Nassim Haramein: Fraud or Sage?

NassimWill the new age messiah of free energy please stand up! You may recognize Nassim Haramein from his cameo in the recent internet film “Thrive”. Surely many are wondering if there is any legitimacy to his credentials or theories and one curious skeptic has taken him to task in the following article. Via Up:

I’d like to outline here some very sound reasons for asserting that Nassim Haramein is grossly misleading people by claiming to have any depth of scientific understanding behind his ideas. If you’d prefer to just see some straightforward examples, try some of these — but do come back when you’re done … (Alternatively, read this if you think I’m just being a bit horrid.)

On many of his videos, and on the main page of his Resonance Project’s website, he displays a “prestigious” award for one of his physics papers. What is this?

His certificate looks at first to have been awarded for best paper in the whole of “physics, quantum mechanics, relativity, field theory and gravitation” at the entire university of Liège, Belgium in the year 2009, and “chosen by a panel of peer reviewers”. That would be quite an accolade.

But when you read the wording, it’s clear that it was awarded for best paper presented in that category at a single computing systems conference; and that the ‘peer reviewers’ who awarded it were just the other people on the conference. Most people understand peer review to mean something quite different.

Two relevant questions here. Firstly, how much would the other people on this conference understand about “physics, quantum mechanics, relativity, field theory and gravitation”? Secondly, how many other papers on these subjects do you think were presented at this particular computing systems conference? It’s not likely to be many …

Read more at Up

134 Comments on "Nassim Haramein: Fraud or Sage?"

  1. Hey, it’s 2012. It’s Crazy Cult Time!

  2. Fact Checka | Feb 29, 2012 at 10:17 pm |

     “His theory implies that the nucleus of a single atom of hydrogen has a mass of nearly a billion tons.”  

  3. Firstly, firstly is not a word. Secondly, this guy is a crock.

  4. Planetary Mass > Cometic Mass | Feb 29, 2012 at 10:25 pm | 
    Here Nassim claims that a comet twice the size of Jupiter nearly ripped Mercury from it’s orbit into the Sun…….. Due to it’s incredible mass.  Elementary misconceptions of physics belie his ability to solve the holy grail of physics.  

    • HardcoreMaterialist | Feb 29, 2012 at 11:32 pm |

       Does he have any good ideas or theories?  We should be searching for those. 

      No one is perfect.

      • Well he theorizes that in order for the universe to be expanding it has to be contracting somewhere. he’s claimed to have utilized the energy of the ” vacuum”. That would be awesome if he could back it up with Math. But when scientist criticize his theories, he just replies with a ” oh the scientific community won’t allow any new theories in” instead of just presenting a counter argument with his work. ::shrugs::

      • Camronwiltshire | Mar 1, 2012 at 12:33 am |

        Well we have to define “good”.  Does “good” mean adequate and based on testable hypothesis which could be independently verified?  Or does “good” mean it makes me feel all warm inside to know think that if I give the man with the pony tail my money he will save the planet by creating a free energy device?

          I appreciate that Nassim is charismatic and has a disarming manner of discussing physics for the layman.  The only problem of course is he doesn’t know what he is talking about.  This is rather dangerous when you think about it.  I think their are fantastic thinkers out there who don’t attempt to defraud their fans by cooking up outlandish fantasies and also misrepresenting their credentials.  I do think it likely that often those with a fresh perspective, with new eyes, can in fact create innovative solutions to longstanding problems and support the integration of specialists as well as holists from seemingly disconnected disciplines. 

        I just don’t think presuming that just because you are not part of the establishment that you are excluded from undergoing their tried and true methods for winnowing truth from lie via the scientific method.  To avoid this while proclaiming to have discovered some sublime truth is laughable.  It would be similar to me declaring, “I am best violinist in the world”, and then when asked to duel with the first chair at Julliard, declining because I presume the judges are too biased to give me a fair hearing is an easy out for not proving myself.

        Also he gets very basic concepts completely wrong while lecturing his audiences, and indulges in outright science fiction when he claims to have opened interdimensional gateways in his basement and having observed non physical intelligences warp in and out of this portal.  He literally told this to an audience at the One Heart Conference during his visit in 2009.  

      •  I’ve been inspired to build some crystal power cells, they carry a consistent charge and there is no chemical reaction or other conventional explanation. I have been researching others like John Hutchison and John Bedini. There are magnetic generators that output more power than is put in. The current well established and accepted laws of physics do not explain the direct evidence. Why would these guys care how Nassim makes his living? How does it threaten them? Those are the questions we could be asking…how is Nassim in competition with the way Cam or Bob make their living? Maybe they make their living based on the conventions being true, so that we all have to keep relying on fuel and those who profit from it…

  5. Umm….. Fraud?

  6. TruthersSoSmart | Feb 29, 2012 at 11:27 pm |

     After all I’ve seen and learned these days, I’m willing to give him a bit of leeway for the benefit of the doubt.  Not saying I believe him, but not saying I’m automatically writing off his ideas.  Skepticism shouldn’t be a one-way street.  He might have a good idea or two buried in there, but is unable to express it in a proper manner.

    The raging angry materialist athiests aren’t winning me over any more.  Time to broaden our minds to consider some new possibilities.

    • Camronwiltshire | Mar 1, 2012 at 12:12 am |

      Nothing wrong with considering new possibilities.  But.  When you present that you are peer reviewed and you aren’t, when you solicit money and missionary work from unsuspecting non scientists (yoga teachers, hippies, new age afficianados via his ‘delegate’ or ’emissary’ programs) to spread your untested, basically unreviewed theories while also displaying an abject ignorance of the fundamental laws of physics you claim to be revolutionizing.  Well then the ole scientific community is too “materialist” for their own good argument is shown to be nothing more than cover for another new age conman who can’t stand up to scientific scrutiny and is better labeled an entertainer than a ‘physicist’.  An unearned title at that.

      Of course the argument is not whether or not he is correct, he has every opportunity to prove this in a real peer review, the question is why does he continue to lie about having been peer reviewed and why do people continue to believe him once he has been exposed?

      BobAthon provides Ample evidence discrediting Nassim thoroughly as essentially misleading people on multiple levels.  I would suggest reading the article and asking yourself if a hydrogen atom nucleus weighs 2 Trillion Pounds!  Then why are we unable to measure this requirement for his theories to work?  It’s easy to say this, but how can he prove it?  The answer is he can’t and this is why he avoids peer review.

      Masaru Emoto who is famous for his fancy pictures of water crystals is another pseudoscientist scamming gullible new agers.  He as well claims to be peer reviewed, the basis for his claims, he had a photo essay printed in a peer reviewed journal.  This equals peer review in his mind and is on par with Nassim hiding behind winning an award for a paper in a computing systems conference and then having the results published at AIP (pay to play journal).  

      Other notable new age cranks are David Wilcock, Steven Greer, and Mark Rodin.
      They use basically the same formulas for deception and have managed to hoodwink enough folks to make a living with their drivel.  I have nothing against pushing the limits of knowledge and for pursuing outlandish or outrageous theories, one must be willing to adhere to the scientific method though if they are to proclaim their work, in fact scientific.

      • Monkey See Monkey Do | Mar 1, 2012 at 1:39 am |

        Blaming Yoga teachers and ‘hippies’ for spreading misinformation is a cultural stereotype usually reserved for the right wing.

        If your interested in legitimate scientists pushing the boundaries, look up Amit Goswami – there are many others like him. The reason the cranks get all the publicity is because people with vested interests make sure they do. (Atheists and religious people)
        I dont see any difference between an Atheist and Religious person. Their both absolutist and they both think with a pea sized consciousness. For instance ‘we are suppossedly on the verge of finding a theory of everything (TOE)’ once we do we will be able to ‘read the mind of god’. We probably don’t even know 0.0001% of how the universe works.

        • Camronwiltshire | Mar 1, 2012 at 9:46 am |

          “Blaming Yoga teachers and ‘hippies’ for spreading misinformation is a cultural stereotype reserved for the right wing.”  – Sorry your argument itself is a stereotype.  

          No one blamed them for spreading misinformation but you, I stated that it is odd that he does not seek physicists, scientists but rather “Yoga teachers, hippies, etc”.  This does not mean you can not be a brilliant “hippie” or “yoga teacher”, it does mean though if he is looking exclusively for more yes men and women who won’t take him to task on any of the pesky physics he flings around, well you have then the formula for another new age guru and not a scientist.  

          It’s kinda like Bush recruiting “Nascar” voters for his re election campaign.  He is playing on their ignorance, understanding that with the right rock music and pageantry they will give their first born to fight his fake wars on terror.  Yeah that is a bit of a harsh comparison but I think you get the idea. 

          “The reason the cranks get all the publicity is because people with vested interests make sure they do.”  

          I do find it interesting that Nassim receives exposure along with Steven Greer in “Thrive” right a the beginning of the film.  For me this is perhaps a way to discredit the overall message by front loading it with easily discredited cranks once the band wagon is in full motion, but who knows.  At this point if it helps the “hippies” or “new agers”, hell even the “yoga teachers” to wake up to the uncomfortable realities we are ALL being challenged to deal with and to harness the energy normally reserved for planning and producing another Burning Man pilgrimage than more power to the film and them.

          “By Any Memes Necessary”.

          • Camronwiltshire | Mar 1, 2012 at 9:50 am |

            From a recent “emissary” trip apparently.  Yes I’m just having a little fun at what I have personally experienced in navigating the realms of metaphysical culture.

          • I think I see Leanne in the upper right here.

          •  Thanks for the pic, it’s awesome! I’m actually behind a rock, you can’t see me…

          •  Wow, It seems like Nassim is your reason for living, even in his fans I have not met anyone else so passionate about him! I met Ashley McIsaac once, and he also laughed hard at his critics “any press is good press”. “C’mon and stir it up!” Bring it on! I don’t give a shit if his papers are “peer reviewed” by a bunch of conventional block heads. I read it and I think it’s brilliant. I guess in your world it’s rare for people to have their own opinions, you need someone else to tell you what’s true. Some of us have evolved beyond the brainwashing you are so obviously a victim of. I’m praying for you 😉

          • Thanks for “praying for me” Leanne.   I will “pray” for you too.  

          • Camron Wiltshire | Mar 2, 2012 at 5:47 pm |

            Psychological projection or projection bias is a psychological defense mechanism where a person subconsciously denies his or her own attributes, thoughts, and emotions, which are then ascribed to the outside world, usually to other people. Thus, projection involves imagining orprojecting the belief that others originate those feelings.[1]

            ” I love you guys, really. You are truly helping me see my own reflection. Challenging all of us who are willing, to look things up, cross-reference and do more research.”  -Leanne

            This remains to be seen Leanne.  Thanks for posting.  Be sure to ask Nassim why he doesn’t attempt a real peer review sometime soon and lay the whole matter to rest.  If he would like to field questions from real physicist to clear up these incongruities I’m sure we could set that up.  

          •  Yeah, so I agree, and I’m owning what I was projecting onto you. I’m over critical and you are helping me see that. It’s not about you. You are also helping me see where I can be sloppy too sometimes and to have more compassion for that.
            Give a little respect to someone going out on a limb in a courageous way. Nassim may not be following the usual protocols or have a conventional education, but he has some radical and beautiful ideas that some of us find compelling.
            Why don’t you go find some warlord politicians to pick on and really help us out?

          •  Alright! thanks for the post on Breitbart, it has nothing to do with Obama, just an interesting exposure…

          • Monkey See Monkey Do | Mar 1, 2012 at 10:18 pm |

            I think you have too many hang ups about hippies and new agers. They’re just categories created by people to explain a plethora of unique ideas and thought patterns. Categories makes it easy to marginalize other groups, so you can say “well at least im not a ‘hippie’ or ‘new ager’, ‘Im more rational than that” 

            I love scientists and alot of what science has offered the world, but most scientists arent seeking any kind of overall truth, they just want to finish the job they get paid to do, and their job is usually so compartmentalized that they have no real outlook on the overall project anyway. This is all natural under the system of capitalism, so i think the fault lies there.

            I’m open to the idea that ‘all knowledge is, at best, an approximation’. But even that begins to sound dogmatic.

            One final thought and its probably my most important.. Having a belief system is important, it provides a stability in our emotions and personality, and believe me, EVERYONE has a belief system. Its important to realize something about belief systems though. They should always be open to being discarded in favour of a new belief system, this also paves they way for ‘chaotic thinking’ ‘periods of time where one doesn’t have a belief system at all, this period of time presents the most oppurtunity for rapid evolution, but it is also the least comfortable and most anxiety filled time. any thoughts? I recieved many of these ideas from John C. Lilly.

      •  Would it really be so terrible if a few of us get inspired by a rogue mystic science buff to build and experiment with devices that produce clean sustainable energy? Maybe we are all working together to try to bring forward ideas that can really help to improve our lives on this planet. Thank you for helping us fine-tune our instruments! Namaste

      • Tuna Ghost | Mar 8, 2012 at 7:07 pm |

        Since when are you this rational and investigative about physics???  Why can’t you be this rational and investigative when it comes to a certain topic that shall not be named?  

    • Monkey See Monkey Do | Mar 1, 2012 at 1:16 am |

      Just mention ‘the measurement problem’ to any physicist.

  7. Anarchy Pony | Feb 29, 2012 at 11:38 pm |

    I’m skeptical.

  8. I checked this guy out. He does pose some intriguing questions. The problem is, the science. I’m not a PhD in physics. But thankfully, my ole man is. So i ran it by em. He said well,  i’d just like to see his math. He’ll ask people who don’t really know anything about science to pay for his work. Where i can understand where the powers that be may not want a free energy source, nor pay for the research; i don’t really think his being judged harshly by the scientific community as a sure sign he’s on to something. He said something like ” I created a black hole in my bedroom & i saw beings traverse in and out of it” — after that i was like yeaaaah SNAKE OIL salesmen for metaphysical escapist.

  9. LSD is a hell of a drug

  10. Eric Drake | Mar 1, 2012 at 6:53 am |

    Nassim Haramein’s main internet critic and the person who is offering the critical statements and blog links above is a anonymous blogger who calls himself ‘bob-a-thon’.  Mr. Haramein has offered a very thorough reply to his comments here: 
    If you are truly interested in Mr. Haramein’s scientific research, you may wish to read the peer reviewed and published paper referred to here called ‘The Schwartzchild Proton’ for yourself before delving into the various replies he has given to the anonymous person above. Mr. Haramein’s scientific papers can be found here:
    I hope this will be of use to the many truth seekers out there.
    Many Thanks,

    • BrianApocalypse | Mar 1, 2012 at 9:24 am |

       His “peer reviewed” papers have already been thoroughly debunked as useless crap by real scientists.

      •  Where? by whom? Links? proof?

        • Well I would start with the debunking of his peer reviewed status in the article of which these comments are discussing.  Having read that if you needed further clarification let us know.  Best wishes.

          •  There is no proof in this article that his paper was not peer reviewed. Further investigation into the actual facts would show this. This article expresses nothing but opinion,

          • Actually it’s pretty cut and dry, that is if you actually read the article…
             Leanne why are you so afraid of Nassim receiving justified criticism for lying?  Or as it is stated more eloquently by “BobAThon” in the article which you obviously have not read, “My criticism, as I keep saying, concerns the content of his science, and the disparity between this and the claims that he makes for it. Not his intentions in doing so.Misleading it certainly is. He succeeds in pulling the wool over so many of his followers’ eyes, whether he intends to or not. His impressive ability to sustain this level of ignorance for so many years will never qualify as a reasonable excuse for making a living by misleading people into seeing him as an authority.”

          •  I appreciate your criticism, It helps me tremendously to see how important it is to be thoroughly prepared and follow notes, which Nassim doesn’t do. His presentations do get sloppy and he is human (I think) with a human ego which gets carried away, just like yours. Why are you so threatened by the way he makes his living? He’s not encouraging any of us to commit suicide or anything so where’s the danger? Does he threaten your livelihood?

          • Why do you assume that he “threatens” me.  Could it be that I don’t like to see good people be taken by charlatans?  I treat politicians who cook up evidence for war with the same disdain.  Rethink your equations Leanne.

          •  I’m not going to war, I am not “taken” or harmed in any way by a charlatan. Is it really my best interest you are looking out for? Are you trying to protect me from the depression I might experience if my batteries and other devices don’t work? What if they do work? What if they are working? I don’t really need equations, I use a formula and so far so good. So, don’t worry about Nassim, there are worse crooks out there you could be tracking…

    • Camronwiltshire | Mar 1, 2012 at 9:36 am |

      Here also is the response to Nassim’s “response”.
      ” The blatant discrepancy between his theory and the real world remains. Still, if the desired effect is “whoa, hit me with that far-out shit, you like totally pwned that status quo dude, man”, then I give it top marks and a gold star.)”and”What’s hard to believe is that it could be possible to maintain these kinds of delusions without some conscious act of sustained wilful ignorance as to what’s actually out there, especially if he’s involved in actually trying to carry out research. But perhaps he is somehow capable of this in all innocence. So I’ll let it go…””My criticism, as I keep saying, concerns the content of his science, and the disparity between this and the claims that he makes for it. Not his intentions in doing so.Misleading it certainly is. He succeeds in pulling the wool over so many of his followers’ eyes, whether he intends to or not. His impressive ability to sustain this level of ignorance for so many years will never qualify as a reasonable excuse for making a living by misleading people into seeing him as an authority.”“Luckily for us, we can continue to discuss his incompetence as a scientist and to question his integrity without resorting to any assumptions about what in the name of arse is going on inside his head.I do hope that settles the matter to Mr Haramein’s satisfaction.”The discrepancy in Nassim’s physical models and reality are addressed of course but I thought these points important to give context to why he is worthy or skepticism.

      •  Yes, I agree that he is worthy. The reason this upsets you so much is because you have a deep feeling that it could be true and you are terrified. People have strong reactions to things they are afraid might really be true. It’s a good sign that Nassim arouses the ire of people like you. If he was way off base, no-one would care to react…is he paying you?

        • So much convoluted nonsense… where to begin.  Nassim doesn’t “scare” me, I think Alex Simmonds prettily handily dismissed the illogical nature of your thinking above.  Please scroll up, read through and remember that it’s ok to question people, it’s alright to ask for proof, it’s actually scientific to do so.

          •  Thanks, again I do appreciate your concern, however you have nothing to be so concerned about. We’re all gonna be ok one way or another, We love you too!

          • Camron Wiltshire | Mar 2, 2012 at 5:56 pm |

            Here ya go, 

            “Ha – I love this! Leanne, you’re great.Your argument seems to be that Camron is insecure (which you’ve made up), jealous (which you’ve made up), with a closed mind and closed heart (which you’ve made up), suffering (which you’ve made up). And that he must love Nassim (which you’ve made up), and that “any real scientist seeking the truth” would disagree (which you’ve made up), and that it’s all about him (which you’ve made up).If you like just making things up, and you like people who’ll just make things up that fit the things that you like making up, and you don’t even know that you’re doing it, I heartily recommend someone called Nassim Haramein – have you heard of him?”  Thanks Alex for showing Leanne what everyone else is reading when she attacks the messenger.

          •  Here ya go,

            “I think you have too many hang ups about hippies and new agers. They’re
            just categories created by people to explain a plethora of unique ideas
            and thought patterns. Categories makes it easy to marginalize other
            groups, so you can say “well at least im not a ‘hippie’ or ‘new ager’,
            ‘Im more rational than that”  Thanks monkey dude for showing what everyone else knows about Cameron’s bias. A little amateur advice for you Cameron; If you don’t want to perceive attack, don’t start a war.

          • Camron Wiltshire | Mar 3, 2012 at 11:15 am |

            Nice red herring!  

            It must be me and my hang ups over hippies!  It has nothing to do with your guru lying to your face and stealing your money while you play with chemistry sets and imagine you are saving the world!  Way to go Leanne you’ve cracked this case!!

            You’re bias to believe whatever fanciful things Nassim plants in your little head is exceedingly obvious to everyone but you apparently.  But please keep posting it only supports why Nassim is able to get over so easily.

            Seriously post at least 30 more times and don’t change a thing, just be you in all of your ignorant and self-righteous glory!  Contradicting, projecting, apologizing (half heartedly) and continuing to present yourself as as the unrepentant, unreflected follower you’ve become.

            While your at it be sure to avoid all of the evidence brought forward in the article and to attack the messenger rather than heed the message. 

            This shows how “enlightened” you are.  You are truly much more cosmic for not using the 3lbs of jelly between your ears but for relying on your “heart” and copious amounts of psychedelics to gain all you need to know about what is real or not.

            There is not way this pattern could spell disaster for you!  It’s never upended real movements for social change by real hippies of ages past.

            If you want to know more about that go ahead and tune into, study R. Gordon Wasson and understand which net you are trapped in without the trivium.

            The true magus requires elemental integrity and balance.  Your heads in the sky with no sword of reason to clear the debris of the metaphysical jungle you’ve become lost in.

            Sharpen your sword Leanne.


          •  Hmm, talk about projection. Cameron said “His “peer reviewed” papers have already been thoroughly debunked as useless crap by real scientists.” but I still see no proof of this. “Bob” is certainly not a real scientist. The wordiness of these replies and the aggressive stance that is taken shows that I am indeed getting under his skin. I believe it’s possible he might have a heart after all, that’s why I’m not giving up Peace

          •  I express compassion for your suffering and you think I’m attacking you? Maybe you are delusionally paranoid? I accused you of loving which is offensive to you? My heart is opening more every day, does that mean I’m saying it’s closed? Maybe you and Alex just don’t understand me, and that’s ok. I guess I don’t understand you either, but I do my best to have compassion for the conditioning that lead you to have such a strong reaction against someone whose living has no direct impact on yours at all.

      •  “I guess it all depends on what you think is real” If you think the information you receive with your five senses is showing you “reality”..well I guess that would explain a lot about who you think you are and why. It’s ok, you’ll get it eventually…Scientists still think the brain is creating the mind, talk about having it backwards, so of course conventional scientists are confused about what they call “reality”…hmm…maybe YOU should try some LSD and learn something about “reality”…;)

  11. Wow, you must really love Nassim to spend so much time analyzing him and his ideas! They certainly are worth considering, I agree. Any real scientist who is sincerely seeking the truth would not be so pedantic and nitpicky, so I guess you are a great demonstration for us of how whenever people judge, their opinions are more about themselves than what they appear to be judging. Apparently you feel a bit insecure about your own accomplishments, maybe a little jealous? I pray for your mind and your heart to open and for the easing of your obvious suffering

    • Ha – I love this! Leanne, you’re great.

      Your argument seems to be that Camron is insecure (which you’ve made up), jealous (which you’ve made up), with a closed mind and closed heart (which you’ve made up), suffering (which you’ve made up). And that he must love Nassim (which you’ve made up), and that “any real scientist seeking the truth” would disagree (which you’ve made up), and that it’s all about him (which you’ve made up).

      If you like just making things up, and you like people who’ll just make things up that fit the things that you like making up, and you don’t even know that you’re doing it, I heartily recommend someone called Nassim Haramein – have you heard of him?

      •  Wow, you’re pretty touchy and reactionary too. The truth hurts I know, just a personal observation…I do make everything up, including the world i experience, just like everyone else…I just made you up for fun

        • BrianApocalypse | Mar 1, 2012 at 4:39 pm |

           See now there’s the difference between someone like Nassim
          and the people who think he’s got something genuine to say, and actual
          scientists… Actual scientists don’t just “make stuff up” to suit their
          own ideal reality, they make painstaking measurements of reality as objectively as possible.

          •  Are you kidding? Results are being fudged and tweaked all the time! Of course they make things up…like the idea that anyone can be truly objective! Where do you think names like “color force” come from? It was MADE UP.

          • Do you judge the color force from the point of view of deep understanding of the theoretical structure of the theory and the experimental evidence for it? If you do, let’s talk, I love discussing the details of quantum chromodynamics. Tell me your reasoned perspective on the issue.

            OR, do you judge it from the point of view of ignorance. Judging something from ignorance is bigotry. Always. I’m sure you wouldn’t do a thing like that.

          •  just because you’ve never seen a free quark doesn’t mean there aren’t any…hmm maybe there aren’t any, what does that really mean?…if what seems to be two or more “things” can’t be separated maybe it’s really one thing…who has seen a quark? how do you measure an infinite force?

          •  I just found this, seems quarks are named after beers…”
            The word quark was coined by American physicist Murray Gell-Mann (b. 1929) in its present sense. It originally comes from the phrase “Three quarks for Muster Mark” in Finnegans Wake by James Joyce.
            On June 27, 1978, Gell-Mann wrote a private letter to the editor of the
            Oxford English Dictionary, in which he related that he had been
            influenced by Joyce’s words: “The allusion to three quarks seemed
            perfect.” (Originally, only three quarks had been discovered.)
            Gell-Mann, however, wanted to pronounce the word with (ô) not (ä), as
            Joyce seemed to indicate by rhyming words in the vicinity such as Mark.
            Gell-Mann got around that “by supposing that one ingredient of the line
            ‘Three quarks for Muster Mark’ was a cry of ‘Three quarts for Mister . .
            . ‘ heard in H.C. Earwicker’s pub,” a plausible suggestion given the
            complex punning in Joyce’s novel.[1]

            The three kinds of charge in QCD (as opposed to one in quantum electrodynamics or QED) are usually referred to as “color charge” by loose analogy to the three kinds of color (red, green and blue) perceived by humans.
            Other than this nomenclature, the quantum parameter “color” is
            completely unrelated to the everyday, familiar phenomenon of color.

            Since the theory of electric charge is dubbed “electrodynamics”, the Greek word “chroma” Χρώμα (meaning color) is applied to the theory of color charge, “chromodynamics”.

          •  Free quarks for everyone Aaarghh, Slainte

          • BrianApocalypse | Mar 1, 2012 at 5:51 pm |

            Fudged data will always end up being eventually challenged by other scientists and exposed. A prime example of this being certain scientists working on anthropogenic global warming who apparently forced some of their data to fit an agenda. Well guess what, it was exposed. And when it is exposed it is pretty big news because the experiments that such people are involved with actually have real world implications, as opposed to the whimsical randomness that pseudo-scientists like Nassim Haramein produce.

            People like Haramein are selling a New Age dream of a better world to people who wish the world was a better place, and wish they could do something about it. I wish I could do something about it too, and I’ve spent quite a significant portion of my life listening to feel-good “prophets” like this man who promise the world and deliver nothing. The more of this kind of bullshit that’s out there being believed, the less chance humanity has of actually making progress, and THAT is why there are so many voices raised against him.

            If rational people do not stand up and challenge the proclamations of “spiritual” snake-oil salesmen like this, then society would be flooded with crap. It’s already bad enough as it is.

            As for “objectivity”, you’re partly right insofar as being truly objective is very very difficult. On a moment-by-moment basis, we’re all experiencing a subjective reality that exists nowhere outside of our own minds. This is why humans created the scientific method. It is a method by which we can make measurements of our shared universe and ‘externalize’ our perceptions. This does not lead to blockages to truth as certain types of new-ageish ‘philosophers’ have claimed, but rather leads to actual real-world practical results.. you know, like the internet and medicine satellites and stuff.

          •  Our “real world” speaks for itself about how much all that science is really helping people, life…

          •  If, based on these ideas, a bunch of us go out and build some energy-producing devices that are clean and sustainable, wouldn’t that help “our world”?

          • BrianApocalypse | Mar 1, 2012 at 7:25 pm |

             Yes of course that would help. In fact, free energy would transform almost everything about our world for the better.

            But you seem to be missing the point… Which is that Haramein’s “science” will not achieve this!!

          •  Wait and see..

          • To all smart people in this blog. Did you figure out who build pyramids? It is simple task not quantum physics stuff you cannot even see with naked eye or touch.  These are big you can see and touch, but who built it?  Ha? Not so simple. That proofs how little we know about stuff around us. I would have some respect to other new comers. May be they are wrong but none of you can proof otherwise. All you say it is nonsense and he has no education he did not finish high school…….  But maybe he has something to offer what no one could even come up. That I call thinking out of the box.

          • I for one am all for open minded thinking, but if you present yourself as peer reviewed and you are not, it is fraud.  For example, if I passed myself off as a structural engineer, and you hired me to build your high school’s gymnasium, you may be disconcerted to realize I actually had no expertise in this realm and the sports center I had designed might be liable to collapse in on itself at anytime, taking all of the villagers gathered and their hard earned money with it.   Now by then I would have skipped town with your checks and avoided the repercussions of my misleading ways, where the unassuming towns people would be stuck with the bill and the carnage.  

            This approximates the Nassim Haramein mind fuck in my experience.  He is a pied piper pretending to be a physicist.  I would make the time to study the evidence compiled against him and use reason to consider what is being said.  Nassim is counting on you not doing so and going with a right brained intuitive response to his ideas strictly, in other words being out of balance.  (when entering the metaphysical jungle, it pays to have a well honed sword of reason)
            It’s too bad he is such a defrauding charlatan as his charisma and down to earth nature (even though it’s part of the act) would do well to demystify science, if he actually understood what he was saying and not just spinning incredible yarns for wide eyed new agers. (read the bobathon article and tell me I’m wrong)

            Nassim is entrancing his audience, jumping from one idea to the next knowing that most humans (even left brain dominant) can only manage 7-9 pieces of information at a time.  Inducing you to think he is too far beyond prosaic fundamental concepts and that you need his Dvd to study his findings later, never realizing he has never faced a test from his own ‘peers’ and is using your ignorance of science to his benefit.

            I see the point you are making and I dont’ disagree that we need to be humble, open minded and creative in order to grasp the deep Mysteries of our being, I having investigated Nassim up close and personal have found that his road is crooked and wanted to prevent folks from wasting their time getting caught up in his cult of personality.

            I’d be happy to share with you my experiences and don’t become dejected, Nassim like anyone can be a prompt for the genuinely curious to go further and surpass his charismatic stage act towards true knowledge.

          • BrianApocalypse | Mar 1, 2012 at 7:25 pm |

             It certainly does. The population of the planet right now is higher than its ever been. All those people can exist right now on Earth because of… science. The quality of life is higher now that at any other time in human history because of… science.

            Of course, there’s also horrible evils being committed through technology, but that is the current nature of human society and always has been. You seem to condemn science but at the same time you also seem to think that the work of one particular man who ALSO claims to be a scientist (and yearns for the approval of the scientific community) is somehow immune from the very evils you condemn science for.

        • If you made this world up for fun, why have you filled it with so much war and famine and disease? That’s rather sickeningly horrible of you.

  12. jelyfish | Mar 1, 2012 at 3:01 pm |

    Nassim has challenged my way of thinking about our solar system. The basic solar system model I was taught in school is false (overly simplistic). Peer reviewed is just that – implies a level of ambiguity.  While I’m not familiar with “Thrive” I have found some of his stuff at least interesting.  Just saying …

  13. mahajohn | Mar 1, 2012 at 4:11 pm |

    There is something disheartening and yet completely in line with my expectations to see a bunch of alterna-thinkers rushing to defend a man whose entire modus operandi is spouting pseudo-scientific ideas that border on gibberish. The man has NO academic reputation at all. None. Zippo. Zip.  It’s quite fitting that a bunch of people on a website founded upon the idea that there is a mass spiritual awakening foretold by Mayans (who didn’t and don’t foretell such a thing at all) would come fast to the defense of a dude spouting such utter BS. 

    I’ve read some of his work at length, and I have to say that even the first time I encountered it my BS detectors went off the charts, even more than they did with Stephen Greer (that took me a few months). My background is in the humanities and social sciences, but I’ve had a long-time interest in quantum mysticism (heretofore, ‘QM’) and it’s been my experience over some decades that the great body of “information” in the QM field shows fundamental flaws in understanding physics, or worse, purposely misrepresents quantum mechanics at the service of an outlandish mystical paradigm that has proven attractive to laypeople for many years. 

    Haramein has made a career out of promulgating malarkey and falsehood. Anyone who has been exposed to mainstream popular science journalism (I don’t pretend to read scholarly scientific journals, except for the occasional befuddled look at “Science” and “Nature”) can see through his obfuscating shtick immediately.

    Having said all that, it’s not for nothing that quantum physics has sparked the QM meme. It’s because the stuff is totally psychedelic and weird, and its full implications would seem to touch on the realm that folks in the English-speaking world would call “mysticism.” I’ve long found the thought of David Bohm to be of special significance in this regard. Whereas Haramein presents his hilarious take on quantum mechanics as proving that there’s some supernatural force at work in the universe, the mysticism of Bohm is borne out of his study of the structure and nature of physical reality, and is really only “mystical” in the sense that the term is meant to describe a relationship between the world of “hard matter” and a transcendent yet fundamental order of being that undergirds our own, but is just as real, without necessitating a spooky God figure with Its Finger in the mix.  

    As to attitudes of folks like “Leanne,” who seem to believe that science is filled with “blockheads,” well I know I can’t convince you otherwise, since you obviously have no good knowledge of the appreciation for the diversity of science and the amazing information we’ve uncovered with science in that century and a half. Suffice to say that in the matter of one-hundred years, for instance, astronomers have had to contend with enormous paradigm shifts, from discovering that other galaxies exist to belief in a steady-state universe to the Big Bang to the contemporary understanding of a increasingly speedy expansion of a cosmos comprised predominantly of matter and energy that are complete mysteries to us, and they have adapted quite well. My point being that these “block heads” you refer to are much more flexible than you imagine them to be. I would hate to think that “evolution” and being evolved, as Leanne claims to be, involves the wholesale abandonment of rational, critical thinking, and the acceptance of some absolute relativism that is actually the death of intellectual inquiry.

    • Fantastic response!  Thank you for commenting.  

      •  Hey, Cameron, look, I’m sure your a really nice kid, well meaning and everything, I’m just curious about your real motives here. Do you really wanna save us hippies and new agers from spending the hard earned dollars we made selling beads and buddhas on some mystic physics pseudo guru? Really? You want us to spend our time and money on what instead? What do you suggest? What do you do with the money you earn doing whatever geeky (I mean that endearingly) things you do?

        You say ” I treat politicians who cook up evidence for war with the same”. Why can’t I find any articles you wrote about them? Why can’t I find any evidence of your journalistic credentials at all? Maybe you’re not even a journalist (yet?)
        Keep workin’ at it kid, I’m sure you’re learning some lessons too. Maybe one day you’ll be a real journalist 😉

    •  Yeah, you understand me! Maybe you can tell I enjoy Buddhist philosophy, pure intellect cannot grasp the truth. Everything is interdependent and co-arising. I don’t follow Nassim really, in fact I might enjoy just as engaging a debate with him as I am enjoying with you. I follow my heart which is more reliable than my brain, something no close minded scientist will ever understand. Like I said, they still think the brain is thinking…that’s why I called them blockheads. Blocked by a rational, intellectual barricade

      • Masgfras | Sep 1, 2012 at 4:32 am |

         Go girl.  All pioneers are ridiculed for their discoveries by those too ignorant to ‘know’  the truth when they hear it, Einstein used to meditate every morning, he said, and this is how he got the ideas for all his work 🙂  I for one, have a strong hunch Nassim is on the right track

    •  Evolution involves thinking for yourself, and questioning everything. So obviously you must be slightly evolved…now question the things you hold to be true…and I will too…Namaste

    • lenslens1 | Mar 3, 2012 at 2:04 am |

      I like your reply, especially as it pertains to Haramein.
      I also agree that the (accelerating) pace of discovery is astounding.
      However, “blockhead” and “scientist” are not mutually exclusive by a long shot.
      To elaborate, I’ve run into many people in science who magically turn into blockheads when they are presented with paradigm shifting new ideas. It’s been a problem in universities for centuries when new ideas encounter establishment and the peer review process du jour. It’s really evident in the history of mathematics. It’s also not that hard to find examples of scientists who have deliberately behaved as blockers to others because they want to first publish associated ideas themselves!
      In this environment, to use religious terms, I can appreciate that some people would lose faith in mainstream scientific religion, with academia as its spiritual head, and become susceptible to the likes of Haramein as a new prophet.
      P.S. I can’t think of a better example of an oxymoron than “absolute relativism”.

      •  Interesting how you see the religious aspects of science. Science also has it’s dogma which followers tend to recite mindlessly. Challenge it and they get very defensive and emotional, just like other religions. Thank you, I was beginning to feel like a voice in the wilderness…

        • lenslens1 | Mar 3, 2012 at 3:50 am |

          Yes, a strong reaction is common in followers when their faith is challenged, be it in scientific dogma, a church, or whatever.
          I know I can be that way.
          An individual running a church may be open about other religious possibilities (at least in some religions) but the parishioners can be something else.
          Unfortunately there are many people that do not have the self awareness to realize they behave religiously (like a parishioner in a church) about science, and so are unable to appropriately question and test their faith.
          I don’t think great scientists are necessarily dogmatists, but often stand upon the shoulders of those who went before them. They may have become great by learning and then challenging accepted positions, not by lucking onto something or inventing something out of the ether, as, in my opinion, Haramein may be doing.

          Some people are amazingly good listeners/observers and open minded – I think that may be a part of what enables them to discover new things and make sense of what others do not.

          By the way, as an anecdotal counter-example from another discipline, I once had a dinner discussion on this subject with a professor of economics that was a major economic adviser to the EU at the time. He emotionally said, as a way of shutting down a discussion that made him uncomfortable, “Well you can’t question everything you are told, like how dentists recommend you brush your teeth!”. It was something he should have been questioning in his personal life as he was receiving poor English dentistry and his teeth were in a terrible state. I felt kinda sad cause I really felt at the time that the EU needed some good advice economically, and that wouldn’t be provided by an economist that, by nature, did not want to think out of the box, and didn’t have the self awareness to see his own rotten teeth when talking about them.

          • Science isn’t a dogma, it’s a method.

            It is the observation of nature, recording what you see, communicating honestly, making your methods clear to others and being open to discussion and criticism. Most importantly of all, it’s about making every effort to seek evidence against your own ideas before making claims about them.

            It’s the best way we have, as humans, of avoiding spinning a story to suit our own preferences, and of describing what we see in nature accurately and honestly.

            All scientists are human, they don’t this perfectly all the time, but that’s what they’re supposed to be doing. Whenever they’re not doing it, they’re not doing science.

            If you don’t like science, nobody is saying you have to have ‘faith’ in
            it. You don’t at all, you can denounce it as much as you like.

            What your guy Nassim does is not science, so if you like his ideas, you can keep them, and just admit that you don’t approve of the scientific method. Don’t try to call his ideas science.

            You won’t see him laying his ideas out for discussion among scientists or taking any interest in evidence against his own ideas. They’d be torn to pieces by anyone with any understanding of the subject (as they have been in the piece here), because anyone with any understanding of the subject can see very clearly that he’s just telling stories.

            Saying that his ideas are science is as absurd as saying his ideas are Islam. They’re just not.

            Ok, I’ve shared my understanding of the situation. Please note that I haven’t used accusations, slurs, putdowns of anyone else’s character or motivations, because I believe there’s no need for petty putdowns when you have something of substance to say. I also haven’t expressed any opinion that I couldn’t back up in great detail if requested. If you choose to respond, I hope you will try to do the same. Let’s see.

          • Camron Wiltshire | Mar 7, 2012 at 4:12 pm |

            Again another cogent response.  Nassim is not practicing science.  He is not peer reviewed, therefore he is misrepresenting himself and his work in order to solicit funds from people who don’t know any better.  Obviously a shit way to make a living.  

    •  Are you really disheartened that there are alternative thinkers on this site? Well, don’t worry, I’ve never been to this site before, and I won’t be back. Curious how you see me with multiple personalities. You might be projecting…
      If anyone really wants to discuss quarks of beer and chromodynamics with me, let me know. Namaste

    • DontMindMe | Mar 3, 2012 at 4:22 pm |

       HaHa, you think the intellect is the answer. I thought you had a good BS detector?

    • I have to agree with your assessment of Mr. Haramein.  On the chance that you are still following this posting, can you do me a favor and check out some of the relevant postings on Facebook page Theory of Everything (Not to be confused with book by Ken Wilbur).  We are working on inclusion of Consciousness as a result of or resulting in matter and life; observing changing outcome, increasing probability of matter.  Maybe you can add your two cents.

    • General Rush Hour | Aug 16, 2012 at 1:03 pm |

      If you listen to him you´ll see that EVERYTHING IS CONNECTED. 

      Ancient history, Aliens, Humans, Geometry, Space EVERYTHING. 

    • The current patchwork quilt which is today’s state of physics leaves much to be desired in its exploration toward a unified field theory. The fact that Nassim Haramein addresses these patches (such as the ‘strong force’) and basic questions such as what came before the big bang has to be embarrassing for the physics community. I attribute this embarrassment to a great deal of his disapproval within the discipline. Haramein’s field theory, based largely on geometry rather than the convoluted math which has yielded us 7 competing string theories and exactly 11 dimensions: (10 and 1), quite frankly seems more reasonable that the current track of recent physics trends. It makes so much more sense than a string theory which has cost tax payers unknown sums in grants and scholarships and which has led to NOTHING but confusion, which quite frankly, is laughable at this juncture. “Glue-ons,” “the strong theory,” and so many other hackneyed devices for covering the glaring holes in standard theory are each day making Haramein’s ideas not only seem plausible, but probable, in comparison to the shambles field theory seems to be in today.

    • We’ll see who has on open mind and furthers science… Nassim’s Unified Physics speaks for all scientists and resolves many unsolved physics problems.

      • Sorry, nope. He’s entirely irrelevant to the study of the cosmos, physics, or any other scientific endeavor humans are concerned with, except perhaps those who study how idiotic, fringe-y ideas propagate in societies, or how terrible science education allows for folks who don’t know any better to come to believe his ideas constitute science.

        His “unified physics” are nothing so much as malarkey and claptrap of the highest order, and the only folks who think his theories resolve anything are folks who are not involved in hard sciences. He has no credibility whatsoever. Anyone involved in the study of astrophysics would find his work absurd and laughable, if not even dangerously misleading.

        • Lol, we’ll see. We’ll see. We’ll see when CERN LHC comes back empty handed with no Higgs Field and no Higgs Boson and no origin or source for matter having mass. When they languish on for years not being able to solve the proton radius problem. They will come up empty handed. And when nothing is left but the impossible, Haramein steps in and shows the way. We’ll see who’s laughing then.

  14. So, my question to all those who seem obsessed with discrediting Nassim; do you have any brilliant insights or ideas that address the modern contradiction in old school physics? Or can you not come up with anything yourself and so have nothing better to do than tear down other people ideas? Maybe you also enjoy destroying other people’s sandcastles (I just made that up, brilliant eh?)

    •  I love you guys, really. You are truly helping me see my own reflection. Challenging all of us who are willing, to look things up, cross-reference and do more research. What harm is there in building some cool and fun devices to experiment with these ideas and see for ourselves how they work?

      • BrianApocalypse | Mar 1, 2012 at 7:37 pm |

         Please do. And if you can succeed where all of history’s greatest scientific minds have failed, your name will be forever remembered.

        (When you’re doing your “research” though, please remember to use some sources of information other than Haramein’s)

        •  Yeah, I came accoss John Hutchison first, because I was looking up “antigravity” , also John Bedini and a few others, I just didn’t happen to meet them personally…There are many names that will be remembered before mine, I’m just a lab tech…

    •  Obviously no-one has the courage to answer this question directly, I rest my case.

      • BrianApocalypse | Mar 3, 2012 at 4:17 pm |

         I think it’s more like nobody deemed the question worthy of response.

        First of all, what contradiction?

        You’re asking for a solution to a problem that doesn’t exist. Sure, I’d love to solve the world’s energy crisis, but sadly I don’t have a PHD in physics or anything similar that might qualify me for the task.

        I can, however, recognise bullshit when I see it, and highlighting such BS is important. If nobody contested the endless stream of nonsense that gets spewed into the cultural milieu, then we would be overwhelmed.

        We are not “obsessed” by discrediting Nassim, we just have a distaste for meaningless drivel passed off as profound revelation. And by Christ there’s a lot of that around.

  15. You didn’t answer my question Bri, are you a politician?

  16. Wow, you guys are hilarious. You obviously don’t have much real or important work to do to have time to engage in this silly banter with me. I’m just hanging around waiting for my latest batch of crystal batteries (power cells) to dry out. I’m making free energy, what have you done to really help the world lately, other than attempt to save us all from discovering useful information?

  17. If you think some of the things Nassim says are out there, you better stay away from Nicola Tesla, that man was crazy…

  18.  I’m not exactly sure how to characterize the founders and supporters of this website other than as reactionary, blowhard debunkers.

    Unlike “mahajohn” I do have a background in math, physics and engineering. I find Nassim’s work credible, insightful and logical. Let me not forget radical; and that is the key reason he is being smeared and ostracized.

    From my personal experience, I have found the “academic community” to be isolated, dogmatic and arrogant. When individuals like Nassim provide true paradigm smashing ideas, this community will rally together like no other behind their credentials to repel any and all threats.

    Say what you like. Truth is truth. 

    • Camronwiltshire | Apr 4, 2012 at 11:21 pm |

      There is no hive mind functioning here.  We tear into each other over many topics so I take issue with your dismissive stance.  Also what are your credentials and what do you have to say about the questions raised in the article?  Can you address any of the scientific questions brought forward?  Also what do you think about his abuse of the concept of peer review?  Don’t expect anyone to take your anonymous pronouncements seriously.  Perhaps if that bothers you then you’ve not come to the right forum.  

      I’m assuming you’ve actually read the article.  Prove it by disproving the valid questions brought forward within.  Specious condemnation of an entire communities “bias” as you see it does not pass for an articulated and reasoned response to the very valid scientific questions raised by Bob-A-Thon.  

  19. Gapracht | Apr 7, 2012 at 1:32 pm |

    Funny how disinformation tends to usually be the “uninformed” ones. Do your research. Check your sources, bud. Take a beginning physics class or something but please everybody stop trying to be intellectuals in areas which you have no expertise.

    • Leave My Guru Alone!!! | Apr 7, 2012 at 3:26 pm |

      Translation.  “Leave My Guru Alone!!!”  So I take it you either didn’t read the article, have no response to the valid questions raised, or need to attack the messenger to soothe the cognitive dissonance you are experiencing, or some murky combination of all three.  

      Tell me why should everyone take Nassim’s word for it when NOTHING is preventing him from undergoing an actual peer review.  Save for exposing himself completely and angering all of the devout flock he has orbiting around him and feeding him their money.  

      Keep believing what you are being spoon fed.  Oh and if you are so “intellectually” versed in physics, then why don’t you explain exactly why Nassim’s models are legitimate,  when they in fact have no resemblance to physical reality.  Case in point:

      “(b) His theory implies that the nucleus of a single atom of hydrogen has a mass of nearly a billion tons. This does seem a bit silly – but theoretical physicists do hypothesise apparently silly things sometimes, so that’s not a deal-breaker. For obvious reasons, though, you need a very convincing reason to do something like that, including an explanation as to why we never measure this huge mass when we weigh hydrogen (or anything else), and none is given.” – The article above which you are welcome to refute and probably haven’t read.

  20. Unfortunately, the theory of Nassim Haramein and all math around it are based on wrong concept. The vector equilibrium IS NOT the Flower of life, and the structure of his tetrahedron  is also wrong.

  21. This dispute can be resolved only by truth knowledge. Why spend time discussing the false theory, when the knowledge about the real Universe is already exist? One need only read books The Final Appeal to Mankind,  The Anisotropic
    Universe, or Spirit and Mind

  22. A classical skeptic withholds judgment – a modern pseudo-skeptic is quick to judge. We have to be careful. You can read a paper by Nassim’s here: I suppose the pseudo-skeptics will say he is a great fraud of charlatan who can even do mathematics. Personally, I am not that keen about black holes, the quantum vacuum, etc. These are useful fictions like vector space in QM – but useful fictions nevertheless. If Nassim can move out of the fictional world of mathematics into the practical world of the lab, my hat is off to him. Reading Gerry Vallilatos book, _Lost Science_ is a good reminder that skeptics should be agnostic lest they throw the baby out with the bath water.


    • Camron Wiltshire | Apr 27, 2012 at 11:18 pm |

      It’s not a left/right, classical skeptic/ modern skeptical issue.  It’s a matter of fraud.  Here is one definiton, “a person who makes deceitful pretenses; sham; poseur.”

      I am curious what you have to say about Nassim’s faux peer reviewed status and it’s giving him seeming clout he has not earned, nor does he deserve, at the expense of those whom he has convinced to fund his “research”.  Which skeptical mindset would point that out in your opinion?  Which are you?  Also did you actually read the entire article before you commented?  If so what did you think of the other very direct evidence implicating Nassim is a new age conman who would be laughed out of any serious physics forum as he stumbles on reciting basic laws while also displaying an abject ignorance of the subject he is pretending to revolutionize.  He is no Einstein.  Einstein actually earned degrees, passed peer review and proved his worth the old fashion way.  Not as glamorous as milking and bilking wide eyed new agers. 

  23. When things are confusing it is best to go back to the beginning. For people who think Haramein is saying something new and important name a few things and their importance to living or how they would have an impact on the world.

    I’ll start with one. Haramein thinks we live in a black hole. He doesn’t use the term as a metaphor. He thinks in a science-fiction kind of way that there could actually be a universe like ours inside a black hole. As I understand it there is only one way you can get a black hole in today’s universe and that is through the collapse of stars greater than x solar masses. I can’t imagine how a nicely structured small universe would be the end result inside the event horizon.

    Here is another. Haramein thinks the universe is self-similar like a fractal. By thinking about the universe at different size levels he sees fractals. This is the revelation he had in either grade school or high school. If you’ve seen videos of fractals the self similarity is exact. You can magnify the picture as much as you want and it looks exactly the same at all sizes. If you’ve seen the video about the universe at various powers of ten magnification then you’ve seen that objects at a larger scale are not  similiar to objects at a smaller scale at all.

    So I conclude that Haramein doesn’t know what he is talking about. He is just what he seems to be on his video: a person who had trouble in public school, didn’t finish high school, somehow got odd jobs in different countries and somehow found university teachers who would talk to him informally, who tried to self study in libraries. For a subject like physics I think it is impossible. That video footage of him waving around the “Gravitation” book by Misner, Thorne and Wheeler shows someone who doesn’t grasp analogies. The balloon model with black dots representing galaxies in an expanding universe is not meant to be taken literally. He is wondering if there is something shrinking that inflates the balloon. His comments about his grade school math teacher trying to explain 1, 2 and 3 dimensions was another failure of understanding.

  24. Tzraikat | May 8, 2012 at 7:13 pm |

    Have any of you debunkers out there been paying attention to what’s going on in conventional science? If you have, you will have noticed that different parts Haramein’s theories (such as the infinite density of the so-called vacuum, the geometrical organisation of energy, and the collapsing action of the universe as a necessary corollary of its expanding action) are being validated by recent ‘discoveries’ by formally qualified, respected scientists? Who cares about the man’s qualifications? His thinking is sound, his reasoning appropriate, and his conclusions, logical and justifiable. We “alternative thinkers” are not stupid or naive. We simply see that the halls of academia and science do NOT have exclusive right to truth and reason, and that, on the contrary, they can be downright blind and mule headed in their resistance to new ideas and different perspectives. Be assured, dear cynics, that within ten years, much of Haramein’s theories will be part of conventional scientific thinking, supposedly formulated and validated by your respectable scientists. Even then Haramein will get no credit for his contribution, but those of us who are not overly impressed by your credentials and can think for ourselves will know who to thank and who to esteem for his insights as well as for his courage in facing up to you lot.

    • Camron Wiltshire | May 8, 2012 at 7:41 pm |

      So how is it possible that a proton nucleus has more mass than Earth?  This is part of Nassim’s theorizing.  Nothing stopping him from going through actual peer review.  No red herrings please.  

      Yes Academia has it’s flaws, but it’s not keeping Nassim out, Nassim is doing that.  Also you do realize that he has been completely wrong about very elementary and fundamental aspects of physics on numerous occasions right?  If you know anything about physics you would balk at his assumption that a comet, “almost two times the size of Jupiter” almost took us out and pulled mercury out of it’s orbit as he ignorantly displays in the following video.  He is confusing the length of the cometary tail which is a trail of dust and gases pulled by the comet nucleus through the vacum of space.  There for the only way to reconcile it being, “almost twice the size of Jupiter” is for him to imagine that the length of it’s tail corresponds with the diameter of Jupiter, which obviously is a pointless comparison unless you are seeking dramatic effect.  Secondly it would not have the anywhere near the mass to perturb a planet without a direct strike,  let alone pull it out of orbit and with it hurtling into the sun.  
      This is what Nassim does, he creates a fanciful narrative and borrows headlines from real scientific pioneers and discovery and suggests that their findings confirm his own.

      I’m curious, have you actually read the article from BobaThon?  Do you have any points you can raise about the actual science as discussed in the article?  Most people who rush to Nassim’s defense do so using his own method of attacking those who question him as industry and academic stooges who are unwilling to open their minds to new ideas.  It sounds nice but again, there is nothing preventing him from engaging in a real peer review of his theories.  The fact that he refuses to do so and purports to have already achieved this feat (he hasn’t)  while receiving donations from those who have not done their homework is very telling.

      Please actually read the article and please actually contest any of the scientific challenges to his theories.  Emotionalizing and identity politics will do nothing to convince any serious scientists or skeptical lay people that he is on to anything but a way to bilk naive new agers.

      Also Sacred Geometry is not Nassim’s discovery by any means.  As above so Below has been known and understood welll before his time.  So please dont’ give him any more credit where it surely isn’t due.

      No one is arguing that academia alone is the sole arbiter of truth but you.  The scientific method though has served to raise mankind out of the dark ages and promote many of the benefits (and detriments admittedly) of our modern world.  Nassim is avoiding utilizing scientific method as he is not allowing his work to be scrutinized by independent parties for the sake of pursuing the truth.  In other words he is no scientist.

  25. Detroitblue9100 | May 24, 2012 at 4:36 pm |

    The man doesn’t need an academic reputation…People on here sound hilarious, Basically your saying if man has a theories and because the Government isn’t funding he or she isn’t advertised on the mainstream media crap your saying he is a joke?lol
    Please explain that to me!!!!

    I’m not saying I am a 100% believer of his work or anything like that. I am just trying to put the pieces together on how you figure this guy is all BS?

    “The Flower of Life” is where his information is based from.The symbol is found all over the world that could predate atleast 6,000 to 10,500 B.C.or even earlier. Can you also explain how man traveled all over the world to teach the symbol to different civilizations at different times of our world? Not likely. How can u just criticize what you don’t know the answers too? I mean if u base your life knowledge on Mainstream media information then your asleep like most of the world.

    I respect a person that would come fast to the defense of any theory that hasnt been proven otherwise of what the theory says, because there is a chance it could be true…I dont respect people that criticize what they cant prove out of pure ignorance. Gather all your Info and please post something informative about Nassim and his work that proves him wrong. 

    • The problem is not in the fact that he has a theory it is in that is it is too clean for people to believe, the thing that people need to understand is the fact that the universe does not do “math”, and something simple with no holes is far better then current models with holes everywhere you look, google problems in physics and you will see a list as long as your arm and yet Nassim’s theories not only hold water but explain things without exempting fundamental laws such as gravity at the quantum level.

      • Of course there are ‘unsolved problems in physics’. That’s what physicists work on. We have physicists because we don’t know everything about physics.

        If someone claims to have solved problems in physics and you find it convincing but all the world’s physicists dismiss them consistently for decades, then either you know better than ALL the world’s physicists, or they can see something that you’re not able to.

        How do some people come to believe that all the physicists in all the world are so stupid? They have years or decades of experience and practical investigation and reflection and imagination and teamwork and debate. Do you think they’re morons? Do you think they’re robot clones?

        Instead of thinking that perhaps they might perhaps have some understanding and experience that you don’t have, you choose to believe that they’re all wrong and you’re right?

        What leads people to that kind of arrogance and lack of imagination. I don’t understand it.

        • “… If someone claims to have solved problems in physics and you find it convincing but all the world’s physicists dismiss them consistently for decades, then either you know better than ALL the world’s physicists, or they can see something that you’re not able to. …”

          OR All you physicists are pissed that this guy has perhaps figured something out in a manner that makes you feel you have wasted your whole lives working on something that is completely wrong and don’t want to admit it.Sorry a stupid comment deserves a stupid response. If we had the attitude that whatever ever the majority believed is correct then we would all be back in those crazy Earth centre of the universe days…. ironically as it turns out in a manner of thought it might not be so incorrect after all….I conclusion I would prefer to put my trust in on genius than a million idiots…. obviously.I am not calling physicists idiots! I am just trying to make a point.

          • If you think I was saying that whatever the majority believe is correct, then no wonder you think it was a stupid comment, and the point you were trying to make would be sensible.

            But I didn’t.

            The point is that any physicist – in fact, any capable physics undergraduate – can easily see that he’s not only wrong but incompetent. It has nothing to do with their beliefs.

  26. you want discrepancies, look at the current models of physics, the strong force, the weak force, has anyone ever told you why or how those forces work, i can tell you right now the the reason that those so called forces exist is because some scientist saw that two objects that should never touch are touching and he simply calculated the force that would be required to hold protons together and named it as truth. no-one ever though to question this extremely circular argument.

  27. I think the NASA data is proof of the extreme sun activity…  what about the “comet” that flew into the sun?  

  28. Check out the article “Who is Nassim Haramein?” on the Thrive-Debunked blog

  29. Digitalbeat666 | Aug 11, 2012 at 3:51 pm |

    it seems that scientists are gods nowadays. wrong

  30. I’ve read BobAthon’s articles with their hundred pages of comments, as well as all the comments here, and so far i have yet to find anyone who has managed to defend Haramein’s science or maths, or in fact to successfully refute Bob’s science or maths (or logical reasoning).

    Giving Nassim the benefit of the doubt, I’d like to think that he may have started his journey with real scientific intentions but has now slipped into legitimate snake oil sales, is enjoying the fruits, and can no longer extricate himself from the cash / fame / influence that he enjoys within a certain sphere of our society. I doubt that many people would be able to resist falling into a trap like this. God (and Leanne) might forgive him – it’s certainly forgivable to be human and make mistakes – but i do find it difficult to excuse him for what appears very clearly to me to be a conscious and base money-making scam. That he is now selling energy (?) crystals through his website seems more in line with what he really is, as opposed to a scientist.

    Free energy is a wonderful ideal from the perspective that it could do so much good for the many, but i believe you’d have your head in the sand if you didn’t believe it could do exponentially more bad by the few. 

    oh Nassim…. it’s dots all the way up.

  31. I’ve watched The Black Whole 3 times and then I came online to find out more.  I was saddened to hear this about Nassim Haramein because the video was astounding to me.  Credentials don’t mean that much to me, as this is a relatively recent man-made scale that cannot measure anyone’s potential.  In fact, it often gives us a sense of false security and allows someone with ‘impressive’ credentials to fool us all the more.  We need to be aware that we can be hoodwinked by ANYone, regardless of their credentials, and do our own study and research.  So in my humble opinion, knowing that no one single person has 100% truth, I think that Haramein’s ideas have merit, and we should look at what he’s pointing to, rather than pointing the finger at Haramein himself.

  32. Jonjon Taka | Jul 10, 2014 at 3:28 pm |

    Add the words Einstein, unified field theory, a little bit of new age environmentalism and health awareness and you’ve got the perfect formula to reproduce a better version of the Scientology sect.
    That said, his theories are quite interesting and therefore NH deserves the benefit of the doubt.

  33. well i’m an energy based alien riding in a human body, who came to earth after being contacted by a human who had mastered hyperspatial communication skills and even I think this guy is spouting BS. he simply doesn’t understand the math.

  34. but did you know that Nassim is a millionare living in Hawaii, enjoying full life b/c people are buying his crap theories as real? haahaa! got you all didn’t he!

  35. The guy seems to be a really good Cult Leader!

Comments are closed.