Maegan
in Tampa, FL - USA
Member
|
Posted: Wed May 04, 2005 | 09:25 AM
I heard it was stupid...so I skipped over it. |
X
in McKinney, TX
Member
|
Posted: Wed May 04, 2005 | 09:57 AM
Well GlamCat.....You now have Maegans thoughts on it!
I never heard of it personally. |
Charybdis
in Hell
Member
|
Posted: Wed May 04, 2005 | 12:03 PM
It's "spiritual" and features Deepak Chopra. Nuff said. |
Maegan
in Tampa, FL - USA
Member
|
Posted: Wed May 04, 2005 | 12:16 PM
My husband just re-started our Netflix account...so b/c it's cheaper to rent now...I might go ahead & watch it. I can always drop it in the mailbox if I really hate it. |
Papazombie
|
Posted: Fri May 06, 2005 | 10:45 PM
Hey Glamcat.
If you like to question the fabric of reality, check out the paradox I posted in "Off Topic Chit Chat II". Deals with reality not being constand. Posted it today, it's near the end.
😉 |
Papazombie
|
Posted: Fri May 06, 2005 | 10:47 PM
... constant ...
🙄 |
Glamcat
Member
|
Posted: Tue May 10, 2005 | 05:22 PM
Wow, you're all so open minded! :blank: |
Sixy
|
Posted: Thu Jun 02, 2005 | 09:29 AM
I watched the film last night and thought it was excellent. I recommend that you go see it if you haven't already.
As far as Deepak Chopra goes, I've heard of him, but I'm pretty sure that he isn't in it!
It's a shame when people say that because others thought it was "stupid" that they won't go and make their own minds up themselves. We are programmed enough as it is to conform to a certain pattern. We should be aiming to make up our own minds!
It's time to think outside of the box.
Go see the film. |
Boo
in The Land of the Haggii...
Member
|
Posted: Thu Jun 02, 2005 | 09:37 AM
Sixy, I understand what you are trying to say, but to say
'We should be aiming to make up our own minds!' and then telling us to go and see the film is slightly funny. |
Maegan
in Tampa, FL - USA
Member
|
Posted: Thu Jun 02, 2005 | 09:52 AM
Sixty. I respect the opinion of the people who told me it was stupid...SOoo, I'm going to guess they're trying to keep me from wasting my time. |
David B.
|
Posted: Thu Jun 02, 2005 | 10:25 AM
[sarcasm]
Well of course we're all ex-moonie, scientologists who pin our 'Heaven's Gate' badges proudly to our 'I survived Waco' t-shirts.
Why Boo swims Loch Ness twice a day, just to personally experience not seeing the monster.
It's just so much easier than using reason or judgement when forming an opinion.
[/sarcasm]
Being open-minded means you're willing to change your opinion on receipt of additional information from respected (by you) sources or personal experience. It doesn't mean that you mustn't have an opinion unless it's based on personal experience; that's solipsism.
I doubt that the movie is worth my money, and nobody whose opinion on the matter I'd trust has said it's worth seeing, so I won't be going to see it (it only opened recently in the UK).
I think the same about 'Revenge of the Sith'.
Can't wait for 'Sin City' though! |
Boo
in The Land of the Haggii...
Member
|
Posted: Thu Jun 02, 2005 | 12:46 PM
*nods*
Me and Nessie? We're like that.
*crosses fingers* |
Winona
in USA
Member
|
Posted: Thu Jun 02, 2005 | 01:50 PM
Nessie's actually a third cousin of mine, once removed. Nice gal, she is, but has a bit of a drinking problem. 😉 |
Boo
in The Land of the Haggii...
Member
|
Posted: Thu Jun 02, 2005 | 01:53 PM
Runs in our family, Noni.... |
buba
|
Posted: Thu Jun 02, 2005 | 02:14 PM
i had never left a movie in the middle before seeing this. its really bad! junk science. |
Kirstin
|
Posted: Thu Jun 02, 2005 | 03:23 PM
I read a book with quotes and pictures. Some of the stuff seemed really good, if for nothing other than an exercise in mind-blowing. I'd like to see it.
But I found it disturbing that along with scientests and religious thinkers, it quoted a supposed spirit guide somebody was channelling. I believe that "spirit guides" are often made up but can be from the dark side of the spiritual realm. Not sure why he/it would be qualified to add its 2 cents to the movie. |
Sixy
|
Posted: Fri Jun 03, 2005 | 08:48 AM
Yep, I can see what you mean by me saying to see the film to make up your own minds is weird to say...but what I was meaning to get across is that I can't see how people could have their own judgement of something if they haven't experienced it themselves.
If you've seen the film and hated it, fine. Thats your own opinion and thats fine. But to say that you are not going to see it just because others have said not to means that you are taking somebody elses judgement of the film and not your own. Does that make sense?
Yes, there is someone in the film that believes they channel someone from Atlantis. Yes, I have my own issues with that. But I still think that its a refreshing look on life and one that is worth exploring - I'm talking on a personal level here.
There are lots of things in this world that we don't all understand and thats cool, we are different people. Maybe the science and the beliefs of this film are things that some of us can't understand.
No hard feelings is meant by anything I'm saying. you're entitled to your opinions as much as I'm entitled to mine 😊 |
Citizen Premier
in spite of public outcry
Member
|
Posted: Fri Jun 03, 2005 | 09:02 AM
I feel like I've already explored all that metaphysics crap thoroughly--when I was twelve. I have no need to do it again. |
buba
|
Posted: Fri Jun 03, 2005 | 01:40 PM
sixy, one does not need to experience a brick to the head to know it hurts. one may say 'that looked like it hurt! i wont do that to my self'.
the problem with this film is not that: "Maybe the science and the beliefs of this film are things that some of us can't understand." it is that the makers of the film and the interviewees no not understand the science.
from review By John Olmsted, E-Skeptic #36 for October 1, 2004 :
"In April of this year I invited one of the film |
David B.
|
Posted: Fri Jun 03, 2005 | 04:55 PM
I can't see how people could have their own judgement of something if they haven't experienced it themselves.
Not very open-minded of you! :lol:
Seriously, let's hope you are never called for jury duty then. Not actually having been an eyewitness, you wouldn't be able to accept the eyewitness testimony of others. And not actually having collected and processed the trace evidence with your own hands, all that forensic science would be wasted.
Judging what other people are saying can be difficult; what are they claiming, how likely is it to be true, why might they claim that, why might they lie, etc. But it is a worthwhile skill to learn.
Almost all animals can learn from direct experience while very few are capable of learning from the experiences of others. Why not be special? |
Citizen Premier
in spite of public outcry
Member
|
Posted: Fri Jun 03, 2005 | 06:53 PM
Smart man learns from his mistakes, wise man learns from the mistakes of others. |
Truth Seeker
|
Posted: Thu Dec 14, 2006 | 01:12 PM
I just saw this movie last night and I couldnt help laugh!! At first I thought it was a spoof, than they had some solid science, and then it switched to a spoof again. Quite hillarious!
What I really thought to be funny was that towards the end many made it seem that to talk to some pie-n-the-sky-holy-guy was pure nonsense, but yet one of their one was "channeling" a dead guy! What a contradictory of statements when none of the reverse tunneling of quantum mechanics has yet to be veriafably proven.
Clearly a new-age religion laced movie that may be good for a laugh and that is about it. I am glad that the producers at many other top companies saw through this one and didnt take it.
See ya! |
Tabari Noni
|
Posted: Tue May 20, 2008 | 02:26 AM
Best noni, which I tried - Tabari Noni :exclaim: |
MrDave
|
Posted: Mon Nov 02, 2009 | 06:54 AM
So many think only in feelings that they dismiss anything remotely akin to the facts. I mean we in the US had an historic election recently. We elected the first Marxist/Statist/Fascist to office in history of the country. Oh and by the was his father was a revolutionary communist from Africa.
The film had a lot of fluff built up to explain concepts of quantum mechanics and small particle physics. The experiments that they referenced where in real, at least from what I have been able to tell. By far the most significant thing was the "imprinting" of a device that could be a radar detector. It blows my mind that anyone would even think of producing such an experiment, but the fact that it was done in a and the evidence release to the scientific community is incredible. If people can replicate the results it will be even more perplexing. Changing the PH of pure water is not a trivial thing. To me, what is missing is that the water sample was not fed back through a mass spectrometer to check for contaminants. In another CD, there is a panel discussion where that scientist goes into even greater detail about his experiment.
Many of the other principles discussed in the film wrap science around idea's that have been held by people for centuries. One guy was babbling about chi and stuff. While this isn't currently accepted scientific theory outside of China and maybe San Fransisco I don't thing one mildly loony person should detract from the facts.
The are human side of the film can just was easily be gathered from the writing of Napoleon Hill or any of the 100's of personal enhancement coaches that have preceded him on up to the current time in the likes of Tony Robbins.
Still in all, some people will not and can not accept anything that is outside of what they want to be true. They are in fact actively creating their own reality. If someone associates with other people who think like they do and accepts the fact that their friends don't like the film, then so be it. It is still a free country. I have to wonder though what the detractors of this film thought about the fictional documentary by AlGore? I mean some people will believe anything if it is on film. Some people are far more addicted to guilt and anger. But those are just my musings.
I am critical of the film but, after just reading Dan Browns the Lost Symbol i must admit that there is a lot of tie in. It has me curious. I understand Dan Browns work is fiction and that he makes liberal use of poetic license. Still a lot of the same ground is covered.
In the end I enjoyed the film. |
Mikungfu
|
Posted: Sun Jan 31, 2010 | 03:39 AM
We all know there are all sorts of "sensitivities" to cognition, that range from nylists to naifs, going through skeptics, science fundamentalists, new age freaks, religious fanatics...
We also know there is rational cognition and ituitive cognition and not to mention that both science and phylosophy are interrelated forms of epistemology.
So let's cross reference all these approaches and look at this movie the way it deserves.
I think despite not being 100% proven, some issues associating quantum physics with consciousness deserve our best atention and respectful consideration. The problem with scientific skeptics sometimes is that they fail to understand their dogmatism in regards to science and the scientific method. To them science is a religion... But what is science? In my opinion, science is no more than an effort for systematization of the results of human cognitive activity, in particular using a deductive process. Therefore it is not the only way of practicing epistemology and certainly not an infalible one!.. Some science people lack the "sine qua non" humbleness of destinguishing science from Truth. Science is a dynamic form of epistemology and keeps correcting itself all the time... So, despite being one of the most valid forms of cognition, it's far from perfect, unlike a typically aristotelian-ptolemaic view of the world would lead you to believe. Most scientists are too attached to this dialectic cartesian view of the world because they were brought up to structure their perception that way... And therefore believe that science is the only form of epistemology that strives for serious common sense usage in cognition. This is an arrogant mistake.
On the other hand some New Age people seem to advocate that we should be mischiveous towards anything taught or learnt by science, as if it was just another form of educational conspiration. This is even more absurd!..
This movie scratches subjects like "The Secret" but at least attempts a more scientific approach. Personally I believe Quantum Physics will eventually find a common ground with gravity and General Relativity. I also believe this common ground will consolidate the already growing bridge between Modern Physics and Oriental Mysticism/Phylsophy and even with religion. Of course I don't think it will be the same or replace it... Because they stand for different forms of cognition... Or even faith.
I also believe that the Unified Field theory, if proven, may very well provide a scientific approach to subjectivities like Consciousness, Chi/Prana, Tao or even God (pardon the blasfemy). I'm not saying it will explain it because I truely believe our intelect hasn't been designed to process certain degrees of understanding and certain depths of reality. But modern physics models will provide huge step in that direction.
I know this will not be consentanous but, at this point and even for science puritans, it's absurd to still insist that it's the physical-chemical structure of the brain that creates consciousness and that it begins and ends within those parameters. Besides there being a lot of aspects of consciousness (most of it) that science can't explain within that framework, there is on the other hand a lot that science is finding that points in the oposite direction.
Skeptics don't need to listen to people like Deepak chopra if they don't like him... They might instead listen to what people like Penrose Stuart Hameroff or even Dr. John Hagelin, Ph.D have to say about Threshold of Objective Reduction and the role of Cosnciousness in the creation of everything in the universe since the Big Bang (including the human brain). Science itself HAS BEEN sugesting that information is not processed by synaptic connections in the neurons but is rather processed/embeded at plank scale not only in the brain but in every atom of your body, and therefore consciousness may well be a phenomena occurring at a fundamental level of space time geometry. |
