Ya know it seems that there is a tendancy by some people to want to discredit the filmakers and the information in the film based on their affiliation with Ramtha's school of Enlightenment. Some of you call RSE a cult but have no evidence or facts to back up that accusation.
Well, I'm one of the most vocal critics, and I've never ever called the RSE a cult.
What I can say is that there's a fast-and-loose game going on here trying to claim that there is some repeatable scientific means of demonstrating that anyone anywhere can somehow "infect the quantum wave" through conscious thought. They cannot. The film mis-represents Emoto's work as science; they clearly say that it is NOT science in the study guide! Why the flip-flop?
In short, I don't really care about the status of RSE, but I do care that the premise of this film is fundamentally flawed. The producers seemingly think that innuendo is as good as real science.
Many of those guilty of this practice are the same people who will argue that the film is bunk because of it's lack of scientific credibility.
Then why don't you talk about that?
Do you think there's a shred of scientific credibility in the central tenent of this film? If so, please provide a URL supporting that.
The "official" Ramtha site doesn't google the word science on it anywhere. However,
http://ramtha.com/html/pdf/introduction.pdf says that a fundamental concept of this practice is:
"The redefention of God as the Observer in quantum physics."
This co-opting of the term of the scientific principle of "quantum physics" does appear to be similar with what the film does. Look at the poster of "What the Bleep" -- there is a particle collider bubble chamber in the background. Look at the title itself -- there are the symbols of the mathematics of quantum physics. But it's all superficial -- the use of such images/symbols is all simply innuendo. There is NO explanation of any science in the film of somehow co-opting the observer in quantum physics, and AFAICT, no explanation on
www.ramtha.com, either.
Both the film and
ramtha.com provide innuendo, but nothing to back it up.
I find this interesting and hypocritical because to dislike the movie based on it's failure to provide proof of its claims in one breath and then make claims of your own with no evidence to prove your own statement in the next is just downright peculiar.
This is rather silly. Unlike the producers of this "scientific" documentary, people here are just posting to a discussion board.
I don't know -- or really care -- if RSE is a cult.
I do care that both this film and RSE are making claims about quantum physics that neither can back up.
If you participate with this organization, YOU should be concerned about that.
Now: would you like to explain why
ramtha.com can claim that they can possibly scientifically demonstrate "The redefention of God as the Observer in quantum physics."
*That* would be a good question to discuss here!
reply
share
CACTUSJACKmankin
18 years ago
the problem isn't just RSE it's more about JZ Knight. Channeling is an act. it has been clearly demonstrated that "convincing" channeling can be done with a little acting. Look up the Great Carlos incident in Australia for more on that. The film looses credibility just for endorsing "Ramtha", that's in addition to all the bull$#!+ science.
reply
share
agadfy
18 years ago
Channeling is an act? When you are absolutely cluless about a subject why don't you do us a favor and don't post your asinine opinion. It just makes you like like a complete idiot.
reply
share