Water, The Great Mystery

  • More Options

VN:F [1.9.16_1159]
Rating: 5.5/10 based on 186 votes cast.
Is This Documentary Broken?
(Click Here To Let Us Know)

“Water is the driving force of all nature.” – Leonardo da Vinci

Water makes most of earths surface and most of our human bodies … but do we really know the secrets of this amazing element.

From agriculture, to factories and hydropower, we put water to work in a million different ways every day. And yet water acts outside all known physical laws of nature.

At a time of global climate change, understanding the mysteries of water is critical. Every living thing needs it to survive … Our ignorance of its function and capacities has lead us to abuse its quality and forget its potential. Witness WATER’s capacity and challenge historical assumptions. Unveil enlightened information and new scientific discoveries that create new possibilities for water’s use in every field of endeavor.

These new discoveries go beyond human reckoning – beyond the solar systems and galaxies to the Source of life itself..

Featuring breathtaking discoveries by researchers worldwide including Masaru Emoto from “What the Bleep Do We Know” …

“Just as with the film “What The Bleep Do We Know” , “Water” shows us through science that our thoughts have an effect on our external reality. Imagine the possibilities when people realize their own potential for creativity. Films like this give me hope that there is an emergence of collective intelligence that can solve the problems of the world.”

Related Documentaries

From The Web

  • Alex

    This is full of bullshit and homeopathic propaganda. Water does not defy ‘all known physical laws.’ In fact, it doesn’t defy any.

    • Isa

      Is an amzing video!! thank you for all the information.
      I love it.
      Alex, for people like you the world is how it is right now, you should to keep your comments for yourself.

      • Alan

        Except that he’s right. These studies about water changing its properties in reaction to human emotion and “projection” are laughable. I highly doubt you would be able to reproduce the results with any higher rate than random chance.

        Don’t let the use of words like “experiments” and “data” or titles like “doctor” or “professor” make you think anything presented in this video is fact.

        It is true, water has some unique properties, but this video takes that well established scientific fact and uses that as a starting place to make many wild assumptions and presents them as fact. It is despicable.

        • Dasjieb

          Interesting remark: “Don’t let the use of words like “experiments” and “data” or titles like “doctor” or “professor” make you think anything presented in this video is fact.”

          What makes you believe in science? Doctors and professors who make claims and use very intelligent language and mathematics that backup their claims, I guess. However, did you YOURSELF research everything science told you, or do you just take it as a fact that if it’s ‘official science’, it must be RIGHT?

          Just realize the doublesidedness of your own remarks bro, that’s all 😉
          Love,
          Chuck

          • Scruggs

            Look’s as if “Chuck Norris” couldn’t pass high school science!

          • Chuck Norris

            Thanks for the laugh, I appreciate that :) Now, besides being funny, could you react to the point I’m making in my post? I’m not saying science is wrong, just that people like you blindly believe in what are considered facts today, but could be non-facts in the future.

            “Ah, yes, its in my textbook, so this must be the absolute truth, and anyone who thinks otherwise is a, I quote, “IDIOT””. Good logic, people. What happened to critical thinking? You only are critical to things that don’t fit in your view of the world, a view that was foonsped to you from the day you were born, reinforced by the education of allmighty ‘SCIENCE’ at schools.

            Remember the people believed the earth was flat story that’s been told a billion times already? If you told the earth was round in that day and age if you went there by timemachine (theoretically speaking), people would react to you the same way you’re reacting to me right now.

          • Scruggs

            The Earth is not round, it is a sphere or to be precise an oblate spheroid.

          • Chuck Norris

            Touché

          • Chuck Norris

            Ofcourse, I ment ‘spoonfed’ instead of ‘foonsped’ 😛

          • Chuck Norris

            Ofcourse, I ment ‘spoonfed’ instead of ‘foonsped’ 😛

          • Gribnie

            Chuck Norris, just realize that your remarks are based on a lack of intellence and understanding bro, that’s all 😉

          • Chuck Norris

            Obvious troll is obvious?

          • Luayursula

            Norris proved to all of us, reading you both, that he is way ahead of you on thinking for himself. You are a warted troll who probably eats babies.

            That said… I’ve always been weary about the hold body of arguments (or more, the conclussions) made by “What the bleep do we know” or “The Secret”.

            Of all… Mr. Emoto’s claims, seem not just extrapolated out of context like the rest, but either false, or one the most mind-blowing discoveries of our time.

            Someone trully needs to try and replicate those experiments!

            Not you Gribnie, because those bad vibes will sure spoil the samples.

          • Luayursula

            Norris proved to all of us, reading you both, that he is way ahead of you on thinking for himself. You are a warted troll who probably eats babies.

            That said… I’ve always been weary about the hold body of arguments (or more, the conclussions) made by “What the bleep do we know” or “The Secret”.

            Of all… Mr. Emoto’s claims, seem not just extrapolated out of context like the rest, but either false, or one the most mind-blowing discoveries of our time.

            Someone trully needs to try and replicate those experiments!

            Not you Gribnie, because those bad vibes will sure spoil the samples.

          • Bobby

            Chuck, really… have these kind of conversations at your church because you’re greatly outnumbered by those that recognize veritable proof when deciding on what is believable and what is bullshit. Believe what you want but you’ll have to come up with better proof that this “film” if you intend on being taken seriously. i mean… just listen to yourself…” did you YOURSELF research everything science told you, or do you just take it as a fact that if it’s ‘official science, it must be RIGHT?” WTF is that supposed to mean? So, unless we OURSELVES build a particle accelerator and start smashing atoms together then everything we’ve learned about dark matter is invalid? Do me a favor and ignore everything we’ve learned from scientists about thermal dynamics and press your face onto a red hot stove element for a few minutes as an experiment to see if it’s truly hot.

        • jesus in another guise

          Alan you are as closed minded as religious crazy folk, if you would bother to investigate yourself before jumping in with your opinions you would have found out that it is genuine. Its science but not well understood science. Compared to scientific theories like multiple universes and quantum physics it is a lot more believable.

        • jesus in another guise

          Alan you are as closed minded as religious crazy folk, if you would bother to investigate yourself before jumping in with your opinions you would have found out that it is genuine. Its science but not well understood science. Compared to scientific theories like multiple universes and quantum physics it is a lot more believable.

      • Plaguewatcher

        Keep your comments to yourself?
        Really? is the “real world” so distasteful to you that you would muzzle those that do not believe in fantasy? How very republican of you

    • Tony

      I totally agree. The Rice experiment was hysterical. If the results from that were as predictable as was shown, food manufacture would never be the same again, who would need preservatives? For every disease that has been ‘stopped’ by prayer, many many millions more have perished despite diligent efforts of prayer and love by doting bedside carers. If we could influence matter with out thoughts this way, medical science (who have apparently ‘proved’ these claims) would have effectively changed government policies, the infrastructure of civilisation and ended natural dilemmas. I was looking forward to a credible scientific study of waters properties and structure. All we got were ‘scientists’ talking about god. What complete bullshit.

      • Luayursula

        Well… fact is, as far as you don’t know it is, placebo, often works.

        They tried to keep us (humanity) in that state for a long time, they called it religions, and yeah… taken with faith, many work, as far as you don’t start questioning.

        When science starts to take that role of “we know and can solve it all”, they end up like a religion. Not so much the “practicioners” as the mindless fans.

        I’m too smart for religion and too cynical for wishful-thinking… but hell if I don’t envy that numb contemt. For many, it does work.

        Same goes for scholastic science, if my food water and air were not all poisoned thanks to it, I’d be such a believer…

        We are the illiterate barbaric assholes who almost destroyed the planet to the eyes of the future inhabitants of the Earth, let’s keep that in mind, when thinking ourselves “soooo right on.” WE know crap.

      • Luayursula

        Well… fact is, as far as you don’t know it is, placebo, often works.

        They tried to keep us (humanity) in that state for a long time, they called it religions, and yeah… taken with faith, many work, as far as you don’t start questioning.

        When science starts to take that role of “we know and can solve it all”, they end up like a religion. Not so much the “practicioners” as the mindless fans.

        I’m too smart for religion and too cynical for wishful-thinking… but hell if I don’t envy that numb contemt. For many, it does work.

        Same goes for scholastic science, if my food water and air were not all poisoned thanks to it, I’d be such a believer…

        We are the illiterate barbaric assholes who almost destroyed the planet to the eyes of the future inhabitants of the Earth, let’s keep that in mind, when thinking ourselves “soooo right on.” WE know crap.

      • Luayursula

        Well… fact is, as far as you don’t know it is, placebo, often works.

        They tried to keep us (humanity) in that state for a long time, they called it religions, and yeah… taken with faith, many work, as far as you don’t start questioning.

        When science starts to take that role of “we know and can solve it all”, they end up like a religion. Not so much the “practicioners” as the mindless fans.

        I’m too smart for religion and too cynical for wishful-thinking… but hell if I don’t envy that numb contemt. For many, it does work.

        Same goes for scholastic science, if my food water and air were not all poisoned thanks to it, I’d be such a believer…

        We are the illiterate barbaric assholes who almost destroyed the planet to the eyes of the future inhabitants of the Earth, let’s keep that in mind, when thinking ourselves “soooo right on.” WE know crap.

    • eva

      Most comments are a matter of opinion about this film.
      If you want some real understanding, here are some papers you can check to get a clearer understanding of what the information this video implies. If you are a chemist you should know that all of this can be considered very plausible, thanks to statistical mechanics and the dynamics of energy and the system.
      People disappointed in science are too stupid to understand the actual implications and their disappointment is largely due to expectations that are too high ; this isn’t because of what is presented. The principles stated in this film are so small but then again so are neutrinos. We have always known about clustering and the intermolecular forces these molecules. This movie has some opinions but you would have to be retarded to deny many overarching facts that makes this movie valid; facts that say for every actions there is a reaction, that applies to your smallest neutrino. Statistical mechanics is pretty clear about how energy states of molecules are more related to the system that they are in than the actually composites of energy that they represent. If you felt like an idiot watching this movie its pretty simple so either you didn’t understand the material. Disbelief in something so ubiquitous in your lives its very understandable because you hardly notice. But it can be calculated, measured and it has been and its there, just like the neutrino. Deny it and insult it but its there. Here are some papers to check out why and how clustering is studied. If you are chemist you should have no problem, if you aren’t watch the movie instead. Data is there so check it out before you say some one doesn’t know what they are talking about.

      Again here is a list of studies that have a huge amount of application in atmospheric and molecular dynamic studies check out the pseudoscience on the last one . Berkely is known for idiotic religious pseudoscience.

      The Changing Hydrogen-Bond Network of Water from the Bulk to the Surface of a Cluster: A Born−Oppenheimer Molecular Dynamics Study
      N. Galamba and B. J. Costa Cabral
      J. Am. Chem. Soc., 2008, 130 (52), pp 17955–17960

      Quantum Cluster Equilibrium Theory Applied in Hydrogen Bond Number Studies of Water. 2. Icebergs in a Two-Dimensional Water Continuum?
      S. B. C. Lehmann, C. Spickermann and B. Kirchner
      J. Chem. Theory Comput., 2009, 5 (6), pp 1650–1656

      FT-ICR Studies of Solvation Effects in Ionic Water Cluster Reactions
      Gereon Niedner-Schatteburg and Vladimir E. Bondybey
      Chem. Rev., 2000, 100 (11), pp 4059–4086

      A Molecular Dynamics Investigation of Hydrogen Bonding in Supercritical Water
      Tahmid I. Mizan, Phillip E. Savage, and Robert M. Ziff
      Innovations in Supercritical Fluids, Chapter 3, 1995, pp 47-64

      Morphology of Protonated Methanol Clusters: an infrared spectroscopic study of hydrogen bond networks H+(CH3OH)n(n=4-15) j. phys. chem. A 2005, 109, 138-141

      Water Cluster Anions Studied by the Long-Range Corrected Density Functional Theory J. Phys. Chem. A, 2008, 112 (40), pp 9845–9853

      Calculation of Electron Detachment Energies for Water Cluster Anions: An Appraisal of Electronic Structure Methods, with Application to (H2O)20- and (H2O)24- John M. Herbert* and Martin Head-Gordon
      Department of Chemistry, University of California, Berkeley, California 94720
      J. Phys. Chem. A, 2005, 109 (23), pp 5217–5229

      Infrared Predissociation Spectroscopy of Large Water Clusters: A Unique Probe of Cluster Surfaces
      C. Steinbach, P. Andersson, J. K. Kazimirski, and U. Buck, V. Buch, T. A. Beu J. Phys. Chem. A, 2004, 108 (29), pp 6165–6174

      This one is really easy
      http://www.holosuniversity.net/pdf/SimmonsJ_Dissertation_web.pdf

  • Luke

    As a chemist, I found this video both laughable and appalling. The claims made are ridiculous.

    • Matt

      DISAPPOINTEEED! Complete waste of time.
      More than the manic-depressive Hollywood disgusts me pseudo-scientific documentaries.

      A documentary should document facts not reinvent reality.

      “* water senses human emotions and reacts to them
      * water is able to communicate from a distance
      * a prayer can turn bad water into good one ”

      This is what some poor soul wrote after watching the stuff of debilitating nonsense on Amazon’s Review.

      This movie definitely has religious motivation and this despicable.
      BTW: Why do I have to see “Scientology” ads on this site? WAKE UP MORONS!

  • Crow

    Interesting – a 1000 years ago exactly the same comments would had been written about going into space – people wake up – I agree with Isa

    • Tony

      But 1000 years ago society did not have the technology to investigate space, nor did it posses any knowledge about how to go about building it. We also knew nothing of space. You can’t realistically compare the situation of ignorance then to our limits of knowledge now. Because as limited as it still is, there is an incredible amount we DO know. And we know enough, in fact more than enough about chemistry to KNOW, not refute or disbelieve but KNOW that the claims made in this documentary are simply not true. I understand that scientists are always reliably hostile, incredulous and nervous about new theories and discoveries. But the key point to remember is that this only happens when inarguable fact threatens orthodox knowledge and lifetimes of work are suddenly made obsolete. But this isn’t the case here. The claims made in this doc are not genuine discoveries or new facts. They are simply outrageous lies. I’m sorry to say. But with what we do know about water, and we know a lot despite what they claim here, we can PROVE, DEMONSTRATE and SUBSTANTIATE that these claims are just not true. This is DELIBERATE misinformation for the purpose of religious and new age propaganda.

    • Claribel R.

      “a 1000 years ago exactly the same comments would had been written about going into space” And how does that validate the myths and distortions in this movie?

  • Pete

    Two words explains this video Religious Pseudoscience, seriously if you believe the claims in this video your an IDIOT, I actually felt my intelligence being drained while watching this crap.

    • Chuck Norris

      Haha, yeah your intelligence was obviously drained, otherwise you wouldn’t have placed such a comment here bro 😉

      • Dorothy W. Sallee

        Haha, you am ignorant fool otherwise you wouldn’t have placed such comments you have on this page.

        • Chuck Norris

          Yes, I Am ignorant fool! I’m all things, because I’m Chuck Norris, nuff said!

        • Chuck Norris

          Yes, I Am ignorant fool! I’m all things, because I’m Chuck Norris, nuff said!

          • Gribnie

            Dorothy, and others, “Please do not feed the trolls.” He’ll get bored soon enough and stop posting, or his mother tell him it’s time to go to bed.

          • Chuck Norris

            I think you should stop feeding yourself then, dear Gribnie. You’re the one thats avoiding a discussion by flinging insults rather then responding in a fashionable manner :)

          • Gribnie

            Discussion? Where is the discussion from you? For example: “I’m all things, because I’m Chuck Norris, nuff said!”

          • Chuck Norris

            Selective quoting, way to go!

          • Gribnie

            Gribnie, allow the little boy to have the last word and he’ll go away.

          • Chuck Norris

            Mummy has called for me to go to bed so I can not play any more.

          • Chuck Norris

            LOL!

          • Chuck Norris

            LOL!

    • Chuck Norris

      Haha, yeah your intelligence was obviously drained, otherwise you wouldn’t have placed such a comment here bro 😉

    • Bob

      Your intelligence must have completely drained within the first minute of watching this or you would have been intelligent enough to realize that it was garbage and watched something else instead.

      DH needs a rating system so that we can get a census on what we are about to watch before we do. I would have given this a zero out of 5 stars.

  • Mike

    Why is it that so many really intelligent people believe such crap? Do we actually have to grasp for explanations of phenomena that we can’t fully comprehend, so we swallow the pseudo-scientific bullshit because it sounds very plausable? Yes it does, if you know very little about chemistry and physics. It really sounds good and we want to believe. Very sad!

    • Chuck Norris

      Can you tell me the difference between ‘intelligent’ and ‘really intelligent’ people, as per your definition?

    • Chuck Norris

      Can you tell me the difference between ‘intelligent’ and ‘really intelligent’ people, as per your definition?

      • Agree with Mike

        Well I can tell you that based on your earlier comment, including “This documentary is about another way of observing our universe, that doesn’t make it any less valid than science”, is that you are not ‘intelligent’ and certainly not ‘really intelligent’.

        • Chuck Norris

          Thanks for your scientifically based viewpoint on this issue, ‘Agree with Mike’. Since I’m Chuck Norris, I already contain all the knowledge of the universe, so I *do* know why you’re reacting like this, but perhaps the other readers would like to know why you’re insulting my intelligence in this way? I’d appreciate it if you’d do it scientifically though, so I won’t accept an answer without mathematical equations. You may include another insult, but only if you prove them with facts.
          Love, Chuck

          • Gribnie

            Dear “Agree with Mike”, I’m not disagreeing with you but I do advise ‘Do not feed the trolls’, especially immature ones.

          • Chuck Norris

            Right… who was the troll again? There’s a difference between trolling and incorporating humour in a discussion. I never insulted anyone, but the insults keep coming my way in great numbers 😉 This surely is a touchy subject to some of you. Why all that hostility man?

          • Gribnie

            “Right… who was the troll again?”

            You.

          • Chuck Norris

            You’re a funny man, thanks for the entertainment :)

          • Monte Miller

            Gribnie, allow the little boy to have the last word and he’ll go away.

          • Chuck Norris

            Although I shouldn’t reply anymore, I’m going to anyway to prove you’re right. Ha! Also, do you do that often, talking to yourself on the Internet? Thanks for the look into your psyche, it really adds to your credibility, mister ‘I never responded to the actual subject matter Chuck brought up’-Gribnie :)

          • Gribnie

            I wasn’t “talking to yourself on the Internet”. It was clearly somone else posting using the same non de plume. Just as someone else did with the comment about your Mummy calling you to bed … unless it was you and your Mummy really did call?

            As far as never responding to to the “actual subject matter Chuck brought up” .. this was that you don’t understand basic science, and you were advised to investigate this yourself (back to school & read some books) rather than posting your semi-literate, immature ramblings.

            As far as credibility … what credibility to you think you are due from comments such as “Since I’m Chuck Norris, I already contain all the knowledge of the universe.”

            And re. “mister” in your post recent post. Sexist of you to assume I’m male.

          • Gribnie

            I wasn’t “talking to yourself on the Internet”. It was clearly somone else posting using the same non de plume. Just as someone else did with the comment about your Mummy calling you to bed … unless it was you and your Mummy really did call?

            As far as never responding to to the “actual subject matter Chuck brought up” .. this was that you don’t understand basic science, and you were advised to investigate this yourself (back to school & read some books) rather than posting your semi-literate, immature ramblings.

            As far as credibility … what credibility to you think you are due from comments such as “Since I’m Chuck Norris, I already contain all the knowledge of the universe.”

            And re. “mister” in your post recent post. Sexist of you to assume I’m male.

  • http://www.peretimasd.com Marquita Salee

    I maintain listening on the news converse about obtaining free online grant applications so I’ve been
    looking about for the best website to get 1.
    Thank you for the assist!

  • http://BuyXbox360KinctGames.com Shelby Ronsani

    you’ve an awesome blog here! would you prefer to make some invite posts on my weblog?

  • BillyB

    Luke, Pete, Mike.. are you paid to mess up and create negativity?
    Are you Agents of Darkness ? Get life and joy instead of ignorance :)

    • AgentOfDarkness – Not!

      “Are you Agents of Darkness ?”

      Fantastic .. in reply to a number people noting the flaws in this video BillyB suggests they are part of a organised conspiracy! If that was funny enough he them writes: “Get life and joy instead of ignorance :)” Aside fromthe first part sof that sentence is meaningless, the second part “Get … ignorance” is exactly what BillyB as if he believes this video.

  • BillyB

    Luke, Pete, Mike.. are you paid to mess up and create negativity?
    Are you Agents of Darkness ? Get life and joy instead of ignorance :)

  • BillyB

    Luke, Pete, Mike.. are you paid to mess up and create negativity?
    Are you Agents of Darkness ? Get life and joy instead of ignorance :)

  • Chuck Norris

    Yeah, call it despicable, laughable or whatever you want. It’s just another point of view. What I don’t get is why the people in this comment thread, who believe in SCIENCE, are so religious in defending science as the only good religion, and ridiculizing everything else that doesn’t fit their beliefs. Yeah, I said science is a religion. And some of you are behaving like religious fundamentalists in your crusade to crush anything that’s not ‘up your alley’, so to speak.

    Again, even science is a belief. Everything is a belief. Without a believer/observer, you can’t have anything to believe in. So science = yet another belief system, that was created by observing nature/the universe.

    This documentary is about another way of observing our universe, that doesn’t make it any less valid than science. People that rage about documentaries/viewpoints like this are blatantly showing their narrowmindedness.
    (disclaimer: I’m not a native English speaker so I’d appreciate it if you don’t attack me for some spelling mistakes/grammar errors. Then again, I won’t stop ya ;))

    • Wrg.Brg

      It’s is not any spelling mistakes or grammatical errors about which people will attack you. It is your sloppy thinking for which you deserved to be criticised. You appear to consider that just because somone holds a view it is somehow as legitimate as the long standing, proven facts.

      “This documentary is about another way of observing our universe,” No, it groundless pseudoscience, and that does “make it any less valid than science.”

      “People that rage about documentaries/viewpoints like this are blatantly showing their narrowmindedness.” No they don’t, they show a understanding in advance of your ignorance and gullibility if you believe this video has merit.

      • Johnny

        In science there is no such thing as a ‘proven fact’. There are those that the mainstream community ‘accept as facts’ whether they deserve to be or not, but nothing is ever 100% verifiable in science.

        The atom was the smallest thing known to mankind until the discovery of ‘sub-atomic particles’, it being ‘accepted as fact’ at the time didn’t stop people from looking further and advancing science.

        It only took Birkeland’s theory of field-aligned currents powering the aurora’s like 6 decades to go from ‘pseudoscience’ to proven fact, and strangely there are still those who argue like it isn’t proven even after HAARP has ‘reconfirmed’ NASA’s original 1960’s confirmation of the theory.

        Strangely the rest of his theory regarding the fact those currents are produced by electrically charged particles coming from the sun doesn’t seem to be credited to him, or discussed much at all these days(outside of the ‘fringe sciences’).

        Instead we have discussions on the ‘proven facts’ of magnetic reconnection… that is that it is theoretically possible based on computer simulations that a ‘reconnection event’ could occur in an ‘infinitely conductive'(superconducting) plasma in which there is no loss of ‘magnetic charge’ allowing a magnetic field to exist without an accompanying electric current.

        That therefore proves that magnetic fields OBSERVED in space plasmas are also caused by theoretical ‘reconnection events’, despite no naturally occurring space plasma having ever been observed as being ‘infinitely conductive’.

        So it’s a ‘proven fact’ that theoretically magnetic reconnection can occur in superconducting plasma, yet it’s also a ‘proven fact’ that there is no evidence of such a superconducting plasma existing.

        But better the reconnection theoretical crap than the well established electrical principles which dictate that only constant electric currents produce magnetic fields, which collapse the moment the current ceases.

        No evidence of ‘electric currents’ in space means the currently accepted ‘facts’ of electrical science must be ignored, and replaced by a purely theoretical concept that can only exist in a plasma for which there is also no evidence that it exists.

        I guess if you have 2 theories with little evidence you may as well go with the one that completely ignores the already established ‘proven facts’.

        And the one that sticks to the ‘proven facts’ more-so is ‘pseudo-science’, eh?

        I’m glad the people who are actually researching water’s many still unknown secrets are far more sensible than you and your mainstream religion.

        I won’t ask of you to go against what was told to you to be facts which you dare not question, but at least use some commonsense and realize that the history of science is thousands of years of people thinking they have it right being proven wrong.

        6 years ago I suggested to a friend that it would be good to look into using electric fields and currents to fight fires. He laughed at me and called me some unfriendly names saying it was ‘pseudo-science’ bullshit just as you would have too no doubt.

        Thankfully there are smarter people out there who also have open minds who actually figured some things out:

        Taming the flame: Electrical wave ‘blaster’ could provide new way to extinguish fires –

        http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2011-03/acs-ttf030911.php

        “Ludovico Cademartiri, Ph.D., and his colleagues in the group of George M. Whitesides, Ph.D., at Harvard University, picked up on a 200-year-old observation that electricity can affect the shape of flames…”

        Only 200 years to realize the potential, now that isn’t bad at all.

        Maybe this water research will provide some useful information, maybe it won’t, but it’s unscientific to not look for it and find out for sure one way or the other.

        You personally disagreeing with doesn’t make it any less scientific.

        • Gribnie

          You right, up to a point. Science is about observations … theories & hypothesis … and then challenging these based on reproducible experiments … and these to be open for peer review before acceptance and further challenge.

          This doesn’t mean this movie is anything other than hokum.

          • Chuck Norris

            Well thats interesting. Basically you’re saying “I agree, but I disagree!”. Problem, contradictory statement?

          • Gribnie

            Dear Chuck – you really do need to go back to school.

          • Gribnie

            Dear Chuck – you really do need to go back to school.

          • Kongkakingchongcha

            Yes, Gribnie’s right. You need to start with learning the definition of Religion.

          • Kongkakingchongcha

            Yes, Gribnie’s right. You need to start with learning the definition of Religion.

          • Kongkakingchongcha

            Yes, Gribnie’s right. You need to start with learning the definition of Religion.

          • Tom

            Guys come on, this video is a load of bolox!.. Science should never, ever be contaminated with religion.

          • Myaddressforjunk

            I totally appreciate new approaches to scientific theory’s, but there are so many mistakes in this… in 1 of the first sentences calls water an element. Its using entirely false assumptions to propose things even more ridiculous.. Its so sad that some people can actually watch this seriously and believe it, and more worrying that someone actually made this,.

          • Tom

            and whats with “The university of london great” haha, such a uni has never existed.. just more evidence of how wrong this documentary is.. rant over..

          • Bob

            I laughed out loud within the first two sentences when they called water an element. How can you take the rest of it seriously after that statement?

            They might as well have said “Cheese… it’s the largest planet in our solar system.”

          • Nihils B

            Water isn’t an element?

            Fire? Wind? Earth?
            Be carefull w/ words.
            And just because some filmdirector shits his leg doesn’t mean that the baby should be thrown out with the water, now does it?

            I have not even seen this film – HAHAHAH!

          • Terry

            i have to say, that since seeing “what the bleep” it has gnawd at me how many scientists are actually religeous believers..

            and also the one piece of that flick that sticks out was that water..

          • Tom

            Guys come on, this video is a load of bolox!.. Science should never, ever be contaminated with religion.

          • Johnny

            I don’t necessarily disagree on this specific issue, but the problem is many issues that have been backed up by repeated experimentation are not accepted into the ‘peer-review’ system as those doing the experiments aren’t considered professional ‘peers’.

            Everyone that replicates the experiment is a ‘pseudo-scientist’ or a ‘fraud’ and the issues aren’t addressed in any critical fashion except to publish a few papers explaining that it’s impossible based on the existing ‘accepted facts’.

            If the ‘mainstream society’ deems something ‘pseudo-science’ they have no reason to replicate those ‘fraudulent’ experiments, they’re simply dismissed.

            And when they do attempt to replicate them they often do so in a half-assed manner, such as the early 90’s attempts to recreate ‘cold-fusion’ experiments by MIT students which didn’t follow the original experiment’s full parameters (and members of the team claimed purposeful fraud which led to a few resignations of staff).

            Experiments are done in highly controlled environments because any little factor could change the outcome, yet in the case of those experiments where exact parameters were not properly replicated they say ‘its doesn’t matter, you’d still get the same result’.

            How about doing it properly and actually showing that then? Oh yeah, it’s not worth the resources cause it’s crap science that has already been ‘proven wrong’…

            The experiments that ‘proved’ cold-fusion false got huge news attention for a few days and then faded away to the archives to be used as sources for future dismissals of the matter, the controversy over the way the experiment was conducted and the fraud allegations were virtually completely ignored and occasionally dismissed as ‘baseless’ by the media at the time.

            In order for the public to have confidence in the ‘consensus community’ and continue it’s tax-payer funding they need to believe the science is well understood and their money is achieving solid results, to even try to replicate a ‘pseudo-science’ experiment could be viewed as defacto admission that the currently ‘accepted facts’ aren’t beyond doubt and aren’t so ‘solid’.

            But anyways could you provide links to official published ‘peer-review’ articles that address the issues and experiments specifically addressed in this documentary?

            Specifically articles involving attempted reproduction of any experiments mentioned.

            If it has been deemed to be pseudo-science then someone must have attempted to recreate the experiments and failed and there must be a peer-reviewed record of it as you say.

            I’m looking but so far I haven’t found anything except for the usual ‘it’s not possible because…’ articles that dismiss the science based on previously ‘accepted facts’ and have absolutely nothing to do with testing the specific experiments in question.

            Actual ‘mainstream’ attempted replication of experiments that adhere to the specific parameters of the original experiments that call the original research into doubt would be of great interest here.

            On a side note – I believe science is an attitude and not a ‘system’.

            I’m the type of person that says ‘hey, let’s hook up a watermelon to a generator and see what happens when 210 amps are run through it’ just for the sake of seeing what happens. Is that not science?

            The mainstream scientific community is the ‘system’ and it is anti-scientific in that is based on democracy(politics) and is specifically designed to maintain an acceptable ‘status-quo’.

            The system is specifically designed to reject anything that threatens the ‘status-quo’, regardless of it’s actual scientific value.

            Although he may have just been having one of his ‘insane’ days I do believe Einstein was right on the mark when he stated that “The only thing that interferes with my learning is my education”.

            Some reading on the Delphi Technique that the consensus scientific and academic systems are built on:

            http://www.rand.org/international_programs/pardee/pubs/futures_method/delphi.html

            Delphi has little to do with experimentation, it’s all about ‘expert opinions’ and manipulating group dynamics to cut down the number of ideas and focus a group on a single conclusion or set of conclusions that are ‘acceptable’ to the entire group to produce false ‘one mindedness’.

            Of course it’s a bunch of bull really since those who disagree or refuse to accept that Delphi’ed viewpoint are simply removed from the community and ignored/silenced.

            Note: although the system hasn’t changed very little academic discussion has occurred on the Delphi Technique since the early 1970’s.

            The latest available paper from Rand is from 1974 which discusses how it “is an unreliable and scientifically unvalidated technique in principle and probably in practice”.

            No further research required obviously…

        • Anonymous

          Absolute crap. Proof is a well defined subject in science. You are uneducated.

        • Anonymous

          Absolute crap. Proof is a well defined subject in science. You are uneducated.

          • Nihils B

            What a civilised, humble, respectful, educated contributor to this debate, you are 😛

          • http://www.facebook.com/NANDGated NAND Gate

            lol. Not exactly here to make friends or influence people. This is the internet – not a dinner party at your mothers. People post demonstrably false statements all the time, and some people actually end up believing them. This is a war of ideas and falsehoods cause war and mortality. Believing this junk is akin to believing in religion. 

        • Anonymous

          Absolute crap. Proof is a well defined subject in science. You are uneducated.

        • Anonymous

          Absolute crap. Proof is a well defined subject in science. You are uneducated.

        • Anonymous

          Absolute crap. Proof is a well defined subject in science. You are uneducated.

      • Chuck Norris

        Why is it groundless pseudoscience? I’d like to know what facts you can come up with to prove this is pseudoscience. I see where you’re coming from with bringing up the ‘long standing, proven facts’ viewpoint, and I respect your opinion, but long standing, proven facts can change over time, can’t they? When is something considered to be a ‘proven fact’? By setting standards, making measurements by those standards, but who creates the standards? Yes, men do. Even setting a standard for a scienfitic measurement is a subjective act, it has to be agreed upon. Also, Einstein proved with his thought experiments an observer is an integral part of the experiment, and even can influence the outcome of the experiment. Oh well, even I, Chuck ‘Roundhouse Kick’ Norris, knows you can’t win a discussion on the Internet, but I thought I’d drop my 2 cents anyway.

        Furthermore, I agree with my main man Johnny below.

        • Gribnie

          “Why is it groundless pseudoscience?” Well go back to school, or at least read a few tect books, rather than posting idiotic comments.

          • Chuck Norris

            Ah, that explains. You’d make a good teacher, insulting everyone while teaching them a lesson!

          • Gribnie

            I described your comments as idiotic. This is not insulting you; it is an opinion of your comments … which your later comments only validate.

          • Chuck Norris

            So if you build a house for yourself, a work you’re proud of, put in a couple of years hard labor, and some person comes along that says: “Damn, that house stinks”, you’re not offended because it’s not you, but he’s insulting the house you’ve built? Ehhh, right. I think I’m getting an idea who the person is that should go back to school :) Logic 101 friend

          • Gribnie

            Gribnie, allow the little boy to have the last word and he’ll go away.

          • Chuck Norris

            Mummy has called for me to go to bed so I can not play any more.

          • Chuck Norris

            Haha! 😀

          • Chuck Norris

            Haha! 😀

          • Anonymous

            downie

          • Bob

            so… let me get this straight; your previous comments took you 2 hard years of labor to produce and now you’re offended because someone insulted them?

            Really, you need to go back and read the non-stop stream of uneducated goop that your mind has come up with. You sound like the type of person that should stop talking and instead sit and listen to people who know more than you… it makes for a better learning environment.

        • Anonymous

          HAHAHA you dont even know what the word “facts” means. To you, it is anything that supports your childlike view of the world.

          Dont talk about Einstein. You know NOTHING of his work, Einstein had nothing to do with the “observer phenomenon”. Ppl like you refer to him to give yourself credibility – but he would laugh himself silly at your ideas – you forget – he was a SCIENTIST.

          Proof is proof. It is not relative. I can prove science works, because we are on the internet. What progress has your daft interpretation of nature added to the world?

          Nothing. Because it isn’t even real.

        • Anonymous

          HAHAHA you dont even know what the word “facts” means. To you, it is anything that supports your childlike view of the world.

          Dont talk about Einstein. You know NOTHING of his work, Einstein had nothing to do with the “observer phenomenon”. Ppl like you refer to him to give yourself credibility – but he would laugh himself silly at your ideas – you forget – he was a SCIENTIST.

          Proof is proof. It is not relative. I can prove science works, because we are on the internet. What progress has your daft interpretation of nature added to the world?

          Nothing. Because it isn’t even real.

          • Jesse

            I don’t believe anyone knows EXACTLY what happens when we think, therefore we cannot really know or prove anything. 

          • Anonymous

            Idiot. I can prove the internet works, because you have posted on it. Kill yourself.

          • Anonymous

            Idiot. I can prove the internet works, because you have posted on it. Kill yourself.

          • Terry

            agreed i know nothing of Einstein,  but as you say he was a SCIENTIST..   are you saying those water crystals and the other experiments were fraudulent?  and that Einstein, a man of science would have just disregarded them?

          • Anonymous

            Yes, they are fraudulent, in the sense that the people doing the “experiments” are masquerading as people with scientific understanding, and pretending that even though all of science is laughing, their “experiments” are credible. They are not, and neither are you.

          • Anonymous

            Yes, they are fraudulent, in the sense that the people doing the “experiments” are masquerading as people with scientific understanding, and pretending that even though all of science is laughing, their “experiments” are credible. They are not, and neither are you.

          • Terry

            agreed i know nothing of Einstein,  but as you say he was a SCIENTIST..   are you saying those water crystals and the other experiments were fraudulent?  and that Einstein, a man of science would have just disregarded them?

        • Bob

          here’s a fact for you… water is not an element, it is a compound. If there were any urge for the producers to want to seem credible, you’d think they’d at least try not to make a mistake within the first 2 sentences of the film.

        • Bob

          here’s a fact for you… water is not an element, it is a compound. If there were any urge for the producers to want to seem credible, you’d think they’d at least try not to make a mistake within the first 2 sentences of the film.

      • Squidgeon

        WELL DONE CHUCK!!!

        You saved me a hell of a lot of time with your comment. we ARE FUCKED! anyways and there aint a shit thing we can do about it!

      • Squidgeon

        WELL DONE CHUCK!!!

        You saved me a hell of a lot of time with your comment. we ARE FUCKED! anyways and there aint a shit thing we can do about it!

      • Katharashine

        You must have already realized that many people believe what they believe for emotional reasons.The down side is that you are wasting your energy trying to shed light on the views of those that believe a whole world of pseudo science and conspiracy,it is nice to hear a rational voice though.!.People enjoy the belief that they have special knowledge particularly when others don’t have it.Lets also not forget how much easier pseudo knowledge is to acquire…You switch on your computer and watch entertaining images from the comfort of your home.Real science requires that you come to grips with demanding ideas over a long period of time, and importantly, in a very exposed environment.(exposed in terms of ones ideas being openly challenged by others on a daily basis, in a face to face environment) I suspect that those that take the pseudo knowledge path find it a far easier and psychologically less challenging(ie safer) way of being able to feel good about themselves when playing the knowledge card…Of course there are rare cases of gifted individuals seeing truths from outside of the normal box and there are those that are just plain mad…..I do hope that my ranting has irritated someone who is capable of believing that talking to a jar of submerged rice is able to stop the rice rotting!! Sorry for the length of my rant!!

      • Katharashine

        You must have already realized that many people believe what they believe for emotional reasons.The down side is that you are wasting your energy trying to shed light on the views of those that believe a whole world of pseudo science and conspiracy,it is nice to hear a rational voice though.!.People enjoy the belief that they have special knowledge particularly when others don’t have it.Lets also not forget how much easier pseudo knowledge is to acquire…You switch on your computer and watch entertaining images from the comfort of your home.Real science requires that you come to grips with demanding ideas over a long period of time, and importantly, in a very exposed environment.(exposed in terms of ones ideas being openly challenged by others on a daily basis, in a face to face environment) I suspect that those that take the pseudo knowledge path find it a far easier and psychologically less challenging(ie safer) way of being able to feel good about themselves when playing the knowledge card…Of course there are rare cases of gifted individuals seeing truths from outside of the normal box and there are those that are just plain mad…..I do hope that my ranting has irritated someone who is capable of believing that talking to a jar of submerged rice is able to stop the rice rotting!! Sorry for the length of my rant!!

    • Icelander

      Agree 100%

    • Icelander

      Agree 100%

    • Anonymous

      Hahaha ridiculizing.

      I guess there is no point explaining the concept of “proof” to you.

      People like you make me depressed.

    • TheIgnorantFool

      @14e18f59a3348db63b0868c59196ec2b:disqus

      Science is only a tool, called “The empirical method”.

      At the core is an idea that one can find a very accurate model of reality if we shed ourself from all our beliefs, create a very simple hypothesis, and do an experiment where any element which can contaminate/ruin the experiment, is removed. And then to have others reproduce the experiment to reduce the chance of a flawed experiment.

      In truth no scientific theory is “true”. They are all wrong, all of them. But they have proven to be a very useful “replacement” for reality. In fact, If it were not for these models, our world would be quite different.
      After the invention of this powerful tool, the rate of which we developed new technologies skyrocketed, and has continued to do so.
      Imagine a world without antibiotics, electricity or advanced constructional technologies.
      imagine living in a 1500 century world where your life-expectancy is less than half of what it is now.
      I see this rapid growth in our welfare ( or chance of reproductivity ) as A proof that science (the empirical method) is our best bet to ensure the survivability of our future generations, until it is proven obsolete.

      I have to say i stopped watching this documentary after 18 minutes because of its lack of documentation and merit, and the fact that some of the experiments had obvious flaws. It is common to document to what length one goes to to eliminate possible cotangents, and in this documentary they did not seem to have eliminated the most basic elements.

      An scientific experiment has to follow a strict protocol. If it fails to so, it is simply not science.
      And this is why we would call this sudo-science. It does not meet the criteria put forth by The empirical method.

    • TheIgnorantFool

      @14e18f59a3348db63b0868c59196ec2b:disqus

      Science is only a tool, called “The empirical method”.

      At the core is an idea that one can find a very accurate model of reality if we shed ourself from all our beliefs, create a very simple hypothesis, and do an experiment where any element which can contaminate/ruin the experiment, is removed. And then to have others reproduce the experiment to reduce the chance of a flawed experiment.

      In truth no scientific theory is “true”. They are all wrong, all of them. But they have proven to be a very useful “replacement” for reality. In fact, If it were not for these models, our world would be quite different.
      After the invention of this powerful tool, the rate of which we developed new technologies skyrocketed, and has continued to do so.
      Imagine a world without antibiotics, electricity or advanced constructional technologies.
      imagine living in a 1500 century world where your life-expectancy is less than half of what it is now.
      I see this rapid growth in our welfare ( or chance of reproductivity ) as A proof that science (the empirical method) is our best bet to ensure the survivability of our future generations, until it is proven obsolete.

      I have to say i stopped watching this documentary after 18 minutes because of its lack of documentation and merit, and the fact that some of the experiments had obvious flaws. It is common to document to what length one goes to to eliminate possible cotangents, and in this documentary they did not seem to have eliminated the most basic elements.

      An scientific experiment has to follow a strict protocol. If it fails to so, it is simply not science.
      And this is why we would call this sudo-science. It does not meet the criteria put forth by The empirical method.

      • T.I.F.

        btw: A friend posted this on facebook a while back.
        http://www.nature.com/news/2011/110530/full/news.2011.322.html

        “Edzard Ernst, the world’s first professor of alternative medicine, is stepping down.”

        “-I found that homeopathy is pretty useless. I would have liked the
        evidence to go the other way because I trained as a homeopath. It would
        have been quite nice to win a Nobel prize by showing that ‘no molecule’
        can have an effect, but the evidence is clearly against it.”

    • Brian Bissell

      The fallacy you commit here is confusing a singular belief with a BELIEF SYSTEM.

      Science in no way constrains its members to believe any dogma or set of beliefs, in fact, it encourages dissent and distrust so that further verification may occur…OR a total change in beliefs!

      When was the last time any religion analyzed itself and changed a fundamental belief?

      PS. You’d do better to not talk like a 13 year old teenager who is clearly looking for a fight. Speak your mind, but do not pre-emptively attack others and purposely be abrasive. 

      Either way, ANYONE who takes the time to watch documentaries and comment on them in a dialogue with other people is at least ATTEMPTING to learn….WE NEED TO STICK TOGETHER, NOT TRASH EACH OTHER!

    • Monstaah

      well said Chuck, 

    • Anonymous

      hahahah “ridulizing”. If you can’t even spell, or use English correctly, where does your justification for spouting authority on matters science related, come from?

      I’ll tell you. It comes from your behind. Get a science degree.

      • Jeffrey

        I really shouldn’t feed the trolls, but here goes. Chuck doesn’t state anywhere that he’s an authority, he just gave his opinion. Secondly, you quoted a spelling mistake that I couldn’t find in the original message. So that makes you the one that’s not using English correctly, besides presenting misleading information to launch yet another personal attack.

        Also, after reading your other comments in this thread (and some other threads) I’m getting the idea that you’re an immature 30 year old ‘kid’ who still lives in his mothers basement flaming others because otherwise you’d feel your life would be completely wasted… Now, wipe those pizza crumbs off your belly and get a life, I heard they sell ’em next door. And while you’re at it, get a science degree as well, you surely could use one.

        As for the documentary, not scientific at all, but an interesting watch nonetheless.

        • Anonymous

          “..not scientific at all, but interesting watch nonetheless.”

          Yes, well – that about sums you up I guess.

    • Anonymous

      hahahah “ridulizing”. If you can’t even spell, or use English correctly, where does your justification for spouting authority on matters science related, come from?

      I’ll tell you. It comes from your behind. Get a science degree.

    • Anonymous

      hahahah “ridulizing”. If you can’t even spell, or use English correctly, where does your justification for spouting authority on matters science related, come from?

      I’ll tell you. It comes from your behind. Get a science degree.

    • Anonymous

      hahahah “ridulizing”. If you can’t even spell, or use English correctly, where does your justification for spouting authority on matters science related, come from?

      I’ll tell you. It comes from your behind. Get a science degree.

    • Anonymous

      hahahah “ridulizing”. If you can’t even spell, or use English correctly, where does your justification for spouting authority on matters science related, come from?

      I’ll tell you. It comes from your behind. Get a science degree.

    • Bob

      … as soon as you try to back science with a belief, your science becomes exactly that… a belief. 

      We don’t say, “water is made up of hydrogen and oxygen… I believe.” No, we mechanically and chemically separate the elements to hold them up in the air and say, “look, there’s 2 particles of hydrogen and 1 particle of oxygen”… voila, science, now lets go make a bomb.It isn’t a matter of “facts”, it is a matter of “linguistics”; science is science, a belief is a belief – don’t get them mixed up when debating a native English speaker. Science is based upon measurable, well tested facts with consistent results – even quantum science reports these results and continues to do so, which is why quantum physics is considered a science and not quackery.

      If you want to add some credibility to this “documentary” then you must stop talking about your beliefs and put some credible science behind it.

      Until then, this is nothing more relevant than “The laws of attraction”… a well versed story intended upon swaying its audience into buying a book and then having them cross their fingers in hope of any result that would indicate truth.

  • Johnny

    Just as an added note to the topic of this film, for those interested in such ‘pseudo-science’ –

    Water, Energy, and Life: Fresh Views From the Water’s Edge

    “Dr. Gerald Pollack, UW professor of bioengineering, has developed a theory of water that has been called revolutionary. The researcher has spent the past decade convincing worldwide audiences that water is not actually a liquid. Pollack explains his fascinating theory in this 32nd Annual Faculty Lecture.”

    Courtesy of the Research Channel:

    Note: Well worth an hour for anyone with a scientific or just generally curious nature.

    It is a full audio-visual presentation with plenty of pictures, videos and graphics showing what he’s doing in his experiments and making it easy to follow what he says in the lecture.

  • Johnny

    Just as an added note to the topic of this film, for those interested in such ‘pseudo-science’ –

    Water, Energy, and Life: Fresh Views From the Water’s Edge

    “Dr. Gerald Pollack, UW professor of bioengineering, has developed a theory of water that has been called revolutionary. The researcher has spent the past decade convincing worldwide audiences that water is not actually a liquid. Pollack explains his fascinating theory in this 32nd Annual Faculty Lecture.”

    Courtesy of the Research Channel:

    Note: Well worth an hour for anyone with a scientific or just generally curious nature.

    It is a full audio-visual presentation with plenty of pictures, videos and graphics showing what he’s doing in his experiments and making it easy to follow what he says in the lecture.

  • Anonymous

    Total junk. For the love of god learn the concept of “proof”.

    Without it, nothing you assert is of any worth. Nothing.

    • Johnny

      You don’t know what science is, do you?

      Science is the act of seeking observable or experimental proof to verify or falsify a theory or set of hypothesis’.

      What you are referring to is Public Relations – telling people the “establishment’s expert conclusion”(on issues that are far from conclusive) – which has nothing to do with actual science.

      The science is what takes years and years before any so-called conclusions are ever provided to the public via PR.

      Don’t hate the real scientists who are seeking scientific progress just because you prefer to stick with what you already know and is accepted.

      Thankfully people like Dr. Gerald Pollack exist to keep pushing science forwards whether the establishment likes it or not.

      Of course Dr. Pollack’s work isn’t the first and everything he has recently discovered had actually been discovered in the early 1900’s already and just forgotten because of people like you impeding scientific progress…

      Dr. Pollack offers lots of direct observable, experimental evidence that shows current understanding of water is incomplete at the very least.

      He generates electrical current from the DL formed in the water without any purposeful input of energy(except light), is that proof that the current views of water are incomplete?

      If they are even possibly incomplete why are you so hostile to those who are seeking to complete them?

      • Anonymous

        Lols magic water

        • Johnny

          If that is the most intelligent thing you can come up with your opinion on any aspect of science is worthless, so thank you for making that clear.

          • Anonymous

            I state “learn the concept of proof”, and you ask “you dont know what science is, do you?”

            ’nuff said 😉

        • Johnny

          If that is the most intelligent thing you can come up with your opinion on any aspect of science is worthless, so thank you for making that clear.

        • Johnny

          If that is the most intelligent thing you can come up with your opinion on any aspect of science is worthless, so thank you for making that clear.

    • Johnny

      You don’t know what science is, do you?

      Science is the act of seeking observable or experimental proof to verify or falsify a theory or set of hypothesis’.

      What you are referring to is Public Relations – telling people the “establishment’s expert conclusion”(on issues that are far from conclusive) – which has nothing to do with actual science.

      The science is what takes years and years before any so-called conclusions are ever provided to the public via PR.

      Don’t hate the real scientists who are seeking scientific progress just because you prefer to stick with what you already know and is accepted.

      Thankfully people like Dr. Gerald Pollack exist to keep pushing science forwards whether the establishment likes it or not.

      Of course Dr. Pollack’s work isn’t the first and everything he has recently discovered had actually been discovered in the early 1900’s already and just forgotten because of people like you impeding scientific progress…

      Dr. Pollack offers lots of direct observable, experimental evidence that shows current understanding of water is incomplete at the very least.

      He generates electrical current from the DL formed in the water without any purposeful input of energy(except light), is that proof that the current views of water are incomplete?

      If they are even possibly incomplete why are you so hostile to those who are seeking to complete them?

  • Anonymous

    Get off my internet you science hating hippies.

    We didn’t make it so that you could come along and post your propaganda.

    So the world isn’t what you hoped it was as a child? Get over it. There are no fairies.

    Learn what proof is or stfu

  • Anonymous

    lols magic water

  • Anonymous

    @e6842847d7903fef79486251a3bb9b6e:disqus  and “I want to believe” hippies:

    Any uncertainty that the chemistry community may have about the
    nature and existence of water clusters, is not apparently shared by the
    various “inventors”, who have not only “discovered” these elusive
    creatures, but who claim findings that science has never even dreamed
    of! These promoters have spun their half-baked crackpot chemistry into
    various watery nostrums that they say are essential to your health and
    able to cure whatever-ails-you. These “benefits” are hawked to the
    more gullible of the general public, usually in the form of a
    “concentrate” that you can add to your drinking water— all for a $20-$50
    charge on your credit card. Some of these hucksters claim to make the water into clusters”
    that are larger, smaller, or hexagonal-shaped, allowing them to more
    readily promote “cellular hydration” and remove “toxins” from your body.

    The fact is that none of these views has any significant support
    in the scientific communities of chemistry, biochemistry, or physiology,
    nor are they even considered worthy of debate. The only places you
    are likely to see these views advocated are in literature (and on Web
    sites) intended to promote the sale of these products to consumers in
    the notoriously credulous “alternative” health and “dietary supplement”
    market.

    Critical thinking FAIL.

    • Anonymous

       End of argument.

    • Bigmatty88

      You’re so right the internet and television are full of people abusing these theories to sell “Magic Tonic” that’ll regrow the hair on a bald man’s head or will extend the length of your penis.

      BUT  where you are mistaken here is that the overall message of this film states that it is your attitude and intensions that affect your personal experience with water. SO if anything this program is hurting corporate yahoos who prey on the small minded.

       Please don’t be so quick to dismiss theories like this, because they can’t be that far off. Too much money and time is spent doing research for it all to be false. There must be some truth to their claims about water because just look what it has done for this hunk of rock drifting through the cosmos. Water is INCREDIBLE and there is a lot more for us to learn about it. These reputable scientists and authors are just taking this opportunity to showcase some of what they have learned over the last 2 decades they’ve spent researching.

       Imagine it was your money they were spending… you’d cut the funds if it was all going nowhere and they’d stop researching if it was bullshit. 

  • Anonymous

    It is generally agreed that the special properties of water stem from the tendency of its molecules to associate,
    forming short-lived and ever-changing polymeric units that are
    sometimes described as “clusters”. These clusters are more conceptual
    than physical in nature; they have no directly observable properties,
    and their transient existence (on the order of picoseconds) does not
    support an earlier view that water is a mixture of polymers (H2O)n  in which n
     can have a variety of values. Instead, the currently favored model of
    water is one of a loosely-connected network that might best be described
    as one huge “cluster” whose internal connections are continually
    undergoing rearrangement. Therefore, there is no such thing as a “cluster” of H2O molecules that is consistent or constant. The best you can say is that they sometimes associate, and then move on.

  • Anonymous

    I have looked in the reputable (peer-reviewed) scientific literature for evidence
    that would support the claims regarding the structure or action of the
    various brands of SAW. So far, I have found none. If anyone can provide
    me with such a reference, I would be delighted to share it. The SAW sales sites are full of absurd claims (about
    “beautiful star-shaped molecules”, for example) that strike me as
    belonging more to the realm of mysticism than of science. Scientific
    terms are frequently used inappropriately and in contexts that I
    consider incorrect and often misleading. Many of the statements pertaining specifically to chemistry
    and physiology that are adduced to support the claims fall quite outside
    the range of what I think most chemists, biochemists and physiologists
    would regard as credible science. The claims about “cellular resonance”
    have no scientific support and contribute nothing to what is presently
    known about cellular signal transduction. The claims that these various structure-altered waters promote
    “cellular hydration” are not only unsupported by evidence, but are
    inconsistent with the known “one-molecule-at-a-time” mechanisms
    by which water is transported across cell walls. Some promoters quote
    the results of scientifically-dubious “bio-electric impedance analyzers”
    to demonstrate improved hydration; don’t believe this junk science! Several vendors claim that their SAW products can delay or reverse ageing. Such claims are untrue; there is no evidence that any type of dietary supplement or treatment can slow ageing. All of the sales sites display the required disclaimer that
    the information they provide is “for educational purposes only”, but the
    sales pitch is strongly directed toward the notoriously uncritical
    sports beverage and “alternative health” market. Most of the sites
    promise (without any credible supporting evidence) vague benefits such
    as “energizing the body”, “empowering the natural healing process”, or
    “enhancing toxin removal from cells”. Some sites have referred to
    incredible numbers of clinical “case histories” purporting to support
    the effectiveness of their “technology” in treating ailments such as
    asthma, diabetes, hypertension, etc.

    Stephen Lower
    retired faculty member
    Dept of Chemistry, Simon Fraser University
    Burnaby / Vancouver, Canada

  • Anonymous

    I have looked in the reputable (peer-reviewed) scientific literature for evidence
    that would support the claims regarding the structure or action of the
    various brands of SAW. So far, I have found none. If anyone can provide
    me with such a reference, I would be delighted to share it. The SAW sales sites are full of absurd claims (about
    “beautiful star-shaped molecules”, for example) that strike me as
    belonging more to the realm of mysticism than of science. Scientific
    terms are frequently used inappropriately and in contexts that I
    consider incorrect and often misleading. Many of the statements pertaining specifically to chemistry
    and physiology that are adduced to support the claims fall quite outside
    the range of what I think most chemists, biochemists and physiologists
    would regard as credible science. The claims about “cellular resonance”
    have no scientific support and contribute nothing to what is presently
    known about cellular signal transduction. The claims that these various structure-altered waters promote
    “cellular hydration” are not only unsupported by evidence, but are
    inconsistent with the known “one-molecule-at-a-time” mechanisms
    by which water is transported across cell walls. Some promoters quote
    the results of scientifically-dubious “bio-electric impedance analyzers”
    to demonstrate improved hydration; don’t believe this junk science! Several vendors claim that their SAW products can delay or reverse ageing. Such claims are untrue; there is no evidence that any type of dietary supplement or treatment can slow ageing. All of the sales sites display the required disclaimer that
    the information they provide is “for educational purposes only”, but the
    sales pitch is strongly directed toward the notoriously uncritical
    sports beverage and “alternative health” market. Most of the sites
    promise (without any credible supporting evidence) vague benefits such
    as “energizing the body”, “empowering the natural healing process”, or
    “enhancing toxin removal from cells”. Some sites have referred to
    incredible numbers of clinical “case histories” purporting to support
    the effectiveness of their “technology” in treating ailments such as
    asthma, diabetes, hypertension, etc.

    Stephen Lower
    retired faculty member
    Dept of Chemistry, Simon Fraser University
    Burnaby / Vancouver, Canada

  • Anonymous

    I have looked in the reputable (peer-reviewed) scientific literature for evidence
    that would support the claims regarding the structure or action of the
    various brands of SAW. So far, I have found none. If anyone can provide
    me with such a reference, I would be delighted to share it. The SAW sales sites are full of absurd claims (about
    “beautiful star-shaped molecules”, for example) that strike me as
    belonging more to the realm of mysticism than of science. Scientific
    terms are frequently used inappropriately and in contexts that I
    consider incorrect and often misleading. Many of the statements pertaining specifically to chemistry
    and physiology that are adduced to support the claims fall quite outside
    the range of what I think most chemists, biochemists and physiologists
    would regard as credible science. The claims about “cellular resonance”
    have no scientific support and contribute nothing to what is presently
    known about cellular signal transduction. The claims that these various structure-altered waters promote
    “cellular hydration” are not only unsupported by evidence, but are
    inconsistent with the known “one-molecule-at-a-time” mechanisms
    by which water is transported across cell walls. Some promoters quote
    the results of scientifically-dubious “bio-electric impedance analyzers”
    to demonstrate improved hydration; don’t believe this junk science! Several vendors claim that their SAW products can delay or reverse ageing. Such claims are untrue; there is no evidence that any type of dietary supplement or treatment can slow ageing. All of the sales sites display the required disclaimer that
    the information they provide is “for educational purposes only”, but the
    sales pitch is strongly directed toward the notoriously uncritical
    sports beverage and “alternative health” market. Most of the sites
    promise (without any credible supporting evidence) vague benefits such
    as “energizing the body”, “empowering the natural healing process”, or
    “enhancing toxin removal from cells”. Some sites have referred to
    incredible numbers of clinical “case histories” purporting to support
    the effectiveness of their “technology” in treating ailments such as
    asthma, diabetes, hypertension, etc.

    Stephen Lower
    retired faculty member
    Dept of Chemistry, Simon Fraser University
    Burnaby / Vancouver, Canada

  • Martin

    I’ve been watching this, and it just dawned upon me what this reminds me of. It’s just like those documentaries which Schick Sunn Classics used to peddle in theaters back in the 1970s. The whole style is almost identical, especially the narration, which sounds just like good ol’ Brad Crandall’s delivery in several of their titles. The one which I think of as the prototype is ‘In Search of Noah’s Ark’, in which Crandall bombards the audience with unreferenced claim after unreferenced claim for an hour and an half, just like it is in this movie. In both cases the thesis is never >really< made to earn its way, and the whole presentation is essentially the equivalent of a show-trial, wherein the guilt or innocence of the accused is decided ahead of time.

  • thekingbeyondthegate

    Cool peace safe.

  • thekingbeyondthegate

    Cool peace safe.

  • thekingbeyondthegate

    Cool peace safe.

  • thekingbeyondthegate

    Blood and ashes, you all take yourselves quite seriously don’t you? Think about this: science may not be 100% factual (but I think Plato established nothing in a changing world can be) but at the moment it seems to be movement based most in fact. Science is a part of philosophy (philosophy broken into its roots just means love of wisdom) created originally by Aristotle. Just because something may approach a subject in a philosophical way (which is not scientific) does not mean it is not correct. Neither does it mean it is.

    What everyone needs to do is occasionally take a step back and look at everything (literally everything) as objectively as possible (yes true objectivity is impossible ect. ect. bla. bla. bla.). Truth is the only quality I have found in my existence worthy of worship. Not science, not religion, not “puesdo-science”, not reasoning. Truth. This truth has the POSSIBILITY of coming from any of these sources. Likelihood is a different matter. Although I do not discount religion I think it is highly unlikely, almost infinitely.

    You have to watch out for whole-heartly believing in one thing to the exclusion of others that you haven’t even necessarily analysed.

  • thekingbeyondthegate

    Blood and ashes, you all take yourselves quite seriously don’t you? Think about this: science may not be 100% factual (but I think Plato established nothing in a changing world can be) but at the moment it seems to be movement based most in fact. Science is a part of philosophy (philosophy broken into its roots just means love of wisdom) created originally by Aristotle. Just because something may approach a subject in a philosophical way (which is not scientific) does not mean it is not correct. Neither does it mean it is.

    What everyone needs to do is occasionally take a step back and look at everything (literally everything) as objectively as possible (yes true objectivity is impossible ect. ect. bla. bla. bla.). Truth is the only quality I have found in my existence worthy of worship. Not science, not religion, not “puesdo-science”, not reasoning. Truth. This truth has the POSSIBILITY of coming from any of these sources. Likelihood is a different matter. Although I do not discount religion I think it is highly unlikely, almost infinitely.

    You have to watch out for whole-heartly believing in one thing to the exclusion of others that you haven’t even necessarily analysed.

  • thekingbeyondthegate

    Blood and ashes, you all take yourselves quite seriously don’t you? Think about this: science may not be 100% factual (but I think Plato established nothing in a changing world can be) but at the moment it seems to be movement based most in fact. Science is a part of philosophy (philosophy broken into its roots just means love of wisdom) created originally by Aristotle. Just because something may approach a subject in a philosophical way (which is not scientific) does not mean it is not correct. Neither does it mean it is.

    What everyone needs to do is occasionally take a step back and look at everything (literally everything) as objectively as possible (yes true objectivity is impossible ect. ect. bla. bla. bla.). Truth is the only quality I have found in my existence worthy of worship. Not science, not religion, not “puesdo-science”, not reasoning. Truth. This truth has the POSSIBILITY of coming from any of these sources. Likelihood is a different matter. Although I do not discount religion I think it is highly unlikely, almost infinitely.

    You have to watch out for whole-heartly believing in one thing to the exclusion of others that you haven’t even necessarily analysed.

  • Grim Berge

    The subjects they interview are well known scientists from top notch Universities and institutions, Nobel Price winners, and well renowned authors. Why do those who criticize this documentary feel elevated above these expert insights? Or is this just good old resistance to new thinking? Almost every great new genius who defined our world, from Gallileo, Da Vinci and Newton were ridiculed and opposed in their time.

  • changspaman

    Stop arguing people !! I am having some tea and don’t want all your negative energies recrystalizing the water
    LOL
    jokes aside, i found it very interesting (of course like everyone kept pointing out further study is needed for any concrete conclusions.. but interesting still)

  • http://www.facebook.com/catowg Cato W Gustavson

    Extraordinary claims, calls for extraordinary evidence.

  • Alex

    I don’t know whether to laugh or be worried that people believe this nonsense.

  • Alex

    I don’t know whether to laugh or be worried that people believe this nonsense.

  • Alex

    I don’t know whether to laugh or be worried that people believe this nonsense.

  • Alex

    I don’t know whether to laugh or be worried that people believe this nonsense.

  • Asiourtos

    Never heard so much nonsense in one ‘documentary’

    Is this a joke? Do people actually think this is factual?

  • Arie Bombarie66

    what a load of pseudoscientific crap

  • Arie Bombarie66

    what a load of pseudoscientific crap

  • Arie Bombarie66

    what a load of pseudoscientific crap

  • Johnny_Reb

    So called pseudoscience of today will become the official science of tomorrow.
    Just remember the development of quantum physics…when you think you came to the end, it happens to be just a new start.

    P. S.
    Only stupid ppl think they are smart…smart ppl know they are stupid.

  • Johnny_Reb

    So called pseudoscience of today will become the official science of tomorrow.
    Just remember the development of quantum physics…when you think you came to the end, it happens to be just a new start.

    P. S.
    Only stupid ppl think they are smart…smart ppl know they are stupid.

    • Mike

      Johnny, the healing frequencies of loving enlighted heart and positive wishful thinking, really harmonise structure of water in its crystal structure. Love life, love life, love water . your life depends on water too..  This is about shift in perceptions of Life.. Best to all. Mike

    • Mike

      Johnny, the healing frequencies of loving enlighted heart and positive wishful thinking, really harmonise structure of water in its crystal structure. Love life, love life, love water . your life depends on water too..  This is about shift in perceptions of Life.. Best to all. Mike

    • Mike

      Johnny, the healing frequencies of loving enlighted heart and positive wishful thinking, really harmonise structure of water in its crystal structure. Love life, love life, love water . your life depends on water too..  This is about shift in perceptions of Life.. Best to all. Mike

    • Mike

      Johnny, the healing frequencies of loving enlighted heart and positive wishful thinking, really harmonise structure of water in its crystal structure. Love life, love life, love water . your life depends on water too..  This is about shift in perceptions of Life.. Best to all. Mike

    • Anonymous

      hahaha another hippy spouting quantum physics (science discovered) as justification for their unscientific beliefs. Your lack of insight is extraordinary.

    • Anonymous

      hahaha another hippy spouting quantum physics (science discovered) as justification for their unscientific beliefs. Your lack of insight is extraordinary.

    • Anonymous

      hahaha another hippy spouting quantum physics (science discovered) as justification for their unscientific beliefs. Your lack of insight is extraordinary.

    • Bob

      … you think you’re smart.

    • Bob

      … you think you’re smart.

    • Bob

      … you think you’re smart.

  • Tom

    What an absolute load of bolox…. !! not to mention the mistakes.. “The university of london great” haha

  • Tom

    What an absolute load of bolox…. !! not to mention the mistakes.. “The university of london great” haha

  • Rev. Ingrid Jolly

    A most marvelous documentary and a much needed one! I hope this is viewed by many and distributed by even more. May we at last recognize, remember and treasure our most precious resource of water! 

  • Bigmatty88

    There is a lot of hostility in this thread….

    While I respect everyone’s opinion. Say whatever you want about the scientific methods used in this film but please also note that it is a film first. In order to get permission to create a film you need to prove that a profit can be made in order to cover the initial costs. This film needs to be entertaining AND the information has to flow constantly to keep the simple minded folk at home entertained. There is no way you can make “the proper scientific method” entertaining. No one wants to watch some japanese guy sit in a lab and compare frozen petri dishes for 8 hours.

     And on that note, Dr. Imoto and many of these men do just that. They spend their entire lives doing these studies. There must be something to what they’re doing. Otherwise, what the hell are they doing it for? And furthermore who would continue to invest in their lab work if they weren’t achieving anything? You have to be able to prove to your investors that you are earning the money they give you. I’m gonna go out on a limb here and assume that running a giant freezer for 20 years isn’t cheap.

     If you’re having a hard time believing any of this information, one way to open your mind a little bit might be to look around the solar system and try to find the other planets with complex organisms capable of building vast empires, massive structures, and flying contraptions. I’m no scientist but I’m pretty sure Earth is the only planet for several light years that has this incredible phenomenon. It also happens to be the only planet with water that exists in 3 states. Water is obviously more incredible than we can comprehend.

     I also read a few times in this thread “you may need to go back to school.” For those of you who have gone through a lot of school don’t forget that school teaches you how to follow a path and how to use pre-existing knowledge. School isn’t the best environment for new ways of thinking. People who can get A’s in school will always play the game well but they rarely change the rules of the game. It wasn’t all that long ago that science was certain the earth was flat. It wasn’t all that long ago that the atom was the smallest thing in existence. It wasn’t all that long ago that the edge of the Milky Way was considered the edge of the universe. And people who said otherwise were considered crack pot pseudo- scientists.

     It’s important to open our minds and be willing to hear these “crack pot” ideas. Because before you know it, some of them may become the mainstream.

     

  • Bigmatty88

    There is a lot of hostility in this thread….

    While I respect everyone’s opinion. Say whatever you want about the scientific methods used in this film but please also note that it is a film first. In order to get permission to create a film you need to prove that a profit can be made in order to cover the initial costs. This film needs to be entertaining AND the information has to flow constantly to keep the simple minded folk at home entertained. There is no way you can make “the proper scientific method” entertaining. No one wants to watch some japanese guy sit in a lab and compare frozen petri dishes for 8 hours.

     And on that note, Dr. Imoto and many of these men do just that. They spend their entire lives doing these studies. There must be something to what they’re doing. Otherwise, what the hell are they doing it for? And furthermore who would continue to invest in their lab work if they weren’t achieving anything? You have to be able to prove to your investors that you are earning the money they give you. I’m gonna go out on a limb here and assume that running a giant freezer for 20 years isn’t cheap.

     If you’re having a hard time believing any of this information, one way to open your mind a little bit might be to look around the solar system and try to find the other planets with complex organisms capable of building vast empires, massive structures, and flying contraptions. I’m no scientist but I’m pretty sure Earth is the only planet for several light years that has this incredible phenomenon. It also happens to be the only planet with water that exists in 3 states. Water is obviously more incredible than we can comprehend.

     I also read a few times in this thread “you may need to go back to school.” For those of you who have gone through a lot of school don’t forget that school teaches you how to follow a path and how to use pre-existing knowledge. School isn’t the best environment for new ways of thinking. People who can get A’s in school will always play the game well but they rarely change the rules of the game. It wasn’t all that long ago that science was certain the earth was flat. It wasn’t all that long ago that the atom was the smallest thing in existence. It wasn’t all that long ago that the edge of the Milky Way was considered the edge of the universe. And people who said otherwise were considered crack pot pseudo- scientists.

     It’s important to open our minds and be willing to hear these “crack pot” ideas. Because before you know it, some of them may become the mainstream.

     

    • Bigmatty88

      I forgot to mention… I also noticed people’s concern with merging religion and science. Again I have to go back to my point about this being a film first. One thing about working in television is that you can’t create a show that caters to a limited audience. In order to get permission to make this show the creator’s of it would have to find a way to make it interesting to as many demo graphs as possible… including religious folk. 

      • Anonymous

        Just because someone spends their entire lives being a moron, does not mean what they have wasted their time on “has something to it”. I wont bother listing the multitudes of halfwits that have proven this over the centuries.

        This entire documentary, and supporting posts, is a example of just how undereducated you all are, how willing you are to still believe in “magic”, and just how incredibly dumb and gullible you all are. No wonder you can be controlled so easily. You are nothing but “I want to believe” machines.

        Credible documentaries were NEVER, EVER created on the premise that they need to appeal to a large audience. That is why there are documentaries on everything, from bird watching and chess, to computer games, to one sided political documentaries.

        A program written for public consumption masquerading as a documentary (documentary being based on the word DOCUMENT) is called INFOTAINMENT.

        This is not a documentary. It is entertainment for the brainless, pretending to be information.

        Get off my planet. We have serious work to deal with.

      • Anonymous

        Just because someone spends their entire lives being a moron, does not mean what they have wasted their time on “has something to it”. I wont bother listing the multitudes of halfwits that have proven this over the centuries.

        This entire documentary, and supporting posts, is a example of just how undereducated you all are, how willing you are to still believe in “magic”, and just how incredibly dumb and gullible you all are. No wonder you can be controlled so easily. You are nothing but “I want to believe” machines.

        Credible documentaries were NEVER, EVER created on the premise that they need to appeal to a large audience. That is why there are documentaries on everything, from bird watching and chess, to computer games, to one sided political documentaries.

        A program written for public consumption masquerading as a documentary (documentary being based on the word DOCUMENT) is called INFOTAINMENT.

        This is not a documentary. It is entertainment for the brainless, pretending to be information.

        Get off my planet. We have serious work to deal with.

        • Bob

          Hostility set aside, I am in complete agreement with Psinet. This is not a documentary rather, an infomercial for products based upon unproven science. Documentary Heaven should stick to documentaries and steer away from fantastical stories that do nothing to promote education and insight in a scientifically based manner… even the 911 conspiracy documentaries are backed with firm science – they do not delve into why or how Allah made them do it.

          Pull this infomercial from DH and get back on track sooner than later or, this site will eventually lose a massive following of people looking for intelligently arranged information.

        • Bob

          Hostility set aside, I am in complete agreement with Psinet. This is not a documentary rather, an infomercial for products based upon unproven science. Documentary Heaven should stick to documentaries and steer away from fantastical stories that do nothing to promote education and insight in a scientifically based manner… even the 911 conspiracy documentaries are backed with firm science – they do not delve into why or how Allah made them do it.

          Pull this infomercial from DH and get back on track sooner than later or, this site will eventually lose a massive following of people looking for intelligently arranged information.

          • Paulo

            Im going to be really honest, assume my ignorance and ask you about the products advertised here… From what i understood, they say that it is possible to change the properties of any kind of water… but i might have missed the comercial products based upon unproven science.

            Cheers man

        • Bob

          Hostility set aside, I am in complete agreement with Psinet. This is not a documentary rather, an infomercial for products based upon unproven science. Documentary Heaven should stick to documentaries and steer away from fantastical stories that do nothing to promote education and insight in a scientifically based manner… even the 911 conspiracy documentaries are backed with firm science – they do not delve into why or how Allah made them do it.

          Pull this infomercial from DH and get back on track sooner than later or, this site will eventually lose a massive following of people looking for intelligently arranged information.

        • Paulo

          As the supereducated person you claim to be it seems to me that you are forgeting a very important principle in the road of knowledge and wisdom: to remain humble. Every single person in this world has something to teach you and to forget about that is to show that maybe you are academically educated, but maybe humanly undereducated. Arrogance and ignorance often walk side by side, dont forget to pay attention to that. 

          And who are we to judge the unknown? Are we the same kind of narrow minded people that burnt Galileo? 

          Time to tear down the walls of certainty and embrace the unknown as possibility. What do we have to lose?

          Cheers man

          • http://www.facebook.com/NANDGated NAND Gate

            Sorry Paulo – but there is not “unknowns” in this documentary. It is just pretend science trying to sell products. Be careful what you CHOSE to believe.

          • Paulo

            Do you know what i really enjoy about this subjects? Is that a lot of intelligent people comes forward and express their ideas based upon their own personal believes and upon what they take as most likely. And, no matter who’s right or wrong, debate is created and that is what we need to improve our understanding of the world around us. I do believe in science, but i think science is more a translator of nature’s language than a truth creator. We do know that our understanding of the world is limited and, as experiencers, we fail more often than we suceed. The same with science…How many hipothesys do a scientist has to test in order to achive some level of truth? Lets remain open to possibility, i would say…

            Cheers

          • http://www.facebook.com/NANDGated NAND Gate

            Enjoy whatever you like – just don’t try to proclaim any of this is truth and not entertainment. People with better minds than you and I have already disproven this junk. The process of “changing water” falls under the banner of science – chemistry, physics, biology etc. Definitely not magic. I want people to be happy. I just dont want them to be so arrogant as to think they can challenge science from the the comfort of their home without a science degree.

            Science is the process of uncovering the truth using proof. Science doesn’t pretend to know everything. But some thing it DOES know. And this documentary pretends they know about science. And they dont.

          • Paulo

            You talk to much. Show us were it is disproved and show us evidence that the research that disproves it has more credibility than this research. Then we’ll talk. And about the arrongance you mentioned, what would you call to say that a chemistry nobel prizewinner(quite recent,2002) only pretends to know about science.

          • http://www.facebook.com/NANDGated NAND Gate

            lol. Let me see – I talk too much, but you were the one to come and comment on my post (and continue responding. I criticise too much, but you were the one to come criticise me. 

            I and others have already shown how this is disproven, already in this thread. I will not bother arguing with someone’s religion – and this is your religion. Later.
            EDIT: Here is a cut paste of one post from me here – there are others. Read them. Try reading before being a rude, aggressive magic-believer.

            I have looked in the reputable (peer-reviewed) scientific literature for evidence that would support the claims regarding the structure or action of the various brands of SAW. So far, I have found none. If anyone can provide me with such a reference, I would be delighted to share it. The SAW sales sites are full of absurd claims (about “beautiful star-shaped molecules”, for example) that strike me as belonging more to the realm of mysticism than of science. Scientific terms are frequently used inappropriately and in contexts that I consider incorrect and often misleading. Many of the statements pertaining specifically to chemistry and physiology that are adduced to support the claims fall quite outside the range of what I think most chemists, biochemists and physiologists would regard as credible science. The claims about “cellular resonance” have no scientific support and contribute nothing to what is presently known about cellular signal transduction. The claims that these various structure-altered waters promote “cellular hydration” are not only unsupported by evidence, but are inconsistent with the known “one-molecule-at-a-time” mechanisms by which water is transported across cell walls. Some promoters quote the results of scientifically-dubious “bio-electric impedance analyzers” to demonstrate improved hydration; don’t believe this junk science! Several vendors claim that their SAW products can delay or reverse ageing. Such claims are untrue; there is no evidence that any type of dietary supplement or treatment can slow ageing. All of the sales sites display the required disclaimer that the information they provide is “for educational purposes only”, but the sales pitch is strongly directed toward the notoriously uncritical sports beverage and “alternative health” market. Most of the sites promise (without any credible supporting evidence) vague benefits such as “energizing the body”, “empowering the natural healing process”, or “enhancing toxin removal from cells”. Some sites have referred to incredible numbers of clinical “case histories” purporting to support the effectiveness of their “technology” in treating ailments such as asthma, diabetes, hypertension, etc.

            Professor Stephen Lower
            B.A. Biochemistry, University of California, Berkeley
            Ph.D. Physical Chemistry
            retired faculty member
            Dept of Chemistry, Simon Fraser University
            Burnaby / Vancouver, Canada

          • Paulo

            “The only published reproduction of Emoto’s work on record was conducted by Mr. Damian Nash’s AP psychology class at Durango High School in Colorado. Despite numerous difficulties reproducing Emoto’s procedure and controlling the temperature and sample freezing and melting rates, at least the class employed a blind experimental design to eliminate the possibility of experimenter’s bias when photographing the water samples. As published on the website of the Institute of Noetic Sciences on May 25, 2004, Mr. Nash states that the team “did not find sufficient evidence to refute or accept Emoto’s hypothesis that thought influences water crystal formation.”Kristopher Setchfield, BA, Health ScienceNatural Science DepartmentCastleton State College, Vermont
            Speculation aside, and as you would say, facing the “facts”, there is nothing to prove or disprove it. So as i am saying since the beggining, lets remain open to possibility. 
            You are the religious guy here, im being scientific. Since there is nothing to disprove it, even if you dont like the idea, lets wait for more scientific research and forget about people who interpret others research by what they think is more likely to happen.
            Show me another research  reproducing the experiment, not someone’s review. 

          • Bob

            Paulo, Paulo, Paulo…it’s endearing to read about all the quirky little thoughts running through your pretty little head. Like the part about the narrow minded people that burnt Galileo… when he actually died a natural death while under house arrest for heresy. But hey, believe what you want… it’s all so much more interesting when people just make it up as they go.

          • Paulo

            Nice thoughts about Galileo=)

      • Anonymous

        Just because someone spends their entire lives being a moron, does not mean what they have wasted their time on “has something to it”. I wont bother listing the multitudes of halfwits that have proven this over the centuries.

        This entire documentary, and supporting posts, is a example of just how undereducated you all are, how willing you are to still believe in “magic”, and just how incredibly dumb and gullible you all are. No wonder you can be controlled so easily. You are nothing but “I want to believe” machines.

        Credible documentaries were NEVER, EVER created on the premise that they need to appeal to a large audience. That is why there are documentaries on everything, from bird watching and chess, to computer games, to one sided political documentaries.

        A program written for public consumption masquerading as a documentary (documentary being based on the word DOCUMENT) is called INFOTAINMENT.

        This is not a documentary. It is entertainment for the brainless, pretending to be information.

        Get off my planet. We have serious work to deal with.

      • Bob

        and what a completely idiotic statement to make… this is not presented as a film – the Wizard of Oz is a film – this is presented as a documentary on a website dedicated to documentaries. Had I have found this on a movie website, I would have already known that it was just a story and chosen not to watch it. Documentaries do not need to cater to a broad audience because their audience is already decided on whether they do or, do not want to watch it based on the area of interest that the documentary claims to address.

        Claiming that this is “a film first” is nothing short of removing it from the status of being a legitimate documentary. Claiming that the producers had to reach a wide audience by introducing religion is an insult to anyone with half of a brain. 

        If there’s one way to get a scientist to stop paying attention to you, you only need to start quoting the bible. 

      • Bob

        and what a completely idiotic statement to make… this is not presented as a film – the Wizard of Oz is a film – this is presented as a documentary on a website dedicated to documentaries. Had I have found this on a movie website, I would have already known that it was just a story and chosen not to watch it. Documentaries do not need to cater to a broad audience because their audience is already decided on whether they do or, do not want to watch it based on the area of interest that the documentary claims to address.

        Claiming that this is “a film first” is nothing short of removing it from the status of being a legitimate documentary. Claiming that the producers had to reach a wide audience by introducing religion is an insult to anyone with half of a brain. 

        If there’s one way to get a scientist to stop paying attention to you, you only need to start quoting the bible. 

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1106687067 Tessa Rae Gibson

      In addition to his books, Emoto also sells various water products from his websites and catalogs, which are purported to have healing properties derived from his research and experiments.

    • Bob

      There’s a lot of hostility because a number of intelligent people pressed “play” thinking that they were going to be shown something meaningful and then realized that they were wasting their time. Then, like myself, they turned to the comments section to vent their frustration on those that would actually believe a word of what they were presented with and then have the audacity to begin justifying their ignorance by debating the difference between beliefs and science.

    • Bob

      … and by the way; the scientific explanation to why water expands at sub-zero temperatures is because of molecular alignment. It is the same explanation behind why all crystalline substances produce more volume than their bare molecular components in liquid states.

      The “film” (not, documentary) actually states that “no one knows why water expands”…. sure they don’t… if this “film” was made in the 17th century.

      • Anonymous

        Listen to Bob.

  • Bigmatty88

    There is a lot of hostility in this thread….

    While I respect everyone’s opinion. Say whatever you want about the scientific methods used in this film but please also note that it is a film first. In order to get permission to create a film you need to prove that a profit can be made in order to cover the initial costs. This film needs to be entertaining AND the information has to flow constantly to keep the simple minded folk at home entertained. There is no way you can make “the proper scientific method” entertaining. No one wants to watch some japanese guy sit in a lab and compare frozen petri dishes for 8 hours.

     And on that note, Dr. Imoto and many of these men do just that. They spend their entire lives doing these studies. There must be something to what they’re doing. Otherwise, what the hell are they doing it for? And furthermore who would continue to invest in their lab work if they weren’t achieving anything? You have to be able to prove to your investors that you are earning the money they give you. I’m gonna go out on a limb here and assume that running a giant freezer for 20 years isn’t cheap.

     If you’re having a hard time believing any of this information, one way to open your mind a little bit might be to look around the solar system and try to find the other planets with complex organisms capable of building vast empires, massive structures, and flying contraptions. I’m no scientist but I’m pretty sure Earth is the only planet for several light years that has this incredible phenomenon. It also happens to be the only planet with water that exists in 3 states. Water is obviously more incredible than we can comprehend.

     I also read a few times in this thread “you may need to go back to school.” For those of you who have gone through a lot of school don’t forget that school teaches you how to follow a path and how to use pre-existing knowledge. School isn’t the best environment for new ways of thinking. People who can get A’s in school will always play the game well but they rarely change the rules of the game. It wasn’t all that long ago that science was certain the earth was flat. It wasn’t all that long ago that the atom was the smallest thing in existence. It wasn’t all that long ago that the edge of the Milky Way was considered the edge of the universe. And people who said otherwise were considered crack pot pseudo- scientists.

     It’s important to open our minds and be willing to hear these “crack pot” ideas. Because before you know it, some of them may become the mainstream.

     

  • Spontaneous combustion

    May Chuck norris spontaneously combust. That is what happens in the extreme when you pollute your bodies water

  • Spontaneous combustion

    May Chuck norris spontaneously combust. That is what happens in the extreme when you pollute your bodies water

  • Spontaneous combustion

    May Chuck norris spontaneously combust. That is what happens in the extreme when you pollute your bodies water

  • Spontaneous combustion

    May Chuck norris spontaneously combust. That is what happens in the extreme when you pollute your bodies water

  • jesus in another guise

    People seem to doubt what is right in front of their eyes because they wish not to believe it e.g. no one wants to be believe that Islam aims to dominate the world even though Muslims have written it on placards and pushed into their face after being exposed by numerous hidden camera shows exposing the saudi arabian teachings being taught stating the same thing about taking over when they are ready to. Denial of reality is common and so I am very open minded about this. It needs more evidence which I will find if it is there when I get the chance.

  • jesus in another guise

    Just did a check on the claim that adding emulsified water improves fuel efficiency meaning that water does actually burn as suggested and it is pukka, searched it on google scholar 100% true.  http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0196890403001791   water mysteries 1 doubters 0

    • Frosty

      That site does not in any way state that the water burns. “The results indicate that the addition of water in the form of emulsion improves combustion efficiency” is not burning water..

    • Frosty

      That site does not in any way state that the water burns. “The results indicate that the addition of water in the form of emulsion improves combustion efficiency” is not burning water..

  • jesus in another guise

    Dr Emoto MASARU also checks out as genuine. I found this on google scholar, http://www.liebertonline.com/doi/abs/10.1089/107555304322848913 which is talked about in the video above. The relevance of this is that anything found on google scolar can be taken to be a reliable source of information.  http://astro.temple.edu/~rlfile/criteria_for_evaluating_info.pdf  I dont think I need to add anything else I’m convinced this video is genuine.

  • jesus in another guise

    Dr Emoto MASARU also checks out as genuine. I found this on google scholar, http://www.liebertonline.com/doi/abs/10.1089/107555304322848913 which is talked about in the video above. The relevance of this is that anything found on google scolar can be taken to be a reliable source of information.  http://astro.temple.edu/~rlfile/criteria_for_evaluating_info.pdf  I dont think I need to add anything else I’m convinced this video is genuine.

  • jesus in another guise
  • jesus in another guise
  • Anonymous

    Yay lets all worship the magic water god. You morons.

  • Anonymous

    Yay lets all worship the magic water god. You morons.

  • Anonymous

    Yay lets all worship the magic water god. You morons.

  • Anonymous

    If you don’t have an accepted scientific qualification or training in science, please don’t pretend you know what you are talking about when it comes to science.

    The end.

  • Anonymous

    If you don’t have an accepted scientific qualification or training in science, please don’t pretend you know what you are talking about when it comes to science.

    The end.

  • Anonymous

    If you don’t have an accepted scientific qualification or training in science, please don’t pretend you know what you are talking about when it comes to science.

    The end.

  • Anonymous

    If you don’t have an accepted scientific qualification or training in science, please don’t pretend you know what you are talking about when it comes to science.

    The end.

  • Anonymous

    If you don’t have an accepted scientific qualification or training in science, please don’t pretend you know what you are talking about when it comes to science.

    The end.

  • Pingback: Inspiraven Babble Box » reading and viewing()

  • http://twitter.com/azav azav

    Earth’s surface, not earth.  “Earth” needs to be capitalized and it’s possessive, so you use an apostrophe.

  • Djtfh

    Rubbish.

  • Djtfh

    Rubbish.

  • Anonymous

    I’m writing the completely WRONG claims in the film as I watch it:

    -Scientist DO KNOW why water expands below 4 degrees.
    -Water is NOT the only liquid to do this.
    -“In the south, people would put wet wedges…” What south? You can’t just say “in the south” South of what?!!!!
    -Plant shoots can NOT break through asphalt AT ALL!!! They might grow through cracks, but they sure as hell can’t break it. Tree roots might be able to slowly over years and years.
    -“Every one of water’s properties is unique” Absolute fucking bullshit. Water is a liquid, is THAT unique to water?
    -“Science cannot explain….three states, highest surface tension, capillary action” YES IT CAN.

    Fuck me, that was just the first five minutes. I give up.

    • anonymous

      @anonymous Aug 26th 2011 – hahaha i agree this movie was so ridiculous i made it 12 minutes until the captain of the life vessel turns salt water into regular water with thought (yknow cause its the structure of water and not its salt content that matters).

  • SAL

    Lots of this and the major idea underlying this is documentary is highly questionable – and the attitude conveyed here are certainly not a scientific one, but the one with a truely scientific attitude would be able to pick out the interesting parts of this, instead of bursting out his general hostility.

  • Anonymous

    I just bought a dehumidifierwater machine for the home.  It makes 5 gallons per day. How original is that?  This video nonsense is actually a great visual for stoners.

  • Anonymous

    I just bought a dehumidifierwater machine for the home.  It makes 5 gallons per day. How original is that?  This video nonsense is actually a great visual for stoners.

    • stoner

      i found it extremely boring

  • http://www.facebook.com/Eigosensei Temperance Raziel

    Not a documentary.  Just religious nonsense

  • http://www.facebook.com/Eigosensei Temperance Raziel

    Not a documentary.  Just religious nonsense

  • Mort

    Water has many interesting properties. It is vital to life and it can exist in all forms withing the range of temperatures and pressures of the earth’s crust, surface and atmosphere. However, it is much more likely that water is important because it was present rather than the other way around. It’s attraction to it’s self is more a result of it molecular geometry than anything else. And statements about water being the only substance that exists in all three states is incorrect. Under the correct conditions ALL substances can exist in four states. As is the assertion that only water is more dense in it’s liquid form. This is true of all liquids that crystallize. All of the peer accredited scientists in this documentary are just stating that water is important and interesting. But if you ask any scientist about their topic of study they will say the same.

    Water is something that we all should care about and protect, but I don’t think you’ll catch me speaking to it anytime soon.

  • Mort

    Water has many interesting properties. It is vital to life and it can exist in all forms withing the range of temperatures and pressures of the earth’s crust, surface and atmosphere. However, it is much more likely that water is important because it was present rather than the other way around. It’s attraction to it’s self is more a result of it molecular geometry than anything else. And statements about water being the only substance that exists in all three states is incorrect. Under the correct conditions ALL substances can exist in four states. As is the assertion that only water is more dense in it’s liquid form. This is true of all liquids that crystallize. All of the peer accredited scientists in this documentary are just stating that water is important and interesting. But if you ask any scientist about their topic of study they will say the same.

    Water is something that we all should care about and protect, but I don’t think you’ll catch me speaking to it anytime soon.

  • Peter Jones

    is this a joke?

  • Tbrown53

    I must speak up in defense of Chuck Norse’s comments. The art of science as we know it today is a religious one. There is so much more to the universe, the world and our human bodies than “science” can explain, understand or even comprehend.

    It is only the belief of those too narrow-minded to see the vastness of the yet unknown and unimagined that makes them grasp at so called “scientific fact”. This is not any different than those religious fanatics that threatened early scientists with excommunication or death for expounding on their findings.

    People who refuse to open their minds to possibilities beyond what their “scientific” method can prove, limit their own ability to be good scientists. Science is a belief system based on a strict method of observation and structured experimentation that can produce replicable outcomes. It is expanding all the time and most true scientists,  that I know, understand the limits of the art they practice. It takes an open mind to ideas beyond what we can currently prove to advance what we currently understand or think we know.

    I do believe that there is a body of knowledge that has grown out of good scientific method. However, to expand on that body of information documentaries such as this bring fresh view points and possibilities to the world of science and the collective mind. Perhaps this documentary will lead to discoveries that will open doors and turn on lights that lead to human advancements that will one day be viewed as common knowledge that can not be refuted.

    After all there was a time when the science of the time said the world was flat! We live in a dynamic world not a static one. What we understand and believe to be true and fact today could be  fairytale tomorrow.

  • Tbrown53

    I must speak up in defense of Chuck Norse’s comments. The art of science as we know it today is a religious one. There is so much more to the universe, the world and our human bodies than “science” can explain, understand or even comprehend.

    It is only the belief of those too narrow-minded to see the vastness of the yet unknown and unimagined that makes them grasp at so called “scientific fact”. This is not any different than those religious fanatics that threatened early scientists with excommunication or death for expounding on their findings.

    People who refuse to open their minds to possibilities beyond what their “scientific” method can prove, limit their own ability to be good scientists. Science is a belief system based on a strict method of observation and structured experimentation that can produce replicable outcomes. It is expanding all the time and most true scientists,  that I know, understand the limits of the art they practice. It takes an open mind to ideas beyond what we can currently prove to advance what we currently understand or think we know.

    I do believe that there is a body of knowledge that has grown out of good scientific method. However, to expand on that body of information documentaries such as this bring fresh view points and possibilities to the world of science and the collective mind. Perhaps this documentary will lead to discoveries that will open doors and turn on lights that lead to human advancements that will one day be viewed as common knowledge that can not be refuted.

    After all there was a time when the science of the time said the world was flat! We live in a dynamic world not a static one. What we understand and believe to be true and fact today could be  fairytale tomorrow.

    • Drwmnn

      You don’t understand the scientific method if you’re saying that. “Scientific facts” are not facts at all. They are observations that are adjusted if they cannot stand up to scrutiny. The problem with science is the mainstream media’s interpretation and the politics involved in it and how it is used. If you truly understood the institution of science you would know that it was created under the tenant of being just as organic as life in so far as it explores the mysteries of the universe. No real scientist would ever advocate that you take a scientific fact as proof of the existence of anything. Science as an institution seeks to understand nature, not to create some unchangeable monument of mankind that’s never to be questioned.

      • Drwmnn

        And to add to that: Science has done and still does some despicable things. It’s created weapons of mass destruction. It’s lead to eugenics programs that lead to forced sterilization programs in the US and the Holocaust in Europe, as well as inhumane attempts at mind control experiments ultimately culminating in a very scientific methods of torture that is used around the world today. But it’s also done some very good things. It’s allowed us to harness the power of electricity to better our lives. It’s the reason you’re able to make a comment on a thread in a forum on a computer that is a combination of electrical energy flowing through gated channels of silicon that is connected via a vast communications network consisting of fiber optics, wireless transmission and satellites that orbit the Earth. The scientific method is a tool. So long as that tool is used morally, it will produce moral things. Whenever it is allowed to be used immorally, it will beget immorality. Religion and science are separate institutions of mankind that both have their value to society and to each other, but whenever they are used with malicious intent they have horrific and oppressive outcomes. It’s up to us. Don’t use science or religion as a scapegoat, no real scientist or religious person would ever do such a thing.

  • Fábio Costa

    You will find a great review at skepticdetective. Cheers.

  • Telwebb

    why are we `beating about the bush` this doc. is the biggest load of old cobblers i have ever suffered . Go do something useful, knit some sandles .

  • aqua man

    maybe
    the most precious piece of evidence i have ever witnessed, lay down the
    ego and segragation we are all one maybe metaphyisicaly but also seems
    we are one on the relative level …..now watch this !

  • aqua man

    maybe
    the most precious piece of evidence i have ever witnessed, lay down the
    ego and segragation we are all one maybe metaphyisicaly but also seems
    we are one on the relative level …..now watch this !

  • Peterwm

    I do not want to sound agressive, but:
    -The memory of water is a homopatic practice. Although claimed to work, Science has held that it does not. for some easy info: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aligned_water_theory
    -The man making fuel from water in china is a known scam. 
    -Chaos theory dictates that very small changes in an initial state can tip a system, so yes: -Theoretically a thought CAN change the universe. The catch is that this change should have no correlation to what this thought actually is. Much as the methaphorical butterfly is not trying to make hurricanes.
    -We know little of the existence of liquid water on other planets. Much of the reason for this is that we can only observe the planets in this solar system because the stars are so bright, they blot out the rest. You can do indirect observation trough gravitational pull, but that tells us nothing of the possible existence of water. Mars may have had liquid water, and the moon Europa is HIGHLY likely to have it. Just not on the surface.
    -If you want to believe: Do the rice experiment at home. But: Have more that 3 glases. Separate them, but treat the couples of 3 in the same way(Thank 1, ignore one and repremand one in each couple.). If you can prove this works, then apply for nobel price.
    -You do not get to blame this on quantum physics! (Not without first understanding said physics)

    I would like nothing better than for the theory of the memory of water to be true. It DOES sound quite magical, and the world would be nicer if it was true. However, science has to deal with all of this:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_topics_characterized_as_pseudoscience

    A lot of this has charismatic people behind it, and a LOT of it may really make you want to believe. 
    That, unfortunately, does not make it true.
     

  • Meledisharapova

    but isn’t that a fact by doing all those experiments that molecules within water change e.g when you say thank you and when you are happy or unhappy.

  • Meledisharapova

    But of course there should be more research done over many years to prove this more and more known to people

  • Patchelly Croes

    This is probably the worst “documentary” I’ve seen.
    It really doesn’t fit into the genre and shouldn’t be show on this website, in my opinion. Call it whatever you may, but this was just a waste of my time. I’m just grateful I didn’t fall asleep and get brainwashed.

  • fuckgreece

    This is fucking retarded. Yes water is a very strange substance that acts unlike anything else but these fucking russians have been drinking too much vodka. 

  • J-gigidy

    Pseudoscience indeed.

  • just a guy

    can someone please delete this shite documentary, its embaressing.

  • Nic

    This documentary is actually a waste of time…. Bollocks, if i’m nice to water it notices, riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Axel-White/1153414791 Axel White

    Love drinking water! and documentaries too…

    • http://www.facebook.com/BrunoSweetdog Bruno Sweetdog

      ahhaha this is awesome!!!

  • http://www.facebook.com/BrunoSweetdog Bruno Sweetdog

    Intriguing story!!!

    I was soo inspired i composed a song about it!

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rRxxe0tO61c&feature=autoshare

  • Anonymous

    wow!!nice documentary

  • Asdsad

    “Water makes most of earths surface and most of our human bodies … but do we really know the secrets of this amazing element” its a compound nigga 

  • Doc Watcher

    video does not work

  • Pingback: Promo Code For Best Buy Online()

  • Ecosse_stu

    this has been removed

  • Gabriel

    Ha so dumb!

  • Aaron Eichelberger

    “As [water] records new information, it receives new properties…” This quote should be enough to dispel any sure-to-be disappointed viewer.

  • Dawid Nowak

    broken video – deleted and doesn’t work

  • electrode

    water is not an “element”

    • josephcarrilho

      You are correct “electrode” and I think this is a ‘waste of time’ video. There are many other
      worthless videos on this site & many which are ‘blocked’ or simply do not work.

  • nimrod

    Full of erroneous and idiotic statements from beginning to end.

    • Nimrod, son of cush.

      like?

  • generalchaos

    Water – “the most common substance on Earth”? Surely it’s Iron? Water – an element? “The only such planet in the Universe”? All that in the first minute.

    “Who bestowed water upon us?” Do I sense religious undertones? Or perhaps pseudo science. Either way I’m out.