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 : 1929-1946 of 4038
(http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pjrv/messages/1929?)
23:31:53
~~--------ArchivedPostFollows_Yahoo-PJRV_group---------

#1929

From: "David " Date: Sat Jan 4, 2003 10:07 am Subject: Ouija and RV jam1433 Glyn wrote: "I have often thought that it would be interesting to maybe use the Tarot in conjunction with an RV session." I was thinking that it might also be interesting to attempt to use the Ouija in conjuction with an RV session. Perhaps trying a regular RV session first, and then using the Ouija to gleen additional data. Like asking the ouija to "Describe target XXXXX" David M. Reply | Forward

#1933

From: "intuitwolf " Date: Sat Jan 4, 2003 2:35 pm Subject: Re: Ouija and RV intuitwolf > David wrote > I was thinking that it might also be interesting to attempt to use > the Ouija in conjuction with an RV session. Perhaps trying a regular > RV session first, and then using the Ouija to gleen additional data. > Like asking the ouija to "Describe target XXXXX" If it's treated like a session and you aren't invoking any disincarnate entities in the process you might get some info...I'd surely have a scribe assisting cause it would just be too cumbersome to write while trying to gather info. Think of how fast one sometimes writes in a session -- the data comes so fast a lot of it gets lost. Let us know if you get a sprained wrist sliding about that board. :-) I am kidding; I think it would be a fun experiment. I've played with the Ouija when I was a kid -- but we never thought of it as connected to 'spirits' or entities. We (my cousin and I) thought of it as just being psychic. We never had any frightening experiences with it. But then, at 18 I moved to St. Louis and lived with a doctor and his family -- the wife was very interested in the Ouija and she had that 'spiritualist' slant to it. Which resulted in some very terrifying experiences for me. So, I think it really does depend (just as when working with any other medium) upon your perspective - how you approach it -- for what purpose -- and with what intent. I don't feel that any 'disincarnate entity' still hanging out in a near-earth orbit is wise enough to advise me on anything...so I would never intend contact with such in this context. :-) Same thing goes for 'aspects of self' that aren't evolved enough to come through in a more appropriate and identified context...in other words if its trace and influence is so weak that I have to project it as being outside of myself in order to make contact with it then it is probably some part of self best left alone to either develop or dissipate. Shelia Reply | Forward

#1936

From: "Glyn" Date: Sat Jan 4, 2003 3:11 pm Subject: RE: Ouija and RV gebega It certainly would David, we wouldn't have to deal with the sort of AOL that we deal with in an RV session....but we may still get some 'verbal' I guess. LOL! :-)). It would be a fascinating experience . Unfortunately I now don't have anyone to do the Ouija with...well no one I could trust to keep two feet on the ground about it anyway, and I can't do it on my own. If you or someone else on the list manages it I would love to hear about the outcome. I will try the Tarot with a future target and post if there seems to be any correlation. Kind Regards, Glyn > I was thinking that it might also be interesting to attempt to use > the Ouija in conjuction with an RV session. Perhaps trying a regular > RV session first, and then using the Ouija to gleen additional data. > Like asking the ouija to "Describe target XXXXX" Reply | Forward

#1946

From: greenmn900... Date: Sat Jan 4, 2003 11:11 am Subject: Re: Ouija and RV greenmn900... Hi, > David Wrote: > "I was thinking that it might also be > interesting to attempt to use > the Ouija in conjuction with an RV session" I agree. I've sometimes wished I was practiced with Tarot Cards, the I-Ching, Dowsing, Scrying, and even reading things like tea or coffee grounds, and other forms of divination. That would be a hell of an arsenal of methods for one person to be able to bring to bear on any applications problem. Then you would have different tools for different aspects of the problem; Tarot cards for getting interpersonal data and relationship stuff, RV for the more physical data, the ouija board for specific numbers and letters, etc. Best Regards, Don pjrv : Messages : 1911-2006 of 4038
(http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pjrv/messages/1911?)
23:35:24
~~--------ArchivedPostFollows_Yahoo-PJRV_group---------

#1911

From: "Sharon Webb" Date: Fri Jan 3, 2003 3:41 pm Subject: Re: Ouija (was Thoughts; 2003) sharwebb_30512 Glyn, At the risk of turning off the rest of the list, I'll give you a couple of Ouija hits: I was asking for a friend about her daughter, Gretchen, who was planning to go to Italy on a junior year summer abroad study program. The board said that not only would Gretchen go, but so would her cousin and the cousin's boyfriend. Her mom said, "That's impossible. Diane doesn't have any money, and neither does her boyfriend." The message went on to describe the room where Gretchen would stay---in a high-ceilinged room with no closet in a yellow building off a square filled with pigeons. There would be a cathedral at one end of the square. A few weeks later, my friend called and told me that Diane and boyfriend had suddenly come into a windfall and would be going. They did, and Gretchen's room was as described. Another example: I was told that my husband (who was a real estate salesman at the time) would have a new client show up soon. This man would have a white beard and drive a van. He would buy a large tract of land. The next day, my husband called home just after lunch. In a hushed voice, he said, "Your man just came." The guy had a white beard, drove a van, and bought a couple of hundred acres. He came from out of town and had never been in the office before. Sharon sharwebb...net www.fractalus.com/sharon ------------------------------ Moderator's note: Turn 'em off if necessary. Psi is psi; exposure to all aspects of it is useful IMO, and anybody who gets far enough into RV eventually has their mind greatly expanded in this regard anyway. I think it is good for the list to have people with a variety of backgrounds on it. There are people on this list who've done more in the way of Tarot, scrying, dreamwork, OBEs, TM/meditation focus etc. than RV, and it's my feeling that such people often do better with RV as a result of that exposure and experience. Though I focus on RV (and to a lesser degree dowsing), the list's subtitle is 'Practical Psi...'. -- I want the list to have a focus on "practical psi and experiential development" -- that isn't limited to RV, that's just the normal focus. Your work with Ouija, with channeling, and with Silva, is plenty interesting to me, and to many others I am sure. FWIW... just fyi. - Palyne Reply | Forward

#1915

From: "Glyn" Date: Fri Jan 3, 2003 5:43 pm Subject: RE: Ouija (was Thoughts; 2003) gebega Thanks for that Sharon, it's very interesting.........as PJ said, '"psi is psi", and a hit is a hit no matter how it manifests itself :-)). We never got such astounding results unfortunately. I wish that we had concentrated more on asking sensible things that may, perhaps, have been validated like yours..instead of some of the silly stuff we did do. The questions I would ask now would be quite different. Ah well. PJ mentioned the Tarot, and I used to do that a lot too, and sometimes I still do, but I told my friends that I have stopped doing it now.. because I used to be inundated by love-life questions almost non stop. Agghh! I once told my sister I'd lost my cards, but she discovered them in my cupboard. LOL!! I use the 'Thoth' deck (Crowley's), its the only one I like. I usually ask myself a question (and do the same simple past/present/future spread every time..lack of imagination I guess :-)), and I let things just come into my mind when I look at each card. Sometimes I let the traditional meanings influence me consciously, and maybe look them up, but sometimes not. I can never remember all the meanings and nuances..but my sub can of course because I've read just about every Tarot book going :-). I don't care which way up they fall and don't hand the cards to the querant, if there is one, to shuffle or deal out. Sometimes I would ask the person just to think of their question and I would do a 'blind' reading. Now of course, I understand that I am using the designs on the cards to get info via my sub, but it has always amazed me how those who do concentrate on only using the traditional meanings.. can often have such great success.....now how does that happen? Surely it can't be the cards organising themselves at the shuffle stage?! What's going on there? Fascinating stuff. I have had some good results with the Tarot, but only broadly, never detailed...but there is someone (who I think may be on this list) who could really talk about the Tarot..if they wanted to. No names no pack-drill; I'll leave it up to them ;-)). I have often thought that it would be interesting to maybe use the Tarot in conjunction with an RV session. Regards, Glyn Reply | Forward

#1917

From: greenmn900... Date: Fri Jan 3, 2003 1:26 pm Subject: Re: Ouija (was Thoughts; 2003) greenmn900... Sharon, Those sound like awesome hits. :-) One of the nice things about the ouija board is that it's good for getting names, letters, and numbers - the very things RV is generally NOT good at. Just as RV is generally NOT good at "finding" things but dowsing IS. I think this makes it pretty apparent how valuable learning many different psi methods can be. It gives you many different tools for attacking any problem. Best Regards, Don Reply | Forward

#1921

From: "Glyn" Date: Fri Jan 3, 2003 7:20 pm Subject: RE: Ouija (was Thoughts; 2003) gebega Hi Don, Yes, it's becoming more and more apparent that combining these 'tools' (and finally laying to waste the 'supernatural' flim-flam that surrounds their use; which puts so many people off), may have the potential to produce some pretty amazing results. Regards, Glyn Reply | Forward

#1928

From: "Nita Hickok" Date: Sat Jan 4, 2003 3:38 am Subject: RE: Ouija (was Thoughts; 2003) nitahickok Hello Glyn I like using a set of rune stones. You make your own set by picking up stones you like and then painting the runes on them. You put them in a bag and when you have questions you shake them up and draw out the stones in the number you want. There are a number of books upon this. I have a tendancy to make the tarot cards come up the way I want them to but I don't seem to do that with the runes. Another scrying tool is a magic mirror. You take a mirror and coat it with camomile tea. Let it dry and energize the outside of the mirror in the way you want to do it. You can use prayer to ask to see what you want to observe. You then view it in the mirror. It takes clearing your mind but then the pictures show up in the mirror. All of these are old methods. Pyromancy is also interesting. You take a non-flammable bowl and put water in it. You then add a thin layer of wood alcohol or rubbing alcohol upon the top of it. You set it on fire and it shows the images of what you want to see. You pray or think what you want to see into the water before you set it on fire. These are all old methods and probably safer than the ouija board. Nita Reply | Forward

#1934

From: "intuitwolf " Date: Sat Jan 4, 2003 1:54 pm Subject: Re: Ouija (was Thoughts; 2003) intuitwolf > You take a mirror and coat > it with camomile tea. Does the tea give it a yellow cast to the color or somewhat distort the mirror? I'm going to have to try that one. Do you brew a really strong tea to do this? > Pyromancy is also interesting. > You take a non-flammable bowl and put water in it. You then add a > thin layer of wood alcohol or rubbing alcohol upon the top of it. a very thin layer! Children or people who tend toward pk experiences should not try this one :-) Thanks Nita, Shelia Reply | Forward

#1937

From: "Nita Hickok" Date: Sat Jan 4, 2003 3:18 pm Subject: Re: Re: Ouija (was Thoughts; 2003) nitahickok Hello Sheila Camomile tea is a universal condenser which concentrates the energy that is projected at it and produces a more visible result for the person trying to scry. It is the reason for the prayer or request before doing the scrying. It collects the energy and makes it easier for things to form and be seen. It should be a really strong tea. A interesting note to everyone. A simple witchcraft spell so psychic people can not see you involves two mirrors. You coat the shiny side with marigold tea with a prayer that anyone looking will only see themselves. You glue the mirrors together and hang them above the bed or wherever you want to protect. Nita Reply | Forward

#1920

From: greenmn900... Date: Fri Jan 3, 2003 1:47 pm Subject: Re: Ouija (was Thoughts; 2003) greenmn900... Glyn, > You Wrote: > "I have often thought that it would be > interesting to maybe use the Tarot in > conjunction with an RV session" My wife has been involved in Tarot cards for many years (btw, she uses the Crowley deck, too). Several years ago we did an experiment with the cards in a way that at least approaches RV protocol. I took the names of 10 of her friends and sealed each one in an envelope. Then I mixed them up and several days later, she began the experiment. She would pull an envelope at random and then do a card spread. At the end of her session, she would write down which one of her friends she thought it was based on the information she had gotten from the cards. When she had done all 10 envelopes, we opened them and she got her feedback. She was right 8 out of 10 times! I hadn't put much stock in the Tarot cards prior to this little experiment. It wasn't that I didn't think they worked, I just thought that the psychic is restricted by the cards that turn up and that somehow that MUST be a huge damper on accuracy. But after this experiment and then watching my wife use the cards over time, I changed my mind. I now think they work for most people as you described - they sort of give the reader something to occupy the conscious mind long enough for the subconscious to pass information into the reader's awareness. Because I've learned that most long-time card readers are like you and my wife, they use their own interpretation (which may change for the same card even in the same position when it's for different clients). Best Regards, Don. Reply | Forward

#1923

From: "Glyn" Date: Fri Jan 3, 2003 8:46 pm Subject: RE: Ouija (was Thoughts; 2003) gebega Hi Don, > > When she had done all 10 envelopes, we opened them > and she got her feedback. She was right 8 out of 10 times! Now that is impressive Don. I hope she does RV too. > I wouldn't mind having a try at that myself , > beats the heck out of love-life readings :-). > > I now think they work for most > people as you described - they sort of give the > reader something to occupy the conscious mind > long enough for the subconscious to pass information > into the reader's awareness. Well I was actually thinking along the lines of the designs on the cards helping with imagery....but what you say makes far more sense! I have been trained in only one structured method of doing RV (HRVG), so I can only speak for that, but I know that some of the thinking behind doing the various Stages in such a precise way is to keep the conscious mind occupied so psi can get through. It's the same thing isn't it? Yes, I think you're right. Regards, Glyn Reply | Forward

#1922

From: Richard Krankoski Date: Fri Jan 3, 2003 10:46 pm Subject: Re: Ouija (was Thoughts; 2003) Rich_crv > > At the risk of turning off the rest of the list, > I'll give you a couple of Ouija hits: I agree with PJ. Are you still doing ouija? If so, how about asking for your soul name? The reason I did way back in my one experience was that at that time I was heavy into Edgar Cayce who spoke of soul names and I was curious as to what would happen. Rich Reply | Forward

#1925

From: Richard Krankoski Date: Fri Jan 3, 2003 11:10 pm Subject: Re: Ouija (was Thoughts; 2003) Rich_crv Well, ok, Never mind my treasure hunt, lets go to work on the lotto. :) Rich > Glyn wrote: > Yes, it's becoming more and more apparent that combining these 'tools' (and > finally laying to waste the 'supernatural' flim-flam that surrounds their > use; which puts so many people off), may have the potential to produce some > pretty amazing results. Reply | Forward

#1927

From: Richard Krankoski Date: Fri Jan 3, 2003 11:18 pm Subject: Re: Ouija (was Thoughts; 2003) Rich_crv Hi Don, That's the kind of results that never seem to make it into controlled experiments. Every article I have read on Tarot experiments pretty much said something like: For any given reading most of the participants felt it applied to them. Or--- multiple readers gave varying data on one subject. Can anyone refer me to a book or article on successful Tarot experiments? Rich -------------------- Moderator's note: It occurs to me that Tarot, like i-ching, might be better for 'conceptual', 'contextual', 'relationship' and 'situationally predictive' data than the kind of physical info RV is usually trying to describe. Not sure but it seems like those are more the strong points of those arts. -- PJ Reply | Forward

#1931

From: "intuitwolf " Date: Fri Jan 3, 2003 11:56 pm Subject: Re: Ouija (was Thoughts; 2003) intuitwolf > Moderator's note: It occurs to me that > Tarot, like i-ching, might be > better for 'conceptual', 'contextual', > 'relationship' and > 'situationally predictive' data than the > kind of physical info RV is > usually trying to describe. Not sure > but it seems like those are > more the strong points of those arts. -- PJ Essentially you are right that these tend to work best in regard to relational data; but then, if you are looking for something (for instance a box of papers in the cellar buried under four layers of other boxes) then it can give you relational data that will help. I've used the IChing on several occasions to find things and it actually works better for me than dowsing. You just have to have a really open response set to the imagery in the reading. I've also used it to work the lottery (and have won some of the smaller Pick 3s and partials of the 5 and 6 number lotteries) - but that's a pretty complicated system involving the Yellow River Map and spreadsheets. :-) Shelia Reply | Forward

#1940

From: greenmn900... Date: Sat Jan 4, 2003 10:26 am Subject: Re: Ouija (was Thoughts; 2003) greenmn900... Glyn, >You Wrote: >"Now that is impressive Don. I hope she does RV too." Yeah, she really blows me away sometimes. Her readings with I-Ching seem to be even more accurate than her Tarot card readings - except when she does them on me. She rarely can do an accurate reading for me, probably because she's too close to the situarion she's inquiring about. My wife, Sheila, has done around 20 RV sessions (I just went to ask her because I couldn't remember). And some of them were excellent. One in particular is probably the single best session I've ever seen, a drawing that was almost an exact duplicate of the picture in the envelope. That particular one was somewhere around her 4th or 5th target. She does a form of ERV, like I do. She basically relaxes, clears her mind and meditates, waiting for the information to appear. I'd like to see her do a lot more RV, but she's just not interested. I think using the cards and the I-Ching have made it too easy for her to be very interested in RV, RV reqires a lot more work. So, I do the remote viewing and she does her stuff - we live in a very psychic household. lol. Best regards, Don Reply | Forward

#1944

From: greenmn900... Date: Sat Jan 4, 2003 10:52 am Subject: Re: Ouija (was Thoughts; 2003) greenmn900... Rich and PJ, Rich, can you point me to some experiments with Tarot Cards? I didn't know anyone had even researched them and I've always wondered, why not? Ours was pretty uncontrolled, and remember, we set it up so that she had to decide which of her friends from a list of ten matched which reading. So, she basically did the judging her self. I think there's lots of ways to set up better experiments. Like you siad, PJ, the kind of information one generally gets from Tarot-style readings doesn't lend itself to describing specific physical objects or locations. But they don't seem bad when it comes to events where humans are involved. One way to set up a good experiment might be like they did with mediums not long ago (where John Edward was one of the mediums) at some university, I can't recall who it was that did the study (was it the guy from the "Mobius" something-or-other?). If I recall correctly, the "target people" (who the readings were done for) gave a list of names of dead relatives and friends prior to the experiment. Then, after the readings, they looked to see how many of the mediums had named or described how many of the names from the people's lists. I think this style of experiment would work well for Tarot cards, the i-Ching, etc. Just have the "target people" give a list of brief descriptions of what's going on in their lives currently and then see how many of the Tarot card readings match up. The matching could even be done by a blind judge who otherwise doesn't take part in any aspect of the experiment. It could even be done doubleblind. I'd really like to see more research in these areas as I think all the forms of divination are every bit as valid as RV is. Warm Regards, Don Reply | Forward

#1945

From: greenmn900... Date: Sat Jan 4, 2003 11:14 am Subject: Re: Ouija (was Thoughts; 2003) greenmn900... Nita, > You Wrote: > "These are all old methods and probably > safer than the ouija board." I think you're probably right, but could you explain why you think they are safer, please? Safer in what way? I'm not trying to be challenging or anything, I'd just like to hear your thoughts in this area. Thanks. Best Regards, Don Reply | Forward

#1948

From: "Nita Hickok" Date: Sat Jan 4, 2003 6:44 pm Subject: Re: Ouija (was Thoughts; 2003) nitahickok Hello Don Ouija boards mainly link into the dead and people with mediumistic capabilities. Scrying links into clairvoyant talents and far seeing just like RV. There are no outside forces called upon unless you do a prayer and then you pick who you pray too. A common prayer would use God, angels or saints. Nita Reply | Forward

#1954

From: "Glyn" Date: Sun Jan 5, 2003 5:10 am Subject: RE: Ouija (was Thoughts; 2003) gebega Hi Nita and all, I don't know about linking to the dead, as this opens up a whole area rife with belief/non-belief..an interesting area, and one worthy of discussion......but for the present anyway, my main interest lies with areas of psi that can be easily verified, and what you say about linking to people with mediumistic capabilities when 'doing' Ouija rings a distinct bell (please excuse the pun LOL!). When my sister, mother, and I used to 'do' the Ouija years ago, we actually very rarely got 'messages' from those who considered themselves dead, or from beings who had never lived (as we know it) in the first place..............but we used to get lots from those who claimed to be people fast asleep, and they came from all over the world...and across time (which is quite significant). Some of the 'contemporary' ones even gave us phone numbers (but those we tried never worked, but we never looked further than modern phone directories), and addresses (which shamefully we never really followed up.....because we were not 'into' that sort of thing at the time). These 'conversations' would sometimes start off fairly sensibly, and then they would deteriorate badly. Sometimes it seemed as if we were talking to idiots, and sometimes children or childlike adults. Now, there are some theories that 'psi' happens because we are all connected on a deeper level. If that were indeed so, then the Ouija would be more easily explained. If during Ouija we 'tune' into those who are sleeping (in other altered states), it would be very rare to find someone who could communicate logically. Someone with mediumistic (psi) abilities would stand a better chance of having a logical 'conversation' while in that state (but like lucidity in dreams it would probably be extremely difficult to 'hold' onto for long...hence some of the garbage after a while). Most of the 'stuff' would be like trying to get sense out of people who are dreaming........yes, just like that! There could seem to be entities, discarnates, aliens, even the dead, because some sensible and even validatable stuff would come through, perhaps even sparking off visuals in participants more sensitive (maybe both 'sides' of the 'conversation'). Clairvoyant ability would be working on both 'ends of the Ouija phone', and linear time would not be a problem (as seems to be the case when using psi in RV), in fact it could be causing problems. Waking visuals and hallucinations could be 'sparked off' in the more sensitive (e.g. seeing ghosts/ hearing things). OK, this is total speculation on my part, but it is an area to explore, definitely, as it may contain pointers to how psi works. However we need to drop some of the old-fashioned thinking about Ouija. As for the PK activity (poltergeist activity) reported by some, well that deserves exploring too. Excuse the ramble and if a bit disconnected...........I got on a 'roll' there. LOL! Regards, Glyn Reply | Forward

#1956

From: "Glyn" Date: Sun Jan 5, 2003 6:11 am Subject: RE: Ouija (was Thoughts; 2003) gebega Hi Nita and all, I'm back again :-). I've been thinking about how we may be able to 'speak' to the dead, while using the Ouija. If my ideas (and those of many others no doubt) about people communicating on a subconscious level, (via psi), while using the Board are anywhere near the mark, and there are no linear time problems outside our normal conscious perception... then it would be quite possible to 'speak' to someone who although dead in our present time, would not be dead in the past where you 'speak' to them.. Being able to cross time 'barriers' and access information in the past could help to explain many things. We do it in RV, so we know it's possible, it's just that there may be a way of getting more 'inter-activity' via something like the Ouija, where we can use language more easily. What I am getting at here is that sometimes we may be mistaken. I am willing to believe that perhaps I could 'talk' to my mother by accessing her mind back in time, but if I can only communicate with her subconscious then I could get all sorts of garbage and make all sorts of deductions from that. Just think of some of the dreams we have...and the trouble we get during RV, and the stuff we can get from people who are hypnotised. My Mum's sub could convey that she was dead and sitting on a cloud...and I might believe it. I am not explaining myself very well, but I hope you get my drift. However....... could I talk to her in any situation she may be in *now* (hopefully not just sitting on a cloud :-) ? Obviously that depends on whether there really is an Afterlife....and that's where we start to get all the belief stuff coming into it and maybe messing up truth and fiction. If there is evidence of life after death mixed up in all the records of human experience then it may be hard to find because of that. Trying to confirm it will need some pretty level-headed experimentation, and absolutely no prior assumptions or belief system 'baggage'.......and that is the difficult bit..... End of ramble, your mail inspired so many thoughts Nita, thanks. :-). Cheers for now, Glyn ------------------------- Moderator's note: It's just evidence that it's all a matter of belief systems, I guess. I am perfectly OK with the idea of talking to the dead (though it does generally seem a bit pointless, unless they know where that gold is buried! LOL!), but an earlier post that mentioned the "universal condenser" of Camomile Tea and its energies made me smile. I think I have my own little box of "acceptable data," and no matter how possible or even logical something might be, if it isn't familiar in MY little box, it cracks me up! You guys just keep expanding my brain. It's good for me. :-) -- PJ Reply | Forward

#1969

From: Bill Pendragon Date: Tue Jan 7, 2003 4:28 pm Subject: RE: Time traveling ghosts docsavagebill Hi Glyn, I think a lot of RV scientists share your view that talking to the dead involves talking thru time to a then existant brain. I think the model of ARV inspired that viewpoint. However I don't agree.. I think if conciousness exists independent of the brain,..there is no reason to confine it at all to a brain in the past. It seems more reasonable to assume that it's everywhere and everytime ( the Matrix model). For instance Rob Abbott has several "spook" friends that pop in and talk and joke and have even have heated arguments with him. If they are having heated arguments about contemporary issues..it seems unnecessary to make a model that maintains ghosts are actually a now dead brain talking thru time ( and gleaning current knowledge thru time), when they were alive. In fact I'm not sure that those two cases could be experimentally separated. Occams razor etc....G. Best Regards Bill Reply | Forward

#1971

From: "Glyn" Date: Wed Jan 8, 2003 1:43 pm Subject: Theories of Life the Universe and Everything :-) gebega Hi Bill, (This is a long one best kept for when you have the time. Sorry, but sometimes I don't know where to stop, so I've changed the subject to keep it separate :-)) > From: Bill Pendragon > I think a lot of RV scientists share your view that > talking to the dead involves talking thru time to a > then existant brain. Well it's not really a set view of mine Bill, as I have quite a few others which are fighting amongst each other for supremacy; and I'm always adding more anyway :-). > I think the model of ARV inspired > that viewpoint. However I don't agree.. I think if > conciousness exists independent of the brain,..there > is no reason to confine it at all to a brain in the > past. If you mean by that consciousness may be 'held' (for lack of a better word), outside the brain, do you still think that consciousness is brain dependant in the first place(i.e. an individual consciousness is 'birthed' by an individual developing brain, even though 'held' separately), and if so, do you think that particular 'new' consciousness eventually becomes joins up with and becomes part of a collective consciousness...('Matrix')? Or....do you think along the lines of there being one consciousness in the first place...maybe a non-physical life-form...which uses physical bodies to express individuality (or for whatever reason...maybe has to). For an example (analogy) of what I mean (I expect you have seen something like this before, but for the benefit of others who haven't...and for me who needs to get it straight in my mind).... .... We may be like many computers (bodies with brains) which all run slightly different software (different brain-chemistry/personalities/mental abilities), and they are all connected (two way) to the same enormous database somewhere(the Matrix/group mind/Cosmic Consciousness/whatever),which contains the sum of all experience; although the individual machine/brain does not have the processing power to 'know' the full extent of the database. Throughout its existence each individual uses it's own brain for slightly different purposes, and it's experiences will be uploaded (by 'backdoor' software..maybe our subconscious) to augment the source database. When one computer goes down (an individual dies)there are always others being built (born), to carry on expanding the database. Bit long-winded and very simplistic that, but more or less explains one of my more favourite ideas :-). I think that what may be happening with 'psi' is that we (little individual machines), are sort of 'hacking' into parts of the main 'database'. LOL! Is however this 'sum of all experience'...conscious in its own right, and does it retain elements of the personality of the individual; for even a short time? That's another question(s) worth the pondering, but it's for sure that there's a lot more going on than mundane existence would lead us to believe. > It seems more reasonable to assume that > it's everywhere and everytime ( the Matrix model). For > instance Rob Abbott has several "spook" friends that > pop in and talk and joke and have even have heated > arguments with him. Interesting, I'd love to know more about that. Is this via something like the Ouija or does he actually see them? Have they confirmed that they were once alive? Can that be validated if recent? Are they waiting to be re-incarnated? What is time like for them compared to our perception of duration? What do they do when not visiting people? If you're on this list please tell us more about that Rob. > If they are having heated > arguments about contemporary issues..it seems > unnecessary to make a model that maintains ghosts are > actually a now dead brain talking thru time ( and > gleaning current knowledge thru time), when they were > alive. In fact I'm not sure that those two cases > could be experimentally separated. Occams razor > etc....G. I had to look that one up Bill because I am ashamed to say I didn't know what you meant. :-).............. ........................................................ Occam's Razor : is a principal of always preferring the simplest explanation of events to any other. The principal of Occam's razor is attributed to William of Occam, although there were philosophers before him that had previously employed its use. The principal states: "a person should not increase, beyond what is necessary, the number of entities required to explain anything, or that the person should not make more assumptions than the minimum needed. This principle is often called the principle of parsimony." The principal has played a major role in getting rid of fictitious or unnecessary elements from explanations since as far back as the Middle Ages. Bertrand Russell and other logicians got rid of traditional metaphysical concepts by employing the use of Occam's Razor. There is however some skepticism as to the extent to which the principal can be applied; especially regarding whether or not a person can determine without any doubt that the assumptions or given entities are not needed in an explanation. Source: Information taken from an extract in the Grolier Encyclopedia. ................................................................ I do like the third paragraph :-)) At the moment one man's (and woman's of course :-), idea/guess/hypothesis/theory about he workings behind 'psi' related phenomena is as valid as another's, (although some of the weirder ones seems to have got themselves bogged down a bit in 'paragraph 3 thinking'...but who am I to judge after that lot I have written above :-)...... and I agree that we are probably talking about the same thing here (I think that's what you were saying anyway :-), and must be very careful that we don't make it more complicated than it actually may be. However, the scientific approach has got to be the key. We must not go down the road of thinking that something may be even remotely like what it appears to be. :-). Hope you got this far ...;-)), Kind regards, Glyn Reply | Forward

#2006

From: Bill Pendragon Date: Sat Jan 11, 2003 1:32 am Subject: Re: to Glyn, Theories of Life the Universe and Everything :-) docsavagebill > ...do you still think that > consciousness is brain > dependant in the first place... Hi Glyn, Sorry I'm way behind on this list..G. I believe separate conciousness in a body is an illusion. Although I first read this in Buddist Hindu and Mystical Christian traditions..I never really believed it until doing RV and attending Rob's classes. Then it became very clear to me that we don't really go anywhere during RV we just "remember" another part of the Unity or Totality. Obviously difficult to prove.. but to me it's the simplist explanation of psi. The other models of a brain based psi..are all like the old Radio Model which doesn't fit with Electromagnetic tests of Psi. > Re Robs seeing ghosts.... What do they do when not > visiting people? > If you're on this list > please tell us more about that Rob. Hi Glyn, I don't think Rob is on this list. He doesn't spend a lot of time on the computer. He is on Stargate if you post a question to him he usually will answer in time. Rob sees ghosts almost every evening. Some are his friends and some are drop ins. He sees them as Auras without bodies, and hears and feels them..albeit with psi senses. Interestingly it was a "Spook" that taught Rob what he was experiencing as a child. He was seeing and perceiving so many psychic phenomenae, but his family in rural Idaho just wooped him for talking about it..G. Finally, a ghost came down and explained what he was perceiving.. and how to avoid woopings. The last class I took with Vivian two ghosts dropped in and Rob asked them to allow us to feel their auras. Which we all did.I was impressed at how respectfully Rob treated the entities. And he was constantly cautionaing us not to bump into them and jostle their auras. Rob has talked to many people that had messages for ones left behind and is often pestered with contact wishes from entities. . He has verified the contact 100's or 1000's of times. His current best ghost buddy...is much like a regular friend. Rob treats ghosts respectually but not at all like they are channels of infinite wisdom. What are they doing? Rob's ghost friends are not earth bound ghosts. They come and go from their "ghost worlds" at will. And drop in to visit Rob or other sensitives..Rob says people doing psychic activity including RV shine in the astral world as a bright light..and astral beings frequently come to investtigate..such as at Robs last class. I must say that John Edwards show best describes Rob's experiences with Ghosts are like. > Hope you got this far ...;-)), Here's the PROOF GLYN! Hugs, Bill Reply | Forward

#1973

From: "Bo Kindstrand <031-7115905...om>" <031-7115905...om> Date: Wed Jan 8, 2003 4:28 am Subject: Re: Time traveling ghosts bokindstrand Hi Bill! Isn't it more accurate to view it as it is, you are talking to someone that has no brain anymore. That's on characteristic that an OBE share with the dead, that you leave your brain behind you. In the first case on the pillow and in the second permanently in your leftbehind body. Consciousness does exist without the brain as you point out. Brain semmes to constitute some sort of voluntarily limitation imposed on the Consciousness during lifetime, so it can experience and operate in the three dimensional world. I suppose there is some sort of meaning in this for all of us, or if not perhaps the one responsible for this great show is having a real good time! Bo Reply | Forward

#1947

From: "Linda & John Garvey" Date: Sat Jan 4, 2003 4:24 pm Subject: RE: Ouija (was Thoughts; 2003) linda_g7us > Nita wrote >Another scrying tool is a magic mirror. You take a mirror and coat >it with camomile tea. Let it dry and energize the outside of the >mirror in the way you want to do it. You can use prayer to ask to see >what you want to observe. You then view it in the mirror. >It takes clearing your mind but then the pictures show up in the >mirror. All of these are old methods. Hi Nita -- Now this really does appeal to me. I am going to buy some chamomile tea this afternoon and try it. I have had some success with scrying, using amethyst crystals. Thank you -- Linda G "The distinction between past, present and future is only an illusion, even if a stubborn one." -- Albert Einstein -- Reply | Forward

#1950

From: Richard Krankoski Date: Sat Jan 4, 2003 10:45 pm Subject: Re: Ouija (was Thoughts; 2003) Rich_crv > Moderator's note: It occurs to me that Tarot, > like i-ching, might be better for 'conceptual', > 'contextual', 'relationship' and 'situationally > predictive' data than the kind of physical info > RV is usually trying to describe. Not sure but > it seems like those are more the strong points > of those arts. -- PJ Is that like saying 30% of the data applies to 30% of the targets? or.... there are 12 adjectives that apply to 90% of all targets? Rich Reply | Forward

#1953

From: "Nita Hickok" Date: Sun Jan 5, 2003 10:39 am Subject: Re: Ouija (was Thoughts; 2003) nitahickok Hello Rich You would have to try a couple of the methods to experiment. Then you would have to ask the questions and decide what good you think the methods are for what you do or are doing. It is always up to the individual to decide what is best to accomplish what they want with what methods. It just might fill in some of the gaps in information. Nita Reply | Forward

#1982

From: "PJ Gaenir " Date: Thu Jan 9, 2003 11:51 am Subject: Re: Ouija (was Thoughts; 2003) dennanm > > I'd written: > > Moderator's note: It occurs to me that Tarot, > > like i-ching, might be better for 'conceptual', > > 'contextual', 'relationship' and 'situationally > > predictive' data than the kind of physical info > > RV is usually trying to describe. Not sure but > > it seems like those are more the strong points > > of those arts. -- PJ > Rich K wrote: > Is that like saying 30% of the data applies to 30% of the targets? No, but since that's demonstrably so in research, there we have it. Of course it is difficult that situationally targets are probably even more often alike than physically, in terms of what could be said about then that one could, on feedback, 'find a way to make it fit'. > or.... there are 12 adjectives that apply to 90% of all targets? LOL, maybe so. But no, I actually feel there is real value to most divinatory arts, done properly and intelligently that is (even RV, without those qualifications, ceases to be worthwhile!). But you have to consider that measurement is affected by the tool. Just like until the dark field microscope, in order to see certain things, we had to kill it, stain it, and stick it under an electron microscope. So a whole lot of fascinating and even profound things were not seen, because our tool and our method for looking greatly biased what we _could_ see -- and _how_ we would see things when we could. In psi research, there really needs to be a sort of right/wrong sort of answer to things. You really cannot measure, let alone calculate statistics based on results, "amorpheous" or "generalized" results. One reason psi research was often picked on is because no matter how logical and factual and automated the process got, there was always a 'judge' needed, and it didn't matter who it was or even if four different people did it and the results were averaged -- still, it was a "subjective" decision. The non-psi scientists hated that because it was subjective, and science as a field in our culture (not necessarily fundamentally) is the very process of attempted objectivity. The psi scientists are frustrated because if Decision Augmentation Theory holds up -- which in a nutshell says the psi for a correct decision in judging is just as likely to be the judge's psi as the viewer's (like people doing tarot or tea leaves, grafting the info/patterns onto whatever witness -- physical medium -- is the focus, such as the judged session -- is in front of them), then the inability to actually PREVENT psi in the process (on the part of the judges) makes the entire process of allegedly judging the psi of the psychics somewhat arbitrary and maybe even pointless! This goes for the study of psi as an entire field -- some researchers seem "psi conducive" and some aren't, this is referred to as "experimenter effect", and it seems to affect psi research more than anything else (but it does in fact affect other fields as well of course). This creates an impossible loop, if you think through trying to resolve it. Like: OK, so we judge a psychic's session, but maybe the psychic is doing well or not based on the psi or the belief systems of the person (s) "leading" the experiment. Or maybe the session accuracy is really up to the judge in any case and it is their psi. So maybe we should be testing either the scientist or the judge instead of the psychic, for psi! OK, we make them the psychic. Now to run it we have to have a scientist, and we have to measure which requires a judge.... it's a loop! The current pre-stimulus response experimental series that May and Spottiswoode are doing, although not the first research along these lines, is the first done with the current method and analysis; it's really the first totally non-subjective psi research on individuals, and stands a good chance of getting a whole lot more attention and credit than most any psi research in quite awhile. Anyway I'm getting off track here. The point of all this was that in my view, it is difficult to test things like tarot or i-ching in "a controlled situation with an objective measure (or even a subjective measure that was controlled enough to result in a generally objective statistic)." Their strength is in aspects of data that are a little more difficult to nail down than most physical targets. I said difficult though, not impossible. One could certainly select a target pool that is as intelligently designed as the current research RV pools are, where targets are in categories, and a category is randomly selected, and then an item within that category is randomly selected, several, and then these are presented for the judging to compare to the session (already done), and THEN one of those items is randomly selected and assigned as the target. To study tarot or i-ching, I think one could choose targets with specific events, or contexts, or relationship issues, that these methods are likely to be able to get decent information about. For example, I would expect a session in either art to make my choice between, say, a plane crash vs. a Miss America contest to probably be clear -- even if the data was symbolic, still I'd think that OFTEN (not always) such disparate targets could be chosen from. However it'd leave us in the same boat with the experimenter and the judge. :-) PJ Reply | Forward

#1958

From: greenmn900... Date: Sun Jan 5, 2003 8:20 am Subject: Re: Ouija (was Thoughts; 2003) greenmn900... Nita, I tend to agree that Ouija boards involve something different than what is occurring with scrying, clairvoyance, or RV. I have nothing to back this up other than the experiences others have told to me, but their stories are coupled with a strong feeling I have about staying away from them. So I do. Best regards, Don Reply | Forward

#1968

From: Bill Pendragon Date: Tue Jan 7, 2003 4:40 pm Subject: Re: Ouija (was Thoughts; 2003) docsavagebill Hi Don, You remind me of Bevy Jaeggers..G . I always argued with her about this. My limited experiences with Ouiga boards were all fun and never negative. But I know others have had problems. Perhaps there is such an overall world wife BELEIF about Ouiga boards that using one automatically connects one to some questionable gateways. Bill Reply | Forward

#1970

From: greenmn900... Date: Wed Jan 8, 2003 1:30 pm Subject: Re: Ouija (was Thoughts; 2003) greenmn900... Hi Bill, I don't really have much experience with Ouija boards at all. I'm mostly going by what I've read and what others have told me about their bad experiences. But there's another reason I stay away from Ouija boards that's a little more personal. Ever since I was a child I've dealt with unwanted and unexpected apparitions off and on (I only recently learned my little sister does, too), so I tend to be little on the careful side when it comes to these kinds of issues. I think I'm what people used to call a "sensitive". I can perceive energies, whether positive or negative (I'd bet most of the people on this list do the same thing), but the negative ones are the most impacting. Some "entities" (for lack of a better term) have a vibration that feels just utterly evil. Ouija boards give me that same feeling - so I stay away from them. But I don't feel that I know enough about them to counsel other people on what to do. To each his own... When this topic came up, I remembered I had a book on the Ouija board packed away somewhere. Last night I went out to the garage and rifled through a bunch of boxes until I found it - then I stayed up all night reading, lol. It's a small but really good book, very balanced and open minded and full of opinions from different people in the parapsychology field. It also has a lot of case histories. It's called "Ouija, The Most Dangerous Game", by Stoker Hunt, published by Harper & Row, 1985. Despite the biased-sounding title, it's really a very balanced approach to the subject. It said that the origins of the ouija board are very ancient. Apparently, there were forms of it in use in China prior to 479 B.C., in Rome in the 3rd century A.D., and Pythagoras in Greece in 550 B.C. encouraged his students to use a Ouija-like device to unearth revelations "from the unseen world". One thing the book brought out that I guess I had forgotten is the amazingly high number of famous channelers and automatic writers that began with a Ouija board before graduating to the abilities they later became known for. People like Jane Roberts ("Seth"), Pearl Curran ("Patience Worth"), and Pulitzer Prize-winning James Merrill, who says his lengthiest poetic work, "The Changing Light at Sandover" (which is a 3-volume trilogy) was co-written with communications he received from a Ouija board. Two parts of that trilogy, which was released in small sections or books, won literary awards. I DID find something in the book that kind of clicked with me regarding a possible reason people seem to encounter evil or mischevious entities when using Ouija boards, so much more so than with other forms of divination. Apparently the company that first made the boards in America, The Baltimore Talking Board Company, went to court against the IRS. The IRS claimed the boards were games, and therefore taxable. Arguing for the Ouija board company, Allen Fisher said, "...We contend that it is a form of amateur mediumship and not a game or sport. By means of this board one is enabled to get in touch with the other side." Another attorney, Washington Bowie, described the board as "a medium of communication between this world and the next". Could it be possible that the intentions of the manufacturer of the ouija board has some effect on how it works? Of course psychology calls it "automatism" and claims the information is coming from the subconscious, parapsychologists agree; with the exception that under those conditions psi-information is available as well as communicating with the dead. But I wonder if the manufacturers' intentions have any impact? A very interesting idea I found in this book is to use the planchette from a Ouija board for map-dowsing! It *should* work just like the pendulum. Since I'm not a very good dowser ("not very good" - actually, I suck, lol!), I'm considering making a planchette-type device myself and seeing if it doesn't work better than the pendulum. An intersting idea, I thought. I wish I could just download this book and email it to all you guys. It's really very good. Best Regards, Don ---------------------------- Moderator's note: Merrill's 'The Changing Light at Sandover' is one of the most amazing books. I've had it half-read for about 15 years. The book is nearly an "epic poem" in a way. The entire thing is written based on Ouija communications, as well as a sort of prosic-poetic journal narrative of Merrill's life. He was a homosexual and a lot of people are put off by the fact that he was obviously in a relationship with another man. But I found the book simply mind boggling. He talks about a lot of personal stuff (like his mate's serious health issues) as well as all his own reaction to what was happening with them. I was getting to a point in the book where the entities in SOME cases were frankly beginning to remind me of some of the things I've heard about The Urantia Book. -- A channeled work. Unfortunately, although I have that book, it is the singularly most BORING book on earth, at least the first part of it. If you took the biblical "and X begat Y" and you assigned to it politics instead of genetics, and you imagined the largest, most insanely bureaucratic government possible if you had a whole universe to govern, and then someone wrote a book detailing every damned position and authority -- that's the Urantia book. I've had people tell me some stuff in it correlates with some of my 'Bewilderness' stuff, but I have yet to find anything in the book about this. I guess the Noshaimus are discussed... somewhere... but I didn't have the fortitude to keep reading to find it. :-) 'The Changing Light at Sandover' is NOT for the faint of heart. It is probably the most dense, slow reading book -- and it's the size of a tome -- imaginable. -- PJ pjrv : Messages : 1935-2054 of 4038
(http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pjrv/messages/1935?)
23:39:26
~~--------ArchivedPostFollows_Yahoo-PJRV_group---------

#1935

From: Timelord2029... Date: Sat Jan 4, 2003 9:42 am Subject: Re: Re: Ouija (was Thoughts; 2003) psitrooper24 Hmmm interesting discussion. Ive always wanted to at least TRY using a quija board but cant find the the courage to use one:) I dont believe in dabling so i probably will never use one until i know HOW it works and what the dangers are. Recently (two days ago) i saw a movie called "Long Time Dead" british film made 2 years ago. All the actors died at the hands of a gin or jin or whatever it was they "summoned" from the beyond using a quija board. Ive read postive acounts of quija uses such as the book Messages From Michael (channeled work all from a quija board) My wife doesent want anything to do with a quija board as she has seen the effects from college students who messed with it. Is this a belief thing here or are entities actually being summoned from our own imagination.? How does this really work and is it as dangerous as people make out? Peace, Tunde Reply | Forward

#1938

From: "Nita Hickok" Date: Sat Jan 4, 2003 3:20 pm Subject: Re: Re: Ouija (was Thoughts; 2003) nitahickok Hi Tunde I personally have seen the havoc that ouija boards can cause people. It all depends upon your stability and control but I basically agree with your wife. I don't have one in my house and a lot of other things can be used to get the same results that don't have the dangers of a ouija board. I used one when I was a teenager and my sister had a really bad experience with it. Nita Reply | Forward

#1939

From: "Sharon Webb" Date: Sat Jan 4, 2003 3:21 pm Subject: Re: Re: Ouija (was Thoughts; 2003) sharwebb_30512 Tunde, It's a belief thing. I'm sure of this. If you expect demons, you get demons...and that's true of many events that have nothing to do with Ouija boards. I don't think it's dangerous. At least it hasn't been for me and I started with the Ouija when I was about five years old. (Don't use it anymore, but that's not because of fear.) I _think_ one of the problems with it, besides bad press, is that it is marketed as a "game." It is possible to get in touch with all sorts of beings and entities, but if you approach it as a game...and add to that drugs or drink...then you might run into some problems. It is simply a focus. The Ouija is a piece of wood with a plastic counter. Nothing more. There is nothing intrinsic within it to cause the sort of fear that many have. It is not "evil." Fear is due to beliefs, and, I am a believer in "you create your own reality." If you believe in ghoulies and ghosties and long-legged beasties and things that go bump in the night, then you will manifest them. It is a focus no different than tarot, or scrying mirrors, or contemplating your navel, or determining the mushiness of the paper under your pencil point. :-) Sharon sharwebb...net www.fractalus.com/sharon Reply | Forward

#1942

From: greenmn900... Date: Sat Jan 4, 2003 11:07 am Subject: Re: Re: Ouija (was Thoughts; 2003) greenmn900... Chris, > You Wrote: > "As the new kid on the block (Kid? Who am I > kidding?) please excuse any lapses in group etiquette." Welcome aboard! That was a great story. I know a few people and have read of many more who became the victim of poltergeist phenomena soon after becoming involved with ouija boards. These kinds of occurrences seem somewhat unique to this one method of divination for some reason. My theory is that it's because most people who use ouija boards are specifically trying to communicate with some other entity. Whereas, in most other forms of divination, they are not. This may also be the reason for so much non-sensical information coming from them, too. I don't know. > You Wrote: > "As a group you speak of skills way beyond my level." We might be a bit misleading here. I often talk about specific sessions with unique or advanced kinds of data that were amazing hits. It's important to remember that those kinds of things don't happen all the time and some of them are really pretty rare. I guess we talk about those kinds of things because it gets pretty boring talking about misses, lol! So, we probably all sound better than we really are. I know that even though I've made vast improvements over the last 4 years, I still have complete misses all the time. In fact, about 25-35% of all my sessions are misses, and then there's an additional amount where I've just barely made target contact. We all have to start somewhere and I think we all can make incredible progress through consistent, quality practice. So don't feel alone, none of us are perfect and all of us were in exactly the same place you are now. Good luck and it's nice to have you as part of the group. Best Regards, Don Reply | Forward

#1955

From: "chriscordenuk " Date: Sun Jan 5, 2003 1:10 pm Subject: Re: Ouija (was Thoughts; 2003) chriscordenuk Thanks for the welcome Don. You wrote: > I know a few people and have read of many more who > became the victim of poltergeist phenomena soon after becoming > involved with ouija boards. These kinds of occurrences seem > somewhat unique to this one method of divination for some reason. > My theory is that it's because most people who use ouija boards are > specifically trying to communicate with some > other entity. Whereas, in most other forms of > divination, they are not. > This may also be the reason for so much non-sensical > information coming from them, too. I don't know. Do you see the basement incident as poltergeist activity? I rather felt as if I was there, in that time. Or still asleep! I have had one other definate occasion when I time shifted in broad daylight while sitting in a parked car. However this involved looking at a building in a clearly defined area. At other times it has been possible to gain the 'impression' of people who would have been there. At times just as shadowy costumed shapes. It's possible I just have a vivid imagination! As for the other incident with the sheets of paper that fell like lead. That certainly has the poltergeist hallmark. However there was a follow up. I had kept the sheets of paper for a number of years and was going to throw them away during a clear out. In case they held any latent power I decided that rather than bin them I would burn them. When put on the fire they burnt very quickly with an unnatural pinky/blue flame. Again I include this information without any further comment, other than to say it seemed to be a perfectly ordinary bonfire. And perhaps to observe that over the years I have learnt to avoid the word impossible. Chris Reply | Forward

#1943

From: "Linda & John Garvey" Date: Sat Jan 4, 2003 4:13 pm Subject: Re: Re: Ouija (was Thoughts; 2003) linda_g7us > Nita wrote > I used one when I was a teenager and my > sister had a really bad > experience with it. I would not have anything to do with ouija boards. In the 1960s, a couple of years before my husband John and I met, he and a few of his buddies decided to use a ouija board to get answers to some questions, etc. They did not believe in spirits or anything like that, much less call upon any. They ended up having a terrifying experience nonetheless. Forget it. I will stick with the safer methods. So, Tunde, John and I, too, agree with your wife, and with Nita. :) Linda G "The distinction between past, present and future is only an illusion, even if a stubborn one." -- Albert Einstein -- Reply | Forward

#1962

From: greenmn900... Date: Mon Jan 6, 2003 9:12 am Subject: Re: Re: Ouija (was Thoughts; 2003) greenmn900... Hi Chris, > You wrote: > "Do you see the basement incident as poltergeist activity?" Probably not. But the papers feeling very heavy sure sounds like it. Without having been there, it's hard for me to have a definite opinion. I have noticed though, that poltergeist phenomena following the consultation of a ouija board seems to be a strangely common experience for a lot of people. It doesn't seem to happen when people consult other kinds of oracles. I played with a ouija board only once, witha group of friends when I was about 12 years old. Nothing happened and we had no strange experiences afterward either, so all I have to go on is what I've heard or read about from others. Best Regards, Don Reply | Forward

#1985

From: greenmn900... Date: Thu Jan 9, 2003 7:51 am Subject: Re: Re: Ouija (was Thoughts; 2003) greenmn900... PJ, > you wrote: > "One reason psi research was often picked on is because no matter how > logical and factual and automated the process got, there was always > a 'judge' needed, and it didn't matter who it was or even if four > different people did it and the results were averaged -- still, it > was a "subjective" decision. > The non-psi scientists hated that because it was subjective, and > science as a field in our culture (not necessarily fundamentally) is > the very process of attempted objectivity." How does this relate to other, more accepted fields? Is there any way to "prove" the mental state of hypnosis that satisfies non-psi scientists? How about generally-held theories in the areas of psychology and sociology? It seems to me they are every bit as subjective in evaluation as psi is, and yet they are generally accepted. I don't know anything about these areas, but I know you are well-versed in hypnosis. I wonder is psi is being held to a higher standard than any of the other "soft" sciences. I was thinking of the results on insane patients' behavior when they used to do frontal lobotomies. From what I understand they don't do them anymore. Wasn't the evaluations of patients that swung this decision a very subjective one? What hard proof is there to back-up the idea of mental states such as schizophrenia or psychosis? Isn't it all based on very subjective evaluations of patient behavior? is subjectivity held as a strike against the evidence for psi but not for anything else? Warm Regards, Don --------------------------- Moderator's note: No. That is one reason psychology is a so-called 'soft science' while neurology is a 'hard science'. Some scientists in parapsychology say they would like to change the name, that the name itself infers a great deal about it all, and that there is no reason to model after psychology when that field has been an abysmal failure in so many regards. But of course, psychologists don't feel that way about it, lol. PJ Reply | Forward

#2048

From: Weatherly-Hawaii...m Date: Thu Jan 16, 2003 2:13 pm Subject: Re: Re: Ouija (was Thoughts; 2003) maliolana Aloha Sharon, }It's a belief thing. I'm sure of this. If you expect demons, you get demons...and that's true of many events that have nothing to do with Ouija boards.( That is my experience exactly...I never had any problems with the board...It is only a tool...same as tarot/I ching/runes...which I have also used for 3 or more decades... I did have one friend that went over the deep end though...She was told that she would marry her boyfriend and that he would have her committed to an insane asylum...and divorce her...and so she proceeded to loose her mind...and was committed to an asylum...and of course he dumped her before that..she never did get married... None of my other friends had this problem...Of course after that...I worried about the other people I might be doing it with...so stopped......but I do have two boards still in my posession...as well as my Iching coins and tarot cards... I also believe it has everything to do with ones belief systems...I have not believed in the devil for many years...so...I do not see things along that line... although I do have a few lessor selves...that need a lot of work and occasionally get stupid...hahah...but none of them are evil......or paranoid of evil...just a bit still in the ruff... The only way I can see how a board might be dangerous ...is if it perhaps belonged to someone that practiced doing nefarious stuff to others with it...Perhaps their vibes are still attached...but in that case ...it could just be washed/purified... and actually I was always taught... this was a good practice to do with most things ...when they have belonged to another person...to get their vibes off it... Love & Light & Laughter Mali'o...aka...Dawn [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Reply | Forward

#2049

From: "Sharon Webb" Date: Thu Jan 16, 2003 10:20 pm Subject: Re: Re: Ouija (was Thoughts; 2003) sharwebb_30512 Dawn, I do believe it is all beliefs, but beliefs can be dangerous. In order to explain what I'm about to say, I need to give a bit of background. Three times and ONLY three times in my life, when I have been giving readings...or what have you...I have "heard" a very commanding voice. It is a quiet voice, and yet intense. So intense that it INSTANTLY gets my attention. It calls itself Control. And I have tried many times to ask more about just what the nature of "Control" is, but each time I have fallen asleep before I got an answer. Anyway, I was at a science fiction convention, and we were playing with tarot cards, and palm readings. One woman who lived in town said that she would bring a Ouija board the next night...and we would try it out with a guy named Charlie. Now, Charlie was a self-avowed skeptic...but we all felt that he was a bit stiff and could use a bit of "unbending." We thought it would be fun, so the woman promised to bring the board. As soon as she left, "Control" popped in. Now each time this has happened it has been to ward off possible "harm" to someone else. The voice said, "This is Control. Under no circumstances allow Charlie to use the board." That was it. But it was something I just couldn't ignore. And then it came to me WHY. Charlie was SUPPOSEDLY an agnostic and skeptic. But he came from a very religious family and his father was a minister and his agnosticism was largely posturing. I suddenly realized, with a chill, that if he were to use the board, DUE TO HIS BELIEFS, he would become possessed. So...I headed off the woman...and we never exposed Charlie to the Ouija. Sharon sharwebb...net www.fractalus.com/sharon Reply | Forward

#2054

From: Weatherly-Hawaii...m Date: Fri Jan 17, 2003 9:20 pm Subject: Re: Re: Ouija (was Thoughts; 2003) maliolana Aloha Sharon, }That was it. But it was something I just couldn't ignore. And then it came to me WHY. Charlie was SUPPOSEDLY an agnostic and skeptic. But he came from a very religious family and his father was a minister and his agnosticism was largely posturing. I suddenly realized, with a chill, that if he were to use the board, DUE TO HIS BELIEFS, he would become possessed.{ I feel the same way...One must be careful turning people onto alternate realities ...they are not equipped to handle...especially because of latent/repressed fears... can be very deadly ...to a vulnerable persons psyche... I always tell anyone that I do the I-Ching or tarot for (freebees) that I am just reading the cards for them...The cards are handled by them and I just interpret and incourage them to 'help me' inter- pret them...... I also tell them they do not need to tell me their question...Just to meditate a few moments ...get their question clear...specific...so the answers will be clear/specific as well...and then to warm/give energy/ put their mana...on the coins/cards... they are holding... before they throw/lay them down...They always seem real pleased...so I guess it worked?...haha I also show them how to set it up/make/figure/count the diagrams for themselves if they are interested...just as my friends taught me... I still read them the book version before I try to interpret...haha...everytime... after all these years you would think I would have it memorized...hahah... and then I encourage them to analyze the cards...tell themselves what they see and how it applies to their question...I don't really think it is me per se... I think it is just intuition...on my part...much like your control...except not quite as life saving... Lots of folks seem to think they have worked through their problems with their childhood religion and deep down have truly never let go...In spite of what they tell themselves... I was lucky...I began working that out in puberty...piece by piece...over the years...I revisited my belief systems...and still do...I guess I finally attained true agnosticism...(except I am partial to pagan values ...other than idolatry/ sacrifice/etc.... haha)...Never did like the devil stories...even when I was a believer... Love & Light & Laughter Mali'o...aka...Dawna

// 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