The First (Partial) Debunking of the Full-Length Thrive Movie.

This is Part I of the first debunking done on the full-length Thrive movie. More parts will be uploaded in coming days, and there will be additional debunking material that is more detailed, both on the full movie and on various individual aspects of it. This debunking is not by me, but by gabrieltech, who will (we hope) be a contributor to this blog.

——————————

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence

The intro:

The movie begins with Foster Gamble’s early story and memories, introducing himself and showing his revelation where he apparently found a pattern involving a torus which is according to him, imbued to basically everything involving energy other common geometric patterns through history.

The torus:

First, I’d like to say that the torus is a very common shape and patter in nature, especially when it is related to magnetism, electromagnetism and magnets (how do they work?), then he introduces the vector equilibrium and states that those two are related to several physical phenomena including the creation of the universe and in all scales showing global weather patterns, the airflow from helicopters and a few things more.

No real problem so far but at around 15 minutes into the video he states that inventors using the torus have created devices that generate energy without using combustion, then he proceeds to use buzz words such as zero point energy, radiant or free energy and rebrands them as New Energy Technology.

Later Gamble states that much of the suffering in the world is directly linked to the lack of energy. While this is true in some cases, he completely ignores geopolitical, ethnical, religious and nationalistic conflicts and tensions. Gamble states that free unlimited free energy would improve the living condition of many and become a great break through(thanks captain obvious we didn’t notice), and then he asks who knew about such “potential” torus based devices.

The “Flower of Life”

Following this question Gamble proceeds showing several pieces of ancient works of art, sculptures paintings and even alphabets, most of those have spiral and circular patterns and drawings, claiming that the torus has been encoded in such works(some of the most notable are the Orobus snake and the Giza pyramid).

The flower of life in the Temple of Osiris in Abydos Egypt is mentioned and Hassim Haramein claims those have been burned into the atomic structure of the rock. No support is provided for the claim that it is “burned into the atomic structure of the rock.”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flower_of_Life

http://www.floweroflife.org/folindia.htm

http://www.kch42.dial.pipex.com/egypttour_osirion.html

First, I have failed to find in any respectable source citing or confirming the veracity of this statement.

Second, this shape isn’t exclusive to the Egyptians. It has appeared in several cultures along the ages, given how Egypt was a cultural hub in the period of these markings those certainly were brought by foreign travellers and were imported to other regional cultures, this shape held a significant religious and philosophical meaning in representing life and time.

Third, while it is related to torus it isn’t limited to one shape of solids such as pyramids and tetrahedrons but a vast array of regular shapes.

Later Gamble claims the expanded 3D view of the Flower of life holds the vector equilibrium, but when I searched for more information regarding this aspect I could only find sites and articles made by Nassim Haramein or citing him as a source. Those who didn’t cite him as a source were either exoteric or another conspiracy theory websites that had no respectable sources or weren’t even sourced at all. No other serious academic report or article has been made to support such claims.

Gamble claims the flow of power in the structure is the torus (so far, this has been nothing but nonsense, as any regular shape can be fitted inside a spherical shape, making such claims proves nothing but basic geometric concepts).

After that Gamble brings that the same shape is also in the forbidden city in China. I stated earlier this shape is common in several cultures and it’s not surprising others also decided to reproduce it in their own works (it’s is a very beautiful pattern it’s easy to see why it was copied during history).

The sixty-four energy units:

Apparently the meaning of life, the universe and everything is 64. Most of the claims were hazy at best, the flower of life circles have been reproduced by several cultures during a time span ranging millennia from middle east (probably its origin, then it was exported to other countries) to as far as India and China.

One peculiar interesting claim was that the human DNA helix “has an alphabet of 64 codons that is used to encode our human DNA”.

Since I have no authority in genetics I can’t properly refute this claim, instead I’ll leave a link and a quote for you to make your own conclusions.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DNA#Transcription_and_translation

Quoting from Wikipedia (yes, I quoted Wikipedia and yes it was from a reliable page so shut up).

“the codons of a gene are copied into messenger RNA by RNA polymerase. This RNA copy is then decoded by a ribosome that reads the RNA sequence by base-pairing the messenger RNA to transfer RNA, which carries amino acids. Since there are 4 bases in 3-letter combinations, there are 64 possible codons (43 combinations). These encode the twenty standard amino acids, giving most amino acids more than one possible codon. There are also three ‘stop’ or ‘nonsense’ codons signifying the end of the coding region; these are the TAA, TGA and TAG codons.”

Gamble along with Haramein imply an alien origin for the tetrahedron, the flower of life along the human knowledge of engineering, writing and science being passed to humanity through sun gods descending to earth to spread knowledge, later inferring that said gods were advanced extraterrestrials with an exposition of paintings as old as the first biblical representation of god and more recently from the Renaissance and 18th century paintings.

That is an off-shot that any major in both theology and history can properly refute and explain, unfortunately I’m neither.

[Muertos comment: I am a historian, and I can and will properly refute and explain these issues in a future entry.]

But the point is simple: Gamble is coercing the viewer into believing that ancient myths and creeds are tied to the existence of aliens and their coming to earth regardless of that being true or not, it doesn’t show any conclusive evidence besides paintings whose interpretation can vary from viewer to viewer.

The first interviews:

Steven Greer: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CSETI

What I know so far about him is that he is legally formed as a physician and became an ufologist.

He created the CSETI and the Disclosure project and has featured in several congresses about UFOs and abductions. One of the most notable appearance was in the History Channel’s Ancient Aliens show (which is very well known for its lack of credibility).

After a brief introduction, Greer makes a comment about the certain possibility of the existence of alien races as advanced or more than the human race and proceeds to show several footage containing alleged UFOs, several of which can be attributed to natural phenomena such as ball lighting and meteorites or pure mistaken sightings of weather balloons (I know this is a cliché explanation but it’s true), aircraft and even hoax videos who are manipulated to show an UFO.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoenix_Lights#Explanations

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ball_lightning

One of the most baffling videos was the Mexico City skyline in 1997, an already admitted hoax.

http://brumac.8k.com/MexCityAug697/MexCtySmearAnalysis.html

Edgar Dean Mitchell, Sergeant Clifford Stone, Harry Allen Jordan, Col Dwynne Anderson and John Callahan.

These five men have two things in common: they used to work for the government (Mitchell was an astronaut, Stone and Jordan were military servicemen, John Callahan is a former FAA head of Accidents and Investigations) and all of them believe that the US government knows about the existence of aliens and actively tries to cover their existence.

Most of the reports I could find about them were either tied to other conspiracy theory sites some of which being the Greer’s Disclosure Project and an interview with Sergeant Stone on Burlington news.

There isn’t much official data about Mitchell besides his career as an engineer, astronaut and his mission as the pilot of Apollo 14. His views of aliens and UFO have the same issue that many others UFO and aliens advocators suffer from: lack of credible and verifiable sources.

He also believes a remote healer with the pseudonym of Adam Dreamhealer helped with the cure of his kidney cancer.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edgar_Mitchell#cite_note-13

http://www.burlingtonnews.net/stone.html

http://www.nicap.org/articles/631002jordan_testimony_article.pdf (Jordan’s views of the event in the Disclosure project)

The incident they mention with UFO’s disabling nuclear missiles can be found in those articles

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/ufo/8026971/Aliens-have-deactivated-British-and-US-nuclear-missiles-say-US-military-pilots.html

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1315339/Aliens-hit-nukes-They-landed-Suffolk-base-claim-airmen.html

The crop circles:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crop_circle

Perhaps one of the most sensationalist parts of the documentary involves crop circles, which Gamble and his friends claim are made by extraterrestrials. There are several sites that either debunk or give detailed instructions about how those circles were man-made.

[Muertos comment: as I will cover in a future entry, if there is a rational explanation, supported by evidence, that crop circles are man-made, the rules of logic require you to assume that they are man-made until and unless proven otherwise--and that "proven otherwise" has a very high standard of proof. I say require because you simply don't have a choice. Jumping to the conclusion that crop circles are extraterrestrial in origin, when there is a much easier and more rational explanation at hand, is simply bad logic. I consider this point absolutely conclusive regarding crop circles, but SlayerX3 is certainly correct to marshal the evidence, as he does, that they are man-made.]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a_opN9ghPKQ

Here is a link with the how-to guide into making convincing crop circles covering even the bent stalks, magnetized soil and exotic patterns:

http://www.wikihow.com/Make-a-Crop-Circle

http://www.wikihow.com/Explain-Crop-Circles

“Could hoaxers have created all 5.000 of these patterns?”

Do not underestimate human boredom, publicity and search for attention.

The NASA message and the Chilbolton crop circle:

Perhaps the most extravagant crop circle, the crop circle in Childbolton in England is a quite interesting one first I’ll show what the NASA message is called the Arecibo message

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arecibo_message

The message contains basic information about the Human Race such as location in our solar system, a sample of our genetic code and numeric system.

It wasn’t considered an attempt to make contact but simply a show of technical prowess as the clusters of stars where this message is aimed at is 25.000 light years away from earth, and is highly unlikely that an advanced species had picked up the message what was originally transmitted in 1974 and answered it in 2001.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chilbolton_Observatory

There is a radio scope and observatory no further than 200 meters away from the crops, it doesn’t help that previous crops have been targeted with pranksters (from the Childbolton’s observatory, possibly) and the crew of the Observatory is possibly familiar with the Arecibo message don’t give much credibility to this crop “circle” as it could be a detailed practical joke from the observatory’s crew.

http://www.cropcircleresearch.com/articles/arecibo.html

http://www.rense.com/general13/mistakes.htm

http://www.rense.com/general13/arc.htm

http://www.swirlednews.com/article.asp?artID=260

Author note: I had difficulty in finding mainstream and more reliable sources for this event, so make your own conclusions, along the links I’ve sent.

Later Gamble makes a bold and unfounded statement about how the crop circles, the torus, vector equilibrium are coherent and carry messages on how to access clean and unlimited energy and transportation.

More material from gabrieltech’s debunking of Thrive will be posted at a later time.

About these ads

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

112 responses to “The First (Partial) Debunking of the Full-Length Thrive Movie.”

  1. gabrieltech says :

    If anyone point out a mistake (not a typo or syntax error, factual error) please feel free to point out and post information for correction, from verifiable and reputable sources so I can correct whatever is wrong. (SlayerX3 is my twitter and gaming nickname/Alias)

    Blogs, forums and conspiracy sites of any kind will be ignored (unless they link to decent sources, but in this case you can paste those here)

  2. The Locke says :

    Three things that someone should ask them if they actually believe them about this free energy machine is: Are the blue-prints on how to make this unlimited free energy machine? What type of materials are needed to build this machine? Is there an actual video of an actual one of these machines being built and eventually in full working order and fully operational, and not just a CGI model of this machine?

    I wonder how long it would be before they got a response and if it included all, if not any of the information they requested?

    • Core Burner who lost in the lottery but got a ticket through a camp-mate says :

      Most of you will dismiss this “free energy” link… out of principle, because you don’t want to open your mind to a new world view.

      http://www.icestuff.com/~energy21/testimages.htm

      Some of you will look into it, and find it interesting. Actual Pictures of real machines. No Proof – how can you prove anything through the Internet??? The only real proof is through personal experience – something you must seek out for yourself.

      Faith, on the other hand, is something altogether different, and quite powerful.

      I have faith that “free energy” (loosely termed) is real and simply waiting to be understood.

      One question for your physics / science mind: what force keeps the world going round?

      I ask because in all my (somewhat limited, but ever expanding) studies of physics, I find no contemporary explanation from any field of science – for what force keeps the world turning..?

      Try spinning an egg on the floor – it stops very quickly – a hardboiled egg will spin much longer. The force put into the spin is quickly absorbed by the friction in the viscosity of the egg. The EARTH is like a raw egg… (fertile! haha) it has a viscous core, with huge amounts of friction and resistance. If some force ever set the earth spinning, it would have slowed down and stopped long ago…

      Yet the earth keeps spinning. Nassim Haramein is the only person I have known to provide any kind of thought through, thorough and researched / mathematically developed explanation for what force keeps the world turning – he is a pioneer on the for-front of thought! And his explanation is a expansion / derivative of Einstein’s theory’s and formula’s.

      It is the same energy that keeps the world turning that is what’s referred to as “free energy”. It’s called “free” because you don’t have to pay for it. It is sourced from the (potentially) infinite energy potential held within the vacuum. How much energy has been formally calculated (in the “normal” physics community) to exist in the vacuum? One Answer: more than is represented in the entire visible universe, all of our telescopes included.

      One interesting article on the subject:

      http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/vacuum.html

      this guy has a lot to say about it:

      http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/cosmo_constant.html

      but even just glancing through these two one can see that there is no real definitive conclusion… mainly because of “missing links” in different view points (Quantum Field Theory vs. General Relativity) – conclusions range from zero energy density, to infinite! But again I ask you: what’s keeping the world turning around – and I mean, physically – what force – where’s the energy coming from to rotate the entire world against its own internal resistance from viscous friction???

      Haramein is the only one so far to offer a Unified Field Theory which applies the same rules on the Macro Scale equally to the Sub-Atomic scale – something which no other theory has done – and which is remarkable (the first of it’s kind) and much needed since you could think intuitively that the universe would have the same laws apply on every scale, from the very large all the way down to the sub-atomic.

      • anticultist says :

        “Some of you will look into it, and find it interesting. Actual Pictures of real machines. No Proof – how can you prove anything through the Internet??? The only real proof is through personal experience – something you must seek out for yourself.”

        Wrong. The only real proof is through scientific data and studies, simply looking at a box on a table operate means nothing in the real world to a scientist.
        If you had any intellect or knowledge of science you would have never uttered such preposterous ramblings. If you have no schematics and data to present to the world that can ultimately conclude your box works then you have nothing. Likewise you have yet to even prove scientifically what energy these machines are tapping into. The whole notion of being in the same room as the evidence being substantial enough to verify it is just the uttering of a childish mind.

        “Faith, on the other hand, is something altogether different, and quite powerful.

        I have faith that “free energy” (loosely termed) is real and simply waiting to be understood.”

        Which is exactly why no one who studies science would ever take you seriously. You might as well say you are faith healer who has the ability to tap into the cosmos and heal with his hands. The level of nonsense you utter is equivalent in stupid.

      • docstrnge says :

        I have a mixture of skepticism and belief in this whole “Thrive” thingy. As for the “free energy” aspect, of course it can be done. The most basic thing I learned in vocational school (Electrical Maintenance), as a teenager, is the fact that electricity is generated with the combination of a magnetic field and a conductor – one item stationary and one moving. I imagined a giant, man-made ring around the planet (a conductor) which tapped the earth’s magnetic field and the resulting electricity being transmitted wireless to earth (see: Tesla). Yeah, it’s not a bright idea – I’m just an average shmoe with some imagination, not a rocket scientist. However, I do understand that there’s energy all around us, in our atmosphere, and there has to be a practical way of tapping it. I believe that this will eventually be accomplished someday and the primary driver to this goal will be found in advanced materials fabrication. That’s why I fully support the idea of space exploration, because that’s where these technologies will be developed. I shudder when I hear the current batch of neocons and troglodytes piss and moan about “what’s in it for me, right now” as they poo poo the Mars rover program. There’s no problem with thinking big. I don’t like cultists and conspiracy theories myself but couldn’t we be spending some debunking time thinking big? That’s advice to myself, BTW – I’m just saying……

      • Wyboth says :

        @docstrnge
        I think you might be confused as to what they mean by ‘free’ energy. What you just described is renewable energy, which is entirely practical, and being implemented right now. What the thrivers mean by free energy is where energy would be created from nothing. You’re probably thinking of things like wind and hydroelectric power, but on a much grander scale. These methods work because they transform energy from the air and the water into electricity, though it will take a while to get to the scale you’re talking about. What Thrive refers to as free energy is something completely different. They believe that a free energy machine would be able to produce energy from nothing, thus being ‘free.’ You may ask, “What’s the problem with that? Why bother with alternative energies if we can get it for free?” The problem with free energy is that it’s impossible. If you remember “energy can not be created or destroyed” from grade school, you should quickly recognize that there can be no free energy, because it attempts to create energy. I think the thrivers realize this, but purposely choose to ignore it because it would disprove their ideas, and they can’t have that, can they?

        Anyways, I hope this helped you.

      • Erik says :

        @anticultist – Don’t forget that “Science” used to say the Earth was flat…

      • anticultist says :

        @Erik don’t forget to read this on your way out:

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myth_of_the_Flat_Earth

      • Frankie says :

        Thanks Anticultist. I learned that they didnt think the earth was flat in the middle ages from a history book.
        Some people read too much conspiracy crap that they distort history in sick ways.

      • Scott says :

        What the hell are you talking about? Lol. There is little friction in space to stop it from spinning…. It can be explained by the conservation of angular momentum principle and similarly Newton’s first law of motion. Objects in motion do not require force to keep them moving/spinning, they require force to stop them.

  3. Professor Pious says :

    Great start. Looking forward to more debunking.

    Ultimately Thrive’s credibility is only as good as its sources.

    Nassim Haramein is one of Thrive’s “scientific experts”, yet his misunderstandings of basic physics is legendary. Hardly a credible expert in “what’s really going on,” but a good posterboy for present day pseudoscience:

    http://azureworld.blogspot.com/2010/06/whats-so-misleading-about-nassim.html

    Another of it’s purported experts is Patrick Flanagan, who has a seemingly endless ability to talk about “free energy” devices, but cannot actually produce one. What he has produced is fake medical credentials, bogus scientific studies:

    http://www.healthwatcher.net/Quackerywatch/Colloidal-minerals/patrickflanagan.html

    http://www.chem1.com/CQ/FlanBunk.html

    And magical claims about “pyramid power”:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patrick_Flanagan

    Besides using spheres, Foster Gamble also tries to push his torus notion by superimposing the torus over various circular phenomenon. An easy trick, considering the circle is one of the most common shapes in nature, but hardly proof of anything, except cherry-picked examples presented in a way to elicit a big “Wow” from the scientifically challenged.

    • SlayerX3 says :

      That was the exact feeling I had when the kept putting tori in everything, there wasn’t something special about the torus shape.

      Thanks for the comment, and the links.

    • Frankie says :

      There is no reason why any particular shape should be important. Just because we like donuts and tori, doesnt mean it is a source of universal energy. These nutbags and also Gamble, have an infatuation with it, and cant seem to get that nature doesnt favor any other particular shape over another one. It’s all in their heads.
      Thanks for the articles

  4. Syd Baumel says :

    The “flower of life” is an all but inevitable discovery in any culture that uses the compass as a drawing tool. Here’s the formula: Using a compass, draw a circle. Next, put the point of the compass anywhere on the circle and draw another one. Now, start putting the point of the compass on every point where the circles intersect to keep drawing new circles. In no time, you’ll have a “flower of life.” It’s an awesome pattern, reflecting the inherent beauty of organic geometric form and pattern, but there’s nothing mysterious or magical at all about these circles cropping up, if you will, all over the world.

  5. Professor Pious says :

    Nice to see some quality debunking and critical thinking going on here. Unsurprisingly, here is a quote from the New [W]Age crowd regarding the Thrive movie:

    “Discernment is necessary in all things. Go to your heart souce and see what resonates for you.”

    No joke, that’s someone’s actual advice on how to view the movie. I am happy engineers who design bridges hold themselves to a higher standard. LOL!

    Listening to Foster Gamble drone on, my first reaction was he must be one of the dullest, blandest characters possible without actually being in a coma. Then recalling classic brainwashing and mind control techniques, realized he was using what’s known as a “voice roll”:

    ‘A “voice roll” is a patterned, paced style used by hypnotists when inducing a trance. It is also used by many lawyers, several of whom are highly trained hypnotists, when they desire to entrench a point firmly in the minds of the jurors. A voice roll can sound as if the speaker were talking to the beat of a metronome or it may sound as though he were emphasizing every word in a monotonous, patterned style. The words will usually be delivered at the rate of 45 to 60 beats per minute, maximizing the hypnotic effect.’

    Source:

    http://www.phinnweb.org/neuro/brainwash/

    A number of other brainwashing and mind control techniques summarized in the link above are also noticeable in “Thrive.”

    • Syd Baumel says :

      I could smell the brainwashing as soon as I saw the trailer, that is, before I even watched it. One gets a feel for the production values of delusion-peddling. As soon as I saw Gamble, my expectations were confirmed. Spiritual snake-oil salesman. And then one patented bamboozlement after another, including the unwitting participation of the odd credible expert to make the snake oil seem like medicine. As long as people want truth to be more like fantasy fiction, these guys will always have an eager audience.

    • SlayerX3 says :

      “Discernment is necessary in all things. Go to your heart source and see what resonates for you.”

      It was simple for me, it every beat in my heart spelled B-U-L-L-S-H-I-T

      Ah, thanks for explaining what was so annoying about Gamble talking(at least for me), I kept wondering why the hell he kept a messianic “I’m totally the good guy” tone, at it was driving me nuts.

    • Gerry Ditto says :

      I am not sure about all the cold fusion ,torus , alien stuff. I did however find his views on Politics and the control of our government by a rich elite to resonate well.The Fed is what people should be talking about. The Black light people with all there wealthy supporters will either prove or disprove the energy idea over time, The thing we should be more concerned with is the corrupt crooks in Washington, not the ones on Thrive if that is indeed what they are.How do people really think there is a difference in the two parties anymore. They take the emotional issues and divided them up and people line up like sheep on one side or the other.
      ,

  6. Mike says :

    notice how he only mentions fossil fuel energy as though any renewable energy methods shouldn’t factor into his viewers reality anymore.

    As for the torus. Hmm, where have i seen that before…. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tokamak – Maybe the “Aliens” are explaining how to create thermonuclear fusion power – i don’t think we need help with that one.

  7. Pete-o says :

    Did anyone notice how the Amy Goodman/Democracy Now segment seemed to be dropped in there for no apparent reason? I wonder if it was one of those segments like Dawkins in Expelled where it was edited and they misrepresented their intentions?

    It seemed to be all over the place, and a complaint that I have for many movements. People can’t focus on one goal at a time. You get anti-war demonstrations and voila! You get PETA there protesting, you get the Communist party pushing their agenda, you get vegans, nudsts, etc.

    When will people realize to focus and to use credible sources.

    You can see the magical thinking on the Thrive Facebook page, not much critical thinking going on there.

    Thanks for critiquing the movie.

  8. Pete-o says :

    I forgot to check notify by email,

  9. Sequoia (@_sequoia) says :

    Regarding the Osirian temple: First of all what does “burned into the atomic structure” mean? Don’t all burns affect the atomic structure of an object?

    Anyway in terms of debunking, just check the “Thrive movement”‘s own site:

    http://thrivemovement.com/fact_checks

    “Since the completion and launch of THRIVE: What On Earth Will it Take?, we have received new information that the Flower of Life symbol at Abydos is believed by some experts to be inscribed with *Ochre stain,* which might date it instead to the 1st century AD.”

    What is ochre? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ochre#Pigment So when the movie claims the symbol is “burned into the atomic structure” they really mean it’s “PAINTED WITH CLAY.” Not quite as mind-blowing :p

  10. Greg Gauthier says :

    The whole business with the misuse of the Taurus and the Buckminsterfullerene – it’s just a woo-woo repackaging of Kepler’s attempt to harmonize astronomy with the Platonic Solids (Sacred Geometry). The only difference is that they’ve decided Plato got the wrong shapes.

  11. Information dude says :

    That is he worst attempt at debunking I have ever seen. The only point you have made throughout your entire piece is the lack of credible sources. You too lack credible sources, in fact your source regarding the alien response via crop formation provides a rebuttal to the information you are sourcing directly on the same page.

    The fact that there are no mainstream sources to support thrive’s claims is exactly why Gamble apparently decided to make the movie in the first place. I will keep reading your blog in hopes that you come up with something that actually debunks some of the points made in Thrive.

    • anticultist says :

      @Information dude, yeah because his movie using discredited people and sources that lack credibility is the best way to make a movie seem believable right ?

      It doesn’t take a NASA link to prove aliens are not travelling here and making pretty pictures in the ground, it just takes some rational thought and time to understand the science and likelihood. It could easily be argued away scientifically and with full research, but I don’t think this blog is trying to do that. This blog is literally showing the movie for what it actually is, and that is a series of anecdotal claims with no scientific backing or credible origination. If you want a full technical debunking of all the individual claims, they do exist if you can be bothered to actually check them out online.

      Crop circles are literally something no credible scientists will give any validation because they are known to be faked and if any do appear to be anomalous on first glance they typically end up being anecdotal and hardly ever unexplained.

      • Core Burner who lost in the lottery but got a ticket through a camp-mate says :

        I think scientist who refuse to acknowledge crop circles are simply afraid of acknowledging something that they do not understand. It’s way too obvious to me that crop circles are *mostly* not of human origin.

      • anticultist says :

        What you think is of zero relevance to scientific fact and evidence.

        Just because you fantasise about aliens making pictures in the hay doesn’t make it real in the minds of those more educated and expert in science than you.

        What you fail to see is that the evidence against crop circles is already out and shows all the claims of the believers to be ludicrous.

    • Paul Rubino says :

      This is classic conspiracist thinking: No proof IS proof!! Can’t find information on the illuminati? That’s proof they’re a SECRET society! Can’t find any proof of a second gunman in Dealey Plaza? That proves the government is covering it up! I can’t prove i DIDN’T climb a tree last night, so i MUST’VE climbed a tree! It’s a weird world where lack of evidence IS evidence.

      One other thought, it’s not incumbent on this website, or any website, to disprove the information in this movie. It’s incumbent upon the makers of this movie to prove their assertions. You put forth the idea, you prove the idea. I insist i can fly by flapping my arms and, until YOU debunk MY assertion, i can fly by flapping my arms?

      This reminds me of these UFO documentarians that write letters to congressman and government officials and, when they don’t get a response to their nonsensical conspiracy theory inquiries, they twist the non-response into, “Obviously they’re hiding something. Why else would they refuse to talk to us?”

  12. nil01 says :

    Hi,
    I love skeptics, because i am one, i found your sites cheking Benjamin Stewart’s credibilty, i always double check.

    I looked up crop circle and I double checked.
    My opinion is that some are fakes of course, but some are very intriguing.
    those one are either made by ETs (there is obvious intelligence behind the drawings, it cannot be a natural phenomena, we agree on that) or they could also be made by human with a technology based on micro wave or electro magnetism but very advanced.
    the rolling thingy is just plain ridiculous. that might be used to make fakes but the more complex would take you days or weeks to achieve, but some are proven to be done overnight (eye witnesses).
    I dont get how you can be sure that 100% of crop circles are fake.
    you should google for images of “crop circles bent nodes” of wheat or whatever plant of the crop.
    the modification applied to the plant is intriguing. you should check out biological studies of samples.

  13. Drew Colwell says :

    You should watch the movie again without the perception that everything in the movie needs to be “de-bunked”. There are too many people like you who’s main goal in life in to find flaws and exploit them. Depression is caused by people like you, suicide is caused by people like you, wars are started because of people like you and its all because people like you make it too hard for the rest of us to accept who we are. It creates a division in our communities and country that will be very hard to eradicate because its exactly what the people who have created and control this very fucked up system we call America want. What is your personal gain searching for the wrong in this video? Is it your day job? Or do you just have nothing better to do in your pathetic life because you thought that your career was going to fulfill you and are confused that it doesn’t? I would really appreciate you to reply to this because I simply don’t understand why someone would take this much time trying to “de-bunk” something that is just trying to educate people about their potential as human beings when there is much of the information taught to us as youth is lies. Why don’t you try to “de-bunk” a history book?

    • Mike says :

      Thrive is great as it provides fresh examples of pseudoscience and conspiracy theories. The debunking here is distinguishing between those lies and what is true. Drew, you should be thanking the creator of this page for attempting to help you.

      “It seems to me what is called for is an exquisite balance between two conflicting needs: the most skeptical scrutiny of all hypotheses that are served up to us and at the same time a great openness to new ideas… If you are only skeptical, then no new ideas make it through to you … On the other hand, if you are open to the point of gullibility and have not an ounce of skeptical sense in you, then you cannot distinguish the useful ideas from the worthless ones.” – Carl Sagan

      • too frustrated to read your negative comments any further says :

        lol the video quotes ghandi and mlk and you quote carl sagan. LOL

    • muertos says :

      @ Drew Colwell:

      So, you have blamed depression, suicide and wars on me, because I disagree with you about the movie Thrive. Everyone who ever commits suicide is my fault, because I think Thrive is a bunch of crap. Everyone who has depression can be blamed on me, because I don’t like Thrive. Every war in the history of the human race is my fault, because I disagree with Thrive.

      Wow. I certainly have a lot to answer for, don’t I?

      Do you really expect anyone to take seriously the sort of comment you have made here? Do you really think that this is a reasonable argument? If you think I’m wrong on this blog, I invite you–in fact, encourage you–to demonstrate where my error lies. However, I do ask that you be specific, and that you back up your claims with reliable evidence. Don’t just tell me that I kill people through wars, depression and suicide because I disagree with you. Show me an actual fact that I’ve gotten wrong, and show me something that proves that something I’ve stated is wrong. Until and unless you can do that, I find comments of this nature somewhat less than persuasive. Show me where I’m wrong–with specifics, with evidence, with facts, with logical reasoning–and I will post a correction. If all you have is generalities, speculating on my motives and spouting vague statements and conjectures about why I create this blog, may I respectfully suggest that you either hone your criticism into something productive, or admit that you have no viable criticism to contribute.

      • Drew Colwell says :

        While I will apologize for directing my claims at you personally, which was not my intention, I will not retract my statement. The ideologies that are forced into us as kids create depression, suicide, and wars. We are constantly being separated from each other of disagreements just like this one. What really is the point of an argument like this? If you can have an entire blog based on your opinions why are you so offended when someone presents one that is different? The fact that we all have our own opinions is the beauty of mankind but it is being destroyed because we have been taught that you are either right or wrong. No one is right or wrong here. What do you consider a viable resource wikipedia? Some .com that anyone that knows how to create a domain can make? I again apologize because I in no way meant that you personally cause any harm to anyone. I should have been more clear about my opinion and I hope you can recognize the respect that I have for your opinion but also have the open mind to think about mine. Thrive is not out to get anyone other than the people that Gamble feels are responsible for the situation we find ourselves in today. I believe that all Thrive is trying to do is show people the power they have, which to me is amazing because all I see everywhere are reminders of how I need to better myself or change who I am because its not good enough. I don’t feel the need to back up any claims with links or anything of that nature because you can’t cite the claim I have which is this; Every human being has the capability of being amazing no matter what but there are people who try very hard to keep us unaware of this. Again I am very sorry for directing negativity towards you, I just love the movie Thrive because it gives me hope. All I want is for as many people to be inspired by this movie the way I was because it is too hard for me to see and hear about so many people living with so little while we enjoy the benefits of their destruction. I wish everyone nothing but peace, love and happiness and I really hope I made up for the offensiveness of my last post.

      • muertos says :

        @ Drew Colwell: OK, I understand where you’re coming from. The tone of my reply was probably too sharp. It’s not every day I’m personally accused of causing murders, suicides and depression.

        If you look around this site you may be surprised to find that I believe in the positive potential of the human spirit too–in fact, I believe in it more than Foster Gamble and the makers of Thrive seem to. For example, if you scroll to the end of this article, you’ll see that I believe a group of smart, talented men and women living thousands of years ago in Egypt built the Great Pyramid all by themselves. Foster Gamble and Nassim Haramein don’t believe this. They believe that those people were too stupid and backwards to accomplish this without help from aliens. If you look at this article, you’ll see that I believe a couple of ordinary guys from southwest England can make beautiful and magnificent crop circles with boards, string, measuring tapes, and knowledge of geometry. In fact, I can prove that they do. Foster Gamble and Nassim Haramein do not believe in this potential. They think it’s impossible, and that aliens must have done it. This is a rather depressing lack of belief in the capability of our species, don’t you think?

        What bothers me about Thrive is that it chooses to advance a positive message about human potential in such a negative, destructive and counter-productive way. Conspiracy theories are toxic. They teach people to look for an evil “other” on which to blame their problems–the Rockefellers, the Illuminati, the New World Order, etc.–instead of trying to solve them. Conspiracy theories corrode reason and the ability to think critically. They substitute innuendo, rumor and irrationality for fact and evidence. When a movie like Thrive pushes demonstrably false information and offers it as fact, I have a hard time understanding how I should accept that’s OK because the overall message is supposedly good.

        I often get comments like yours that take me to task for the general idea of criticizing Thrive because they think I’m attacking whatever positive message they personally found in it. I typically insist on people providing actual, factually-based criticism on what I’ve gotten wrong because I want to reinforce the idea that this is, in a world of reality, really the bottom line. Aren’t there better ways of spreading positive ideas to people than lying to them about conspiracies that do not exist? This is my issue with Thrive, and it’s the reason this blog is here.

        Thanks for your comment and clarifying your meanings.

      • Core Burner who lost in the lottery but got a ticket through a camp-mate says :

        I want to thank Drew for standing up for what he/she believes and feels about Thrive and society in general. I am with you Drew on most / all of your points.

        Muertos, have you ever watched Haramein’s 4+ hour lecture called “Crossing the Event Horizon”? It’s incredibly detailed and the level of research is staggering. I’ve watched it at least 5 times because that’s what it takes to even begin to understand what he is really talking about. I can say that he is not unsupportive of human ingenuity – simply realistic about things such as the technical challenge of placing over 1 Million Stones to build the great pyramid of Giza, each weighing over 200 tons (400,000 pounds) – vs. what we know about Egyptian technology such as: they didn’t even have the wheel, nor did they have hardened tools which would be needed to cut stone, nor do they talk anywhere in all of their hieroglyphics about having actually built the pyramids – even though they talked about literally every other aspect of their lives… don’t you think they would have said something about having built the pyramids? Besides that, pyramids have been discovered under the ocean, where they have been carbon dated because of coral growth – showing that they went under water over 10,000 years ago – long before the Egyptian civilization is said to have been flourishing.

        As far as crop circles are concerned, Haramein has acknowledged and appreciated human circle makers in his research and studies – and still it would not be accurate supportable to say that all crop circles are made by humans. Such a blanket statement itself goes against reason and logic in light of the detailed biologic studies that have been made, as was mentioned in another post above.

        It’s actually quite bold and egotistic to say that humans are responsible for all of the amazing phenomenon that has been observed – even though we do some amazing things, that in no way makes it even unlikely that we might be in the midst of alien intelligence – as a critical thinking you might want to acknowledge that possibility, considering the universe is far older than our civilization – especially our drop-in-the-bucket ~200 year industrial revolution… we are babies in comparison! We have a lot to learn if we are still poisoning our planet and killing each other off!

        Also, given the complete ability for humans to psychologically manipulate each other – it’s not to far fetched to think it might be happening on a grand scale, under our noses… look at what hitler did!

        And Thrive does offer positive solutions. You just have to make it through to the end.

      • muertos says :

        You think I’m going to sit through a 4 hour lecture of nonsense from Nassim Haramein? Christ, just the five or ten minutes he was on screen in Thrive was more than any rational person should have to endure for a lifetime. What does this man have to contribute to science, archaeology or ancient history? You can read the article on this blog about him and see just how accurate and prescient he and his theories are. Real scientists laugh about him or roll their eyes. His research is shoddy. His conclusions are ludicrous. The only claim Thrive has actually retracted–the ridiculous “Flower of Life” atomic structure claim–came out of Haramein’s mouth and has proved to be embarrassing even to Foster Gamble, who is one of his strongest supporters. Why would I waste my time with this guy?

        I did sit through Thrive to the end. In fact, with all the watching and reviewing I’ve had to do of this execrable film for purposes of this blog, I would estimate I’ve sat through Thrive about five or six times. All the “positive solutions” it offers are more conspiracy theories, or hard right-wing libertarian propaganda. There are no positive solutions here. In fact, there are a fair number of very negative solutions that will make the world worse, not better. Read my article entitled “Paranoid Utopia” for a taste of the world Thrive’s “solutions” would give us.

      • Core Burner who lost in the lottery but got a ticket through a camp-mate says :

        Well Muertos, you are never going to change your belief about something unless you want to. And as long as you label something or someone is a “crackpot” or the like, you will never be open to the potential benefit they might be to you – because you have pre-concluded that they are of no value… but you will never know, because you do not truly understand them. This is your own ego saying “I’m right, and they are wrong, no matter what they say!” Well, good luck with that.

  14. Hollywood Tomfortas says :

    It’s not every day I’m personally accused of causing murders, suicides and depression.

    Well, duh, Muertos, with a name like “muertos” (which I assume comes from Spanish los muertos = the dead) what else would you expect?

    Haven’t you seen the movie The Secret, which teaches you about the Law of Attraction?

    So here’s my suggestion. In order for you to overcome the negativity you are causing Mr. Colwell above, and more importantly to keep you from attracting even more death, murder, suicide and depression to yourself and thus contaminating the whole human race, then why not be as amazing as Mr. Colwell knows you to be and simply change your name to something positive, hopeful and wondrous, say like . . . “medrando” which I believe is Spanish for thriving?

    You could be “El Medrando!” and thus attract thriving vibes to yourself and thereby save all of humanity. Or at the very least stop giving heartburn to Mr. Colwell.

    • anticultist says :

      Here is my suggestion, Hollywood, didn’t you know that witches used holly wood to make their witchy spell casty sticks from ? That must mean you are attracting witchy spells and witchy nasties every second ?

      Your logic for why muertos is attracting ‘negative energy’ because that pseudoscientific movie the secret is pure folly and childish.

      • Hollywood Tomfortas says :

        Hollywood, didn’t you know that witches used holly wood to make their witchy spell casty sticks from ? That must mean you are attracting witchy spells and witchy nasties every second ?

        OMFG, you’re right! Do you realize that I cannot practice my ritual physical exercise today because the police have closed off Griffith Park in order to search for the rest of the body that belongs to the severed head and hands and feet they discovered yesterday right below the HOLLYWOOD sign?

        http://www.cnn.com/2012/01/19/justice/california-severed-head/index.html

        You see, I try to make it a regular practice that once or twice a week I will climb Mount Hollywood (located 3 peaks east of — about one mile from — the HOLLYWOOD sign) and this grisly discovery was made about a ¼ mile down the canyon from the approach road I always take. (Of course, Brad Pitt’s house is even closer, but, well, let’s not implicate him.)

        I wouldn’t have thought that I might have attracted such “witchy nasties” as you say, except that you brought it to my attention. Thank you! Zounds, my man! I ought to practice what I preach and change my own name first before I give any such advice to Muertos.

      • anticultist says :

        And your comments are supposed to pass for intellectual debate Hollywood ?

        My advice to you would be to find someone more your intellectual age and quit playing with the adults until you are ready to interact in a sane manner.

  15. Utopia Bold says :

    Even if the “aliens” gave us free unlimited energy, the human herd would still be overbreeding like lice and ravaging the Natural World. Overpopulation was caused by patriarchy, a sociopathic, male dominant social system that regards women as men’s livestock. Abortion and birth control are no nos because the industrial mass production of consumer/breeder/worker/soldier units must not be disrupted. Endless economic growth requires an ever increasing number of people to enrich the male controlled global economy. So I doubt the eradication of patriarchy and womens reproductive rights are mentioned in this mega woo woo movie.

    • anticultist says :

      Easy on the conspiratorial feminism there sweet heart x.

      • areyoukiddingme says :

        Seriously? The subjugation of women on the part of patriarchal socioeconomic mechanisms and institutions is a historical fact. Why don’t you go look at some primary sources, hmm?

      • anticultist says :

        Why would I want to look into feminist historical articles or current feminist propaganda ? It is clearly a male dominated society we live in, it doesn’t take a brainiac to figure that out,

        Personally I feel that anyone who is harping on about the domination of feminine culture in a world where women can be prime ministers of a country, have all the same rights as everyone else on the planet, and can even be astronauts etc.. is arguing a pointless case.

  16. Relic says :

    I’ve just spent hours reading this entire blog and pasted links on attempts to “debunk” the film Thrive even before I have seen the film Thrive. All I got was a bunch words being thrown around in attempts to discredit Thrive by saying there is no evidence, yet nobody provided any evidence (including any of the links) to disprove what the makers were trying to prove. from my hours of reading this entire blog/forum, you so called debunkers have mainly focused on the statement that was made about the flower of life being burnt into the pyramid. From my research regarding this matter, it has NOT been disproven that it was not burnt but that this statement was retracted because in order to provide more evidence you would have to carve into the pyramid, which is currently not possible.

    About the crop circles:
    The links provided on how to make your own crop circles are a laugh and a half! And the Doug and Dave attempts to create crop circles look nothing like the mysterious (unexplained or extra-terrestrially explained) crop circles. People have tried to explain all the mysterious details such as the bent stalks, interwoven stalks and magnetic particles, yet NONE of the replication attempts come close to being perfect like the “mysterious’ ones.

    Muertos:
    And this is personally addressed at you: You are the most suspicious character. I’m sure a conspiracy theory around you could easily be devised. But that is besides the point. I’d like to address when you twisted Drew’s comment. Drew was talking about people LIKE you, and your defence was: “Oh so it’s my fault that this and that happened, because I don’t agree with Thrive”. That was a very immature reaction (and I’m not defending Drew here because saying people like you is immature as well). But your reaction was both immature and lowered your own credibility as a logical thinker. You keep talking about lack of evidence or scientifically proven evidence etc. but you have provided none yourself. As I said, I haven’t seen Thrive so I’m not here to defend it. The mere fact that I haven’t seen it allowed me to read through this blog with a neutral perspective. That being said I do know of most of what has been talked talked about here, and the fact is there is PLENTY of evidence to back up a lot of theories (even if you would like to call them conspiracy theories).

    The funny thing about science and scientific evidence is that it is evidence that is always proven wrong at some later state…like the Earth is flat or the Sun revolves around the Earth etc etc Even many of Einstein’s Theories have been proven wrong (knowing Muertos, he’ll ask which ones). One word: Google ;)
    Scientist are constantly changing the age of our Universe because they are discovering New things. You want to talk about credibility…in what form? A PhD?? LOL Because many of the people who contribute to “conspiracy theories have PhD’s in VARIOUS amounts of fields of physics and science. Not only that but the some of the same physicists and scientist by which you have agreed upon have disagreed with some of there original claims.

    Yes Muertos I know, you want facts facts facts, yet when the facts stare you in the face you will not accept them because they are contradicting your current belief system. Either that or you are trying very hard to convince people that “conspiracy theories” are bullshit using the exact same tools that you claim make them bullshit.

    All that being said, it is wise never to accept something just because it has been presented to you, and doing the necessary research is important. My main point here is that there is endless amounts of information and “reliable or credible” source is nothing but someone or a group of people (of any size) labelling it reliable. You can filter through endlessly with your mind and rationalisations, I know because I do it myself. But knowing the truth requires getting in touch with your heart.

    • muertos says :

      Relic:

      Thank you for your comment. However, you don’t seem to understand how facts and evidence work in cases such as these. Let me draw out a specific portion of my Global Domination Agenda article, which you may have read, that illustrates what’s going on here.

      The facts as we know them indicate that Grant is buried in Grant’s Tomb. The conclusion that Grant is buried in Grant’s Tomb is entirely consistent with what we know about the world around us. If we come upon a monument in New York City with an inscription reading “Here Lies Ulysses Grant,” it would be entirely rational to conclude, just by what we know about how funerals, cemeteries and graveyards work in the real world, that most likely Ulysses Grant is buried beneath that stone.

      If you claim that Lincoln is buried in Grant’s Tomb, the burden of proof is on you to demonstrate that this is true. You don’t get to believe that Lincoln is buried in Grant’s Tomb simply because you want to, and because, short of getting a bulldozer and a crowbar and cracking open the tomb and the coffin of the person buried inside, I can’t disprove that Lincoln is buried there. I can show you evidence, eyewitness accounts of Grant’s funeral, perhaps a document from his undertaker and the man who built the tomb stating that, yes, in fact Ulysses Grant is buried there. If you continue to insist that Lincoln is buried there, don’t be surprised, if you produce no further proof, that everyone else continues to accept what has been indicated as true—that Grant is buried in Grant’s Tomb.

      You seem to be under the impression that, once Foster Gamble presents a conspiracy theory or an irrational concept as fact, that the burden of proof shifts to me to demonstrate that it is not true. That’s not how it works at all. The burden of proof never shifts to me. Let me stress that. The burden of proof never shifts to me to demonstrate that Thrive is incorrect. To the contrary, the burden of proof is always–always, ALWAYS, ALWAYS–on Foster Gamble to prove that the assertions he makes in the film are true.

      This is particularly apposite in cases, such as these, where the “facts” Mr. Gamble asserts are so far beyond the realm of reasonable, rational and ordinary experience that they require a significantly greater burden of proof than would normally be the case if the matters he asserted as fact were consistent with our ordinary understanding.

      Example: free energy devices. The very principle behind devices of this nature violates the laws of physics as they’re generally understood. In order to assert that “free energy” exists, and in order to make it stick, Mr. Gamble has to present overwhelming evidence–meaning, evidence that is absolutely incapable of being misconstrued or mistaken–to meet this extraordinary burden of proof. If he can do that, he will have accomplished something truly amazing, and would certainly deserve all the accolades that would invariably result. If he can’t, he’s a charlatan. That’s the risk he’s taking–and the risk he ought to know full well that he’s taking–when he ventures forth to make these claims.

      Do you not understand how completely irrational, and how completely beyond the realm of common experience, are the matters asserted as fact in Thrive? Don’t get me wrong–the fact that they are irrational and beyond common experience does not, a priori, make them untrue–but what it does mean is that the amount of evidence required to prove them is far and away greater than the amount of evidence you would need to prove something that is rational and entirely consistent with the world as we know it to be.

      Only two other points from your comment are worth responding to. As for Drew, how would you react if someone you’ve never heard of suddenly appears on your blog and accuses you, personally, of causing wars, suicides and depression–just because you posted an opinion critical of a movie released on the Internet? You say you aren’t defending his comments, and it is true he backtracked on them in a later comment, but I ask you, how exactly do you think I should have reacted? What, did you expect me to agree with him?

      Finally, crop circles. You claim that the example presented, which is undoubtedly a crop circle made by human hands, is shoddy. I suggest you go back and look at this article and the video embedded in it. Fast-forward the video to 9:36 and you’ll see a shot of the completed circle from the air. Does this look “shoddy” to you? Indeed, this is a pristine example, completely consistent with all of the examples Foster Gamble shows in the Thrive movie.

      If you apply the rules of logic, critical thinking and burden of proof, this one example demonstrates the efficacy of the the conclusion that crop circles are made by human beings. Fortunately you don’t need to rely on this one example. There are thousands more. Go to circlemakers.org and browse some of them. Nothing is being kept secret here, and nothing is being fudged or obfuscated. Crop circles are made by human beings.

    • Sarah says :

      @Relic
      “About the crop circles:
      The links provided on how to make your own crop circles are a laugh and a half! And the Doug and Dave attempts to create crop circles look nothing like the mysterious (unexplained or extra-terrestrially explained) crop circles. People have tried to explain all the mysterious details such as the bent stalks, interwoven stalks and magnetic particles, yet NONE of the replication attempts come close to being perfect like the “mysterious’ ones.”

      This is getting old.
      Here are three examples of PEOPLE making the crop circles.

      Here are pictures of the last one (http://www.cropcircleconnector.com/2011/rivar/rivar2011.html). Not mysterious enough for you?

      And here’s what the Japanese do with their rice paddies (http://pinktentacle.com/2009/07/rice-paddy-art/). Not the same as crop circles but still pretty cool.

      Anyway, someone should tell the aliens that the farmers don’t like them messing with their crops. Wanna volunteer?

  17. Relic says :

    Thank you for your reply muertos and Sarah.

    muertos:

    You are right that the burden of shift does not need to shift to you needing to prove that Thrive is untrue. And I appreciate your lengthy answer. Unfortunately I will have to retreat from any further comment about the film Thrive, until I watch it (likely within a few hours time, hopefully). And after all this controversy I am looking forward to seeing it even more.

    About Drew, let bygones be bygones, it was a flaw in human personality. Perhaps once we reach to the level that these Aliens are at, we would not encounter these flaws any longer ;) lol

    Sarah and muertos:

    here is a link about crop circles that is very interesting:

    http://cropcirclefacts.com/

    In a nutshell: there are numerous amounts of crop circles and just because there is footage of humans making them (and yes I do agree that the link is a very nice and mysterious looking crop circle). But the fact is that there are crop circles with many unexplained attributes such as the ridiculously short and seemingly impossible time they appeared in (apparent eye-wittnesses – which muertos states is evidence to prove something) or the 90 angled bent stems none of which are broken or the electromagnetic fields or etc etc…just check out the link.

    The point here is that no a little green man did not come on television and say we made these. And there has not been any footage of UFO’s appearing and making the circles released (not that that is how Aliens would create them if they would create them). Yes humans can and do make crop circles and I have been shown that the designs do look amazing (I do not doubt in human potential at all). But from the information that I have gathered the so called “authentic or alien created” crop circles have not been fully explained and dus not been debunked. What this means is that nobody on this blog nor anywhere else that I have found have proven beyond reasonable doubt that Aliens do not make crop circles.

    I love a good debate, and I love you guys :) haha

    • Sarah says :

      “there are numerous amounts of crop circles and just because there is footage of humans making them”

      You didn’t finish the idea.

      “and yes I do agree that the link is a very nice and mysterious looking crop circle”

      And we can agree it was made by humans, right? Some people don’t think so. The ‘circle’ is hailed as truly alien-made and the video as fake (http://www.cropcircleconnector.com/2011/rivar/comments.html).

  18. Relic says :

    Here’s another link for you guys explaining the difference between “real” and “fake” crop circles:

    http://peterxdunn.hubpages.com/hub/Crop-Circles-Fake-or-For-Real

    Crop circles are also become more complex, without any humans having been able to replicate them.

    These humas playing hoaxes have some pretty advanced technology it seems…I wonder who is funding them?

    Just some more food for thought…

    • anticultist says :

      LOL does it make any difference who supports them financially if the results and tests carried out to show how easy it is to make a crop circle are valid and honest. Seriously the page you linked to shows iron balls, and bent corn stems, all of which are easily explained and have been above numerous times by people posting here.

      The fact the page you linked discusses magnetic vortices as a possible explanation should give you a fair idea that the page is speculative at best and downright creative thinking with no valid backing.

  19. Relic says :

    @ Sarah:
    Yea sorry I noticed I didn’t finish that sentence. The completed sentence is:There are numerous amounts of crop circles and just because there is footage of humans making them, does not prove that humans created all of them.

    Well I agree that the footage you you linked was made by humans, but it actually is very easy to fake a video and make a replicate to then pass off to the media as the source of an apparently mysterious and alien made crop circle. But I do not wish to go further into trying to prove or disprove this particular crop circle.

    @ anticultist:
    You obviously either didn’t read the entirety of the two links that I posted or are just not addressing them correctly

    • anticultist says :

      @Relic I read it, and again I will say it out loud, nice hypothesis on the website but must I reiterate that it’s completely speculative and without any scientific verification ?

      And this as evidence of crop circles :
      “Are they old enough to be responsible for the crop circle depicted in the image above? I think not. This is a detail: from a woodcut illustration, of the famous Hertfordshire Mowing Devil of 1678.” With a picture of this as the damning evidence ? http://s3.hubimg.com/u/4110970_f520.jpg

      Surely if we are going to talk about historic crop circles we can provide superior evidence than this ?

  20. Relic says :

    Oh and I started watching Thrive last night, but I fell asleep lol.
    I am determined to watch the whole film tho…

  21. Jared Boice says :

    This entire article is nothing less than a straw-man. It’s true that you could put any geometry within a circle, but it’s the RELATIONSHIP between the tetrahedron (most stable geometry) and the sphere (least stable geometry) that is what’s at stake here. Further more, to the less gullible intellectual who is willing to review opposing sides of an argument, it would become clear through further investigation that the 64 Tetrahedron Grid of Geometry has UNIQUE mathematical/geometrical properties (analogous to how a right angle is special and unique for having a 90 degree angle). The geometry discussed in the film is related to the golden ratio found in nature.

    As soon as the author attempted to claim that he couldn’t find any evidence that “the expanded 3d view of the flower of life holds the vector equilibrium” I stopped reading. It’s clear the author barely understood the most substantial information in the film, and that is geometry. It’s possible that you might require, at the very least, a high-school level understanding of geometry to even attempt such refutations. 8 Star tetrahedrons coming together to form the 64 Tetrahedron grid intersect to form the vector equilibrium at the center. This is also clear from the visual aids in the film, Thrive and in Nassim Haramein’s 4 hour presentation titled, “Crossing the Event Horizon”

    Epic Fail. Anyone who believes this article without doing further research is a fool and I’ve got a bridge to sell you.

    • Telia McCarthy says :

      @Jared: Anyone who believes the film without doing further research is also a fool. The point of this blog is to encourage critical thinking and for people to do their own research. [i]We[/i] aren’t the ones using well-known brainwashing techniques and expecting the logic-challenged to swallow some sparkly, extraterrestrial, recycled hippie simulacra as if it’s ‘gospel’.

      I don’t see the big deal about nifty geometry showing up in nature. Of course it does. When the most fundamental aspects of geometry are a key part of physics, it’s reasonable to expect to see those same shapes show up in a macrocosmic view as well. Duh? Oh, look, it’s a hydrogen atom! Without outside interference, that electron can make a perfect circle/sphere! It must be magical, obviously it’s the Flying Speghetti Monster’s divine language teaching us how to properly construct a meatball! I bet if I squish 64 of them into a tetrahedron grid, they will produce marinara sauce from the nothingness of the space around them!

      Oh, I get it, there must be some cosmic/spiritual significance to simple geometry and math just because the shapes we can observe and create are pretty. What a unique and amazing idea, as if people haven’t been doing that same thing for thousands of years, often for the same purpose of gaining attention and often material profit, frequently under the guise of being the ‘good guy’ who just wants to save the world.

      Let me try, I’ll start a movement, nay, a religion. As sentient beings, or at least capable of sentience, we don’t fully experience a dualistic mindset until we’re born. At that point, there is suddenly a clear experience of ‘me’ and ‘not-me’. The great prophet Bill Keane explains much of the complexity of this relationship in his gospels (http://childhoodrelived.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/family_circus_notme.gif) which I won’t go into detail about in here. However, I will provide more examples for the heathen ‘skeptics’. Multicellular life that reproduces asexually is the First Gift, therefore fungi and ferns are among the holiest things to be found in the wilderness. Life that reproduces sexually are the children of the Holy Binary and it’s obvious by the fact that we are (generally) male and female. Our conscious awareness is an expression of the Great Binary in that all our concepts and mental constructs begin with the absence of a thing (zero) versus the presence of a thing (one).

      Any cat can prove the truth of the Great Binary, even Schrödinger’s. For the simple-minded, I will ask this: What is the opposite of ‘cat’? No, it’s not dog nor mouse. The opposite of ‘cat’ is the absence of ‘cat’. What has been confusing most people for most of their lives is that they tend to think in polarities and assume that most things work that way. North and south are polarities but they are not opposites, they are different ends of the same stick. The opposite of either is the absence of that stick. Love and hate are perhaps the worst perversion of a polaric view because they aren’t even on the same stick. The clear evidence of this is that both can be present in the same space, just as good and evil can.

      What’s important is the fundamental nature of duality and how it permeates every aspect of the conscious existence of those who have not yet transcended such a limited view of reality. This nature proves the divinity of binary as the root ‘language’ of the entirety of physical existence. In its very essence, we can see the pure truth of binary expressed in existence through space itself as ‘zero’ and matter/energy that arises in the space as ‘one’. Since this is one universe yet two basic concepts, the First Law requires us to multiply by two.

      Understanding the First Law, you can see how the rest of creation unfolds from it. We have four, then eight, then sixteen, and so on… all the way up to the ultimate magical number of 65,536. These things are to be expressed in this way to the uninitiated so as to not profane the Holy Language. It is not a sin to reveal the secret of 65,535 as the Truth, we simply say 65,536 so as not to confuse the gentiles who believe that counting begins with 1.

      On the matter of fundamental evil: 3 is the root of all evil. To the heathens and gentiles, it takes the form of 11 which is also significantly evil as it is also prime. By extension, a regular tetrahedron is among the most evil of three-dimensional shapes. The most dangerous aspect of the tetrahedron’s evil comes from its perversion of the Holy Number Four. It’s the root of all deception and abomination in that it combines the evil of three with the Holiness of four to confound otherwise rational beings. Next in line is the arch-demon hexahedron, also known as ‘cube’. The proof of their evil is quite obvious to anyone who has stepped on a 1D4 or legos at night.

      On recognizing holy signs: Aside from the fundamental holy numbers, there are greater numbers that can act as signs to keep you headed in the right direction. These are akin to ancient Hebrew mythologies about angels, but they also have demon counterparts. Even the Hebrews knew that such ‘entities’ are fixed in their nature and neither holy nor unholy in and of themselves. They lack the vision of truth that the gift of duality has given to us, thus they are incapable of making decisions or doing anything against their nature.

      The signs are holy in their nature but have been taken apart and made somewhat profane so that they might be more easily visible to us in this realm. Among the first and most important is 10000001, which is 385 to the gentiles and heathens. Even among the gentiles, the truth is easily visible. The holy 8 at the center, 3 and 5 beside it adding up to 8 as well. The eights combine to form 16, which is reduced to 7, which is the true 8 (1000). 8 is key among the holy numbers because it is the first in the holy language that uses four digits. 385 (10000001) is the second in the holy language to use 8 digits and since 8 X 2 = 16 = 7 (the true 8), I think you can see the key reasons that it is among the first and most important signs upon the holy path.

      More about 8 and the first holy sign: Expanding the holy 8 into three dimensions gives us the octahedron. It is the result of the holy number 4 raping a tetrahedron. Together, 2, 4, and 8 have made 3 their bitch by not only the molestation of triangles but also the abuse and conversion of 6 by way of the 6 vertex points that each connect to 4 edges. The raping of 6 by 4 forces it to proclaim the holiness of 24, which is itself a further raping of 3 by 8. Octahedron is also the first proper three-dimensional shape to contain holiness, rather than the evil of tetrahedron and the abomination that is cube. It should also be noted that octahedron is the first proper shape that can be laying on a flat surface and upwardly exposing its own flat surface. Cube is profane so don’t even go there.

      The creator is not without mercy for the dimwitted. If the holy numbers and shapes aren’t enough, there is also the holy color of Purple. All other colors are inferior. Following in line with the Great Law of Self-Referentialism as set forth by all major religions in history, I will explain the truth of Purple to you. I will also give you the key to the second Holy Sign that you will encounter, should you prove yourself worthy to even make it to the first.

      Remembering that 385 is the first sign, it is also the beginning of purple, being 385 nanometers in wavelength. 451 is the end of purple and that is the second sign. As 385 is 10000001, so 451 is 11000011. Unfortunately, one cannot prove the beginning without knowing the end. Because of this, you must first see the proof of 451 before you can properly discern 385. The easiest way for a beginner to do this is to get a bible, a thermometer, and some matches or a lighter. You will see that the pages of the bible burn at 451 degrees Farenheit.

      So… 0 X 1 = 1. 1 X 2 = 2. 2 X 2 = 4. 385 is the beginning and 451 is the end of Purple and even the bible itself proves this, although your faith in math should have been far more than sufficient. All of what I have written here is as it has been given to me by the Almighty. None of this can be disproven. In fact, much of it has been proven to be true countless times, even since before humans first began to comprehend the Holy Binary in its proper context.

      Now that your eyes have been opened to the truth, I’m sure you understand that nearly all currency is worthless. You should send me all the things that the heathens value and I will send you Purple. In particular, things like diamonds and all gemstones that the heathens value that aren’t purple, gold, platinum, silver, and any currency created by heathen governments and used by evil corporations that isn’t entirely purple. We will create a new world economy based on purple, after I have bought all the purple things from the gentiles and heretics. When all the material possessions we own are purple, the world will finally be walking the True Path.

  22. David Koch says :

    Any person who starts out “debunking” any information and lists, wikipedia, as a source is, sorry to insult, but an idiot. Any person with a computer can put “information” on wikipedia. My thoughts on this movie, regardless of opinions, are that its not far fetched to think that these elite men who have so much money are bored and are now trying new experiements with socializations all over the world where money is at the heart of it all and control is a mirage that they let us think we have, with voting, and yet they, the elite truly control who is the front man/woman in all countries and if they disobey an assassination occurs. Come at this with an open mind. Think for yourself and forget about who is in control, and ask why is this hapenning all over the world. No money was ever made in peace time, no money is made from power sources such as solar, once the panel is installed. We need to think about things now, and forget the saying of “well that’s just how it is” and “things have always been like that, so thats how they will continue to be.” No small company ever got bigger by staying the same. Our founders gave us a great foundation that our newer generations of politcians have amended to death. Even if you don’t believe all that this video has to say, which is agreeable, an open minded person will be able to see that the system in place is the problem; to say its this country, or its the politicians, or the people, is BS. The system is wrong and needs to be changes drastically. No more lobbyists, no more special interests, no more unnecessary wars, no more private/central banks. Put the power back in the hands of the people. Let us decide, not a small number of elite men who have never known hardship.

  23. bensteigmann says :

    Hello Muertos,

    I was sent this film by email when it cam out for free, by email, and soon found your blog. For this section, I have no desire to defend this film’s specific claims, but merely to provide a refutation to fundamentalist materialism. For an introduction, the journalistic work of Lynne McTaggart provides a good overview: http://lynnemctaggart.com/
    Rupert Sheldrake’s text “The Science Delusion” also looks promising, though I have not purchased it yet.

    But if we combine the information put forth by Rupert Sheldrake and David Bohm, we find a refutation of that view. Bohm deals with the fact of non-locality, how, fundamentally, there are no particles as such, but rather, the universe is an undivided totality. This has been demonstrated by Alain Aspect, and other experiments have continued to verify it. Quantum entanglement has been established to exist in biological systems, and is even fundamental in neuro-processing, as shown by the research of the physicist Sir Roger Penrose and the anesthesiologist Dr. Stuart Hameroff in the ORCH-OR model, which posited consciousness arising from Quantum computation in microtubules. Hameroff provided an overview of this, and a defense of the model against the critics, in a Google Tech Talk entitled “Clarifying the Tubulin bit/qubit – Defending the Penrose-Hameroff Orch OR Model (Quantum Biology)”: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LXFFbxoHp3s

    A combination of the Penrose-Hameroff ORCH-Or model and Bohmian Quantum Mechanics opens up the way for Jungian synchronicities and other “paranormal” phenomena associated with spiritual monism: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qAjC81MUe_I

    So already we have some very interesting things going on here. But the rabbit hole goes deeper – Some will say that these effects only apply at the extremely microscopic level, but Anton Zellinger has demonstrated that these effects occur with buckyballs, which are some of the largest molecules. Zellinger’s updates to Aspect’s experiments have refuted materialism. This paper can be read in an article in a Nature paper entitled “An experimental test of non-local realism”. Commentary on it is here: http://henry.pha.jhu.edu/aspect.html

    “Alain Aspect is the physicist who performed the key experiment that established that if you want a real universe, it must be non-local (Einstein’s “spooky action at a distance”). Aspect comments on new work by his successor in conducting such experiments, Anton Zeilinger and his colleagues, who have now performed an experiment that suggests that “giving up the concept of locality is not sufficient to be consistent with quantum experiments, unless certain intuitive features of realism are abandoned.”

    Be clear what is going on here. Quantum mechanics itself is not crying out for such experiments! Quantum mechanics is doing just fine, thank you, having performed flawlessly since inception. No, it is people whose cherished philosophical beliefs are being threatened that cry out for such experiments, exactly as Einstein used to do, and with exactly the same hope (we think in vain): that quantum mechanics can be refined to the point where it requires (or at least allows) belief in the independent reality of the natural world it describes.

    Quantum mechanics makes no mention of reality (Figure 1). Indeed, quantum mechanics proclaims, “We have no need of that hypothesis.” Now we are beginning to see that quantum mechanics might actually exclude any possibility of mind-independent reality – and already does exclude any reality that resembles our usual concept of such (Aspect: “it implies renouncing the kind of realism I would have liked”). Non-local causality is a concept that had never played any role in physics, other than in rejection (“action-at-a-distance”), until Aspect showed in 1981 that the alternative would be the abandonment of the cherished belief in mind-independent reality; suddenly, spooky-action-at-a-distance became the lesser of two evils, in the minds of the materialists.

    Why do people cling with such ferocity to belief in a mind-independent reality? It is surely because if there is no such reality, then ultimately (as far as we can know) mind alone exists. And if mind is not a product of real matter, but rather is the creator of the illusion of material reality (which has, in fact, despite the materialists, been known to be the case, since the discovery of quantum mechanics in 1925), then a theistic view of our existence becomes the only rational alternative to solipsism.”

    You comments on “Quantum mysticism” are uncalled for, since the leading Quantum physicists were heavily into “mysticism”:

    Werner Heisenberg had discussions with Rabindranath Tagore concerning Indian philosophy (see the article on The Tao of Physics
    Neils Bohr was deeply into Taoism
    Wolfgang Pauli was into Quabalah and Carl Jung
    Erwin Shrodinger was into Vedanta
    David Bohm was very close to Jiddu Krishnamurti for much of his life. They even collaborated in a series of dialogues entitled “The Ending of Time”.

    It gets interesting when we combine this with Sheldrake’s hypothesis of Morphic Resonance. What they show is that forms arise from this undivided totality as habits, rather than fixed laws or traits. Sheldrake has been viciously attacked by fundamentalist materialist colleagues, who were intellectually dishonest in their criticisms. This has been established by Philip Stevens in an Imperial college of London Master’s dissertation: http://www.skeptiko.com/upload/skeptiko-Philip%20Stevens-dissertation-Sheldrake, and also becomes apparent when reading Sheldrake’s responses to his critics: http://www.sheldrake.org/D&C/controversies/

    An example is the case of Richard Wiseman, who, as you will see if you read the above, indirectly admitted to falsifying data in his critique of Sheldrake. Sheldrake discusses that here: http://www.skeptiko.com/134-rupert-sheldrake-on-richard-wiseman-deception/

    There has been verification of Sheldrake’s thesis long before Sheldrake formulated it. One example comes from experiments carried out by William McDougal testing Lamarckian (as opposed to Darwinian) inheritance – he trained rats to escape from a particularly difficult maze that he had constructed. The rats were randomly bred to avoid the possibility that rats with inherent adaptations favoring their performance in the maze would breed with others of similar quality. Still, via Lamarckian inheritance, the performance of rats in general increased over the course of generations. McDougal then modified the experiment so that rats who were poor performers bred together and rats that were good performers bred together. Over generations, the performance of ALL these rats increased, and was superior to the original set. So this seemed to imply something beyond Lamarckian inheritance. Critics of McDougal, like Francis Crew, repeated the experiment, but with untrained rats vs. trained rats. The untrained rats STILL performed much better initially then the original set performed initially. Thus, what was occurring was neither Lamarckian inheritance, nor Darwinian inheritance, but something entirely different. Crew’s experiments had defects, but these defects were fixed in a follow up experiment by William Agar – which STILL showed that the new set of untrained rats learned more quickly than the previous sets.

    These habits are not unmalleable. This became apparent in experiments by the geneticist John Cairns. He placed bacteria that were intolerant to the enzyme lactase in Petri dishes in which the only source of food was that enzyme. The bacteria entered into a period of extreme stress, and then their maladaptation disappeared. For these bacteria, there were no escapes, no forms of “entertainment” to occupy themselves with – there was only pure stress, and when there was nothing but absolute, total stress, suddenly there was no stress. They thrived, as lactase consuming bacteria, in a lactase abundant environment. (for more on this, see “The Origin of Mutants”. John Cairns, J. Overbaugh and S. Miller. Nature 1988, 335:142-145)

    And so, in biological systems, we see materialism refuted.

    • bensteigmann says :

      Part of this was formatted for a debate with someone else, hence the incomplete statement w/ regards to Heisenberg, but most of the material I wanted to get through got through.

  24. Karma Tinfoil says :

    When are you going to Debunk the part about the Federal Reserve?
    (ooh, that’s right…. you can’t)

  25. gorg222 says :

    Well I feel that this debunking does offer just another view, not much of errors on Thrive side. As for the claim of laser burned Flower of life may be just mistakes. We all do mistakes. For the whole thing it just can be important for “aliens did it” stuff but when I read here that torus is not at all important and/or flower of life is just nice pattern nothing magical about it, I see that we really choose how to look at things.
    Because I do not expect in near future any proof of anything magical fully PROVEN about flower of life or torus (concept of contraction and expansion). From some viewpoints it’s even about reality tunnel bubble we can create around ourself :) Extrapolation of nondeterministic reality.
    Torus as nothing special is another viewpoint. I don’t have the math, but interesting is that lot of people went to torus is special conclusion (eg. http://www.meru.org , math study of hebrew letters). Usually all of them (if even being scientist) laughed at by (another) scientist as mad.. but .. :) Frontier science propably always seemed mad.

    —————————–
    Bohr stood up and said, “Mr. Pauli, we in the back are all convinced that your theory is crazy. But what divides us is whether your theory is crazy enough!”

  26. Leinad says :

    Funny how you’re just dancing aroung the whole crop circle theory. Did you pay attention the rest of the film or just watch what would help you “debunk” Thrive? I think the bigger problem is who has control of the US. No one man should have all that power. The whole point of the movie, IMHO, was to wake up everyone and to get us thinking and talking about the problems we have within our system. Insanity is to keep doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting to get different results. Correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t that what we are doing today? It’s sad to see people always buy into the mainstream media and take everything they report at face value. I think it’s good to challenge what we’ve been told. I’d rather have an open mind and at least consider all the possibilities, instead of automatically saying “impossible!”. Hell, the world might still be flat today if we didn’t challenge that theory. To be a great philosopher, you must challenge other philosophers. I suggest that if you are still undecided about the vitality of the film, you should look up Mike Ruppurt on YouTube and google. He’s one slick political renegade. The thing I enjoy about Mike is that he strictly deals in conspiracy FACT, not theory. Thanks to him I AM AWAKE. If you don’t know what I mean when I say that, I suggest you start doing some research. We have no one to blame but ourselves, we’ve become complacent and lazy. The president we need today is Thomas Jefferson. He said we need a r3VOLution every generation. I think the r3VOLution should come from within yourself and that’s probably the toughest type. To strip down everything you were taught and start with a blank page… Those of you that are standing by idol as our constitutional rights and our freedoms are being slowing stripped from us are the “Un-American”. Our forefathers faught for us to be free and now we’re being put right back into the position they were running from…
    Ron Paul 2012 ;-P

    • anticultist says :

      Leinad

      The crop circle matter was and has been discussed above it you had the ability to read. You have noted if able to read, that there were already examples of counter evidence showing crop circles to be unscientific and of earthly origins.

      The rest of your shit ramble is not even worth addressing.

    • ...they killd my heros says :

      See, there are good people in this world
      it is sad that the bad people are so dark
      that they seem to outshine the light

      i cannot imagine this world any different
      yet I do not wish to live any longer
      if this is all it will be

      people bickering and aruging
      abotu whos right
      seaeking only fame

      I wished for puberty to come last week
      but today i decided there is somethign much more

      So i sit and ponder,
      with eyes of tears

      if one day i will becoe as ingorant
      as the people that i see

      become as ingorant as my aprents

      and give up hope
      or a quick fix on the coputer oh whos right and wrong

      isntead of out in the field doign the work

      i used to read about heros
      and no i am afraid to be one

      becaue i se what you guys call heros

      and to me that is no more than a coward
      hidign behidn a computer

      throwing a nother down in the dirt
      sall him a lie
      and nothig more

      then to go out and do the work on his own woudl be such a feat

      that he rather sit lazy and do not speak

      but sit and hide behind a mask
      and type down upon peolpe

      “debunk” as if it mattered at all

      you smissedhte story

      you faiel the quiz

      and when i grow odler i will remebr your name

      your name was Gaberial, King of nobodies
      a King Shill for all men to tell..

      Wake me up when its over
      for i do not need these years

      i rather be dead

      as mu dog that has pasted
      she was so soft
      yet ran so fast
      and when she hit 13, she was put down

      why cant my life be that easy

      why cant i not care about fame

      …. my sister said she wants to be Lady Ga-Ga when she grows up.

      you know how that makes me feel./

      becaus eof instead you mena dn women ifghtiner crime
      you have intitled big brother from hell

      and made him yoru god

      your shing star

      frogotten yoru chidlren
      left them afar.

      not mu sister wants the glory

      yet she does not understand a hariot or whore

      yet one day she will spread legs and bcome her dreams

      while you ideally sit ina bed

      read rehabiltion hosipital
      old gfolks hom indeed

      so why not do soethign with your life now

      while you sitll have time to speak

      for i am too young to even unerstand

      yet i know ths is no easy task or feat.

      please, stop fighting, i cannot lose my sister
      and i cant lose hope./

      there are good people, and they look at the glass half full

      ..i dont want to grow up liek you.

      you are not my hero

      my heros woudl know right from wriong

      and would’t be afraid on being wrong….

      instead you care about whos victory

      and to left him go the spoils.

      instead you wont jsut fight the fight

      yu leave it for me and my sister
      and yo know it.

      dont grow up
      i never will

      i will stay a child,
      rather than be a star in hell

      some rockstar legen dyou call yoruselfs

      idol scary women

      and point fingers liek sluts

      please why cant someone just be strong

      and fight for teir children

      and giev them a name

      a vocie to be heard
      ad not be alone

      instead of fight and bicker,
      liek my step paretns at home

      .thanks u’ xoxo

      • Mr. Anon says :

        I’m sorry Muertos, but why exactly do you allow spam comments like these to pass?

      • muertos says :

        I want the world to see the kind of person that is attracted to Thrive. This is their target audience. I hope they’re proud of them.

    • Mr. Anon says :

      Ron Paul is a racist who would destroy this country. Thomas Jefferson was NOT a founding father, as he chose not to participate in the creation of the constitution. Federalism (the viewpoint of most founders) was at that time the “big government” view.

  27. Tonic says :

    You haven’t really “debunked” anything. You’ve just stated your own opinion in most cases. This is just another example of the negativity that is engulfing this world. Bah!

    • Lee says :

      You may deny Muertos’s debunkings as just opinion, even when they’re backed with more facts than Thrive movie, or call them as “Negativity” all you want. The fact remains Thrive movie is bunk no matter how positive it makes people feel.

    • too frustrated to read your negative comments any further says :

      exactly……..

  28. Mo Belbasi says :

    when was this documentary released? anyone has any idea about the date?

  29. GB says :

    The correspondence theory is also called realism and is the theory used by science: it assumes that an object is what it appears to be, that is, an object is made of matter. In this theory, objects are independent of the observer who is looking at them, so they are not mental creations. Since objects are self-evident they in fact prove their own existence. Systematic thinking, the kind of thinking that ranges over many disciplines and tries to find associations between them, is not a virtue of this theory. Scientists are usually specialists who have little awareness of other disciplines outside their work. Hence there is no pressure to be a system thinker. Even within the broad range of science, generalists are few.

    The correspondence theory can contain contradictions: for example, the idea of a table either being solid or being primarily empty space. Also, causal processes are fundamental to science, yet statistical criteria, which are non-causal, are often substituted for causality. Since contradictions are allowed so thinking is largely piecemeal thinking.

    • GB says :

      The coherence theory assumes that objects are not self-evident – their existence has to be explained. This theory is rather like a jigsaw puzzle; every bit of explanation has to be mutually compatible with all other bits, so that everything fits together coherently.

      Any contradiction indicates a defect in the theory. The thinker searches for patterns in ideas over the whole range of his interests. For example, the patterns of power that he detects in forms of religion need to be compatible with patterns of power in other domains, such as social relationships. Hence the coherence theory is the hallmark of system thinking. System thinking is pattern thinking. It is the theory that I espouse.

      The major difference between the two theories is really one of generalisation. The correspondence theory (see previous post) is the narrow view of reality, the coherence theory the big view of reality. For example, though Newton’s theory of gravitation is a big view within the subject of dynamics, it is only a narrow view when taking into consideration everything that affects a human life.

      The coherence theory presents a major problem to analysis since contradictions are not allowed. In these times it is so hard to suspend judgement and keep an open mind. A suspended judgement is not a vehicle for faith in oneself.

  30. Zero says :

    All you people talking on here… it’s people like you who truly destroy the world… Let me tell you how dumb you so called SMART” people really are….

    READY:

    “We are blind, to our own creation”
    Let’s see who is “SMART” lol enough to figure out what this truly means….

    Thinking on a universal scale too…. fyi smart people….

  31. John says :

    Man…sooo much energy gone into ‘debunking’ a guy who may not have it all right, but at least he is making an effort to help society. What are you doing Mr. Debunker…apart from sitting at your pc wasting your life and creating conflict…?

    And that’s all the energy I’ll spend on this website…peace…

  32. marc says :

    Why are you trying to debunk hope for our future? Why would mr gamble turn away a wealthy life in proctor and gamble to make this film and start this project? You sir, present no real evidence to support the idea that anything in this film is fake.

    • anticultist says :

      Because he is stupid and doesn’t understand science or reality.

      And that is why dumb shit gets debunked.

    • a rational person says :

      ridiculous bullshit. thrive is not “hope for our future”. it’s a movie full of lies and garbage. foster gamble is either a con artist or a moron. maybe both. “you present no real evidence to support the idea that anything in this film is fake”…um, did you READ THE FUCKING BLOG? jeezus christ, these nutbags are fucking stupid.

    • Frankie says :

      “Why would mr gamble turn away a wealthy life in proctor and gamble to make this film and start this project? ”
      Probably because he wanted to get more money out of the movie? probably because he is so stupid that he believes the bullshit spoused in there?
      It can be anything, but one thing is certain, the movie is shit, for all the reasons that were explained in this blog. Gamble may be well intentioned, that means he is gullible and wasted his money and time on this shit.
      I honestly dont know what goes inside the mind of that guy, and honestly, i would want to know to get a better understanding of how woo woos work, and find any new pattern. Why do woo woos always buy into things without any credibility check? What is so endearing about cult figures like gamble that it attracts tinfoil hat nutbags?

      You really Are so dumb and lazy. you just watch some stupid movie, but dont care to look who this Foster Gamble is and if he is worth listening to. You believe in him, while reality keeps going contradicting you. how sad…

  33. Charles Cameron says :

    yes the earth is flat. there are no other lifeforms in the galaxy. Don’t believe the testimony of astronauts or air force sargents. they aren’t credible. Don’t believe released FBI documents. Don’t look up the Rodin Coil or vortex mathematics. don’t look up at the sky.

    the illuminati is not real. The symbol on the one dollar bill is not the symbol of a cult, its as american as apple pie. George washington just really liked obelisks.

    Nikolai tesla didn’t invent the wardenclyfe tower. its was a fraud, just like AC electricity. mass ufo citings like the pheonix lights are just a big collective hallucination… i mean weather balloons.

    Humans know everything about the universe. its a shitty place. but we have all the facts and will never need anymore. there is no meaning to anything. DNA is just a big long molecule that is mostly junk.

  34. Free Spirit says :

    So where are you’re arguments? You just repeated everything stated in the video….and added more to it…you didn’t debunk a damn thing, only further accentuated it.

  35. ra says :

    I was under the impression that debunking consisted of “proving” something to be false. I read no such proof on this blog entry, only doubt and, perhaps skepticism. That’s ok to have doubt about crop circles, ET, “free energy”, and other “Thrive” movie claims. But to debunk (to expose the falseness or hollowness of (a myth, idea, or belief).) requires more effort than what has been presented here.

    Juvenile nerds are cool too, up to a point — that point being when they become arrogant and judgemental of their debunking target as well as their critics. When you grow up to become a scientist, it is good to be skeptical but not so good to be arrogant. Being a good scientist is like being an agnostic with regard to the phenomena being studied.

    I too have my own doubts about the crop circles, ET, and “free energy” but I also admit that these issues have not been debunked and thus require more study and investigations. Perhaps as you become older and continue research to debunk these ideas you will discover and/or come up with your own ideas and solutions to the issues that the movie attempted to bring awareness to?

    • Anastasio says :

      Well looky here; a condescending new-age hippy called ra pretending they’ve watched Thrive though an unbiased lens. Whatever next?

    • Joel T. says :

      I am sorry that you were under a false impression. “Debunking” means to expose the false assertions or claims of something. So if Hassim Haramein says that a torus has been “burned into the atomic structure of the rock” of the “flowers of life” in the Temple of Osiris in Abydos Egypt, then a proper debunking is noting that no evidence is given, and that the claim itself is nonsensical (what does it mean to burn something into the atomic structure).

      Crop circles, ET, and free-energy do not require more study and investigation. They’ve been investigated, there’s no shred of positive data. Everything is either negative or inconclusive. Science doesn’t dwell on negative results, it takes negative results as proof that the hypothesis is incorrect.

      The problem is that the movie attempts to bring awareness to false issues: there’s no reason anyone should waste their time on those when we have plenty of real ones about.

  36. too frustrated to read your negative comments any further says :

    …all that trust in science, when science itself is going through rapid changes. you know what you guys sound like, some dumb ass self proclaimed scientist in like a 50’s era, and me trying to explain an iphone to you and lets say i time traveled back to the 50 ‘s right? bear with me, and i tried to explain to you im from the future , and that in the future we have iphones. i would go ahead and try to explain to you what it does. just to have you locked me up. telling me im a nut and that there is absolutely no scientific “proof ” that an iphone is possible. so you lock me in the name of “doing whats best for me(THANKS BUD)” give me drugs that you claim is backed by your “science” and essentially making me a drug adict for the rest of my life, then i choose a natural plant to get me off my addiction, and you claim through your “science” that natural is illegal so you put me in jail…thanks man////////and poof youll have to wait 50 years for the iphone cause you are so FUCKING closed minded. its impossible to discuss new ideas and ways to better ourselves around people like you. when i was 13 i talked sooo much, believing i was such a bright kid . an older man told me, he who speaks all day has no time for listening and learning. how about instead of discrediting everyone in this film, make your own about how you can change the world.

    • conspiracykiller says :

      All that don’t understand that science is designed to correct itself and force changes when they are necessary, you know what you sound like ? Some dumb ass new age high school dropouts.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 138 other followers

%d bloggers like this: