Dr. Wayne Dyer Makes Me Cry

Watching PBS tonight: “Dr. Wayne Dyer: The Power of Intention.” Holy moly bad stuff. Religion dressed up in authority soaked in pseudoscience. Use the word “energy” enough and people will believe anything you say. “Spirititual energy is the energy of abundance.” What does this even mean? So here is the real question. Why doesn’t the word Hamiltonian achieve as high a standing as energy? Or at least the Lagrangian, for gosh sake! And why no talk of the action. I mean that’s my favorite quantity, the action! No eigenvectors, no eignenvalues, no renormalization group. If you’re going to talk to me, and convince me of your self-help mumbo jumbo, you’d better be talking my launguage!

This entry was posted in Religion, Science. Bookmark the permalink.

2,321 Responses to Dr. Wayne Dyer Makes Me Cry

  1. Wim van Dam says:

    Besides “energy”, there are some other terms that have crossed: “frequency”, “field”, and -I guess- “potential”. What do they have that “action” does not?

  2. jose says:

    Energy, potential and other “scientific” words are previous to science. Why must worry to us its use outside science?

  3. Dave Bacon says:

    Because Dr. Dyer is explicitly using them to pretend that there is science behind what he is saying. If he were using it, as say Sidney did in Def. Poesie, to express force of language back in 1581, then sure it would be fine. But he is not.

    He can, of course, say what every he wants. I too can tell you that he is full of it and that he is using a simple argument by authority to boost up his vacuous claims.

  4. jose says:

    “Dr. Dyer is explicitly using them to pretend that there is science behind what he is saying”

    Sorry! I did not know it. (I live in Spain)

    Dr. Dyer makes my cry, too.

  5. Dave Bacon says:

    Doh! I should have made it clearer in my post!

  6. Steve says:

    I looked at Wayne’s biograghy. He has 8 kids and at least 2 ex-wives. Does that sound like someone that has all the answers?

  7. Craig A says:

    I love Wayne Dyer. He has helped thousands of people. I guess we’re all dopes. Have a great life!

  8. Dave Bacon says:

    I’m happy he has helped people, but unhappy that he has to resort to using really silly methods to achieve this goal.

  9. yo yo ma says:

    Maybe silly, but I wonder how many people you helped using your ideals.

  10. janet silde says:

    I find his stuff really confusing and contradictory. He talks about God, Jesus and reincarnation being the sources of our beggining. Science and Christianity are totally opposite teachings and he includes both of them in his theory..?

  11. PH says:

    I have never been religious, and I’m aligned with you on science, but based on reading his books, I think you got the wrong impression of Dyer’s pitch.

    First, his basis is Eastern philosophy not science. In fact, he points you to scientific references only for those who feel they need that to support the philosophy, but it’s really not part of his pitch.

    Second, he’s not at all religiously dogmatic (which is why I like him). He points out that if you medidate to clear a path to your subconscious and picture things as you wish them to be, you will gravitate to make those things a reality. This is self-hypnosis in a nutshell. It’s well-observed and it does work, but whether or not that is based in human physiology or spirtualism doesn’t matter. He theorizes that there’s a source of spiritual energy, possibly the state you were in before birth and after death. We’re born thinking that we are “separated” from this state and he thinks we can tap into it. That’s philosophy not science and I’ve never seen him even suggest otherwise.

    Unless you listened to his entire presentation from start to finish, you probably wouldn’t have tuned into this. It’s much clearer in his books.

  12. janet silde says:

    I have not listened to the entire presentation so you are probably right about where his teachings are based but I didn’t get it anyway.. I just got very frustrated.

  13. PH says:

    Dyer will not appeal to everyone, but he doesn’t intend to include any science, in case that is what frustrated you. Spiritual “energy” isn’t a physics connotation, it would refer to more of an energy you might feel as part of loving someone or a “connection” you might feel in a very close friendship, more like emotional energy. Energy might be a poor choice of words for him because he didn’t mean to suggest that we’re talking about science in the context of energy vs. matter.

    Purely from age-old philosophy and empircal observation, he postulates that corporeal life is a state, and that death is another state, but that our spirit doesn’t end, it just changes states. The non-corporeal state is a spiritual energy — here’s probably where it sounds like science, but that’s a misunderstanding. He goes on to say that this spirit is like a lake, a source, from which we came and where we go, and that the main problems on Earth stem from the fact that so many believe we’re separated from that “source” while we’re living. Now you’re probably saying: “Hey, how does he or anyone else know that?”

    He never claims to know it or have any proof. It’s pure faith based on observation and he does not claim to have any scientific proof.

    For example, I can look at the miracle of our body’s make-up, particularly our ability to reason in the abstract and this looks to me as if there was intelligent design because it does not seem reasonable to me that it’s coincidence. But, I’ll be the first to admit that is purely speculation and common sense and there’s no science to it. Philosophy is about reason and common sense, drawing conclusions from what appears to be but it’s not science.

    What’s so frustrating to you about that other than a poor choice of words?

    He just says that many organized religions were based on these same philosophies, but he never endorses a single one. He uses the writings of Buddhism, just as much as not more than of any other organized religion and actually tries to cut through the dogma and get down to the common philosophies. That seems so reasonable to me.

    What I find frustrating about Dyer and others like him is that he presents his material as if he’s certain he knows its truth and I agree that he should be more careful to make it sound like one possible answer rather than suggesting he knows “the” answer. I don’t think he intends to do this, something is lost when you’re giving a lecture and trying to debate your point of view. He should be more humble about that in my opinion.

  14. Tim says:

    Dr. Dyer is not only preaching to you a false philosophy of life, but one that will in the end prove to be a dead end. There is nothing positive in what he is saying, nothing of value. I realize that what I am now going to say will sound to many of you just as ridiculous, but test these things, and see if they are not so.

    Dr. Dyer asserts that we can somehow muster within ourselves positive energy drawn from and sustained by a connection with “The Source” It is in this manner that we partake and indeed become a divine nature. Now, contrast this with what the Bible, hold with me for a minute, has to say about where we come from, why we are here, and what we must do to find a connection to “The Source”

    Acts 17:22-31

    22So Paul, standing in the midst of the Areopagus, said: “Men of Athens, I perceive that in every way you are very religious. 23For as I passed along and observed the objects of your worship, I found also an altar with this inscription, ‘To the unknown god.’ What therefore you worship as unknown, this I proclaim to you. 24The God who made the world and everything in it, being Lord of heaven and earth, does not live in temples made by man, 25nor is he served by human hands, as though he needed anything, since he himself gives to all mankind life and breath and everything. 26And he made from one man every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth, having determined allotted periods and the boundaries of their dwelling place, 27that they should seek God, in the hope that they might feel their way toward him and find him. Yet he is actually not far from each one of us, 28for

    “‘In him we live and move and have our being’

    as even some of your own poets have said,

    “‘For we are indeed his offspring.’

    29Being then God’s offspring, we ought not to think that the divine being is like gold or silver or stone, an image formed by the art and imagination of man. 30The times of ignorance God overlooked, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent, 31because he has fixed a day on which he will judge the world in righteousness by a man whom he has appointed; and of this he has given assurance to all by raising him from the dead.”

    I understand that this probably sounds like a bunch of hooey to many of you, but when it comes down to it, it is the testimony of one man, Paul, against another. The viewpoints are in direct opposition to one another and both make claims to be the truth. I only ask that you consider what the Bible has to say against the “enlightened” doctrine of Dr. Dyer. In the manner of Paul I tell you that Dr. Dyer is very religious, but he does not know the only true God, the only true “source.” The divine being is not an image formed by the art or imagination of man.
    It is to God, who gave us life and breath and everything, that we will be ultimately accountable to at the end of our lives. And it is through his son Jesus that we find forgiveness for our sins, and escape from the wrath of God.

    If you feel that you are experiencing “negative energy” in your life, it may well be that you are living under the wrath of God that Paul speaks of in the book of Romans. Because he is holy, he commands that we be holy. We all know that this is not possible. Is it not obvious that we are depraved in so many ways within our hearts and minds?? Is it not true that in your own life you must deal with wrong thoughts and motives against others? This is not negative energy, but is sin. The cure is not to be connected with a glowing metaphysical “source” but to turn to Christ to heal you. The Bible says in 1 John that if we confess our sins, God is faithful to forgive us our sins, and cleanse us of all unrighteousness. This is the only way to obtain peace in this life. All other methods will fail when you begin to realize that you can never get rid of the sin that prevades our minds and hearts. We need forgiveness and reconciliation to God, not “positive energy” from within ourselves.

    I say with the prophet David,

    “Oh, taste and see that the Lord is good. Blessed is the man that takes refuge in him!”

  15. Dave Bacon says:

    Both could be wrong.

  16. KP says:

    It is amazing how so many people will stand up and use the Bible as the basis for why someone is preaching a “false philosophy”. They stand up and use it like it is some well known truth that can’t be disputed.

    If you listen closely to what Wayne Dyer talks about, it all comes down to the power of thought and how the energy of thought creates the world we live in.

    I personally have seen this concept work in mine and others lives.

    I’m not someone who professes to know the ultimate truth but it drives me crazy when I see comments, like the one above, where someone starts preaching religous Dogma to prove a point like this. I can “cherry pick” the bible just like the respone above and show exactly why Wayne Dyer is onto something.

    The Power of thought does change peoples lives and can be scientifically proven to show change in body chemistry and health.

    That, to me, is energy in action.

  17. Tim says:

    KP, thanks for your comments. Could you please explain a few ideas within your post so I can be sure I’m understanding correctly? Thank you.

    1. Why are you standing up and using science like it is some well known truth that can’t be disputed?

    2. I have seen the power of Christ and the forgiveness of God work in my life and others as well. This being the case, stating that the philosophy of Dr. Dyer works in your life does not negate the Biblical testimony.

    3. Why is it that you have chosen to criticize my use of religious dogma with dogma of your own?
    “The Power of thought does change people’s lives and can be scientifically proven to show change in body chemistry and health.”
    I have no problems with you speaking dogmatically, I’m just trying to figure out which kind you deem acceptable.

    4. Please show me how what I have done in regard to the Bible quotation is “cherry-picking”, and please demonstrate how Dr. Dyer is onto something based on this Biblical hermeneutic.

    • Victoria says:

      I hope you realize you can find examples for absolutely everything in the Bible, including why it is acceptable to kill a man or woman and including having slave, and many other atrocities the Bible condones.

  18. greg says:

    in regards to the two folks arguing about wayne and the bible…
    if everyone would read his books cover to cover and keep an open mind, they would see that both dr. dyers’ books and the bible actually compliment each other and prove each other to be true!!
    folks who practice the old time religeon will claim dyer is a sinner and tells lies. but dyer is guilty of no evil…if anything, he teaches us how to live life more christ-like!!
    if you read the bible, jesus teaches the same doctrines just different phrasing. people couldn’t handle his teachings either which led to his crucifixion!

  19. KP says:

    Tim,
    I can see right where this conversation can go and I don’t think this is the right forum for this discussion. To keep this blog on track I apologize for being so antagonistic. I would be happy to discuss with you where I’m coming from and answer your questions in another forum.

    With that said, I will get back to what this blog is about. Again it is the power of thought, believing, and creating the energy that makes things happen. Whether one chooses to believe that the power of Christ is responsible for creating that abundance in ones life or one believes he can pull from a field of energy, it doesn’t really matter. Both approaches can achieve what Wayne Dyer calls “creating an energy of abundance”. Jesus most certainly had very good teachings and I believe he did understand how to pull from this energy source. It is the way man has wrapped his own version around Jesus’ story I find hard to deal with.

  20. Tim says:

    Greg,
    You are certainly right in saying that Jesus’ crucifixion was the result of people hearing things they couldn’t bear. However, what Jesus taught was nothing like what Dr. Dyer is saying. The fundamental difference is this: Dyer says to pull from the source, and Jesus claimed to be the source, hence the “I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life” statement, among many others that he made concerning his exclusivity. The ends to which these two teachers point us are radically different from one another. In the earlier posts I was taking issue with Dyer because I believe that he is pointing people to an inadequate source, namely themselves. It’s certainly not wrong for him to want to help people, and thinking positively is no evil. In fact, it is very beneficial as KP has already stated, but thinking positively is not the end that will give you lasting peace, meaning in life, freedom from guilt(not just the feeling of it), and the ability to truly love your neighbor as Jesus commanded that we do. According to what he taught, we must be given a new heart which comes by grace through faith in who Jesus is and what he did. I too apologize if I came off too strongly to anyone in the first post, but being this was my conviction I felt I had to say something. If you do not agree with me, I won’t hold it against you, but I will take issue with the notion that these two veins of teaching can be reconciled.

  21. David W. says:

    Dyer walks around up there on stage bitting his lip, pushing up against his teeth with his tongue, pulling this stuff out from his nether region, and then ladles some Sufi white sauce on it, and garnishes it with a sprinkling of Buddhism.

    If you want the real thing go to Japan and join a monastery. If you ask the meditation master to help you connect with the source energy, he’ll wack you with a stick and tell you to go scrub the kitchen floor.

  22. VB says:

    Attitude and close-mind are the kind of negative energy Dr. Dyer talks about that we need to move away from. Having a defensive attitude will not allow to see or listen others people’s ideas. If you want to see how powerful the mind is to create energy, you just need to look over a background of any successful profesional athlete such as Lance Armstrong. His powerful will and positive attitude help him to overcome illness and won 7 tours of France.

  23. Dave Bacon says:

    Medicine also helped.

  24. areuwired says:

    I watched Dr. Dyer yesterday on PBS, and I was moved. He reconciled many faiths by finding similarities between different tenets and ideas, and in a time like ours, where religion is such a cause for debate and hate, I was very impressed with Dr. Dyer’s open pluck.

    Also, as PH says, Dyer is talking about philosophy, it’s not religion.

    Finally, if you wish to agree or disagree it is your choice, but I don’t feel like people should discredit him just because they don’t understand his ‘language’, because believe it or not, I felt every word he said. Maybe I’m weird, or maybe I just get him…?

  25. areuwired says:

    Also, for those who think Dr. Dyer is posing as a prophet, first and foremost, he never claimed to be one.

    Just because he is confident in his teachings, and that some people agree with him doesn’t mean that he suggests to have all of the answers.

    He is just a man speaking out on what he has learned through his life, and regardless of what you think of his teachings, just because he has 8 kids and two ex-wives doesn’t mean that he is any less credible, it just means he’s human and goes through troubles just like the next person.

  26. areuwired says:

    It’s also okay to believe in different faiths all at once.

    For example, believe it or not, Christianity, Judaism and Islam are all connected to some degree in theory, the differences are in the way people interpret their respective faiths. That doesn’t mean that the faiths themselves are faulty, but that in fact, it is up to us, as followers of faiths, if we are indeed, followers of any faith, to interpret each faith as we see fit, without hurting others who have the same right to follow whichever faith.

  27. Dave Bacon says:

    Don’t forget athiesm, agnosticism, buddhism, taoism, hinduism, chinese folk religion, sikhism, juche, bahai faith, jainism, shinto, cao dai, pagan, tenrikyo and aftrican tradidional religions. Can they all be right?

    “The stage is too big for the drama.”

  28. Tim says:

    Truth is exclusive by nature, therefore they most certainly cannot all be true at the same time, since each makes an absolute truth claim sooner or later. Certain religions may have terminology that is related, but beyond that, they differ greatly from one another. This is especially true of Christianity when set next to any other faith.

  29. KP says:

    Dave,

    After reading your first comment in this blog, it doesn’t surprise me to see why you would question someone like Wayne Dyer and believe what he has to say is nothing more then “Mumbo Jumbo”. The first time I heard him I was also skeptical. I can only imagine that after all the schooling you have had and your work in Quantum physics, I’ve read your Bio and it is quite impressive, that you are either an Atheist or Agnostic by now. Doesn’t really matter but people with your back ground typically go down one of those paths. What I can tell you though is that you will get to a point in your life and you will wonder what this life is all about. You probably have already reached that point. Regardless, with your back ground in Quantum Physics aren’t you struck with amazement how unless there is an observer in this reality, reality becomes …. Exactly, becomes what?
    I don’t have near the knowledge you have in Quantum physics but what I have learned about it is what made me really look for “What is this life all about?” You can probably tell from my previous post, I don’t think very highly of the popular organized religions. I don’t believe Wayne Dyer knows all the truth either but I can say assuredly, the power of positive thought and knowing that something will happen, whether one believes that this is pulling from some source like some people believe, or it’s something else entirely, really does work. If he wants to call it “energy of abundance”, fine with me. I just know it works. I do meditate and actively focus on what I want in my life. Since I started doing this, things happen in my life on a regular basis that most people would never believe. I guess what I’m trying to say is if you can get beyond the “mumbo jumbo”, there really is something there.

    By the way, how do you ever find time to right on all these blogs? I see you are an avid skier, as I am myself. You should do yourself a favor. Stop typing and go skiing!

  30. Dave Bacon says:

    Hey KP,

    The role of the observor in quantum physics is a very interesting subject. But I’m affraid that it is one issue that has been more often been mutalated into something very strange by mainstream “spiritualists”. Indeed, consider your statements about positive thinking and the role of the observor. One interpretation of the role of quantum physics is that an observor can “influence” reality. But this actually is just as true in classical physics as it is in quantum physics (an example for the experts: contextual theories are easy to create by just assuming that classical information about what is being observed affects the information being observed)! So you don’t need quantum physics to justify the belief that you, as some crazy strange entity in this universe, have an impact on shaping how the rest of the universe acts. And this is the kind of thing I was sort of what I was aluding to in my post: many people, try to dress up their discussions of “ways to live” by a bunch of mumbo jumbo talk which often uses the vocabulary of science and physics in particular. And from a scientists perspective this seems often seems really kind of comical because it is pretty clear that they don’t understand the science they are discussing. Now I don’t spend much of my time listening to Dr. Dryer, but his use of the word energy is funny bording on nonsensical to most scientists.

    Now, all of this is not to say that I don’t disagree with you that positive thinking isn’t probably something imporant for how you live your life. Someday I think we may even understand why this is so! But I don’t think you need to appeal to physics to justify this. I think you can appeal to the wisdom of many who have taken this path, to a sense of what you think is moral and clear in this world, and to examples and counterexamples you might witness in your own life. But these things aren’t within the relm of science…yet!

    And yes, indeed I should be spending less time typing and more time skiing!

  31. KP says:

    Dave,
    First thanks for writing back. I am still trying to understand your example of “Contextual theories”. I’ve looked up a bit of information on it but still trying to grasp what it means. I’ll have to study it a little more.
    Anyway, you are right about mainstream “Spiritualists” grabbing on to their interpretation of what this so called “Energy of Abundance” is and trying to back up their claim by interjecting terms from science to give it validity. I think this is more down the roads of philosophy then a religion and how much truth there really is to this has only been measured by what people perceive to be a truth. I started listening to him and others that were touting the same ideals and began to see a lot of what I call good “Moral Truths” intertwined with pseudoscience. This is a great recipe for capturing a hungry audience that wants to understand why we are here. The crazy thing is that when you really do get into this calm state and focusing on what you want and do it from a an unselfish position, it almost seems magical how the right things in your life start happening to fulfill your dreams. What I would like to see is some real science behind this. I could never prove that I’m pulling from some “higher source” or “energy” but with the type of work you do, you might be able to make sense of this one day. I am very interested in real science producing experiments and getting results that explain this strange world we live in.
    Again, thanks for your post.

  32. angelessence says:

    After reading all the posts, I am inclined to say a few things.

    First of all…it does not matter what your faith is. I have met some Christians who do not act or speak in any way shape or form in a Christ-like manner. I have met Buddhists who do aknowledge and respect the teaching of Christ. I have met Hindu’s who have taught me a great deal about connecting to my source. With any religion, it is doctrine…thought form. you take from it what you feel is your truth. It does not matter what path we take….we are all led to the same source. There is no religion that is the “whole truth”. Meaning that they are not complete.

    Wayne Dyer is universal in his teachings and this is refreshing. I see no harm in his thoughts or actions. We live in a world that is chaotic. Things need to change. Dogma has not helped. Spituality is all about understanding that the inner peace is within…and it is not something you can find…because it is already there. It just takes a little “re-membering” to bring us back to who and why we are here.

    There is a divine paln and it is happening right on schedule. There is a universal intelligence that does not make mistakes. Call it God, call it energy, call it whatever you feel comfortable with, or what you feel is your truth. There is no right or wrong. The greatest teachers and masters that have walked this earth have tried to tell us this. But our huge human ego’s think we have to change it to fit whatever doctrine we feel that will ultimately control the masses. There always seems to be someone/some way who/it has to be right and making others wrong wehter this be in a belief system or what you decide to watch on TV.

    Also, I am not comfortable AT ALL with naysayers who have to debate issues with quoting scripture.
    Speak from your heart. If you don’t like watching Dr. Wayne Dyer…your TV set has on OFF button.

    We are connected from and by the same source. So many beings feel they have to be better than others. There is no need for this. This planet is in dire need of a global transformation.

    I applaude the Wayne Dyer’s of the world….because it is their positive outlook, their shared trial and tribulations that bring us to the understanding that we are all ONE on this planet…and for that matter with the Universe.

    May we all find peace and love in our hearts.

    Namaste.

    “We must be the change we want to see in the World”
    ~Gandhi~

  33. Tim says:

    I gather then, angelessence, that you believe there is no such thing as absolute truth?

  34. Rare_Diamond says:

    Dyer’s ideas really bring good results, peace and content. This and nothing else matters.

    Enjoy your lives on Earth while you have them, and do not engage in foolish disputes.

    Greetings from a successful follower 😀

  35. Dave Bacon says:

    Some believe that there is more to life than peace and content. Further if a belief system tells you things that make you happy but also are untrue and keep others from being happy is that okay?

  36. Rare_Diamond says:

    1.What is more than peace and content ?
    2.What is not true in Dyer’s ideas ?
    3.What do you mean by keeping others from being happy ?

  37. Dave Bacon says:

    1. Strife. Suffering. Famine. Desire. Progress. Evolution. Change.

    2. “Spirititual energy is the energy of abundance.” What, persay, is “spirtual energy?” I’m fine with just thinking that this is metaphorical, but it certainly doesn’t fall into the relm of things we can experiment about. (Of course my definition of true is very different, probably, than most others definitions of true!)

    3. Some belief systems impose their view of the world upon others. For example, you might believe that peace and contentment are the end goal of life. I however don’t find this true and find that there is more to be gained in a robust society which is not content with its place in the universe. Certainly one could say, “fine let us just get along” but I am part of a community and this community makes me larger and if this community is content, then I am at a loss.

  38. MC Hammerabi says:

    The issues that people have who do not care for writers, speakers, or leaders such as Wayne Dyer is that they are looking for concrete “double blind” proof before they will believe.

    This limits the mind. It separates science from the rest of life. The real truth is that what we are really talking about here is low minded scientist (or people who would like to think of themselves as scientist). High minded scientist already recognize that the universe can not be contained in a labratory (Niels Bohr, Werner Heisenberg, the “Copenhagen Interpretation”, Non linear dynamics, fractal geometry, chaos theory, super string theory).

    Wayne Dyer’s message falls on deaf ears to these low minded “scientist” because there frame of reference has no way to comprehend what does not occur in a linear fashion, which “spiritual enery” certainly does not occur in linear ego time. It operates on the real level of the non-linear.

  39. David O says:

    If the thoughts that you created were positive (including the ones on this website) you may have had a chance to see underneath your words into the “energy” you seek. However with the quantum physics mentality you readily deny yourself the exsistance of things you cannot see.
    As your picture shows you skiing over the cliff, the moment you at your happiness, as so the power of your thought. Just some of us choose to be more content at all times than just a given few in the snow. As all of us, you have much to learn.

  40. Dave Bacon says:

    Yep that “quantum physics mentality” is horrible stuff. You know science and all that junk just gets in the way of getting high.

  41. Dave Bacon says:

    Ah yes, “linear ego time.” Such BS. “Non linear dynamics, fractal geometry, chaos theory, super string theory.” Look! Big words!

  42. MC Hammerabi says:

    You have every right to ridicule what you deem “big words.” In fact, this writer would expect no more of a skeptic. The question remains though, what word is big? Dynamics? Geometry? Non linear?

    Your retort to the position laid out by this writer previously, however, is less than complete. Your response only illustrates the intellectual immaturity that my post discusses. Those who don’t understand concepts that they are unable or unwilling to learn (because of their proud positions) have the same response as a wise ass ten year old, who assumes he knows everything, but in fact, (as everybody around him recognizes) knows nothing. But to point out to the little brat his error, is a waste of time.

    Furthermore, this writer takes issue with David O. In my estimation it is not a “Quantum Physics Mentality” that limits Dave Bacon, in fact, this autor would propose that is quite the opposite; it is a lack of “Quantum Perspective,” not an overabundance that is limiting Dave Bacon. Just because Dave Bacon purports to “Quantum Mechanics,” does not mean he understands the minds of Niels Bohr or Werner Heisenberg. It is, in fact, this author’s proposition that Dave Bacon claims a “Quantum Philosophy,” but instead lives a “Newtonian Mechanical” existence. However, his claim to be the “Quantum Pontiff” does demonstrate his potential for growth.

    “If any man has ears to hear, let him hear” Jesus Christ – The Gospel According to Mark Chapter 4

  43. MC Hammerabi says:

    Dave, you call “linear ego time” BS – yet you have written a book review on the subject of Kurt Gobel? Do you really understand or do you just like the idea of being smart?

  44. Dave Bacon says:

    MC: you must have me mistaken with someone else. I’ve never written a book review on Kurt Gobel. Perhaps you mean Kurt Godel? And I never claimed to be smart, that was you lecturing me, not the other way around. But thanks for calling me a low minded scientist!

  45. MC Hammerabi says:

    I apologize for the error. In the future I will attempt to be more accurate. I further apologize for the “lecture.” I am sure that you, and the readers of this blog, are quite fine without the disturbances of my vain opinions.

  46. Dave Bacon says:

    Don’t apologize for sharing your view! While I certainly disagree with the majority of comments ont his post, I certainly think having the comments here is worthwhile. I do worry however that this post comes up on the first page on Googling “Dr. Wayne Dryer” I have nor real animosity towards the fellah, just that his particular brand of self-help/spirituality isn’t my cup of tea. And my original intention in the post was to be funny to the group that reads this blog, mostly theoretical physists. To us it is rather amusing/anoying that a large class of self-help/spiritual speakers have coopted words for their own totally out of context use. Metaphor is fine, but out of context metaphor to boost your authority is (IMHO, of course) just silly.

  47. MC Hammerabi says:

    Fair enough Dave; to clarify I haven’t read any Wayne Dyer, I was googling his name to find out about him and this site was on the first or second page. I was apologizing not for expressing myself, but for the vanity that “I was right and you were wrong.”
    The frustration I was expressing is the perception that I have about “Theoretical Physicist”…mainly that they “know about” the mechanics of the universe and yet cannot appreciate the wisdom literature (Gospels, Lao Tzu, Zen Buddhism, Vedas, Meister Eckhardt). In fact it amazes me that men who could understand such magnificent and beautiful concepts could ridicule the “spiritual” nature of existence.

  48. Dave Bacon says:

    I do find appealing many of the thoughts and feelings about how to live life that are present in what you call the wisdom literature. On the other hand, I have little use for mysticism or claims to authority in this literature. And I don’t find much use at all crossing between the boundaries of physics and the boundaries of human concerns except in so much as the later better not conflict with the former. So mostly it is probably this later view which gets me into trouble!

  49. MC Hammerabi says:

    I probably get in to trouble with my need to eliminate boundaries.

  50. Jorel says:

    Dr. Dyer is a member of humanity. As is anyone reading or responding to this post. He has no answers only ideas, which is all any of us have. We are all part of humanity, none greater, none less, regardless of the “weight” we give our ideas. If we take anything from religions teachings take that in and of themselves they mean little. If I am a buddist, does your believe change mine. Have I found any great truth that grants me autonomy over non-beleivers. And what if I was a Christian, would I know be greater than you, would my knew found relationship now mean that from a sinlge notion, my soul is more valuable than yours. Or would my embracing Islam bring me closer to bliss. Would it grant me the peace that all other religions lack. It couldn’t possibly. We were none of these things in the womb. We are none of these things now. We are. We are humans. Our humanity is that of joined experience. Though different we may be do you not expereince life? Emotion? Do you not have ideas of pain, joy, achievment? Dr. Dyer is simple sharing what HIS insight has for those who are open to embrace it. He another member of humanity, as are you. How about sharing your innsight with us.

  51. Tim Denton says:

    Dr. Dyer is yet another in the short history of man trying to build a new Tower of Babel. Rather than a physical tower, he thinks we can reach the heavens by using this “source”. Tim is correct, the source is Jesus Christ and we must go through Him to reach heaven and get back to our Father. Dr. Dyer uses slight deviations from the truth to mislead people into believing they control their destiny, the same slight deviation that Satan used in the garden to decieve Eve.

  52. yada yada says:

    I agree as Tim noted, …the source is Jesus Christ and we must go through Him to reach heaven and get back to our Father.” I also believe that Dr. Dyer opens up the hearts of thousands to this way of thinking and doing thus it potentially leads many to find Jesus Christ.

  53. Dave Bacon says:

    Ah quite the gammit. From Dr. Dyer as the path towards Jesus Christ, to Dr. Dyer as the path towards Satan, to Dr. Dryer as just another guy sharing his experience, to Dr. Dyer as an exploiter of science, to Dr. Dyer the bringer of peace and contentment, to Dr. Dyer as Budha-lite.

  54. MC Hammerabi says:

    Maybe…instead of “pontificating” on Dr. Dyer and his “message” and “motivation”, we should go outside and fall in a river and be mad at ourselves when the water is cold.

    “We’ve all been waitin’, wonderin’, will we ever know the truth?”

    http://www.livewidespreadpanic.com

  55. Dave Bacon says:

    I ain’t ridiculing what they need (which apparently, according to your perspective, is “understanding”), I was, way way way way back at the top of this page, in my post, pointing out exactly that the word energy has many different meanings, but that it is funny that other words which scientists used, you know, the ones not a single person in this ebntire thread has commented on except Wim at the very top, have not been coopted to the same extent.

    But to your other point (see no one wants to talk with me about the use of the renormalization group in spirtiual conversations), I think some perspectives are more limiting that others.

  56. elwizardo says:

    Energy: a capacity for acting or being active that is within a person.

    Many people can’t help but look at the world from one specific entrenched perspective. So now we have a message board illustrating this point.

    Aren’t all perspectives limiting? Wouldn’t you rather understand than be correct!

    Indeed, why must the Dave Bacons of the world ridicule that which they need most dearly?

  57. elwizardo says:

    Hehehe. Well, when you asked why the terms Hamiltonian and Lagrangian have not been coopted by the masses, I assumed you were being facetious. Every field has its terminology. That does not mean that the terminology is useful or descriptive. When you suggest that I am off-topic, perhaps you are just trying to protect yourself from truly thinking about what I’m saying. When people have the attitude that they completely understand something, they are no longer open to learning. Yes, Dave Bacon, I am suggesting here that you are ridiculing spiritual definitions of energy and clinging to your own (limiting) scientific definition so that you won’t have to think about something that might challenge your world-view.

  58. Lina says:

    Every human being is looking for something. When you find Jesus, you find everything you have ever wanted. Try Him, just speak to Him wherever you are and ask Him to reveal Himself to you, then you will know the truth (Jesus) and the truth will set you free from all this searching. “I am the way, the truth and the life.” Jesus said. He did not speak of truth, He is truth itself. And just before you jump on me for bringing in religion, there was not a religious born in Jesus Christ, that is a man-made thing. He came as the king and taught about the Kingdom. He spoke also about the Wayne Dyers of this world, (And I do not hate Wayne, it is not Christ-like to do so) Here is what Jesus said of all like him ”
    The Apostle Peter warns 2 Pt. 2:1-3: “But there were also false prophets among the people, even as there will be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Lord who bought them, and bring on themselves swift destruction. And many will follow their destructive ways, because of whom the way of truth will be blasphemed. By covetousness they will exploit you with deceptive words; for a long time their judgment has not been idle, and their destruction does not slumber.”
    “There will also be false teachers among you.” false teachers can be very effective communicators; they can have a personal magnetism. They use smooth and flattering speech to bring you into their bondage; they present their teaching cleverly, very smoothly.
    If you are a Christian, Christ said to beware of false teachers like these. Pray for discernment of the Holy Spirit that dwells in you. If you are not a christian, don’t just blow me off, ask Christ to reveal Himself to you so you can make an informend decision. Now you know and you cannot unknow the truth. God says “I am God, I change not.” We have made God out to be different things, if you disagree, check with God’s word in the King James Version Bible and know that anything that exalts itself above the knowledge of God is to be cast down. What Wayne Dyer is proffessing is not scriptural. That is what is wrong with it, it leads people to another source which is self when only God is our source. We must not exalt ourselves above God. Thanks and be blessed.

  59. dan says:

    dr. wayne speaks the same truth jesus spoke… and runs into the same pharisees jesus ran into… if you had ears to hear, you’d hear the truth.

  60. Dave Bacon says:

    I have no problem being told I am close minded with regard to spiritual definitions. It is true! I also don’t think it is bad, however, which is where we certainly differ.

  61. elwizardo says:

    If you want to see then open eyes are necessary. If you want to understand then an open mind is necessary.

  62. elwizardo says:

    The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain with themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts. –Bertrand Russell

  63. joe gerhardt says:

    I listened to this guy lecture and it was the most worthless rambling I have ever heard.
    No specifics, just generalizations and no structure or message. I some it up as think positive thoughts and something positive will happpen. Whup tee Do!

  64. Lina says:

    For people who are sold on the worldly teachings and are not willing to hear the absolute truth of Jesus, that is ok you can skip this post, on judgement day you will answer to Him. To those who are Christians and have not realized what is wrong with teachings like Wayne Dyers’ hang with me for a few minutes. I listened to his TV presentations especially power of intention more than twelve times a few years ago and read several of his books cover to cover and loved them until I decided to read the bible cover to cover and learn to walk with the promptings of the Holy Spirit. Then i realized how his theories fall under false teachings.

    Dyer in his teachings draws alot from the teachings of Yogananda who after he graduated from Calcutta University in 1915, took formal vows as a monk of India’s venerable monastic Swami Order, at which time he received the name Yogananda. If you are a Christian, know this has nothing to do with Christ.

    Dyer also is an avid reader of and pulls from the Hindu sacred text which is presented as transcendental knowledge of the most profound spiritual nature as revealed in the Bhagavad – Gita. It is the divine discourse spoken by the Supreme Lord Krishna Himself and is the most popular and well known of all the sacred scriptures from ancient India. Always being revered as a true source of spiritual knowledge. while as Christians, we believe in the bible as the incorruptible, indestructible, ever-living word of God so if you profess Christ as your Lord, you don’t want to be mixed up with these subtle teachings of other ‘lords’ like lord Krishna

    Dyer also quotes Sufi principles. Sufism or tasawwuf, as it is called in Arabic, is generally understood by scholars and Sufis to be the inner, mystical, or psycho-spiritual dimension of Islam. If you are a Christian brother or sister, I appeal to you to not be seduced by these seemingly good and useful teachings. They teach you to depend on yourself and makes God unnecesary. They do not teach you the gospel truth of Jesus Christ the son of the most high God. The only reason teachers like this mention Jesus is sow it is appealing to Christ’s followers who may be ignorant of God’s view.

    Hosea 4:6 “My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge”

    Proverbs 9:8 “Never correct conceited people, they will hate you for it. But if you correct the wise, they will respect you.”
    Proverbs 3:5-7 “Trust in the LORD with all your heart And do not lean on your own understanding. In all your ways acknowledge Him, And He will make your paths straight. Do not be wise in your own eyes; Fear the LORD and turn away from evil.”
    Proverbs 14:12 “What you think is the right road may lead to death.

    If you are a Christian, just as you read Wayne Dyers books cover to cover, curl up with a bible and read it cover to cover and you will know the truth and the truth will set you free. For only the truth you KNOW will set you free. If you have ears, hear what the Lord is saying.

  65. Stacy says:

    I think you are all exactly where you need to be as I am as well and so is Wayne. I personally find him most inspirational and a wonderful spirit who has found his purpose here and is living to serve. Look for the good and that is what you shall see. Look for the bad and you shall see that too.
    -Stacy

  66. Dr. Michael F Hensley says:

    You all missed the point again. It’s all about Morality. Each person has a spark of being Divine inside themselves. That spark (spirit)
    makes all of us on planet earth in the same boat.
    Therefore, being created by the same source we should love each other (that is love your neighbor as yourselves) and love the God that created that spirit from the beginning. That God is Yahweh ( Jehovah )! It has nothing to do with science. Thanks, Mike

  67. Dave Bacon says:

    Never trust anyone with a Dr. before their name.

    — Dr. Dave Bacon

  68. elwizardo says:

    Just when an interesting discussion is threatening to break out, people come flying in with quotes from the friggin bible. Maybe the point of the story of jeebus is that people should keep an open mind, and not crucify those that put forth ideas that don’t fit into some accepted ideology. After all, jeebus himself didn’t quote the bible in his teachings. Why should you?

  69. Chancery Stone says:

    I have just published an article on my blog site called “Finding God With Wayne Dyer” about his recent book The Power of Intention and his descent from fairly sound self-help into Snake Oil salesmanship and the peddling of religious mumbo-jumbo. Here is a link

  70. FreetoBe says:

    Interesting debates. It appears to me the Dr. Dyer is encouraging us all to re-associate/connect with our Source (remember the example of the apple slice originating from the apple pie so it must be apple pie…I hope you imagine your Source to be more expansive, infinite than apple pie…but if you don’t, OK..be free to be).
    In reference to all major religions, they all seem to have as many variations in perspective as there are different types of vehicles. I don’t think any “religion” has a hold on all truth. HOWEVER, I believe Truth exists and is best observed in an individual who is free to be with out self-condemnation, self-defamation, self-exaltation, etc. or need for un-loving judgement or demeaning of others.

    If you believe in God’s sovereignty (infinite intelligence) and the Spirit of God residing in each individual, then it may not be a stretch for some to “believe” God perfectly capable of stringing a series of words and incidents together through various sources which reflect that Spirit. If we believe God infinite, then it is quite odd for some to try to condense that essence into one person. The Bible contains a lot of the pertinent things Christ said but by God I think Christ still speaks and He does so through many individuals who are of His essence whether they acknowledge it or not (It’s the Bible who says who are we to judge whether the Potter choses some pottery for honor and some for dishonor (dishonor versus honor may be used because our thinking consistently thinks of everything as good OR bad).

    Just one scripture group that may help express what Dyer and Tolle and others may be trying to say. Those living in Spirit and Truth but don’t acknowledge it as Christ… Romans 2:14-16 (Apostly Paul speaking)

    14: For when Gentiles who do not have the Law do instinctively the things of the Law, these, not having the Law, are a law to themselves,

    15in that they show (Z)the work of the Law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness and their thoughts alternately accusing or else defending them,

    16on the day when, according to my gospel, (AB)God will judge the secrets of men through Christ Jesus.

    It’s the Spirit of Christ that these speakers are re-connecting too and they are so excited. The words of man are limited in their ability to fully disclose/describe/define this state but ALAS we all try. Thank God for scientists, philosophers, prophets, teachers who have experienced the freedom of operating according to divine purpose. You know Truth when you hear it. EGO wants to destroy it or alter it, Spirit wants to embrace it as it is. OK, next… Blessings to you all as you seek the Truth that sets you free. FreetoBe

  71. Richard P. Condon says:

    Stopped watches are right twice a day. There ought to be empirical support for a position before relying on it. Dyer went like Dale Carnegie and Norman Vincent Peale from being right to being richer.

  72. JohnQPublic says:

    A few points:

    1. The person that pointed out above that Dr. Dyer’s main flaw is that he presents his ideas as “truth” and not as opinion I think really gets to the heart of the problem with his lectures. If we cannot not back something up with reason, then we might as well believe anything that someone says. That does not mean reason can prove everything, but I do not see the point is accepting just any idea because of reasons’ shortcomings. It’s our best defense against non-truth.

    2. Science as a basis for an argument cannot be compared to using the bible as a basis. Religion claims truth rather than seeks it. It is not self-correcting when it gets something wrong. When wrong, the religious defend their position rather than change. Science, by definition, constantly challenges itself and when wrong changes its position. Science has been right far more than religion ever has. Religion would still have the earth flat, at the center of the universe, and the sun revolving around us rather than the other way around. Religion has a long history of fearing what science has proven.

    Finally, Dr. Dyer once wrote that authority deserves to be questioned. However, if you read his writings closely he does not like to be challenged when that authority is him. He likes to be skeptical of conventional thinking, but in the same breath derides skepticism of his ideas as “low energy” rather than address the challenges.

    He once wrote that ESP was more than coincidence because he asked a group of students to raise their hands if they ever had the experience of that while thinking of someone that someone suddenly called. A majority raised their hands. And that was enough for him to draw a conclusion. However, if he would have asked those same students to “raise your hand if you’ve ever thought of someone and they didn’t call you while you were thinking of them,” it would have probably contradicted his conclusion. But that is how he operates. He never really addresses challenges except for the occasional off-putting remarks such as “I’ll believe it when I see it.” Or claiming that someone is just too bound to their “Earth Guide Only” (EGO).

  73. JohnQPublic says:

    By the way, on a personal note so you know where my comments above are coming from, I have read every book (all of them more than once) Dyer has put out since 1976, and have listened to every lecture he has recorded. When I was 19 I believed what he wrote. Now with 30 more years of life under my belt, I realize how wrong he is and has been in so much of what he claims. His basic tenet in his philosophy of “what you think about, you become” has not proven in my life or the majority of others I know. For many years I thought this was true, but the fact is you can put many years into something only to get “experience.” (I guess he would argue that I did get something and that there really is no “failure.” But that is basically side-stepping his point about “abundance.”)

    But he will never acknowledge the evidence that contradicts his claims. There are many, many people who find a sudden “abundance” based on the circumstances they just happened to find themselves in and did not create through thought. (Is it safe to say that Paris Hilton has found “abundance” in life?) We all know people who find themselves doing something well in life that they never put any real thought into; it just happened. And then there are plenty of examples of people who build a life around their thoughts and work and find nothing even near “abundance.” That is because “abundance” is decided by those around you. If others don’t like what you do (for whatever reason), “abundance” will never “materialize.” You look at all this and realize it’s hit and miss. There is no clear evidence that what you focus your mind on brings about “abundance.” Otherwise, why are there so many talented yet starving artists in the world? Ironically, Dyer’s good friend, Ram Dass, is one of those. He poured his life into what he believed and “abundance” never found its way to his doorstep.

    Something I found true for a lot of people who find financial success in their lives are blind to any luck or coincidence that help create it. They come to believe their “abundance” came solely from them and not others. The fact his, his success was because millions of others each decided individually to buy a copy of “Your Erroneous Zones.” Yes, he put out the work, but it was the public’s acceptance of that work that created that abundance. You can put out all the work you want into the world and non of it will “bring you abundance” until that world decides on their own, for their own reasons, that they like it. I do not know how he can ignore that part of the equation.

  74. AB says:

    Arent’t Religions too much dogmatical ? Influenced by them, don’t people lose their real inner purpose and outer pratice to turn to supercicial social attitudes ? And isn’t the result a lack of coherence between real actions and what is so openly asserted ? : what about a nun being a liar, for example, does it not mean she has not achieved anything at all ? Does it not mean she has met “nothing” but a sort of useless void and she is just another “phoney” ? Now, if this type of doubtful experience happens to some ordinary person will it not be an incentive to quit all those religious fields ?

    Wayne Dyer seems to offer his reader to make a real concrete experience, which spiritual aspects should lead to. His language is beyond words. It gives images to precise and describe what could be done and how it could be done. Putting it into practive is probably the only response. Even if building a theory is interesting, is the average reader really attracted by that or mainly by practical positive consequences in his everyday life ?

  75. JohnQPublic says:

    The greatest problem with Dr. Dyer’s message is his inability (described by him as unwilling rather than unable) to prove his most fundamental principle. His fundamental message in everything he writes or verbalizes is that you can do anything you set your mind to. So, my challenge can he personally demonstrate that? He proclaims to do so but only with very weak examples. For example, he claims he teachers regarded him as a poor writer and speaker, but look at him today. That is a weak example in my opinion. That is, being better at something than others thought you were as a child is a long, long way off being *anything* (and he emphasizes anything even to the point that he says he teaches his kids to move clouds with their minds) you want. I, too, beat the expectations of my teachers. This is a common claim. There are probably millions who can claim that and therefore is hardly extraordinary enough to prove his point.

    I would think that if he wanted to be convincing of his message he would, for the sake of example: make an unprecedented contribution to mathematics, or solve the quantum mechanics puzzle (actually, he shows that he really does not understand the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle), or become an NBA star, etc. Something that would normally be considered impossible by conventional standards. But he does not. Instead his examples are, “and they said I could not write this book [Wisdom of the Ages] in 60 days.” Well, again, that is a long way from doing the “impossible.” Or that he jumped a fence at 50 years old because he forgot that he was 50. His examples are everyday things that millions do. All he is doing is lowering the standard for what he wants to call “impossible” and then claims we are seeing examples of “impossibility” all around us.

    The fact is that his claim that anyone can do anything (i.e., “manifest it”) is a big lie. Ironically, a chapter in one of his books entitled “The Big Lie” claims that the conventional wisdom that we have limitations is the “big lie.” Actually, his claim is not only a lie that he himself cannot prove, but gives false hope to many who could be much happier and more productive should they learn to accept their limitations. An example of this is can be seen at the beginning of each season of “American Idol.” Every year we see examples of thousands of people who have absolutely no singing ability at all say after rejection, “I know I can do this. I know I have greatest within in me and I’m going to pursue my dream regardless of what others say.” (All things Dyer would say, too.) Well, since it is others who do not think they can sing, they’re deluding themselves. No matter how much they think they can sing, the fact these people simply do not and will never possess the talent to sing. Their efforts are in vain. They would be so much better off pursuing something else; knowing their limitations. Yes, there will be a few who surprise us and actually make it beyond the odds, but that does not prove the point that anyone can achieve anything. In fact, that proves there is luck within circumstances because most of these people will not achieve success and will waste years through frustration of pursuing something they cannot do. If Dyer is right, then we can expect to be hearing on the radio these thousands of wannabe singers despite their poor singing skills. Anyone want to bet we won’t be hearing from them at all?

    My point is not that people should not try to do the difficult. My point is they people need a realistic self-image, first, and that is based on how others see them, too. (Success actually comes from others not from yourself. No one is successful on a planet where no one else exists. Acceptance by others is what success means. If you do not believe that, then let me operate on you because “I have a knowing” that I am a doctor, even though others do not believe I am. My bet is you wont let me touch you regardless of what I think because it is what others think that matters.) My other point is understanding your limits (e.g. not wasting your time trying to be a professional singer when your voice makes others cringe) is critical to healthy development. This is not the fear of failure I’m talking about, but understanding your circumstances well enough to know what would work for you. Having limitations and knowing them is good and healthy; believing you can do anything is self-delusional and, ultimately, self-defeating.

    There will always be a few exceptional people who do something we think is impossible. And they do serve as an inspiration to us all. But this is my main departure from Dyer: that in no way can be extrapolated to anyone else can do it, too. What can be extrapolated is there is luck and coincidence in the world: being born with a great singing voice is not a choice but luck; being born with an high level ability to solve abstract equations as a child is luck; being born with the gift of art is luck; etc.

    Another criticism I have of Dyer is that he simply lowers the standard for what can be considered “genius” to prove that “genius” is all around us: children who make up their own languages is one of his examples. Another is his daughter’s ability to train horses. Genius by definition means what only a few can do. If anyone can do something it is not “genius.” His examples are not examples of “genius.” If we go by his standard, then everyone is a genius (and he would probably agree with that). And if everyone is a genius, then actually no one is because there is nothing to separate abilities. Genius marks a level of ability against the efforts of the ordinary.

    If Dr. Dyer is truly sincere in his message that anyone can do anything, then give us a real example. So us something truly convincing and not use debating tactics such as redefining words like “genius” to do it. Show something extraordinary on the terms of others not on your own.

  76. abby says:

    how about leaving him alone and living your own lives. as dr. dyer would say, the only person you can control is yourself. his way of life works for him and he isn’t afraid to talk about it. we all have a choice to listen\read or NOT. thank you.

  77. JohnQPublic says:

    And we have a choice, no, a duty, to examine his claims and possible consequences. Would you not agree? If not, why not just also accept Bush’s (you can pick anyone here) ideology without examination? That is because it is through critique and examination that we defend ourselves against falsities. Dr. Dyer is not simply living his life and telling others, he out-and-out says he knows what’s best for us all. If the world is perfect as he says, why does he try so hard to change it all?

  78. abby says:

    Dr. dyer teaches extending love and compassion to everyone and everything that comes our way. If you look deep into his teachings, he says you can manifest your destiny ONLY if you align yourself with the universal force (God). We, all human beings can relate to that. Nothing really happens(no manifestation) if we rely on our abilities and strength but on God. I am not pretending to know everything but i know that there is no comparison between bush and dyer. If we all submit to God(which is good and love), the world would have been a better place. And that is exactly what dr. dyer teaches. thank you. God bless

  79. Dave Bacon says:

    “We, all human beings can relate to that.”

    I guess atheists and agnostics aren’t human beings 🙁

  80. JohnQPublic says:

    Thank you for your response, Abby. However, Dr. Dyer clearly lays out in “A Promise is a Promise” that one can manifest another’s destiny. This is what he and is family attempted to do for Edwarda, as a matter of fact; and to failing results. Her condition did not improve. Once again he did not prove is point and, moreover, never admits it publically.

    There was a research experiment recently where the family of severely ill patients were asked to pray for their loved one’s recovery, and the other half asked not to pray their loved one’s recovery. The patients with the praying family members fared worse than the ones with family members who did not pray. This means either praying for others doesn’t work, or it’s coincidence to begin with.

    Now, I know Dr. Dyer does not have much faith in scientific research, but he does use it when it supports something he already believes. For instance, he points out the scientific research that shows that when people are in presence of a positive act that their serotonin levels increase. Dr. Dyer, unfortunately, cherry picks his research: picks what supports his claims and disregards that which does not support him.

    My point about Bush was that Dr. Dyer asks that we are open to all ideas. Should we be? Open to the teachings of Heaven’s Gate? Open to the hateful ideas of the KKK? My point was that if we are to accept any idea that anyone puts forth, without challenging it, questioning it, and critiquing it, then you have no reference to the truth and in fact can be blindly led to devastating consequences. (I’m not suggestion Dyer leads to devastating consequences, what I am saying is that with out critique of any idea that can be the result. Critique and reasoning is how one keeps out of trouble. So, my point is that challenging ideas is the only way one can seek truth and his ideas need to challenged.)

    The followers of Heaven’s Gate could have lived had they simply used reason to question their leader’s claims. Dyer asks us to critique everyone but him. Question authority when he is not the authority; banish your doubts. But when it comes to others, say, President Bush, then by all means have your doubts.

    Dyer sets up a circular reasoning system that allows him to avoid criticism. He will never admit when his ideas are wrong and he plainly says that he does not take challenges. While I believe he is personally honest, I believe his methods are not and does not appear to be smart enough to realize it. He creates a fool’s paradise. Remember, the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

  81. abby says:

    Great remarks from both of you. yes, a promise is a promise and one can manifest ones destiny if they rely on the universal knowledge of the universe. That is the only way, and all of you seem to leave that fact out. I have never heard dr. dyer suggesting that we should rely on our selves (physical and mental abilities) but also on the spiritual. The spiritual part is hard to explain cuz it is a deep knowing in human’s heart. i can go on an on about the love of your own children but you will never know what it is like until you have children. It is one of those things. About prayer, if i pray for someone and they dont’ get healed, it doesn’t justify anything. It only means that the time for that person on earth has come to an end. Again, the only core teaching from Dr. dyer is LOVE. And the rest follows. I believe in results too, so if one person listens to his teachings and able to forgive another who harmed him, or if one learns how to love the other person with no judgement then i would say his work is done on earth. Lets focus on human value (love, compassion, forgiveness, helping one another, non judgemental attitudes) instead of material things. Yes dr. dyer also says, be open to everything but attached to nothing. That doesn’t include hatred or judgement of any kind.

    Anyhow my point is, lets leave our ego behind and not argue for the sake of arguing. John, you read his teachings and you challenged it, but it doesn’t seem to work or YOU. But it works for so many others. so why don’t you just accept who he is and extend love towards him.

    Dave, you picked just one phrase from my paragraphe and made it a point of argument. I didn’t say athiest aren’t human beings, but they have their own “non god” phylosophy. just cuz athiest believes that there is no God , it doesn’t make it true. I accept their way of life even if i dont’ agree with it. Let’s not judge eachother but let’s try to live with eachother in LOVE.

    God bless

  82. frank pellegrino says:

    The Dyer approach predates most religions it started in the Garden of Eden and it was one of the two trees, guess which one. Hint, Not the tree of Life. The tree of the Knowledge of good and evil has an appeal and like the Dyer information it looks and taste good but in the absence of fellowship with the Almighty God it will not sustain a spiritual life. The error on Eve’s part was to rely on the thinking and feeling part of ourselves to obtain the position of Captain of our own destiny. .REAPEATED MOST NOTABLY BY NIMROD IN THE TOWER OF BABEL. Reality has it that they and we obtain the highest position when we have the same mind set that Jesus Christ has/had “let this mind be in you that was also in Christ Jesus”. that mind set is obedience to and fellowship with the Creator that is our Father. Mary said “be it done unto me according to your word” that resulted in Mary bringing forth a Son that would manifest the Father and do His will. The Father has exalted the name of Jesus above every name that is named as Scripture records that at the name of Jesus every knee shall bow and ever tongue will confess his lordship. Getting in touch with the Christ that is indwelling connects us to the Fathers will and transcends good and evil and moves us to Righteousness, peace and joy. You guessed it the Kingdom of God is where it is happening. You can only have one King in a Kingdom the problem is everyone wants to be the chief and there are no Indians. As long as we are seeking our own, what’s in it for me, and my, me and mine the results are obvious. When we turn our life over to Jesus. in reality not just the motions than things start to change. We stop living the life that we created from our will and start living the life God has planned for us since the beginning. God starts to birth the new creation man in us who is the light in the world and a manifestation of God’s love in the earth. Most of this Dyer and new age, eastern etc is devoid of a personal relationship with the Source of our existence that is the Almighty God. They are trying to tap into the mind and emotional part of our being where we measure by what we see, smell and hear instead of tapping into the Christ who the bible says dwells in us. The same spirit that raised Christ from the dead dwells in us and it will make alive our mortal bodies. I believe the Holy Spirit will lead us to all truth and all righteousness, peace and harmony. The Dyer method appears to circumvent the yielding part which is necessary to any real success ,happiness or fulfillment in our life. Remember the Tree of knowledge was not only evil it was a tree of judging good and evil. The bible teaches that we need to have our senses exercised to discern good from evil. That process takes a Spiritual connection with the Holy Spirit. The Natural mind doesn’t get it we need to use the Christ mind.

  83. DrugfreeHippie says:

    When electricity was first discovered as a power source any product being sold that could not be explained was attributed to “it works by electricity” The newness of this science is an invitation to make questionable claims. I have been hearing that our thoughts can effect the universe and can cause earthquakes and tsunamis, Butterfly effect?? I am not an expert , but it seems quantum science is trying to fill in the unexplained areas of physical science so if it can explain fantasy, great!. I do know our attitude can cause us a lot of grief but tsunamis, I think not. Having said all that. I would like to add that I was a viewer of Charlie Chan (remember his frequent references to Confucius), and an avid viewer of Kung Fu played by John Carridine a popular series. Many of the wise Dr Dyer statements are very familiar. They remind me of the proverbs we would often recite to help us with value judgments, some made a lot of sense. I would hesitate to call the ideas evil or bad just immature. I also see the correlation of the 60’s hippies. Bad vibes, your energy is taking me down. I don’t like the energy. I like your energy. I feel like I am receiving so much energy when I usually am drained by others having low energy. I lived through it but never got it but I never smocked any weed. Seems to me we should be giving people genuine answers,not displaying the world through rose colored glasses. If your being attacked I think the energy you should engage is fight or flight positive intentions may fall short for the moment we can hope later. We may all be ONE but its best to remove the bad apples out of the barrel. I can hear the energy people saying of my post “Bad Trip”

  84. Paul d'argent says:

    Jesus Christ!
    Fellows….I lived on Maui for 10+ years…just left in April 07.
    I saw Dyer in Detroit 25 years ago,…his spiel is the same, but more along the lines of his buddy Deepak Chopra.
    …who ripped off the Maharishi (Beatles) and Ram Dass.
    Dyer lost me w/ the current NPT hocking the $365. “Whole Enchilada”….saying he “had to get out of Kaanapali Maui, it was too much”…??? What the hell is he talking about? Ram Dass is in a wheel chair and George Harrison died who lived in Hana.
    Maybe Maui is a portal to the infinite?
    Glad I got out at 52.
    Oh, and Jesus is NOT the ONLY way to God, you idiots!
    Aloha.

  85. DrugfreeHippie says:

    Flying isn’t the only way to Maui, but it is a long swim or a lot of rowing. p.s. Most try to respect other peoples views, calling them idiots isn’t validating but reveals immaturity.

  86. tom skledany says:

    why won’t the dyer doctor name his source? if we came from this source then it seems if we have personality then “source” must also have personality but in a far greater reality. also what of forgiveness? men have made this world into a far from perfect place.

  87. Been there says:

    Prayer only works if it is God’s will.

  88. David says:

    P.S. By the way Dave, I have become quite fascinated with your area of expertise, quantum physics and such, over the last few years. Realizing that according to the Scriptures we are able to percieve and understand how the unseen {spirit] dimension functions, as we look closer and discern more clearly the inner workings of our physical realm and it’s governing properties! Recognizing that the latter was parented in the former! Just my way of sayin: “I enjoy your site!”

  89. David says:

    I find these discussions concerning Mr. Dyer and many of his “erroneous zoned” beliefs even more confirming to the “absoluteness” of truth that Jesus spoke. For man made wisdom void of absolute truth always tends to breed but more confusion! A couple of things that sets Jesus’ credentials apart from all others is this: His virgin birth at one end and His resurrection from the dead at the other concerning His manifested life here in the earth. Two well documented and substaniated realities! The problem from Jesus’ teachings perspectve concerning Mr Dyer’s views is the absence of dealing with man’s real problem, his “sin” condition introduced into the human bloodline back in the Garden. I’m wondering if Mr Dyer agrees with Jesus’ statement: “You must be born again?” That being said, I will give Mr. Dyer some credit for doing his humanistic best to try to explain how to function in the reality of what Jesus did teach, that being: “All things are possible to him that believes!”

  90. Dave Bacon says:

    “Two well documented and substaniated realities!”

    By well documented I’m sure you mean all the contemporary accounts of this by the historians of the day.

    “Prayer only works if it is God’s will.”

    Head’s I win, tales you lose.

  91. David says:

    Historical authentication takes many sources into account to arrive at what it considered actual, proven, factual history. That being said, there is as much “evidence” of the two accounts mentioned as there is…say… Alexander the Great ever lived and plundered! Prayer only works if it is God’s will? True that! One need only to look into God’s Word and they will discover His will. And in that He is no respector of persons, the clearer truth is that Jesus always placed the emphasis on an individual’s faith as the determining factor in answered prayer. [Matthew 21,22] But wait a minute… faith begins where the will of God is known, so in the knowing of His Word one can only then pray in faith, thus be empowered to believe for the answer! And according to Jesus…believing is the prerequiste for receiving! (Mark 11:24) Heads or tails I still win!

  92. Robert R. says:

    Wayne Dyer demonstrated his true nature in a PBS appearance when he told the story about trying to get a lot of books on the airplane (more than he should), and how he would use his ‘techniques’ on the attendant and have her ‘eating out of his hand’. Eating out of his hand? When you try and imitate Christ, and you’re no Christ, you make mistakes. That’s what it’s about, getting people to eat out of your hand.

  93. A seeker says:

    I agree with Robert R. When I watched Mr Dyer recall that story, I was dismayed. It felt very manipulative. And at that point all I could see was a man with a huge ego. It felt like his true colors peeked through….

  94. ministersdaughter says:

    The best bumper sticker I ever saw was, “Jesus please save me from your followers”. After reading the majority of these posts, I am reminded why I love that sticker so much. I betcha’ Jesus is up there pulling for Wayne and all of us crazy fools for that matter. Obviously “the creator” has a great sense of humor.

  95. Dave Bacon says:

    I’ll take the evidence of Arrian, Curtius, Plutarch, Diodorus, and Justin et al over Josephus and Tacitus any day, not to mention that the later never mention a virgin birth.

    Yes, heads or tails you still win! Isn’t it fun to win at a game you’ve rigged? “The stage is too big for the drama.”

  96. Dave Bacon says:

    Oh, and thanks for the kind words about my site, although I’ll bet you can guess that I don’t think quantum physics has much to say about spirituality. Call me a young grump 🙂

  97. David says:

    No Dave, that’s the beauty of truth. The Creator rigged the whole deal concerning securing eternal life for us through the gift of the Son. All He asks us to do it simply take Him at His word in childlike faith and humility. No doubt, we can’t find God with that head of ours, man did I try…then I discovered that’s what our hearts are for! The stage is not nearly as big as what lies at the end of the production: eternity! Either Jesus is who He said He was and therefore spoke the truth or He is not and He didn’t. I guess for me, when I chose to believe He was and did, I found myself put in that position of a man with a lifetime of experience that eventually finds himself not again at the mercy of one with but a mere arqument! You young grump you! lol Ah… Dave, actually spirituality has much to say about quantum physics, if we have them ears simple ole Jesus said was necessary for one heart’s to hear what can’t be heard, yet is being openly communicated! Gosh, just imagine a man with your obviously gifted intellect gettin a hold of them there ears poor misinformed Jesus spoke about. Again, I like your site Dude, lots of interesting thoughts in much of your work…hey and even”some” truth. lol

  98. Tessa says:

    Watched the “newest” PBS offering by Wayne Dyer about the “Dao.” Laughed all the way through it as it was so opposite of what he was trying to teach. He “gave up” his townhouse (to supposedly get rid of things and books he no longer needed) yet lives in Hawaii and swims with the whales…..

    Then he tells a parable about taking a T-shirt his son likes away from him, supposedly to teach the son that things aren’t important??? What a crock.

    His whole new premise negates his “intention gets you what you want” drivel completely. Guess PBS was scheduled and he had to write something up quickly. (The J.K.Rowling syndrome of promising 7 books but only having talent for 2.)

    Running around in bare feet doesn’t a dao master make. When we see him with a bowl and a bell….maybe. (He can leave me his house in Hawaii, happy to take it off his hands, tax-free.)

  99. Gary says:

    Bowls and bells are Buddhist.
    If you ever actually saw a Taoist master, you would not know it.

  100. janna says:

    re: post from chancery stone. in his blog, he comments about Americans: “They’ve been rolling with snakes and speaking in tongues, finding stone tablets in the hillsides and offering polygamous marriage as a way to get closer to God for many years now. Even to this day they set themselves up in desert camps and hoard guns as acts of ‘righteousness’ then commit suicide in mass pacts that make people in tinfoil hats worshipping His Holiness, The Hobgoblin of Wellington Boots, look sane.

    We Brits just don’t do it”

    As an American, I find it quite odd that Brits choose to worship at the shrine of Her Highness, who is the the Queen of The Hobgoblin Hats. A woman of such frigid mein that she could be used as a deep freezer if only she had a door on her front. Plus, one of the richest women in the world, a billionaire, who, until quite recently, lived 100% tax-free, supported by the the compulsory taxes of Brits like Chancery. And not her alone, but the entire useless royal family, living on the dole of people who actually do work for a living.

    If they were living on my dogs back, I’d call them parasites and take him in for a flea dip. Instead, the Brits go quite mad when Her Hideousness shows up with a sissors to snip a ribbon at a garden show. This maddness manifests itself chiefy by: compulsory bouquet giving which must be presented by virginal girl children under the age of 10; dipping and curstying like Mad Hatters; and, an overwhelming interest in the most minute details of the royal life. Including an obsession with their breeding habits that make a 12-step program for sex addiction look like a kindergarden party. Who can forget Prince Tamponito?

    But to get back to the garden shows. Wielding a sissors with such precision a few dozen times a year is so exausting, that, August through October, she must retire to Balmoral, her 55,000 acre country cottage where she exists with only 200 servants in attendance. Worn out by her toils, the by now anemic Queen is restored to health by daily infusions of freshly slaughtered stag blood. Why, it’s like a fairy tale!

    Give me a Wayne Dryer any day.

  101. Tessa says:

    Wayne uses them all, Sai Baba, Tsu, Confucius, Buddha, Jesus….tells everyone they can get what they want (The Secret) if they “intend” it, be sure and torment you children, while you are at it, teach them cruelty for having their “selfish desires,”and now he wants hos followers to give it all up. “Die while you’re alive.” You don’t need all that stuff in your homes/offices. It “weighs you down.”

    Bet that’s interesting for his book sales. People really don’t need to buy his books and tapes now….he doesn’t need their money any more.
    He’s complete. (Wonder what Hay House thinks of that??)

  102. Robert R. says:

    Wayne Dyer is nothing more than the Dr. Phil of the soft-headed, educated, NPR PBS left. What is so surpising is to see all those ‘smart’ people so gullibly suck it in and in a way reminiscent of people considerabley less educated and more routinely reviled. And to see the camera pan across those smug, melifluous, knowing smiles and agreeing nods that silently say, “I’m here for the secret of life, and he’ll give it to me.” Dyer is such an obvious fraud he’s laughable. What does that say about his audience? I’m really quite shocked at this sort of thing on PBS. They are, indeed, a cult after all.

    I am especially amused when Dyer goes on a venting rant. They are short but interesting. Like when he gripes about doing yard work or fix it jobs around the house. “I don’t do screen doots,” he once quipped after a rant on being distracted while in the act of inspired cdreation. Ugh …

  103. Gary says:

    A Taoist with a website store selling books and giving lectures on TV is sort of like a Poor Clare nun driving a new Rolls-Royce. They just don’t get it.

  104. Tessa says:

    Wayne’s just a bald Sylvia Brown….and about as useful.

  105. ministersdaughter says:

    If it crawls under your skin so bad, why do you watch it? Why not find some quaint little show laden with sarcasm or pessimism? I haven’t watched the whole thing myself, but Dr. D. did say one of the most intelligent things that I’ve heard lately. In fact, he had the whole audience repeat it with him. It went something like this…”I don’t know”. Practice it. I promise it will sharpen your intellect (be you a scientist or theologian).

  106. David says:

    I’m confident not anyone of us “sperts” qualifies to actually come to any real conclusion concerning Wayne’s motivation to do what he does. Heck , it could be his spirit truly embraces that which he speaks, and thus sincerely believes he is “helping” folk, you know… make them ok cause he’s ok? I’m kinda thinkin he really does, shoot…I’ll give the guy the benefit of my doubts. And hey if that’s true- you gotta give him credit for gettin out there and in bed [ no pun intended] with they with the ability to get his message out! One thing I do know- his “intention” of being “heard” certainly has come to pass. We are his proof, we been talkin about what we “heard” from him for a few days now! Yikes!!! Wow, maybe it is true?

  107. tom skledany says:

    perhaps prayer can work, even if it’s not God’s will. the Israelites asked for a king and God gave them one, even though it was not His perfect will. they were asking for a king because they had rejected God as their King. Maybe we should be careful what we ask for.{reference-the book of Samuel}

  108. ronda says:

    I can’t figure out why Dr. Dyer’s philosopies seem to be so awe inspiring to so many folks. Man has spent thousands, perhaps millions, of years looking within himself for the meaning of life through Eastern philosophies and mysiticism. In fact the greater part of our planet’s population follows these belief systems.Yet to date he is still looking!

    If these philosophies really worked wouldn’t we be experiencing Dr Dyer’s idea of solving conflicts with love worldwide by now???? Dr Dyer seems to be cashing in on old philosohies with new hand movements.

  109. ronda says:

    oops sorry for the typos

  110. Lawrence Price says:

    Hello all
    What is all the fuss about? There were two books published some years ago. “The power of positive thinking” and “Think and grow rich”. Dr Dyer has taken those concepts and dressed them up by using sayings from ancient philosiphers and religion. Put it all into a new package, TV, DVD,s etc. and has made a success of it. What is so mysterious about that?

    What is he saying. “This is how I have made a success of my life, and you can do the same”.

    Why is it that some people see some one who is successful, and immediatley jump to the conclusion that they must be cheating?

    Some doubt the power of thought. Look around you.
    Everything that we humans do, begins with a thought, including you. Without thought nothing would get done.

    Have you never been in a room full of people, when a person walks into the room and the whole atmosphere changes. Some times positivly and some times not.

    Look back on your own life and see how the experiences you have had, have influenced your life. Your family, schooling, work mates,etc. The experience affects you only by what you take from it. What you accept or reject. There are three ways you can go. Take a positive attitude a negative attitude or neutral. The event it self do’s not do anything. Only you really know who you are, to every one else you are a figment of their imagination. The same go’s for your opinion of others.
    Lawrence.

  111. Gary says:

    Here’s what all the fuss is about:
    Remember all the Christian televangelists who, in the name of Jesus (who would not accept a rich man as his disciple because he only wanted to give away HALF of his money and who said: “It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter into Heaven.”) then preached the ‘Gospel of Prosperity’, telling people that if they obeyed God he would make them rich in return? Basically, they turned the entire message of Jesus upside down for their own personal gain.
    The same applies to charlatans who twist and manipulate the teachings of others in order to convey their own message for their own personal gain. It is simple deception and it is dishonest. It is also very offensive to those who have taken to heart those genuine teachings that are now being manipulated.

  112. Joules says:

    aka Dr. Wayne Liar and the Power of Invention

  113. j.a. says:

    hello…last I checked, this is America…if someone picks up a book, looks through it and decides, “Gee, this is a good book and I have the money to buy it…I think I’ll buy it.”, they can…this is not Dr. Dyer manipulating people out of money…it’s called free will, which is something he promotes…
    …as some people freely believe that we come from monkeys and apes, there is simply no scientific proof to this “theory”, it is merely bad guesswork by “smart people”…I reiterate guesswork…
    Also, it is fair to say that some people will never believe that being kind to others will in turn POSSIBLY cause others to be kind to you…or that when you give, people may POSSIBLY feel inclined to give to you…
    …it happens…it just so happens that the more often you are kind and giving, the more often it happens…I don’t need a giant list of “smart people” to “prove this” and publish thier “findings” in a book and call it “science” to believe it…but I guess some people always will…

  114. TERRIA says:

    I must say that I throughly enjoyed reading each of the comments here, respectively. I, too, stumbled upon the recent PBS special with Dr. Dyer, during an insomnia bout, and managed to watch the entire show. It is amazing to me, how these people get on television, command these exhorbitant fees from a room full of hungry souls “seeking” something, anything that will help them with whatever they’re experiencing. I wish that I had that talent, I’d certainly be very rich.
    The shrewd listener, keeping an “open mind”, as has been suggested by many on this page, will clearly hear many philosophies cloaked within what Dr. Dyer states is his interpretation of the Dao. I was entertained by the show, and truly howled when Dr. Dyer stated that he had divested himself of all his worldly goods-with the exception of the Maui estate, etc. I do not need anyone telling me to divest of anything in the name of anything, to “free” myself.Yes, I agree with some of the posters here, I will certainly accept any of the antiques and the Maui property for free, should the good doctor need to divest of any more “incumberances”. Yes, keep sending your $300+ dollars in folks!

  115. j.a. says:

    hello…
    let’s see…according to Dr. Dyer, if we do things we enjoy to do, we will be happier…
    …makes sense to me…
    …if we get rid of things that we don’t like, we will be happier…
    …again…makes sense to me…
    …a loving God wants us to prosper and share…
    …o.k…so far, so good…
    kindness=good…anger=bad…
    …I think he’s onto something here…
    I think people get angry at him because he charges people Money for his books, etc.
    Here’s what I think…there are many different ways to make money…selling drugs, guns, and porn…
    OR…
    You can write down some ideas that people will benefit from…you can talk about things that people will benefit from…and you can invest your money in things that will make this money grow…
    So, don’t be pissed because he’s rich…he earned it by helping others, in an honest way…that is his gift…he forces nobody to buy stuff…people seem to have a demand for his ideas…probably because his ideas work…
    …people usually don’t reach enlightenment by putting others down…

  116. Lawrence Price says:

    Hello again.
    I find it interesting that we all interperate Dr Dyer’s lectures and writings in differant ways. Also the postings. Isn’t that what Dr Dyer is doing with his quotes from the various religions and philosiphers.

    From my own experiace I can tell you that his teachings do work. I began trying to pattern my life in the same manner fifty years ago, when Dr Dyer was still a teenager. I stress “trying”. My insperations at that time were the two books I mentioned in an earlier posting. “The Power of Positive Thinking” and “Think and grow Rich” I also read “A Magnificent Obsession” A work of fiction but a good idea of how to live a life.

    He says he has given up material things. Has got rid of unnesersary clutter in his life. We all have our own idea as to what that is. He is certainly no Mother Terasa, although he uses her as an example from time to time.

    He lives on Maui. Last time I heard, prime water front realestate was one million dollars a front foot. It is probably a lot more now. If he is living in a very remote area, in a tent, which I doubt, he is paying lots of bucks to be there. Still I do not believe he has cheated anyone or given anyone false hopes. As some one else said none of us have to read his books or watch him on TV, and if we do we are free to make up our own minds as to what we take from him.

  117. George says:

    Wayne Dyer is the Guru!

  118. jayson says:

    here goes…

    if you want to learn about Jesus, read the Bible.
    if you want to learn about Dr. Dyer, read some Dr. Dyer books.
    Wayne seems to know how to be happy on earth, and Jesus knows and tells us not to be wrapped up in earthly things, as we are not of this earth, but we are just in this earth…for a while.

    BUT WAIT!!!

    Science hasn’t “proven” Jesus’ teachings! Whatever are we to do!? It’s called faith. Which basically means we don’t need proof from men.
    I have seen and experienced miracles.
    I don’t know how miracles work, but I don’t think I have to.
    Meanwhile, major university studies across the nation are trying to find out big important things like, “Do women really talk more than men?”, and “Do sharks have thier own langauge?”

    How’s that cure for cancer coming along, fellas?

    I guess my point is that I am very skeptical of scientists who waste grant money on useless crap, then have balls enough to says things like, “You can’t prove the benefits of positive thinking! It’s just not scientifically sound! We need tangible results!”

    I would trust Jesus over a scientist any day.

    And if Dr. Dyer gets his proof by personal experience and not science, that’s good enough for me.

  119. jayson says:

    ummm…
    not written about for over 150 years??? Obviously, you have not been to a bookstore in say, 150 years.
    Basically unknown historical figure??? Let’s see, 2000 yrs. later, we’re still taking about Him.
    Largely created??? I think you mean He created largely.
    And “the failure of science to prove something in no way is a comment on faith.”
    FINALLY-something we agree on. Didn’t you read the part where I said I don’t NEED SCIENCE TO BE MY PROOF?
    Science has indeed effected my life because God has given humans gifts of intelligence(some) and has shown these people the way to a cure. To say it is science and man alone is foolish.

  120. jayson says:

    By the way, I think women do talk more than men, but I’m glad the local Journal here in town published those results(slow news day) because now I know for sure.
    Scientists make me cry:)

  121. j.a. says:

    hello…
    …I think the reason you can’t find writings on Jesus shortly after He died was because the Pharisees, kings and whatnot would persecute anyone who claimed to be a follower of Jesus…
    …anyone caught or accused of being a christian would be put to death or locked up, and writings were confiscated and destroyed…
    …History Channel, y’know…
    …that’s HISTORY channel…history, as in things that really happened…

  122. JohnQPublic says:

    So, you don’t think that science has had more of an impact on the quality of your life than a character of the past of who never left any writings and was not even written about for over 150 years after his death? Basically, an unknown historical figure that was largely “created” in many ways by 2nd century Christians.

    So, the advances in understanding bacteria and viruses and the near elimination of plague, yellow fever, malaria, and typhoid in the developed nations has less of a positive impact in your life than the writings of superstitious and oppressive men during superstitious and oppressive times? That’s like saying “Hansel and Gretel” is more important to my well being than medical science.

    The failure of science to prove something in no way is a comment on faith. Any failing on science’s part does not mean faith is right about anything. “Faith” is another word for abdication of reason. Religious faith had almost everything wrong. It took science to answer most of the questions that faith never could–and didn’t even come close to.

    Faith has a bad track record. I have no faith in it.

  123. Frank says:

    Religion and spirituality are two different things entirely. Religion, I believe, is dogma. Man-made rules. Spirituality is building a relationship with God. Seeking out God’s rules, which are more or less “Love your neighbor as yourself”, and “Forgiveness.”
    When did God say the world was flat?
    Perhaps you are right not to have faith in religions, but religion is not God. God is love.
    The body of Christ is not a building. It is all His followers acting toghether for a higher purpose. Service to others.
    Of course, there will always be wolves in sheeps clothing, but they are not always scientists, philosophers, or priests. They are simply pretenders.
    And while we can’t judge others as being good or bad, we can make a judgment call as to what we choose to fill our heads with. We can judge the difference between right and wrong, but we shouldn’t judge people. Not our job.
    We can limit Dr. Dyer, but Dyer chooses not to be limited by our thoughts, only his own.
    God cannot be limited by anyone. Miracles happen when God decides to suspend the laws of science and human reason momentarily for His will, not human intention. If a human was aligned with God’s intention, and was in agreement with God, then a miracle may occour.
    But this is not a human performing a miracle, it is God using the human as a vessel.
    It has been said that if you asked a scientist a hundred yrs. ago if he believed in God he would say,”Of course not, I’m a scientist.”
    But if you asked a modern day scientist if he believed in God he would say,”Of course I do, I’m a scientist.”
    This is because people have come to realize that God and science go hand in hand. Science isn’t all man-made jibberish, it is seeking out and understanding God’s mysteries of the earth(which was discovered to be round only by exploring with an open mind and a little faith).

  124. Gerry Tomkins says:

    I have seen Dr Dyer on PBS and I think of him as a teacher. Like all of us he is trying to make sense out of this experience of “life”. He writes about his journey, his observations, his discoveries, and as a teacher, he shares what he has learned. Unlike some teachers he doesn’t say you will go to hell if you don’t believe him. While he does offer answers he is not dogmatic. He offers perpectives that aren’t new but aren’t often taught in our society. He is inclusive with his ideas and beliefs. His books sell because there are a lot people searching for something better than what they were taught. Some embrace his ideas, some walk away.
    It’s great to have faith and believe, but a religion is called a “belief” and a “faith” for a reason: that is precisely what it is. No matter how convinced you are, it is still a “belief”. If the bible answers all your questions… well then good for you. It doesn’t answer all of my questions. Here is just one as an example: With God’s infinite imagination and divine love how did he come up with the solution of “redeeming” mankind with the crucifixion and death of his son? That’s the best and most loving idea he could come up with? What an insult to a loving God. Some of Dr Dyer’s ideas strike me as silly and even weird but they are all better than that one. That’s not God’s thinking, that’s the thinking of men. Primitive, barbaric men. The bible is full of this kind of “man-thinking”. I believe in a better God than the bible god and I suspect Dr Dyer does too.

  125. JMB says:

    One can take from the Tao Te Ching and use it in ways for which it may not have been intended (e.g., to sell books, to make one sound wise). For example, Dyer is violating several instructions of Lao Tzu such as

    “Those who know do not talk. Those who talk do not know.” (From Chapter 57 of the Tao Te Ching)
    “If you want to possess something, you must first give it away.”(From Chapter 36)

    The problem is that I can also find others that may support what he is doing.

    The lesson here is to be careful when you start to believe without careful scrutiny. To quote W. K. Clifford

    “The danger to society is not merely that it should believe wrong things, though that is great enough; but that it should become credulous, and lose the habit of testing things and inquiring into them, for then it must sink back into savagery… It may matter little to me, in my cloud-castle of sweet illusions and darling lies; but it matters much to Man that I have made my neighbors ready to deceive. The credulous man is father to the liar and the cheat.”

  126. *** says:

    The last comment by Gary is my favorite so far.

  127. frog says:

    Kermit the Frog has some pretty good philosophy, too.

  128. lm says:

    You all think too much, talk too much. You don’t have to believe DWD a prophet or a scientist, only a teacher. Believe or not, some or all, but if a person is quiet, and strive to connect, it makes sense at a level that defies explanation.

  129. Gary says:

    A dash of Lao, a sprinkle of Siddhartha, a touch of Jesus, a pinch of Krishna.

    Jack of all trades…master of none.

  130. frog says:

    “Time’s fun when you’re having flies.”
    -Kermit the Frog

  131. HA says:

    To JohnQPublic: If you’re comparing the language of sharks and the # of words spoken by women vs. men with the elimanation of plauge, malaria, etc., then maybe you should put down the Hansel and Gretel books. And the books about Jesus may not be in the fairy tale section. Probably a reason for that.
    Start with the Kermit philosophy and work your way up.

  132. Catherine Young says:

    It amazes me that Wayne Dyer can boast of “leaving it ALL” including his shoes. To go to MAUI?? Oh please! Don’t you need $$$ to live in MAUI?? Wayne, get real…you left what you WANTED to leave!

  133. HA says:

    To JohnQPublic: Didn’t mean to sound harsh(well, o.k. maybe a little). It’s just that in response to Jayson’s claim to have personally expirienced miracles firsthand, thereby recieving all the proof he needs of a God that others choose not to believe in, and then being frustrated at university studies that waste $$ on things like girls vs. boys—you suddenly went on to say(not quoting verbatum…to lazy)”So, you don’t think science curing malria had an impact on your life?”
    huh?
    All i’m saying is that if someone sees something with thier own eyes that is considered a miracle, you probably will not be able to convince him that reason is superior to faith.

  134. frog says:

    Hansel and Gretel taught me not to take candy from strangers. That’s pretty good advice.
    That could be a good metaphor. Is Dyer the “stranger” and is his message the “candy?”

    hmmm…

  135. JohnQPublic says:

    Not sure what you mean, HA. My only point is that faith, which is so often substantiated by the bible, is largely built on unverifiable claims. And not just biblical claims. Claims that we have immortal souls; claims that the universe (actually, a pantheistic view) conspires to help us out through tricky subtle messages; etc. Those who buy into these claims are abandoning their highest quality: reason. Ironically, there really is no escaping the human desire to reason. Even those who make these claims under the guise of “faith” attempt to reason them, too. Dr. Dyer spends years reasoning out his beliefs–he even gives use reasons why reason is not the best arbitrator of truth in his opinion. So, even he does not escape the reasoning process. Humans are built to reason and it is our greatest defense mechanism. Without it, all claims can be considered truthful. Research has shown time and again that those who rely on instinct, gut-feeling, and intuition can be more easily conned than those who reason. In fact, cons always avoid the rational person.

    However, my “Hansel and Gretel” remark was to draw a comparison to the bible. After all, if we don’t need reason to ascertain truth, as the faithful claim, then isn’t “Hansel and Gretel” equally truthful by that criteria? If my basis for truth is that I simply believe it (“I’ll See It When I Believe It!”), then what makes one story more worthy than another?

    Fact: The bible was heavily edited by emperor Constantine at the Council of Nicea 300 years after Jesus died, hardly a first hand account, for the political purpose of consolidating his followers. The bible is a collection of books with no first hand accounts–e.g. gospels were written almost 200 years after Christ–from the minds of very superstitious men.

    I think JMB, in an earlier post here, was on to something. Those like Dyer who acquire their “abundance” by talking as if they know the big answers should be viewed with suspicion. If Dyer truly lives by the Tao Te Ching, then why must he go on television to talk about it when by doing so if violating one of its tenets? That’s because he wants to proclaim truth to others and not really seek it. His claim, like so many others, is he has found “the truth” (albeit from many different sources) and to follow him “in spirit.” His message is: abandon your reasoning (when it comes to him), abandon your doubts (when it comes to him), and give in to his beliefs because his intentions are pure. It as been a long-held philosophical point that pure in intention does not mean pure in action.

  136. frog says:

    Thank you Gary. I happen to agree with your last comment as well, about how chance being introduced as a structural element of existence shows us that anything is possible.
    That is truth. I would definitely watch your PBS program should you ever get one.

    And to HA: When an alligator opens his mouth really wide, his eyes will close.

    You see, HA…the frog philosophy ain’t that bad.

  137. JohnQPublic says:

    This should be of interest to anyone inquiring about Dr. Dyer. This is taken from:
    http://home.hetnet.nl/~ex-baba/engels/letters/glenkcet.html

    From: Glen Meloy

    To: The President’s Office at KCET

    Subject: Dr. Wayne Dyer and Sai Baba

    Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2003 11:30:25 -0700

    The President’s Office at KCET

    Dear KCET,

    I was shocked to learn today in the Email below that Wayne Dyer actively promotes and speaks of Sai Baba in his books and lectures.

    If I had known that at the time of your fund-raising over a year ago, I certainly would not have purchased the Wayne Dyer “whole enchilada” as it was then being promoted.

    For your information, Sai Baba is the leader of one of the largest mind-controlling cults in the world and is a total fraud and sexual deviate who molest boys and young men and who claims to be the God of Gods. His organization in the United States has been and still is covering up these activities since 1980.

    Don’t just take my word for it. Check out the material found on http://exbaba.nl.

    The listeners and viewers of KCET and all PBS stations that allowed Wayne Dyer to participate in their fund-raising programs and the unsuspecting followers of Wayne Dyer deserve to know the truth about this fraud avatar who masquerades in a cloak of goodness, while in reality, is sexually molesting his victims in his private interview rooms in India .

    I expect to hear from you and will want to know what you plan to do to rectify and help expose this horrible deception fostered on your listeners and viewers.

    The background of celebrity Guests for fund-raising efforts should be more carefully checked out in the future to prevent this most unfortunate situation. If your staff would have done a google search on Dyer, it would have learned he was endorsing and promoting a world-wide sex molester by the name of, Sai Baba.

    Glen Meloy

  138. JohnQPublic says:

    I bet I know how Dyer ended up promoting this fraud, Sai Baba: because he relied on faith and didn’t ask the critical questions that would have exposed him.

  139. HA says:

    To JohnQPublic: Forgive the misunderstanding. I did take it to mean you thought faith was flawed because it hasn’t been proven by reason. Your last comment cleared that up nicely.
    BUT…
    See, here’s the thing…the criteria of faith is that we don’t need criteria for it to work. It works because we know it will.
    As you can see, there is no reason to it. That is why it is hard to understand.
    AND TO FROG:
    ummm…
    Where do I start. Well, I actually can’t say I disagree with you. And I like metaphors. Soooooo…I guess you take the chips on this one.

  140. Gary says:

    I find an interesting irony here. Some argue against faith or religion because it does not stand the test of reason and/or is based on the flawed reasoning that results from a belief in the supernatural. Quantum theory, though, especially with the introduction of chance as a structural element of existence has, if anything, demonstrated that nothing is beyond the realm of possibility…even God. Wouldn’t you say a lot of ‘faith’ is required to accept some of the results of contemporary quantum theory, e.g. quantum foam, wormholes, vacuum energy, string theory, hyperspace, supergravity, multiple dimensions, etc., etc. Comparing what we know today to what we knew five hundred years ago, it would seem prudent to consider what we won’t know until another five hundred years.

    “The more you know, the less you understand.”
    Lao tzu

  141. Gary says:

    I think you jumped on that one, froggy.
    Pluck your magic twanger.

  142. JohnQPublic says:

    There’s a misunderstanding: because faith does not stand up to reason does not mean it is flawed. That is not my point. It’s that faith is speculation and therefore has no criteria to be measured. So, it’s not that it is flawed it is: why believe one speculative view over another when they’re all just taken on faith? The Christian belief is no more valid or invalid than the beliefs of the Wadarni tribe of South America. Thus, no more valid than any fairytale.

  143. HA says:

    Ah, yes. The box. What does it mean?
    Well, we know this much—the box is definitley there. This we know is true. So the truth, so far, is that there is a box.
    We also know that if we choose to ignore the box, which is our free will, the box will still be there.
    We also know that when we reached out to this box, it left us. So that right there tells me that I should not go to that box if I need something. I should not go to that box if I want to put something into it. It will leave me if I try.
    So, therefore—JUST BECAUSE SOMETHING IS TRUE DOESN’T MEAN YOU SHOULD PUT YOUR FAITH IN IT.
    Is the box true because other people saw it? Doesn’t matter. If thier backs were turned and they missed the box, would that make it less true? Doesn’t matter. I saw it.
    But being true and being good for me are TWO COMPLETELY DIFFERENT THINGS.
    It was just another box. Even though is was what it was. So it sounds like we agree on this particular box. What we deduced as truth we did without trying to convince anyone else. And we also didn’t listen to anyone else.
    A good box is one you can put things in and take things out of. It won’t leave you when you need it.
    Faith in this box would have been misplaced, even though the box was truely there. And whose yardstick did we need to determine that?
    Where the hell am I going with all this?
    Instead of ignoring the box altogether, it would be better to make a judgement on wheather or not this box is good for me or bad for me. Don’t make a judgement on wheather the box is truely there. Then walk away, with or without the truth. Even if Wayne Dyer is still trying to figure it out.

  144. JohnQPublic says:

    Well put, HA. Your “don’t need criteria for it to work” is well stated, in my opinion. But having faith is not lost on me. I do get it. But when I ask myself have I put my faith into something truthful, I am immediately confronted with the need for a working definition for “truthful.” It is hard to escape the notion that truth is something that stands up against critique. Therefore, truth is objective. If it were subjective and changed from individual to individual, then the word “truth” becomes meaningless and every idea is equally valid. No idea is false if there is no critique. So, while I don’t need criteria to make it work, I do need some yardstick to determine if I’m being told lies or not. Reason is all we have.

    To me if I am going to accept a body of thought especially put forth by someone claiming to have the answers, then I want to make sure that it is correct. My simply believing it is not enough. The world simply could not work that way. The worth of every doctor, dentist, lawyer, and any other professional is determined by the recommendations of others. No one in their right mind is going to choose a doctor simply because that doctor believe in himself. When you choose a doctor you want references; the opinions of others about the doctor are more important than his opinion of himself. Therefore, through the testimony of others I can discern some truth about the doctor. If your faith is misplaced into a falsehood, what is the worth of your faith?

    My personal view about faith can be best described with a metaphor about life represented as a party with a magical box.

    Here you have a party with people laughing, conversing, drinking, and generally enjoying themselves. But there is this mysterious box in the middle of the room. When anyone approaches the box it vanishes. It is perpetually elusive. But when you don’t attempt to grab it, it reappears. After a few attempts at snatching at the box, most people give up and resume having fun. However, there are some that start to speculate about the box. After a while they come to believe they know what the box means and its significance to everyone at the party. However, each one speculating comes up with a different answer, but all are convinced they’re right. They’re speculation is truth (and religion doest claim objective, not subjective, truth) and if everyone at the party does not buy into their newly created truth there’s a price to pay.

    Soon they focus their entire time on the box. The box becomes their party. They’re so sure that they’re right that they spend the rest of the party trying to convince everyone else that they solved the mystery. They are now missing the party because the box has consumed them. Their sole purpose is now wrapped in their own speculative thoughts about the box. Moral of the story: you at a party, enjoy the party and forget about the box. You can’t understand it and when you try you’re just making things up.

    Whatever spiritual elements there are to this world, I will either find out or never know. But I will never figure it out by speculating and I would rather enjoy the “party” rather than obsessing about whether I have a spirit or not.

    To bring to topic back to Dyer, he basically claims that leading a spiritual life improves your survivability in life. He says that by connecting with the “source” that you find “abundance” (i.e., you get what you need to aid your survival) as well as peace of mind. (Peace of mind comes when you quit focusing on survival.) I disagree. I have never witnessed anyone gaining peace of mind through spiritual living and certainly those who survive the best among us usually don’t get there by focusing on the spirit–unless they’re a scheming televangelist, which actually means they’re focusing on survival–money–and so are back to the former. In fact, people who focus on the spirit tend to have the most difficulty on the surviving front. I don’t see abundance following spirituality as Dyer claims.

    If there is a purpose to our lives, it is not for us to know; it is certainly not for me to know otherwise I would just know. I much rather ignore the box and just enjoy the party.

  145. Gary says:

    So I asked the host of the party: “Just what the hell is in that box, anyway?”
    He said “Hee hee…nothing at all.”
    Suddenly, a cat jumped out of it.

  146. *** says:

    Wasn’t Einstein the one that was smart enough to build an atomic bomb—but never could figure out that darned hairbrush.

  147. frog says:

    “Taaa Daaa!”
    Now I’m cracking up! Y’know, a disappearing litter box would be less embarrassing at parties.
    But should we put our faith in the crap that’s in the box?
    Hahahahaha!!!

  148. Gary says:

    Just in case anybody’s a little confused by my last comment, it was sort of a ‘quantum’ joke (think Schrodinger).
    My point was: if anything is possible in the Universe, then anything at all could be in the party box so everybody is correct.

    I still think Dyer’s full of beans, though.

  149. JohnQPublic says:

    Ha! LOL! Yes, Dyer does not have a firm grasp of the collapsing wave function, or any physics for that matter. His interpretation of Quantum Mechanics is that the observer creates (manifests) the outcome. But that was not what Heisenberg meant and that is not how Plank, Bohrs, et al interpreted it. The problem is that spin and velocity cannot be measured at the same time. They’re mutually exclusive. That’s all. Therefore, when measuring for a wave you will get wave results because of the way you have to disturb the subject, not because that is what you expect or think of or believe in. And you will get particle results when tested another way.

    The Copenhagen interpretation, which has been the official one for over sixties years, says quantum effects are because the observer disturbs the subject matter in order to test it and some things such as light are so small that there is no way to test it without disturbing it in an extreme way.

    It is not about the observer “manifesting” what he thinks or expects. Scientists have a field day with Dyer and Chopra’s quantum explanations.

  150. havAgr8Day says:

    Hmmm. Interesting. Fun. Here’s what I often think: scientists who are atheists are frightened control freaks who like to imagine that they know everything that there is to know AT THIS POINT IN TIME. And anything that they haven’t figured out – either isn’t (the worst sort of scientist) – or just hasn’t been figured out by SCIENCE yet. K. Have I riled anybody up yet? Not TRYING to, honest :).

    The thing is, the truth is – there are many ways to do and experience what we understand to be the same thing. For example; owls, hawks, hummingbirds, a certain type of spider, airplanes etc. are all able to “fly” through the air (for miles). Yet, they all do it differently. (Especially that cute little spider who spins a long thread of web and catches a current.)

    Isn’t a scientist turning science into some sort of dogmatic religion of his/her own when s/he asserts it’s THE answer, THE ONLY answer, etc.?
    When, in fact, it is only one way of doing something?

    I wish I had all of the answers. I don’t. However, I know for sure that science does not. And a belief and God, and a belief in spiritual principles, is NOT religion. From a human who often feels that she flies like that little spider with the long thread of web; I can attest that those beliefs are often developed over a long time of personal experience.

    Last but not least – oh no!!!!!!! – although I am not a psychic (and I don’t play one on t.v.) – I have actually been psychic. And, fortunately or unfortunately, during different years of my life -quite frequently. (What would be the odds of me walking up to someone in the ocean at Bermuda {and feeling a bit crazy for doing it, but a gutt instinct told me too}, asking said person if she had found a camera case (with all of my credit cards etc in it) – and having her be the one who actually did find it – hours earlier, miles away?
    The truth is, having felt overwhelmed, I wasn’t even going to ask anyone – but just felt this sense that I was supposed to ask her?

    Now – where was my psychic ability when I lost my camera case (with all I.D., credit cards etc.)? Well, that is extremely easy to answer!! It was with Einstein’s HAIRBRUSH! 🙂 🙂

    Sometimes, although I do not know this for a fact, I think that being open to things beside the little halls in your brain sometimes makes you forget the little halls in your brain – and you lose things. The more creative I am, the more psychic experiences I usually have – and the more difficult it is to remember whether it is tuesday or wednesday.

    Now, when my life is all organized in little behavior and thinking boxes, I KNOW THE DATE, TIME, MINUTE… you get the point.

    None of us know it all. When you destroy what you don’t know (the unknown) because you don’t know it – well, that just seems like close-minded, fearful… (please don’t be offended)… childishness.

    Don’t be afraid of the dark. 🙂

    OPEN UP.

    Forget to brush your teeth – if it allows you to accept that there is great mystery. Don’t obsess over that magic box in the room – but do enjoy how it stretches you. It comes and goes and you can’t control it??? Oh, come on you (atheist, I have to destroy whatever I don’t know) scientists – have some fun knowing that there is more – SO MUCH MORE – to life than what we can quantify, qualify, score and statistically analyze.

    Atheists, FREAK YOURSELVES OUT – become… AGNOSTIC!!!

    I’m just trying to improve y’all quality of life.

    PS I hated disecting a frog in middle school.
    “If this is to see what a dead, leathered frog looks like when cut open – fine. But why not use a model? If I want to know anything about a LIVE frog – I will spend time with one. 🙂 Happily.

    Now, really, everyone, HAVE A GOOD DAY & NIGHT; EMBRACE THE MYSTERY.

    It will lead you to more joy.

    PSSS??? (Where’s that camera, hairbrush? Run on comment?) I liked all those smiley faces in above comment. Right back at cha!

  151. havAgr8Day says:

    Oh, like I didn’t ramble enough already … but before I really head off for some night-night; a response to John Q. statement: “I have never witnessed anyone gaining peace of mind through spiritual living.”

    Have you studied the life of Mother Teresa of Calcutta? Have you ever looked at a photograph of her eyes; or the joy on her face when she’s laughing? And in terms of abundance, she created an absolute orchard of abundance around her in terms of love, connections, etc. etc. etc.

    As far as I’m aware of; she also passed in an incredably peaceful way as well (something I’ve witnessed a couple of times in my life with human beings who have lived very loving, spiritual-goal oriented lives).

    Thanks for the chance to let it all out! 😉
    Love, peace, and mystery…..

  152. havAgr8Day says:

    To all those scientists, I ask: have you not heard of Einstein? Are you aware of his beliefs? As far as my understanding goes, his understanding of the universe – and his open, exploring way of thinking and connecting dots – allowed him to make great scientific discoveries –
    and lead him to the belief in God; an abosolute over-arching intelligent source.

  153. Dave Bacon says:

    I am aware of Einstein’s beliefs. I’m also aware of his science. I am also aware of Richard Feynman, Paul Dirac, Francis Crick, Thomas Edison, and a host of other brilliant scientists who had no use for religion. I also know famous scientists who believe in the paranormal and UFOs. Argument by famous scientist can prove just about anything you want. 😉

    And I think you have it backwards! Einstein said that his love of truth and beauty in physics had its origins in religion, not that his physics led him to his very pantheistic relgion. However, if you can find religion in a Lorentz transform, I’d be very excited 🙂

  154. nez says:

    Einstein is to Dyer as:

    Ferrari is to skateboard.

  155. frog says:

    I have learned something from Dr. Dyer. And I think that lesson is this: You will never become a Martial Arts Master when you take lessons from a yellow belt.
    Seek out the masters and learn from them.
    I don’t want to take one good line from this religion, and another from that religion, and so on—then decide I’m a big ball of light.
    Don’t need money, don’t want fame. I want the friggin’ black belt!
    “I KNOW THE TRUTH!!! I KNOW THE TRUTH!!! AND YOU CAN, TOO!!! JUST SEND THREE EASY PAYMENTS OF $29.95 TO…”
    Here’s the real deal people, and I hope you get this: The real Master will just give you the free gift.

  156. frog says:

    And to havAgr8Day:
    Thank you for hating disecting. No, seriously. I agree. If you’re going to learn about life, don’t inspect the dead. And I happen to like frogs;)

  157. havAgr8Day says:

    I thought nez’s comment was hillarious too.
    And so succinct!!!

    I think the fruit of a good (for me, this includes spiritually good) life is experienced in the present – it shapes each moment and day and guides your decision making. If love (truth and honest sort of being essential to that) practiced until it is second nature – life istself seems to grow in entirely different ways. (Again, don’t have all the answers.)

    I like Dyer personally – but I don’t think he is the big ball of light. I think he’s just one of the sign posts jumping up and down shouting “there’s a big ball of light people!” Hopefully, he puts some gasoline into engines so that people can head off in a better direction. Or not. I’m not the big ball of light judging it all :).

    Mother Teresa said something to the effect of “I don’t judge, because during the time I am judgeing, I can’t be loving.” (Love as an action.)

    Mystery. Beauty. It’s all around us. Many ways of enjoying it, growing with it – while we are alive.

    AND, as someone who has a BELOVED brother-in-law who is an AMAZING SCIENTIST – I know that many scientists are indeed extremely creative, and very open. (NOTE: before marrying my sis and knowing me – he was an atheist 🙂 and his life was much duller.) Now, the curiosity and open-ness that he extends toward science he extends towards all of life.

    I was only trying to NUDGE the scared/denying/controlling/atheist scientists who fit that profile into opening up a big. Just think it will make a better world. (Knowing full well there are scientists who range the gamut spiritually.)

    The last thing about Dyer: he is helping PBS when he tries to do those fundraisers. Thus the price-tag. And… I like Public Broadcasting….

    Now, headin off to find Nez for that lesson in succinctness…….. 🙂 🙂 🙂

  158. JohnQPublic says:

    To havAgr8Day: Regarding your comment to my “I have never witnessed anyone gaining peace of mind through spiritual living,” I mis-stated my point.

    You’re right. Of course there are those who find comfort and peace through religion and spirituality. No question about it. (Although, I don’t think the warm cuddly external way in which you described it is actual peace of mind, but that’s debatable.)

    What I should have said was that I find that most people who get on the spirituality track are looking for something else beyond this life. The very fact that they go searching means they’re discontented with the struggle of survival. Personally, I’m not discontent so I’m not searching for anything–I don’t need salvation or the promise of a better existence. I rather like this life and if I don’t have an immortal soul that’s fine with me. But that’s just me. I do not need to have everyone believe the same as me. (Funny, Dyer says the same but spends his whole adult life trying to get everyone one his belief system.)

    So, that really was my point: The “search for purpose” is the language of the disconent.

  159. JohnQPublic says:

    BTW, that “Ferrari is to a skateboard” comment by nez is hilarious!

  160. j.a. says:

    “All right! All you idiots fall out!!!”, yelled the drill sargeant to his soldiers. The squad quickly dispersed—except for one lone recruit.
    The sarge stalked up to him, stopped, and raised one eyebrow.
    The private spoke up, “There sure were a lot of ’em huh, sir?”

  161. JohnQPublic says:

    On other point to havAgr8Day: I think you’re projecting a personal image when you described scientists as control freaks. You are generalizing to the point that borders on stereotyping.
    I work within the science community and have some published articles on science, so I have some first-hand knowledge. Scientists do not imagine they know everything. Absolutely not. What scientists abhor is speculation without predictability. If science uncovers a mystery , then Dyer, Chopra and others will claim, “that mystery indicates there’s a God.” That has been said throughout written history: if we don’t understand it, it must be supernatural. But faith is not a measurement of truth, it an acceptance of what anyone says without measuring its truth. Faith by definition says, “I will take what someone else tells me as truth without checking it.” Science is nothing more than a process. A process to weed out untruths. Faith has no place in such a process.

  162. nez says:

    Sooo, that’s the enchilada…?
    One taco to go, please.

  163. JohnQPublic says:

    havAgr8Day, you make some good points. But do you really think Dyer is non-judgmental? I know that is what he preaches, but doesn’t he judge everything conventional? (In just about every book he devotes a large section to explaining what is wrong with the world.) Doesn’t he judge things by labeling certain behaviors as “low energy” vs. “high energy?” Isn’t that just a disguised value judgment?
    Here is some standard garden variety Dyer logic: “In my world everything is perfect. That is a powerful statement.” Then, “conventional wisdom is a big lie” [“Your Sacred Self: The Big Lie”].
    Fact: Dyer does not really believe everything is perfect because by definition it means it cannot be improved. He covers this with little riddles such as, “Everything is perfect including your desire to improve it.” That is the same paradoxical reasoning as with, “This statement is a lie.” It’s double-talk. And he has decided that his purpose in life is improving just about everything about you. Everything from subtle statements you make that imply blame, to how your thinking process developed, to how you respond to certain circumstances, etc. Basically, Dyer really preaches that everything is wrong with you and you need a total makeover. Everything is wrong with you because society–especially American culture–has programmed you as such. And he is here to deprogram your conventional thinking patterns; to help you become a no-limits person. Why? Because you have so many limitations you didn’t realize it until he told you. Now you know how imperfect you are–but he’ll contradict himself with, “you’re already perfect”–you can set yourself on the path of not just self-actualization but enlightenment.
    So, unless you live the way he describes–never feeling guilty or worried, never acting in conflict, allowing yourself to be pulled into activity rather than pushing into it, etc.–you are not enlightened.
    Dyer constructs a framework such that if you don’t fit it you can’t be enlightened. So, regardless of what he claims in the end he is just as dogmatic as any religion.
    And you have to ask yourself: How can someone with such a sloppy work trail be believed that he has found enlightenment by a unique syntheses of ideas?
    By sloppy I mean:
    – he wrote your Erroneous Zones in 2 weeks
    – he wrote Wisdom of the Ages in 60 days
    – he teams up with frauds like Chopra and Sai Baba because he doesn’t take the time to background check them
    – he shows little understanding about physics and then uses his misunderstanding to make profound claims
    He simply does not do his homework before he speaks. Someone who shows such a lack of mastery of ideas in my opinion cannot be enlightened.

  164. Gary says:

    Your reference to Chopra is interesting. I first heard of him when I read a novel he wrote about Armageddon. He made reference to Ash Wednesday as the Wednesday of Holy Week. It occurs, in fact, seven weeks before Holy Week at the beginning of Lent. Talk about good research! Only about a billion Christians knew that little fact. And he is a religious teacher? Ha!
    Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice…

  165. Zer0 says:

    I’m going to throw a few rocks in this pond and watch the standing wave pattern that develops.
    Think about this:
    If there is only one universe (or God) then it contains in itself everything that has existed, exists, or has the potential to exist. Nothing can be created in this universe without creating the complete opposite of it at the same time. We may not have the “instruments” (physical or mental) to detect the creation of the opposite, but it would have to be created in order to keep the balance.
    If you create a positive energy a negative energy is created automatically. They have to add up to zero or nothingness. The universe itself is nothingness yet from it everything can be created as long as the complete opposite is also created.
    If you want to create Good, you can, but Bad is also created at the same time. If you want Truth, you can have that too, but Untruth is created as well.
    So all those who are looking for the Truth are searching only for half of the Whole. The “scientist” is observing only half of the universe and wants to explain the workings of the Whole universe. He can not. The religious is chasing after the Good and hopes to know God. He can not.
    Everyone wants to polarize the universe or God. It does not have polarity, charge, mass, energy, etc. etc.. For God there is no Good or Bad. We have created those concepts out of the nothingness of the universe. We have polarized the universe in our minds and picked half of it to represent the Whole.
    Rather then search for the Truth we should search for the Whole. We should become Wholly by understanding the Whole and not just one part of it.
    It was not dark before “let there be light”. The concept of light and dark had not been manifested in the universe just yet. As soon as light was created, darkness was created as well. God did not create anything. God and Universe are the same thing. They are both nothing and everything at the same time. Light and darkness, time and timeless, etc..
    …..at the end you will find NOTHING, but will you be wise enough to realize that you have found EVERYTHING…….
    Did I disturb the pond with my thoughts?
    Now I will just watch the standing wave pattern resonating the universe.

  166. havAgr8Day says:

    Zero, I don’t know why, but I didn’t FEEL what you were writin’.

    Regarding Dyer; I am fairly uninformed regarding his writing. I wasn’t thrilled with YOUR ERRONEOUS ZONES (although, you have to admit, he did some good “manifesting” with that if he wrote it within two weeks and had the outcome he received!).

    However, the PBS fundraising effort I watched of his was on INSPIRATION. I found it to be completely, and utterly similar to my own experience with creativity. Astoundingly so.

    When I watched that talk (complete with his guests), I was SPELLBOUND. I actually doodled the title for an upcoming book without knowing it while I watched it (I don’t write self-help books btw).

    Anyway, the truth he described about inspiration –
    has definitely been experienced by me anyway, as profound, uplifting TRUTH in terms of my creative life – and my evolution as a person.

    I’m not going around talking to people about what I’m experiencing though – too busy using all the energy to write/create more (oh, and blab on this it appears ;).

    Anyway, I’m thinking that NEZ has all the answers. “Sooo, that’s the enchillada? One taco to go please.”

    OMGosh, I think perhaps we should all follow NEZ as the great simplifier of all thought – a new cult perhaps??? 🙂 🙂 🙂

    I guess one more thought – maybe I do want to respond to what zero wrote: perhaps we can pick what polarity we want to dwell and develop in most. A lovely writer (sorry, can’t remember her name and mutilate her lovely quote) wrote something like “When you’re searching for glad things, it’s hard to find anything else.”

    Sort of like – where’s the love in this moment – there cannot also be apathy in this exact moment between us.

    Nez????

    Xox

  167. havAgr8Day says:

    sorry bout sooooooooo many typos. That’s sort of the way it is with me though 🙂

    unless i force myself to proof – and that’s only for manuscripts. 🙂 🙂

  168. Randy says:

    He talked bout the 80-20 rule. I wonder if he’s given away 80% of the millions he’s made on all his other books and tapes? Randy

  169. Fred says:

    “Doctor” Dyer’s primary intent is to sell his books, tapes, etc., and to promote his daughter’s singing career.

  170. Francesca says:

    PH’s explication of Dyer makes me think of the Aliens in “Invasion.” Basically collectivism and denigration to the point of endangerment of the physical: A mixture of Heaven’s Gate, 1984, and the Soviet Union. As objectivists have put it, you can’t talk to people (such as Dyer) who insist on putting their wishes and fantasies above reality. But the new age has a built in defense mechanism of irrationalism when asked, no matter how nicely, to account for itself.

    As for those who insist Dyer’s seminars and other costly products “help,” I suppose lobotomies help some desperate individuals. Actually lobotomies are a short cut to “enlightenment” or “in Spirit(edness)” that I’ve often wondered why new agers don’t take.

    At least fundamentalist religions have absolutes that force consistence.

    I’m worried about where these gurus are taking society in teaching the desperate and confused to stop thinking and stop asserting themselves. The only way to deal with the cognitive dissonance they so manipulatively put out there is to kill your brain in some way. This is why in London workers are suing an American Co., in London, who sent it’s workers on some sort of new age retreat. This kind of forced cognitive dissonance actually caused workers mental break downs and detroyed personal relationships.

  171. Francesca says:

    I liked your comments, Mr. J. Q. public. I remember thinking in one of his useless PBS plugs that according to his [il]logic, suicidal homeless people must be the most enlightened people on earth!! Then I realized he’s not a cute aging hippy parent but a bad sadistic parent-a mommie dearest dressed like Kurtz in “Apocalypse Now.” And then I realized, evil separatist individualist coporeal being that I am, I could actually turn the TV off and resist the brain washing.

  172. Francesca says:

    wow “zero” that was pretentious.

  173. HA says:

    Tell me, ZerO, if I sat around and did nothing, what would that create. I’m gonna say nothing.
    BUT WAIT!!!
    The opposite of “nothing” would seem to be “something.”
    Just something to think about. Oops, I mean nothing to think about.

  174. havAgr8Day says:

    Okay, I’m in love with Nez.

    And Frog – I like you too. I mean, sitting right in front of my desk is a book with a picture of Kermit on the cover that’s entitled IT’S NOT EASY BEING GREEN. AWWW.

    It’s not ez being human.

    And about those Europeans (really?) suing an American company for taking them on a retreat and exposing them to New Age thoughts that caused mental breakdowns etc. – I have to say, after I experienced enough psychic experiences (with real – still living witnesses 😉 ) – I tried to look into the subject – as if I’d find a simple answer. I didn’t. However, I remember finding a book about the government’s study of esp, and training regarding theta brain waves – etc. And one of the book’s points was that there was a high degree of mental breakdowns in people who experienced the training and results, without having some sort of construct for handling it ahead of time.

    I’ve never tried to be New Age – whatever that is. My experiences almost always are linked to creativity or relaxation (driving, swimming, etc).

    However, I think science and spirituality do actually blend and that the same principles at times can be applied to both. You can’t have a few psychic experiences and jump to the conclusion that you’re psychic.

    It’s easier to accept reality – ‘sometimes I have psychic experiences; and this makes me think, or know as much as I know anything, that there is some sort of sixth sense, etc’ – then to deny the reality of it. However, like someone on a bicycle using training wheels – WAIT!!! I just had a NEZ moment:

    Psychic experiences are too enlightenment
    as training wheels are to motorcycles.

    🙂 🙂 🙂

    I’m so pleased with myself.

    Again, I think everyone needs to try to stay open. Accept what real experiences they have. Assume we’re all imperfect. And that the only perfect thing is love – which it seems to me we all know when we feel it.

    Alrighty, now I have to get back to other sorts of writing.

    PS I love envisioning Frog taking care of his dog. 🙂

  175. havAgr8Day says:

    Oh, one last thing. This doesn’t have anything to do with Dyer. I stick by my feeling that from the little I’ve seen, it’s been positive.

    However, in terms of the whole concept of “manifesting” – I think that is very short sighted. If you look at any great humanitarians, who manifested huge shifts in human consciousness – Martin Luther King, Ghandi, Mendella etc. (I’m avoiding stating super religious figures) – they all suffered. For example, Martin Luther King bettered the lives for almost all of us; and died by a gunshot.

    Spiritual living – is more about manifesting abundance on a human level (what is good and right for all people) – and getting rid of exploitation etc. – then it is about “manifesting” whatever you want.

    HOWEVER (deep breath for all my run-ons) I generally think that individuals who try to help others re-shape their thinking and open their mind to new possibilities in their life are most often trying to help them.

    I’ve seen people live in mud puddles for years when the entire, gorgeous world was right outside their door.

    Good wishes for all. 🙂

  176. Modeeb says:

    Have to agree with Zero but unfortunately, that explanation doesn’t satisfy most people’s need to align themselves with a black or white reality. Look how easy it was for Bush to promote the “evil doer” label on the Muslims or “axis of evil.” It makes it so much easier if someone will do the thinking for us and label what’s good and bad in the world. “True Believer” is an excellent book on the subject of how people come to believe things as true.

    Interesting that Dr. Dyer even quotes the Tao saying, “the Tao that can be spoken of is not the tao.” He didn’t mention it also goes on to say, “those who speak about the Tao, do not know it, those who know the Tao, do not speak about it.”

  177. Randy says:

    How could he afford to live a “spartan life” in Maui if not for his millions? Isn’t there something a little disingenuous about helping PBS with its fundraising efforts and then telling us to rid ourselves of our possessions? Maybe we should all send our shoes to PBS!

  178. nez says:

    My thoughts on apathy are as follows:

  179. frog says:

    When you create a truth, an untruth is created as well. hmmm… Those who are seeking truth are only searching for half of the whole. Hmmm.
    I seek truth, but yet somehow I don’t seek lies. But did I create the desire for someone else to seek a lie? I’m guessing no.
    I think we all know what an untruth is instinctively. Why would you seek out a lie? What is there to gain?
    Well, ok, I guess it helps sometimes to know how not to do something.
    Creating good is good, and when I give my dog a treat just for the hell of it, I don’t think I created another dog owner giving thier dog an ass-whoopin’ just for the hell of it.

  180. frog says:

    When you create something(good or bad), you don’t always create the opposite. You just know how to. Weather you do or not is another action entirely.

  181. frog says:

    To havAgr8Day:
    I have one of those wiener dogs, and his name is Frank(get it?) if that helps your vision:)

  182. Swanny says:

    I agree, we are not perfect, and we will all stand before Gods perfect law, do you think you will mesure up…..i don’t think so, that is unless you except His perfect gift. By the way, love is not a feeling, God is love, and He sent his son Jesus to pay for your sin with his blood, now thats love!!!! Budda and the like have some nice things to say about how to get along with each other in this life but i hope your not counting on them or Mr.Dyer’s all paths lead to heaven jargen to get you there! Chritianity is the most logical world view period!!!! For anything to exist there must be something eternal that has always been and always will be. God and “the universe” can not be the same thing! The universe is a created thing just like you if you would quit trying to be your owne god and submit to the one and only who loves you, life would make much more sense. Don’t take my word for it, God gave you free will and you can keep on trying your way for the rest of eternity.

  183. frog says:

    I agree. God is not “the universe”. I don’t pray to “the universe”. And if the universe was ever destroyed, there would still be God. If the earth were to perish, I would perish, Frank would perish, Dyer would perish, nez would perish, but God would live on and on and on.
    God is good. God is love.

  184. nez says:

    Agreed.
    Jim Henson was not a muppet.

  185. Gary says:

    Are we still in Kansas?

  186. havAgr8Day says:

    O. Now I’m tired.

    I was awestruck at the beauty of Joe G’s comments.
    WOW.

    I love knowing that Frog’s dog is named Frank. 😉

    And I still think Nez has A GIFT.

    But now, I just have to second everything Joe G. said. (Even psychic or other sorts of experiences are better sifted through that sieve –
    what I’ve already thought anyway.)

    AND, John Q., I think I understand your concerns… your worried that Dyer’s words reach too far and could potentially hinder as opposed to help people? And perhaps that’s what drives you to be so anti-Dyer?

    Oddly enough – and un-nervingly enough – my experiences back up a couple of what appear to be Dyer’s bizarre claims: I actually do believe our positive thoughts can help others (and vice-versa), we are all connected, and … that forcing things generally doesn’t work – not in the long run. But for the general framework of all of my thoughts – look loosely at (again) at Joe G. WOW. And I don’t think he had more than maybe two typos. WOW.

    Also, for enjoyment of life – perhaps part of our great purpose – see Nez.

    And whatever you do, make sure to walk a mile in another’s shoes – and don’t react, or over-react to your own fear – and burn somebody (anybody) at the stake.

    Those are all random comments. From me. 🙂
    (I don’t know if ya’ll feel it too – but seems to me there’s a lot of good stuff happening here.)

  187. clsr says:

    Dyer, like any teacher, puts the idea out there and what you get from it is very personal. I think he is trying to give direction to those who have no direction. What have I taken from him? Guilt and worry are useless, because you cannot change the past and you have no control over the future. We are all the same to God. Hand yourself over to God or the creator (whatever you want to call him) and you will find inner peace. I think it is sad that some feel the need to find as much negative as possible. So what if he’s been married and divorced. I know ministers of churches who have been divorced. His message is one of acceptance and equality. Kind of what I see in the bible. Did it ever occure to anyone that when Jesus said I am the way, he meant his way is the way, and we like Jesus are all children of God? We all come from the source of the creator, and we will return to that source, it’s called heaven in our small minds. It’s pure love, not a palace with gold and rubies. Get over yourselves, and remember when you point your finger at someone the rest of your fingers are pointing back at you!

  188. JohnQPublic says:

    In response to the “I think we all know what an untruth is instinctively” statement made by frog. While I understand what you’re getting at, that we often sense lies in what others tell us, untruth here is really a broader construct. You’re taking a narrow meaning of it. That is, we probably all agree that that objective states exist regardless of our opinions or expectations. (Sorry, but I need to go philosophical to explain myself.) Because without external objectivity, there are no axiomatic points of agreement among any one; everything is epistemological. Therefore, there is nothing to discuss because it all what you say it is a no one can be wrong. (That would make racists’ views equally valid, which they clearly are not.) Everything would be simply what you interpret it to be.
    I do not believe that. I believe clearly that the universe operates in a consistent way on which our thoughts and opinions have no bearing. Therefore, there are “truths” that are independent to us. How the universe came about and its physical laws are things that have evolved without human opinion or influence.
    With that premise our endeavor to understand our world then rests on finding those objective truths. Dyer is acting as a guide to understanding our earthly plight. But there are correct and incorrect explanations. These are the truths that are being discussed here, not if someone is lying or not. And the “sense” about them is usually wrong. There is no way our common sense tells us we are in the corner of this huge galaxy colliding with another galaxy (M31), spinning at an amazing 18,000 miles per minute around an axial point while swirling around a large nuclear fusion reactor. No, your senses tell you the world is flat, unmoving and that the stars revolve around you. You cannot sense objective truth. It must be examined to be uncovered.
    Dyer is explaining how the universe works to us. His whole explanation of “the source” brushes on the details of how it works and what it is. For example, in his latest special he declares unequivocally, “there is no violence in the source.” Really? Is that objective truth? But there is so much evidence to the contrary. If one believes nature is a reflection of “the source,” or at least created by it (and he has stated so), then an astounding amount of violence is built into the instincts of its creatures. (He attempts to brush it off with cherry picked examples, and ignores examples that contradict him.) I’m not talking about the horrific things man does, but the general thread that we see throughout nature: creatures are built to react to strangers in violent ways. In fact, the variations of violence is staggering. On top of that, “the source” creates an endless parade of killer diseases and natural disasters. That seems odd for a “source” that knows no violence. There are very few examples of love and caring in nature. Most of “caring” in nature seems to occur with its own offspring, not with its neighbors. (And I’m not talking about ecological harmony, but the instinctual behaviors of living creatures.) It seems obvious, then, “the source” would have built the instincts to coddle and be gentle since that is how it is. Or so we’re told that is how it is.
    My point is that he is making a putative claim of objective truth, for which scientific methods are squarely designed. He is saying, “I know the nature of the universe and I know that things manifest themselves from a spiritual world.” If that is true, then tell me why do scientific methods do not apply? Why should he not have to prove what he is claiming? Isn’t that the responsible thing to do?

  189. JohnQPublic says:

    Response to clsr: yes, he is putting out an idea to do as you will with it. But with that comes the responsibility of making sure you are right. Plus he goes far beyond just giving direction to others. With the way you have framed putting out an idea, then applying it to, say, college text books we could say, “oh, well. It may not be correct, but it comes from the heart and the author was very well intentioned.” When you jump up on the soapbox, you must be right.

  190. JoeG says:

    I find the posts very thought provoking!

    Here are my 2 cents. In the end, I feel we all believe what we each choose to and as a result we find the evidence to support our beliefs whether we take the scientific, religious, or new age point of view. When we find ourselves dissatisfied with our life experience in some way (or are driven by a desire to improve on it) then we are willing to take an open/critical look at our beliefs and in doing so we are willing to examine and listen to the beliefs of others whether they be Dr. Dyer, our favorite church preacher/pastor/minister, rabbi, guru, or any other person that publicly lectures on spiritual/life beliefs. In the end we take on our version of the truth from someone or something else “out there” since most of us are not born “knowing the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth” since the moment of our birth (hence we go to church, buy books, listen to speakers, etc. to get the truth we seek).

    I respect Dr. Dyer and rather than take a stance that we either “have to” buy his entire philosophy or reject all of it: I personally find it more beneficial to consider what he (and what anyone else I choose to listen to) has to say carefully, submit it to my life experience and my heart for guidance and then keep what serves me and discard what does not. I like some of what Dr. Dyer says and find it useful and so I take it in. The rest goes in one ear and out the other and yes I have actually laughed at some of his comments (in disagreement) while being truly inspired and touched by many of “his” teachings (most of which I have heard from other sources way beforehand which he acknoledges in his quotes but I still appreciate the great reminders). I was just remembering Tony Robbins (in his very successful “Unlimited Power” tape series) years ago using the analogy of a computer needing to be “conditioned” by repeating the same procedure over and over until the computer “gets it”. Tony tried to make the point that we need to repeat to ourselves what we want to change in our life’s (his “point” being that if a computer needs repetition then imagine how much more we need it!). This was opposed to the view of NLP which implied/believed that we humans could be programmed like a computer and would never revert to old unwanted behaviors. As a computer programmer for 20 years, I found his computer analogy of “conditioning” laughable but still I can discern the difference between a computer and my personal life and I didn’t reject the point he was making because his lack of technical knowledge caused him to use a poor example for what is otherwise a valid point. Likewise, that our perspective on any experience is more responsible for the nature of our experience than what is happening to us “out there” is a valid point that we need to remind ourselves of constantly of because it is easy to forget (whether Dr. Dyers analogy of Quantum Physics proving that “when you change the way you look at things, what you look at changes” is technically correct or not). To a person who wishes to die, being shot at is an act of kindness. To a person that is ready to or even unafraid to die, being shot at is a forgivable act, to someone who really wants to live or is terrified of dying, being shot at is an act of murder, wrong, and an unforgivable act. The point being that we may not get to choose what “happens to us” in this life but we can choose what we want to make of anything that can potentially happen to us in this life beforehand and this will greatly determine our experience of it.

    I agree with the some of the observations expressed in the posts by some Christian writers that we shouldn’t make Dr. Dyer into “the answer” or bet our soul’s destiny on EVERYTHING he has to say. I also believe we shouldn’t believe anyone just because they call themselves Christians and can quote Bible scriptures to drive a point that is both judgmental and unloving and who claim an exclusive domain over ALL TRUTH. I believe the highest and noblest use of the Bible is to spread a message of love, forgiveness and peace which are the essence of the spirit of Jesus Christ. I also believe Jesus Christ to be a much better role model and source of the truth than Dr. Dyer and I think Dr. Dyer would agree with this statement as well. If Jesus was speaking on public television then I would first and foremost tune in to what Jesus had to say and I suspect Dr. Dyer would too. In the meantime, until this option becomes available we all freely and willingly listen to mere mortals interpret and “teach us the truth” all the time, whether it be on PBS or Sunday service.

    We are all on this journey of life together trying to figure it out as we go.

    As I write this post I just realized that just like Dr. Dyer we all have a deep desire not only to “learn the truth” but by writing and posting our beliefs on this site we prove that we also (just like Dr. Dyer) have a deep need/desire to “teach our truth” as well, whatever that truth happens to be.

    I wish you luck in your own pursuit and hope I have just as much luck in mine!

    Joe

  191. JohnQPublic says:

    A list of Dyer claims that go beyond just advice and which cannot be substantiated (I can back all of these with specific references to his works if you like):

    – that when people have sex and yell “oh God” it is because they are really attempting to get closer to God during the act. (Say what??? Yes, he really claims that in one of his books.)
    – that “ah” is the sound that created this universe and therefore is why it exists in the word for God in all languages. (Actually, there are many Hindu gods that do not have the sound “ah” in them at all, but once again he did not do his homework)
    – we are not separate entities
    – clouds can be moved with the mind
    – one can enter another’s dream (he says he and his wife have done this)
    – the dream world is reality and our everyday life is not
    – disease is mostly a function of negative thinking
    – the universe helps those who as for help
    – the universal source is all-loving and non-violent
    – there is no authoritarian God as Christianity claims (I’m not religious, but my point is he can’t substantiate it and is just another of his silly speculations)
    – you help others with nothing more than good thoughts
    – we are all connected in the spiritual world
    – when you sleep, it is your soul detaching from your body
    – seratonin levels increase when a person is in a positive energy field witnessing a positive action to the same amount as medical anti-depressants
    – that he knows the level of God’s love (this is in reference to his Shia story. While it is a good story, I do like it, his conclusion is another example of his tendency to overgeneralize. He states that those boys playing baseball, “rose to the level of God.” Has anyone seen God do what those little leaguers did? I’m more inclined to say the rose to a level above God, but since I do not know anything about God including its existence, I won’t say anything.)
    – Worrying is not helpful. (I believe this to be overly generalized. While one should not over worry, it can be a positive motivator to action. Worrying can lead to more productive lives.)
    – Guilt is not helpful. (Again, the same response I have to worrying.)
    – All the world needs is love to function properly. (This is akin to young kids who believe the can “live of their love for one another” and wind up poor)
    – Branches of trees don’t fight, why should the branches of mankind? (Why did he pick branches over, say, colony ants which instinctively war with one another? Or gorillas who have been witnessed in the wild to rape their females? He needs to explain what were more like branches than gorillas.)
    – That forcing things causes what you want to escape your grasp like grabbing water. (How is using force to do something like water? Why did he pick water over, say, coal? When you apply force to coal you get a diamond.)
    – The natural world evolves without force. (How does he know what is behind nature?)
    – That the mysteries that science cannot yet answer are supernatural and science just won’t accept that fact
    – That a picture of his grandson in the bath smiling ear to ear is what our soul looks like. (I’m not being literal here. What I’m saying is how does he know that his grandson throwing an tantrum is not what our soul looks like? Or when he is frustrated? He has a whole myriad of emotions to capture but the source and our souls are only made of happiness.)
    – that our reality is is a manifestation of our thoughts
    – that your inner child is closer to the source than, say, your outer adult
    – that children are closer to God than adults (Since in Dyer’s world you do not need to back your claims, then I claim this is God punishing of adults through old age.)
    – that the ego works against us and that enlightenment can only be found through spirit (basically, this is an argument that focusing on spiritual needs trumps focusing on survival needs. The irony is if I focus entirely on spiritural that is what I’ll become: dead.)

  192. JohnQPublic says:

    To joeG: I like your explanation. Well said.

  193. JoeG says:

    Thanks JohnQPublic!

    You also express your thoughts very well.

  194. havAgr8Day says:

    Re: Gary’s post: Are we in kansas anymore?

    No… I’m thinkin’ we’re somewhere over the rainbow havin’ a love fest now :).

    And I’m likin’ it!

    If Nez, Frog (and Dog Frank), Joe G., and even John Q (who for some reason seems so thoughtful, but also wounded – by believing in Dyer too much? Not sure…), and even Dave Bacon 🙂 (for providing an accidental forum for this) all lived in the los angeles area – I’d invite y’all over for a barbecue (but no bacon Mr. Dr. Bacon – it would be strictly veggie – in honor of Froggie’s Frank {furter} :).

    Night night. Sweet dreaming…

    PS the invite would be extended to everyone, not just those I named above – in honor of peace, love and great conversation 😉

    PSS I loved that Joe G. shared his typo truth.
    See, still … WOW. 🙂 🙂 🙂

  195. frog says:

    To JohnQPublic:
    Thanks for the help. I do have a better understanding, now. I needed to grab my dictionary in order to see that(ha, ha), but I am now able to see the broader view.
    And to JoeG:
    Damn…Your post made me change some of my perspective for the better. I have learned something more about objectivity, and blah, blah, blah, blah—I can’t find the right words.
    I think I’m trying to say thank you:)

  196. nez says:

    To JoeG:
    If that is your two cents, I’ll gladly take a dollars worth.

  197. nez says:

    To frog:
    Forgot to say, to name your wiener dog Frank was genius.

  198. JoeG says:

    To havAgr8Day:
    Thanks for your comments on my previous post. You made me laugh with your observation on the low number of typos and I’ll take the chance now to confess that I started writing directly on the space provided on this website but before I clicked on the “Post” button, I first copied everything to Word (like I am doing now) so I could run a spell check on it because I know otherwise I end up with way too many typos!

    To frog:
    I am glad that you found what I wrote helpful! You really made me laugh with the “blah, blah, blah, blah” part!!

    To nez:
    Thanks for your kind words. I started out intending to write just 2 cents worth but once I started writing, it just kept coming out so I guess I went over my allowance! (I have been known to do this…)

    I really love this site because it showcases the dominant (and sometimes opposing) points of view in our country today and yet here we are, all of us (by far and for the most part) expressing our views in a very civilized and respectful way. Hopefully, this format can spread to other sites as well and rather than have conflict driven exchanges bent on personal attacks, opposing views can be presented in a way that enrich all of those who read it, just as reading all of your posts on this site has done for me.

    THANK YOU.

  199. JohnQPublic says:

    I have to agree with the comments about the discourse here being civil. It is refreshing. And I certainly hope that my remarks that question religion or anything else are not taken as disrespect for the religious. And regarding my earlier compliment to joeG for a well stated rebuttal, that should not be confused for agreement as others have indicated here.
    In response to havAgr8Day’s comment about what concerns me about Dyer: here it is in a nutshell. He sells Santa Claus in a bottle. What he does is akin to televangelists selling prayer cloths for $1,000. He takes what are basically a child’s wish and tells you it is real and is how the universe actually works. He makes things up and then writes them as facts. Federal consumer laws prevent us from making false advertising claims. I cannot create skin cream and then claim it cures skin cancer too unless I can prove it does so. Dyer claims disease can be overcome through correct thinking and positive field energies. But he doesn’t just claim it, he sells it for money. Deepak Chopra does the same with “quantum healing.” Therefore, I think this activity is as fraudulent as any other unproven claims for a product. I believe consumer laws should directly apply to these snake-oil salesmen. The fact that some, as in this discussion group, find useful information in it, is fine. I have no argument with these well-meaning folks anymore than I would have for a grandmother who was duped into buying fraudulent cancer-curing skin cream. But I do feel that people who buy into his nonsense are victims. They are being sold things they want to hear, not things that are proven to be effective.
    So, my concern with Dyer is he is selling a fraudulent product through unproven claims. I do not have an argument with his victims, only sympathy.

  200. JoeG says:

    To JohnQPublic:

    My comments were not meant as a rebuttal as I was just expressing my personal views rather than addressing yours. I respect your views and my personal experience has led me to views that I know you would disagree with at this time so I am not going to try to convince you otherwise. Regarding the views you have presented, you made some good observations on some of Dr. Dyers points of view that you found objectionable that I wanted to comment on since as I mentioned before while I respect and appreciate Dr. Dyer for sharing his thoughts, I dont agree with EVERYTHING Dr. Dyer says. To keep the posts smaller, I will take one topic at a time and spread them out over the next few weeks.

    EGO
    When I look honestly at my life, I have realized how much trouble my EGO has gotten me into and how many mistakes I have made by acting only on its counsel and from its point of view so many times.

    I also see that it has helped me many times and I have also come to realize that there is a reason for everything under the Sun and while I agree with Dr. Dyer that we really need to keep our ego on check since its concerns are usually only either material, exterior, or temporary, I also believe there is a reason why we have an ego to begin with and that instead of suppressing it, denying it, resisting it or fighting it, I believe that we are better of trying to understand when does having an Ego serve us and when does it not. I think making our Egos into the equivalent of Evil or something to be rejected altogether is fighting/resisting our own nature and results in an experience of self-defeat, guilt and condemnation. I say it is natural to have an ego since our egos are usually strongest during are earlier years and we all know why we call our second year of life, our “terrible twos” (me, I want, mine, give me, now…).

    Someone I heard said that “our greatest faults are actually our greatest gifts – with the volume just too high” and I will never forget that. I think our Egos also fit this description. Our Egos help us experience what we come to experience in this life by ensuring that we are here long enough to experience it, by constantly reminding us to do all we can to “try” to protect ourselves. I include “try” in quotes because many times what it is attempting to protect us from is completely out of our control and often times it is not something we need to be protected from to begin with. With its concern for our safety in all major areas of this life (physical, emotional, financial, etc.), the Ego helps us develop much of the wisdom we call common sense (i.e. look both ways before crossing the street, be careful who you talk to, be careful who you do business with, etc.) which help us to experience this life. The thing with our ego is that it is not self-adjusting (like any other attribute of our lives) much like the volume during a movie that sometimes is too loud and sometimes it is too low so we have to keep an eye on it make sure our “protector” is not getting carried away and becoming paranoid, self-limiting, or self-defeating.

    I believe that in addition to monitoring and adjusting the volume of our egos we also need to monitor and adjust the volume of that other side of us and that is our spiritual side. Our spirit’s needs are different than those of our Egos and its volume needs to be adjusted as well and more often than not I find that the volume of our egos are little too high and the volume of our spirit is too low). Rather than being closely aligned with the needs of our physical experience, our Spirit is concerned with the actual experience of life itself and our connection with the whole. Spirit is concerned with life in the big scheme of things (at a universal level and beyond the physical). I remember when Buddha went to the forest to become an ascetic and he denounced his Ego completely, not taking care of his body at all to the point of not eating for periods of time sometimes bordering on the verge of physical death. After several years of this, he realized that this “way” was extremist and while he previously embarked on this path as a way of denouncing the needs of the ego to focus on the needs of his spirit, he found that the best way was what he referred to as “the middle way”. His analogy was that if you don’t tighten the string of a stringed instrument (like a fiddle) enough, then you get no sound. If you tighten it too much then it will break.

    When both the needs of our spirit and the needs of our ego are being met then I believe we are in balance. Having said this, I see much of the work for me is to help my ego see things differently often times since many times my ego thought it was protecting me while it was actually mistaken in the past and it actually caused me unnecessary pain. So the work for me is to adjust the prescription lenses my ego sees life through so it can see clearly what it is looking at and also to adjust its volume so it is not too loud or too low and it can do for me what it was intended to do.

    I don’t want to fight my ego, I don’t want to do completely without it in this life on planet Earth and I don’t want to be controlled by it either so the only sane option I see at this time is to work with it and also question it when I get a feeling I don’t want, to make sure it is not misleading me into an unnecessary painful/stressful experience like so many times in the past while also giving it the benefit of the doubt and checking things out in case it is right.

    Again, these are my views I am sharing with you rather than a rebuttal of your views.

  201. Gary says:

    I want to thank those of you who have brought us back to ground (Kansas), i.e., our general subject: Wayne Dyer. Since we seem to have been getting somewhat personal here lately, let me share this with you. I have been a believer in the scientific method and its (verifiable) results since I was a child. I have also been a follower and student of Lao tzu for over forty years. I see no conflict between these approaches to understanding. For example, JohnQPublic mentioned how violent Nature is (and how Dyer glosses over this fact). In truth, though, Nature is decidedly brutal, perhaps, even, from a human perspective, downright cruel. Millions of creatures die or are eaten alive every day, babies and all. But this is confirmed not only by the Biological Sciences but by Lao tzu as well: “Nature is not kind. It treats all things indifferently.” – Tao Te Ching, Chapter 5.
    I write and publish poetry, mostly about Nature (which to me includes Physics and Cosmology). I rely greatly on both the facts of science and the insights of the Taoists to guide me in this endeavor. They do not, in my mind, conflict at all. Neither do they conflict with my faith in God. If anything, as we see father and farther into the Universe and deeper and deeper into that of which it is constructed, Science has simply reconfirmed my belief that there is more than we, as humans, can perceive. How could an ant describe Mount Everest?
    But faith is faith and fact is fact and Wayne Dyer has apparently gotten the two confused. The point is that Dyer has blasphemed both of these disciplines by misinterpreting and selectively misapplying them. He is either woefully unknowledgeable or an outright fraud. He can say anything he wants, but only a fool would try to use the Tao Te Ching to expound a different message than what is contained in it and if they understood what was in it, they would not endeavor to expound that message. As I said in my very first post here: If you ever actually saw a Taoist master, you would not even know it. If you could tell, of course, he wouldn’t be one. Dyer would probably say that he never claimed to be a Taoist. If so, then he should stop selectively interpreting Lao tzu (and Heisenberg, Schrodinger and Planck, for that matter).

  202. JohnQPublic says:

    I thank you for the response, JoeG. I understand what you’re saying and you make a lot of sense. I agree with concepts like balance and I think your metaphor of the EGO as an immutable loud speaker is very good. Our personal views may not be as far apart as it appears.
    But while I believe your sentiments are sincere, it would be another matter if you took them, packaged them on a DVD and then went on television to sell them to me. Expressing and sharing ideas is good and healthy, but there is a whole other level of responsibility when you sell them with big promises, even if only implied.
    There is something insincere about someone who gets rich off telling others they can have all the abundance they want just by rearranging they’re thinking and builds a philosophy that downplays hard work and effort in favor of an extreme emphasis on if it feels good it is right, and thwarts any kind of argument against it. I would actually have more respect for Dyer if he knew he was scamming the public. The problem is he doesn’t realize it because he has convinced himself that if intentions are pure then so are actions. Nothing is further from the truth.
    I believe in the Adam Smith maxim: “Social good comes from self-interest.” That is not an endorsement for the greedy by any means. It just means intentions are independent of actions. In the course of helping one’s self to survive, it is almost impossible to not help others along the way regardless of your intentions toward them. Conversely, good intentions can be the must hurtful to others. I believe actions are more important than intentions. And aligning the two does not improve it. Those who have helped the world the most have not had the best of intentions. The emphasis should be on what you do, not what you think or feel.
    I am a strong believer that the culture of Western Civilization, meaning a continuum of military defense from the Greeks to the Romans to the European culture, has bestowed the greatest benefits on mankind despite its shortcomings and spikes of cruelty. It is the only civilization in history that is truly self-correcting and continually improves itself. It fixes its mistakes. And what makes it all possible is its capitalist engine. If it were not for the benefits of a free market economy, Dyer would still be struggling to survive and not have much time for his idle speculation. The fact that he can stand there devoid of the natural maladies that should afflict him–his teeth don’t ache, he’s older than he should be by natural standards, he doesn’t have lice, the plague, grille, diphtheria, or cholera, all because of civilized advancements driven by self-interest and not because of any positive thinking or warm intentions–that have been near eliminated by the civilization that he adamantly criticizes. He should be praising the virtues of western medicine , but he condemns it and makes physicians sound like idiots in some of his stories. The world is largely a better place (any student of history familiar with homicide and death statistics knows what an unbelievably safe and unprecedentedly secure time we live in) because of actions not intentions. Dyer is now telling us, “if we don’t get it, and I mean really don’t get it, civilization will end as we know it.” Western Civilization has survived all the holy roman emperors of Europe, the hundred years war, the quadruple alliance wars, two world wars, the great battle of Salamis, the attack from Carthage, the Punic wars, the Spanish Inquisition, the crusades, and he says that, by comparison, the little squabbles of today are going to do us all in! Nonsense. These are the most peaceful times in human history. Western medicine has done more good for the world than a million Dyers.
    Bitting the hand that is economic prosperity which feeds you is not only foolish but self-defeating.

  203. JohnQPublic says:

    By the way, Gary I completely agree with your last post. That’s is exactly right.

  204. RJ says:

    Just my 2 cents: the santa claus in a bottle comment made me think of something. Once there was a mail order product called genie in a bottle. What the buyer got in the mail was a little bottle with a message in it that said “the power is within you”. If Wayne Dyer advertised himself it would say “do you want a lifetime of abundance? Want to live a life of warmth and happiness? Then buy my product” And then what you get is a little message that says “the power is within you.” I think he’s a fraud too.

  205. JoeG says:

    To JohnQPublic and Gary:

    I agree with many of your views about the generalizations and selective misstatements that Dr. Dyer makes about the nature of life many of which have clear evidence in nature to make the opposite assertion. Many if not all of these assertions are not his invention per se but part of a larger thought movement many loosely refer to as new age thought. I would also say that I have had personal experiences that do not conform to a mechanical or scientifically valid framework for life and that some of the topics he discusses I actually agree with while disagreeing with his supporting statements and with some generalizations.

    JohnQPublic, I do agree that you have plenty of reasons to disagree with some of the key statements Dr. Dyer makes on his program. Talking about proof and its importance when making statements, while I believe you have plenty of reason to question Dr. Dyer, I personally don’t believe that you have sufficient proof of your own to convict him of being a fraud (or a person who intends to defraud) either in a court of law or even in the court of public opinion.

    When Dr. Dyer talks about Quantum Physics and its implications on life, he does not tell us that he obtained his knowledge of physics by pursuing his PHD degree in Physics at Cambridge University or that he studied under Steven Hawkins. What he clearly tells us is that his source for his understanding of Quantum Physics is Deepak Chopra (a non-physicist new age guru!!)

    If you notice one of the central quotes he uses is Einstein’s view that the biggest question we face in life is whether this is a friendly or hostile universe we live in.

    A case can easily be made that Dr. Dyer has chosen to answer this question posed by Einstein for himself, which is something he is entitled to do (as we all are, whether we are right or wrong) and then he found the evidence (I agree that mostly poorly researched and often selective) to validate his own beliefs. No different than the approach we all take in our lives so we are also guilty of poor judgment at times. In fact the scientific method starts out with a hypothesis (a belief) and then the search for evidence follows to validate the hypothesis. Many times the search for evidence proves incomplete or inconclusive so we go back and keep on looking for more evidence. The scientific community has agreed that this method is subject to cross examination and the repeated results from independent experimentation before the scientific community accepts it as a theory. This works for the scientific community but there are many areas of life that are beyond the reach of the scientific method at this time and require a decision NOW whether to believe in something or not (a trial and error or sink/swim if you will). For instance we don’t have time to wait around for science to prove God exists before we chose whether we believe or not. So we all make our decisions on what we want to believe in on major areas of life all the time for our own reasons whether the evidence we select is valid or not.

    A case can also be made that he shares his views and opinions on public television and that you do not have to pay a cent to learn what his views are unless you want to purchase the very same video that you just watched for free on TV! A con typically hides the product, gets the money first then gives you fake goods. Dr. Dyer puts his program out on free public television for all to see freely and if you want to buy it after you watched for free then this is your choice!

    Regarding the role of consumer protection laws taking care of this “problem” consider this, right now it is legal for the tobacco industry to sell a product that is both addictive and known to cause cancer and is responsible for over 490,000 deaths a year! Also, how many prescription medicines are OKd by the FDA only to be pulled off the market due to unacceptable research and side effects? Is this the group that is going to save us from misinformation?

    If we require that the government enforce proof standards for any program that falls under the category of personal help, religious or spiritual beliefs then we would have to require that Christians produce proof that Jesus was born of the Virgin Mary, and that he came to die for our sins, and that he resurrected on the third day. We would also need to provide proof that Jesus performed the miracles the Bible states he performed. Anything else could potentially “dup” people into believing false teachings!! Not only would we have to require this from Christianity as well but also from all other religions across the country and subject those statements to the same standards. Well we all know that this is not going to happen.

    Personally, while I like proof/evidence and have a decent collection of physics books written by actual physicists, I do not need this level of evidence when it comes to my spiritual and emotional life and I certainly don’t need the government telling me what I should/can believe in and what I cant.

    I agree that Dr. Dyer is not “the answer” and I don’t agree that all we need are his views to save us all from pain and disappointment in life but I don’t believe that government is equipped to save us from the misstatements of opinion of any public figure any more than government or any other institution\community itself can save us from the pain and disappointment of life themselves.

    I also don’t see Dr. Dyer selling a program marketed as a Quantum Physics program and then delivering a program about “mumbo jumbo” and I don’t believe anyone has paid anything upfront to view the contents of these programs for either its content of physics, cosmology, geology, or any other science just to find themselves disappointed however I do understand how incomplete or unsubstantiated references to these sciences can be upsetting to some people even though as a computer professional I am not upset by inaccurate references made by non-computer people to back up their belief about anything in life!

    To me his programs are about life, and yes science and Christianity, and Buddhism, Taoism, and all other religions are also part of life so it is hard to talk about life and how to live it without addressing what religions and science have to offer as guidance. What I learn from this is that if you are going to speak publicly about your understanding of any of the sciences or religion then you should do your research and make sure you know what you are talking about.

    I am not defending his views, but I am willing to defend his right to express his views and if people want to give him money for his programs then I see no reason for him to refuse or for the opportunity to be denied.

    I see Dr. Dyer as someone who is going through life TRYING to figure it out just as the rest of us and very successfully sharing his views on life with the rest of us whether we agree with him or not.

    I have no interest in crucifying Dr. Dyer for stating his beliefs and for offering poor evidence to substantiate it, but that is my choice.

    Good luck in your own pursuit.

  206. Gary says:

    caveat emptor.

  207. JoeG says:

    To JohnQPublic:

    I added my last comments before I had a chance to see your last comments. I really enjoyed reading your response and I just wanted to add that I understand what you are saying and I understand your genuine concerns and the potential for disappointment.

    I just believe that in the end we are ALL endowed with the ability to make our own decisions and to learn from what works as well as from what doesnt work.

    I dont believe we are talking about a country of intellectually inferior individuals devoid of the capacity to figure things on our own. We put things to the test, when they dont work then we try something else. Maybe this is the reason there isnt just one religion or one Self help book out there that meets the needs of all of humanity.

    I agree that some of the points of view he expresses will not work as presented. When people try to see life through an “Erroneous Zone” to put his title into a different context then they will question the beliefs themselves and make the adjustments they need to make their lifes work again. I see this being similar to going to the doctor to get help with a medical problem and if you dont like the diagnosis or proposed treatment then you have the right to a second opinion and you will likely seek it if you have any questions.

    What I am suggesting is that we are talking about adults who have the God given ability to discern what sounds like pie in the sky beliefs and what beliefs they want to try on for size.

    I think you are doing a great service by sharing your beliefs and poking the holes into Dr. Dyer’s beliefs. In the end, people will read your comments then they will do and believe what they choose to and neither one of us can stop this.

    Like Gary said: Caveat Emptor.

    Good Luck.

  208. windiK says:

    Fascinating comments from all, except of course the obvious Christian extremists. One question, why DOES Dr. Dyer constantly mention over and over that he lives on Maui? He’s obviously not stupid, yet when he says that over and over again, it makes him sound so immature, as if he has to constantly reassure himself that he has “made it,” despite all his other supposed messages. IT starts sounding like simple “lok at me I live in Maui and you don’t, ha ha) I like listening to him, and as some said, don’t try to scrutinize or worry about his personal motives or authenticity too much (though many of your criticisms ring true, he still seems to offer help to some who could benefit from it, for not THAT much money, so who cares), but every time (about every 5 minutes) he reminds us that he lives on Maui I feel the need to roll my eyes. I AM SINCERELY ASKING THIS QUESTION. Hasn’t anybody ever given him feedback on this? I will be listening, thinking, oh, that’s an interesting thought, and then WHAM – “Where I live, on Maui, with the whales, blah blah ….there he goes again. I have lived in the Caribbean, own a home there, and visit Maui frequently, yet I don’t find myself repeatedly announcing this to everyone, in fact I go out of my way NOT to mention this in conversation since it’s sounds so obviously pretentious! (Except of course that I mention it here!)I just don’t get it. I like him, but I wonder how peaceful he’d feel if he were living in a poor, inner city environment. Just why does he say this, over, and over, and over again?! And, like anyone touting his found utopia to others, would he love it so much if all of his followers suddenly crowded his beach? (Though his beach IS obviously crowded, and crowding up more all the time!)
    WindiK

  209. Zer0 says:

    It seems to me that not too many of you ware able to tune in my wavelength. If you didn’t “FEEL” me then your mind wasn’t opened wide enough or I didn’t explain myself clearly (most likely the later).
    About God and Universe: these are just concepts as well. What we call God or Universe is limited by our own limitations to understand or comprehend. It may be that these concepts don’t even scratch the surface of what’s OUT there or IN here. By our own definitions we create our own reality and Universe. The scientists will try to quantify and label everything they are able to detect with their Detectors (instruments and minds) and call that reality. The religious will try to explain things that they do not understand or comprehend with a Devine being that has all the answers and creates reality. Maybe not to all, but to me it is plain to see that neither of the two camps has a hold on REALITY (a concept as well that has it’s opposite). Both camps have been wrong in the past, are wrong now, and will be wrong in the future. Will either of them comprehend the Whole? I don’t know, no one does. But this is how I see each camp:
    Religious – think that reality is explained in a Book, so they keep reading and studying the same book to find hidden meanings or the truth in it. For them The BOOK of reality has already been written at the beginning.
    Scientists – probe their surroundings and write new books on what they find. They are trying to compile The BOOK of reality. For them The BOOK has not been written yet. It will be written at the end.
    Both camps overestimate their capacities and their ways of pursuing what they seek.
    One has more faith in what they don’t see than in what they do see, while the other has more faith in what they see than in what they don’t see. They each use different sensors for “seeing”.
    Is there more (energy, information, etc…) in the particles that make up an apple than in the “empty” space between the particles? The closer and closer you look at the apple you find that there is more “empty” space than actual nuclear matter. It’s made up of 99.9% (I don’t know how many 9’s after the decimal place, but believe me there are a lot) “nothingness”. So the apple is the sum of a little “somethingness” and a lot of “nothingness”.
    So what does all this mean? Unless we know everything about “nothing”, we don’t know much at all. We know and are aware of so little about God or Universe that we are not even qualified to have an opinion. There is infinitely more than meets the eye.
    Well I have to get back to work. For those who question the creation of the opposite (the opposite is created simultaneously with any creation to maintain the balance in universe) in my earlier post can give an example and I will try to show how the opposite is created as well. One thing to keep in mind is time and space. The opposite may not be evident “here” and “now”. It may manifest in the future and somewhere else, but it is a “reaction” of the initial event.
    Our minds may be our best friends and our worst enemies, they may help us see but also can make us blind. Sometimes you have to be “out of your mind” to see the Whole picture.

  210. Zer0 says:

    To JoeG
    I feel that you have good balance and an open mind. I value your opinions and philosophy on life. Your vector is in the right direction with proper magnitude. Keep flowing. If you have a chance check out the works of Tom Beardon. I’m sure what you find, can’t be found in your current library.

  211. JohnQPublic says:

    I did not realize Dave Bacon’s credentials. Very impressive. I would absolutely love to hear his explanation of ultraviolet catastrophe in the blackbody radiation problem. There is a subtle, and basic, point in it I never could fully grasp: why does Planck’s constant for the quantum allow the radiation to curve off and avoid the catastrophe?

  212. havAgr8Day says:

    Gosh, I liked that one blissful moment over the rainbow. Sometimes, I think moments like that are worth so much more than all the WORD and THOUGHTS and ANALYSIS…

    A wierd example of ‘manifestation’:

    When I was 11, my older brother drove an on-off road bike. Mostly, he drove it all over our property for hours on end. 🙂 Essentially, the sound was annoying; to me, it looked boring. HOWEVER, my parents thought it was fantastic. Every wheelie he did, the 10,000 circle he road… u get the point…

    So much positive attention. I convinced myself to like it. It HAD to be FUN. At least, getting some of that positive attention sounded like fun. And so, during Christmas, my brother up-graded, and I got his old on-off road bike.

    Ok. I waited until Spring – all ready to impress my parents with my gusto. I was gonna get IN on some of the attention.

    I had one driving lesson. Simple: pull the handle grips toward you – go faster. Release – slower. Brake.
    EZ. ??? But deep down, I WAS SCARED OF IT. I DIDN’T LIKE IT. I KNEW I WAS GONNA CRASH. (But I pretended to be excited.)

    (Imma girl btw)

    About a week after learning to drive it – I was out on the front lawn, bored AND nervous – drivin around in little circles – when suddenly the self-conscious part of me kicked in. Where was everyone? Not only was nobody applauding… nobody was around…

    Suddenly, the on-off road bike shot off like a rocket – and I tried to hold on for dear life. That faster I tried to hold on – the faster the motorcycle flew. My mind was numb – I was flooded with fear/shock – until A GREAT BIG TREE JUMPED IN FRONT OF ME and STOPPED THE HORRID ORDEAL.

    (The Doctor neighbor came flying out of his house to see how I was. “Oh, I’m fine, really, honest, thank you so much…” I said. The motorcycle/bike frame was BROKEN. I ended up with the hugest bruise on my leg that I have ever seen on a human.)

    Hmmm. I manifested my own fear, completely, 100% on my own. If the bike really had taken off on its own, I could have driven it forever – or until it ran out of gas – as I lived in a pretty quiet area at the time. I mean, I had to cross an acre of open land and aim for that one big tree – TO STOP ME.

    I know I don’t have to explain all of that… but…

    When I went into fear, I pulled the handle grips tighter and tighter making the motorcycle go faster and faster – and then focused on the one thing I was afraid of – that tree – and aimed perfectly for it.

    Broken cycle only. Lucky me.

    It happens ALL the time.

    In my experience, I can observe how it operates in myself much more now (especially not being 11 ‘n all). I can often see often see how the opposite happens – when positive thoughts align with positive goals and positive efforts – and they’re all guided by – at the very least the golden rule (and for me, Christ’s teachings of peace, forgiveness, love…) – when it’s all combined with perseverence and holding things openly – WOW, can great progess in life be made.

    Funny, I grew up in an affluent area not far from where Dyer grew up (I believe in a not very affluent area – more struggling – Detroit? Maybe?) Yet, at the time I became aware of him – he was most known for having written YOUR ERRONEOUS ZONES – which I felt was a nice self help book – but never got very far into/though it for whatever reason. He also occasionally spoke in later years at a church which I never felt compelled to visit.

    STILL. WHEN I CAME ACROSS HIS PB Fundraising effort on INSPIRATION – it really did mesmerize me – not because of him, but because of the things he described – which I’ve said before SO paralleled experiences that I and fellow writers (one author in particular – a good friend who shares her experiences) have experienced. I remember thinking: Wow, maybe if you stay with a subject long enough (as Dyer has) – you evolve with it.

    John Q. – I wish I hadn’t said the wounded thing. What I meant was more complicated – more like – you know so much about him – and have such great concerns. And I can see where you could be concerned. I think I said before the point about
    not liking it when manifestation is made into a too simplistic term – or a selfish one. (I’m a consultant as well as a writer – and I would be so saddened if someone with a disability or illness believed they were at fault for manifesting it…for example.)

    Yet, I hope people can take something constructive from the concept.

    Direct TV has a lot of channels, right (conjecture – I don’t have it 🙂 ). Anyway, I think we can make a creative comparison. Nobody can watch all the channels all the time. And who wants to spend a whole lot of time passively watching tv anyway??? When there’s REAL, not surreal, life to be living? However, when you do watch a show – you PICK one. That’s where you put your focus. That’s what you take in. That’s what influences your thoughts, emotions, and physical responses within your body during that time. ANALOGY? That’s sort of like LIFE. Nobody can do everything, live everywhere, etc.
    So where will you put your attention? What will your life be? And how much will you let your fear, pain, previously dashed hopes etc. get in the way of whole-heartedly enjoying the life that you believe you most want?

    Too many words – even for me!!!!!!!!! Blek.

    As a friend of mine says “Over-analysis is paralysis.”

    Just, if you’re in any sort of mud puddle, know that you can step out of it – RIGHT NOW.
    If there is a dream inside of you – you can begin moving toward it – RIGHT NOW. Do accept this life as the gift that it is. That’s my personal xyz on the subject.

    Lastly, I can always tell Joe G’s entries within the first couple of sentences. 🙂 How funny. Same with John Q. Nez, etc. There must be some sort of personality/energy? 😛 we give off – even in our writing. (I don’t even have to read the thoughts – it’s the politeness, or humor, or sensitivity, etc.)

    Well, for me, I don’t think I have much more to say on the subject.

    NO!!! One more thing. The Hawaii thing. I know several people who live in Hawaii – one on the big island, two on smaller islands. One is a realtor (who was trying to get me to by a beachfront condo for less than 150,000 seven years ago), another a web developer/maintainer/web coffee shop owner, and another a number cruncher who is helping his company establish a branch on the island.

    It has never sounded to me like Dyer is bragging when he talks about Hawaii (but again, only heard the INSPIRATION talk). Still, if ya wanna live in Hawaii – live in Hawaii!!! Or come live near me – the Santa Monica mountains and the Pacific ocean are unbelievably uplifting every time I see them (everyday). And no, I’m NOT a millionaire.

    Just – be happy.

    Live happily.

    And Joe G, – completely assuming you’re married. But if you’re not – you should ask Dr. Bacon if he has my email address – cuz I’d love to get to know you better – seems like you have a great heart.

    PS Probably no more posts from me now – as I’d be repeatin’ myself. Plus, I already had my joy – that brief moment when all diverse opinions seemed to find a middle spot of accord.

    Ahhh…….

    LOVE TO ALL!

  213. havAgr8Day says:

    PS let no stone go unturned 🙂

    Zero – I did feel you – not just what you were writing. What I meant was – my brain grasped it – as a concept – but my heart and soul didn’t sense it as being a place to focus physical/emotional energy to get the most joy out of (and give the most joy to)……

    But love to you to :). 😉

  214. JoeG says:

    To Zer0:

    Thanks, I really appreciate your comments.

    I took a quick look at Tom Beardon’s work and it appears that his free/zero energy machines are still a work in progress from the sites I saw on google. I have looked in to FREE/ZERO energy machines in the past and while I find the possibilities very interesting, I have yet to see one work. Have you seen demonstrations of his work elsewhere?

    I first heard of these from the book:
    The Field: The Quest for the Secret Force of the Universe by Lynne Mctaggart.

    I have seen claims that people have made a machine that produces energy machines based on these principles but I still dont understand why we have not seen a single demonstration on national TV yet. I mean this would be HUUUUUGE if anyone could actually make it work and whoever does it would be extremely wealthy.

    On this one, I am willing to be open to the possibility of it being done one day but personally I wouldnt put any of my money in it until I personally saw it working first.

    Thanks Zer0

  215. havAgr8Day says:

    Clsr – nice chatting with you. (!)

    And I love what you shared about health.

    My Grandmother was diagnosed with breast cancer that had matasticized to the bone – and was given several weeks (possibly months) to live. My mother made the decision not to tell her – but to go with essentially hormonal and pill/medication oriented treatment. Actually, what my Mom focused on the most was piling on the love, fun and joy – whenever my Grandmother was awake and up.

    My Great Grandmother lived to be 107 – so my Grandmother had some good health genes rootin for her – still. I think a lot of what helped her was her body feeling loved, joyful, peaceful and relaxed. (Allowing the medication to work, facilitating her body to heal…)

    Anyway, seven months later – they couldn’t find a trace of cancer in her body. NONE. (She died year’s later at 97, a tuckered out heart.)

    I guess I’m saying – that I believe it is the frame of one’s mind that can help health tremendously. What you wrote about what you did made perfect, complete sense to me. Congratulations and bless you for sharing it with us.

    🙂 Love to you!!

  216. clsr says:

    To John Q.

    You indicate that in order for Dyer to get on his soap box and preach he needs to have proof. I in no way believe him to be perfect; however he is someone who is putting a spiritual belief out there. NO ONE can PROVE what is spiritual, that’s why when someone believes its called faith. All I am saying is you take from what he says what you want to take, if you choose to believe that everything he says is hog wash, so be it. I do think that there are those who are extreme and follow like a lamb; however, there are basic concepts he puts out there that have helped people. If you and I had the same illness and we went to a medical doctor, what would work to cure you might not work to cure me. This is the same thing, a person in pain or turmoil may need a positive message and it’s possible his is the only one found. I will say it’s probably easy to have the amount of money he has to have the time to meditate, ponder, give, and feel secure that all will be provided. I myself have to spend a good 10 hours a day either working or traveling to work. But, if taking the idea of taking time every morning to be thankful for what I have makes my day more tolerable, than it’s not a bad idea.

  217. JohnQPublic says:

    To JoeG: Regarding your response to my point about consumer laws etc. I believe you may have overlooked some of what I wrote. That’s understandable as we all seem to be prolific writers in this group.
    Dyer and Chopra claim healing methods for cancer and other ailments. They’re slick in that they always represent these claims through first person experiences and never outright recommendations, but they are still telling us they have cures. Therefore, public safety is an issue. In fact, there are documented cases where a pregnant women with AIDS took up their recommendations and refused AZT treatment and later had t children die of AIDS related diseases. They were convinced that using their minds as alternative to drugs would be more effective.
    I believe the government has a responsibility to prevent this kind of medical advice.

  218. JohnQPublic says:

    To clsr: thanks for the response. My comments about proof were not on the spiritual front, but the “I can do anything I believe” including moving clouds with my mind or other “conventionally impossible” things.

  219. clsr says:

    John Q.
    I am a cancer survivor, and I went through conventional medical treatment, however, even my doctor told me that he believed I would be ok where others wouldn’t because I went into my treatment with a positive mental attitude, he said that those who go in feeling like poor me, poor me, are the ones who work against the treatments. I’m sure if I hadn’t gotten convential treatment I would not be here now, but I do believe that part of my recovery was believing I could force my body to work with the medication. I’m 6 years out and I believe I will keep myself healthy (at least mentally) with the right frame of mind, and part of the right frame of mind is stress relief. Meditation can help with that. I do agree with you in finding it hard to believe that you can make anything happen with your mind (including the cloud thing) But I do believe that there are things in this world that are not explainable.

  220. JohnQPublic says:

    clsr: I can only say that I am glad to hear you are surviving and on the road to health. I cannot imagine what you went through.
    There is plenty of research to support your experience. I have no argument with the idea that optimism and a positive outlook help the healing process. But this is not what Dyer and Chopra are saying when they discuss “quantum healing.” They use the term “quantum” because they believe it means “the physical is completely a manifestation of your mental image.” Therefore, they go on to say, “every molecule in your body is controlled by your mental image.” They claim that you if have a strong enough image in your mind, you can even “reverse”–not stop, but reverse!–the aging process. Dyer has said many times that he has ridden himself of all aliments once he corrected his self image. He has even claimed that autism can be cured through helping the afflicted individual to develop a positive self image. (He often cites the book “Son, Rise” to support this claim.)
    Regarding your other point: the unexplainable. I agree. But religion and spirituality attempt to explain the unexplainable. And they attempt to explain it through speculative ideas and conjecture. Some things will most likely remain unexplained. Why is it not ok to just leave them that way? Why must certain individuals absolutely need an answer even if it is probably not correct? I see no reason why we need a purpose that transcends this life. What is wrong with making our purpose the here and now and building on the continuum of humanity? And that our purpose needs no other higher source than just ourselves? My purpose is what I make it, not what I convince myself a supernatural entity divined it to be.
    Thank you for sharing your personal insight, though.

  221. clsr says:

    I have to say I never heard him say he could reverse the aging process. If that’s the case why does he look his age? He looks healthy but not like he’s “reversed” aging.
    You are absolutely right your purpose is what you make it.
    Nice chatting with you.

  222. Gary says:

    Dr. Bacon:
    What about that blackbody radiation problem?

  223. JohnQPublic says:

    havAgr8Day, I knew what you meant by “wounded.” No offense taken. I immerse myself in study. Dyer is not my obsession as I study as many topics as I can. But I do think he is a very irresponsible and a reckless individual who needs to be taken on. Some are doing so. For example, Michael Schemer. Also, look into a book called “Fool’s Paradise.”

    Regarding reversing age, this link is from Chopra. but I happen to know it was originally written when he and Dyer collaborated. Also, Dyer has publicly endorsed it. (This is before the Chopra lawsuit incident.)

    http://anti-aging-news.com/articles/spirituality.htm#aging

  224. JohnQPublic says:

    Dyer’s endorsement of reverse aging:

    “An ecstatic journey into the miracle of age reversal by two of the finest physicians and thinkers of our time. Grow Younger, Live Longer provides you with every tool to dramatically reverse your biological age. Willingly suspend your disbelief and observe yourself growing younger in every way. The best book on this subject since Dr. Chopra’s bestseller Ageless Body, Timeless Mind.” Wayne Dyer, Ph.D., author of Your Erroneous Zones and The Wisdom of the Ages

  225. JohnQPublic says:

    Also, regarding the age reversal idea, did you know that Chopra uses a picture of himself taken almost 20 years ago for all his recent books?

  226. havAgr8Day says:

    Okay, I’m promised myself I wouldn’t look… and then I did ;).

    I write (as I’ve already repeated), and I consult – in a medical field in which I have a graduate degree.

    It’s so interesting – because in medicine, it is called ‘the art of practicing medicine.’ Although western medicine relies as much as possible on scientific methods to establish a decision tree of healing methods – I’ve never met a physician, etc. who considered there to be only one right way. The concept is that human beings are all alive and different, and respond differently, etc.

    Anyway, I believe when Chopra et al refer to biological age – that he/they are not referring to cosmetic looking age (how old we appear) but the age and health of our various organs, systems etc. In truth, the idea of turning back the clock biologically is pretty much an accepted concept in medicine these days. STOP SMOKING… and you will not only stop continuing to damage your lungs – but you will actually allow your lungs to repair themselves – thus if your lungs were very aged and diseased while you smoked, within about seven years – they would be almost pink again (as opposed to grey…) and their biological markers of effectiveness etc. would be hugely increased.

    There’s actually a ton of medical stats now on the bio-chemistry of emotions – and on how the health of the body effects the emotions, and on how the health of the emotions effect the body.

    Also, there is a large body of growing knowledge on what is called the chronically triggered fight or flight response (and it’s often unhealthy effects on the body) and on the relaxation response (and it’s generally health enhancing effects). Oddly enough, many of the things that alternative, or complementary medical practices have been advocating for years (such as meditation – a huge relaxation response inducer for the majority of the population) – has been found to have health inducing qualities. And when you consider that the body regenerates daily, weekly etc (depending upon what we’re referring to) – the choices you make everyday, and the thoughts (because thoughts can trigger the fight or flight/relaxation response as well) can have a huge effect on the biological markers of health (and I believe what Chopra is calling age).

    About Chopra having the same picture for twenty years – 🙂 🙂 🙂 I know quite a few authors like that. I initially thought it was vanity – but later realized that for many – it’s sort of like ‘brand recognition.’ Like, Ronald McDonald never ages, right? And you always recognize THAT face :).

    Anyway, I picked up Dyers book on Inspiration over the week-end at a local Barnes and Noble.
    Gotta tell ya – found the little blurbs I read/skimmed VERY INSPIRING. I will also say –
    he does talk about his own path (in the book) of growth – talking about his desire to take a compassionate look at all of his mistakes etc. He also mentions that he almost always experiences a ‘fall from grace’ right before he synthesizes experiences/spiritual energy (my words – sorry Bacon 😉 – to a higher level of understanding.

    Maybe if his most recent PBS thing was horrible – he’s experiencing one of those falls from grace before he synthesizes it more.

    Again, I only skimmed a few chapters – but I didn’t see him in the INSPIRATION book talking about himself or life like a magician holding a magic wand. He seemed to be fully aware of his history of flubs and foibles.

    I guess in the end, checks and balances are always helpful. I know they are to me.

    But I still wish that people could and would let go of the side of the pool more often (some anyway) – and experience the discomfort of floating out in the unknown – long enough to begin to see the outline of a brand new shore.

    Is there something more? Of course.

    And Bacon 🙂 will keep finding out about it in the direction he is looking, Joe G. in his own direction, and me (and all the rest of us-es 😉 in our’s. There’s lots and lots more.

    I LOVED what the ministers daughter wrote eons up the posts “Practice saying ‘I DON’T KNOW…'”

    What we know is infinitely less than what we don’t. I think anyone in any field would agree with that. And that’s okay. In fact, it’s down right exciting.

    But LOVE – still, for me, that needs to be kept number one in terms of focus – because without it – well Bacon, the “spiritual energy” just really su*ks. 🙂 🙂 🙂

    When you’re feeling down, look up – or OUT (as an astronomer might tell ya’).

    Still loved Joe G’s initial post. Thought it was full of GRACE. Loaded with it.

    Night night.

  227. havAgr8Day says:

    How funny Joe – just after I posted my lengthy note – saw your briefer one to me. HOW FUNNY. I too thought “Joe must be married because he seems quite well-loved.” CONGRATULATIONS TO YOU AND YOUR WIFE! And how nice that you are celebrating your 20th!! (I have a feeling I’d really like your wife too 🙂 ) Have a great party this week-end!

    And I do hope you keep posting your thoughts – on this board or elsewhere – because I think the depth, breadth, and sensitivity of them are awesome.

    Now, night night again to everyone 🙂

  228. JoeG says:

    To JohnqPublic:

    I wanted to respond to your comments on healing and the role of the mind vs. conventional medicine.

    As you may know, there are many more cases like CLSRs and beyond than the medical community or the scientific mind can possibly explain. Many documented cases where doctors have actually written off the patients as “terminal” by all medical and scientific standards and yet these people have experienced healings that can only be attributed to either their mental resolve or to a positive attitude or to direct spiritual intervention. I have had the honor of meeting and chatting with several people with cases like this in my life.

    At the same time, I agree that it is one thing to recommend that you enlist the power of your mind (or spiritual power or here’s an idea: GOD) to overcome disease and it is another to advice people not to seek medical attention at all.

    My question is: Did the person you gave the example about incorrectly interpret Dr. Dyer’s advise to use the power of his/her mind to help heal themselves as “medical advise” to completely forego conventional medical treatment or did Dr. Dyer in fact clearly state that people should forego conventional medical treatments in his book?

    If you could, please include a quote from his book where he makes this statement and I will gladly agree with you on this one since I too believe this would be irresponsible.

    Here are some additional thoughts on this subject:

    If there is in fact a mental or spiritual component to healing (even if only a selective or small measurable impact) do you believe the government should suppress this information or promote it or conceal it?

    While we wait for the government to decide what to do, what do we tell the tens of thousands of people who as I write this right now are suffering at hospitals around our country being offered the standard medical treatment but who are truly beyond the help of our best trained medical doctors?

    You provided a valid example of a lady who followed the “alternative” approach and avoided medical treatment and had her children die as a result, as a good reason why we shouldn’t allow anyone to suggest that the mind can be more effective than drugs. In a major study released in 1999, the National Academy of Sciences Institute of Medicine found that up to 98,000 people are killed each year by medical errors in hospitals. Now imagine what would happen if we used these failures as a reason to tell people: “If you are sick, forget about going to the hospital since 98,000 people die at hospitals needlessly each year due to medical negligence so you are safer/better off using ONLY alternative treatments”. If we did this, then what we would be doing is using only the failures as a reason to ignore the conventional medical treatment successes wouldnt we? If so, can the failures in mental\spiritual healings be taken at the exclusion of the successes to now tell people essentially not to waste their time with mental\spiritual approaches to healing when many such successful cases do exist as well?

    If people have in fact been cured from cancer by nothing else than the power of their thoughts or from a higher power then should we withhold this information from the thousands of otherwise hopeless cases out there right now?

    I strongly feel your concern for the weak minded who may be hurt by believing unsuccessfully in alternative treatments. What do you say to the many more who will believe in conventional medicine (and nothing else) and who will die as a result of only believeing in what is still an imperfect science/system that yet does not have all the answers?

    Another way to ask this would be: whose death is sadder, the death of the one who skipped on conventional medical treatment seeking only alternative treatments, or the death of someone seeking only conventional treatments when they were beyond the help of conventional doctors at the exclusion of alternative approaches that have worked for others?

    To me there is no difference. What I take from this is once again, be open to doing what works and if conventional medicine works for you then go for it and if alternative medicine works for you then do yourself a favor and give it a chance. In other words give yourself the best chances for healing by enlisting ALL possible healings avenues as needed!

  229. JoeG says:

    To JohnqPublic:

    I understand and admire that you are seriously concerned about and want to protect the weak minded so please don’t take my questions the wrong way. I am just as concerned about the impact of depriving the smart ones of potentially useful ideas out of the concern that the weak minded may misunderstand the advice to the extent of ignoring their own common sense and life experience.

    I also wanted to offer my comments/questions on the topic of Age Reversal which I only know little of what Dr. Dyers beliefs are on this topic based only on his quote that you provided.

    I agree that the “Age reversal” idea sounds really hocus pocus, like a pie in the sky promise.

    Not having read Dr. Dyer philosophy on this beyond the quote you offered, I still wonder whether you believe however that the opposite can be true.

    Do you believe it is possible for a human being to accelerate or age their bodies beyond their biological years (to any extent) by eating poorly, smoking, drinking alcohol heavily and being always stressed, depressed, angry and miserable?

    More specifically, do you believe there is a measurable and aging or damaging physical and biochemical effect on the body from consuming toxic substances, unhealthy foods and being under prolonged emotional distress?

    I take it that like me you are not a medical doctor, so I am just asking for your general belief based on what you know about the body and the well published medical research, not your medical opinion of course.

    Thanks

  230. JoeG says:

    To havAgr8Day:

    THANKS for your compliments (you made me blush) and yes you assumed correctly that I am married and yesterday we happily celebrated our 20th anniversary! Actually we have been celebrating all month and we still have a big party planned for this weekend!

    You have a great heart yourself and a great spark and you seem full of life and I can tell that you are deeply loved by all who know you!

    I wish you the best and please dont hestitate to address your comments or any questions you have for me in the future and provided I am still checking in, then I will be glad to respond.

    Thanks,

  231. JohnQPublic says:

    Regarding the comment from JoeG “Do you believe it is possible for a human being to accelerate or age their bodies beyond their biological years (to any extent) by eating poorly, smoking, drinking alcohol heavily and being always stressed, depressed, angry and miserable?”

    Age is the 2nd law of thermodynamics in action. Entropy only goes one way: from orderly to disorderly.

  232. clsr says:

    havAgr8Day,

    Wow the story of your grandmother is truly a testament to the power of love.

    I too have read several of Dyers books, and have taken parts of them to help me see another way of looking at situations.

    I know that some of his ideas are extreme; however, when my children were small I would exaggerate the importance of keeping their toys picked up in the hope they might pick things up once in a while. (Actually when they got older they asked if the “clean house police” were going to come over and if not what is the big deal. (This gives an indication of how influential I am.) I was raised knowing of the Bible and taken to church on Sunday, and yet I can say with confidence that I probably only know 10% of that book. (If that much) Maybe that’s why Dyer seems so over the top to some.

  233. Gary says:

    Just in case anybody besides JohnQPublic is interested. This is from Wicked Pedia.

    The ultraviolet catastrophe, also called the Rayleigh-Jeans catastrophe, was a prediction of early 20th century classical physics that an ideal black body at thermal equilibrium will emit radiation with infinite power. The term “ultraviolet catastrophe” was first used in 1911 by Paul Ehrenfest, although the concept goes back to 1905; the word “ultraviolet” refers to the fact that the problem appears in the short wavelength region of the electromagnetic spectrum. Since the first appearance of the term, it has also been used for other predictions of a similar nature, e.g. in quantum electrodynamics (also used in those cases: ultraviolet divergence).

    The ultraviolet catastrophe results from the equipartition theorem of classical statistical mechanics which states that all modes (degrees of freedom) of a system at equilibrium have an average energy of kT / 2. According to classical electromagnetism, the number of electromagnetic modes in a 3-dimensional cavity, per unit frequency, is proportional to the square of the frequency. This therefore implies that the radiated power per unit frequency should follow the Rayleigh-Jeans law, and be proportional to frequency squared. Thus, both the power at a given frequency and the total radiated power approach infinity as higher and higher frequencies are considered: this is clearly an impossibility, a point that was made independently by Einstein and by Lord Rayleigh and Sir James Jeans in the year 1905.

    Einstein pointed out that the difficulty could be avoided by making use of a hypothesis put forward five years earlier by Max Planck. Planck postulated that electromagnetic energy did not follow the classical description, but could only oscillate or be emitted in discrete packets of energy proportional to the frequency (as given by Planck’s law). This has the effect of reducing the number of possible modes with a given energy at high frequencies in the cavity described above, and thus the average energy at those frequencies by application of the equipartition theorem. The radiated power eventually goes to zero at infinite frequencies, and the total predicted power is finite. The formula for the radiated power for the idealized system (black body) was in line with known experiments, and came to be called Planck’s law of black body radiation. Based on past experiments, Planck was also able to determine the value of its parameter, now called Planck’s constant. The packets of energy later came to be called photons, and played a key role in the quantum description of electromagnetism.

    Many popular histories of physics, as well as a number of physics textbooks, present an incorrect version of the history of the ultraviolet catastrophe. In this version, the “catastrophe” was first noticed by Planck, who developed his formula in response. In fact Planck never concerned himself with this aspect of the problem, because he did not believe that the equipartition theorem was fundamental—his motivation for introducing “quanta” was entirely different, and the ultraviolet catastrophe was not a motivation for the foundation of quantum mechanics at all. That Planck’s proposal happened to provide a solution for it was realized much later, as stated above. Though this has been known by historians for many decades, the historically incorrect version persists, in part because Planck’s actual motivations for the proposal of the quantum are complicated and less easy to summarize to a modern audience.

  234. Gary says:

    PS – This also fits in with our Dyer debate somewhat. As you can see, Quantum electrodynamics is pretty complicated stuff. You can’t just ‘cherry-pick’ bits and pieces of and take them out of context…just like the Bible or the Tao Te Ching.

  235. JohnQPublic says:

    Thank you, Gary.

  236. JohnQPublic says:

    JoeG, your last comments bring up 2 good points. But first, I am not out to change anyone’s thinking. While understanding and agreement are always nice, I do not expect it. This is a point where I both agree and disagree with Dyer: agree with what he says, but disagree with what he does. That is, he very often extols the virtues of acceptance and toleration of other views, but then he tries desperately to have the world adopt his view. He now goes as far to say “civilization will end as we know it” if we don’t get it—i.e., get his view. So, I’m not out to change your mind about how responsible he is. To me he clearly is reckless and there is a large body of knowledge to support it. Also, you said I’m attempting to protect the “weak.” I do not think the religious, the spiritual, or the followers of likes of Chopra and Dyer are weak. I believe they are in search of big answers, that the have a strong desire to have purpose that transcends life, and that it is not a function of IQ. But is a function of effort because challenge is effort and faith takes the easy way out. I maintain that spirituality is for the discontent.
    The other point, JoeG, is your comment also demonstrates a central point I am making about faith: most of the faithful actually use what I’ll call “selective faith” or “selective proof.” That is, they’ll adopt a view without proof because it appeals to them—it’s warm and nice and tells they what they want to hear–, but any arguments that arise against their adopted faith then they want proof. Proof is really a defense mechanism against falsehoods—as it should be. The whole question is how motivated one is to uncover falsehoods. The fact that you are saying in so many words that you need more proof that he is irresponsible rather than just adopting my views outright illuminates that point. To generalize a bit if I may, even the faithful will demand analysis and proof when it is something they don’t want to believe. This is the problem with faith and the faithful: faith is only adopted when it is convenient. We all want the world to be the way we want it to be and not necessarily the way it is. Dyer preaches that very acceptance of taking the world as it is, and then describes the world in his own image—teddy bears and flowers (gag me!)–not the way it really is. What he suggests to you is that you not to accept reality but to put his positive mental spin on everything you see. He wants you to delude yourself into happiness. While I’m all for happiness, I would rather it be based on concrete thinking than ideals that are false. In fact, I will go a step further: I would rather fail with logic than even be right with faith because I would have at least expended the effort to be right. “Faith” is the lazy man’s language.
    Now, you can take my word on faith, or you can demand I prove my claims, or simply ignore me. But any way you go I promise I will never tell you that civilization will end if you don’t “get” what I’m saying. The world will function fine without anyone agreeing with me.

  237. Dave Bacon says:

    JohnqPublic: ““Faith” is the lazy man’s language.”

    Boy, that one is going to get you in trouble 😉 BTW, it reminds of one of my favorite phrases: “What is proved by religion is a lack of imagination.” Of course that sounds really really arrogant, but you have to understand that I spend most of my day trying to dream up theories, so you might say that I spend considerable time imagining the myrad of ways that the world might have been.

  238. JohnQPublic says:

    Thank you for the response, Dr. Bacon. I would add to your comment about how you spend your days, that you probably are not satisfied with just dreaming up theories. But that is a starting point for you and in the end if the model does not show predictability you probably put aside the theory. I bet you go through a self-correcting process. Imagination is the launching point, but it is critique and especially peer critique that determines the validity of that imagination. You don’t just take the imaginative idea on face value.

  239. Dave Bacon says:

    Definitely. Experiment is the final arbitraror. Imagination in a straightjacket, is the expression, I think.

  240. JoeG says:

    To JohnQPublic:

    You didn’t really answer my questions and that is OK, I respect that you dont have to and at this time I feel it is best for me to stop addressing any more comments or questions to your attention.

    I just want to wish you the very best in your own life journey!

    Thanks for the exchange…

  241. JohnQPublic says:

    Wow, JoeG, you give up so easily. Here are my responses:

    Question: “Did the person you gave the example about incorrectly interpret Dr. Dyer’s advise to use the power of his/her mind to help heal themselves as “medical advise” to completely forego conventional medical treatment or did Dr. Dyer in fact clearly state that people should forego conventional medical treatments in his book? “

    Response: The degree to which they took is advice is unknown. But degree is not the issue. He is not careful about his advice (i.e., reckless). He puts little emphasis on proper medical treatment and mostly condemns it.

    Question: “please include a quote from his book where he makes this statement and I will gladly agree with you on this one since I too believe this would be irresponsible.”
    Response: I take it you mean on medical treatment. Some quick examples: his discussion on PBS about his daughter’s warts near her eyes and how “of course” (his words) the doctors could not do anything about it but once she starting “talking to the warts” they disappeared. Perhaps you have seen that. His talk on how serotonin levels are increased through witnessing nice acts and, therefore, are superior to taking anti-depressants. (Also on PBS.) Those are the light ones. Since I no longer have a copy of erroneous zones, I will have to paraphrase. In there he claims that no pill ever cured anything that it is your body’s reaction to the pill. True. But then he goes on to say that you can do the same as the pill mentally. False and irresponsible. There are more that I have come across, but digging them up will take some time. In general, he does not believe in western medicine that consistently points out that it is inferior to healing with the mind.

    Question: “If there is in fact a mental or spiritual component to healing (even if only a selective or small measurable impact) do you believe the government should suppress this information or promote it or conceal it?”
    Response: I don’t believe the government should suppress any scientific data unless it can hurt national security. So, no. It should not do anything with it. This is not a place for government. Protecting its citizens from fraudulent medicine or related advice is.
    Question: “While we wait for the government to decide what to do, what do we tell the tens of thousands of people who as I write this right now are suffering at hospitals around our country being offered the standard medical treatment but who are truly beyond the help of our best trained medical doctors?”
    Response: This is loaded with assumptions. Being beyond medical treatment does not give any validity to the views of shamans or any alternatives. Exposing these people for shamans and fraudulent claims only makes it worse.

    Question: “You provided a valid example of a lady who followed the “alternative” approach and avoided medical treatment and had her children die as a result, as a good reason why we shouldn’t allow anyone to suggest that the mind can be more effective than drugs. In a major study released in 1999, the National Academy of Sciences Institute of Medicine found that up to 98,000 people are killed each year by medical errors in hospitals. Now imagine what would happen if we used these failures as a reason to tell people: “If you are sick, forget about going to the hospital since 98,000 people die at hospitals needlessly each year due to medical negligence so you are safer/better off using ONLY alternative treatments”. If we did this, then what we would be doing is using only the failures as a reason to ignore the conventional medical treatment successes wouldnt we? If so, can the failures in mental\spiritual healings be taken at the exclusion of the successes to now tell people essentially not to waste their time with mental\spiritual approaches to healing when many such successful cases do exist as well?”

    Response: Wow. Again, the failures of medicine in no way validate anything spiritual. To show that anything spiritual works, you first need to prove there is a spirit. But the negation of one idea is not necessarily the validity of another. You’re building in a logical fallacy.
    Question: “If people have in fact been cured from cancer by nothing else than the power of their thoughts or from a higher power then should we withhold this information from the thousands of otherwise hopeless cases out there right now? “

    Response: Another built-in assumption. Who said anyone was been cured by cancer through just their thoughts? And how was it proven that it was thoughts that did the work and not the cancer just going into remission on its own?

  242. JoeG says:

    To JohnqPublic:

    I read your last response after I already sent my previous one. I respect your point of views and you are entitled to your beliefs just as I am.

    While you wont receive further comments from me I am sure that you will find that as long as you keep posting your opinions publicly then you will continue to receive more opinions in return.

    Good Luck and again thanks for the exchange.

  243. JohnQPublic says:

    JoeG, I think you just proved my point. The faithful loath challenges and become frustrated by them. Science, on the other hand, not only welcomes them but demands them.

  244. JoeG says:

    To ALL:

    I realized that this website has served its purpose for me and it is time for me to get back to work as I am falling behind and I have much to do.

    I know that anyone who was actually going to benefit and get anything from what I had to say already got it and anyone else is entitled to their opinion as well and that is OK since I have other things I have to do at this time.

    Thanks and good luck to all!!!

  245. JohnQPublic says:

    Well, then one parting remark. You waged a good debate and you gave me many things to consider. (I have a copy of your questions.) For that I thank you.

  246. Zer0 says:

    To JohnQPublic:
    “Age is the 2nd law of thermodynamics in action. Entropy only goes one way: from orderly to disorderly.”
    True, that is the definition of Entropy. But there is also NegEntropy or Syntropy that goes the other way.
    Is age or life governed only by Entropy? Don’t be too quick to form an opinion. Big changes are coming. Just wish you can live long enough (slow down your Entropy) to see what’s around the corner. Don’t let your today’s beliefs blind your tomorrow’s visions. There is so little that you know and so much that you don’t.
    I’m not defending nor accusing anyone, just stating, and looking at the bigger picture.

  247. JohnQPublic says:

    OK, zer0. Point well taken. Are you making a case for the possibility of growing younger? If you are, how so?

  248. jday says:

    I read the beginning and the end of this blog…same story different page; as is the middle, I’m certain. It’s just like men before us -men of a former era, men like you and me, discussing similar topics, arguing varying perspectives, getting nowhere…really, except intellectually closer to our own or another’s perceptions of reality, be that science based, religious, or otherwise. It’s interesting. I found the readings quite entertaining. I find people and humanity enigmatic. Our thoughts, our interactions, our misinterpretations, clarifications, emotional response, intellectual warfare, endless debates, cyclical nature, blah, blah, blah, yaddah, yaddah, ya.

    “What does energy mean?” posts Dave. “I’ll tell you, it’s Christ,” replies someone else. “No! You’re both wrong. It’s neither, either, or; it’s what you want it to be, what feels right and moves the spirit and your life into positive action.” ….”Gee, Joe, that sounds good to me,” agrees the one who thinks it sounds good today. “NO. It’s not good, you fool. It’s about endotropy, built-in assumptions and cancer!”

    Man before us is dead. We are alive. We too, soon, will be dead. That is a fact.

  249. JohnQPublic says:

    “Endotropy?” “Man before us is dead?” Is there a meaning in there?

  250. jday says:

    You hardly had time to read my response, let alone think of meaning.

    But for me, yes, it does hold meaning: it means what do i really want to do in this lifetime. Do I want to pass on living as I am, or have lived, or do I want change in my life. The thought that men, like us, are now dead, as are their debates and conversations, is motivating. I guess we can learn from former conversation, but not all. Point: What do I want to leave behind. How do I want to live knowing that I get no other shots at this. It’s not a dress-rehearsal. The show must go on. But do tell…I’m enjoying this act of my life. I’m new to blogs, or whatever this is, and I like the perspectives I’m gaining. However, when I wake up in the a.m., my life must continue. I want to make the best of it, as I’m sure some of us also do.

  251. JohnQPublic says:

    Well, I like to think I can absorb the meaning of a 188 words in a mere minute. The average reader, I believe, reads at a speed of 150 words per minute. So, 3 minutes on your post is probably adequate.
    Now that I’ve had time to reflect on what you said…they still seem to be words in search of a meaning.

  252. jday says:

    By the way…did it ever occur to any of you that Mr. Mystery-Man-Dave-Whatchamacallit, a.k.a. Ski-Master-Quantum-Physics-Guru/Dyer advocate-even-if-you-don’t-know-it is a fabricated being created by the advertisers that foot the bill for his blog?

    Check out the “links” below (whom are they by?).

    Life is short. Live it, without knowing where you’re going, and without going where you know. Ciao!

  253. WH says:

    Dude, does the “J” stand for what you smoked this morning?

  254. havAgr8Day says:

    Wu tzu,

    HONEST – hadn’t checked in on purpose for a bit.

    Felt that it was getting repetitious – and also, didn’t want to get… stuck :).

    What’s funny and sweet and OF COURSE: I was thinking today as I was driving – ‘I need to pop up on that sight and just write “LOVE,”‘.

    🙂 🙂 🙂

    How cute that you got the point all along.

    Love. Love. Love.

    Big bushels of it.

    Love Love and MORE LOVE!

  255. Zer0 says:

    To JohnQPublic
    “Are you making a case for the possibility of growing younger?”
    First you need to clarify for yourself and for me as to what is “younger” and “older” (as it’s opposite).
    Your body regenerates and heals itself, otherwise you would already be dead. The exact nature of this process has been studied for some time and is being further developed by some very qualified people (at least in my opinion).
    Rather then me speaking for them I will direct you to the source of this info. If you’re really interested in knowing and can keep an open mind please study the info at these links (I hope the links will be posted).
    I think your concern for the possibility of growing younger will be dwarfed by so many other possibilities that are about to become real.
    If you find nothing useful at least you’ll know what some people are pursuing.
    http://www.cheniere.org/toc.html
    http://www.ifisoft.ch/test/pdf/bearden/
    http://www.cheniere.org/correspondence/index.html
    Best regards

  256. JohnQPublic says:

    Wow, that’s some pretty hard evidence. Son, this is how Jim Jones got his followers to drink the kool-aid.

  257. Wu tzu says:

    What, exactly, was the subject of debate again?

    HavAgr8Day…come back. We’ve run out of love.

  258. Wu tzu says:

    Yes, many watch who do not speak.

  259. JohnQPublic says:

    The debate is if Wayne Dyer speaks mumbo jumbo or not. The latest twist in the debate is Dyer’s endorsement of the “quantum healing” and “reverse aging” claims by Deepak Chopra. Specifically, do you believe that you can reverse–reverse, not stop–your aging through, mainly, positive self image? Zer0 has evidence that we are on the verge of a literal fountain of youth.

  260. Wu tzu says:

    So did Ponce de Leon, eh?
    Same fantasy, different century.
    Hmmm…sort of like Heaven.

  261. Zer0 says:

    I did not ask you to take it as hard evidence. If you think I take it as hard evidence then you don’t know me well enough. But I see that for you if it’s not hard it’s not real. Your reply tells me more about you than it does about me.
    Did you understand what you read? I only ask because the terminology and concepts may not be familiar. You will not find those in the textbooks . Please don’t take any offense, I’m not questioning your intelligence. I just think you didn’t even give it a chance. Probably your defense system reacted and closed your mind before you finished the first paragraph.
    What is a “hard evidence” for you? Can you give some examples?
    What are You pursuing? What have You to contribute to the knowledge base of mankind?

    You think you are a very strong debater (my assumption). You are entitled to think that.
    But to me you come across as a Resistor, resisting the flow of new information. As such you are not Conducting useful energy to yourself or to others through yourself. But I guess Resistors have a useful function in circuits as well. A circuit without resistance is impossible, not real (conventional thinking, “hard evidence” thinking). So I guess you serve your function of keeping everything real and conventional. Otherwise we would all follow Jim Jones.
    And for that I thank you.
    But I strive to be a Conductor, passing energy and information to the other components of the circuit and to other circuits. I may keep certain information in my Capacitors and later release if I no longer have need for it, so permanence is not in my nature. What I pass is not necessarily what I also keep. So what I believe at this point in time is not what I believed in the past or in the future. I try to expose myself to as much and as diverse information as possible. I keep or discard as I evolve.
    I maybe as wrong about you or me as I think you are wrong about me or yourself. It shouldn’t be about wrong or right.
    It’s all about change and exchange. Death (of body or mind or whatever else) is the lack of the above.
    Looking forward to your exchange.

  262. m.e. says:

    I just read “Ask and It Is Given” by Ester and Jerry Hicks…teachings of “spirit” called Abraham(introduction by Dr. Wayne Dyer). I found it an encouragingly relevant translation of, and in support of the Biblical teachings of Christ. I’m confused, though, when Jesus is itemized among a list of people in history also connected to “source energy” including Mohammed, Joan of Arc, etc. But the Biblical history of Jesus includes his death and resurrection so that we are reconciled to God through faith. Is this book submitting that the Biblical account of Jesus Christ is inaccurate? How are these two teachings reconciled?

  263. nez says:

    To m.e.:
    You are not confused, you are simply correct.
    Jesus is not connected to the source; He is The Source.

  264. tac says:

    Does anyone have to show another that he or she has the one right way to learn or see something? Each of us has our eyes opened the way they are able to be opened. Each of us attracts the lessons and the teachers we need, and at some point, we are open to the learning and understanding and growth. Does it matter which author pens the words that shine the light so we may see how we may grow? Does it matter what inspires us if we are inspired? If good comes of it, is it bad? One does not have to choose Dyer’s way if it rings false, does one? Does one need to express one’s opinions with vituperative commentary? Or can one’s heartfelt views be put forth in a gentle manner that invites consideration and contemplation? I understand a lot of scientific things and that leaves plenty that I don’t understand at all. (For instance, quantum mechanics is way beyond me and I am just glad there are those who do get it and work with it and make the discoveries they do.)

    If all the semantics are set aside, it seems the core of religion is finding some sort of peace and meaning and the guidance offered is usually (not always) that compassion and generosity of spirit is very helpful in that. Each of us finds our own way, hopefully, with the tools that move them to grow and learn.

    Please be well and take good care.

  265. frog says:

    To m.e.:
    Never read the book, but I believe that Jesus is God incarnate. While in human form, God taught us forgiveness and love. Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.
    I would listen to your heart and know that if this book is in any way at odds with the Bible, then you probably already know the answer you’re seeking.
    The God of the New Testament realized that humans will always fall short, which is why He came to earth in the form of Jesus, preaching forgiveness. The whole point of the cross is basically Jesus paying for the sins of the believers so that we have a better chance at eternal life with God.
    Jesus should not be included on a list of people searching for Jesus. That doesn’t make sense.
    Now, I know there will be lots of people who may have a problem with this knowledge of mine, but I’m going with it, anyway. It’s ok that they don’t agree, as I don’t judge people. I just agree with the Biblical account of Jesus being the actual Son of God.

  266. frog says:

    I also agree that God uses more than the Bible to send us signs of enlightenment. There are many ways to learn something, and one can not limit God as to the way He chooses to teach.
    If God wants to use this thing or that thing to teach us something, wheather it be a book or a different form of communication, He will.
    But I do see the Bible as true history and lessons in the form of parables.

  267. m.e. says:

    rather than chase our tails(so to speak) or settle for any sort of doctrine that feels good for the moment, isn’t it more important that we all strive for truth and life, as opposed to subtle and gradual deception, and kool-aid. The problem comes when truth is clouded by religious legalism, hypocrisy, manipulation, etc. God has been a faithful teacher and protector to me in the search for truth in my own life –His word promises He will answer if we just ask.

  268. JohnQPublic says:

    Zer0, why did you think I did not give it glance? In fact, I read it all and throughly.

  269. JohnQPublic says:

    Zer0, a comment on my viewpoint in regards to your “you think you’re a good debater” but “are a resistor” remarks.
    I believe that the greatest gift man has is doubt. Doubt keeps us from getting in trouble. Doubt would have saved the lives of followers of Heaven’s Gate and Jim Jones. So, yes I do resist ideas until they have proven they stand against challenge. Being open is exactly why people blindly follow others. I simply try to think for myself.

  270. hana says:

    faschinating blog. For me, the bottom line is that W. Dyer seems and sounds sincere, and has helped me via tapes (especially the “AAAH”) and books to feel better and manage my life more effectively.
    hana.

  271. JohnQPublic says:

    Nothing wrong with that, hana. I will say, and this is not a contradiction to my previous posts as I have just not touched on these specific topics, his message of personal responsibility, emotional management, deliberate action (i.e., recognizing you have a choice in each action), are all good. It is just a shame he dilutes them with the pseudo-science, new age spirituality, and, the most egregious I believe, dispensing ill-informed views on western medicine.

  272. hana says:

    Dear HaveaGr8Day. What is your genre of writing? I`ve been busy wanting to become a writer of fictional prose but dont know what to write about, nor how to (I do write little poems,though). happy end of summer.
    hana

  273. JohnQPublic says:

    So, what does “Spiritual energy is the energy of abundance” mean exactly? And what then provides the energy of depletion and demise?

  274. m.e. says:

    –I too am inspired and encouraged by Dr. Dyer’s messages of personal responsibility and empowerment. I’ve chosen to accept his ‘teachings’ cautiously, however, as he delves into ‘new age spirituality’ and supports the idea that we each have our own spirit guide–why not choose ‘enlightenment’ through the one-true-most-powerful God; and why is that not obviously better?

  275. havAgr8Day says:

    HAPPY END OF SUMMER HANA.

    I write… anything that wants to come through me – really. And the more unconscious I allow the process to be – the better the writing almost always. Essentially – set the (OH NO!!!) intention to be open – and follow all your YESSES. (Does that meadow call you? Spend time there – and hopefully remember to bring a pen and paper. Craving the sound of waves – head toward the beach…) The biggest thing, more than anything in my life, that has helped me to move forward in creative areas, is honoring the personal fact that that is what I would want to be doing more than anything (‘cept lounging with the ones I love) if I only had a few more days on this planet. And since we all may only have a few more days on the planet – for me, I just decided to make some “sacrafices” (I don’t drive an expensive car – in fact, I sort of practice the concept of driving less car than I can afford – so that I can afford to spend more time sitting in the meadow waiting for the butterflies to land on me – the actual way I described the process of receiving creative inspiration – for years – which is why I almost zoomed through the roof when Dyer’s theme for his INSPIRATION fundraiser was so entwined with the monarch butterfly – and why his story of the butterfly landing on his finger – and his own personal WONDER and AWE {the way it came across to me anyway} just stopped me in my tracks. Truthfully, there were so many unbelievable synchronicities {close your eyes Bacon 🙂 it won’t feel so painful if you don’t read it. Just teasin’ you!!!} – that I felt as if – as if I was seeing a big sign post confirming everything I had been experiencing for several years…)

    Anyway, the thing that seems to come through me most is writing that appeals to the child in all of us. I’m sorry I’m not more specific – but for me – it’s something I protect deeply as much as possible – and I don’t feel this forum would be that helpful for it.

    But in terms of you – if you want to pursue your writing – then I would say absolutely whole-heartedly do it. For me, it generally equals pure joy. Truly – I once sat down to do some writing (around 7:30 pm) and after what I thought was probably close to two hours – I got up – and saw that it was almost 3:00 am. That has forever amazed me – because normally, you would have to have some very thick rope to tye me up with to keep me sitting in one place – not getting up to get a drink or use the ladies room 😉 etc – for even a few hours. So, to do something for over seven hours – with no sense other than one of sort of fully being in a river of – creative pleasure – Anyway, BLAH BLAH BLAH. 🙂 🙂 🙂

    The truth though, for me.

    Such happiness there.

    The only other thing I would say if you want to really give yourself to your writing is: there are a lot of writing organizations out there – with a TON of resources. And while I like to feel like I’m a bit on a safari when I write (and not writing for a group-audience), I have met some of my closest friends and encouragers and fellow writers/authors that way.

    And Hana? Never stay around nay-sayers if it takes away from your writing/creativity/joy.

    That’s my whopping too many cents worth.

    Oh wait, as always, a couple more: to Bacon:

    I would guess that there is a real potential that science, and delving into the cosmos – brings you similar experiences? (Or not 🙂 ) But to bring it all home – I still think: a person will lose out tremendously in this lifetime if they take only the path that their comfortable with (or joyous in) and use it to obliterate others. sort of like a person who can only see out of one window of their house.

    🙂

    Wow, nobody should make any more references to me now though. Because I really don’t feel I have anything more to add – I’ll just be sayin’ the same thing – and with so many words!!!!!!!!

    (With manuscripts – I sometimes practice trying to cut the words in half… With this, I know if I even re-read what I’ve written, I might not have the time to send…)

    Love to you Hana. And I hope your writing finds it way into my life someday :).

    Pressing SEND 🙂

    xox!!!

  276. havAgr8Day says:

    m.e. –

    remember that angel, not JohnQ’s cynacism.

    Love to JohnQ too.

    (Sorry, after making my post, i spotted m.e.’s sharing about the angel. JohnQ, I really wish you could feel better. I get this sense that you feel you’ve lost something. I don’t think you’re going to find it doing what you’re doing here. It seems like you’re using logic to try to understand something much more – whole. Sort of like – you know, killing the frog and dissecting –
    and missing the chance to know the frog. And look – right here on this board – FROG is so nice. Just a thought – could be ‘pletely wrong. And that’s okay with me. 🙂 )

    Last but not least, for my own sake – I’ve got to get quite a few things into the mail – I will do my best NOT to read or post – for at least a couple of weeks.

    Where your attention goes – grows 🙂

    And there are some sprouts needing some big amounts of attention in other areas of my life right now.

    Thanks so much to all of you for sharing your thoughts and hearts with me.

    Until we post again 🙂

    XOX!!!

  277. havAgr8Day says:

    JohnQ: oh help, see, the quicksand?

    Posted my post to Hana, and m.e. – and then saw your’s to me.

    THANK YOU FOR MANIFESTING MY POINT FOR ME.

    Still, love to you.

  278. JohnQPublic says:

    By the way, zer0, a response to your assumption that resistance is defending the status quo or “conventional” thinking. (Forgive me for addressing your points piecemeal, as there’s just too much in this discussion group for one fell swoop response.)
    Religion and spirituality have been the status quo for centuries. That is the convention! The application of science is relatively new. Demonstration of proof has shown to progress humanity faster and better than religion ever did. (Although, I do not ignore historical theologians such as Thomas Aquinas and their contributions to the idea of analysis.) In fact, religion largely wants to turn the clock back in many cases (not always). Since the idea of analysis and proof, which hinges off the idea of doubt, took hold, progress accelerated in leaps and bounds.
    So the resistance you mention does not have a track record of slowing things down. It sped things up! Speculation and superstition slows us down.

  279. JohnQPublic says:

    To complete that thought, zer0, it is precisely because challenge and resistance create a self-correcting process. Science is very quick to correct itself. Religion and spirituality want to proclaim truth rather than seek it. Religion goes to great lengths to not to change. If you sincerely want to be a conduit of progressive information for humanity (which is such a grandiose claim that I feel silly even typing it), then demanding proof of ideas is how you get there.

  280. m.e. says:

    o.k., here’s another thought. Maybe new age spirituality isn’t a bad thing. I know that when I was a little girl, I saw an angel who tried to comfort me when I was scared. Maybe since Christ(or source energy in human form) walked on this earth, God has provided several others connected with ‘source’ who’ve been rejected as unconventional or nuts etc.

  281. JohnQPublic says:

    If you saw an angel, m.e., then you confirmed that the Europeans were right and that the largest percent of humanity have been wrong. Since angels originate from European culture and are not described by myriad of other cultures around the world, then Christianity must be right in its conceptual image of beyond and the Goilala tribe of New Guinea has been completely wrong. Also, I wonder if angels come in other life forms: are there dust mite angels? Or bacterial angels? How about opossum angels? I’m sure there must be earwig angels because I see so many of them around my house. Do they not have immortal souls, too?

  282. m.e. says:

    JQP, you seem to have a lot of knowledge on various subjects and I’m not sure I’ve been taken seriously. My search for truth and relevance is sincere and I welcome any contributing discussion.

  283. JohnQPublic says:

    I’m sorry, m.e. It was also meant to provoke some thought as well.

  284. havAgr8Day says:

    JohnQ’s comments to me copied and pasted here:
    “But I absolutely do not agree with the philosophy of the inner child. This is an idea that is an outgrowth of a prosperious economy as most similar ideas originated from middle class youth with a comfortable life and disposable income, not the poverty-stricken. (That was also true during the middle ages.)”

    JQ, I think your “intuition” was off the mark here. I wrote that much of what comes through me appeals to the child in all of us. Earlier, I wrote that I had a book in front of my desk, entitled IT’S NOT EASY BEING GREEN – with Kermit on the cover. That would be an example of a book that appeals to many adults (it’s not a picture book for children). But your hodge-podge analysis of your beliefs about one’s “inner child,” etc. – ????????????????????????????

    More of you comments to me:
    “Additionally, your comments about writing I have not found to be true, and I do not see it with other professional writers I work with either. To get published requires a ton of editing and rewriting. It is anything but a subconsciousness flow. Unless you write for Hay House, it is almost always an extreme left-minded activity. (Dyer was turned down by many publishers after Schuster and Simon dumped him, and then he found Hay House which will does little factual investigation and will take just about anyone who can fog a mirror.) My father was a writer, too.
    But, again, this discussion group is not about me. It does have a topic.”

    JQ, this is one of the most extraordinary comments I have ever heard. There is a book entitled THE ARTIST’S WAY – and before I discovered the book, I stumbled upon much of it’s suggestions – in my own creative process.
    I understand that you write technical material. And I understand that you probably don’t have a lot of unconscious process involved in that.
    Okey-dokey.

    Writing to publish within a professional field (which I have done within the medical field) is not what Hana was asking about. She asked about creative/fiction writing. ART. There is a huge difference in the writing process of both.

    And the truth is: I have actually dreamt manuscripts in my sleep. Creative/fiction/art DOES NOT EQUAL professional writing within the constructs of a given field in any way shape or form.

    MY COMMENTS: I truly have said everything I want to say here. I don’t feel love toward you JohnQ at the moment – because despite how much you protest – you repeatedly come across to me like someone who is entrenched in a position (and who does have a lot of time on his hands) – and who also has an agenda.

    I think humility, and encouraging others – is one of the highest things one can offer. And I’ve tried to offer it here (the encouraging). But the well is pretty dry at this moment in time.

    Your question about who my publisher is? What????? The only person I am aware of in recent years with just one publisher is probably Dyer. And it is Hay House – and they all seem to be working very well together. I’ve never published with Hay House. But I’m certainly not going to shift over to now sharing with you my professional creative associations. Again, most CREATIVE writers that I know of – publish with multiple publishers – if they stay in the field very long. And not everything I write is geared for a book – again, I write what wants to be written through me.

    I hope what I wrote was helpful to HANA.

    But I won’t be checking back on this sight anymore. I like things that expand me.
    And I feel like you are a dominant presence on this site, and that you constrict things. I’m glad you liked the term cynic – but do you know the current definition of the term? It is one who in general harbors a deep mistrust in the integrity and natural good-will of one’s fellow man. For me, cynic’s are exhausting.

    I want to use the time in my life to move forward – not to parse sentences and words with someone who is cynical about – well, what are you not cynical about?

    All I could think earlier today – after I sent my last posts – was: now I understand how people who can never be sure of love (what is love? does it really exist? I can’t prove it in a laboratory. will you love me forever? I’m cynical. Prove it….) can drive away the very people who could love them, be-friend them, grow with them, etc. It’s a loose, strange association – but it’s what randomly went through my head with you.

    I’ve said what I’ve wanted to say about what was important and interesting for me.

    No more now.

    Do you know where I feel I failed? I failed with you JohnQ. I should have bowed out before I got to this point. There are just too many other important things to do.

    (About Mother Teresa, I was the one who illuded to her inner glow. And the fact that she questioned her faith just as she lived it – doesn’t throw me. I’ve probably read 50 times more about her life, efforts, and the fruit of it – than about Dyer’s. If you are at all like me – reading her writings – won’t make you concerned that she questioned her faith. Again, checks and balances within any human being.)

    And in terms of your life being a tremendous success – I hope very much that that is the case.

    Someone wrote previously that they saw you as a resistor – for me it just seems like you have an agenda. And that you love to debate only for the purpose of advancing that agenda – or maybe – no, I don’t even need to write that.

    But truthfully, your agenda is not attractive to me.

    Bless you, good luck to you.
    Take care of yourself.
    I’m glad someone else on this site said you had many friends (maybe it was Dyer in disguise – because he could probably overcome your cynicism with love better than the average bear)
    And if you say your life is wonderful; then I will wish it so – because that will give me a lot of peace.

    Sorry folks – I failed in the end – because I do NOT feel love for johnq. at this moment.

    But there is hope: I probably will tomorrow, when I’ve detached from this situation – and know that I’m not mis-using my energy – as I have been in these last few exchanges.

    I’m feeling better already.
    Love to all.
    XOX – really. 🙂

    But love also to myself by releasing this now.

    The End. 🙂

  285. JohnQPublic says:

    Just out of curiosity, havAgr8Day, who is your publisher?

  286. JohnQPublic says:

    Thanks for the thoughts, havAgr8Day. Normally I do not like to speak personally in discussion groups because it strays from the topic.
    Your senses about me are not accurate in the least. This is the problem with people who trust intuition so much–it is almost always wrong. (Ask any scientist how many times their gut was wrong before it finally was right. It’s very lopsided.) I have had a tremendously successful life, married just once longer, probably, than most of you have lived (I absolutely adore my wife going on 30 years–how many can claim that?), and to be honest I’m an extremely happy person. I love science (it’s my passion) and I think cynicism is a wonderful thing. In fact, if you read about the Cynics of ancient Greece you’ll see that
    much of your new age philosophy originates there. It’s just evolved from political activism to more a universal language adopting the “feel good” element along the way.
    I’m a voracious reader (about 300+ books a year–I am semi-retired and so have a ton of time on my hands), I’m a writer by profession, I travel a lot (I logged over 280,000 air miles last year), my son is a successful rock musician, and I have nothing to complain about. In fact, knowing as I do some the details of Dyer’s life and his upbringing, he is typical of the type of person who was wounded at a young age and then spends his entire life telling everyone how happy he really is. I see no need inundate people with my feelings. But truth be told, I am internally a very optimistic person. I just do not believe that true happiness or true optimism is something you can detect or should be worn on one’s sleeve.
    But I absolutely do not agree with the philosophy of the inner child. This is an idea that is an outgrowth of a prosperious economy as most similar ideas originated from middle class youth with a comfortable life and disposable income, not the poverty-stricken. (That was also true during the middle ages.)
    Additionally, your comments about writing I have not found to be true, and I do not see it with other professional writers I work with either. To get published requires a ton of editing and rewriting. It is anything but a subconsciousness flow. Unless you write for Hay House, it is almost always an extreme left-minded activity. (Dyer was turned down by many publishers after Schuster and Simon dumped him, and then he found Hay House which will does little factual investigation and will take just about anyone who can fog a mirror.) My father was a writer, too.
    But, again, this discussion group is not about me. It does have a topic.

  287. JohnQPublic says:

    Did you all read today that Mother Theresa’s personal letters reveal she questioned her faith for almost 50 years? Who was it in the group that used her as an example of how an external “glowing” reflects internal happiness?

  288. Wu tzu says:

    I read about Mother Theresa. Shook me up.
    What have you published, havAgr8Day?
    Where did you go, Zer0? JohnQPublic took the last round.
    JohnQPublic: What do YOU write?

  289. Wu tzu says:

    Gary: what does a Taoist poet think about Dyers new book “Wisdom of the Tao”?
    JoeG: have you abandoned us?

  290. JohnQPublic says:

    I write technical books and articles. Mostly on computer science. Actually, a lot of income that stems from writing is really through consulting and speaking engagements, not the books themselves. So, I’m not a fiction writer. My son is the creative one in the family. (Although, I do play jazz piano, so I’m not entirely without a right-side to my brain.)
    I understand that my dry writing style and frequent use of active voice comes across as mean or frustrated to some. I suspect that is the case with havAgr8Day. But I can assure you I mean well and take no umbrage with anyone in this group. The image I usually form about others in debates like this is pretty positive. I believe people to be basically well-meaning even if I think their thoughts are incorrect.
    It is not my intention to upset anyone or be condescending to anyone in anyway. Even those with whom I disagree (which for some odd reason turned out unexpectedly high here–usually I find friends in sciences forums) I believe make insightful points.
    Everything I have posted here is an attack on ideas not people. (With the exception of Chopra and Dyer, who as public figures deserve it.)

  291. Wu tzu says:

    You have many friends here, John. If we all agreed, what would we have to talk about? What is life without challenge, or, to paraphrase you, how can we learn without doubt? Even jday would agree with that.

  292. m.e. says:

    JQP,thank you for your kind apology, although I don’t feel it was necessary. Your banter is refreshing to me, as both my father and husband are usually way too serious when I’m not. I’m a little too intense at times, and I’ve tried to balance that with my dry sense of humor.
    I think I’ve pretty much come to terms with my confusion regarding new age spiritualism and Dr. Dyer. My mom is not a fan of my constant questioning of ‘established truth’ and at the age of 40 with my own little girl, her disapproval still knocks me off balance at times.

  293. m.e. says:

    that really sounds pathetic

  294. Wu tzu says:

    That really sounds human. Welcome to the club.

  295. JohnQPublic says:

    No, you don’t sound pathetic. In fact, that’s where we have common ground, m.e. I’m glad to hear you’re questioning established truth. That is how you will get answers. My advice is to not give up and always, always think for yourself and never blindly follow anyone. If the citizens of Germany had done the same in 1932, nazi (I refuse to capitalize that word!) Germany might not have emerged because what they were being told did not make any sense. So, keep at it!

  296. m.e. says:

    my constant reference point exactly. I remember being in highschool and reading about Anne Frank and the holocaust, slavery, KKK etc. all in the present (20th) century. And I am still amazed today by most people’s complacency and lack of fury!!

  297. m.e. says:

    excuse me, — kkk–

  298. Kate says:

    I have been to a Wayne Dyer lecture, and he gives 100% to his speaking and connecting to the audience.

    He’s more than a hawker of books, and cds and dvds.

    He has shared the whole journey of his life, from his difficult and troubled beginnings – to the moment in his 30’s when he had a mystical event take place regarding his Father.

    He was able to quit drinking and focus on health by becoming a long distance runner, and over the years, he has shared his budding discoveries in the Positive Thought Movement – with a large audience eager to find meaning and contentment in their lives, and Dyer is the king of culling great works – and dispensing the core ideas in easy to read format.

  299. Kate says:

    Hi there havAgr8day,
    I have been in the presence of Mother Theresa, and the energy, warmth, and care was so amazing, and I sensed she was deeply sincere in her love and service to the poor.

    I will never forgot that feeling of love and grace – radiating from her. I have no doubt that her personal inner journey was a struggle at times. I have had many intense moments of questioning my beliefs, my intentions, and what I am here to do in service and how best to express my love for the Divine gift of Life itself.

    Love to you,
    ~ Kate

  300. JohnQPublic says:

    I am curious, then Kate, and others, how do you feel about her personal letters to priests, just recently revealed in the last few days, where she says:

    “I am told God loves me–and yet the reality of darkness and coldness and emptiness is so great that nothing touches my soul.”

    “Inside it is all dark and feeling that I am totalty cut off from God.”

    She also wrote the prayers “did not work” that they were either “spurned” by God or “empty.”

    And, she said she that she did not any longer see “Christ’s presence.”

  301. Kate says:

    Hi JQP,
    Do you feel Mother Theresa ‘failed’ in her spiritual practice? Because she had doubts? She seems to have had enough courage and – the honesty it takes – to expose her deepest fears, in letters she wrote to her confidantes.

    She was and continues to be for many, and immense inspiration.

  302. JohnQPublic says:

    Thank you, Kate. No, I do not feel she failed at all. What I think this points out is that someone so close God (as we believe) says prayers don’t work, does not feel God’s presence and that God seems be inactive in her life and others’. Contrast that to Dyer who says he feels “the source’s” presence in everything he does and expounds endlessly that prayers in fact do work. (I guess God likes Dyer better than Mother Teresa.) On another point, it also shows that one really cannot necessarily determine one’s inner happiness by their external behavior (as havAgr8Day posted earlier; sorry to see her go.) Mother Teresa was actually in internal “agony” (her words).
    So, do prayers work? Mother Teresa says no, Dyer says yes. Is God present in our daily lives? Mother Teresa says no, Dyer says yes. Was her outward “glow” reflective of her internal contentment? Turns out it was not.

  303. m.e. says:

    what I think is that Mother Theresa, in the true spirit of Love and Compassion, chose to minister to poor souls in hell on earth and separated from God…that right there IS emptiness and darkness

  304. Kate says:

    You ask great questions John!

    This one in particular intriques me,
    ‘do prayers work’?

    My answer is Yes, and No.
    the paradox

    My life is the working ground of all paradox! 🙂

    I believe as you – Mother Theresa did not fail in her service to the poor.
    She did the very best she could – and really has made an impact.

    Contrast this with the work of Wayne Dyer.

    Is his work of less value?

    Do you feel he is not being honest when he says – what in essence, is the direct opposite of what Mother Theresa reveals in her letters.

    Has Wayne Dyer attained personal happiness within himself and his relationships to his family, his friends, and to his community, and to the larger community which he writes for?

    He has been candid in past work in books and lectures, about his struggles with addiction, and his trouble with his daughter, and his failing in marriages.

    He says he has made contact with ‘the Source’. What does this mean? how does it apply to his life?

    Thanks for a great discussion!

    ~ Kate

  305. JohnQPublic says:

    A great response, Kate. In fact, an outstanding set of questions. (Where have you been hiding?) I completely agree with your comments on her service to the poor. I’ll attempt to address your questions one at a time.

    Question: “Is his work of less value [than Mother Teresa’s]?”

    Response: I don’t really have enough information to answer that. For all my criticisms of Dyer, I do believe there is much value. The degree of value would need some kind of measurement and that is where I’m coming up short. What is the best yardstick for value of this kind? But since she did not go on PBS and sell DVD’s touting her charity and tell others “follow me, I’ve got the anwsers” I have to say she gave value in a more humble manner and more consistent with what I believe is true charity.

    Question: “Do you feel he is not being honest when he says–what in essence, is the direct opposite of what Mother Theresa reveals in her letters?”

    Response: I do think he is honest and lives in a manner consistent with his message. However, I do think he is unintentionally reckless in some ways, and I think the fact that he does not welcome open challenge diminishes his claims. But I do think he is sincere in his message. (On a slightly related strand in this discussion, I do not think Deepak Chopra is sincere. But that is outside this exchange.) Finally, I do not think he does his homework before treading into some deep topics and winds up offending Christians, scientists, Buddhists, etc. in one fell swoop.

    Question: “Has Wayne Dyer attained personal happiness within himself and his relationships to his family, his friends, and to his community, and to the larger community which he writes for?”

    Response: Probably so. Again, it’s a lack of a yardstick that makes the answer difficult. But I also believe that the truly happy do not necessarily devote much time to trumpeting their happiness to the world. I believe that perhaps the happiest of all will never be heard from and will offer little external evidence.

    Question: “He says he has made contact with ‘the Source’. What does this mean? how does it apply to his life?”

    Response: Good question. I do not know. His description of the source actually seems pantheistic and therefore is nothing more than another name for nature.

    My take on the recent revelations from Mother Teresa’s letters and how they apply to Dyer’s claims is this: if her letters revealed that praying did in fact work for her, that she did sense Christ’s presence (I’m extending that to mean the same as God and “the source”) in her undertakings, that Dyers and others would be waving this on stage like a winning lottery ticket. His response is yet to come, but I believe it will be more of the what David Bacon described earlier as the “heads I win, tails you lose” logic. If his ideas are externally supported, we hear about it. If something occurs that contradicts his claims, then he presents that something as either flawed or irrelevant. What I would like to see is that he directly takes on the contradictory evidence. Either by openly questioning his own position in light of the new facts or developments, or strengthening his position by showing precisely the contridiction’s shortcomings. I would like to see a self-correcting course of thought.

    Some questions back to you, if I may:

    Do you think that his often stated criticism of western medicine and practices dangerous for some?

    Why do you think he touts open questioning of authority but says to his followers that they need to banish their doubts when it comes to his claims? Should I then also banish my doubts and listen to the unsupported claims of racists?

    If prayer paradoxically works (i.e., God assists those who ask) but does not (i.e., assistance is not given to those who do not “need” it), how can we say anything about the effectiveness of prayer?

  306. JohnQPublic says:

    I have to also say that I expected one of the counter points to mine regarding Mother Teresa and the effectiveness of prayer might be she was the answer to others’ prayers. That she didn’t see it because she was it. (But I still maintain that prayer really does not create change, that we do through action.)

  307. JohnQPublic says:

    Well, it’s a shame we lost havAgr8Day. But in my experience this is typical of those who claim the loudest about their inner peace and happiness. They actually tend to exhibit the most inner turmoil.
    A few random questions:
    – Do you notice a common pattern to those professing the most love in how they exit the discussion? One was “I’m leaving” then later “I’m really leaving!” then finally “I’m really leaving now!!” Why the need for such dramatic exits? If one doesn’t like it, just go quietly. It seems akin to, “I’m taking my marbles now and going home and you’re gonna really miss me when I’m gone!”
    – About 10 years ago I saw Chopra on Bill Mahr’s show, “Politically Incorrect”. Actor Patrick Duffy was on, too. At one point Chopra blew up, Patrick Duffy patted him on the back and said, “you need to calm down, buddy.” Funny stuff.
    – Why did havAgr8Day felt she needed to love someone who she only knew through writing? (She said she “failed to love” me. That’s ok with me, as I knew nothing about her and for all I know it could have be the love of a triple ax murderer.) It is natural for the strange to be greeted with distrust. (Just ask my dog.) Why isn’t distrust a good starting point? That is, shouldn’t trust be earned and not just given away freely to just anyone?
    – One earlier comment of mine, posed in sarcastic way (for which I apologized), actually had a sincere basis. If all lifeforms possess an immortal soul, and souls from the afterlife occasionally drop by the form of angels (you can substitute “angels” with ghosts and other apparitions), why wouldn’t other creatures do the same? And I mean the really ugly ones like Jerusalem Crickets (potato bugs), tarantulas, and rattlesnakes? And why not single celled creatures like paramecium or amoebas?
    If my questions infuriate others, I’m sorry in advance.

  308. Lana says:

    Wow! I chanced upon Dr. Dyer on PBS. I will start by saying that i have not read everything all of what you have posted..it simply would take a ton of time! But as a mother who has lost her only child, I feel the need to make a comment. The ONLY way for me to survive life is to hold onto my faith in Jesus Christ. Just as my whole world has crumbled to the ground, my only way to survive is through my faith. Yes, there are many times when I feel that my prayers are unanswered…that my God does not hear me. But I know in my heart, that God IS with me…that He IS holding me up…and He IS helping me to survive a mother’s worst nightmare. Maybe I should say nothing as I know nothing…but through my own heartache, I have tried to help others through their heartache. Does positive thinking help us? Well, it certainly cannot hurt! When I go to my dark side, I pray to God to deliver me from my demons; the demons which tell me over and over again that it should have been me who died…not my beautiful child. Before I had my daughter, I had many surgeries to have children. God gave me ONE. He loaned me this special angel so that I might grow in faith and service. But not until I lost her have I really achieved that goal..and I continue to do so.

    I am a scientist as well. And I truly do not find a conflict in my beliefs and in science. Science is a conjecture of what we believe to be true. Does it have to conflict with religion? Could there be different meanings for the same words? Science does its best to prove what it says…but we know that is not always the case. there are things we just have to believe to be true. But if those things are not true, our whole scientific system falls apart. Consider Euclid’s underlying belief that through a point there is EXACTLY one line parallel to any given line. Well, that is NOT true on the planet earth! By definition, parallel lines are lines that never meet. But consider a point on the sphere. There are an infinite number of lines (actually circles) that pass through a given point and never meet and are “paralle” to any given line. Our scientific method is only as good as the assumptions we make in our system.

    So, what is the point here? We are given situations and we are given a choice as to how to react to those situations. We cannot change how we FEEL. I am perpetually sad about the loss of my only child. But how I react to that IS my choice. I can choose to follow those demons that haunt me…those demons that blame me…those demons that tell me all is lost. Or I can choose to look to the light and feel the love of God. Well, you don’t have to be a brain surgeon to figure this one out! However, sometimes it is not so easy to make that choice. Sometimes those demons are so strong and so powerful that to fight them takes every ounce of energy that you have. Then you must give your life to God because it is the ONLY way you will survive. Faith is what might be when faced with things that cannot be. It is looking for things that can be, opening our minds to possibilities.

  309. Trish says:

    Don’t you people have anything else to do?
    Geez, get off your ass and go do something.

  310. Gary says:

    The way to do is to be – Lao tzu.
    The way to be is to do – Descartes
    Do be do be do – Sinatra

  311. alan says:

    Be a good Do-Bee
    — Ms Jean of Romper Room
    Smoke a good doby
    — Cheech and Chong

  312. JohnQPublic says:

    Despite the time I do have on my hands, I have to agree with Trish. To go a step further, what the world really needs is serious people with serious solutions and fewer smiley faces and people roaming around claiming they “love everybody.” For the child-like, put the toys back in the toy box, turn off the cartoons, roll up your sleeves, dig in and truly help the world improve. You want to help the poor? Then go to South America and help build houses for those who can’t afford them. Go to New Orleans and help rebuild (which I have done). That’s how you help. Improvement takes hard work not hugs and kisses.

  313. frog says:

    ToJohnQPublic:
    Opinions are not something you should apologize for. Ever. Many of your comments made me think a little harder, even if I didn’t always agree.
    In fact, there were some I did agree with.
    Most people come to blogs like this looking for answers and looking to pose new questions.
    This page was intended to be blogs about Dyer, and I think we share the same opinion.
    There are many different styles of writers here. Some will argue, “What about the good?”, and some will say, “What about the bad?”
    And I guess some will say,”Get off your ass and do something.”
    That was both funny and insightful, by the way. Your response to that was good. There are serious solutions to serious problems. But I don’t think we need less love and smilies.
    Wait a minute, I know what you mean now—we need less of the CLAIMING to love, etc. Gotcha. See once again, you made me think a little harder.
    I agree. Patience is a hard attribute to master.
    Debate is tricky sometimes in that some people will get very frustrated if they can’t “win” the debate. I look at it like boxing—Two people trying hard to get the knockout, but after the fight they(hopefully) will shake hands and say, “Thanks for the challenge.” Win or lose.
    My opinoins about some things changed, but I never felt like I lost—I just changed. For the better. Thanks to people like you and Gary, Joe G, nez, and havAgr8Day, etc.
    Anyway I have to get off my ass now(thanks Trish). Just wanted to say that as many different opinions we have, don’t be sorry for expressing yourself.
    P.S.
    Gary’s last comment was done well. I like Sinatra.

  314. Gary says:

    Reply to Wu tzu:
    Why would I read somebody’s interpretation of the Tao Te Ching when I can read the many translations of the original? And…
    if one needs interpretation it is quite easy to find dozens of books written by professional scholars of Chinese philosophy. Dyer appears to me to be a ‘johnny-come-lately’ amateur who is just taking advantage of these teachings for his own gain. If not, why wouldn’t he actually take Lao tzu’s advice and be quiet?

  315. JohnQPublic says:

    Awesome! You’re a voice of reason, Gary.

  316. Zer0 says:

    Zer0’s back.
    Well said JQP (we need action , not words).
    I don’t see how you guys can be on the blog during the weekend. I was building a patio/deck over the weekend under the hot S. Calif. sun from 9am to 9pm. Monday morning I couldn’t straighten out. By back and hands are killing me. Finally rolled off the bed and dragged myself to work.
    Unfortunately I don’t have the luxury to read and write as much as I want to. JQP I envy you. Right now I’m writing from work during my lunch break. I have an 18 month old daughter that takes most of my time. But I give that time to her with love.
    I’ll scroll back and see if I can reply to some of the comments. A great week to everyone.

  317. JohnQPublic says:

    No you don’t, Zer0. Trust me, life’s better on the upward side when you’re full of piss and vinegar and everything is coming at you. Enjoy that little girl like there’s no tomorrow. One day you’ll get up and that little girl is a thing of the past. It is unbelievably fast. The empty nest is deceitful.

  318. Zer0 says:

    JQP, in response to your 8/24/07 comments.
    You probably do not see my doubtful side in my writings. But I may be more doubtful than even you, because I doubt today’s science camp also together with the religious. Let me continue and address your comments from 8/25/07 as well.
    Today’s conventional science has become a sort of religion. The textbooks that the future “scientists” are learning with have old and erroneous information. The concepts that we have been taught and are still being fed have been shown to be in error. But the “Vatican” of science still “preaches” the conventional and the status quo. My point for the electrical circuit analogy in comparing you to a resistor was to show that, as the religious were doubtful about the scientific method centuries ago (and still are), todays conventional “scientists” are doubtful about the emerging new science and scientist, which emerges from the doubt about the validity of what we have been preached as scientifically proven truth.
    I guess the difference between you and me is that you doubt religion and put your faith in todays science and it’s methods, while I doubt religion and todays conventional science and have more faith in tomorrow’s science which is born because there are those who continue questioning when others stop and accept the status quo.
    And you are wrong about science being quick to correct itself. There are many concepts that people have gotten Nobel Prizes for and been experimentally proven, contradicting the conventional. These findings have not made it to the textbooks or have become conventional. The main body of science is 50 to 100 years behind in certain areas. It’s like in medicine, the latest research findings are at least five years ahead (more like 10) from getting to the doctor who is going to treat you. The patient needs that info today not 5 years from now. There is nothing fast in bureaucracy.
    I’m not even going to reply to your “If you sincerely want to be a conduit of progressive information for humanity (which is such a grandiose claim that I feel silly even typing it), then demanding proof of ideas is how you get there.”.
    You obviously missed the point. The book does not have to prove the validity of what’s written in it. It’s just a conductor of the information. The writer has the obligation to put on those pages correct information and the reader has the obligation to check the facts for himself. I guess I did reply to your statement.
    Well I have to get back to work. My back still killing me.

    WARNING:
    All statements made by Zer0 are for information only. Zer0 does not claim to have “true” information. Zer0 only knows what information he has been exposed to and remembers only the information that was filtered by his mind and accepted as something useful to keep and pass along.
    He who gets exposed to information from Zer0 must do their own research to determine if the information is beneficial and worth keeping.

    A little serious humor 🙂

  319. Zer0 says:

    Thanks for the wise advice JQP.
    She Is my tomorrow. I want her to grow up and be smarter, wiser, stronger, faster, etc….. than me.
    I want her to discover and see the things that I will not be able to. But most important I want her to be an independent and free thinker, having no fear to challenge the conventional and status quo if she finds a reason to doubt.
    I love that little girl….

  320. Wu tzu says:

    I recently read that the first person to live for 500 years (thanks to Science) is alive today.
    I recently read that the first person who will step foot on Mars is alive today.

    That could be your daughter, Zer0.

    But also (just to keep our interchange controversial) I have to admit that, though I have great faith in Science, I will never give up on God. Too many miracles to account for with logic…or Science.

    Don’t forget to mention that to your daughter.

  321. månesteiner says:

    “I recently read that the first person to live for 500 years (thanks to Science) is alive today.”

    500 years you say, Huh… and I thought the “Weekly World News” had shut down.

  322. Wu tzu says:

    Correction (grammatical): who ‘would’ live for 500 years. (Re.: CNN).

  323. månesteiner says:

    Grammatical correction granted. But still, the amended claim that:

    The first person *who would* live for 500 years (thanks to Science) is alive today.

    Not bloody likely.

    Quoting from CNN:

    http://www.cnn.com/2003/HEALTH/07/19/aging/index.html?iref=newssearch

    “There is a dramatic and intensive push so that people can live from 120 to 180 years,” he said. Some have suggested that there is no limit and that people could live to 200 or 300 or 500 years.”

    “Outside the conference, many scientists who specialize in aging are skeptical of such claims and say the human body is just not designed to last past about 120 years. Even with healthier lifestyles and less disease, they say failure of the brain and other organs will eventually condemn all humans.”

    “These people spout off as though a large part of the population is going to be able to do something like this. It’s just way beyond reality,” said Thomas Perls, who leads the New England Centenarian Study, the largest such analysis of the oldest of the old. “It’s just pure science fiction.”

    “We are fast approaching what our bodies are capable of achieving,” he said in a telephone interview. “To get even the average person to be 100 or to get them to 180 is like trying to get a space shuttle to Pluto.”

    “It’s certainly unlikely any time in the near future,” he said in an interview. “Sure there is a possibility but there is no data currently available to suggest ways that would happen.”

  324. hana says:

    HavAgr8Day, many thanks for the inspirational suggestions (esp. the one about not writing for an audiance). even more thanks for the warmth between the lines. Hope you`ll be back soon.

  325. hana says:

    Dear HavAgr8Day (2):
    me and (the other) frog also loved the reference to missing knowing it in vivo. Quaaa . (or what is the English word for “Ciao ” frog-style).
    hana

  326. JohnQPublic says:

    Alas, seems this forum has been partially co-opted by what appears to be teenage girls wanting to console one another. The topic of this group was an out-and-out criticism of Wayne Dyer. It would be nice if it were an actual academic debate from serious minds. But I guess that is not the case. I do not believe what this has become is what David Bacon intended.

  327. Zer0 says:

    Wu tzu, thanks. I don’t know in what she would be the first but more importantly I would want her to be healthy and happy no matter how long she lives. For me healthy body and healthy mind come first. Everything else is secondary.
    Regarding God: Are you saying that that if the miracles could be repeated by men then you would lose faith in God? I hope this is not the case because the science that I am referring to and the technology based on that will perform even bigger “miracles” than what you are talking about. If the concept of God fills a need for you then it doesn’t matter if there were miracles performed or not. I think many people take the expression “Gods children” literally and think like children about God.

  328. Zer0 says:

    I agree with JQP about the forum but admit that I have veered off the subject myself. My apologies. Tell you the truth I am not really interested in criticizing Dyer. There are bigger issues that I would prefer to spend my time on. If anyone knows of a blog or forum that fits better the subjects that I am discussing please point me in that direction.

  329. hana says:

    ZerO: The Intent Blog (Deepak Chopra), but this one is more fun.

  330. JohnQPublic says:

    Regarding, Zer0’s comment: according to George Lakeoff in “Moral Politics,” world views of government and even religion are extensions of views on parenting. While his book is mostly on government, he touches on religion, too, just a bit. For example, those who believe in a nurturing supportive parenting style (they don’t spank, they don’t use reward and punishment as a primary system of rearing, et cetera), tend to believe in a nurturing God and not the traditional Christian God. Conversely, those who believe in corporal punishment with their children, use reward and punishment style of rearing, then to believe in a God who issues reward and punishment: heaven and hell, for example. He says that our world views are very much shaped by our views on parenting.

  331. Gary says:

    Does that make those without kids atheists?
    🙂

  332. JohnQPublic says:

    Ha! LOL! Had not considered that. I should have qualified my post with a “those who believe in a god” clause. I doubt that a lack of belief has any relationship to parenting views because we don’t think of the universe as having a parent in the human sense.

  333. Kate says:

    Hello again John,
    (from your comment dated 8/26)
    I agree about your observation – it seems sometimes Wayne Dyer picks up on pseudo-science. I remember reading about Sanctuary, in Wayne’s book ‘There is a Spiritual Solution to Every Problem’ – which alleges healing by praying over pictures. WD himself suffered a heart attack as he was finishing writing the book.

    There are elements in his life (imo) which contradict his teaching/preaching.

    I find Mother Theresa so remarkable – in these newly discovered letters – to be able to write about her fears, doubts and not ‘make pretty’ the dark feelings, and her awareness that Life can be very difficult.

    Thanks again for your great questions and this discussion.

    ~ Kate

  334. JohnQPublic says:

    Thanks, Kate. Your mention of Dyer’s heart attack. That seems to only lend more support about how biology really dominates so much of us regardless of our thoughts. Here you have someone who has led a very, very positive life for a long time (he has written so for over thirty years), has longed practices mind over biology (going back to the eighties), told us you can get younger by thinking so (that claim precedes his “There’s a Spiritual Solution to Every Problem” book, so was practicing that before his heart attack), then suffers the attack. My father who never practiced anything Dyer preached, ate horribly his whole life (donuts, Dr. Pepper, ice cream everyday) , never exercised (he was a writer), smoked for many years, was not really a positive person, and basically never did a thing Dyer said. And yet my father never suffered a heart attack or any other serious ailments. (He certainly did not think “young.”) In fact, he lived will into his eighties and almost reached ninety. (I had a grandfather who lived well into his nineties, smoked his whole life, and claimed he lived so long because he had eggs every morning of his life. Understand that I don’t believe it was the eggs, as I think it was in the genes.) Yet, Dyer has told us many, many times how to avoid diseases through positive thinking, that ulcers (which we now know is caused by the H. pylori bacteria, not mental stress) are caused by thought, as well as heart attacks, et cetera, and yet there it is. He just cannot substantiate his claims and his own life even contradicts them. How one thinks I believe has some influence over one’s biology, but I think he overstates it dramatically. I think action far outweighs thought when it comes to improvement of any kind. Yes, thought precedes action, but it is the action that makes the real difference.

  335. JohnQPublic says:

    By the way, WH, I thought that that video you posted by the girl was great. She’s one smart kid. There is hope.

  336. Zer0 says:

    Well said JQP (your comment to Kate).
    The so called “healthy lifestyle” preached by the so called “medical community” has led to nutritional deficiency which is the main cause of the majority of ailments. Heart attack is not caused by cholesterol, it is a nutritional deficiency problem. In fact the older we get the more cholesterol we need to stay healthy. Of course the “medical community” will keep leading the public to believe that cholesterol is to blame so they can push their cholesterol drugs. Conventional medicine and doctors have become drug dealers, they have a prescription for any ailment. If one drug doesn’t work they have a dozen more that they can try on you. It’s OK that thousands of people die each year from the drugs prescribed by the well meaning doctor. Of course there are exceptions, but when it comes to medicine it’s “buyer beware”. Conventional medicine is great for patching injuries but when it comes to prevention and finding the underlying cause of the disease and treating it, they cause more harm than do good in the long run. No drug can do for you what good nutrition can. And I am not talking about the food pyramid that they have come up with to represent good nutrition. Only if you new who and how they came up with that pyramid.
    John, those eggs that your grandfather ate every day were just as important as his genes. Eggs have a lot of nutrition and cholesterol. Only our body can heal itself. Nothing that any doctor can do or prescribe will heal our body. Positive thinking and attitude will help a little, but to help our body do what it is designed to do we need to provide it clean organic unprocessed nutrition. It will repair itself even if you smoke, have cancer, or any other ailment. Of course there will be exceptions. If the body’s self healing mechanism is genetically damaged or gets damaged later by an accident or by the “well meaning” medical system with it’s drugs, then no amount of positive thinking or good nutrition can overcome that. But I am sure that the new science that’s coming can repair the damage to the healing system of the body.
    If you want to know how long you can live following your doctor’s advice on cholesterol and nutrition then find out how long doctors live. You will find that the “experts” on heart disease die from heart disease themselves, etc. etc.
    Go ahead and trust the “experts” with your health, if something goes wrong see if they will take responsibility for it. Only you have the responsibility for your health. Your doctor will go on with his practice even after your death caused by his well meaning advice and drugs.
    I am not advocating the vitamin pushers at all. That has become another drug dealing clan pushing another type of chemicals. Our body does not recognize these chemicals as nutrition. It does nothing at best and passes through or does damage at worst.
    If you want the real “high” than you will find it only in natural clean unprocessed food.
    Have you ate anything like that today?

  337. JohnQPublic says:

    Sorry, Zer0, can’t agree with that. There is a very clear correlation between high LDL levels and heart attacks. There’s really no disputing that as there’s a wealth of information to support it including those who lower LDL levels avoid heart attacks. I was not making a case that diet didn’t influence health that the “healing positive energy” business didn’t do him any good.
    But I do agree that genetic composition plays a huge role in lifespan. But there’s no getting around the historical fact that as nutrition has improved, so has lifespan.

  338. Zer0 says:

    JQP, I’m really sorry about your confidence in the “wealth of information” that supports the link between LDL and heart attacks. Just like many well meaning doctors you too get your “truth” from the 10 o’clock news or the magazine article titles. I would have expected you to have at least some doubt. Have you yourself read a research study, or researched to see who did the research and who was it funded by?
    I am a Senior Development Engineer at a Research and Development company and know first hand how things work. Any study can be run in any way to show any desirable outcome. Then those findings can be worded in a way to lead you to believe what they want you to believe. They can do “magic” with numbers and percentages. Then a reporter will get a hold of the research findings and without understanding what they are reading will publish a small fraction of the research or just a paragraph declaring that the research has validated something. And this is how the “wealth of information” is piled.
    One of the most valuable classes I took in collage was Critical Thinking. What I got from that class was more important than all the formulas and theorems that I have long forgotten. If you can’t read in between the lines then you are doing a disservice to yourself and just feeding the propaganda machine.

  339. David says:

    Dave,

    You are driving yourself crazy by searching for answers in a boundless Universe you cannot study in its entirety in one lifetime. The progresses made by science are astounding, as are the progresses made by spiritual enlightenment. I cant say that Dyer has done any wrong, but merely tried to promote manifest destiny and self control. I too am against dogma, and believe it can only lead to, well, war. Quantum Physics is a detail oriented science but you must indulge in the fact that every theory in Quantum Physics is man made, therefore subject to a margin of error. We watch gravity act as a force but cannot see it, just as people believe in miracles they cannot see. You only see the result instead of the action. I think “energy” is used in a more verbal sense than scientific. But i applaud the civil debate on this board, and believe we can all learn from each other, and come to an understanding that we all share the same elements, energy, and breath needed to sustain life. peace.

  340. JohnQPublic says:

    What progress has “spiritual enlightenment” made? Let’s look at 3 examples: it didn’t work for Dyer because he wound up with a heart attack right in the middle of the statistical age group–just like anyone else. And Chopra wound up suing an employee for $36 million dollars. (I’m sure it was a spiritual suit, and not about the money.) And Ram Dass, for all the years in the “healing positive energy,” is now in a wheelchair from a stroke at a way too young an age. Again, just like anyone else.

  341. JohnQPublic says:

    The “spiritually enlightened” tend to frequently suggest: “understand before you criticize.” Well, I suggest they do the same. Get a full education in quantum mechanics and physics before you criticize. Why is gravity a substantiation of the “miracles” people claim to see? One big difference is everyone experiences gravity whether they believe in it or not. (Completely suspend your belief in gravity and jump off a building and you’ll see what I mean.) But “miracles” seem to only emanate from a certain few individuals. Then the charge that others can’t see them because they do not “believe.” Nonsense. Because you can’t see gravity or wind or other features not visible to the eye, does not mean you cannot see its effects. And, moreover, it is not contingent on belief.

  342. JohnQPublic says:

    Our world will drastically improve once the remaining vestiges of religion and superstition are squashed. You want to end wars and fighting? Then quit pushing the idea that you understand the will of an invisible man and unsubstantiated unprovable ideas. As long as there are people believing in that throwing salt over your shoulder improves your circumstances, then we will get nowhere.

  343. JohnQPublic says:

    Before I get the argument back about Dyer’s non-violent ways, let me summarize precisely what I’m saying: Spirituality (all of it) is not the solution to our problems, it is the cause. Dyer is no better than any Christian missionary.

  344. Gary says:

    PASCHAL’S WAGER:
    EITHER God exists or he doesn’t.
    Which alternative will you wager on?
    You can’t avoid choosing one or the other;
    you have embarked on the wager already.
    A refusal to choose carries the same result
    as choosing that God does not exist.
    What if you choose to bet that God exists?
    If you win, you win everything;
    if you lose, you lose nothing.
    Make a bet that God exists.”

  345. JohnQPublic says:

    Well, if I choose that God exists, then I have taken a position in the historically endless violent struggle of interpreting the will of that God. Now I have to have an interpretation of that God because it is not enough to simply say he exists. I will also have to have a significance to me and that God otherwise this is no point in conjuring him up in the first place. Not to mention wasting my life believing in miracles that never happen, or men with tricky magical ribs, or that I will be healing through the “power of positive thinking.”

    So, with all due respect to Pascal, I do lose something: a place outside the great struggle and time.

  346. Dave Bacon says:

    Dave Bacon’s Pascal Wager:

    1. Either God exists or God does not exist.
    2a. If you believe in God, then you go to hell.
    2b. If you do not believe in God, you go to heaven.
    So you should….?

    For completeness…

    Pascal’s triangle
    1
    11
    121
    1331
    14641
    15101051

    A Pascal program

    program HelloWorld(output);
    begin
    writeln(‘Hello, World!’)
    end.

  347. Robert Cohee says:

    We all have a view…I feel that if you look at all civilizations each of them had / have a set of “Golden rules”.. We can argue all our lives about which belief system is the right one…If they are based on love and not fear..They are true…
    Can you ever be wrong if your actions are based in love…?
    I wish all of us could stop looking for what is wrong with the other…
    Robert Cohee

  348. Zer0 says:

    OK I’ll get in on the wager too, although I think it is a childish wager. How old was this guy Paschal when he came up with this wager? It shows what a limited mind he had and how brain washed he was.
    “If you win, you win everything”? What is he talking about? I don’t know of any God believing (more like fearing) person who has “won” or has anything more than a non believer has. Now if there is God then all of the believers who have wagered that God exists (otherwise they would not be believers) would have “everything” material and spiritual. The wager itself implies that the God who’s existence we have to wager on is a rewarding/punishing God. Since the believers have not been rewarded or the nonbelievers punished, then this God does not exist. If anyone thinks that this is not so they should show some examples of how a belier was better off than a nonbeliever ONLY because they believed in God’s existence and nothing else and vise versa.
    Would anyone argue that all the other nonhuman inhabitants of this planet who don’t have a concept of God, or can’t choose on either side of this wager and therefore choose that God does not exist by default, have anything less than the so called “true believers”?
    I think man came up with the concept of God because there was a need for it to deal with the unknown. It fills a different need for different people. It has become an instrument and an excuse for some, and a psychological crutch for others.
    Unless mankind evolves to a point that the need for it disappears, there will always be the concept of God and the believers of the concept.
    Personally I don’t have a problem with anyone believing in whatever they want to believe as long as they don’t try to make me a part of it.
    If they try to force God on me I may turn into the Devil and take them to Hell with me 🙂

  349. JohnQPublic says:

    Well, yes you can be wrong if your actions are based on love. That is my point about the independence of intention and action. If your intention is good but the resulting action is wrong, which trumps? You can believe you’re helping someone but that help could very well be unintentionally hurting. You have to objectively look at the action and divorce it from emotion. Make sure what you do really helps, not what you think helps. I rather give a poor person a house to live in and be completely indifferent to them emotionally than love them and give them nothing kind words. And, no, loving and giving shelter does not make the action any better or worse. It’s about the action, not the intention.

  350. JohnQPublic says:

    By the way, Dr. House is my hero.

  351. Jodee says:

    My husband and his brother LOVE Wayne Dyer’s stuff, but as I had never heard of him before last year, I decided to read some of his stuff and look him up on the net to see what’s out there on him as a person and about his teachings. This is a pretty interesting site in that regard.
    I used to be a Christian – for nearly 50 years. And not just your average name-only Christian. I walked the talk. I was the queen of involved in every church activity and study I could do. But more importantly, I was and still am a truth-seeker, and unlike most people I’ve known, and apparently many on this blog site, I am willing to pursue it regardless of the cost. Therefore, it has “cost” me my religion, a lot of “friends”, and some of my family, but gained me great freedom. Freedom from the slavery of dogma and the accompanying guilt. (Sorry, folks, that forgiveness thing doesn’t really cut it. There’s still guilt when you have to live with the consequences of your stupid actions and decisions.) And by the way, if Jesus died for ALL my sins, how come I still have to pay my traffic tickets. You know, the judge just didn’t buy the argument that I didn’t have to pay, since Jesus had died and paid the price for all my sins. Hmmm. Seems we’re still under a sacrificial system, eh?
    To be fair to you all, I’m out here in the sticks and only have dial-up, so this sort of thing takes a lot of my precious time. (We farm – summer is really busy, but right now it’s too hot to work outside, so, here I am frittering away some of that time on this blog.) I say this only by way of explanation as to why I haven’t read every single entry on this site – only about the first 20, and then skimmed after that. I’m noticing, however, this great debate over various religious/philosophical views and I’m very amused, because almost all of you, regardless of whether you’re Christian or not, actually assume that Jesus really existed, despite the fact that no contemporary historian of his supposed time has recorded the existance of a miracle-working god/man. Sorry folks, you can’t claim the ones referring to “Christ” or “Chrestos”. Those are sungod dieties. And you can’t go to Josephus, either. Number one: he’s NOT a contemporary, so his accounts are hearsay evidence. Number two: the earliest documents of his work contain NO entries about Jesus by any name, making the later copies clearly a forgery. (Enter the Roman Catholic Church and/or it’s predecessors.) And, where did the name, Jesus, come from since the letter “j” didn’t even exist until the 15th century? Iesus, as in “Son of Zeus”?
    If any of you Christians out there are wondering how I could abandon a previously very strong faith in all this, what I’ve just sited should give you a clue. I still love truth above all else. What I discovered when I started investigating church/Christian history was mostly lies. If I was to remain true to myself – who I am as a person – then I could camp there no longer. It’s really pretty simple.
    Now, this latest bet about God has a couple of major flaws, (other than the name, “God” which has been used for nearly EVERY supreme sungod deity, in one linguistic form or another.) It assumes that there really is a heaven and a hell. Study your myths, people. Heaven and Hell, in the modern understandings, are inventions of the Roman Catholic Church. They existed in the minds of the ancients in slightly different forms, but were still part of their myths. Doesn’t it seem a little odd to you that the ancient Egyptians’ god, Horus, also called the “Son of God” “sun of Righteousness” “Lamb of God” “The Light”, etc. is exactly like Jesus? From the angelic announcement, impregnation by the “Holy Spirit”, virgin birth, adoration of magi, to the miracles, the mode of death, the 3-day burial time and resurrection – except for the time period, it’s identical. And that religion predates Christianity by 1,000’s of years. (BTW, most of you Christians out there have a serious math problem. Friday evening to Sunday Morning is NOT three days and three nights, not matter how you cut it. See: Jonah 1:17 and Matthew 12:39 & 40)
    In fact, the entire New Testament is of questionable origin and authority, since the Gospels of Matthew, Luke, and John are clearly re-makes of Mark. And who the heck is Mark? That’s not even a Hebrew name. And the disciples? Who are James and John? (Remember, no “j’s” until the 15th century.) No one really knows who Mark actually is. And Paul was a Gnostic, so there goes the rest of the NT. All but one of the books of the NT clearly states that they are letters. Just letters, people. One guy writing to someone else. Additionally, the Old Testament authors are questionable. The story of Moses exists in time periods long before his supposed existance.
    So, since I prefer NOT to believe in myths and esoteric stuff that can’t be proven or quantified, because it’s basically man’s vain imagination, all I’m left with is science. But now I have another problem, because too many scientists are religious, and I’m not talking about the creationists. You evolutionists out there are just as religious as the Christians you ridicule. You base your ridiculous theory (and it is still JUST A THEORY!) on flimsy evidence and the emotional need to deny a higher being. What’s more, you also state your dogma as though it were fact. Disproving one thing (eg. the Bible) doesn’t automatically prove your crap, either. So, I don’t see you guys as any better than the Pope and his minions. You haven’t proven a thing except that you’re just as enamored with religion and religious debates as those who engage you. I think you’re both wrong.
    What I do see, scientifically, is that there is incredible order. The mathematical odds of that ocurring out of disorder are staggering. Also, from my limited understanding of physics, the evolutionary theory flies in the face of well established laws, ie., order does not evolve from chaos, but rather evolves TOWARD chaos. Yet, order seems to prevail, despite the chaotic actions of humans, so I can’t go with atheism. It looks to me like there is ample scientific evidence for intelligent design (just look at DNA, for Pete’s sake,) and evidence that that designer is a continuing stabilizing force.
    There’s also science to back up many of what are referred to as the Mosaic laws (despite the fact that Hammurabi and Ur had them far earlier than “Moses”.) There are definite consequences for breaking some of them, that are natural and detrimental. ie. Sex with animals results in disease and death. And as nature seems to make every effort to continue life, it seems to me that death and disease are counter to our true nature, or at least that death BY disease is counter to our true nature. Otherwise, why do we have this compulsion to overcome it regardless of our religious or philosophical bent? These consequences are naturally avoidable by simply abstaining from the prohibited behavior. Animals don’t naturally cross breed, and mutations don’t reproduce. Cross bred animals, even close in species (ie, donkey with horse) are sterile and can’t reproduce. So, there seems to me a natural boundary there, that even animals understand. Also, if I step off a building, I will fall to my probable death. So I do see natural boundaries to our behaviors. Now, if one believes that death is the natural state rather than life, then, of course they would have no boudaries, but as humans, we can’t deny a certain level of conscience. We somehow intinctively know that some things are wrong and we instinctively are resistant to death. We need myths and philosophies to enable us to be comfortable with it. Of all the “aminals” on earth, humans are the only ones with these esoteric traits of abstract thought. I can’t see that as a product of evolution.
    I can even see logic in some of the social (Levitical) laws. I have to ask myself, “Are we as a society, better off for tolerating adultery, murder, theft, etc.?” I don’t think so. Plus, generally speaking, our conscienses tell us these are wrong behaviors. We don’t need some church telling us that shooting up a hundred or so kids in a school is wrong. I also notice there is no prison system in the Levitical laws or even Hammurabi’s code. There is restitution for loss, fines as punishment, and death. The closest to prison are the cities of refuge for those who accidentally kill someone. So, it’s a form of house arrest if the offending party wants to remain alive, although that is still their choice. The one guilty of what we would call manslaughter, is not bond to go there. He/she could just as easily take their chances where they are, that the family of the one who they accidentallly killed won’t in turn kill them.
    I have to agree with something I heard the other day: “I don’t know who God is, but I sure know who He isn’t.” So, I wouldn’t take any bet on God per se, although I am convinced of a higher intelligence of an electrical nature, because everything bears his/it’s thumbprint of electricity, so to speak.
    You can’t go to any one source for truth, because everybody has some of it – some more than others. There can be no lie unless there is truth, because lies are perversions of truth. The problem is that both Eastern and Western thought is so saturated with mythology, it’s darn near impossible to sort out where the truth is.
    So, back on topic. Does Dyer have some truth? Yes. But who the hell knows what part of what he’s teaching really is truth? If the energy he’s talking about is really electricity (because everything has an electrical quality/thumb print, both so-called matter and thought,) then there is some shread of truth to what he’s saying. On the other hand, electricity can be interferred with, as all of us have experienced. So, maybe you can only aim your “energy” in some direction, but that’s no guarantee that you’ll reach the destination or that you’ll get there without a “power outage” somewhere along the line. You might even end up somewhere you never dreamed of. The fact is, anyone with a strong desire for something will tend to seek out the things/people/avenues that will get them what they want. There’s no great mystery to that. And if that is what Dyer is really saying, then why are some of you people spending money on his books and speeches? GEEZ! Think for yourself for a change!
    My husband and his brother swear by “The Power of Intention”, bless their silly little hearts, but there’s a lot in there that is conveniently unquantifiable. Also, you can’t underestimate the power of perception. If someone tells me that I will be happier and more content if I think a certain way, and if that is really my ultimate goal in life, then I will find a way to eventually perceive that I have indeed arrived at my happy and content place. And who can prove me wrong? I BELIEVE I am happy and content! See? Unquantifiable. The fact that many people have been “helped” by Dyer and by any number of religions around the world only means that they have found the perception (dillusion?) that they are comfortable with. It also means that there are an aweful lot of people out there who want someone else to tell them how to think. Not that there aren’t useful guides, but common, people, nobody has all the answers and few people even have most of them. You just have to figure it out on your own. Quit being so damn lazy! I can say this, because, as a former Christian, that’s where I was, too – happy and content, for the most part, living in my myth of choice, convinced I had at least most of the truth. Then my boat got rocked by irrefutable facts and the myth just wasn’t good enough anymore.
    Dave, this has been a very long-winded way of saying that I think I probably agree with you more than I agree with your critics, but there’s still truth out there to be discovered. Maybe we’ll be fortunate enough to find it.

  352. Zer0 says:

    Robert,
    I think “right” and “wrong” are very subjective concepts.
    What may be right for you may be wrong for me.
    And, yes you can be wrong (have undesirable results) even if your actions are based in love.
    I don’t feel that we are “looking for what is wrong with the other…”. At least I don’t approach this forum that way. Rather, we express our viewpoints and point each other in directions that we have not explored yet, so we can learn from each other and grow wiser together. Of course the quality of education that we get depends on us, the participants. I think I speak for everyone when I say that we welcome anyone who has something to say that can benefit anyone or everyone. The only prerequisite is that they put some thought behind their input and keep an open mind.

  353. Jodee says:

    JohnQ – Are you a truth-seeker at all? How can Dr. House be your hero? He’s the fictional propoganda machine for one of the biggest lies of all time, and all that in the name of science. It’s known as allopathic medicine – based on Voo Doo and the desire to profit from other people’s miseries.

  354. Jodee says:

    ZeroO
    So, if someone brutally kills your little daughter (if you have/had one,) but believes it’s the right thing to do, you’d be okay with that? Isn’t leaving all right and wrong concepts up the individual a formula for chaos and anarchy?

  355. Zer0 says:

    Jodee,
    WOW, where were you all this time?
    You brought an electric storm with you. I was losing hope already. Happy to see that there are still free thinkers out there. I am especially impressed with your transformation from hard core religion to a free and independent thinker.
    Completely agree with you on all your points. Thank you for your great input.
    I would suggest that you research the info on this site with an open mind (which you already have):
    http://www.cheniere.org/
    It will tie some of the loose ends.
    Don’t stop writing.

  356. Zer0 says:

    Jodee,
    I have a 18 month old daughter now. If someone hurt my daughter believing that it was the right thing to do, would live long enough to find out what Hell is like on earth. I’m not religious and I don’t believe in Heaven and Hell but I have a very powerful imagination. Even if he doesn’t believe in Hell I’ll make a believer out of him. When it comes to my loved ones, I am the judge, the jury, and the executioner.
    But I don’t see the point of your argument (other than waking the beast within me).
    For him it was the right thing to do, for me, it was the wrong thing that he did. It just proves my point that right and wrong are subjective.
    What I do to him would be wrong from his perspective but right from mine.
    Maybe it’s a formula for chaos and anarchy, but we are not discussing what we as a society agree as to what we want to consider right and wrong and putting it on paper as laws and abiding by them.
    We are just talking about the concepts of right and wrong as they relate to us individually.

  357. Jodee says:

    ZeroO

    You actually brought out more of the point I was making. There is no true individuality in the larger sense. What we do as individuals, what we believe, the decisions we make based on what we believe often become public and often a public problem very quickly. That is, they effect some other individual(s) and perhaps in ways that weren’t considered or intended.
    My former husband felt it was right for him to sleep around. He brought home a nice little “present” for me which I was plagued with for nearly 10 years. Knowing the nature of this little “present”, I’m sure I’m not the only one who was adversely effected by his “private” acts.
    I don’t think the lines of right and wrong are all that subjective or blurred when it comes to doing harm to someone else or to what is theirs. Outside of that scope, I would agree with you, that individual non-consequential (to others) choices of what’s right and wrong are subjective. Is it wrong for me to go to a movie? Of course not – unless that means I’m leaving my 6 mo. old infant (hypothetically speaking) at home alone or in the care of someone I know to be a child molester.
    I see a huge difference between bountries and free choices. When natural boundaries are crossed, and I believe murder is one of those natural boudaries, for the reasons I sited in my original posting, there are unpleasent consequences. The very fact that this scenario awoke the “beast in you,” more or less proves my point. You instinctively are protective of your own offspring, as well you should be. The fact that some people aren’t doesn’t make them right. I’m sure that for the same reasons you got your hackles up over the prospect of your own daughter being victimized, you probably get equally disturbed when it actually happens to other children. I don’t get the impression you’d be sitting there listening to the news and thinking to yourself, “Well, that guy must have a good reason to do that to that little kid.” (Assuming a “good reason” would make it right for him.)
    Frankly, your excercise of your own righteous anger (and I do believe it would be righteous) would be right for a whole lot more people than just you. It would be right for all the other little kids he didn’t get a chance to do the same thing to.
    What I see is that we humans, by and large, inherently have a sense of good and evil and when push comes to shove, those lines aren’t all that fuzzy. At the same time, we also seem, overall, to have a sense that evil should be eliminated and good should prosper.
    As far as the acts of love always or even often being the right thing, I have found that most of the time, people (not you,) who make that argument are really justifying selfishness or some self-serving attitude – the meddling mother-in-law. She meddles because she “cares”. (And I’m sure she thinks that the right thing to do, too.) No. She meddles because she’s a selfish control freak. I’m not talking suggestions or solicited advise, I’m talking real meddling manipulation. And in my book, stuff like that is not love. But, that’s just me.

  358. JohnQPublic says:

    A lot of good points here, Jodee. I’ll respond when I get a chance. Good input, I agree.

  359. JohnQPublic says:

    Jodee, regarding your question about House, the character is simply an example of the separation of intention and action. That’s all. It demonstrates that social good can come from self-interest. It had nothing to with the practice of medicine. It was to punctuate the previous post.
    We have some common ground, but we do diverge on allopathic medicine. Simply put, it’s got the best track record of any other “voo-doo” remedies you can present. What has proven more effective? Homeopathy? The medicine that has no medicine?

  360. JohnQPublic says:

    One other point, Jodee, where is evolution substantiated by the flaws in Christian theology? That is to say, I know of no one who claims evolution is true because Christianity is wrong. I have my own doubts about evolution–that in no way steers me towards the spiritual or supernatural–but it is, after all, based on discovery and evidence and not mythology. There are holes, to be sure, but it seems that Christian mostly takes the opportunity to proclaim their position in the face of the holes in evolutionary theory not the other way around.

  361. JohnQPublic says:

    Also, you’ll have to explain “electricity thumb print” to me. I have no idea what you mean by that.

  362. Zer0 says:

    JQP,
    I think Jodee means that electricity is at the root of all other fields and forces in nature, including matter, gravity, energy, life, and thought.
    But let’s get her explanation, the above is just my interpretation.

  363. JohnQPublic says:

    Electricity is the root of gravity? The electro-gravity thing, I suppose. Oh, man. Years ago there was an author claiming that gravity was the effect of continuously expanding matter. He claimed that the universe is growing (not to be confused with an expanding universe) and that it is not the ball falling downwards but the ground swelling upwards that causes it to meet the ground. (I believe this was pretty well discredited.)
    You live long enough and you eventually hear everything. Thank God science eventually weeds out every crackpot theory.

  364. JohnQPublic says:

    Dr. Bacon, I’m glad to see your search for a stable qubit is also going to create world peace.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TsvEkPNitdQ&mode=related&search=

    I guess the residual effects of the psychedelic sixties lives on.

  365. Jodee says:

    John Q Public
    Actually that is the perfect handle for you, because I fear that you represent the average unthinking close-minded American today. Sorry. I tried my best to be polite, but people like me suffer from the attitudes of people like you, because you seem to be the people who get autocrats and fascists elected to public office and then the rest of us suffer for it. (See, ZerO? No individuals. All parts of a whole and all the parts are connected.)
    But for the sake of some of the others out there who might actually be buying what you’re saying, I’ll have a go at your comments.
    First of all, lets take the one about Dr. House. There is literally NO truth in ANY of what you said. Heretofore, I thought it was impossible for someone to be totally wrong, but I guess I was mistaken. Of course, that’s just my opinion based on facts and here they are:
    In 2000, if memory serves, Dr. Starfield did an extensive study on the leading causes of death in the US. Guess who came up #1 (or three, depending on who is spinning the results)? That would be the somewhat less than the illustrious altruistic institution known as allopathic medicine. 225,400 people, on the average, die every year as a result of doctor/medical error, unnecessary surgery, uninformed practices/procedures, iatrogenic infections (doctor and hospital caused), and drug interactions. That’s just over 75 occurrances the size of Twin Towers 911 in ’01. Want the whole story, look it up, people. It’s on the web.
    JQP, your incredible ignorance is showing. When I said allopathic medicine is reworked VooDoo, I wasn’t just being euphamistic. It really is just reworked VooDoo. VooDoo is based on the notion that if one is sick, it is the result of an evil spirit. To rid oneself of the evil spirit, one must ingest or in some other way absorb poison in order to kill that evil spirit and regain health. I’d actually wager that Voo Doo has probably killed fewer people than the allopathy that is based on it. Don’t see the connection? Here goes: Allopathy assumes that if one is sick it is the result of a “germ” (evil spirit substitute). The germ theory is again, just that – an unproven THEORY!!! Never mind that the same supposed pathogens can be present in the same person at a different time and NOT make them sick, or that it can be present in another person who NEVER gets sick because of it. Nonetheless, the priests of allopathy (doctors) prescribe their poison (drugs) to kill the evil spirit (“germ”) or to mask it’s symptoms until your body, despite the fact that it has just been poisoned, manages to heal itself. Have you seen the size of the PDR? Get a clue! ALL DRUGS HAVE SIDE EFFECTS. Why? Because all drugs, whether over the counter, prescribed, or illegal, trap plasma proteins. Where ever those proteins become trapped, you have a side effect. That’s why there can be such a range of side effects. Now, connect the dots, here. Death, disease, and pain CANNOT be present, CANNOT HAPPEN UNLESS there are trapped plasma proteins. Of course, drugs are not the only substances that cause plasma proteins to become trapped, but ALL drugs do. And by the way, your body doesn’t know the difference between legal and illegal drugs. Ponder that the next time you see a drug ad apprearing in the same program hour with a public service ad telling you in some form, to “Say NO to drugs.”
    Now comes the really interesting part – the part you, the average JQP does’t get. Everything has an electric property, signature, frequency. So, those drugs you take do, too. Unfortunately, their frequency disturbs the natural frequencies in your body which is what causes those proteins to become trapped and which in turn POISONS YOU!!!! Drug companies and doctors actually know this stuff, but they don’t tell you, because as long as they can only treat you and not actually restore your health to you, they can make a killing! How do you not see the problem here?
    Homeopathy works (I know, because I’ve used it for over 20 years) precisely because it DOESN”T have any actual “medicine” in it. It only carries the electrical frequency of the herb from which it was originally taken. So, your body recognizes the frequency and responds accordingly, producing healing, because the immune system has been stimulated naturally and that has resulted in self-healing. If you’ve tried it, JQP, and it didn’t “work” for you, there are a number of explanations for that, none of which fit within your very limited perameters. #1 – since homeopathy works WITH your immune system (instead of against it!) if your immune system has already been shut down by toxins (eg. drugs), it will be unable to respond or at least respond in a way that you would recognize. #2 If you’re expecting an instantaneous resolution to your health challenge, you’re not going to get it either way. Drugs mask symptoms, so you’ve still got the problem. And it didn’t develop overnight, so it’s not going to go away overnight, either.
    So, now what do we have with allopathy? Oh NO! Another RELIGION!!!!! not based on proven science, but on faith in a theory that says you’ve got a germ that has to be killed. HHmmmm. Sounds a lot like, “You’ve got some heretical ideas that need to be killed.” The doctor tries to kill the germ with toxins and if that doesn’t work, he cuts it out of you. If that still doesn’t work, he tries to burn it out of you. The priest tries to kill it with holy water, communion, “Bible Study”, and prayer, and if that doesn’t work, he cuts you out with excommunication. If that doesn’t work, he burns you at the stake. (Inquisition, anyone?) Oh, wait. They don’t do that anymore. They just send you to hell so you can burn there.
    Doctors dress in white coats (denoting purity?) while they have you take off your clothes. That way you feel small and intimidated in their presence, as they surely have the authority of the AMA behind them. Priests dress in white robes and stand in high places while you sit below them in pews or chairs. That way you feel intimidated in their presence as they surely must have the authority of God behind them.
    Do you really think you’re going to get the truth from either of them, when they can make so much money off of people like you with blind faith in them, their “magic potions”, and “spells”.
    So, you see, selfish motivations, such as Dr. House’s, don’t really result in good for others. They result in profits for the medical establishments (churches/cathedrals), and sickness and death (slavery/guilt) for their victims (parishoners). All this while being protected by the Big Pharma Cartels. Oh, but wait. JQP is not the least bit interested in the truth. You’ve made that abunantly clear from your posted comments. I’ll bet, you’re probably on at least 4-6 meds yourself. And while I certainly wouldn’t deny you your views or the freedom to express them, I am dismayed that you do, in fact, probably represent a drug dependant public, who is so toxic they couldn’t think for themselves if they wanted to.
    Enter, Dr. Dyer to save you from yourself. GEEZ!!!! ZerO, I think it’s just you and me….and I’m not sure about you… LOL Just kidding.
    P.S. to JQP: go to rationalresponders.com and there you will find Bible naysayers (and they’re right about that) who then cling to evolution and atheism as fact; unwilling to examine it with the same critical eye with which they examine the Bible. The insinuation there is that if the Bible is fiction, then evolution is fact, as if there could only be two possibilities.
    We could only hope that science would weed out all the crackpots, except that the scientific community has already been infiltrated by religious zealots, so, I don’t think we can count on that either.

  366. Zer0 says:

    Jodee, I’m falling in love with you 🙂
    You made my day today.
    You speak my mind better than I do. I wish I could express myself the way you do, but I try as much as I can.
    Looks like it’s just you and me that don’t have blinders on. But that is enough to start a revolution. We are a few but we have the universe on our side because we understand it better.
    So you have used homeopathy. I have never tried it. I usually just eat raw good quality food and let my body heal itself. I haven’t used any “medicine” for many years (and I’m still alive JQP). But the next time I am under attack I will ask for your advice Jodee on what to do homeopathy wise.
    Have a fantastic weekend.
    We’ll continue next week.

  367. Toddmeister says:

    Back to the whole Wayne Dyer thing …
    Suppose we look forward ten thousand years – what will be true? What will be the condition of life as we know it?

    The religious literalists might predict something completely supernatural will occur – something already written (predetermined?) in the Bible’s apocalypse for example?

    The positive thinkers might assert that we influence it by our intents, and that good intentions are better than bad.

    The scientists might predict that whatever happens, at least has to obey the laws of physics. The laws that are testable and repeatable regardless of the belief of the observer – not the quasi-spiritual energy quantum mumbo-jumbo.

    What will *actually happen* as the universe marches merrily along without a whole lot of regard for what one tiny little population of sentient beings might believe?
    1) Something that still obeys the laws of physics.
    2) What humanity as a whole acts toward, with accountability. This includes:
    *Direction or intent. This is what I like so much about Wayne Dyer – it’s up to us to imagine our direction, to focus on it, and to desire what is good (using religion or not). This is a mental and spiritual process.
    *Action. Beyond intent, it is real physical WORK. This includes not just the push to move forward, but the accountability of feedback (or the feedback of accountability). Wayne Dyer’s philosophies, or anyone else’s MEAN NOTHING without the step of accountability. This is what bugs me about the spiritual non-physical bias not just of Wayne Dyer but that ilk generally. Seems like WD covers this base (barely) by saying things like “if you want it bad enough” meaning “you’re willing to work for it.”

    Intent doesn’t yield outcomes – accountability does. A person’s values aren’t defined so much by their desires (is this opposing WD now?) as they are defined by what a person holds themselves accountable to. Mankind as a whole will achieve no better. Wayne Dyers of the world encourage us to extend our vision of what is achievable and to participate. I wish that they would add to their message a more realistic and factual method of realizing accountability.

    Just trying to re-stir the pot :^)

  368. JohnQPublic says:

    Homeopathy has been debunked as a con job so many times it’s not really a debate anymore. There’s just no credible support in your corner on this one. (Personal experience is not credible peer critique.) To believe in it you have to believe water has memory because it is diluted to such a degree that the “curing” ingredient (which if you list what some are, including that which killed Socrates, your hair should stand on end) is gone. Homeopathists response? The water retains a “memory” of the ingredient.
    For example,to make a 10X solution the dilution process is carried out ten times, each time taking one tenth of the mixture and diluting it. At each level, the mixture is “succussed,” which means hitting the container (seriously??) in a certain fashion. So, a 10X “succssion” means the active ingredient is reduced to a factor of one molecule in every 10X29 molecules. That means there is no more active ingredient! And, again, supporters say this is because the water “remembers” the molecular structure of the ingredient. That has no basis in physical law.
    So, this is your position?

  369. JohnQPublic says:

    Actually, it is 10^29. Which roughly one molecule per all in the entire universe.

  370. JohnQPublic says:

    And, no, I’m not on any meds. I just don’t have anything wrong with my health at this time. Your corporate conspiracy theories are just silly and have nothing to do with provable truth. I’m sorry.
    (Why do some simply have to go ad hominem in a debate? It would be a relief to keep it academic and not personal.)

  371. JohnQPublic says:

    Social good from self-interest. This is Adam Smith’s remark and point in The Wealth of Nations. You see it all around you every day: you probably didn’t build your house, but one was built out of self-interest (i.e., profit) and provided you a benefit (i.e., social good). You probably don’t make your own clothes, but that self-interest benefits you. You probably didn’t etch your PC board on your computer, but you benefit from someone else’s self-interest. And so on. There were several communes in the seventies that were built on intentional goodwill and not profit motive. They all failed. The profit motive has created more social good to man than any other. You see its rapid growth in China and India. Result? Poverty levels being slashed in large swaths. People don’t need kind thoughts, they need jobs. Nothing lifts poverty levels like a strong economy. Evidence is in such abundance I’m not sure how anyone can argue with it.

  372. JohnQPublic says:

    Zer0, you appear to be emotionally worked up. It’s just a volley of ideas, no emotion necessary.

  373. JohnQPublic says:

    Toddmeister, I’m mulling over your comments. Not sure what you’re driving at, yet. (It’s me not getting it, not you.)

  374. Jodee says:

    JQP, your ignorance is still showing as you still don’t understand the electrical nature of everything around you. Do you believe the particle theory, too? Now there’s a snipe hunt if ever there was one!
    And homeopathy has been debunked by whom exactly? The religious medical high priests? But, of course! For them, homeopathy is herecy. It heals, keeps healthy, and cuts into their profits. And the fact that homeopathy actually does work has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that it worked not just for me, but for countless others. It’s science is well documented for those who wish to educate themselves rather than being spoonfed by people who claim to be authorities just because they have letters after their names. It’s all electrical, and I don’t know what your scholarship is, but it appears to be limited to your myth of choice. Homeopathy was not debunked, as you say, 100’s of years ago. What it was was overcome by the profitiering allopathic physicians who organized and formed the AMA – the collective god almighty. They did this because their popularity was waning. Why? because their track record, even back then was horendous. (There must have been a higher population of thinking individuals then, too; back when good sense was common.) Homeopaths, to their partial undoing, did not organize into a collective, as they were not motivated by greed and power, but only by the simple desire to heal. Most had other occupations by which they earned a living, and willingly educated those they “treated” to enable them to help themselves. Likewise with most herbalists. The AMA would like to debunk that, too, but there’s that pesky 3000 years of research, experimentation, and documentation in China during the Chen Dynasty.
    Ironically, it’s the allopaths, who keep people sick and dying, that have kept herbalists and homeopaths in business. All you have to do is compare the track records. Hhmmm. People getting cured of “incurable” diseases vs. people dying from the treatments for those incurable diseases. The AMA’s definition of “incurable” is any disease for which they have not found a poison that will only mask symptoms until the body heals itself. (Explains why there are so many “incurable” diseases – allopathy runs contrary to the very nature and makeup of human physiology.) That 225,400 deaths at the hands of allopathic medicine doesn’t even count the 553,091 deaths from cancer and 710,760 deaths from heart disease, both of which they refuse to cure and opt instead to treat. (The Cure for All Diseases/The Cure for All Cancers/The Cure for ALL Advanced Cancers; Hulda Clark, PhD, ND. The China Study; Campbell and Campbell, PhD. – if you’re really interested in scientific documentation.) It’s just that 225,400 is all the AMA will admit to at this point. And by the way, these figures come from an allopath.
    You don’t have to be a conspiracy theorist to follow the money. While capitolism has its definite upside, the downside is when it turns to avarice and an over-developed sense of greed in the few and the willingness by the rest to become slaves to them, so long as it doesn’t hit them in the wallet too badly.
    You, like most statistitions, measure poverty in terms of monetary income. But that’s not an accurate measure. The value of any currency is only relative to what backs it up and how much FAITH the general public has in it. It is of no intrinsic value, therefore, at any given time, the world bankers, who control just about everyone’s currency, can manipulate economies worldwide. (Great Depression anyone?) The truly wealthy person is the one who can remain solvent and maintain a livelihood regardless of what the monetary markets do. And there are damn few people like that. That “poor” farmer with his fields and livestock who can feed himself and his family without depending on unstable currency is far more wealthy than the city-dwellers of China and India who have been convinced that earning a good living equates to lots of “money”. So, it would behove them to take some of that money, while it still has perceived value, and invest in real wealth – land and things they can use to sustain life. Oh, but wait. In China, they’re not allowed to do that. They have to get PERMITS to have a dwelling in any particular place and they don’t get to own REAL property. So, unfortunately, the people are being lulled into a false sense of prosperity because now they can afford “stuff” – gismos, gadgets – and they can afford to buy food from those that the Chinese government will allow to be farmers. Hmmm. Seems we’re not too far from that here in the good ol’ USA.
    So, if your idea of a strong economy is monetarily-based, then I think you’ve bought into yet another religion, because you’re apparently not a student of history. True poverty is the result of ignorance, not the lack of self-serving capitolists.
    Speaking of whom, (and lest we appear to be fetching too far afield,) enter, once again, Dr. Dyer. Hmmm. A “workshop” in Maui. That’s not going to be cheap!

  375. Jodee says:

    Hey, Toddmeister! You almost sounded coherent there. You’ve impressed JQP, though. Do you think Star Wars is real?

  376. Michael’sword says:

    Wasn’t Jodee the name of the demon in Amityville?

  377. Jodee says:

    Michael’sword, thank you SOOOO much for elevating the intellegence level of this cyber conversation! Good luck to you and yours in the next fascist regime. Your wit will no doubt serve you well in the food lines.

  378. Michael’sword says:

    Jodee:
    Just an innocent observation on the sad descent of this exchange into personal insult and nastiness. I recommend you re-read the entire conversation and note that although the opinions have been diverse and frequently vigorous, even zealous, they were always, until recently, at least relatively civil.

  379. Michael’sword says:

    P.S. – It’s capitAlist.

  380. JohnQPublic says:

    Thank you for calling me ignorant. I guess if someone doesn’t agree with you they are ignorant. (Note that I did not call you silly, but only the theory that you adopted.) I don’t understand the “electrical nature of everything around us?” Not sure what you’re basing that on. I’m a statistician from a simple extrapolation? Not sure why you decided to just lump me up with that group, but you entitled to your own conjecture. But you really are arguing that water has molecular memory and that is simply not supported in physics. I hope that came across.
    I’m sorry, but you didn’t get the profit argument at all. It did not measure poverty alleviation in monetary terms. You jumped to that conclusion. I did not state specifically what the measurement was, I only stated what the basis of an improved quality of life was, not how it was measured.
    We live longer and safer than anyone has in history. There are so many centurions alive today that science no longer studies them—they now study those over 110 years old because that is the new anomaly, 100 used to be that anomaly. So, the measurement is live span and living conditions free of disease. This just happens to go hand-in-hand with economic development. You cannot show a correlation between the sudden improvement in life span, reduced disease (malaria, typhus, yellow fervor, et cetera) and homeopathy, for instance. How do you explain that we now live so long, infant mortality rates are so low since the 20th century, and we live so disease free compared to our counterparts in , say, 500 A.D.? What caused this turn of events in your opinion?

  381. JohnQPublic says:

    One other comment, Jodee, I did not express being “impressed” by toddmeister’s comment. I simply said I wasn’t sure what he was saying and the source of confusion was on my part at the moment. Nothing about that says I was “impressed.” Suggestion: please avoid the ad hominem statements. I don’t mind volleying ideas with you and I certainly don’t mind attacking ideas (in fact, I think that is a good thing), but attacking the person behind them isn’t helpful and detracts.

  382. JohnQPublic says:

    http://www.freenewmexican.com/news/9594.html

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/medicine/story/0,11381,847758,00.html

    http://www.quackwatch.com/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/homeo.html

    http://72.14.253.104/search?q=cache:1SKFljGfV70J:www.physoc.org/publications/pn/issuepdf/65/3.pdf+homeopathy+debunking&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=7&gl=us

    http://www.gordonresearch.com/answers/abc_news_20-20_debunks_homeopathy.html

    “Is Homeopathy Quackery? by Mahlon W. Wagner, Ph.D.

    In the United States, we have a motto: “If it walks like a duck, and looks like a duck, and sounds like a duck, then it probably is a duck.” To what extent does homeopathy look like quackery and sound like quackery?

    One clear link that homeopathy has to quackery is its supporters’ use of faulty logic. The first example is known as the “test of time” argument — the fact that homeopathy has existed for a long time shows that it is valid. But longevity does not guarantee validity. Astrology, numerology, and dowsing have been around for a long time, but they are clear examples of pseudoscience. Longevity of an idea is never a good substitute for rigorous science.

    The second argument is that many people have tried homeopathic remedies and are all satisfied, so homeopathy must be legitimate. Along the same lines, we are told that the following famous and important people all supported homeopathy: The British royal family, Johann Wolfgang Goethe, Mahatma Gandhi, Mother Teresa, Mark Twain, O. J. Simpson, Yehudi Menuhin, Angela Lansbury, and Mary Baker Eddy (founder of Christian Science). The Chinese have a saying that if a thousand people say something foolish, it is still foolish. Also a majority vote is no substitute for good science. In addition, we usually hear only about the successes, but the failures are conveniently forgotten or ignored.

    A third argument is the “non sequitur.” Typically, the crackpot says: “They laughed at Galileo, and he was right. Today they laugh at me; therefore I must be right.” (Actually Galileo was not laughed at. Rather he was persecuted because he was devoid of a proper Christian faith to accept the correct dogma.) Homeopaths say that throughout history many great geniuses have rebelled against the prevailing wisdom; many of these were ultimately recognized as correct. Paracelsus, William Harvey, Louis Pasteur, and Joseph Lister were vindicated by history. Therefore, it is argued, Samuel Hahnemann and homeopathy also will ultimately be recognized as correct. But this argument forgets that many more who claimed to be geniuses were correctly rejected.

    In the spirit of fair-mindedness, one may be tempted to give homeopathy the benefit of the doubt and simply conclude “not yet proven.” However, what then are we to do when many lay practitioners report that merely writing the name of the remedy on a piece of paper, and putting this on the body of the patient results in a “cure.” Even two respected national spokesmen were unwilling to reject these reports, and one of them suggested that quantum physics may ultimately explain these healings as well as those reported by patients who are given the remedy over the phone.

    We must conclude that homeopathy certainly sounds like quackery.”

  383. JohnQPublic says:

    I have to agree with Michael’sword latest comment about the descent of the conversation. Let’s try to improve it. I’ll do my part.

  384. JohnQPublic says:

    One more parting comment for the night (it’s very late where I am), let’s drop the homeopathy debate. I don’t believe I’ll convince you as you have your own experience to draw on, and I have already enough on it over the years to solidify my opinion, so personal experiences is not going to convince me. (That is in the general since, too.)
    Can we turn back to the topic? I’m sure David Bacon is amused by a lot of this senseless banter (that is comment on me not others as I am a sucker for bad debates), but there is a topic.

  385. månesteiner says:

    I agree with the calls for more civility, but I’m wondering, even with that, how much further this conversation can proceed.

    It’s not just that those involved in the discussion hold different viewpoints on Dyers claims, but rather they approach his claims with such entirely different methods for discerning truth from falsity in general.

    Temporarily set aside the discussion of critiqueing the merits/drawbacks of the different approaches to knowledge used by those in this debate.

    If a common set of tools for assessing an empirical or philosopical claim can’t be agreed upon then things grind to a halt pretty quickly. A discussion between astrophysicists and astrologers on “The effects of the planet Saturn on the lives of humans on Earth” can be interesting for the first 10 or 15 minutes or so, after that, there’s nothing more useful to be said.

  386. JohnQPublic says:

    Perhaps. I think it’s amusing the way quantum mechanics is so widely used to link any subjective idea to science. When something is compared to quantum mechanics (the properties of healing, consciousness, etc.) suddenly everything about it operates on quantum properties and you can claim your idea is backed by science.

  387. JohnQPublic says:

    Dr. Bacon, one book I recommend to add to your library list (in the right hand column) is: “Why People Believe Weird Things: Pseudoscience, Superstition, and Other Confusions of Our Time” by Michael Shermer.

  388. JohnQPublic says:

    Challenge to Jodee: show me an example where communicable diseases are largely eradicated, starvation is minimized (i.e., large local agricultural yield per acre is available), life spans increase, infant mortality rates decrease, and more discretionary time is spent on non-survival activities that does not also have a correlating economy?

  389. Jodee says:

    Interesting that after you’ve gotten YOUR personal attack in, NOW we should all be civil and shame on me? Come on, Michael’sword…the demon in Amityville? Just remember that when you point the finger at someone else, three are pointing back at you. Thankfully you can spell.
    And JQP, you did appear to me to be somewhat impressed just by the notion that there might be something worth considering. It just looked like psycho-babble to me. I’ve never been terribly impressed with esoterics. It seems to be a popular technique for elevating oneself over others and creating an image of higher understanding and wisdom. I find it very self-serving, most of the time – and who can counter them as their claims are completely unquantifiable. (Gee, I think we’re back on topic, here.) I think we probably agree on this point, at least in regard to Dr. Dyer.

  390. Jodee says:

    “Religion dressed up in authority soaked in pseudoscience. ” I think that applies to way more than Dr. Dyer. I find that scientifically speaking, that is the perfect description of allopathy. Re: “Confessions of a Medical Heretic” (Dr. Robert Mendelsohn, PhD) JQP, do you not see a pattern here? All the references I’ve sited for you are MEDICAL people and scientists. They are brave souls in their fields who aren’t afraid to say that the “Emporer has no clothes.” My attempts to explain the electric nature of the universe and everything in it (re: “Sub Atomic Physics” Frauenfelder & Henley; Prentice Hall, New Jersey, 1991 & “The Structure and Properties of Water” D. Eisenberg; Oxford University Press, New York) and homeopathy have nothing to do with my opinion or even my personal experience. They are purely science. Misunderstanding of that science doesn’t equate to “debunking”. The fact that I have used that particular modality (as well as others,) only substantiates for me, the validity of that science, but the truth of the science is certainly not dependent on my opinion, as is the case with any science. It is true, or it isn’t. It is factual or it isn’t. It is proven or it’s theory.
    I agree that you are unlikely to change your mind, especially if you are unwilling to do the research. I don’t know that you aren’t, but you seem pretty content to stay in the paradigm that you’re in, so at this point it seems pointless to continue that particular debate. People behave according to what they believe to be true, with or without the benefit of facts. I’m certainly unwilling to change my view of allopathy, and that’s based both on personal research AND personal experience. I’ve learned what the science is and I know how it damaged me. Conversely, I also know how avoiding it in favor of more physiologically compatible modalities has benefited me.
    As far as your challenge is concerned, it is nearly impossible for me to meet as there are a couple of premises that are either incorrect or too vague to adress. You’re talking infectous diseases, when we’re in the age of degenerative diseases. (USA) While antibiotics may have had a band-aid effect in underdeveloped countries at some point in time (including this one), we are now suffering the consequences of that short-sighted band-aid solution – “super-bugs”. And viral organisms go through evolutionary cycles (evolution in the true sense, not the metemorphic sense) whose declines can be historically charted in both countries that vaccinated and ones that didn’t. The decline rates are nearly indistinguishable between the two. Degenerative diseases are the result of nutrient deficiencies, not drug deficiencies. Out of 12 developed countries including Canada, France, Germany, & Japan, the US consistantly ranks LAST on the basis of sixteen different indicators of health care efficacy. The WHO ranked the US 37th in the world overall. Yet, the US out-ranks EVERY other country in allopathic spending. As a statistition, I should think that would interest you somewhat. The info is out there for anyone who is truly interested in knowing.
    It’s been a stimulating discussion, JQP, but I think we’re done. Thanks. It was fun.

  391. månesteiner says:

    To JQP:

    You’re going to engage in an extended conversation about Wayne Dyer’s statements on “Intentionality” and quantum physics with those who believe, among other things, that gravity is electrically based, and that our bodies can be healed by the frequencies in herbs, and you’re expecting a meaningful discussion on the topic?

    “Hope Springs Eternal” begins the final paragraph of Shermer’s book 🙂

  392. JohnQPublic says:

    MÃ¥nesteiner: Well, I am perpetually curious why people buy into some very fringe ideas. Specifically, if they are just contrarians (which, ironically, means their views are still defined by mainstream thought) or if there is any real logic there–and I don’t mean a tie to science kind of logic, which is almost always the case, such as borrowing from quantum theory terminology, but an actual procession of rational thought. Like Shermer’s example on the Holocaust deniers.
    But my challenge was legitimate. I really am curious if there is a case either in history or just naming some sovereign state where there is sustained improvement in conditions with no ties to a strong local economy.
    But a lot of my points are of the “how high will this ball bounce if I throw it this way” vein.
    I also find it interesting how deeply emotional and personal worldviews are. They become fortresses that must be defended at all costs sometimes.

  393. JohnQPublic says:

    Have you read any of Bacon’s research papers on this site? They’re pretty interesting.

  394. månesteiner says:

    “MÃ¥nesteiner: Well, I am perpetually curious why people buy into some very fringe ideas.”

    I’d agree with Shermer in that “… the reason people believe weird things is because they want to. It feels good.” p.275

    As you know, in his book Shermer argues that the human brain is hardwired for pattern seeking, we
    search for causality. Those are basic survival skills. Not exactly a new idea, but still the Psych research does support that. So, confronted with raw data, we’re always wanting an explanation, a context.

    He also notes that rational thinking, skepticism, takes effort and work. It’s not the brains default approach to incoming data. So, less disciplined minds (hardwired for pattern seeking) will connect the dots in lazier ways, resulting in magical thinking, astrology, fringe ideas, etc.

    Anyways, that’s my take on why people believe crazy stuff!

    “I really am curious if there is a case either in history or just naming some sovereign state where there is sustained improvement in conditions with no ties to a strong local economy.”

    Not that I can think of, I think you’re correct on that.

    I haven’t read Bacon’s research papers yet, but I will check them out 🙂

  395. Jodee says:

    The flat-worlder/earth, the center of the universe masses thought that a round earth solar centered system was “fringe”. That didn’t make them correct. Most peopel would rather believe the lies that are endorsed by the herd. Those “patterns” are ususally easier to swallow. (Zeitgeist)

  396. Jodee says:

    There is one simply principle that improved conditions in any society: don’t eat where you poop and and don’t poop where you eat. And proper sanitation is not soley dependant on capitalism or free market, (which are not necessarily synonymous.) I see the perceived prosperity in the US as masked slavery to a system over which the average person has no control and cannot function without. When it all comes crashing down, which a debt-based economy has to eventually, most people won’t know how to survive on their own. I don’t call that prosperous.

  397. Jodee says:

    Wow! long weekend. Sorry for the typos: people, usually, simple, not simply. At least I got all the big words correct. LOL

  398. JohnQPublic says:

    Ah, yes, the perennial Galileo argument. That can be used to justify just about anything, I guess.
    I read “The Great Depression of 1990” by Ravi Bahtra, long ago, “Bankrupcy 1995” by Harry Figgie, Jr., “The Day of Reckoning” (forgot that author) not to mention “Famine 1975”. All these ideas went the way of Y2K. I have seen nothing but prosperity my whole life (I’m not far from 60) and I suspect that won’t change. Not that depressions don’t happen, but when they have occurred (1870, 1929, etc.) the economy tends to come back stronger that before the episode. They’re really price correction episodes, kind of like the housing market right now. Home value was just raising too fast and had to come down, which is a good thing.

  399. JohnQPublic says:

    Glad to see someone else reading Shermer, månesteiner. Sending some of these putative claims to the test I think has long been needed.
    Regarding Bacon’s papers, they’re pretty abstruse but I have barely just enough math background to follow them. I really didn’t know what quantum computing was attempting to accomplish, but this has given me an idea. I wonder if there will be any on the market before the 2038 32-bit epoch date problem hits (not that I’ll be around)? But I guess everyone should be 64-bit before then. But the ideal of a boundless computing architecture (which I think is where it’s going) is pretty intriguing. But I have yet to understand the material properties that can allow a qubit its multiple states. More reading…

  400. Jodee says:

    Okay, JQP and Manesteiner. I understand why you are not understanding me. I read (re-read) the first 10 pages of Dyer’s book and he talks about this force (intention) all around us and in everything. Sounds a lot like electricity actually, so if you’re not buying into his stuff, I can see where you’d have a hard time with what I was saying. The thing is, every lie, every deception, starts with a truth. Yes, as Tesla discovered, there is a “force” or “field” all around us and in everything. But that is where the truth of the matter ends with Dr. Dyer. From there he goes into contradiction and circular reasoning (pretzel logic.) On the one hand he seems to be preaching a sort of predestination, and then on the other hand a way to change that predestination or how we keep it from happening in our lives. But, predestination by definition is unchangable. I note that he himself has been unsuccessful in changing his when it comes to baldness and a hairy nose and ears. He is resigned to keep “trimming away” while he merely observes. Why won’t intention let him intend himself hair on his head?
    So, back to Tesla for a moment. He discovered ways of harnessing energy out of thin air, so to speak. He likely discovered and developed a way of producing perpetual energy and/or motion. We can only surmise at this point, because at the same time that he was working on his discoveries and inventions, Edison and Westinghouse had already decided to take that same electricity, channel it through wires, and charge people for it. (Tesla would have given it to us for free.) So, once again, the ugly side of monopolistic capitalism (vs. free market) rears it’s ugly head. Instead of paying our electric bills, we could have been doing something else perhaps even something fun, with our resources. Rather, most people are hopelessly, helplessly tied into power grids, that when they fail, send the masses into a tail spin.
    Because Westinghouse and Edison saw a real threat to their power, prestige, and profits, much of Tesla’s documentation of experiments and inventions were destroyed “mysteriously” (if memory serves, by an unexplained fire), and Tesla was driven to ruin. When lust for power and wealth rear their ugly heads, it seems the prophets of liberty are destroyed. (Dr. Gearson – 1930’s – would be another one.)
    Orson Wells, before he died, became very interested in Tesla’s work, and began attempting to reconstruct if from the little that remains of it. He had limited success, but was still able to demonstrate a simple electrical event, that without understanding what was really happening, was mind boggling.
    Just think of the prosperity that we could have enjoyed if we were free of the grid – if we really could be self-sufficient. Hmmm. Real freedom vs. perceived freedom.

  401. Zer0 says:

    I see there was a lively discussion over the weekend.
    I have to finish a project so I will be brief.
    JQP: “Zer0, you appear to be emotionally worked up. It’s just a volley of ideas, no emotion necessary.”
    I did not have any emotions up until Jodee showed up.
    In fact I was bored to death reading the bland posts by you and others like you. It was like monitoring a conversation between robots, that were programed by the same programmer to appear human, to show disagreement but be in agreement at the core, to show emotion but be mechanical in their judgment and reasoning. I admit that Jodee got me excited when she rattled the robot cage and I’m not going to apologize or feel inadequate for expressing my emotions.
    Looking at the history of progress I can say that it is free thinkers like Jodee that have pushed the envelope and fought against the current of ignorance and ridicule to discover new fertile planes while the general public (the sheep, the herd) kick and scream as they are pushed to the new plane, then reap the benefits munching on the delicious green grass but quickly forget the history of how and by whose “extra-ordinary” visions and efforts they got there. This history repeats itself the next time someone dares to separate from the heard and say “hey there is something new and different just beyond the next ridge (mental obstacle).
    Does anyone know and remember Nikola Tesla other than a narrow layer of people? What he has contributed to the advancement of the civilization is very little understood by the “herd” and is mainly undermined and forgotten. Instead the heard credits others with his discoveries. There is so much that we don’t know about him and many others like him.

  402. Zer0 says:

    Jodee, just saw your post after I posted mine. It is interesting that we both remembered Tesla at the same time. JQP would say it is coincidence but we know better than that 🙂

  403. månesteiner says:

    To JQP:

    Regarding Dave Bacon’s writings, I took a peek but they are way over my head. I’ve got only a layman’s grasp of Quantum Physics, not enough to follow Dave Bacon.

    “Glad to see someone else reading Shermer, mÃ¥nesteiner”

    Back in the day, early 1980’s, my friends and I were amateur cyclists in the Phoenix area. We still remember Michael Shermer taking on the phenomenal Lon Haldeman in the Race Across America. So it’s with great affection, and nostalgia, that I read him today.

  404. JohnQPublic says:

    No, zer0, I think it’s a connected consciousness because who else would think of Nikola Tesla (or George Westinghouse, for that matter) when the word electricity comes up? Very rare indeed.
    So, everything is really comprised of electricity? And here I thought it was ball bearings all this time. (At least, that’s what Fletch said.)

  405. JohnQPublic says:

    Jodee, some things you type give me the image you’re a little bit Nikita Khrushchev mixed with Robespierre (and maybe with a little attitude of Emma the Red). So, once capitalism is stamped out (what will replace it, anyway?) will there be a reign of terror? Will the lower middle class on down (the ones without plasma TVs and with they’re Beta-max’s still in use) behead the wealthy class? It seems to me that by and large Americans aspire to the wealthy class, not despise it.

  406. JohnQPublic says:

    Also, the national debt (if that is what you meant by a debt economy) is almost entirely owed (the interest) back to the same American economy that incurred it. So it’s circular, and not lost income. It’s like owing yourself $1,000.
    But if you mean consumer debt, it is still a small percentage of GDP, so it’s covered. And if you mean government debt, that too is small percentage of GDP. It was not long ago that Italy’s national debt (total) was 110% of their GDP and yet they’re still thriving; no big collapses that I’ve heard of. Also, there is a trend towards capitalism lately: Canada recently elected Stephen Harper who opposes socialism; Angela Merkel recently elected in Germany who also ran against socialism; Nicolas Sarkozy is very pro-American capitalism and opposed the very socialistic Ségolène Royal; Gordon Brown of the U.K. was part of the labour movement that shifted it away from socialism.
    Why is this happening? Because socialism is, largely, economically unsustainable. Not all of it, but too much of it is.

  407. Gary says:

    “…who…would think of Nikola Tesla (or George Westinghouse…) when the word electricity comes up?”
    LOL. Good zinger, JQP.

  408. JohnQPublic says:

    Zer0, I guess you’re not aware that Tesla is largely known by the public. In fact, there was an eighties hair band that even used his name. I don’t think I’ve met anyone who doesn’t know that name. It’s not that obscure.

  409. Jodee says:

    JQP, Well, I guess civility is out the window once again. Very well. I think you may still be suffering residual brain fog from the last meds you were on. You’ve not been reading with any kind of understanding at all. It seems to me that you and your boys are just having fun picking on the girl. Oooo, but that would just be sexist, so that can’t be it.
    Nikita Khrushchev would be one of those fascist dictators I referred to earlier, so try to get over yourself and follow what I’m really saying here. What replaces monopolistic capitalism is FREE MARKET!!! We have not enjoyed the benefits of a truly free market in some time. Thus, the Tesla point. There is no free market when it comes to energy, and that’s just one example. How many entrepreneus have invented alternative fuel cars, only to be quashed by the established automobile monopolies via paid lobbyists, “gifts” to key legislative and judicial figures, etc.? These pioneers and their inventions have all gone the way of the Tucker and the Red Car. In the absence of a free market, there is only a manipulated market, which inevitably puts wealth and liberty in the hands of an elite few and takes on various forms and degrees of fascism. Surely, you’ve heard of the disappearing middle class – it’s been in all the papers.
    And BTW, I highly doubt that the general public knows who Tesla is. Most of them don’t even know the difference between Alexander Hamilton and George Hamilton.

  410. Jodee says:

    Gary, only those who have gotten a decent education or bothered to educate themselves would connect Telsa with electricity. JQP is old enough to have had a 50/50 chance of going to public schools that actually taught relevent curriculum; either that, or the benefits from private education. That doesn’t apply to a vast number of the public today, which his “zinger” doesn’t take into account. You have now joined the ranks of the narrow-minded. Congratulations.

  411. Jodee says:

    Watched Wayne Dyer on PBS last night, just for kicks. (He is supposed to be the topic of this discussion, right?) So, as he touts the benefits of minimalism, I have to wonder: why does he need two houses? and why does his “entlightenment” cost 295.00-350.00, not including air fare to MAUI. If we only use (and therefore, only NEED,) 20% of what we have, why does he have 80% more (Florida and Maui are NOT cheap places to live,) than those who so desparately need his instruction and vision? Oh, yeah. They gave him that 80% they weren’t using.
    So, here’s the formula: take commonly understood words, like “intention”, and alter the meaning to some high-minded esoteric application. This helps keep the unthinking masses off balance and makes them think you know something they don’t. This in turn, elevates you to a higher position than they. And just in case they start thinking you’re arrogant, remind them of how humbe you really are. (Truly humble people don’t have to tell others they’re humble, they just are.) Now throw in just enough truth, recognizable even to the non-thinking masses, to make it sound like you know what you’re talking about. Then when you hit a conundrum, which of course, you have created with your esoteric crap, jump to a personal and amusing anecdotal story from your enlightened past to “illustrate” the point. Laughter makes the herd forget the (You can tell this by all the nodding heads in the crowd.) Continue with unquantifiable claims of peace and happiness, and at the end of your “sermon”, collect the profits.
    I certainly don’t begrudge anyone financial success. I’m all for free market enterprise, as I have repeatedly stated. I simply object to deceipt as a means of obstaining it. However, I as much as I may personally object, I object even more that so many people fall for the deception, because that’s where the free market fails. It fails when people stop thinking for themselves and allow charlatans to tell them what to value and what to think. Enter the subtle slavery of religion and a manipulated market. (Which are probably not all that different from each other.)
    I have another question – If Wayne Dyer is the master of conflict resolution he claims to be, why is he divorced – twice? I can understand maybe the first one going to pot – young, stupid, chose unwisely, etc.; only had one kid. But, to then divorce a woman you’ve had 7 kids with – what’s up with that?! Did mommy get tired of trying to keep some level of order in a house full of kids while daddy sat on the couch and “let them work things out for themselves?” Just curious.

  412. Jodee says:

    ZerO. Appreciate your remarks. You’re probably young – maybe late 20’s/early 30’s – just a guess. But you give me hope for the future. Keep having kids and teaching them to think for themselves.

  413. Zer0 says:

    Jodee, Thanks for the complement about my perceived age. Chronologically I am 43 years old, but biologically I feel as young and as healthy as when I was 30. I think what threw you off was the age of my daughter, or maybe my attitude.
    I’m not going to guess your age, but whatever it is you are very wise for your age (or any age for that matter). You have done a great deal of self education, because none of the stuff you have acquired can be learned in any school.
    My hope for the future is my daughter. I am planing to retire early and take on her education myself. When she graduates from my school she will be an independent and truly free person that can lead the heard and not follow it. She will know how to grow her own food, how to be off the grid (or greed), etc. She will be brave and fearless, ready to tackle any issue and come out victorious.
    Seeing her energy and curiosity makes me hopeful. I will not let her down and I’m sure she will not let me or herself down either when the time comes.

  414. Gary says:

    Jodee:

    1. The ‘zinger’ was funny, like it or not.
    2. Your comments and observations are intelligent and your sex is irrelevant.
    3. You seem to be a very angry person. Who, exactly, are you pissed off at?

  415. Gary says:

    …the world, maybe?

  416. Zer0 says:

    JQP (and others), knowing someone’s name does not equate to knowing the person and their worth.
    I know about the Tesla band, I have their fist album. In my collage days I played an electric guitar and was into Hard Rock and Heavy Metal. So, don’t think that you are giving me an education on Tesla’s name and it’s use by the herd.
    In all my collage and university years I don’t recall reading anything about Tesla other than a brief and inaccurate biography in textbooks and learning that the tesla (symbol T) is the SI derived unit of magnetic flux density.
    If you think that associating Tesla’s name with electricity separates you from the herd, think again. If you or anyone else really knew about Tesla and his work, would know about his bladeless turbine that can also be used as a pump, about his air-to-air air conditioner that can cool air down to -40deg C without using any hazardous refrigerants, etc, etc. His contribution to areas other than electricity has been undermined just as bad.
    You should go look this up and educate yourself, so next time you can associate Tesla’s name with more than electricity.
    You stated that you read 300 books a year. Seems to me that you are more concerned with quantity than quality. I would suggest that for the next year, for every book you read that supports a given viewpoint you read a book that contradicts or presents an alternative to that viewpoint. In my opinion you have a very narrow and one-sided view of the world around you.
    You need to expand your mind and expose it to wider spectrum of knowledge that’s out there.

  417. JohnQPublic says:

    Who said I didn’t know the Tesla story? Jumping to conclusions again. The point was that the association is not remote enough to support your point: that it was some kind of universal connection. I never touched on the Tesla story, only the association which you made clear was significant. I doubt many do know the story and struggle of Tesla and Westinghouse. But your point was that you thought it was significant and unusual that you too thought of Tesla, brought my name into it and, so, that warranted comment.
    Your remarks on what I know or may not know is just speculation. Besides, it’s not a way to make a good rebuttal.
    By the way, a lot of books I read don’t support my view. I read all of Dyer’s for example, including that latest screed. But you’re speculating, again, and not basing even that on any evidence. You have no information to determine the spectrum of what I read. In fact, many of my points are precisely stated in a way that give clues that I’m already familiar with the arguments. For example, I said “life span” and not “life expectancy” because I already knew the standard argument for “why is life expectancy increased” is “improved waste management.” Which Jodee is exactly right about for “life expectancy” but not “life span.” (They’re two different measurements. If you’re well read on history, then you already know this.) So, if knew the topic you would have caught that subtle frame up. But I was glad to see Jodee respond with what is a generally accepted—yes, external review weeds!–position.
    Also, I don’t think sarcasm is out of line. But some just have great big hot buttons I sometimes can’t resist pushing them.
    Finally, why do so many come to discussion forums not to actually discuss but to find support? I respond mostly to those who disagree with me (which has come down to you two) because that is the point. I’m not seeking any support, because I’ve heard almost everyone of these arguments before. In the eighties when was an options trader I heard about capitalism collapsing all the time. Mostly from those identified as “survivalists.” When I was working on my graduate degree in economics, I debated a lot with a good friend (and later an employee) about the sustainability of a monetary fiat system vs. the Austrian economic system. (Which is one of the many arguments for a collapse of the U.S. economy.) I was attempting to smoke out Jodee’s thoughts on how and why the economy would collapse. But, I hold a undergrad degree in world history, a grad degree in computer science and in macro economics. So, I’m pretty secure with my education.

  418. JohnQPublic says:

    I just noticed an incomplete statement in that post. I meant to say, “yes, external review weeds out untruths.” Bad editing on my part.

  419. JohnQPublic says:

    Jodee, I haven’t gone through all your last rebuttals (I just flew in from Texas) but I noticed the “Free market” response. Very encouraging, indeed. You’ve piqued my interest. Just need a little time.

  420. JohnQPublic says:

    And, zer0, I don’t mean to pick on you at all. However, when you lay down your opinions like that you should expect criticism–and when you do it passionately, then you’re setting yourself up for possible ridicule. If I’ve been too rough and it bothers you, then I apologize. I welcome any sarcasm back. I can take it and deserve some at this point.

    One other thing, Jodee, I’ve glossed over some points you’ve made that I thought were really good and I fully agree with, but I got distracted because I thought you were setting up for a socialist or survivalist position and also with the electricity thing. I was jumping to conclusions, too.

  421. Jodee says:

    Gary, it does appear as if gender is indeed the issue. When you guys spar with snide sarcasm you’re “making a point” or “defending a position”. When I send it back to you, I must be “angry”- at the whole world, no less. Typical male response. Women dish it out and they’re catty, bitchy, bitter, angry, etc. Maybe I’m just annoyed that you can’t seem to come up with an intelligent response.

  422. Gary says:

    Jodee:
    I apologize if I’ve offended you. I’m not qualified to debate economic, political, medical or even social issues like you, Zer0 and JQP. I only got in on this because of what I felt was Wayne Dyer’s inappropriate use of certain scientific concepts and Taoist philosophical principles.
    Good luck with your continuing debate.

  423. JohnQPublic says:

    Ouch!

  424. hana says:

    LOL, may this lively discussion never end . And BTW, where are u, HavAgr8Day. Please come back to help us resolve: “Energy?” Wayne Dyer? Does “intention” work? The world’s problems? Good night.

  425. JohnQPublic says:

    “Consciousness collapses the wave function into actual particles that exist in space and time. Consciousness experiences energy as matter.
    Consciousness is the energy that influences energy. All energy is actually consciousness, therefore it is consciousness influencing itself.

    The observer is not apart from the observation. The experimenter is not apart from the experiment.

    The observer simultaneously plays a part in creating the reality he is observing. The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle of consciousness states that no pure measurement is possible without creation. Physicists who deal in quantum mechanics state: “You cannot (objectively) observe something without changing it in the process.”

    This experiment also shows that God remains unmanifest unless you participate. Without God, we cannot. Without us, God would not. We are all co-creators of reality with God. God moves only when there is intention or prayer. Faith is focus.

    Everything is energy and energy is mental. The mind creates and controls reality.

    Our thoughts have the very power to shape our reality. This is how the Law of Attraction works. What we focus on most of the time, we get. The observer creates reality simply by observing.”
    __________________________________________
    Good God.

  426. Dave Bacon says:

    LOL, nice paragraph.

    “What we focus on most of the time, we get.”

    Crapzolla, I’m going to get a lot of mathematical equations about quantum algorithms?

  427. JohnQPublic says:

    “Certain interpretations of quantum mechanics, the revolutionary theory developed early in the century to account for the anomalous behavior of light and atoms, are being misconstrued so as to imply that only thoughts are real and that the physical universe is the product of a cosmic mind to which the human mind is linked throughout space and time. This interpretation has provided an ostensibly scientific basis for various mind-over-matter claims, from ESP to alternative medicine. “Quantum mysticism” also forms part of the intellectual backdrop for the postmodern assertion that science has no claim on objective reality.

    The word “quantum” appears frequently in New Age and modern mystical literature. For example, physician Deepak Chopra (1989) has successfully promoted a notion he calls quantum healing, which suggests we can cure all our ills by the application of sufficient mental power.

    According to Chopra, this profound conclusion can be drawn from quantum physics, which he says has demonstrated that “the physical world, including our bodies, is a response of the observer. We create our bodies as we create the experience of our world” (Chopra 1993, 5). Chopra also asserts that “beliefs, thoughts, and emotions create the chemical reactions that uphold life in every cell,” and “the world you live in, including the experience of your body, is completely dictated by how you learn to perceive it” (Chopra 1993, 6). Thus illness and aging are an illusion and we can achieve what Chopra calls “ageless body, timeless mind” by the sheer force of consciousness.
    Since no convincing, reproducible evidence for psychic phenomena has been found, despite 150 years of effort, this is a flimsy basis indeed for quantum consciousness.”

  428. JohnQPublic says:

    Thus…

    “The conventional interpretation of quantum mechanics, promulgated by Bohr and still held by most physicists, says nothing about consciousness. It concerns only what can be measured and what predictions can be made about the statistical distributions of ensembles of future measurements. As noted, the wave function is simply a mathematical object used to calculate probabilities. Mathematical constructs can be as magical as any other figment of the human imagination-like the Starship Enterprise or a Roadrunner cartoon. Nowhere does quantum mechanics imply that real matter or signals travel faster than light. In fact, superluminal signal propagation has been proven to be impossible in any theory consistent with conventional relativity and quantum mechanics (Eberhard and Ross 1989).”

  429. Zer0 says:

    JQP: “The point was that the association is not remote enough to support your point: that it was some kind of universal connection.”
    I did not imply that it was a universal connection, I left it open ended. I just remarked that “it was interesting”.
    JQP: “Also, I don’t think sarcasm is out of line. But some just have great big hot buttons I sometimes can’t resist pushing them.”
    Well, if you like pushing the button then you shouldn’t complain about the “hot” responses you get :).
    JQP” “Finally, why do so many come to discussion forums not to actually discuss but to find support? I respond mostly to those who disagree with me (which has come down to you two) because that is the point.”
    I agree with you completely John. Even though we exchange some “heavy punches” in this forum (and you have to admit that Jodee packs some really heavy ones) we return to our corners as “good sportsmen/sportswomen”. Even though Jodee and I feel and think along the same lines we don’t need each others support to fight our battles. And we don’t mean to gang up on you (I hope you don’t feel that we do). We can take turns if you like 🙂
    Let’s have a great weekend and come back ready to “rumble”. 🙂

  430. Jodee says:

    JQP, impressive educational resume’ to be sure, but what that tells me, in view of some of your responses, is that you’re looking at all these issues through the eyes and/or under the influence of people who likely have more letters after their names than you do after yours. Honestly, you do come across as narrow-minded in many of your remarks. And the fact that you are “secure in [your] education” seems to imply that you think you have nothing more to learn, or that you at least know more than anyone who has no letters or fewer letters after their names. Perhaps it was simply a poor choice of words on your part, but in presenting your positions, you do tend to give the impressions that ZerO expressed.
    So far, the assumed implications of me as person have included: demon from Amityville, contrarian, ex-hippy druggy, fringe (radical), and socialist communist/fascist sympathizer. And why? just because I have made the informed choice of using alternative health care and I recognize an electrical nature to things, (based, BTW, on the fact that EVERY molecule is made up of electrical matrices, not solid particles)? You have made or concurred with most of these assumptions either directly or indirectly. Whether you intend it or not, that makes you appear to be narrow-minded and unwilling to consider anything outside your own educational sphere or experience.
    The ex-hippy inference is particularly hilarious, since I have never smoked anything, not even once, in my entire life, and never experimented with narcotics legal or illegal. In fact, I’m allergic to most drugs, even over-the-counter types (I’m talking hives and a number of other unpleasant manifestations).
    I don’t have your expensive education or letters after my name, but I do have a pretty good grasp of logic, an extensive ever-growing research library, and an insatiable thirst for truth in all arenas. The main difference between us that I see, is that when I read/study data, I am not under the third party influence of someone else’s opinion about it – someone who is even more invested in their letters than I would be as one of his/her students under pressure to make a grade and get letters after my name, too. I’m free to apply my logic and critical thinking and come to my own conclusions or even determine that the data is inconclusive or questionable. (and I’m not implying that you’ve never done the latter.) I’m not invested in letters after my name, so I have nothing to jeopardize in changing or expanding my views.
    It is splitting hairs to differentiate between life span and life expectancy in this discussion, since life expectancy can’t be determined without the data on life span. There is a distinct correlation between sanitation and life span, ergo, life expectancy, as noted by any number of well respected researchers. Furthermore, all alternative medicine cannot be lumped into one box. There are many modes, most of which are useful to many, none of which are useful to all, and some of which are total crap. Only someone willing to accept truth at any cost can accept it where ever it is found, regardless of the box someone may have put it in.
    I don’t gainsay the value of your expensive education, but it has it’s limitations and you academic types often come off as arrogant and close-minded, perhaps because you are still paying off your student loans, or it hasn’t been that long since you did. I can see how it would be tempting to assume that the expense has rendered you an unsurpassable knowledge in most fields of debate – except, of course for debates with people who have even more letters after their names.
    Of course, this is just the opinion of a lowly lay person.

  431. Wu tzu says:

    Is this discussion getting really weird, or what?
    Maybe the wave is collapsing.

  432. JohnQPublic says:

    Doh!

  433. JohnQPublic says:

    Question: why is science used as support for fringe ideas when convenient, but refuted when it contradicts?

  434. JohnQPublic says:

    And who is “Crapzolla?”

  435. månesteiner says:

    “Question: why is science used as support for fringe ideas when convenient, but refuted when it
    contradicts?”

    The same reason politicians point to phenomenom X, Y or Z when it supports their agenda, but downplay or ignore the same when it doesn’t. Or that a baseball player will cite a certain training regimen as the reason for his successful performance this season, but offer a different explanation when the same regimen yields poor results the next season.

    When the mission is only to persuade an audience, which sometimes, sadly, includes oneself (for example, just listen to the excuses people come up with as to why their ex dumped them), the standards of argument sufficient to persuasion are all that’s needed. Honest thinking takes work, and sometimes hurts.

  436. JohnQPublic says:

    True. But the interesting cases are when the premise is that science can’t prove all or science is stubborn and (always) on the verge of coming around to whatever mysticism is on display–then scientific reasoning is used to support it. Yet the reverse does not occur. Science never uses faith to support its position. Reason is always the inescapable component.

  437. JohnQPublic says:

    I do have a question for Bacon regarding a statement above: “In fact, superluminal signal propagation has been proven to be impossible in any theory consistent with conventional relativity and quantum mechanics.”

    What about entanglement?

  438. Jodee says:

    JQP, impressive educational resume’ to be sure, but what that tells me, in view of some of your responses, is that you’re looking at all these issues through the eyes and/or under the influence of people who likely have more letters after their names than you do after yours. Honestly, you do come across as narrow-minded in many of your remarks. And the fact that you are “secure in [your] education” seems to imply that you think you have nothing more to learn, or that you at least know more than anyone who has no letters or fewer letters after their names. Perhaps it was simply a poor choice of words on your part, but in presenting your positions, you do tend to give the impressions that ZerO expressed.
    So far, the assumed implications of me as person have included: demon from Amityville, contrarian, ex-hippy druggy, fringe (radical), and socialist communist/fascist sympathizer. And why? just because I have made the informed choice of using alternative health care and I recognize an electrical nature to things, (based, BTW, on the fact that EVERY molecule is made up of electrical matrices, not solid particles)? You have made or concurred with most of these assumptions either directly or indirectly. Whether you intend it or not, that makes you appear to be narrow-minded and unwilling to consider anything outside your own educational sphere or experience.
    The ex-hippy inference is particularly hilarious, since I have never smoked anything, not even once, in my entire life, and never experimented with narcotics legal or illegal. In fact, I’m allergic to most drugs, even over-the-counter types (I’m talking hives and a number of other unpleasant manifestations).
    I don’t have your expensive education or letters after my name, but I do have a pretty good grasp of logic, an extensive ever-growing research library, and an insatiable thirst for truth in all arenas. The main difference between us that I see, is that when I read/study data, I am not under the third party influence of someone else’s opinion about it – someone who is even more invested in their letters than I would be as one of his/her students under pressure to make a grade and get letters after my name, too. I’m an equal opportunity offender 😉 I’m free to apply my logic and critical thinking and come to my own conclusions or even determine that the data is inconclusive or questionable. (and I’m not implying that you’ve never done the latter.) I’m not invested in letters after my name, so I have nothing to jeopardize in changing or expanding my views.
    It is splitting hairs to differentiate between life span and life expectancy in this discussion, since life expectancy can’t be determined without the data on life span. There is a distinct correlation between sanitation and life span, ergo, life expectancy, as noted by any number of well respected researchers. Furthermore, all alternative medicine cannot be lumped into one box. There are many modalities, most of which are useful to many, none of which are useful to all, and some of which are total crap. Only someone willing to accept truth at any cost can accept it where ever it is found, regardless of the box someone may have put it in.
    I don’t gainsay the value of your expensive education, but it has it’s limitations and you academic types often come off as arrogant and close-minded, perhaps because you are still paying off your student loans, or it hasn’t been that long since you did. I can see how it would be tempting to assume that the expense has rendered you an unsurpassable knowledge in most fields of debate – except, perhaps for debates with people who have even more letters after their names.
    Of course, this is just the opinion of a lowly lay person.

  439. Jodee says:

    Sorry, everyone for the double post. My computer glitched.
    That’s one of the many benefits of dial-up.

  440. JohnQPublic says:

    Two guys in a bar are arguing whether women are equally as good as men in math. “I can prove to you women are not as good,” exclaims one. “When that waitress comes over I will ask her to integrate x squared and I bet you $5 she won’t know what I’m talking about.” Making sure he won’t lose the bet, the other excuses himself to catch the waitress in the back of the room and give her the answer. “Look,” he says, “that guy over there will ask you a question and when he does just say ‘one third x cubed,’ OK?” She agrees. When the time comes and he asks, “what’s the integral of x squared?” “One third x cubed,” she replies. Then as she walks away she looks over her shoulder and says, “plus a constant!”

  441. havAgr8Day says:

    Hmmm, a testing post…

  442. havAgr8Day says:

    Not sure what’s happenin’ with computer, so will try to post a few short posts and see if they will work…

    Hey, Hi everyone!!! 🙂 🙂

  443. havAgr8Day says:

    Otay. Worked.

    I really want/need to post a few things:
    1. clean up my messy last post 🙂

    2. write a post that I think the universe wants me to share 🙂 (Really – otherwise, I’d skip it)

    3. and write one last one that my conscious feels sort of required to…..

    so let’s see how fast i get through it, may have to wait a bit if the posting is slow 🙂

  444. havAgr8Day says:

    Messy last post:

    JQ – I DID feel love for you 🙂 as soon as re-claimed my time. (Btw, my love or not really was irrelevent – I wasn’t trying to set myself up as a love and peace expert – only interjecting those words a lot because I felt the engine was wired a little too tight in terms of the conversation) and that throwing out LOVE, LOVE, LOVE might get the engine a little lubricated, so to speak :).
    Perhaps toss it a little over into the right hemisphere – where WONDER DOES SOMETIMES HAPPEN (in my humble experience).

    Anyway, my last post to you reflected frustration and distress (which I’ll address directly in my last post) – and my desire to get my lil rear outta here so that I could get to the work I needed to do.

    But it left me with a sense that I’d thrown a bit of a hissy fit 🙂 🙂 🙂

    And if I think I make a mess – I like to clean it up. So, onward? Yes? Good!

  445. havAgr8Day says:

    Okay,
    what I feel the universe wants me to post:

    (For those just joining, I had previously posted that I had seen Dyer’s PB fundraising talk on INSPIRATION, and that it had resonated on probably every level possible with me…)

    SO, after posting several Dyer/creativity related posts – and then writing that I really didn’t have much more to say and would probably be dropping off… here’s what happened.

    I DID mention that I came across Dyer’s book on INSPIRATION at Barnes and Noble – and then made another post somewhat about that. However, here’s what I didn’t say…….
    (If i write a too long post, it seems to disappear, so will continue on next post…)

  446. havAgr8Day says:

    What I feel the Universe wants me to say CONT. 🙂

    Here’s what I didn’t write:

    I didn’t go to B&N to get/look at Dyer’s book.
    I went to there to purchase a friend’s recently released Gift Book (something I like to do for all my writing friends).
    When I couldn’t find the Gift Book in the Gift Book section – I went to the book sellers station and asked if they carried it.
    The book seller said they did – but it had been stocked in the ‘self-help’ section.
    As I followed the book-seller to this section, my mind was completely pre-occupied by a charming “growing up in Texas” story she was telling me… until she located my friend’s book and handed it to me.
    I thanked her, and as she walked away, I looked back at the shelf to see if there were any addtl copies of the book left (something many writers like to know for some odd-ball but fun reason).

    Anyway, when I looked at the spot where she had pulled my friend’s book from – I saw Dyer’s book on INSPIRATION (no other copies of friend’s book).
    The INSPIRATION book was on the shelf just above, maybe one or two books to the left.

    I didn’t think much, just grabbed it along with my friend’s and went to sit down for the last few minutes before the store closed.

    (BTW, my friend’s last name begins with an L, and of course, Dyer’s begins with a …… oh, isn’t this fun???)

  447. havAgr8Day says:

    Anyway, having only seen portions of my friend’s book, I couldn’t resist diving into it right away – plus, gift book texts are generally short, fun (but the best ones pack a lot into those few words – i think).

    And so, I was just finishing my friend’s book when I heard last call.

    Hmmmm…. There was Dyer’s book sittin on my lap, i hadn’t thought through what i was going to do with it – didn’t have time to skim it. Ummm…
    OKAY, I’m buying it.

    The next day, while PROCRASTINATING from writing some correspondence that was for some reason difficult for me – I opened up his book, (PROCRASTINATING I THOUGHT) and skimmed it for about 15-20 minutes (later posting a few thoughts about what I’d read).

    However, didn’t post this: the last thing I read in it (that the universe sort of inhales/exhales, gives/receives, etc) clicked somewhere inside of me – because when I sat down to write the correspondence that had been tricking me up for over two weeks – all of a sudden EVERYTHING flowed. It flowed because I realized that I needed to thank the person more than anything else. (Technically, professionally, I had – but in my heart, I knew given what I had received in our last interaction, that it wasn’t spiritually nearly enough.) Thus, as soon as my desire shifted to what I truly felt comfortable doing – thanking her for something more than worthy of that gratitude – everything else fell into a real, natural, RIGHT context. Two weeks of tail chasing – and finally – AHHH. Good. YAY.

    ***********************

    About a week later, was feeling stumped about something else, opened Dyer’s book, spent about five minutes skimming a chapter – and the same thing happened.

    Those are some good results for what I kept thinking was just a fluke and few minutes of time procrastinatin…….

    *********************

    After this second situation, I began to think, you know, this is startin to feel a little bit like some good ole synchronicity!!!!!!! (sometimes the experiences are a bit more BOLD and SHOCKING frankly – but the one above was still very fruitful.)

    Anyway, thought – maybe I’m spose to write this on this board – but, feeling as pressed for time and as occasionally selfish as I am – put it off – UNTIL,
    yesterday, I thought, what is WEDGED between this (puppy)gate and doorway. I looked down, and saw Dyer’s lovely face (and butterfly on his finger) looking up at me.

    OKAY!!! ALRIGHTY!!! Ya got my attention!! I’ll write the post!!!
    (Everything else on the corner table was undisturbed).

    So, Universe, here is that post.
    (BTW, i don’t even know if any of Dyer’s other books were on the shelf – didn’t look.)
    Also, just a tip, writin these posts are a lot more fun when you have a little puppy layin fast asleep on your left shoulder…….

  448. havAgr8Day says:

    What I feel morally compelled to post:

    David Bacon has his name/identity to what he writes. Thus, write what ya want Mr. Dr. Bacon, cuz, YOU are standing behind it. And if Dyer ever wants to address it honestly – he has the opportunity (somethin tells me – he probably won’t find the need – but that’s no insult to you Bac. 🙂

    However, if you (like me) are using a name that allows you anonymity – then, I think you need to be a little more responsible when discussing your views on a real, live human being. (Discussing concepts? Okay, let it rip if ya need to. A human being? Well, if you’re going to really do a slice and dice job – then I think you need to do it the cloak of anonymity.)

    I’m assuming that people all over the world have access to this public site.

    JQ, I’m not trying to single you out, oh, heck, to an extent I am, so I’ll just choke the truth out of myself.

    JQ, if you reviewed your posts about Dyer – some of what you say/said would be considered slander in my book. The words you used to describe him, his publisher, other related to him, etc. – were really, really – not just critical – but downright tearing apart, and in my book, (said in an understated way, really 😉 – rude.

    I think when you start alleging as much as you did in your earlier posts (and I’m not trying to drag those up now, just address a concept about that) – that YOU REALLY NEED TO STEP UP TO THE PLATE, IDENTIFY WHO YOU ARE, WHO YOU ARE AFFILIATED WITH – AND allow others to have a true sense of who the real person is making all of these allegations.

    Again, debating ideas is one thing, but what I wrote above something entirely different.

    Having said that, in your previous posts, you mentioned that there were many things that you thought Dyer had expressed that were positive and helpful. You also mentioned that you believed he was SINCERE. I understood you to be saying that during earlier years in your life, you had gotten some positive out of his talks, etc.

    And so, I ask you – why not now offer him the same back?? Why not approach him with the desire to be helpful? Why not approach him sincerely?
    Why not express any concerns you might have with him in an honest, forthright manner, that might help yourself, potentially him (if any of it seems right to him – based on your description of him as being somebody who is sincere and wanting to help, I’d guess that he’d want to consider what you said – if done in kindness.)

    Anyway, that was essentially what my last-post hissy fit was about.

    I thought the way you were addressing him, as well as others loosely related to him – bordered on slander. I actually felt physical pain reading your posts -and thus tried to ID them early on, and then skip them for the most part…
    (guess my technique didn’t work too well in the end huh???)

    Anyway, when your comments started reaching farther then those areas (into the realm of Angels for example) – I just had the visceral sense of you being like a bull in a china shop – and HAD to get out of here.

    Which, guess I did. 🙂

    My last point in this post –
    PLEASE know that not all people come to this site to debate. Some are aware that they can share a thought or two, and that that thought may reach someone who will resonate with it – or not.

    Personally, sometimes I feel as if I’ve fallen into a lucky tub of butter (in terms of how much fun I get to have in creative areas, and in the realm of spirit and synchronicity) – and sometimes you just want others to have the chance to experience it too… as possible. We’re all different in so many different ways.

    But the last thing that I want to do is spend time debating anything. Maybe pop up and share, but that’s about it (and nobody need agree – at least, until they one day fall in to that same tub of happy butter and go, what the hay? This really exists????? Wow life can be SOMETIMES glorious.)

    xox.

  449. havAgr8Day says:

    And btw, just for good measure …

    i bet there’s a whole lot of other tubs of happy somethin or others out there that i haven’t fallen in to yet…….

    sounds sort of fun thought.

    Dusky dark here now – but still time to ease into the eve. Thanks for reading all of my thoughts if ya got through them.

    g’nite.

  450. Dave Bacon says:

    Entanglement does not allow superluminal signaling. Any experiment which shows superluminal signaling would tell you that quantum theory, or at least normal relativistic quantum field theory, is wrong (always a possibility, but no such experiment has ever been performed.)

    That being said entanglement is very strange, representing a correlation which is stronger than that which can be reproduced by people doing classical things and communicated slower than the speed of light. In other words, if you try to explain the quantum world by a classical world which doesn’t allow superluminal signaling, you will fail. If you think about this for a second, you’ll realize that the converse of this is not that quantum theory allows superluminal signaling.

    Most physicists just say “accept that you cannot explain the world classically” and then carry on doing their calculations. This is a very pragmatic response. However quantum entanglement really is strange and so thinking hard about it has led people to realize that it allows different power computers than our current computers. That’s what I work on: quantum computation.

    Crapzolla is just a word I made up which is kind of like “ah crap.” Pardon my language.

  451. JohnQPublic says:

    Good god. Slander? You need to lighten up. You take things far too seriously.

  452. JohnQPublic says:

    Yeah, I’m feeling the unconditional love now.

  453. JohnQPublic says:

    Have you looked at this whole site? Bacon’s whole resume is on here, his research papers (with his name on them), the work he is doing, etc.
    And what is this if-Dyer-wants-to-contact us business? I don’t know, doesn’t sound like both feet are on the ground. Some of the occasional lofty remarks made here, as if we were saying some really important things, are just laughable. If Dyer feels any of this is important enough (he probably has better things to do like meditating on his navel), he can post a message and I’ll email him. It’s that simple.

  454. JohnQPublic says:

    Regarding Hay House and publishers, I really asked that question in sincerity. But it sounds like you freelance write and are not commissioned. (I’m not saying anything bad about freelancing at all.)
    One of the responsibilities of any non-fiction book publisher is fact checking. This is what got James Frey’s publisher, “In a Million Pieces,” in so much trouble. Just look at some Hay House’s offerings: a series on “angelic therapy,” which is counseling for your relationship with your guardian angels. Are you kidding me? I’m sorry, but that kind of nonsense is just not right to peddle to an unsuspecting market. They are making money off a gullible audience, which is in no way moral–and yet what they claim so much to be. I feel no need to apologize for calling out what is clearly a rip off.

  455. havAgr8Day says:

    Hey JQ,

    although I don’t read auras (but I also don’t discount that there is the potential that some people MIGHT) – here’s what I’m thinkin after your last 2 posts:

    i’m thinkin it’s bright, shiny and sparkly – cuz your last 2 posts seemed playful and fun.

    Hey!!! Good!!!!!!!!

    And frankly, reading a post from you that talks about your wife, and your youngest GRANDDAUGHTER (congrats!) just makes me feel happy.

    So, i’m gleanin that my aura is a lil bit brighter now too.

    Anyway…….
    gotsta-go. Wanna sit in the meadow so some butterflys can land on me (never works if i chase ’em).

    ps tried to post this comment at exactly the same time as your post about the image popped up – and my post disappeared (oh, it was much more entertaining and better in every way than this one 😉 )

    pss there is a saying in the foyer/entrance to my home “never look down on anyone unless you are helping him up.”

    Good words to read i think.

  456. JohnQPublic says:

    Me, my wife, and my youngest granddaughter. Last year. Anything else you’ll just have to glean from my aura.

  457. JohnQPublic says:

    I embedded an anchored image link, but it didn’t take. Oh well.

  458. havAgr8Day says:

    A quite sleepy me (who just read Kate’s post) adds … very much so!

  459. JohnQPublic says:

    Well, I guess this is the only way I can do it. Again, wife, me, granddaughter.

    http://i147.photobucket.com/albums/r317/Retromingent/Nov_2006.jpg

  460. Kate says:

    What a wonderful picture!
    ~ Kate

  461. hana says:

    Ditto, (the picture). Welcome back HavAgr8Day.

  462. Zer0 says:

    Looks like it was a calm weekend. Nothing exciting took place.
    JQP, thanks for the photo. Now we can place a face to the name. Thanks for the link to Tesla band also.

    I have a suggestion. Let’s pick an interesting and controversial subject and debate. Actually, let everyone who is interested, propose 3 subjects and we can vote and pick one out of the bunch.
    Let’s make it a productive debate. I don’t have much time to dedicate to this forum so for me every hour counts.

  463. Zer0 says:

    Jodee,
    Did you have a chance to research the info on Tom Beardon’s site?
    What do you think?
    I just got the 2 DVDs and am eager to set some time aside to watch.

  464. WhoKnows says:

    Some of you already know all that you are about to read here but it looks like a few on this website think they are “KNOWLEDGE” itself!

    The more we know, the more we find out how much more there is yet to know and consequently just how much we truly dont know.

    Some people on this website critize that which has no “scientific basis” AS IF science DEFINES reality when it merely tries to understand it and live with it and it is ALWAYS in a state of learning. I will call this type of arrogant thinking SCIENTIFIC FUNDAMENTALISM.

    This is no different than the Christian fundamentalists who reject any idea that has no basis on the Bible.

    If we compare REALITY with an Elephant, Science has a hold of the Elephant’s head, Religion has a hold of the Elephants heart and New Agers have a hold of the Elephant’s back, ALL the while each group is screaming at the other, LOOK AT ME, I have a hold of REALITY and THIS is what it looks like!!!

    One day each self labeled individual will find that just like an elephant, REALITY was much bigger than any one group could put its arms around!

    While I have an appreciation for science and I have had some serious spiritual experiences (enough to send you know who among you asking for PROOF or better yet a Straight Jacket) I can see “that which I DONT know” spanning out without end in the horizon just as when the first explorers left land and the farther they sailed the more ocean they saw and the more unknown territory they became aware of!

    The UNIVERSE is a pretty DARN BIG THING! Who among us mere mortals can say they have IT contained within the relatively microscopic confounds of their small and underutelized brains!
    I include my brain in the description here as well, I am NO BETTER and of course, NO WORSE!

    Good Luck and may you be at peace with the fact that:

    No matter how much you think you know, WHAT YOU DONT KNOW is actually infinitely more than what you actually DO know!

    I am at peace with it. We are all ignorant and we are all wise in our own ways. Growing and learning are Life’s infinite journey and none of us can truthfully claim to have arrived! I found out through this website that to debate or argue personal life experiences and beliefs is like arguing which country or food is better with someone who has not lived in our country or tasted our food and who has NO PLANS on doing so either!

    Good Luck y’all!

  465. havAgr8Day says:

    Well, i’m not against y’all debating – just, i’ll skim read those parts :).

    However, JQ, just so you know – i think a lot of people join the intention, thoughts… action.

    I’d guess most people on this blog do so.

    In terms of my action (oh, bore… more ’bout me, i’ll try to keep it short…enuf) –
    I volunteered in children’s hospitals when I was an undergraduate – volunteered in homeless shelters for women and children (primarily) during grad school (this extended through the ten years I worked on an inpatient hospital unit – because having had a relationship with the woman minister that ran one particular unit, the unit I later worked on essentially adopted that shelter.)

    Anyway, I could go on and on with that – however, I still think the other side is important as well.
    One of my best friends is a trauma and vascular surgeon – and goes to Mexico fairly regularly to volunteer medical services. But if he was an ogre and made the people around him cry – I would think he was doing something wonderful, and something sort of sad.

    Helping others, helping oneself (I agree with what you wrote about that), and allowing yourself happiness (something for me that helps me to have a full cup when I dip into it to help others) all seem interwoven for me.

    BTW, I chose to get a grad. degree in a medical field because I can be so empathetic to the suffering around me, that it seemed easier to encorporate that into part of my life’s work – because then it eased my heart and actually helped me.

    Guess that’s also the point: don’t think I’ve ever helped anyone where I haven’t felt like I’ve gotten as much if not more back.

    Still, I love creativity and writing. And I think you can give to others in many, many ways/shapes/forms. Writing a story that ultimately comforts, uplifts, or inspires self-acceptance in someone – is a great gift as well in my book. (PUN not intended, but sorta fun anyway.)

    I like to think that individuals can give in all sorts of ways. (A woman at Petco gave me a lovely gift tonight when I was there buying special food my little kitty; who is having some struggles. Her warmth, connection, and conversation left me feeling strengthened.

    I’m glad to know about all of the people you know who help others.

    Still, concrete action IS helpful. I believe sharing encouragement and offering a smile and a shoulder (intention: love) is also helpful.

    Just thoughts.
    Nothin to debate on.

    A question about debates though…
    (truly) for me – writing in here is only a good use of my time when I feel like I’m sharing something positive. Otherwise, I start to feel like I’m sitting in a cave with a bunch of people discussing life – when the big ole real thang is right out the door. And I wanna be IN life.
    So, the question is: for those who enjoy debating (as if there is a right and wrong answer) – what is the enjoyment in it? Are you really seeking to convince? To share? To educate? Or is it more of an enjoyable recreational experience (that maybe I just don’t relate to?)

    Me, headin to sleeeeeeeeeeeee
    p. 🙂

  466. havAgr8Day says:

    It’s funny about absurdities – in my experience – something only seems logically absurd – until you actually (and potentially accidentally) experience the reality of it concretely in your own life. Then, it seems to me, that you either have to stretch yourself open wide enough to encorporate the reality of the concrete, still not completely knowable – experiences – or you shut yourself down so that you can maintain reassuring sense of knowing everything there is to know, blah, blah, blah.

    If you woke up tomorrow, and began having weekly, witnessed, psychic experiences – would the concept be absurd to you? Perhaps after you ran and had your mental health checked (delusional? scratch. psychotic? scratch. Diagnosis: reality intact.) would you debate about the existence of psychic experience? Or would you not waste your breath and look elsewhere….

    must. go. night. night. now.

  467. JohnQPublic says:

    My goodness. Yes, I have to agree, “New Agers have a hold of the Elephant’s back…”

  468. havAgr8Day says:

    o no. i fibbed. lastly, i related to a lot of what Whoknows wrote.
    And Hana Girl, HUG right back atcha.

    NOW. TO. FALL. INTO. DREAMS……..

  469. WhoKnows says:

    I’ll repeat it again, some people want to debate the merits of countries without ever venturing off the borders of their own land.

  470. JohnQPublic says:

    Actually, you’re a bit mistaken. I’ve ventured and it turned out to be Disneyland, so I came home.

  471. JohnQPublic says:

    If only you New Agers knew what I was doing for a paralyzed women in Texas, you’d never bug me again. But I won’t elaborate because it is about action and not intention.

  472. JohnQPublic says:

    Let me try to impart some life experience. I was a teenager in the sixties and grew up in California through the whole love generation movement. However, those professing to love everyone rarely actually did any real work to help anyone. They just talked about it. Then later came my personal inspiration. Much, much later in life I worked for a corporate VP who was the meanest SOB I’ve ever known. He typically would make people cry (literally) in meetings and wouldn’t take anything from anyone. After working for him for a while, I come to learn that every year he takes 3 full months off (not for vacation, mind you) to go to Costa Rica and build homes for the poor. (This was somebody with a lot of money.) One year, he even wound up in a Costa Rica jail doing so because of a car accident. He never talked about this charity he did. He kept it a secret. (It was an accident I found out.) He never preached to others about giving to the poor. He never espoused to love everyone. But come to find out, he just did it. I started doing the same with him. Then I met others like him.
    In my life, I have found those who talk about love and charity typically (not always, mind you, but typically) actually do the least. You see, you really can’t help others unless you have the means to do so (money, free time, etc.). You have to help yourself first.
    So, that’s my speech about charity and how it relates to self-interest. Keep the kind words and just do more.

  473. månesteiner says:

    “I have a suggestion. Let’s pick an interesting and controversial subject and debate. Actually, let everyone who is interested, propose 3 subjects and we can vote and pick one out of the bunch. Let’s make it a productive debate.”

    But the problem that I see is that even with this 1st subject “Wayne Dyer and his intentionality quantum physics mutterings” is that an actual productive debate hasn’t really occurred.

    Granted, there’s been lots of conversation. But, the parties from the opposing sides haven’t agreed upon a basic starting point, a common definition of terms, beginning premises, nothing.

    No one from either side has advanced a claim that has then been conceeded or refuted by the other side. No movement of the argument.

    All we have so far is people expressing their opinions to each other. That’s not a meaningful debate. That’s people each taking their turns on the soapbox.

  474. JohnQPublic says:

    This is why Dyer’s relentless self-promotion bothers me. Chopra’s, too. Yes, they do good things, but I have met those who I believe do a lot more. Further, those I admire put action before all else. In fact, that was one of David Bacon’s original comments in the forum. “No talk of action.” Why so much emphasis on the thoughts and emotion when it is the action that really helps.

  475. JohnQPublic says:

    I vote on the dihedral hidden subgroup problem.

  476. JohnQPublic says:

    Honestly, the only real way to have a debate is with those who have been trained in debate. By that I mean people who understand rhetoric (true sense of the word) and logical fallacies (I think Aristotle identified 127 of them) that most fall into. If you can debate and not get into circular reasoning and such, then it really can be productive. But if you don’t know how to look for those pitfalls, then it inevitably becomes emotional and, as you say, winds up as turns on the soapbox. It’s like anything else, it takes practice.
    So, I don’t mean to rain on your parade, but I’m not holding out much hope here.

  477. månesteiner says:

    You’re not raining on my parade. I was the skunk at the garden party on this conversation from the get go:)

    “The only safe rule, therefore, is that which Aristotle mentions in the last chapter of his Topcica: not to dispute with the first person you meet, but only with those of your acquaintance of whom you know they possess sufficient intelligence and self respect not to advance absurdities; to appeal to reason and not to authority, and to listen to reason and to yield to it; and finally to cherish truth, to be willing to accept reason even from an opponent, and to be just enough to bear to being proved in the wrong, should truth lie with him. From this it follows that scarecely one man in a hundred is worth your disputing with him.”

    -Arthur Schopenhauer, The Art of Controversy

  478. WhoKnows says:

    SOOOO JohnQPublic:
    The lesson you learned from your life experience is that mean SOBs or intellecutal bullies who do good works part time and in secret are more honest and better role models than anyone who talks about love and kindness publicly?

    Action precludes talk? If you DO then you can not TALK about it? Why do you talk about science then?

    Mother Theresa, Gandhi, Budah, Jesus, and millions of others who dedicated their lives to being like them must therefore be fakes because they TALKED about love and kindness publicly?

    Do you really believe the world would be a better place if there were less people publicly talking about love and kindness and more people who were being jerks 9 months out of the year but did great works in secret the remaining 3 months?

    I will tell you this, while you may never forget your hero’s 3 months out of the year of secret kindness, the world is full of those who will never forget the remaining 9 months out of the year of his public meanness. EVERYTHING we DO AND SAY counts, EVERY DAY.

    I NOTICED YOU ASKED FOR KINDNESS FROM ME AND OTHERS, BUT YET YOU COULDNT WAIT TO PICK 3 WORDS OUT OF MY ORIGINAL POST TO TAKE YET ANOTHER JAB AT NEW AGERS WHEN MUCH OF IT APPLIED TO YOU!!

    Where is your kindness and intellectual humility on this site? Where are your posts acknowledging that there is much you simply DONT know?

    I read the posts JQP and it is clear that you are unaware that time and time again you come off as an intellectual snob and bully with much derrogatory and condecending to say (much like your SOB hero) and I can see that you derive a sense of power from it. I KNOW YOU HAVE A GOOD HEART, the question is:

    Why do you ask for kindness from others when you have no hesitation withholding it yourself at the first opportunity?

    Here is another question for you, how much time have you actually seriously spent in the personal lab of life rigorously giving meditation, prayer, yoga, acupuncture or any kind of religious or even new age practice an open minded and OBJECTIVE test to see if YOU find something you can not explain through convetional logic and scientific wisdom?

    Being that you are a fan of scientific method which hinges on experimentation and you say you ventured out of your own “land” and it turned out to be “Disney Land”, I have another question for you: If Thomas Edison experimented with light the way you have experimented with spiritual “phenomena”, would he have discovered the light bulb?

    If you say that you have honestly and seriously been experimenting with spiritual phenomena then you are missing something BIG in your experimental approach and you are just like the scientist who is better cut out to be a theorist rather than an experimental scientist.

    Instead of taking the time it takes to READING 300 books a year, I spent years personally doing and experimenting with a variety of spiritual “phenomena” and I found that without a shred of doubt there IS such a thing as SPIRIT and there are plenty of actual life experiences that fall outside the limited domains of our physical brain and 5 senses. Conventional science is still in denyal about anything spiritual because not everyone has these experiences and mainstream science can not control/influence it at will and apply its conventional methods to it and measure it with any kind of electronic gadget yet to be invented. What science finds itself saying is that HUMAN EXPERIENCE outside the lab is not “PROOF” of HUMAN EXPERIENCE, for human experice to be TRUE, “we the scientists” must be able to apply our methods to it and separate the experience from the experiencer in order to accept it as scientifically valid!?!?!

    Your true agenda and your unkind feelings towards new agers and religious people alike (well anyone spiritual) is well documented on this site. You may be unaware that being a SCIENTIFIC FUNDAMENTALIST makes you an unkind person to others who dont share your atheist views and your selective love and unquestioned belief for the “scientific”.

    Fundamentalists of any kind are not people without love, but people with same amount of love as everyone else who choose to primarily RESERVE their love for a very limited subset of the population, people who are just like them.

    More often than you realize, the “intellectually superior” mask you wear hides the kind and humble man behind it.

    I know you will likely read this right now as a personal attack on you and if you do then you will miss the point once again.

    I am not expecting anything from you JQP, I write this for others to read and to counteract some of the negative effects of the anti-spiritual propaganda you have been so passionately delivering here.

    I also realize that I can not stop you from writing about your anti-spiritual beliefs as if they were FACTS anymore than you can stop Wayne Dyer or Deepak Chopra from doing so either no matter how hard you try.

    So in the end, READER BEWARE.

  479. JohnQPublic says:

    No, the lesson is this: the ones who talk about charity the most usually don’t deliver. I don’t think Jesus falls into that category.

    I never asked for kindness from anyone here, I suggested civil discourse.

    I don’t care about anyone’s kind heart. It’s what you do that matters.

    My goodness you make some lofty claims. You probably need to replace your caps-lock key now.

  480. havAgr8Day says:

    Jodee,

    hello :). No, I don’t really have the stomach or the patience for this conversation – very often.

    I don’t do a lot of parsing words on this site – cuz when i post, i try to do so quickly (or i regret the time i have spent).

    In terms of my slander comment – the casual definition is simply – to circulate false, discrediting/defamitory rumors – and such rumors CAN have a very negative effect on a person – when the rumors are spread using the internet. (Trust me on this one thing: I have a friend who has written a highly used university text book on public relations and the media – and he would highly concur that people can read a bit of something on the internet – especially if they are from out of the country – and, without the desire to do some extensive time consuming research – have that piece of information effect them.)

    Point: What I was referring to regarding JQ’s distressing posts were very specific comments that regarded Dyer, and his publisher/previous publisher/and their relationships. Having been immersed in the book making world for quite a few years – I have never heard/read what JQ asserted in those posts. They were factual statements, phrased in (for me) a derogatory way (I’m not going to repeat them here) – that, as far as the facts that I know of (through people who work in different publishing houses) were false. Period.
    Those were the posts I was referring to – and they came very near to when I jumped out of here.

    Also, the funny thing is: what also happened at that time was that JQ made some comments about the writing process (creative) – that made absolutely no sense to me. I won’t go any further, because I don’t have a desire to embarrass JQ – that isn’t my point. But for me, when he made those comments (again, stated so factually) – it concerned me even more – because I thought “Woah, what if there’s a whole lot of what he is stating that is that far off?” JQ, you refer to facts etc, but when you’ve talked (Otay, Jodee 🙂 WRITTEN) about writing – (and not the clinical/professional journal sort – but the creative sort) – I generally feel that the words you use reflect a real lack of knowledge in the area. However, it doesn’t bother me – because I don’t think you need to feel the pressure to be the expert of all things all the time. And like I said, for me, running a long a hamster wheel (in terms of debating ALL things while sitting at a computer screen) is not productive.

    So Jodee, I live in a beautiful area – about a mile from the Santa Monica mountains, and about fifteen miles from the Pacific ocean. I have two professions: consulting in the health field, and writing. And I have a lot of people whom I love in my life. So many amazing things to do and learn. There’s a center about ten miles up the road where I can go listen to a Nobel Peace Prize winner speak quite frequently (part of their speaker series) – and I try to take advantage of all that life offers me at this point. So spending lots of time in here addressing random debates – doesn’t make sense for me.

    And about debating – so funny 🙂 – I only scanned the debate y’all were having ’bout allopathic medicine etc. – and, (BLAH BLAH BLAH) as someone who has a grad degree in a medical field – I felt no need to jump in. I’m not a system defender. Most of the people I know who work within the more traditional western medical profession are not either (that includes some surgeons). But like Bacon here, my training in that field requires lots of consistency and generalization of practice – which has it’s own sets of limitations. My point is – I’d never deprive myself of seeking or utilizing other forms of health care. (The field I work in is PM&R – physical medicine and rehabilitation). Anyway, my point is – although I work in that field – I was very glad to move into consulting – because that allowed me to use the parts of my training that I felt allowed me to offer the most to others – and to not emphasize the areas that I didn’t find to be authentically helpful (after a decade of shared clinical experiences). Again, sowwy, cuz i jump around – can’t stand spending too much time here. But the point is – I would want all the choices available to me. And I haven’t studied your field – so I don’t really know very much about it. But I certainly wouldn’t discount it. Thus, I just felt no need to debate anything. Point ad nauseum: 😛
    I see a lot of strengths and weaknesses in any system. I love to cull the strengths, and minimize the weakness as much as possible.

    Anyway, I actually popped up in here after googlin’ ’round a bit trying to see if I could find something that would help me to help others for whom I consult. They represent a diverse group religiously – and people of different religions are often in close proximity – and to serve them the best that I can, means to help them with their own discomfort – or ??? – confusion over how to share close physical spaces with others (while trying to heal) who have such different views. Thus – and this is funny – I randomly thought of Dyer’s Inspiration talk – and on his guests – and googled him thinking that something might click somewhere that would be helpful.

    And I ended up here 🙂 🙂 🙂

    Well, yes, it has been helpful for me internally in gaining some of what I was looking for.

    Also – when I popped up here – and saw Bacon’s post – I never thought I’d stay around. Regardless of what he said/no!!!! oh no!!! I mean WROTE 😉 I felt a fondness for him – and for others of his ilk :). As I said waaaayyyyy up in the posts, I have a beloved brother-in-law who is a very creative, excellent scientist (Ivy league phd if that impresses anyone 🙂 – and he initially sat pretty firmly in Bacon’s camp. However, he and I actually never debated. (Probably cuz he wanted to marry my sis and knew how much we love each other 😉 – however, even though we never debated, we would have lots of normal talks like families do – and within about six months, he had one foot firmly stepping out into unknown territory. Now, I think he lives everywhere. I love his passion for science and experimentation – discovery. I find it extremely creative and very similar to my creative writing process (the straight jacket for me in the writing process comes in the last stages – copy proofing, some editing, etc.etc.). But sometimes the things he says – (and he’d never consider himself new age – just someone who speaks his thoughts honestly as he has them) – make me go “wow, that was an amazing view on that.”

    Anyway, during most of this post, I have felt like I’ve been wasting too much time – cuz my heart and mind really need to be elsewhere – thus the guilt that I may be even wasting other’s time right now. All these words.

    And so, until I feel like something more compelling urges me to pop up in here (it probably will) I’ll probably pop out for a bit.
    This post has felt really DRY and dull – and at the very least, i hope to be slightly entertaining. 🙂

    I will say one last thing though – it is funny that JQ calls me new age. I’ve said repeatedly that my experiences with being psychic are almost always linked to my creative life. The fact that I’ve dreamt manuscripts in my sleep – does that make me New Age? Or does the fact that I’ve dreamt about a manuscript in my sleep (after praying for help with an introduction the night before) make me new age?

    I don’t label myself. I just deal with myself :).
    That’s usually enough for me.

    But truthfully, I grew up in a Catholic household, believe in Christ – and have no desire to discount anyone else’s religion or beliefs.
    I do hold LOVE up as the greatest goal.
    And for me – intention – does matter. Because if I’m doing something for someone because I want something from them – YUCKO!!! If I’m doing something for someone because loving energy is flowing through me – Bingo. And even with goals, I’m pretty sure that Bacon wouldn’t be doing the work he’s doing if he hadn’t somewhere, somehow set the intention (probably after he found he loved that area). Hmmm. Remembering Dyer’s talk on INSPRIRATION … just remembering him saying that (loosely repeated) living an inspired life requires living in spirit. I sort of take it that Bacon loves what he does, follows that love – and is thus living in spirit (oh Bacon, let that spirit keep growing…….).

    And maybe that is what “Spiritual Energy is the Energy of Abundance,” means… when you do something that you love (I’ll connect that to your heart here) – you are in spirit – and I think Bacon’s creating some abundance around him.
    Go Bacon!!! 🙂

    For me that statement rings true in that way for me. I originally had two author/writing mentors (very lucky me!!) – and both always said “You are so prolific.” I love creative writing – it sort of owns me really – and when I open myself to it –
    the stories come like waterfalls. Awake, asleep… absolute abundance.

    Anyway, also know that many mystics, many saints, many lovely humans – have talked about things like the soul, the spirit, loving ENERGY, the energies that flow through our body – way before anybody ever talked about new age.

    So, however you want to define me, otay. 🙂

    But for me, I’m just lil ole curious me.
    Tryin to live up to the life i’ve been given by living it – loving it – and keepin my eyes, heart, and mind wide open to it.

    Quaaa (or for Hana, however a Frog would say “ciao for now.”) 🙂 🙂 🙂

  481. JohnQPublic says:

    Very true words, mÃ¥nesteiner. “…only with those of your acquaintance of whom you know they possess sufficient intelligence and self respect not to advance absurdities.” Unfortunately, you can see from the WhoKnows (ex-Jodee, I believe) last post that absurdity is in the eye of the beholder.

    Regarding “the parade,” I was only referring to your request for vote, not your comments in general. If anyone actually agrees to go forward with a vote, then I still am voting for the dihedral hidden subgroup problem. It is one of the issues Bacon cites for quantum computing, so I think is in-line with the website.

  482. JohnQPublic says:

    By the way, nothing about this website supports spirituality. If you’re looking to resonate with others who agree, why here?

  483. havAgr8Day says:

    It took me so long to post that last forever post that i missed some cute ones (Hana – your’s, JQ, you calling Dyer a friend – Ummmm, WOWWWWWW. Happy!!!!)

    bu-bye now 🙂

  484. havAgr8Day says:

    Said with the utmost affection:

    “JQ, Get Out Of That Office. Get Out of That Office…” (Said with the accent from the movie I never saw – where some crankcaller was scaring a babysitter? No? But do ya know what i mean???)

    I mean, just rip off your clothes and run around the woods nakid for a bit.

    Anything. Ya got to get out of that office!!!!

    And so many kids waiting for you to help them even more (and lovely stray dogs)…

    “Get Out Of The….”

    XOX!!!

    (Playful!!!!!!)

  485. WhoKnows says:

    GENUINE (my caps are stuck, what can I say) kind actions do not flow out of an unkind heart so we cant separate the two anymore than you can separate the left side of your body from the right.

    You are quick to judge others but take issue when others judge you. Very interesting…

    By the way I have been a New Ager, a Christian, and a scientist in my life and I dont consider myself just a “New ager” as you were quick to label me but actually the sum all three.

    If each of these areas was a country, I can say I have actually lived in each one long enough to appreciate why people choose to make a home for themselves in either camp.

    Its anyone’s choice to decide which camp they want to make their home, but to be bashing one camp because you choose not to live there is not a reflaction on the other camps, just a reflection of your own biases and preferences.

    Each group has its own answers and holds a portion of the truth and each has its own shortcomings and anyone that pretends their camp is above others and without lack is at the very least being biased and not objective.

    BYE FOR NOW

  486. JohnQPublic says:

    “Why do you talk about science then?” Because science delivers; it is action. Every time I turn on my microwave, every time I get on a jet, every time I type on my computer, every time I look through my catadioptric telescope, every time I talk on my cell, et cetera. To me, science is true magic and does not require belief to demonstrate itself.

  487. JohnQPublic says:

    I was not referring to you as a new ager, I was referring to havAgr8Day, JoeG and a few others. You in no way strike me as a new ager. They tend not to yell in their writing.

  488. WhoKnows says:

    Yes science works, but also “new age” works, and religion works that is why they are still around and will continue to be long after we are all gone, whether you like it or not.

    THINK WHAT YOU WILL. Like I said I wouldnt expect any different.

    HERE ARE SOME MORE UPPER CASE LETTERS SINCE YOU LIKED THEM SO MUCH, ONE LAST TIME!!!!

  489. JohnQPublic says:

    I don’t know about you, but I am not going to step one foot on a plane built on New Age idealism.

  490. JohnQPublic says:

    What has religion given us but a bunch followers killing each other over their interpretation of divine will? Even you said you walked away from it.

  491. JohnQPublic says:

    WhoKnows, since you’re a scientist you’re then well trained in calculus. Any comment on some of the research papers here?

  492. JohnQPublic says:

    David Bacon: I saw the Kernighan Ritchie book pop up on your random book selection. Very nice.

  493. JohnQPublic says:

    havAGr8Day: Your list of charities is impressive. ( I mean that and is not to be taken as sarcasm.)
    Part of the reason I put the example of the example of my friend’s work in Costa Rica seems to be lost here: living in horrid conditions of villagers, construction work for six days a week for three long months in ma