Remote Viewing is not an Ouija board. It is a science based information retrieval system developed by the military-intell complex way back 1970s when the Soviets had psychics eavesdropping on our strategies so we freaked and did research then funded natural psychics to come up with procedural steps (Ingo Swann and others) to train special groups to spy on our enemies which could be anyone, ourselves etc. Can be used for research, medicine, stock market trends the past, current future probabilities. There are excellent, good, average remote viewers depending on ability training and methodology. If there can be a blind target called “Peter Pan”, with several viewers you may get the mythical, author, movie or persona depending on the cue. Sometimes a target (ARV) may represent an outcome. It’s all in the tasking. Dr. Brown has written numerous papers on parallel universes. I can only go on how the target was crafted in a straight forward manner and congruent data recorded by the viewers. These are my opinions and reflect my years of research and highest regard for SRV methods. Peter Pan maybe more than we realize. The highest levels of transcendent awareness indicate we are spiritual beings with limitations being our own ignorance. The Death Traps as presented indicate a structure and presence of control. Remote Viewing breaks the control mechanism with this information. There is more to follow with the next work in progress. Where we came from? I’m currently finishing “Human Devolution” by Michael Cremo.
“Nothing is true, all is permitted.” Hassan of the Mountain. I’m very curious. Farsight prime is an exception.

Any links in particular?

Ok, I looked over his site....

Lots of vagueness of the type psi believers are accused of doing...

As you wrote, he's not a sceptic - he's a debunker.

I note for his report on RV, he a) references some apparent debunking and supposed closure of the programs... although no evidence is given for this. b) his only actual debunk of Joe McMoneagle is based on ONE single video, and nothing else. Oddly, the video linked does not match the description given in the following paragraph. The video does suggest McMoneagle was accurate - but that's up in the air because there's not much to go on, other than Ed May saying he matches Joe's description with one of the target photos, which happens to be correct. 1 in 6 chance of that... (well, sort of... given Joe doesn't actually know the contents of the photos, his depiction is a LOT higher than that).

There's other issues he has with some other topics as well. Not least of all is his willingness to accept official narratives as automatically true. He's also quite willing to use ad hominems to push his point... see his "Rogues Gallery" for the current UFO trends... he doesn't actually produce any evidence that it's all fake - he just makes suppositions, and expects people to agree. Similarly, he doesn't bother to look into any of the actual reports that were made - just poo-poos them.... AND intentionally misquotes the one person who has been linked as a 'counter' - and it's not an actual counter... it's a 'well, they're doing real physics, but I don't think we'll be able to use it", implying technological limitations, rather than it being crap. (or, as Dunning calls it "crazy science fantasy".

Dunning is the worst type of 'debunker'... very very narrow viewed, with zero intention of trying to see both sides (let alone do anything that's remotely scientific).

I notice that the word "debunk" is used, when instead the correct term would be "counter". To actually "debunk", you'd need to provide definitive evidence (proof) that something is not true. However, this is not what usually happens. It's only that contrary evidence is provided.

I have found in the past that debunkers are just as liable to cognitive dissonance, vagueness, cherry-picking, and fraudulent manipulation of data as true-believers. Dunning is no different. His references are woefully inadequate, and incredibly limited (I note, for example, the podcasts on both RV in general (focussing basically *solely* on Joe McMoneagle, and ONE TV program) and Stargate only have references to newspaper articles (bar one actual "research paper" which was written by a known debunker).

He also is quite liberal with using ad hominems.... why is Russell Targ, Hal Putoff and others in a "Rogues Gallery?" - he offers absolutely NO reason for why they, as scientists, shouldn't be viewed any differently to any other scientist doing research (other than, obviously, Dunning doesn't believe in paranormal stuff - and this is sufficient to denigrate anyone who does - mind you, withOUT reading through the published research on the field!)

So, I'm watching this recommended video...

And, 15 minutes in, and I see problems with it already... such as the arrogance & hubris of the scientists they're talking with. They don't seem to understand that when they say "the laws of physics", they're not actually talking about reality in this universe, but about this lot of humans *understanding* of the reality. While there are underlying 'laws of physics' at work in the universe, that doesn't mean by any means that we actually understand them all, nor that any other beings in the universe would be constrained by our limited understanding. (given our technology hasn't even gotten to the point of getting us outside of this solar system should be a good indicator of just how much we have to learn!) So, it's quite ridiculous to think that a species that's at least as intelligent as humans - but with thousands, tens of thousands, millions (or even billions) or years more technological development would be just as limited in space travel as and by our current understanding of physics (and engineering) is just stupid! (as one commenter on that video wrote - even our "Relativity" allows for wormholes and other dimensions, etc). They have mentioned twice this "breaking the laws of physics", rather than addressing the elephant in the room - our lack of understanding of all the laws in place. Quantum Mechanics would be a good example of this - and the possibilities of 'teleportation'.

19mins - his logic is really flawed! Just before then, he talks about the Christmas tree issue - having technologically advanced civilisations around at the same time... yet, then ignores that when he says that since they haven't landed on the White House lawn, they can't exist (or have "broken" the laws of physics" (quote/unquote).

https://www.reddit.com/r/UAP/comments/18udkus/documentary_the_ufo_movie_they_dont_want_you_to/?share_id=FFNTmlS2fwt0Q7u16vGof

This has some really good comments (only 10!!) for this supposed 'debunk' video! The hubris of Dunning is amazing!

Jesus (by whatever name) has already been done... dare I say, to death (and after).

For Joseph Smith - There are currently a very limited number of viewers available (in general, and very much more specifically in Farsight), and time for them to do sessions. There are almost effectively an infinite number of possible targets (obviously, some far more interesting than others).

So, the question becomes - which should take priority??? (Obviously, other than those that someone is offering up sufficient money to have done).

I would suggest it may be *MUCH* better to form an RV group - get people the basic methodology in place, and a bit of practice, and some time down the road, do such a tasking. You'll be far more likely to get it done in your lifetime.

(NB - the last bit is not in any way specific to your targets... it's true for just about any targets people come up with - including (if not especially) a lot that I'd like to see done!)

I would have thought Paul H Smith or David Morehouse would already have done some projects along those lines, being themselves educated in the Church of the Latter Day Saints ("Mormons"). You might want to touch bases with them.