- Sale items. Buy now - stock going fast. Specials
- You must now select Courier Delivery if you wish to receive items before Christmas.
Forums > Social Discussion > Messages from Water
Login/Join to ParticipateSee my vest.... see my vest...
693 posts
Location: Adelaide - South Australia
693 posts
Location: Adelaide - South Australia
Posted:
Ok, if you have seen the movie 'what the bleep do we know' then you will know where I got this from. By the way, it's a really thought provoking movie. I think everyone should see it. You may not like it, but it still stimulates some interesting concepts about the philosophy and reality of life as we know it, and as we don’t know it.
But anyway. I found this part of the movie the most interesting. As a 'scientist' I am trying to work out if this is 'true'. For example, did he replicate his experimental results, did he use fair testing etc....
What do you think?
Dr. Masaru Emoto has undertaken the research of water around the planet not so much as a scientific researcher, but more from the perspective of an original thinker. He realized that it was in the frozen crystal form that water showed us its true nature. He continues with this experimentation and has written a variety of well-received books in Japanese, as well as the seminal "Messages from Water" books published bilingually.
https://www.wellnessgoods.com/messages.asp
.......I do think water is amazing though. And I also wouldn't be surprised if this was true.
But what do you think??
k8
Ok, if you have seen the movie 'what the bleep do we know' then you will know where I got this from. By the way, it's a really thought provoking movie. I think everyone should see it. You may not like it, but it still stimulates some interesting concepts about the philosophy and reality of life as we know it, and as we don’t know it.
But anyway. I found this part of the movie the most interesting. As a 'scientist' I am trying to work out if this is 'true'. For example, did he replicate his experimental results, did he use fair testing etc....
What do you think?
Dr. Masaru Emoto has undertaken the research of water around the planet not so much as a scientific researcher, but more from the perspective of an original thinker. He realized that it was in the frozen crystal form that water showed us its true nature. He continues with this experimentation and has written a variety of well-received books in Japanese, as well as the seminal "Messages from Water" books published bilingually.
https://www.wellnessgoods.com/messages.asp
.......I do think water is amazing though. And I also wouldn't be surprised if this was true.
But what do you think??
k8
Love and Light
~*~ Katinca ~*~
GOLD Member
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,252 posts
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,252 posts
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom
Posted:
Then that's you, and that's what works for you.
Others find the blunt objective world to be deeply unsatisfactory- they need spiritual meaning.
And spiritual meaning is not 'a pack of lies'- it's simply a different way of seeing things (I acknowledge that some unscrupulous people do use lies in the guise of spirituality to abuse others; but that approach is not restricted to spirituality, it's rife everywhere).
Written by: quiet
re: 'if it works, then leave it'
I think there's a conflict of values here, also: I'd rather know the truth, and risk unhappiness, than find solace in a pack of lies.
Then that's you, and that's what works for you.
Others find the blunt objective world to be deeply unsatisfactory- they need spiritual meaning.
And spiritual meaning is not 'a pack of lies'- it's simply a different way of seeing things (I acknowledge that some unscrupulous people do use lies in the guise of spirituality to abuse others; but that approach is not restricted to spirituality, it's rife everywhere).
"You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it."
--MAJOR KORGO KORGAR,
"Last of The Lancers"
AFC 32
Educate your self in the Hazards of Fire Breathing STAY SAFE!
analytic
503 posts
Location: bristol
503 posts
Location: bristol
Posted:
just wait a damn minute . . .
I wasn't implying that spiritual meaning is a pack of lies; I *was* trying to make the point that the truth matters. Sometimes other stuff matters more, and different people have different preferences regarding this. I also think that most people are strongly concerned with the truth.
This is the whole point of the 'orgasmatron' thought-experiment: if 'how it feels' is all that matters, then you might as well plug yourself in. But I don't think that many people would want to.
just wait a damn minute . . .
I wasn't implying that spiritual meaning is a pack of lies; I *was* trying to make the point that the truth matters. Sometimes other stuff matters more, and different people have different preferences regarding this. I also think that most people are strongly concerned with the truth.
This is the whole point of the 'orgasmatron' thought-experiment: if 'how it feels' is all that matters, then you might as well plug yourself in. But I don't think that many people would want to.
ture na sig
See my vest.... see my vest...
693 posts
Location: Adelaide - South Australia
693 posts
Location: Adelaide - South Australia
Posted:
Don't you need to define what 'truth' is then?
And in what parameters is something then regarded as true?
You have a vast amount of evidence that shows something to be true, but you don't know that it is ‘true’. You can only assume it's true based on the evidence you have *observed*.
Observation is also purely a personal and subjective thing - woo getting into radical constructivism here... What I am saying is you can construct an experiment that hypothesises something to be true or untrue, but you can have your experimental data clouded by your initial expectations. Sometimes you may even think you are being totally impartial. However more then likely you are not. Our science often based on observation. What we can see – if you see it a million times it must be true. Why?? Maybe it’s just a thousand different scientists ‘wishing’ it to be true and thus ‘seeing’ it to be true.
I think that so many people believe things are true because Science proved it and therefore it’s right. For example: Western Medicine. So many people put their complete faith in Western medicine and call any other types of medicine a crock. WHY ? Because scientists proved that drug to be safe? Chinese medicine has been around for thousands of years – wow now that’s a lot of clinical trials!! But that’s hoo-ha and a bunch of b*llocks. Why is western medicine so good? Or perceived to be so good and truthful….
I think it’s really important that people question science and what it has proven and not just take it for granted and face value. Isn’t science just another wacky amount of theories and concepts? It just happens to the favourite way of investigating new knowledge our species is developing. In 100 years we may have come up with a new ‘science’ and suddenly realise that all those theories that we believed so strongly to be true are not….
It really wasn’t that long ago as pointed out that people believed the world was flat and that we were created from Adam and Eve (disclaimer – I teach evolution and I do believe that it is *currently* the best theory that explains our existence, however I am open to new ideas).
I think it is really important to be a critical thinker and not just to take things at face value and then to argue so strongly for or against them. Anything is possible. You just don’t know it yet….
That’s my two bob…..
Don't you need to define what 'truth' is then?
And in what parameters is something then regarded as true?
You have a vast amount of evidence that shows something to be true, but you don't know that it is ‘true’. You can only assume it's true based on the evidence you have *observed*.
Observation is also purely a personal and subjective thing - woo getting into radical constructivism here... What I am saying is you can construct an experiment that hypothesises something to be true or untrue, but you can have your experimental data clouded by your initial expectations. Sometimes you may even think you are being totally impartial. However more then likely you are not. Our science often based on observation. What we can see – if you see it a million times it must be true. Why?? Maybe it’s just a thousand different scientists ‘wishing’ it to be true and thus ‘seeing’ it to be true.
I think that so many people believe things are true because Science proved it and therefore it’s right. For example: Western Medicine. So many people put their complete faith in Western medicine and call any other types of medicine a crock. WHY ? Because scientists proved that drug to be safe? Chinese medicine has been around for thousands of years – wow now that’s a lot of clinical trials!! But that’s hoo-ha and a bunch of b*llocks. Why is western medicine so good? Or perceived to be so good and truthful….
I think it’s really important that people question science and what it has proven and not just take it for granted and face value. Isn’t science just another wacky amount of theories and concepts? It just happens to the favourite way of investigating new knowledge our species is developing. In 100 years we may have come up with a new ‘science’ and suddenly realise that all those theories that we believed so strongly to be true are not….
It really wasn’t that long ago as pointed out that people believed the world was flat and that we were created from Adam and Eve (disclaimer – I teach evolution and I do believe that it is *currently* the best theory that explains our existence, however I am open to new ideas).
I think it is really important to be a critical thinker and not just to take things at face value and then to argue so strongly for or against them. Anything is possible. You just don’t know it yet….
That’s my two bob…..
Love and Light
~*~ Katinca ~*~
GOLD Member
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,252 posts
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,252 posts
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom
Posted:
The thing about science is that, done properly, it goes to great lenghs to eliminate the researchers affecting the outcome.
It demands reproducibility of results ie if an experiment produces result A, done by science team B in location C; then, when the same experiment is done by team D in location E, it must also produce result A.
Much of scientific experimentation is done, not to affirm a given hypotheseis, but attempts to find results that disprove it; because it is the hypotheses that stand up to many sincere attempts at disproving, that are the strong ones.
I agree with you that some things based on science are dodgy eg the pharmacutical industry; but that is down to corporate greed, immoral marketing etc; it's not a fualt in scientific method.
Like I said above, IMO the alternative/new-age/spiritual community is often 'shooting itself in the foot' by atempting to use science to 'justify' its doctrines; equally, attempting to bring down scientific method is, IMO a mistake.
Critisise the dodgy stuff like aspects of the pharmacutical industry and other problems with the orthodox appraoch to health; but attacking scientific method itself is, IMO, futile, because it is an outstanding method for getting genuine results with minimal risk of error and bias creeping in.
(it goes with out saying that scientific method can't guarantee 100% error-free, but it's pretty much as close as you can get. If errors do creep in then it's basically because scientific method has not been strictly followed).
The thing about science is that, done properly, it goes to great lenghs to eliminate the researchers affecting the outcome.
It demands reproducibility of results ie if an experiment produces result A, done by science team B in location C; then, when the same experiment is done by team D in location E, it must also produce result A.
Much of scientific experimentation is done, not to affirm a given hypotheseis, but attempts to find results that disprove it; because it is the hypotheses that stand up to many sincere attempts at disproving, that are the strong ones.
I agree with you that some things based on science are dodgy eg the pharmacutical industry; but that is down to corporate greed, immoral marketing etc; it's not a fualt in scientific method.
Like I said above, IMO the alternative/new-age/spiritual community is often 'shooting itself in the foot' by atempting to use science to 'justify' its doctrines; equally, attempting to bring down scientific method is, IMO a mistake.
Critisise the dodgy stuff like aspects of the pharmacutical industry and other problems with the orthodox appraoch to health; but attacking scientific method itself is, IMO, futile, because it is an outstanding method for getting genuine results with minimal risk of error and bias creeping in.
(it goes with out saying that scientific method can't guarantee 100% error-free, but it's pretty much as close as you can get. If errors do creep in then it's basically because scientific method has not been strictly followed).
"You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it."
--MAJOR KORGO KORGAR,
"Last of The Lancers"
AFC 32
Educate your self in the Hazards of Fire Breathing STAY SAFE!
SILVER Member
Pasta of Muppets
2,722 posts
Location: in the interwebs..., United Kingdom
Pasta of Muppets
2,722 posts
Location: in the interwebs..., United Kingdom
Posted:
I'm with OWD...
Just to rewind: Discover the difference between objective truth and subjective truth... i.e. what is real and what people think is real...
And as for dismissing peoples ideas out of hand... I wouldn't do it personally, due to the fact that I know much, but I don't know everything...
"The only true wisdom is knowing that you know nothing" - Socrates
As for explaining or proving altenative therapies or New Age stuff, I personally don't believe we have the science to explain the theories yet... There is still so much we do not know about the universe and therefore we cannot use our pitiful tools to take apart theories that we dont understand yet, we just know that they work.
One thing we do know is the truth of Good and Bad - Hitting someone is Bad, giving them a flower is Good.
We need to take more note of our spiritual well being when guiding us through our dicoveries - or else we find out that wood makes good paper and stuff and we lose 10% of the worlds biomass geologically overnight. (my numbers may very well be a long way off, i never said i was accurate, just I got good intentions)
I'm with OWD...
Just to rewind: Discover the difference between objective truth and subjective truth... i.e. what is real and what people think is real...
And as for dismissing peoples ideas out of hand... I wouldn't do it personally, due to the fact that I know much, but I don't know everything...
"The only true wisdom is knowing that you know nothing" - Socrates
As for explaining or proving altenative therapies or New Age stuff, I personally don't believe we have the science to explain the theories yet... There is still so much we do not know about the universe and therefore we cannot use our pitiful tools to take apart theories that we dont understand yet, we just know that they work.
One thing we do know is the truth of Good and Bad - Hitting someone is Bad, giving them a flower is Good.
We need to take more note of our spiritual well being when guiding us through our dicoveries - or else we find out that wood makes good paper and stuff and we lose 10% of the worlds biomass geologically overnight. (my numbers may very well be a long way off, i never said i was accurate, just I got good intentions)
ohmygodlaserbeamspewpewpew!
BRONZE Member
Returning to a unique state of Equilibrium
3,289 posts
Location: Adelaide, South Australia
Returning to a unique state of Equilibrium
3,289 posts
Location: Adelaide, South Australia
Posted:
Applied Science (vs Theoretical Science) is also limited to the tools of observation, measurement and reproduction available to it. I dont believe our science (applied science) is even close to pure application of scientific method.
Applied Science (vs Theoretical Science) is also limited to the tools of observation, measurement and reproduction available to it. I dont believe our science (applied science) is even close to pure application of scientific method.
--
Help! My personality got stuck in this signature machine and I cant get it out!
SILVER Member
Pasta of Muppets
2,722 posts
Location: in the interwebs..., United Kingdom
Pasta of Muppets
2,722 posts
Location: in the interwebs..., United Kingdom
Posted:
Oh and as for the water crystals idea, it just looks very random, not scientific. After all, weren't we told as children that every snowflake is different?
And one result for every experiment? And of course heavy metal music will produce a crap crystal cos of the vibration destroys the ice crystal, rather like hitting it with a hammer? Dur
Oh and as for the water crystals idea, it just looks very random, not scientific. After all, weren't we told as children that every snowflake is different?
And one result for every experiment? And of course heavy metal music will produce a crap crystal cos of the vibration destroys the ice crystal, rather like hitting it with a hammer? Dur
ohmygodlaserbeamspewpewpew!
See my vest.... see my vest...
693 posts
Location: Adelaide - South Australia
693 posts
Location: Adelaide - South Australia
Posted:
onewheeldave you have a fair point.
I am not saying Scientific Method is crap. I agree that is the best logical method we currently have for explaining things. I teach it, and understand its statistical significance and I do believe in it. But it doesn't mean that scientific method as we know it today will always be the best method for explaining things. That’s all I was really getting at, is that people should be open to new ideas and explorations, but with a critical eye. Just as they should not take everything that science has given us as truth. We scientist are just creating ideas and knowledge that seem logical based on our observations at that time. These observations maybe limited by technology, procedures or any other number of factors that come into play when doing experiments.
Also, I did write my last two bob through the slightly jaded eyes of someone who worked for the pharm industry. It was interesting that you picked up on that one
onewheeldave you have a fair point.
I am not saying Scientific Method is crap. I agree that is the best logical method we currently have for explaining things. I teach it, and understand its statistical significance and I do believe in it. But it doesn't mean that scientific method as we know it today will always be the best method for explaining things. That’s all I was really getting at, is that people should be open to new ideas and explorations, but with a critical eye. Just as they should not take everything that science has given us as truth. We scientist are just creating ideas and knowledge that seem logical based on our observations at that time. These observations maybe limited by technology, procedures or any other number of factors that come into play when doing experiments.
Also, I did write my last two bob through the slightly jaded eyes of someone who worked for the pharm industry. It was interesting that you picked up on that one
Love and Light
~*~ Katinca ~*~
analytic
503 posts
Location: bristol
503 posts
Location: bristol
Posted:
'. Isn’t science just another wacky amount of theories and concepts? It just happens to the favourite way of investigating new knowledge our species is developing. In 100 years we may have come up with a new ‘science’ and suddenly realise that all those theories that we believed so strongly to be true are not….'
In short, no. I've got one point to add: it's the 'no miracles' argument, otherwise known as 'if none of science is true, it'd be a miracle that e.g. televisions work; but there aren't any miracles, so science must have got it at least partly right.'
'. Isn’t science just another wacky amount of theories and concepts? It just happens to the favourite way of investigating new knowledge our species is developing. In 100 years we may have come up with a new ‘science’ and suddenly realise that all those theories that we believed so strongly to be true are not….'
In short, no. I've got one point to add: it's the 'no miracles' argument, otherwise known as 'if none of science is true, it'd be a miracle that e.g. televisions work; but there aren't any miracles, so science must have got it at least partly right.'
ture na sig
SILVER Member
Pooh-Bah
1,626 posts
Location: Southampton, United Kingdom
Pooh-Bah
1,626 posts
Location: Southampton, United Kingdom
Posted:
Written by: quiet
'. Isn’t science just another wacky amount of theories and concepts? It just happens to the favourite way of investigating new knowledge our species is developing. In 100 years we may have come up with a new ‘science’ and suddenly realise that all those theories that we believed so strongly to be true are not….'
In short, no.
What a wonderful miracle if only we could look through each other's eyes for an instant.
Thoreau
Froggie ... Ribbit !!!
4,224 posts
Location: Back in Paris... for now !
4,224 posts
Location: Back in Paris... for now !
Posted:
helloooo katinca kaborghananaaaaaaaaaaaa I miss you
I have to agree with onewheeldave and many others here..
I always find it interesting how my mind works when approaching those subjects... I feel like I am slightly schizo cause half of me really has no interest in what french people call "enc**age de mouche" aka "fly f**cking" which means much ado about nothing in very pompous terms but no real depth... ESPECIALLY when it comes to dealing with energy and vibrations and things-you-cannot-quite demonstrate
yet...
working in massage and doing some bodywork which tunes in to nature elements etc... i can only admit that i beleive there is more to it all than what meets the eyes OR the brain of scientists... and i beleive there is such thing as "energy" and vibrations.(i do not even think anyone disagrees with it, it is just the explanation they disagree on)
Spirituality is not just a word which was invented by trendy magazines to sell more "zen products" and cheap gurus... But spirituality seems to be mistreated and diistorted a whole lot by being forced through the grid of rational thinking... it is sucha personal, private experience...
I wish people did not always try to explain some things to prove it to the scientific world, sometimes a bit like a child trying to impress their father . Being demonstrable with a scientific approach is not the only realm there is around here... and some things would be better off if someone tried to explain them in poems, paintings, music, bodywork or just through life actions in silence...
It is always interesting to do a cross-cultural view on those subjects too (or is that cause i am a trained anthropologist
? ) like you said Kate, with western medicine versus traditional, same goes with science versus tribal beleifs (some would argue science is a cult or tribe in itself ) ...
what it boils down to is humility...
the socratic approach i agree is possibly the key to it all... I know that I know nothing...
to remain opened, but also to remain a child...
I find children possibly touch a purer truth than many big headed people simply because nothing is impossible to them yet they do not obsessively try to demonstrate it all...
i love that you bring out subjects which make me think, brain happy
shine on
cass
helloooo katinca kaborghananaaaaaaaaaaaa
I miss you I have to agree with onewheeldave and many others here..
I always find it interesting how my mind works when approaching those subjects... I feel like I am slightly schizo cause half of me really has no interest in what french people call "enc**age de mouche" aka "fly f**cking" which means much ado about nothing in very pompous terms but no real depth... ESPECIALLY when it comes to dealing with energy and vibrations and things-you-cannot-quite demonstrate
yet...
working in massage and doing some bodywork which tunes in to nature elements etc... i can only admit that i beleive there is more to it all than what meets the eyes OR the brain of scientists... and i beleive there is such thing as "energy" and vibrations.(i do not even think anyone disagrees with it, it is just the explanation they disagree on)
Spirituality is not just a word which was invented by trendy magazines to sell more "zen products" and cheap gurus... But spirituality seems to be mistreated and diistorted a whole lot by being forced through the grid of rational thinking... it is sucha personal, private experience...
I wish people did not always try to explain some things to prove it to the scientific world, sometimes a bit like a child trying to impress their father . Being demonstrable with a scientific approach is not the only realm there is around here... and some things would be better off if someone tried to explain them in poems, paintings, music, bodywork or just through life actions in silence...
It is always interesting to do a cross-cultural view on those subjects too (or is that cause i am a trained anthropologist
? ) like you said Kate, with western medicine versus traditional, same goes with science versus tribal beleifs (some would argue science is a cult or tribe in itself ) ... what it boils down to is humility...
the socratic approach i agree is possibly the key to it all... I know that I know nothing...
to remain opened, but also to remain a child...
I find children possibly touch a purer truth than many big headed people simply because nothing is impossible to them yet they do not obsessively try to demonstrate it all...
i love that you bring out subjects which make me think, brain happy
shine on
cass
"I want brown bread... no, that is diesel oil..."
"So I was raised in Europe, where History comes from ..."
"NON !!! La Plume de mon oncle n est pas Bingibangibungi !!!"
GOLD Member
HOP Mad Doctor
13,925 posts
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
HOP Mad Doctor
13,925 posts
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
Posted:
Most of the theories that we once thought were true were either guesses or otherwise not based in scientific reasoning.
We've been using the modern scientific method for only about 150 years or so. Since we have, we've invented amazing things. The discovery of the electron, for example... We've flown to the moon, we've made computers and televisions, we've cured cancer (yes, folks, we've cured cancer...just ask Lance Armstrong and he'll tell you all about how his cancer was cured).
People used to think that the moon was a basketball-sized lump of green cheese or whatever. That wasn't their 'science,' that was their belief system. It was the modern scientific method that proved it to be a thousand-mile lump of rock some several hundred thousand miles away. And it's science that's given us MRI, computers, microwaves, CD's, and plastic.
Science is nothing more than a method of gathering information that is rational and resistant to 'belief.' And since the dawn of science, we have done amazing things...and horrible things.
Written by:
I think it’s really important that people question science and what it has proven and not just take it for granted and face value. Isn’t science just another wacky amount of theories and concepts? It just happens to the favourite way of investigating new knowledge our species is developing. In 100 years we may have come up with a new ‘science’ and suddenly realise that all those theories that we believed so strongly to be true are not….
Most of the theories that we once thought were true were either guesses or otherwise not based in scientific reasoning.
We've been using the modern scientific method for only about 150 years or so. Since we have, we've invented amazing things. The discovery of the electron, for example... We've flown to the moon, we've made computers and televisions, we've cured cancer (yes, folks, we've cured cancer...just ask Lance Armstrong and he'll tell you all about how his cancer was cured).
People used to think that the moon was a basketball-sized lump of green cheese or whatever. That wasn't their 'science,' that was their belief system. It was the modern scientific method that proved it to be a thousand-mile lump of rock some several hundred thousand miles away. And it's science that's given us MRI, computers, microwaves, CD's, and plastic.
Science is nothing more than a method of gathering information that is rational and resistant to 'belief.' And since the dawn of science, we have done amazing things...and horrible things.
-Mike
Certified Mad Doctor and HoP High Priest of Nutella
A buckuht n a hooze! -Valura
Froggie ... Ribbit !!!
4,224 posts
Location: Back in Paris... for now !
4,224 posts
Location: Back in Paris... for now !
Posted:
Mike... Green CHEESE ? I am interested
::looking at the moon wondering where i put the crackers::
Mike... Green CHEESE ? I am interested
::looking at the moon wondering where i put the crackers::
"I want brown bread... no, that is diesel oil..."
"So I was raised in Europe, where History comes from ..."
"NON !!! La Plume de mon oncle n est pas Bingibangibungi !!!"
GOLD Member
HOP Mad Doctor
13,925 posts
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
HOP Mad Doctor
13,925 posts
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
Posted:
Great, I tell a Frenchwoman about a thousand-mile lump of green cheese and not only does she believe me without scientifically testing the theory, but...
she gets excited.
Great, I tell a Frenchwoman about a thousand-mile lump of green cheese and not only does she believe me without scientifically testing the theory, but...
she gets excited.
-Mike
Certified Mad Doctor and HoP High Priest of Nutella
A buckuht n a hooze! -Valura
See my vest.... see my vest...
693 posts
Location: Adelaide - South Australia
693 posts
Location: Adelaide - South Australia
Posted:
Doc and quiet - you both have really good points about scientific method regarding the functioning of computers and t.v etc.. Thanks for that insight. I will take that on board – ooow cognitive conflict.
And so Doc.... I see you believe that USA landed on the Moon then. ….despite all the ‘ evidence’ that shows it might not have happened.....and why haven't we ever gone back there? Economic reasons? I am sure there would be plenty of rich joes who would pay to go to the moon...if they could (conspiracy style theory)**.
<**Disclaimer - not saying that USA didn't land on the moon, just throwing spanners around the place for a bit of fun>
Doc and quiet - you both have really good points about scientific method regarding the functioning of computers and t.v etc..
Thanks for that insight. I will take that on board – ooow cognitive conflict. And so Doc.... I see you believe that USA landed on the Moon then. ….despite all the ‘ evidence’ that shows it might not have happened.....and why haven't we ever gone back there? Economic reasons? I am sure there would be plenty of rich joes who would pay to go to the moon...if they could (conspiracy style theory
)**.<**Disclaimer - not saying that USA didn't land on the moon, just throwing spanners around the place for a bit of fun>
Love and Light
~*~ Katinca ~*~
GOLD Member
HOP Mad Doctor
13,925 posts
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
HOP Mad Doctor
13,925 posts
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
Posted:
Katinca,
Carl Sagan has a great rant on this issue in his book Pale Blue Dot. In short, our reasons for going to the moon were a military publicity stunt.
Basically: "If we can put a man on the moon, imagine what we can drop into your back yard."
We haven't gone back to the moon because there's no selfish reason to. The development costs for a commercial venture are prohibitive, as is the cost of climbing out of Earth's gravity well. Just remember, the round trip flight to London cost me US$800. The first-class flight would have been US$5,000. And that's just for 8 hours strapped in a seat hurtling along at 800 km/h 11,000 meters above the surface of the earth. And airliner technology is over 50 years old and is amazingly well-developed.
In fact in all of the moon landings, good science was only returned from one or two of them.
Written by: Katinca
Doc and quiet - you both have really good points about scientific method regarding the functioning of computers and t.v etc..
And so Doc.... I see you believe that USA landed on the Moon then. ….despite all the ‘ evidence’ that shows it might not have happened.....and why haven't we ever gone back there? Economic reasons? I am sure there would be plenty of rich joes who would pay to go to the moon...if they could (conspiracy style theory
<**Disclaimer - not saying that USA didn't land on the moon, just throwing spanners around the place for a bit of fun>
Katinca,
Carl Sagan has a great rant on this issue in his book Pale Blue Dot. In short, our reasons for going to the moon were a military publicity stunt.
Basically: "If we can put a man on the moon, imagine what we can drop into your back yard."
We haven't gone back to the moon because there's no selfish reason to. The development costs for a commercial venture are prohibitive, as is the cost of climbing out of Earth's gravity well. Just remember, the round trip flight to London cost me US$800. The first-class flight would have been US$5,000. And that's just for 8 hours strapped in a seat hurtling along at 800 km/h 11,000 meters above the surface of the earth. And airliner technology is over 50 years old and is amazingly well-developed.
In fact in all of the moon landings, good science was only returned from one or two of them.
-Mike
Certified Mad Doctor and HoP High Priest of Nutella
A buckuht n a hooze! -Valura
veteran
1,376 posts
Location: London, UK
1,376 posts
Location: London, UK
Posted:
Heh, I've seen the evidence for why the Moon landings were faked, and so far none of them stand up to scrutiny. They're based on bad science, imperfect knowledge of the actual proceedings of the landing or just wild supposition...
Here's one rebuttal, with links to a load more...
https://pirlwww.lpl.arizona.edu/~jscotti/NOT_faked/
Written by: Katinca
And so Doc.... I see you believe that USA landed on the Moon then. ….despite all the ‘ evidence’ that shows it might not have happened.....and why haven't we ever gone back there? Economic reasons? I am sure there would be plenty of rich joes who would pay to go to the moon...if they could (conspiracy style theory
<**Disclaimer - not saying that USA didn't land on the moon, just throwing spanners around the place for a bit of fun>
Heh, I've seen the evidence for why the Moon landings were faked, and so far none of them stand up to scrutiny. They're based on bad science, imperfect knowledge of the actual proceedings of the landing or just wild supposition...
Here's one rebuttal, with links to a load more...
https://pirlwww.lpl.arizona.edu/~jscotti/NOT_faked/
"Moo," said the happy cow.
Scientist of Fortune
1,189 posts
Location: Edinburgh
1,189 posts
Location: Edinburgh
Posted:
Moon landings faked, pyramids build by aliens and so forth...
why do some people have trouble believing that humans are capable of incredible things on our own.
Moon landings faked, pyramids build by aliens and so forth...
why do some people have trouble believing that humans are capable of incredible things on our own.
According to Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle of Quantum Dynamics, we may already be making love right now...
BRONZE Member
Returning to a unique state of Equilibrium
3,289 posts
Location: Adelaide, South Australia
Returning to a unique state of Equilibrium
3,289 posts
Location: Adelaide, South Australia
Posted:
and why did the same people who put people down for looking at alternative theories put people to death for suggesting that the Earth rotates around the Sun?
and why did the same people who put people down for looking at alternative theories put people to death for suggesting that the Earth rotates around the Sun?
--
Help! My personality got stuck in this signature machine and I cant get it out!
SILVER Member
big and good and broken
7,330 posts
Location: lunn dunn, yoo kay, United Kingdom
big and good and broken
7,330 posts
Location: lunn dunn, yoo kay, United Kingdom
Posted:
because the people that put forward those ideas lived in a social and political environment that was massively resistant to change due to the fact that the 'government' was indistinguishable from the church and as such any challenge to religion was perceived as a challenge to the state.
i reckon
cole. x
Written by: Pyrolific
and why did the same people who put people down for looking at alternative theories put people to death for suggesting that the Earth rotates around the Sun?
because the people that put forward those ideas lived in a social and political environment that was massively resistant to change due to the fact that the 'government' was indistinguishable from the church and as such any challenge to religion was perceived as a challenge to the state.
i reckon
cole. x
"i see you at 'dis cafe.
i come to 'dis cafe quite a lot myself.
they do porridge."
- tim westwood
analytic
503 posts
Location: bristol
503 posts
Location: bristol
Posted:
i don't understand . . . what are you getting at?
i don't understand . . . what are you getting at?
ture na sig
SILVER Member
big and good and broken
7,330 posts
Location: lunn dunn, yoo kay, United Kingdom
big and good and broken
7,330 posts
Location: lunn dunn, yoo kay, United Kingdom
Posted:
me? i was answering josh's question
i wasn't sure what the question was trying to elicit so i answered it in the hope that the answer might be more applicable to the discussion.
i'm not sure that it is but its better than having an unanswered question left hanging...
cole. x
me? i was answering josh's question
i wasn't sure what the question was trying to elicit so i answered it in the hope that the answer might be more applicable to the discussion.
i'm not sure that it is but its better than having an unanswered question left hanging...
cole. x
"i see you at 'dis cafe.
i come to 'dis cafe quite a lot myself.
they do porridge."
- tim westwood
SILVER Member
15,417 posts
Location: South Wales
15,417 posts
Location: South Wales
Posted:
Yes, I think so.
I dont like to leave questions hanging either
Written by: Cole
me?
Yes, I think so.
I dont like to leave questions hanging either
analytic
503 posts
Location: bristol
503 posts
Location: bristol
Posted:
oops - coleman, my post was meant to come after josh's, not yours. bad timing
oops - coleman, my post was meant to come after josh's, not yours. bad timing
ture na sig
BRONZE Member
Geek-enviro-hippy priest
1,858 posts
Location: Diss, Norfolk, United Kingdom
Geek-enviro-hippy priest
1,858 posts
Location: Diss, Norfolk, United Kingdom
Posted:
I've only just got round to reading all this thread since my first post.
Thanks UCOF for sticking up for me - that is what I ment.
I think my posts in other threads and other peoples posts in this tread mean I will take polarity's advice.
Bye
I've only just got round to reading all this thread since my first post.
Thanks UCOF for sticking up for me - that is what I ment.
I think my posts in other threads and other peoples posts in this tread mean I will take polarity's advice.
Bye
There's too many home fires burning and not enough trees
Similar Topics
Using the keywords [message * water] we found the following existing topics.
- Forums > Messages from Water [55 replies]
Show more..
© 1998 - 2024 Home of Poi
All prices converted to United States dollars using XE.com