Noise Quiz

Glenn, Since I’m new at this, it will be interesting to see what the answers are. Valerie

1. IF 2 TARGETEERS TASK DIFFERENT TARGETS USING THE SAME TARGET NUMBER DOES IT CREATE A CONFLICT FOR THE VIEWERS?

Theoretically it should not. Isn’t it the intent and question that is given the target that is important The target numbers, alphas, etc. are something to focus on initially and are just random.

2. IF YOU ALWAYS USE THE SAME TARGET NUMBER REGARDLESS OF TARGET DOES THIS CREATE A CONFLICT FOR THE VIEWER?

I think it shouldn’t if the viewer does not let the idea that the same numbers are always being used, distract him/her.

3. IF 2 DIFFERENT TARGETS WITH THE SAME TARGET NUMBER ARE WORKED BY INEXPERIENCED VIEWERS WILL HE/SHE GENERATE DATA FROM BOTH THE TARGETS?

Don’t you usually work one target at a time. I may be misunderstanding the question. Is this question similiar to question 2. Once again it’s the focus, intent and question given the target.

4. IF 2 DIFFERENT TARGETS WITH THE SAME TARGET NUMBER ARE WORKED BY ADVANCED VIEWERS WILL HE/SHE GENERATE DATA FROM BOTH TARGETS?

Same as question 3 and 2. It may be discipline from distraction that is key to keeping the focus on the intent of the target.

5. IF 100 TARGETS SHARE THE SAME TARGET NUMBER “AND” YOU GOT THE TARGET NUMBER FROM A WEB PAGE OF POPULAR TARGET NUMBERS, WHICH TARGET WILL YOU SEE IF YOU WORK THE TARGET NUMBER?

My guess is that you will see the target provided from the web page.

What are your answers to the above questions?

Aloha

>

I was about to post a similar question.. but Glenn beat me to it. According to PSI tech this works sort of like a cosmic data base. The target cue is like a string of search terms. The numbers are a way to track the cue and target. The numbers get the viewer to the target cued to that number.

So lets say tomorrow you select a target number:

2120-6100

“Amelia Earhart/Disappearance/Event/July2, 1937

And what if 16 years ago the military just happened to have used the same number number:

2120-6100 but cued to a different target

“Bamburovo Infantry Training Facility/

Vladivostok, Russia/current time

Would that send unconscious into a tizzy?

1. IF 2 TARGETEERS TASK DIFFERENT TARGETS USING THE SAME TARGET NUMBER DOES IT CREATE A CONFLICT FOR THE VIEWERS?

Probably. But its my understanding if a number is generated and assigned within a closed local loop (like among people working together at the Hawaii Guild.. or people working together training with Pru) then the viewer should be able to go to the target intended by the person they’ve working closely with.

2. IF YOU ALWAYS USE THE SAME TARGET NUMBER REGARDLESS OF TARGET DOES THIS CREATE A CONFLICT FOR THE VIEWER?

I think it would probably give you an aneurysm.

3. IF 2 DIFFERENT TARGETS WITH THE SAME TARGET NUMBER ARE WORKED BY INEXPERIENCED VIEWERS WILL HE/SHE GENERATE DATA FROM BOTH THE TARGETS?

Yes. We tested this in class. One target number on the outside of the envelope. Inside the envelope.. two different targets cued to that number. We morphed them. It was an interesting experiment.

4. IF 2 DIFFERENT TARGETS WITH THE SAME TARGET NUMBER ARE WORKED BY ADVANCED VIEWERS WILL HE/SHE GENERATE DATA FROM BOTH TARGETS?

Probably most of the people discussing RV on the internet don’t even KNOW an advanced viewer, let alone understand the capabilities of one.

5. IF 100 TARGETS SHARE THE SAME TARGET NUMBER “AND” YOU GOT THE TARGET NUMBER FROM A WEB PAGE OF POPULAR TARGET NUMBERS, WHICH TARGET WILL YOU SEE IF YOU WORK THE TARGET NUMBER?

I wondered if PSI tech wasn’t testing this question. When I got my Module One tape, I also received a card with a list of “target numbers” for students to use. Didn’t the thousands of PSI tech tape students use and reuse these numbers cued to different targets?

At any rate, given a number of targets cued to the same number, you might go to the target of greatest interest to your sub, if you really have your head wired on straight. Most likely you would throw your pen down and say “I don’t know what’s wrong with me tonight!”

Dick,

The coordinates are for refernce purposes only. The person creating the target and who assigns the coordinates has basically told the Matrix what it is looking for. The Matrix does not take a look at any other person that has allocated these numbers and get “in a tizzy”. This is why you cannot get a computer generated target/coordiates. It is the “act” of a human doing this that is the key.

Martin…

Dick,

The coordinates are for refernce purposes only. The person creating the target and who assigns the coordinates has basically told the Matrix what it is looking for. The Matrix does not take a look at any other person that has allocated these numbers and get “in a tizzy”. This is why you cannot get a computer generated target/coordiates. It is the “act” of a human doing this that is the key.

Martin…

Exactly. We agree there. It is the human intent that is the most important thing. As long as the targeteer has a clear intent of what the target is… that is the most important thing. Isn’t it facsinating that this works? That out of all the possible events in the history of the universe… you can send someone’s subconscious awareness to the correct pattern of information or energy? That boggles my mind.

I’ll take a shot.

1. IF 2 TARGETEERS TASK DIFFERENT TARGETS USING THE SAME TARGET NUMBER DOES IT CREATE A CONFLICT FOR THE VIEWERS?

No.

2. IF YOU ALWAYS USE THE SAME TARGET NUMBER REGARDLESS OF TARGET DOES THIS CREATE A CONFLICT FOR THE VIEWER?

No.

3. IF 2 DIFFERENT TARGETS WITH THE SAME TARGET NUMBER ARE WORKED BY INEXPERIENCED VIEWERS WILL HE/SHE GENERATE DATA FROM BOTH THE TARGETS?

No, if by inexperienced you mean the viewer is focused on the target number rather than the target.

4. IF 2 DIFFERENT TARGETS WITH THE SAME TARGET NUMBER ARE WORKED BY ADVANCED VIEWERS WILL HE/SHE GENERATE DATA FROM BOTH TARGETS?

Yes, if by advanced you mean the viewer recognizes the target number as being inconsequential to viewing the target.

5. IF 100 TARGETS SHARE THE SAME TARGET NUMBER “AND” YOU GOT THE TARGET NUMBER FROM A WEB PAGE OF POPULAR TARGET NUMBERS, WHICH TARGET WILL YOU SEE IF YOU WORK THE TARGET NUMBER?

The target intended to be seen.

Martin, your comments present somewhat of a dilemma. A conflict arises with the premise of

“The Matrix does not take a look at any other person that has allocated these numbers and get “in a tizzy”.

If the mechanics of Remote Viewing function as understood and targets can indeed be done blind or double blind then it is the relationship between the cue and the target(s) that establishes connectivity. Since the collective is not an intelligence, but an environment, it does not stand to logic that it would be so discriminating. If your premise was correct then blind targets would not work any better than computer generated targets. I would also add that computer generated targeting is not the dismal failure as believed. The success rate is not near that of human assisted targeting, but has shown some results. It is an interesting concept to wrestle with. Your premise also makes a case for residual overlay with the target number. (a favorite of mine). ALoha

Glenn,

You say that the matrix does not discriminate. So when given a cue, are you saying that the Matrix makes no decisions as to what it thinks you want ? Have you ever come up with a cue that you looked at afterwards and said, “hmm, my cue was so ambiguous !”. Did you get data back though ? I bet you do if you were in your RV structure. So what was the data that came back ? A totally random set of data, or was it what the next best thing that the Matrix decided to give you ?

If the Matrix is all events, all unconcious, etc, there is no better decision maker. I personally like to believe that the Matrix is God. When you look at it that way, you start to think, well maybe the Matrix does decide.

No matter what I say or you say, there will always be doubts, scepticisms, semantics. I say that these kinds of things get in the way of the advancement of Remote viewing. However one achieves the goal, is a separate subject. The proof is in the pudding Glenn. Until we all agree on a set of targets that can be RV’d by each of the groups, and the results looked at, no one is going to know what is right. Many theories and hypothesis can be made that are difficult to agree or disagree with. We wont get anywhere until we proove things to the public.

I as an independent RVer would meet this challenge if asked to. I have no doubts about TRV for example, that it works. I am sure you have no doubts about HRVG and I am sure SRV/CRV/TDS people feal the same. However I am certain that very few people will accept this challenge.

Working together with all the groups is my aim, it is not to put down individuals or protocols. I never believed that any of this RV stuff was true until I did it.

It is good to be able to discuss these things isnt it ?

Martin…

OK ! Martin’s comments about the noise not being evident in the numeric pool has prompted this quiz? Questionaire? to see if by asking the right questions if a concept will be understood better.

1. IF 2 TARGETEERS TASK DIFFERENT TARGETS USING THE SAME TARGET NUMBER DOES IT CREATE A CONFLICT FOR THE VIEWERS?

Definitely Not

2. IF YOU ALWAYS USE THE SAME TARGET NUMBER REGARDLESS OF TARGET DOES THIS CREATE A CONFLICT FOR THE VIEWER?

Definitely Not

3. IF 2 DIFFERENT TARGETS WITH THE SAME TARGET NUMBER ARE WORKED BY INEXPERIENCED VIEWERS WILL HE/SHE GENERATE DATA FROM BOTH THE TARGETS?

Definitely Not

4. IF 2 DIFFERENT TARGETS WITH THE SAME TARGET NUMBER ARE WORKED BY ADVANCED VIEWERS WILL HE/SHE GENERATE DATA FROM BOTH TARGETS?

Definitely not

5. IF 100 TARGETS SHARE THE SAME TARGET NUMBER “AND” YOU GOT THE TARGET NUMBER FROM A WEB PAGE OF POPULAR TARGET NUMBERS, WHICH TARGET WILL YOU SEE IF YOU WORK THE TARGET NUMBER?

You will get data only from those targets assigned by a human.

C’est tres simple, n’est pas ?

Martin…

Yes it is very nice to be able to express opinions openly in public… I agree that we can all learn from eachother, and that by some of us working together we can help with the evolution of Remote Viewing. I may have learned TRV, and as a graduate I know it works, and I do not doubt the validity of all the other forms. As such I would love to see us begin testing the various forms, to see possibly which ones give more accurate data in which areas..

Let me know if there is anything I can do to help,

Di (Diana)

Yes,

It is good to see some spirited yet friendly debate.

Martin, what I think would be really interesting… rather that put up “tests” for each other over the net….(although we could do that too)..

It would be great to get together for a bit of time and work targets together using various protocols. I think we would all get valid data..but it would be interesting to see how it came out differently…and which forms are best at getting different aspects.

Glenn is not married to the idea of his protocols (not HIS, but those he learned in the Army) being the end all of remote viewing. He would like to have TRVers and other practices as members of the guild, to test things out just as you have suggested.

And one more thing…. I can’t say how much we appreciate your chat site at

www.marty.com

Hummmm…. where did we get to the point that if we disagree on either content or delivery that it is somehow an affront. Remote Viewing is an amazing field, where all players are pioneers they have passionate expressions about their experiences. Blanket agreement is not a healthy thing because we stop thinking and exploring. I do not know how this issue got to be such a big deal, and we do not want it to become devisive.

You say that the matrix does not discriminate. So when given a cue, are you saying that the Matrix makes no decisions as to what it thinks you want ? Have you ever come up with a cue that you looked at afterwards and said, “hmm, my cue was so ambiguous !”. Did you get data back though ?

The intention of the person writing the cue is the dominate factor, over the words. If the intention is clear even if the words are not, you will go to target. On the other hand a target with a good cue can be messed up by poor intention, because the link is poorly made. My conclusion about this comes not only from Glenn’s training but from my experience as a minister and spiritual therapist.

If the Matrix is all events, all unconcious, etc, there is no better decision maker. I personally like to believe that the Matrix is God. When you look at it that way, you start to think, well maybe the Matrix does decide.

I personally think of the matrix as a gigantic hard disk. The storage medium of all the electro magnetic signitures of every event large or small that has ever happened. My experience doing regressions for 20 years has exposed me to a very different perspective on consciousness and the dymanics of the life force.. which is where I believe God exists.. not in the matrix. Now this does not make either one of us right or wrong. Like the blind monks describing the elephant, we are all approaching this from a different angle, and so have a different part of the puzzle.

As you say time will tell, the more we do, open to letting RV teach us, the more we will grow and our beliefs will change.

>…. It is good to be able to discuss these things isnt it ?

We have enjoyed many discussions in the past. Obviously each of us on our own sites will present information the way we see it and believe it to be true, but this is not an insult or a challenge to any other oponions.

We support open discussion here, and obviously we will not always agree but we would like to have a friendly board.

Aloha Yaana

If the use of target IDs is for reference only are not the above questions invalid? The tasker’ sintent is the driving force is it not?

Now, if the tasker’s intent is the driving force, how do such things as pasting a feedback target on a plain sheet of paper to prevent “contamination” from whatever may be on the other side of the feedback photo have any relevancy?

Another “problem” in have heard of is having more than one target in the work area.

Is the tasker’s intent an overwhelming force or are there other influences such as the above mentioned that can influence a session?

While I am at it……is there such a thing as an unambiguous target…..such as the surface of the sun….which would leave very little room for variances in data? In other words….a calibration test target or standard. Would not a target such as this serve best for the comparison studies mentioned in this thread?

Rich… you bring up an interesting point about having multiple targets in the work area. We’ve had several occasions of this in class, which we’ll get around to posting on the site.

The instructor brought in two target envelopes with two targets, well cued, different numbers. One was selected and we shot the target.

A couple of viewers drew absolutely perfect sketches of the target in the OTHER envelope… the one we were not supposed to be viewing.

Go figure.