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.

 

A fair and open challenge to remote viewers, psychics or anyone who is up for this test.

page: 2
12
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 23 2011 @ 05:16 AM
link   
reply to post by miniatus
 


sorry. wont be doing the zip files though, had my guess..... next thread plz



posted on Jul, 23 2011 @ 09:43 AM
link   
I'm participating in this one.


Maybe I'll actually try this time. haha



posted on Jul, 23 2011 @ 01:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by xawesomepants
I'm participating in this one.


Maybe I'll actually try this time. haha


Glad you made it



posted on Jul, 23 2011 @ 02:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by DaveNorris
reply to post by miniatus
 


sorry. wont be doing the zip files though, had my guess..... next thread plz


lol the zip files are a hassle but a necessary one, I would like to be trusted and just do a photo but that can't happen if it's to be taken seriously.. I want no possibility of tampering.



posted on Jul, 23 2011 @ 02:56 PM
link   
I'll throw my guess in when the time comes. Thanks for the game. It is entertaining.



posted on Jul, 23 2011 @ 06:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Balkan
I'll throw my guess in when the time comes. Thanks for the game. It is entertaining.


My pleasure.. I don't like to call it a game but I suppose that fits the same as any other title..

If were a rich man I'd offer a prize but sadly I'm just a regular joe



posted on Jul, 24 2011 @ 04:22 PM
link   
All right, I'll officially commit to this. I've had moderate success with remote viewing in the past.


Originally posted by miniatus
I have taken an ordinary object and placed it inside of a white box and this box will not move from it's current location at any point during the test period. I will provide a photograph of the box at the bottom of this message as well as a link to a zip file that everyone who reads this is welcomed and encouraged to download, in fact, this zip file is insurance for the tests integrity.


Again too much info. Now everyone has an image of a box in their heads, and it's really hard to resist the urge to outright guess what could fit in a box. Seriously, I'm trying to remote view it now and all I can see it that white box.

I'd suggest in future attempts just pick your target and assign it number. Numbers are better than code names because they don't carry any visual associations. Lol, kinda what I was saying in the other thread about numbers, except here we use it to our advantage.


Edit: Also, it would be interesting to see people post how confident they feel about their "guesses" and if they've ever done any remote viewing before.

edit on 24-7-2011 by The Cusp because: adding something



posted on Jul, 25 2011 @ 04:20 AM
link   
Sounds interesting... what is in the white box I wonder???

I will participate - if I do remember the date...

S + F



posted on Jul, 25 2011 @ 11:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by shimmeringsilver73
Sounds interesting... what is in the white box I wonder???

I will participate - if I do remember the date...

S + F


Thank you, that is perhaps my biggest concern is that the date will be forgotten and being that this thread will then be a week out, it won't be showing up on the recent post list so this may have a much shorter participation list than the previous one.



posted on Jul, 27 2011 @ 08:35 AM
link   
I'm still watching this thread.

and that box.....





posted on Jul, 27 2011 @ 08:43 AM
link   
reply to post by miniatus
 


I am keeping my eye on this thread... I do hope all the participants have made notes or set their alarms for the date. Will be interesting to see the results.



posted on Jul, 28 2011 @ 03:20 PM
link   
A tip for would be participants:

Do not try to guess outright what the object is when remote viewing. This almost always leads to failure. Instead, just try to describe the object. Size, shape, color, feel. Pro remote viewers don't guess a target by themselves. A group of RVers will RV something and then hand off their descriptions to someone trained at making sense of them.

Also, the descriptor "ish" is your friend. Instead of saying something is round, you could instead say it's roundish. Sounds like a scam, but it does make for better descriptions.



posted on Jul, 28 2011 @ 04:37 PM
link   
reply to post by The Cusp
 


no offense to you, any remote viewers, or anyone reading this thread but that sounds like the exact reason that people are always skeptical of rv's/psychic visions/etc. You try to make it as vague as you can while still making it seem like a fairly specific answer so that what you say actually covers a wide variety objects/places/whatever you're looking for.



posted on Jul, 28 2011 @ 05:19 PM
link   
reply to post by Universer
 


I will participate if i remember the thread, but here my thoughts:

The problem is in the fact that the size etc. of the box already implies it cannot be certain things, eg..it should be obvious it cannot be a bike or a real life size boat


The "problem" (in my opinion) is that this could lead to distractions in a sense that people more tend to guess what it is (seeing the box etc.)...."what could fit under the box"....instead of having a "free" flow of mental images/impressions.

I am really not an expert, just a casual interest in RV...maybe it would be better to RV what is on images just to exclude such conscious/semi-conscious influences from our thinking brain which might distort the actual viewing. ?!!?

edit on 28-7-2011 by flexy123 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 28 2011 @ 09:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by The Cusp
A tip for would be participants:

Do not try to guess outright what the object is when remote viewing. This almost always leads to failure. Instead, just try to describe the object. Size, shape, color, feel. Pro remote viewers don't guess a target by themselves. A group of RVers will RV something and then hand off their descriptions to someone trained at making sense of them.

Also, the descriptor "ish" is your friend. Instead of saying something is round, you could instead say it's roundish. Sounds like a scam, but it does make for better descriptions.


Denali is right ( above ) .. being super vague is akin to cold reading and it doesn't help the case much..

MY advice to participants is being as exacting as you can.. if you say "roundish" then that is too forgiving on MANY shapes to be taken seriously .. the test isn't to demonize you, I won't be grading you at all .. and you're welcomed to submit privately, I won't out you with your guess and SN .. but I will post your results with "Anonymous" attached ..

This test is exactly that.. a test.. describe what you see in as much detail as you can.. don't be afraid to be wrong.. you're not only taking part in this test but testing yourself as well, so don't cheat or you're cheating you as well.

Lets try to make this as strong as possible, and let us also remember that this isn't the end .. this is simply round two, I've refined the test based on feedback.. if you guess, and you guessed wrong.. let me know if there's something I can do in round three to improve your chances while not making the test itself a joke.. I don't want to make it simple.. I do however, want to make it fair.

I'm glad you guys are still awake =) I will be concluding the test tomorrow, however.. I have a dinner engagement after work so the test is SLIGHTLY extended .. with that said

HERE IS HOW TO PROCEED WITH THE NEXT PHASE OF THIS TEST:

As of midnight tonight ( eastern standard time) .. you can begin posting your guesses to this forum.. when I'm back from my engagement, I will pop in and view the results and will be issuing a stop at some point, probably near 8 or 9pm EST .. once I've called a stop, no more posts will be counted unless they are posted before I post my summary


in other words.. if you post a guess shortly after I post the results, you're flat out of luck ... after the summary is posted, you're all free to review .. and provide feedback on how to conduct round three.

GOOD LUCK!



posted on Jul, 28 2011 @ 09:27 PM
link   
Off topic but a bonus, not sure if you guys will like it or not .. but here's two songs I've finished =) they will be free, not trying to sell anything:

1. soundcloud.com...
2. soundcloud.com...

Feedback is welcomed! even if it's negative
both songs are entirely different from each other sound wise
edit on 28-7-2011 by miniatus because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 28 2011 @ 09:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by flexy123
reply to post by Universer
 


I will participate if i remember the thread, but here my thoughts:

The problem is in the fact that the size etc. of the box already implies it cannot be certain things, eg..it should be obvious it cannot be a bike or a real life size boat




That should make things easier... not harder, I fail to see that as an issue =)


Originally posted by flexy123

The "problem" (in my opinion) is that this could lead to distractions in a sense that people more tend to guess what it is (seeing the box etc.)...."what could fit under the box"....instead of having a "free" flow of mental images/impressions.



We can eliminate that distraction in round three, but I was under the impression from feedback in round one that the test was too vague.. people were calling on needing locations and more information.. so round two ( this ) was designed to meet those "needs" .. if we find that there's too much information this time, I can remedy that by supplying location information and no picture to start with.. however, location alone might eliminate such things as "boat" or "airplane"
.. the VERY point of me providing the box picture was to prevent that sort of thing, and to try to fair.. giving as much information as I could without giving away too much.. the chances of someone guessing this object by chance are very unlikely


Originally posted by flexy123

I am really not an expert, just a casual interest in RV...maybe it would be better to RV what is on images just to exclude such conscious/semi-conscious influences from our thinking brain which might distort the actual viewing. ?!!?

edit on 28-7-2011 by flexy123 because: (no reason given)


I suppose I can sum up by saying that if remote viewing is SUCH a sensitive gift that it's probably useless .. if it really requires so many things in order to be successful, is it even useful? .. those sorts of points to me just seem to scream excuse for failure.. I'm not being critical, or maybe I am actually.. but the point of this test is to really decide how it works, if it works, and why it works.. if it doesn't work with the given parameters we'll adjust them until it does.. I want to understand it... but the more 'rules' there are the less it seems useful even if it exists.. know what I mean?

Lets see how this goes .. next round, I'll adjust

edit on 28-7-2011 by miniatus because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 28 2011 @ 10:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Denali
reply to post by The Cusp
 


no offense to you, any remote viewers, or anyone reading this thread but that sounds like the exact reason that people are always skeptical of rv's/psychic visions/etc. You try to make it as vague as you can while still making it seem like a fairly specific answer so that what you say actually covers a wide variety objects/places/whatever you're looking for.


I'm by no means trying to make it "as vague as possible". I don't like it any more than you do, but that's just the way it works. There is no way to generalize a description that could cover everything. Hell, I can't even think of anything that matches my description below, never mind a wide variety of objects that fit that description.


It's not quite midnight yet, but I'm going to go ahead and post my attempt anyways.

-Hard
-Not smooth like glass, but not rough either
-about the size of a baby's fist
-Curved, Kind of like a half doughnut, but not exactly. One side is curved in more, sort of like a snail's shell.
-Pinkish, with some darker gray or brown.


My confidence in my attempt is only 5 out of 10. It's been a long time since I've tried this, but this attempt did sort of feel like previous successful attempt I pulled of in the past.
edit on 28-7-2011 by The Cusp because: (no reason given)

edit on 28-7-2011 by The Cusp because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 28 2011 @ 11:05 PM
link   
Hello hello! I like to be fashionably early (by one minute)
(edited: whoops, it's 12am here)

My first instinct was a rock, chalky colored, size of a fist or slightly smaller, round but rough. Perhaps a paper weight of some sort.

When I gave it some effort I came up with a small Godzilla toy. Not joking, that's what I came up with.

The winner should win a song written by the OP btw.

edit on 28-7-2011 by Balkan because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 29 2011 @ 01:16 AM
link   
reply to post by miniatus
 


2:14 AM EST - My guess is that it is a blue or black cloth baseball cap with white stitching on the front.

Timidgal



new topics

top topics



 
12
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join