Remote Viewing time

[Terri]

Per the definition of RV it needs to be verifiable.
If the target or session is not verifiable, it's not RV.
Past is fairly verifiable, and anything else the viewer gathers is just anything else, discoveries in the future may prove the past (thus may prove or validate a session) .. the future is very iffy and is not, does not qual as RV until it comes to pass.. IMO and experience the future (viewing) is only fairly stable/ accurate about, around a week or two in advance. I don't care what anyone says this has proven out over and over.. some RVers (some of the best) have stuck their necks out with some (published) predict.. I have never seen anything come to pass.. yet.
But/and I'm not holding my breath.
The past is easy, very easy, it's also highly verifiable.
There is a time line out there, it's very easy to lock onto a specific signal, everything leaves a signal, an imprint, a shadow, a trail. Any embellishment ummm addition,fabrication of fact/s non factual, past lets say.. would be considered TOL, (telepathic overlay) from the tasker/monitor, AOL (analytical overlay) from the viewer, and there is such a thing as viewing the feedback..

RemoteViewing is used for verifiable stuff.. when some folks hype it up as something else.. well it's something else but not  Remote Viewing.

What has come to pass, zippo, nothing, nada .. none of the prophets or seers.. Cayce, Nostra.. who else Sister somebody.. the bible.. has anything ever come to pass? The only thing I have my eye on now is the calendar the Maya and the Egyptian, they seem to end here shortly.. could be interesting IMO.

   Terri


Does anyone here (Terri?) have any experience with time RV'ing, and in particular forwards - as that hasn't happened yet in the physical real-time zone, and cannot therefore be contrived retrospectively? Historical RV's can easily be influenced by the existing knowledge of the RV'er of the event, and embellished - subconsciously of course. The future, even tomorrow, hasn't happened yet in the RT zone, and so any pre-cognitive results and predictions which could be verified 24 hours later after it had occured is much more significant.
   

[Adrian]

Greetings Terri!

Thanks very much for the response regarding future RV!

I am not sure that verifiability is too much of an issue is it? After all, if an RV'er sees a specific future happening, in accordance and connected with a pre-defined target, and the happening subsequently comes to pass as previously viewed, then is is surely verifiable? Especially so if this is reproducable.

I am not talking about large scale global situations, over very long time spans or future projections for the planet or universe, but rather a very specific focus, on a very specific, symbollically identifiable factor, say a maximum of 24 hours into the future.

After all, isn't scientific RV just that for the most part? Being provided with symbolism, coordinates etc., and viewing the associations?

This would be simpler, the target and focus is known, the only factor to be viewed is the status of that definitive target 24 hours hence.

I would be most interested to hear your further views on that one

Best regards,

Adrian.

[Terri]

Adrian writes;
I am not sure that verifiability is too much of an issue is it?

. . . .I'm kinda confused here, verifiability, just the main issue, that's what RV was developed for.
Accuracy.
To qualify for it to be per definition Remote Viewing there must be verifiable feedback (somewhere sometime), otherwise your what? just psychically seeing *stuff* and no one knows if it's true or false, or what the heck your seeing or doing, or even the why..
(Channeled data?? of/for what good or use?)
(Why would you/one put all the money/manpower/research/years into something, if it wasn't verifiable, it was developed for spying initially, so what good/use/worth is bogus data-if your spying (?)


A~
After all, if an RV'er sees a specific future happening, in accordance and connected with a pre-defined target, and the happening subsequently comes to pass as previously viewed, then is is surely verifiable?


. . . .  Yes this is verifiable..
kinda confused here to/what your questions are.
(But keeping in mind there is no actual seeing with RV practice,no grand visual scene unfolds, RV is sensual, involves the senses, seeing like a blind man (feeling/knowing/describing descriptive) there is no labeling, identifying from the viewer, it's just a descriptive process).
If the viewers session data is verified a day or week in the future then its a hit, a verifiable remote viewing session equals a hit.



A~Especially so if this is reproducable.
I am not talking about large scale global situations, over very long time spans or future projections for the planet or universe, but rather a very specific focus, on a very specific, symbollically identifiable factor,

. . . . (whats a symbolic identifiable factor?)
very little if any symbolism in RV.
The specific focus would be the target site? or the tasking?

A~
say a maximum of 24 hours into the future.
After all, isn't scientific RV just that for the most part? Being provided with symbolism, coordinates etc., and viewing the associations?

. . . . viewing the associations. . . (?)
Viewing the signal?
scientific remote viewing..
SRV? Is that the Dames/Dourif concoction? That's not considered main stream remote viewing, SRV is not even considered actually.
The coords represent/designate a/the signal (line) is all.
The viewer receives a set of coords.
The viewer describes (usually single word descriptive) what data or information s/he receives.
This is usually done (written up) in or keeping in/with a certain session structure.


A~ This would be simpler, the target and focus is known,

. . . . . You mean to know what the target/site/objective is?
no and never.
Frontloading is death to an RV session.
All RV is worked blind.
(Viewer never knows what a target/subject/location is)
If the viewer is not blind to the target site, their mind will do the talking/directing (fill in and provide details, and the left brain/analytical, is almost always wrong) Your thinking rational mind will almost always fookle you up, your analytical is subjective and  stimulus/responsive, that's why OOBers dont usually do well in regard to .. ummmmm... trying to target and/or reach a blind targeted site, I've never seen an OOBer reach/contact a signal target site, RV takes a lot of discipline, it takes a lot of practice, it's very structured, the etheric is very subjective and reactive, it aims to please)


A~ the only factor to be viewed is the status of that definitive target 24 hours hence.
I would be most interested to hear your further views on that one []
   
   
. . .  yes, a tasker could task and re-task a specific site/object/person a bit in the future and have viewer work this/these sessions over and over, daily weekly etc.
That's what's known as tagging (on to a site or person).

Read JoeM's first book on RV.
Stay away from the outliers in the field.
There is Joe, Skip, Paul and Lyn, the rest are afterwards, after the fact, they are recent concoctions after the fact.
RV works it doesn't need to be altered or changed.
RV was designed for a specific reason (accuracy ).
It is awesome as it stands.
Many folks have grandiose dreams of pushing that window even wider, IMO, you then loseRV and have something else.   
If something else (fringe development) is reliable dependable accurate/duplicatable/teachable then by all means call it something else.

I think you said earlier something about something RB discovered, some source of info or knowledge, IMO this is perhaps what Ingo Swann (acknowledged father of RV) called the Matrix.
(read his WWWsite also,
just the RV stuff,
not the goofy stuff, ET's and such, or read the ET/alien stuff, it's just not my cup of tea, too "out there" and unverifiable for my taste, once your out of RV state everything becomes personally subjective and objective).

Have fun...  Terri

[Adrian]

Greetings Terri!

Interesting discussion, and thanks for your input.

I know very little about RV, and hence the questions, but I did see this program on TV, which was very scientifically approached, and with alot of film archives of actual RV operations, and their results, and all sorts of objective stuff.

As an aside, a VERY graphical demonstration on film, was an RV'er sitting in an office thousands of miles away in a different country, guiding a bomb disposal person through a very heavy concentration land mine field!

It was an amazing act of faith on the part of the person walking through the long land mine field from one side to the other, among hundreds of deadly land mines, to mark the path for everyone else to follow afterwards. He literally walked off into the field, while the RV'er, thousands of miles away, guided him by telling him to walk left, right, forward, stop etc.. The person did in fact successfully walk across the entire mine field safely!

But there were many spying examples. One RV'er "entered" a highly secure, fortified building in Russia, to see what was going on. He described arc welders, and a ship with a flat top and lots of people. It turned out, much later, to be the construction of the first in a new range of nuclear submarines.

That is why I don't understand the "not visual" comment. On this program, the RV'ers accurately "decribed" scenes and events, and wrote them down on paper symbolically as well as by means of sketches.

As for not "frontloading" the session  - I am baffled by this. I can understand, from a completely scientific perspective, why this might not be desirable, where the concept of RV itself was in question, but not from the point of view of using RV for practical purposes which is what we are talking about here. Not random or hypothetical situations.

What I am asking seems very definitive. Can an RV'er be given the details, coordinates, call it what you will, of a very specific item, at a very specific place and time, no more than 24 hours ahead, and say what has happened to that item 24 hours later? It would be extremely easy to verify it under controlled conditions. All it would require is a device, e.g. a random number generator, that is located in a sealed room. The RV'er views the value of the number generated 24 hours hence, after which, the randon number generator, exactly at the appointed time, exactly 24 hours after the RV'er views the number, randomly generates the number. If the numbers match, then the RV'er has been verified.

That is a very simplistic model. It is frontloaded to the extent that the location is known, the random number generator is known and the time is known. But the RV'er still has to view that number 24 hours in advance of it being generated. That, to me, if repeatable, is significant.

On a general level - this is the main problem as I see it with modern RV research as per Farsight.org and others. It appears to be an almost completely scientific, academic excercise, without any practical or spiritual objectives that I can determine. Also, RV'ing back in time is certainly not conclusive either. Who can say that what people saw when the Pyramids or Stonehenge were being constructed for example, is really accurate or not? The historical record is not that accurate, so it can neither be confirmed or denied.

RV'ing into the future is different though. Because 24 hours hence, the RV'er would either be proved to be 100% right or 100% wrong.

I hope that clarifies where I am coming from

Best regards,

Adrian.

[Terri]

The construction of the pyramids and stonehenge are unverifiable targets/timeline, any sessions worked will have to wait for the future (till we figure it out) to verify the past. (to be considered RV sessions/hit/miss)
Newgrange is unverifiable but an awesome target/experience to work, all of Ireland is.
Cashel is another great target.

I worked several (blind/dbl blind) sessions for RB, he verified them, the first was the death/event of his son, at the end of the last session I started thinking/writing/knowing in "baby talk".. "Owie" I think was the word I wrote.
I hated the feedback, knowing what I was describing, I was shocked that someone would task me on that, it kinda tore me up, I never told RB that, I told the tasker tho.
It helped I hope, Ben (RB's second son)..
Another target I viewed for them, RB and tasker (Keith), was RB's first Kundalini rising.. I think.. as I recall at the end I encountered some entities, 4, I correctly named or identified 3 of them.. Jesus, Buddha. who else.. I forget, Mohammed?
Krishna.. something.. I don't have the session's, Keith and RB may.
I also viewed some for Donni... Biami and ummmmmmm the Opal Dreaming I think.. I don't have those sessions either.. She may.
Ummmmmmm also a missing person for RB, some young man in Yugoslavia? I forget. I got he was dead, accident, and I guess I correctly drew the location of the mishap, and I correctly described the/fact missing deceased/male/body, I was totally blind, all I knew was it was a missing person, not gender nor area/country/where/why/how/what.

All of that work was verified by RB, my husband/tasker/Keith, and Donni on TheDonni sessions, I was blind to all of the tasks and in some or most cases the tasker was blind.

So I guess if you want in your opinion first hand trusted reliable info, ask them how verifiable the RVed past is..

On the other hand...






















      you have different fingers.




 ~T~

[Adrian]

Greetings Terri!

Thanks very much for this personal insight into your work, I appreciate it

Don't get me wrong, I am no skeptic on RV or anything else metaphysical, Magic etc.., but RV is a very grey area in terms of the information available, claims and counter-claims, descriptions as to the experience etc.. e.g. whether it is visual or intuitive.

I don't doubt the historical accuracy of RV, especially after the accounts of your own experiences, but it still leaves the question of forward, or pre-cognitive RV, based on my scenarios of random number generators etc..

Thanks again

Kind regards,

Adrian.

[Terri]

Random number generators and just all and any and every sort of applications (pre-cog aka future) and experiments have been used for the past 20 years or more, near 30 years perhaps (by viewers, taskers, scientists, PhDs, everyday folks on the net) .. Read, hun, read, a lot of it (studies)are public documents.

As I have written before, I very often pre-view (pre-cog) my targets, I view the target befor I am tasked. I always hit.
Years ago I intentionally publicly posted my session/work to a net list it's called Innerlight, I let a fella task me, but before I agreed I had already viewed his target, so... (in playing around with him, his mind (cuz he thought he was *hot stuff* and was gonna "test" me)) I sent him the session then told him to go ahead and give me the coords.. he was confused as hell.

(IMO it's just working time as a circle or figure

(y'all come back now...


Enjoy!

~T~

[Adrian]

Greetings Terri!

Thanks for all of your valuable insight (and outsight) into these issues.

Very interesting, and I would like to learn more. Alas, you would not believe the amount of reading I do anyway both on and off the 'net in pursuit of my objectives. RV is particularly difficult, because there are so many definitions as to what it actually is!

But I think we have acertained have we not, that given a definite target and time and task, RV'ing the future is a definite yes? Regardless of how the answer is divined.

The big question I have for now, and only respond if you have time and a mind to, is "tasking by coordinates". I understand how the tasker provided targets and objectives with coordinates, but how are the coordinates derived, and how are they applied?

Coordinates are a man made parameter surely - like those on a map? The coordinates I have seen as RV targets seem very random - although they must clearly mean something. If the coordinates were "cosmic" coordinates I could understand it better, but how are RV spatial coordinates as allocated by a tasker contrived and provided in order to enable the RV'er to follow the correct timeline and place?

Please don't ask me to read about it - I already have. The derivations of coordinates are never given, just the coordinates themselves without note of how they were derived.

Thanks for your indulgence in these questions.

Best regards to all,

Adrian.

[Donni_Joy]

Hey there

Skim reading ya messages and I just wanted to say that terri's RVing was awesome. She did the Opal Dreaming first (it's in my oracle, "Oracle of the Dreamtime.") I retold her experiences to a Koori storyteller who literally screamed in excitement because Terri related the "secret" aspect of this Dreaming. So from there, with my friend, we arranged Tez to RV another location, which was totally spot-on and just mind boggling....  It just totally amazed me that she was so accurate and got the location, and she had no idea it was from me so there were no Aboriginal overtones. Totally opened my eyes.... will eventually write a book on it one of these days ... covers prohopecy and alien crash landings and a secret society under Uluru....

Thanks again for that terri -- you are one awesome chicky-babe!

Cheers
Donni

[Winged_Wolf]

This jibes with what we've found as well--that RV is one application of the input function of time ability, as are precognition and retrocognition.
All three deal with perceiving events and places occurring in time--whether past, present, or future, and all three manifest in the same way--flashes or impressions of a sensual nature (a smell, an object or building, a sound, a taste, etc).


--Winged Wolf

[Terri]

A writes~But I think we have acertained have we not, that given a definite target and time and task, RV'ing the future is a definite yes?

. . . .  The very near future seems to be the only reliable..  year/s, several months, it goes to pot (not accurate).
A week, 2 weeks is all I will do.

A~Regardless of how the answer is divined.
The big question I have for now, and only respond if you have time and a mind to, is "tasking by coordinates". I understand how the tasker provided targets and objectives with coordinates, but how are the coordinates derived, and how are they applied?
Coordinates are a man made parameter surely - like those on a map? The coordinates I have seen as RV targets seem very random - although they must clearly mean something. If the coordinates were "cosmic" coordinates I could understand it better, but how are RV spatial coordinates as allocated by a tasker contrived and provided in order to enable the RV'er to follow the correct timeline and place?

. . . . . coords originally meant, signified actual coordinates of/on planet earth. Then.. I dunno what changed.. testers, scientists, skeptics, believing/saying the viewers had/could memorize every single longitude latitude coordinate/location of the earth, so just a set of numbers were then used.
It's just intent. A direction.
So what I use what was taught to me is..
the views number (say005) , the number of the session (001), the date.
So when I task I would use,
005 / 001 / 003 / 011 / 2002.
viewer number 005
session number 1
the date is march
11th.
2002.

This is just for my bookkeeping.

I could use XXX/ABC/zed, or purple/pillows/w/pink/polka/dots, for the coords, it maters not, all the coords do is capture my intent.

When a viewer gets a set of coords, the viewer will 'go'(view) absolutely no where else but the intended target site/signal.
(it just works)

The target should be clean, it should be something that stands out or alone. Definite, defined, attractive. It should be fairly unique, distinct .. e.g., if you tasked the Taj and viewer describes a white domed building, what says viewer was not describing the capital building in Washington DC, USA? (thats beginners)

(I might also add that with ERV you can move the viewer all over during session, the whole target is there from the get go, the rest is eating the elephant one bite at a time (pulling the target appart bit by bit))

Then you can move to events.
I as a rule start in present time and have the viewer give me, describe environmentals. Then when I am satisfied that viewer is on target,  I simply move (re-task) the viewer back to the event (my intent/direction) or just tell the viewer something will catch your attention (my intent), tell me about it.
I give them the second set of coords then holding my/next intent/ion.
005 / '002' / 003 / 011 / 2002.

e.g. I use the great quake in San Francisco Calif, USA.
I bring the viewer in 5 minutes before the event, the quake.
The viewer can come in any place in San Francisco, where ever they are attracted to, that's their own choice, their own attraction.
I have them describe the environmentals, get solidly locked on target, when I am satisfied, then move them to the event (shake rattle and roll).

I task  (move advanced students) the ark of the covenant.. I task viewers to the location present time (even if tasker doesn't know the actual location) and have them describe, then I move them.. to the ark.
just with coordinates.
Just with my intent.
A trained viewer will move to the signal.

It gets more complex and defined after that, you can work tasking all sort of ways, just all sort of wonderful ways, I can hold a viewer very very tight, locked on to a very small tiny minuscule narrow area location object or time frame.
You/I could task/target a coin on my front yard and have the viewer tell me if it's heads up or tails/down..
You can "shrink" the viewer down to the molecular and have them attach certain colors to certain shapes/structure and describe/draw a molecular construct.

You can also include in your basic tasking a sub target.  That means when I task a target, another will surface (also).
That's a bit advanced (and sometimes mind bending).

It's all my intent and direction, it's all mine every nuance.
I use all of me, and the viewers skills, knowing the viewers that I worked with (sometimes training them), viewers are not all alike, many have different strong points etc..
Sometime I just think it's genius, it's amazing.
A well trained viewer and monitor are an amazing team.

So now you have read and read, now would be the time to get trained. Training, actually working RVing, explains sooooooooooo many aspects, more than you'll ever get outa books. Then go on to teach it, this really brings RV full circle, into perspective.
Learn it, then put the shoe on the other foot (total mind/brain/viewpoint flip flop), trade places and have to put into words and use/duplicate/teach what you have been thru/know, it really clarifies the (RV) picture.

Like I told you before, simple..
it's just magic Adrian ..

~T~

[Terri]

Hiya Donni..

Thanks much for your input.. it's a bright spot

Hugs...

~T~

[Adrian]

Greetings everyone!

I saw a very interesting program on TV a while back on Remote Viewing - all the more interesting because I almost never watch TV, let alone that particular channel, and for some reason I switched it on and there it was :-)Roger Moore was the program host - 60' of it.

Very interesting demo's of RV'ing in all sorts of situations including the usual spying ones etc.. Mostly scientific RV'ing though.

In particular, they showed what puported to be RV'ing into the distant past and into future - which seems to me to be possible.

For example, one RV'er went to the dinosaur extinction, another to the point of death of Amy Johnson, and many other such big events.

The dino RV'er described the asteroid impact, dead T-Rex's, and even going into the mind of a live dino and sensing the fear and panic.

This is stretching things without backup knowledge - they might have been influenced by the latest dino extinction theories for example.

Does anyone here (Terri?) have any experience with time RV'ing, and in particular forwards - as that hasn't happened yet in the physical real-time zone, and cannot therefore be contrived retrospectively? Historical RV's can easily be influenced by the existing knowledge of the RV'er of the event, and embellished - subconsciously of course. The future, even tomorrow, hasn't happened yet in the RT zone, and so any pre-cognitive results and predictions which could be verified 24 hours later after it had occured is much more significant.



Best regards to all,

Adrian.