The Final Word on "The Secret": Deep Dish's Exposé on the Naked Truth

[God_of_getting_layed]

All truth passes trough 3 stages:

First, it is ridiculed
Second, it is violently opposed
Third, accepted as self-evident


Good Job on some more violently opposing Deep Dish

you forgot the part about the stage were the "truth" gets supported by a very large amount of evidence, making the chance of it being true as very high. :yes: (this stage happens right before the "accepted as self evident stage )

we know "the secret" will never get that kind of evidence, therefore we know it will never get past the "violently opposed" stage. tisk tisk, too bad man.

This same thing goes for beliefs.
At first I entered PU and thought, whahaha no way this is going to work for me and so did my friends who saw me try things.
Then, I started to get succes and my friends were like, what, no way he really thinks that he can be this, and they started denying it.
Finally, it was excepted as self-evident by them that I was quite the DJ, to speak about it in those terms

yeah, what about all the times you beleived in something, and found out it was total bulsh1t? yeah, you left that part out didnt ya?

 

[Francisco d'Anconia]

you forgot the part about the stage were the "truth" gets supported by a very large amount of evidence, making the chance of it being true as very high. :yes: (this stage happens right before the "accepted as self evident stage )

we know "the secret" will never get that kind of evidence, therefore we know it will never get past the "violently opposed" stage. tisk tisk, too bad man.

Kinda like an atheist's stance on the existence of God and the whole creation/evolution debate, isn't it?

 

[God_of_getting_layed]

Kinda like an atheist's stance on the existence of God and the whole creation/evolution debate, isn't it?

*clears throat*

1. The existance of god question is a philosophical argument. so its not really relevant to a scientific argument such as the truth about "The secret"

2. The theory of evolution has far more evidence supporting it than the secret ever does. But their is already sufficient proof that the current darwinian theory of evolution is incorrect (statistical impossibilities), but there is still room for other versions of evolution that rely on a totaly different evolutionary vehicle other than natural selection/genetic mutation. such a theory has yet to be invented.

"the secret" has zero evidence supporting it. In fact, there is actualy already evidence saying it is bull**** that is undeniable. Yeah, "the secret" wont get past the "violently opposed stage".

 

[Holland]

yeah, what about all the times you beleived in something, and found out it was total bulsh1t? yeah, you left that part out didnt ya?

Than it wasn't truth.

Come on, sure not ALL the things in the Secret are perfect, but the main dudes who represent it (Proctor, James Ray, Canfield) know what to convey. It's basicly the same shiit that's in Think and Grow Rich by Napoleon Hill (who made A LOT of people wealthy).

 

[ricorico]

This same thing goes for beliefs.
At first I entered PU and thought, whahaha no way this is going to work for me and so did my friends who saw me try things.
Then, I started to get succes and my friends were like, what, no way he really thinks that he can be this, and they started denying it.
Finally, it was excepted as self-evident by them that I was quite the DJ, to speak about it in those terms [/QUOTE]


Holland,

Changing behavior and getting different results is not exactly a "secret". take a wallflower girl for example. Dress her bettter,change her attitude, teach her how to attract guys and her luck with men will change altogether. Teen movies are all about that.It's not science. It's common sense. People respond to what they like or what makes them comfortable.

But I ask anyone who really believes the "LOA " is a universal law to watch movies like "Hotel Rwanda", or "Blood Diamond" , where the country is run through a reign of terror by Rebels and government who do NOTHING to stop it!who sell drugs or Diamonds in order to get arms to bully the people. using their own people as slaves in order to have monetary gains. they think nothing of shooting whole villages at a time . Meanwhile these poor people have no shelter to run and hide,they may try to get to refugee camps THOUSANDS of miles away with no cars, just dessert heat and no water.Meanwhile on that walk to refugee camps, they risk getting eaten alive by wild animals, or having the Rebels attack them again because now they are really easy to see. Do they all atrract that?

You cannot say the law of attraction is a law. Otherwise, some of the folks in Rwanda or Sudan or India would not be living the lives of slaves. There is still slavery alive and well throughout the world,do you know that? people are shackled, beaten, made to work 16 plus hours like a dog. Not because they attracted it. But because of corrupt government and rebels who care more about the almighty dollar than a persons life. Therefore it can be said the "slaveowners" are "attracting" money and the good life.meanwhile the slaves are all negative thinkers?.It seems the opposite to me. The slaveowners would be thinking of money and abusing their slaves. The slaves would be fantasizing about freedom and food in order to have a little hope to stay alive.

How about when we had slavery in the U.S.? anyone with a drop of black blood was considered a slave. Why did every single black person "attract" slavery to themselves. even ones with a small drop of black blood. But all white people knew the LOA and used it not to be slaves? Slaves were used because their color made whites think they were not human. Other people were in the equation besides just black people.

A slave could use voodoo(which many believed in and is a form of attracting hat you want) or spiritualism to try to gain freedom. But did not succeed until the white men who had the money to pay for weapons went to war to make a difference. The slaves were not paid, had no money for arms,kept weak and in shackles ,kept uneducated. What law of Universe makes it possible of very evil people to attract money and power? Should'nt it be the opposite as evil people have evil thoughts?

 

[A-Unit]

Re:

Ricorico,

The denial of any "positive, progressive, or forward" thinking is what denigrates people to their circumstances. NON-right thinking. You don't need the Secret for that, the True Bible says as much. If not the bible, read The Science of Getting Rich. Rich is taken into the context of the reader, though. You perceive rich to be money, spent and earned. Rich, in terms of living and Earth, is abundance. It's health, it's family, it's time, it's freedom. It's having any amount of whatever you want.

What would you have these people do who are in awful circumstances?
-Get pissed, bytch, and complain?
-Work up ways to get through it and prevent it from occuring again?
-Think positively, progressively, and forward?

The Secret didn't put them there ( maybe their religion did ), but the thinking behind it can certainly assist them in getting out of it. There's horrible attrocities the world around, both outside the US and INSIDE the US, so it isn't relegated to other countries. But you can't be so absorbed with the past that you never pave the way to the future, or even present, you seek to create and enjoy.

Reality and life is whatever we make our minds up to be. What is a challenge to one person, is viewed as a problem to another. A challenge, is something someone over comes, learns from, grows through, and ends up better. A problem is something we seek to mitigate, that we hope never happens again, and generally breeds a feeling of negativity, dislike, or disgust.

If you're sitting where you are today, where will you go? What will you do? Everyone is born at a different set point. I'm sure there's guy who feel they're living hell, because their dream is to be in the NFL, but they're born like the Strawman. Or maybe someone wanted to be born into wealth, and has to work to achieve all they desire, without the backing of priviledge. You're not speaking to a board of Wealthy Paupers (currently) who can donate millions, if not billions to the world. You're talking to your peers, who are working to improve "their stars, their destiny," and not through well-wishing, but proven tools for improvement in life.

What alternatives have you and Deep Dish suggested, or other contrarions? What good have you provided the board as it relates to these areas?

One person can't save the world, unless he has saved himself. Sad thing is, if you're poor, and you give to the poor, the world isn't better off. BUT, if you become rich, and donate in a way to make other's rich, then the world is better off. A donation of time also helps, but I don't see people doing that, or suggesting it.

Think of how much better off guys who've never encountered the information here, or books suggested here, or programs, or just the MERE conversations we've had have benefited? Hundreds of posts from guys CHANGING their realities, almost daily. And we deny that? Fine, if the Secret was off the mark in your opinions, fine. I don't know if that's true or not. Heck, maybe down the road, we learn EVERYONE goes to heaven, not just Christians, or whoever, but if it helped them, good for them.

I just don't get where people support the arrogance pervading the posts who are telling you what to believe, AND, not offering an alternative thinking pattern. At least Morpheus gave Neo 2 pills to choose from. The guys here are offering nothing.



A-Unit

 

[darwinian_sympathiser]

Dear A-Unit,

Here's my reply to you, in defence of Deep Dish. I like to add further I am supporting Deep Dish because he has made a very good essay, and it is very well argued. I can add to it because, would you have it, I am just starting to learn Quantum Mechanics, so I should be able to shed some light on a few things. Please don't ask me anything technical since I am not there yet, might take a few more months/years to get to that level. However, even with basic understanding I still think I can contribute a worthwhile reply:

I've always tried to write what I thought were helpful bits of information, because that's what this place is, helpful bits of information. The world has enough contradicting negativity to suppress the lot of us -- what we need is MORE hope, MORE BELIEF, MORE Idea for extending and uplifting human potential.

"helpful" in what context, in providing false, tedious, repetitive psycho babble that does not work "helpful"? Notice the speech marks, because I'll try to explain that later. Also, why should the damn world owe any of us uplifting positive beliefs, or reinforce them? I say that we are not any of us to judge whether the world is contradicting nor consistent, and why should any of these words should apply to something as complex a concept as "the world"? By your perverse logic we might as well call an apple contradictory, because I could say it's a fruit that "wants" to be eaten, but most of those who eat it don't fulfill it's purpose by planting its seed?

You are no more qualified than I to tell people what to believe or not believe. Any person here can do a cursory review of websites, books, and papers, put it together to make their point...and bammo, a well-written post that really...helps no one. I'd agree that some "Consumer Watch Program" be enacted if people were losing their lives, loved ones, or well earned dollars...but even right now, more people are blowing money on booze, drugs and sex, so if anything...let the wasted dollars make them thing a little more, rather than bury feelings.

yes, that's true, but the purpose of this thread was to show that "The Secret" is total BS, no matter how you dress it up. Yes, there are people in this world doing wasteful extraneous things, not counting their blessings, ungrateful and just living up the good life while there are millions of others much worse off. That's another issue, debate that somewhere else. In actual fact falsification is generally easier to do than proof, and so we can "tell" people what NOT to believe. But the purpose of this thread remains, so onto the main points:

Enter The Secret. It is a patently scientific book but not in the good and not in the traditional sense. "The universe" is invoked in what seemed to be every other sentence; "the universe" was mentioned probably hundreds of times. In addition, there were countless references to "energies", "frequencies", "vibrations", and I even heard "reverberations". It's almost surprising I didn't hear anything about perpetual motion machines but then again maybe I am going deaf.

vibrations, energies, frequencies, the universe? So let me get this right: the author of the work cites these concepts and tries to appeal to them to support his arguments, while at the same time he probably has never done any quantum mechanical calculation/experiment in his life? Of all the concepts invoked he refers to waves/energy/frequence etc. . . and for what purpose, so he can confuse people who aren't well versed in these concepts to concede?

As demonstrated throughout the whole material, Byrne makes it explicitly evident the "Law of Attraction" is not intended as metaphorical but as a real scientific theory. Bob Doyle was certain to rally this point by stating on his Wealth Beyond Reason website: "Contrary to mainstream thinking, the law of attraction is not a 'new-age' concept. It is a scientific principle that absolutely is at work in your life right now."

well if this is true he should win the Nobel Prize, so where is it? He has not explained his principles explicitely enough in the language that Quantum physicists understand, so excuse us while we deride him as a charlatan, a purveyor of shoddy science.

"Our thoughts are linked to this energy and they determine what the energy forms. This explains things such as positive thinking, prayer, faith, creativity, goal-setting, disease, and much more in a very scientific way. Your thoughts literally shift the universe on a particle-by-particle basis to create your physical life."

there's a lovely phrase by Richard Feynman when asked why he is not religious. He replied that if all these subatomic interactions were played out for judgement of good or evil it would be just ludicrious: "the stage is too big for that drama". Also note that the quote above from shows a major travesty: it's an unfalsifiable statement. The purpose of any theory is that it be testable and be possible to be proved wrong, if it is wrong. If it does not satisfy this then it really is of no use, since we can have endless pointless disputes that result. And regarding the statement above how would you go about proving it anyway? It is not testable to be right or wrong, it is therefore of no us to the scientific community. I'm more likely to believe, on hearing of it, that it was made by some crank with very little intelligence who has something to sell . . .

 

[darwinian_sympathiser]

cont . . .

* Your thoughts become things. (Byrne, disc 1, track 07)
* What most people don't understand is that a thought has a frequency. We can measure a thought. And so if you're thinking that thought over and over and over again or if you're imagining in your mind, okay, having that brand new car, having the money you need, building that company, finding your soulmate; if you imagine what that looks like you are emitting that frequency on a consistent basis. (Assaraf, ibid)
* Thoughts are sending out that magnetic signal that is drawing a parallel back to you. (Vitale, ibid)
* Thoughts are magnetic and thoughts have a frequency. As you think, those thoughts are sent out in the universe and they magnetically attract all like things that are on the same frequency. Everything sent out returns to the source and that source is you. Think of it this way. We understand a television station transmission tower broadcasts a frequency which is transformed into pictures onto your television. Most of us don't really understand how it works but we know that each channel has a frequency and when we tune into that frequency we see the pictures on our television. We choose the frequency by selecting the channel and we then receive the pictures broadcast on that channel. If we want to see different pictures on our television we change the channel and tune into a new frequency. You are a human transmission tower and you are more powerful than any television tower created on earth. You are the most powerful transmission tower in the universe. Your transmission creates your life and it creates the world. The frequency you transmit reaches beyond cities, beyond countries, beyond the world. It reverberates throughout the entire universe and you are transmitting that frequency with your thoughts. The pictures you receive from the transmission of your thoughts are not on a television screen in your living room. They are the pictures of your life. Your thoughts create the frequency. They attract like things on that frequency and then they are broadcast back to you as your life pictures. If you want to change anything in your life, change the channel and change the frequency by changing your thoughts. (Bryne, disc 1, track 08 )

well me punching someone in the face has a frequency, does that necessarily follow that the bad deed will be repaid back to me since I've done something bad and cosmic karma has to be kept in balance? And why this "frequency" fetish? All we know at the moment is that we have a concept to explain to people in "laymen's" terms, argue for it, let the people decide, and hope they agree. At no point have we given any evidence, nor backed our findings with valid scientific proof. Why didn't they talk about superstrings since they seem to be the fundamental blocks of life (or so we think at present, and even this theory might be consigned to the waste paper basket) - or is it that the authors have no heard of it yet to put the concept into their act? What's quoted above shows that the authors are playing with the audience who are as blind about science as they are.

* Quantum physicists tell us our entire universe emerged from thought. (Byrne, disc 1, track 10)
* And so you end up attracting to you the predominant thoughts that you were holding in your awareness, whether those thoughts are conscious or whether they are unconscious—that's the rub. (Beckwith, disc 1, track 12)

Let's get this right: NO ONE, and I mean NO ONE, understands quantum mechanics. So for Byrne to base his con, erm sorry doctorine, on a theory/framework that nobody actually understands is actually quite laughable. It's downright hilarious. We can use quantum mechanics to predict things and the framework is very successful at doing this - but no one understands why it works, and that's the point.

* All energy vibrates at a frequency. Being energy you also vibrate at a frequency. What determines your frequency at any time is whatever you are thinking and feeling. All of the things you want are made of energy and they are vibrating, too. Everything is energy. Here is the Wow Factor: when you think about what you want, and you emit that frequency, you cause the energy of what you want to vibrate at that frequency and bring it to you. As you focus on what you want, you are changing the vibration of the atoms of that thing and you're causing it to vibrate to you. (Bryne, disc 4, track 9)

If I weren't so cynical I call this "pandering" to the reader. Why attach such pointless egocentric measurements to impersonal processes? Why on earth should impersonal chemical reactions have anything to do with you? What you are saying is that you can "will" something to happen since you have this positive energy. That's unfalsifiable, and therefore not worth arguing about. On a personal note it's downright arrogant to think that that was possible

 

[A-Unit]

Re:

Ahem, Mr Darwin, only about 2 of the paragraphs you QUOTED were actually written by me...Unless you were aiming to put together some diatribe directed at me, using what appears to be Deep Dish's work? Needless to say, unless you site what I've said and point out something worth responding to, I'll stand pat on responding to you.



A-Unit

 

[darwinian_sympathiser]

I wish to add further, but it's too much effort, and this "The Secret" thing it a totally laughable mess.

Deep Dish, let's me a you debunk Neil Strauss, he ought to be persecuted for dishonesty, I'm utterly amazed at what he got away with in his book, total BS and yet it sells. Just goes to show that you can never go broke underestimating people's intelligence.

And as for Stephen Jay Gould, he was a great scientist, and I find it deeply insulting that John Demartini should say, "Our physiology creates disease to give us feedback to let us know we have an imbalanced perspective and we're not loving and we're not grateful". Why doesn't Mr Demartini tell that to those who have incurable diseases/terminal illnesses?

As for you A-Unit:

Why not invest that talent in something that will empower guys? Why not explain what works for you and an alternative to "The Secret"? A good christian would explain his faith in Christ. It's very easy to say, "thats' STUPID, here's why." Life is full of critics, but few creators. Where's the creation? All I see is destruction. And sometimes destruction helps re-create. But what is left in it's wake? Two huge threads...and nothing to replace the destruction. Fine, you don't believe. You don't buy it. It's quite hard to speak about something you don't believe anyways. You're all logic, no emotion then.

The path to empowering, in case you have not been told, is to first get rid of the cr*p. Weed out the stuff that does NOT work. Only having successfully rejected the hoaxs, cons, hustles, etc. . . can we begin to make real progress. It's getting late and I want to go to sleep, later . . . .

 

[God_of_getting_layed]

Great posts Darwinian Sympathizer.

You have all those "the secret" suckers OWNED!

 

[ricorico]

The Secret fails Carl Sagan's "Baloney detection

http://thesecretlie.blogspot.com/2007/03/baloney-detection-kit-testing-secret.html

 

[God_of_getting_layed]

One of the stages for knowing when a 'theory' is bullsh1t, is when opposers of it explain why it is wrong, and the supporters of it cant say anything back becuase they cant explain the holes in it that the opposers point out.

That is exactly what I am seeing here:....silence from the supporters. They cant explain the holes weve pointed out in the bullsh1t "the secret".:crackup:

 

[Holland]

Mmmm, not really, Mr. 'god of getting laid.'

But I'm getting rather tired with WASTING MY TIME.

I say:

F*ck critics, you can kiss my whole as shole, if you don't like my lyrics you can press fast forward

Like A-unit said, Deep Dish is only bashing the Secret. I haven't seen any constructive advice from him. That's why I choose to stop convincing someone who is not ready see the value of the underlying principles that many people have used to become succesfull.


ricorico, apparently it is a secret to some people. Maybe not to you and me, but there are a lot of people out there who are not growing and living fulfilling lives. They have no clue that they can change things (or no confidence in it). They live an average life and I think that is just sad.
The secret is telling them that if they believe they can do something and take constructive action upon that belief they will be succesfull.
That is probably much more effective than criticing it and doing nothing.

I don't know about you, but what I have come to believe is that anything you can conceive and believe, you can achieve (Napoleon Hill).

And what about people like Viktor Frankl, Nelson Mandela, Gandhi, did they not manifest much in very poor circumstances?
I think it would be very offensive to people like that to say that they just got lucky and that people in poor circumstances are just doomed and that the only hope for them are rich, goodwilling people who come to save them from their corrupt government.

Don't you agree that people like that are an EXAMPLE for those people about what CAN be done by the individual?

 

[A-Unit]

Re:

I gave up replying and posting because...

- I don't care to converse with, debate, or even attempt to convince kids I don't know through the internet.
- I've made my case a bazillion times in the initial post by DD, but never really got specific replies to my content. If people want to take an ego trip, make a name for themselves by being a follower of the hundreds of "secret" debunkers coming out of the wood work, go right ahead. Be my guest.
- Because Mr Darwin up above quotes DD, but then pegs those as my words. I can't reply to illogical, non-sensical posts made by un-aged and underaged posters.
- Because the dregs, and probably trolls, replied to these 2 posts with such venom, it's been more a time waster than anything.
- The OP has issued a "Final" word on things, so what point is there in discussing anything? He had a belief, he extracted it from other sources, and disproved everything! Yay, now I know what to believe, "thank you SoSuave! You've helped me get girls, demystified Physics and Quantum Mechanics, AND saved me from buying a stupid book!" WHOOPPEEE.
- This might as well have been a RELIGIOUS post, because you can't prove that stuff either, billions donate money AND time every year, but RELIGIOUS topics are banned...so pick the next best thing: Meta Physics.

--------------------------------

What was said in other sources related and unrelated to The Secret happens to be very true, and is the reason people come here, and find success. If you don't realize that, then you're a damn fool. And if you want to immerse yourself into what's BEHIND the Secret, then take on ALL the information behind it, too. Extract Hill. Extract Ford. Extract Frankl. Extract NLP. Pull out everything with a tenacle toward it. However, grasping at straws like vibrations, quoting them, and then pegging me speaks of how immature this site gets when more mature posters leave and actually know how to stay ON-topic.

I never personally said..."This is A-Unit's" belief...what I did say was...The Video and Movie made it on my list of reco'ed books posted here before. I took issue with the fact that alot of people replied with nothing more than what had been written in DD's post, and misconstrued ALOT. Rather than discussion, posters like RicoRico overlayed HIS expectations of the world and what the SECRET should do...but never took issue with a god or religion for the same things.

The fact is....I'm willing to bet dollars to donuts...or $10, that since I initially POSTED the video source for downloading it...that video has done more for people to actually PAY attention to their thoughts, to FOCUS on what they want, and read more DEEPLY into places like HILL and FRANKL, than BOTH these DD posts combined.



A-Unit

 

[Francisco d'Anconia]

I gave up replying and posting because....

Hey, I think someone bumped another "Looks are the most important thing that matters" thread. Let's hang out there!

 

[darwinian_sympathiser]

Dear A-Unit,

- I don't care to converse with, debate, or even attempt to convince kids I don't know through the internet.

If I'm a kid, then I'm sure a very informed and logical kid!!!

- I've made my case a bazillion times in the initial post by DD, but never really got specific replies to my content. If people want to take an ego trip, make a name for themselves by being a follower of the hundreds of "secret" debunkers coming out of the wood work, go right ahead. Be my guest.

We couldn't be bothered to read most of it because it was awful, repetitive and tediousl, not to mention full of circular arguments

- Because Mr Darwin up above quotes DD, but then pegs those as my words. I can't reply to illogical, non-sensical posts made by un-aged and underaged posters.

my posts, strange as they may seem to you, have raised very valid and critical points to which someone like yourself should try to justify. That you have not tried to justify them shows how weak your case is. My age and experience is of no concern to someone like you, in the same light that a proof of a mathematical conjecture does not concern itself with the age/experience/sex etc. . of the author of the proof. All that is required is that the proof be correct - whether it is done by a 10 years old or a 90 year old is quite irrelavant.

- Because the dregs, and probably trolls, replied to these 2 posts with such venom, it's been more a time waster than anything.

Nobody's trolling at all here. I've never seen the video or listened to the CDs and from what Deep Dish is posting of it I have no intention to.

I am not given out venom, I've posted what I observed are the holes in the work - there might be even more.

You say that Deep Dish and Co have not provided anything of worth? That they have not created anything and that all they do is spend time disproving and destroying "stuff". Well let me put it to you this way: I consider it a duty to destroy stuff that are patently lies, elaborate cons to sucker in the awary in.

Science would not have progressed where it is now without the falsifiers, on the contrary quite a lot of progress in technology were made from trial and error. Didn't Edison go through thousands and thousands of prototypes before he got to a proper working light bulb? He let go of his ego when he realised a prototype is wrong and probably said to himself: "damn it, that's another one consigned to the dust bin, next!!" And yet you, A-Unit, cling onto this as if your life depends on it, and that's nothing more than ego - sorry.

I'll elaborate more with you, but I'm out of time since I have to get some sleep. Later . . .

 

[Holland]

Darwinian Symphathiser,
Have you yet studied the works of

1. The master key system
2. The power of concentration
3. Law of attraction by Michael Losier
4. Think and Grow Rich by Napoleon Hill
5. Osho Books
6. Ask and It is Given
7. The Secret video and movie.
8. Denis Waitely
9. Bob Proctor
10. Robert Collier "the secret of all ages."
11. Tony Robbins
12. Any other big author, Henry Ford "Whether you think you can or you can't, you're right."
13. Early donald trump books.
14. NLP
15. Brian Tracy's work (Psychology of Achievement, Science of Self-confidence)
16. Wayne Dyer (Your Erroneous Zones, Being in the moment, Power of Intention, Secrets of the Universe)
17. Jay-Z and Roc-a-Fella Records, as well as some other hiphop artists
18. The power of your sub-concious mind by Joseph Murphy
19. Power vs. Force by David Hawkins
20. David Deangelo's Advanced Series
21. James Arthur Ray
22. Any other likeminded material

If not, I see no point in discussing, since you will not be able to see things in perspective.
Have a nice day.

 

[darwinian_sympathiser]

Dear Holland,

I have skimmed through:

4. Think and Grow Rich by Napoleon Hill
11. Tony Robbins
12. Any other big author, Henry Ford "Whether you think you can or you can't, you're right."
13. Early donald trump books.
14. NLP
15. Brian Tracy's work (Psychology of Achievement, Science of Self-confidence)
16. Wayne Dyer (Your Erroneous Zones, Being in the moment, Power of Intention, Secrets of the Universe)
17. Jay-Z and Roc-a-Fella Records, as well as some other hiphop artists
22. and maybe some other likeminded material

But there's a flaw in your argument: it presupposes that I need to look at these works to make a judgement. No, I don't. All I need to do to prove them wrong is to attack what interdependence they have on whatever concept that they use. Like my criticism on the side of Deep Dish, I pointed out the flaw in the appeal to Quantum Mechanics, and that's enough.

For example, you could write a 1000 page book on the building, maintenance and workings of a perpetual motion machine (a machine that goes on forever without any external energy aid), but no serious scientist would ever take your work seriously because all they would do is to appeal to the first and second law of thermodynamics to invalidate your book.

Same here. In general, from the public point of view anyway, disproving something is actually easier that offering justification.

 

[A-Unit]

Re;

Yes, you do in fact need to examine BOTH sides of the equation before you pass true judgement. Making up examples to prove your point is pure idiocy.

To be frank, I've never made mention of quantum mechanics in my posts. I am studying such things, but going back, I've never made mention of them. I have no ego investment in this. What I do have is a disdain for posters such as yourself who just "tag along" like a lapdog to more seasoned posters, fill their posts up, spin in some buzz words, and some off like an immature troll. We've crossed the threshhold between the original topic, and pure flaming now.

The "concepts" behind all the works and the Secret, which is in my opinion "Consciousness," are what matters. The consciousness of our universe. Of our planet. With 6 billion people, and ricorico professing LOA can't work because other people are so horrible and good people are oppressed, you only need to look at the state of mind of humanity. We throw off responsibility to genetics, childhood, emotional and chemical imbalances, the environment, religion, a higher power, but it never comes back to the individual. Individuals never see their responsibility in creating this world. Is that not seen amongst the works provided? Is it not known by you that we create this world, all 6 billion of us? And if we're pissed off about it, we have only need to look in a mirror?

I took a "concept" from The Secret, which happened to make more sense than pure religion has, and doesn't ask for sunday alms, or offerings, and yet contradict itself. The concept here, that I've positioned myself in supporting is personal responsibility and the will of the individual to create HIS world as he sees fit. Do you take issue with that? Go back. ALL my posts are related to that, probably back 3 years.

Today it's the Secret, Tomorrow's the Secret to Infinity or some other concept. If this post is about disproving The Secret by science, that's false imo, too. What was known science YESTERDAY, is no longer KNOWN SCIENCE today. Science is only presently known opinion. It isn't THAT concrete. There are some laws which explain our universe, and there are other's that are, or have been, turned over.

As someone who understands the tendency of people to CLING to something as their crutch, I've never been 100% into one thing, because I understand something will override or maybe contradict these concepts. BUT, they are a step in the right direction. So many people want to point blame elsewhere. Fundamentalists, poverty, health, wealth, weather, life, and never think..."Do we as a species make this world this way? What if we tried, as a group, to make this world in some better vision?" While LOA, or just wishing or praying at your nearest church can't save people in Africa, certainly a GROUP of people, and the whole humanity COULD. But Consciousness is fractured and broken. For the most part we link that to psychological or genetic problems. Is it? We think we've evolved and yet we commit the same atrocities we did as a species, just with greater rapidity and stealth?

I care not for keeping this post going, but at every turn I've either, not communicated effectively, had my words twisted, OR, been misunderstood totally. I care not for convincing you, as this is our world, and our realities are separate, as are our beliefs. Obviously. People say...well "If it's so great it would...do this, this, and this!" But not all people WANT that. Not all people are aware or CARE about atrocities the world around, as ricorico noted. Not all people believe the war is good, or bad. If they did, people would help in changing things. They'd act.

And lastly, the concepts behind the Secret aren't just Quantum Mechanics. They're bodies of work dating back 100 years, and even several centuries. Different religious texts say much the same as the secret does, minus the science the secret attempts to use. The field of "Chaos and Chaos Theory" is relatively new in comparison to all other fields. It's value has become obvious and practical, and is drawing the attention of scholars the world around. However, it doesn't have the track record that other Science Fields have. Should it be discounted because it's new?

I really don't care what anyone believes, because no one cares what I believe. It's your reality, do what you will. Perhaps some viewers saw a different science in The Secret than I did. My point since the get-go was...this isn't new science, just packaged better. And...having not read or watched any of it...well, just confirmed my waste of time on this topic.

Good day to everyone,


A-Unit