Nassim Haramein. Debunked?

Get Email Updates Email this Topic Print this Page

richrf
 
Reply Thu 25 Jun, 2009 08:17 pm
@glasstrees,
dwixi;72218 wrote:
I think its good that people dig deep in this apparently physical existence though.


I agree. Observing physical existence is great fun and very interesting. For me, the macro world is a mirror of the inner, micro world. So observing one is like observing the other. Both are great ways to pass time and learn. I love reading about the newest developments in quantum physics.

Rich
 
zeroone
 
Reply Tue 30 Jun, 2009 06:05 am
@richrf,
Come on guys - you have to do better than that!

Thank you Justin for some nice words about Nassim - that's all truth.
Hope your camera managed to snap some moments with Nassim and you'll be willing to share?!

http://www.book-of-light.com/beta6/sites/default/files/pictures/event_horizon_dvd_cover.jpg
I purchased Nassims DVDs back in 2007. Done a lot of research after that. Very soon after watching this astonishing DVDs I came across with Walter Russell. And so on ...

It seems that even though he made one of the very best presentation I ever saw, there are a lot of people finding him hard to comprehend. But hey - that's understandable - totaly! How much of Russells work do we understand at all? Russell studied physics for 6 years just to understand scientific language.

Nassim Haramein is unique! Time will tell!

It's easy to judge someones work - hard to comprehend if you didn't do yours. But that depends on what you are looking for.
W.R. would probably say: God will work with you - but not for you!


Zeroone
 
xris
 
Reply Tue 30 Jun, 2009 06:34 am
@zeroone,
zeroone;73603 wrote:
Come on guys - you have to do better than that!

Thank you Justin for some nice words about Nassim - that's all truth.
Hope your camera managed to snap some moments with Nassim and you'll be willing to share?!

http://www.book-of-light.com/beta6/sites/default/files/pictures/event_horizon_dvd_cover.jpg
I purchased Nassims DVDs back in 2007. Done a lot of research after that. Very soon after watching this astonishing DVDs I came across with Walter Russell. And so on ...

It seems that even though he made one of the very best presentation I ever saw, there are a lot of people finding him hard to comprehend. But hey - that's understandable - totaly! How much of Russells work do we understand at all? Russell studied physics for 6 years just to understand scientific language.

Nassim Haramein is unique! Time will tell!


It's easy to judge someones work - hard to comprehend if you didn't do yours. But that depends on what you are looking for.
W.R. would probably say: God will work with you - but not for you!


Zeroone
Relating him Icke wont do his credibility any good.
 
zeroone
 
Reply Tue 30 Jun, 2009 06:59 am
@xris,
xris;73612 wrote:
Relating him Icke wont do his credibility any good.


Totaly agree with you!
I don't relate him with Icke. I also deleted link in my previous post. @xris - can you please do the same with upper quotes. TNX

But where else is the right place for people to talk about this kind of stuff?
I tried once on philosophyforum but was canceled immediately.

Zeroone
 
xris
 
Reply Tue 30 Jun, 2009 07:23 am
@zeroone,
zeroone;73615 wrote:
Totaly agree with you!
I don't relate him with Icke. I also deleted link in my previous post. @xris - can you please do the same with upper quotes. TNX

But where else is the right place for people to talk about this kind of stuff?
I tried once on philosophyforum but was canceled immediately.

Zeroone
was a reason given? I find this musing science a bit like trying to hold sand in your hands,it does not stay there long enough to examine it.
 
jeeprs
 
Reply Sun 13 Dec, 2009 07:48 pm
@glasstrees,
I was at the www.scienceandnonduality.com conference in October. Somebody mentioined this 'Nassim Harrieman".

Anyway he seems very much a maverick as far as the science community is concerned. As is Rupert Sheldrake, who I have met, and who seems very wise to me.

I will await further research.
 
DojiSan
 
Reply Tue 9 Feb, 2010 07:00 am
@jeeprs,
I watched his presentation at Rouge Valley and it made perfect sense to me. The information he presented profoundly affected how I view the world. I felt like Newton being hit by the apple on the head except it wasn't an apple that hit me but a tetrahedron toy Very Happy I'm doing more research on him and this Russel guy.
 
adam21
 
Reply Tue 2 Mar, 2010 08:38 am
@DojiSan,
I've watched over 8+ hours of videos on him, His work is absolutely extrordinary and has sent me on a two month research binge into dozens of other topics. I now believe in UFO's and that they are using the sun to access different dimensions, I also believe that there are extra-terrestrial beings on mars and the moon, and the annanaki created us.

I've came to the conclusion that the majority of humans are too ignorant, uninterested and judgmental to become educated on the topic of where we really came from and how the universe works, but I fully understand and at the moment im contemplating on moving to ecuador.
 
joehojo
 
Reply Fri 12 Mar, 2010 05:09 pm
@glasstrees,
dwixi;72128 wrote:
He does the same things as lots of people trying to convince you they are right and make you feel stupid if you don't believe him.

He claims he came up with these ideas as a child. To make you think "wow I must be really stupid if i don't agree with him" also he gets the audience to laugh at other peoples theorys. It seems like he is just being an entertainer and convince people. He doesnt act like someone that is into genuine scientific research but trying to sell people his idea.


I am sorry but your poor attempt at an analysis of what he is presenting and doing is inaccurate to say the least.

Please take a look at what your saying. 1) if he was trying to make you think "wow" as you so eloquently put it then he wouldn't spend 5 hours doing lectures to people int he physics AND non-physics communities at all. Because its a big waste of time.

2) everyone gets a real genuine feeling from Nassim, he is not doing this for shock value, and if you follow some of the components to his assertions they make perfect sense.

Whats wrong with something making perfect sense? Are you scared of that? He isn't trying to "sell" his idea, because in the world of high level sabbatical and peer review Grand Unified Field theory physics it doesn't do any amount of good to have "mainstream" folks on your side. It just doesn't

Plus all of his equations are under intense peer review and are doing fine and this was years ago. He has moved considerably well through the physics community. You have to understand that so many people have wonderful theories which we never here about because this community is so elite


---------- Post added 03-12-2010 at 06:13 PM ----------

adam21;134570 wrote:
I've watched over 8+ hours of videos on him, His work is absolutely extrordinary and has sent me on a two month research binge into dozens of other topics. I now believe in UFO's and that they are using the sun to access different dimensions, I also believe that there are extra-terrestrial beings on mars and the moon, and the annanaki created us.

I've came to the conclusion that the majority of humans are too ignorant, uninterested and judgmental to become educated on the topic of where we really came from and how the universe works, but I fully understand and at the moment im contemplating on moving to ecuador.



I like your thoughts here. We have a serious problem with intellectual prowess in this Country and in the world. But mostly in the fine US of A with ordinary folk having to questions and almost get down right mad at the people who want to be intellects are understand more educating themselves.

However, the Moon and Mars aliens idea you present is questionable. I don't know about all that. But most of Nassim says is stuff which is present in Hinduism in a different way. Nassim is going to and in my opinion SHOULD win the Nobel Prize in both Nuclear and Astro-physics!
 
James J
 
Reply Mon 12 Jul, 2010 07:08 am
@glasstrees,
The question of why something and not nothing is not proof anything really. The fact that "something" was in existence in the beginning does not *mean* anything.

When people think of "nothing" they tend to picture an immense blackness. Like space without the starts. Unfortunately, in a realm of "nothing" there wouldn't wouldn't *be* empty space. There has to be "something" for something to even be empty. That's why space (the literal space, not what we call the expanse outside of earth) didn't exist until the beginning.

This is the problem with trying to explain the "big bang" to people who don't understand. They usually see the "egg" as sitting in the middle of "nothing" and then exploding outwards and "filling" "nothing" up with "something". This is mostly, (unfortunately) because it is the best analogy we can come up with right now. But in reality, the egg *wasn't* sitting in the middle of "nothing". The *only* "something" in existence was the egg. And then it... hatched I guess you could say (lol) which is another bad analogy because it assumes something laid the egg... You see? By attempting to explain I can only go in circles. The point is, "something" didn't *have* to come from "nothing", for just as "nothing" could always exist, (and indeed can be said to still exist, side by side as before, but that's another conversation...) "something" would also simply always exist. It's in fact *necessary* for "something" to have always existed. For even if you are a deist of some type, any God would be "something" even if not a physical "something". The only argument between theists and atheists is whether the original "something" was the matter we already have proof of existence, or the spiritual matter that science has no currently accepted proof of. The two ("nothing" and "something") have equal values on the scale. It's a multiple choice question with only two answers. Take your bet. Of course there's the hidden third answer, where they both exist, "something" being the universe, and "nothing" being outside it and yet also not in some other universe... But back to the point, if matter and energy can never be created or destroyed, only changed from one form into another, even on the extreme going from matter to energy and vice verse, then by *definition* we already understand that it always was, and had no beginning.

As for the physics, trying to understand physics from the analogies is really a bad idea. You can't do it. The analogy is so broken down, and leaves out so many tiny (and not so tiny) components in an attempt to bring the student even a tiniest bit *close* to understanding, that attempting to prove or disprove anything with the analogies is not possible unless both people actually understand the real physics behind them and so can understand the math that is needed for the analogies. For anyone else, the analogies leave so much out that you can't argue anything with it, simply because you have no idea what you're actually arguing.
 
seenitwmyowneyes
 
Reply Mon 19 Jul, 2010 08:27 pm
He's a con-artist. He thought up the entire scam while smoking crack in a van he lived in. The pictures on his web site are of a property he got kicked off of for being a fraud. He can't say that his machine works because he's never built it! He's just a drug addict/pervert trying to stoke his own ego. Anyone would be a fool to have anything to do with him or give him any money
 
Waffa
 
Reply Tue 3 May, 2011 01:46 pm
I smiled when i saw one of hes video as then i know instantly - i was not alone with my thoughts
 
yaed
 
Reply Sun 22 May, 2011 06:03 am
Ask yourselves what current so called science has brought us. The combustion engine using fossil fuels, electricity and stuff like that, thats 100 years or more old stuff. The internet and sending electrical signals and all that, also pretty much old suff. The kind of things that gets used is only stuff that someone sees an opurtunity the amass fiat so called "money". Its not really money but thats another matter.

So what Nassim Haramein and Marko Rodin and Russell and Tesla did/is doing and its application must be understood in that kind of setting. You must understand what kind of world it is you live in. Political parties, democracy, justice, law, liberalism, socialism even capitalism, all these things are ideas some people had 100 years ago or even longer then that. Until you study those things, and our present time, you know nothing of how far away we have come from those ideas. Nobody can do that work for you, you either choose to inform yourself, or let someone else inform you, which one is it going to be and will you know the difference? I think in your heart you know the diference. The world of today is a corporatocracy. Have a look at what John Perkins is doing, have a look at what Max Keiser is talking about.

A lot of the stuff you guys are moving around in your head and so on is really, really old stuff. This world will fight tooth and nail to the bitter end to keep itself in its set tracks. People with new ideas that dont fit well into that world will have a hard time. This is nothing new, this is the history of mankind. Most people are far, far behind the forerunners, not because they arent as smart, but because they are hindred by older ideas. Im not saying Nassim is one of those forerunners, im just saying that in general. He might be, and he might not be that depends on your own judgement.

However our time, as all other times has its own set of variables. From here we will move on with what is given to us from historical events. In 40 years life on this planet will be quite different from what its like now. But dont take my word for it, just check how many there are of us now and at present rate of increase how many there will be in 40 years. Add to that the present usage of oil, phosphor, coal, silver, copper, iron, arable land, rainforest per capita and you do that math. Its not that hard.

After i did that i came to the conclusion that a new way of life will be dominant in 40 years. I intend to introduce the world to some new ideas in those 40 years. Or at least ideas that are new to the world. Simply because its needed. I think thats sort of how Nassim think too. He might be a charlatan, i might be a charlatan, you might be a charlatan. I guess we will just have think.
 
naturalman
 
Reply Tue 22 Nov, 2011 06:48 pm
Occasionally, a new interesting individual has a really bright idea. This idea
has to be juxtaposition next to all of the other ideas, bright or not, that this
individual has. Nissam's statements concerning Moses, for instance, are
truly incorrect, since one should not naively quote and/or refer to legendary
or fictitious characters, as agreed up0n by zero-archeological findings, not just bible stories. He overstepped his bounds in moving into religion. Not even close to what is knowledge there...everything is math to him...but I do appreciate innovative physics ideas...and for that I thank him...even though he is bound to be way off on numerous other things, e.g. crop circles,etc....still, many others, well known scientists...all have naive foibles on their list of achievements...
 
rienk
 
Reply Wed 13 Jun, 2012 01:28 am
@glasstrees,
i think that is not how you spell charlatan.
 
 

 
Copyright © 2014 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 10/31/2014 at 11:46:32