Water Crystals respond to prayer and emotion

I have no idea if this is fragile earth, paranormal, or something else all together!

Water Crystals

This is amazing. Yes, it's being reported from a conservative Catholic source, but I think it has enough merit to discuss.

Water, as it turns to ice crystals, responds to words, music, prayer, and perhaps even human feelings.

The crystals form beautiful patterns when they are formed while someone is praying or saying nice things. They form in an 'ugly' manner when someone near them is saying something negative.

This is absolutely wild. Pictures and everything.

Ya'll take a look and see what you think.

Could it not just have something to do with the sound produced by the different kinds of music/prayer etc?

it doesn't seem to have much detail on exactly how the experiment was conducted. It just says "we froze some water and exposed it too this".. well, HOW did you do it? Where is your control? How do we know the experiment was uniform and fair?

Need more detail really, although interesting...

I first encountered this whilst watching the film 'What The Bleep Do We Know' and mentions the work Messages From Water by Dr. Masaru Emoto.

What caught my attention during the film was the comment "If humans are 70% water, and a single negative thought can have this effect on a water molecule, what effect can negative thinking have on our bodies?"

The whole film is well worth watching at least 3 times...as you'll be distracted by questions in your mind the first couple of times you watch it and miss something

Originally posted by stumason
Could it not just have something to do with the sound produced by the different kinds of music/prayer etc?

The experiments were done by Dr. Emoto. His experiments were also featured in the movie what the bleep.

Interestingly its not only sound that changes the water crystals but thought also changes them.

www.masaru-emoto.net...

Emoto's experimental setups are "poo", which is why he can't get them published.

You should be able to replicate them yourself, though, they don't seem to be all that involved.

But you should do this, instead, which is what Emoto should have done.

Write down your statements which are to influence the water, but not on the sheets that are to be attached to the containers. Give the list to someone else. Let them make the sheets, and put them into randomly (but uniquely) numbered opaque envelopes. You can't have all the "bad" ones 0-50 and all the "good" ones 51-100, for instance.

Both statements and envelopes have to be as uniform as possible, that is, they should be printed on cards that are all exactly alike, and stuffed into opaque envelopes, all exactly alike. No putting "good" statements into one sort of envelope and "bad" in another.

Then have the preparer give you the envelopes, but not any sort of key as to which statement is in what envelope. You'll also need a lot of them in order to even out some of the statistical flukes. I suspect you'd need several hundred. No discussion! Just hand you the envelopes and walk.

Do the experiment, but then before ascribing "ugly" or "beautiful" to each crystal formation, you have to write your unfortunately subjective judgment down, along with the number on the envelope. Since "ugly" and "beautiful" are unmeasurably subjective, a group of people should do this. Actually, to be even more detached, this group should do it and you should NOT, and your friend that prepared the envelopes should not either, nor should either of you communicate anything to the group other than a written explanation of what you want from them. Neither of you should be present during the evaluation.

Only after you have this info documented should you open the envelopes to see which statement was in which envelope, and how this correlated to "ugliness" or "beauty" as judged by the independent group.

And then you have to do the entire thing several times with different people participating each time, and average out the results.

Boring? Tedious? Yes. But that's what you have to do in order to make the results "science". Unconscious experimenter bias is a huge factor in setups like this. You just can't get an acceptable result if you know what's what.

Especially in cases like this where the experimenter wants it to come out a certain way. Emoto knows how to do a proper experimental setup, I'm sure, but he chose not to.

This is totally a hoax. You can read about it on wikipedia, and how it's done, but Dr. Emoto refuses to condust this experiment in a double blind study. Basically put, the photographer knows which water sample he's looking at, either the good one, or the bad one, and then takes pictures accordingly to reflect it.

James Randi has even gone so far as to offer Dr. Emoto 1 million dollars if he can reproduce the effect using a double blind study (in other words, a study where the photographer documenting the crystals does not know which sample came from where, and of course, Dr. Emoto has not taken him up on the offer.

There are going to be wonderfully beautiful crystal formations, and horribly deformed crystal formations in any frozen water. They just selectively choose which photos to use to prove their idea.

You can read more about some of the criticism Dr. Emoto's experiments have been met with here:

link

The best exceprt however is from the end of the paper:

After the lengthy review of Emoto’s research methods and results, I have come to believe that Dr. Emoto is offering pseudoscience to the masses in the guise of defensible research. Only time and review by others will tell if there is any truth at the heart of Mr. Emoto’s claims, as Emoto himself thoroughly believes in his findings but does not value the scientific method or community. What is truly fearsome is the great numbers of people that accept his words as proven facts without looking deeper to find out if his claims are truly justified. While I respect Dr. Emoto’s desire to save the Earth’s water from contamination and pollution, unless he can produce a scientific paper and get it published in a scientific journal, I believe that he will continue to be ignored by the scientific community, and his claims will never be soundly proved or disproved.

Editted for spelling

[edit on 3-5-2007 by Athenion]

Oh man .. a hoax? You all think it's a hoax? You are bumming me out! I thought this sounded so cool. I would like to see if anyone else has been able to duplicate these findings.

What the earlier posters said about humans being mostly water ... and the effect that prayer and positive/negative thoughts and musics have on people .. that really was interesting when taken in conjunction with this.

I hope it's for real. It would be amazing.

I think its been proven beyond a doubt that prayer does help people heal.

Originally posted by junglelord
I think its been proven beyond a doubt that prayer does help people heal.

Well, "proven" is a strong word. I'm not saying there isn't a lot of evidence, and I'm certainly a believer in the power of prayer and faith, but scientifically proven is another thing altogether.

I'm deeply skeptical of any scientist who claims to have proven anything involving spirituality. Every time that claim has been made, in the end it's been debunked by good science.

I do believe int he spiritual and the need for faith, I just don't think it's something that can be quantified and boiled down in a test tube somewhere. It's something deeply personal between you and whatever divine being or entity you believe in.

well Life magazine had a front page story on it about six years ago.
in double blind studies people who were prayer over healed faster.
much beyond the 33% placebo effect
I am too lazy to look that one up.
but I am sure it was like 66% difference
heal 2/3 faster
they made an incision and then had people put their arm through a hole.
No one knew who was being prayed for, or for that matter what was on the other side of the screen.
yeah, they have proof


[edit on 3-5-2007 by junglelord]

More recent thorough studies show something rather different.

news.bbc.co.uk...

news.bbc.co.uk...

These studies need to be controlled quite robustly. Same with this water crystal stuff.

Emoto is well-involved in pseudoscience, even his degrees come from a diploma mill.

[edit on 3-5-2007 by melatonin]

yes, your correct, thats what I get for being lazy

a quick google search showed not much proof of any repeatable experiments

Interesting find Flyersfan.

Contrary to the others, I for one, believe it's insane to think that energy, in any form, can not affect something else. Least of all water, which appears to be the most energy sensitive thing on the planet.



[edit on 3-5-2007 by mrsdudara]

Originally posted by FlyersFan
Oh man .. a hoax? You all think it's a hoax? You are bumming me out!

I thought this sounded so cool. I would like to see if anyone else has been able to duplicate these findings.

No, they haven't. I should also add that the experiments weren't done under controlled situations (in other words, have it verified that these crystals did come from the "good emotions" or "bad emotions." You can freeze up water in a matter of a few minutes using dry ice, so we're not talking about waiting till winter.

But yes, he mysteriously can't duplicate these things in front of cameras or an audience or with any kind of verifiable activity. He just shows up with pretty crystals and says "created by prayer and nice music".

What I suspect is that the crystals formed at different temperatures. Slight variances in temperature makes a difference in stucture.

Water is the universal solvent and memory liquid. I am currently reading a book about the zero point field and its interconnection with organic life, and it goes on to say how when a homeopathic solution is taken, where it is diluted to the point where none of the original "healing chemical/compound" is present, only water, that the water infact had taken on the form of the original compound and still retained the original compounds effects!!

But yes, intention DOES have an affect on water structure/behaviour. Shame too many people dismiss the idea before looking into the science behind it.

Originally posted by shrunkensimon
But yes, intention DOES have an affect on water structure/behaviour. Shame too many people dismiss the idea before looking into the science behind it.

Were this true, then you'd have to rewrite physics.

Also, it would be quite simple to replicate Emoto's "experiments". But you can't because he's full of excrement.

Intention has no objective effects. I can "intend" all I'd like, but it isn't going to cause any measurable difference in anything.

I had a friend who started following this idea of talking to your water when he was in the Navy. For two years after he was out of the Navy he hasn't evern accepted a glass of water from my house, and always brings his own water. I've seen him bow his head and whisper a few nothings right before he takes a sip, and i've read Emoto's book regarding his experiments as well.

My biggest issue with this whole ordeal is the fact that good thoughts create beautiful crystals, while negative thoughts create "ugly" crystals. Beautiful and ugly are two very subjective terms, what is beautiful to me is usually ugly to my wife. So right out of the gate I have specific issues.

Of course, if the mind has the ability to influence things outside of itself (moving objects, remote viewing, etc.), then i'd have to agree that it is also capable of influencing the composition and/or quality of water. If one thing is possible, then anything is possible.

Originally posted by Tom Bedlam

Originally posted by shrunkensimon
But yes, intention DOES have an affect on water structure/behaviour. Shame too many people dismiss the idea before looking into the science behind it.

Were this true, then you'd have to rewrite physics.

Not rewrite, just update. This is happening right now anyway As time goes on, more and more scientists are seeing the interconnected wholeness of reality, and how it all really works. The era of believing we are just a spectacular accident is almost over, and we will once again be made aware of just how amazing we, and reality actually is.

If i told you that plants feel empathy towards other plants subjected to pain, you'd probably again say, physics needs rewriting. If i told you that newborn ducklings could influence an REG robot to make it move towards them, you'd probably say it again..

The evidence is out there, but mainstream science shuns it, partly because it has become a business.

Originally posted by Tom Bedlam
Intention has no objective effects. I can "intend" all I'd like, but it isn't going to cause any measurable difference in anything.

Spoken like a true materialist. If thats true how then do you explain the double slit experiment and the recent findings from australian physicist?

physicsweb.org...
www.abovetopsecret.com...'
www-physics.lbl.gov...

Originally posted by shrunkensimon

The evidence is out there, but mainstream science shuns it, partly because it has become a business.

More like, when you do well designed double-blind experiments, all the new-agey stuff quits being replicable and shows itself as experimenter bias.