Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Remote viewers: have you seen past 2012?

page: 8
73
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 15 2009 @ 05:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by Tayesin

Originally posted by v01i0
Remote viewing doesn't not refer on seeing future. Remote means distant and is bound to location. Remote viewer could see distant places at this moment, not in future.

I think strictly speaking you would be correct, but at the same time i also think we perceive it far too strictly.


I agree. I just posted this for the sake of clarification. Because we all aren't psychics being able to interpret the meaning beyond (mis-)spoken words, I thought I'd clarify.

When broading the concept of 'remote viewing', we could include the connotations of 'remote future'. But as I said, for the sake of conversation we have to be as precise as possible.

Sincerely,

-v

[edit on 15-10-2009 by v01i0]




posted on Oct, 15 2009 @ 05:14 AM
link   
people on this forum need a reality smack in the face... they speak of molecular vibrations and moving to a higher dimension and seeing into the future...

I am a beleiver in things beyond imagination but you all sound so stupid. You are literally taking all of sciences key words and smudging them into some 2012 theory of skipping off into lala land.

single topic 2012 mayan calendar

single topic dimensions

single topic matter vibrating

single topic remote viewers

single topic seeing into the future

single topic aliens landing on earth

single topic doomsday


smudge them all together.... and magically you have this thread!! yaaay

none of these things directly correlate.


here is the real mayan prophecy

www.youtube.com...

here is an explanation of the fourth dimension

www.youtube.com...

here is an explanation of molecular vibrations

en.wikipedia.org...

here is a professional dreamer who can see into the future that doesnt pan out so well

videos.howstuffworks.com...



now everyone do your homework please before posting anymore mumbo jumbo.

Your making science look bad. Your making the mayans look crazy.

Oh and lets not forget jesus! you think jesus would like the mayans predict the end of the world? Mayans arent christian!!!

you all need to calm your brains down smoke some weed or something



posted on Oct, 15 2009 @ 05:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by v01i0

Originally posted by Tayesin

Originally posted by v01i0
Remote viewing doesn't not refer on seeing future. Remote means distant and is bound to location. Remote viewer could see distant places at this moment, not in future.

I think strictly speaking you would be correct, but at the same time i also think we perceive it far too strictly.


I agree. I just posted this for the sake of clarification. Because we all aren't psychics being able to interpret the meaning beyond (mis-)spoken words, I thought I'd clarify.

When broading the concept of 'remote viewing', we could include the connotations of 'remote future'. But as I said, for the sake of conversation we have to be as precise as possible.

Sincerely,

-v

[edit on 15-10-2009 by v01i0]




ok again you all dont understand what your talking about

remote means distant as you said

time is a measurement

therefore you can correlate time and remote as being the same thing


here is the definition

re·mote (r-mt)
adj. re·mot·er, re·mot·est
1.
a. Located far away; distant in space.
b. Hidden away; secluded: a remote hamlet.
2. Distant in time: the remote past.


notice it can be distant in time or space


learn to educate yourselves please. both of you. before you open that yapper



posted on Oct, 15 2009 @ 05:26 AM
link   
reply to post by sciencenewby
 


I guess what you said in the beginning of your post, goes for you as well



Originally posted by sciencenewby
2. Distant in time: the remote past.

notice it can be distant in time or space

learn to educate yourselves please. both of you. before you open that yapper


You should have add 'the remote future'.

I tend to think that it is impossible to see beyond time in either direction, past or future. All we can see is what we are truly seeing right now. But then again, it is my opinion.

Have a nice day,

-v

[edit on 15-10-2009 by v01i0]



posted on Oct, 15 2009 @ 05:27 AM
link   
reply to post by sciencenewby
 


If you do not like a topic do not click on it coming on and saying people are stupid is NOT the way to go it it you have negative thoughts about a topic state them without name calling.
Me i would like to know if anyone has remote viewed past 2012.

THANKYOU



posted on Oct, 15 2009 @ 05:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by v01i0
reply to post by sciencenewby
 


I guess what you said in the beginning of your post, goes for you as well



Originally posted by sciencenewby
2. Distant in time: the remote past.

notice it can be distant in time or space

learn to educate yourselves please. both of you. before you open that yapper


You should have add 'the remote future'.

I tend to think that it is impossible to see beyond time in either direction, past or future. All we can see is what we are truly seeing right now. But then again, it is my opinion.

Have a nice day,

-v

[edit on 15-10-2009 by v01i0]



the little blurp after distant in time "the remote past" is an example. They only list one example for each defintion.

the remote past and the remote future would both be accurate. dont be a smarty pants



posted on Oct, 15 2009 @ 05:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by mars1
reply to post by sciencenewby
 


If you do not like a topic do not click on it coming on and saying people are stupid is NOT the way to go it it you have negative thoughts about a topic state them without name calling.
Me i would like to know if anyone has remote viewed past 2012.

THANKYOU


I do enjoy this topic of remote viewing if it is kept within sanity and is factual.

I am not talking about you. Your interest is my interest. We share the common goal here. I am just trying to weed out the people who "think" they are remote viewers on the internet... but in actuality are fakers sitting behind a computer screen where they are "safe to pretend"


Like the one person who said you may have been seeing an alternate dimension and not this dimension. I linked the science behind dimensions... if someone was remote viewing another dimension then you couldnt mistake it for the usual dimension because nothing would be the same shape!


I would love to hear someones remote viewing past 2012. But please accompany the story with what you saw and how you knew what time it was(year). And please spare including the following words because you probably dont know what they mean. Molecular vibrations, dimensions, higher dimensions, ascending, alternate realities.


I am just as interested as the next person.



posted on Oct, 15 2009 @ 05:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by sciencenewby
ok again you all dont understand what your talking about

remote means distant as you said

time is a measurement

therefore you can correlate time and remote as being the same thing

here is the definition

re·mote (r-mt)
adj. re·mot·er, re·mot·est
1.
a. Located far away; distant in space.
b. Hidden away; secluded: a remote hamlet.
2. Distant in time: the remote past.

notice it can be distant in time or space

learn to educate yourselves please. both of you. before you open that yapper


Thank you newby.

I think we are talking about the same thing, albeit with slightly different perspectives on the wording, although our intent with definitions is the same.

I find it amusing that so many "educated" people have such unbalanced ego, tending to be superior in their communications with us plebs. Perhaps that is due to the perception of being amongst the Elite once studies are completed.

It is a shame that they did not learn Manners too.

Also, who is to say what is Factual and Sanity? Is it the one who learned through education, perhaps, but maybe those who do view or project may also know too from their direct experience without being officially trained?

[edit on 15-10-2009 by Tayesin]



posted on Oct, 15 2009 @ 06:20 AM
link   
reply to post by sciencenewby
 



Originally posted by sciencenewby

the little blurp after distant in time "the remote past" is an example. They only list one example for each defintion.

the remote past and the remote future would both be accurate. dont be a smarty pants


Haha, OK. You win! I guess you are here for the sake of argument. Why don't you read through whole post in order to 'intelligently' find out the stand of another?

I don't consider remote viewing to be true - then again, I don't know, since I don't have any experiences of it. It might be true, but I am more willing to think it is merely fantasizing with the help of imagination - thus, capability of human nervesystem located mostly around head area.

Here on ATS, during few years span, there has been quite few 'remote viewing experiments', which all seem to back up this claim. Plus being unable to do it personally, also tends to bend one's opinion in that direction.

But then again, I can't ride singlewheeled bike, play ice-hockey very well, astral travel, do consciouss OOBE, do clairvoyance nor -audience... wait I did do clairaudience once. But anyways, I just lay myself back and see what is coming.


As I stated on my previous post:

Originally posted by v01i0
I tend to think that it is impossible to see beyond time in either direction, past or future. All we can see is what we are truly seeing right now. But then again, it is my opinion.


Sincerely,

-v

[edit on 15-10-2009 by v01i0]



posted on Oct, 15 2009 @ 06:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by kapodistrias

Originally posted by Psychonaughty
Though, the people who move on or repeat the cycle will have to walk the valley of death, its just how it is.


And from where comes this conclusion??


I dont think thats right either. There is a lot of difference between having your soul harvested (Move up to 5D) or die and the soul is the redistributed to another 3D planet to repeat the cycle.



posted on Oct, 15 2009 @ 06:49 AM
link   
Good question High Eye It would be nice to hear what Ingo Swann would see. There are psychics who claim to not be able to see beyond 2012.



posted on Oct, 15 2009 @ 07:00 AM
link   
reply to post by sciencenewby
 


Answer to all questions. Take a couple remote viewing classes and it will all be explained to you!

Because as Ingo Swann once stated:

---

It's unkind to point out the Obvious
to those who don't want to see it.

But it's worse to point out the Invisible
to those convinced it doesn't exist.



posted on Oct, 15 2009 @ 07:36 AM
link   
reply to post by Psychonaughty
 


I am not disagreeing with you, but i feel we're all in the same boat here, and to say that you absolutely know whats going to happen, and speak in such a condescending tone.... doesn't show anything to me.

If i had a clear dream, so absolutely real about what was going to happen, or if i studied it for years, ultimately at the end of the day, we all don't know what is going to happen. Plus, the thread is to hear other remote viewing angles on this future event.



posted on Oct, 15 2009 @ 08:07 AM
link   


Great. I'm glad another experienced person has joined the thread. May I ask, what did you think of Dr. Morehouse's book? I thought the first 3/4 was quite compelling, yet the last 1/4 fantastical. On the order of mental breakdown where reality and unreality meet. I completely agree that a consciousness shift of the masses is in the works. Not in 2012, but has already begun. 2012 may be the apex point. Would you please describe why you feel anxiety of fear in viewing this event? I am very interested in other peoples intuition since I have developed my own. I feel a great excitement is building in the ethers and all around us. I STRONGLY feel that this is not another Y2K type of event. I can already feel the waves reverberating back to us. There is definitely something happening. My feeling is completely independent of the 2012 theories and Mayan predictions because I feel it mysel





With all due respect, don't you mean simply......someone who has the same view as yours? What makes you think this person is "experienced" doesn't that require evidence?


Sorry for any confusion, but no, that is not what I was trying to say. I meant experienced. Someone else who has been trained to remote view as opposed to others here on this thread who have many opinions and little education on the subject.

[edit on 15-10-2009 by Spirit Warrior 11:11]



posted on Oct, 15 2009 @ 08:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by nrky
This thread is rather devoid of posts questioning the EXISTENCE of 'remote viewing' and 'the end of the world in 2012', so I will contribute.

Just because there's a conspiracy theory relating to possible government research into a topic, doesn't mean it is real.
Just because our cultures over the last few thousand years used the solar cycle to determine crop rotation and peak/optimal harvest times, and that the solar cycle was due to change at a certain time, that doesn't imply that the world will cease to exist then.
Just because some crazed vague man from hundreds of years ago wrote a series of texts that the 'thousand monkeys with typewriters in a basement could eventually write the works of shakespeare' could apply to, doesn't mean that they are accurate predictions, especially when they are being misinterpreted.
Just because some money-grubbing hollywood director makes a movie about the year 2012, that doesn't make it real.
Just because Al Gore is running out of money and wants to sell more tickets to his 'talks' whilst scaring the crap out of us, and he and his eco-terrorist buddies want to set a timeline for our 'stop using technology to save the planet', doesn't mean you should listen to them.


I am hoping that this post will give some actual discussion as to the EXISTENCE of remote viewing and the 2012 armageddon, because frankly, this thread seems rather ignorant.

To paraphrase Penn and Teller: Remote viewing and 2012... is MALE BOVINE FECES!


I find posts like these to rarely be worth replying to. I felt compelled to respond to this one, however, due to the massive dose of hypocrisy within it. YOU are saying that WE are ignorant because we are interested in RV. We have also been discussing the events of the timeline as we see it for many pages, yet you missed that as well. IT IS YOU who are ignorant.

I suggest you do some actual research into the subject before believing that it is a 'conspiracy theory'. You can read a book or take a class I don't really care. Do you understand how ignorant you are for saying this is not real without any understanding yourself. Are we ignorant for believing this after we have done our research, taken classes, and devoted massive amounts of time? I can tell you one thing for certain, you are a massive hypocrite.



posted on Oct, 15 2009 @ 08:29 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Oct, 15 2009 @ 08:44 AM
link   
reply to post by Psychonaughty
 


No such thing as 'free will'. It is a myth.

Causality my friend, everything (EVERYTHING) you do is a result of causes.



posted on Oct, 15 2009 @ 08:48 AM
link   
reply to post by Freenrgy2
 



Originally posted by Freenrgy2
reply to post by Psychonaughty
 


No such thing as 'free will'. It is a myth.

Causality my friend, everything (EVERYTHING) you do is a result of causes.


Agreed, to a certain point. There's freedom of choice and it is for stupid people only; a wise person does have no choices to make, because one knows exactly what needs to be done.

-v



posted on Oct, 15 2009 @ 08:50 AM
link   
There are camps. It is cold. I see Asians on American soil in uniform. There are resistance groups. Social order has broken down. Lots of clouds in the sky, overcast. Feels damp almost constantly. Food shortages common. Plans being made to move large groups of people. Montanta, Idaho, the Dakota's.



posted on Oct, 15 2009 @ 08:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by v01i0
reply to post by Freenrgy2
 



Originally posted by Freenrgy2
reply to post by Psychonaughty
 


No such thing as 'free will'. It is a myth.

Causality my friend, everything (EVERYTHING) you do is a result of causes.


Agreed, to a certain point. There's freedom of choice and it is for stupid people only; a wise person does have no choices to make, because one knows exactly what needs to be done.

-v


And the knowing was caused. You do not know on your own. You know from things that happen to you or learn. These things cause you to know. Even freedom of choice is not free. You chose because of causes.

It's hard to grasp but when you do, things seem much simpler.





new topics

top topics



 
73
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join