It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Remote Viewing Mars

page: 1
13
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 04:25 PM
link   
Mars has always fascinated man, and scrutinizing Mars images has become a passion for many people since sondes and satellites started sending back pictures from the planet's surface.

We can - for the moment - only guess what some of the Martian terrains and landscapes seem to contain.
But, what if you take the coordinates of some of these mysterious places, and remote view them?

For those who are not familiar with remote viewing technique, you can find a short introduction to it here:

en.wikipedia.org...

en.wikipedia.org...

Those of you who are familiar with remote viewing may have come across the accounts of US Military trained remote viewer Joe McMoneagle (participant in the military funded Stargate remote viewing project), and a now famous remote viewing session with McMoneagle, in which the target location was on Mars.
In short, McMoneagle described the remnants of a civilization which disappeared a long time ago:

satwater.www9.50megs.com...

Other remote viewers have also targeted locations on Mars. There are a number of remote viewing institutes teaching people how to remote view today. Two of them are the Farsight and PSI TECH institutes. They have released remote viewing session data with Mars locations as targets:

Let's start with the Farsight institute :

Target 1:



Source link:

www.msss.com...

Picture and data presentation:





PSI TECH:

Target 1:



Source link:

www.msss.com...

Target 2:



Source link:

www.msss.com...

Target 3:



Source link:

www.msss.com...

Introduction:

www.remoteviewing.com...

Session #1:

www.remoteviewing.com...

Session #2:

www.remoteviewing.com...

Session #3:

www.remoteviewing.com...

Session #4:

www.remoteviewing.com...

Session #5:

www.remoteviewing.com...

Session #6:

www.remoteviewing.com...

Session #7:

www.remoteviewing.com...


Now, the question here isn't whether you think remote viewing works or not, there are other threads for that topic. For now, remote viewing rests in the speculative domain. We can still take it seriously though, since remote viewing repeatedly provides verifiable data that turns out correct. I'd like to know why all the remote viewers reports seem to be coherently talking about dug down hidden structures on Mars. If it's just figments of imagination, why doesn't it take off in all different directions?




posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 05:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Heliocentric
I'd like to know why all the remote viewers reports seem to be coherently talking about dug down hidden structures on Mars. If it's just figments of imagination, why doesn't it take off in all different directions?

That's a good question.

The only explanation that comes to my mind is that they all share some common characteristics that makes them "work" in the same way, so their imaginations give the same results,

I know, it's not a good explanation, but I think it's better than "they talked to each other about what they should say to make people believe them".


Edited to add: are those people following ATS? All those images were discussed here some time ago.


edit on 20/9/2010 by ArMaP because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 06:19 PM
link   
reply to post by Heliocentric
 


Maybe because the structures are there? I've read accounts of Mars remote viewing done in the military that said there are hybernating Martians there.



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 07:44 PM
link   
Or because the remote viewers are feed with the SAME image and let be honest is very "suggestive" about tunnel structures.



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 07:54 PM
link   
reply to post by blackcube
 


I don't think they show them any image, that's why it's called it "in the blind" or something like that.



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 08:10 PM
link   
I consider myself someone with an open mind, as many around ATS. I have not formed an opinion about Remote Viewing yet, but something weights heavily in the forming of my opinion, which is an experience from a close friend of mine. We are talking about a person with a very pure heart and who would never lie about such a thing. He went to a workshop on various things and one of the exercises they did was with remote viewing. They also worked with Out of Body Experience. He succeeded in both exercises and tells me both are very real to him.

Now, I believe him and there is nothing anyone can do to make me think otherwise.

That said, I believe in the possibility that remote viewing works. Now, how accurate it can be and if the videos posted here are for real, that I can't say. But I believe in remote viewing and thus give the accounts posted here some credibility.

S&F



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 08:11 PM
link   
reply to post by ArMaP
 


That is correct, just given co-ordinates. That's what is so amazing about the similarities of the viewings
What a trip to what they all saw


They all viewed (with no knowledge of the target) a liquid under high pressure spraying out of a tube connected to a mound and all viewed this as artificial.

They viewed 3 underground chambers connected by tunnels below the mound. A power plant manned by hopeless humanoids?

The JPL pic of the liquid is very compelling and so are these RVs


edit on 9/20/2010 by Overtime because: (no reason given)




edit on 9/20/2010 by Overtime because: Correction



posted on Sep, 21 2010 @ 01:05 AM
link   
"Remote viewing" is a bit of a mis-nomer.

Thoughts are real things. They have substance in mental matter. Once formed they never dissipate. They a have permanence. Every thought that has ever been, remains like a history of humanity. Many of us are sensitive enough to go to the earth's mental plane and retrieve everything to do with a particular topic. Remember though that ALL thoughts are vital in this way. There is no differentiation between true and untrue.

In "RV" this subject is simply reading and reporting. The card in the pocket is nothing to do with the process. The awareness by the controller and guest of what is written on the card has so strong an effect that the subject becomes completely aware though he himself probably does not know where the information comes from.

Is this subject "viewing" mars of one million BC? No, not in a visual sense. He is not "sending his mind to mars and looking around" as we might believe. He is simply accessing those "mental footprints" left by every human being who ever considered the history of Mars and is reporting back what he finds.

Psychic ability is real. Mind reading is real. Intuition is real. Those who conduct these experiments need to realize that they cannot hide their thoughts from the subject. This is the error they make. And what of the results? Well, the record is correct. It is just a new twist on a phenomena which is as old as the human race. Any "viewing" that is done is simply the rendering by the brain consciousness of the mental records which are brought to it by the will of the subject.

Last comment. If there were "humans" on mars in the past they too would have contributed to the mental records with all their activities. These memories remain vital in mental matter even now. When the subject in this experiment taps into these ancient "books" he is, in truth, being truthful and correct.

It is for us to sort it out but first we have to know the "how" of it. The answer is simple. I hope this response of mine is useful.

tt



posted on Sep, 21 2010 @ 01:23 AM
link   
Now I want to report my own conclusions regarding those targets on Mars.

There is water below the surface the pressures of which are varied quite a bit by the ordinary things that a planet experiences in rotation. None of this need by recounted here.

At times a semi-frozen slurry breaks the surface and shows as a flow of some sort. These are often seen in craters as though the crater is being filled from below. Sometimes the crater rim is broken where the mass bursts free and makes an escape. When the pressure of the localized "burping" is spent however, the flow stops and freezes solid. This example is found where the paths to the surface cause the upwelling water to mix with soils.

Now in the case of the "glass tubes". These are produced by clear water erupting from a rocky aquifer. But, as in the muddy flows, the flows are of short duration. "Burping" is a good descriptor because it is exactly what happens. The interval between the segments of the tubes tells us of the volume of the water which is ejected from below. It flows suddenly then retreats just as suddenly leaving a relatively thin clear icy shell as sign of it's waxing and waning. A series of these "burps" results in a long variated, segmented tube. In the target we see a less seldom secondary event which is only a bit of compressed "air" and maybe some liquid which has ruptured a thin place in the ice looking like a fountain.

There is no intelligent life responsible for any of this. It is mother nature doing her thing. No biggie.

I've just provided you all with my own "remote viewing" in the above. Does it seem plausible? I am confident of it's correctness. Remember that pendulum thing which says that the simplest explanation is almost certainly the correct one.

tt



posted on Sep, 21 2010 @ 03:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by ArMaP
are those people following ATS? All those images were discussed here some time ago.


Hey ArMaP and all,

Yes, it is true that there are plenty of Mars image threads here on ATS where some or all these images have appeared, but as far as I know, none has been discussed as target location for remote viewing sessions. It's a different ballgame after all.

The picture M11-00099 - which to me is possibly THE picture capable of tipping the scale in favor of the Artificial Structures On Mars theory (together with M00-01661, which is not a subject of this thread), was first made available by Malin Space Science Systems, then J.P Skipper over at Mars Anomaly Research.com posted an analysis of the picture in 2001. In 2007, mikesingh commented on the picture here on ATS, but he posted a cropped version which showed only the top part of the photo, with the spray and the 'pipeline', not the two domes.

Where did "they" get the picture from? Who knows, the internet works in mysterious ways...

I hope to see an intelligent debate on this picture, and I would like to know how NASA and why not independent geologists feel about it.


Originally posted by trailertrash
Now I want to report my own conclusions regarding those targets on Mars.

There is water below the surface the pressures of which are varied quite a bit by the ordinary things that a planet experiences in rotation. None of this need by recounted here.

At times a semi-frozen slurry breaks the surface and shows as a flow of some sort. These are often seen in craters as though the crater is being filled from below. Sometimes the crater rim is broken where the mass bursts free and makes an escape. When the pressure of the localized "burping" is spent however, the flow stops and freezes solid. This example is found where the paths to the surface cause the upwelling water to mix with soils.

Now in the case of the "glass tubes". These are produced by clear water erupting from a rocky aquifer. But, as in the muddy flows, the flows are of short duration. "Burping" is a good descriptor because it is exactly what happens. The interval between the segments of the tubes tells us of the volume of the water which is ejected from below. It flows suddenly then retreats just as suddenly leaving a relatively thin clear icy shell as sign of it's waxing and waning. A series of these "burps" results in a long variated, segmented tube. In the target we see a less seldom secondary event which is only a bit of compressed "air" and maybe some liquid which has ruptured a thin place in the ice looking like a fountain.

There is no intelligent life responsible for any of this. It is mother nature doing her thing. No biggie.

I've just provided you all with my own "remote viewing" in the above. Does it seem plausible? I am confident of it's correctness. Remember that pendulum thing which says that the simplest explanation is almost certainly the correct one.

tt


First of all, thanks for your reply, I appreciate it.

Remote Viewing as an established technique is not done individually. The whole point of RV protocols is to try to filter away all types of subjective 'interpretation' of the received impressions. The Remote Viewer works in the blind, and the control person 'guides' the viewer towards the target.

I don't know how you reached the conclusion you posted, but I suspect you might have simply drawn parallells to similar geological formations on Earth and reasoned yourself to the answer. In that case, it's not remote viewing.

It seems to me that all the remote viewing sessions which have targeted the glass tubes speaks of them as artificial, so there's a correspondence there that proves nothing but should be taken into account.

Occam's razor (which you referred to) states that the simplest explanation is usually the correct one. Nothing more. It is sometimes referred to as a 'law', but in reality it isn't since it cannot be applied with any degree of certainty.



edit on 21-9-2010 by Heliocentric because: If everything seems under control, you're not going fast enough



posted on Sep, 21 2010 @ 06:45 AM
link   
Well some guy who was supposed to be one of the worlds best remote viewers was on UK tv recently, he was supposed to figure out the location of a target person and even although they both were in the same city, well lets just say we could have come up with as much info by guessing!!!



posted on Sep, 21 2010 @ 08:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by wmd_2008


Well some guy who was supposed to be one of the worlds best remote viewers was on UK tv recently, he was supposed to figure out the location of a target person and even although they both were in the same city, well lets just say we could have come up with as much info by guessing!!!


Well, what can I say about that, except too bad that your first and so far only experience of remote viewing came from a TV show.

Visit the links I posted, that will probably give you additional perspectives.

So, a remote viewer tried his luck on TV and failed. I consider that normal. Remote viewing does not always work, for X number of reasons (if it worked all the time, I would get suspicious!).

You know, top baseball batters only hit the ball about 30% of the time, and that's considered excellent (that's what the expression "batting 300" refers to). Top remote viewers get it right 60% to 80% of the time, still people laugh at them...



posted on Sep, 21 2010 @ 08:46 AM
link   
Remote viewing works, you lousy sceptics!

All it needs is a TV camera, an encoder and a radio transmitter.

The Mars Rovers are great at remote viewing.

So is the camera on my laptop.



posted on Sep, 21 2010 @ 02:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Astyanax
All it needs is a TV camera, an encoder and a radio transmitter.

The Mars Rovers are great at remote viewing.

The Mars Rovers do not have TV cameras.



posted on Sep, 21 2010 @ 03:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by ArMaP
I don't think they show them any image, that's why it's called it "in the blind" or something like that.


That's right. All they're shown are numbers. Not even the people conducting the experiment are shown the images, because they might subconsciously or inadvertently lead the remote viewer to give them responses they think are proper. The remote viewer is put in an isolated chamber (not quite sensory deprivation, but close) then basically goes into a kind of "half sleep," like when you're dozing in front of the TV. Then they jot down notes, and communicate with their guides and give them various impressions they get. You really can't do it by yourself, and need a guide. They tell the guides what they feel, smell, taste. If there are any significant shapes they're aware of. If there are any other people (or "people") around, etc.

After the impressions are gathered, another group of people compares the images with the notes and assigns a score for accuracy. Then the scores are all statistically tabulated, and it's determined whether or not the remote viewing session was a "hit" or a "miss." The idea is to try and eliminate any external influences and just get a clear, unbiased appraisal of the success or failure.

It fails more than it succeeds. And it doesn't succeed that much. Just enough for there to be a small but statistically significant outcome. So it's not very practical, and sometimes it's hard to tell if the viewer is focusing on the place itself, or the image in the envelope, or the image in the person's head at another point in time. Clairvoyance or precognition. Hard to tell the two apart.



posted on Sep, 22 2010 @ 02:06 AM
link   
reply to post by ArMaP
 


The Mars Rovers do not have TV cameras

That's just what I mean! They're even greater at remote viewing because they can do it with still cameras!



posted on Sep, 29 2010 @ 07:40 AM
link   
reply to post by Heliocentric
 


I can only comment one way here, because I RV also. 1-C interested me so I did a 3 sec. look inside. I saw leaning or angled levels at 30 to 40 degrees. Dark flat pathways (15 ft across X 10 ft high) that seemed to be very dimly lit by the walls and the ceilings. The floors were jet black and smooth. To me that seems too steep for walking or moving materials.

Then I played the videos and the consensus was that there is activity inside that mountain. I didn't see any activity, but it was my first RV of Mars and I was a little freaked out. 3 sec. seemed like a whole min.

I am glad to see that this study was published. Although unverifiable physically, I have my own so called evidence now.



posted on Oct, 1 2010 @ 01:37 PM
link   
Way to go Tribble! I have not yet tried to remote view, I'd like to get some proper training in this discipline.

I've got another target for you coming up, I'm trying to locate the proper coordinates,



posted on Oct, 3 2010 @ 10:02 PM
link   
RVing is a fascinating concept.Iam under perscrption drugs which ive been told make it impossible for me.
Of course his makes it all the more fascinating personally.
I understand that stargate RV ers "found a russian submarine(the biggest they ever built) being constructed in a huge covered shed (to foil satelite imagery)The RVer drew a picture of two tubes side by side(which was the stage of construction at the time)The talking heads couldnt accept that there were two huge tubes in the shed, but that was the way they built the huge sub.tarting with these two huge pressure hulls side by side, and joining them as they progressed.
Of course when the sub was launched....well the RV guy was vindicated.
On the other hand, why cant Ossama be found this way?
One other question...if this is so effective, why are we not remote viewing the solar system and beyond assiduously?
The method should produce immediate and useul data that should be worth something to persue.Yet no news and no real takers yet it seems.....hmmmmm



posted on Oct, 4 2010 @ 12:02 PM
link   
reply to post by Heliocentric
 


I can only RV off of a description or a pic : -]

I am going to try the surface of the Hale Crater soon.




top topics



 
13
<<   2 >>

log in

join