I hate to burst your bubble
Dec. 4th, 2006 09:27 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
catalyst2I always feel sad when I see people express boundless enthusiasm for ideas that seem be too good to be true. I listened to someone go into raptures about Masaru Emoto's work on crystalline structures in water and the way that "positive vibrations" can influence the water. Don't get me wrong, if this were to be true it would be wonderful and I would love it to be true but ....
I guess it is this - one of the few universal rules that I believe in is that if it is too good to be true, then it probably isn't (either so good or so true, either will do!) By the by, the other two rules are:
1. Follow the money - it will always tell you where the power and the motives are and
2. As an adult, you can do absolutely anything you want to - you just have to accept the consequences, whether you knew about them or not, whether you meant them or not.
There we go - the three universal rules of life by catalyst2!
Anyway, back to topic.
Emoto's claim is this: that the crystal structures that water freezes into are influenced by prayer, by positive words or by different types of music. Because of this, he claims that if thought affects the molecular structure of water, then similar negative thoughts can do similar things to our bodies since we are mainly made of water. The problem is that his claims are untested and, I think, untestable, although there are some claims to verification, not always exactly scientific, but claims nonetheless.
His method is to freeze very small samples of water in 100 petri dishes and store them at a temperature of -25 degC for three hours in a freezer. Samples of these are then taken out and studied under a microscope. As they melt, photos are taken through the microscope. Beautiful complex crystals can be seen to form in samples where "good" music was played or positive words used and distorted or very simple crystals form in "negative" samples.
That sounds impressive - 100 dishes, a photo from each one, controlled conditions and so on - but he fails to control for that one all-important factor: human subjectivity. He may take 100 dishes but we only see one photo (and, of course, one that always proves his hypothesis) but even more so, and this is a very telling paragraph:
"In fact, in the Maui News interview, Dr. Emoto specifically stated, "I do not require any blind tests on any samples," but rather he believes that "the researcher's aesthetic sense and character is the most important aspect when taking crystal photographs." Emoto's belief that ice crystal formation is sensitive to human thought lead him to select technicians who would not affect crystal formation with negative thoughts over technicians who had formal research experience. (from here, about 3/4 of the way down the page)
In other words the photographers
a) knew what effect they were looking for
b) knew which sample was which
c) did not have to photograph every petri dish and
d) could pick which photos to use, based on their "aesthetic sense and character".
See, that's reduces the claim to "they knew what they were looking for and found it"
Don't get me wrong, I also don't state this is not true either - all I state is that I cannot know one way or the other based on this evidence. Nor do I claim that I can't believe this is true. I can claim belief for anything - indeed, claiming that it is a belief rather that a fact alerts me to the very fact that you do not have proof.
Sadly, I wish it were true - with the power of positive water we could cause wonderful things to happen - and we could charge like wounded bulls for it. Gosh, look at that - the "Ocean of Gratitude" Cruise!
Remember the "Follow the money" rule?
I guess it is this - one of the few universal rules that I believe in is that if it is too good to be true, then it probably isn't (either so good or so true, either will do!) By the by, the other two rules are:
1. Follow the money - it will always tell you where the power and the motives are and
2. As an adult, you can do absolutely anything you want to - you just have to accept the consequences, whether you knew about them or not, whether you meant them or not.
There we go - the three universal rules of life by catalyst2!
Anyway, back to topic.
Emoto's claim is this: that the crystal structures that water freezes into are influenced by prayer, by positive words or by different types of music. Because of this, he claims that if thought affects the molecular structure of water, then similar negative thoughts can do similar things to our bodies since we are mainly made of water. The problem is that his claims are untested and, I think, untestable, although there are some claims to verification, not always exactly scientific, but claims nonetheless.
His method is to freeze very small samples of water in 100 petri dishes and store them at a temperature of -25 degC for three hours in a freezer. Samples of these are then taken out and studied under a microscope. As they melt, photos are taken through the microscope. Beautiful complex crystals can be seen to form in samples where "good" music was played or positive words used and distorted or very simple crystals form in "negative" samples.
That sounds impressive - 100 dishes, a photo from each one, controlled conditions and so on - but he fails to control for that one all-important factor: human subjectivity. He may take 100 dishes but we only see one photo (and, of course, one that always proves his hypothesis) but even more so, and this is a very telling paragraph:
"In fact, in the Maui News interview, Dr. Emoto specifically stated, "I do not require any blind tests on any samples," but rather he believes that "the researcher's aesthetic sense and character is the most important aspect when taking crystal photographs." Emoto's belief that ice crystal formation is sensitive to human thought lead him to select technicians who would not affect crystal formation with negative thoughts over technicians who had formal research experience. (from here, about 3/4 of the way down the page)
In other words the photographers
a) knew what effect they were looking for
b) knew which sample was which
c) did not have to photograph every petri dish and
d) could pick which photos to use, based on their "aesthetic sense and character".
See, that's reduces the claim to "they knew what they were looking for and found it"
Don't get me wrong, I also don't state this is not true either - all I state is that I cannot know one way or the other based on this evidence. Nor do I claim that I can't believe this is true. I can claim belief for anything - indeed, claiming that it is a belief rather that a fact alerts me to the very fact that you do not have proof.
Sadly, I wish it were true - with the power of positive water we could cause wonderful things to happen - and we could charge like wounded bulls for it. Gosh, look at that - the "Ocean of Gratitude" Cruise!
Remember the "Follow the money" rule?
