It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Shawn B.
lol seriously it says that? that's pretty...off. they saw them, they had boats too, it's just N.O.W. propaganda.
Without really knowing it, I've watched a film specifically designed to promote Ramtha's (ramthian?) beliefs. Now I'm not opposed to following someone's beliefs, but how can I not be suspicious with the way this was presented?
I've watched a movie claiming to debunk the concept of all other religions, which maintains a $2 million dollar compound in Yelm, Wash. for the purpose of conducting classes for the followers of Ramtha, and are we not supposed to think at all about this being their version of a religious belief? All the experts are presented without any discussion of their connections with Ramtha, or the entire creating force of the movie being Ramthian followers.
in addition The following persons in the film have all spoken at RSE and sold books there.
Fred Allen Wolf
Dr Candice Pert
and of course, Ramtha
Salon.com has a wonderful expose on this aspect of the movie, saying the movie could easily be interpreted as a full-blown infomercial for Ramtha. When criticized that the money for Bleep came from Ramtha, the creators ignored the implication that the followers of ramtha helped with the money, and instead issued this quote, which I actually love:
"Ramtha did not fund this film, as Ramtha does not have. a bank account or a Social Security number"
ok, so next time I'll be specific and say "the followers of Ramtha funded this movie to promote their interests, and Ramtha can claim a lack of responsibility since Ramtha does not actually do the accounting for the Ramtha School of Enlightenment"
how does that sound?
here's a link to salon.com's article on the subject
before I forget... I also read some interesting information on the 3 scientific proofs.
1. There appears to be no source for the story about the Indians literally not being able to see Columbus's ships.
2. The "Maharishi Effect" was an experiment in 1993 about the drop in violent crime in DC during a two month period of meditation. There were a number of problems with this experiment including that the murder rate actually rose. It was discovered later that ALL the members of the "independent scientific review board" were followers of the Maharishi, and the experiment has never been independently replicated.
3. For the formation of crystals in certain shapes in response to a word on the bottle, or music being played, what the filmmakers don't tell you is that for each type of crystal, Emoto takes 50 samples, and then spends (hours, days?) browsing through each of them for the one that looks right based on the word he selected. From Emoto's website: " we look at a sample of water 50 different times and take photographs when the right image appears"
In the film, during a discussion of the influence of experience on perception, Candace Pert notes a story, which she says she believes is true, of Native Americans being unable to see Columbus's ships because they were outside their experience. According to an article in Fortean Times by David Hambling, the origins of this story likely involved the voyages of Captain James Cook, not Columbus, and an account related by historian Robert Hughes which said Cook's ships were "...complex and unfamiliar as to defy the natives' understanding". Hambling says it is likely that both the Hughes account and the story told by Pert were exaggerations of the records left by Captain Cook and the botanist Joseph Banks. Historians believe the Native Americans likely saw the ships but ignored them as posing no immediate danger.