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

The RV Oasis / PJRV Discussion List Archives

Dojo Psi Library, Archival Material, Remote Viewing and Psi

RV Oasis / PJRV List Archives Menu

RV Oasis / PJRV Discussion, Yahoo Groups.
Source Location: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pjrv/
Filetype: Archive. Topic: Remote Viewing. Blocked: by topic detail.
Archive Storage: www.firedocs.com/pjrv/ and http://www.dojopsi.info/pjrv/
Archivist: Palyne PJ Gaenir (PJRV, Palyne, Firedocs RV, TKR and the Dojo Psi.)



begin archive





pjrv : Messages : 2614-2731 of 4038
(http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pjrv/messages/2614?) 2006/07/01 00:13:35
~~--------ArchivedPostFollows_Yahoo-PJRV_group---------

#2614

From: "pjgaenir" Date: Tue Mar 11, 2003 11:27 am Subject: Investigating the Hypothesis pjgaenir Offline Offline Send Email Send Email Invite to Yahoo! 360 Invite to Yahoo! 360 OK you guys. Now of all the people who read the largeruniverse.com essay, let me ask you: How many people actually, just out of curiosity to SEE how well "retasking an existing session" worked, and whether it might have any affect on the session itself, went out and seriously made an effort to try doing this? I mean, armchair debate or discussion is one thing, but this is EASY to actually experiment with. I have. Several others have, I hear via PEM. What are your results? What are your thoughts about your results? Do you find that a lot of session data accurately reflects your new target(s)? Do you find that any inaccurate data in the first session reflects your target, and if so do you think it's coincidence? Do you find that the accurate data in the session (and some are entirely accurate), is coincidentally put in such a way to match BOTH sessions? Do you think it's coincidence? If enough coincidence conspires together, is it still coincidence? Are we just reading 'what we want' out of sessions, or might there be more at work here? PJ Reply | Forward

#2618

From: "smitty97006" Date: Tue Mar 11, 2003 6:03 pm Subject: Re: Investigating the Hypothesis smitty97006 Offline Offline Send Email Send Email Invite to Yahoo! 360 Invite to Yahoo! 360 Hello PJ, Is there a specific protocol that this is being done wtih or is it a simple matter of saying ok I'd like to have a session done on XYZ then randomly pulling out a session done in the past and saying this is my session on my just designed cue. Would you consider being a conduit for an overview of the information you get on this combining both public and private data. Thank you, Gene Smith ---------------------------- Moderator's note: Hi Gene. Well, Pru uses mostly wildcard tasking I'm told, where you simply take an existing session and assign a target to it. (Obviously, you're not comparing anything. More like, sessions are filed here numerically, taskings are filed there numerically, whichever is next in line for both go together. Not that I'm ANY expert on whatever she does, this is just what I heard... I think.) I sometimes do wildcard sessions as she calls them, I called em precog, where you do the session on "whatever target is shown me as feedback at ____ time." Then I'd generate from my program and/or choose from my bag a target. Makes no diff in the session accuracy unless you think it does, and goes a long way to knocking down belief systems related to time. For some experiments in 'retasking', I would do it just how you described it. Of course we don't know that on some level, we doing the experiments are not actually psychically choosing two that go together well! (May's "Decision Augmentation Theory".) Choose existing sessions from yourself, any friend who agrees, or any internet source that makes 'em public. I've downloaded about 1.7bazillion pages from public posting sites to experiment more with when I get more time. I'll facilitate whatever I can if list members want me to, but I'm not sure what you're asking me to do. -- PJ Reply | Forward

#2627

From: "smitty97006" Date: Tue Mar 11, 2003 7:57 pm Subject: Re: Investigating the Hypothesis smitty97006 Offline Offline Send Email Send Email Invite to Yahoo! 360 Invite to Yahoo! 360 > I'll facilitate whatever I can if list members want me to, > but I'm not sure what you're asking me to do. -- PJ Hi PJ, So as not to bog you down with a lot of stuff. I am basically asking that you would simply keep us apprised of what results you are hearing in regards to this. My thinking is that if a lot of even anecdotal info comes in indicating there is a real phenomenon at work here, those interested could take it upon themselves to do something in a more controlled way to test emerging theories. Thank you, Gene Smith Reply | Forward

#2711

From: "Glyn" Date: Sat Mar 15, 2003 6:43 am Subject: RE: Re: Investigating the Hypothesis gebega Offline Offline Send Email Send Email Invite to Yahoo! 360 Invite to Yahoo! 360 Hi PJ, > You said in answer to Gene's mail.. > > I sometimes do wildcard sessions as she calls them, I called em precog, > where you do the session on "whatever target is shown me as feedback at ____ > time." Then I'd generate from my program and/or choose from my bag a > target. Makes no diff in the session accuracy unless you think it does, and > goes a long way to knocking down belief systems related to time. I am interested in what belief systems about time you are talking about there, because personally I would have thought that these 'wildcard sessions' would go a long way to demonstrating that it definitely does have something to do with time; in FM theory accuracy and 'clean-ness' would be dependant on at which point the memories of the feedback /target were accessed by the sub (or whatever is responsible for data-retrieval ). It's all belief-systems at the moment I must admit, but interesting discussion nonetheless :-). Kind regards, Glyn ------------------------------- Moderator's note: I think on at least subconscious levels, all of us have a lot of resistance to the concept that time can be so easily violated. Yes I know everyone goes, "Oooh! OK, time doesn't matter!" -- but in my opinion it could be, but usually isn't, that easy. It is difficult to describe the feeling of belief systems changing, but it IS a feeling one gets; the whole of one's concepts about reality actually begin shifting slightly. It is sometimes too subtle to describe, but it is quite tangible to the individual. It just 'opens one up' a lot more to a whole lot of stuff that normally, concepts about linearity and time would prohibit. I am a big fan of future memory only because I'm a big fan of the concept that time simply doesn't exist beyond our perception. So in that model, the future is as present as the present and the past; everything lives in the NOW. If the information required to answer a question resides in our perception that is future, then certainly we'll tune into that. I don't think it's the only source, I just think the source is equal to everything else. -- PJ Reply | Forward

#2726

From: "Glyn" Date: Sun Mar 16, 2003 3:57 am Subject: RE: Re: Investigating the Hypothesis gebega Offline Offline Send Email Send Email Invite to Yahoo! 360 Invite to Yahoo! 360 Hi PJ, > You said: > I am a big fan of future memory only because I'm a big fan of the concept > that time simply doesn't exist beyond our perception. So in that model, the > future is as present as the present and the past; everything lives in the > NOW. If the information required to answer a question resides in our > perception that is future, then certainly we'll tune into that. I don't > think it's the only source, I just think the source is equal to everything > else. -- PJ You just hit the nail squarely on the head with those few words PJ. It can only be called accessing our 'future memory' because in our linear time-view we can (consciously) experience nothing else, but yes, what appears to be in our future may not be anything of the kind, esp if we have a holographic universe as some suggest, or there is no time at all...or maybe even something along the lines of serial time as Dunne proposed. I suspect that the reality will probably be something more than we can even imagine at the moment. It is so frustrating that we can only take little peeks through chinks in our linear time 'box' at the moment...but I guess those little chinks may one day become big holes. Not too big too soon for us to handle I hope or we won't know whether we're coming, going, or have been. LOL! Grins, Glyn Reply | Forward

#2637

From: "pjgaenir" Date: Wed Mar 12, 2003 3:47 pm Subject: Re: Investigating the Hypothesis pjgaenir Offline Offline Send Email Send Email Invite to Yahoo! 360 Invite to Yahoo! 360 > How many people actually, just out of curiosity to SEE how > well "retasking an existing session" worked, and whether it might > have any affect on the session itself, went out and seriously > made an effort to try doing this? Why am I not surprised that only one person responded to this. :-) Well, and a couple more PEM. I figure there are a few possibilities. 1. Nobody is reading the list anyway. 2. People don't want to take seriously anything presented by Calabrese, no matter how interesting the questions on their own merits might be. That would be a mistake I wouldn't expect anybody who 'thinks' to make, regardless of their feelings about her. 3. People are sure they already know the answers so it isn't worth investigating. 4. People are lazy and waiting for other people to do it, discuss it, and inform them from the screen. --------------------- Here is what I rather expected would be the questions to come up: Q. Is it ethical to go get another person's session and "re-task" it, if the process of doing so might and/or does affect the viewer/session? A. If it does, then probably not. If it doesn't, then why not. If it is some combination between, it's a little iffy. Q. Why would PJ suggest we go get sessions off the internet and try this? A. Because when she did this with her own, then with a few others' with permission, then with a few others without permission, she found that there seems to be something TO this; that the RV session really MIGHT be a quantum event affected by the "observation" of people re- tasking; and felt it was important anybody serious about viewing figure this out for themselves. Of course there are other alternative answers I have already brought up in posts directly addressing Prudence's essay. Such as that we find what we want in data, or even on a deeper level find what we need in any information; such as that much data applies to many targets (we know this already, but I mean, to a greater extreme than realized); etc. But, in exploring this, it is quite a helluva coincidence that the data the viewer chose to record in a good session (and this appears to be moreso the better the session/viewer thus far I might add) is curiously congruent with the data in the re-tasked session, to the degree where the precise choice of phrasing makes all the difference and makes it work. I am not talking about a session with bad data, which when I compare another re-tasked target to, the session data matches that one better. That's silly. I am not saying that the session has to be entirely accurate about both targets. Obviously drastically different targets, esp. when the major feature of one is say humans and the other doesn't have that, is going to have data that is NOT going to fit both. But I am talking about excellent sessions with highly specific shape- sketches and concepts as data, which curiously overlay in the oddest way with a re-tasked session. Out of all the zillion things that viewer could have reported, and out of all the ways they could have perceived that and chosen to communicate it, they just happened to choose ways that matched a surprising amount of data on the retasking. Might the quality of the observer (including potential DAT involved in randomly selecting a target to re-task on a session) have as much effect on this as anything else? So, could the very nature of the experimental results be 'biased' by observer quality? Could be. I am not paranoid last time I checked. ;-) I think some other people in this field might be. But it's going to be a long damn time before I publicly share my sessions again after seeing this. That is how seriously I'm taking it after doing several experiments with this. So I thought others might wish to experiment and see what they find. Of course, if nobody else cares, that is all very well too. But there is something going on with this that does not strike me as the 30/30 lab finding or the psychological tendency to 'interpret' all data to fit what you're looking for. Maybe I'm wrong. But until I know more about it, I can't recommend people publicly post sessions unless they just really don't care about this. PJ Reply | Forward

#2641

From: Karl Boyken Date: Wed Mar 12, 2003 4:26 pm Subject: Re: Re: Investigating the Hypothesis kboyken Offline Offline Send Email Send Email Invite to Yahoo! 360 Invite to Yahoo! 360 My thought on this was, who's going to do the judging/analysis? If I go and retask someone else's session, then shouldn't a blind third party analyze the results? Karl >>How many people actually, just out of curiosity to SEE how >>well "retasking an existing session" worked, and whether it might >>have any affect on the session itself, went out and seriously >>made an effort to try doing this? ----------------------------- Moderator's note: You be the judge. But pick the target blindly, and/or pick the session blindly. (In other words, obviously, don't choose a session you've seen and a target you know or there's likely to be something else up with your subconscious matching them.) If you choose the target randomly or blindly from a pool, then there's no reason you can't be the interpreter in this regard. PJ Reply | Forward

#2662

From: "Elizabeth Hambrook" Date: Thu Mar 13, 2003 5:16 am Subject: Re: Re: Investigating the Hypothesis ozblueriver Offline Offline Send Email Send Email Invite to Yahoo! 360 Invite to Yahoo! 360 PJ > So I thought others might wish to experiment and see what they find. > Of course, if nobody else cares, that is all very well too.> Hi PJ, I'm rivited to any news on this subject. I'm waiting for the weekend to come around so I can get 5 minutes to do the double tasking. Thanks for posting your findings so far. I'll let you know what I find a.s.a.p. Cheers Liz Reply | Forward

#2731

From: "Linda & John Garvey" Date: Sun Mar 16, 2003 4:00 pm Subject: RE: Re: Investigating the Hypothesis linda_g7us Offline Offline Send Email Send Email Invite to Yahoo! 360 Invite to Yahoo! 360 PJ and Glyn, I just want to say that I agree wholeheartedly with what both of you are saying -- yes! Linda G "The distinction between past, present and future is only an illusion, even if a stubborn one." -- Albert Einstein -- Reply | Forward

#2651

From: Bill Pendragon Date: Thu Mar 13, 2003 2:24 pm Subject: Re: Re: Investigating the Hypothesis docsavagebill Offline Offline Send Email Send Email Invite to Yahoo! 360 Invite to Yahoo! 360 Hi PJ. (Big Grin)..now wern't you making fun of Pru for making everyone paranoid. But I SALUTE you for testing it out. Good job to those that did and to PRU for getting us to pay attention. Now I think this could really improve the quality of sessions. Best Regards, bill ----------------------- Moderator's note: More like I was teasing, but she's hardly alone if she is. However, you're assuming that because I've taken the time to investigate her comments on retasking, that I agree with her conclusion on why we come up with the results we do. I don't know the answer to that yet. I don't necessarily agree that this is a quantum/RI effect on the session, retrocausally. That is one option. It is an interesting one. Research shows 30% of data for any session can be found in 30% of any targets generated. And, that's an average so we assume some are higher/lower. And I've done a lot of posting describing many other quite logical possibilities that could be the real answer to why this retasking seems to work well. Maybe compared to Joe we all just suck so bad as viewers that our sessions match damn near anything equally. LOL. No but really, some of the sessions I've done this on were really good sessions, so I don't think that's the case. Pru's concept that an RV session as a quantum event is influenced by anything tied into it, such as the observation of others and deliberate retasking, is an interesting idea. Yes, yes, now everyone on the net is swearing it's old news, THEY thought of it LONG before she did, gee whiz, and they were just talking to their grandmother about this last week don'tcha know! LOL! Yeah right. Eeeeeeeverybody's an expert in RVland. Well anyway, regardless of what the answer might be, I still feel that the answer, and the process of thinking about this, is a healthy exercise for serious viewers, and that's why I've been pushing it on the list. Even if the answer is that we're deluded, it is still a valuable lesson, after all! :-) PJ Reply | Forward

#2649

From: Bill Pendragon Date: Thu Mar 13, 2003 12:24 pm Subject: Re: Investigating the Hypothesis and ARV docsavagebill Offline Offline Send Email Send Email Invite to Yahoo! 360 Invite to Yahoo! 360 Hi PJ, I didn't need to do it again. I've done it myself in the past...muliple times! Just like I've posted before. Even as an analyst. or a JUDGE. if you want to see something in the session..it tends to come out. I was analyzing for Eva.. doing ARV..I hoped her multiple sessions would all come out for the same of the two targets .and they did in astounding multiplicity! I then did the same thing for Pame doing ARV at the time. Then I did myself.. then I stopped analyzing anyones ARV..because the mulitple sessions ( 2-5) almost always matched up but were usually WRONG. Somehow my desire to see matches had overridden the original tasking of getting the CORRECT picture.. OK now are we in agreement about this..LOL. ?? I thank Pru for making this breakthru in understanding RV and ARV. Best Regards, Bill ------------------------ Moderator's note: I haven't really accepted her conclusion yet. I don't have enough evidence for that so far. I have accepted her initial findings, however. The reason for those findings, I am not yet sure about. -- 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