That Bleeping Movie

[slingblade]

I ran into another member of my college cohort at my school yesterday. She's doing her pre-internship, and will student teach in the fall.

She loves that Bleeping movie, and I have a painful admission to make: I saw part of it before I took my class on skepticism, and there was just enough "truth" in it to fool me. I also didn't have any baloney detection kit. As soon as I figured out it was a load of premium horse hockey, I told this woman, who was simply enraptured by the film and bought every word of it, that it was just so much bull. She rejected my argument completely.

Yesterday, she reminded me about the movie, and I sighed to myself. Then she asked if I remembered the part about the water crystals. Yes, I remembered. Well, she's getting ready to put a lesson plan together about it.

Imagine how thrilled I am that a teacher is about to spread this nonsense to a bunch of kids who don't have crit thinking skills, and will probably swallow every word.

I'm very sad. Here I am, trying my best to teach skepticism to my students, while she is teaching them to be gullible and accept nonsense.

I despair.

[sophia8]

Why don't you offer to help her put her lesson plan together? In particular, suggest that she demonstrates the "Emoto effect" practically with an experiment involving freezing various types of water - distilled, tap, stream water etc - with various labels on the bottle, then getting the students to decide which set of crystals came from which bottle.
That way, you might just persuade even her how silly the whole idea is! Certainly, it may kick-start some of the students into thinking critically, when they can see for themselves that thee's no difference in the crystals.

[TV's Frank]

I feel your pain, but take heart; there is hope left in the world:

I'm currently teaching university sophomore-level physics. Last week, we had begun introductory Quantum Mechanics. During a discussion session (where students are arranged in groups of 4 to answer some non-trivial questions), one student asked me about That Bleeping Movie. I immediately told him that it was crap. Pure and total crap. This piqued the interest of some other students, and they began listening to me. I told them that it got the physics all wrong. I went on to explain the difference between Quantum Mechanics (mathematical description of reality) and the Copenhagen Interpretation (wordy interpretation of QM).

I went on for awhile, decribing how the Copenhagen Interpretation is useful in certain situations, while other interpretations exist but have their own uses. In the end, however, it doesn't matter: even if we don't "understand" QM on a wishy-washy philisophical level, it's still a correct theory.

To clinch it, I talked about some weird results of QM. The students always like hearing tidbits of advanced physics. I think that was the draw of the movie for most of them (they are engineers, after all).

But now they've heard The Real Scoop from a (hopefully) knowledgable and (even more hopefully) trusted source. From reading their faces, it looked like most of them took what I said to heart, and may think about that movie (and future incarnations) more critically.

The end.

[slingblade]

Why don't you offer to help her put her lesson plan together? In particular, suggest that she demonstrates the "Emoto effect" practically with an experiment involving freezing various types of water - distilled, tap, stream water etc - with various labels on the bottle, then getting the students to decide which set of crystals came from which bottle.
That way, you might just persuade even her how silly the whole idea is! Certainly, it may kick-start some of the students into thinking critically, when they can see for themselves that there's no difference in the crystals.

I frankly don't have time to do my own planning, much less help her, although it is a good idea. In fact, it's a very good idea, and I only wish I could do it.

I also can't figure out how she plans to work this into an English class. I can't see how she could make it fit into that context.

[Jimbo07]

A friend of our is a lawyer and an excellent cook. We had just finished consuming one of his fantabulous meals, when my wife noticed "What the..." from a movie rental place on his endtable. She asked what he thought. He said it was the best movie he'd ever seen.

Hoping for many more exceptional meal invites, I kept my big-fat trap shut.

[Hindmost]

I have heard too much about this movie. I guess I am going to have to watch it just so I can respond to others. The fact that it has "Ramtha" on it makes me want to hork.:sour: How bad is it???

glenn:boxedin:

jimbo07...was the food that good????

[Jimbo07]

jimbo07...was the food that good????

Some things in life just trump the heck out of skepticism.

He also throws really good parties (attended by doctors, crown prosecutors, etc. and l'il ol' me), at which he also serves good food.

He doesn't need to know how terrible I thought the movie was. I mentioned this to my wife later. Also, I no longer talk to my Dad regarding Crystals, the Knights Templar, etc. Fighting with woo-oriented middle-aged men hasn't been doing anything for me lately...

[Math Maniac]

What movie are you talking about? Is the title "Bleeping" or are you just using a euphemism?

[slingblade]

"What the BLEEP Do We Know?" or that Bleeping Movie, for short.

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0399877/

[ruach1]

I feel your pain, but take heart; there is hope left in the world:

I'm currently teaching university sophomore-level physics. Last week, we had begun introductory Quantum Mechanics. During a discussion session (where students are arranged in groups of 4 to answer some non-trivial questions), one student asked me about That Bleeping Movie. I immediately told him that it was crap. Pure and total crap. This piqued the interest of some other students, and they began listening to me. I told them that it got the physics all wrong. I went on to explain the difference between Quantum Mechanics (mathematical description of reality) and the Copenhagen Interpretation (wordy interpretation of QM).

I went on for awhile, decribing how the Copenhagen Interpretation is useful in certain situations, while other interpretations exist but have their own uses. In the end, however, it doesn't matter: even if we don't "understand" QM on a wishy-washy philisophical level, it's still a correct theory.

To clinch it, I talked about some weird results of QM. The students always like hearing tidbits of advanced physics. I think that was the draw of the movie for most of them (they are engineers, after all).

But now they've heard The Real Scoop from a (hopefully) knowledgable and (even more hopefully) trusted source. From reading their faces, it looked like most of them took what I said to heart, and may think about that movie (and future incarnations) more critically.

The end.
So everything in the movie was all wrong? :confused:

What about all the information about renewing or reordering the mind by realizing that chemicals or neuron firings in the brain (?) flow in correspondence with past experiences and that we can shape our world and our attitudes more than we may be aware? What about these aspects of the movie?

[thaiboxerken]

Give a lesson that debunks all the points that the "Bleeping" movie makes.

So everything in the movie was all wrong?

Pretty much, yes.

[TragicMonkey]

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0399877/

Wow. I just read the four "plot outlines"....quite a contrast! The ones favorable are so overblown I thought they were parodies.

[sophia8]

I frankly don't have time to do my own planning, much less help her, although it is a good idea. In fact, it's a very good idea, and I only wish I could do it.

I also can't figure out how she plans to work this into an English class. I can't see how she could make it fit into that context.
I can - something to so with the transforming power of words/language, I imagine. Though how she's going to demonstrate it, I haven't a clue.

[slingblade]

Sophia, that may be what she plans. Funny thing: she almost took the skepticism class, too, since the class description said it was about magic and miracles, fairies, witches, and UFOs. She thought we were going to study those things, not debunk them.

She was glad later she didn't take it, as she would hate for anyone to disabuse her of her beliefs. In fact, several of the students in the class were unhappy with this, as they thought the same thing.

She also told me in one of our shared classes that she was psychic. "No, really!"

I have attached custom wheels to my eyes. Makes it easier to roll them.

[TragicMonkey]

She was glad later she didn't take it, as she would hate for anyone to disabuse her of her beliefs.

This is the aspect of the woo mind that I will never understand. It's like they pick what they believe and grow attached to that belief, and like it so much they don't care if it's really true or not. I just don't get that. I don't choose what I believe. My brain processes whatever data it gets and spits out a theory. My conscious will is not involved. How I feel about what I believe is irrelevant to whether it's true or not. I would never say "I'd hate for anyone to disabuse me of my beliefs", because if they were able to it would be because they had better evidence, and my view would alter to a more-likely-correct one, and I'd be wiser for it. It would be crazy to just refuse the opportunity to confirm or correct knowledge.

[thaiboxerken]

I always find it ironic when a believer tells me that my mind is closed.. it's usually after I've thoroughly given mundane explanations for every anecdote they've thrown at me.

Yep, my mind is closed, yet they ignore all explanations that don't support their beliefs.

[TJ]

I always find it ironic when a believer tells me that my mind is closed.. it's usually after I've thoroughly given mundane explanations for every anecdote they've thrown at me.

Yep, my mind is closed, yet they ignore all explanations that don't support their beliefs.

Best article on closed mindedness:

http://www.skeptics.org.uk/article.php?dir=articles&article=the_open_mind.php

[Jimbo07]

I always find it ironic when a believer tells me that my mind is closed...

Reminds me of IDers claiming that their position brings 'fairness' to science... :boxedin:

[Chris Haynes]

So everything in the movie was all wrong? :confused:

What about all the information about renewing or reordering the mind by realizing that chemicals or neuron firings in the brain (?) flow in correspondence with past experiences and that we can shape our world and our attitudes more than we may be aware? What about these aspects of the movie?

They were probably oversimplified, you really cannot shape your world, just your reactions to it. I have not seen the movie, but I read this: http://skeptico.blogs.com/skeptico/2005/04/what_the_bleep_.html

I was also told by a "What the Bleep" fan that the natives literally did not see the ships Columbus sailed in because they had never see ships. The natives (Carib indians) were on islands, and they traveled between these islands in canoes... some which were large enought for 60, sixty! people. The idea that they did not see what would have been (slightly) larger canoes with bit sails coming ashore is totally ludicrous.

I tried to explain this to the person who told me this (also explaining I had spent a good portion of my youth living in Venezuela and Panama, which including learning some of the history, including the eventual genocide of the Carib... our "Venezuelan History and Social Studies" teacher did not hide any of the nasty stuff, and she was Venezuelan). There was no convincing her. She responded by taping it off of her cable service and giving me a copy because this movie makes her happy. :boggled:

[Vagabond]

I actually thought the movie was pretty good. As you point out the part about the water crystals and the indians not seeing the ships was stupid, but most of the rest of it was pretty good. It had some profound things to say about the nature of reality and our senses and quantum mechanics. I had never heard of "Ramtha" before. She seems pretty thoughtful in the movie and afterward I looked her up and found out she was a woo head. But, she doesn't say anything "ramtha" like in the movie.

[Chris Haynes]

Ah... but you see, some us remember when Ramtha was a big deal here in the Northwest. A total loony bin, and I think there is a lawsuit somewhere in there.

I saw this: http://www.cultnews.com/index.php/category/ramthaschoolofenlightenment/

Anyway, many years ago they provided some fun fodder for a local comedy show called "Almost Live", which happens to be where Bill Nye the Science Guy got his start.

As far as "quantum mechanics", uh.. no, not in your brain. Check up on neurology here: http://faculty.washington.edu/chudler/introb.html , plus there is lots of good reading out there. I personally like the Oliver Sacks books, and I read this one that is interesting on perception and brain structure in A Brief Tour of Human Consciousess (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0131486861/ref=pd_sxp_grid_pt_2_1/104-7077620-5376707?%5Fencoding=UTF8) .

Quantum mechanics is bounced around often without any regard to what it really means. Check out a recent comment on it:
http://photoninthedarkness.blogspot.com/2006/02/field-guide-to-quackery-and.html

[Jimbo07]

It had some profound things to say about the nature of reality and our senses and quantum mechanics.

It sure didn't!

I did like the wedding scene, tho.

[drkitten]

It had some profound things to say about the nature of reality and our senses and quantum mechanics.

If by "profound" you mean "wrong, misguided, and ill-advised," then your description is pretty much spot-on..

[NotJesus]

I was also told by a "What the Bleep" fan that the natives literally did not see the ships Columbus sailed in because they had never see ships. The natives (Carib indians) were on islands, and they traveled between these islands in canoes... some which were large enought for 60, sixty! people. The idea that they did not see what would have been (slightly) larger canoes with bit sails coming ashore is totally ludicrous.

It's ludicrous even if they didn't have canoes.

Suppose these natives had lived all their lives in the interior and had never seen the ocean. One day they pack up and move and, after walking some distance, they come to the shore. Wouldn't they simply keep walking into the water and drown? After all, they couldn't possibly see the ocean because it was completely outside their prior experience.

The first time I saw someone talking on a cellphone, I couldn't see the phone. My experience told me that a phone was something attached to a wall by a cord and couldn't possibly be used by someone walking around in the open air. What I saw was a crazy person holding his hand to his head and talking to himself.

[Pragmatist]

They were probably oversimplified, you really cannot shape your world, just your reactions to it. I have not seen the movie, but I read this: http://skeptico.blogs.com/skeptico/2005/04/what_the_bleep_.html

I was also told by a "What the Bleep" fan that the natives literally did not see the ships Columbus sailed in because they had never see ships. The natives (Carib indians) were on islands, and they traveled between these islands in canoes... some which were large enought for 60, sixty! people. The idea that they did not see what would have been (slightly) larger canoes with bit sails coming ashore is totally ludicrous.

I tried to explain this to the person who told me this (also explaining I had spent a good portion of my youth living in Venezuela and Panama, which including learning some of the history, including the eventual genocide of the Carib... our "Venezuelan History and Social Studies" teacher did not hide any of the nasty stuff, and she was Venezuelan). There was no convincing her. She responded by taping it off of her cable service and giving me a copy because this movie makes her happy. :boggled:

I dealt with that in detail here: http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=950318#post950318 by referring to Columbus's original records. Of course there is no indication that the natives didn't see the ships. In one of the logs Columbus relates how the Taino islanders came out to meet his ships in canoes. If they couldn't see the darned things, then what were they rowing out to meet? :)

Anyway, if you want some actual facts to throw back at the woos, ask them to explain why Columbus's own logs contradict their claim!

[Earthborn]

Suppose these natives had lived all their lives in the interior and had never seen the ocean. One day they pack up and move and, after walking some distance, they come to the shore. Wouldn't they simply keep walking into the water and drown? After all, they couldn't possibly see the ocean because it was completely outside their prior experience.Just think of the military applications if this is true: all that is necessary to make something completely invisible is to make it look like nothing that has existed before. As soon as someone says: "WTF is that?!" it is entirely invisible.

Nobody has ever seen this museum:
http://www.mfa.nl/contents/library/9/055.jpg

I wonder though how long this invisibility lasts. No matter what the object is, you will once see it for the first time. Apperently after a while someone does manage form a concept of it or otherwise everything would forever stay invisible.

The first time I saw someone talking on a cellphone, I couldn't see the phone. My experience told me that a phone was something attached to a wall by a cord and couldn't possibly be used by someone walking around in the open air. What I saw was a crazy person holding his hand to his head and talking to himself.Now you are pushing it. I think that really could happen. That's pretty much what I still see.

[varwoche]

I had never heard of "Ramtha" before. A Ramtha thread (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=35998) :D

[sir drinks-a-lot]

I wonder though how long this invisibility lasts. No matter what the object is, you will once see it for the first time. Apperently after a while someone does manage form a concept of it or otherwise everything would forever stay invisible.

W ll, b liv it or not, I'v n v r s n th l tt r " " b for . To t ll th truth, I'm not sur how long it lasts. I gu ss I'll just hav to wait and s .

[sophia8]

I was also told by a "What the Bleep" fan that the natives literally did not see the ships Columbus sailed in because they had never see ships.
Hang on a mo... These natives, descended from Atlanteans, had no contact with filthy Western civilisation and were living in a primal Eden; they were completely innocent and in touch with the many-dimensioned Universe, Conversing daily with spirit guides and devas, they possessed extraordinary wisdom and psychic capabilities that we modern materialists have lost.
So why the bleep couldn't they see the ships coming?

[slingblade]

Hang on a mo... These natives, descended from Atlanteans, had no contact with filthy Western civilisation and were living in a primal Eden; they were completely innocent and in touch with the many-dimensioned Universe, Conversing daily with spirit guides and devas, they possessed extraordinary wisdom and psychic capabilities that we modern materialists have lost.
So why the bleep couldn't they see the ships coming?

I don't know, but that was the point in the film that I saw the bullpuckey coming.

[Chris Haynes]

I dealt with that in detail here: http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=950318#post950318 by referring to Columbus's original records. Of course there is no indication that the natives didn't see the ships. In one of the logs Columbus relates how the Taino islanders came out to meet his ships in canoes. If they couldn't see the darned things, then what were they rowing out to meet? :)

Anyway, if you want some actual facts to throw back at the woos, ask them to explain why Columbus's own logs contradict their claim!

Wow!!! Thanks a bunch! I don't have time to check it out (I'm checking the forum and running), but I'll be sure to send this to the relative who does speak Spanish!

[Chris Haynes]

I dealt with that in detail here: http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=950318#post950318 ...!

Thanks again. I have read it while dying fabric green. Now I know why I missed it. I find my sanity is better (and a better use of my time) if I skip threads started by certain people (I.I., jay gw, and now Paulisonne).

[Stout]

BUMP

Over on another board, we've been having a conversation about a couple of movies. This Bleeping Movie and The Secret. Now, I must comfess I haven't seen either one but I have spent way more time reading both here on the JREF and on other sites about these two movies than it would have taken me to watch both of them...twice.:D

The Secret I judge as being "harmful" in the way that some people have maxed out their credit cards with the intention of asking "the universe, or whatever" for the cash at the end of the month to pay off these debts.

OTOH I fail to find anything harmful in The Bleeping movie other than coming off looking like an idiot talking about emotions and ice crystals and quantum mechanics and consciousness. I suppose tossing the prescription meds could be the harm here. but it's my understanding that prescription meds are something one is "supposed" to get off after a while anyway. Let me add too, that I have no first hand experience with the mental health industry, in any capacity so I'm basically saying that out of ignorance and hearsay.

Am I off base as simply classifying this movie as harmless woo?

[Lensman]

I'm on a lifetime of "prescription meds", I'll never be weaned off them - they're for a minor heart attack I had a few years ago, Soluble Aspirin, Ramipril, Simvastatin & Bisoprolol Fumarate - they're for high cholesterol, blood pressure etc.

[Stout]

Thanks Lensman...I should have been more specific when I said prescription meds. In What the Bleep they were talking about anti-depressants, specifically.

Yikes !!! So there's no lifestyle changes you can make to lessen your dependency on those drugs? Such as more exercise, eating 'healthier" etc ?

[calebprime]

Thanks Lensman...I should have been more specific when I said prescription meds. In What the Bleep they were talking about anti-depressants, specifically.

Yikes !!! So there's no lifestyle changes you can make to lessen your dependency on those drugs? Such as more exercise, eating 'healthier" etc ?

This is a complicated issue, and controversial.

But one thing's for sure. Anyone who watches this movie, and then says to herself "It's all in my mind" and quits the anti-depressants cold turkey is in for some real suffering. Especially for the SSRI's that wash out quickly, like Paxil and Effexor.

According to Peter Kramer, some British studies show that exercise is as effective, or more effective, than AD's for mild depression. Some severely depressed people are too far gone to start exercising, though.

Plus exercise has the benefits of physical fitness, endorphins, improved appearance, improved sleep.

As for the movie: One of the worst I've ever had the displeasure of shutting off several times in disgust. I tried watching it again and again--once to see the dancing gummy bears. The first part was like a bad Nova, then it went way down hill from there. It also taps into that part of the market of women who feel that they are victims--you know, of evil leering men.

Reducing meds, self-empowerment are potentially good things, if done right. Sometimes, people do the right things for the wrong reasons.

[Stout]

Calebprime. it's comments like yours about being of the worst I've ever had the displeasure of shutting off several times in disgust that have basically prevented me from going out and spending my time and money actually watching this movie. I've promised myself I'd watch it if it ever came up on the movie channel, but so far, no dice.

I might just crack today, go out to the DVD rental place, and just get it over with.

In my experience, with neighbours who are schizophrenics, and anecdotes I've heard about schizophrenics, just going off the meds for the heck of it is about one of the worst things they can do. As for anti-depressants, most people I've talked to about it, say they'd love to get off them however their doctors recommend adjusting the dosage rather than cold turkey.

Reducing meds, self-empowerment are potentially good things, if done right. Sometimes, people do the right things for the wrong reasons.

Very well put.

[calebprime]

In my experience, with neighbours who are schizophrenics, and anecdotes I've heard about schizophrenics, just going off the meds for the heck of it is about one of the worst things they can do. As for anti-depressants, most people I've talked to about it, say they'd love to get off them however their doctors recommend adjusting the dosage rather than cold turkey.



Yeah, and for people who are really bipolar, going off the meds is often something they want to do when they are feeling manic and expansive. Not a good idea.

IMO, psychiatric treatment for bipolar disorder is one of the successes of psychiatry--that is, it works, and saves lives. The only problem is, too many people are being diagnosed as bipolar--without proper justification. No figures to back that up.

As for What the (*&^, one snarky Amazon reviewer called it "New Age camp." So bad it was good. You might enjoy it for the laughs.

[Tumblehome]

Am I off base as simply classifying this movie as harmless woo?


Yes. The Bleep was at the least an advertisement, at most a recruitment film, for The Ramtha School of Enlightenment. It wanted vulnerable, unhappy viewers to indentify with the vulnerable, unhappy Marlie Matlin character, and show them that they could find happiness and fulfillment, as Marlie did, through the film's hodge-podge collection of woo. Smart marketing on J. Z. Knight's part, but not harmless. I encourage people to find a copied DVD if they want to watch it, or they'll be contributing to her con.

The Indians not being able to see Columbus's ships was one of the highlights of the film. You'll notice that the ships would have remained invisible forever if the natives hadn't been given a magical shock by a shaman, which plays into the hands of Knight as shaman/spiritual leader.

And this has nothing to do with the movie itself, but J. Z. Knight struck me as having one serious case of penis envy.

[Tumblehome]

Am I off base as simply classifying this movie as harmless woo?


Yes. The Bleep was at the least an advertisement, at most a recruitment film, for The Ramtha School of Enlightenment. It wanted vulnerable, unhappy viewers to indentify with the vulnerable, unhappy Marlie Matlin character, and show them that they could find happiness and fulfillment, as Marlie did, through the film's hodge-podge collection of woo. Smart marketing on J. Z. Knight's part, but not harmless. I encourage people to find a copied DVD if they want to watch it, or they'll be contributing to her con.

The Indians not being able to see Columbus's ships was one of the highlights of the film. You'll notice that the ships would have remained invisible forever if the natives hadn't been given a magical shock by a shaman, which plays into the hands of Knight as shaman/spiritual leader.

And this has nothing to do with the movie itself, but J. Z. Knight struck me as having one serious case of penis envy.

[Skeptic Ginger]

I dealt with that in detail here: http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=950318#post950318 by referring to Columbus's original records. Of course there is no indication that the natives didn't see the ships. In one of the logs Columbus relates how the Taino islanders came out to meet his ships in canoes. If they couldn't see the darned things, then what were they rowing out to meet? :)

Anyway, if you want some actual facts to throw back at the woos, ask them to explain why Columbus's own logs contradict their claim!Or how about the fact that if you can't see something because you don't previously know about it, how the bleep would you ever see anything the first time you saw it?

And I see that was the same thought several other people had.

[anticonspiracy911]

So wait a minute. If the Bleep movie is telling me it's all in my head then is it alright if I stop hydrating my body, starve to death and go sleepless? Afterall, those bodily needs are all just in my head. WHAT THE BLEEP DO WE KNOW?!?! AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

[Stout]

So we have the going off the meds ( psychiatric ) as being harmful if not done under proper medical supervision, and the recruitment element for the cult of Ramtha. I haven't spent much time looking into Ramtha, my cult discussion on another board got sidetracked into Landmark Education, because some poster on that forum thought what the bleep was made by Landmark, and he's a big proponent of Landmark . I hope to check into it today.

Suffice to say that I, personally would have a hard time accepting any wisdom from a purported 35 000 year old entity and I would class any organization that demanded money and obedience form "confused" people as harmful.

So that's two strikes.

The Native Americans not being able to see the ships.....Is it just me or is that sentiment just too stupid for words ?? Third strike.

I like the so bad it's good statement, When I eventually do watch it, I'll be thinking of it as comedy.

[Faithless]

My take on Ramtha on uncyclopedia

uncyclopedia.org/wiki/Ramtha

[MattusMaximus]

Ironically, I got into a conversation just last night with a friend of a friend at dinner about this movie. Since I teach physics, they were very interested in hearing what I had to say about it - and since I was, how shall I say, rather diplomatic about my criticism of the film, I think they took what I had to say to heart.

In fact, one person was so interested in the real explanations behind quantum mechanics, as opposed to the pseudoscientific woo-woo espoused in the movie, she has decided to correspond more with me. She actually seems genuinely interested in learning more about QM - makes me happy.

Now, if only we could have more people like her who don't automatically buy into all the New Age garbage :hypnotize

Cheers - Mattus

[kerikiwi]

It has also been claimed that when the local South Americans first saw Spaniards on horseback they didn't understand what they were seeing, and thought they were gods, somehow being unable to recognise the horse as an animal, and the human as, well a human!
Utter codswallop! (What is a cod's wallop?)

[Madalch]

It has also been claimed that when the local South Americans first saw Spaniards on horseback they didn't understand what they were seeing, and thought they were gods, somehow being unable to recognise the horse as an animal, and the human as, well a human!
Utter codswallop! (What is a cod's wallop?)

There is a hint of truth to that- where do you think the Greeks got their myths about centaurs?

[kerikiwi]

There is a hint of truth to that- where do you think the Greeks got their myths about centaurs?

Peyote? (Or its Greek equivalent)

I do not believe that the South Americans were unable to recognise a man on an animal as a man on an animal, just as I do not believe they were unable to see the sailing ships.

[thaiboxerken]

There is a big difference between not understanding what's perceived and not seeing something at all.

[kerikiwi]

There is a big difference between not understanding what's perceived and not seeing something at all.

Perhaps in some cases, but the locals certainly knew what an animal was and what a person was. It is stretching credibility to claim they couldn't recognise a person riding an animal as a person riding an animal, just as it is stretching credibility to claim they couldn't see ships.
Too, too silly.

[thaiboxerken]

So you're saying it's more plausible that they "saw" centaurs instead of misperceiving men riding on horseback? What other animals did these people see others riding at that period of time in that area?

[Almo]

...but most of the rest of it was pretty good. It had some profound things to say about the nature of reality and our senses and quantum mechanics.

But it gets the Quantum Mechnics all wrong! :confused:

I wish that damned film had never been made. :mad:

[kerikiwi]

So you're saying it's more plausible that they "saw" centaurs instead of misperceiving men riding on horseback? What other animals did these people see others riding at that period of time in that area?

I don't understand your first sentence.
Why would they 'misperceive'? They knew what people were, they knew what animals were. The fact that a person was seen for the first time actually riding an animal would not mean they were unable to identify the two elements. It is much more likely ( a nod here to Occam) that they were rather impressed with such an innovative means of transport.
I think it is more likely an early version of the urban myth, rather like the belief that the early European mariners thought the earth was flat.

[Earthborn]

It may well be a myth, but considering that those Spaniards must have had very weird clothing compared to locals, and probably dressed up their horses as well, I don't think it is all that unreasonable that some of them may have had trouble seeing where the men ended and the beasts began.

[thaiboxerken]

I can believe that people mistake what they're seeing much more than not seeing something because they don't know what it is. I can see how ignorant folk could mistake men riding horses as centaurs, although it's still a claim that needs proven, but I can't see how a person could simply not see a giant ship because they don't know what it is. Seeing a thing doesn't require knowing what that thing is. Identifying a thing does require knowledge, though.

[Ladewig]

It may well be a myth, but considering that those Spaniards must have had very weird clothing compared to locals, and probably dressed up their horses as well, I don't think it is all that unreasonable that some of them may have had trouble seeing where the men ended and the beasts began.


Perhaps. Then again, they had seen llamas so they knew that large four-legged animals existed.

. . . . . . .
ETA: I just looked at the range of habitat for llamas and realized that many natives would not have had contact with them.

[cisco]

I'm taking a public speaking class and one of the other students is giving an informative speech on the water crystal woo from this movie Thursday. I'm torn like 80% keep my mouth shut and 20% raise my hand and say "this movie was made by a cult and the results of that experiment are not scientific or reproducible."

[Gravy]

It had some profound things to say about the nature of reality and our senses and quantum mechanics.
NO. (http://skeptico.blogs.com/skeptico/2005/04/what_the_bleep_.html)

I had never heard of "Ramtha" before. She seems pretty thoughtful in the movie and afterward I looked her up and found out she was a woo head. But, she doesn't say anything "ramtha" like in the movie.You missed the fact that everything she is saying is "Ramtha like" in the movie, because she's channeling "Ramtha." I suggest you check the end credits, where J.Z. Knight is introduced as Ramtha. I don't think you'll have any trouble guessing why that information was not provided when Knight first spoke in the film, rather than in the end credits.

[jaydeehess]

I had never heard of this movie in my life before this thread. Given that it would be 109 minutes that I would never get back ( perhaps a condition Ramtha would dispute ) I will not be bothering to rent it.

As I read about the native islanders who could not see a bloody large chunk of boat shaped wood I thought about a baby being born.

If we can only see something we have witnessed before then all children will be born unable to ever comprehend anything they see. If however there is just that one moment when we are born at which we can see something then the only view we would ever understand would be a view of our mothers that , as adults, no one really wants to comprehend.

[cisco]

I'm taking a public speaking class and one of the other students is giving an informative speech on the water crystal woo from this movie Thursday. I'm torn like 80% keep my mouth shut and 20% raise my hand and say "this movie was made by a cult and the results of that experiment are not scientific or reproducible."
Well, she gave her speech and it filled my heart with joy that there were giggles throughout. We took a break immediately afterwards and the topic of most of the little conversation-circles was how wacky the whole idea was. Little things like this are just enough for me to keep the faith :).

(the metaphorical faith, of course. I have no spiritual faith.)

[EHLO]

...I do not believe that the South Americans were unable to recognise a man on an animal as a man on an animal, just as I do not believe they were unable to see the sailing ships.

I think the first native encounters with sailing ships just resulted in implausible anecdotes about Unidentified Floating Objects populated by strange white beings that came ashore and abducted people. So it wasn't that nobody saw them, just that nobody believed those that did!

Movies like this and The Secret make me feel sick at how ill informed people can be.

[Vic Vega]

It may well be a myth, but considering that those Spaniards must have had very weird clothing compared to locals, and probably dressed up their horses as well, I don't think it is all that unreasonable that some of them may have had trouble seeing where the men ended and the beasts began.

I think it's completely unreasonable. These were intelligent people. They would have seen men with funny clothes and funny shoes on their feet riding animals. Despite the fact they they had never seen horses, it isn't like they had no frame of reference.

Maybe the first Indian to see them thought, "Wow! That is an oddly dressed man with pale skin riding a large deer-like creature. I hope he doesn't try to kill me or give me some strange disease."

[Madalch]

I think it's completely unreasonable. These were intelligent people. They would have seen men with funny clothes and funny shoes on their feet riding animals.

Depends on the viewing conditions. If the Spaniard stood still, and the Mayan/Aztec/Whatever came up to take a good look, it would be obvious.

If the fellow saw a few Spaniards riding horses, possibly in the middle of attacking someone else, in the distance, it wouldn't be.

[Drudgewire]

Sitting through What the Bleep is forever going to be the reason I give whenever anybody asks me "why don't you date hippies anymore?"

I QUANTUM HATED EVERY BLEEPING SECOND!! http://www.lethalwrestling.com/upload/fist4su.gif

[Vic Vega]

If the fellow saw a few Spaniards riding horses, possibly in the middle of attacking someone else, in the distance, it wouldn't be.


Only if the fellow needed contact lenses.

[Fredrik]

I actually like the Dr Quantum presentation of the double-slit experiment, but everything else makes me want to vomit on J.Z. Knight. Except maybe the scene when Armin Shimerman (http://www.lightspeedfinearts.com/photos/ArminQuark2A.jpg) shows up to endorse that crazy stuff about water. That makes me want to vomit on him. Edit: Vic Vega's avatar gives me another idea.

Can someone explain what "down the rabbit hole" is? Is that a sequel or something?

[Darth Rotor]

I actually like the Dr Quantum presentation of the double-slit experiment, but everything else makes me want to vomit on J.Z. Knight. Except maybe the scene when Armin Shimerman (http://www.lightspeedfinearts.com/photos/ArminQuark2A.jpg) shows up to endorse that crazy stuff about water. That makes me want to vomit on him. Edit: Vic Vega's avatar gives me another idea.

Can someone explain what "down the rabbit hole" is? Is that a sequel or something?

Reference to the book Alice in Wonderland. Once you go down the Rabbit Hole, you enter a world that is unlike the world you now inhabit. Alice chases a Rabbit down a Hole, and enters Wonderland.

I recommend the book, it's a fun read.

Also good fun is "Alice Through the Looking Glass." It is the source of one of the most enjoyable poems in the English language (YMMV), Jabberwocky (http://www.jabberwocky.com/carroll/jabber/jabberwocky.html)

'Twas brillig, and the slithy toves
Did gyre and gimble in the wabe:
All mimsy were the borogoves,
And the mome raths outgrabe.

"Beware the Jabberwock, my son!
The jaws that bite, the claws that catch!
Beware the Jubjub bird, and shun
The frumious Bandersnatch!"

He took his vorpal sword in hand:
Long time the manxome foe he sought --
So rested he by the Tumtum tree,
And stood awhile in thought.

And, as in uffish thought he stood,
The Jabberwock, with eyes of flame,
Came whiffling through the tulgey wood,
And burbled as it came!

One, two! One, two! And through and through
The vorpal blade went snicker-snack!
He left it dead, and with its head
He went galumphing back.

"And, has thou slain the Jabberwock?
Come to my arms, my beamish boy!
O frabjous day! Callooh! Callay!'
He chortled in his joy.

`Twas brillig, and the slithy toves
Did gyre and gimble in the wabe;
All mimsy were the borogoves,
And the mome raths outgrabe.

---Lewis Carroll---
(from Through the Looking-Glass and What Alice Found There, 1872

The poem makes more sense than the movie under discussion.

DR

[Almo]

I actually like the Dr Quantum presentation of the double-slit experiment, but everything else makes me want to vomit on J.Z. Knight.

Actually, the Dr. Quantum bit contains the mistake that the whole movie bases its premise on. When he says "By merely observing the system, we affect its outcome!" He puts an eyeball there as the observer.

The thing is, it's not "merely" observing a system. To observe a system, you must hit it with something, or let it hit something and take down the result. This action is what collapses the wavefunction. At least, that's my understanding of the situation.

[Madalch]

Only if the fellow needed contact lenses.

So you have such spectacular vision and a quick wit that you have -never- mistaken one thing for anything else? You can look at something, no matter how far away, for the merest fraction of a second, and you instantly know exactly what it is? Impressive.

[Drudgewire]

So you have such spectacular vision and a quick wit that you have -never- mistaken one thing for anything else? You can look at something, no matter how far away, for the merest fraction of a second, and you instantly know exactly what it is? Impressive.
Centaur nonsense aside, the real eye-roller was the claim that since they hadn't seen them before they looked out and just saw ocean when the Spaniards arrived. I believe because those big ships coming were so completely alien to them their minds didn't process anything at all.

Maybe I'm getting that a little twisted. If I'm wrong, I'm wrong. I don't feel bad maligning that movie in any way after being forced to watch desire germs sing Addicted to Love.
In fact, just the memory of it... http://www.lethalwrestling.com/upload/suicide.gif

[Madalch]

Centaur nonsense aside, the real eye-roller was the claim that since they hadn't seen them before they looked out and just saw ocean when the Spaniards arrived.

Don't worry- I realize that "not seeing something because it's unfamiliar" is silliness distilled; I'm merely arguing that unfamiliar things may be mistaken for something else.

[normdoering]

If you thought "What the BLEEP Do We Know?" caused brain damage, what are you going to think of Ben Stein's new movie, "Expelled."

http://normdoering.blogspot.com/2008/02/ben-stein-crouching-theocon-hidden-nit.html

[vIQleS]

http://www.lethalwrestling.com/upload/suicide.gif

OMG!!!111one

Greatest smiley ever.....

ROTFLMAO :-D

[Father Dagon]

Does anyone know about some article that helps you debunk it quick, cheap and polite? (After you've seen it, of course.)

[godless dave]

Does anyone know about some article that helps you debunk it quick, cheap and polite? (After you've seen it, of course.)

http://skeptico.blogs.com/skeptico/2005/04/what_the_bleep_.html

[Ateius]

Just think of the military applications if this is true: all that is necessary to make something completely invisible is to make it look like nothing that has existed before. As soon as someone says: "WTF is that?!" it is entirely invisible.

Nobody has ever seen this museum...

Museum? What museum? All I see is a river. Just what are you trying to pull?:p

[Damien Evans]

If you thought "What the BLEEP Do We Know?" caused brain damage, what are you going to think of Ben Stein's new movie, "Expelled."

http://normdoering.blogspot.com/2008/02/ben-stein-crouching-theocon-hidden-nit.html

It can't be as bad as "The Secret", can it?

[Btodd]

It can't be as bad as "The Secret", can it?

I don't know; let's split some hairs!

The Secret, Expelled and What the Bleep Do We Know.....this thread angries up the blood.:mad:


Btodd

[Damien Evans]

I don't know; let's split some hairs!

The Secret, Expelled and What the Bleep Do We Know.....this thread angries up the blood.:mad:


Btodd

What's worse, my parents have both what the bleep and the secret:mad:

[Btodd]

What's worse, my parents have both what the bleep and the secret:mad:

There's still time for the trifecta.....Expelled hasn't been released yet.;)


Btodd

[SezMe]

What's worse, my parents have both what the bleep and the secret:mad:
Well, if my wife and I both had "what the bleep" I'd want to keep it a secret too. :)

[Kahalachan]

The movie was entertaining in a fictional way. Someone said they liked the Doctor Quantum stuff and I liked it too. Except when they tried to imply that particles are sentient or whatever. I don't really know how to explain it. It's annoying people buy into that. It's filled with pseudoscience. But it has this appeal to it where, if you ignore all that and just watch it as you would the Matrix, it's kinda fun. Unfortunately, I've seen people take the Matrix literally and entertain it as a possibility.

:xrolleyes

The only educational setting I could see that movie being "taught" in any way would be religious studies or philosophy. Religious studies as long as it's taught objectively and not preferential over any other belief, and with philosophy go hog wild with it.

[ronananderson]

Thanks for the warning JREF people!My flatmate just gave me a copy, its sitting right in front of me as i type.Or is it?I watched a bit of it, until Colombus' ships landed, then collapsed unto the floor in a fit of incontinent giggles.Can anybody recommend a book or site on QM?I just want to have a lay understanding to debunk believers in this crap.Their tears give me sustenance.