Remote Viewing

by funkyderek 161 Replies latest jw friends

Ralph Burton

Thanks for the invite.
You need to have a better understanding of what to expect
when someone RV's a target.
Let me give you a few examples. The subsconscious communicates
via pictures, feelings and memories. So what might be a
good description of the target, may appear with mixed analysis
of the perceptions. www.hrvg.org has sessions posted that
will give you a better idea how this works...
Plus the books I mentioned earlier are filled with examples.
Anyway, what I saw was that someone did hit your target
and you all joked about it.
So, what to do... why don't all the skeptics put a 1000.00
dollars in a pot, we'll have a third party judge and if I
the Judge says I described any part of the target I get the
money. If I don't you guys can harass me? That seems fair. LOL
People can easily say things don't work, or prove it to me.
But are they willing to put it on the line for money?
Remote Viewing works, let's get 5k on the table, come on!
I'm sure I could get a few other viewers to RV too.
I'm tired of the B.S. of people putting down RV.
So people put up or shut up. Let's see some real money held
by a third party that understands RV.
Ralph
[email protected]
larc

Ralph,
You wrote, "Anyway, what I saw was that someone did hit your target, and you all laughed about it." In this statement, whose target are you referring to, mine or someone elses?
Regarding the proposed bet, you stated that you would win if you saw "any part of the target." How do you define a "part". For example, is a "circle" a part of the target or would you have to say that it is the moon. There is a big difference here. A circle covers a lot of territory; the moon does not.
Also, what is the size of a part? Does one small dot in the corner of the picture constitute a part?
How are we going to agree on a neutral third party?
If we can work out the details, I will take your bet.
ChuckD

I have a couple of questions for those who beleive in this ability.
First, just what is it that you claim to be able to do? From what I am reading, there does not seem to be a lot of agreement on what the bottom line will be here. I had always thought that the idea behind remote viewing was just that - to see something that someone could see if they were in a remote position. Now, if that worked, it would be of great value. A government could, for example, have their representative "look" to see if another force had missiles or troops stationed at location X and so on. Or, to look into a enemy staff meeting to see who was there, or what was on the charts they were holding up. That would be a concrete benefit, if it worked.
I would further assume that anyone doing this would have to specifically know where they should be "looking." If they looked in the wrong place, the information would be of little value.
But the descriptions here don't seem to follow this idea. The viewers have not required that the thing to be "viewed" must be at a specific location, which seems to go against the whole idea of remote viewing (at least how I understood it). It also makes it difficult for both sides to agree upon a target. Could a proponent please tell me exactly what it is that they feel this ability allows them to do, and perhaps give a detailed example?
My second question is this. If you are a person who believes that you have this ability (and I am sure that these folks SINCERELY believe that they do), would you ever agree to a test for which an unsecussful outcome would move you to admit that you do not have this ability after all? Obviously, there is no way to prove that an unsucessful test was not just a fluke, or that the powers were somehow compromised temporarally, but could you ever see yourself saying "I guess I can't do that after all" if the results were negative?
seven006

Ralph,
I live in the Portland Oregon area and I'd love to see a session. I think if I did that and reported back to the rest of these people we could put this matter to rest. I think everyone here would believe me. Let's set it up.
Dave
Ralph Burton

I was referring to the car target.
It was a car.
To expect someone to say it's a VW, is expecting a lot.
I mean I've RV'd boats before and I certainly had no clue
of the Make or model.
Sometimes submarines come through as boats too. I believe
it's possible to come up with Make but generally it's rare.
>A circle covers a lot of territory; the moon does not.
I agree, but if someone says it's a planet. Would you give it
to them or would agrue that they need to say it's the moon?
I RV'ed the Sun once and I called it a Star. Was I right or
wrong?
>Also, what is the size of a part? Does one small dot in the corner of the picture constitute a part?
No. What I meant is this... when you RV a target many time
invalid perceptions come through or invalid analysis of the
perceptions. So a person can hit the target and describe it
incorrectly. I posted a Dilbert cartoon on my website
that shows what I mean. My website is: www.copsoftware.com
Go to MISC links then Remote Viewing and select the Dilbert
cartoon. It's a good example of what I'm trying to describe.
Scott Adams did the cartoon because he too was skepitical and
saw it work. So he pokes fun at Skeptics because some will
never see how it works.
>How are we going to agree on a neutral third party?
Good question. I'm sure we can come up with something.
>If we can work out the details, I will take your bet.
I don't consider it a bet, I'm not putting 1,000.00 on the
table. ;-) I know RV works... can't afford if I miss, not
to mention the pressure on me while I'm RVing... LOL
Ralph
Ralph Burton

Chuck,
The Army had an RV unit close to twenty years. Did it have value?
This was a Black Ops Intelligence unit. These are serious military people in an Intelligence environment that took their jobs seriously. Ask yourself why hasn't all the material been
declassified if has no value? Very little has been declassified.
But there are plenty of examples that show it works.
Read: Remote Viewers by Jim Schabel it's only 5.99 in paperback.
It explains the history of RV and how it was used and who the
scientist and RVers are...
Does China have a Psychic unit, sure they do, read:
China's Super Psychics _ Paul Dong
Do the Soviets have unit, well that was confirmed by the CIA.
And it was sponsored by KGB.
If it didn't work why would the biggest nations in the world
have units?
I'm confused about your location question. The target should
be a location and the RVer should return a description of
the location. For example: Let's say it's a Catholic Church.
The viewer might get, it's a structure, tall, city, people,
it has a religous feel to it, it's quiet like a library.
Gray, concrete, colorful glass, pizza, cows, and cookies.
Mind you they may be having a program at the time of the church
is viewed where they are serving pizza and cookies. But
the cow would just be an AOL (analytical overlay).
Though the RVer didn't say Catholic church, the other perceptions
would be considered good info. The actuall session might
have a lot of AOL's and some good info, or it may build into
a good description of the target.
I find your second question about admitting this doesn't work
a bit strange. But let's address it.
I've been training for four years.
If it didn't work and I didn't see results do you think
I would continued training? Let me tell you, I would have
walked away. I have better things to do with my time and money.
I've had some great sessions and some not so great sessions.
So you want me to admit it doesn't work because I miss one target?
Doesn't that seem a bit silly?
I wouldn't be here talking about RV if I hadn't seen for
myself that it works.
Ralph
Ralph Burton

Dave,
Let's meet. I have some time this weekend.
email me at: [email protected]
Talk to you soon.
Ralph
ChuckD

Ralph,
What I still do not understand is HOW the viewer is told what the target is in these tests. In your example with the target being a Church, did someone have to tell the viewer to "go" to a particular location, such as the intersection of two roads, and report what they saw there? For example, let us suppose that there was a clearly defined target here in my city that I wanted you to view remotely. Wouldn't I or someone else need to tell you at least where it was so that you could know where to look?
I do have to take issue with your description of the cow as being an "analytical overlay" when the goal was viewing a church. To me, such a thing would seem indistinguishable from be an incorrect guess. If someone tosses out a number of ideas and concepts, letting only those which match count as "hits" while dismissing the misses is not going to give a very valid result in any test.
Ralph Burton

Chuck,
The way targets were originally assigned were by using map
coordinates.
Read Remote Viewers - Jim Schnabel
They then found coordinates didn't matter.
The target is assigned by "Intent" of tasker.
Or the target is the tasker.
I was trained to use date and viewer number to assign
my targets.
I use that number as my queue for the target. But I don't
need it to hit the target.
Then I work the session... write down what comes through.
Chuck said:
>If someone tosses out a number of ideas and concepts, letting only >those which match count as "hits" while dismissing the misses is not >going to give a very valid result in any test.
When we score a session we take misses into account.
I really don't want to get into how to score a session here
either. Because what you want to know is if this is real
or B.S.
www.irva.org - has papers written by researchers on the
subject of RV.
Cya,
Ralph
bboyneko

Chuck, let me try to clear up your confusion, me and saffron are beginners, and have only experiented with RVing drawings and images. Ralph is much more experienced and does real places. From what i understand, the RVer does not need a lot of specefic info on the target, this is called 'frontloading'..If I tell a Rver to RV a boat in the south pacific, I have frontloaded him by already letting him know its a boat and that it at sail in the ocean. Generall, you dont wanna tell them alot of info.
here is the dilber cartoon for the lazy peeps who didnt go there to click on the image :)

Remote Viewing

Share this