by funkyderek 161 Replies latest jw friends
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.
Would you mind explaining your terminology? In this context what do 'date', 'viewer number', 'queue', 'hit', 'work the session' mean? Why is this jargon needed?
Aloha All,
This is a reply to ChuckD who asked some good questions about Remote Viewing.
First As a former Military Remote Viewer I must preface my comments with a few facts about remote viewing so that we keep the topic in the realm of what it actually is.
Remote Viewing is not magic or some feat of psychic wonderment being progmulgated on the masses. It is an advanced communication skill in humans.
Chuck D ask "what is it that you claim to be able to do?"
Remote Viewing was designed and developed to be a collection platform. An asset to acquire information about a person, place, or event that was not able to be acquired by conventional means. The remote viewer can collect information (normally sensory information) about a target within the limits of their training and ability. The information will usually be a mixed bag in three parts, Good information, unknown information, and contamination or bad data. The viewer should be able to at a minimun provide information about the basic gestalts associated with the target in question as well as describe the target on a gross level. This data is normally grouped within the methodology as matrix data about sights, sounds, smell, tastes, temperatures and textures as well as sketches of the site itself and notation data about the activities at the site as well as location information. As the viewer trains to higher levels the data improves in quality. Viewers normally operate in an alert beta/alpha brainstate but can drop down to an altered state of consciousness low alpha/high theta and collect very high level data about the target.
This exactly means that a viewer may provide simple identifying data about a target or they may slip to an altered state of consciousness and self realize the data experientially as if they were actually there.
The data is always recorded in a fixed format for turn-in to qualified analysts who will then sort thru the work for validation as well as development of new information about the target that surfaced in the work. Viewers are trained and evaluated on their ability to generate data about a target that is able to be validated through analysis. Once a viewer has demonstrated the ability to collect verifiable data then they are allowed to work targets where data is needed that has yet to be validated.
Viewers are never told what the target is prior to actually working it. That is the prime no-no in RV Work. Usually a person (a Targeteer) will assign a random serial number to specific target. This proccess keeps the viewer in a blind condition about the true nature of the target prior to working it. The viewer is only given the serial number or random alphanumeric code and then begins viewing using that as his/her only refference. What they actually do is determined by the RV Methodology being employed. It is not a perfect skill but it does produce results.
I will include an article I wrote for "On Target" the rv newsletter. It should give you some insight to the theory of why rv works and how it is all connected.
This article and others can be viewed at our website at http://www.hrvg.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
La Propagation élégante
l'évolution
It was just about an hour before noon when the Japanese Submarine I-26 fired 3 torpedoes at the American warship San Francisco. None of the torpedoes struck the San Francisco but a single torpedo slipped beyond and struck the USS Juneau. In an instant 700 men were cast to fate's hand. Almost 8,000 miles away in a small town of middle America a mothers heart froze as she realized that something was wrong, a feeling that would haunt her for the days to come. Despite the thousands of miles between them and the lack of any news about them, she knew that her 5 sons were in peril. In the South Pacific off the island of Guadalcanal, Albert, Francis, George, and Madison had just been killed. The last remaining son, Joseph Sullivan, would die 6 days later in a personal battle with three sharks that would finally best him in the sea.
Almost 70 years later a young scientist in a laboratory sends two identical photons racing away from each other. The photons fly true. They follow the rules. That is until the scientist introduces a change into one of the photons and is amazed to see the change manifest in the other photon. Quantum non-locality just breeched the signal to noise ratio and like a large donkey in a room full of scientists, it began to bray.
In another part of the world a soldier slips silently into a tunnel in a dense jungle in Southeast Asia. Inside, other soldiers lounge about a small fire, while others sleep nearby. In the back of the tunnel are 3 men bound tightly. Two of the men seem to be French and the third is a German. They are journalists who got too close to the war, but they are not American POW's. The soldier leaves the tunnel… by just simply not being there anymore.
These stories like many others give us clues about the nature of our being and our environment. It hints at the connectivity between us, and our world. It is a connectivity that is beyond our technology to isolate and identify. It is a connectivity that is accessed by our conscious or subconscious intent. It is a connectivity that calls to us again and again when danger is near or fate has severed connections dear to us. It has called some from beyond the grave, still others from a time of history. It is a connectivity of relativity in a spectrum that is like the propagated environment of the electromagnetic wave. But it is different. It is very different. It is like the electromagnetic spectrum was alive and this special connectivity was its consciousness. This may not be far from the truth because we have begun to reverse the event. We seek it out and learn to use its pathways. We have begun to communicate with it.
examen éloigné et la vague
We live in a universe where life itself is dependant on the qualities of the electromagnetic spectrum. It is the single most important factor in the ability of a life form to support consciousness. For the human, consciousness is by the grace of the Electromagnetic Wave.
Remote Viewing is perhaps the most elegant expression of human consciousness. Whether or not remote viewing is an event of a propagated field environment, I have no doubts as to the nature of what constitutes the RV Effect and where it occurs. It is an event of non-locality in a spectrum that behaves much like EMF theory outside space/time. Its only enemy is noise.
All remote viewing event data, manifests and is realized within the folds of the electromagnetic brainwaves of our consciousness. There is only evidence of its existence within the cognizance of the minds brainwave field. Despite the non-local nature of the data it arrives on the wave, albeit a quantum one.
There is no evidence to suggest or support that remote viewing is not an exotic propagation of consciousness. On the other hand, we cannot prove this premise. A wise remote viewer once said, "if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck…perhaps it is like a duck."
Because remote viewing is not in the physical it presents a quandary for some to quantify. It brings new questions to the physics of consciousness. Can consciousness behave in a non-local modality?
We tend to explain remote viewing in a format that is laced with terminology borrowed from theories associated with electromagnetic wave propagation. We use these terms because in our frame of reference it is what remote viewing is the most like. It is a model of a non-local propagation-like event that exceeds our technology to identify. It seems to be demonstrative of access to a greater consciousness. It is the demonstration of the acquisition of information beyond the limits of the physical reality and in a manner that indicates non-locality.
The limitations of our own science are what bring about the clamor of dispute over what Remote Viewing is. It is hesitancy or a faltering step towards credibility while we wait for science to catch up. We prefer to cling to the magic of what we think it is in lieu of accepting what the demonstrated performance indicates within the structure of science.
We exist in a Universe that seems to have a sort of order. We have defined some of that order into laws. In the history of our science we constantly redefine those laws to upgrade our idea of reality. We have concentrated our scientific understanding of the universe on the real and the physical.
Consciousness is real but nonphysical. We have a real problem defining the nonphysical. This is a definition problem of technology and not logic. Our inclination is to observe and replicate the science of it in the laboratory. The nature or laws of consciousness are perhaps the most unexamined in the sphere of human science. So we find ourselves able to replicate but not prove, explain but not quantify.
We think we know that the viewer without the aid of mass, space/time, individual elementary particles, gravity, obvious external electromagnetism, nuclear force or weak forces somehow manages to do something that defies the logic of the assembled laws of the physical. But is it beyond the logic of consciousness or the quantum?
il nous fait dieux
Some would attribute the viewer's demonstrated performance to some magical accessing of some galactic akashic record or some deep blue expression of the God in us all. But this is more than likely not the case.
Still others postulate a hypothetical signal line. While the dogma stipulates a signal line, few of them believe in it enough to commit to embracing the idea of a spectrum of frequency usage in remote viewing.
As an RF Engineer I agree with the concept of the signal line. It would seem that it is the most likely scenario. I am biased because I know the value of frequency. I know frequency is the scale of our real measure. There are those that believe there is no lower measure of frequency than the hertz. In reality it is an arbitrary measurement we apply in labeling that portion of spectrum we can actually detect and identify. It is like believing there is nothing below the big 55 on your radio dial. This is flat earth mentality in a universe scaled by frequency.
Remote Viewing is more than likely exactly what it seems to be. Exactly what it seems to be the most like. What logic implies. It is the exchange of information across fields of overlapping consciousness.
It is less a phenomenon and more a communication skill. For humans at our stage of evolution it is an advanced communication skill. It is possibly the most advanced communication skill able to be demonstrated by the human, able to be replicated by other humans, and the first non-local demonstration of communication to get a foot in the door of the scientific community. The keyword here is communication because the human only really does one thing. It seems to really only serve a single purpose. The human communicates. No matter how far down the road you go and what you see or say or do you still only communicate. All thought, all actions, all sensory exchanges, and everything associated with being human is a form of, or a facilitation of, communication. It is what we do. It is all we do.
The question is what kind of communication event is remote viewing? We know that the effect is realized in the conscious mind. Consciousness is a propagated field activity of the brain under electromagnetic bio-chemical influence. Consciousness is active when there is more than life. Life or the state of living does not imply consciousness.
Would science attribute consciousness to a single living cell? Would we attribute consciousness to inert material such as rocks or the dark matter of space?
Consciousness grants me the "I am". It is the unique cerebral cognizance of myself in a virtual crowd of conscious beings sharing a common medium of space in time. Awareness is the expression of our individual consciousness in an active state. We function within the limitations of what we perceive that state to be and embrace a behavior of mind. It is that behavior that drives a projection of mentality. We assess each other on the displayed state of that mentality. We actually judge the competence of a person by their display of mentality, never really understanding the consciousness that is driving it or the mind that is shaping it. Consciousness is born of brain and mind on a foundation of bio-tissue, electromagnetics, and chemicals and exists not in matter but in fields and effects.
Laissez votre conscient soyez votre guide
An anomaly of consciousness is intuition. Evidence of intuition is evidence of a pathway or connectivity to something beyond the direct consciousness. It is an event of non-local awareness. Non-locality becomes more of a factor when dealing with any remote viewing activity. It is behavior outside the conventional mentality. Remote viewing seems to bridge the gap between fields of consciousness separated by space and time.
The task is to identify the type of communication that remote viewing is. Remote viewing is an advanced communication skill in humans. It has a point of origin for transmission and reception that is identifiable. It happens in the human conscious awareness. This is a very important clue about the real nature of remote viewing.
The reception or realization of the non-local data occurs in the consciousness of the viewer. The consciousness is a propagated field environment. We say that it is a propagated field environment because that is exactly what it is. Consciousness despite its many other attributes, qualities, and behaviors is not a physical thing. It is micro clustering of electromagnetic fields in and around its power source, the live human brain.
Any event of non-locality occurring within the conscious awareness of a human is demonstrative of an exchange between like fields of consciousness. The real missing information is what is the spark that ignites the state of non-locality?
We seem to be able to forecast remote viewing event size in terms of time but cannot solve it for frequency. Research in the event size in regards to sidereal time and the geomagnetic index reveal the type and nature of an environment that affects remote viewing performance or event size. Instead of a propagation chart showing the most and least useable frequencies for a block of time, we can only forecast the most useable and least useable time for the acquisition of non-local data. It is still demonstrative of propagated environment that can be forecasted in a limited way.
One thing we must all remember is that we do not know the truth of it. At best we have an idea and have devised an arbitrary means to secure a result. It is much like the mouse in the maze that has learned the route to the cheese. While we may excel in the maze and get fat on the cheese we are no closer to knowing the purpose of the maze or the source of the cheese. For some that is enough.
l'épilogue
As humans we function almost exclusively in the past. Before I can say it I must formulate it and put it into language. I must speak it. Before you can hear my words they must travel to you and be collected, processed and understood within the field of your consciousness and intellect. All the while time has been steadily streaming and somewhere along the way we realize that we are functioning just a wee bit behind the now of reality. We realize that we are designed this way. We batch process bandwidth strips of the near past as our realized present. Simple non-locality for us would to even for a moment grasp the real present, the real now. A place most of us think we are at already…but won't realize till sometime later.
Aloha
Glenn B. Wheaton SFC USA (RET)
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. LOLPeople 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!
This is good news. Would you be so kind as to reflect on the JREF challenge? Many skeptics have created such a pot which now contains ONE MILLION dollars. For ten years now.
http://www.randi.org/research/index.html
Please let us know about the progress on your application.
Julien:
> Why is this jargon needed?
Just like there is a cyberlanguage or computer geek speak.
So too, RVers have
developed terminology to help explains types of perceptions,
impressions and analysis. The process of pulling out perceptions
and reporting the information can be complicated, depending on the
session.
I was trained by P>S>I - Lyn Buchanan:
http://www.crviewer.com/crviewer/index.html
Here's a site that explains the terminology and contains the
manual they used at Fort Meade and the variation I use taught
by P>S>I:
http://www.firedocs.com/remoteviewing/core2.cfm
Cynicus:
The amazing Randi is really amazing... go check out these
two sites. There's more. Do a search and see.
http://survivalscience.50megs.com/torandi.htm
http://www.geocities.com/randiexpert2001/
Glenn - Military Remote Viewer:
I am happily surprised to see Glenn enter the discusson.
He heads the Hawaii Remote Viewers Guild.
I had the pleasure of briefly meeting Glenn and other
Hawaii RVers at the International Remote Viewers Association
conference. Though I haven't trained in the method Glenn teaches,
I am impressed by the results. I believe his site offers
training for a reasonable fee. It also has a BBS, newsletter,
examples posted of HRV sessions. Glenn has a lot more experience than I do at RV... website: www.hrvg.org
Meanwhile I hope to meet Dave from this list and show him some
sessions. So far I haven't heard from him.
I'm planning on fading off the list soon because I'm
pretty busy. Though I'm not a Jehovah's witness...
(but do have some friends who are), I found everyone
to be quiet friendly here while discussing RV.
I can be reached at my email address if you have
any other questions.
Cya, See ya, see you, ;-)
- Ralph
I had the pleasure of briefly meeting Glenn and other
Hawaii RVers at the International Remote Viewers Association
conference.
Do these RV conferences take place at a physical place or do you all just agree on a time and start RVing each other.
CIA PSYCHICS - Remote Viewing Video
This is one of shows I saw on A & E channel.
It's available for 14.95 at: AandE.com
Just visit the store, do a search on "CIA" or
Item Number: AAE-12531
Description of Video:
In the depths of the Cold War, when no development went unanswered and any "gap" was a crisis, America learned that the USSR had a program in psychic research. Inevitably, the government responded with a paranormal project of its own, spending $20 million on "remote viewing" from 1976 to 1995!
In CIA PSYCHICS, three men who worked as psychic operatives tell stories of supernatural spying. Chief Warrant Officer Joseph McMoneagle sensed the location of General Dozier, then held hostage by the Red Brigade in Italy. Master Sergeant Melvin Riley drew pictures of the top secret B-2 bomber long before its existence was made public. And Captain Paul Smith sensed a tragic loss of life at sea hours before the submarine USS Stark went down in foreign waters. Despite apparent successes like these, the "remote viewing" program was cancelled in 1995. Did these men really use supernatural powers to discover military secrets and predict disasters, or can their findings be explained in other ways? CIA PSYCHICS examines all the evidence and asks you to decide.
Here's a list places where RV has been discussed in the media:
http://www.lfr.org/csl/media/publicity.shtml
Here is the research and commentary on the study that helped
to close the FT Meade unit. They studied only non-classified
material from the last year of the unit.
I quote Professor Jessica Utts, Division of Statistics
University of California, Davis
"Using the standards applied to any other area of science, it is concluded that psychic functioning has been well established. The statistical results of the studies examined are far beyond what is expected by chance. Arguments that these results could be due to methodological flaws in the experiments are soundly refuted. Effects of similar magnitude to those found in government-sponsored research at SRI and SAIC have been replicated at a number of laboratories across the world. Such consistency cannot be readily explained by claims of flaws or fraud."
http://www.lfr.org/csl/media/ciaairreport.shtml
Cya,
Ralph
P.S. Really, this is part of me fading off the list... just
had to post a little more... ;-)
some RV links:
http://www.mceagle.com/remote-viewing/pub/news/95dec11-nw.html
http://walden.mvp.net/~para/scrapbook/psychics.html
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/archive/1995/951211/intelligence.html
To me it sounds like sometimes an RVer simply guesses correctly.
Ralph said:
The person who said car deserves the 50.00. It was a direct hit.
No it wasn't. It was hardly even close. The supposed "direct hit" was:
I'm seeing a car sitting on a feild, with a tall person standing beside it. The car is red.
Problems with that:
1. The car was not stationary.
2. The car was not in a field.
3. There was not a tall person standing beside it.
4. The car was not red.
Additionally, the guesser failed to mention that the car was moving through water, that there were three people in the car, that it had a number clearly visible on it.
A car is not an unusual object. There's no reason to believe that it was anything other than a guess, not even a particularly good one, as the guesser got the location ad colour of the car wrong, and was completely wrong about the other details of the picture. I don't think I was being too hard looking for the model of the car, when it's the most recognised in the world. I thought I was very fair in my test, and nobody really came close. In all fairness Ralph, if you count that as a direct hit then you're fairly easily convinced. I'm willing to set another test, if you think my rules weren't fair.
--
Those who can induce you to believe absurdities can induce you to commit attrocities - Voltaire
Folks,
I have a target in mind which will serve well for this test. It is something quite un-ambiguous, and any incorrect descriptions would be easy to separate from correct ones.
Please tell me what to do - should I take a picture of this "target" and keep it here, display a picture of the target somewhere, simply "think" about it, or provide lat/long for where it is?
Ralph & Glenn, thank you for the detailed information and for participating in this discussion. I must say that this is much different than I though it was, and it seems even more difficult to set up a test based on the descriptions I read in the training manual.
I would be less than honest if I said that I believed this to be possible at all, but I will also say that I would be delighted to be proven wrong. I hope that we can do this simple test to at least establish if there is something there to follow up on. Weather or not the government investigated this means little to me, and I am sure that no matter what their experiences were, there will also be "true beleivers" who will champion its cause. Remember, not that long ago, we had a First Lady who used the services of an astrologer to help her schedule her husband's events. I am sure she beleived that it was helpful, and if asked, could provide plenty of anticecdotal evidence of it having helped.
I also agree with Derek in that someone (not even the person who was supposed to be doing the test) tossing out "car" intermixed with several incorrect pieces of information is hardly convincing at all. If we had 1,000 people doing this, someone would have probably said "Volkswagen." Would we then consider that accurate, and ignore the 999 incorrect submissions?
ChuckD: I have RV'd your target. The target is an object or objects made of matter. That is a direct hit.
