Survey!

I need to make a list of reasons remote viewers do not produce data congruent to the target they have been tasked.

What went wrong? Why did you appear to miss the target you were assigned? And what caused you to produce this errant data?

Examples:

1. I remote viewed a different future timeline.

2. Telepathic Overlay.

3. I went to a more important target.

Please list as many reasons as you have experienced, and why you feel they occured.

Please let’s refrain from arguing the theory behind any of this in this thread. I just need raw data for a project- not trying to debate at this time.

Thanks

Dick

Blown targets? (Maybe your talking about something else, but you’ve got to call a spade a spade. If your data is not congruent with a target you have direct feedback on then it’s "blown".)

Well, for me its…

#1 Caught up in "thinking" or analyzing during the session…Having an idea of what the target might be that you just can’t fully shake off. This always causes a blown target.

#2 Physiological. Just can’t seem to focus at that time…tired, or mind is "churning" too much on another day to day problem that you can’t seem to drop during the session.

#3 Noise…be it sound or kinesthetic noise (lots of activity or movement happening in the next room or nearby). Night seems to be the best RV time for me and I suspect it’s because of lower audio and kinesthetic noise.

#4 Unknown??? But for some ungodly reason ;-) we’ve all had those targets that we just can’t seem to get data from. Despite sticking to protocol, performing the session with all the focus and intent, and being meticulous about everything…the data just doesn’t seem to be there no matter how hard you try. Anyone can figure out what’s causing this I’d sure love to hear about it?

On the contrast, we’ve all had those targets where the data just flowed easily and the "signal" was much stronger then normal.

So not to pollute Dick’s survey, but I’d sure like to hear the flip side…

What causes you to perform above and beyond your day to day performance level?

Hey Dick,

The biggest problem has got to be the imagination monster, when it comes to missed targets.

On the flip side of this, I would have to admit that your description of the "duh" state, seems to be the thing that will nail down the target for you. Learning to "groom" this mind-state would increase a viewers target contact.

J.P.

Dick,

We put way too much importance on prolonged peak performance. Especially in our study of cognitive abilities it is so easy to forget we are dealing with organic processes here. It is so easy to attribute a decline in ability to environmental stress, a lack of discipline, or something "going wrong". Much more difficult to recognize however are our innate limitations. Ebbs and flows in our natural abilities are normal. To be ‘on’ for prolonged periods of time is very difficult and depleting. Even Olympic training programs for athletes have fixed cycles of resting, then building, followed by performance bursts, then they repeat. If you are in a resting period, you simply shouldn’t be competing "for time". Your results are sure to be disappointing and well off your bests. I would argue occasional poor performance is not negative – it’s natural. Perhaps the expectations were unrealistic. Rather than discounting negative performance, try to value it, and try to chart a measurable cycle. Then work to ‘train’ and control these performance cycles so when necessary you can back-time from a performance window, cycle through your program, and be in the zone exactly when it counts the most.

The flip side, yes. I think that is a very good question. I’ve not done a lot of RV and I’ve not been very disciplined in what I did. Yet, I’ve done a huge amount of researching the state of mind that engenders PSI. This includes a good 1000 hours of experiments as well as a lot of reading etc. The BIGGEST thing that I’ve come across is the "First Time Effect" in many different forms. The first time very often has an innocence to it. Jesus was reported to have said, ".. unless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven." This child like innocence is part of what is needed.

Remember when the HRVG class RV’ed in low lights the first time? The results were great. People were out of their box just a bit as a result of the low lighting. Did the good results continue with low lighting? I’ll bet not. I’ve also noticed great results when there is a distraction, when ones "gives up" and just goes through the motions", or when one comes back from a long vacation and is feeling fresh and free. Also, the first time I experimented being a little drunk worked great, but not the second time. Almost anytime one is in a different environment etc. J.B. Rhine remarked that he noticed that having someone in a new environment often produced great results. His most famous subject did 25 out of 25 Zener cards while being taken for a ride in Mr. Rhine’s car.

So not to pollute Dick’s survey, but I’d sure like to hear the flip side…

What causes you to perform above and beyond your day to day performance level?

Most often has been the "certainty" that " this can’t be right" It occurred most often with very simple targets….those with very little data to "view"……
a jelley bean or a statue.

I can’t say that any of the samples you give occured because usually I have no way to determine that.

Rich

Aloha Dick,

I am sure that many consider in the post feedback analysis the quality of their performance during the session. If there is a failure to produce definable congruent data then the dilemma arises as to "Why". We all like to think that perhaps there is an external cause for our failure but in reality it’s just Remote Viewing. In an area where we are not intelligent enough to understand the process we employ we are confronted with a need to diagnose why an RV event did not occur.

This is not intended to be a belittlement of anyone or anything, but more of an awareness that every time we Remote View it is an exploration of mind. We train and evaluate, retrain and yet re-evaluate. We have cause to identify only one real culprit to the process and that is the ingress of non-target related noise. I have seen it given many names and many origins from the yappy dogs outside to the ever-evil telepathic overlay, but still the human is resilient if one adopts a discipline of mind conducive to cancellation of internal/external noise.

Many times I have had to reconcile a lack of data using excuses much like we hear (and use) from time to time, but I know that each time it was to stabilize and indemnify myself against the greater sense of failure which would cause ego and confidence levels to drop.

Noise management or a failure to manage noise is the only reason I have every done less than what was needed. Somewhere along the way I decided not to link my confidence or ego to RV performance, that was when the worm turned for me. While I have left footprints all over this old world, none are as important as the mind that made them… to me.

Glenn

To play devils advocate…

Yes, noise of any kind, sorting the noise from the target "signal" is very important for remote viewers.

However, I’d suggest that there is more going on here…

What about the strength of the target signal? Surely we have all had sessions where the percepts seemed stronger. We didn’t have to strain to perceive the target signal. The percepts were just there, loud and clear. Was this because the noise level was less? Was it because we were more keyed into the signal?

Or…

Are there variables that we have not yet figured out that determine our contact with the target?

We do not yet know just how the Remote Viewing process works. We do know it does work, but how it works is pure speculation.

If we all share the same neurology then if one person can do it then we all can do it…that’s a basic tenant of NLP. However, perhaps there are variables outside of neurological factors that determine PSI function.

I would suggest that if we are able to uncover each and every variable to the Remote Viewing process and are able to measure those variables we would be able to determine with 100% accuracy if the remote viewer sitting down to start a session is going to produce accurate data or not.

Not only that, through a more "real-time" feedback process we would be able to train remote viewers much more elegantly then we do now.

Imagine knowing that very second if you were "on signal" or not…rather then finding out at the end of the session.

With current biofeedback a person can learn to control their heart and other sympathetic nervous system functions. Imagine if that same person was trying to do the same thing with delayed feedback. Of course it’s going to be a frustrating process without the real-time feedback.

Well, I would suggest to the remote viewing community that more thought and experimentation needs to be channeled into this type of research.

Otherwise, no matter how hard we try, there will continue to be a few remote viewers who intuitively learn how to produce exceptional data, and a whole lot of remote viewers who produce so-so data most the time and a few exceptional hits now and then.

To be operationally effective all the time…

To solve many of the problems we face…
To evolve remote viewing to the next level…

…the process must become much more elegant. And the data resolution must be increased.

No offense to the RV community, but right now we are dealing with a "Module T". But to get to the moon we need a rocket. The current "Module T" we have can and will evolve into that rocket. The question is how and when.

So let’s not get dogmatic in our thinking. The same level of thinking that created current RV won’t be the level of thinking that will evolve it to the next level.

No one really understands this process. Everyone has their theories and modules. But no one has figured out all the variables to this process yet and no one has figured out how to measure and track these variables.

If they have then I’d sure like to hear more about it.

Hello, Nemo

Interesting points – ‘I still have a whole-lot to learn about remote viewing’; But, would like to explore your comment … "Otherwise, no matter how hard we try, there will continue to be a few viewers who intuitively learn how to produce exceptional data," …

I would like to look at – ‘Intuition and emotions …’

I am going to use the book, "The Sedona Method" – ISBN 0-9719334-1-3; by: Hale Dwoskin. {Pg. 76 & 77}, "Uncover Your Intuition" …

Hale Dwoskin writes, "Although limiting feelings may seem to arise from the same place below conscious awareness as intuition does, intuition is actually the natural knowing of our true nature that gets obstructed by emotions. When we release, we uncover intuition."

"Lester Levenson used to say, – ‘Intuition is only right 100 percent of the time.’ Until you can tell the difference between your intuition and your emotional reactions, you may find this hard to accept. So, use the process of letting go to distinguish more easily between them. You can not release intuition. In fact, the more you release, the more intuitive you’ll be – …"

What, I am looking at – "May this help us, to have a clearer signal line and still, stay within remote viewing protocol?"

Still putting the pieces together, jimmy

To play devils advocate…

Yes, noise of any kind, sorting the noise from the target "signal" is very important for remote viewers.

However, I’d suggest that there is more going on here…

What about the strength of the target signal? Surely we have all had sessions where the percepts seemed stronger. We didn’t have to strain to perceive the target signal. The percepts were just there, loud and clear. Was this because the noise level was less? Was it because we were more keyed into the signal?

Or…

Are there variables that we have not yet figured out that determine our contact with the target?

We do not yet know just how the Remote Viewing process works. We do know it does work, but how it works is pure speculation.

If we all share the same neurology then if one person can do it then we all can do it…that’s a basic tenant of NLP. However, perhaps there are variables outside of neurological factors that determine PSI function.

I would suggest that if we are able to uncover each and every variable to the Remote Viewing process and are able to measure those variables we would be able to determine with 100% accuracy if the remote viewer sitting down to start a session is going to produce accurate data or not.

Not only that, through a more "real-time" feedback process we would be able to train remote viewers much more elegantly then we do now.

Imagine knowing that very second if you were "on signal" or not…rather then finding out at the end of the session.

With current biofeedback a person can learn to control their heart and other sympathetic nervous system functions. Imagine if that same person was trying to do the same thing with delayed feedback. Of course it’s going to be a frustrating process without the real-time feedback.

Well, I would suggest to the remote viewing community that more thought and experimentation needs to be channeled into this type of research.

Otherwise, no matter how hard we try, there will continue to be a few remote viewers who intuitively learn how to produce exceptional data, and a whole lot of remote viewers who produce so-so data most the time and a few exceptional hits now and then.

To be operationally effective all the time… To solve many of the problems we face… To evolve remote viewing to the next level…

…the process must become much more elegant. And the data resolution must be increased.

No offense to the RV community, but right now we are dealing with a "Module T". But to get to the moon we need a rocket. The current "Module T" we have can and will evolve into that rocket. The question is how and when.

So let’s not get dogmatic in our thinking. The same level of thinking that created current RV won’t be the level of thinking that will evolve it to the next level.

No one really understands this process. Everyone has their theories and modules. But no one has figured out all the variables to this process yet and no one has figured out how to measure and track these variables.

If they have then I’d sure like to hear more about it.

Please accept my apologies in advance if I get flippant or patronizing… but here goes;

What about the strength of the target signal?

Rule Two of Remote Viewing!

When you do a bad session, always blame the targeteer. We have elevated this to an art form at HRVG, but it is not a very good excuse.

Surely we have all had sessions where the percepts seemed stronger. We didn’t have to strain to perceive the target signal. The percepts were just there, loud and clear. Was this because the noise level was less? Was it because we were more keyed into the signal?

Have you ever read a really good book, where you were not aware of turning the pages, where you were totally caught up in the story? Have you ever read a terrible book where couldn’t remember the content of the last two paragraphs?

Are there variables that we have not yet figured out that determine our contact with the target?

There are all kinds of variables. Sidereal Time, the viewers’ cycle of contact, viewer headspace (some times we all have an off day), the quality of targeteering process, the complexity or simplicity of the target- some viewers perform well on mechanical or structural targets, while others key in better to kinesthic or emotional elements. If there is an urgent need for the data the viewers tend to perform better. I could go on and on.

We do not yet know just how the Remote Viewing process works. We do know it does work, but how it works is pure speculation.

As Glenn says, we are rats in a maze who know if we do this, this, and this we will get a piece of cheese at the end of the process. We haven’t figured out who is conducting the experiment, or why.

If we all share the same neurology then if one person can do it then we all can do it…that’s a basic tenant of NLP. However, perhaps there are variables outside of neurological factors that determine PSI function.

Some people are really smart and very perceptive. Some people are quite ignorant and barely perceptive. The smart and perceptive ones seem to do a lot better at remote viewing. (But not always.)

I would suggest that if we are able to uncover each and every variable to the Remote Viewing process and are able to measure those variables we would be able to determine with 100% accuracy if the remote viewer sitting down to start a session is going to produce accurate data or not.

Good luck. If you can figure all this out, please share it with the rest of us.

Not only that, through a more "real-time" feedback process we would be able to train remote viewers much more elegantly then we do now. Imagine knowing that very second if you were "on signal" or not…rather then finding out at the end of the session.

I have seen videos of Ingo Swan teaching students and giving such "real time" feedback. He would either say "Yes" if the data was good, or "no" if it was bad, or no comment if it were neutural. Good God! If I had someone walking me on to target with this type of "You’re getting warmer!.. no you’re getting COLD!" type of help I could do the session of the century. One thing we have always taught at HRVG is that the viewer has to develop his or her own ability to recognize good data. This is fundamental to learning remote viewing. Sorry, you’re on your own.

With current biofeedback a person can learn to control their heart and other sympathetic nervous system functions. Imagine if that same person was trying to do the same thing with delayed feedback. Of course it’s going to be a frustrating process without the real-time feedback.

Well, I would suggest to the remote viewing community that more thought and experimentation needs to be channeled into this type of research.

You are right. There is something to do with electronic stimulation and biofeedback that we are not being told. If someone could unlock that one, we could learn to remote view like Glenn Wheaton.

Otherwise, no matter how hard we try, there will continue to be a few remote viewers who intuitively learn how to produce exceptional data, and a whole lot of remote viewers who produce so-so data most the time and a few exceptional hits now and then.

Yes, this is how it is going to be. The folks who work hard and are taught a viable method will perform best.

No offense to the RV community, but right now we are dealing with a "Module T". But to get to the moon we need a rocket. The current "Module T" we have can and will evolve into that rocket. The question is how and when.

Your Model T analolgy is good. Here is another: Glenn once spoke with us about our work and shook his head almost sorrowfully. He said, "You guys are doing amazing work, but you are doing it just by sheer mental muscle and force of will. It’s like you are plowing a field with a spoon, when you could be using a backhoe."

Aloha,

Dick

An interesting response, and I like what your saying but I am putting a few thoughts together that suggest it is a more utopian concept for the masses and much more practical an approach for a select few. While we share some neurological similarities, each brain is its own fingerprint so to speak of mind. Many times a "capacity for" does not necessarily imply a "capability to". In some an anomaly exists that stands out very strikingly. I’ll use Richard Ireland as such an example. As we found out in researching preparation and training in the Army "Individual Training" always produces better results than "Group" training.

If one had the resources to bring together qualified individuals to prepare a single person to remote view I have no doubts that this remote viewer would perform at a higher level than others not so prepared. Preparation in the area of psychological counseling and preparation as well as biofeedback and exercises of mind, while the single largest external consideration is, and should always be environment.

We have discussed environment and the need to set the stage so to speak for the remote viewing activity. Considerations such as diet and intake of drinks that adjust blood ph and buff up the biochemical/electrical qualities of the brain as well as construction of a chamber or other such environment in which the activity is to take place. While such activities will surely help it should be geared to support of the remote viewer and not necessarily a cause or reason for success. There is a range of other actions that could be taken to improve performance but they would be considered invasive such as certain drugs and sensory deprivation. These would literally take control of the viewer and would violate anyone’s idea of "Human Use".

When it comes to the environment from which the viewer derives the data it becomes a bit tricky. Having an understanding of the murky world of the altered state certainly helps. By understanding I mean a familiarity of the sense of the state and the ability to remain in it with or without a sense of target contact while maintaining an overwatch of the self-condition as it navigates about or merely exist in it for prolonged periods of time. Navigation should be self-determined but can be by suggestion from and outside source such as a monitor or another method I wont go into here.

When I begin to think of everything that could be done I would prefer to think about "Whom" I would want to give this level of support. I would not be a proponent to just open this type of effort for anyone. Activities such as remote viewing done at the level you are looking towards would certainly change what the viewer literally is. While some changes may be wonderful, others may not. The requirements for support especially in the area of mental health may be considerable and a bit more exotic.

Another consideration has to be management of the entire activity. While it is possible that an educational effort may throw together enough resources to process a viewer through a system to super-size them for the collection of scientific scaleable data it would then be a matter of time before a cabal would form in a private sector effort to gain wealth and power.

So my question would be to anyone that assembled the resources to create an Oracle of Viewers. Who gets to ask the questions the Oracle would tackle? And what would the questions be?

Glenn

Nearly instantaneous feedback of this state is possible if one bypasses the conscious mind. Dousing goes a little bit in this direction. If one thinks out of the box a bit, a computer can be used to get this instant feedback. I’ve used a computer to do it, but it’s still frustrating. The state of mind where the magic occurs is like the ultimate wet bar of soap. It slides away just as soon as you grab at it.

To play devils advocate…

Yes, noise of any kind, sorting the noise from the target "signal" is very important for remote viewers.

However, I’d suggest that there is more going on here…

What about the strength of the target signal? Surely we have all had sessions where the percepts seemed stronger. We didn’t have to strain to perceive the target signal. The percepts were just there, loud and clear. Was this because the noise level was less? Was it because we were more keyed into the signal?

Or…

Are there variables that we have not yet figured out that determine our contact with the target?

We do not yet know just how the Remote Viewing process works. We do know it does work, but how it works is pure speculation.

If we all share the same neurology then if one person can do it then we all can do it…that’s a basic tenant of NLP. However, perhaps there are variables outside of neurological factors that determine PSI function.

I would suggest that if we are able to uncover each and every variable to the Remote Viewing process and are able to measure those variables we would be able to determine with 100% accuracy if the remote viewer sitting down to start a session is going to produce accurate data or not.

Not only that, through a more "real-time" feedback process we would be able to train remote viewers much more elegantly then we do now.

Imagine knowing that very second if you were "on signal" or not…rather then finding out at the end of the session.

With current biofeedback a person can learn to control their heart and other sympathetic nervous system functions. Imagine if that same person was trying to do the same thing with delayed feedback. Of course it’s going to be a frustrating process without the real-time feedback.

Well, I would suggest to the remote viewing community that more thought and experimentation needs to be channeled into this type of research.

Otherwise, no matter how hard we try, there will continue to be a few remote viewers who intuitively learn how to produce exceptional data, and a whole lot of remote viewers who produce so-so data most the time and a few exceptional hits now and then.

To be operationally effective all the time… To solve many of the problems we face… To evolve remote viewing to the next level…

…the process must become much more elegant. And the data resolution must be increased.

No offense to the RV community, but right now we are dealing with a "Module T". But to get to the moon we need a rocket. The current "Module T" we have can and will evolve into that rocket. The question is how and when.

So let’s not get dogmatic in our thinking. The same level of thinking that created current RV won’t be the level of thinking that will evolve it to the next level.

No one really understands this process. Everyone has their theories and modules. But no one has figured out all the variables to this process yet and no one has figured out how to measure and track these variables.

If they have then I’d sure like to hear more about it.

I don’t know who should get to ask the questions, but the question(s) should be "How do we best improve the process?" I don’t think that there is any better question.

So my question would be to anyone that assembled the resources to create an Oracle of Viewers. Who gets to ask the questions the Oracle would tackle? And what would the questions be?

Glenn

Why not ask the matrix…?

The most optimal use of remote viewing / (insert individual or organization here) / present time

However, I think Glenn is asking a deeper question here…

If you have the power or the ability how do you use it?

Remote viewing at that scale would truly be powerful. Power that could be used for the highest good of mankind, or for the highest "evil" (to use terminology most would relate to).

Which brings to mind a famous quote, "Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely."

It is very naive to think that this kind of power wouldn’t be misused. However, this is the same with any tool, be it a kitchen knife, or nuclear power.

In this arena we are dealing with all kinds of people. Some with less then noble intent, some with purely noble intent, and a whole lot of in-between. In the end people will do what they will do, and there really is nothing we can do to change where that person is coming from.

A very, very enlightening read I’d recommend you all check out is "Power vs. Force" by David Hawkins.

In it he explains a basic principle…

Persons, organization, nations, companies etc. who operate or who’s "way of being" are rooted in "power" always overcome those who are rooted in "force".

Now, his use of the word power I would need to clarify a bit…

Power, by his definition, is strengthening to the individual. Force is weakening.

Powerful ways of being would be courage, willingness, neutrality, reason, love, acceptance, joy, peace…

Weakening ways of being would be pride, anger, fear, grief, greed, apathy, guilt, shame.

He developed a protocol to test any person, organization, even nation to determine just where they were on this scale. (And anyone can do it. Glenn you want to know how to pick the "whom" this would be a way to do it.)

Let me give you an example…

Nazi vs. England

Few would argue Nazis were operating from a position of force. And for awhile they seemed unstoppable. But then they came up against this little island nation. No matter how hard they tried the British would not be defeated.

The British at the time were operating from a position of power…a higher good. If you hear the speeches of Winston Churchill at the time you can realize just how committed this man was to their cause. Not just for the sake of his nation, but for the sake of the world.

And despite all the odds against them they prevailed.

You can argue all the reasons why, but I believe it was solely because of where their cause was rooted. The rest took care of itself.

Ironically, on the flip side…

Gandhi vs. England

Gandhi truly was operation from a position of strength (power). England was operating from a position of force.

Well, a 90 pound man was able to free the grip England had on his country without using any force of any kind. Do your really think if he would have tried to apply force he would have prevailed? Do you really think if his cause was rooted in anything less then the highest good for his country he would have prevailed?

Not let’s just step back on moment and look at the individuals or organizations in the RV community. You make your own judgments here…Who was operating from a position of power? Who was operating from a position of force?

Well, you don’t really need to guess. The history speaks for itself.

My point of all of this…

Surely Remote Viewing will be miss-used by individuals or organizations. However, those individuals or organizations will never have a lasting impact.

Its individuals or organizations who are rooted in power (dare I say "the right thing") that will have a lasting impact.

It is my firm belief (however naive it might seem) that mankind will be far better of if this ability becomes ubiquitous, accessible to anyone.

Maybe I’m speaking to the choir, but I believe anything, and I mean anything, can be achieved more elegantly, using less resources, less time, less effort if Remote Viewing is used as a guide. Let alone to know if its even worth pursuing or not.

It’s the difference between trying to traverse a landscape with a compass and a map verses no compass, no map, and for many no sight either.

However, to date, this valuable resource just isn’t available to that many people. That I see is a greater problem then the question to ask.

An interesting response, and I like what your saying but I am putting a few thoughts together that suggest it is a more utopian concept for the masses and much more practical an approach for a select few. While we share some neurological similarities, each brain is its own fingerprint so to speak of mind. Many times a "capacity for" does not necessarily imply a "capability to". In some an anomaly exists that stands out very strikingly. I’ll use Richard Ireland as such an example. As we found out in researching preparation and training in the Army "Individual Training" always produces better results than "Group" training.

If one had the resources to bring together qualified individuals to prepare a single person to remote view I have no doubts that this remote viewer would perform at a higher level than others not so prepared. Preparation in the area of psychological counseling and preparation as well as biofeedback and exercises of mind, while the single largest external consideration is, and should always be environment.

We have discussed environment and the need to set the stage so to speak for the remote viewing activity. Considerations such as diet and intake of drinks that adjust blood ph and buff up the biochemical/electrical qualities of the brain as well as construction of a chamber or other such environment in which the activity is to take place. While such activities will surely help it should be geared to support of the remote viewer and not necessarily a cause or reason for success. There is a range of other actions that could be taken to improve performance but they would be considered invasive such as certain drugs and sensory deprivation. These would literally take control of the viewer and would violate anyone’s idea of "Human Use".

When it comes to the environment from which the viewer derives the data it becomes a bit tricky. Having an understanding of the murky world of the altered state certainly helps. By understanding I mean a familiarity of the sense of the state and the ability to remain in it with or without a sense of target contact while maintaining an overwatch of the self-condition as it navigates about or merely exist in it for prolonged periods of time. Navigation should be self-determined but can be by suggestion from and outside source such as a monitor or another method I wont go into here.

When I begin to think of everything that could be done I would prefer to think about "Whom" I would want to give this level of support. I would not be a proponent to just open this type of effort for anyone. Activities such as remote viewing done at the level you are looking towards would certainly change what the viewer literally is. While some changes may be wonderful, others may not. The requirements for support especially in the area of mental health may be considerable and a bit more exotic.

Another consideration has to be management of the entire activity. While it is possible that an educational effort may throw together enough resources to process a viewer through a system to super-size them for the collection of scientific scaleable data it would then be a matter of time before a cabal would form in a private sector effort to gain wealth and power.

So my question would be to anyone that assembled the resources to create an Oracle of Viewers. Who gets to ask the questions the Oracle would tackle? And what would the questions be?

Glenn

This has been a VERY interesting line of inquery.

I remember reading in Joe McMoneagles book, Mind Trek, his remark about making a ,list of everything he needed to do to be a better viewer. Then he said it ocurred to him that what he was REALLY doing was creating reasons to fail at remote viewing. He threw the list away.

On the one hand I understand where he was coming from, but on the other hand……..well, it seems like a catch twenty-two. Surely there MUST be SOMETHING we can do that will optimize each rv session for the better and at the same time not be subtly convincing ourselves we can’t RV.

RG

I need to make a list of reasons remote viewers do not produce data congruent to the target they have been tasked.

What went wrong? Why did you appear to miss the target you were assigned? And what caused you to produce this errant data?

Examples:

1. I remote viewed a different future timeline.

2. Telepathic Overlay.

3. I went to a more important target.

Please list as many reasons as you have experienced, and why you feel they occured.

Please let’s refrain from arguing the theory behind any of this in this thread. I just need raw data for a project- not trying to debate at this time.

Thanks

Dick

Aloha,

I enjoyed for many years a very unique position. I was able to work and train with the very best men in the world. These were men that simply did not fail, could not fail, and their abilities would stagger the concept of what was possible. What could not be done was done everyday. I am fond of saying that the ability to remote view is not limited by who you are, but by what you are. To think that we cannot break a mold and emerge different, better, is to fail before you even begin. There is a kernel of self within us all that can be nurtured to excellence. Sometimes it takes someone else to show us clarity and a path to develop that which did not exist before in us. I know the secret is really in the development of the viewer and not a trick of methodology. To get your mind right you must train your brain. It will then begin the process of change to the whole person. I have had 3 great men mentor me in my life. Colonel Robert L. Howard below taught me to accomplish that which I feared I could not. It was the ignorance of what I really was that he showed me in a mirror that I could not close my eyes to or turn away.

Glenn

Théun says "We all start off life as average men and women, but this does not mean that we do not have the ability to mould our lives according to our choice. We may feel that we are the victims of fate, and although it is true that no man can escape his destiny, we all have the capacity to rise above fate if we so choose. We are all given the opportunity at some point in our lives to decide for ourselves what we would like out of life."
(From Return of the Warriors, The Toltec Teachings – Volume One)

May I be so bold as to sidestep the point of your post and ask:

a) What is the ‘kernel of self’ and/or where does it originate from?

b) Does knowing what one is include knowing one’s path?

c) Are the above questions silly? ;)

Aloha Lucid,

Gotta teach a class this evening so I will have to respond to your post a bit later tonight.

Glenn

We may feel that we are the victims of fate, and although it is true that no man can escape his destiny, we all have the capacity to rise above fate if we so choose.

Does free will really exist in the ultimate sense?

And what is the implication of this in regard to Remote Viewing?

Aloha!

Jim K.

Aloha Jim,

I am just a bit behind in getting a few things finished. Soon as I catch up a little I will get back in this very interesting discussion.

Glenn

We may feel that we are the victims of fate, and although it is true that no man can escape his destiny, we all have the capacity to rise above fate if we so choose.

Let me interject a few more things that I like to ponder. I don’t see the evidence pointing towards a reality where free will ultimately exists. There seems to be a cause and effect behind everything, except perhaps for the very present moment, which of course very few of us have ever experienced yet in a meaningful way.

Is the ‘quality of one’s being’ (if I may use Glenn’s take on the meaning of that) that which allows one to rise above fate?

Aloha Lucid,

I have started a reply several times to your questions but have opted to continue to think about the most appropriate way to explain what I was referencing in regards to the kernel of self. So much has been written about self-realization that I did not want to take the road most traveled and offer some canned "Know Thyself" nonsense.

What I mean is more an expression of the awareness at the very core of our consciousness devoid of personality, pain, or pretense. It is a place within us that we can actually function from. I can best explain it by giving an analogy of it as it rises. I say that it rises because we seldom seek it in the depths of our consciousness. From the moment of our birth we collect information about our environment and learn to function within the real world of want and need.

We all adopt "ways" about us that are the repetitive paths we follow for want or need resolution. By the time we come of age we have used experience to layer and buffer our consciousness with what is essentially a cloak of personality. We function from within it during our waking hours in all that we do, many times to our detriment. We function in cycles that sometimes can be utterly inescapable.

There are events that occur in life that disables this grand cloak of personality where we have access to a part of our self that has no name and no sense of pain. It is a blank place where sequence and method drive the actions in a sort of emergency override especially when survival is at state. Many have experienced the window to this place when involved in car accidents.

You hear again and again in descriptions how it was all going in slow motion and the person experiencing it felt that time somehow shifted allowing for a massive amount of information to be processed very quickly. It was a dilation of consciousness and time. In reality it was a near instantaneous rush of chemicals to the brain simultaneous to the capturing of nearly 100% of the focused attention of the person.

There are a few things that can be learned by those who have had this experience. The value of mere focused attention is amazing. Could this be replicated without the risk event? If one had access to this car wreck focus that seems to have the power to stretch time it is logical that one could take it from the passive to the active.

Well one can, and I have. Not an original discovery but one necessitated primarily by a need to survive. If you do nothing but watch it as it all flashes by regardless of the time dilation there is no reason to believe that the outcome will out dance fate. Fate is the cyclic spin-up of potentials as they begin to collide. If you dare to act at a critical moment it may in-fact be the difference between success and failure, life or death. The problem has been that this window that opens in critical moments is accompanied by inaction by the person experiencing it. There are so caught by the experience that they do nothing as every human response resource needed is given them to provide for at least their own dance with fate.

Col Howard was able to get my 100% focused attention on any task he laid before me to accomplish. This was a man whom I had followed on grueling marches through the snowy woods of wintertime North Carolina for endless miles carrying 100-pound rucksacks and weapons moving faster at the march that the average person can run. Always in the lead he would push all of us until we dug into our consciousness to find someway, any way, to take another step, to keep up and not have to catch up. I don’t know any man that could face him should they fall behind. Those that fell behind were sent away quickly lest they infect the rest. Purpose seemed to give us access to a deeper self. One filled with reserves of strength and endurance. Once engaged you learned to function from that place. A path of consciousness seldom sought by most was being well worn by a few. If I had never known this man I would not know myself as well as I do. In fact I am doubtful that I would be alive today.

I remember a bitter cold night struggling to stand with 63 other Green Berets inside a C-130 jinking and dropping as the tail ramp slowly lowered and in a pale blue light this man who was 20 years my senior walked forward and stood on the ramp. Burdened with weapons and equipment he moved with ease, turned just for an instant and shouted over the noise of the engines of the plane "Time to go". No sooner said he launched himself into the darkness and there was a rush as 64 men surged onto the tailgate and off into the darkness after him. I was there but it wasn’t me, it wasn’t Glenn, it was what I was, what I am. I was functioning from a state of mind that was more primal in the sense that what must be done, will be done. It was what I had to do.

Once found that little place of mind is easily revisited. It becomes a refuge when confusion reigns. Without fanfare or drama it lets you prepare to launch out against whatever darkness awaits you. It gives you clarity of thought as well as an alignment of focus and purpose. The time dilation lets you breath and slow the racing heart.

Glenn

Wheaton,

A consciousness devoid of pretense? You must have already ascended and we just didn’t notice. ;-)

If a trained and disciplined mind easily and frequently revisits this "little place" isn’t that psyche in danger of using it as a crutch and/or a place to hide rather than a temporary refuge? When does it cease to be a part of our inner strength during times of physical or emotional danger and become our daily drug of choice . . . so to speak?

Each of us has a different perception of what constitutes a crisis. What I consider a frustrating and challenging circumstance, another person might find devastating.

It must be tempting to disconnect from an event that would normally require us to stay in reality and face the situation — and perhaps more importantly, ourselves.

Cheryle

P.S. And don’t even consider proffering the “men think differently than women” pretext.

=====

Aloha Lucid,

I have started a reply several times to your questions but have opted to continue to think about the most appropriate way to explain what I was referencing in regards to the kernel of self. So much has been written about self-realization that I did not want to take the road most traveled and offer some canned "Know Thyself" nonsense.

What I mean is more an expression of the awareness at the very core of our consciousness devoid of personality, pain, or pretense. It is a place within us that we can actually function from. I can best explain it by giving an analogy of it as it rises. I say that it rises because we seldom seek it in the depths of our consciousness. From the moment of our birth we collect information about our environment and learn to function within the real world of want and need.

We all adopt "ways" about us that are the repetitive paths we follow for want or need resolution. By the time we come of age we have used experience to layer and buffer our consciousness with what is essentially a cloak of personality. We function from within it during our waking hours in all that we do, many times to our detriment. We function in cycles that sometimes can be utterly inescapable.

There are events that occur in life that disables this grand cloak of personality where we have access to a part of our self that has no name and no sense of pain. It is a blank place where sequence and method drive the actions in a sort of emergency override especially when survival is at state. Many have experienced the window to this place when involved in car accidents.

You hear again and again in descriptions how it was all going in slow motion and the person experiencing it felt that time somehow shifted allowing for a massive amount of information to be processed very quickly. It was a dilation of consciousness and time. In reality it was a near instantaneous rush of chemicals to the brain simultaneous to the capturing of nearly 100% of the focused attention of the person.

There are a few things that can be learned by those who have had this experience. The value of mere focused attention is amazing. Could this be replicated without the risk event? If one had access to this car wreck focus that seems to have the power to stretch time it is logical that one could take it from the passive to the active.

Well one can, and I have. Not an original discovery but one necessitated primarily by a need to survive. If you do nothing but watch it as it all flashes by regardless of the time dilation there is no reason to believe that the outcome will out dance fate. Fate is the cyclic spin-up of potentials as they begin to collide. If you dare to act at a critical moment it may in-fact be the difference between success and failure, life or death. The problem has been that this window that opens in critical moments is accompanied by inaction by the person experiencing it. There are so caught by the experience that they do nothing as every human response resource needed is given them to provide for at least their own dance with fate.

Col Howard was able to get my 100% focused attention on any task he laid before me to accomplish. This was a man whom I had followed on grueling marches through the snowy woods of wintertime North Carolina for endless miles carrying 100-pound rucksacks and weapons moving faster at the march that the average person can run. Always in the lead he would push all of us until we dug into our consciousness to find someway, any way, to take another step, to keep up and not have to catch up. I don’t know any man that could face him should they fall behind. Those that fell behind were sent away quickly lest they infect the rest. Purpose seemed to give us access to a deeper self. One filled with reserves of strength and endurance. Once engaged you learned to function from that place. A path of consciousness seldom sought by most was being well worn by a few. If I had never known this man I would not know myself as well as I do. In fact I am doubtful that I would be alive today.

I remember a bitter cold night struggling to stand with 63 other Green Berets inside a C-130 jinking and dropping as the tail ramp slowly lowered and in a pale blue light this man who was 20 years my senior walked forward and stood on the ramp. Burdened with weapons and equipment he moved with ease, turned just for an instant and shouted over the noise of the engines of the plane "Time to go". No sooner said he launched himself into the darkness and there was a rush as 64 men surged onto the tailgate and off into the darkness after him. I was there but it wasn’t me, it wasn’t Glenn, it was what I was, what I am. I was functioning from a state of mind that was more primal in the sense that what must be done, will be done. It was what I had to do.

Once found that little place of mind is easily revisited. It becomes a refuge when confusion reigns. Without fanfare or drama it lets you prepare to launch out against whatever darkness awaits you. It gives you clarity of thought as well as an alignment of focus and purpose. The time dilation lets you breath and slow the racing heart.

Glenn

>

Aloha Miss Cheryle,

I am afraid my ascension is a bit behind schedule, lol I think it is an Irish thing. I read your post and had several thoughts racing about. First it is indeed a series of excellent questions that you ask. Certainly behavioral changes could result in a reliance on a particular state of mind. Your post is in itself a mirror of sorts, as I read it, I ask myself your questions. Meanwhile in the back of my mind I marvel at a most elegant trap of sorts. But like they say no guts no glory so here we go.

—————————————- You ask…

"If a trained and disciplined mind easily and frequently revisits this "little place" isn’t that psyche in danger of using it as a crutch and/or a place to hide rather than a temporary refuge? When does it cease to be a part of our inner strength during times of physical or emotional danger and become our daily drug of choice . . . so to speak?"
—————————————-

I have always thought that existing in high performance environments for extended periods of time can and will change how you view the rest of the world. Add to that involvement in cognitive applications such as remote viewing which can be a bit destabilizing and you could have the makings of a real mental tragedy. You will also find a need to stabilize yourself more often than you might believe. I am not sure if this is a weakness of character somehow but it may well be. Outside of these environments it may be more difficult to function. Just what does one do with their day when the Batphone doesn’t ring calling you out to yet once again be more than you should be.

It may be that when we attempt to operate at levels beyond our design that we struggle a bit with it all. Side effects manifest that reflect in our behavior and in how we deal in environments that may be outside of our zone. There is a tendency I think to retreat and seek solitude or refuge when we are in unfamiliar waters. It is a lot like we tool our mind to function a certain way and then there is no need to be "that way" anymore and we are ill prepared mentally to function in the reality of a civilian world with real people and not friends or foes. Real life roles with dishes to do and appointments to keep and relationships and social obligations are strange waters indeed

I think it is a problem for many. And I well know that my transition has not been very graceful but I am working on it.

Aloha Nui Loa

Glenn

P.S. Men and Women think differently???

Red or blue?

N’est-ce pas?

Cheryle

=====

Aloha Miss Cheryle,

I am afraid my ascension is a bit behind schedule, lol I think it is an Irish thing. I read your post and had several thoughts racing about. First it is indeed a series of excellent questions that you ask. Certainly behavioral changes could result in a reliance on a particular state of mind. Your post is in itself a mirror of sorts, as I read it, I ask myself your questions. Meanwhile in the back of my mind I marvel at a most elegant trap of sorts. But like they say no guts no glory so here we go.

—————————————- You ask… "If a trained and disciplined mind easily and frequently revisits this "little place" isn’t that psyche in danger of using it as a crutch and/or a place to hide rather than a temporary refuge? When does it cease to be a part of our inner strength during times of physical or emotional danger and become our daily drug of choice . . . so to speak?" —————————————-

I have always thought that existing in high performance environments for extended periods of time can and will change how you view the rest of the world. Add to that involvement in cognitive applications such as remote viewing which can be a bit destabilizing and you could have the makings of a real mental tragedy. You will also find a need to stabilize yourself more often than you might believe. I am not sure if this is a weakness of character somehow but it may well be. Outside of these environments it may be more difficult to function. Just what does one do with their day when the Batphone doesn’t ring calling you out to yet once again be more than you should be.

It may be that when we attempt to operate at levels beyond our design that we struggle a bit with it all. Side effects manifest that reflect in our behavior and in how we deal in environments that may be outside of our zone. There is a tendency I think to retreat and seek solitude or refuge when we are in unfamiliar waters. It is a lot like we tool our mind to function a certain way and then there is no need to be "that way" anymore and we are ill prepared mentally to function in the reality of a civilian world with real people and not friends or foes. Real life roles with dishes to do and appointments to keep and relationships and social obligations are strange waters indeed

I think it is a problem for many. And I well know that my transition has not been very graceful but I am working on it.

Aloha Nui Loa

Glenn

P.S. Men and Women think differently???

>