Quote:
If you'll recall, during that discussion I pointed you to testimony from people who were interviewed for that nonsense film, who said they were taken out of context and portions of their statements were used to give the wrong impression.
|
Yeees, some of them did,
some didn't, and either way, it doesn't surprise me that some of these scientists who are under such strict guidelines in their research and professional careers had 'buyers regret' for participating in this project. At all. I said that already.
I just didn't get so freaked out by this movie that I googled and found what I needed to disprove the entire thing as false.
Instead, I spent my time researching parts that seemed to have merit, and in fact, might hold truth, or provide a simple doorway to truth (i.e. NYT article).
That is a difference between us. I am looking for something useful from the plethora of information skimmed upon in it, and you are clearly not. Go figure.
Quote:
I'm not clear on what you're trying to prove here, since brain science is a fascinating and growing field.
|
YEASSSSSAH, Didn't I just say that exact thing AGAIN and again, from the beginning? *sigh* I'm "saying" (but apparently you're not reading what I'm writing) that there is information in that movie related to mind/body sciences, and peptides, how the brain processes information, etc, that (given the NYT article as one point of very recent information) has merit, and very very simply
isn't bullshit, just because it might be a little to mystical for your average thinker. So is most of quantum physics, and neuroscience, and anything that is new to humankind in our generally weak-ass way of seeing the world.
Quote:
|
The fact that memories are imprinted on our neural synapses has nothing to do with time travel or talking to 30,000 year old warriors
|
Who said anything about time travel (huh? where was time travel in the movie? i missed that?) Who said anything about warriors? The woman you reference is someone I don't like for reasons beyond her claims of channeling, but, she was an one small part of the movie and apparently that part scares you. Who cares about her so much? If you don't like that part, and don't believe in it (which I also don't get into) then that is the bathwater, eh? Throw it out.
What I'm trying to say is that people are so certain all the information is so completely wrong in that movie (in this case, because you googled it and then read that it was at least as misguided as most of our media tends to be...on a website...coz clearly everything you read hasn't been edited for specific purposes just like the movie...shit I'm getting sarcastic now, sorry) when it
literally and simply isn't all wrong, that you're throwing the baby out with the bathwater because of your own prejudices.
You can filter something instead of trash it, keep the baby, throw out the bathwater...that was my point.
Simple enough, eh, what I'm saying, I hope? I'm sure there are more scientific and less entertaining movies and docs with similar information out there, so feel free, someone, to share them if you've got something that's tried and tested. I'd love to learn more!