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 Viewers Predict Catastrophic Meteor Impact Before 2013

page: 28
56
<< 25  26  27    29  30  31 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 12 2012 @ 12:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by mountaingirl1111

If I see a picture of the exterior of a building and cannot see inside, how can I see inside of it and around the property that I cannot physically see from the picture? How can I spot certain objects in that place that were not shown or known to me afterwards? How can I see a picture of land and not know where it is at all, but can accurately portray historical information about it that the person giving it to me can verify afterwards with acutal, written historical information and personal experience?


I have no idea. I don't understand the mechanics of psychic information collection, RV and don't know anyone who does.


Originally posted by mountaingirl1111
Here's the thing. Before RV was invented as a concept, back in the early part of the last century, it was a practice people used all the time. Maybe not many people, but it was done. All that guy did was make rules for it. Doesn't mean it didn't happen before. So, to think that this is some exclusive club of people following protocol, that all others who can view remotely aren't doing it, is wrong. This is like saying that people who prayed to God before organized religion came about weren't really praying, because religious texts weren't around yet to lay the groundwork down of how to do it and when to do it through priests, etc.

My guess is that you are a remote viewer who follows strict protocol and you were trained a certain way and taught to dismiss any variant of your method, which is why you cannot begin to accept the ideas of others, even if proven and documented.


I dismiss nothing and I can see you are not bothering to read my previous posts otherwise you would not say such a ludicrous and silly thing. I am also fluent in shamanism and shamanistic practices having spent considerable time with Terence McKenna in the 60s and 70s.

I know what RV is and what it is not. You are not performing RV according to any RV standards of value. Truth is simple.

Instead of fitting a round peg into a square hole, why not practice the RV protocols or simple revel in what you are? It appears only you are sensitive to what you must believe are shortcomings of your psychic abilities. That's a shame.

Ingo Swann was first and foremost a renowned psychic before he and others ever set the standards for RV at SRI. Why did he set RV standards? Because he knew that by doing so it elevated RV out of the realm of the kooky and too-be-disbelieved.




posted on May, 12 2012 @ 12:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by firegoggles

Some people just don't like any ties to things that don't have that scientific ring to it


Some don't, I agree, but I am not one of them.

You see, here is the heart of the problem with the public's refusal, inability or incapability re: RV. RV is pretty darned easy to define, the protocols are everywhere as the multiple links I have provided amply show.

The inherent problem is that regardless of the availability of the RV standards and information on RV, people refuse to educate themselves. I chuck it off to lack of time since it does take a few hours to get a grip on the facts.

Of course many of these same people post to forums endlessly and watch General Hospital instead.



posted on May, 12 2012 @ 01:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by AlchemicalMonocular

Originally posted by mountaingirl1111

If I see a picture of the exterior of a building and cannot see inside, how can I see inside of it and around the property that I cannot physically see from the picture? How can I spot certain objects in that place that were not shown or known to me afterwards? How can I see a picture of land and not know where it is at all, but can accurately portray historical information about it that the person giving it to me can verify afterwards with acutal, written historical information and personal experience?


I have no idea. I don't understand the mechanics of psychic information collection, RV and don't know anyone who does.


Originally posted by mountaingirl1111
Here's the thing. Before RV was invented as a concept, back in the early part of the last century, it was a practice people used all the time. Maybe not many people, but it was done. All that guy did was make rules for it. Doesn't mean it didn't happen before. So, to think that this is some exclusive club of people following protocol, that all others who can view remotely aren't doing it, is wrong. This is like saying that people who prayed to God before organized religion came about weren't really praying, because religious texts weren't around yet to lay the groundwork down of how to do it and when to do it through priests, etc.

My guess is that you are a remote viewer who follows strict protocol and you were trained a certain way and taught to dismiss any variant of your method, which is why you cannot begin to accept the ideas of others, even if proven and documented.


I dismiss nothing and I can see you are not bothering to read my previous posts otherwise you would not say such a ludicrous and silly thing. I am also fluent in shamanism and shamanistic practices having spent considerable time with Terence McKenna in the 60s and 70s.

I know what RV is and what it is not. You are not performing RV according to any RV standards of value. Truth is simple.

Instead of fitting a round peg into a square hole, why not practice the RV protocols or simple revel in what you are? It appears only you are sensitive to what you must believe are shortcomings of your psychic abilities. That's a shame.

Ingo Swann was first and foremost a renowned psychic before he and others ever set the standards for RV at SRI. Why did he set RV standards? Because he knew that by doing so it elevated RV out of the realm of the kooky and too-be-disbelieved.


Listen, I did read what you said. You did read what i wrote, but you did not understand its true content, either. I am not trying to convert anyone to a particular train of thought, but at the same time, I do not believe what i do to be in any way sub par to anything else or inferior, simply because it does not fit your opinion of its definition.

It is great you have met and trained with who you have said you have, but it does not change my personal experiences or change the way I view what I do and how i do it. I do not wish to squabble with you. I think it's great that you have such an affinity for what you do and what others close to you do. I just think that you should be more accepting of others here who have taken the time to explain to you what it is they do, be more open-minded. I was open-minded and researched what you were saying, and said so, despite holding on to my own beliefs and opinions.

I wish you luck in your endeavors, but continuing to try to discuss this with you has made me feel defensive when I have no reason to be and I don't like feeling that way. Continuing this conversation is moot and it has widely sidetracked the original purpose of this thread. Best of luck to you.



posted on May, 12 2012 @ 01:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by mountaingirl1111

Listen, I did read what you said. You did read what i wrote, but you did not understand its true content, either.


"True content"? What you wrote was not RV. Truth is simple.


Originally posted by mountaingirl1111
I am not trying to convert anyone to a particular train of thought, but at the same time, I do not believe what i do to be in any way sub par to anything else or inferior, simply because it does not fit your opinion of its definition.

It is great you have met and trained with who you have said you have, but it does not change my personal experiences or change the way I view what I do and how i do it. I do not wish to squabble with you. I think it's great that you have such an affinity for what you do and what others close to you do. I just think that you should be more accepting of others here who have taken the time to explain to you what it is they do,


Again, you have failed to read my posts as I have over and over explained, and will again, that I have no problem with psychics (real ones), paranormal information collectors, etc. etc. etc.

I know exactly what you do as you posted exactly what you do. Unless you either lied or was in error it is very plain, simple and easy to see what you claim to do. Nothing hidden. It's not RV though.


Originally posted by mountaingirl1111
...continuing to try to discuss this with you has made me feel defensive when I have no reason to be and I don't like feeling that way.


I didn't "make you anything", if you feel defensive then it is because of something inside you. I would suggest you find out what that is. Obviously, you do have a reason to be defensive-minded, I would suggest, as I have before, that you inherently don't have the [self] respect for your psychic abilities that, if they are true, I have willingly, time and time gain, given them.

That's odd.
edit on 12-5-2012 by AlchemicalMonocular because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 12 2012 @ 05:43 PM
link   
reply to post by AlchemicalMonocular
 


I'm not sure if you got mixed up in who you were posting to but I know what RV is and I keep a strict RV protocol going when doing so. I think I made it very clear I understand the difference. I was just trying to point out that some folks that don't use the protocol still get valid results albeit error and imagination filled. So your preaching to the choir explaining RV protocol to me.. Although still a good post my friend and great information so I'm not offended or anything. Just saying.. yep that's right!


Thanks



posted on May, 12 2012 @ 05:55 PM
link   
reply to post by mountaingirl1111
 


I have to chime in here and say that no one is doubting your ability but reading over this stuff you want to label looking at a photo and getting data from it that you shouldn't be able to know RV. While it is a small part of RV again I think your failing to totally understand the RV protocol.. If you can do what you say you can and your not using strict RV it allows too much error and imagination.. I would urge you to learn a very strict RV protocol because it would make you 100 times better at gathering information. And don't get me wrong I see what your saying and I'm not saying you are not getting some great data from looking at the photos. But thats not real RV as developed by the military. And yes I understand where your coming from in thinking that your doing a form of it. But you must understand millions of research went into how to perfect gathering that data with less mistakes and no imagination involved. If you would truly learn the REAL RV protocol and not just use one tiny part of it it sounds to me llke you would make an incredible RV'er. But again if your not following the protocol your only doing one tiny part of the RV as that was developed to be superior. Don't be defensive or offended please just give it a chance and study the protocol and you will totally understand that you were missing out and you would be amazed at your results after learning to follow the strict protocol...

Thanks!



posted on May, 12 2012 @ 08:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by firegoggles
reply to post by mountaingirl1111
 


I have to chime in here and say that no one is doubting your ability but reading over this stuff you want to label looking at a photo and getting data from it that you shouldn't be able to know RV. While it is a small part of RV again I think your failing to totally understand the RV protocol.. If you can do what you say you can and your not using strict RV it allows too much error and imagination.. I would urge you to learn a very strict RV protocol because it would make you 100 times better at gathering information. And don't get me wrong I see what your saying and I'm not saying you are not getting some great data from looking at the photos. But thats not real RV as developed by the military. And yes I understand where your coming from in thinking that your doing a form of it. But you must understand millions of research went into how to perfect gathering that data with less mistakes and no imagination involved. If you would truly learn the REAL RV protocol and not just use one tiny part of it it sounds to me llke you would make an incredible RV'er. But again if your not following the protocol your only doing one tiny part of the RV as that was developed to be superior. Don't be defensive or offended please just give it a chance and study the protocol and you will totally understand that you were missing out and you would be amazed at your results after learning to follow the strict protocol...

Thanks!


Thanks, Firegoggles, I get what you're saying. I wasn't off-put by the gist of what you're saying, just the tone of how it had been put to me. I appreciate your taking the time to jump in and put it to me in the way that you did. The thing is, I don't even do what I do regularly anymore, as I said, it has been a long time, years. If I were to want to get back into doing it, I would probably check out actual RV protocol. I'm not saying I won't, but at this point in my life, it's just not something I do. I find it incredibly draining, at the least what I would practice, and at times, it made me a little physically sick. I do just want to put across here that the use of actual photographs is really just an aid, it is not the act of the whole thing. I do understand what you mean by the potential for error, this is just what came naturally to me and worked for me and gave good, verifiable results with the parties concerned. It was because of this that I had wanted to apply for a spot in the ASU Veritas Program, but by the time I knew to contact them, they were shutting the program down and replacing it with the Windbridge program, something that was a bit different. The reason why was because I wanted to verify what I was doing in a strict and controlled setting.

Thanks, Firegoggles, I appreciate your comments and advice.



posted on May, 12 2012 @ 08:46 PM
link   

edit on 12-5-2012 by mountaingirl1111 because: Double Post



posted on May, 12 2012 @ 08:57 PM
link   
reply to post by AlchemicalMonocular
 


Thank you for the link,
it explains the different methods, so thank you agian



posted on May, 12 2012 @ 09:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by mountaingirl1111

Thanks, Firegoggles, I get what you're saying. I wasn't off-put by the gist of what you're saying, just the tone of how it had been put to me. I appreciate your taking the time to jump in and put it to me in the way that you did. The thing is, I don't even do what I do regularly anymore, as I said, it has been a long time, years. If I were to want to get back into doing it, I would probably check out actual RV protocol. I'm not saying I won't, but at this point in my life, it's just not something I do. I find it incredibly draining, at the least what I would practice, and at times, it made me a little physically sick. I do just want to put across here that the use of actual photographs is really just an aid, it is not the act of the whole thing. I do understand what you mean by the potential for error, this is just what came naturally to me and worked for me and gave good, verifiable results with the parties concerned. It was because of this that I had wanted to apply for a spot in the ASU Veritas Program, but by the time I knew to contact them, they were shutting the program down and replacing it with the Windbridge program, something that was a bit different. The reason why was because I wanted to verify what I was doing in a strict and controlled setting.

Thanks, Firegoggles, I appreciate your comments and advice.



yeah i was getting the same boxed-in intimidating feeling.
and i now just realized why, i should have clicked on earlier due to the fact im actually married to one lol

we are two giggly girls with a free spirit. now i know my personality actually helps me in gathering and filtering the information im getting. anyway i think we are talking with Military or ex military personnel. and they have a built in nature of being "stiff" or coming across stern.

they don't mean to, its just the way the are. forgive if im wrong.



posted on May, 12 2012 @ 11:09 PM
link   
Here is a forum which opens its arms to non-RV psychics. Note that this forum, as I do, embraces psychics who are not classified as RVs.

Dojopsi



posted on May, 13 2012 @ 12:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by AlchemicalMonocular
Here is a forum which opens its arms to non-RV psychics. Note that this forum, as I do, embraces psychics who are not classified as RVs.

Dojopsi


Thank you very much, AM. I will give it a look tomorrow.



posted on May, 13 2012 @ 02:04 AM
link   
has anyone came across anyone else seeing men in black combat gear shooting civilians?
they had black military type guns. bootlaces tied up properly, they acted and looked very professional.

i really think this is important.



posted on May, 13 2012 @ 06:38 AM
link   
I find the whole remote viewing schtick troublesome, it's kinda queer and over the top. Am I the only one?



posted on May, 13 2012 @ 06:52 AM
link   
reply to post by PeaNice
 


If you are speaking as a RVer, anything that affects your perception of and relationship to reality is going to be destabilizing.

I was talking to someone the other day who is very "new age" oriented. She mentioned she's part of a metaphysical group that meets once a week. After a few brief discussions (I was being cautious) I asked her if she knew what remote viewing is.

"Oh, yeah", she said, "And you have to be really careful with that because if you do it, the government will know about it and they'll be after you!".

"Be 'after me'?", I said, "What do you mean by that?".

"She said, "They'll zero-in on you and come and take you away, probably lock you away in a prison somewhere or kill you because then you'll know their secrets that we're not supposed to know".

I'm sitting there thinking, "No, no, no." and "Oh God, where do I even start trying to clear up all these misconceptions?".

I mean, this lady is fairly intelligent. But like many people, she's gotten her RV education courtesy of people like Dr. Doom on nightly radio. I tried explaining that RV isn't that perfect, that without feedback you can't trust what you get anyway, and how it would be difficult if not impossible to psychically track an RVer to his or her physical location and pinpoint the person. I told her I've been RVing since 1998, that I've done literally thousands of practice sessions, and I tried explaining the doubleblind protocol and selaed-envelope picture target viewing, etc., etc and not to confuse people who "see things" with practiced, competent and mentally stable RVers.

But as I was explaining all this, I began to notice her eyes glazing over and her attention beginning to wander. The actual nuts-and-bolts of day-to-day RVing just isn't that exciting to the average person. Most people don't want to hear that "the miracle" of RV actually requires lots of plain old hard work and, frankly, isn't all that glamorous. Not compared to having immediate visions and being in constant contact with the Others. [palm-face]

I hate to see how RV has passed into the same far reaches of the fringe zone that UFOs have.



posted on May, 13 2012 @ 06:57 AM
link   
I've read the thread ok the last half dozen pages or so. Frustrated are ya;? lol



posted on May, 13 2012 @ 07:04 AM
link   
reply to post by PeaNice
 


I've spent many an hour debating with skeptics on online forums (I enjoy the challenge and sometimes it throws up wonderful little victories. Most of the time the conversation goes like this.

ME: Remote Viewing is possible, I can do it, anyone can do it. You can do it.

SKEPTIC: Why aren't you a millionaire then? What am I wearing?

ME: It isn't quite that simple. Though very real, Remote viewing can be inconsistent. As for what you are wearing, you've just frontloaded me. Remote Viewing requi...

SKEPTIC: Excuses. And frontloading? Whats's that?

ME: Remote viewing is a protocol developed around the...

SKEPTIC: So what am I wearing then?

ME: I could try and tell you that but the target would need to be set up under preferably blind conditions...

SKEPTIC: So why aren't you a millionaire? Why haven't you passed Randi's Challenge?

ME: If you'll just let me explain, remote viewing operates around...

SKEPTIC: HEY GUYS LOOK AT THIS IDIOT!!! HE THINKS REMOTE VIEWING IS REAL!!!

CHORUS: Why aren't you a milionaire? Why haven't you passed the Randi Challenge? What are we wearing?




posted on May, 13 2012 @ 07:15 AM
link   
reply to post by AlchemicalMonocular
 


Yeah, between the true believers on one side and the intellectually-dishonest skeptics on the other, there's not much room in the middle for people with truly open minds and the courage to really, seriously look into stuff like RV.

I actually pity the skeptics. I always sense a sort of panicked anxiety in them, especially as quantum science keeps marching on and physicists are starting to sound like mystics, lol.

But I just don't know how to handle the true believers out there. I mean, I'm pretty open-minded. I'll even listen with rapt attention to most conspiracy theories (and I believe in a few myself, sort of) - until they start getting laughable. But there are so many new age-inclined people who blindly accept any statement, no matter how ridiculous, from whomever their personal messiah happens to be, and then they'll parrot those statements - all without ever investigating the subject themselves. I guess it's their lack of intellectual curiosity that I don't understand.



posted on May, 13 2012 @ 07:15 AM
link   
reply to post by rebellender
 


i think mankind is already wiping himself out with a nuclear device at fuk u shima. the radioactive stuff (rs)is already contaminating the oceans and there's a heap more up on the third floor just waiting for a close encounter with an earthquake. it may not happen overnight----but it will happen! the rs is already increasing in alaska and nearby. but of course little or no mention in the msm.



posted on May, 13 2012 @ 07:22 AM
link   
reply to post by PeaNice
 

The irony of the situation (when arguing with skeptics) is that I remain a pretty arch-skeptic to 80% of the stuff that I read with regards conspiracies, UFOs, blah-de-blah and as such I am totally with them when it comes to adopting a 'show me the proof' attitude. The laughable thing about RV however is that proving its existence takes about as much time and physical activity as it does to turn on the television set, fix up a bag of crisps and watch a movie - most people just mentally corner themselves via laziness, block-headed acceptance of the existential 'rules' or subconscious fear of the unknown.

What RV has taught me is never to discount anything. It might all be true. This is a far healthier position (IMO) than the general skeptic's assertion that when it comes to the paranormal, NONE of it is true.

As for quantum science...yes, I have to admit to the occasional fist pump and quiet high five whenever weird new findings make it on to the news. That wonderful feeling when mainstream accepted science takes a quantum dicking...I smile to the sound of storms of cognitive dissonance keeping skeptics awake the world over.



new topics

top topics



 
56
<< 25  26  27    29  30  31 >>

log in

join