I appreciate your skepticism, FD, I think it is healthy. But don't be afraid to look at that which cannot yet be "measured" by our as yet limited perception.
I'm not afraid at all. And, fortunately, Emoto's claims can be measured. (If they could not, they would be outside the realm of science.) Emoto has not used double-blind testing, allowing the possibility of bias. A far better study on the subject was done by a group of high school students who did understand the double-blind method, and, while they found no evidence supporting Emoto's outrageous claims, were honest enough to admit that their sample sizes were too small to be considered conclusive. See http://184.108.40.206/viewitem.php3?id=910&catid=510&kbid=ionsikc
I think most scientists believe it would be relatively trivial to disprove Emoto's wacky claims. However, I would imagine they're quite happy not to waste their time until he starts using scientific methodology. Otherwise, he will continue to be viewed as a quack.