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 : 694-709 of 4038
(http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pjrv/messages/694?) 2006/06/30 22:19:00
~~--------ArchivedPostFollows_Yahoo-PJRV_group---------

#694

From: Bill Pendragon Date: Wed Oct 2, 2002 11:54 am Subject: Re: Joe's book docsavagebill Offline Offline Send Email Send Email Invite to Yahoo! 360 Invite to Yahoo! 360 Hello PJ, In reading Joe's book ( which I highly reccommed), two things leap out: 1) Don't make a career out of the Army..-:).. 2) He did two or three of his best working sessions when he was ANGRY. I have not heard that addressed. I've seen a couple of others do outstanding pieces when they were angry also and the RV represented a way to justify themselves. Perhaps not politically correct. But I think it's there. Best Regards, Bill Reply | Forward

#695

From: "PJ Gaenir" Date: Wed Oct 2, 2002 3:52 pm Subject: Re: Joe's book dennanm Offline Offline Send Email Send Email > --- In pjrv...ll Pendragon Hello PJ, Hi doc! I've been totally out of touch for awhile good to hear from you. I was wondering why I had so much time last night and then realized I had forgotten to read anything about RV online in at least a couple weeks. :-) I've had other focuses online is all, plus alas, some of my favorite pjrv members only want to email privately! - well, it's still good conversation but it's too bad everyone else can't hear it... anyway I went back today and caught up... > In reading Joe's book ( which I highly reccommed), two > things leap out: Only two. :-) > 1) Don't make a career out of the Army..-:).. LOL! Or don't marry a soldier. ;-) > 2) He did two or three of his best working sessions > when he was ANGRY. I have not heard that addressed. > I've seen a couple of others do outstanding pieces > when they were angry also and the RV represented a way > to justify themselves. Perhaps not politically > correct. But I think it's there. I think (sane-level) anger very well focuses both emotion and 'intent' and as a result, is probably pretty good for a session, as long as it isn't of the sort to interfere with the session itself. PJ Reply | Forward

#698

From: Bill Pendragon Date: Thu Oct 3, 2002 12:44 pm Subject: Re: Re: Joe's book docsavagebill Offline Offline Send Email Send Email Invite to Yahoo! 360 Invite to Yahoo! 360 Hi PJ, The book had a person impact for me. My dad was a 20 year Sr Master Sgt in the Air Force up thru about 1970 and he worked for the National Secruity Agency at Ft Meade while I was in 9th grade. I had the feeling this stuff ( all the stress and back biting and abuse of personnel, and marital stress ) was going on but of course he ( nor my mother) could talk about it. . I remember the NSA base in England ( Chicksands) had the highest suicide and nervous breakdown rate of any military US installation.. Interestingly, I was surprised to see Joe was born the same month and year as I was and was in the womb in FL area at the same time he was.although born in Oregon. I didn't see his exact birth date.. mine was Jan 7 1946. So I had a chronological link also. I thought I'd post the the things that came to my attention as I posted. ITEM: I already mentioned ( on stargate) that Joe says his first near death experiece was do to being poisoned ( from his psychic knowledge during the OBE's he had while "dead") and he knows who did it , but doesn't want to act against them..intriguing.. ITEM: Joe had the same experience many have had about his first effort at RV ( at SRI) being directly on target, but after going back to Ft. Meade he couldn't hit a target for the life of him for quite awhile until he got very angry at a situation and broke thru.. ITEM: Skip Atwater ( his monitor) seemed to be able to tell when Joe was on target.. and Joe seemed to know also.at least on some occasions...different than many RVers will say. ITEM: Also I'm reading now its about 1982-83 and Joe says he is VERY disatisfied with the techniques being taught ( at that time) at SRI. He says they are so compartmentalized and structured that they repress psychic input ( In his opinion)..It wasn't spelled out but I suspect he is talking about the developement of CRV, but I'm not sure. He was also disturbed by the use of monitors in training that he felt led the viewer to the target. Well enough controversy for now...I'll wait for the avalanche of hate mail..I'm just doing my best to bring up what Joe said.. my precog apologies if I got it wrong...or if it changes later in the book... G Best Regards, Bill Reply | Forward

#701

From: Richard Krankoski Date: Thu Oct 3, 2002 8:08 pm Subject: Re: Re: Joe's book Rich_crv Offline Offline Send Email Send Email Invite to Yahoo! 360 Invite to Yahoo! 360 > Bill Pendragon wrote: > ITEM: Also I'm reading now its about 1982-83 and Joe > says he is VERY disatisfied with the techniques being > taught ( at that time) at SRI. He says they are so > compartmentalized and structured that they repress > psychic input ( In his opinion)..It wasn't spelled out > but I suspect he is talking about the developement of > CRV, but I'm not sure. He was also disturbed by the > use of monitors in training that he felt led the > viewer to the target. > Well enough controversy for now...I'll wait for the > avalanche of hate mail..I'm just doing my best to > bring up what Joe said.. my precog apologies if I got > it wrong...or if it changes later in the book... G LOL, I don't think you will get hate mail here. You should post that info over on stargate for jfk to chew on. :) Rich ------------------------- Moderator's note: Oh my. You're cruel and unusual Rich. Well, unusual, anyway. ;-) I just caught up on a few weeks of SG messages all at once. Gee. Seems like I read all those before... I forget again, who is it we hate this week?? :-) PJ Reply | Forward

#708

From: Bill Pendragon Date: Fri Oct 4, 2002 12:53 pm Subject: Re: Re: Joe's book more questions??? docsavagebill Offline Offline Send Email Send Email Invite to Yahoo! 360 Invite to Yahoo! 360 Hi Richard, > I don't think you will get hate mail here. You > should post that info > over on stargate for jfk to chew on. :) Now I'm confused. I'm into 1985, Joe retired fed up and burned out with the ft meade and the Army and got a job at SRI as a civilian viewer, and now likes what they are doing and is fully into there methods, although it may now have a different guidance. He also mentioned that someone at Ft Meade tryed to sabotage his effort at getting a job with SRI and even lied about him to make him look like a crappy viewer!. So now the tables are turned. SRI is good and Ft Meade is evil (G).. except for Mel Riley and Lyn which he is very high on thruout??? Anyone straighten this out..?? Best Regards, Bill ---------------------- Moderator's note: For those who haven't read it there is actually very little about Mel or Lyn, more about Mel as he was on the first team of viewers. I suspect the only ones who can straighten much out are the people who were there. Joe is telling his story as one who was there... most everybody else has had their say to the public/students a lot now, but this is the first time he's talked about his own experience in that way. The end-result book is more gentle and diplomatic than I'd have been in his place I imagine. Not that that's too big a stretch. ;-) -- PJ Reply | Forward

#706

From: aeonblueau8008... Date: Thu Oct 3, 2002 6:19 pm Subject: Re: Re: Joe's book terri8008 Offline Offline Send Email Send Email Invite to Yahoo! 360 Invite to Yahoo! 360 Well, he doesn't work CRV, what works well for some doesn't work for others. He's like home grown. It's a PSI catchall basically, and face it- not all nor anyone I know have/had the afforded PSI luxuries that Joe had. + an NDE, that always seem to open doors. ~~Terri > > Bill Pendragon wrote: > > ITEM: Also I'm reading now its about 1982-83 and Joe Reply | Forward

#709

From: Bill Pendragon Date: Fri Oct 4, 2002 1:08 pm Subject: Re: Re: Joe's book docsavagebill Offline Offline Send Email Send Email Invite to Yahoo! 360 Invite to Yahoo! 360 Hi Terri, > --- aeonblueau8008...wrote: > Well, he doesn't work CRV, what works well for some > doesn't work for others. > He's like home grown. > It's a PSI catchall basically, and face it- not all > nor anyone I know > have/had the afforded PSI luxuries that Joe had. > + an NDE, that always seem to open doors. True but he and Mel Riley seem to have been the concensus best RVers in the group and I think his book deserves a really good hashing over to see how much dogma we've been taught is really dogdoo and what actually provides consistent rules that really help. Also Joe is a big believer that talent is the bottom line and no protocol will turn a pigs ear viewer into a silk purse viewer. Best Regards, Bill ----------------------- Moderator's note: He doesn't say that he and Mel were the best. He says most of the first team of viewers were equally matched. However, Mel was in the first group that was chosen based on research and demonstrated skill, as opposed to the later group he suggests was chosen based on (deliberately per Swann's request) their "not" being psychic, so as to experiment with a method. IMO (politically incorrect of course), too bad Puthoff apparently didn't take Swann seriously enough to bother giving even some basic science approach to it all. Had the candidates been pulled in and tested initially, for a baseline, and then again after training, someone might have actually learned something. Instead, there is no way of telling whether training actually harmed or helped them, or whether any skill they might have is due to innate talent or training. The most rudimentary respect for Ingo's efforts actually being scientific could have changed a lot of things in this area. I know I'll get trashed for picking on Puthoff, who I otherwise think is a brilliant scientist, but in retrospect I see a lot of the problems that followed then and now as all stemming from his decisions way back then. PJ