I think it'll be fairly obvious if someone sees something at Apple that we don't know about and pans out in the next few months.
-
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!
The Ultimate Remote Viewing Experiment?
- Thread starter Gene Steinberg
- Start date
Free episodes:
Lori Williams
Paranormal Novice
Lori Williams
Paranormal Novice
Hi, All,
To clarify on the question of actual coordinates, historically, the military believed coordinates (lat and long) were needed. Once targets started appearing for which no coordinates were possible, they realized coordinates were no longer necessary. Now, random coordinates are used -- usually chosen by the project manager, who utilizes various database fields to help him or her organize the material.
Mike, you are correct: It was definitely a mistake for me to engage in responding to Gene's original question. I'm not even sure how I came across the question, as I had never heard of this forum before. Gene seems like a very nice person, and I'm sure his question was in earnest.
Mike, your reply is the "snarky" type that keeps things interesting. I was hoping to contribute something useful, that a lot of us have discussed at length. There are a few attorneys among the remote viewers I know, and they bring up the dangers of litigation now and then when discussing certain types of targets. Your interpretation of my motives is incorrect, but that's ok. I'm sure you know that you are never wrong, LOL!
And Gene, there are definitely ways that the target you suggested could be made into a target for a viewing project. As someone on this list has already indicated, though, it would have to be assigned to a viewer(s) who was blind to the target. Knowing what the target is beforehand makes it difficult to view without interference from the conscious mind and the imagination.
To clarify on the question of actual coordinates, historically, the military believed coordinates (lat and long) were needed. Once targets started appearing for which no coordinates were possible, they realized coordinates were no longer necessary. Now, random coordinates are used -- usually chosen by the project manager, who utilizes various database fields to help him or her organize the material.
Mike, you are correct: It was definitely a mistake for me to engage in responding to Gene's original question. I'm not even sure how I came across the question, as I had never heard of this forum before. Gene seems like a very nice person, and I'm sure his question was in earnest.
Mike, your reply is the "snarky" type that keeps things interesting. I was hoping to contribute something useful, that a lot of us have discussed at length. There are a few attorneys among the remote viewers I know, and they bring up the dangers of litigation now and then when discussing certain types of targets. Your interpretation of my motives is incorrect, but that's ok. I'm sure you know that you are never wrong, LOL!
And Gene, there are definitely ways that the target you suggested could be made into a target for a viewing project. As someone on this list has already indicated, though, it would have to be assigned to a viewer(s) who was blind to the target. Knowing what the target is beforehand makes it difficult to view without interference from the conscious mind and the imagination.
boomerang
Paranormal Adept
Lori, you input here is appreciated.
I can only attempt to explain my reasoning on this subject. My personal impression of remote viewing is that it dwells in that same broad category of all things paranormal. It visits and affects us strictly on its own terms, refusing to yield to our attempts to utilize or study it by traditional cause and effect analysis. RV is supposedly practiced by use of "protocols" developed by dedicated teams in a research setting. To me, the term "protocol" implies some degree of control and utility. I don't mean to sound offensive, but I have not seen evidence of this, at least in the public sector. Such evidence should, in fact, become blatantly obvious over time.
Do I believe some remote viewers, at certain times, score impressions of remote objects and situations that lie outside the bounds of mere chance? I would have to say I do. But who or what is controlling the larger situation? This seems equally true of the UFO, which both stubbornly refuses to cease intrusion into our physical reality, but likewise succeeds in staying just beneath the threshold of conventional believability by actively denying itself in ways that are as astounding as the phenomenon itself.
I can only attempt to explain my reasoning on this subject. My personal impression of remote viewing is that it dwells in that same broad category of all things paranormal. It visits and affects us strictly on its own terms, refusing to yield to our attempts to utilize or study it by traditional cause and effect analysis. RV is supposedly practiced by use of "protocols" developed by dedicated teams in a research setting. To me, the term "protocol" implies some degree of control and utility. I don't mean to sound offensive, but I have not seen evidence of this, at least in the public sector. Such evidence should, in fact, become blatantly obvious over time.
Do I believe some remote viewers, at certain times, score impressions of remote objects and situations that lie outside the bounds of mere chance? I would have to say I do. But who or what is controlling the larger situation? This seems equally true of the UFO, which both stubbornly refuses to cease intrusion into our physical reality, but likewise succeeds in staying just beneath the threshold of conventional believability by actively denying itself in ways that are as astounding as the phenomenon itself.
Randall
J. Randall Murphy
Well, we certainly know the location of Apple's corporate headquarters.
Actually my intel indicates that the public location is merely a decoy and that the real location is hidden
in a secret underwater facility previously disclosed on another thread
... see video reposted below:
in a secret underwater facility previously disclosed on another thread
... see video reposted below:
trainedobserver
Paranormally Disenchanted
Lori,
Has anyone attempted to use Remote Viewing to attempt to uncover what is behind Remote Viewing? Have you ever attempted it? If you have or will, could you share the results?
What is your best guess as to the mechanism behind Remote Viewing?
Has anyone attempted to use Remote Viewing to attempt to uncover what is behind Remote Viewing? Have you ever attempted it? If you have or will, could you share the results?
What is your best guess as to the mechanism behind Remote Viewing?
Jeff Davis
Paranormal Adept
I would think that would be a question for the Akashic Record, more so than the remote viewing process. There is something amiss here and darn it, I'd like to know what that missing link is all about.
I still don't understand this coordinate thing in the least. When I go to the people whom I trust (Targ/Puthoff/Smith/et al, the people at SRI) I see that coordinates are typically used. My question for Lori would be, when the term "random coordinates" is applied within the remote viewing process you're describing , does that mean they are "fake coordinates", or non specific with respect to actual target location? Or are they actual coordinates that are computer randomly assigned to a "blind" number of random viewers?
Remote Viewing leaves me with more questions than answers. If the process is one to be understood, real levels of descriptive certainty with respect to linear process must exist routinely. A seamless comprehensibility. And yet, every time I seem to think I have a handle on the concept, I am one step forward, two steps back. A perfect example would be Ingo Swann's Jupiter rings. When this experience took place, Swann was literally visualizing the planet from the perspective of space itself. Yet so much of what is described as being contemporary acquired RV signal line reception consists of a two party system wherein a documenter accompanying a viewer, record and subsequently decode a low signal to noise consciously acquired subconscious archetypical symbology to produce report. They aren't actually viewing anything wholly image based as if one were envisioning something. There still has to be some means of identifying the target location or orientation within the process however, correct Lori? I mean if all we are doing is making up random, meaningless coordinates, why do it at all? Very confusing, but intriguing as is imaginable.
trainedobserver
Paranormally Disenchanted
I attempted to use the word "attempt" again in that post but the attempt failed, so I'll attempt again here. Sheesh. Sometimes it just ...
Obligatory relevant post:
If Remote Viewing is real and teachable to virtually anyone, the social and political consequences of its popularization would be incalculable and certainly undesirable. It would seem to me that any government sold on its validity would take whatever steps necessary to prevent its widespread and unregulated use.
Remote viewing is used in the 1978 Kirk Douglas movie The Fury. A movie about the weaponization of physic powers.
Tyger
Paranormal Adept
The misunderstanding is that only certain people are 'psychic' when in fact we are all receiving impressions of that order. We have not learned to 'tease out' the wealth of impressions that flow to and through us on-going. Some have - some are very clear as to what is and is 'not them', in a sense, and are adept to ascribing point of origin. Such individuals will confess to 'being psychic'.
The one problem with the below demonstration is that the man who picked out the picture, and has it secreted beside him, is actually in the room with the 'Remote Viewing' neophyte. What may be being demonstrated here is not 'remote viewing' but 'mind reading'.
A better demonstration would be if the 'remote viewer' has no contact with the person who does the pick and the numbers. The person the 'remote viewer' is with in the room should be as clueless as the 'remote viewer' as to the target choice - and should not even have any contact with the person who chose the target.
The question to all of this - I would assume - is mechanism. How does this happen? There has to be an idea/hypothesis regarding what is taking place for the experiments to have a chance at penetrating that 'mechanism' question.
The Akashic Record is a term used from ancient times. In a sense, it is a scientific term from out of a science that is no longer recognized - but it is as precise - from a particular time - as any term used currently in Quantum Physics (which may not do the term, or the ancients, justice, in fact
). However, the thing about it is - that one must be actually at a certain level of awareness or sophistication or experience for the term to make any sense beyond the purely imaginative or sensational. As an idea it has a certain attractiveness - like a Dyson Sphere, for example - but shorn of personal experience it becomes just a term that gets bandied about without any real understanding, particularly of 'mechanism'.
The issue is that we cannot yet assume congruent ideas are taking place. 'Remote Viewing' is based on assumptions - so how it is interpreted is through the filter of those assumptions. From an occult perspective the demonstrations are messy and lacking in rigor - precisely because the subtle 'structure' of the human consciousness/awareness/mental gestalt vis-a-vis the world is really unknown in mainstream science. But we cannot yet say 'remote viewing' is the same as saying - pick a term - 'being psychic'. The science is too nebulous at this point - while the occult may be precise in a sense, those occult terms are also very old, and are in need of refinement themselves. Different times, different humans.
The summation of my thinking on the matter is that the demonstrations need to be far more 'blinded' - and that each demonstration is a reflection of the people involved. There may be different aspects of 'psychism' being demonstrated with different 'remote viewers'. That will only become clear with meticulous observation and record keeping. In fact, the experimenter must sophisticate and learn the subtleties of this arena and what the questions are that should be asked.
The one problem with the below demonstration is that the man who picked out the picture, and has it secreted beside him, is actually in the room with the 'Remote Viewing' neophyte. What may be being demonstrated here is not 'remote viewing' but 'mind reading'.
A better demonstration would be if the 'remote viewer' has no contact with the person who does the pick and the numbers. The person the 'remote viewer' is with in the room should be as clueless as the 'remote viewer' as to the target choice - and should not even have any contact with the person who chose the target.
The question to all of this - I would assume - is mechanism. How does this happen? There has to be an idea/hypothesis regarding what is taking place for the experiments to have a chance at penetrating that 'mechanism' question.
The Akashic Record is a term used from ancient times. In a sense, it is a scientific term from out of a science that is no longer recognized - but it is as precise - from a particular time - as any term used currently in Quantum Physics (which may not do the term, or the ancients, justice, in fact
). However, the thing about it is - that one must be actually at a certain level of awareness or sophistication or experience for the term to make any sense beyond the purely imaginative or sensational. As an idea it has a certain attractiveness - like a Dyson Sphere, for example - but shorn of personal experience it becomes just a term that gets bandied about without any real understanding, particularly of 'mechanism'.The issue is that we cannot yet assume congruent ideas are taking place. 'Remote Viewing' is based on assumptions - so how it is interpreted is through the filter of those assumptions. From an occult perspective the demonstrations are messy and lacking in rigor - precisely because the subtle 'structure' of the human consciousness/awareness/mental gestalt vis-a-vis the world is really unknown in mainstream science. But we cannot yet say 'remote viewing' is the same as saying - pick a term - 'being psychic'. The science is too nebulous at this point - while the occult may be precise in a sense, those occult terms are also very old, and are in need of refinement themselves. Different times, different humans.
The summation of my thinking on the matter is that the demonstrations need to be far more 'blinded' - and that each demonstration is a reflection of the people involved. There may be different aspects of 'psychism' being demonstrated with different 'remote viewers'. That will only become clear with meticulous observation and record keeping. In fact, the experimenter must sophisticate and learn the subtleties of this arena and what the questions are that should be asked.
Did you not watch a single video i posted ?
The answer is in them
As Lori said, the military originally used longitude latitude co-ordinates, but geographic co-ordinates are limited in scope.
What do you use if the target is on the moon ? mars ?
The modern protocol is to use a set of 8 random generated numbers, associate these "co-ordinates" or as they are better known TRN's (target reference numbers) with the target.
These are used to start the session
Thats why this statement
Is invalid, one could take a photo of the plane, generate and assign a TRN to the photo and the viewer could go from there, The geographical co-ordinates are not necessary for such a task.
The adherants of Remote viewing claim they can RM the other side of the universe as easy as they can the house next door.......
In that context geographical co-ordinates ie Longitude/Latitude are small in their scope and not necessary (though they may have once been used as TRN's)
And in my opinion you didnt
Sorry but i see this all the time with those claiming special powerzzzzzz
They internalise the
"i can do it" theme, while externalising the "i dont have to prove it" mantra
Sometimes there is a convenient escape clause, like i could curse you, but it would come back on me threefold so i wont...... But i can do it if i need to.....
I reminds me of the advice re falling off a horse or bicycle, ie get straight back on or your confidence will take a hit and cripple you mentally.
I see this time and time again with the woo woo brigade, a claim of amazing powerzzzzzz, but a convenient escape clause so they dont ever have to face a situation where that claim falls flat on its face. (and thus shatter that internal i CAN do it dialog)
Youve made lots of claims, but weve seen no real case examples, no testimonials. Just adverts for courses etc etc
If you talk the talk, you gotta walk the walk.
Talking the talk, while insisting you dont gotta walk the walk for anyone is a hollow claim in my book
Just my opinion, its worth no more than the time it took to type, but then the same can be said for your claims here too
Its all good
For those who may think i'm being "snarky" , I just dont give out free passes to anyone who makes a claim
Notwithstanding the remote viewer doesnt choose the target, we have a claim of "professional"
So we have a claim of great competence,
And then of course the hand out for money aspect
Like Gene i have an open mind on RV, but ive also run across some shonky ppl, who make claim to RV skills
On one site i had not one but two people claiming to have great skills in this area RV me.
One claimed i was "not human"
Another claimed to have sensed an energy pattern identical to certain bad ET's they had been dealing with........
Of course the audience in this little circus lapped this up, it was far far more exciting then the sad reality neither of these two RV experts could actually get anything of any real substance in regards to me.
So you'll forgive me if i am unwilling to give a free pass to people who make grandiose claims, then stick their hands out demanding money, while simultaneously refusing to provide any evidence for the skill they want to charge money for.
I hear Silvia Browne's audience is looking for someone new to throw money at.
Its just not in my nature to hand out a free pass to someone making such large claims, who also refuses to provide any thing to substantiate those claims and then sticks their hand out and says give me money
Its nothing personal, but that pattern is an automatic red flag to me.
A professional, someone so good at the skill they lay claim to they get paid for doing it, shouldnt need to make excuses as to why they wont present a single example to back those claims.
Notwithstanding her first response seems to show a complete lack of understanding of even the basic premise behind the process, ie the viewer does not choose the target, doing so would invalidate the process. Something she later recognises on the fly
Which contradicts the orginal statement
Sorry but between the contradictions, the claims of great skill, refusal to provide any proof of said claim, and the demand for money despite that......
Something doesnt feel right to me
We dont give Greer or Browne a free pass for this sort of stuff
Sorry but when someone claims they are so good at something they should be paid for doing it, but then refuses to demonstrate that skill, insisting the claim should stand without proof......
Notwithstanding the remote viewer doesnt choose the target, we have a claim of "professional"
So we have a claim of great competence,
And then of course the hand out for money aspect
Like Gene i have an open mind on RV, but ive also run across some shonky ppl, who make claim to RV skills
On one site i had not one but two people claiming to have great skills in this area RV me.
One claimed i was "not human"
Another claimed to have sensed an energy pattern identical to certain bad ET's they had been dealing with........
Of course the audience in this little circus lapped this up, it was far far more exciting then the sad reality neither of these two RV experts could actually get anything of any real substance in regards to me.
So you'll forgive me if i am unwilling to give a free pass to people who make grandiose claims, then stick their hands out demanding money, while simultaneously refusing to provide any evidence for the skill they want to charge money for.
I hear Silvia Browne's audience is looking for someone new to throw money at.
Its just not in my nature to hand out a free pass to someone making such large claims, who also refuses to provide any thing to substantiate those claims and then sticks their hand out and says give me money
Its nothing personal, but that pattern is an automatic red flag to me.
A professional, someone so good at the skill they lay claim to they get paid for doing it, shouldnt need to make excuses as to why they wont present a single example to back those claims.
Notwithstanding her first response seems to show a complete lack of understanding of even the basic premise behind the process, ie the viewer does not choose the target, doing so would invalidate the process. Something she later recognises on the fly
Which contradicts the orginal statement
Sorry but between the contradictions, the claims of great skill, refusal to provide any proof of said claim, and the demand for money despite that......
Something doesnt feel right to me
We dont give Greer or Browne a free pass for this sort of stuff
Sorry but when someone claims they are so good at something they should be paid for doing it, but then refuses to demonstrate that skill, insisting the claim should stand without proof......
Kieran
Paranormal Adept
Daz Smith, but he did produce possibly creditable results that demonstrated some sort of unusual abilities. Gene tell us more?
Jeff Davis
Paranormal Adept
Mike,
Your video is by no means, the be all, end all, of remote viewing. I offered a link prior, or in response to the video that you posted, that apparently you basically ignored. It directly contradicts your claims about "random coordinates" and is coming from SRI which IMO, is about the only credible source for remote viewing information that I am familiar with.
Mike, I gotta state for the record. You have been mighty presumptuous lately. I showed you direct evidence that what you claimed concerning your short version of Schrodinger's cat experiement was wrong. Then I offered you a link in this very thread that you apparently didn't read yet. Have a look. Please man, your opinion is not the only one that matters here. OK?
I did read your link, but as stated thats an outdated method.
Your original premise that RV requires precise geographical co-ordinates is just flat out wrong, and the statement shows a complete lack of understanding of even the basic premise behind RV.
Opinions are one thing the facts another, the latter not being open to personal interpretation
The fact is the old geographical co-ordinates were used, and they worked in the same way as the random number TRN's that are now used
But they are limited in scope, they can only reference locations on earth and RV is allegedly capable of seeing anywhere in time and space
Home
Your question has been answered, by me, by the videos i linked and Lori. If you dont like the answer , fine. Feel free to believe whatever floats your boat
But your claim viewers need "precise (geographical) co-ordinates" is wrong, they dont.
Ive linked to demos that show RV can allegedly work just using random generated TRN's
As for the discussion about schrodingers cat, you claimed reality is created by conciousness, i countered that the universe aka reality is far older than conciousness, weve only been here 200,000 years tops.
Im satisfied ive made my case and dont intend to debate your nonsense any further
The universe existed long before conciousness, the claim conciousness creates reality is mystical nonsense. Yes conciousness filters and presents a limited picture of reality, but it cant "create" something that predates it by billions of years.
Dont confuse presents with creates, Conciousness presents us with a filtered view of reality, but it does not create it. How can it ?. Reality predates conciousness both on the macro and micro scale.
It existed before "we" as a species were conscious, and it existed before "you" as an individual was conscious.
Lesson over, class dismissed
Last edited by a moderator:
On a kinder, gentler note
Coordinate remote viewing is real, thats not in dispute.
Whats in dispute is the claim that
This is dead wrong and shows a lack of knowledge about the larger RV phenomena, you do not need precise (geographical) co-ordinates, it was to this inaccuracy that i responded.
You are chuckling from a place of ignorance and i felt duty bound to set the record straight.
Yes GCO's can be used, but they are not as your statement asserts as fact essential
Now on to that cat
Schrödinger's cat - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Its not meant to be a serious description of reality
And we can demonstrate this with a revised version of the experiment.
Cat goes in box with the trigger mechanism of your choice , ie radioactive particles with a half life of X, or random gas release etc etx
We wait 150 years..........and open the box
Is the cat dead or alive ?
Its dead, the observer has no effect, its not in a state of quantum flux until the box is opened, its dead.
We could perform this experiment 10,000 times and it will be the same everytime, a dead cat
Coordinate remote viewing is real, thats not in dispute.
Whats in dispute is the claim that
This is dead wrong and shows a lack of knowledge about the larger RV phenomena, you do not need precise (geographical) co-ordinates, it was to this inaccuracy that i responded.
You are chuckling from a place of ignorance and i felt duty bound to set the record straight.
Yes GCO's can be used, but they are not as your statement asserts as fact essential
Remote Viewing - Defense Intelligence Agency Coordinate Remote Viewing Manual (CRV Manual) |
Now on to that cat
Schrödinger's cat - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Its not meant to be a serious description of reality
And we can demonstrate this with a revised version of the experiment.
Cat goes in box with the trigger mechanism of your choice , ie radioactive particles with a half life of X, or random gas release etc etx
We wait 150 years..........and open the box
Is the cat dead or alive ?
Its dead, the observer has no effect, its not in a state of quantum flux until the box is opened, its dead.
We could perform this experiment 10,000 times and it will be the same everytime, a dead cat
Jeff Davis
Paranormal Adept
This is TOTAL BULLSHIT Mike. Never, and I repeat I NEVER, stated that reality is created by consciousness. Please quote me where I stated what you claim I stated. What you did is claim that observation has nothing to do with the experiment, and that my friend is also total BULLSHIT.
Let me ask you a question Mike, if I could. Are you an expert on Remote Viewing? Didn't think so. Have you contacted SRI to actually learn for yourself what you are claiming to know and understand that you DO NOT, at all? Didn't think so.
BTW, I have responded to the BS Schrodinger's Cat post too. You are wrong there too when you claimed to be right. This is not a class room Mike. If it were you would be sitting in the corner facing away from the class, maybe with one of those little hats on, I dunno.
Self Importance does not serve you well Sir. I would suggest adopting a more so passive path with respect to matters theoretical, and as yet, uncertain.
Bye.
What utter nonsense, reality existed for billions of years before we had ears, and it most certaianly does exist apart from the human condition.
It existed long before we did, and would continue to exist long after we are all dust.
Conciousness is like the screen at the cinema, It is that which the movie is displayed on, it does not create the movie it presents it
You've made the mistake of thinking of SC as a real experiment, it isnt
It is more accurate to describe it as measuring the ignorance effect, the observer is ignorant of the cats actual state until he opens the box and looks in, but the cat is either one or the other it is not "both" thats a ridiculous premise
Not even schrodinger wanted to promote that as a serious proposition.
Schrödinger himself is rumored to have said, later in life, that he wished he had never met that cat.
As for being an expert in RV or any of the other silly questions youve posed in a desperate attempt to "not be wrong" i dont need to meet any of those conditions to prove
Is dead wrong
Ive posted links to target reference number generators on RV sites and videos showing viewers apparently doing a sucessful viewing using just a TRN and not precise geographical coordinates
The claim as absolute fact that you need precise coordinates, is proven false, it was so patently wrong i dont need to be an expert to prove it, the links and examples ive provided do that easily enough.
You were wrong, you dont need precise coordinates, get over it
Last edited by a moderator: