Nassim Haramein - Fraud or Sage?

[CyRus]

Hi all,
I start this thread with trepidation, as I am fully aware that there are a great many supporters of Haramein within this forum and in the alternative community as a whole.
The thread title was inspired by this blog:
http://azureworld.blogspot.com
Where a physics teacher objectively points out the errors and fraudulent claims made by Haramein.

This man is very fair and makes an excellent case and in my eyes Haramein is conclusively debunked. I think it vital that anyone who are massive fans of Haramein at least take a look, and perhaps learn some physics in the process. (Very informative!)
As you all know, there are a great many frauds within the alternative community. People who either consciously or unknowingly provide fraudulent information in order to make a buck.

I find it vital therefore to inform and educate on anyone who might be a fraud, and feel this will benefit the alternative community as a whole by "separating the wheat from the chaff".

Whether Haramein is deliberately misleading the populace is something I strongly doubt. Rather, I believe Haramein is a man with delusions of grandeur. Theories he has made up that he believes is physics, but lacks the mathematical and scientific knowledge to back them up.

I am aware that I most probably am stepping on many toes with this thread, and know that many people might find their belief systems "attacked" (for lack of a better word), and I apologize profoundly.

Nevertheless, this is a forum. An outlet for differing opinions and the flourishing of discussions. I welcome any views and objections, and am looking forward to a stimulating debate. =)

[conk]

As a layman I find his videos very interesting. A simple mind can understand some of the concepts. Who knows, not me. I'm not educated enough in the sciences to determine his authenticity or credibility. I do know that much of what mainstream, commonly accepted science says is in need of challenge. Physics tout some principle, but the equation would be something like: a/bx (E = xxb) x (we don't know) = our best guess. So, some of the accepted science has big holes in it. Entrenched scientists most certainly resist change or affront to their cherished theories. I say challenge the hell out of them. Nassim might be the guy. There is lots of exciting information on the edge. Anyone up on their votex based math?

[CyRus]

Posted by conk (here)
As a layman I find his videos very interesting. A simple mind can understand some of the concepts. Who knows, not me. I'm not educated enough in the sciences to determine his authenticity or credibility. I do know that much of what mainstream, commonly accepted science says is in need of challenge. Physics tout some principle, but the equation would be something like: a/bx (E = xxb) x (we don't know) = our best guess. So, some of the accepted science has big holes in it. Entrenched scientists most certainly resist change or affront to their cherished theories. I say challenge the hell out of them. Nassim might be the guy. There is lots of exciting information on the edge. Anyone up on their votex based math?

Actually, most mainstream science is pretty much right on the money. The existing models such as Classic Mechanics, General Relativity, Special Relativity, and Quantum Mechanics and Quantum Electrodynamics predict our physical world to a great detail. The problem it faces now is to combine the areas, as Classic Mechanics and Relativity are at odds with Quantum Mechanics, although both work. (As far as I understand it, but my knowledge of theoretical physics is limited at best, as I have only done engineering physics which is much more practical) This is the paradox, and also several of the more fundamental concepts such as the origin of mass and consciousness etc.

The problem with Haramein is that he cannot be called a physicist, because his "equations" defy the laws of physics profusely. (As stated, he is not a prominent mathematician) Therefore, I find him to be a fraud, as he is misleading the public to think he is a maverick physicist...which is incorrect.
At best he is a New Age philosopher, but a physicist...No. =P

[ROMANWKT]

Nassim Haramein, I love that guy, I have followed all his work, he always has a great way of opening ones mind, and see what he is seeing.

I am downloading the 51 min video and shall with interest hear the counter knowledge.

Thank you Cyrus
roman

[CyRus]

Posted by ROMANWKT (here)
Nassim Haramein, I love that guy, I have followed all his work, he always has a great way of opening ones mind, and see what he is seeing.

I am downloading the 51 min video and shall with interest hear the counter knowledge.

Thank you Cyrus
roman

No problem Roman, and I appreciate your open mind!
(Edited: My words can be misinterpreted)
What I meant was, I appreciate the fact that you are willing to look at both sides of this issue.

[CyRus]

Posted by conk (here)
As a layman I find his videos very interesting. A simple mind can understand some of the concepts. Who knows, not me. I'm not educated enough in the sciences to determine his authenticity or credibility. I do know that much of what mainstream, commonly accepted science says is in need of challenge. Physics tout some principle, but the equation would be something like: a/bx (E = xxb) x (we don't know) = our best guess. So, some of the accepted science has big holes in it. Entrenched scientists most certainly resist change or affront to their cherished theories. I say challenge the hell out of them. Nassim might be the guy. There is lots of exciting information on the edge. Anyone up on their votex based math?

I do agree with the fact that some of the most paradigm shifting research is done by mavericks on the edge. Plate tectonics were one such example. Also, it is true that some scientists are dogmatic in their beliefs..specifically in the belief of materialism (which I think has been somewhat dead since the discovery of Quantum Electrodynamics) but I would like to believe that most scientists are honest men who would accept the evidence if it was provided. The sad fact is that most paradigm breaking research lacks funding due to the dogmatic attitudes of the scientific "hierarchy" and also the whim of the government.

[eaglespirit]

My Analogy...
Haramein is to Physics/Science as Grof is to Psychiatry/Medicine


for reference...Stan Grof's book, When the Impossible Happens

[Ilie Pandia]

My take on this:

- I went trough school and the physics there did not make as much sense as the 8 hour presentation of Nassim Haramein. If he is a good scientist or simply a charming presenter I could not say

- Using a 3D modeling Software I have followed his 3d fractals multiplying and dividing and it works

- His work has a certain beauty that "main-stream" science does not

- He has put a lot of "thinking-for-yourself" in building his presentation and writing his paper. Even if it proves to be wrong is much better than regurgitating "half-explained" scientific "truths" and memorizing "other's-people-work".

- We at Avalon know that much of the "science" taught in school is outdated. Using "outdated science" to debunk Haramein may not provide valuable results

- Does any of my above statements have any "scientific value" - probably not .

But I can not say that Nassim's work is totaly debunked. I will say: I do not know!

[Ilie Pandia]

The article on the blog in the original post is dated: July 22nd 2010. That is old (in the sense that since then Nassim has published his work and his paper has passed peer review).

Nassim Haramein has published his work (contrary the the claims on that blog) on December 6th 2010: See here and follow instructions. So he is not debunked just yet!

[shiva777]

Haramein has lots of good info...much of it based on the distorted geometry of our hologram...so it leads to misleading conclusions in many instances.

The fibonacci and golden mean,for example,are not NATURAL laws...they are the manipulation of our hologram that have lead to parasitism and the disconnect from Eternal Living Light conciousness...to get some idea of what I am talking about,scroll down about a quarter of the way down and open your minds to a whole new understanding of physics

http://www.azuritepress.com/New%20Co..._summary_2.php

it is no accident that we were disconnected and it is no accident that we are being reconnected to TRULY SACRED GEOMETRY

[daledo]

At one point almost all scientists said that the earth was flat, THEY WERE WRONG. The education system is flawed because scientists have to adhere to certain codes of conduct in order to keep their jobs and get more federally funded grants in the future. Many scientists have written articles later to recant what they said because they were influenced by TPTB in one way or another. I do not trust what mainstream says because of all the agendas in play to keep the people in their little box.

[Icecold]

Bob Athon put up an extremely detailed and comprehensive argument against the theories of Nassim Haramein. He covers the entire theory.

Having read through the argument against the physics of .....the schwarzchild proton, it would seem that Haramein totally ignores many principles of physics to construct his theory.

TO NASSIM FROM BUBBUH:

THE MORE POLYSYLLABIC WORDS YOU NEED TO EXPLAIN SOMETHING, THE LESS YOU UNDERSTAND IT.

THROWING WORDS AT SOMETHING WILL NOT GET YOU ONE IOTA CLOSER TO COMPREHENDING IT...BUT IT DOES PUT ON A GOOD SHOW IF ONE'S PURPOSE IS TO IMPRESS CREDULOUS OR NAIVE FOLLOWERS.

AS RAMANA MAHARISHI ONCE WROTE, THE TRUTH CAN ONLY BE EXPRESSED IN SILENCE.

As a layman I find his videos very interesting.

I think that this is the perspective from which Haramein garners most of his support.

Layman are attracted to the claims because they do not understand the physics involved.

It would seem that in the final analysis, Haramein is just another new age prophet.

I believe in one mind and a higher power but I also believe there is so much information out there and we need to investigate before we expand our inner instinct of believing everything we see and hear.

The article on the blog in the original post is dated: July 22nd 2010.

This in no way detracts from the argument. To claim that something is 'old' and therefore not true is fallacious.


I've said it before...novelty rules the new age community...they don't want truth...they want entertainment.

[Elixer]

I haven't looked at the Nassim stuff yet, but want to comment on the Azurite debunking of the golden mean. That too me has to be wrong.

The golden mean is a ratio that is found all over nature, in your body, in your face, in plants, the DNA spiral. Anywhere.
The platonic solids like icosahedron, dodecahedron, are fundamental buillding blocks of our physical reality. Golden mean (phi) is inheherent in those shapes. Crystals grow in stages, from icosa to dodeca to icosa etc.
The golden mean to me is key to understanding the physical and beyond.

To say that this is based on false teachings, is like saying the cube is part false teachings. Perhaps I misunderstood what Asha' is trying to say here, but when you try to debunk phi, well, misinformation to say the least. (IMO)

That is my main problem with her work: It seems to try to scare you away from very basic, well established and potentially beautiful teachings. Don't get me wrong, a lot of established knowledge does need to be reviewed, revised and possibly thrown out. But the star tetrahedron, the flower of life, the golden mean rectangle are wrong? Come on.
If I dare say, it could even be considered luciferian to say make such claims.

I love the work of Dan Winter. He has many examples of structures based on phi and how they optimize fractality, increase growth rate, and basically just work in the utmost life-promoting way.
His work is very much in line with Nassim's (or vice versa). Dan also refers to Ashayana, but uses her old name.
Unfortunately his website seems to throw people off, but there are many videos there that discuss these topics and he is a very entertaining speaker.
http://www.goldenmean.info/

[StateOfTheHeart]

Thanks for the thread, I would 'sort of' like to know the answer to the question posed in the thread title. Most peer-reviews of Haramein, which I hear of, don't seem too positive, which is a shame... I watched his 8 hour lecture with great interest and would love for his stories to be true - and would be a little saddened for them not to be so... but the truth must be, regardless of what we like/dislike. I think my feelings on the matter are shared by a few people in this thread already.

Posted by Ilie Pandia (here)
My take on this:

- I went trough school and the physics there did not make as much sense as the 8 hour presentation of Nassim Haramein. If he is a good scientist or simply a charming presenter I could not say

- His work has a certain beauty that "main-stream" science does not

- He has put a lot of "thinking-for-yourself" in building his presentation and writing his paper. Even if it proves to be wrong is much better than regurgitating "half-explained" scientific "truths" and memorizing "other's-people-work".

- We at Avalon know that much of the "science" taught in school is outdated.[/B]

Yeah I agree with this I'd say. I might check out those critiques, thanks.

[noxon medem]

WHY (here it fits)
does it have to be

one definition (approach) Or another (one)

OR , this or that ( dual choice in a multiverse, not very practical .. )
well
not only do our perception of reality change fast and drasticly,
( so that we can barely hang in there, to keep up ...)
And then
Reality itself continualy changes, also,
with or without US
About and above us. ( wg Help us ..)

keep it flexible, and real
whatever that means to you

Thank You too ..
nm .

[greybeard]

Does he have to be either Fraud or Sage?
I believe he is dedicated to his work, right or wrong I cant say but he makes a very strong case that traditional understanding of what the Pyramids were for and how they were built is deeply flawed.
Time will tell.
There was another thread about his work here that said it had been accepted and validated by an American body not the Australian validation.
Einstein did not go up the university route either.
His talk on sacred geometry is interesting to say the least but if experts cant agree what hope have I?
He may just be right.
Chris

[Elixer]

I have now read most of the blog countering Nassim's position. I do not understand all the physics, but the blogger certainly isn't fair as stated in the OP, in the sense of being objective.
His critisisms are full of ad hominem attacks and do seem somewhat ego-driven. It reads to me as if he feels he has some good points, but is not taken serious which has made him dissappointed and frustrated.
It is quite emotional and tries very hard to paint Haramein as a 'Hawaian fruitloop'. It does not seem to be very scientific, in that a scientist would approach this in a much more objective way.

Haramein cannot be as wrong as is suggested in the blog. If he were, he would not have gotten the respect he has. He would not even have been taken serious at all. Yet, he is peer-reviewed and has won at least one fairly prestigious scientific award.
The fact that peer reviews are highly critical does not mean the entire body of work is nonsense. Of course it is going to be critical because his theories are challenging established science. Also the work is not finished.

From the Bob Athon blog:
"His [Haramein's] theory gives the mass of the proton as 885 million tonnes when it's straightforward to measure that it's 1.67 trillionths of a trillionth of a gram"
Surely this suggests that they are both looking at something different. The discrepancy is soooo huge (a factor in the order of 10^32, a 1 with 32 zeroes) that it doesn't make sense to critizise him for this number.
If Haramein uses this number that is so obviously at odds with established facts, no scientist would even give the theory a second thought. So there seems to be a misunderstanding here (weight vs mass?).

Beauty, or elegance in theories suggest it might be correct. Isn't that a consequence of Ockham's razor? In structure it certainly holds true. Something that looks good, works well (a well designed sailboat for instance).

The title of this thread is wonderfully provocative.
I would say he is neither sage nor fraud.
Even Bob acknowlegdes that he cannot claim Haramein is a fraud (or manipulative or deceitful), since that would imply knowledge of his intent, that he is purposely trying to deceive people. Bob has had to retract those statements.
Nassim might not be completely right, that would not make him a fraud. And why does it have to be either that, or some holy man coming to save the world, or whatever?
He is (just) an intelligent guy with a very interesting theory and a charming personality.

So, once again, I am inclined to call 'disinfo' on both the Bob Athon blog and this thread's title (no personal offense). I also realize that I can be accused of the same. I assure you though, these are just my opinions.
Twenty-Five Rules of Disinformation

[Jayke]

Nassim will prove or disprove his own theories with his ability to put his thoughts into practical actions.
The acid test of his work won't come in the form of some 'peer review panel' but in his ability to create a technology based on his theories that enhance the quality of life in some way, even if one life enhancing technology comes out of his theories then it's going to be pretty hard to debunk him when you can hold a working practical model of it in your hand.

On a personal level i've had major breakthroughs in understanding how the universal mind works and the principles it operates on directly because of something I've heard Nassim talk about so I'm inclined to believe what he's saying is true... as i've been able to take those understandings and apply them in the field of hypnotherapy to really help people out and improve the way they function in the world, and if I've been able to develop a mind technology based on his principles, then I see no reason why elite academic scientists won't be able to come up with a working physical technology at some point in the future either. So I'm happy to reserve judgement, wait and see how it all pans out...let the scientific Goliaths battle it out while I feast on whatever crumbs of wisdom either side of the debate accidentally spill over in the process.

[Ilie Pandia]

Posted by Icecold (here)

The article on the blog in the original post is dated: July 22nd 2010.

This in no way detracts from the argument. To claims that something is 'old' and therefore not true is fallacious.

What you say is correct, but it is not what I meant.

The point I wanted to make is that after July 22nd 2010, Nassim Haramein's paper "has passed peer review and is now published at the American Institute of Physics". This it is also a strong point supporting the math and the physics behind Nassim Haramain's work.

[Tenzin]

Oh, neither a Fraud nor a Sage. A messenger rather. His advice to us all starts around clip 36 as follows:

https://youtube.com/watch?v=xyTjSr9D9VU

2:34 - "There is very little time left." The whole 8 hours, and there was his subtle but clear warning to us all.