Comments on: Results of the Clean Water Experiment:Of glowing light and alchemy

By: debra derella cheren

debra derella cheren — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 15:24:24 +0000

Come explore our new site, Be the Light, Be the One : tools and resources for conscious change,
We offer the best of Science and spirituality resources, such as Lynn, Gregg Braden, Bruce Lipton, Noetics and WiserEarth. We also carry
conscious gifts from heart which include our inspiring message on bamboo/organic apparel, recycled umbrellas and DVDs.

By: Wendy

Wendy — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 16:55:04 +0000

I know thoughts are THINGS and if we can purify water then we can create peace and environmental integrity for our world. Let’s get on with what really matters now that Lynns work has proved true.. I hope Lynns next experiment will be exactly that. Thank you Lynn. Namaste’

By: Georgette

Georgette — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 13:00:11 +0000

i dont inderstant any of it

By: Wes

Wes — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 20:14:55 +0000

I wasn’t here in time to participate but i will share that when i pour a glass of water to drink, if i thank it and bless it for it’s hydrating and nourishing qualities, it seems to taste much MUCH better than if i were to drink it without saying any thanks (and sometimes, if i’m in a foul mood, it tastes rather nasty.) at first i had thought that it was mainly psychosomatic, but now i’m starting to think that there’s something more to it than just a shift in perception.

i believe that you’re on to something very important and i wish to contribute in any way that i can.

thank you for doing the work you are, i hold high hopes and many positive blessings/vibes towards you and your teams.

Namaste!

By: Joan McBride

Joan McBride — Wed, 21 Oct 2009 17:01:52 +0000

Water is indeed an incredible carrier of information and intention. This web site will show you fabulous revolutionary quantum physics for health, longevity and more! Enjoy!

By: Pauline

Pauline — Wed, 21 Oct 2009 11:44:24 +0000

This works is so very important as once people start to exercise their intent – like any muscle – it will grow more powerful and effective. This study paves the way to an acceptance of our greater capabilities and hopefully in turn will lead to a host of similar studies and as our skills improve even more remarkable results. Well done.

By: anna

anna — Mon, 19 Oct 2009 15:34:40 +0000

Is this type of photography similar to the “Kirelian” photography that brought so much interest in the seventies? That showed “auras” around living things as well, and was called “unscientific” by debunkers then. also. Even when it showed the aura of an amputated finger still glowing on the hand as if it was still there!!!

By: Alia Curtis

Alia Curtis — Mon, 19 Oct 2009 14:15:20 +0000

It is refreshing and it evokes hope knowing that the imbalances of our planet can be healed through a unified effort of God given energies. Though Nature is being abused, Natural Law cannot be altered, therefore wrongs will always be made right when like minds cooperate in healing efforts.

By: Sachin R Sharma

Sachin R Sharma — Mon, 19 Oct 2009 02:32:36 +0000

Dear Lynn,

The Sept. 19 experiment results look completely in consistent. The GDV images of the control and the target look completely different. Infact after the intention the control and target images look similar. The image at the outset look inconclusive unless there is a mix up in uploading the pictures.

Having said that, let me assure you that I’m a firm beleiver in the scientific work that you are doing. It definately has potential to open up completely new doors for humanity. That mind can influence matter has been mentioned consistently in ancient texts, if you prove it with your research it will be incredible.

Also the experiments such as these can conclude that intention can influence matter, but the bigger question HOW? What the are sub-atomic particles or space-time disturbances that we are able to generate from our minds that can lead to such changes?

Work towards that in your research credibility will move to a whole new level

By: Michel

Michel — Sun, 18 Oct 2009 21:22:03 +0000

I’m afraid not to be in the mainstream of this forum. I think that this experiment is fuzzy and not significant.

First the concept of bottled water is vague and confusing. Its quality and caracteristics depend on the local laws and of each “manufacturing” process. In addition to this, bottled water is stagnant while tap water necessarily flows through the pipes down to the tap…
There is no proof whatsoever that its quality is always better than water tap (which is also variable in quality). So the participant opinions about the values of bottled and tap water may have influenced their intention.

When I look at the results, the photos, I am not convinced at all. No photo looks like the “typical” bottled water one.

It seems to me that in both experiments, the intention has allowed water to recover from stagnation, not to be similar to bottled water.

But what about the evolution of controls ? Why do they also evolve ?

All this is purely qualitative and debatable and certainly not significant from a statistical point of view.
The only way to have valid experiments would be to make measurements, (of what, I don’t know) which would be treated by statistical analysis.
I hope my remarks will not hurt anybody, they are dictated by the willingness to improve this wonderful scientific research.

It’s great to be with you.