What The Bleep Do We Know DEBUNKED....

reply to post by scientist


They're using James Randi's fraudulent challenge to debunk Emoto? Randi's challenge has been debunked numerous times already here on ATS.

reply to post by TheBandit795


to be fair, that's not the only "proof" they offer. I agree that not signing up to be scrutinized by Randi isn't proof or disproof of anything.

However, the manner in which those ice crystals were named, and then shot, has more parallels in marketing than it does in science. And rightly so, as he became famous for his book, and the way he marketed his projects, as opposed to making any real scientific discoveries or advancements.

Just another example of how this movie has mixed b.s. in with legit research. That's the shame of this whole thing, when you mix bad info with good info; otherwise known as disinfo.

reply to post by logician magician


10 dolphins

Originally posted by StopComplaining
reply to post by logician magician

 

10 dolphins

Good example of seeing something that's not there.

There are only 9.

Originally posted by PieKeeper
I loved this movie until reading this thread.

Great. That means the thread has helped one person, at least, 'deny ingorance'.

You'll get over the disappointment, and you'll be that much less likely to fall for persuasively-presented pseudoscientific misinformation in the future.

The real world is much more interesting than all this fake magic stuff anyway. Welcome back to it.

Hi all,

And wow what an astonishing thread!!!!

Some of you poster's remind of people who have tried to watch the Matrix and missed the deeper meaning of the films altogether even to the point of not understanding when Neo is in or out of the Matrix;

My advice is to obtain a copy of the 5 hour version of What the Bleep and then come back to this thread; there is a hell of a lot more material contained within that version.

Also can I just ask does this mean all you guys are writing off the wave/particle theory too??

oh and last but not least for anyone considering watching "What the Bleep" think of it more as a Door; a new entrance to a rabbit hole previously undiscovered or many Doors to an infinite number of rabbit holes but either way it is just a Door; you the observer are the one who has to enter that Door and validate the material contained within the film; the film alone will not do this hence you people disregarding the film after one small part where the lady in question states “a story which I believe to be true” which she believes!!!! Where does it say you have to believe it too?? Come on people try thinking for yourselves; humans and the need to be spoon fed tut tut.

Do you think it CONICIDENCE that Neo feel like he is tumbling down the Rabbit hole LMAO.

And please no one think that I am trying to say the Matrix is real; the Matrix is a very clever film with many deeper meanings to it; I tend to think of it as the action version of What the Bleep in fact I would probably consider it better than What the Bleep due to the fact that it is also an attempt to warn us about our “lovely overlords who so dearly love us and take care of us. Note my Sarcasm”

And one more thing to remember is that all of the scientists etc represented in the film may not and do not all agree on the same things/theories or set of beliefs religious spiritual or otherwise so there will be parts which clash or different views to one another; again do your homework/research and find out which ones; they all have books and papers out there so go and read them just remember one thing that in essence they are all fighting the same battle as are we.

Peace and remember the ATS motto Deny All Ignorance

Originally posted by WeAreOne
Some of you poster's remind of people who have tried to watch the Matrix and missed the deeper meaning of the films altogether even to the point of not understanding when Neo is in or out of the Matrix;

The difference is, matrix does not claim to be science, nor does the movie have a credentials page setup to show how Keanu Reaves is some scientific enigma. The Matrix was based on various forms of philosophy, metaphysics, etc. Just like What the Bleep was. Only, Matrix is obviously fiction. What the Bleep has kicked up mud between the line separating fact and fiction.

My advice is to obtain a copy of the 5 hour version of What the Bleep and then come back to this thread; there is a hell of a lot more material contained within that version.

seen it. still has ramtha. again, very interesting, but it doesn't negate anything mentioned in this thread.

Also can I just ask does this mean all you guys are writing off the wave/particle theory too??

I can't speak for everyone else, but certainly not! Again the shame about this movie is that it mixes good info with b.s. info.

[edit on 4-9-2008 by scientist]

Thank you Scientist, for your contributions to this thread.

I'd like to ask if you can provide an argument for the RNG experiments.

reply to post by Unit541

You're talking about the PEAR experiments? Where a vanishingly small deviation from the expected 50 percent random outcome was talked up by the experimenters as evidence for psychokinesis and precognition?

Not scientifically significant, I'm afraid. To see why, read this.

"Native American's couldn't see Columbus's ships because they didn't know what ships were and had no concepts of them. "

This is such crap. I'm a Mi'kmaq native, from the northeast coast. Our people were among the first Native Americans to encounter Europeans.

We knew EXACTLY what the ships were. Our oral tradition evidences this. Plus, an elder predicted the coming of blue-eyed people years and years before their arrival; she also predicted that the would sail over on large boats. We knew they were ships. How dare these idiots make US look like idiots.

reply to post by PieKeeper


I still love the movie, I just don't take it all literally. Nor do I attend or buy any of the mass of lectures, books, products, etc. that I've seen advertised based on their connection to it.

I think the story about the Native Americans not "seeing" Columbus' ships is a great anecdote, and would like to see references. I can think of a number of possible explanations (including the one someone already posted about when a ship will actually be observable on the horizon to the unaided eye.)

Re: the recent Brazilian natives photo -- unfortunately, it's been admitted to be a fraud. There's an article on ATS about its debunking, also got massive coverage in the MSM back in June I think.

What the bleep do we know? made me ask questions that I hadn't thought of yet. I had enough sense not to trust Ramtha for the answers, but that doesn't invalidate the questions.

reply to post by Shazam The Unbowed


i just want to point out that whether Columbus was the first to arrive, how he arrived etc... is not the point.

I want to say that I studied shotokan karate and received a black Belt, only a shodan ho.

Alot of what is being taught by Ramtha is Karate. I believe she speaks wisdom, by proxy of some other entity or not.

I believe "What The Bleep Do We Know?" is a very creditable movie, with or without her. She would say so herself. I can see her seeming "fake" and called this by large amounts of people, while none of those same people really interviewing or talking to her themselves. Perception does seem to be everyone's own reality, doesn't it?

a reply to: Astyanax

Old post... but I really liked your take! Kudos, and I totally agree. Got dragged into this movie by a friend who lured me by acknowledging my love of science. I sat there, stunned that my friend actually was sucking it all in, and excited about the presentation and ridiculous content. I kindly thanked her, but we've never spoken about the movie since. lol