firedocs archives

Public Viewer Email Group
Archive 004
.


This is an archive file of the public Viewer [VWR] email list. This list is sponsored by the private Viewer Forum, hosted by Paradigm Systems and Design, and owned and operated by PJ Gaenir. It is dedicated to discussion of the practical aspects, theories and experience of formal psychic methodologies such as Controlled Remote Viewing, and independent efforts by the public interested in working under the formal RV protocol (the set of rules which define "remote viewing" as the term was coined in a science lab). You can find details, rules, and a form for joining the email group here. The list is moderated during operation and archiving. I remove last names and detail locations of contributors (within the archives) for privacy, and signatures for space conservation. I have added notes marking the posts from former U.S. intelligence remote viewers. Archiving of posts is done manually and may not include all posts.

This is the fourth archive.


APRIL 10 1997 TO APRIL 17 1997
BEGIN ARCHIVE 4

To all VWR,

What a blessing these two gentlemen, Lyn & Paul are. It is fascinating to "view" the interaction between those "baby viewers" and these two masters. I commend both for their time & energy and devotion to seed CRV into the future of mankind. Bravo! It is also heartening to see the passion and dedication of PJ. Surely, she will become a RV master in her own right. Great is the teacher whose students surpass the master.

These two guys are treasures. Learning RV at their feet would be like learning to fly after WWI from Eddie Rickenbacker or Frank Luftberry.

PJ, thanks once again for providing this forum.

vic


<<Does the shielding just come from on the job training - such as emergency medical technicians or police get who are constantly exposed to potentially traumatic experiences. Is it a sort of 'desensitization or is there a discipline which comes with time either through training or experience.

Let me clip a portion of Paul's very good response to another of Nancy's threads: [edited]

The CRV process and training includes two things related to this question of "shielding": one is the training which helps you see things you would not normally see because you automatically and naturally shield yourself from seeing them. Then, there are other parts of the CRV training and structure which help you deal with the things, once you have dropped your shielding and face them. Above all that, experience at facing things you would not want to face helps you face them again. It does, in effect, desensitize you to them to a degree, but never completely. At some point(s) you have to fall back on the built-ins of the CRV process.

<<I know that this isn't directly related to CRV, and I hope this stays within the scope of our group:

This thread IS<<< directly related to the very central core of CRV: the fact that it was created not as a neat thing to understand humans better, but that it was created for the express purpose of being applications-oriented. In application, it must work, and to make it work, the fact that it is done by humans has to be taken into consideration. Those humans are sometimes tasked to view things they don't want to view, and things that they would never view unless given the proper tools and the proper training to use those tools. CRV is not a "lie back, close your eyes and let it happen" type of thing. It's entire purpose is to be usable when needed. Like other tools, it is mainly needed to fix something. If it won't work under the worst conditions of need, then .... well, like the commercial says, "You can buy cheap tools every few years, or you can buy a Craftsman once."

<<Does one's will factor into effective shielding?

I have another view on this whole "shielding" thing. While there are some targets I would want to be shielded from (everyone has something they won't face), I think that the automatic use of shielding against any and all emotional or "painful" contact with the site is ill advised. There are some things you can't know about a person until you have felt his/her pain and suffering. There are some thing you can't know about an event or activity until you have felt the good and the bad<<< parts of being there. If you constantly shield yourself from the suffering and pain of the people and places you are viewing, then you aren't viewing to the best of your ability. You aren't working as well as you could. In short, you're doing your job, but not very well. It is a great job perk for the remote viewer to go through joy and good times and situations with their targets. Well, I firmly believe that it is also the job of the remote viewer to go through the target's pain and suffering - and even to accompany them through the process of death, if need be. Again, I say, "It comes with the job."

Lyn Buchanan

[Archive Note: Lyn Buchanan, former U.S. Intell RV]


Nancy,

[Re: "reality blasting" of the military Viewers]

There is not one single thing in Paul's response with which I would disagree in any way. Good answer, Paul! I gave an incomplete answer to Nancy, and you brought it up to a full answer very nicely. Thanks.

Lyn Buchanan

[Archive Note: Lyn Buchanan, former U.S. Intell RV]


Mark wrote:

<<Is the target the actual site or location of the "target" or the picture of the target or does it matter one way or the other?

Does it matter? That all depends on what your purpose is for doing the session. If you are there to practice and get better, then either is OK. If you are there for actual real-world tasking, then you need to go to the target. For one thing, you might never get feedback. For another, you might never the proper feedback. If, for example, you are doing a session for the (name deleted: a large, powerful intelligence agency) and your only feedback comes through their action of entering your office and seizing your records, saying that you can't see them any more... well, you know must have done something right. However, you don't have proper feedback for judging the individual elements of your session. (Yes, this has happened before.)

Almost all trainees start out viewing their feedback. That's good. It trains them to view. It also introduces them to the idea that if they can view 30 minutes into the future, then more should be possible. At that stage, that's all you're after. To view the actual site (which may or may not still be the same as in the picture) is often confusing to them, and often somewhat detrimental. But at some stage along the way, you have to "wean" them of their dependency on the feedback and start actually giving them sites which have changed before or since the picture was taken, and require them to go to the present, or to a time before the target was changed. In other words, you have to start forcing them to go to the site instead of the feedback. For some viewers, it can be an unpleasant experience.

<<The reason I ask is that sometimes I also get things like people talking in the background or "hear" footsteps but obviously this is not taking place on the picture.

Theoretically, I'm not so sure about that. It is possible that you are neither going to the site nor to the feedback picture, but to the site at the time of the feedback picture. This being so, then who can say that the feedback picture doesn't have for the viewer all of these things tied up in it? Theories are great, aren't they?

Lyn Buchanan

[Archive Note: Lyn Buchanan, former U.S. Intell RV]


Thanks Lyn,

Your response and Paul's response to Nancy answered my questions regarding shielding for difficult targets. I think I better understand what you mean about the importance of receiving vital information through remote viewing raw, visceral aspects of certain targets as well as the pleasant or fun targets. That training, our mind's own internal survival mechanisms, and experience help us face difficult targets we may experience and reduce burn-out. It seems to me, that I will gain an even better understanding after receiving training and going through various experiences with different targets.

Would you say then that mental discipline is the most challenging or difficult aspect of CRV?

Regards,

Roger


First of all I would like to thank everyone for responding to my questions as they did. Special thanks to Lyn who not only brought clearer insight into my question but also got made me put my thinking cap on.

My question is: I have done some "work" for people in the past mainly locating lost objects and the way that I operated (this is long before I had even heard of RV in its present day context) was not to "view" but to sense the emotional "ball" that surrounded the object that was missing. What I mean is that, it seemed to me that I could sense the constellation of emotions surrounding the object and the emotional attachment that the people placed on it and so when I came in close proximity to the object then I not only sensed the emotional "field" attached to the object but all coming from the individual who had lost the object (I presumed this to be because they had only consciously lost the object but that there subconscious remembered what had happened). Anyway, and believe it or not I am relating this to RV, when do emotions come into play in RV and how do they figure into the actual acquisition of information? I tend to have a great deal of emotional influences affecting me in my day to day life but so far when I am practicing viewing I don't seem to be able to sense any emotions at all...this is very unusual for me...am I not doing something right in the process?

Thanks again to everyone for answering my seemingly redundant questions.

Mark


Anyone who is in any way interested in the ongoing history of the CRV story will have to send for the March 30, 1997 issue of "La Mirada". The cost is $1.50. The address is:

La Mirada P.O. Box 2786 Corrales, NM 87048

Subscription for 10 issues is $15.00. I haven't seen any of the other issues besides this one, but it is absolute "must" reading for anyone interested in what is presently going on at the "fringes" (or should I say, the two extremes) of the CRV story.


Lyn Buchanan

<<Would you say then that mental discipline is the most challenging or difficult aspect of CRV?

I would be hard put to give a quick response for what the most challenging and difficult aspect of CRV is. However, from what I've seen (and experienced myself), the most difficult to face aspect of CRV is failing. I (and almost everyone else) can do 100 truly bang-up sessions, but then let us hit even a one-session slump, and we're dog meat! Pig innards! Nobody can do this stuff! This is impossible! etc.etc.etc. Then, the next tasking comes in and we drag ourselves to the table and "just do it". I think that these times are the subconscious mind's way of chastizing the conscious for getting in the way, and after time and experience, it tends to automatically stay out of the way more and more because of it. It's hard to go through, though - and we all do.

Lyn Buchanan

[Archive Note: Lyn Buchanan, former U.S. Intell RV]


<<What I mean is that, it seemed to me that I could sense the constellation of emotions surrounding the object and the emotional attachment that the people placed on it and so when I came in close proximity to the object then I not only sensed the emotional "field" attached to the object but all coming from the individual who had lost the object (I presumed this to be because they had only consciously lost the object but that there subconscious remembered what had happened).

Believe it or not, this is a combination of ARV (Alternate [Associative] Remote Viewing) - but in a more allegorical sense than in the normal format. Then, instead of "viewing", you are, in a sense, dowsing for the emotional impact. Those are two good and proven methods, so why not put them together and use them? Sounds good.

... Anyway, and believe it or not I am relating this to RV, when do emotions come into play in RV....

In the later stages (actually, beginning with Stage 1, you are required to recognize the emotional impact, but you have to "set it aside". In Stage 3, you have to recognize the "aesthetic impact", which is generally an emotion-associated reaction to being at the site. In Stage 4 and on, you can use the emotionals to gain information about the targets. Up until Stage 4, emotions can stop a session cold. You have to get a good, firm site contact before you can use them to any extent.

...and how do they figure into the actual acquisition of information?

You'd have to take the training for that one. It's not something that I'd want to just plop onto someone who wasn't ready for it.

... I tend to have a great deal of emotional influences affecting me in my day to day life but so far when I am practicing viewing I don't seem to be able to sense any emotions at all...this is very unusual for me...am I not doing something right in the process?

You are doing very nicely. Don't rush into emotionals. They can overpower a session and, like I say, stop it cold.

Lyn Buchanan

[Archive Note: Lyn Buchanan, former U.S. Intell RV]


Wow! I love this forum. You all have expanded my own thinking about all those matters I brought up. Thank you!!

Love,

Nancy


Dear Vic, and everybody else as well--

For the past couple of days I've been mulling over how best to respond to this posting. I don't want to offend you Vic, since I know you meant well, and just wanted to express your enthusiasm. Also, I (and Lyn as well, since I've discussed this briefly with him) am very flattered at the high regard and esteem in which you hold us. We both appreciate being respected for our knowledge and experience (and wisdom, good looks, mental acuity, cooking skills, basket weaving, unicycle juggling, sword swallowing, etc., etc. ;-) HOWEVER, I feel a little sheepish being praised so highly for what amounts to a stroke of pure luck (and maybe a few hiccups of the Universe) that happened to put me in the right place at the right time to take advantage of an offer that not only I, but most, if not all of you could not have refused.

I also feel a little guilty that I was blessed to have so much fun while taxpayers like you all out there underwrote my salary (this fact is, of course insufficient to motivate me to offer my services gratis out of pure thankfulness! <G).

So, I guess the upshot is, I'm asking you all AT MOST just to treat us the way you would your piano instructor or history teacher (well, maybe not quite THAT bad)--Lyn and I are only a couple of lucky guys who otherwise aren't much different than the rest of you. We CAN speak with authority when it comes to matters of CRV and related topics, but other than that, our opinions are just plain old opinions.

Related to that, I believe Palyne originally coined the term "baby viewers"--and it IS quite descriptive (and kind of cute, too!). But I think used too much it puts the wrong spin on the CRV teacher-student relationship. Many/most/all of you out there are very accomplished in your own rights and, while you may be just beginning the journey with respect to remote viewing, you are still ADULT beginners, and I would like to think you are all approaching this from a very mature and well-balanced perspective. Often the words we use to refer to things color both our attitude toward those things and out attitudes toward ourselves. I am perhaps being excessively curmudgeonly about this (it wouldn't be the first time!), but I'd like to declare a moratorium on future usage of "baby viewers." Any and all of you are, of course, free to object (cast stones, sling mud) if you so choose.

With the best of intentions (and yes, I know what they say about "good intentions"),

Paul

[Archive Note: Paul H. Smith, former U.S. Intell RV]


Paul,

<<am very flattered at the high regard and esteem in which you hold us.

Lu and I talked over whether I should post and say, "Oh no, not 'the guru!' " I decided to let it slide. I see you didn't. <g>

<<I believe Palyne originally coined the term "baby viewers"

I've never even HEARD it, let alone said it. I usually say "second generation," to mean someone learning from an 'original' viewer in the lab or military. Not my style.... Sorry, that was somebody else. :-)

PJ


Giday!

<<In other words, you have to start forcing them to go to the site instead of the feedback. For some viewers, it can be an unpleasant experience.

Can you please expand on those "unpleasant experiences"? Just a bit curious as to what to expect so I won't be so afraid when I experience them.

You know the Buddist Monks in Thailand have dead bodies of street people that have been knocked down by cars etc., brought to them to "view". They open the cofins, put their head in and get a good lung-full of the decaying corpses. And if they can't get the corpse they have photos of them brought instead and spend quite a bit of time "viewing" them. Pretty gross I know, but the reason they do it is because they believe that by "viewing" death it makes them stronger by preparing them for it and therefore understand it and not fear it, or something like that anyway! My point is, is it necessary for us to "view" "unpleasant experiences" in order for us to become better "viewers"? Or looking at it from a different angle; do we become better "viewers" if we train ourselves on the more bizarre or "unpleasant" targets?

Cheers

Bradford (;-D)


<<Can you please expand on those "unpleasant experiences"? Just a bit curious as to what to expect so I won't be so afraid when I experience them.

What I meant was that the weaning process can be an unpleasant experience, in and of itself. Feedback can get almost as addictive as chocolate. When you tell a viewer that they can't have feedback on a session, you'd better be wearing extra-thick leather cuff bands around you arms and legs. They can get downright mean at times. :-}

Lyn Buchanan

[Archive Note: Lyn Buchanan, former U.S. Intell RV]


Paul (& Lyn),

Humbleness is a virtue of all great teachers I have experienced in my life. Thank you for reinforcing that insight. Although your opinions "are just plain old opinions", your experiences in RV are NOT just plain old experiences. All the "novice" viewers in this forum are aware of this, and that's why we're here.

I was just trying to point out how small that CRV experience cadre is. I know that you two, McMoneagle, Dames, Morehouse, Atwater at TMI, and possibly some other yet unidentified viewers exist but it is still a very small cadre. Paul, I understand your awe at "being at the right place at the right time", but understand our awe of having the opportunity to gain from that gift. Being skilled at something doesn't necessarily make you a great teacher of that skill. I see the patience, motivation and ability to simplify and metamorphize (?) in both Lyn and yourself. I repeat, great is the teacher whose students surpass the teacher.

I've got to read Peter Russell's book- The Global Brain Awakens. The WWW IS transforming the world!

Damn Paul, you mean all this hero-worship isn't going to get me free lessions in the future? How about a veteran discount? I can come to Lake Austin. Oh well.

I was remiss in my aviation analogy earlier. I should have included WWI aces from all the countries involved. Sometimes my past "national" consciousness reveals itself. It will be interesting in the future to learn about the "psychic warriors" in the other countries.

To my fellow "novice viewers",( Actually, I am a potential novice- I am still in the survey stage- reading and observing), a quote from one of my daily meditation readings (Apr 14)-

"For some reason we expect to conquer every challenge , to know unquestionably how to solve every problem the first time we encounter it. We can fully understand that children need to practice walking and catching a ball and eating with a fork before they can master these skills. But we're adults. We think we must get right the first time" - Karen Casey

Enough of this, there is work to be done. Thank you all for listening to my ramblings. Back to learning RV!

Once again PJ, THANKS!

Blessings, vic


Aw! Paul!!! I just went out and bought myself a brand new halo, and was thinking of doubling my prices. You just HAD to go and mess it up! :-]

BTW Vic, I agree with Paul. If, in the span of time, we don't get a bunch of you to be better than we are now, then we will have basically failed. There's something about this whole "collective unconscious" thing that requires that we progress in a group, or we won't progress much further as individuals.

Lyn Buchanan

[Archive Note: Lyn Buchanan, former U.S. Intell RV]


...My point is, is it necessary for us to "view" "unpleasant experiences" in order for us to become better "viewers"?

That all depends. To become better viewers of what? If it somehow becomes your job to view those unpleasant things, then you would need to know how. If, on the other hand, you used CRV for the stock market, the worse you would need to be able to view would be a downward pointing line. Serious, but not gross. If you were to go into medical diagnostics, you could view seriously gross problems allegorically, as different colors or textures, and not have to see the actual problems, themselves.

However, I would give a somewhat different answer to your next question...

...Or looking at it from a different angle; do we become better "viewers" if we train ourselves on the more bazaar or "unpleasant" targets?

I think so. Mainly because it develops self-discipline, and that is really the backbone of the CRV process.

Lyn Buchanan

[Archive Note: Lyn Buchanan, former U.S. Intell RV]


<<From what you've said here, and what you said earlier in your post, it seems to me that this kinesthesia or synesthesia is nothing to really be worried about. I'll give your suggestion a try if it ever happens again, and see what results ensue.

Nothing to worry about? It's the NEATEST thing!!! The first time it happened to me, I heard purple. Now, for the rest of my life, I am stuck with the story of hearing purple, and can't tell it to anyone, because people always want to know what purple sounds like... like grape?... like kool-aid? No. It sounds like purple! I have always thought that what happened was that the information was coming down a new path which the mind didn't exactly know what to do with, yet. An impression would come along, and get switched into the wrong sensory path. There's no mistaking the meaning, but the way the body translates it is bizarre and fascinating. From what I've been able to find out, it only happens to a very few people, and I feel luck to have been one of them. I was sort of disappointed when my "path controller" got things worked out and it stopped happening. It was really a neat set of experiences.

[ A vocabulary exercise was posted in this original message. It is now available on the firedocs site in the "misc. rv stuff" section. -- PJ]

Lyn Buchanan

[Archive Note: Lyn Buchanan, former U.S. Intell RV]


Hi Viewers,

I thought you might be interested in a new web page online, for Dr. Charles T. Tart. Charley's a great guy, in addition to being one of the world's leading and most innovative psychologists. One of the founders of transpersonal psychology, he has numerous papers about psi research, skeptics and fear of psi, consciousness and spirituality, etc. There's also a brief but very worthwhile paper on a hypnosis study he did in the early 60's, which gives some insight into potential monitor influence in a CRV session (even unintentional). He's also done a lot of work on out of body experiences, near death experiences, etc. You can find his site at:

http://www.sciencehorizon.com/cttart/

PJ


Hi all. I'm new to the list and am looking forward to the discussion here.

I've been reading what I can about remote viewing, read 'Mind Trek', Jim Schnabel's book and all the Web sites out there. Have even tried some practice sessions based on Lyn Buchanan's general guidelines. We can all do this, can't we? It's been an interesting beginning. :)

I've read PJ's archives so hopefully I have an idea of what you folks have been discussing.

I think I read some discussion in the archives about the impressions we receive and how they're described. More specifically I think a woman was mentioning how she tends to name things as a description, rather than describe them in the more general terms I see in RV transcripts. If I recall, when she switched to just trying to describe targets in less specific terms, she found herself concentrating too much on the act of describing, rather than just letting it flow, so to speak.

My experience with several practice sessions has probably been very similar. I tend to start listing a series of objects, more than say "the target's blue, warm and rough" (although I do some describing and drawing as well).

So, rather than "white and puffy", I'm saying "clouds". To cure this I've found myself saying things like "cloud-like", but I don't think that quite fixes it, does it?

Of course, I've just started practicing and don't have any formal training yet, so this is probably to be expected at first. :)

Thanks everyone, I'm enjoying this.

- Mike


Hi Mike,

Glad you finally got here.

<<So, rather than "white and puffy", I'm saying "clouds". To cure this I've found myself saying things like "cloud-like", but I don't think that quite fixes it, does it?

Naw. :-) When you see transcripts of any RV session that are filled with labels ('what' is viewed rather than the descriptives of whatever it is), you're looking at a session with some real problems.

<<Of course, I've just started practicing and don't have any formal training yet, so this is probably to be expected at first. :)

Ha! Formal training is no magic clover. You're going to have to work on this whether you get training or not -- and the work comes from YOU, in either case. Methodologies are great, but you get all the credit - and all the blame. :-)

PJ


How 'bout the issue of eyes open vs. eyes closed? It seems that in standard CRV the viewer sits across from a monitor, much like in a normal conversation. Are there any concerns that visual stimuli interfere with the process. I understand that, obviously, this process works. I'm just curious to hear what experienced viewers think about this (if they think about this).

I believe with Joe McMoneagle's ERV (it's ERV, right?), he lies down comfortably with his eyes closed, correct?

Wasn't the original rv'ing at Ft. Meade done in a darkened room?

- Mike


Hi Mike,

<<How 'bout the issue of eyes open vs. eyes closed?

Whatever works for you. Once you're in target contact, you might prefer to close your eyes, but having them open doesn't pull out of contact, at least in my case. I can "feel myself in both realities" and simply switch my attention between one or the other.

<<It seems that in standard CRV the viewer sits across from a monitor

The monitor can be anywhere, actually. Across from you, behind you to the side, is another room if necessary.

<<Are there any concerns that visual stimuli interfere with the process.

It can in some ways... that's why the monitor's role is to be extremely still, and quiet, and only to speak when necessary, to use neutral and previously-agreed upon words if possible, with as little inflection as possible.

<<I believe with Joe McMoneagle's ERV (it's ERV, right?), he lies down comfortably with his eyes closed, correct?

If he has the opportunity. Joe has done this numerous times on live TV, walking around and talking to the film crew in the middle of it. Partly to prove it can be done at any time, anywhere, and doesn't require any kind of trance.

<<Wasn't the original rv'ing at Ft. Meade done in a darkened room?

I don't know. Probably the ERV. Since you gotta see what you're recording, that wouldn't be very practical for CRV.

Now, about that "ERV" term. ERV is a name assigned to what Joe did years AFTER he did it, simply to differentiate between CRV, which is a fairly rigid and formal methodological structure, and "unstructured" methods that individuals used to gather psi data (e.g., lying down in a darkened room and 'letting it come to them,' talking during the process usually, and often drawing afterward).

However, it should be noted that it doesn't necessarily mean any one thing. Technically anybody using "natural psychic" methods could probably say they were using "ERV," only because ERV has no formal structure of its own (at least that's taught publicly), so there's really no way to say you're doing it wrong. :-) On the other hand, there's no way to say you're doing it right, either. It is simply the term used for "unstructured" remote viewing, and on occasion for "altered state" remote viewing. It _becomes_ remote viewing, like in Joe's case, because he follows or works within the RV protocols (controls) necessary. (Protocols are not methodologies. They are controls. The word confuses a lot of people in this subject.)

PJ


Thanks for letting me post this to the list Bob.

---------- Howdy Bob,

<<and supporting my belief that CRV is a viable 'art';

Physicist Ed May, currently head of the Laboratories for Fundamental Research and the Cognitive Sciences Laboratory -- he ran the RV science projects funded by the CIA (and others) for years at SRI and then at SAIC -- is currently President of The Parapsychology Association. He says his biggest beef with people in the psi fields is that they overstate things and then nobody believes them. Says he spends more time telling people what RV is "NOT" about and can "NOT" do or can "NOT" lay predictable claim to than what it can.

<<Seems to me that the more data that can be collected, and the greater the numbers providing the data for a given target, the greater the propensity for locating meaningful data, the more such data to be acquired, and the higher the odds for accurately interpreting the data.

1. If the Viewers are tasked slightly different, this may be true, except the last comment.

2. If the Viewers are tasked identically, you've pretty much polluted the target, which is now filled with the overlays of a number of consciousnesses. You'll get mostly the "sheep and goats" scenario, where Viewers agree with each other on data points, even when they're wrong.

3. According to the science folks, tasking more than one person against a target often gets ADDITIONAL data, however, receiving a data component from more than one person appears to be NO indication that it is any more "correct" than a data piece received by only one. Remember, RV is unavoidably interactive, though many people aren't aware of that. View a target and your perception of it becomes part of it. That overlay is not impossible for a Viewer to recognize, but few have the skill.

(Btw, this is all an interesting corrollary to those quantum physics experiments where the perception of the observer appears to affect the event itself. So would it follow that if I can view the future or the past or the present, my perception of it would actually affect what happens [what I view]? Maybe. That's a pretty big field for theory.)

4. As for interpreting the data, this really depends solely on the analyst. It is of course logical to assume that if he has 100 data pieces he is more likely to see a puzzle-picture forming than if he only has 20. Of course, the accuracy of those pieces would make all the difference in that case. In a group situation like that, one of the most critical roles is a good tasker, right up front.

<<perhaps several GROUPS of viewers contributing their data to a significant number of analysts...at the second level, who then pick out matching data and forward them to one or more final analysts...for consolidation, evaluation and utilization.

It's a good idea, but like I said, Viewing in groups is more harm than help. Some recent people in the media have really educated others to believe that if you sit a dozen people down and they all get the same thing, that proves it's true. ... It proves telepathy's true. Doesn't prove the data is correct.

However, the idea of using groups in general (with varied tasking) is a good one.

Part of the problem is that in this field, due to the confidentiality issues, nobody knows each other. Not even students. So there has been little if any chance for teamwork and experimentation. This list is hopefully the beginning of some of that. I have a private Viewer Forum for formally educated CRVrs opening near the end of this month, and that hopefully will be another step.

<<This suggests that CRV may not be so much a matter of data collection and the "protocol" of its collection...as the inate ability of those involved the the viewing.

Maybe I worded it wrong. CRV is the methodology + controls. Psi is the innate ability. Everybody's got the ability. The method is a structure for pouring it into. It's like piano. You may have musical talent, and some people can be masters without any training. Pretty darn few though. Suffering through scales teaches your brain to recognize patterns and work instinctively and correctly and quickly, so that whatever musical ability most people have can be brought out and operate dependably and to its full potential. None of it's rocket science. It's just a lot of work, that works.

<<If a 'protocol' EXISTS that could bring ME to the point of being able to provide meaningful input...that is, being able to envision and record those elements which comprise a worthwile set of data, that would be great!!!

My personal opinion is that the number of people who do not have some degree of innate psi ability is pretty slim. And people who are in any way creative are almost certainly psi (long story, but my experience bears this out).

<<My gut instincts are that I'm not equipped to properly utilize such a "protocol"

I'll tell you what's hard about it:

1. You have to suspend some part of your disbelief. Otherwise, it's like trying to learn to shoot hoops but refusing to throw the ball. You can be as skeptical as you want, but at some point you have to allow yourself to really do it.

2. You have to be willing to be wrong. You're not going to be perfect and you're going to feel clueless and you're going to have to spend a lot of time writing down everything you "think you might maybe possibly sense sort of but it's probably my imagination," because frankly that's what it feels like at first, and you have to learn to listen to that intangible stuff and validate yourself. Over time you'll learn to sort out what's what.

3. You have to be willing to suffer lack of recognition. It can be very frustrating to describe something for 40 minutes and still not know what it is, and in most of RV that's how it works. It does not have anywhere near the psychological satisfaction of actually "seeing" something and recognizing it. This often takes awhile to hit people but when it does, it can really affect their sticking to CRV.

4. You have to be willing to be right. Many people including me are often more disturbed by their success than by their failure. There is an inherent fear of psi that is found in a large percentage of our culture's population and you don't really know if you have it until your own abilities stare you in the face. A secondary disturbance is that you want to know "how" you did it, so you can do it again, so you can do the same thing, but usually you have no clue, nothing to hold onto. It works, and you don't know why. That can be more upsetting than you might suspect.

5. You have to be willing to invest real time into it. Consider it a mental martial art. It takes correct practice and experience.

6. You have to have the kind of personality that is not offended by the structure of CRV and that is able to stick with it. The structure is not a suggestion. It is rigid. There are areas where you might personalize small things, but in general it is not open to change, and most people who try, see why it was that way in the first place.

If those aren't a problem, you'd probably be good at it.

<<I'm not a good subject for hypnosis; I laugh!!!...(and probably 'fight' it).

Fortunately this isn't hypnosis. :-) I have pointed out the hypnotic aspects, however, let me take the time here to explain what I meant. Whenever you have someone in a superior/teaching role, who is sitting with you and talking calmly with you, combined with the subject "opening to intuitive data" (in other words, becoming suggestible), you have a hypnotic modality. Add in the teacher or monitor talking them through something, and you have what qualifies as a form of hypnosis. (Of course, all hypnosis is self hypnosis... that's another story.) But that is a sort of 'accidental' situation created by the process of training and RV team work -- it is not a deliberate part of the process... at least, not overtly. Most CRV you'd be doing on your own.

PJ


Does anyone know where I can get a CRV Viewer's Training Manual?

CM


Hi.

<<Does anyone know where I can get a CRV Viewer's Training Manual?

Not available anywhere at this time.

However, one derivative of CRV is TRV, and a further derivative of TRV is SRV, and I've heard that The Farsight Institute (c/o Courtney Brown (who 'invented' SRV)) is going to be offering his training manual for sale soon. I have no idea how much it has in common (or not) with CRV methods.

PJ


Hi all,

In reading Lyn's response to "viewers see what they want to see," I started thinking about the accuracy of information. Is it possible to have a cue for yourself so that you don't get too off-track in accessing information. For instance, if you are viewing a scene where the media or some such thing has caused millions of people to think about and form an opinion about a certain event...is there a danger in picking up on the general thoughts and emotions of those opinions rather than the actual event and if so, a way to discern the difference?

Also, thanks for the wonderful vocabulary exercise. Is it o.k. to make a list of general descriptors such as color, smell, taste, texture, etc. and go down that list to help focus on each one or should you just go with what comes to you? I tried doing this with the last target and it seemed to help me not get caught up with trying to describe a particular image since my mind seems to want to identify and comes up with an image that may have many of the descriptors but is way off base from the actual target. I don't know...I may be way off track with this but couldn't think of a better place to ask it ; - )

Thanks,

Vickie


END ARCHIVE 04
APRIL 01 1997 TO APRIL 10 1997

A form for subscribing / unsubscribing from the Viewer Email Group can be found HERE.


VWR Email Archives Menu
Firedocs Entrance
Top of Page

All contents copyright © 1995-2002 by PJ Gaenir. All rights reserved.