Comments on: Sunday Funnies: LOL-May 9

By: Keera

Keera — Tue, 11 May 2010 05:20:23 +0000

Darren, so I’ve been told, but I honestly didn’t find anything in the movie that I hadn’t already read/heard about elsewhere (and I have never read anything by Ramtha/J.Z. Knight because I never believed Ramtha was real) - except for the quantum physics. I have only now learned that the movie was heavily sponsored by some Ramtha organization. But again, the movie’s not saying anything I haven’t already heard from other sources. This stuff’s been floating around for ages. (Unverifialbe/unreproducable: Indians not recognizing European ships; ice crystals reacting to words; quantum mechanics acting on things bigger than than atoms.)

Thanks for the quantum link, Nathaniel!

By: Nathaniel

Nathaniel — Tue, 11 May 2010 01:01:47 +0000

If anyone wants to learn about quantum mechanics for real, you can see Nobel laureate Richard Feynman explaining it here. Don’t worry, there’s no math.

By: Darren S. A. George

Darren S. A. George — Mon, 10 May 2010 22:46:03 +0000

Keera- “some” of the stuff has been shown to be unverifiable? I thought the whole thing was an ad for the “Ramtha” cult, i.e., garbage from beginning to end.

By: Keera

Keera — Mon, 10 May 2010 16:22:00 +0000

Bookworm, Dr. David Albert was the one who found his interview edited beyond recognition. I do like the tone of it, the positive self-empowering thoughts in it, but it is sad that some of the stuff they state as fact has been shown to be unverifiable or outright humbug. I would have liked the whole thing to be utterly reliable.

By: bookworm

bookworm — Mon, 10 May 2010 16:04:58 +0000

Keera, I watched that version of “What the Bleep Do We Know?”, too. Interesting ideas, although I can’t say I agree with, or even understand, everything in it. I did read that one of the guys interviewed — can’t remember names right now — was duped into thinking it was going to be a documentary, and when he saw the finished product and how they had edited his interview, he was extremely upset.

By: Bob in Nashville

Bob in Nashville — Mon, 10 May 2010 11:31:19 +0000

Actually a comics site, rather than an explanation site, but a kool-aid comic with a canine in it got picked apart in the comments at http://www.gocomics.com/theargylesweater/2010/05/04/ .

By: Morris Keesan

Morris Keesan — Sun, 09 May 2010 23:02:48 +0000

And yet “implicate” feels like it has a much different relation to “implicit” than “explicate” has to “explicit”.

By: mitch4

mitch4 — Sun, 09 May 2010 22:55:48 +0000

Or else “explicate” for make explicit.

By: Dave in Boston

Dave in Boston — Sun, 09 May 2010 22:51:27 +0000

Morris Keesan: there is, it’s “explain”. More or less.

By: MellowCake

MellowCake — Sun, 09 May 2010 17:27:01 +0000

Another Kool-Aid comic:
http://www.pbfcomics.com/?cid=PBF143-Kids_Are_Thirsty.gif