pjrv : Messages : 3779-3783 of 4038
(http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pjrv/messages/3779?? ) ?006/07/01 16:10:00
~~--------ArchivedPostFollows_Yahoo-PJRV_group---------

#3779

From: "pjgaenir" Date: Sat Jan 17, ?004 11:30 pm Subject: Another RT Experiment--for Everyone pjgaenir Liz and Glyn, I want to thank you guys for taking the trouble to experiment (I love it when anybody seriously experiments!? ) and for posting it all to the list. I wandered my way through many theories and thoughts on retro- tasking, many of them openly on the list, and ended up feeling it was not a concern for me. Not because it was impossible, or because the 'underlying dynamics' were, I don't think that; but simply because for _me_, I do not worry about it. Others have gone through the same process, and yet come to the opposite conclusion. Clearly it's a murky subject, which IMO has such a vast number of variables at every point which can change things, that it's very difficult even to think through cleanly, let alone discuss with others in english. But you guys have taken an idea, a place to start, and gone with it, and that's cool, I like that. I HAVE AN IDEA I'm kicking around, about a small addition of my own as a retro-tasking 'experiment', inspired by you guys. I am considering scanning a few old RV exercises (when I had nothing in my head about this? ) and a few upcoming ones (when I'll be thinking about NOT having rt in operation in my session? ), all of them at least decent enough that you can clearly see I had target contact [there'd be little point to this, it's sure to match something else better if it's wildly off the target LOL!] and posting all of them for pjrv members. Be aware most mine are very BRIEF--they are not full sessions, they are 5-?0 minute exercises is all. I might also post some of them in 'presentation' format, meaning post the data in a neatly written page(s? ) without the personal comments that are not session data etc. I'd like to add this in because at TKR, I expect most people will post data, not raw session, including on 'window gallery' sessions (that means, sessions done outside TKR, like old ones, or stuff for practice groups? ). Data is data after all, whether it's re-written neatly or not; I doubt it matters but just in case, I'll see if I can add some of those too. Then, I'd like anyone here who is interested, go "retro-task" my sessions to any target they want, with the caveat that they will please provide me (I'll post this stuff on the web so everyone can see? ) their target's feedback, and the points of correlation they found between my session and their new target. The OBVIOUS point of this is that you cannot look at my sessions and THEN choose a target-- or you'll just be choosing something to match (duh!? )--you gotta choose a target, THEN choose one of the sessions to compare it to. A variety of factors would be in play here, starting with multiple RT on one session, as well as the 'oblivious' vs. 'aware' viewer, and it would be interesting to see just how many correlates can be found to different targets in one session. One of the theories in this subject is that so many correlates can be made by chance and then more by conscious intent to find them and the flexibility of english, as well as the possible psi of the analyst in choosing the target to compare, that some degree of "seeming results" in RT will be present for all those combined reasons, not because the viewer, session or target were actually 'influenced' in any way by the RT process. This little experiment can't prove or disprove that, but it might provide a little more data, with a variety of people contributing, as food for thought. What do you guys think? Is it worth me taking the time to dig up and scan this stuff out of my lab books? Will someone make the time to try the RT so we can see the results? PJ

#3781

From: Bill Pendragon Date: Sat Jan 17, ?004 11:55 pm Subject: Re: Bills open retrotasking target docsavagebill Hello PJ, I think it better to just give the sessions to one person for retrotasking. If you give them to a group.. with lots of different targets I don't see how anything clear would come thru. I also think the person should send you her/his "retrotasking" target before you send them the sessions..so everything is nice and blind. I have a task already I will share. What is the helmet colors and design of the team winning the superbowl feb1 ?004. Now just send me a random session ( without reading it? ) and lets see what happens..G Bill --------------- Yes but we already HAVE an experiment with one person doing RT on another person. I'm not trying to replicate what Liz & Glyn are doing, I am pointedly trying to do something else. Among the many other theories about RT was allegedly that it could be done multiple times on one session. I suppose I could take a couple just for one person and a couple more for everybody. The multi-person aspect was part of what I wanted to see the results of. I'll have to just trust people on the RT target thing... I can't send a random session without reading it, it's a pain to scan so of course I would see anything I chose, and now that you've told me the task, it become somewhat arbitrary on my part. I can't say I'm sorry to have to pass up on anyone's obsession with lotto, football or other such targets though! PJ

#3783

From: "Glyn" Date: Sun Jan 18, ?004 6:03 am Subject: RE: Another RT Experiment--for Everyone glynis5799 Hi PJ, Just a quick reply, will get back later........gotta go shopping and stuff. Yes, I'd love to take part. Glyn pjrv : Messages : 3780-3799 of 4038
(http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pjrv/messages/3780?? ) ?006/07/01 16:1?:34
~~--------ArchivedPostFollows_Yahoo-PJRV_group---------

#3780

From: "Elizabeth Hambrook" Date: Sun Jan 18, ?004 1?:04 am Subject: Re: Another RT Experiment--for Everyone ozblueriver >>>I HAVE AN IDEA I'm kicking around, about a small addition of my own as a retro-tasking 'experiment', inspired by you guys. Hi PJ, I think you're idea for an experiment is great. I would suggest that you only get one Retro Task per session though. If it is a real phenomena then it might show up clearer that way. As you say there are so many variables so it's probably better to make the experiment as clean to start with as you possibly can. Of course this is just in my non-scientific, uneducated opinion. 'g' I'm happy to volunteer to do any RT that is needed. Just mail me when you need me to help. Glyn and I have started on our next set of experiments. This happened by chance and has lead us to investigate further. I wanted to know what would happen if one of us chose a photo for a target. Then instead of doing a session, the other person plucked a set of words out of a book. The first time we did this the match was so good that we decided we had better keep going and do some more. So we have done two 'sessions' out of ten. We will post the sessions and results for everyone to see what happens. And Glyn has lots more ideas, so we plan on doing lots of experimenting in the future. Hopefully we will learn a little something here and there as we go. cheers Liz ------------------------------ Hi Liz, Bill suggested 'just one' also. I'll do a couple with that I guess. One thing I'm trying to hit here, is stuff done *prior to* the decision to work with RT. It is supposed to be something one can apply to a session done previously by someone oblivious to the RT. It is entirely possible that knowing about it and agreeing to experiment has some affect. So my goal in choosing old stuff, even if it's not great or formal, was to do something different than you guys were. So we'd be hitting different variables, so to speak. Well anyway it'll be a couple weeks at least, this is new term so my job is mega-busy, plus I'm trying to finish and open TKR Galleries this month, so it's going to have to fall behind that. But I think it sounds interesting! PJ

#3789

From: "Elizabeth Hambrook" Date: Mon Jan 19, ?004 4:46 am Subject: Re: Another RT Experiment--for Everyone ozblueriver Hi PJ, I think I misunderstood what you wanted to experiment with. Lets see if I've got it straight now. You want to see if multiple Retro Taskings will work and you want to try that out using a few sessions done prior to you knowing about RT and a few after knowing about it. Is that right? I think most but not all of my sessions used in the RT experiments were prior to my knowledge of it. I can't really remember when Pru brought the subject up though. If you can recall the date, we can check that against the dates of my sessions and see if it seemed to make a difference. cheers Liz ---------------------- Hi Liz, I want to cover the variables. So, you guys are doing single RTs, I want to do multiple. If RT is effective then logically, multiple RT could show less effect. So, we'll do it that way too, then we can see if it does show up less. Also, if a session can have the same data RT'd in different directions (to match diff targets? ), then this is a good example to us of how arbitrary some of this might be. The sessions aren't prior to my 'knowing about' RT, only prior to my considering using my practice sessions as victims, lol. PJ

#3797

From: "Elizabeth Hambrook" Date: Thu Jan ??, ?004 5:41 am Subject: Re: Another RT Experiment--for Everyone ozblueriver Hi PJ, > I want to cover the variables. So, you guys are doing > single RTs, I want to do multiple. If RT is effective > then logically, multiple RT could show less effect. > So, we'll do it that way too, then we can see if it > does show up less. OK, sounds groovy to me. :? ) One more thing we have come up against is how to decide what matches and what doesn't. Most of the time Glyn and I have agreed, but there is a certain amount of sway. And that area can make or break a session appearing to be a good match or not. How on earth do we get around that? It seems such a personal choice. For example if the target is a lake and in the photo it is seen as grey what do you do when blue is written in the session? If the person doing the session viewed the real thing rather than the photo it could very well have been blue so what do you do? Do you give it a yes just because it might have been right? I'd say probably, but if you're trying to decide if RT works, do you give the same leyway or try to be really harsh and exclude it because it's not definite? cheers Liz

#3799

From: "pjgaenir" Date: Thu Jan ??, ?004 10:15 am Subject: Re: Another RT Experiment--for Everyone pjgaenir Hi Liz, > One more thing we have come up against is > how to decide what matches and what doesn't. > Most of the time Glyn and I have agreed, > but there is a certain amount of sway. And > that area can make or break a session appearing > to be a good match or not. > For example if the target is a lake and in > the photo it is seen as grey what do you do when > blue is written in the session? If the person doing > the session viewed the real thing rather than > the photo it could very well have been blue so > what do you do? Do you give it a yes just because > it might have been right? I'd say probably, but if > you're trying to decide if RT works, do you give > the same leyway or try to be really harsh and > exclude it because it's not definite? --------------------- Well just my opinion, but the retro-tasker should be the sole voice of choice. They are assumed to be the one privately doing this after all. Also, one of the biggest problems in addressing the possibility of retro-tasking is IMO making the mistake of putting it in a practice model instead of an ops model. The entire concept of RT was brought up by Prudence as something that could be part of a distributed network, that would allow useful information to be gathered, for real ops needs, without having one's own viewers. Outside of an ops use, there is something no point to RT. Which brings up the most annoyingly obvious flaw to RT theory, that being the real question of *what can RT tell a tasker that he or she doesn't already know?* The real test of RT is having a genuine question, having an RT'd session to work from, and knowing which data applies and how it applies. This is difficult enough in regular RV never mind RT'd-RV, which is one of the primary arguments against it; not that it's entirely impossible, but that it's entirely unworkable, hence it doesn't matter if it's possible, if it doesn't lead to a usable product. If there is not a way to demonstrate this is possible eventually-- learning something we *don't* know about an RT'd target, from an RT'd session--then the whole RT thing is useless operationally, and hence the topic is pretty much moot, whether or not we can 'find correlations with' photographs/targets other than the one a session is supposed to match. The question of 'matching' kind of ties into that. Match to feedback can be a boggy area even in regular practice RV. The real test of useful data is of course, whether or not it answers a question for a tasker in non-practice RV. In which case, if grey or blue answered the tasker's questions or contributed to the answer, then one or both would be useful, but if not, then it doesn't really matter whether the color is exactly matching water, which btw can be grey, blue, green, brown, and even black depending on lighting and many other conditions. (I find that in water data, color is often symbolic data, without this being realized by the viewer. Sometimes blue is said because it represents water to the viewer. Sometimes the color represents the state of the water (eg grey or black for polluted, even though the river may really be brown? ). Viewers usually figure this out eventually if it's something they do.? ) Of course, if the session is not in depth enough that colors are attached to anything, but rather part of a list of descriptives, then we get back to the same issue that such sessions have even in regular RV, of being generic enough, outside a couple points (and who knows which? ), to apply to a good % of anything. I lost track of what I was talking about, as I fell asleep near the end of the last paragraph, lol. That'll teach me to get too comfy with my laptop PC here in bed, lol! PJ

// end archive

Top of Page

Remote Viewing info page spacer

RV Oasis / PJRV List Archives Menu

Dojo Psi Library, Archival Material, Remote Viewing and Psi

The RV Oasis / PJRV Discussion List Archives


Remote Viewing RV Oasis / PJRV Discussion list archives. Dojo Psi dot com / info