Remote viewing - how do they do it?

[EternalSceptic]

Quite simple: They don't

 

[Joe_Black]

"One thing: if the military believes that this crap works, why do they even bother with guards? If this stuff worked, every government buidling would look like effin Versaille on the inside with mirrors and blind hallways everywhere. "

Not to sure what you mean? Not having guards?

 

[ChristineR]

"Think of all the billions of things, people and events in this world that could be remote viewed for positive benefits, such as medical and psychological diagnosis."

What?

Is it just me, or does that make no sense whatsoever? Unless they mean a doctor or psychologist could remotely view a patient to diagnose them ... no, that still doesn't make any sense.

They mean remote viewing someone's insides, as a non-invasive form of testing. This is not taken very seriously in the scientific community, and the only scientific attempt I know of to test such a thing (CSICOP's test of Natasha Demkina) was not very successful.

Nonetheless, there is a contingent of believers who take this stuff very seriously.

 

[Slimething]

"One thing: if the military believes that this crap works, why do they even bother with guards? If this stuff worked, every government buidling would look like effin Versaille on the inside with mirrors and blind hallways everywhere. "

Not to sure what you mean? Not having guards?

I meant that, if remote viewing worked, the threat of having someone break in would be tremendously reduced. I know this isn't practical and I only wrote half-seriously.

 

[terry_wong001]

Many articles on remote viewing

I would suggest you read some of the material out there on remote viewing. One book of interest is "Above Black" - "Project Preserve Destiny" by Dan Sherman.

 

[Luke T.]

Are the targets not random? Do the people running the test fake the results by substituting the target so the person thinks they got it right? Does anyone have any information about this? It just seems impossible that anyone would get anything even vaguely right.

An outstanding article on remote viewing can be found here.

Sort of like the fuss over Sylvia Browne and Shawn Hornbeck going on right now. Only this one was about Psi-Tech and Elizabeth Smart.

After reading that link, follow it up and see the current post hoc spin on Psi-Tech's site about the whole mess.

http://www.psitech.net/news/tsl_031403.htm

If I want remote viewing to be real, it will be real. That's not a mystical What The Bleep Do We Know statement, it's a psychological one.

As you can see by the two links, the sellers of this crap will go to great lengths of mental leaps and twists to preserve a belief in it.

 

[Rodney]

An outstanding article on remote viewing can be found here.

Sort of like the fuss over Sylvia Browne and Shawn Hornbeck going on right now. Only this one was about Psi-Tech and Elizabeth Smart.

After reading that link, follow it up and see the current post hoc spin on Psi-Tech's site about the whole mess.

http://www.psitech.net/news/tsl_031403.htm

If I want remote viewing to be real, it will be real. That's not a mystical What The Bleep Do We Know statement, it's a psychological one.

As you can see by the two links, the sellers of this crap will go to great lengths of mental leaps and twists to preserve a belief in it.

Yes, and you will also see that Claus is spinning as well. He states:

"Almost immediately after Elizabeth was found alive, all material concerning the search for her was removed from the PSI TECH website. Almost. A few, very quick skeptics managed to save some of the material before it was removed."

So, his implication is that those noble skeptics saved the world from the forces of evil once again. And yet, the other link clearly states:

"The news on Wednesday broke of the retrieval of Elizabeth Smart. Since that day, PSI TECH has been inundated with hate mail because we announced early in our investigation that she was deceased. Personally, I must tell you, I am devastated. I can only imagine how upset and angry I would be if my daughter had been abducted and missing and I was informed by a reputable intelligence gathering company that she was dead."

So, PSI TECH blew it big-time, but they aren't trying to pretend they didn't.

 

[terry_wong001]

Remote viewing

Sort of like the fuss over Sylvia Browne and Shawn Hornbeck going on right now. Only this one was about Psi-Tech and Elizabeth Smart.

My feeling on Sylvia B is that she once had abilities but she lost them and eventually became a showman. When you are on TV performing you feel that you have to always have an answer. This is not always the case and no one really no why. Psychics connect differently. Some need pictures, some use objects and some use names. Others need all 3 or combination of.
The US government is fully aware of the potential of remote viewing and they invest a lot of dough in it each year. Obviosly this is not something that would be benificial to talk about openly since it it used for military research. In the world of the socalled parannormal it is not always possible to apply newtonian physics to find the answers. In the cworld of quantum physics intentiion affects the outcome.

 

[BillyJoe]

very wrong terry wong

Sorry, cheap joke at your expense but I couldn't resist.
(my name is BJ by the way so make of that what you will )

Someone may wish to take you through SB's life history to show that the more things change the more things stay the same.
Someone else may wish to take you through all that stuff about the US government and remote viewing and the farce it all became.
Some else yet again may wish to take you through quantum physics to show you how it is irrelevant to the paranormal claims.

Firstly, however, you may like to present of some of your own evidence for your three claims so as to get a start off as it were - so we know where to start.
Take it slowly one at a time if you wish and tell us why.

I can help out if I get the time.

regards,
BJ

 

[terry_wong001]

Distant Viewing

very wrong terry wong

Sorry, cheap joke at your expense but I couldn't resist.
(my name is BJ by the way so make of that what you will )

Someone may wish to take you through SB's life history to show that the more things change the more things stay the same.
Someone else may wish to take you through all that stuff about the US government and remote viewing and the farce it all became.
Some else yet again may wish to take you through quantum physics to show you how it is irrelevant to the paranormal claims.

Firstly, however, you may like to present of some of your own evidence for your three claims so as to get a start off as it were - so we know where to start.
Take it slowly one at a time if you wish and tell us why.

I can help out if I get the time.

regards,
BJ

Well if it isn't noway BJ
I don't claim to be an expert on SB however you seem to know a lot more.
Your comment "present some of your evidence" is so lame and predictable. it is as if there is a limited vocabulary for non beleivers. Can you please show me conclusive evidence that paranormal activities don't happen or exist? Take your time!!!

 

[terry_wong001]

Let me guess the next phrase that you mention... "if you know of any paranormal activity why don't they apply for Randi's Million dollars?" Am I right?

 

[Gr8wight]

Well if it isn't noway BJ
I don't claim to be an expert on SB however you seem to know a lot more.
Your comment "present some of your evidence" is so lame and predictable. it is as if there is a limited vocabulary for non beleivers. Can you please show me conclusive evidence that paranormal activities don't happen or exist? Take your time!!!

Dear Terry Wong,

Could you please show me conclusive evidence that the invisible fire breathing dragon I keep in my garage does not exist? Take your time!!1eleventyone

 

[gopi]

Psychics connect differently.

I see a lot of carts here. Do you think you should put some horses in front of them?

You talk a lot about the needs of different psychics. However, since none of them have even remotely demonstrated their abilities in a plausibly controlled manner, you're coming at this backwards.

I'm ready to believe in psychics; I simply need to see one doing something that _can't_ be more easily done using trickery.

All the psychics I've seen on TV, and all the testing I've read about indicates that trickery of various kinds is being employed.

The US government is fully aware of the potential of remote viewing and they invest a lot of dough in it each year.

The secret, un-verifiable spending of money by the government doesn't make something true.

The US government was planning on building a US$200m bridge between an island with 14,500 people and an island with 50 people...

Do you have any references to public, verifiable research backing your claims up?

Why won't any of the people who teach remote viewing to the general public take Randi up on his challenge, take his $1m, and use the publicity to make even more money? They'd become immensely wealthy.

Since these remote viewers offer their training services to the general public - including foreign nationals - it's pretty clear that the US government isn't doing much to keep them quiet.

 

[Slimething]

The US government is fully aware of the potential of remote viewing and they invest a lot of dough in it each year. Obviosly this is not something that would be benificial to talk about openly since it it used for military research.

It's OK to talk about it here. Hell, all the sciences are used in military research and we talk about those endlessly. How much money is the US govt spending on remote viewing? (I don't doubt you that they are. I just want to know how much. Bear in mind that the military spending money on it doesn't make it true.)

In the world of the socalled parannormal it is not always possible to apply newtonian physics to find the answers.

What are you trying to say here? I don't normally need to apply physics of any kind to find most of my answers because the questions I have are not related to physics. Are you saying that psychics are not subject to the rules of nature? If so, what rules are different? What rules take their place? How do you know these rules? That is, if there are rules and you know about them, they can be studied.

In the cworld of quantum physics intentiion affects the outcome.

No, that's not true. In quantum mechanics, you can't measure more than one thing at a time because the measurement affects the other characteristics of what you're measuring. Intention is not a physical force and can't change anything in the real world. It's actual observation that changes things. If intention had anything to do with matter, we could control inanimate matter with our minds. The wiki article is here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncertainty_principle.

 

[Bob Klase]

Personally, I must tell you, I am devastated. I can only imagine how upset and angry I would be if my daughter had been abducted and missing and I was informed by a reputable intelligence gathering company that she was dead."

So, PSI TECH blew it big-time, but they aren't trying to pretend they didn't.

Yes they are- they're trying to blame some reputable intelligence gathering company. That certainly doesn't describe themselves.

 

[BillyJoe]

Well if it isn't noway BJ
I don't claim to be an expert on SB however you seem to know a lot more.
Your comment "present some of your evidence" is so lame and predictable. it is as if there is a limited vocabulary for non beleivers.

Well, that is not exactly what I said. What I said was "you may like to present of some of your own evidence for your three claims so as to get a start off as it were - so we know where to start". I mean I don't know exactly if you want to go anywhere with your statements and, if you do, how you want to tackle it. I don't want to get all interested in discussing this if you don't really want to pursue it any further. Okay?

Can you please show me conclusive evidence that paranormal activities don't happen or exist? Take your time!!!

Actually, I do not claim that the paranormal doesn't exist. I hope I am not required to supply evidence for a claim I haven't made.

 

[BillyJoe]

Let me guess the next phrase that you mention... "if you know of any paranormal activity why don't they apply for Randi's Million dollars?" Am I right?

I truely have never said this to any poster on this forum ever. And I have been here since the beginning in 2001. I have never had any faith ( ) that the Challenge could achieve anything and I have often been a soft critic of it over the years.

 

[Luke T.]

Yes, and you will also see that Claus is spinning as well. He states:

"Almost immediately after Elizabeth was found alive, all material concerning the search for her was removed from the PSI TECH website. Almost. A few, very quick skeptics managed to save some of the material before it was removed."

So, his implication is that those noble skeptics saved the world from the forces of evil once again.

I was one of those noble skeptics.

I downloaded everything they had posted about Elizabeth Smart. What you see in Claus' article is only a fraction of what was on their site. And all of it was way off.

And yet, the other link clearly states:

"The news on Wednesday broke of the retrieval of Elizabeth Smart. Since that day, PSI TECH has been inundated with hate mail because we announced early in our investigation that she was deceased. Personally, I must tell you, I am devastated. I can only imagine how upset and angry I would be if my daughter had been abducted and missing and I was informed by a reputable intelligence gathering company that she was dead."

So, PSI TECH blew it big-time, but they aren't trying to pretend they didn't.

They CAN'T pretend they didn't blow it. They certainly TRIED to pretend they didn't. But we have the evidence they did, and they know it. They obviously tried to cover-up their error when they removed all the material from their site. We were just faster than them.

 

[Rodney]

They CAN'T pretend they didn't blow it. They certainly TRIED to pretend they didn't. But we have the evidence they did, and they know it. They obviously tried to cover-up their error when they removed all the material from their site. We were just faster than them.

So, why, just two days after Elizabeth Smart was found alive, did PSI TECH admit on its website that it had "announced early in our investigation that she was deceased"? I have seen many an erroneous stock market or weather forecaster be much less forthcoming than this.

 

[Luke T.]

So, why, just two days after Elizabeth Smart was found alive, did PSI TECH admit on its website that it had "announced early in our investigation that she was deceased"? I have seen many an erroneous stock market or weather forecaster be much less forthcoming than this.

The moment I heard Elizabeth Smart had been found alive, I went to Psi-Tech's site and started downloading everything they had remote-viewed about her. Other skeptics did the same.

At the same time, we emailed Joni Dourif that Elizabeth had been found, and that she had screwed up big-time.

Within the hour, everything about Elizabeth Smart disappeared off their site. But it was too late. We had it all. So Joni knew she was busted. It is only because she knew we had the information that she was forced to admit they screwed up. She moved as quick as she could to avoid the embarassment, but not quick enough.