• NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

Remote Viewing

Just to add another point of view to the debate, whatever 'scientific verification' there has been in RV, its is still highly contested knowledge. Independent examination of the topic requires acknowledging the problematic aspects of the interpretation of RV sessions as well as other aspects of the phenomena. I will suggest this article and following the links provided at the bottom (as well as the referenced articles), just to put an opposing view point for those following the thread. Of course the url quoted is from a site with an 'agenda'; but no more than one that is 'pro RV' in its selective interpretation of 'facts'.

While I am no way qualified to give a definitive answer (my main areas of interest are the nature of the debate, and how 'facts' are constructed rather than the objective 'truth'), it should be noted that there are opposing 'scientific' viewpoints as well as supporting evidence as with any contested knowledge.

Regards

Ewen

Hello Ewen,

Good idea, putting up an article from an opposing viewpoint and this is a good example of some issues rv faces.

General public inquiries don't yield anything that moves us from "highly contested knowledge." RV isn't on the nightly news (at least in the midwest in the US) and all the public sees is old stuff. It's in the civilian sector and it has been in the civilian sector. The research quoted here was done in the military and now we've moved into application.

I couldn't find the date the article was written. The information sourced is dated, meaning researched in the mid-eighties (?) and it doesn't bring you up to speed with what is happening in 2009. The site was updated in February of 2009 but the article doesn't give any clear indication of new info. A TV episode and a magazine article or two were what caught my eye.

The dated information in the article brings up another issue: taboos from both ends of the spectrum. Science keeps it under the rug and people hesitate to say that they're remote viewers. "Psychic" carries stigma and baggage. See "Science and the taboo of psi":

So meanwhile, if you know where to look and who to ask, remote viewers have clients and they're working. All the public has to look at are stats from a handful of viewers of twenty-five or thirty years ago.

P>S>I's server is down. I waited, hoping it might come up. When I can show all of you some curriculum info from 2009 I will. Meanwhile, maybe some other schools / trainers will post here so that people following the thread can see what students in the civilian sector today are learning, including retasking and scalar measurements. Whether the student practices to the level of their ability after they are taught is up to them and like anything else, if you don't use it, you lose it.

Here are some Student Training Sessions from Paul Smith's group. These sketches don't speak to questions about hit / miss ratios or percentages but they're examples of what you can pick up in session and they're good.

http://rviewer.com/Student_Sessions.html

Thanks for posting,
Teresa
 
As far as i'm aware RV is a method for the gathering and correlation of facts, images and sensory information. All of the associated information that is gathered is contestable (scientifically or otherwise), even by the viewers themselves, nothing is taken just on face value alone.

Military RV was used as an adjunct to their usual intelligence gathering methods. As stated before a team of viewers would be tasked to view a target and the information collected, in some cases, over a number of sessions. This combined with all other information of the subject would then be used to define the intelligence gathered. (Teresa, Fahrusha please correct me if i'm wrong!)
RV has never claimed to be the psychic answer to all things.
At times the viewers would have an extremely minimal "hit" rate comparable to nothing more than mere chance.
But at other times some stunning results would be gained.
 
As far as i'm aware RV is a method for the gathering and correlation of facts, images and sensory information. All of the associated information that is gathered is contestable (scientifically or otherwise), even by the viewers themselves, nothing is taken just on face value alone.

Military RV was used as an adjunct to their usual intelligence gathering methods. As stated before a team of viewers would be tasked to view a target and the information collected, in some cases, over a number of sessions. This combined with all other information of the subject would then be used to define the intelligence gathered. (Teresa, Fahrusha please correct me if i'm wrong!)
RV has never claimed to be the psychic answer to all things.
At times the viewers would have an extremely minimal "hit" rate comparable to nothing more than mere chance.
But at other times some stunning results would be gained.

Agreed. Other dojos / trainers / methodologies may state differently.

~Sensory perceptions are obtained and compared to feedback of target / site information during training to build the confidence of the communication of the two minds against the day the viewer would be operational and have no feedback.

~My dojo teaches that each viewer has strengths and weaknesses and project managers choose teams of viewers based on that knowledge paired with the information the tasker requests.

~Retasking / multiple sessions sometimes are needed. New / additional or clarified tasker intent are some of the reasons.

~RV is stated by the IRVA board and P>S>I as being an adjunct / assists with finding information, not as the bottom line. Other dojos may present it differently.

Thanks,
Teresa
 
Hello Ewen,


General public inquiries don't yield anything that moves us from "highly contested knowledge." RV isn't on the nightly news (at least in the midwest in the US) and all the public sees is old stuff. It's in the civilian sector and it has been in the civilian sector. The research quoted here was done in the military and now we've moved into application.

I couldn't find the date the article was written. The information sourced is dated, meaning researched in the mid-eighties (?) and it doesn't bring you up to speed with what is happening in 2009. The site was updated in February of 2009 but the article doesn't give any clear indication of new info. A TV episode and a magazine article or two were what caught my eye.



So meanwhile, if you know where to look and who to ask, remote viewers have clients and they're working. All the public has to look at are stats from a handful of viewers of twenty-five or thirty years ago.

P>S>I's server is down. I waited, hoping it might come up. When I can show all of you some curriculum info from 2009 I will. Meanwhile, maybe some other schools / trainers will post here so that people following the thread can see what students in the civilian sector today are learning, including retasking and scalar measurements. Whether the student practices to the level of their ability after they are taught is up to them and like anything else, if you don't use it, you lose it.



Thanks for posting,
Teresa

Following through as promised to try to give anyone following the thread a current 2009, post-military snapshot of remote viewing. This is my school and it is the information that I am familiar with and readily available to me. I want to state clearly that I am not disrespecting any other trainers or schools. I hope they post as well. If the public perception of remote viewing continues to be based on thirty-year-old information we'll never get anywhere, so I am bringing to the table and sharing what I have as an example.

These are from Lyn Buchanan's crviewer website. Paul Smith is currently President of IRVA, the tenth anniversary conference in Vegas is in three weeks and he is beyond busy. He posted that IRVA plans to have a page where all trainers can post their information across the board so if anyone is interested they have an idea of location, schedule, fees, etc. As previously stated by other viewers here, some other trainers and programs besides CRV. Apologies to whom I may miss and they are in no particular order: SRV, TRV, HRVG, Glenn Wheaton, Paul Smith, Stephan Schwartz, Angela Smith, Dick Algire, Courtney Brown, Joni Dourif, Dave Moorehouse, Paul Smith, Simeon Hein, Ed Dames and independent self-starters at sites like TKR supplied by PJ Gaenir.

If you need more there may be more at IRVA. So, if you have the names and sites, those are some examples of remote viewing in 2009 vs a thirty year old search engine hit and general, generic terminology.

Example: 2009 Courses at Controlled Remote Viewing with P>S>I:

1.
Advanced CRV Course (Basic>Intermediate>Advanced)

Scalar Determinations (Degree of/Amount of/Value of/etc.):
Such conceptual aspects as distance in kilometers or miles, value in kopecks, etc., are not natural information structures, and exist only as social constructs. These are difficult aspects of a site to access and report accurately. Methods of reducing the task to small, easily accomplished increments are taught and practiced.

Extremely Detailed Physical Attributes and Relationships:
The student learns new methods for accessing extremely detailed information from the site and ways to combine previously learned techniques to handle seemingly insurmountable tasks.

3-Dimensional Relationships and Characteristics:
Access of physical relationships is enhanced as the student learns how to "perceive in 3-D". Clay modeling and other techniques are used as a working medium as the student learns to access even more detailed information from the site.

Connections (Physical and Non-Physical) in Time and Space:
The most advanced form of relationships are those which exist only in time, very distant locations, or a combination of both. The student learns search methods which identify such "thread" relationships. Once identified, special methods of access and reporting are covered.

Advanced Conceptual Aspects( Implications of / Ramifications of / etc.):
Accessing and describing conceptual aspects of the target site is carried one step further, venturing into possible vs probable futures while keeping the viewing process clean of imagination and/or logical reasoning.

Detailed Drawing and Mapping Techniques:
Methods are taught for using site contact to produce much more detailed drawings and even maps and/or site/construction plans. The student is led through increasing levels of complexity and difficulty, finally reaching a stage of tasking requiring details of components located inside intricate machinery.

2.
Monitor Course
The Monitor's course trains a person to act as an interface between the Controlled Remote Viewer and the "outside world." This training is strongly advised for organization-sponsored students.

The CRV Monitor's Course is for those people who will become professional monitors, as well as those who want to monitor for a friend, spouse, or other viewer(s). It covers the monitoring process in great depth and detail. For those who have already had CRV viewer training through advanced, it acts as a professionalization course. If you will be working with a single viewer, attendance with that viewer is required, either for the monitoring course, or as they take one of the viewer's courses. Corporations or agencies which want a full-time, non-viewing monitor to work with a group of in-house viewers must be willing to send at least one of their viewers with whom the monitor student will train.

Topics Covered

Theory and Structure of the CRV Process:
In-session events provide opportunities for information collection by the monitor which will almost inevitably be missed by the viewer working alone. The monitor is trained to recognize and use these opportunities to further the information-gathering process.

Micromovements:</STRONG>
As the Remote Viewer works, he/she will evidence certain "micromovements" during the course of a session. Many of these are involuntary expressions of the Autonomic Nervous System indicating inner conflict, relief, or other signals of internal processes. The Monitor is trained to pick these micromovements out from general restlessness or other random movements, and understand what they mean. In this way, it becomes possible for the Monitor to watch for micromovements which indicate strong (or weak) contact with the target site, and to thereby perform in-session evaluation of the validity of the Viewer's individual perceptions.

Conduct and Standardized Procedures of the CRV Session:
The monitor student is trained in methods to "keep the viewer and the session on track." Incorrect monitor conduct can damage a viewer's ability to perform at peak efficiency. The monitor must know how to structure, guide and manipulate the session without adversely affecting the viewer, the process, or the information. After every practice session, the monitor's conduct and strategies are reviewed and critiqued to give immediate feedback.

Proper Tasking - What to Accept and Not to Accept:
The CRV process is most effective when the viewer is kept isolated from the tasking information. The monitor must be aware of what kinds of tasking will harm the product, as well as how to handle situations where such problems occur.

What To Do When Things Go Wrong:
Possible problems and how to handle and document them are covered in depth. A problem hot-line to PSI is provided.

How to Handle Session Visitors / Onlookers:
Any visitor to a session must be properly briefed before the session and controlled during it. This is especially so in such cases where the onlooker is a distraught parent or other individual personally involved in the tasking. Proper handling of non-viewing persons in the RV session, while at the same time, meeting the viewer's needs, can attain the status of an art-form.

The Monitor's Responsibilities for Proper Reporting:
Corruption of otherwise valid information during the reporting process has negated the benefits of many a session. Such corruption can be quite subtle in nature. Mastery of proper reporting techniques is an absolute requirement for the monitor.

3.
Analyst Course
The Analyst's course trains a person to better read and understand the information gained during the remote viewing process. It also includes reporting procedures. The CRV Analyst's course is generally limited to people who have already taken the CRV Monitor's course. If the Analyst course student has not taken the Monitor's course, this course is necessarily lengthened to cover the features of the Monitor's course.

Topics Covered

Controlled Remote Viewing's structure:
The Analyst is made intimately familiar with the structure used in Controlled Remote Viewing sessions. The detection and meaning of the various "out of structure" conditions is stressed.

Data separation and reorganization:
It is the nature of the remote viewing session that information about any one aspect of the site will appear in bits and pieces, interspersed with information about other target aspects. The Analyst is taught to separate the data from a session transcript and then reassemble it into a more meaningful structure for proper analysis.

Analogy and imagery transference - Its meaning and interpretation:
The normal remote viewing session is rife with situations where a viewer has either used allegory, analogy or fantasy to attach correct descriptions to incorrect objects. The Analyst is trained to recognize these conditions and to pull the correct information away from the incorrect setting.

Database usage:
A properly run Controlled Remote Viewing program maintains detailed information on a Viewer's strengths and weaknesses. The Analyst is trained in the method of quickly and efficiently accessing the Viewer's data to help in the analysis and reporting processes.

Tasker/Viewer interface:
There are times when the Analyst must consult with the tasker for interpretations. The Analyst is trained to do so in a controlled methodology which will not contaminate reporting and/or future sessions. Proper documentation of such transactions is also taught.

Reporting:
The task of generating the final report usually falls to the Analyst. Even if another person acts as the report writer, the analyst formats the information in such a way that it is prepared for the report. The analyst also acts as consultant to the report writer. The report, most often, will be formatted in such a way that the customer will be able to present it as one of the company's normal reports, with information gained via normal means. The Analyst is trained in this course on proper reporting procedures to include format, content, presentation and style.

Each student for the CRV Analyst's course is required to have completed the Viewer's training. Experience has shown that an analyst cannot fully understand the process until having experienced it. It is most desirable that the student for this course bring along as much work as possible from those viewers for whom he/she will be performing analysis.

4.
Project Management
The CRV Project Manager's course covers those tasks and duties a person needs in order to sucessfully manage the remote viewers, monitors, analysts, and report writers. Since the Project Manager is quite often required to interface with the customer, customer-relation tools are also covered.

Topics Covered

Management's Responsibilities: Management of a CRV effort is different from normal management in a myriad of ways. Conduct and handling of these specialized personnel and the information they produce can be a minefield from which the unwary and untrained manager may never return. Differences, pitfalls, preventive measures, special techniques and moral, legal, social and corporate responsibilities are covered in great detail.

How to Manage for Best Return and Maximum Efficiency:
The manager student learns the proper methods for maximizing the product of the CRV effort.

How to Deal With Taskers:
Special problems arise when taskers are not aware of the information's source, or have erroneous understandings of the CRV process and what it can/cannot do. Problems and techniques for handling taskers and the tasking they provide is covered in detail. The "garbage in - garbage out" principle is most important.

How to Interface the CRV Effort with the Public / Press / Chain of Command:
Many problems can be prevented through a properly conducted effort of aggressive intervention. Potential problems, their causes and cures are covered.

How to Select CRV Personnel:
This is perhaps the most important and the most surprising portion of the Manager's course.

How to Maintain CRV Personnel Proficiency:
This is normally another surprising aspect of the Manager's course, since normal procedures used for other types of employee proficiency are usually inadequate for the maintenance of CRV proficiency. Methods, principles involved, and maintenance programs are covered.

Job Performance Evaluation:
Job performance evaluations for viewers and monitors is one of the Project Manager's largest headaches. It is sometimes impossible to evaluate a Controlled Remote Viewer's results until years after a session takes place. Evaluation cannot be made on the basis of results. Yet, managers who base their evaluations on strictly personal and subjective factors almost inevitably wind up destroying the CRV effort. Special problems and techniques are covered in detail.

5.
In-House Corporate Team Training
Businesses often have the need to gain insight into possible challenges in contract negotiations, new product development and many other daily business operations. Because this information is often proprietary, the company would prefer not to outsource the task of investigating.​

P>S>I is fully equipped to develop a complete in-house remote viewing team using the company's, corporate's, agency's or department's own personnel. This in-house team becomes the equivalent of the U.S. government's remote viewing unit, and in fact, also incorporates improvements learned through the years of that program's operations.​

A project team consists of more than just excellent viewers. Properly trained Project Managers, Monitors and Analysts are essential to the successful execution of a "real-world" project. Training for in-house projects begins with corporate education in operations security, to include security issues for having and using the project team as well as its information. Corporate or "chain of command" managers are trained in the proper selection of personnel, and the proper use of this resource, as well as its security issues.​

P>S>I's director, Lyn Buchanan, was one of the trainer's for the U.S. government's remote viewing program. He has a background which gives him the unique ability of training all aspects of a remote viewing operation.​

For more information, or if you would like to discuss this possibility in greater detail, please contact us by contacting our Project Coordinator .​

All contact information and items discussed are treated according to the strictest security measures.​

6.
Report Writing: Geared toward the specific needs, language and terminology of the specific business or customer:

One of the most important parts of the remote viewing process is the presentation of the information to those who need/can use it. The number of times when good information has been ignored or thrown into the trash because of the wrong presentation, is countless.​

This is an in-depth course in the presentation of remote viewing material in such a way that it will be considered and used, rather than being considered as "crazy psychic stuff" and tossed.​

More than for consideration, though, this course teaches the report writer how to present the information in a way that is so professional that it will meet the needs of any business, scientific organization, or any other professional, governmental or other customer.​

Topics Covered​

Reporting formats
The format of a remote viewing report must meet the needs of the customer. Therefore, the report writer must be able to find out and follow the customer's individual formats.​

Reporting terminology
The information also needs to be presented in the customer's language, and the report writer is therefore required to be able to write the report to be readable by the customer. The report writer is trained in ways to work with the customer in order to access and use the customer's particular jargon correctly.​

The use of necessary equipment:
As obvious as it may sound, report writing requires the use of such equipment as a word processor, printer, fax, internet file transfer, graphics programming, a scanner, an optical character reader, and other programs and equipment as necessary. This course includes instruction in the use of such programs and equipment.​

Most writers do not use spell checkers, grammar checkers, or other means to make their final product as professional as possible. This course therefore includes full instruction on the use of these tools.​

Working with the other members of the remote viewing team:
A report writer cannot just write up the information according to personal interpretation of what is given to him/her. A full understanding of its meanings and intricacies is necessary in order to make the report coherent and correct. The report writer student is taught to consult with the other members of a remote viewing team in order to fully understand the material.​

The proper use of graphics:
Graphics are an integral part of the remote viewing process and will require the proper presentation. In addition, other graphical material will often be used to make the report suitable to the customer, such as company logos, the presentation of background information, cover pages, etc. An untrained person will often over- or under-do graphics, will place graphics incorrectly, and can easily make a report non-informative or unpleasant in the process. The proper and constructive use of graphics is covered in this course.​

----------------​

So there is a bit bigger overview of remote viewing and nonlocality. All content for above courses obtained from Lyn Buchanan and P>S>I at www.crviewer.com.​


Hope it helps,​

Teresa​
 
Teresa wrote:
Following through as promised to try to give anyone following the thread a current 2009, post-military snapshot of remote viewing. This is my school and it is the information that I am familiar with and readily available to me.
I want to state clearly that I am not disrespecting any other trainers or schools. I hope they post as well. If the public perception of remote viewing continues to be based on thirty-year-old information we'll never get anywhere, so I am bringing to the table and sharing what I have as an example.
Hi Teresa,

This thread was generated, I believe, by the appearance by Daz on the Paracast show with the cohosts and the lengthy discussion of remote viewing that followed, culminating in the acceptance by Daz and Gulliver of a challenge to remote view, with only the tag of course, and what many of us consider quite successful results in that viewing. In the thread, before and after the challenge, several of us from the remote viewing community have offered comments and links offering information and opinion about many facets of remote viewing, including scientific studies that have been done. I have appreciated and have supported many of your comments within the above context, as you know.

Now, of a sudden, we see - not remote viewing results, not a scientific study, not actual sessions, not a detailed report of remote viewing from a practical application - but a promotion - a detailed outline of courses provided by your instructor. This does indeed give us a "snapshot" - and unfortunately an accurate one - of one section (a large section) of the current remote viewing community. Several of the ex-military intelligence personnel offer expensive courses, based largely on knowledge and training acquired at taxpayer expense while in the military, while providing very little evidence of the successful utilization of their teaching methods.

Are you able to supplement the above course description, which is quite impressive in the remote viewing accuracy it implies, by offering up any concrete results from these courses, say in applications work? Can you link to where such sessions or reports from your teacher/school are presented so that those in the remote viewing community, those new to it, and skeptics can see the fruit of such instruction? Otherwise...

There are many of us in the remote viewing community who feel a huge shortcoming at present is the relative lack of published sessions and evidence of successful applications work (that is, for example, detailed reports on such work). That is one reason why Daz and several others have started to make such work available online. And that is one reason I recommend TKR as the best intro RV portal - a place where you can see current ongoing sessions - some mind-blowing, some middling, and some "off" - which is generally true of remote viewing by even the best viewers. (There are also extensive and informative threaded discussions on TKR).

As for seeing reports of applications, these are few and far between. Successful pro bono and paid applications work is being conducted by several groups, IMO. And I have seen some indications (at Lyn's 2005 weekend workshop on running RV projects), if not outright evidence, that P>S>I is one such group. Evidence for successful applications work is very hard to come by. I am involved in a group (Aurora) that is attempting such work and will post a link to a very detailed report about one case we undertook.

I appreciate your response to Ewen and will also reply to him after this very busy weekend for me is over.

I think it is important to make the case that RV is definitely "real". I also think it is important to accurately convey the state of RV at this time, as we experience it and see it. Of course, honest reporters may differ on what the state of RV is.

Cheers,
KRG/Jon
 
Teresa wrote:
Hi Teresa,


Now, of a sudden, we see - not remote viewing results, not a scientific study, not actual sessions, not a detailed report of remote viewing from a practical application - but a promotion - a detailed outline of courses provided by your instructor. This does indeed give us a "snapshot" - and unfortunately an accurate one - of one section (a large section) of the current remote viewing community. Several of the ex-military intelligence personnel offer expensive courses, based largely on knowledge and training acquired at taxpayer expense while in the military, while providing very little evidence of the successful utilization of their teaching methods.

Are you able to supplement the above course description, which is quite impressive in the remote viewing accuracy it implies, by offering up any concrete results from these courses, say in applications work? Can you link to where such sessions or reports from your teacher/school are presented so that those in the remote viewing community, those new to it, and skeptics can see the fruit of such instruction? Otherwise...

There are many of us in the remote viewing community who feel a huge shortcoming at present is the relative lack of published sessions and evidence of successful applications work (that is, for example, detailed reports on such work). That is one reason why Daz and several others have started to make such work available online. And that is one reason I recommend TKR as the best intro RV portal - a place where you can see current ongoing sessions - some mind-blowing, some middling, and some "off" - which is generally true of remote viewing by even the best viewers. (There are also extensive and informative threaded discussions on TKR).


I think it is important to make the case that RV is definitely "real". I also think it is important to accurately convey the state of RV at this time, as we experience it and see it. Of course, honest reporters may differ on what the state of RV is.

Cheers,
KRG/Jon

Hi Jon,

I'm glad that you're here. I was thinking of you, Gulliver and Daz when I posted about the TKR site. I'm registered there but it isn't my home base. I wouldn't know where to begin to go if I wanted to show people here anything helpful.

First, I'm sorry if the post seems like a promo to you, but I would ask that you remember why I did it. Bringing the public up to speed. Opposing viewpoints based on thirty year old information? The public has very little, if any idea what we are about or what we can do or what we could do if given the chance. I'm with you: "make a case that RV is real" and "accurately convey the state at this time. I appreciate history but we need to get on with it and not let it be used as the anchor that holds us back. History was meant to be built upon.

I'm with you. I want to hand them more than results and more than dusty historical information. I want to give them the whole picture, front to back and teach them. People aren't happy if you hand them Point C without knowing what happened in A and B. Process and results hand in hand.

No challenge or competition, talking about RV front to back and the more schools here the better. I offered up what I had to acquaint the reader with the process of what it takes to get to the point of pulling the pic out of the envelope. I took away some of the mystery and introduced the word "work."

Now, about your "otherwise...." Some of us are working on Lyn but he won't post entire sessions because he thinks it will confuse people. I am the opposite. I may not "get it" but I'll be happier if I can see the whole thing and form my own opinion.

So, my nonlocality website? I show sessions. I barely made go-live before my surgery but medical people who have never heard of RV are going there. I promo people going to Farsight to see the sessions from HRVG, SRV and CRV. Entire sessions with methodology. Chose my sessions for "oops" reasons that show why viewers sometimes do what they do and get what they get.

I spent so much time on the site that I needed a break. My feedback photos need switched out to color. I need to explain the project at Farsight. I need to contact a two or three more people about linking in / displaying their stuff. My medical colleagues are nosey - they don't want to see just the results, they want to see whole sessions.

So no, I'm not into comparing schools and results, just agreeing with Glenn Wheaton when he says says we're naturally more comfortable in our own camps and this is the info that I have to offer up. I don't have anything that demonstrates results or stats, no help there and the business stuff that Lyn does is obviously confidential. If you want, or if you think it would help, I can think of to offer one example of a working RV company. That one actually exists, it isn't magic and what they offer to provide the customer in 2009.

Looking forward to seeing your stuff and learning more about TKR. I'm registered but haven't been there much yet.

Thanks,
Teresa
 
Teresa wrote:


I think it is important to make the case that RV is definitely "real". I also think it is important to accurately convey the state of RV at this time, as we experience it and see it. Of course, honest reporters may differ on what the state of RV is.

Cheers,
KRG/Jon

Look, an outbounder experiment on Twitter in the UK and if they get good results the "how it works." I get the feeling that the UK is further along with RV than the US? Or not surprising, maybe just my region of the US.

"Study leader psychologist Professor Richard Wiseman, from the University of Hertfordshire, who specialises in investigating psychic phenomena, said: "Personally, I'm sceptical, but three hits would be against odds of one in 125, which would be quite impressive......

The results of the experiment should be known on Friday.

Sumit Paul-Choudhury, online editor at New Scientist, said: "There have been mass participation experiments since the start of mass communication and this is the next step.

"If we find some sort of effect then we can get into speculating about how it works."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sciencea...tter/5415852/Twitters-psychic-experiment.html

Teresa
 
Hi Teresa,

You wrote:
I'm with you: "make a case that RV is real" and "accurately convey the state at this time. I appreciate history but we need to get on with it and not let it be used as the anchor that holds us back. History was meant to be built upon. / I'm with you. I want to hand them more than results and more than dusty historical information.
Yes, good point about focusing on the present. Of course what actually happened and didn't happen in the "Stargate" program and what was and wasn't achieved in the scientific studies of RV by different bodies is important too. From what I've read the history is convoluted and unless the scientists who conducted them take part in discussions of those studies, some of those issues won't be adequately clarified.

It seems to me people will evaluate whether RV is "real" in a variety of ways and will give weight to different factors:

a) direct personal experience. Trying RV and finding out (or not): "Damn, it works!" This can be personal testing or providing information for clients, pro bono or paying.

b) reading about others' experience, history of RV, anecdotal evidence. There is certainly a vast amount of this in books, on forums, in blogs.

c) reading the scientific studies that have been done and the criticisms thereof.

d) Similar to a), but in specific using ARV to make money by predicting games and/or lottery. For some, nothing like material results to convince you something beyond chance is happening.

It's from having experienced positives in a couple of these 4 (a and d) and being very impressed in others, that I long ago concluded that RV is most definitely real. RV data is by no means 100 percent, a team effort is generally best, RV is best used as an adjunct with other information about an objective, RV is variable in accuracy with viewer and circumstances, but it's a real phenomenon. Re d), I have made money repeatedly with ARV variants - not huge amounts, but some. I have also been in two working groups that have had some satisfied clients, including paying clients. (Having satisfied clients does not prove that RV is real - but it is a lot better than having unsatisfied ones!)

Others are likely to make a judgment on whether psi in general and RV in particular is "real" based on their own mix of these features. Some may want to examine only the scientific studies, for example. That's their choice, a legitimate one, and why I think it is important to get a good handle on the pros and cons of those studies. I have read a number of them but am not qualified to evaluate them from a scientific perspective, lacking, for one thing, the statistical background.

...talking about RV front to back and the more schools here the better.
I agree with the former and I'd agree about seeing results from many (but not all!) of the groups or schools.

Now, about your "otherwise...." Some of us are working on Lyn but he won't post entire sessions because he thinks it will confuse people. I am the opposite. I may not "get it" but I'll be happier if I can see the whole thing and form my own opinion.
I applaud your effort. The question arises why "it will confuse people". The most likely answer is that most RV sessions contain accurate data, data that may be accurate but is difficult to relate, and also inaccurate data. Evaluation/analysis of sessions by a team of viewers, which IMO is the way to go, is not simple for a variety of reasons. (E.g. the need to know the work of each viewer and the fact that symbolic data does occur (have seen it many times).) But such analysis has led to useable results (both in Stargate for about 20 years and as noted above in the civilian sector.) The superskeptics/debunkers will jump on anything you provide but genuine skeptics and those who have a feeling "there is something to this" will be able to get a more accurate picture of the phenomenon and judge for themselves.

So, my nonlocality website? I show sessions. I barely made go-live before my surgery but medical people who have never heard of RV are going there.
Kudos for posting a few of your sessions on your web site. There has been a large vacuum in that regard and i agree with you that showing entire sessions is overall a good thing. Especially if one comments on the sessions, as you do. Seeing more actual sessions will dispel the grand impressions some of the leading names in the field state or imply. I see that in the two posted there is some frontloading. There is of course a division of opinion on whether any frontloading (FL is a spectrum, not a yes/no decision) should be used, whether in training or in applications. (In the lab, of course not.) (Very sorry to hear about your surgery; I hope you are making a good and strong recovery.)

I don't have anything that demonstrates results or stats, no help there and the business stuff that Lyn does is obviously confidential.
Yes. However, in the last 10 years, since RV was brought into the civilian world, practitioners could have presented (and a few did) practice projects, or "sanitized" missing person cases, etc. I did see one lengthy project report Lyn was kind enough to share at his 2005 conference, but unfortunately it was unverifiable (details of civilization on a distant star). The previous group I was in - TDS- did many post sessions and several project reports; that group however shut down in 2003 and the materials are no longer online. I have taken part in a few of the projects Daz has recently posted.

Looking forward to seeing your stuff and learning more about TKR. I'm registered but haven't been there much yet.
Thanks, will post a link to the project we worked. As for TKR, try it, you might like it. :)

Best wishes,
Jon
 
Here is the link I said I'd post to a project report, along with a few other relevant links:

"Remote Viewing the Nina Reiser Murder" (by Aurora RV Group)
Cosmic Spoon - ramblings of a modern day psychic
Go about half way the page or search for Nina or Reiser
Click on the link to download the report.
(Some of the links to months do not work, I found.)
(To be clear, Daz was in Aurora when this project was done but is no longer a member.)

It is difficult to find any detailed reports of applications work online - this is one. As above, it's by the Aurora Remote Viewing Group, of which I'm a member and was project manager here. The report details the process by which this long and intensive project was conducted and provides verbal and graphic extracts from the sessions. The project was not flawless - we were unable to ascertain the vital location - but as you will see we did obtain some striking and important data, including location data, which matched what was eventually confirmed in the case.

Aurora Remote Viewing Group web site:
The Aurora Group - Remote Viewing services

Links to Over 120 Remote Viewing sites:
RV links for blog

Tenthousandroads (TKR) forum:
TKR Remote Viewing Forum - Index

Enjoy!

KRG/Jon
 
Hi Teresa,

You wrote:
Yes, good point about focusing on the present......I long ago concluded that RV is most definitely real. RV data is by no means 100 percent, a team effort is generally best, RV is best used as an adjunct with other information about an objective, RV is variable in accuracy with viewer and circumstances, but it's a real phenomenon.......Kudos for posting a few of your sessions on your web site. There has been a large vacuum in that regard and i agree with you that showing entire sessions is overall a good thing. Especially if one comments on the sessions, as you do. Seeing more actual sessions will dispel the grand impressions some of the leading names in the field state or imply. I see that in the two posted there is some frontloading. There is of course a division of opinion on whether any frontloading (FL is a spectrum, not a yes/no decision) should be used, whether in training or in applications. (In the lab, of course not.) (Very sorry to hear about your surgery; I hope you are making a good and strong recovery.) Thanks, will post a link to the project we worked. As for TKR, try it, you might like it. :)

Best wishes,
Jon

Hi Jon,

I really do need to get over to TKR and check it out.

The history of the military apps.... We'll never know a lot of things. But.... I think progress has been made on results. Trainers, yes, practice, yes, but I think the sheer number of people doing it and finding natural talent has to have made a difference. Your thoughts?

Thanks, I'm doing well after surgery but I'm on mandatory post-op house arrest for a little while yet.

My sessions.... I tried to get a few on my site best I could but I need to get back to it. I have ideas for development.

I feel we need to remove as much mystery as possible. Full sessions, good, bad and some in-depth ones. Retasked ones. With as much "explanations of" as possible. That's why I tried to post explanations and interesting "oops" vs. just summaries. More than pulling the picture out of the envelope. They're early in training, they aren't good but if somebody walks in off the street and tried remote viewing they could see what it is like.

Frontloading. Now there's a "loaded" topic. I know pros and cons from both sides, including Joe's "NO." Just for the sake of why we do it, this is our program:

1/ Lyn wants us to begin to work with pollution in training.
"The target is an event. Describe the event." "The target is a manmade. Describe the manmade." That is called a "well formed question to a psychic." It gives each mind something to work with. (see terminology www.crviewer.com if you like.)

2/ If the viewer chooses frontloading it allows them to focus their work. Instead of taking coordinates in S1 / P1 a dozen times and and then working each of them, the viewer now has the option of taking coordinates until they repeat or until they get the ones that allow them to focus on the frontloading. Example above, manmade or event. You get gestalts you think you need for that, move to P2 and start working them for perceptions.

3/ Saves viewer energy (see above). Viewing can be exhausting work.

4/ Speed. If the general (old example) is tapping his foot in the hall he doesn't care if you love peonies at the site and took some time to check them out. Pollution is a given when you're tasked or retasked for specifics. Training with frontloading is a way to prepare for fine-tuned operational get-in / get-out.

5/ See number 4. Not working with Number 4 is not an option in the Operational Certification Program (for us).

Thanks for the offer to let us see your projects... options, options!

Teresa
 
Here is the link I said I'd post to a project report, along with a few other relevant links:



It is difficult to find any detailed reports of applications work online - this is one. As above, it's by the Aurora Remote Viewing Group, of which I'm a member and was project manager here. The report details the process by which this long and intensive project was conducted and provides verbal and graphic extracts from the sessions. The project was not flawless - we were unable to ascertain the vital location - but as you will see we did obtain some striking and important data, including location data, which matched what was eventually confirmed in the case.

KRG/Jon

Hi Jon,

Thanks for that report sample, I haven't tried to find any of them but I can start looking / asking. If I find any I'll post them too. I haven't had a chance to read it; spent my time looking for online sessions from the page you posted. A lot of good people and sites there that I haven't visited in awhile. I'm seriously going to pursue finding some good sessions to display or recruiting to see if somebody(s) will do some. And aestheticimpact is on the list now, have to admit that takes some getting used to!

I was on TKR for awhile reading posts but I keep missing the sessions!

Congrats on Aurora, looks good. I saw Paul Smith's site offered pro-bono work. Here's another business similar to Aurora: GadorianGroup, offers similar services and crv home based but says it "works with freelance viewers." Don't know the particulars but at least people are trying: pro-bono law enforcement, business, research, archeology.
http://www.gadoriangroup.com/services_types.html

~Teresa
 
Hello Blacknight,

Magician2009 can bring his viewpoint to any discussion but he made some critical mistakes before he stepped to the podium and gave his opinion as fact. No room for discussion, fact. He didn't do his homework and your statement "as far as you can tell" shows me that you may be following him down that road without doing any independent research of your own.

1. The thread is about remote viewing and based on his post, his current working knowledge of remote viewing appears to be zero. He offers no supporting statements regarding theory, concept, modality or any current knowledge even hinting at nonlocality.

2. He explains magic as being nothing more than lying to an audience, albeit done skillfully and uses an old Uri Geller video to support his claim.

3. He then erroneously proceeds to place remote viewing in the same context as magic.

4. Lastly, after building on his mistakes of 1, 2 and 3 he closes his post by stating that remote viewing is wanton fiction. That translates into calling anyone present giving opposing viewpoints a liar and in my observation that usually doesn't go over very well. Especially when you haven't done your homework and you're wrong.

Hope this helps,
Teresa

Excellent post Teresa

NSA
 
Getting back to the purpose of this thread:
I really have to say, some of the remote viewing stuff was fascinating. Still, I am willing to wager someone like Darren Brown could produce similar results. Especially since there are so many strings attached.

Keep your money. You will only lose it.
If derren brown tried remote viewing IN PROTOCOL DOUBLE BLIND
he will have a hard time hitting the target lol.


NSA
 
Ewen wrote:
I will suggest this article and following the links provided at the bottom (as well as the referenced articles), just to put an opposing view point for those following the thread. Of course the url quoted is from a site with an 'agenda'; but no more than one that is 'pro RV' in its selective interpretation of 'facts'.

While I am no way qualified to give a definitive answer (my main areas of interest are the nature of the debate, and how 'facts' are constructed rather than the objective 'truth'), it should be noted that there are opposing 'scientific' viewpoints as well as supporting evidence as with any contested knowledge.

Yes, there are certainly opposing 'scientific' viewpoints regarding psi. Thanks for the link. To my eyes, the page is a very selective reading of the evidence, but at least it attempts to make a case rather than lecturing us from a position that appears to be very ill-informed.

One of the books cited on that page is quite interesting - I happen to be reading George P. Hansen's "The Trickster and the Paranormal", cited there. This is a very odd book. The author was employed in parapsych labs for 8 years (at Rhine and PEAR) and definitely believes psi is "real". The main burden of his book is along the lines of showing that psi appears to resist scientific methods of testing it. He refers to it as "the trickster" aspect of psi, a concept which is ill-defined in the book. I find the book odd too because his 'theoretical framework' is explicitly and consciously anti-framework, anti-rational, anti-logical even because he thinks that mirrors what psi is. While not agreeing at all with his framework, finding it more confused than helpful, he has done very very wide reading in a variety of fields and brings all that to bear in the course of this, and I found the book worth reading for that reason. That, and the profile of ultra-skeptic but believer/theist, Martin Gardner (a surprise to me, anyway)! The reviews by readers of the book on Amazon give a good flavor of the book.

The author of the web page you link to refers a lot to David Marks. I see that some folks are now pushing back at the debunkers and ultra-skeptics. E.g. this link contains a note on David Marks:

Who's Who of Media Skeptics:
http://www.skepticalinvestigations.org/whoswho/index.htm
<hr>
The authors describe the site this way:

The Skeptical Investigations website is organized by the Association for Skeptical Investigation, the purpose of which is to promote genuine skepticism, the spirit of enquiry and doubt, within science. This includes an open-minded investigation of unexplained phenomena, a questioning of dogmatic assumptions, and a skeptical examination of the claims of self-proclaimed skeptics.

A new one someone just sent me:
Scepcop:
SCEPCOP - Debunking Pseudo-Skeptics of the Paranormal (JREF, James Randi, Michael Shermer, CSICOP)

KRG/Jon
 
It's pretty simple really, if remote viewing works to the point the guy was talking about. The people that left the stargate(can't remember it's name) project, would of started up schools to promote remote viewing.
 
It's pretty simple really, if remote viewing works to the point the guy was talking about. The people that left the stargate(can't remember it's name) project, would of started up schools to promote remote viewing.

They did. About 5 or 6 of them. But the best remote viewer in the program - Joe McMoneagle - didn't.

(The overwhelming majority in the field feel JM was and is the best viewer - aside from Ingo Swann who is retired.)

What Joe McMoneagle did but they didn't is demonstrate RV in public and he has done it many many times, for Japanese TV, etc. Also he has had many clients, paying and pro bono, which is well known around the RV community. As for the others - some claim so, but you see very little evidence of it. The most well-known (unfortunately), Ed Dames, does strut (and I do mean strut) in public with his many predictions, claims, onsite investigations and the like. He is very consistent -- always (or almost always) wrong. That guy is a disgrace to the field.

The fact someone teaches RV doesn't demonstrate anything other than that one teaches RV. (I would guess there are maybe 25-30 people teaching RV.)

And as someone recently posted on another forum:

"The secret is, remote viewing is extremely easy to do."
- Russell Targ, laser physicist, one of the cofounders of RV at Stanford Research Institute in the 1970s


KRG/Jon

P.S. The entire program is usually referred to as "Stargate" but there were other names at different times (Sunstreak, Center Lane, etc.)
 
It's pretty simple really, if remote viewing works to the point the guy was talking about. The people that left the stargate(can't remember it's name) project, would of started up schools to promote remote viewing.

They did. Smith, Buchanan, Moorehouse, Dames. Who am I forgetting?

~Teresa
 
Hi Teresa,


Yes. However, in the last 10 years, since RV was brought into the civilian world, practitioners could have presented (and a few did) practice projects, or "sanitized" missing person cases, etc. I did see one lengthy project report Lyn was kind enough to share at his 2005 conference, but unfortunately it was unverifiable (details of civilization on a distant star). The previous group I was in - TDS- did many post sessions and several project reports; that group however shut down in 2003 and the materials are no longer online. I have taken part in a few of the projects Daz has recently posted.

Jon

Hi Jon,

Just thought I'd share this sample report of Lyn's that I found (I'd forgotten all about it). The customer wanted to learn how to successfully construct a base on the moon, potential problems, workarounds, etc. It gives results, it talks about viewer's percentages, how the team is chosen and such as that. Has some other surprising "findings" as well but they are unverifiable. ;) Perhaps this is the same unverifiable report you heard him speak about in 2005?

It's an interesting read. http://www.crviewer.com/documents/250208.pdf

:)
Teresa
 
Hi Teresa,
<o></o>
No, that's not the report I saw at Lyn's conference, which was a very detailed one of a civilization on a distant star, which of course, as far as is known, is not confirmable. One wonders who the client was.:rolleyes:

It's useful to see the Moon Base Alpha report, which gives an idea of how a project by P>S>I was/is run. As you note, the objective is also not verifiable. The work may well be useful as an aid in planning, as the report states it hopes it is, but it doesn't set as an objective something that needs to be known, exists or has happened, and can be confirmed.

To add to the reports cited here, I found four online by RV pioneer Stephan Schwartz about his field work using remote viewing. To oversimplify, you dive or dig and either you find something or you don't. I haven't read all of these but they do all seem to be verifiable objectives and as the titles indicate they provide examples of using RV in combination with other methods to gain needed information.
<o></o>
Stephan A. Schwartz
<o></o>
There are links to the reports under "Paper and Reports":
Archeology & Applied Remote Viewing:

A Preliminary Survey of the Eastern Harbor, <st1><st1:city w:st="on">Alexandria</st1:city>, <st1:country-region w:st="on">Egypt, </st1:country-region></st1>Including a Comparison of Side Scan Sonar and Remote Viewing

The Caravel Project: The Location, Description, and Reconstruction of Marine Sites Through Remote Viewing, Including Comparison With Aerial Photography, Geologic Coring, and Electronic Remote Sensing

The Discovery of an American Brig: Fieldwork Involving Applied Remote Viewing Including a Comparison with Electronic Remote Sensing

The Location and Reconstruction of a Byzantine Structure in <st1><st1:city w:st="on">Marea</st1:city>, <st1:country-region w:st="on">Egypt</st1:country-region></st1> Including a Comparison of Electronic Remote Sensing and Remote Viewing

<o></o>*****
Schwartz's work dwarfs what we've done in <st1:city w:st="on"><st1>Aurora, </st1></st1:city>but, then, he's been at it for 30 to 40 years.

The link again to our report: Remote Viewing the Disappearance of Nina Reiser
http://www.cosmicspoon.com/blog/
(Go half way down the page or search for Nina or Reiser. The report can be downloaded from there. It contains a step-by-step account of how we conducted the work.)

Cheers,
Jon
<o></o><o></o><o></o><o></o>
 
Hi Teresa,
<O></O>

To add to the reports cited here, I found four online by RV pioneer Stephan Schwartz about his field work using remote viewing. To oversimplify, you dive or dig and either you find something or you don't. I haven't read all of these but they do all seem to be verifiable objectives and as the titles indicate they provide examples of using RV in combination with other methods to gain needed information.
Stephan A. Schwartz

Cheers,
Jon
<O></O><O></O><O></O><O></O>

Thanks Jon, because you're right. It's nothing short of digging and I'm gearing up to expand the remote viewing information on my website so I really appreciate what you all have posted here!

Update on the RV / Twitter experiment. Paul Smith, President of the IRVA asked that we post a statement around about Prof. Wiseman's RV design being flawed. Paul asks that folks go read it and learn more about RV. http://irva.org/twitterex.html

Personally, for myself, even though Prof. Wiseman's experiment looks like a bust I'm glad for the remote viewing exposure. People tend to plug things like that into their nearest search engine and read up on it.

If Dr. Wiseman hasn't studied RV theory, then bless his heart. If anybody wants to key in "Paul Smith" and "limen", they'll be able to read all about the communication of information from the subconscious / permeating the limen / conscious minds in Reading the Enemy's Mind.

Couple that with Rupert Sheldrake and the possible potential of morphic resonance, then Dr. Wiseman just tweaked a few thousand limens. A limen tweaked begins to be more alert and aware and the human observer begins to notice. The person begins to learn a new language and question things they blew off to a bad night of pizza before.

So a few thousand folks just got a whole lotta curious goin' on after Dr. Wiseman introduced them to the concept that remote viewing might exist. Not once, but three times in a week! That's how the subconscious works. Tweak it once and wake it up. The more curious a remote viewer is about the site, the more sensory perceptions they pick up.

Thanks, Dr. Wiseman. Your experiment may look like a bust but you just tweaked a few thousand individual subconscious minds three times in a week. I appreciate that.

~Teresa
 
Back
Top