RV in the real world

Project Home Page

RVwebForum

TKR @the Dojo Psi

Help make it possible for everyone.

RV CHAT

Monday Nights
9:30-11:30pm Eastern
6:30-8:30pm Pacific
dojopsi.com/chat/

Weekly RV Chat

CS Labs
Ingo Swann
Joe McMoneagle

Baylands Nature Preserve
Pete's Harbor Restaurant
Lucid Dream Example
Radio Listening Post
Test-Bed Trials
Video ABC Put to the Test

The Home Made Viewer

P.I.A.

TKR Blog

Noetic Vision

Serious Kilowatt

Red Cairo

Cosmic Spoon

Psychic Journey

Psyforce

Remote Review

MindBlogging

BadMoJoe

Dojo Blog

Firedocs RV Blog

the McMoneagles

LFR/CSL

RV Roast (alt)

RV Library

[wizopeva]

I have become intrigued with something PJ said on a previous thread.  She mentioned that in target practice, most targets are physical objects and this can lead to viewers assuming all targets will be physical in nature.  Beyond that, I see that many rv projects focus on either esoterics that can't be verified or on physical search type attempts.  This is interesting because really rv is not as well suited to location finding because many locations look very similar to many other locations.  

So what about all the other things rv might be good for.  How about employee screening, stock market trends, finding out why some gadget won't work, etc.  What other things is rv good for?  For those of you in business, if you had an rver as an employee, what kinds of probs would you like him/her to help you with?  For employees, what kinds of probs do you think your employer would be best served to use rv for?  What kinds of screwups could have been avoided?  What kinds of probs are on the plate right now with a big question mark on them?
-E

[Scott]

Well finding a good use for RV is really quite the holy grail isn't it?  If there were a reliably good use for it in business, then funding research in RV wouldn't be a problem.   ARV fits the bill wonderfully, except that you can't depend on it.  

Unfortunately, the only answer for me thus far is that it's so strange that I want to understand what it is, how it works, etc.

Scott

[Member#247]

A highly skilled remote viewer can choose a target and view what they are currently doing.

Do you not see the value in that? Or are you unable to do that?

[Scott]

Member 247 wrote:
A highly skilled remote viewer can choose a target and view what they are currently doing.

Do you not see the value in that? Or are you unable to do that?

Scott Responds:
I'm certainly not able to do that to anywhere near the degree necessary to make it of value, at least not as an individual viewer, on a regular basis.  From what I've seen, very, very few are.  

That's a pretty antagonistic posting on your part.  And based on the tone of your comment I'm confident that 1) you can't or haven't, 2) you have not seen a representative cross-section of RV sessions by highly skilled viewers, and 3) you've bought into the false hype which includes that RV is close to 100% accurate by properly trained viewers.   How's that for accuracy?

If there were so much tangible value in RV then all the people teaching RV wouldn't need to because they'd be rich from DOING RV.  If they wanted to share their knowledge about RV for the betterment of humankind they wouldn't have to charge for it because they'd already be wealthy.

I think RV is a completely worthwhile endeavor for its own sake.  The VALUE in doing RV at this point in time comes from doing it and thus knowing that it is real.  If you come up with a way for a typically highly skilled remote viewer to make a living DOING RV I'll be the first in line - I'm trying to find one too.  But first you have to know what to expect from RV.

Scott

[kboyken]

This brings to mind something I read in Skip Atwater's book _Captain of My Ship, Master of My Soul_.  If I remember right, somewhere in the book, Skip says that it would be great if college or high school students all took a course in RV, the benefit being that it would expand their concepts about reality and their own selves.  Since very few people are likely to take up RV as a career, this educational use of RV would probably have the broadest impact upon the population.

Karl

[Eric]

A highly skilled remote viewer can choose a target and view what they are currently doing.

Do you not see the value in that? Or are you unable to do that?

Thats definately trolling.  Theres been enough of that on the boards of late.  Keep it nice people, or watch your posts get moved into the flame archive section.

Also what "they" are doing suggest spying on others, and I for one think thats just spooky and somewhat threatening.

There aint no reason to have attitude here- were all here to learn.

IF, that was not the intention and the above was just poorly worded, then you have my apologies.  

Play nice kids.

EricT

[Fire]

RV is used successfully in business applications.  But privately; viewers don't advertise their work nor do companies advertise their sources (I can see it now--"our CEO has sold his soul to the devil for corporate profit!" lol).  The biggest problem is not RV's lack of application, it is the lack of viewers competent at a level to apply it.  I know one.  I'm sure with a properly run project lots more would be qualified, but funding a whole properly run project is the hard part; that's different than funding one viewer.

What I find is that the more I do RV, the less I focus on the practical side of it to be honest; the more I do it, the more I pursue it because I need to, like it's addicting, like I love that part of myself, that size of perception, that sharing (RV is my drug! :-)); I love the constant reminder it's possible, and the side effects that has on my thinking even in my daily mundane life.  I love how it opens up me, opens up my universe.  The discipline is an end unto itself, like Scott says.  

This is actually something that every viewer needs to get to.  Many come into RV thinking they will save the world in some form; RV doesn't really seem to stick until someone begins doing it for themselves, just for the experience--never mind other issues.

I used to be more logical about RV, and I still work hard to be, but I'm starting to realize, both with myself and with others, that the most left brain commentary is often a result of people armchair theorizing about it more than actually doing and experiencing it.

Eva, it's a good question.  Many of the easiest applications for psi frankly seem better addressed by dowsing than by RV, I sometimes think.

I can see it doing employee screening, but what specifically is one looking for?  One would almost have to target "How I felt about person X in one year" or something like that--a very ill-defined target, yet still, any conceptual level viewer can probably do that.

But it would take a long time as it'd have to be mixed into a pool of at least a few others of similar nature so that one wasn't too frontloaded at least as to what the target likely was (you can task a series of targets all of which are emotions, of course, that's FL but at least the basic data wouldn't quickly give the target away).  So what I mean is, it isn't that this target would be difficult but that doing it on demand for multiple people would be difficult as there is a time limit involved in such things.

I've had psi readings on things like, "I'm considering buying some land.  Can you tell me anything about it?" and being told, "I see major flooding.  I think it's in a flood zone."  I ask, the realtor hems and haws and says no way I've lived here 40 years and it never has, and come to find out, it is totally in a flood zone but it's like a 50 year cycle of 15' underwater for quite some time--and it's been about 40 years since the last one... good thing I asked for advice.  So that's an example of an application I guess.

Thinking, here... I suppose RV could also be used in a comparative way.  For example, say you have two kinds of building materials, or two different marketing plans, or two different employee candidates, or whatever.  You could say, "describe a fairly unique and recognizeable identifier of which X would be most successful [financially, or whatever]" and hope the description would well enough match one of 'em to figure it out.

You could dowse some things.  You could ARV others. But I'd rather dial-direct with RV on some targets, because you get info you wouldn't get otherwise and which might lead to more useful questions.

PJ

[wizopeva]

LOL, well I see most of the posts on this idea have not gone the way I'd hoped!  My goal was to open people's minds to the possibilities, not argue if any exist.  The idea is that one would have some kind of proper team of viewers so that issues of frontloading could be avoided.  PJ is trying to rescue the thread though.  

But IMO, the prob with 'my feelings in a year' for employee hiring is that it sorta assumes that the person gets hired.  If the session indicates bad feelings, then assumedly the person does not get hired, hence changing the session to something else or making it wrong.  I don't know what this might do to the rv process in general.  That's another great question about rv.  What if your session about the future changes the future thus invalidating your session?   I think I've heard people agree it's best to avoid such a situation, but I don't think I've heard much evidence on what will happen if it's not avoided.  

However, I think the potential usage here for rv is clear, but the tasking might be tricky.  Perhaps one could task for most significant aspects of the person that relate to work performance.  IMO, hiring is one of the most important aspects of a successful business.  Beyond that if one is considering hiring or promoting someone, one could task for best position in the company for person X.    

But lets look at other aspects of a business.  You need customers right?  How can rv be ethically used to find customers?  Maybe you could task for the one thing your company can offer that will most impress customer X.  (ethics means you only offer things you can actually deliver on)  You want to keep your customers too so how about tasking for the thing your company can offer that will make Customer X most happy.  Other things to task on are future stock splits, mergers, bankruptcies, etc.  

Lets look at your company's latest important project.  You could task for best course of action with the project.  You could task for most important problem to avoid.  If something is not working, you could task for the most significant prob in the project.  If a machine is broken, you could task for the problem area AND the solution.

It seems to me that just about any action that is being considered could be viewed in advance if artfully tasked.  Yeah, dowsing could also be used in many cases.  To be honest, I don't know if any comparisons have been attempted between the accuracy of dowsing and rv.  Maybe using them both would be the best case scenario anyway.
-E    

Eva, it's a good question.  Many of the easiest applications for psi frankly seem better addressed by dowsing than by RV, I sometimes think.

I can see it doing employee screening, but what specifically is one looking for?  One would almost have to target "How I felt about person X in one year" or something like that--a very ill-defined target, yet still, any conceptual level viewer can probably do that.

But it would take a long time as it'd have to be mixed into a pool of at least a few others of similar nature so that one wasn't too frontloaded at least as to what the target likely was (you can task a series of targets all of which are emotions, of course, that's FL but at least the basic data wouldn't quickly give the target away).  So what I mean is, it isn't that this target would be difficult but that doing it on demand for multiple people would be difficult as there is a time limit involved in such things.

I've had psi readings on things like, "I'm considering buying some land.  Can you tell me anything about it?" and being told, "I see major flooding.  I think it's in a flood zone."  I ask, the realtor hems and haws and says no way I've lived here 40 years and it never has, and come to find out, it is totally in a flood zone but it's like a 50 year cycle of 15' underwater for quite some time--and it's been about 40 years since the last one... good thing I asked for advice.  So that's an example of an application I guess.

Thinking, here... I suppose RV could also be used in a comparative way.  For example, say you have two kinds of building materials, or two different marketing plans, or two different employee candidates, or whatever.  You could say, "describe a fairly unique and recognizeable identifier of which X would be most successful [financially, or whatever]" and hope the description would well enough match one of 'em to figure it out.

You could dowse some things.  You could ARV others. But I'd rather dial-direct with RV on some targets, because you get info you wouldn't get otherwise and which might lead to more useful questions.

PJ

[Glyn]

But IMO, the prob with 'my feelings in a year' for employee hiring is that it sorta assumes that the person gets hired.  If the session indicates bad feelings, then assumedly the person does not get hired, hence changing the session to something else or making it wrong.  I don't know what this might do to the rv process in general.  That's another great question about rv.  What if your session about the future changes the future thus invalidating your session?   I think I've heard people agree it's best to avoid such a situation, but I don't think I've heard much evidence on what will happen if it's not avoided.

 

That's wonderfully interesting . Maybe we could ask questions like that reliably because what we may be doing is viewing down alternate timelines presented by the decision-point.  Armchair theorising yes, and this has been discussed  many times before; but it does neatly sidestep the  paradox situation.  The ultimate decision itself would wipe out the alternates and the final outcome would be resolved.

However, what if we can't view alternates at all though? This could be gotten round by putting the question in other ways...asking not about the potential employee, but about the success of the department/company in one year's time. If the result of such a viewing shows the company doing great then it will not make any difference who you picked as you would always make the right decision.

Mmmm, that line of thinking is getting uncomfortably close to the 'future set in stone' idea, and I don't like that.........so I prefer to think we can view alternate time-lines at a decision point  .

Regards,
Glyn

[Glyn]

Carrying on from my previous mail..

There is the ethical question to this too. Thinking as that potential employee...would I want to be robbed of a great job by an RVer(s) whose abilities may not be up to the task? But then would I ever be told about it? Probably not. It could come down to that sort of thing more and more often though.. the using of RVers to decide the fate of others.

Surely there must be standards? Thinking as the employer now...If I were to pay an RVer for their services I would want evidence of their track-record, or at least the opinions of others who have used them. If client confidentially made that impossible then I would want a demonstration of their skills. If that was denied then I would want there to be a minimum 'performance' level so I would get at least a partial refund if the work proved to be useless. This may be difficult to determine to the satisfaction of both sides, but it holds true that without accountablility there can be no responsibility, and there are those out there who would take advantage of that. We wouldn't want RVers to be as unaccountable as garage mechanics or doctors in the UK now would we?  

Seriously though, how do others think minimum standards could be ensured? Should they? Could they?

Regards,
Glyn