How To Remote View: Best Techniques & Improve Abilities

[MED]

Does Anybody Knows About Rmote Viewing Best Techniques And The Way To Improve Own Abilities To Remote View?

 

[Evo]

Sorry, this is so "out there" that it cannot seriously be answered. Remote viewing has never been proven although Russia and the US both researched it at one time.

"Remote viewing (RV) is purported to be the ability to perform clairvoyance under controlled conditions. Similar to astral projection, the phenomenon involves a belief in the projection of consciousness to remote locations. Studied by parapsychologists at the Stanford Research Institute, it is controversial as it lacks repeatable scientific proof."

Wiki states - The factual accuracy of this article or section is disputed.
Please see the relevant discussion on the talk page.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remote_viewing

 

[zoobyshoe]

Ivan Seeking started a long, interesting thread about this a couple years ago including a remote viewing contest for PF members. Maybe he'll come along and dig up a link to that thread. (I don't remember what it was called.)

 

[Evo]

All I will say is that mmmmppphhh highly regarded Sr Scientist at a well known University advised me mmmmppppphhhh. I cannot go into details mmmmmpppphhhh, and he goes before Congress annually for other significant world matters. I don't know what to believe. Maybe I've already said too much.

 

[Rach3]

Get a higher-resolution webcam, and upgrade to broadband.

 

[Evo]

Get a higher-resolution webcam, and upgrade to broadband.

That "would" solve the problem.

 

[zoobyshoe]

"Remote Viewing" is a term used only by the people in the US government projects, I think. The ability to clearly see events that are happening at a great distance is commonly reported in literature on shamans, wizards, etc. from all over the world. It is also said to be something long term, serious meditators develop: tibetan buddists and so forth. This ability extends not just to the present at great distances but also to "seeing" the past and future.

There are a lot of things I don't believe in and try hard to debunk but this isn't one of them. I am more inclined to suspect this ability, and also something like mental telepathy, stand apart from the rest of paranormal stuff as probably authentic. Not that I have any way to explain how they might work.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=7801

 

[Ivan Seeking]

I saw a test on remote viewing done by Michael Shermer.
http://www.skeptic.com/about_us/meet_michael_shermer.html

The remote viewer was to remote view photographs brought by Shermer. IIRC, the first round yielded nothing - a clear miss. But the next one was possibly a hit in my opinion. The photo was the Hubble deep field image. The remote viewer drew a whirlpool and described it as a picture of a "whirlpool of energy". Now, this wasn't a clear hit, but when one looks at this Hubble image, one sees many galaxies that might easily be described as whirlpools of energy. It's probably fair to say that this one was inconclusive, but for Shermer to completely dismiss this was highly biased. Consider the possiblities here: Say for example the remote viewer had never seen the image. What was he supposed to say? What would constitute a hit? How accurate does he have to be? I don't think a good test is easy to define since we don't know the limits of this alleged ability.

I've been wanting to complain about that one for long time now.

 

[zoobyshoe]

I don't think a good test is easy to define since we don't know the limits of this alleged ability.

According to the personage of Don Juan in the Carlos Castaneda books, a good see-er sees a literal, clear picture. The poorer ones see their "targets" as metaphorical or allegorical representations. I thought that was interesting. In other words, a good seer looking at G.W. Bush would see him literally, as he is. A poor seer might see the image of a king sitting on a texas longhorn.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

According to the personage of Don Juan in the Carlos Castaneda books, a good see-er sees a literal, clear picture. The poorer ones see their "targets" as metaphorical or allegorical representations. I thought that was interesting. In other words, a good seer looking at G.W. Bush would see him literally, as he is. A poor seer might see the image of a king sitting on a texas longhorn.

So they both would see the same thing!

This seems to be the most difficult aspect of judging the hits and misses. One might have to allow some latitude, but then again, with enough latitude we might be able to argue that misses are hits. I have seen demos that clearly resulted in hits IF they were legitimate. There was one in which a person was somewhere in Los Angeles. The RVer was to locate her. He drew a picture of a building which is of such a unique shape that there was no mistaking the result: He correctly declared it to be the restaurant at LAX. The test was allegedly carefully controlled, but of course this was just TV, so who knows.

 

[zoobyshoe]

So they both would see the same thing!

Heheheheh. You should have been a political cartoonist.

 

[Evo]

"Remote Viewing" is a term used only by the people in the US government projects, I think.

The Russians were also heavily into it, don't know if they still are. I was just surprised that we still are.

 

[zoobyshoe]

The Russians were also heavily into it, don't know if they still are. I was just surprised that we still are.

I don't know if we still are. I seem to recall reading the US project was phased out, but Ivan probably knows the current status.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

AFAIK there is no US RV program any longer. Of course the problem is that if it really does work and this is used for espionage, obviously we wouldn't hear about it.

Something else: Remote viewing is allegedly a learned skill and not ESP in the sense the we normally think of it. It is a systematic method of extracting the correct information from the subconscious... ..or some place. The promoters claim that anyone can do it if trained properly, but not everyone will be as good as some claim to be. On the other hand, what better way to sell training seminars, Mr. Dames?

 

[zoobyshoe]

Something else: Remote viewing is allegedly a learned skill and not ESP in the sense the we normally think of it.

I couldn't make heads or tales of this sentence until it occurred to me you may regard ESP as something only an elite few are born with, that if you don't have it you can't be trained to do it. Is that your take on ESP?

 

[Ivan Seeking]

I think the correct way to say it is that RVing is [allegedly] a specific technique that makes use of ESP. The point being that allegedly it is a technique that must be learned. It is not the same thing as having visions and whatnot, but it makes use of visions and imagery. RVers may works in groups for weeks in an effort to identify a specific target. Over time the target image emerges through this process.

Keep in mind that I don't know what I think about this, but that's the claim as I understand it.

 

[Alkatran]

I saw a test on remote viewing done by Michael Shermer.
http://www.skeptic.com/about_us/meet_michael_shermer.html

The remote viewer was to remote view photographs brought by Shermer. IIRC, the first round yielded nothing - a clear miss. But the next one was possibly a hit in my opinion. The photo was the Hubble deep field image. The remote viewer drew a whirlpool and described it as a picture of a "whirlpool of energy".

I completely agree: whirlpool of energy could be a bad analogy for a galaxy. That's why it sounds like a horrible way to test the ability. You can never be sure if they described a particular part of the picture or not! I remember seeing a show where a simple pattern was matched up with a dock off in the background...

A much better test would be to have three pictures (known to the viewer) and draw a big red X on one. Then they remote-view and tell you which picture has an X. No ambiguity.

 

[Rach3]

No ambiguity.

Unambigious psychics are exposed as frauds; natural selection favors the confusing ones.