Results of the Clean Water Experiment

Aug
7
2009
by
Lynne McTaggart
/
21
Comments

I’m just off the phone with Dr. Gary Schwartz, with some exciting news about our June 13 Clean Water Intention Experiment.
As you may recall, this was our first attempt to clean up polluted water. We decided to start a very subtle measure: water’s ‘energetic footprint’, as measured by Russian physicist Dr. Konstantin Korotkov’s Gas Discharge Visualization (GDV) technique, which uses sophisticated technology to capture the tiny pulse of photons emitted by all living things by stimulating them into an excited state so that they shine millions of times more intensely than normal.
The GDV machine also can record the ‘energy footprint’ of liquids.
Korotkov and his team have carried out a great deal of pilot research on a great variety of biological liquids, showing that the GDV equipment is highly sensitive to changes in the chemical and physical contents of liquids — subtle changes that don’t show up in ordinary chemical analyses.
The GDV machine examines the emission activity on the surface of the liquid — that is, its ability to retain important information from other molecules.
Dr. Schwartz, director of the University of Arizona’s Laboratory for Advances in Consciousness and Health, and his team, including the excellent lab technician Mark Boccuzzi, have been photographing these energetic footprints of water.
There are extremely clear differences between the photographs of tap water and those of bottled mineral water. Tap water has a more diffuse image (like the sun under a lot of cloud cover), while mineral water has a strikingly clear image, like an intense circle of light.
Careful preparations
Before the experiment, Mark prepared four Petri dishes with tap water samples, and labeled them ‘A’, ‘B’, ‘C’ and ‘D’. Once again, Mark and the rest of the scientific team would remain ignorant of which sample we chose.
He then had to photograph the images of the Petri dishes with their labels, plus take images of energetic footprints of all four with his GDV technology.
This is truly an international experiment, run with a lab and scientific team in Arizona, orchestrated by me and my team in London, UK, with our wonderful CopperStrings web team in India, who have donated their time to our project.
Because of the large time difference (12 hours) between the lab and the web team, who must upload the images on our website, Mark had to prepare the samples five days before the experiment, in order to send us the photos in time.
The date before the experiment, I asked my youngest daughter to choose one of four pieces of paper, which contained A, B, C and D, and once she’d selected, we told our CopperStrings team which one to show on our site.
On the day of the experiment, our participants who’d registered beforehand, logged in and were given instructions by the use pages that automatically flipped over at the appropriate times.
Participants from every continent
We had registered participants from 79 countries and every continent, including people from numerous countries in Africa, the Middle East, Central America, and the Far East. Nevertheless, the largest group (more than half) were from the US, followed by Canada, the UK, the Netherlands, South Africa, Australia, Italy, Spain and Germany.
Our participants were shown photos of both the tap water and mineral water energetic footprints, to see the difference. When the experiment began, the Petri dish we’d chosen was revealed.
Our participants were asked to send an intention for the energetic footprint of the tap water to more closely resemble that of the mineral water.
Changed water
Afterward, Dr. Schwartz and Mark again took GDV images of all four Petri dishes. After they’d examined and compared all of them with the images from mineral water, they found that one photo more closely resembled that of the bottled water.
At that point, I unblinded the study; the dish we’d chosen indeed looked more closely like the mineral water than any of the others.
Nevertheless, such a study is meaningless on its own, so we decided to try to replicate it later that month, at a workshop I was running for some 75 people at the ISSSEEM conference in Boulder, Colorado.
We ran an identical experiment in every regard but one – the four tap water samples were left in the Petri dishes for just a few days, not the five days as we’d done previously.
This time, when Mark and Gary examined this results, they did not see a significant difference in the photographs.
Many possible scenarios
So even though we got results the first time, we failed to replicate them. This could mean one of a number of possibilities:
• The first experiment was a fluke
• The second experiment was a fluke
• To get a result we need to leave the water in the dishes for five days, as we did the first time
• Leaving the water in the dishes for five days enabled bacteria to grow. The presence of bacteria – rather than our intention — changed the images
Until we repeat the study, we cannot say for certain that we had a robust effect. Hence why Dr. Schwartz would like to wait before publishing the photographs.
So we’re running the experiment again on September 19.
If you were unable to join in last time, here’s your opportunity to make history. This is the first of a series of experiments we will be running this autumn with a team of scientists to test various methods of cleaning up polluted water. We will be attempting to mutate bacteria, change pH and alter the energetics of the water.
This experiment will culminate in a special worldwide intention Experiment in Japan with Dr. Masaru Emoto in March 2010, where we’ll be attempting to clean up a polluted lake in Japan. So join in now and help us all to clean up the world’s waterways.
Please mark September 19 on your calendar again — and tell everyone you know to register on www.thecleanwaterexperiment.com
We will run the experiment at the same time (4 pm GMT). Here are the time zones:
9 am PDST
10 am MDST
11 noon CDST
12 noon EDST
5 pm British Summer Time
6 pm rest of Europe
2 am Sydney, Australia

Lynne McTaggart

Lynne McTaggart is an award-winning journalist and the author of seven books, including the worldwide international bestsellers The Power of Eight, The Field, The Intention Experiment and The Bond, all considered seminal books of the New Science and now translated into some 30 languages.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *



21 comments on “Results of the Clean Water Experiment”

  1. I will be there on Sept. 19th! I think your comments on a past blog do make sense. In order to make an intention manifest, one has to truly feel it in every cell, not just the brain. I believe you indicated, as I interpreted it, that the 2nd experiment's particpants were not as experienced in the subtleties of energy work as I feel many of those drawn to your Intention Experiment book and site are. As an energy worker I know that it takes practice to become aware of what one is feeling and projecting. I would think that WOULD have an impact on the results. I just know that the connection felt with everyone during the experiment is AMAZING!

  2. Thank you for this most powerful and meaningful work.
    I will be joining for sure and will have my meditation group join as well. Carol is right, thought plus FEELING equals creation... I FEEL this work will support the continued evolution of our understanding of the power and responsibility of intention.

  3. Carol, I also believe that" one should feel it in every cell, not just the brain". Powering up is so important and we all know how to do that thanks to Lynne's earlier instructions. Maybe we should all affirm that we are intending with every cell when we bond together in these experiments.
    In Love and Light

  4. Thanks for the update. This is extremely interesting research, and all sciences should pay attention. There is indeed a FIELD of which we are all part of, and it supersedes time and space. Sadly we are taught that there is no way around time and space. Wrong, beyond the FIELD there is also The Impartial Observer. The more one disengage for the so-called objective reality out there, the more we have the notions that prayer and intention do effect the whole, and those souls who are focused upon. Including water.
    As everyone brought up in a western school tradition, it was difficult to accept “far fetched” claims beyond sensual perception. As a teenager I read “Straight Jacket” by Jack London, where he relaxed his body, and escaped into passed incarnations.
    It was fascinating stuff, and I thought, but this must be impossible. Still something in me believed it was possible. This is the difference between the skeptics, that just keep defining what is impossible, and so it will be. Now I have passed 60, and my notion is that there is nothing that is impossible, and after reading about the research that Lynne has given attention, the more encouraged you become.
    This is great work Lynne, especially because open minded kids, and students will pay attention. They will move the bar for what is possible, and will in the decades to come achieve amazing things. This will be your legacy, by just bringing attention to these great scientists work.
    This is indeed what our great scientists did; they did not read “skeptic magazines.” I have debated them, and told them that they have no real scientific function. What does it matter if some people are deluded by charlatans? They will find out anyway, without their help.
    Truly scientific minds are both skeptics and open minded. The skepticism is there for the sake of probing the data, but not as a limit to what is possible.

  5. Like the approach, however, what does the following actually mean (part of your account)?
    "...After they’d examined and compared all of them with the images from mineral water, they found that one photo more closely resembled that of the bottled water..."
    Does the examination and comparison necessarily include measurements using the GDV machine and associated/relevant baseline readings by the machine of the samples (before and after)?
    Or do you mean a subjective examination and comparison (look and feel), but not an actually measured one?
    Your account above doesn't actually indicate which of these, or both of these, or something else was actually the case for "examined and compared", so it 'sounds' good (the account) but it's ambiguous as it stands. Can you please clarify what 'examined and compared' actually involved?
    As said above, like the approach, but can't determine from the account above the level of rigor and resolution involved.
    Best

  6. Carol, et al., re the ISSSEEM group being "less experienced in the subtleties of energy work". Perhaps knowing that ISSSEEM stands for the International Society for the Study of Subtle Energy and Energy Medicine might suggest that it is the pre-eminent group in the world studying the effects of energy interactions (and has been for 30 years). These are the folks that know (and practice) this extensively. ...so, it is unlikely their intention power is lacking. Another explanation seems likely. Meanwhile, since this group is made up of folks interested in the power of intention you might also check out http://www.ISSSEEM.org site, and perhaps you'll join us next year. Blessings.

  7. Why was such a subtlety used - in the sense of mineral water versus tap water. Wouldn't a water sample that was clearly polluted to the visible eye AND markedly described as polluted by the GDV machine be a better marker (actually attain water from an oil polluted/chemically polluted source - there must be a few of those around). If there could be changes in the obvious visible appearance AND the GDV measurement of the pollution of the water .... now that would be a good foundation and would take a lot of the - what about this or that or this out of the equation. Just a thought

  8. I'm sure you thought of them, but there are more in the "number of possibilities." Perhaps:
    • a large group of intenders is needed;
    • not everyone is an effective intender, and the second group just didn't have any, or too few;
    • There were effective intenders but also effective blockers in the second group (not necessarily cognisant of doing it);
    • there were cognisant saboteurs;
    • some people in the world group use techniques that weren’t being used in the second group;
    • some difference(s) in the source water;
    • difference(s) in the environmental factor(s), such as "conductors" of intention (moon cycle, solar flux, times of day, astrological, wide distribution of intenders energising a “world grid,” &c.);
    • differences in the “identical” experiments (e.g., did they look at the photo on an identical website with timed pages;
    • and so on.
    Fantastic work you’re doing, and I don’t agree that the first results are “meaningless on their own.” Unfortunately, it is daunting to narrow down all these possibilities, but it would be worth it to isolate the techniques, size of group needed, &c. for the potential of being able to de-pollute this world and catalyse peace and “quantum evolution”.
    cj

  9. As a water microbiologist I am interested in the types of water used, and the possibility of bacterial growth. When sterile Petri dishes are used and the tap water is sufficiently chlorinated (active available chlorine), not much growth should occur in five days. There are many different types of mineral water, containing different types of bacterial flora, the purest mineral water has not been treated with any bactericidal treatment, others are treated in many different ways. It would be good to exclude the bacterial uncertainty factor in the next experiment by carefully control the posibly interfering parameters,

  10. Re: “This could mean one of a number of possibilities:” Another variable not mentioned is the individual integrity of each test participant including the scientists, therefore the collective integrity of all of us involved in the test. For example: If we had the choice we’d prefer a brain surgeon who is not cheating on his/her spouse, since we don’t know when the karma will kick in. My research these past 33 years, measuring intentions Vs results, reveals that my integrity (the lead investigator ) and the personal integrity of a participant have an effect on outcomes. That is to say, an unacknowledged perpetration by someone who presents him/herself as a person of integrity eventually reveals itself because they cannot consistently manifest their intentions. (For more about integrity as pertains to communication see The Clearing House).
    Lynne, feel free to run your blog post past me before posting. Two minds mo betta than one, yes?
    Keep up the great work.
    With aloha,
    Kerry

  11. A wonderful job and research, just fascinating and very happy that so much people are aware and willing to participate in this extraordinary work you are doing. Congratulations and you may count on me.

  12. Dear Lynn,
    You were mentioning that "We will be attempting to mutate bacteria, change pH and alter the energetics of the water" in your future experiments.
    Could we also have one experiment in which we simply send LOVE and BLESSINGS to that water so it can heal itself, without asking for any specific result?
    Maybe trying to manipulate the water's parameters is not helping the water at all...

  13. Another factor between the "larger" and "smaller" eperiments would simply be a difference in numbers of focused participants.
    I am curious to participate in Sept. and hope to be there.

  14. I'm curious as to why such bacteria would only grow in the sample that happened to be the chosen one. Wouldn't they grow equally in all of the petrie dishes, or more than one at least?
    Lots of things to consider, for sure. Count me in in Sept.

  15. The difference in the number of participants is a very likely factor in the difference in the results of the two tests. Events that moved the REG's - the OJ trial, etc - involved large numbers of observers. I would be interested in trying the experiment again twice, with two similarly large bodies of participants. Repeating the experiment here is a good idea for indicating that trial 1 was not a fluke, but to show that it is truly replicable, the experiment should be repeated again with a different, though also huge, group of participants.
    I was not among the participants - overslept the day of the experiment. But I do intend to participate in the next one. Thanks very much for all your hard work. In several years or decades when the science behind intention is as generally accepted as that behind germ theory, you should be in textbooks as a pioneer of this field.
    As an aside, does anyone know if there was a REG spike when the death of Michael Jackson was globally reported?

  16. Hi John -
    I'll bet there was a spike in electromagnetic activity around the globe when Michael's death was announced...and I wonder what the readings are since then...there is alot of emotion still ...

  17. Might there be some who identify with the bacteria in the water even though it is not sentient? I lean toward Nico's love and blessings concept. Thank you, Nico, for this clear sight.

Why wait any longer when you’ve already been waiting your entire life?

Top usercarttagbubblemagnifiercrosschevron-down