• 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!

using remote viewing to find missing people


3inchThundr

Paranormal Novice
I was thinking a good thing to ask to the next remote-viewing themed guest brought on the show would be about Joe McMoneagle trips to the Japan for their tv show "psychic investigator" where he has been able to use remote viewing successfully to find something like 13 missing people. I myself would like to know whether there's any way to purchase these shows and I also brought this up because I'm not sure whether Steinberg and Biedny are familiar with the fact that he's been able to do this. It also seems like this would be pretty good evidence in favor of the existence of some amount of psychic ability to present to the professional skeptics if people like this show's hosts had these tapes.
 
It also seems like this would be pretty good evidence in favor of the existence of some amount of psychic ability to present to the professional skeptics if people like this show's hosts had these tapes.

Hi there,

One problem is that most professional skeptics are in truth professional debunkers. I'll take a healthy skeptic any day of the week over a full tilt believer, but as for debunkers they'll only see what they want to see no matter what kind of evidence you put in front of them.

If it's a tv show, they'll say it was faked for ratings. If it's a scientific study, they'll say protocol was flawed or cry fraud etc.

What Joe does in Japan is incredible. What he's done in the U.S. is incredible too. He's done several on camera demonstrations in America. Look for the old remote viewing special "Put to the Test" among others.

Joe is THE most scientifically tested psychic in America today. He's been doing work in labs since the late 70's, and continues even today as a research associate at Cognitive Sciences Laboratory.

If you're interested in evidence to show skeptics, you'll find some great papers and solid research at:
http://www.lfr.org/LFR/csl/academic/library.html

science

Articles and Papers. Charles T. Tart Home Page and Consciousness Library

Online. Info on Transpersonal Psychology, Parapsychology, Consciousness, Hypnosis, Psi, Mindfulness.

PA Member Full Papers (English)

As far as I know, recordings of Joe's Japan shows are not available for sale. It's a small wonder there's some up on youtube.

Joe talks briefly about his work in Japan in one of these interviews: RV Oasis [pjrv] Interview Series - The Firedocs Remote Viewing Collection

No telling how long those shows will stay up so watch them while you can. You don't need to speak Japanese to see the amazing work he's doing over there!

Best,
LD
 
There are "Psychics" and there are Psychics.

99.9 percent of the people who claim to be RV trained, "Psychics" are simply full of shit, and just want you to buy their snake oil.

The other .1 percent actually have a gift, and don't really actually discuss it with people.

That's how you can tell your psychics from "Psychics".
 
There are "Psychics" and there are Psychics.

99.9 percent of the people who claim to be RV trained, "Psychics" are simply full of shit, and just want you to buy their snake oil.

Curious, have you met and tested 99.9% of people who claim to be remote viewers? No? Sounds like a pretty big assumption to me. Sure, there are always going to be plenty of people who make outlandish or false claims, but that doesn't mean you should throw the baby out with the bathwater. There are a lot of very talented individuals out there.

The other .1 percent actually have a gift, and don't really actually discuss it with people.


That's how you can tell your psychics from "Psychics"
I'm not sure what gave you that idea. Actually, out of over two decades of research on remote viewing, the scientists at Stanford Research Institute found that pretty much every individual they tested (thousands) was able to show some level of statistically significant ability. Meaning probably everyone has a certain amount of inherent psychic ability. It's not whether you have it or you don't, it's how naturally talented you are and how much you actually try to use what ability you do have in a proper RV protocol that helps to ensure what you think is happening is really happening.

Further, they found that about .5% of the population has the ability to become really exceptional remote viewers. That's only one out of every 200 people.

The idea that the measure of a real psychic is whether they talk about it or not is completely nonsensical. That may have been true a few hundred years ago when they burned people at the stake for this kind of thing, but in this information age I assure you there are many talented remote viewers who want to talk about what they do.

Best,
LD
 
99.9 percent of the people who claim to be RV trained, "Psychics" are simply full of shit, and just want you to buy their snake oil.

The other .1 percent actually have a gift, and don't really actually discuss it with people.

That's how you can tell your psychics from "Psychics".

What tosh. So a proper 'psychic' [sic] is someone who doesn't tell anyone that they are psychic [sic]. If that is the case then how on earth do you know that these people comprise .1 percent of all those who claim to be RV trained, if they don't admit to anything?

Unless you are 'psychic' [sic] yourself.

Lose the whole 'psychic' label and start seeing the bigger picture. 'Psi' is simply an internal mechanism or functioning possessed by all humans of which mainstream science has an extremely limited understanding. Precognitive dreams, intuitions, sudden 'knowings' and all manner of crazy phenomenon that falls outside the traditional scientific paradigms...that's all psi.

Remote Viewing is a protocol developed to be used in conjunction with this psi-ability. Essentially the protocol insists that the viewer is totally blind to whatever target he or she is describing, thus reducing the interference caused by the conscious mind's efforts to 'guess at' what the viewer is viewing.

This protocol also insists upon the absolute necessity for FEEDBACK against which the viewer's performance can be judged.

Viewer blind to target. Judgement of performance based on real world feedback. That's RV for you, and is what sets it apart from other more nebulous 'psychic' phenomenon.

In-protocol Remote Viewing is scientific. There is no place for charlatans or quacks...a remote viewer lives or dies by his performance and results. Sure you get your total goofballs like Ed Dames who make outlandish, unsubstantiated claims simply to shift their DVDs but for Christ's sake don't go smearing 99% of remote viewers with the excrement that fellow leaves on the pavement.

One other thing: we can ALL 'remote view', just as we can all smell, see, hear, etc. It's an innate faculty, hard-wired into the biological entity known as a human being. Some of us will make better viewers than others, but ALL of us can experience the phenomenon simply be doing a little reading, taking the leap and having a go. He who dares and all that.

Best,

Gulliver
 
Curious, have you met and tested 99.9% of people who claim to be remote viewers? No? Sounds like a pretty big assumption to me. Sure, there are always going to be plenty of people who make outlandish or false claims, but that doesn't mean you should throw the baby out with the bathwater. There are a lot of very talented individuals out there.

I'm not sure what gave you that idea. Actually, out of over two decades of research on remote viewing, the scientists at Stanford Research Institute found that pretty much every individual they tested (thousands) was able to show some level of statistically significant ability. Meaning probably everyone has a certain amount of inherent psychic ability. It's not whether you have it or you don't, it's how naturally talented you are and how much you actually try to use what ability you do have in a proper RV protocol that helps to ensure what you think is happening is really happening.

Further, they found that about .5% of the population has the ability to become really exceptional remote viewers. That's only one out of every 200 people.

The idea that the measure of a real psychic is whether they talk about it or not is completely nonsensical. That may have been true a few hundred years ago when they burned people at the stake for this kind of thing, but in this information age I assure you there are many talented remote viewers who want to talk about what they do.

Best,
LD

You've made 2 posts, and you're responding to this thread. Hilarious.

If you take a look at all the fucking frauds out there writing books, and hocking their bullshit, you have to know that it's all a fucking joke on the people who buy it.

If there were truly GIFTED PSYCHICS, the kind that can see the future, pick the lottery numbers, find missing people or any of that stuff, you can better believe that they aren't going to be talking about it publicly, or... They're already under the thumb of a government somewhere. Only a fucking idiot would blindly believe in a "psychic's" abilities based on hearsay and conjecture.

Let me know when you've grown up a little bit, and have dealt with as many frauds and fakes as I have.
 
What tosh. So a proper 'psychic' [sic] is someone who doesn't tell anyone that they are psychic [sic]. If that is the case then how on earth do you know that these people comprise .1 percent of all those who claim to be RV trained, if they don't admit to anything?

Unless you are 'psychic' [sic] yourself.

Lose the whole 'psychic' label and start seeing the bigger picture. 'Psi' is simply an internal mechanism or functioning possessed by all humans of which mainstream science has an extremely limited understanding. Precognitive dreams, intuitions, sudden 'knowings' and all manner of crazy phenomenon that falls outside the traditional scientific paradigms...that's all psi.

Remote Viewing is a protocol developed to be used in conjunction with this psi-ability. Essentially the protocol insists that the viewer is totally blind to whatever target he or she is describing, thus reducing the interference caused by the conscious mind's efforts to 'guess at' what the viewer is viewing.

This protocol also insists upon the absolute necessity for FEEDBACK against which the viewer's performance can be judged.

Viewer blind to target. Judgement of performance based on real world feedback. That's RV for you, and is what sets it apart from other more nebulous 'psychic' phenomenon.

In-protocol Remote Viewing is scientific. There is no place for charlatans or quacks...a remote viewer lives or dies by his performance and results. Sure you get your total goofballs like Ed Dames who make outlandish, unsubstantiated claims simply to shift their DVDs but for Christ's sake don't go smearing 99% of remote viewers with the excrement that fellow leaves on the pavement.

One other thing: we can ALL 'remote view', just as we can all smell, see, hear, etc. It's an innate faculty, hard-wired into the biological entity known as a human being. Some of us will make better viewers than others, but ALL of us can experience the phenomenon simply be doing a little reading, taking the leap and having a go. He who dares and all that.

Best,

Gulliver

And then there's this guy. ONE POST, and he's responding to my post on this thread. FUCKING PLEASE... Another idiot first time poster. I get a kick out of the "SOME OF US" reference. As if I would be excluded, or incapable of psychic ability, funnier still as if you were a "psychic" or had some power that I did not. Let me explain something to you, I can be just as fraudulent as the next so called "Remote Viewer" or "Psychic", all it would take is for me to start spouting of idiocy, and claim that hits are something that ANYONE could fucking guess.

Aaron C. Donahue, Ed Dhames, and a whole host of other lying frauds are selling you a story, nothing else.
 
Another idiot first time poster.

Wow. So anyone posting for the first time on this forum is by necessity an 'idiot'. At least we can take assurance from the fact that one doesn't need to be new this forum to be an idiot...you are clearly a total bell-end and yet have been posting here ages. Keep it up.

I get a kick out of the "SOME OF US" reference.

Learn to read. Repeat. LEARN TO READ. By 'us' I am referring to all human beings...anyone, anywhere. Us. Humans. Unless you are in some way subhuman (high odds of this I am guessing) in which case I apologise for the exclusion.

I can be just as fraudulent as the next so called "Remote Viewer" or "Psychic", all it would take is for me to start spouting of idiocy, and claim that hits are something that ANYONE could fucking guess.

So what? I can nail my balls to a piece of wood and run screaming into the street. Doesn't mean that I am going to.

You clearly have not understood a word of my post. People like you are a retardant to the general evolution of the species. I wash my hands.

Laters.

G
 
Wow. So anyone posting for the first time on this forum is by necessity an 'idiot'. At least we can take assurance from the fact that one doesn't need to be new this forum to be an idiot...you are clearly a total bell-end and yet have been posting here ages. Keep it up.



Learn to read. Repeat. LEARN TO READ. By 'us' I am referring to all human beings...anyone, anywhere. Us. Humans. Unless you are in some way subhuman (high odds of this I am guessing) in which case I apologise for the exclusion.



So what? I can nail my balls to a piece of wood and run screaming into the street. Doesn't mean that I am going to.

You clearly have not understood a word of my post. People like you are a retardant to the general evolution of the species. I wash my hands.

Laters.

G

I understand that you're a newb, and you have no idea who or what I've done in this lifetime in terms of investigating frauds who sell people their lines of bullshit. I would wager you're someone's sock puppet.
 
Newb to this forum? Yup. Been remote viewing for many, many years, however. Know lots of other people who remote view extremely well, some of whom work in tandem with local law enforcement agencies to help with missing people cases etc. Have seen thousands of examples of top quality remote viewing work in my time, done blind, under carefully controlled conditions.

Never tried to sell anyone anything to do with RV. It's a hobby, a passion, a personal mission of mine simply to keep doing it, to improve my abilities and maybe show a couple of clear headed people how to view along the way.

Hence my annoyance when someone like you comes along and dismisses remote viewers as being 99% bullshit simply because you occupy your time with the 1% that are con-artists.

You may as well claim that all athletes are drug cheats cos you spent the last few years hanging out with Dwayne Chambers.

Congrats for your work with the bullshit merchants. Big thumbs down for the way you trample the entire RV field in the process. Try striking a balance; we'll all be better off for it.

G
 
Newb to this forum? Yup. Been remote viewing for many, many years, however. Know lots of other people who remote view extremely well, some of whom work in tandem with local law enforcement agencies to help with missing people cases etc. Have seen thousands of examples of top quality remote viewing work in my time, done blind, under carefully controlled conditions.

Never tried to sell anyone anything to do with RV. It's a hobby, a passion, a personal mission of mine simply to keep doing it, to improve my abilities and maybe show a couple of clear headed people how to view along the way.

Hence my annoyance when someone like you comes along and dismisses remote viewers as being 99% bullshit simply because you occupy your time with the 1% that are con-artists.

You may as well claim that all athletes are drug cheats cos you spent the last few years hanging out with Dwayne Chambers.

Congrats for your work with the bullshit merchants. Big thumbs down for the way you trample the entire RV field in the process. Try striking a balance; we'll all be better off for it.

G

Would you care to demonstrate your abilities to David or Gene? If they aren't interested I'd be willing to set up a test with you.
 
Sure, Stillborn. Not promising anything, but I'll happily give it a go. You task.

I'm assuming you are familiar with the standard method of tasking a remote viewer, what constitutes a good target etc.

Usual method for situations like these is for you to find a photograph of a suitable target and place this in a sealed envelope. On the back of the envelope I would like you to ascribe two 4 digit numbers, chosen at random. You can PM me these numbers and I will attempt to view the target. Simple.

Please be aware when picking a target that the more unusual or interesting the target, the more likely it is that a) I will view it well and b) the unique qualities of that target will stand out in the data, thus enabling qualification by yourself. Emotional targets are good to view...stuff with a bit of substance to it.

Your target can be anything: a structure, life forms, event, object etc etc. Be creative!

Try and minimise the amount of noise if you can. Be sure exactly what it is you want me to view. Panoramic scenes with a multitude of details make for bad practice targets, for example. Feel free to assign a cue beneath the co-ordinate numbers on the envelope (eg 'Please describe the _____ in this photograph at the time it was taken'.)

Of course I am totally in your hands here and trust that you will fulfil your end of the bargain by sending me a copy of the correct image as feedback AFTER I have submitted my data to you.

I look forward to further correspondence on this via PM. Pick your target, stick it in an envelope, assign the cordinate numbers and let me have them. I'll get back to you with the data by the end of the week.

Regards,

Gulliver
 
OK, Stillborn, I think you've just received a YES to your challenge. I'll be happy to help out in any way possible, and for those wondering, Daz also agreed to a test of his skills as well, right, Daz? Let's get this happening, could be interesting!:)

dB
 
OK, Stillborn, I think you've just received a YES to your challenge. I'll be happy to help out in any way possible, and for those wondering, Daz also agreed to a test of his skills as well, right, Daz? Let's get this happening, could be interesting!:)

dB
Ah yes, doubling our pleasure. :D

Seriously, I'm also anxious to see how this works out.
 
OK, Stillborn, I think you've just received a YES to your challenge. I'll be happy to help out in any way possible, and for those wondering, Daz also agreed to a test of his skills as well, right, Daz? Let's get this happening, could be interesting!:)

dB


I'm working out some details with Gulliver. I may need a third party to send an image or e-mail too over the computer. If so, I'll use you or Gene. This way no one has to just take my word for it and includes someone else.
 
Sure, Stillborn. Not promising anything, but I'll happily give it a go. You task.

I'm assuming you are familiar with the standard method of tasking a remote viewer, what constitutes a good target etc.

Usual method for situations like these is for you to find a photograph of a suitable target and place this in a sealed envelope. On the back of the envelope I would like you to ascribe two 4 digit numbers, chosen at random. You can PM me these numbers and I will attempt to view the target. Simple.

Please be aware when picking a target that the more unusual or interesting the target, the more likely it is that a) I will view it well and b) the unique qualities of that target will stand out in the data, thus enabling qualification by yourself. Emotional targets are good to view...stuff with a bit of substance to it.

Your target can be anything: a structure, life forms, event, object etc etc. Be creative!

Try and minimise the amount of noise if you can. Be sure exactly what it is you want me to view. Panoramic scenes with a multitude of details make for bad practice targets, for example. Feel free to assign a cue beneath the co-ordinate numbers on the envelope (eg 'Please describe the _____ in this photograph at the time it was taken'.)

Of course I am totally in your hands here and trust that you will fulfil your end of the bargain by sending me a copy of the correct image as feedback AFTER I have submitted my data to you.

I look forward to further correspondence on this via PM. Pick your target, stick it in an envelope, assign the cordinate numbers and let me have them. I'll get back to you with the data by the end of the week.

Regards,

Gulliver

You bet you're not promising anything.

Hilarious.
 
I'm working out some details with Gulliver. I may need a third party to send an image or e-mail too over the computer. If so, I'll use you or Gene. This way no one has to just take my word for it and includes someone else.


ME. I want to be the guy. I have several images, and several numbers that would be perfect for this sort of thing.
 
Im more than happy to discuss creating and participating in a properly organised project for you guys - but im not going to just rv any old target you dredge up form your computer folder of images and whatever (some of which could be innapropriate) - this will have to be properly done on both the 'viewers' side and yours the 'taskers' side.

PEM me and we can sort something out.

daz
 
I see that this thread is basically split into two camps; those that are genuinely interested in experimenting with remote viewing and Tommy Allison sitting there with a hard-on waiting for me to fail so he can wank off into a sock.

Ignoring Tommy, I trust those of you interested in trying this out to think carefully before choosing a target. Bad choice of target = higher chance of failure. Sorry folks, but it does.

I have already been asked whether it is okay to put a target 'word' or a drawing in the enevelope. Whilst this is a totally legitimate question, I am going to post my answer to this (sent as a PM) here so that everyone is clear about how this experiment is being run.

Hi there.

Remote Viewing actual written words (or trying to 'read them' from distance) is a definite no-no. Words are almost impossible to remote view as they are abstract symbols and as such have no physical presence in the real world. At best a viewer might pick up the paper they were written on, the ink etc, but more likely they'd just crash and burn altogether.

You can use words to DIRECT a viewer to the target (eg EUROSTAR / DESCRIPTION OF TRAIN ) but in this instance I suspect using an image will provide clearer means for analysis/comparison of data etc

Drawings are problematic, as these too are essentially two dimensional representations of something elsewhere. They aren't the thing in itself.

My personal preference is that you select a jpeg off the internet; a picture of something, somewhere, an object, place or thing...an event...something dynamic and above all INTERESTING.

I cannot stress enough that dull targets lead to dull lacklustre viewings...the best targets are those that jump out at you, that have some kind of impact, be it emotional, aesthetic or otherwise.

Simply select your jpeg, print it off, place it in an envelope and ascribe the random numbers. Let me have the numbers. At the same time you can email a copy of the image to a third party if you wish. When you have received my data you then email me the picture as feedback.

I will be posting the response on the thread board so as to keep everything above board and transparent for anyone following this.

Regards,

Gulliver

:)
 
Back
Top