General

Re: Remote Viewing - Real?

limitgov — Tue, 04 Sep 2012 02:20:32 GMT

Major Ed Dames says he mainly works with FBI and police to help find missing children.

When you remote view, you don't get back nice text....you get images and sensory data. So, you get images of a location and you have to pay attention to details to figure out what the location is. And in cases like missing children, I would assume you have to have several remote viewers hit the target blind to ensure the data is 100% accurate.

Re: Remote Viewing - Real?

Malachi — Mon, 03 Sep 2012 01:27:14 GMT

Is he *bonded* or does he have evercore managing money that he controls through a legal vehicle named after himself? Where does evercore attest to jref financial holdings? I searched their website, didnt see anything.

Re: Remote Viewing - Real?

nirgrahamUK — Mon, 03 Sep 2012 01:16:31 GMT

>>maybe if he was serious he would be bonded by a third party?

like the evercore trust company? and its not *his* money, its JREF's money, which accrued through donations...

Re: Remote Viewing - Real?

Malachi — Mon, 03 Sep 2012 00:54:27 GMT

I guess at some point you have to do your own research. But if I was going to use a given "skeptic" as a shortcut by allowing him to debunk stuff so I dont have to, I would research that person.

edited to add, I'm not trying to be abrasive. Its just how you can see that a guy like ingo swann has made plenty of money training people to do things that supposedly dont exist, and theres data on him, you can look it up and interpret it how you want. But some entertainer has an act as a skeptic, and he makes money "performing" by appearing to debunk claims in an environment he exerts control over (seriously watch his show, its structured similarly to a magic act), its not scientific, its not rigorous, and its not controlled, but its ok for hm to claim he has a million dollars somewhere, that he wont show anybody, and he claims he is willing to give it up...maybe if he was serious he would be bonded by a third party?

I agree it comes down to who you are willing to trust, so I wonder if we trust some people too much and others not enough?

Re: Remote Viewing - Real?

nirgrahamUK — Mon, 03 Sep 2012 00:47:16 GMT

I don't believe that but I believe proponents of remote-viewing would say that. so there we are I guess.

Re: Remote Viewing - Real?

Malachi — Mon, 03 Sep 2012 00:20:34 GMT

Probably because Randi doesnt have the money and refuses to entertain a fair contest.

Re: Remote Viewing - Real?

nirgrahamUK — Mon, 03 Sep 2012 00:08:53 GMT

Is there a reason they wouldnt try to claim the Randi prize?

Re: Remote Viewing - Real?

Malachi — Sun, 02 Sep 2012 23:14:55 GMT

http://biomindsuperpowers.com/Pages/intro.html

Re: Remote Viewing - Real?

limitgov — Sun, 02 Sep 2012 22:48:50 GMT

"who are these ex-military any links to videos or anything? branch of military? "

Major Ed Dames is one.....Army....

Re: Remote Viewing - Real?

Malachi — Wed, 29 Aug 2012 23:06:16 GMT

I would love to hear the reasons behind your opinion, Consumariat.

Re: Remote Viewing - Real?

Consumariat — Wed, 29 Aug 2012 23:04:53 GMT

Remote Viewing - Real?

No.

Re: Remote Viewing - Real?

Malachi — Wed, 29 Aug 2012 22:57:50 GMT

Search "Ingo swann"

his website has lots of free info and study guides.

Re: Remote Viewing - Real?

grant.w.underwood — Wed, 29 Aug 2012 22:19:28 GMT

who are these ex-military any links to videos or anything? branch of military? Also this is occuring now or many years ago?

Remote Viewing - Real?

limitgov — Wed, 29 Aug 2012 22:07:47 GMT

Several ex-military people have talked about remote viewing on coast to coast. And most of them now teach their own students how to remote view.

The protocols for most remote viewing is to remote view blind. What that means, is that the remote viewer is just given a string of random alphanumeric characters. They are not told what the target is. The monitor knows the target and has the alphanumeric string of characters tied to the target. And the unconcsious mind knows this as well. The reason is so the concisous mind will not know the target and cannot influence imagination. They need actual remote viewing data, not imagination data.

Now, I don't know about you, but if these people are hitting targets and they are hitting them blind and they occasionally throw in practice targets to make sure they are getting good data.

Sounds real to me.