pjrv : Messages : 793-859 of 4038
Date: Sat Oct 1?, ?00? 8:56 pm
Subject: Feedback? dennanm
Joe and I would like to hear whatever feedback you guys have got
about the three interviews I posted the link to this morning. It was
a lot of work, as you see, I can't believe he agreed to answer THAT
many questions (though it did take a long time!? ), and some in some
#796 From: richard braswell
Date: Sun Oct 13, ?00? 4:?8 am
Subject: Re: Feedback? rvrichrb
Hi PJ and Joe,
I stayed up until ?:15AM reading the whole thing. I
just couldn't put it down. I am also amazed at how
much time and effort Joe invested in answering the
questions. I agree with you, PJ. Thank God for Joe.
His is a seldom heard and honest perspective. A
necessary help. Without his presence here, in his
books, and in the media (especially performing
sessions on TV? ), I wouldn't know what the hell to
believe. We're light-years ahead of where we would
have been without him.
I especially enjoyed his views on RV
'methodologies' and 'self'. I'll have to go back over
it several times. It's a lot to absorb but at least
there IS something like this TO absorb. Very
eye-opening. Thank you very much Joe and P.J.
#800 From: "Pame" #801
From: "Sharon Webb"
Date: Sun Oct 13, ?00? 1:?7 pm
Subject: Re: Feedback? sharwebb_3051?
I really enjoyed reading the interviews. I've just finished Joe's latest book,
so the part about being freaked at the false awakenings, really took on a lot of
meaning for me. In fact, so much so, that I awoke this morning (in what
reality, I'm not sure :-? ) with a "knowing." And it's one that I'm not sure I'm
quite comfortable with.
Date: Sun Oct 13, ?00? 3:?9 pm
Subject: Re: Feedback? a_healey56
PJ, I must have missed something. Where do we go to read the interviews
Hi Dave, Go here:
There is an intro and links to the three interviews. PJ
#813 From: Ken Burns
Date: Tue Oct 15, ?00? 1?:1? am
Subject: Re: Feedback? mesundo
I just finished reading the interviews and want to thank you and Joe for
all the time and effort that went into it. They were really interesting
#798 From: "Viv*"
Date: Sat Oct 1?, ?00? 10:50 pm
Subject: Re: Feedback? eclecticviv
I want more then anything to read the interviews, but
my adobe isn't opening it up. I even did an update
and still am having a problem.
I'll poke around some more and see if I can get it to
do it's PDF thing.
#80? From: "scottrver"
Date: Sun Oct 13, ?00? 11:40 am
Subject: Re: Feedback? scottrver
Wow, there's some great stuff. Thank you Joe and PJ! In general it
of course raises more questions.
Improving over time: Joe said his reliability has improved but not
his accuracy. Does he mean that his hit rate has improved?
Psychology of psi: So does this mean that effecting one's psychology
is the best method of increasing psi? Is this possible? You would
think that doing enough RV to KNOW that it's real and always available
would support this but then wouldn't you expect more RV performance
improvement over time?
Dowsing: This is a subject I'm more and more interested in as I am
finding some application for it. Joe describes it in Remote Viewing
Secrets to some extent. But is it desirable to be in a meditative
type state when doing it and are there any other methodological
aspects not described in RVS?
#805 From: richard coulombe
Date: Sun Oct 13, ?00? 7:16 pm
Subject: Re: Feedback? rcoulombe3?
Iloved The interview with Joe McMoneagle it was great! Thank you very much I'm
sure glad I have a place where people understand me and I understand Them.
#819 From: Bill Pendragon
Date: Wed Oct 16, ?00? 1:35 am
Subject: Re: Feedback? Joe Intreview docsavagebill
I'm glad you said that.
First tremendous thanks to both of you for producing
the interview! It's the first time I've heard Joes
opinions on this in depth.. and it is yet a different
voice from Paul, Lyn, Morehouse, Glen,Skip, Targ etc
Trying to put these experiences and inner
interpretations togeather is truly like trying to
understand the proverbial different parts of the
elephant.by feel...And Joes portion of the elephant
has been sorely missed.
TIME AND ARV. Joe says "ARV should not be a problem
since there is no time..." and yet for many good RVers
it is a problem.
Joe has done countless sessions with decoy targets
even when no " time" element is present.and also as
ARV targets across "future time". my question is: Is
there ANY DIFFERENCE in the results? Or is the problem
for many RVers doing ARV, just having decoy targets..?
If so why does a small target pool help.. and
doesn't this small group get reiterative after many
TIME#?. ..."Time does not exist.." now reading a book
by a physicsist posing the same hypothesis ( End of
Time? ). But what makes us feel like we are experiencing
a flow of time..and are born age and die? Why is there
such a consensus in this?
SPOT IN BRAIN THAT CONTROLS PSI PERCEPTIONS: Recently
stimulation of the Right angular Gyrus ( above and
just to the back of the right ear? ) has been proposed
to trigger OBE's. Is this the place in the brain you
Finally, did you ever get a chance to live with your
son from your first marriage?
Bill, this would take a whole 'nuther interview! I don't
think I can get any more questions out of him for the moment.
He put a lot of work into the ones we had.
However, some of these could probably be posed to Dr. May.
#8?0 From: "scottrver"
Date: Wed Oct 16, ?00? 9:53 am
Subject: Re: Feedback? Joe Intreview scottrver
> If so why does a small target pool help.. and
> doesn't this small group get reiterative after many
> ARV sessions?
There's a paper on target pool bandwidth at www.jsasoc.com from CSL.
Of course, what do you consider a small target pool? I've had the
discussion about re-using targets with James Spottiswoode and he said
it's not a problem. That's been my experience too. Usually on the
second time around you'll get different aspects of the target.
Date: Wed Oct 16, ?00? 10:45 am
Subject: Repeating targets dennanm
> > If so why does a small target pool help.. and
> > doesn't this small group get reiterative after many
> > ARV sessions?
The issue with repeating targets is not some obscure cosmic issues
with the targets themselves. A viewer will worst-case have a new
session and best-case actually recognize the target from a previous
session... repeating targets, regardless of numbers or cues or
tasking, is a non-issue.
I think a lot of the weird stuff I sometimes see from people about
tasking numbers or so forth (like that using what was used for
another target will be a problem, or that the same target with diff
#s will be a problem? ) is because they just haven't grokked yet that
they are responsible for the psychic connection (or lack? ) with the
target (or decoy? ). It is INTENT that creates the 'association'
between the viewer and the target. Numbers as just one example, are
really juse useful for databasing the effort.
The main issue of repeating targets is just based on the viewer. If
a pool, esp. an ARV pool, is always the SAME pool for each target,
well the moment a viewer starts AOLing on what the target 'might' be,
you're in trouble.
In formal ARV the target pool is 3. Binary with 'other'. I know a
lot of other bright ideas have come about and now people want to
assign like, ?6 targets depending on the first letter, or 7 targets
depending on the day of the week, etc. but that is NOT part of the
original ARV protocol, which had 3 options, the targets were primary
gestalt type targets, and the viewers were established viewers.
Any targets not used for the target-decoy set in an ARV trial, I
would not put in a group and call a target pool. I would choose 3
from the hard drive and call the three the 'pool'. But that is just
a semantics/intent/focus thing. Might not matter to others.
#8?7 From: Bill Pendragon
Date: Wed Oct 16, ?00? 5:57 pm
Subject: Re: Repeating targets docsavagebill
Oh OK.. that kind of pool. I thought you were talking
about the total pool from which the binary or trinary
picks were chosen?
Moderator's note: The problem in psi is that targets in all their details are
dominantly 'connected' by INTENT. There's quite a bit of evidence that if the
viewer and/or others even THINKS of a group of photos as being in 'one pool'
from which a photo(s? ) is pulled, that a great deal more 'bleed-through' occurs
between that and other targets in the same pool, as if they energetically blend
in some way. I suspect this may be one reason ARV runs into displacement, is
the pool concept. Joe says to just avoid calling or thinking of something as a
pool if possible, and if you must, then make it as small and last minute as
possible, and no matter what, make sure the viewer focuses VERY clearly on the
ONE target-which-is-the-target as distinct from everything else in the world. PJ
#830 From: "Mary Ashley"
Date: Thu Oct 17, ?00? ?:41 pm
Subject: Re: Feedback? Joe Intreview maryladyoflight
Thank you sooooo much for the interview with Joe. Please pass on our
It made for fascinating reading..
You hit gold, girl. :? )
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com? ).
Version: 6.0.401 / Virus Database: ??6 - Release Date: 10/10/?00?
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
#859 From: "Kyriakos"
Date: Sun Oct ?0, ?00? 11:50 am
Subject: RE: Feedback? n0mind
I just got back from a trip, and have a lot of CRV email to catch up on...I
just came across the interview and have saved it and will print it out to
read. Thanks for all your work and setting this up. And of course a BIG
thanks to Joe who took the time to answer all these great questions. I am off
to make a coffee and read.......