There are no suitably cool emoticons to express my disgust that yet again, 18 years in of this, Brown has managed to do more destruction to the topic
of remote viewing with the public than anything else accomplished. And be utterly oblivious to it. He is messianic (you probably noticed), paranoic
(you probably noticed -- and surely all those people complaining on facebook were government-corporate-demonic-inspired "seeders" just trying to
hack his groove, right?), and utterly sure that he is the center of the universe. He believes that because someone was crazy enough to gift him with a
PhD at one time, that he hence knows everything about every topic, and anything he chooses to do that he thinks is psychic, is perfectly fine to call
remote viewing no matter how much it may profoundly violate one, a few or all protocols required of the term.
He is acting precisely as his cult-indoctrinating-mentor, strategic-deception specialist Ed Dames does. As was said above:
he also framed the whole thing in the video with basically, buy my video or the world won't change and it's your fault. lmao.
Whereas Ed went on international radio circa '97 or so and told about 30-50 million people how their children were going to die, and assured
everybody that the only way they could save them is if they bought his videos. (As opposed to paid $10,000 for his 10-day seminar.) These things are
hard to believe in retrospect, but here we see the same dynamic happening right in the present. It is mind boggling.
I'm guessing that there are more than enough people who would be more than happy to make a youtube video-for free- so he could post all of the
information 'for the good of mankind'.
Also just like Ed, who was given $10K to make said video so the resource could be free and contribute to mankind, as some altruistic follower with
money said. He took the money and made them but instead of just posting it free, made a killing off radio sales. Your wife. Your little girl. They're
gonna DIE unless you buy my video, learn how to 'remote view' as I'm claiming to call it, and find the only place or two on earth that will be safe
very soon. Oh yeah and buy my algae, the only thing that will grow then. But wait, there's more! For only...
As I have said a few times on this thread, Brown does not represent Remote Viewing except by his own volunteering it. Much like Stephen Greer wants to
represent UFOlogy. How would serious UFOlogists, especially nuts&bolts types, feel if the entire field of UFOlogy and all its people were dismissed as
buffoons and huxters solely because someone was exposed to some event/whatever of Greer? It would seem grossly unfair, especially since there is such
a history in the topic that would make clear what is worth considering and what -- or who -- is not. Well, RV is in that situation. Ed's done his
best to destroy it with the public and he recruited and 'trained' (brainwashed) an already seriously-half-a-bubble-off guy (Courtney) who's gone
forth and, with different motives (good, just deluded) done as much or more damage than even Ed did or could.
The RV community should vote to oust he and his questionable ethics.
He is not part of the science community, and nearly all viewers I know think he is a lunatic. The people fawning over him are either not viewers or,
usually, people already sucked into his paradigm (and probably questionable as viewers IMO as a result). He does not represent the RV community. It's
like how I can't change that people in my government are lunatics, psychopaths and so on -- though I wish I could -- yet people in other countries
hold us responsible for them sometimes.
His entire schtick on this from the start was that someone ELSE was announcing something -- he "did not control" it -- and that it would be official
and so on. And that it would gradually change the world. But I see that he says in his post (thanks for including it here, I don't go to any of his
sites) today, that HE chooses to delay 'the announcement' and:
in time, the release of this project will be seen as the event that changed the direction of thinking on this planet in a major way.
So apparently what he means is that it was never about something that would be officially announced by someone else and be something legitimate and
incontrovertible. He meant one of his allegedly-psychic projects was very exciting to HIM so he assumes, because he is a borderline personality and
this is the messianic part, that this is THE EVENT that changes the world. I'm trying to say, "I'm shocked. Just shocked." But I'm so not.
But I had a teeeeeny bit of hope that maybe he'd just been exposed to someone ELSE who really DID have something interesting going on -- which is the
main reason I paid any attention to any of this. Because he IMPLIED if not said (not in these postings but in other postings) that the announcement
would come from an official source. So ironically the only reason I bothered paying any attention to Brown is because I had hope that someone who was
NOT him was involved, lol.
RV was considered by the US government to not only be viable, but important. The US government stopped the program even though the money spent
on it was a pittance. When they drop a project they believe is useful, it usually means they have a new way to do the job that is even
There is a vast amount to this topic but never mind.
2. Listening to Ingo Swann talk about his experiences you'll note he never tried to "prove" his work was anything, but simply stated his
Viewer #001, Joe McMoneagle, is the same way. Except that both Ingo and Joe in fact have 'proved' it -- they have done immense amounts of work in
the lab, not only doubleblind (ALWAYS, this is the required protocol for legitimate RV 'evidence' in the lab) but even precog (bulletproof
Joe's done at least a dozen shows with Nippon TV where the Japanese version of the FBI pulls up super-cold case files there's been no hope for, and
they hire McMoneagle to give direction to an investigative team to help find them. Not all of them worked (some the person had just moved on when they
got to that location, some were accurate had other issues that made them not televised, some they simply didn't find them), but quite a few of them
did. Some of the sessions were mind blowing. The presentation is hokey (Japanese TV is even crazier than ours in some respects) but the results were
amazing. That's just one example, he's done probably at least 70 live-challenge RV's (including with 'official skeptics') over the years.
But what you'll find in anything Joe writes or says is that he is the archetype of conservative. Though he's willing to discuss his experience, some
of which are pretty esoteric, he will not call anything remote viewing that is not fully done within a remote viewing protocol. He will simply refer
to it as psychic or "attempted" remote viewing; in some cases, the viewing protocol is solid but there is no feedback, and that is a requirement of
the protocol (because you don't know if something is psychic until you get feedback it's accurate. Otherwise it could be anything).
Dr. Brown seems to be working very hard to "prove" something that is esoteric
He's not fully sane I think, and he simply does not have the mental discretion to understand the difference between reality and what he wants to be
In fact, I dare say the government's frustrations with the original RV system was the esoteric/data problem.
No, actually. It was a Director spending megamoney and hype on a certain scientology-based idea while funding his best friend to work without any
subject baseline testing, across the country instead of in a lab, without even proper testing along the way, so that a second/later group of
alleged-viewers which he cult-indoctrinated (perhaps by accident, given his own situation) not only didn't have the same skill as the first group,
but in many/most cases insisted on abandoning the actual RV protocol such as double-blind. That's one of the key differences between "scientifically
legitimate" vs. "part of the BS called psychic since the dawn of time," and the myriad problems caused by this interesting 'direction' he took,
resulted in work that sucked so badly that most of the viewing was pulled from them and given to viewers who were working in the lab, instead. Said
Director apparently saw this coming to haunt him though and abruptly abandoned the project in a way nearly certain to make it fail/close behind him
just as the prove-it-or-lose-it point arrived. Only by a miracle and some people working insanely did the program manage to keep on. But at that point
it was mostly the science side, and their viewers, keeping it alive. The rest was becoming an embarrassment. And was incompetent to the point that the
managers went out looking for and hired a few women 'psychics' (a channeler, a tarot card reader, etc.) to try and prop up some actual psi findings
(which obviously they wouldn't have needed to do, were the people in the unit competent). It wasn't a secret, either.
The program was re-funded annually for nearly 20 years based on demonstrated success including live on senate subcommittee floor viewing on the fly
(including lab viewers). (This includes viewing McMoneagle did, based on about a 1" square cut-out from a B&W photo of a roof. Turned out to be in
the USSR. Then and also in follow up sessions, he predicted it was the biggest submarine anyone had ever seen, with 32 missile tubes and other various
details, and that in a given date-range they were going to suddenly dig a huge channel and drag it out to the ocean which was not all that close.
Everybody in intelligence apparently laughed at how ridiculous this was, because no sub is nearly that big and it was nowhere near close enough to the
water to be that. JM was off by a couple weeks. They dug a ditch and dragged the first Typhoon class sub out into the water, which has 32 missile
tubes and yada yada yada. You get the idea.) My point being it was not refunded without cause. And it did work -- repeatedly, for years and years,
consider -- for every single alphabet agency there is (and some non-government/corporate sources, I believe).
The CIA wanted to own and control it all along, as they were spending good money on buying the viewing work for years, up until near the end when the
DIA unit was an albatross. The CIA got their budget and personnel cut. Then they got the program thrown them like a hot potato. They wanted the
funding and personnel slots. And they knew it was no secret (the WA Post had talked of it a few times), since a book by Jim Marrs was literally going
to print to "expose" the whole program (yet another embarrassment for the CIA). They did what they had to, to make a fast excuse to close it down,
take its money and personnel slots. Marr's book, by the way, was pulled from printing machines and pulped, people at his pubco mysteriously working
elsewhere all the sudden, the National Enquirer announced the gov't was using psychics, and a couple weeks later the CIA officially announced it.
Poor Marrs, who'd spent years of his life and money on the book he knew would be a bombshell.
Not too long later (he had already been doing a lot of legwork for a couple years), Ed Dames went on international radio to profoundly mislead people
about everything related to RV, ensuring worldwide confusion so serious that even trying to explain it is working against a backlog of wrong
assumptions, and offering and spawning 'training' more likely to make the CIA et al. safe from viewers than endangered.
That's probably more than you wanted to know.
Well, I guess I don't have to feel guilty for offending any of the more earnest Brown apologists in this thread anymore since my first several
posts were about a book, video, or his PR team.
How dismal it is that he was so easy to predict.
the main problem with this besides the paywall issues is that we're simply assured that the sessions were 'blind'
Daz's session would be blind. I cannot speak to Dick's, who works in a protocol that for at least a dozen years his guru has insisted be
single-blind, and who is from a group that is generally making endless excuses about why people who know the target are present near the viewer and it
allegedly doesn't matter. And I trust absolutely nothing Brown does because I believe he is legitimately not entirely sane, and seems to have a very
large 'blur-point' about factual reality and internal enthusiasm. But Daz I've known online and in email for about 17 years. He's real about
protocol (he's the one who told me this event was RV-centered, which I had thought it wouldn't be). He can't control how Brown presents stuff,
alas, and he has tried to view for every "public project" anybody has offered, no matter what, just for the experience and just to support any
proactive endeavor in the field. We have different models on the art, but I respect his efforts. He wouldn't claim to be viewing blind if he wasn't.
No real viewer would. This is a major point of honor among those serious about the art and science that, combined, is RV. And it's why if a viewer
doesn't show honor and integrity in what they present as RV, you just can't trust anything from them, forget it. Because in the end unless you're
living in their room with them you have no idea what's real, what's the situation they were in for viewing. You have to trust them. So, you have to
stick with the few people you learn are worth trusting.
But blinding isn't the only thing at issue. Thoughts are things,
as Edgar Cayce said. A target is inherently defined by the tasker that
arranges it, just like a photo is arranged by the photographer and where he chooses to point, and the F-stop and filter and the time of day and so
forth. The tasker's intent is inherently part of the target. A really strong viewer can basically 're-task themselves' to go around the tasker
(working under scoffers tasking at times, viewers have had to), but most can't/don't/just don't have enough opportunity for experience with that
situation and feedback to do so. One of the big issues in RV is finding taskers who are of the personality profile that they are open to it working
without psyche resistance, and genuinely interested (or able to make themselves be) in the task at hand, yet do NOT have any major preconceived
opinions about it, or, critically important, are able to be *more interested in the truth* than in what they currently believe. You'd be surprised
how few people can actually fit this profile. Good taskers are hard to find.
When a person who functions as a project-leader, AND a tasker, AND a guru, arranges something and they already have basically a belief and an
end-result that they want, then an 'accurate' session IS literally what the tasker wants to hear. That's built into the intent. So even in a
totally legitimate protocol, you can still utterly screw up the validity of viewing by screwing up the intent of the tasking. This is why I don't
trust anything Brown does, even when I trust the viewer to have integrity about their protocol and be serious about the art. I don't consider Brown
capable of the objectivity and desire for truth, not feeding his borderline day-glo ego, that is required for the tasking job.
Of course nothing is remote viewing until there is feedback, technically. That is a required part of the protocol: feedback and then comparison (by
someone, in some fashion) between session data and feedback, and confirmation that at least some portions of it are correct. Until that happens it's
all wishful thinking; it's just that if a viewer works within protocol (full blinding and feedback) consistently for many years, and has some track
record of doing decently, then their viewing on non-feedback things is "interesting food for thought." But that's all it can be.
And just like I can't play basketball worth crap, but my issues do not disprove basketball, someone's sucky viewing (or even a good viewer's
off-target viewing, which happens) do not disprove RV. They merely disprove that one person's having successfully accomplished it on that particular
target at that particular time.
"His "proof" is all related to remote viewing.....how do you prove remote viewing back to when the pyramids were built...you
Right. Remote viewing is not only not proof, it's not even evidence; it is essentially 'data' which may be right or wrong and which can only be
validated by feedback. As noted, if one knows a viewer and their results, you might find their stuff interesting and be willing to take a chance with
it. Sometimes when there is no answer and you could start anywhere looking for one, you may as well start where a good viewer suggests; there's
nothing to be lost and maybe something to be gained.
He wanted a specific result, and he interpreted what he got back within that framework.
In his first book, his guru had told him about what viewing had 'found' on many topics, then 'led him through' a session (like a hypnotist playing
charades, I've seen Dames monitor on film), he often knew the target (not that it matters, protocol's already blown since his monitor did), or
'tasked himself' knowing it, during which he 'discovered' (gasp) the same thing he already believed
, which he felt "proved" that
information was true, capital T. This is actually such a ridiculous lack of critical thinking (and this was circa 1995-6) that it seriously makes you
wonder how the man ever got a PhD.
Having utterly ignored every single part of science protocol that defines RV (and which had finally dragged psi out of the gutter of BS it's always
been in), he then literally TRADEMARKED the term "scientific remote viewing" -- as if genuine RV is not inherently so already (the term was coined
in the lab), and as if anything HE did was! -- and then, waving his PhD in Poli Sci like a flag, went forward to tell the world he was expert at and
representing RV. It has been utterly ruinous for RV that he is so determined to be SO public and get SO much attention -- all at RV's expense, when
it turns out he's just... just... sigh.
In his second book, allegedly about the science of RV, he describes how he had this totally preconceived belief, set out to see if it was true, by
damn his followers got just what he expected, which proves it's true, another capital T. Along the way, in the most breathtakingly insultingly
patronizing way (repeatedly), he managed to dismiss all the real scientists who did real science in this subject for decades, as if they were all
misguided shortsighted idiots compared to his superior wisdom. I see there is no vomit emoticon here... Science he had NO part of but, by glomming
onto it publicly as if he's a science expert, while being an idiot in public, has managed to discredit it in the eyes of the public.
(I dunno about you, but if I were an expert RV'er, I'd be remote viewing dozens of targets daily myself until exhaustion set in, not waiting
for an email from Courtney, and I would have long since ago Rv'd the pyramids and everything about them).
LOL. You think. It seems that way until you're there... it is exhausting in a weird way, chronically challenging to fundamental belief systems, and
has regular cycles of psychological destabilization, that arise from having one's most fundamental belief systems about the nature of
reality/time/space/identity annihilated and rebuilt to a new framework, repeatedly. (So, most viewers are, cyclically, kind of offbeat in one way or
the other. It passes. Except for people like Brown, who live on in that state perpetually, solely to serve as a warning to others. Although he was
probably gone long before RV came into his life.)
And there's nothing here that can't be imagination at work
Depends on what you mean. Imagination is an infinitely flexible, every-direction interface between our species and perceived reality; it's not a
one-way thing like our culture teaches us; it talks back, and it is the deliverer of all information we get 'internally' (whether from our bodies,
our subconscious, or the interworlds) -- this is only my theory obviously. Imagination is always involved, is my point; and accuracy cannot be
predicted, so imagination is one of many elements in human mental, physical, and communicative process that can provide inaccurate data, because it's
also the one that provides accurate data -- it's just all of it.
But if you're talking about the whole thing just being a string of waxing on, no; if a session is truly doubleblind, and has any info beyond simple
descriptives, then either it is on target or it is off. Sometimes, the vagaries of the english language can make a few things seem like they match and
don't (about 30% of the data in about 30% of the sessions, sez the lab results), and you never know until you view that our reality actually has a
limited number of "forms and dynamics" that simply present in infinite variation, so it's sometimes shocking how a few basic datapoints or sketch
stuff will actually match any number of different targets. (Handy for making viewers look better sometimes; sucks horribly for doing ARV for gambling
though. Were this not the case, I would be typing this to you from my villa in france, surrounded by my scantily-clad cabana boys. The problem isn't
viewing, it's analysis.)
However, let's say the data is relatively specific, conceptual, etc. In that case, you'd know (at least after feedback) whether the viewer was
'on' or 'off' target. Doesn't mean any given piece of their data is accurate (all data stands alone), but implies they were at least attuned to
the right thing, you might say, so there is more hope for it. If they are truly in a good blinding protocol, then the chances of imagining in detail
the actual target, out of the gazillion things in the universe a target could be, is ridiculously unlikely, to the point of don't-go-there.
Now, if the viewer knows or suspects even the nature of the target, then it's different. Imagination will be more interfering then. How much will
vary depending on the level of 'informed' (directly or indirectly, by accident or design) the viewer is. That's the point of blinding.
That's what is needed here. Give us the formulas for the rock cutting machines and the anti-grav machines that were used to levitate the
blocks, if you want to be taken seriously. Otherwise, it's just really cool sci-fi.
That's an assumption about what's real, of course. ;-) I know what you mean though. I always said if my esoteric experiences (not RV, but
quasi-metaphysical-ufological-sorts) resulted in my suddenly speaking Etruscan, or something I couldn't possibly have picked up by accident, that I
would take them more seriously...
Technology viewing is done, btw. Always in private, always for money. Substantial money. Not by people who will say something publicly about their
hiring it or their doing it. If you have substantial money and you would like to plan a project like that and find a decent viewer, you can. However I
warn you, interpreting anything without a great deal of context and some existing data for corroboration points is nearly impossible. The "analysis"
portion of RV in intelligence was the hard part, not the psi.
Turns out that the "noise" he referred to was created by his own ridiculous hype campaign, not by people trying to hide any sort of truth. I
still find it hard to believe that he thought he could offer nothing more than a video of guys drawing pretty pictures and that would be enough to
constitute "proof" to anyone. This is all starting to remind me of the Mormon episode on SouthPark.
The scientology one would probably be more apropo for this topic...
If they really were expecting this "noise" and "dust", then why should this phase him/them and delay the rest of the
Dammit you beat me to that question.
My browser's character count doesn't work so my messages are as long as I make them, but cannot be edited. So if I mucked up this post in any way I
apologize in advance.