|
Remote Viewing
|
Posted By:
Just a random guy
in in a hospital, out of a long coma
Apr 11, 2005
|
I know that this is an old topic, but it is one that many people believed. I had never heard of it (I didn't hear about it from that movie or whatever, but it was mentioned briefly in a nonfiction book that I read) until a few months ago. Remote Viewing is a process that people would undertake to as the name suggests view something of their choice from long distances with the power of their mind. Apparently from what I heard, the military also had a group of remote viewers (btw, the book that i heard this from is Stiff: The Curious Life of Human Cadavers). I was wondering if any of you out there maybe did some research on this and could share what you found, or any stories of it working?
|
Comments
Charybdis
in Hell
Member
|
Posted: Tue Apr 12, 2005 | 09:31 AM
Funny enough, I just started reading <a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0195143264/qid=1113319330/sr=2-5/ref=pd_bbs_b_2_5/103-2026499-3143802">this book</a> and the first chapter is on remote viewing. The author is very open-minded about things and is usually willing to give it a try. He took a Remote Viewing class. Even before it was finished he noticed problems with procedure. Viewers were allowed to make many charts and pick the one that best matched the target allowing them to claim many "hits". And the instructor thought Shermer showed great promise with his attempt. He drew a vague statue in a public place. The instructor said it was almost a perfect match for the target, Stonehenge. His conclusion, unsurprisingly, is that it is all pseudo-science. I'll let you know if there's anymore in the book about it. |
Maegan
in Tampa, FL - USA
Member
|
Posted: Tue Apr 12, 2005 | 10:52 AM
...I don't get it. |
Charybdis
in Hell
Member
|
Posted: Tue Apr 12, 2005 | 11:10 AM
Alright, sit in your chair and try to picture what I'm doing... wait - scratch that.
Try to picture what Hairy... Damn.
Ok. Try to picture where Alex is right now. Write down all the images and ideas that come to mind, no matter how vague. After you have about 30 different possible places we ask Alex where he is. Say he's in a Burger King. You search through your stack looking for anything even remotely related to food, driving (drive-thru), sitting, plastic, royalty, children, styrofoam, paper, trash, asphalt, walls, etc. If you got any of the above then you scored a "hit" and can claim that your psychic powers are real.
Oh, and you destroy all the "misses" because you don't want to confuse the issue with the facts.
It may seem like I'm exagerating here but really, I'm not. This is exactly how most pseudo-scientific "experiments" are carried out. And if you try to explain this then you're "missing the point" and an "unbeliever". |
Bonk
Member
|
Posted: Tue Apr 12, 2005 | 01:30 PM
They have a non surgical procedure that allows blind people to view a realtime video via a frequency that is transmitted into the brain. Thats the only thing that I can think of that comes close. |
Myst
Member
|
Posted: Tue Apr 12, 2005 | 01:41 PM
Ok Charybdis, I see Alex sitting in front of his computer. |
Charybdis
in Hell
Member
|
Posted: Tue Apr 12, 2005 | 02:09 PM
HIT!!!
And let's just hope he has pants on this time... |
Bonk
Member
|
Posted: Tue Apr 12, 2005 | 02:14 PM
I found this site cause of his book. Does he actually come in here?? |
Charybdis
in Hell
Member
|
Posted: Tue Apr 12, 2005 | 02:17 PM
Oh, and the video thing.
If this is true then you need to contact Scientific American Frontiers 'cause they just did an episode on this. Their procedure involved implanting a camera in the eye and transmitting the signal directly to the brain bypassing the optic nerve. IIR they are at 16 pixels now (yes, 16 - 4 X 4) and plan on 64(?) later this year. They hope to get higher resolution soon which would achieve the most basic "true" vision. And all in shades of gray only. |
Charybdis
in Hell
Member
|
Posted: Tue Apr 12, 2005 | 02:23 PM
I found this site cause of his book. Does he actually come in here?? - Bonk
OMG. Someone who read Alex's book before coming here. You're going to make his day.
:lol:
The real Alex has been dead for a year or more but his replicant replacement seems to be doing a good job.
<a href="http://www.museumofhoaxes.com/hoax/forum/forum_comments/2621/">Alex Is DeaD???</a> |
Bonk
Member
|
Posted: Tue Apr 12, 2005 | 02:26 PM
Are you serious???? |
Bonk
Member
|
Posted: Tue Apr 12, 2005 | 02:33 PM
Wait a sec.
"Now, you wouldn't be Mess'n with me, would'ya?" |
Charybdis
in Hell
Member
|
Posted: Tue Apr 12, 2005 | 02:33 PM
Why don't you ask Raoul. He has all the details.
:cheese: |
Bonk
Member
|
Posted: Tue Apr 12, 2005 | 02:37 PM
Iiiiii don't know....I'm wandering if that Raoul guy is ok. Seems like he has the entire six pack, but just missing the little plastic thing that holds the cans together.
J/K... |
Myst
Member
|
Posted: Tue Apr 12, 2005 | 02:45 PM
Alex pops in here every once in awhile just to make sure the inmates are behaving themselves. |
Bonk
Member
|
Posted: Tue Apr 12, 2005 | 02:51 PM
Thats cool....Last thing, I hate to go off topic, but he has another book comming out, right?? I was curious when I will have a chance to purchase. |
Rod
in the land of smarties.
Member
|
Posted: Tue Apr 12, 2005 | 02:55 PM
"Seems like he has the entire six pack, but just missing the little plastic thing that holds the cans together." - Bonk
That's the best I've ever heard it put.
:lol: |
Charybdis
in Hell
Member
|
Posted: Tue Apr 12, 2005 | 02:57 PM
I think that Alex is still writing the book so it may be awhile before we can purchase it. |
Bonk
Member
|
Posted: Tue Apr 12, 2005 | 02:59 PM
I was kidding, I don't want to offend anyone...At least not my first day in here. Raouls sense of humor is hard to pull off, but he does it. |
Bonk
Member
|
Posted: Tue Apr 12, 2005 | 03:02 PM
I tried talking like that once back in highschool, but I ended up getting my Ass kicked...by cheerleaders. I guess they didn't like the sexual tone or something. It took about 2 years to get any respect back. :gulp: |
Raoul
|
Posted: Tue Apr 12, 2005 | 03:12 PM
To regain one's respect, one must allow it to be lost in the first place. This could not happen in The Land Of My Birth. No true Ramonian would brook such an insult to one's self. These cheerleaders must have fearsome foes indeed, unless you are not much the man. You should wear Paco. It tells the world that you are too much the man, like me, Raoul, the Great Pleaser of Women. Rrrrrraoul |
Bonk
Member
|
Posted: Tue Apr 12, 2005 | 03:17 PM
This one is Wise by all means. Romanian girls are pretty HOT... |
Just a random guy
in in a hospital, out of a long coma
Member
|
Posted: Tue Apr 12, 2005 | 07:21 PM
Don't worry, Bonk, im pretty new here myself (about a week) and the people are nice 😊. The only exception is to the random unregistered people that come in here with arguements to topics trying to make points that don't make sense, and make themselves seem like idiots (Read the Prove the existence of god and win $1,000,000 topic). |
Mark-N-Isa
in Midwest USA
Member
|
Posted: Tue Apr 12, 2005 | 07:40 PM
Dear Random Guy,
Just to catch you up... Bonk is Stephen who likes to refer to himself as "Sir Stephen" when actually it's closer to Silly Stephen. Either way, he's been around for quite some time and is just messing with people. You'll get quite a bit of that around here and mostly it's amusing, however, sometimes it can get annoying or out of control... so be warned.
😊 |
Hairy Houdini
|
Posted: Tue Apr 12, 2005 | 07:53 PM
Note that "bonk" spelled backwards is "Knob", a more fitting psuedonym for Sir Stephen, in my view. Note that "Hairy Houdini" spelled backwards is "Bhodisatva", but you can call me Donny |
Katherine
|
Posted: Tue Apr 12, 2005 | 08:08 PM
Oh my. All is not quiet on the western front...
I don't suppose there's any way we could all cool it and stop posting with sockpuppet accounts? No? Oh, well.
In response to the original post:
I would be perfectly willing to believe in remote viewing if someone could manifest it repeatedly under controlled conditions, but alas, it appears that no one can do this.
However, as we should all know from science class (in the Dark Ages! Yep, I'm old), it's pretty well impossible to prove a negative. It's quite conceivable that "psychic" phenomena are indeed real, but that they're nonreproducible anomalies that occur only rarely. In that case, it would be futile to try to conjure up "psychic powers" in controlled laboratory conditions, and even if they were real, there would be practically no way to prove that they exist.
Not saying that I necessarily believe these things are true, just that I think there MAY be phenomena which are quite real but are unable to be reproduced repeatedly under controlled conditions. |
Katherine
|
Posted: Tue Apr 12, 2005 | 08:16 PM
Ahahaha. Now the Google ad says "Let our psychic readers help you find your soulmate."
:lol: |
The Curator
in San Diego
Member
|
Posted: Tue Apr 12, 2005 | 10:07 PM
Myst, how did you know exactly where I was? Amazing. |
Myst
Member
|
Posted: Tue Apr 12, 2005 | 10:46 PM
Yay, I'm psychic! |
Katherine
|
Posted: Tue Apr 12, 2005 | 10:57 PM
A psychic <i>reader</i>, eh? Myst, darlin, is there any hope you could look deep into the mists of the future and find a soulmate for me?
😊 |
Myst
Member
|
Posted: Tue Apr 12, 2005 | 11:18 PM
Katherine, I can tell you that when you least expect it you shall meet a handsome stranger who will sweep you off your feet. 😉 |
Raoul
|
Posted: Tue Apr 12, 2005 | 11:38 PM
hmmm... I hear bells on the hills ringing... I've never heard them before... hmmm |
Katherine
|
Posted: Tue Apr 12, 2005 | 11:39 PM
Why, thank you! Your consultation fee will be in the mail just as soon as the handsome stranger materializes.
:lol: |
Katherine
|
Posted: Tue Apr 12, 2005 | 11:44 PM
And why in the world are you singing, Raoul? Now you've got that song stuck in my head! "Then there was music/and wonderful roses, they tell me/and sweet fragrant meadows of dawn and dew!/There was love all around/but I never heard it singing/no, I never heard it at all/tilllllll there was youuuuuuuuuuu!"
Stupid songs. Gahhhhh! |
hcmomof4
|
Posted: Wed Apr 13, 2005 | 12:37 AM
"The only exception is to the random unregistered people that come in here with arguements to topics trying to make points that don't make sense"
I must be the exception to the exception, cause I'm a random unregistered person, and I'm nice, and I don't make senseless arguments...
Ummmmmm...this was NOT an argument, by the way... |
Cranky Media Guy
|
Posted: Wed Apr 13, 2005 | 01:59 AM
Charybdis is correct. Many "experiments" conducted by people with a bias toward believing in the supernatural are done exactly the way he says. This ain't "science," folks, this is confirmation bias.
"Confirmation bias" refers to when a person includes the evidence that agrees with his preconceived notions and excludes that which doesn't.
Want more on this fascinating subject? Check out randi.org or skepdic.com. Reading really *is* FUN-damental! |
Charybdis
in Hell
Member
|
Posted: Wed Apr 13, 2005 | 08:42 AM
Katherine, I can tell you that when you least expect it you shall meet a handsome stranger who will sweep you off your feet. - Myst
You're really telling her that she's going to be hit by a car while walking down the sidewalk, aren't you.
:coolhmm: |
viewer
|
Posted: Sun Apr 17, 2005 | 12:41 AM
You are all missing the point because you DON'T know the real actual protocol of Remote Viewing. What was described is NOT what happens at all. |
Cranky Media Guy
|
Posted: Sun Apr 17, 2005 | 02:14 AM
viewer said:
"You are all missing the point because you DON'T know the real actual protocol of Remote Viewing. What was described is NOT what happens at all."
Well, thanks for clearing that up for us, viewer. I understand MUCH better now. |
viewer
|
Posted: Sun Apr 17, 2005 | 02:30 AM
OK, so there's at least on eperson who's interested in the truth, and not label anything not understood as hoax. I was realising I might have come to the wrong place.
What's said in this thread is not only exaggerating, it's nonsense; that's not remote viewing at all! The protocol and structures are a lot more controlled than that.
You don't even know what the target is before and during the RVing.
"Try to picture where Alex is right now. Write down all the images and ideas that come to mind, no matter how vague. After you have about 30 different possible places we ask Alex where he is. Say he's in a Burger King. You search through your stack looking for anything even remotely related to food, driving (drive-thru), sitting, plastic, royalty, children, styrofoam, paper, trash, asphalt, walls, etc. If you got any of the above then you scored a "hit" and can claim that your psychic powers are real.
Oh, and you destroy all the "misses" because you don't want to confuse the issue with the facts.
It may seem like I'm exagerating here but really, I'm not. This is exactly how most pseudo-scientific "experiments" are carried out. And if you try to explain this then you're "missing the point" and an "unbeliever"." |
Rochelle
|
Posted: Sun Apr 17, 2005 | 06:27 AM
Viewer--Perhaps if you would explain how remote viewing actually works, we would get the point. The purpose of this thread is to learn more about it. Since you appear to know something more than us, why don't you elaborate? I, for one, am curious. |
viewer
|
Posted: Sun Apr 17, 2005 | 07:20 AM
Since this is the museum of hoaxes the people lurking around are probably mostly sceptical of remote viewing anyway. I for one knows for a fact that remote viewing is not what is described here in this thread, that's why I couldn't control the urge to correct the matter.
I got here through a link on one of the posts in one of the legitimate remote viewing forums. Later I realise that this is the museum of hoaxes I am not surprised. The people here mostly have preconceived ideas already. If anything they want to prove the things are hoaxes, rather than finding out what they are.
Therefore, it would appear that it woulod be a very uphill climb to try and explain here. If anyone is interested to know the truth they should, or would, go elsewhere anyway.
Bye! |
Charybdis
in Hell
Member
|
Posted: Sun Apr 17, 2005 | 11:10 AM
Well, if you won't support your side of the argument then why are you even posting. You say my views are wrong but you won't tell me what really goes on. You just make a blanket statement and expect this to sway others?
Well, actually, yes you do. This makes you something like the 547 poster to pop in and tell us we don't know what we're talking about then leave without explanation causing us to scratch our heads and wonder what the $&@!&* that was all about, then reappear under a different nonmember name and post the same vague comments without really teling us anything new until ridiculed for your bad behavior into leaving for good.
How's that for a run on sentence? |
Winona
in USA
Member
|
Posted: Sun Apr 17, 2005 | 01:47 PM
Wow, I was out of breath just reading that sentence. 😊 |
midlandsea
Member
|
Posted: Sun Apr 17, 2005 | 01:47 PM
Katherine
"would be perfectly willing to believe in remote viewing if someone could manifest it repeatedly under controlled conditions, but alas, it appears that no one can do this.
However, as we should all know from science class (in the Dark Ages! Yep, I'm old), it's pretty well impossible to prove a negative. It's quite conceivable that "psychic" phenomena are indeed real, but that they're nonreproducible anomalies that occur only rarely. In that case, it would be futile to try to conjure up "psychic powers" in controlled laboratory conditions, and even if they were real, there would be practically no way to prove that they exist.
Not saying that I necessarily believe these things are true, just that I think there MAY be phenomena which are quite real but are unable to be reproduced repeatedly under controlled conditions."
I'm also old - but Ockam's Razor is a lot older and it's still valid. |
Cranky Media Guy
|
Posted: Sun Apr 17, 2005 | 05:20 PM
midlandsea said:
"Not saying that I necessarily believe these things are true, just that I think there MAY be phenomena which are quite real but are unable to be reproduced repeatedly under controlled conditions."
"I'm also old - but Ockam's Razor is a lot older and it's still valid."
Well, I certainly agree about OCCAM'S Razor, but I would suggest that the simplest explanation of why "psychic" powers don't work under controlled conditions EVER is that THEY DON'T EXIST! |
viewer
|
Posted: Sun Apr 17, 2005 | 05:44 PM
I'm NOT trying to sway anybody here. Everyone has their rights to believe what they want to, even that the Earth is flat.
And I did not change my posting name.
bye bye! |
Katherine
|
Posted: Sun Apr 17, 2005 | 06:01 PM
It can be spelled Ockham OR Occam, yo.
I do agree that the simpler explanation is generally the more probable one, but there do exist numerous instances in which that doesn't hold true. I'm not trying to argue in favor of the existence of psychic powers (indeed, I think they most probably don't exist), but because we cannot rule out the possibility one hundred percent, we can't say for certain that they don't. |
Cranky Media Guy
|
Posted: Mon Apr 18, 2005 | 12:07 AM
Katherine said:
"I'm not trying to argue in favor of the existence of psychic powers (indeed, I think they most probably don't exist), but because we cannot rule out the possibility one hundred percent, we can't say for certain that they don't."
That's certainly true, but since we are not required to prove a negative, let the believers prove what they believe in or admit that there's no evidence for it. I mean, sheesh, do we have to believe every cockamamie notion that anyone comes up with? Feng shui (or however it's spelled), for Chrissakes?? Yeah, let's move the furniture so it doesn't block the "energy." |
Accipiter
Member
|
Posted: Mon Apr 18, 2005 | 12:53 AM
I actually tried something sort of like this with my wife once, just to see what would happen. Before I went off on another assignment, we agreed that at a certain time several days in the future we'd both think of each other and try to picture where the other was. When the time came, though, I was busy being shot in the foot, so my mind was on other things and I didn't follow through my half of the bargain. She did her part, though, and said that she saw me sitting somewhere eating (which is actually a pretty good bet with me, most of the time). So the results: no reading on my part, and an unsuccessful one on hers. Not a successful try at ESP, although I'm willing to admit that it doesn't prove it couldn't happen; my mind wasn't focused on the project when the time for it came, so it could be argued that that threw the whole thing off kilter. |
Learn Remote Viewing
|
Posted: Wed Jan 25, 2006 | 04:55 PM
The man in charge of developing Remote Viewing for military intelligence was Major Ed Dames. He now teaches it to the public.
You can go to http://learnrv.com to see for yourself.
Truth is stranger than fiction.
Get ready for the ride of your life! |
Processor
|
Posted: Tue Mar 28, 2006 | 10:26 PM
They use remote viewing in the military. I don't know if they still do. |
Captain Al
in Vancouver Island, Canada
Member
|
Posted: Wed Mar 29, 2006 | 09:22 AM
If remote viewing actually worked, the military wouldn't need spy satellites, would they? And the last I heard, the military still had spy satellites.
Obviously, since Mr. Dames now "teaches it to the public", the military found it of no use. It would seem for some people, fiction is stranger than truth.
Thanks for the spam, LRV. |
Captain Al
in Vancouver Island, Canada
Member
|
Posted: Wed Mar 29, 2006 | 10:30 AM
Here are some excerpts from Dames' <a href="http://learnrv.com/">Learn Remote Viewing</a> site which he was kind enough to spam us with:
"In 1995, this program came to light |
PsiSpy
Member
|
Posted: Fri Jul 03, 2009 | 09:12 PM
Greetings all !
I would like to correct a few misconceptions that our friend Charybdis has put up about Remote Viewing.
In Remote Viewing after you have had training, you do not "Try" to picture ( as Charybdis puts it) This would engage the thinking process and invite imagination to the session. Instead a Remote Viewer would rely on information from what we call the Signal Line. This is basically tapping into a pattern of information that exists in the ether, like a giant google in the sky if you will. Or you could make the analogy like a telephone number you dial up requesting a specific piece of information,from the Past Present or Future.Correct you can get information from the Future ! No this is not Pseudo Science, This is a scientifically proven process, which was done at SRI ( Stanford Research Institute ).
The Military invested in excess of US $20 Million into Remote Viewing. Yes is it a viable tool, yes the Military do use it along with large Corporations.
The way it is described here is ALL WRONG !
If the person knew what they were talking about, ie. they had done some research on the subject and how sessions are done, that person would not write such things.
Wrong ! you do not "destroy all the misses"
You see again this person is wrong. If only they would do their research they would find this is not so.
Oh is this chap Shermer....a magician ?
Slight of hand there old chap. I would not pay attention to somone who is not knowledgeable in this area.
he also states :
quote
"It may seem like I'm exagerating here"
YOU GOT THAT ONE RIGHT ....YES... YOU... ARE !!
Go and read some real Remote Viewing books for example.
Mind Trek Joe mcMoneagle
Complete Guide to RV David Morehouse
River of Dreams Dale Graff
Seventh Sense Lyn Buchanan
There are many examples on the web or on remote viewing forums that will give examples of "hits"
Go take a look.
Uninformed = Uneducated
regards
PsiSpy |
|
Note: This thread is located in the Old Forum of the Museum of Hoaxes.
|
