Anywhere online to practice remote viewing?

a reply to: midicon

Exactly that's what you are meant to think.

originally posted by: charlyv
Proof has to be measured in successes, otherwise none of us (namely, the un-gullible) would ever partake in a belief that does not show results. It is like using a copper chisel to carve a granite block.

You can correct me if I am wrong, but I claim that any time clairvoyance or psychic abilities or remote viewing (list goes on...) was ever called upon to solve an important problem, crime or salvation... in my lifetime (and I am an old #) , it has never worked. That is proof that it is not statistically different, in fact it is WORSE than pure chance.

I'm not trying to win the James Randi award or anything.. it's just something I experienced a long time before eventually searching it out years ago and finding this board talking about it. I don't even believe in it 100%, but I've had enough of them be accurate enough that I find it interesting.

a reply to: shidge.

Right ill give it a try...

There is a spoon?

Oh wait, I knew it...





PS: Please don't say you are eating with a fork when I posted or ill think ive got superpowers mate and lifes hard enough without that carry on. Cheers

a reply to: shidge.

That is cool, and no doubt, does happen randomly.

It is all relevant to statistics, which is our golden standard when analyzing the difficulties of traversing the rabbit hole.

Take the simplest statistical test. Flip a coin. You will be correct on average of 50% of the tosses.

The way we misconstrue things, some will argue that with a random event, they were correct 50% of the time....

Also true, but you can see where I am going here. Statistics must calculate moving odds for all of the complexities and differences that resulted in a correct guess...

In statistics, the average indeed exists for ANY prediction, irregardless of complexity.

Get above that, consistently, and you become the vehicle that launches a new science.

a reply to: shidge.

These guys?

a reply to: infolurker

Remote Viewing 101 - The Complete Lesson

Aziz Brown... is great
But, do a little research on Aziz father if you want to go down the rabbit hole.

youtu.be...

Farsight.

Theatrics with a data set you can not control, no built-in independent verification. No mention of the scientific method required for such experimentation.

A production built for entertainment only.

This guy is a scientist, yet he knows that what is being presented does not stand up to the test of a scientist.

originally posted by: charlyv
a reply to: shidge.

That is cool, and no doubt, does happen randomly.

It is all relevant to statistics, which is our golden standard when analyzing the difficulties of traversing the rabbit hole.

Take the simplest statistical test. Flip a coin. You will be correct on average of 50% of the tosses.

The way we misconstrue things, some will argue that with a random event, they were correct 50% of the time....

Also true, but you can see where I am going here. Statistics must calculate moving odds for all of the complexities and differences that resulted in a correct guess...

In statistics, the average indeed exists for ANY prediction, irregardless of complexity.

Get above that, consistently, and you become the vehicle that launches a new science.

For sure, if I could do it with 100% consistency, I'd be out making money off it instead of posting online. It's still fun for me to do and look back on to think "damn, that was really weird," if nothing else.

a reply to: shidge.

Get you a goat and stare at it.

a reply to: TomCollin

This sort of thing is an art if you are convinced it is outside of your reality, then it is.If anyone has experienced it some will dismiss it as a coincidence, and others will play with it. Like the never-dying OBE thread on this site. A few will have a good idea of what's going on and keep it quiet for obvious reasons. I think there are a few on this site it would be wise for individuals or governments not to piss off.

a reply to: shidge.

I'm wide open. I dare you... read me please. Just as "practice" of course. Here's a hint... I'm in North America...

originally posted by: anonentity
a reply to: TomCollin

This sort of thing is an art if you are convinced it is outside of your reality, then it is.If anyone has experienced it some will dismiss it as a coincidence, and others will play with it. Like the never-dying OBE thread on this site. A few will have a good idea of what's going on and keep it quiet for obvious reasons. I think there are a few on this site it would be wise for individuals or governments not to piss off.

I'm a skeptic. I'm skeptical of everything.

What's interesting is that my skepticism prevents me from ruling out most anything with absolute certainty, because I'm also skeptical about how much we really know. The sum total of our knowledge is a tiny speck in a vast ocean. All of the knowledge we have from all recorded history is almost nothing.

We're barely able to detect the energy around us directly. Our physical senses and perception of the world around us are exceeded even by much more primitive species. Our brain allows us to expand that perception through tools, but we discover "new" things all the time that have existed around us undetected for the entire known history of our species. If our knowledge is very limited and we know that there are forces at work that we can't even perceive, then it seems like whatever is described as ESP shouldn't be completely dismissed.

I think you have a valid point. If one were to possess some kind of ESP, then I think they'd likely be well aware that it's not in their best interests to make it widely known. This thread has shown there is doubt and, at times, outright animosity toward anybody that makes those claims. There's a lot to be angered and disgusted by, but I don't think it should be cast upon everybody because there are some profit driven charlatans. I don't see the harm in some cold reader doing party tricks to be the center of attention, or the tarot readers making a few bucks, or the people just living their lives as the family psychic.

I think most are more comfortable dismissing it completely even though it's intellectually lazy. The world is scary enough without pondering the implications of that power in the wrong hands, so out of sight is out of mind. As time progresses our species continues to discover that there is science behind some things we once considered "magic". Today it's magic, but tomorrow it's science. I think ESP will be one of those things and I have no doubt all world powers have active programs in it.

a reply to: Ksihkehe

That's a healthy attitude,

Its all BS for sure m8 hello from a fellow scot just down the round from you KTF a reply to: midicon

People misunderstand what "Remote viewing" is. Even wiki has it wrong

What your are describing is "Astral projection"

"Remote viewing" is when your conscious is superimposed on another person

It is like waking up inside someone elses body

You can see, hear, smell, touch, taste, everything, as if you were them

You also share their general emotions and feelings

The only difference in conscious/sense/consciousness, is that you are also consciously aware of the fact you are upon someone elses body

This is why it is called "Remote viewing"

You need to be physically connected and conscious in another persons body, or it is not remote viewing, it is Astral projection. Because your are projecting from sense, within your own body

You are not remotely viewing, from another

If you stay amenable to them, you can stay connected to them for some time. You can even influence their feelings and actions

If your consciousness is strong enough, you can even temporarily overpower their conscious and "take over", but this usually does not last long because it causes you to lose "amenable" sync and disconnect

The more passive you stay riding them, the longer you can stay connected

I explained all this in another thread, but nobody paid any attention, so I won't bother cutting and pasting more detail about how it works in here, unless someone is specifically interested

Somehow, people have started using "Remote viewing" as a term for what is actually "astral projection through dynamic concentration"

Which shows these people have never experienced true remote viewing

Astral projection through dynamic concentration is easy. Anyone who can dream, can do it if they practice

Remotely viewing through another persons conscious, is much, MUCH harder

a reply to: [post=26130809]Compendium[/pos

In your opinion does timing matter, or do you just do what you want to when you feel like it? I like your take on Remote viewing, it's enlightening. and could explain a few things.

a reply to: anonentity

I'm not sure what you mean

Are you talking about timing in synchronicity? Or timing in a matter of past, present and/or future?

You can remote view anothers conscious, in a non-conscious state

Meaning that you pair a conscious"ness" to their active mind, that is able to view with full sense, as if you are awake in their body. But it is not

And they are not

It is like using their mind to actively view memories, or predict what the person may/might do in future

In this state you can be in full control of the person. Unless you go too far from their amenable self. Such as try make them do something they would never do

But these are non-effigyan realms. They work of memory alignment, through the planetary and collective medium

You might also find resistance, and/or be disconnected, if you try viewing memories which were/are traumatic or repressed. Active memory is far easier to access

Doesn't mean it can't be done. It can just cause undue stress or pain to the effigyan mind you are connecting to

It is also allot easier if the person gives you permission, or is willing

Accessing active memory of past, also allows calculated projection of future

Though it is very hard to create and control scenarios. Unless you know very specific details about where and when they will be, and more importantly, who else they will interact with

If you have 2 or more known "interact" people, you can project with a certain degree of probability and accuracy to the future

But it will never, ever be accurate

More to the point, it usually becomes variant in nature. Meaning, the fact that you viewed it through them, makes it entirely as improbable to come to be, as it was probable in its viewing

The waking realm and collective conscious seems to actively align itself as far from projection as is possible, when you try look at things in such way

It's the observer paradox, in linear application of probability

The fact it is viewed makes it near impossible to become

In my experience, the events will usually precipitate in such a way that probability exceeds whatever bounds you try set to it

Like the world giving you the finger and a big F@$K YOU, for thinking you could know its thinking

You can connect to the pre-effigyan mind and view them in real-time as well, but this is usually at the cost of full sense

You hear and see vague fragments, because both associated conscious"ness" are active

Senses like touch (especially pain), smell and taste, come through very clearly

While things like sight and sound are fragmented flashes

But active conscious allows these connections at all times anyway. It's just that most people don't realise it

For example: You send someone a text message on your phone. Then an hour later, you have a random thought, remembering that you sent the message

It is likely the person made a connection, such as reading the message, at almost the exact moment you had/have your random thought

Attraction works across complex non-linear dynamics. It's part of our active emotional feedback system, or consciousness (separate and distinct from conscious)

Most people don't even understand the distinction between conscious and consciousness, so the emotional return systems is/are vastly misunderstood

Next time you see someone you find attractive in public. Try looking at them while they aren't looking while processing the most confident thoughts about yourself you can, in relation to them. Think about how perfect you would be for them. And how lucky they would be to notice how attractive you are ...

Then look away and shut your thoughts down to them. Think about something else. Whatever it is you are doing. But ... Keep your peripheral senses alert to what they are doing. Keep an eye on them, from the corner of your eye

I can almost guarantee you, they will notice you. And they will, at the very least, consider if you are attractive to them

It won't MAKE them find you attractive. But it will make them consider it

This is conscious mind, pairing consciousness

It works almost identically in/on the non and pre effigyan conscious, as it does with the waking effigyan conscious

But if I were to use this same example to emphasise my point before about trying to observe the future ...

The problem you find with drawing affinity through conscious pairing with another's emotional return consciousness, is polarisation

If the attractive person looks at you and they find you attractive, it can turn to easily turn to aversion, if they fail to understand "why" they looked at you in such a way

Say, if the person is happily married

They return a negative pairing, for what you issued

Which could mean, even if they may/might find you attractive, they may/might also find themselves repulsed or creeped out by you, without knowing why

Or worse, if they physically saw you looking at them first

It is a very dangerous game to play aligning yourself, or viewing others

It can cause you allot of trouble, even viewing passively

Because it can lead to polarisation or recurrence in your own life

All connections cause ripples that fan out in both directions. Yours and theirs

These forces are what keeps most people from these abilities in the first place

You need to overcome those forces to make connections. And those forces nearly always come back on you in some way

a reply to: shidge.

Just the title of this thread bends my mind!!

Virtual -- remote viewing????

I think that you may already know about Ed Dames and his site but if not. thekillshot.com... I cannot say much about his classes having never taken them but people seem to have good results. For me remote viewing seems to be more like spontaneous bilocation and does not occur too often. I really need to care about the subject. a reply to: shidge.

a reply to: midicon

Remote viewing is legit.
I have even done it myself.

I would say this result is also typical, squid form is similar to a fork.

Youtube: Americas Psychic Spies

On topic, you are already here ATS is the only place I have seen.

I have done it on the phone.
Try making some "targets"

-Driver