Comments on: Are Dr. Masaru Emoto’s Fantastic Claims Actually Real?

By: Tim Krueger

Tim Krueger — Tue, 03 Apr 2012 15:13:42 +0000

I echo the sentiments above. I’m left wondering how many hours of “effort” it took to discredit the scientific methodology used and what value that brings? I had the same thoughts on the lack of hard scientific methodology used after spending 2 hours reading the book. It doesn’t take extensive research to figure that out. It’s pretty apparent.

Doing your own research in this space seems like it would have been a better use of your time and energy. I’d be interested in that.

By: Sabrina

Sabrina — Sun, 25 Mar 2012 05:02:08 +0000

If a person isn’t going to listen to the Christian message, they won’t no matter what. Remember there were people who didn’t believe Christ when he walked amongst us humans 2000 years ago. Personally, I think Dr. Emoto’s experiment proves much of what we as Christians teach regarding prayer, and also demostrates the scripture that reads as a man thinketh in his heart, so is he. No, it’s not just thoughts alone, but thought are very powerful because they can lead to actions.

By: Dr. C. Parrott

Dr. C. Parrott — Fri, 23 Mar 2012 18:55:28 +0000

Another good video, on being open minded. His dialogue indicates that “scientific” persons are open minded and spiritual persons are not, I have found both types to be more close minded than not.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T69TOuqaqXI

By: Dr. C. Parrott

Dr. C. Parrott — Fri, 23 Mar 2012 17:57:57 +0000

“The peer review is just a terrible way for the science to advance and it is the reason why discoveries are being made by “outsiders” rather than “scientists”. ”

You need to learn how to play by the rules before you can get more creative and change and or break them credibly.

You can be an excellent soccer team, however if the rules of soccer are disregarded any wins against another team are void.

By: Dr. C. Parrott

Dr. C. Parrott — Fri, 23 Mar 2012 17:54:34 +0000

Lets stay open minded people and give eachother the credit we deserve, we all come from different backrounds and beliefs and require different levels of evidence to be convinced. Most of us are closed minded to anthing that doesn’t agree with our idea of the world and how it should be looked at and tested. Others are closed minded to the scientific method and that spirituality is not always what we think it is, preferring to live in ignorant bliss not questioning or exploring our beliefs.

I am an open minded skeptic, I am open to both “supernatural” phenomena being real and the possibility that it is “hocum” if properly disproved or proved. Double blind studies are extremely important to negate experimenter bias, the power of expectation alone shows that our intention creates our reality and can do very powerful things such as heal cancer etc. A much more pleasant alternative to chemotherapy and radiation which kill you and your cancer cells.

I found these from another site discussing the emoto work.

http://download.journals.elsevierhealth.com/pdfs/journals/1550-8307/PIIS1550830706003272.pdf

http://www.deanradin.com/papers/emotoIIproof.pdf

and here is an interesting video that quotes scientific research outlining how intention can affect our DNA and that DNA can influence the particles around it. Then gives a demonstration of energetic healing of a large cancerous tumor.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XfTjlfLGBv0

If someone knows where to find the research articles that Gregg Braden talks about can be read I would love to read them.

By: pisimohk ka nipawit

pisimohk ka nipawit — Mon, 19 Mar 2012 00:40:36 +0000

This article is very disheartening and I don’t know why someone would go to great lengths to disprove that thoughts and prayers do not affect things. So what if Emoto is making tons of money from his book, if he makes people change how they think regarding the world around them, then I would say he’s made a valuable contribution to the world. many cultures pray over their food and water before they take it into their bodies and they whole heartedly believe their thoughts and prayers will help heal them. leave it to science and to self proclaimed open minded critics to prove them wrong again.

By: David

David — Sun, 18 Mar 2012 23:28:11 +0000

Well, the opening paragraph certainly grabbed me; I was intrigued as I started reading through this paper only to realise a mild sense of disappointment settle in.

Kristopher Setchfield, BA, Health Science says:-
“After the lengthy review of Emoto’s research methods and results, I have come to believe that Dr. Emoto is offering pseudoscience to the masses in the guise of defensible research. ” I saw no tangible evidence to incline me to spend six to 12 months of my life designing, conducting and publishing a research experiment on the topic.

I therefore assume that a primary reason for not scientifically exploring this reported ‘phenomena’ any further is the principle lack of any tangible evidence.

Presumably the question then arises that in accepting this published critique of Masaru Emoto’s methods used, and the attending uncertainties, then surely this topic is ripe for thorough ‘scientific’ investigation “for its own sake in the pursuit of knowledge” ?

Therefore the following questions come to mind for me:-
Q1 – why is the existence of any tangible evidence necessary ?
Q2 – what direction would have been followed had any tangible evidence been ‘found’ ?
Q3 – after all the talking has been done surely the following remains as the main ‘challenge’ for someone who has the inclination, the resources and the time:-
“While it is possible that he did, in fact, discover that water has an observable sensitivity to external stimuli such as prayer and words, Dr. Emoto’s experimental design and clinical procedures do not prove the claim. A double blind procedure in which a photographer would not know what water sample he or she was photographing would make the claim considerably more credible.”

As for me, I believe we embody that which is the boundary between the physical and the mystical, we make of it what we will.

Thank you for a thoroughly interesting yet ‘incomplete’ half hour.

By: 11

11 — Thu, 15 Mar 2012 19:21:12 +0000

I think someone in defense of the theory would say, “when a person thinks of your good friend Hitler, they project good vibes and thoughts because the thought of him brings pleasant feelings. If someone is referencing Hitler of Austria, then likely there is a negative connotation attached to the name.” Plus, a person is more subjective than a phrase like “love” or “hate”. So I would imagine the results would be somewhat neutral or inconclusive when using an actual persons name. Which it’s interesting to note Mr. Emoto never did the experiment using subjective words or neutral phrases. I’d like to see that.

By: 11

11 — Thu, 15 Mar 2012 19:08:17 +0000

I agree. Even if Mr. Emoto is a quack, people need to realize intent is important. We can’t rely on the scientific community, for much anyway, they have careers to protect and little funding. I don’t think there is anything paranormal about thoughts altering reality to some degree. People only think things are paranormal until its proven by science, then it becomes nature. Things that seem magical are just things that are too complex for scientists to understand at the moment. Not to mention, there may just be some things we can’t understand because our brains have a limited way of taking in information. There will always be hidden aspects of reality I’m sure. I think it should be investigated more, it’s foolish to scoff and move on.

By: Joe

Joe — Thu, 15 Mar 2012 00:58:19 +0000

I actually did an experiment about 2 years ago. I wrote up a lab, after developing a hypothesis based; on Emotos work and the what I have learned about quantum physics, chemistry, and the human energy field over the years. I hypothesized that I could use structured water to cause a massive difference in root growth and growth in the grass between the two groups.
I had a clump of grass for the control group and exp group. I used structured water on one(exp) and regular tap water on the other(control). The exp group got bigger shortly after the experiment started. After a couple more days, I swapped the two, and continued the experiment. Not only did the [new] control group catch up and grow bigger, it got more than three times taller than the cntl group within the next week. The roots were shockingly thicker, longer and whiter than the control group. Then, I didn’t water the groups for four days. I began normal watering after that. The control group was brown/black and somewhat crispy. The exp group was not doing good at all, but still had life in it. After three days, the exp group was in full health again. The cntl group never came back. I still have the lab. I also made markings on the wall as documentation of where the grass grew throughout the three weeks of the experiment. Everyone of my friends saw the difference between the control group and the exp group while the grasses were growing, and the lab with the results.