A remote viewer, Joseph McMoneagle appeared on "Nightline" and on the ABC special "Put to the Test" in 1995 and aparently his perfofmace was pretty remarkable. Then The Washington Post wrote about it. Links below. https://washingtonpost.com/archive/lifestyle/1995/12/04/up-close-personal-with-a-remote-viewer/a0c28792-d7de-4b59-9510-9a73fb23a732/
My take.
Remote viewing is and will not go mainstream. Why. The owners of the world will not allow. We can have a short cameo like Joseph McMoneagle in 1995. And as being the owner of the world would you allow remote viewing go mainstream?
I hope I am wrong.
@Michael - LOL - you seem to be bouncing off the walls of the forum with the frustration of the Remote Viewing process and outcomes - that they're not accurate, they don't pay, they can cause security concerns, it's over-rated, the information is not provable.
In the RemoteViewed video interview with McMoneagle, he stated his hit rate percentages - no they weren't 100% but he wasn't even expecting that outcome. He was paid quite handsomely for some Projects, and he's still here to tell the tale. I'm just not sure what your expectations are
I think Remote Viewing is going to garner some heightened interest in the future - it being mentioned and brought into conversations around the UFO/USO/Alien/Disclosure/Agenda, and people will explore this method of investigating, forecasting and research (as they should) to get a handle on what its about, its application, what it can do and what it can be used for, etc.. I think its on a steady increase in interest.
I think most peoples investment in it though is limited to exploring the subject enough to know what it basically is and to have enough understanding of it that when its mentioned they know what is being talked about.
Many will try it out - and then will come the deluge of conversation about it.
What I took away from what McMoneagle said was, that Remote Viewing is hard work, it takes time to learn, its repetitious, but it has it rewards.
It might not go 'mainstream' as in people learning it, but it might generate more business as in people wanting to consult with Remote Viewers for help or investigations of all sorts.
As for pushback against Remote Viewing though, anything that has the ability to be 'advantageous' that comes from our own innate human abilities that cant be bottled and mass manufactured, owned and controlled, will always be in danger of being ridiculed, pushed aside, banned, rubbished and demoted to stop it progressing.
Remote Viewing will have its day.
.(JMO)
If you do not belive in it, why you follow it. ð
Como on remote viewing. ððĪŠ
PS.
Do you know an jokes about RV?
@Michael, I understand what you're saying - and as for the evidence, as Courtney has said, he cant give anyone proof. He has also said that PrinCess is a Telepath, and it comes through in her sessions - which also means that the results we're seeing from her include this. But they all rely on other human psychic abilities to some degree, and some are more extensively developed than others. Remote Viewing is a access method, but cannot exclude the use of those other human abilities.
And it is a production - we see roughly 10 minutes of explanation in the videos from each Viewer.
There's no reason you cant view your own version of what's going on. You don't have to rely on their results. And no, you don't have to agree with them.
And as for the Ark stuff - and some of the info coming out - I'm waiting to see where that ends up.
Another topic closely linked IMHO to RV is NDE (Near Death Experiences). The published evidence by those who are credible investigators is overwhelming.
I believe it's impossible to say humans don't have souls (is-be) inside. And, those "souls" don't speak to each other with words that originate with vibrating vocal cords that create a compression wave of sound through the air. No--they don't do it that way,.....but they do communicate.
I have three close friends who died and came back. One has horrible scarring over the majority of her body and stopped counting after 20 surgeries to graft skin back on her burned and chard face and chest. And I've read a lot on the NDE topic which I find utterly fascinating.
I consider the NDE topic more mature than the RV topic. Even after decades, and even hundreds of years if you go back to investigations that happens in the late 1800 or early 1900s, science still scofs at the notion.
"It's the effect of hypoxia during death...." or "It's a hallucination..." or .....on and on.
I think science really has a problem letting go and changing its paradigm.
Now,...if NDE exists (and they certainly do IMHO), then why is it not possible that our soul, our "is-be" doesn't have innate abilities dialed down by our human flesh?
Anyway...my $0.02.
I personally think there IS something to RV. WE will know in a few years because there have been some predictions about 2024.
In the mean time, I'm going to keep an open mind.
Star Ali Mistriel
View More
Ibiscus
Edward K
Remote viewing still has not completed its first century, in its form outside of religious or esoteric beliefs and closer to general and universal protocol.
A major reason for the lack of accuracy is that the protocol is basically designed to be descriptive and indefinite, so it would be like describing circumstances and offering suggestions without drawing clear conclusions.
In what ways will remote viewing will change?
To me, funding and the use of artificial intelligence are important, so that data can be analyzed from different angles and perspectives.
A real project should involve at least 20 Remote viewers from my perspective,
In addition, the project is assigned totally blindly, with a need for more than three analysts.
If the project is ongoing, it may need more than one visit, whether through the same team of 20 Remote Viewers or a completely new one.
As an example, one who target an ancient period, such as building the pyramids, may need analysts from Egyptologists who may request a re-visit of a particular targets.
In order to do so, very large funding must be available.
It is easier to use technical methods to spy on or follow opponents at present, but if you have enough data, artificial intelligence can predict what is going on in my mind at that moment without the need for anything else.
Having data and continuously updating variables allows us to predict many details as well as anticipate their occurrence.
Thus, remote viewing depends on those who have a passion for understanding consciousness, and that passion will not diminish.
It won't end, and if it's not the norm right now, it will be important in the future
You used a specific word: "consciousness".
RV isn't going to end any time soon. Why?....because science is slowly being forced to take "consciousness" into account.
I've seen data from Dean Radin's double-slit experiments, using a closed system and simple "thought" to control the outcome. I know a thing or two about statistical probabilities, and when you have "p" values as low as what he produced, and with other analytic tools, the space for chance controlling the outcome is gone.
Our "is-be" interacts with the physical world, and can even influence it in measurable ways. And, if we have that ability (which Radin and others have and continue to show -- at the reluctance of mainstream science), then is it really that big of a leap to consider the possibility that maybe, the world itself, might just interact with our "is-be" in return?
RVs are just closing the loop is all.
Doesn't seem like that big of a stretch to me considering all the other work in consciousness going on.
Star Ali Mistriel
Nameless
Del