BacktoCricaddict Posted July 17, 2023 Share Posted July 17, 2023 (edited) An expert claims that there is scientific evidence that you can change the molecular structure of water and turn it from polluted to healing by using the power of positive thinking. “I know some people that, through energetical transformation, through the power of prayer, through the power of gratitude, they managed to turn the most toxic food, or maybe most polluted water into the most healing water, because water reacts. Scientists have proven that in experiment, that molecules in the water react to our emotions to what has been said,” he said. “I truly believe that we should continuously every single day remind ourselves when we sit, that we sit without cameras, without phones, without watching things and stuff. Or even worse, having nervous [and] conflicting discussions at the table with your close ones during your meal.” Amazing, isn't it? There is scientific evidence that water reacts to our emotions. Send it good vibes and it will shake off the pollutants dissolved or suspended in it. For this discovery, this expert will forever be enshrined in the world of nutrition and toxicology. The problem is that the said expert is an expert alright, but not in water chemistry or toxicology. Rather, he is the absolute GOAT expert the world of tennis has ever seen. Unfortunately, being the absolute expert in one field, be it tennis or podcasting or lawyering, does not give one automatic expertise in other fields. A great deal of thought, hard-work and intellect goes into producing good science, and you must not take the word of someone who has done nothing in this field to tell you about the science of water. Just like you would not ask Dr. APJ Abdul Kalam for advice on perfecting the forehand or Dr. MS Swaminathan on how to execute a reverse-sweep on a turning track, you would not ask Novak Djokovic or Yashasvi Jaiswal about astronomy or plant molecular genetics. The same sense of confidence and intransigent conviction that makes people successful in their field spills over into everything that they believe - even when there is no evidence for their conviction, or worse, when there is rigorous evidence to the contrary. It is of course good to be skeptical of the establishment, but one must also be open to changing one's mind in the face of rigorous evidence. It may seem that unwavering conviction is a sign of strength, but such conviction should only come from having studied and understood something in-depth, not from starting with a belief or conviction based on coincidences and anecdotal experiences. In fact, it takes humility and courage to change one's mind, and to me, that humility is more important than the strength of blind conviction. And for all these reasons, while I am convinced that Djokovic is the GOAT of tennis and, in general, a well-intentioned and compassionate person, he can cause and may have caused untold harm by using the platform he has to evangelize his unsubstantiated convictions. Edited July 17, 2023 by BacktoCricaddict Mariyam and Prakat 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Posted July 17, 2023 Share Posted July 17, 2023 Who is this genius? Seems like a disciple of Deepak Chopra Vijy 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BacktoCricaddict Posted July 17, 2023 Author Share Posted July 17, 2023 26 minutes ago, Lord said: Who is this genius? Seems like a disciple of Deepak Chopra Novak Djokovic - the GOAT of tennis. Lord 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Posted July 17, 2023 Share Posted July 17, 2023 Just now, BacktoCricaddict said: Novak Djokovic - the GOAT of tennis. Damn. looks like defeat to Alcaraz has had a terrible effect. Vijy 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BacktoCricaddict Posted July 17, 2023 Author Share Posted July 17, 2023 3 minutes ago, Lord said: Damn. looks like defeat to Alcaraz has had a terrible effect. Actually, he has been pushing these pseudoscientific for a long time, and the water quote is from 2018 or 2019. This is why I was never his fan. Admired and respected him for his ability, success and heart, but never a fan. Lord 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ravishingravi Posted July 17, 2023 Share Posted July 17, 2023 Journey of life has only made some characters more and more amenable with time. Djoker is one of them. Actually I completely support him and his right to believe what he does. Self procmaimed rationalists might want to label him. Perhaps its the new me which lamented many during covid crisis only to understand later that they were not necessarily wrong. Purely as a liberterian; he has all the right to say and believe without putting it through the rigour of scientific process. Because of his position on vaccines, many from left scientific community were rattled and seriously unhappy. With time, I have only begun to appreciate those who managed to maintain their independent thinking while under intense pressure from scientific community and governments. Empirical evidence is good but one can have an individual and lived experience which need not fit through the prism of sicentific process. Fact that rationalists get rattled by such things and make ad hominem / individual issue, only further confirms frailty of human mind ( scientific or otherwise ). Truly rational thinking would only be issue based and never relate the issue to individual. Scientists are brutal with each otherr on ideas. Thats the training and thats how it should be. But it should never transcends to the individual. Fact that the aspersion can be on the individual itself shows that dogmatic and religious smind may not be that far off. zen 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zen Posted July 17, 2023 Share Posted July 17, 2023 Irrespective of the path he took, I like his message of avoiding conflicts during meals ... Enjoy your meal and be happy at the table. If in that process water stays happy (reacting to emotions around it), a bonus! ravishingravi 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BacktoCricaddict Posted July 20, 2023 Author Share Posted July 20, 2023 (edited) On 7/17/2023 at 11:46 AM, ravishingravi said: Journey of life has only made some characters more and more amenable with time. Djoker is one of them. Actually I completely support him and his right to believe what he does. Self procmaimed rationalists might want to label him. Perhaps its the new me which lamented many during covid crisis only to understand later that they were not necessarily wrong. Purely as a liberterian; he has all the right to say and believe without putting it through the rigour of scientific process. Because of his position on vaccines, many from left scientific community were rattled and seriously unhappy. With time, I have only begun to appreciate those who managed to maintain their independent thinking while under intense pressure from scientific community and governments. Empirical evidence is good but one can have an individual and lived experience which need not fit through the prism of sicentific process. Fact that rationalists get rattled by such things and make ad hominem / individual issue, only further confirms frailty of human mind ( scientific or otherwise ). Truly rational thinking would only be issue based and never relate the issue to individual. Scientists are brutal with each otherr on ideas. Thats the training and thats how it should be. But it should never transcends to the individual. Fact that the aspersion can be on the individual itself shows that dogmatic and religious smind may not be that far off. On 7/17/2023 at 11:46 AM, ravishingravi said: Journey of life has only made some characters more and more amenable with time. Djoker is one of them. Actually I completely support him and his right to believe what he does. Self procmaimed rationalists might want to label him. Perhaps its the new me which lamented many during covid crisis only to understand later that they were not necessarily wrong. Purely as a liberterian; he has all the right to say and believe without putting it through the rigour of scientific process. Because of his position on vaccines, many from left scientific community were rattled and seriously unhappy. With time, I have only begun to appreciate those who managed to maintain their independent thinking while under intense pressure from scientific community and governments. Empirical evidence is good but one can have an individual and lived experience which need not fit through the prism of sicentific process. Fact that rationalists get rattled by such things and make ad hominem / individual issue, only further confirms frailty of human mind ( scientific or otherwise ). Truly rational thinking would only be issue based and never relate the issue to individual. Scientists are brutal with each otherr on ideas. Thats the training and thats how it should be. But it should never transcends to the individual. Fact that the aspersion can be on the individual itself shows that dogmatic and religious smind may not be that far off. No one is calling for a denial of his rights to speak his opinion. I completely support his right to voice his opinion. In other words, my post was not calling for his arrest because he believes in mystical water purification. I am supporting my right too, to ridicule such irrational thought, which has also proven to be dangerous, mainly in the form of unsubstantiated "cures" and "healing" peddled by charlatans who skirt the scientific process. Extrapolated further, unsubstantiated generalizations based on anecdotal experiences (e.g., someone was beaten by African American kids when they were young and now are suspicious of all African Americans) cause societal disharmony. My point? It is okay to have an opinion and stick to it, but when evidence to the contrary starts to build, it is incumbent upon us to change our minds. The same criticism applies to people - many of them scientists - who still refuse to "believe" that SARS CoV2 possibly emerged in a lab and are still holding on to the natural origins hypothesis, even though there is enough evidence in favor of lab origins. Novak's stance on the vaccine rattled scientists not because they were being questioned, but because the evidence had already answered the questions. That his opinion - based on his political stance, rather than statistical evidence - posed a danger to the public. In addition to his refusal to take the vaccine, he undermined it by partying without masks, leading to increased viral spread. By the time his drama in Australia happened it was clear that the vaccine was highly effective at preventing severe disease and quite effective at slowing transmission. He should've listened to the data and supported vaccination efforts to help the people who, unlike him, were most vulnerable. Again, he is entitled to his rights, just as the Aus govt was entitled to keep him out. I do give him this - he was not a hypocrite - unlike Boris Johnson and the liberal mayors of Wash DC and San Francisco who imposed lockdowns and mask mandates on everyone while themselves partying maskless and hosting super-spreader events. Education must lead us away from anecdotal thinking to statistical thinking. Edited July 20, 2023 by BacktoCricaddict Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Posted July 20, 2023 Share Posted July 20, 2023 Same vibes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Khota Posted July 23, 2023 Share Posted July 23, 2023 No. That sh#t does not work Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BacktoCricaddict Posted July 23, 2023 Author Share Posted July 23, 2023 On 7/20/2023 at 11:30 AM, Lord said: Same vibes Yup. Charlatans. Lord and Vijy 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vijy Posted July 23, 2023 Share Posted July 23, 2023 10 hours ago, Khota said: No. That sh#t does not work perhaps you are right regd s**t, but with the power of positive thinking, one can turn p*ss into water Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts