]]>
]]>
]]>
]]>
]]>
]]>
]]>
]]>
we usually work a little like this.
A tasker will pick a target - say for example: the jfk assassination.
he would write on paper or put it in a word document or something.
like this:
'describe the jfk assasination,Friday, November 22, 1963, in Dallas, Texas, at 12:30 p.m'
( you could even add an image of the event or target if you wish)
he would then give this/make up a random number - this serves as something for the remote viewer to focus upon and as an admin use ( a refernce for the project) in this case for example: 1234 - 5678.
The tasker would keep this file to himself and would give it to the remote viewer as feedback after the remote viewer has done their magic.
All the remote viewer would get would be the random number of 1234-5678.
The remote viewer will go away and do his stuff - then scan it in and send it to the tasker.
The tasker will only then give the viewer the feedback info and let him know what the target was.
This allows both the viewer and tasker to then assess the accuracy of the data against the feedback.
The remote viewer should always be blind to what the target is - this allows whatever data they do recorded to be judged against what the target is, knowing the remote viewer had no information hence all the data must be psi.
daz
Statistics: Posted by dazsmith — 03 Jun 2009, 21:07
]]>
]]>
plus knowing its an object in your room cuts out millions of possible targets it could be - hence i am front loaded with information which is detracting and it makes it NOT classable as remote viewing as one is not blind to the target.
Testing and experimentation showed that real targets with change are best. Targets like a spoon on a table in the bigger scale of the universe just don't hold much attention to a remote viewer. things that are good are:
past, present, future events
big structures, locations, things
locations, people and objects
movement, energy, sensory info
ie. jfk assasination, d-day, collider test, jesus, the moon, Eiffel tower, golden gate bridge, Mt Rushmore
A remote viewing for me takes about 2 hrs:
3o mins cooldown - meditation.
1+ hr remote viewing
30 mins scanning the pages 15-25 of them
30 mins writing a summary of the data.
It can be draining - although after all these years not very much for me - just need a coffee to keep me going
remote viewing is the wrong name for this - really its like remote sensing or knowing. I rarely get images, i just know what is right for the target - its a feeling. I can and do ask myself questions tho and get answer, like:
if i taste the target what does it taste like?
if i move about it what does it look like?
what colour is it?
what does it smell like?
by doing this over and over you build a picture 'with data' of the target.
Sketching also helps.
daz
Statistics: Posted by dazsmith — 02 Jun 2009, 22:45
]]>
Do you see actual images in your head when you RV? Or what do you see exactly?
Statistics: Posted by Scepcop — 29 May 2009, 08:33
]]>
]]>
As in the example above the only information we had was the random number. This just acts as something for us to focus on and as a project name.
We do everything blind - hence no sceptical calls for cold reading that kind of thing - blindness also allows you to check the feedback information against the data from a remote viewer allowing you to accurately gauge accuracy - as you know the viewer was blind and had no info.
Im also participating in a project here:
http://www.farsight.org/demo/Multiple_U ... iment.html
This is to see if we can remote view a month in advance a randomly chosen news articles.
Here is my attempt done in march for an April news item - all done and posted publicially.
http://www.farsight.org/demo/Multiple_U ... h2009.html
You will see that I clearly describe a weather/tornado event as the focus of the news - which it was.
daz
Statistics: Posted by dazsmith — 28 May 2009, 06:31
]]>
]]>