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 : 2345-2345 of 4038
(http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pjrv/messages/2345?)
23:51:48
~~--------ArchivedPostFollows_Yahoo-PJRV_group---------

#2345

From: "David" Date: Wed Mar 5, 2003 4:26 pm Subject: RE: No More Larger Universe jam1433 I'm not real sure whats going on at Larger Universe, but something that Pru wrote got my attention: "It is the rare remote viewer who questions the cultural conditioning occurring on both the physical and paraphysical levels, but like any other social dynamic, the result is remote viewers becoming more similar in attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors." I took a class in CRV back in 97. I did pretty well with practice targets for about two years or so, but my practice fell off sharply after that. I am at the point where I might try 2 or 3 practice targets per month and I have not been at all satisfied with my overall results. But the rare successes I have are enough to convince me that I do retain some RV ability. But something else has happened to me in the last few years. I have gone through some pretty dramatic and very positive changes in my political, social and especially spiritual beliefs. Despite some prior and still-ongoing personal set-backs I have somehow been able to maintain a pretty steady level on inner contentment that has suprised me. I began to wonder about a year or so ago if picking up the ability to RV may have played some role in these changes I have gone through. I also began to wonder that while spending all that time thinking about, fretting about and becoming frustrated about my lack of success at RV sessions, I was ignoring some far more important changes that were occurring because of my exposure to RV. I began to wonder if this possible side effect to my exposure to RV may be far more important than the ability to RV successfully David pjrv : Messages : 2373-2373 of 4038
(http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pjrv/messages/2373?)
23:54:06
~~--------ArchivedPostFollows_Yahoo-PJRV_group---------

#2373

From: "De - Hotmail" Date: Thu Mar 6, 2003 12:42 am Subject: Re: RE: No More Larger Universe deann_garcia90....com David: You have got it...there is so much more in the process of Rving than just the ability to do accurate targets. Doing the targets are fun and of course they can be helpful and assist as well. But the process, and what comes from learning to do this, developing that skill, that is the true gift. You cannot be out in the matrix without it having an affect. Congratulations.... De pjrv : Messages : 2330-2411 of 4038
(http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pjrv/messages/2330?)
23:55:17
~~--------ArchivedPostFollows_Yahoo-PJRV_group---------

#2330

From: "Elizabeth Hambrook" Date: Wed Mar 5, 2003 5:55 am Subject: no more Larger Universe! ozblueriver Hey PJ, Have you heard there is no more Larger Universe. If not, you had better read what Pru's got to say on her site. It's REALLY interesting...........and it affects us all. Cheers Liz [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Reply | Forward

#2332

From: "pjgaenir" Date: Wed Mar 5, 2003 6:42 am Subject: Re: no more Larger Universe! pjgaenir HMMMNNNNnnnnnnnnn...... http://www.largeruniverse.com --- "Elizabeth Hambrook" wrote: > Hey PJ, > > Have you heard there is no more Larger Universe. If not, you had better read what Pru's got to say on her site. It's REALLY interesting...........and it affects us all. Reply | Forward

#2334

From: "Scott Ellis" Date: Wed Mar 5, 2003 9:55 am Subject: Re: no more Larger Universe! scottrver So does this mean that Pru is no longer in the remote viewing business? The conclusion at the end of the document that she is terminating all activity at her websites and TDS seems to be a complete nonsequeter to me. Did I miss something as to why she's shutting down? Scott --- In pjrv...oups.com, "pjgaenir" HMMMNNNNnnnnnnnnn...... > > http://www.largeruniverse.com > > > --- "Elizabeth Hambrook" wrote: > > Hey PJ, > > > > Have you heard there is no more Larger Universe. If not, you had > better read what Pru's got to say on her site. It's REALLY > interesting...........and it affects us all. Reply | Forward

#2336

From: "pjgaenir" Date: Wed Mar 5, 2003 10:47 am Subject: Re: no more Larger Universe! pjgaenir > --- In pjrv...oups.com, "Scott Ellis" The conclusion at the end of the document that she is > terminating all activity at her websites and TDS seems to be a > complete nonsequeter to me. Did I miss something as to why she's > shutting down? The inference, at least that I got reading it, is that she thinks Evil Bad Guys may be Using Her Viewers Sessions in their own Nefarious Plans, and hence she is closing down to Protect Their Privacy (and/or other aspects of them) from Remote Influence. I'm confused about one (well, probably more than one!) thing though. Most RV work, whether practice or for hire, is confidential. In order to USE a viewer's session for one's own Evil Gain, one assumes you would need to HAVE/SEE that session at some point in time. E.g., tea leaves won't help me, even if they spell it out in english, if I can't see the cup. That seems sort of ... well, obvious. The only people who would SEE all those private sessions done for practice, for fun, or for hire, would be who, Pru and one or more managers or analysts? Nobody else sees them, right? So what does that mean? That she thinks one of her own is suspect? If the sessions are private, then why would the (granted, very interesting!) theory about "stacking sessions" (as I call it) have anything to do with her closing her business, her practice group, her training site? Pehaps she wanted to do these things anyway for her own reasons, whatever they may be. Otherwise it seems like a pretty gigantic leap to come up with the session-stacking concept as a reason to quit anything, considering how few people have access to the sessions to begin with. Realistically, I am hard pressed to imagine anybody in this field coming out and saying, "Well, we just don't have the customers anymore..." or "Well, the viewing just isn't succeeding at the level needed anymore..." or "Well, the training doesn't seem to be going all that great anymore..." or even the understandable, "Well, I am just kind of tired of doing this now." No matter what the reason, it's likely to leave people ranging from angry to bereft to sad, who were involved, not to mention the ammunition it gives the many Pru sharpshooters out there in RVland. Having a good "reason" to close down that makes it somebody else's fault/cause could be seen as convenient. And good, exciting press (going out with a bang, so to speak). Now I happen to like Pru but I know someone is going to come up with this stuff about it, so it might as well be me, instead of someone throwing sharper rocks. Or: am I missing the obvious? Does she suspect all her phones and fax and email are tapped by some kind of black ops, and hence they have access to everything the group does? Now WHY the black ops would want any of us is kind of beyond me, but a whole LOT is beyond me in this world and that doesn't mean it can't be so. I vary from scorning to paranoid on this subject, it just depends on what day ya get me on, how I feel about it. No matter what, the overall thing about allegedly closing everything down, just because sessions can be stacked for tasking, seems really... paranoid. I still can't help but think that even with that, she had to have other reasons for closing down or she wouldn't have done it. I mean if paranoia were a reason to quit 99% of this field's people would not be around, LOL. PJ Reply | Forward

#2352

From: Bill Pendragon Date: Wed Mar 5, 2003 6:34 pm Subject: Re: Re: no more Larger Universe! .. docsavagebill Hi PJ, Well Pru mentions "accidental stacking" also. And I've seen statistical evidence that Greg K had that everyone in a group effort seemed to be getting each others targets even thought only a computer knew for sure?! In that case keeping it secret wouldn't even help.. But I am not at all sure Pru is paranoid to think she is monitored..If you had been in my class at her office when we ( without Pru's permission) tried to RV the "governements biggest RV secret" And at the exact time I tasked the session.. and announced it outloud..all the power in a 5 block radius went out.. The engineers could not figure out what caused it... Pru said simliar things and worse had happened to her whenever she tried viewing anything to do with the governemnt. Best Regards, Bill Reply | Forward

#2363

From: "Eva" Date: Wed Mar 5, 2003 7:43 pm Subject: Re: no more Larger Universe! .. k9caninek9 Yes, it's easy to write stuff off until it happens to you first hand. I had heard about that black out stuff happening to Art Bell and I pawned it off as likely coincidence and media hype. Heck I still don't know if I believe them about it. HOwever, I was there when it hit at the TDS class within seconds of the final vote for 'Govt Stargate program's biggest secret' (not govt biggest secret). Then the power company guys showed up at the nearest junction box to our building saying there was an unknown power surge that knocked out the system. Doh! It all sounds so black ops and sneaky baloney it's kind of embarrassing to talk about it. However, the timing was really freaky. I did my best to find out a reasonable explanation. I checked with the building superintendant who was equally clueless and I scoured both local newspapers for word but the event was never mentioned in the papers either. Sure it all could be a big coincidence, but if so, it was a freaky one. -E > Bill Pendragon wrote: > But I am not at all sure Pru is paranoid to think she > is monitored.. [snip] > all the power in a 5 block radius went out.. [snip] > Pru said simliar things and worse had happened to her > whenever she tried viewing anything to do with the > governemnt. Reply | Forward

#2384

From: Karl Boyken Date: Thu Mar 6, 2003 8:58 am Subject: Re: Re: no more Larger Universe! .. kboyken Bill, any idea what "worse" might mean? Biblical plague? ;) Karl > Pru said simliar things and worse had happened to her > whenever she tried viewing anything to do with the > governemnt. Reply | Forward

#2401

From: Bill Pendragon Date: Thu Mar 6, 2003 3:58 pm Subject: Re: Re: no more Larger Universe! .. docsavagebill Hi Karl, She never told me.. maybe Eva knows..she just told me they had seen worse as did her co-teacher at the meeting.. boy were they mad at our class for that tasking..G Bill --- Karl Boyken wrote: > Bill, any idea what "worse" might mean? Biblical > plague? ;) > > Pru said simliar things and worse > > had happened to her > > whenever she tried viewing anything > > to do with the governemnt. Reply | Forward

#2337

From: "pjgaenir" Date: Wed Mar 5, 2003 10:52 am Subject: Re: no more Larger Universe! pjgaenir I've been thinking about this more. (Thinking! Oh, no!) As for stacking sessions, I am certain it is possible, but I bet it is MOST workable when the attempt is done within a specific group (by which I mean, the tasker(s) for the stacked sessions are part of the group of viewer(s) whose sessions are being multi-read for data). Groups already have such a huge amount of interpersonal connection. (This is usually the downfall of psi groups, in fact. They begin believing everything because their own people confirm it by allegedly blind RV, not realizing that they're far too enmeshed with each other to consider anything 'blind' from the others, or not to share suspicions even psychically, and most under the leader's direction.) Everyone knows you can wrap more than one target into a session. Most of us have done it by accident, ranging from AOL to feedback problems to tasking errors (such as 2 targets in an envelope). But the concept of using every session as a wildcard, is actually kind of funny in an offbeat way. Sure. You can. But the universe is holographic! And intent is unable to be "contained" in this universe. If you can find an answer to a tasking by looking properly at a pot of boiling beans, you can damn sure find it in a 9 page session worth of data, regardless of the original focus of that session. That doesn't seem ominous or frightening to me; it seems like a sort of logical follow-on to what we already know about 'information' and 'intent' and so forth. And if, like Prudence, you are known for interpreting data in whatever way necessary (not just linearly, but allegorically, symbolically, metaphysically, etc.), well, I'd think that would greatly open up the field to making nearly any session seem to have at least something in common with nearly any target. And yes, it is entirely possible that LOOKING for tasking data in a previously done session on a different target, may in some way bring your query data more into the viewer's session. This could be RI, but I prefer to think of it as the viewer simply being willing, on some level, to respond to that intent. Given a choice between theories that bring fear or theories that bring power, I prefer to choose the theories that bring power. All things being equal, much of reality is what we make it in our minds. I think the subject of stacking sessions is worth a lot more consideration. It really brings into a hard light the issues of interpretation of sessions, and the issues of viewer accuracy, as well as the issues relating to why we get what data we do. All of those are important and thought-provoking concepts in RV. PJ Reply | Forward

#2338

From: "Scott Ellis" Date: Wed Mar 5, 2003 11:34 am Subject: Re: no more Larger Universe! scottrver And what is to become of Pru's employees? Having owned and run a couple of small businesses, I would imagine that she feels some degree of compassion for them. It's hard to imagine laying off employees if a business is profitable. A more likely scenario would be to sell a profitable business to an outside entity or to the employees. TDS, LargerUniverse, etc. would be a necessary part of the asset and shutting them down arbitrarily would make no sense. Her employees too would be a necessary asset that couldn't be easily replaced. Since no reasonable explanation was put forth, I would lay odds that the business was not sufficiently profitable and that the smoke and mirrors is her way of trying to deal with it in a way palatable to her psychology. Scott --- In pjrv...oups.com, "pjgaenir" I've been thinking about this more. (Thinking! Oh, no!) > > As for stacking sessions, I am certain it is possible, but I bet it > is MOST workable when the attempt is done within a specific group (by > which I mean, the tasker(s) for the stacked sessions are part of the > group of viewer(s) whose sessions are being multi-read for data). > Groups already have such a huge amount of interpersonal connection. > > (This is usually the downfall of psi groups, in fact. They begin > believing everything because their own people confirm it by allegedly > blind RV, not realizing that they're far too enmeshed with each other > to consider anything 'blind' from the others, or not to share > suspicions even psychically, and most under the leader's direction.) > > Everyone knows you can wrap more than one target into a session. > Most of us have done it by accident, ranging from AOL to feedback > problems to tasking errors (such as 2 targets in an envelope). > > But the concept of using every session as a wildcard, is actually > kind of funny in an offbeat way. Sure. You can. But the universe > is holographic! And intent is unable to be "contained" in this > universe. If you can find an answer to a tasking by looking properly > at a pot of boiling beans, you can damn sure find it in a 9 page > session worth of data, regardless of the original focus of that > session. > > That doesn't seem ominous or frightening to me; it seems like a sort > of logical follow-on to what we already know about 'information' > and 'intent' and so forth. And if, like Prudence, you are known for > interpreting data in whatever way necessary (not just linearly, but > allegorically, symbolically, metaphysically, etc.), well, I'd think > that would greatly open up the field to making nearly any session > seem to have at least something in common with nearly any target. > > And yes, it is entirely possible that LOOKING for tasking data in a > previously done session on a different target, may in some way bring > your query data more into the viewer's session. This could be RI, but > I prefer to think of it as the viewer simply being willing, on some > level, to respond to that intent. Given a choice between theories > that bring fear or theories that bring power, I prefer to choose the > theories that bring power. All things being equal, much of reality > is what we make it in our minds. > > I think the subject of stacking sessions is worth a lot more > consideration. It really brings into a hard light the issues of > interpretation of sessions, and the issues of viewer accuracy, as > well as the issues relating to why we get what data we do. All of > those are important and thought-provoking concepts in RV. > > PJ Reply | Forward

#2340

From: "pjgaenir" Date: Wed Mar 5, 2003 2:39 pm Subject: Re: no more Larger Universe! pjgaenir Well I admit the paranoia angle of it really bothers me. Of course what is that they say, just because you're paranoid doesn't mean people aren't out to get you! lol. But the thing is, most viewers succumb to some major psyche problem sooner or later, and the ones that don't get caught by all the easier stuff, most seem to end up caught by the paranoia. I would believe in 'remote influence' of this feeling, it is so pervasive in viewers, except I don't feel that RI is necessary to explain something that seems to be a notorious side effect anyway -- not just now, following stargate's little season, but throughout all of human history itself. It's just sort of a bummer to watch from a distance. I guess it's probably a bigger bummer up close though. PJ Reply | Forward

#2342

From: "Eva" Date: Wed Mar 5, 2003 2:49 pm Subject: Re: no more Larger Universe! k9caninek9 Sounds like it would make a fun esoteric target if you ask me.. -E > --- In pjrv...oups.com, "pjgaenir" Well I admit the paranoia angle of it really bothers me. Of course > what is that they say, just because you're paranoid doesn't mean > people aren't out to get you! lol. Reply | Forward

#2411

From: James Phillip Turpin Date: Thu Mar 6, 2003 7:33 pm Subject: Re: Re: no more Larger Universe! james_p_turpin You could try but me thinks that Pru might remote influence your session Which brings us to an interesting and serious point: Can people who are aware of remote viewing psychicly shield against it or misdirect certain targets via false associtations? Might they do so just because they have goals contrary to the persons who hire the viewers and so wish to hinder the viewers rather than gain information themselves? This would not require access to seession information only a vague suspicion that somebody is tasking certain targets > On Wed, 5 Mar 2003, Eva wrote: > Sounds like it would make a fun esoteric target if you ask me.. > > PJ wrote: > > Well I admit the paranoia angle of it really bothers me. Of course > > what is that they say, just because you're paranoid doesn't mean > > people aren't out to get you! lol. Reply | Forward

#2341

From: Timelord2029... Date: Wed Mar 5, 2003 9:42 am Subject: Re: no more Larger Universe! psitrooper24 > Since no > reasonable explanation was put forth, I would lay odds that the > business was not sufficiently profitable and that the smoke and > mirrors is her way of trying to deal with it in a way palatable to her > psychology. Hi Scott, I wouldnt start "laying odds" on why pru took the decision she did. It's all very well us theorizing whats happened but to take the lowest factor possible and say it all because of money or the lack of it seems abit harsh to me. Lets wait and see what Pru herself has to say before jumping to rash conclusions. The situation is very serious as i understand it Iam sure all will be revealed in due course. My thoughts are with pru at this moment and her operational team. Last i heard everyone is ok and fine. Peace, Tunde Reply | Forward

#2343

From: "pjgaenir" Date: Wed Mar 5, 2003 4:10 pm Subject: Re: no more Larger Universe! pjgaenir > --- In pjrv...oups.com, Timelord2029...ote: > I wouldnt start "laying odds" on why pru took the decision she did. > It's all very well us theorizing whats happened but to take the > lowest > factor possible and say it all because of money or the lack > of it seems abit harsh to me. > Lets wait and see what Pru herself has to say before jumping to > rash conclusions. Hi Tunde, Since Prudence has (sort of as usual) chosen to write an essay that is deliberately vague as to details, and deliberately thought provoking as to concept, this is going to inspire theorizing. If she did not want people theorizing, I'm sure she would have been more forthright about the obviously tenuous connection between her essay and why everything she does must be closed down. When I read it I thought to myself, "I wonder if groups like stargate will have a curious lack of open discussion about it." Which is sometimes the case about the most interesting things in the field. So I figured I'd undertake to deliberately bring it out here so others would talk about it. When you make a big deal out of something publicly, the public will speculate. There's no need to defend her, she invoked that all on her own. ;-) Nobody is attacking her. I wouldn't support flaming of her in that regard. But I figure she wants people talking about it or she wouldn't have posted that. PJ Reply | Forward

#2366

From: "intuitwolf" Date: Wed Mar 5, 2003 9:52 pm Subject: Re: no more Larger Universe! intuitwolf > PJ wrote: > When I read it I thought to myself, "I wonder if groups like stargate > will have a curious lack of open discussion about it." Which is > sometimes the case about the most interesting things in the field. If someone who isn't already here wanted to discuss it on Stargate there is certainly no one stopping them :-) I think they've all settle in here for the duration. I personally do not want to exacerbate an already touchy situation by initiating a conversation on Stargate that I do not have the time to follow through with. Shelia Reply | Forward

#2376

From: "Eva" Date: Thu Mar 6, 2003 2:18 am Subject: Re: no more Larger Universe! k9caninek9 I think what PJ is referring to is that while boring bickering goes on and on, it is often the case the when an interesting rv question is asked, then no one gets around to resonding. I should add Shelia that you are one of the few that actually does respond once in a while. But I often find it weird that with all the rv gurus around that find time to post on all kinds of nonrv things, it is often left to students and clueless guessers like me to answer or ponder the actual rv questions. Pru's paper brings up all kinds of questions about morphogenic field theory, double tasking, etc but there has been little commentary other than again by us students. It's been like that ever since I started rv and perhaps much longer if PJ has always experienced the same. -E Reply | Forward

#2344

From: "Scott Ellis" Date: Wed Mar 5, 2003 3:27 pm Subject: Re: no more Larger Universe! scottrver Hi Tunde, I don't think I'm being harsh to try to interpret what Pru gave as a reason for her shutting things down. I thought that WAS her speaking. Also, I certainly don't think there's anything "low" or dishonorable about closing the doors due to economics if that's the reason. In fact, it would be foolish to keep the doors open if economics is the reason. I wish Pru well. Scott pjrv : Messages : 2346-2431 of 4038
(http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pjrv/messages/2346?)
00:08:39
~~--------ArchivedPostFollows_Yahoo-PJRV_group---------

#2346

From: Weatherly-Hawaii...m Date: Wed Mar 5, 2003 4:18 pm Subject: Re: Re: no more Larger Universe! maliolana Aloha PJ, Glad you resurfaced!... > I mean if paranoia were a reason to quit > 99% of this field's people would not be > around, LOL. That is my thought exactly...I thought paranoia was a given...and we might as well just get over it?...hahah Yeah I can hear the sharpshooters now...ratatattooie...oh nooo...not again.../still!...I was thinking on signing up as well...just hadn't decided to make all that time available yet...shoot...uh...I mean...don't shot! This is too weird!...I would have preferred to read the 'long' version... Guess I am just too stupid to let paranoia rule my life...Haven't these weirdos always been there?...lurking?...Isn't that what they do best? Love & Light & Laughter Mali'o...aka...Dawna Reply | Forward

#2347

From: Timelord2029... Date: Wed Mar 5, 2003 11:49 am Subject: Re: Re: no more Larger Universe! psitrooper24 > PJ wrote: > Since Prudence has (sort of as usual) chosen to write an essay that > is deliberately vague as to details, and deliberately thought > provoking as to concept, this is going to inspire theorizing. If she > did not want people theorizing, I'm sure she would have been more > forthright about the obviously tenuous connection between her essay > and why everything she does must be closed down. Hi Pru, I agree with you in that Pru has asked for discussion on this and it will happen however can we not stick to the comments she brought up in the essay as to the reason she has brought things to a halt? Last time i checked "money" (or the lack of it) was not on the agenda. Even if it was, B/slam would not have been affected nor would it have been shut same goes for the aurora bomb free RV website. That should have been pretty obvious by now. But i can understand how it might not be so obvious to others unfortunately. Ive already had one person ask if the IRS had anything to do with it. like i will be privy to that kind of info (sigh) Iam willing to wait for pru's comments when she is ready but equally expect her critics to take advantage of her situation and do their worst. Thats Human nature 4 U. Peace, Tunde ------------------------- Moderator's note: You're right, she didn't mention money. But I think you're reading the worst into the speculation and it doesn't have to be there. Any time someone takes a major action, and it's not entirely clear why they would take that action, people will speculate on the myriad things that 'might' be behind the decision (or part of it, or contributing to it, etc.). Since Pru has made a very public thing out of having a business that makes money off RV, it's natural people would wonder about money issues. She has a large practice group people don't pay to be in, but she's also got a paid group that supports that, and one could certainly affect the viability of the other. As long as Pru leaves the details in the ether instead of plainly for people they will wonder about anything that seems possible. I don't consider it any kind of dark side of human nature as inferred. Come on, Pru must love -- or at least be cool with -- all the fuss people make about her stuff or she wouldn't be so sensational about what she does. If she didn't want to cause "ooooh! aaaaaah!" in the whole field, she didn't have to put anything on her web page, or been much more noncommittal, and/or totally forthright. You know, kinda like the 'Tastes Like Chicken' "scandal" -- if she hadn't want to shock people she wouldn't have written that article the way she did. I'm not against shocking people and don't want to stir up the nest about THAT again, I'm just pointing out a fact -- if she hadn't wanted that tasking to get attention she wouldn't have written it and posted it publicly. So it's silly to think that people aren't going to talk about things and speculate about them and have 'preliminary opinions' about them. I assume that's what she wanted. I might, of course, be totally wrong. But it's no skin of pru's nose what all the grasshoppers think. ;-) PJ Reply | Forward

#2348

From: "pjgaenir" Date: Wed Mar 5, 2003 5:26 pm Subject: Re: no more Larger Universe! pjgaenir That reminds me. I was once as a teen in a charismatic baptist church. Though such churches believe in Angels and miracles and healing, they tend to spend a lot more time believing in demons. At least, the one I attended did, unfortunately. The fairly small church of people were fairly close, and played heavily into each others' concerns about their deepest fears. Not surprisingly, many of them began having the same experiences, and all their experience as a group seemed to only validate and confirm what they already believed (with more detail and concern all the time). Then eventually, the actual symptoms of The Demons began to be pretty damned real. I am talking genuine poltergeist activity, and when this involves kitchen knives for example, it's pretty worrisome. A lot of other things. Bizarre physical afflictions. Intruding mental thoughts. And so on. Apparently they were not aware of our consciousness's ability to manifest these archetypal (and quite real) energies, if there is enough combined belief system added to motive-emotion about it, particularly in a group. To them, their beliefs and emotions were not creating this; rather, this simply confirmed the perfect validity of their beliefs and emotions. In remote viewing, is "black ops remote influence" our "demons"? Are we playing out the same archetypal patterns humans have throughout history, in the new clothes of 'gov't intelligence' or something -- like the entity vs. alien designation, a new label for an old thing? I have a LITTLE belief that could lend itself to some mild paranoia if I were so inclined. Not much. But I am having a hard time working it overtime to believe that every person in Pru's team is so profoundly important that secret government psychics (or something) are trying to influence them, hex them, whatever. If these secret psychics are so good, why do they need to steal anyone else's sessions for stacked tasking? What would be the point of that? They could do their own and far better. So many questions, so few answers. :-) PJ Reply | Forward

#2354

From: Bill Pendragon Date: Wed Mar 5, 2003 7:08 pm Subject: Re: Re: no more Larger Universe! docsavagebill Hi PJ, And it need not be so negative either. I was in an ARV work group with another who I knew did excellent psi work and I was very impressed with that person and also was brand new and intimidated by Rv. At first I didn't believe I could RV at all so what happened was that I got 80% wrong answers.. ( neg psi) . Then I realized I actually must be capable of psychic intuition even if negative..at that realization, I immediately started getting 70-80% correct .. but noticed that I always got the same results as the person I was sure was the best psychic in the group. This went on for about 20 sessions.. but then that person went into a falterning period..and I still copied their sessions all the way down .. then I finally decided I needed to mentally isolate myself from thinking about that persons results. It even occurred to me that my connection to that person had caused their faltering session in advertantly. Again I never saw their actual session..I just saw ( after the fact) which way they predicted the market would go. .. so even looking at their prediction SEEMED to RI myself and perhaps them as well into some kind of psychic entanglement. After that I was always quite cautious about group efforts. I can't prove this to others.. but I've seen it operate in about every group effort I've been involved in.. at some level. I'm adding the failed skin response test in L.A. to my list..G Best Regards, Bill --------------------------- Moderator's note: Hi doc. Yeah they call that the sheep and goats effect in research, you know. It's the primary reason that there is NO validation of data based on "multiple viewers" getting the same data. Because viewers are quite likely to reflect the data of other viewers they think are good (even when that data is wrong). -- PJ Reply | Forward

#2359

From: "Nita Hickok" Date: Wed Mar 5, 2003 5:59 pm Subject: Re: Re: no more Larger Universe! nitahickok Hi PJ What I have noticed is more or less the way things are reacted too. A military remote viewer can make comments and it will be accepted. Everyone else has certain degrees of people taking potshots at them. I haven't figured out all the ins and outs but what I have noticed is this. People accusing others of things that they themselves have been doing to others. You have to be a certain type of person or they try to exclude you. The field is rife with everyones perceptions of what a remote viewer or psychic will be and how they act. I just finished reading Lyn Buchanans book. He described what was going on with how the military group functioned. I found it very informative in the fact that they tried to duplicate normal psychic functioning in everyone. The believe was that everyone was psychic but didn't use it. I like the structure of how you report results. It mentioned psychics in a certain way of flaws in what they perceive It is like everyone has these hidden implied rules to be followed or they are inferior. You don't follow the rules or same methods and you are treated poorly. I know Pru did things differently and I feel that was part of the problem. The other thing is it is miserable to have everyone force you or perceive you as someone that is definitely not you. It doesn't matter what you do they still judge you by the same perceptions. You add into that people attacking others the way they do on the lists and it is a hostile environment for anyone that is different. It makes it where people would need a rest after a while. Nita ------------------------- Moderator's note: I am not sure how this ties into Pru's essay. Other than, 'how people respond' to her essay perhaps. They'll respond as they will. *I* do not take "the military viewers" point of view as gospel -- even when the poster child of CRV I disagreed with several things, much to the distress and disgust of my own group and sometimes trainers. I don't think my musings are any diff for Pru than it would be for anybody else. I don't see it as harmful or unfair to Pru to discuss all this; I think it's good for the field and it's a stimulating, thought provoking essay she provided -- as usual. But maybe I misinterpret what you meant. I don't disagree with your comments, just don't see how they directly tie into the subject at hand. -- PJ Reply | Forward

#2371

From: Bill Pendragon Date: Wed Mar 5, 2003 11:13 pm Subject: Re: Re: no more Larger Universe! docsavagebill Hi PJ, I don't think Nita was referring to discussing Pru's message here. It was the way Pru was treated by some of the military RV people and some others on the other lists. It was a real travesty to treat her like that IMO.. Thankfully the worst purpetrators are gone now. And so is Pru ... But next time some outsider starts getting the RV spotlight and making $$$ and drawing students with their own RV methods, I'll be surprised if they don't get the same treatment. Best Regards, Bill ---------------------- Moderator's note: OK. In that case I've no idea where the subject really came from, but I don't disagree she's probably felt excluded. -- PJ Reply | Forward

#2374

From: "Nita Hickok" Date: Thu Mar 6, 2003 12:19 am Subject: Re: Re: no more Larger Universe! nitahickok Hello Bill You are correct and inherent in Pru's message is the fact that things aren't what they seem to be. Who would be double using sessions etc. It makes it obvious that the whole scenario and problems had a lot of various causes. I was putting forth the theory that no matter what the article said it could cause someone to be burnt out on the subject. It doesn't need to only be one reason. Nita Reply | Forward

#2367

From: "intuitwolf" Date: Wed Mar 5, 2003 10:03 pm Subject: Re: no more Larger Universe! intuitwolf > PJ wrote: > If these secret psychics are so good, why do they need to steal > anyone else's sessions for stacked tasking? Let me venture a guess - to save man hours? Maybe they know how to analyze but not how to RV? Shelia Reply | Forward

#2375

From: "Eva" Date: Thu Mar 6, 2003 2:22 am Subject: Re: no more Larger Universe! k9caninek9 Option 3 would be to screw up other people's sessions as much as possible. If a session were tasked to 5 diff targets, I would imagine that the end result would be substantially diluted and not very useful for it's original purpose. Also, one could double task with unpleasant taskings and not only screw up the session but screw with the viewer's head as well. -E > Shelia wrote: > Let me venture a guess - to save man hours? Maybe they know how to > analyze but not how to RV? ---------------------- Moderator's note: Hmmmn. I like the last option. Evil and nefarious too. Still I think at SOME point I am going to end up back at the doorway of "everything comes down to viewer intent." That is the only possible definition or separation in our universe. A viewer might get some data that relates to something else, but whether or not it took over their session or made them sick or diluted their session to non-useful seems a rather subjective measure. Maybe, the viewer just did not do well on the session, rather than assuming a 'diluted result'. Maybe, the viewer has other subconscious issues with their growing use of psi which is manifesting in problems during the experience that are conveniently getting blamed on 'something else' (not only not the viewer's fault, but interesting as well). Maybe it's impossible even to test and truly know the factors; for example if I do a target, and after feedback you assign a 2nd target to my existing session, there is no way of truly knowing that your selection of that target -- even blind, random, press a button, ask someone else for it -- was not psi-based to pick a target that best matched my session. I can think of no realistic way to test this theory, though I like it well enough as an interesting topic of discussion! PJ Reply | Forward

#2385

From: Karl Boyken Date: Thu Mar 6, 2003 8:57 am Subject: Re: Re: no more Larger Universe! kboyken From my reading of Pru's article, I get the idea that the stealing of stacked tasking would allow a small number of government psychics to leverage their abilities by farming targets out to a number of unwitting viewers. Sort of like distributed computing--you spray a big job across a huge bunch of cheap, slow machines, instead of doing it all on one machine that's expensive, big and fast, but not nearly as big as all the cheap machines combined, and not nearly so fast that it can plow through the whole problem more quickly than the aggregated cheap machines. It's cheaper, and you get your results more quickly. _If_ that's what's going on. Karl Reply | Forward

#2358

From: David Date: Wed Mar 5, 2003 5:58 pm Subject: Re: Re: no more Larger Universe! a_healey56 My intuition tells me that the Gray Dude may have something to do with this decision. ;-) Dave Reply | Forward

#2349

From: Weatherly-Hawaii...m Date: Wed Mar 5, 2003 6:12 pm Subject: Re: Re: no more Larger Universe! maliolana Aloha Tunde, Well I have been much more in the defender camp...as you know...however... I do feel... that this is a bit traumatic for her students...and many an on looker as well...It seems that if this were well thought out...premeditated...then she could have prepared them...at least somewhat...for the let down...as I would expect from any quality leader/ teacher/guru/guide/parenting figure...if this were well thought out... Seems they should have all been notified...before it hit the public... Just comtemplating the possible repercussions...It does feel to me...as if we are all in this...RV... somewhat together...even though frequently played one against the other...and many are hard to pidgeon hole...yet...not always... Nevertheless...we are somewhat...linked at the hip...I am ready now...for the complete paper......the one on her website...was far too encompassing/ sans facts/data/info... Never was all that partial to incomplete info...causes too damn much unnecessary conjecture...and takes a lot of my energy!...course it does give us all a chance to see how good our every day PSI is.../or is it paranoia threshold?...hhaha I am not against positive shock/gorilla theatre...In fact...I am kinda partial to some of it...as long as it is not elliciting the fear factor...alone... Love & Light & Laughter Mali'o...aka...Dawna Reply | Forward

#2353

From: greenmn900... Date: Wed Mar 5, 2003 1:09 pm Subject: Re: Re: no more Larger Universe! greenmn900... PJ, > You wrote: > "If these secret psychics are so good, why do they need to steal > anyone else's sessions for stacked tasking? What would be the point > of that? They could do their own and far better." Good point. I also agree with you that we all have our own self-created demons. But I don't believe they are *all* self-created anymore than I think all the other entities in existence are self-created. This is one of the false paths people tend to follow if they aren't careful when they start down the "we create our own reality" belief system road. But I doubt if black ops surreptitiously using a fledging group of RVers is Pru's concern. Considering the untold billions black ops have to work with, I don't see how anyone could seriously consider that - except someone extremely, dangerously paranoid. Warm Regards, Don ----------------------- Moderator's note: In Pru's defense -- which I guess I have to make here because I'm the one that started it -- she did NOT actually say that black ops were targeting her group. She simply inferred that her group was affected, and since all communication channels would have to be monitored to make this even workable, the logical assumption I made leads to that. I may however be wrong and I hope people WILL debate with me -- I find this all quite interesting. How kind of Pru to throw a molatov into the mix the very day I decided to come back into public discussion. ROFL. -- PJ Reply | Forward

#2355

From: Timelord2029... Date: Wed Mar 5, 2003 12:33 pm Subject: Re: Re: no more Larger Universe! psitrooper24 > pj wrote: > So it's silly to think that people aren't going to talk about things and > speculate about them and have 'preliminary opinions' about them. I assume > that's what she wanted. I might, of course, be totally wrong. But it's no > skin off pru's nose what all the grasshoppers think. ;-) Love the way you word these things Your right Iam sure pru can take care of herself . Peace, Tunde Reply | Forward

#2356

From: greenmn900... Date: Wed Mar 5, 2003 12:51 pm Subject: Re: Re: no more Larger Universe! greenmn900... Hi, I have to say that I think Pru's entire essay demonstrates a simplistic - and just plain wrong - view of non-local perception. I think it's based on an underestimation of the depth and breadth of the ability of the subconscious mind of the RVer. The subject of her essay, what PJ is calling "stacking sessions", is of course possible. And, like PJ said, many of us have experienced it accidentally several times. But it seems to me that Pru has forgotten that the RVer also usually picks up on much more about a subject than just the specific information being desired by the tasker. Anyone here who has done much application work will know what I mean. In my experience, the RVer also gets a lot of associated information and usually ends up with some inkling of what exactly is being desired, or what the information is intended to be used for. The RVer also, in applications, will learn a lot about the client themselves in the process. The more sessions that are done for that client, the more the RVer learns about the client's family, friends, lifestyle, and various intentions. Because of the above effect, I don't believe what Pru is alluding to in her essay is possible, at least not very effectively and not for very long. It couldn't be kept secret from the RVers. Sooner or later the perception that something not-quite-straightforward is occurring would emerge in the mind of the RVer, leading to a slight, nagging suspicion. The moment this suspicion is present, more information regarding the source of that suspicion would be retrieved by the RVer with every session. This will occur even when the RVer doesn't intend for it to, simply because the suspicion has become associated with the act of remote viewing. I believe doing things like too much remote viewing of aliens or other esoteric targets can lead to this kind of process occurring as well. The above described process can happen so easily that I don't see how the secretive, nefarious use of what appears to be straightforward practice RV sessions could go on for very long or be very effective. I don't know much about Pru, TDS, or The Larger Universe but I also believe one of the reasons she might be thinking along these lines is that she probably feels a need to explain why all RVers produce reams of such specific and such obviously wrong data - when she believes that *all* RV-derived data is correct, it is only sometimes misinterpreted. I don't know why she believes this but I completely disagree. RV is only non-local focus and our psi focus can be as easily pointed in the wrong direction as any of our mundane senses can be. I think that's the usual reason for incorrect data. I won't speculate here as to why she's closing everything down. I don't know her or anyone from TDS well enough to have the slightest idea as to the reason. But I DO think it's sad to see any RV group fall apart. I wish them all the best. Don ------------------------- Moderator's note: Then again, maybe it hasn't gone on very long or been very effective. Maybe exactly what you describe -- the viewers finally realizing something was happening and tuning into it -- is the case. Who knows. PJ Reply | Forward

#2361

From: "Eva" Date: Wed Mar 5, 2003 7:50 pm Subject: Re: no more Larger Universe! k9caninek9 Good point PJ. If you figured out you were getting double tasked, then what? Can it be blocked? -E > Moderator's note: Then again, maybe it hasn't gone on very long or > been very effective. Maybe exactly what you describe -- the viewers > finally realizing something was happening and tuning into it -- is > the case. Who knows. PJ Reply | Forward

#2362

From: "pjgaenir" Date: Wed Mar 5, 2003 8:42 pm Subject: Re: no more Larger Universe! pjgaenir > --- In pjrv...oups.com, "Eva" Good point PJ. If you figured out you were getting double tasked, > then what? Can it be blocked? > -E Well, who knows. I guess I'd initially try blocking it by my intent to do so; intent drives everything in RV. If that didn't seem to be working, the only logical answer if you think your communication channels are where the info (your sessions) are gotten for the retasking, is to change your communication channels. Either use FedX solely or stick with people local, have physical meetings to share sessions every month or whatever. There are some things I guess I don't doubt. I always figured when I talked to Joe on the phone that given his background and ability, everything we said was probably being translated into about 156 languages and telexed around the planet, LOL. (It'd have to be by satellite, since he can sense a tap device in any environ far as I know, so physical ones wouldn't last long.) I just accept that; and it's possible my close association with him puts me in a monitored position, but there is nothing I can do about that if so, and I don't take it personally; it ain't because I'm important, it's just the intell equiv of tagging a duck, big deal. That is slightly paranoid perhaps but is something quite other than the session stacking Pru refers to of course. The group dynamics of any RV group, and as RV as an entire field, have always fascinated me as much as RV itself ever did. I'm a sociologist at heart. Pru's discussions on emergent behavior are interesting and worthy of consideration in the RV field I think. However, there are sort of four separate topics here that get mixed, because of how all this came to be presented. 1. The emergent behavior concepts, quite fascinating; 2. The session stacking concept, quite interesting; 3. The DELIBERATE "pirate sessions" (or what Pru calls 'hijacked sessions') possible and the implications or worry about that; and 4. The issue of Pru's groups suspending activity for the moment, which leads anybody to think that if she's serious about all this, that she is REALLY serious about it, and there must be more to all of it than is being made clear. The existence of 3 and especially 4 sort of overshadow, or blend in, to the first two points which are worth of discussion on their own. I might add that there are really in my view three logical responses to Pru's essay, which I intended to bring out individually (I have the first two, this email touches the third): 1. Is the public document 'really' the reason for her suspension of her groups, as it is a very tenuous, mostly suggestive reasoning, carefully worded to seem more philosophical than literal, which makes the 'stretch' to connect the essay to her ceasing a bit of an assumption; 2. If such things are really the reasoning behind it, is it possible that there is any other possible source of the experiences or symptoms that caused the suspicions, other than what is assumed; and 3. Basically, once those obvious (and skeptical but fair) points are covered, then one is left simply discussing the topics themselves at face value. I've had private conversations before about the formative nature of RV and methodologies and mental maps on the whole field and viewers individually, but it's not something that I think has been much addressed in public before, so I'm glad she brought it up. PJ Reply | Forward

#2382

From: David Date: Thu Mar 6, 2003 5:53 am Subject: Re: Re: no more Larger Universe! a_healey56 Hello De, "It is the rare remote viewer who questions the cultural conditioning occurring on both the physical and paraphysical levels, but like any other social dynamic, the result is remote viewers becoming more similar in attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors." This is the sentence that reached out and grabbed me too. I thought what Pru was inferring was that many new viewers become automatons who just thoughtlessly regurgitate every word and adopt every theory that spews forth out of the mouths of RV guru's. But as we all know, Pru is also very big on the many tangential benefits of remote viewing, as you mention. David H. Reply | Forward

#2402

From: Bill Pendragon Date: Thu Mar 6, 2003 3:46 pm Subject: Re: Re: no more Larger Universe! docsavagebill Hi David, I suspect that TO can work this way too in the short run. I think Ingo gets into that in his books about Power. But in the long run.. diversity seems to erupt out of the RV world almost like none other..and really nothing can suppress it. It is a very personal experience and only the ARMY would try to fit all into the same mold...G Bill [TO = telepathic overlay - PJ] Reply | Forward

#2386

From: Karl Boyken Date: Thu Mar 6, 2003 9:06 am Subject: Re: Re: no more Larger Universe! kboyken I think I recall reading an HRVG article or post somewhere about Glenn Wheaton picking up on what a room of viewers were perceiving, via a process he calls "tagging," if I'm not mistaken. Is it possible that Pru believes her viewers' sessions are being hijacked in some manner like this, not via some physical means? Karl -- Karl Boyken kboyken...t http://soli.inav.net/~kboyken/ We dance 'round in a ring and suppose, while the Secret sits in the middle and knows. --Robert Frost Reply | Forward

#2406

From: Rocheleh Date: Thu Mar 6, 2003 3:58 pm Subject: Re: Re: no more Larger Universe! rochelehhakt... > Karl Boyken wrote: > like distributed computing--you spray a big > job across a huge bunch of cheap, > slow machines, instead of doing it all on > one machine that's expensive, big and > fast, but not nearly as big as all the cheap > machines combined, and not nearly > so fast that it can plow through the whole > problem more quickly than the > aggregated cheap machines. I really like this distributed computing analogy. Thanks! Actually, I recalled something... the guess that gov't services are doing this sort of thing (outside interference in the psi perception process) is by no means new. There is Richard Deacon's book on Israeli intelligence - I just checked at Amazon, and found on their British site that it was published in 1977! (http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/0241897653/qid=1046988220/sr=1-9/ref=s\ r_1_0_9/026-6539205-2203622 for reference.) And this one says at one place that the Soviets were experimenting with disturbing psychic seances. They called the person interfering in the seance the "interpolator". This person took part in the seance, he was physically there AFAIR. It's not known exactly what this person did, but there's some data that the Soviets were experimenting with feeding false data to the percipient, confusing the percipient, eavesdropping on telepathic information that has been intended by its sender only to an other receiver, etc. Not completely what Pru writes, but there definitely is some overlapping IMO. Okay, just how real this was I don't know, but the *idea* of doing such things has been around for quite some time now. Rachel Reply | Forward

#2413

From: Rocheleh Date: Thu Mar 6, 2003 5:15 pm Subject: Re: Re: no more Larger Universe! rochelehhakt... A few parts cut and pasted in from the TDS website, with my comments. > What if it wasn't Remote Viewing at all but something else? Quantum > Viewing may be a more appropriate term. I fail to see why it would be a more appropriate term... would someone fill me in on that? I couldn't deduce it from the article. Pru has background in physics, she wouldn't just throw in quanta without at least traces of an analogy, right? Maybe it's in the extended version, or I really failed to notice something this time. > machine, or a website or a copier. A channel wherein the session can > be captured and married with other sessions too numerous to count so > something other than the intended purpose emerges? Okay, I might be behind, I still haven't written my introduction to MadDogRV, but I don't know where'd that amount of sessions come from. Farview has five sessions on each target on average, and there are targets every two weeks. And there are no other public or semi-public lists doing sessions, right? I also can't really think of websites churning out sessions by the ton. OK, there are some, but by no means "too numerous to count". > One key feature of these systems is that new members adapt to the > characteristics of the system, more than the system accommodating to > the changes offered by any new member. I would debate whether this was really so; despite everyone saying to some degree that I should stick to their system, I made up my composite version - and judging from the methods poll on this list, pretty much everyone else did this. Similarity between individuals > is what results in the spread of culture across any group, and a > diversity of opinions is reduced as individuals are exposed to a > preponderance of majority arguments. In other words, as people > interact, they persuade one another of things, they teach each other, > they mimic one another, with the result being that they become more > similar. But in a really limited fashion. Our views might be similar on that RV exists. And on a few other things, like RV can be learned to some degree. All in all, not too many - take a step and you find utter disagreement everywhere. But as lots of the RVers are physically separate from each other, we can't really influence each other's dress code, metacommunication style, etc. Those that are very easily influenced in physically close-knit communities are completely missing in our case. Or maybe I only see the RV community as widespread all over the Earth with a low density because I'm attached to it only via Internet and I only what's going on in the US from these lists. IRVA people, fill me in on this. > diversity or change. In the case of remote viewing, new viewers may > not know what they've been adapted into, Now seriously - who on earth knows? > central focus for any individual. It is the rare remote viewer who > questions the cultural conditioning occurring on both the physical > and paraphysical levels, but like any other social dynamic, the > result is remote viewers becoming more similar in attitudes, beliefs, > and behaviors. Seems like the average Yahoo-using RVer is the rare remote viewer. I don't see people becoming too similar in attitudes, beliefs and stuff. Hard-ingrained values don't change that easily - no Republican will get Democrat or vice versa here, despite endless threads of political debate on Freevent ;) At least I have yet to see such. It just occurred to me - obviously we don't know about the lurkers! But I think the average subscriber will be an adult, less prone to change opinions after a message or two. Of course, if all military RVers claim something in loud unison (as if that might happen ;) ), I might consider it and give it quite a bit of thought. But if it doesn't fit, I'll throw it out just like much else. And I don't think other people here are a lot different in this respect. I admit Ed May's claim that psychokinesis doesn't exist gave me a hard time. :) But hey, being 19, I'm still in my teens ;) > behaviors. One can attempt to predict what types of patterns, > attitudes, and functions such a system would display over time. I don't see yet how this could be predicted using non-psi means, without extraordinary funding and allocated research. Something only a developed country with a large military budget and little to lose could pull off, I think. Figuring the system made of all RVers out is like figuring the Matrix or akashic record or however you name it out. We'd already be seeing the effects. Of course, attempts could be made. But I wouldn't overestimate those attempts, I still think we'd already be seeing large-scale changes if something usable came out of those. One > can say for certain, however, that a network of remote viewers would > be more effective as an intelligence gathering tool if the > individuals were so similar that they used specific methodologies > developed to keep them working essentially in unison. The less the > data collection method is questioned or challenged, the more robust > the network is. But it's completely questioned and challenged all the time! That's partly what these lists are about. Not a too robust network, is it? > The easiest way to accomplish such tasking is to use the collected > data as Wild Card sessions. A Wild Card is a session that has been > completed by a remote viewer, but without a tasking yet being > assigned to the session. These have been shown to be as effective as > prior tasked sessions. Who does wildcards in public? I have never, ever seen that happen. > outside remote viewing groups and individuals. We have noted that > each time a new task is assigned to a pre-assigned session, that the > data then reflects both (or more) taskings, but it becomes slightly > cloudy, as if the mind is struggling with finding language and > imagery suitable to answer both (or more) taskings. ...huh? The data that has already been observed after the first tasking changes? How? > By collecting sessions from many hundreds, if not thousands, of > remote viewers, over time, and using them as Wild Cards for > multi-tasking purposes, one would not need highly trained or skilled > viewers. The copious amount of data would lend itself to a type of > pattern-finding meta analysis which could answer specific questions > without having to know any particular viewer's strengths and > weaknesses. One would need immense computing power to collate and analyse the results, I'd say. (We're talking thousands of sessions here!) Maybe they should hijack distributed.net and SETI... well :) And even if there is enough computing power, where are the algorithms? I'd say they would be pretty hard to code. > Remote Viewers whose sessions are used in such a multi-tasking method > could be remote influencing themselves or others as they view, by a > simple task written by an outside party. Viewers in these cases may > experience uncomfortable physical and mental sensations during or > after viewing. (Just a small note: how about *prior to* viewing?) > Since agents in a distributed intelligence network look to other > agents for clues on behavior, actions, ideas, and thoughts, some > agents could have seeded an initial network with thoughts that would > carry through the life of the network, including ideas on how remote > viewing works, who makes a good remote viewer, etc. Are there two people who agree on the same thing re: these issues? This could be done, but I don't see it done, at least not in a large scale. It could definitely be applied to psi in general, that area has a paradigm of sorts by now. But remote viewing in particular? > Any session collected and then used for something else, without > permission of the remote viewer, can be considered a hijacked > session. Multi-tasked and RI Enhanced sessions can be hijacked > sessions. Just to add my bit of paranoia to the pool ;) If someone decided to hijack sessions on Farview recently, it would've been likely he would have chosen mine, as those were usually the longest of each. (If I can't be the best in quality, then at least I should try quantity, LOL!) ...Eve, did you say verbosity was not a disadvantage? :))) (Now that I've reminded everyone, people head off to Farview en masse to use my sessions for all sorts of divination... imagine the sight ;) ) My RVing style is all too suitable for this, as opposed to Rich's, for instance. He writes little, sharp, correct descriptions. I write a lot and most of it is the land of weird AOLy visuals, even when I'm visibly on target. There's lots of room for someone to fit their information in there. So, a good defense could possibly be, not to be too verbose. Not if I'm gonna change my viewing style :))) I still prefer it this way. The advantages outweigh the disadvantages - I don't want to leave anything undeclared. > One counter thought would be that a viewer's intent could allow them > to steer clear of being used in this way. However, if a viewer's > intent is to describe the objective/target, and the viewer adds the > proviso to each and every viewing that they will view only the > objective/target assigned by a specific tasker, is there any evidence > that this works? Is there any evidence for the rest of this? Okay, there probably is, but we're not being shown. Understandable, but it's still not really fair to refer to "no evidence" when it's contra and not when it's pro argument. > persons running the experiment. There is the added reality that on > the psi level a viewer may perform differently in a controlled > experiment (intended to measure the limitations of specific tasking > directions involving intention,) than in a true hijacked session > situation. As long as we don't know how the badguys are doing it, yes. But chances are if we made our hijacking protocol, it'd end up pretty similar. Uuugh... this post ended up more debating-style than I intended to, mostly because when I agreed, I didn't say "great, I agree", I deleted those parts as I didn't want to keep the message too long. I like Pru's style (don't tell my rabbi! LOL) and really admire her achievements in the field. My current methodology is also based in large part on what was up at Aurora Bomb. I posted on the forums. (I was one of the last to. :( ) So it's not like I want to take her apart on the spot or anything, and I figured after reading my post that it somewhat sounded like that. I'm just asking where it is not clear, flaming was not my intention. Hoping that all will be settled at TDS, and Pru will be back; Rachel -------------------------------- Dear Rochele, you are the first person to actually address, in detail, the whole of Pru's essay. Regardless of whether you agree, don't, or merely comment or question, it is great that you have. -- PJ Reply | Forward

#2419

From: Bill Pendragon Date: Thu Mar 6, 2003 11:02 pm Subject: Re: Re: RV as QM docsavagebill Hi Rocheleh, I'm working out my view here.. and am open to all comments. But the reason I think Pru would like to call RV Quantum viewing is because it seems to follow many of the rules of quantum mechanics. In Quantum Mechanics all particles are assumed to have knowledge of all other particles down to the last neutrino...There is a net of non local interactions that connect everything. This net is analogous ( but not necessarily the same as) the matrix. In QM the particle itself is also assumed to be spread all over the universe until that particle interacts with another particle..Then its position "collapses" to a specific location. If a scientist is recording the two particles hitting each other he is also included in the collapse as is everyone that is informationally connected to him. By setting up his experiment certain ways ( analogous to tasking) the scientist can actually CHANGE the result of the collapse even though nothing physcial is done. Also in QM..this vaugeness is spread thru time.. QM collapses spread thru time as well as space much like RV. The position of an electron is not determined ( even in theory) in space or time until observed. Pru sees RV as operating the same way. I can RV because my conciousness is actually spread all over the whole universe. When I task myself to view something it is much like collapsing the QM wave function. I'm now focused on one event. But if others can see my results they become part of the same QM wave function and if there intention is different than mine.. might alter the results of the collapse.. Anyway it's not a 100% congruous..but the analogy seems spookily appropriate IMO. Best Regards, Bill Reply | Forward

#2431

From: Benton Bogle Date: Fri Mar 7, 2003 8:50 am Subject: RE: Re: RV as QM waterway_21 Bill wrote: " Anyway it's not a 100% congruous..but the analogy seems spookily appropriate ." in speaking about Quatum mechanics and RV mechanics. It used to irritate me to see the process of RV compared or associated with QM, just as it does when someone refers to the human brain as a computer..... perhaps the comparison provides useful handles but maybe it clouds the issue more. Just because both areas of research have lots of mystery and unanswered questions doesn't mean they are closely related or work in similar ways. Having said that.... I get the feeling that an understanding of how RV works will provide some very useful insight into how QM, and "physics" works. Not that RV will be used to answer the questions, but the scientific understanding of the mechanics behind RV will expose the mechanics behind quantum phenomenon. Since both areas of study seem to be hog-tied on the question of "time" and perception, it looks like RV has a lot to tell QM about the significance of the concepts of past, present and future. Not that the question seems to have been answered in the RV science.... but when (no pun intended) it is.... QM science will benefit greatly from it. Or, to put it more simply, yes Bill, I agree. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Reply | Forward

#2368

From: Bill Pendragon Date: Wed Mar 5, 2003 10:45 pm Subject: Re: Re: no more Larger Universe! ... Ingo swann on TO docsavagebill http://www.biomindsuperpowers.com/Pages/RVVsTelepathicOverlay.html Hello Don, It has never been a secret from those that know. It's frequently pushed under the rug to avoid giving excuses to beginning viewers ( a mistake in my opinion). But the experienced viewers all seem to agree it's real. Above is Ingo Swanns essay on Telepathic Overlay. I think this is what is occuring to Pru..only in her case it would be deliberate TO...which = RI..same thing IMO. Also she is not at all naive about much of anything. She could be mistaken but not ever naive. Best Regards, Bill Reply | Forward

#2381

From: "stanley01420" Date: Thu Mar 6, 2003 7:15 am Subject: Re: no more Larger Universe! ... Ingo swann on TO stanley01420 > Bill Pendragon wrote: > It has never been a secret from those that know. It's > frequently pushed under the rug to avoid giving > excuses to beginning viewers ( a mistake in my > opinion). But the experienced viewers all seem to > agree it's real. Above is Ingo Swanns essay on > Telepathic Overlay. I think this is what is occuring > to Pru..only in her case it would be deliberate > TO...which = RI..same thing IMO. I may be misunderstanding this but are you saying that if her results are inaccurate it is because someone is using RI to make her (or her students) results inaccurate? I don't mean this as any kind of a negtive response but it just seems as if that is kind of a convenient excuse for lack of results. trypper Reply | Forward

#2403

From: Bill Pendragon Date: Thu Mar 6, 2003 3:56 pm Subject: Re: Re: no more Larger Universe! ... Ingo swann on TO docsavagebill No! Mary Not at all. It's not an excuse.Whether this definitely caused Pru's problems or not .. of course I can't know..but I do know its possible.. Read Ingo's article..he needs no excuses and neither does Pru. ..She made millions of $$ doing RV. She made it pay as one else. Before one can overcome a problem one must first realize it's there...I suspect that's what Pru is doing now. She did it before (after Hale-Bopp, which was a classic power TO play....comming down from Ed Dames to Courtney B. to Pru ) she can do it again I'll wager...G Bill --- stanley01420 wrote: > I may be misunderstanding this but are you saying > that if her > results are inaccurate it is because someone is > using RI to > make her (or her students) results inaccurate? > > I don't mean this as any kind of a negtive response > but it just > seems as if that is kind of a convenient excuse for > lack of results. Reply | Forward

#2407

From: "Eva" Date: Thu Mar 6, 2003 5:00 pm Subject: Re: no more Larger Universe! ... Ingo swann on TO k9caninek9 I guess that would depend on the circumstances. If accurate rv data were never obtained in the first place by the viewers, then I would say blaming it on 'others' would be rather lame. ON the other hand, if something were to suddenly change, then one is left wondering why that occured. If it were only one person, it might well be the result of personal probs, overload etc. I guess one would have to look at the whole picture. A number of the Larger Universe members had been involved in rv for a long time, some coming from other schools originally. I guess one would have to ask if they ever were any good to start with. -E --- In pjrv...oups.com, "stanley01420" > I may be misunderstanding this but are you saying that if her > results are inaccurate it is because someone is using RI to > make her (or her students) results inaccurate? > > I don't mean this as any kind of a negtive response but it just > seems as if that is kind of a convenient excuse for lack of results. > > trypper Reply | Forward

#2415

From: greenmn900... Date: Thu Mar 6, 2003 2:46 pm Subject: Re: Re: no more Larger Universe! ... Ingo swann on TO greenmn900... Bill, You wrote: "It has never been a secret from those that know. It's frequently pushed under the rug to avoid giving excuses to beginning viewers ( a mistake in my opinion). But the experienced viewers all seem to agree it's real. Above is Ingo Swanns essay on Telepathic Overlay. I think this is what is occuring to Pru..only in her case it would be deliberate TO...which = RI..same thing IMO. Also she is not at all naive about much of anything. She could be mistaken but not ever naive." You are wrong, Bill. In my opinion, you've been mis-informed about a subject that is purely theoretical and is completely lacking any scientific evidence at all. Not all experienced viewers agree that it's real. I've done a little over 2300 sessions. I consider myself at least fairly experienced. I think it's bullshit. Ask Joe McMoneagle if TO is real or not. Like I've said before, and like I'll keep saying regardless of what Ingo believes; TO is only possible if the RVer allows it. You mention "those who know". Tell me where and when it's ever been researched and how one would even go about doing so. The fact is, NO ONE knows. There's only opinion. In fact, most cases of supposed "TO" seem to have taken place when someone who knows something about the target other than the viewer is in the room with the viewer while the session is going on. This is anything *but* "TO". So many people who have so much fear and doubt about so much of psi have only a glimmer of an idea of the proportions of our individual personal power. I've had experience with TO as both the one doing the overlay and as the one being supposedly subject to it. I've had experience with RI both as the RIer and as the target for RI. I've learned that YOU - as an individual entity - have much more control over what you experience non-locally even much more so than you do locally. This is personally how I view reality: Everything is everything and everything has consciousness in one form or another. We are all only points of varying degrees of awareness, interacting with and focusing on, other points of awareness. I didn't accuse Pru of being naive. I said her essay was simplistic and underestimated the ability of a compentent RVer. RI can be perceived, *especially* while the RVer is in-session. Do a couple thousand sessions and you learn to recognize when someone is merely thinking about you. At the risk of sounding like a braggart, I can do this myself. PJ can back me up on this fact. I have no idea of what is going on with Pru. It could be any number of things. Whatever it is, I'm sure it goes deeper than just simple RI or TO. These are simple things that can be defended against at a personal level in many different ways. I'm sure whatever has caused her to take her recent actions are things she feels are very challenging. Regarding that, that's all I'm sure of. Best Regards, Don [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Reply | Forward

#2424

From: Bill Pendragon Date: Fri Mar 7, 2003 12:36 am Subject: Re: Re: no more Larger Universe! ... Ingo swann on TO docsavagebill Well Don, I don't agree with your opinion on TO at all. So we shall just have to agree to disagree. I encourage others to make up there own minds too. I've had my say for now. Best Regards, bill > In my opinion, you've been mis-informed about a subject > that is purely theoretical and is completely lacking > any scientific evidence at all. Not all experienced > viewers agree that it's real. ----------------------- Moderator's note: I find myself in the funny position of both agreeing AND disagreeing (nice way to agree with everyone, lol). If the question is, can one person's mind have effect on another - absolutely! I don't think anybody (including Don) would disagree that telepathy happens, unless they have never had it happen, which seems odd to me but maybe for some people they really haven't. But if the question is, is a good viewer, who chooses NOT to be affected by others' sessions, at the helpless mercy of random "overlay" of every imaginable kind? Is it okay to blame session issues on 'telepathic overlay' because it just can't be helped? Then NO - I believe it's the viewer's responsibility to have a strong and clear enough will to focus on the kind of relationship they wish to have with the target, regardless of what anybody else is doing with the target (or, to bring in recent events -- with the session, either!). Somehow I think as often, it's actually the semantics of this, the interpretation of words and phrases and "the assumptions they come with" that confounds such issues. -- 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