Ingo Swann-Penetration The moon remotely viewed

I think people forget that our Shadow government is very intelligent. Actually they are a mix of some of the greatest minds in the world. These are not just bumbling idiots wasting time on investigating something that does not already have some kind of merit.

If you think you are skeptical imagine a panel of know it all's that are total narcissists that has to open their mind and budgets to something like this for the first time. Do you think they would have wasted 15+ years on something like this if it did not have some kind of valid application?

What about the Russians? Do you think they would have wasted 20+ years on the same absurd idea?

Originally posted by Tifozi
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan

 

I know that it is something made up by Ingo.

That's actually my point. The grid thing seems to be something to refute all the people who don't agree with him... "I'm right, you are just stupid".

then please, read up on it. he has provided a few thousand pages of information explaining how he believes the human mind works. It seems to be more sensible than any other explanation thus far, and mirrors many of my own observations.

That is all i am saying...before branding him a charlatan, read what he says. Don't cherry pick, and don't skim. Actually read it for comprehension. The "grid" is nothing more than the system your mind uses to classify and process data. It is obvious that these grids vary from person to person, especially from culture to culture.

It isn't a concept use to brow beat, it is a concept used to explain a concept.

At the end of the day, very reputable individuals vouch for Ingo Swann. His affiliation with Puthoff and SRI, alone, are enough for me.

reply to post by Tifozi


When you see things so plainly using RV, there is a tendancy to begin to regard dissenters as being narrow minded idiots. I feel that is human nature kicking in.

That is because things become very black and white. There is usually only one right answer....many possibilities but only one right answer. When you gain confidence in technique, it becomes easy to find that one answer which is the right answer. I do feel 100% accuracy is possible. Variables are, lack of committment by the viewer.

if 65% was anything like a key figure, why didn't axelrod wait for that target to be reached before doing ANY work with ingo?

reply to post by SecretGoldfish


I see your point. I believe (speaking for Ingo) that he was trying to relay the fact that the techniques were at that time only soo reliable. He did not want to give them the wrong idea. As for why did 'Axlerod'not wait, I believe the current situation did not allow for that time. They obviously were detecting activity on the moon and needed some form of answers NOW. I come to this conclusion because the agents already had the coordinates in mind and wanted more intel on that.

reply to post by dna42

Again, show me just ONE example that doesn't link me to some unfalsifiable stories. Just one. If you make claims it is your task to prove em. I'm not making any claims besides what has been researched by the science community so far.

Again, I'm happy to see you are skeptical, but I believe you are leaning towards being close minded. I have pointed you towards three different researchers already. Do you need me to read it for you?

Lynn Mctaggart studied and reported on a phenominon of mass consciousness affecting living plant life at any distance or timeframe. The effects were proven. Also reported were experiments with DNA electrical responses to emotion at any distance. This was proven.

There are also consciousness effects on water experiments that have been published. The Princeton Egg experiments were published as well. Dean Radin PhD has many papers also. There are many more.

On and on and on... deny all you want you will be left behind in the end. I also find it outrageously hilarious that you cite wikkipedia being so 'science' minded yourself. Do you believe in fox news and the easter bunny also?

[edit on 1-10-2009 by Spirit Warrior 11:11]

reply to post by Somamech

Does anyone have any thoughts on Ed Dames?

What info are you looking for? I have listened to quite a few of his interviews and I have read much from his web pages and many of the sessions his team did. I also have the DVDs he made of his classroom teaching RV to a small group. His methodology comes from being trained by Ingo. As part of his class he will send you on a mission to the moon/mars/other planet etc..

I personally would not get along with the man, but the training is a different story. If you are going to use it it may be worth it. There are also books and DVD training systems out there. I would start there.

reply to post by dna42

I simply refuse to read this rubbish because it is a waste of my time. Now why do I think that? Easy. Because others have already looked into it

I sincerely hope you are not a teacher with that mindset. Like I said, you would have been one of those guys having the opinion the world is flat because "someone else already looked into the matter". Are you kidding? If this is your answer then you should NOT have ANY opinion since you have not read any research yourself.

You refuse to read the book or any research on the matter. Yet you feel it is acceptable to post your nonsense opinion on the thread discussing these things. This is beyond ridiculous.

Originally posted by dna42
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan

 

I rely on science and the scientific community. Science is trying to understand the beauty that is existence and life. So yes, I base my knowledge on their understanding much rather than some sci fi freak who writes book about spiritual stuff and tries to win a buck on gullible people.

I am not saying that these things are impossible, just that there is no proof whatsoever

What evidence? I just see some words.

I've taken the liberty of grabbing a couple of your statements for the following example:

Are you familiar with Masaru Emoto, an internationally renowned Japanese scientist? Perhaps you've heard of the movie 'What the bleep do we know?'
Masaru Emoto discovered that molecules of water are affected by our thoughts, words and feelings.

The evidence was tangible and something you can see. Here is something to ponder.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/7db571112621.jpg[/atsimg]

What do you have to say about science now? And this scientist has a book too. Mere words?

[edit on 1-10-2009 by FlySolo]

reply to post by FlySolo


I just mentioned this experiment a couple posts above. It's a good one. Made quite a wave in the science community. But...what do we know...pseudoscience right!?

Originally posted by Spirit Warrior 11:11
reply to post by FlySolo

 

I just mentioned this experiment a couple posts above. It's a good one. Made quite a wave in the science community. But...what do we know...pseudoscience right!?

We must be psychic.

I read the book, I found the whoel remote viewing aspect of it very interesting. however the whole back story with the "Twins", "Mr.Axlerod" and the hot alien babe...just completely hokey. I really was over it when the hot dog cart was waiting for them next to plane....just silly.

reply to post by van001


I'm happy you took the time to read through it. Are you you familiar with the term "The truth is stranger than fiction" ?

Originally posted by Spirit Warrior 11:11
reply to post by van001

 

I'm happy you took the time to read through it. Are you you familiar with the term "The truth is stranger than fiction" ?

Exactly! Why would he make some of that stuff up?
To be more credible? I don't think he was making it up.
Bizzare as it may be.

Originally posted by van001
I read the book, I found the whoel remote viewing aspect of it very interesting. however the whole back story with the "Twins", "Mr.Axlerod" and the hot alien babe...just completely hokey. I really was over it when the hot dog cart was waiting for them next to plane....just silly.

When I read the book, I was like: his story would make a pretty good indie/comedy movie! You know, something not too serious, like I Heart Huckabees. Something like that. Hehehehe!

reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan


I have read it. That's why I have the opinion I have on him.

If jumping into conclusions just because someone doesn't agree with this """"""movement"""""" makes you skip details like when I said "I find interesting some of his points", I don't know why you are pointing the finger at dna...

I'm not gonna stay here debating what isn't here to debate. I have a opinion, and instead of judging me, try to respect it, or at least, understand it, before putting me on some bag.

You said a little thing that is very important. "He believes"... He believes, he thinks, he has a theory. That doesn't mean that he is right, and I stand by my opinion that the way he attempts to refute those who don't agree with him is simply pathetic.

That is my opinion, my point of view, based on information, based on his input in science. I'm not "off the grid" just because I don't agree with some chapters.

Remember Freud? In his time, some believed he was a genius, some believed he was a idiot. Today, we have him in high consideration, BUT, we use his theories only has bases, since many of them are incorrect.

Ingo, to me, is no different. Just because it looks like he makes sense, doesn't mean he is right.

---

reply to post by win 52


And you figured out that without me pointing out what I agree and disagree with Ingo?

Wow..

Variables means that you have various scenarios to understand what you don't know yet. 100% occuracy means that provably you'll also be 100% wrong at some point.

[edit on 1/10/09 by Tifozi]

Originally posted by dna42 is generally considered as pseudoscience [8] due to the lack of replicable results, and of a positive theory that explains the outcomes of experiments

So because they couldn't come of with a theory that explains the RESULTS. it is is GENERALLY considered as pseudoscience

sounds a bit backwards to me

Thank you very much for this. The subject of parapsychology GREATLY intrigues me. I had not heard of Ingo Swann until this. I am always searching for more information on RV, telepathy, psychokinesis, etc. So this has given my curiosity and self education a feast of information.

-Katerna

reply to post by Spirit Warrior 11:11


Thanks for your reply. I think I will take your advice and use what has been posted here by members as learning material and try to find some local participants in the event of saving some bucks as I've read a few sorta don't go there signs regarding Dames










[edit on 2-10-2009 by Somamech]

I have not read all of Ingo's written work so forgive me for asking if he has ever written about viewing forces such a gravity, magnetism and electricity?

I know it may seem an odd question but I have pondered this for a long time as to whether a "viewer" could see our solar system in some other forms

reply to post by Somamech


In "Penetration" he mentions viewing the sun and moon while RVing the moon. He says that the sun appears small and dim, while the moon is large and bright. Not sure why this is...but that is what he reported.

As far as "seeing" EM or gravity....i don't think that will work the same as truly seeing it. Your eye's are meant to pick up on photons. Anything that isn't photon related won't be seen...but it can still be sensed.