Has remote viewing already been tested?

[Ipecac]

"As for how RV would help you with the stock market, I'm still at a loss." You can determine a probable future using RV as long as it is close enought to when you RV it, i am talking days and hours here, not weeks. Roulette, blackjack, after RV'ing a long time you developed like intuition precognition too a degree this can be trained too give you unfair advantages in games, turning a game of chance, into a game of skill.

Wow. So now it's not just remote viewing. It's actually seeing the future. Amazing.

You'd think people with such power would be kings of the world. Strange how the most powerful man in the world, George Bush, obviously lacks this ability.

 

[Interesting Ian]

Originally posted by Zep
(snip)So while there may be some possibility that a fanciful notion like RV may work, after something like a hundred years of research that proves there is nothing, there comes a time when there has to be a decision made - how much more research needs to be done to confirm that there is indeed nothing there? How much more testing has to be done before we can conclude with some certainty that RV does NOT exist? The answer today is that that point has long been reached for all but the most crackpot, or possibly just grant-hungry, researchers.

But good luck if you want to try something that has not already been thought of! Chances are it already has, though...and failed.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Good points, Zep. I was aware of some research (JB Rhine, for instance) when I was as young as 10 years old (through my father - he was a psych professor, and well respected in his field - he did research in covert speech physiology as well as tension control/stress reduction, but I digress). Yours is perhaps one of the most persuasive arguments against psi I've heard - after all this time, if there is still no evidence in favor of it, can it be there?

There is certainly a vast amount of evidence for psi, I don't know about RV. I believe that zep was talking about RV, not general psi.

And BTW, he hasn't provided an argument. He's simple spouted forth a load of unsubstantiated assertions. The fact that so called "skeptics" are impressed with such unsubstantiated assertions just goes to show how inappropriate is the label they use to call themselves. In other words skeptics are sure as hell not very sceptical, at least when it comes to their own beliefs.

 

[Interesting Ian]

Ian, the list of interesting and important paranormal abilities that might exist is endless.

what evidence have you seen that suggests remove viewing is any more likely than any of these endless possibilities, such that it warrants and investment of time and money to see if anything is there?

I haven't seen any. But if clairvoyance and telepathy and micro-psychokinesis exist, then it might well be the case that RV exists too.

Can you yourself demonstrate the ability? Or present someone who can? Its so terribly easy to test!

No, or at least I doubt I can do it. I have never tried.

Thank you captain obvious!

and just for some more negative evidence, SRI, or Stanford Research Institute investigated RV for years, spent $20mil in US taxpayer money, and found nothing.

Peanuts. Billions should be ploughed into parapsycholgical research. It is that important.

 

[jackmott]

So you have seen some evidence that other paranormal abilities do exist? What evidence is that? Excuse me im new here if you have discussed it before.

I haven't seen any. But if clairvoyance and telepathy and micro-psychokinesis exist, then it might well be the case that RV exists too.


Peanuts. Billions should be ploughed into parapsycholgical research. It is that important.

 

[Interesting Ian]

So you have seen some evidence that other paranormal abilities do exist? What evidence is that? Excuse me im new here if you have discussed it before.

I have a passing familiarity with some of the research if that's what you mean.

 

[jackmott]

I have a passing familiarity with some of the research if that's what you mean.

perhaps you could point me to where I might read about some of it.

You seem to view this stuff as exteremely important to investigate. So im curious why you think this stuff has any more chance of being out there, than say, magical green bunnies that can cure disease. Surely billions shouldn't be invested searching for them!

 

[Interesting Ian]

Zep,

Is this the paper?

Jesus! This is definitely *not* what I want my own website to look like (which I'm in the process of writing ).

 

[Joe_Black]

Wow all these questions! too much for me I have work too do.

Oh well you saw through me, i am a total fruad!

Wow you skeptics sure exposed me!

Oh you can't RV numbers easily. some people can but most find it difficult/impossible. Or so those remote viewer crackpots say anyway.

 

[jackmott]

So I take this to mean you won't accept my $100 challenge?

How about we don't even do it for money, we just arrange a test that you and I agree is fair, keep it on public record here as we proceed, and you can demonstrate your talent?

Wow all these questions! too much for me I have work too do.

Oh well you saw through me, i am a total fruad!

Wow you skeptics sure exposed me!

Oh you can't RV numbers easily. some people can but most find it difficult/impossible. Or so those remote viewer crackpots say anyway.

 

[specious_reasons]

Wow all these questions! too much for me I have work too do.

Oh well you saw through me, i am a total fruad!

Wow you skeptics sure exposed me!

I have not accused you of being a fraud, nor have I shown that you do not have RV ability.

I just don't understand why you won't step into a win-win situation. If what you say is true, you could either gain $1 million or expose Randi as a fraud you claim he is.

Plus, I don't think you addressed my salient point: There can be more parties involved than the claimant and JREF. You can appoint a neutral and fair observer, if that is part of your protocol. How can Randi change the data if he's not the one collecting it?

 

[pgwenthold]

I have not accused you of being a fraud, nor have I shown that you do not have RV ability.

In fact, I haven't seen anyone accuse him of being a fraud. Everyone has basically told him to design a good testing procedure himself.

Personally, I responded on the assumption that he is telling the truth and that he has the ability he claims. That's why I told him to design a protocol that makes it impossible for Randi to wriggle out of it when he passes.

Now, if he doesn't think he can actually do what he claims...

 

[Joe_Black]

http://www.psitech.net/news/tsl_090502.htm

I found this. I have also looked through randi.org's news archive. He tends to filter any infomation that he does not like he leaves out. Its reads a bit like a right wing low grade newspaper too.

"and just for some more negative evidence, SRI, or Stanford Research Institute investigated RV for years,
spent $20mil in US taxpayer money, and found nothing." - actually they were split on that, one statiticain found that psychic functioning does exist though it use for intelligence gathering is poor/not justifyable. The other side of the coin is another professor who claims tighter controls were needed. The full SRI-internation program data has never been released or was seen by either people, and is no longer at SRI all data was returned to the CIA/DIA. 3 people who worked closely on the project claim it too be a resounding success in proving the effectiveness of remote viewing.

I will no longer waste my time with you people. I gave you the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth. If you want to dismiss me as deluded or a nut, do it because I really don't care. YOU are the ones who are loosing out here, not me. As for doing a demo for one person on the webboard? Sure, when i am better in 9 - 14 months where i should be excellent, thats no problen At the moment i doubt i am accurate enought to consistantly provide a convinicing demonstration unless I did around 3-6 targets, and that would take up many hours.

Hey olaf, don't give up on it, the more you practice the better you become.

 

[Ratman_tf]

Peanuts. Billions should be ploughed into parapsycholgical research. It is that important.

And I'm glad you're not the one to make those kinds of decisions.

Billions.

 

[TheBoyPaj]

Cheerio then. See you next year. Of course, you'll be a billionaire by then, but it will be nice to pop in and show us little people how wrong we were.

 

[BillHoyt]

At the moment i doubt i am accurate enought to consistantly provide a convinicing demonstration unless I did around 3-6 targets, and that would take up many hours.

So, let's see. Now the problem is you don't have enough time to earn a million? It would take hours? How many? 24? That would be an hourly rate over $41,000. You are going to turn that down? Or maybe it will take 48 hours, for an hourly rate over $20,000. You are going to turn that down? What, you say 100 hours it will take, for an hourly rate of $10,000?

Do you think that is credible, sir?

Or maybe it was the lack of accuracy that is the real problem. In that case, sir, one wonders why your claimed ability is strong enough to convince you and strong enough for you to jump onto this board loudly proclaiming this ability. But so ulitmately limp and puny you know it won't cut any realistic test.

Co you think that is credible, sir?

 

[Nigel]

Cr@p. He's gone. I wanted to ask him why, if RV works so well, the US gov't spends hundreds of millions of $ on UAV (unmanned aerial vehicles) like the Predator. Surely the gov't would have people who've practiced RV enough to know where bin Laden is??

Guess with Mr. Black gone, we'll never know the answer to that question. Oh, I suppose olaf could answer it, but I'm not holding my breath.

 

[Interesting Ian]

And I'm glad you're not the one to make those kinds of decisions.

Billions.

It certainly would be money well spent. I really have no time for the hysterical denunciations of all apparent "paranormal" phenomena on here. I'm just not interested. It should be investigated whether skeptics like it or not.

 

[thaiboxerken]

Why the hell should anyone have to pay money to research these myths?! And what myths should we research? What objective criteria do you have for determining which paranormal claims might be real and which ones aren't worth investigating?! If investigating mediumship is a good idea, then investigating the effects of pixie dust is also a good idea.

 

[Jeff Corey]

It certainly would be money well spent. I really have no time for the hysterical denunciations of all apparent "paranormal" phenomena on here. I'm just not interested. It should be investigated whether skeptics like it or not.

The only hysteria I see here is found in your staggeringly fatuous hyperbole.
Any money, such as the $20+ million, would have better spent on education in critical thinking, which is apparently an oxymoron to you.

 

[Ipecac]

[BI will no longer waste my time with you people. I gave you the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth. If you want to dismiss me as deluded or a nut, do it because I really don't care. YOU are the ones who are loosing out here, not me. As for doing a demo for one person on the webboard? Sure, when i am better in 9 - 14 months where i should be excellent, thats no problen At the moment i doubt i am accurate enought to consistantly provide a convinicing demonstration unless I did around 3-6 targets, and that would take up many hours. [/B]

Oh rats! The deluded nut is leaving! Whatever will we do?



Feel free to return at any time to demonstrate how wrong we all were.