blog 2

I found chapters 4 thru 6 of The Field to be almost as difficult to follow as the first three chapters. I’m not familiar with much of the scientific jargon used in the reading and I’ve been finding myself reading the same passages over and over. I do like how McTaggart seems to be tying all the chapters together using the idea of Zero Point Field. Perhaps by the end of the book it will be laid out more clearly for me to digest and I will be able to grasp some of the ideas better.
I noticed in chapter 4 a reoccurring theme in the book. When a scientist comes across a major break through that goes against the established scientific community it is shot down and played off as nonsense. This time it was Benveniste and his research with water and its ability to imprint and store information from molecules. When Benveniste was published in Nature magazine his article was followed by an editorial addendum asking for readers to find flaws in the study. Why does the scientific community keep doing this? Are they afraid that one discovery could destroy a lifetime of what they believed to be true? The men that we are reading about in The Field are pioneers with their work in science, but if the so called “scientific community” keeps putting down these new discoveries there’s no telling what we will miss out on.
I realize that animals have been used in experiments to find cures for humans many times in the history of modern medicine, but it turned me off to much of chapter 5. I did enjoy learning about Walter Schempp and his work with the MRI. His dedication in going back to school at age 50 to become a doctor just so he could be qualified to study the MRI machine was amazing. Schempp was able to improve the MRI technology and allow a person to have one done in 20 minutes compared to the 4 hours it took before.
I was in awe after reading chapter 6 and learning how we may be able to control things around us by simply concentrating. When I first saw the findings the PEAR research team came up with I thought the data didn’t seem to prove very much when the difference was only 0.2. Then when McTaggart explained that in many tests with medicine such as aspirin .03 is considered enough to make it a success I was amazed.