Masaru Emoto - How Thought Affects Water/Ice *fascinating*, page 1
Pages:
ATS Members have flagged this thread 4 times


reply posted on 30-10-2009 @ 10:01 AM by v01i0
reply to post by gazerstar



Emoto's findings are interesting, though he has been criticized for vague methods in his scientific experiments.

Here's what wikipedia says about mr. Emoto and his research:
Commentators have criticized Emoto for insufficient experimental controls, and for not sharing enough details of his approach with the scientific community. In addition, Emoto has been criticized for designing his experiments in ways that leave them open to human error influencing his findings.

Source

Personally I find it intriguing what Emoto's work suggest.

-v

[edit on 30-10-2009 by v01i0]


reply posted on 30-10-2009 @ 10:49 AM by gazerstar
Originally posted by v01i0
reply to
post by gazerstar



Emoto's findings are interesting, though he has been criticized for vague methods in his scientific experiments.

Here's what wikipedia says about mr. Emoto and his research:
Commentators have criticized Emoto for insufficient experimental controls, and for not sharing enough details of his approach with the scientific community. In addition, Emoto has been criticized for designing his experiments in ways that leave them open to human error influencing his findings.

Source

Personally I find it intriguing what Emoto's work suggest.

-v

[edit on 30-10-2009 by v01i0]


Thanks for the info. That's interesting. I guess one way to find out if this is true or not is to try to replicate it ourselves. It seems easy enough. Now, I need to find a microscope.


reply posted on 30-10-2009 @ 10:56 AM by themuse
reply to post by gazerstar



Hi gazerstar

Awesome that you posted this. I love his work with water crystals, I have always believed you resonate what you think and say, for example i do not say the word hate and havent for many years. ( i didnt even want to type it now!)
When I came across Dr Emoto it validated my personal reasons for this conviction, logically as we are 70% or so water our words and thoughts resonate just like this through us.

Nice find and great posting ! I hope many people see it and think twice about their inner and outer dialogue. Goodness knows all the trolling flamers here that bag others here could gain insight into why they might be in cycles of ill worded, ill feeling lives and hopefully change what they think for their own good!

Have the best day
themuse


reply posted on 30-10-2009 @ 12:18 PM by sirnex
reply to post by The Killah29



This man has already been shown to be a fraud as far as I know. I also suggest reading this link LINK as I think it does an excellent job at explaining why some people, such as yourself, would believe in these kind of thing's. It give's excellent examples and explanations.

The Japanese guy already admitted to basically skewing the results in his favor and that these experiments were not conducted in a scientific manner. The fact that you still regard the results as valid despite what the man himself says is just... amazing.


reply posted on 30-10-2009 @ 12:23 PM by Rikhart
reply to post by sirnex



Are we supposed to take your word for it? Or care to show us proof of that bold statement? Where did Emoto ever admit to such a thing?


reply posted on 30-10-2009 @ 12:42 PM by Danna
reply to post by gazerstar



I actually knew about this there is some documentary I think I remember i gues its ''What the *bleep* do we know'' where she's at the subway and there are images about this


reply posted on 30-10-2009 @ 12:47 PM by sirnex
reply to post by Rikhart



Someone already posted the wiki link and quoted it earlier. He left out the part where the guy essentially admits the results are fraudulent.

Emoto freely acknowledges that he is not a scientist,[7] and that photographers are instructed to select the most pleasing photographs.


Even one of the websites discussing the 'double blind' experiment show's indications of fraudulent results.

LINK

and the resulting images were blindly assessed for aesthetic appeal by 100 independent judges. Results indicated that crystals from the treated water were given higher scores for aesthetic appeal than those from the control water


In other words, they were only including those that were of the most aesthetic appealing results of the experiment in the same manner that the earlier conducted experiment results were obtained.


reply posted on 9-11-2009 @ 03:47 PM by bsbray11
reply to post by Copernicus



Thanks for posting. That double-blind study just goes to validate the original research in the OP. Real science is about prediction and repetition.



reply posted on 12-11-2010 @ 09:26 PM by mrvdreamknight
reply to post by bsbray11



Is thi stuff true or not?

Does anyone know for a fact one way or the other?
Pages:     ^^TOP^^



Only read this if you are quite young?
  Posted 10 days ago with 71 member flags
The World Is Waiting On You To Liberate Yourself From Ego!
  Posted 5 days ago with 36 member flags
Crazy Sufi Wisdom: The Moon Is More Valuable Than The Sun
  Posted 8 days ago with 25 member flags
PEACE To attempt the impossible...
  Posted 4 days ago with 23 member flags
Something I Learned from Looking at my dog in the eye.
  Posted 16 days ago with 17 member flags
Experiment: What would YOU do?
  Posted 16 days ago with 12 member flags
A cry for help....anyone out there?
  Posted 16 days ago with 11 member flags
The unsung canine heroes of 911 (12 of 100 remain)
  Posted 3 days ago with 11 member flags