• 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

Forums New posts

Free episodes:

UBERDOINK said:
you mean "hand" right? Why can't I fire from the hip... like everyone else that doesn't know what they are talking about when it comes to a topic. I thought opinions were just as important as facts and data... right?
Click to expand...

I think you're answering your own questions about what works and doesn't work in online forum discussions.

1. Enter a discussion like you would enter someone's home. Say hello.

2. Fire from the hip: firing from the electrical cells in your head usually works better.

3. Like everyone else that doesn't know what they are talking about: your point?

4. Informed opinions work better. Show us what you got w.r.t remote viewing and avoid #3.

5. I understand that you may be into creativity and freedom of expression but you make it difficult to be taken seriously. Reconsider the screen name and image and if you need to write about sex then go work on a limerick.

So back to the topic of remote viewing. You were saying?

~Teresa
 
My hat is off to you, Teresa, for at least trying to educate the uninformed. But when someone enters a discourse about any subject, with silly, pretentious barbs that make absolutely no sense or have any reason other than to attack the subject matter without having actually researched any of the reams of informational sources provided by yourself and others, then they get the response that they deserve.

The subject of Remote viewing is indeed controversial but i think it has been proven here on the forum that at least the subject warrants some research.
 
The Pair of Cats said:
My hat is off to you, Teresa, for at least trying to educate the uninformed. But when someone enters a discourse about any subject, with silly, pretentious barbs that make absolutely no sense or have any reason other than to attack the subject matter without having actually researched any of the reams of informational sources provided by yourself and others, then they get the response that they deserve.

The subject of Remote viewing is indeed controversial but i think it has been proven here on the forum that at least the subject warrants some research.
Click to expand...

Thanks, Phil. Beyond learing about remote viewing, there are people out there experiencing things naturally for which they have no background, no association, no language to explain. We hope the information we've provided may spark someone to begin their own research.

"In training mode, the reason to do a remote viewing session isn't to learn something about the target, it's to learn something about yourself." -Lyn Buchanan

~Teresa
 
The Pair of Cats said:
The subject of Remote viewing is indeed
controversial but i think it has been proven here on the forum that at least
the subject warrants some research.
Click to expand...

Phil, I should have posted this sooner. TKR has already had several
outstanding speakers this month. If you want to catch some of them at
the podium there is still time. You'll need to register (free) over at TKR to
get in.

JOSEPH W. MCMONEAGLE
<NOBR>DR. CHARLES T. TART</NOBR>
<NOBR>DR. DEAN RADIN</NOBR>
<NOBR>NANCY MCMONEAGLE</NOBR>
<NOBR>RUSSELL TARG</NOBR>
<NOBR>DR. RICHARD BROUGHTON</NOBR>
<NOBR>DR. ANGELA T. SMITH</NOBR>
<NOBR>DR. JESSICA UTTS</NOBR>
<NOBR>GARY LANGFORD</NOBR>
<NOBR>DR. EDWIN C. MAY</NOBR>
<NOBR>http://www.dojopsi.com/rvexpo/</NOBR>
<NOBR></NOBR>
<NOBR>The 2009 IRVA guest speaker DVD's should be ready sometime August - Septemberish. </NOBR>
<NOBR>You can see who covered what topics by going to IRVA's website or mine: </NOBR>
<NOBR>www.aestheticimpact.com under RV DVDs: Humanity's Investment Portfolio on the </NOBR>
<NOBR>left navigation bar. </NOBR>
<NOBR></NOBR>
<NOBR></NOBR>
<NOBR>~Teresa</NOBR>
<NOBR></NOBR>
 
I have listened to and read everything I can on RV - it's fascinating.

It seems to be similar to other things:
Astral projection
Out of body experiences

Abuse survivors tend to develop certain `skills', like temporarily leaving the body or hovering over it. This seems to be part of dissociation, with the consciousness dissociating from the body.

Are these related? Perhaps a subset of something larger?

[computer geek, wishing people were as easy to figure out and fix]
 
I have to admit, the concept of remote viewing fascinates me. However, I have seen so many crappy 'investigations' into it, where no scientific controls were done, that I am really burned out on all the garbage.

It seems that many times the actual target is shoe-horned in to make it fit the reading. Like vague predictions and making actual events match them.

Also, it is so easy to make a video appear to be linear when it is not. Editing.

Anything less than fully monitored and audited sessions by accredited labs (accredited as a scientific lab -- university, etc...) showing positive results has to be taken with a grain of salt.

Anybody can stand at a podium and say anything. 0% proof.

Many people can make videos that look convincing. If that video was not made under the control of some valid lab or science team, it is meaningless.

Don't get me wrong, I am not, in any way, saying that it does not exist or that it is impossible.

I just think that there is too much garbage flying to accept anything but cold hard proof.
 
bobheck said:
I have to admit, the concept of remote viewing fascinates me. However, I have seen so many crappy 'investigations' into it, where no scientific controls were done, that I am really burned out on all the garbage. It seems that many times the actual target is shoe-horned in to make it fit the reading. Like vague predictions and making actual events match them. Also, it is so easy to make a video appear to be linear when it is not. Editing. Anything less than fully monitored and audited sessions by accredited labs (accredited as a scientific lab -- university, etc...) showing positive results has to be taken with a grain of salt. Anybody can stand at a podium and say anything. 0% proof. Many people can make videos that look convincing. If that video was not made under the control of some valid lab or science team, it is meaningless. Don't get me wrong, I am not, in any way, saying that it does not exist or that it is impossible. I just think that there is too much garbage flying to accept anything but cold hard proof.
Click to expand...

Hi Bob,

Excuse me, but you may be the guy I'm looking for. No joke, I'm serious as a heart attack. Can we sign you up?!?!

Research is part of this. Odds are that until you actually do a remote viewing session yourself it will never make sense so don't waste your time over-thinking it. You'll always be an outsider looking in. Nobody can teach you how to balance a bike or propel a swing. Nobody can teach you how to dive. Nobody can teach you how to cross the finish line in a marathon. You have to learn how on your own. Just don't beat up the folks who have gone out and tried it and can do it. Some are quacks. Most are real. Some are better than others and nobody wants a whitewash job on their barn. That doesn't help anybody.

Lefty is asking about dissociation -- wouldn't it be nice if an accredited university psychology program would dedicate part of its core curriculum to studying this to see if there's any correlation? Maybe dissociation would become outdated thinking. Maybe we could develop it and actually get somewhere.

Somehow we have to get the professors trained first then four weeks? Six weeks? We have a lot of work to do, but getting in the door is a political Catch-22 and it's more than skeptics. Money / funding / Old Guard.

Dean Radin does a good job of explaining the hurdles in his presentation "Science and the taboo of psi." It's on my website: www.aestheticimpact.com. Top navigation bar under videos.

Until we get the professors trained and labs to buy in we're stuck with ordinary folks learning one at a time at their kitchen tables that this is real.

~Teresa
 
leftystrat said:
I have listened to and read everything I can on RV - it's fascinating. It seems to be similar to other things: Astral projection Out of body experiences

Abuse survivors tend to develop certain `skills', like temporarily leaving the body or hovering over it. This seems to be part of dissociation, with the consciousness dissociating from the body. Are these related? Perhaps a subset of something larger?

[computer geek, wishing people were as easy to figure out and fix]
Click to expand...

Hi Lefty,

Your entire post points to exactly the thing: we don't know what we don't know but we know that something is going on. Perhaps they are subsets and as we compare sciences and languages we can find the similarities and move into new phases of R & D.

Change that up. Most of us don't know what we don't know because we're too busy with our own "stuff." Have you read China's Super Psychics?

Astral Projection / OOBs seem similar to perfect site integration (per crv). Those are holy crap moments and some people are very, very good at it. Maybe somebody will step in here and talk about those. Ed May just gave a presentation on TKR and I saw a snip of the transcript. Joe McMoneagle is very, very good at it and the transcript says there's a woman in Russia as good as him.

~Teresa
Welcome to Aesthetic Impact
 
ikez78 said:
this would make an interesting documentary on national geographic or history channel
Click to expand...

I agree but I'm a bit biased. A decent documentary that teaches and demonstrates. I know that Lyn has had a couple in the works. Somehow the ducks just never line up and he's not hard to work with.

I'd like to see a decent interview (at least an hour) with some of the developers, move into the trainers and the people in applications then bring in some of the civilians who have learned it since it went public. Then finish it with a short how-to and have some folks who have never done it before gain site contact for the first time. Sorta rocks your world.

Until you do it you have absolutely no idea that's it's like a big library out there just waiting for you to pull a book off the shelf. I think people deserve to know that.

~Teresa
 
Teresa said:
Until you do it you have absolutely no idea that's it's like a big library out there just waiting for you to pull a book off the shelf. I think people deserve to know that.

~Teresa
Click to expand...

Is this something that can be done by the attention-impaired?
You know - the people who can't shut down the machine to meditate....
 
Teresa said:
Great question! No guarantees, but might even help 'em learn how
to slow it down and snag what's comin' through.

:)
Teresa
Click to expand...

Bless you :)
As you might imagine, I'm one of those.

Someone tried to hypnotize me once. It was a scene right out of a sitcom. He talked and talked, getting more relaxed and using guided imagery. While he was doing his business, I became increasingly agitated by the traffic noise outside the window. By the end of the exercise, he was half out of it.

He asked me how I felt.

AGITATED, I said, springing out of my chair :)

It's gonna take a much bigger hammer than that to knock me out.
But it's not like I didn't WANT to relax. I hoped he would succeed. I'm just wired differently.

Thanks for the positive sign. I really need to look into this further.
 
leftystrat said:
Bless you :)
As you might imagine, I'm one of those.

AGITATED, I said, springing out of my chair :)

It's gonna take a much bigger hammer than that to knock me out.
But it's not like I didn't WANT to relax. I hoped he would succeed. I'm just wired differently. Thanks for the positive sign. I really need to look into this further.
Click to expand...

God luv ya. :) No, I'm not remote viewing you but I can almost see you springing out of your chair. You said you've already read everything about remote viewing so there's no sense in pointing you toward books. You're past that and you need a subject matter expert to dialogue with. I may be able to help you with that (and no, for anybody wondering, it isn't Lyn.) Ball's in your court. PEM me at snowsewn1@aol.com and we'll see what we can do.

Meanwhile, let's work on little hammers, no offense intended, maybe you already do or don't do this but I'll offer this up for consideration. You say you can't meditate. Mundane tasks automatically involve meditation because your hands are doing one thing but your head is doing another. That is, unless you have an iPod jammed in your ears or TV or radio with NLP in the background 24 / 7.

Shut off all the white noise and do some stuff around your house. Just you and your head and voila! You're meditating. According to the subject matter experts probably not optimally, but it's a start toward working on the cobweb to noise ratio.

PEM me about the point of contact and helping you shut down the machine if you want to explore that possibility.

~Teresa
Addendum on wiring and sensitivity. You are not alone. You might want go to my site, www.aestheticimpact.com and read:
1. Compassion Fatigue -- scroll down to Elaine Aron's info on Highly Sensitive People and investigate her stuff on same.
2. Top tool bar, video area -- Daniel Trammet and math and language and the original Rain Man synesthesia. Talk about wiring!
 
Teresa said:
Hi Bob,

Excuse me, but you may be the guy I'm looking for. No joke, I'm serious as a heart attack. Can we sign you up?!?!

Research is part of this. Odds are that until you actually do a remote viewing session yourself it will never make sense so don't waste your time over-thinking it. You'll always be an outsider looking in. Nobody can teach you how to balance a bike or propel a swing. Nobody can teach you how to dive. Nobody can teach you how to cross the finish line in a marathon. You have to learn how on your own. Just don't beat up the folks who have gone out and tried it and can do it. Some are quacks. Most are real. Some are better than others and nobody wants a whitewash job on their barn. That doesn't help anybody.

Lefty is asking about dissociation -- wouldn't it be nice if an accredited university psychology program would dedicate part of its core curriculum to studying this to see if there's any correlation? Maybe dissociation would become outdated thinking. Maybe we could develop it and actually get somewhere.

Somehow we have to get the professors trained first then four weeks? Six weeks? We have a lot of work to do, but getting in the door is a political Catch-22 and it's more than skeptics. Money / funding / Old Guard.

Dean Radin does a good job of explaining the hurdles in his presentation "Science and the taboo of psi." It's on my website: www.aestheticimpact.com. Top navigation bar under videos.

Until we get the professors trained and labs to buy in we're stuck with ordinary folks learning one at a time at their kitchen tables that this is real.

~Teresa
Click to expand...

I do see your point. I will check out your site.

Thanks.
 
Back
Top