I got an email from Enio asking me:
I would like to know your opinion about Masaru Emoto's "Crystal Water Photos".
First, some background. Masaru Emoto's book
The Hidden Messages in Water is currently #66 in sales rank on Amazon. That means A LOT of people are buying it. Here's the blurb from the cover that pretty much explains what Masaru Emoto and his crystal water photos are all about:
The Hidden Messages in Water is an eye-opening theory showing how water is deeply connected to people's individual and collective consciousness. Drawing from his own research, scientific researcher, healer, and popular lecturer Dr. Masaru Emoto describes the ability of water to absorb, hold, and even retransmit human feelings and emotions. Using high-speed photography, he found that crystals formed in frozen water reveal changes when specific, concentrated thoughts are directed toward it. Music, visual images, words written on paper, and photographs also have an impact on the crystal structure. Emoto theorizes that since water has the ability to receive a wide range of frequencies, it can also reflect the universe in this manner. He found that water from clear springs and water exposed to loving words shows brilliant, complex, and colorful snowflake patterns, while polluted water and water exposed to negative thoughts forms incomplete, asymmetrical patterns with dull colors. Emoto believes that since people are 70 percent water, and the Earth is 70 percent water, we can heal our planet and ourselves by consciously expressing love and goodwill.
What do I think of this theory? Well, at the risk of giving off a lot of negative energy that's going to make a whole bunch of water crystals get all bent out of shape, I think it's complete baloney. But then, I'm not very 'open minded' about things like this. So I would think that.
(but I have to add: since when has the earth been 70 percent water? Do they mean the surface of the earth? That might make sense. But the earth itself ain't 70 percent water)
Comments
then there was the guy who had this odd mannerism of having to pause while he was talking in order to swallow his saliva. very odd.
i thought it had potential but it ended up being about that deaf girl dancing at a wedding.
it was like deer hunter, when you're saying "is this wedding scene ever going to end?"
The whole changing ice crystals by the power of thought and capturing it with high speed cameras? Hmmm...what's stopping him from taking a photo of an ice crystal with a regular camera? It's not as if he's trying to photograph the actual change, is he?
Ripper: Mandrake?
Mandrake: Yes, Jack?
Ripper: Have you ever seen a Commie drink a glass of water?
Mandrake: Well, I can't say I have.
Ripper: Vodka, that's what they drink, isn't it? Never water?
Mandrake: Well, I-I believe that's what they drink, Jack, yes.
Ripper: On no account will a Commie ever drink water, and not without good reason.
Mandrake: Oh, eh, yes. I, uhm, can't quite see what you're getting at, Jack.
Ripper: Water, that's what I'm getting at, water. Mandrake, water is the source of all life. Seven-tenths of this earth's surface is water. Why, do you realize that seventy percent of you is water?
Mandrake: Uh, uh, Good Lord!
Ripper: And as human beings, you and I need fresh, pure water to replenish our precious bodily fluids.
Mandrake: Yes. (he begins to chuckle nervously)
Ripper: Are you beginning to understand?
Mandrake: Yes. (more laughter)
Ripper: Mandrake. Mandrake, have you never wondered why I drink only distilled water, or rain water, and only pure-grain alcohol?
Mandrake: Well, it did occur to me, Jack, yes.
Ripper: Have you ever heard of a thing called fluoridation. Fluoridation of water?
Mandrake: Uh? Yes, I-I have heard of that, Jack, yes. Yes.
Ripper: Well, do you know what it is?
Mandrake: No, no I don't know what it is, no.
Ripper: Do you realize that fluoridation is the most monstrously conceived and dangerous Communist plot we have ever had to face?
Maybe McDonald's can step into the market niche - McDonald's Happy Water:)
Otherwise, ask for a coke, and you get a cup full of ice, with a drop of coke in it... 😊
Paul and Smerk, ya just caused part of my brain to stop functioning.
Like I can afford to lose much more...
:lol:
Go to randi.org if you want to know more about this utter nonsense. Use Goofball's name as a keyword; that ought to get you some thought-provoking stuff.
Remember this idiocy the next time someone starts to talk about the "sophistication" of today's populace.
That's why it's unethical to drink water. :down:
Quote of the Month
my parents used to say to me, ''Tom, finish your dinner -- people in China are starving.'' But after sailing to the edges of the world for a year, I am now telling my own daughters, ''Girls, finish your homework -- people in China and India are starving for your jobs.''
"Sometimes cutting edge new information can be hard to believe (especially for the common masses, let them eat Genetically Modified Cake and Kraft products) and weakly dismissed without any further research."
Am I to understand, Skeptic, that you BELIEVE that this nonsense is possible? You say that you are a science teacher, yes? And you think that water, a chemical compound with no sensory capabilities, can respond to words written on a piece of tape attached to the side of the glass it's in???
There's just no use in fighting it anymore. We're all doomed as a species.
http://www.mybiopro.com/VoicesInHarmonyEvent.aspx?ID=awengrove
There was not one thoughtful factual rebuttal in all the comments I read, just repitition of predetermined beliefs. This site promotes a sad commentary on intelligent criticism...
"The comments about this book are more hooey than the book itself. The pictures are there for you to see. (Have any of you actually looked at it)?"
I'm sorry, how do PICTURES prove that water can respond to emotions or do anything other than be wet? Please explain.
"There was not one thoughtful factual rebuttal in all the comments I read, just repitition of predetermined beliefs. This site promotes a sad commentary on intelligent criticism..."
Those "predetermined beliefs" are called SCIENCE. We believe in it/them because they are the best system by which humans can understand the world around us that anyone has yet devised. If you have a better one, please tell us about it so that mankind can benefit.
You DO understand, don't you, that WE don't have to prove anything? It's up to the author or a supporter of the author's premise to demonstrate that the theory of "intelligent water" or whatever it's called is anything other than bizarre irrational nonsense.
If you can prove that water can indeed respond to emotions under controlled conditions, the James Randi Educational Foundation has a million-dollar prize waiting for you. I direct you to their site, randi.org, for the details. Good luck.
I am totally serious. http://www.randi.org/jr/052005la.html#4
I have talked with two ministers at the Church of Religious Science about preaching pseudo-science and I am told that the truth is "my reality"?
One of the ministers was my own minister at my RS church I attended for 17 years. Unbelievable.
Can anyone say: Galileo?
"Would you believe it if I told you ministers were preaching from the pulpit that Mr. Emoto's work is proven science and that we can purify water with our minds?"
Yes, unfortunately, I WOULD believe it. There is no definable line between "religion" and "superstition." Those ministers are straddling any line anyone could point out. They're nuts.
"I have talked with two ministers at the Church of Religious Science about preaching pseudo-science and I am told that the truth is "my reality"?"
Yup, in the same sense that gravity is just "your reality." Tell these goofs to jump off a high building. After all, crashing to Earth is just "their reality."
Now if thoughts impact water crystallization formations or not, it is a significant claim. It should put to test by the scientific method, and taken seroiusly.
Because its not like anyone knows where matter and space came from anyway, at least not in this time in history.
My personal opinion I don't know if Dr. Emoto is speaking the truth. If he were, then if I were a god I will be laughing down at your ass thinking on how blantantly ignorant some people can be. Muahahaha
Interesting. But that doesn't explain how thoughts or words can affect formation, considering that this Emoto is telling the truth. And does anyone know of other reputable people/schools that confirm his studies?
.(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)
"Let people believe whatever they want to believe. Because if it makes them happier, and live a better life, then so be it. Don't burst people's bubble."
Sorry, no can do. It's "magical thinking," I believe that, at least in part, led to the current war in Iraq. As in, "We're in line with what God wants so we cannot lose."
Irrational thinking can lead to death, especially when it's practiced by "leaders."
.(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)
It is NOT our obligation to disprove him, he has never proved it in the first place, but yet deceptively has presented it so it seems that it IS proven.
That is the problem with pseudoscience, it disguises itself as science, but it is not. You are falling prey to the deception and propogating pseudoscience with those comments.
"Yes, his research is extreme and in "la la land," but he's providing his proof and its our turn to prove it otherwise or not."
What "proof" has he provided? For the record, just claiming that something has happened does not constitute "proof."
But about the water christals i'm not so sure.
According to quantum mechanics reality does get only 'shape' once you look/feel/think--> observe something. Positive / Negative feelings/thoughts when putting a paper with a certain text on a bottle of water should have impact on the reality of the water when you look at it later.
I'm sceptic; this doctor might make extra money using photoshop on his pictures, but thought/concentration/feelings do effect other water-bags that browse this planet in quantum-probabilities' wierd-ways I "believe" ;-p
-tap
-microwave
-bottle loved
-bottle hated
and then crystalised in some different ways please.
😛
Instead of fact, it seems all that's on this site is bitter dogmatic predetermined oppinion. Nothing but a bunch of "As-if!" postings.
Oh, well.
"Dang. I saw this site in my Google search hits and was hoping there would be something here devoting some time to debunk the book with facts to the contrary."
You're asking us to prove a negative. How about asking the author of this nonsense to prove what he claims under proper scientific testing? Given the nature of his claims, that should be easy, no?
I have his book and this described some kind of not-2-proper scientific testing.. ..I don't expect to get better testing from the inventor himself more than I expect proof of god from the pope.
No nobody disproved this guy he... ...maybe he is right. Reading his book did give me some feeling he is on a right track...
I did see the move 'What the bleeb do we know' recently; also about this special water.. ..and about quantum mechanics and thoughts changing quantum-possibility-fields:p
you are not being asked to do anything... not even believe. the challenge is to provide evidence that what is being claimed is a false positive.
this claim is not entirely unlike the claim that plants are affected by their environment. it could be that the photography used and the type of water (polluted and spring) were factors. it would be interesting if someone were to do similar experiments. but, as with all comparative experiments, there are going to be different results. nothing is entirely conclusive. more results from scientific experiments will likely only provide you with more reason to argue and disbelieve. just don't be directing your crystal-distorting thoughts and energy my way. lol
go, now do it
Hi, who is or are "us" by the way?
And proving a negative is not so hard, like disproving "all things fall up" by one 'negative'; something falling down...
I stil like thus water theory, but seen nog provind or disproving at all...
However, there are lots of reasons to suppose that our assumptions about chemistry are right - for a start, if theywasn't then we wouldn't have the technology to be having this discussion! - and there is nothing but a single crank's unreplicated and highly improbable assertions to support that thesis that our knowledge of chemistry is mistaken.
When someone makes a claim that goes against all extant knowledge it is reasonable to expect that person to prove the claim; it is not reasonable to demand, instead, that it be treated as credible in the absence of any substantive evidence. Apart from everything else, nonsensical hypotheses can be formulated at a rate of thousands per second (prove me wrong!) while testing them takes a long time and a lot of money...
This having been said, should those who regard Emoto as credible wish to fund a programme of research, I am sure that responsible scientists could be found to do the work... who knows, you could win a million:)
Why? Because a lott of things work? Because cars can drive? I don't think this is logic..
In my opinion quantum mechanics shows our whole atom-model is wrong; just a model that worked to invent all kind of technology...
>Emoto's claims would require pretty much everything we know about chemistry to be wrong
Uhm, isn't it also without his claims quite sure we know only a few % of what could be known about chemistry and are we not quite suire most is 'wrong'... ...might be correct according to the proven-wrong atom-model; but still wrong if you have to choose between right and wrong; we know almost nothing I think!!!
(allthough it's quite human to think we know much.. ..see classical mistakes in this).
Gee, thanks God!
It's just a model my dear. What we do does not prove the 'atom-model' to be correct. It's just a model that is proven to be incomplete and therefor in a way 'proven wrong'.
What you say is like saying that because we don't understand gravity exact, things would stop falling down or something...😛