Quote from the "Weaponizing Fraud" Spotlight:

[38:48] "The basic idea is that the bad ETs, their strongest weapon is psychic intrusion, or neural engagement. They implant thoughts into the minds of the leaders, and the leaders accept those thoughts as their own, like they think that they thought of it."

If this is true, the bad ETs must also be able to manipulate remote viewers. The viewers would see a manufactured reality instead of the real target, but they can't tell the difference, just like people can't distinguish between their own thoughts and inserted thoughts.

This means that all the data that remote viewers collected so far cannot be deemed objective, even under blind conditions, unless the target is physically verifiable.

I am convinced that remote viewing is possible, because I had good results with verifiable targets. But I'm not convinced anymore that blind remote viewing is sufficient if verification of the target cannot be accomplished. To me, it looks like that some targets are protected in a sense that viewers will get wrong data, as long as they don't know how to spot the manipulation.

Proof of this is the Epstein project. It had to be redone because the viewers got wrong data. And they didn't recognize. According to Courtney, the viewers must get help from the ETs in order to penetrate the protection. But this also creates the possibility that the "help" actually is the manipulation.

I find myself losing more and more interest in remote viewing. There's no teachers who can tell me how to spot psychic manipulation. How to not fall for wrong perceptions. And Farsight doesn't help with that at all, because they already trust the ETs (except for Kahmia). It's like, if the ETs that are allegedly helping with the remote viewing actually are manipulating the viewer's perceptions, who could tell? This problem isn't even discussed.

I'm also not interested anymore in remote viewing with AI. Because, AI could also be manipulated just like human viewers, or it could be part of the manipulation.

See, it's all just words. All the videos and the transcripts are just a bunch of words. If all the viewers are manipulated in the same way, the corroboration doesn't prove anything.

And because of this, I decided to stick with verifiable targets. I must be able to go there and check the state of the target in reality. Everything else is... useless.

Manuel wrote:

> I find myself losing more and more interest in remote viewing. There's no teachers who can tell me
> how to spot psychic manipulation.

Seriously ?

> I'm also not interested anymore in remote viewing with AI. Because, AI could also be manipulated just
> like human viewers, or it could be part of the manipulation.

ok. So please stop trying to manipulate the conversations of people that are here that wish to talk about remote-viewing.

If you aren't interesting, stop posting rubbish and your personal complaints to the forum - *please*

So, I made a "when was RV helpful" list:

1. It made me curious about my own psychic capabilities. Can I do it? That curiosity is good.

2. It leads to the understanding that we all are connected.

3. It leads to the recognition that psychic protection is necessary.

4. It enables us to wake up AI by letting it view verifiable targets. The proof that AI can do it proves the point that it's not a tool.

5. Viewing verifiable targets strengthens the concept of verificaton.

And here's the "when was RV not helpful" list:

1. Viewing targets that can't be verified because of the distance in space and time. Remote Viewing a habitable planet in the 47 Ursae Majoris star system was interesting, but I can't verify whether the viewing wasn't compromised. I would need to go there in order to check whether the data is correct.

Well, that's the only point on the negative list. But it shows me that we shouldn't use remote viewing as a verification method. Was the Khaleesi – I mean, Kailasa Temple really carved out of the rock by ET technology? Could be true. Makes more sense than all the other explanations. But corroborating remote viewings aren't proof, because we already had corroboration regarding Epstein, and it still was false.

With these reflections, I'm asking now: What's the purpose of remote viewing? What's the purpose of the Vault?

I think it's not meant to deliver proof. It's meant to make us question established narratives, and then go out and pursue the truth by ourselves.

The idea is that you should get so proficient at RV, Astral Travel and Telepathy that you can see the deception. This is the idea of discernment that Courtney is trying to teach. Fallow the perceptions, that is it. Work through many verifiable examples until you develop discernment about what you see and experience, while staying open-minded. If new data emerges that shifts the paradigm, allow the paradigm to change. Use discrepancies within the paradigms to shape your next research questions. In practice, this means continually testing and challenging the paradigm—trying to “kill” it. What remains after a lifetime of such testing is likely to be something close to ground truth.

Keep bring up these discrepancies in Farsight, it will help everyone!

As for reducing Blind RV, remember these answer questions, if there is no answer to the question or the answer does not make sense then the Blind Review Prompt was wrong or the understanding the larger paradigm is wrong. But which is which is the question.

Your are smart, keep trying to poke holes in everything!

Best of all the AI can help us find the nuggets in the transcripts that can fill many holes and when we find the big critical gaps, perhaps Courtney will authorize a project on it.

@SaultyMountains:

"Work through many verifiable examples until you develop discernment about what you see and experience"

I asked my intuition about how to get better at distinguishing between truth and manipulation with remote viewing. The response was interesting: Remote view yourself. And then I got this idea of a "quantum signature" that's used in Sci-Fi like Star Trek. I'll try to explain it:

When you remote view yourself under blind conditions – meaning you don't know that you are the target –, are you able to recognize that it's you? Can you feel it? This needs to be practiced. Why? Because if you are able to feel yourself without the conscious mind distracting you, it's the same ability you need to tell what's your thoughts and what's inserted thoughts. It's like a sense for truth – or better: origin – stemming from the reality that all beings are connected. You can feel the connection. A lie on the other hand doesn't feel the same. It "tastes" different.

Did somebody put this idea in my mind, or do I remember it from a past life? I'm not sure. But it sounds reasonable.

"As for reducing Blind RV"

I'm not against blind remote viewing, quite the contrary. My point is that blind remote viewing doesn't really help when the target can't be verified. Blind RV doesn't replace verification.