forums energies: society, ecology and clean technologies

A doc5 frXNUMX to see absolutely, the return of the memory of water: http://youtube.com/watch?v=EBZ1J-n1pqU

Hello,
An old smokehouse that returns to the carpet
http://www.hoaxbuster.com/forum/memoire ... -la-preuve

Just a funny thing Montagné like those who have tested the E-cat are retirees who have nothing more to lose.
The science of old people!

"The dogs are barking, but the trailer goes by."
volunteer

He achieved notoriety in 1971 (at 36) by the discovery of a factor activating blood platelets, PAF-Acether.
In 1973, he entered INSERM where he continued the rest of his career. He will direct several research units there, and will be the advisor to Jean-Pierre Chevènement, then Minister of Research, from 1981 to 1983.

He was far from being an old man! His work on the memory of water earned him to be sidelined because it disturbed the thinking people of his time, who made current followers as evidenced by the ignorant who express themselves here.

Precisely I was not talking about Benveniste who ended rather badly but Montagné who finished his career. Montagné has nothing to do with his career.
I used "old men" just for the sake of humor.
I find Montagné's work extremely interesting.

The report is very interesting.

I am surprised at the controversy over the single "job"(I do not say" discovery ") of Professor Montagnier.

As he often says: ""experience shows that there are facts". Afterwards, we may or may not agree with the explanations and hypotheses put forward by Prof. Montagnier.

What bothers me in this debate, however concerning scientists, is that the detractors remain firmly anchored in their disagreements and oppositions on the "concept" of the memory of water and its assumptions, but do not seem to contradict the simple one. result of the experiment described, and which would show (conditional) that information has passed from one test tube to another, perhaps carried by water molecules.

I have not read it anywhere, but is there at least 1 other scientist or 1 other lab who has tried to reproduce the experiment which highlights a possible trace of the presence of a substance having been in contact with the diluted and coded aqueous solution?

This heated debate is all the more incomprehensible since the experience, as explained in the film, seems very simple and within the reach of many laboratories and scientists.

If all this is piped up or wrong, which is possible, it should be simple to prove it scientifically and by something other than opposition speeches only argued by dogmas based on scientific knowledge today.


("E pur si muove!" Had said a certain controversial researcher)

izentrop wrote:Hello,
An old smokehouse that returns to the carpet

+1

you can immediately see that izentrop and lessdewatts are more competent specialists than the scientists involved!

Yes, personally I would not put my hand in the fire that "the water would have no memory"!

Aren't we made up of 65% water ourselves? If so, our own memory is therefore well composed of this water, at least up to this value there (and much more proportionally if we remove the bones). Even if I know that the electro-biological organization of the human body is not at all comparable (it's just an example story to demonstrate certain certainties ...)

On the other hand, I would also await evidence to affirm that this would possibly be the case in the absolute of still water ...

On the other hand, I would also await evidence to affirm that this would possibly be the case in the absolute of still water ...

check out Emoto's work!