Remote Viewing Results

This forum is for the discussion of psychokinesis and extrasensory perception.

Moderators: ryguy, chrLz, Zep Tepi

Remote Viewing Results

Postby Shawnna » Fri Aug 04, 2006 7:29 pm

From where I sit, I would want to see the criteria used, the protocols established, and the verification methods incorporated to validate the results before forming an opinion one way or the other.

I do believe there are those who have a "sixth sense" about things. I also understand that the US government had some CIA-sponsored research on this during the Cold War (I believe?) that involved Hal Puthoff, Kit Green, and others. But remote viewing a bomb making factory in Russia can easily be validated by going to the physical location. What I can get my arms around is how you would validate remote viewing a base on Mars or the moon for instance.

I'd like to hear what others have to say.
Last edited by Shawnna on Mon Oct 30, 2006 9:33 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Shawnna
Uncovers Reality
Uncovers Reality
 
Posts: 1243
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2006 11:30 pm


Re: Is Remote Viewing a valuable research tool for UFOlogy?

Postby Hidden Hand » Fri Aug 04, 2006 7:39 pm

Shawnna wrote:From where I sit, I would want to see the criteria used, the protocols established, and the verification methods incorporated to validate the results before forming an opinion one way or the other.

:trstme: No, sorry, I meant - "good question!"
Is this a private fight, or can anyone join in?
User avatar
Hidden Hand
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 820
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2006 8:46 am

Re: Is Remote Viewing a valuable research tool for UFOlogy?

Postby MikeJamieson » Sat Aug 05, 2006 12:41 am

From where I sit, I would want to see the criteria used, the protocols established, and the verification methods incorporated to validate the results before forming an opinion one way or the other.

I do believe there are those who have a "sixth sense" about things. I also understand that the US government had some CIA-sponsored research on this during the Cold War (I believe?) that involved Hal Puthoff, Kit Green, and others. But remote viewing a bomb making factory in Russia can easily be validated by going to the physical location. What I can get my arms around is how you would validate remote viewing a base on Mars or the moon for instance.

I'd like to hear what others have to say.


Being unable to reality test, with independent "eyes on" verification, is
obviously a big problem with remote viewing things like this. It's important,
if we are going to use this and consider results from that, that a team works
on the "target". The target has to be "blind", with only the monitor knowing
what it is.
MikeJamieson
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 564
Joined: Thu Jun 29, 2006 4:53 pm
Location: Ukiah, CA

Postby Shawnna » Sat Aug 05, 2006 2:51 am

But how do you do it if the "target" isn't verifiable - i.e. a community of intelligent life on on Mars?
Last edited by Shawnna on Mon Oct 30, 2006 9:33 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Shawnna
Uncovers Reality
Uncovers Reality
 
Posts: 1243
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2006 11:30 pm

Postby dragonfire » Sat Aug 05, 2006 4:22 am

How do you do it period. Especially accross the cosmos. Alien lifecould talk back maybe. Wow what a concept. Who needs SETI.
Irritating the world, one person at a time
dragonfire
Latrine Only
 
Posts: 262
Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 5:41 pm
Location: NC, USA

Postby dragonfire » Sat Aug 05, 2006 4:37 am

Actually I do recall a program that was on not to long ago, now I wish I paid more attention, about using remote viewing in Afganistan by the troups. They were amazed at how it worked. I believe it took two individuals who comprised a unit for "viewing". I wish I could remember the program. I think it was on History Channel or the Science Channel.
Irritating the world, one person at a time
dragonfire
Latrine Only
 
Posts: 262
Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 5:41 pm
Location: NC, USA

Postby Almeirhria » Sat Aug 05, 2006 5:13 am

The physics side of RV is fine, the history runs deeper than your initial post Shawnna. I am not certain on it's effectiveness as I have not attempted tests at this stage and have not seen any independent studies.
Those truly helpless are those who have not consciously chosen but who repeat patterns without knowledge of the repetition or the meaning of the pattern
User avatar
Almeirhria
Member
 
Posts: 131
Joined: Wed May 24, 2006 1:39 pm

Postby MikeJamieson » Sun Aug 06, 2006 5:49 pm

Shawnna wrote:But how do you do it if the "target" isn't verifiable - i.e. a community of intelligent life on on Mars?


Hi Shawnna. I have high hopes that something like that could be
verifiable......perhaps with manned missions to Mars!


I have always felt (and I think I posted over at Michael's yahoo group)
that remote viewing was a bit higher up in reliability than granted by
Salla. Funny he should put it at the moderate level, given his wife's
vocation as a clairvoyent.


Here's the link to the original DIA remote viewing manual


I think that if a team works on a specific "target" and furthermore if
that team of viewers do NOT know the nature of the "target" (only
the monitor of the sessions knowing), then that helps in granting
a high degree of reliability (in my own mind, anyway).


****MOD EDI**** - to make link stand out.
MikeJamieson
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 564
Joined: Thu Jun 29, 2006 4:53 pm
Location: Ukiah, CA


Google

Return to PSI / Mind Control

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests

cron