View Active Topics          Latest 100 Topics          View Your Posts          Switch to Mobile

free remote viewing magazine - issue 3

Discussions about Psychics and Psychic Phenomena, Extra Sensory Perception, Telepathy, Psi, Clairvoyancy, 6th Sense, Psychokinesis, etc.

Re: free remote viewing magazine - issue 3

Postby Craig Browning » 19 Mar 2010, 19:54

ProfWag wrote:
dazsmith wrote: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...


As Obi-wan would say, it depends on your point of view... (rim shot please) :lol:

I can't speak for Daz but I do know, based on my own experiences that it's not that difficult to actually maintain a 70-80% accuracy rate as a Reader but when it comes to RV type bits breaking that 80% threshold is exceptionally rare. The handful of folk I've worked with (who I know for fact, work with several different Governments via the U.N.) rarely prove out at more than 85% and they are considered "the best" out there.

Again, I'm not trying to challenge Daz or bust his chops, I believe him a fair and exceptionally patient sport (far more than I tend to be). But as someone involved in this stuff I do feel the need to chime in and shine a hint of light, based on what I've seen, etc., around the issue.




:? Now I know that somewhere around here we have a thread on Exorcism... I REALLY think we we might want to try an experiment on that front, some of the silliness is getting very confusing for what's left of my mind :roll:
User avatar
Craig Browning
 
Posts: 1526
Joined: 13 Feb 2010, 05:20
Location: Northampton, MA






Re: free remote viewing magazine - issue 3

Postby ProfWag » 20 Mar 2010, 03:19

Craig Browning wrote:
As Obi-wan would say, it depends on your point of view... (rim shot please) :lol:

I can't speak for Daz but I do know, based on my own experiences that it's not that difficult to actually maintain a 70-80% accuracy rate as a Reader but when it comes to RV type bits breaking that 80% threshold is exceptionally rare. The handful of folk I've worked with (who I know for fact, work with several different Governments via the U.N.) rarely prove out at more than 85% and they are considered "the best" out there.

Again, I'm not trying to challenge Daz or bust his chops, I believe him a fair and exceptionally patient sport (far more than I tend to be). But as someone involved in this stuff I do feel the need to chime in and shine a hint of light, based on what I've seen, etc., around the issue.

:? Now I know that somewhere around here we have a thread on Exorcism... I REALLY think we we might want to try an experiment on that front, some of the silliness is getting very confusing for what's left of my mind :roll:

Craig, you've shined the light on the subject, but unfortunately, I think your light has run out of batteries. Could you please put some energy back into that light and provide us with the information that brings you to the conclusion that 70-80% accuracy rate is not that difficult? Or, if you'd prefer, shine that light over in another direction and show us something that would put an accuracy rate anywhere above chance or educated guess. Anything'll do. You see, I'm not involved in this stuff on a daily basis as you have so eloquently made it known to all that you are a time or two, so if I missed out on this 70-80% accuracy rate, I need to do some quick studying as that's pretty darn impressive! Or, are you saying that 70-80% accuracy is about what you'd get from chance 'cause chance is all that's ever been detected. Thanks.
Respectfully,
Wag
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: free remote viewing magazine - issue 3

Postby dazsmith » 20 Mar 2010, 21:04

nostradamus said:
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?


The Paracast Radio show hosts only provided us with a random number - no other intomation whatsoever.

The target description - was written down and was inside a sealed envelope or something similar - this was not given or told to us - but is the recorded action that the tasker wanted us to remote view. its generally written down somewhere to make it more accurate when later reviewing the data rather than just sying 'well i wanted them to look at this, n that'. We did not get this info until the experiment was complete and reviewed by the paracast team who then gave us feedback on what the target was.

Blind - we had NO INFORMATION other than a randomly generated number.


Really said:
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.


So what you are avoiding here is that you CANT actually quote where i claim any HIGH DEGREE OF ACCURACY - because I didn't - yet you find it hard to even admit your mistake on this. Don't avoid - answer the question - can you provide where I claim a high degree of accuracy?


Profwag said:
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.

I don't know how anyone could ever determine if a psychic just helped or if the solely solved a case unless every single case where a psychic were involved were submitted to independent scientific analysis - so i cant say either way on this.

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...


I don't think so - there are others like Joe McMonegale who seems to have a much higher accuracy than this. I also stated that I do completely miss the targets - so this could never be described as a high accuracy - but again its point of view isnt it we all have differing opinions.
I posted links to my public rv work this last two years you can quite clearly see where im off and on target - in the predictive targets I would say im approx (estimated) at 50% accurate overall but i do also have some great data in the good hits like naming the target being a tornado weeks before the tornado event, then weeks more before this was chosen as the random news event for this target.
Other things Im not so good at like outside events involving people and music - i seem to bomb at these.
So in short I think Im about average for a well practiced viewer and not I wouldn't class those numbers and statement as highly accurate.

All the best...

Daz
User avatar
dazsmith
 
Posts: 71
Joined: 25 May 2009, 22:02

Re: free remote viewing magazine - issue 3

Postby Craig Browning » 20 Mar 2010, 21:59

Wags... any good student of "Cold Reading" can hit those ratios and that's without any intuitive inclusion.

I don't know of many veteran Readers that walk with a foot in either world (theater & real world) that can't meet those levels of presumed accuracy; we are actually known for being more accurate than the "shut eye" Readers of the world because we understand the demographic and psychological aspects of doing the work.

Hope that shines a brighter light on things. ;)
User avatar
Craig Browning
 
Posts: 1526
Joined: 13 Feb 2010, 05:20
Location: Northampton, MA

Re: free remote viewing magazine - issue 3

Postby Nostradamus » 21 Mar 2010, 23:17

Daz, I did not try to cherry pick items. You didn't suggest I did. So you make it explicitly clear now that you only get a random number.

Why supply a random number? It's part of the protocol, but why?
Scimitars were not available - beware January 19, 2038 is upon us.
User avatar
Nostradamus
 
Posts: 1761
Joined: 08 Aug 2009, 14:08

Re: free remote viewing magazine - issue 3

Postby dazsmith » 26 Mar 2010, 02:45

First sorry for the delay - Ive been very busy this last week.

Why supply a random number? It's part of the protocol, but why?


Two reasons really.
Firstly because the very early testing of remote viewing in 1972 onwards created a method of trying to describe targets from their coordinates. This random number thing is partly a ritual/nod back to this era.

Secondly its just a 'thing' for the remote viewer to use as a focus but that doesn't impart any of the project information. It also serves as an admin tool as it gives the project an name that everyone can use in discussions and any project management etc: ie. project 2503-2010 (generally most people just use the days date).

So nothing esoteric behind it - just something for the remote viewer to use as a focus for their intent and for admin.

All the best...

Daz
User avatar
dazsmith
 
Posts: 71
Joined: 25 May 2009, 22:02

Re: free remote viewing magazine - issue 3

Postby Craig Browning » 26 Mar 2010, 08:02

:lol: Daz, thanks for that line "nothing esoteric about it"... I use this CONSTANTLY when dealing with skeptic & believer alike (and yet, both seem to have the ardent need to cling to the fantasy) :roll:
User avatar
Craig Browning
 
Posts: 1526
Joined: 13 Feb 2010, 05:20
Location: Northampton, MA

Re: free remote viewing magazine - issue 3

Postby Nostradamus » 26 Mar 2010, 12:22

I was just curious here since there has been what appeared to me so much talk about the random numbers. So are both of you saying it nothing more than a diversion - a part of the show.

You have to agree it is curious when there is this table thumping cry that all that was known was a random number. I've been corrected before in these threads about there only being a random number. So after all of the table thumping it seems I am being told that it's a meaningless diversion that can be eliminated from the show.
Scimitars were not available - beware January 19, 2038 is upon us.
User avatar
Nostradamus
 
Posts: 1761
Joined: 08 Aug 2009, 14:08

Re: free remote viewing magazine - issue 3

Postby Craig Browning » 26 Mar 2010, 20:01

Nostradamus wrote:I was just curious here since there has been what appeared to me so much talk about the random numbers. So are both of you saying it nothing more than a diversion - a part of the show.

You have to agree it is curious when there is this table thumping cry that all that was known was a random number. I've been corrected before in these threads about there only being a random number. So after all of the table thumping it seems I am being told that it's a meaningless diversion that can be eliminated from the show.


:shock: I'm not certain what you're getting at here Nostradamus... I don't understand the whole number thing Daz is speaking on... and I'm a Numerologist :lol:

What I do know is that 90% of what's been presented as being "special psychic/spiritual gifts" for eons, hosts a very down to earth explanation. As I mentioned previously, it's getting folks from both sides of the issue, to let go of the fantasy we've been trained to believe exists. The scenario being more akin to the various levels of "Top Secret" each government/military branch operates from with "Need to Know" being at the top rung... in the case of the paranormal/psychic, it is only those initiates that prove themselves "worthy" (intelligent & wise enough) that are allowed to move deeper into the "mysteries"... the greater truth behind it all. Just like stage magic or even the Martial Arts, simplicity and logic tend to be the solution... the answer to it all.
User avatar
Craig Browning
 
Posts: 1526
Joined: 13 Feb 2010, 05:20
Location: Northampton, MA

Re: free remote viewing magazine - issue 3

Postby NinjaPuppy » 26 Mar 2010, 20:10

Agree!
User avatar
NinjaPuppy
 
Posts: 4002
Joined: 28 Jul 2009, 20:44

Re: free remote viewing magazine - issue 3

Postby Nostradamus » 26 Mar 2010, 20:33

Craig a while back there was a post about an rv in which it seemed that the viewers knew that this was about a ship and also were given a random number. When I asked for clarification as did someone else, I got the following response:

Blind - we had NO INFORMATION other than a randomly generated number.


It seems to me that there was been big emphasis on a random number being the only information passed. My thinking of random is that it does not contain information.

Apparently it was unclear to more than just me what information was available before the remote viewing started. Daz I thought, was fairly emphatic about the random number although now it seems that it is not really a part of the protocol.
Scimitars were not available - beware January 19, 2038 is upon us.
User avatar
Nostradamus
 
Posts: 1761
Joined: 08 Aug 2009, 14:08

Re: free remote viewing magazine - issue 3

Postby NinjaPuppy » 26 Mar 2010, 20:41

Nostradamus wrote:It seems to me that there was been big emphasis on a random number being the only information passed. My thinking of random is that it does not contain information.

Apparently it was unclear to more than just me what information was available before the remote viewing started. Daz I thought, was fairly emphatic about the random number although now it seems that it is not really a part of the protocol.


I'm going to go out on a limb here and speculate on this a bit. IMO, Daz has said that he is following a protocol from 1972. That protocol includes a random number. In order to follow a protocol, the protocol must be followed but the individual doesn't have to be interested in all aspects of the protocol, just follow them. Am I correct?
User avatar
NinjaPuppy
 
Posts: 4002
Joined: 28 Jul 2009, 20:44

Re: free remote viewing magazine - issue 3

Postby dazsmith » 26 Mar 2010, 20:51

I'm going to go out on a limb here and speculate on this a bit. IMO, Daz has said that he is following a protocol from 1972. That protocol includes a random number. In order to follow a protocol, the protocol must be followed but the individual doesn't have to be interested in all aspects of the protocol, just follow them. Am I correct?


The random number thing is not part of the protocol as such.
The random number is just for admin - it gives the project a reference name, and for a focus for the remote viewer.
For example in the links i provided for the rv experiments done for the Farsight institute (multiple universe) because there was no target when we did the remote viewing ( it was chosen weeks later) we all individually used or made up our own - I and others generally just use the date of the day we do the rv. There are even on-line random number generators that some people use.

The protocol insists that the viewer is BLIND only - not that a random number be used. Some practitioners used a jumble of letters and numbers - some just write 'target'. The ONLY thing that matters is that IF the tasker gives or creates the name/umber for the project task - that it imparts NO information about the project at hand - leaving the remote viewer BLIND.

for example you cant have the target tasker assign the name/number: Eiffel1 or stat-lib1 or moon12 or sydney-har9 as this can impart information.

Daz
User avatar
dazsmith
 
Posts: 71
Joined: 25 May 2009, 22:02

Re: free remote viewing magazine - issue 3

Postby NinjaPuppy » 26 Mar 2010, 21:07

Ahhhhhh, thank you!
User avatar
NinjaPuppy
 
Posts: 4002
Joined: 28 Jul 2009, 20:44

Re: free remote viewing magazine - issue 3

Postby Craig Browning » 27 Mar 2010, 21:12

It seems to me that there was been big emphasis on a random number being the only information passed. My thinking of random is that it does not contain information.


Strictly from a psychic's point of view, this brings up that age old question as to if or not the information conveyed is (in this case) RV or Telepathy?

Of all the Psychic Abilities we hear about, Telepathy is the one Science has the most empathy with and belief in... the basic ideas around it have in fact been exploited in recent years for technological advancements... BUT, aside from all the arguments on that point, we have the fact that science views TP as being viable... plausible. It would stand to reason therefore that anyone in the room or within a reasonable circumference around a testing facility that has any knowledge about an RV test, could unknowingly tip that data with the RVer picking it up subconsciously... innocently... and not realizing that this is what's happening.

It's just a pov not yet weighed that I thought could prove an interesting bone to chew on ;)
User avatar
Craig Browning
 
Posts: 1526
Joined: 13 Feb 2010, 05:20
Location: Northampton, MA

PreviousNext

Return to Psychic Phenomena / ESP / Telepathy

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron