free remote viewing magazine - issue 3

[dazsmith]

Look guys as i stated I'm not here to argue - but am willing to show and share stuff that you and I may not have seen that may bend each of our viewpoints. Do i think psi and the paranormal in general needs to prove its claims - yes absolutely - most of the psi/psychic field is full of people who are deluded either with their knowledge or without.

There are many people out there who give what could be a real thing and very bad name - which is why proper remote viewing practitioners work within rules. Take Ingo Swann for example - the most lab tested psychic who has done tens of thousands of blind lab remote viewing experiments with an impeccable record and the creator of the CRV remote viewing process. 32yrs record - http://rviewer.com/IngoSwann-ResearchOverview.html

All I'm saying is, that there is some documented lab tested remote viewing that has shown a statistical anomalously, and there are many examples of blind remote viewing working both in military applications and in the commercial world since the project went public in '95. IF just a single one of these is an application of psi then its the one white crow that proves all crows are not black.

This is a good document to start with: http://www.remoteviewed.com/files/starg ... eports.pdf

I do understand any scepticism but at the same time we must all be prepared to change viewpoints - i certainly have I first believed in all forms of psi - I now feel that most practitioners and probably fakes. I've turned down so many Remote viewing projects because they are'nt fully blind or the protocol isnt exactly right - yet 99% of psychics work face to face and front loaded with information.

[really?]

Really? Welcome to the forum.

Missed this , Thanks.

[NinjaPuppy]

I guess it was easy to miss due to your choice of ID, which is pretty cool.

[really?]

Okay I have an update form the Group owner and the police chief on the missing person case where I believe we helped.

Daz,
Just got off the phone with Chief Gonzalez and he stated that he and the state police and local Sheriff went to the spot we had indicated where we stated the body was by snagged by a fallen tree….. They used poles, oars and their engines to try to stir up the water to see if it would dislodge the body. They could not see it because of the dirty water. The following day a fisherman found the body next to the fallen tree, so it is most likely the stirring up of the water in the area around the tree forced the body to come up later…..

Regardless, it was because we pointed out that he was underwater by that tree is why he was found…..

Daz

How are we to know if this body was just found where you said it would be through RVing ability or just plain old coincidence. We can't know because one hit is to small of a sample size. For Rv to qualify as a real ability you'd have to consistently score better than chance.

All i can offer is this - the police asked us for a gps for this missing person we did - they then find the body within 100ft of this gps - now I think thats a success.

I thought it was 200. See how the story changes first it was 200 feet now it's 100 feet.
Lastly, since none of us were at the scene where the body was found, your argument is still a take my word for it argument.

P.S. if Ingo Swann could do what he claims we'd know where all of the bad guys are and he'd have a Nobel Peace Prize

[dazsmith]

really said:

How are we to know if this body was just found where you said it would be through RVing ability or just plain old coincidence. We can't know because one hit is to small of a sample size. For Rv to qualify as a real ability you'd have to consistently score better than chance.

I was just responding to a post someone said that said that psychics have never helped solve a case. The police chief and others involved think we did in this case. Could it be coincidence - yes, maybe i have to concede this, if there exists such a thing as coincidences.

I thought it was 200. See how the story changes first it was 200 feet now it's 100 feet.
Lastly, since none of us were at the scene where the body was found, your argument is still a take my word for it argument.

The story has never changed - you just haven't read anything correctly - a common trait among sceptics.
I said from the start I was 200ft or more off on this project. One of the other group members was the closest with a supplied GPS 100ft away from the actual location. For the police we work as a group.
Its not a take my word for it argument - its a take the word of the police chief I'm afraid. I cant add any more to this - it is what it is.

P.S. if Ingo Swann could do what he claims we'd know where all of the bad guys are and he'd have a Nobel Peace Prize

This is an argument I hear allot and to be honest its a silly one.
for example if we describe the location of Osama Bin Laden as:
male, in a cave, hot place, natural, dusty, foreign, surrounded by family,
The location is, hot dusty, sandy, dry, cool inside, natural, rocky, up high, in the hills.

Now if done blind ( the viewer did not know the target) all this information may be accurate and on target - but descriptions and 'search' don't locate locations very well. You'd need very, very specific and accurate data to do this. RV can supply this but exact locations are hard as remote viewers describe - other psychics may be able to supply more details info - i cant hep with this - I'm just a remote viewer.
And if it did how would you act upon it to see if the data is accurate?

[ciscop]

you think osama and you think cave?
how intuitive

is just like me thinking tiger woods.. im thinking
miami, mansion, hot tub, hot blonde, scented oil, margaritas, hiphop music

common daz
why dont you think Ninjapuppy and guess what she puts in a box??
do something that will makes us believe
or will you jump this opportunity?

[really?]

really said:

How are we to know if this body was just found where you said it would be through RVing ability or just plain old coincidence. We can't know because one hit is to small of a sample size. For Rv to qualify as a real ability you'd have to consistently score better than chance.

I was just responding to a post someone said that said that psychics have never helped solve a case. The police chief and others involved think we did in this case. Could it be coincidence - yes, maybe i have to concede this, if there exists such a thing as coincidences.

I thought it was 200. See how the story changes first it was 200 feet now it's 100 feet.
Lastly, since none of us were at the scene where the body was found, your argument is still a take my word for it argument.

The story has never changed - you just haven't read anything correctly - a common trait among sceptics.
I said from the start I was 200ft or more off on this project. One of the other group members was the closest with a supplied GPS 100ft away from the actual location. For the police we work as a group.
Its not a take my word for it argument - its a take the word of the police chief I'm afraid. I cant add any more to this - it is what it is.


Now if done blind ( the viewer did not know the target) all this information may be accurate and on target - but descriptions and 'search' don't locate locations very well. You'd need very, very specific and accurate data to do this. RV can supply this but exact locations are hard as remote viewers describe - other psychics may be able to supply more details info - i cant hep with this - I'm just a remote viewer.
And if it did how would you act upon it to see if the data is accurate?

Could it be coincidence - yes, maybe i have to concede this, if there exists such a thing as coincidences.

Yes there are co-incidences[emphasis on the syllable co]. Two things can happen which appear to have a meaningful relationship, like two cars meeting at the same intersection. That's an example of a co-incidence

The story has never changed - you just haven't read anything correctly - a common trait among sceptics.
I said from the start I was 200ft or more off on this project.

I was actually 200ft away with my GPS given to the police on this one but i did have him dead and located in the river - and again I worked this case BLIND with no details.

Even you seem to raise self doubt. "Hey, but at least I said he was dead'

P.S. if Ingo Swann could do what he claims we'd know where all of the bad guys are and he'd have a Nobel Peace Prize
This is an argument I hear allot and to be honest its a silly one.
for example if we describe the location of Osama Bin Laden as:
male, in a cave, hot place, natural, dusty, foreign, surrounded by family,
The location is, hot dusty, sandy, dry, cool inside, natural, rocky, up high, in the hills.

Now if done blind ( the viewer did not know the target) all this information may be accurate and on target - but descriptions and 'search' don't locate locations very well. You'd need very, very specific and accurate data to do this. RV can supply this but exact locations are hard as remote viewers describe - other psychics may be able to supply more details info - i cant hep with this - I'm just a remote viewer.

You don't understand your own position do you. Your the one claiming a high degree of geographical accuracy, but then you backpeddle and you are making excuses. If you can describe the location of the first dead person and give GPS coordinates then you can do it again. Do that consistently and we skeptics might begin to take your claim of RV seriously. That's how we skeptics would react to claims of RV.

Still if Swann could do what you believe he can it be plastered all over the news just like Tigers Woods marital troubles were. He wouldn't be on YouTube. He'd be a household name.

BTW, your argument is still a take my word for it. Think about what makes it so.

[dazsmith]

really said:

You don't understand your own position do you. Your the one claiming a high degree of geographical accuracy, but then you backpeddle and you are making excuses.

please show me one quote where I claimed ANY high degree of accuracy?
let alone a high degree of geographical accuracy - quite the opposite if you actually manage to read the posts.

If you can describe the location of the first dead person and give GPS coordinates then you can do it again. Do that consistently and we skeptics might begin to take your claim of RV seriously. That's how we skeptics would react to claims of RV.

Again I've already addressed the search problem and that Rv inst good for this - but yet again stupidity reigns.
Cant you come up with a serious argument?

explain these away:
http://www.remoteviewed.com/files/11.4. ... island.pdf
http://www.remoteviewed.com/files/11.4. ... sydney.pdf
http://www.farsight.org/demo/Multiple_U ... h2009.html
http://www.remoteviewed.com/files/ferri ... ession.pdf
http://www.remoteviewed.com/files/daz_wayland.pdf
http://www.remoteviewed.com/sirius/sess ... 8_0011.pdf
http://www.remoteviewed.com/files/brso2_full.pdf

or these 160 examples:
http://www.remoteviewed.com/remote_view ... litary.htm

Still if Swann could do what you believe he can it be plastered all over the news just like Tigers Woods marital troubles were. He wouldn't be on YouTube. He'd be a household name.

yep you are so right - only he is a household name/legend within the fields of psi research - but there again as you've never read any of the literature then you wouldn't know this now would you
let me give you a little help here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ingo_Swann

Seriously if you want to debate and if Remote viewing doesn't work - how did I get this information weeks before the event and even more weeks before the target had even been chosen by random:
http://www.farsight.org/demo/Multiple_U ... h2009.html
please answer this question.

ciscop:

common daz
why dont you think Ninjapuppy and guess what she puts in a box??
do something that will makes us believe
or will you jump this opportunity?

why what will this prove that a few thousand experiments done in lab conditions and peer reviewed wont?

Also I cant as you've already front loaded me - remote viewing is blind - knowing its an object in a box is information and dismisses billions of potential targets. If you're desperate to believe then look at the links to the reams of remote viewing examples I have already given.

daz

[ciscop]

common daz
accept the test
go for it

[Nostradamus]

Also I cant as you've already front loaded me - remote viewing is blind - knowing its an object in a box is information and dismisses billions of potential targets. If you're desperate to believe then look at the links to the reams of remote viewing examples I have already given.

Daz. Was it you that posted an example in which you knew it was a ship?

[Nostradamus]

Let me help you out. Here is the link: http://www.debunkingskeptics.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=41&p=70&hilit=titanic#p70

The random number was the only information supplied to Myself and another participant in the attempt using the online name of 'Gulliver'. The number supplied was 4672.

The target description was: Describe the ship in the picture, and any details surrounding it.

Personally we feel that this was a great double hit on the blind target all done out in the open in front of a sceptical audience.

I pulled out 3 statements from the post which you made. You claim this was blind. BTW, the bolding is mine. You appear to make it clear that more information that a random number was provided.

I have to say that the term blind does not mean no information. It means that certain types of information are not available.

Can this issue be clarified?

[really?]

really said:

You don't understand your own position do you. Your the one claiming a high degree of geographical accuracy, but then you backpeddle and you are making excuses.

please show me one quote where I claimed ANY high degree of accuracy?
let alone a high degree of geographical accuracy - quite the opposite if you actually manage to read the posts.
My reply:It matters not whom spouted out the numbers 200 and 100 feet. What does matter is you've included that data because you believe it to be important.

If you can describe the location of the first dead person and give GPS coordinates then you can do it again. Do that consistently and we skeptics might begin to take your claim of RV seriously. That's how we skeptics would react to claims of RV.

Again I've already addressed the search problem and that Rv inst good for this - but yet again stupidity reigns.
Cant you come up with a serious argument?
My reply: You really can't tolerate the least bit of criticism.

explain these away:
http://www.remoteviewed.com/files/11.4. ... island.pdf
http://www.remoteviewed.com/files/11.4. ... sydney.pdf
http://www.farsight.org/demo/Multiple_U ... h2009.html
http://www.remoteviewed.com/files/ferri ... ession.pdf
http://www.remoteviewed.com/files/daz_wayland.pdf
http://www.remoteviewed.com/sirius/sess ... 8_0011.pdf
http://www.remoteviewed.com/files/brso2_full.pdf

or these 160 examples:
http://www.remoteviewed.com/remote_view ... litary.htm

My reply:I can't because you've presented one side of the story your side. And I have no way nor the resources to investigate the evidence you present.

Still if Swann could do what you believe he can it be plastered all over the news just like Tigers Woods marital troubles were. He wouldn't be on YouTube. He'd be a household name.

yep you are so right - only he is a household name/legend within the fields of psi research - but there again as you've never read any of the literature then you wouldn't know this now would you
let me give you a little help here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ingo_Swann
My reply: So is Sylvia Brown, John Edwards. I knew of Ingo Swann close to 30 years ago. So do not assume I'm wet behind the ears on matters of paranormal research.

Seriously if you want to debate and if Remote viewing doesn't work - how did I get this information weeks before the event and even more weeks before the target had even been chosen by random:
http://www.farsight.org/demo/Multiple_U ... h2009.html
please answer this question.
My reply: That's for you to find out. Do you know why it's your job to find out ?



daz

[ProfWag]

Okay I have an update form the Group owner and the police chief on the missing person case where I believe we helped.

Daz,
Just got off the phone with Chief Gonzalez and he stated that he and the state police and local Sheriff went to the spot we had indicated where we stated the body was by snagged by a fallen tree….. They used poles, oars and their engines to try to stir up the water to see if it would dislodge the body. They could not see it because of the dirty water. The following day a fisherman found the body next to the fallen tree, so it is most likely the stirring up of the water in the area around the tree forced the body to come up later…..

Regardless, it was because we pointed out that he was underwater by that tree is why he was found…..

Daz

Thanks for the clarification Daz!

[ProfWag]

I was just responding to a post someone said that said that psychics have never helped solve a case. The police chief and others involved think we did in this case. Could it be coincidence - yes, maybe i have to concede this, if there exists such a thing as coincidences.

I just wanted to clarify that I don't think I said psychics have never "helped" solve a case, I said they have never "solved" a case.

[ProfWag]

please show me one quote where I claimed ANY high degree of accuracy?
let alone a high degree of geographical accuracy - quite the opposite if you actually manage to read the posts.

I don't mean to call you out on this Daz, but on page 2 of this thread, you said:
"I have a good accuracy that hovers at approx. 70% accurate 70% of the time. Sometimes (rarely) i do completely miss but there again sometime I 100% nail the targets."
I'd say that qualifies as you claiming a high degree of accuracy...