Search This Blog

Tuesday, 17 December 2013

Nassim Haramein - Fraud or Sage?

Comment: I've been having a look at the Resonance Project lately. It all seems very interesting and upbeat but there's a lot there that feels "off" to me. Straight off the bat,  if anyone there was onto a genuine Unified Field Theory (UFT) they'd be dead before their blueprints even got to the review stage, as so many others have found out to their cost. That isn't paranoia that is simply the way the world is at the moment. And nor does it mean these people are bad but they are often hopelessly naive about psychopathy and CoIntelpro.

The guy below gives a very good overview of what's wrong with Nassim and his scientific harem.  And as one comment mentions, when you have no reliable peer review group to critique his work then this leads to pseudo-science groupies where disinformation and pathology abound. 

But hey, everyone believes what they want to believe and be damned with the warning signs...

 Nassim Haramein and the UFT | Enigma TV

I'd like to outline here some very sound reasons for asserting that Nassim Haramein is grossly misleading people by claiming to have any depth of scientific understanding behind his ideas.

If you'd prefer to just see some straightforward examples, try some of these (también en español) – but do come back when you're done...

Más discusión en espagñol aquí.

(Alternatively, read this if you think I'm just being a bit horrid.)

[Edit Dec 2011: Anyone curious about Haramein's appearance in some obscure 'peer-reviewed' conference proceedings, please see this note: Feel free to ask questions in the comments.]

[Edit July 2013: He's had another pretend science article ("Quantum Gravity and the Holographic Mass") published in a pretend science journal. please see here for details.]


On many of his videos, and on the main page of his Resonance Project's website, he displays a "prestigious" award for one of his physics papers. What is this?His certificate looks at first to have been awarded for best paper in the whole of "physics, quantum mechanics, relativity, field theory and gravitation" at the entire university of Liège, Belgium in the year 2009, and "chosen by a panel of peer reviewers". That would be quite an accolade.

But when you read the wording, it's clear that it was awarded for best paper presented in that category at a single computing systems conference; and that the 'peer reviewers' who awarded it were just the other people on the conference. Most people understand peer review to mean something quite different.

Two relevant questions here. Firstly, how much would the other people on this conference understand about "physics, quantum mechanics, relativity, field theory and gravitation"? Secondly, how many other papers on these subjects do you think were presented at this particular computing systems conference? It's not likely to be many.

It does sound impressive when described on the website and on videos such as this one. If you've looked at youtube comments and so forth, you'll see that plenty of people are impressed by it. In reality it is no more than a certificate for turning up at a conference in Belgium with a paper.

It seems likely that this is the best he has to show from any respectable institution for his twenty years of research, and he really would like to present something from a university that makes him look like legitimate scientist. You can't accuse him of lying here: to his credit, he puts the certificate in clear view right under our noses. As a display of sheer pretentiousness, it's pretty blatant.

No comments:

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...