ARV Project 'Tomahawk'

RV Protocol

GO VIEW! @TKR's dojo

Project Home Page

RV webForum (here!)

Email: @Yahoo|@Google

Help make it possible for everyone!

TKR is Funded by:
PJ of Dojo Psi

Simple Session

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

P.I.A.

Greg K's ARV Trials

RV Roast (alt)

RV Library

[Marv]

Sweet! How much money have you made?

[katzenhai2]

Marv, I like your thinking!

This is the first Project after several others which seems to be stable in terms of having hits more consistently (others seemed to be influenced by novelty).

We've put 10 Euros on each bet. This will stay the same until the project (20 bets) is completed. Because of 2 discarded trials we will add 2 more trials (up to 22 in total) to compensate for them.

Next project could be the use of financial markets to see if it works the same. Betting has a bad money management (risk 100% and profit max 80%). Sure, with a good accuracy it works but there are better ways. Also the timeframe is more variable and therefore the profits too. Good news is financial markets having a binary outcome too (up/down).

[Marv]

Nice going Katz....that's a great accuracy record. Keep it up! Any tips you would share with others here?

[katzenhai2]

No tips yet but reserve them for a later discussion when the project ends.
~8 trials to go...

At the moment it's more to show what others are doing with (A)RV.
Would be interesting to see how others work looks like. It's not about the group effect because as I've experienced in ARV analysing the session isn't the hard part. I'm surprised how good target elements looks in the results when site-morphing and displacement is reduced to nearly non-existent. Confusing results could origin by site-morphing or displacement, means noise, even if some bad results are not associated with these terms.
The viewer is far away being "professional". Seems the elements of a site I chose are distinctive enough to be recognized. There are bad days, sure. Either on the viewer part or the analyst part. That's why I discarded two trials and one were wrong.

In our first projects it seemed we've found a solution to reduce the site-morphing effect. Now the displacement effect seems also reduced. Fingers crossed for the long term.
I'm sure there are more working strategies to reduce noise and enhance the signal. So much more to experience with. I will never stop until 100% perfection (if it's possible because of the human factor involved).

[tbone]

I'm sure there are more working strategies to reduce noise and enhance the signal. So much more to experience with. I will never stop until 100% perfection (if it's possible because of the human factor involved).

I admire your perserverance, it is similar to mine.  So many people try ARV and quit after a bad stretch and say it is impossible or unworkable.  Many simply feel their time would be better served on other projects, which is fine, but the pervading mentality that ARV can't work I think does a disservice to RV in general.

[Marv]

So many people try ARV and quit after a bad stretch and say it is impossible or unworkable.  Many simply feel their time would be better served on other projects, which is fine, but the pervading mentality that ARV can't work I think does a disservice to RV in general.

I don't think that that it is the 'pervading mentality' as there are many many people out there continuing to experiment with ARV. At the same time one has to ask oneself why, after 30 odd years of RV, ARV etc, there are no ARV-made millionaires out there. (Or if there are then they are keeping very quiet indeed).

I have stated over and over again that the ONE way to shift the entire world-view of psi is for one person to publish a list of predictions on line (could be anonymously) that consistently come true. A 75% accuracy rate would do it. One a week for 30 weeks...just to get the press interested. Another 10 weeks of 75% accurate predictions and the world would be watching. Another 10 weeks of consistent 70% predictions and that person would be in a position to DICTATE the existence of psi. Forget Bem and his erotic precognition experiments...this would shatter boundaries. The skeptics would be left speechless. Science would HAVE to take note.

So why then has this not happened? Let's explore the possibilities:

1) Someone out there IS doing this, but privately, on the sly. They must be a multi millionaire by now.
2) Someone out there IS doing this, in public, but they're just not making enough noise about it.
4) Someone out there knows that this CAN be done, but refuses (for whatever reason) to do it.
3) 70% + accuracy using 'standard' ARV is not possible

Now ONE of these must be the case. Which one do you think it is?

I throw this open for discussion.

- - - - - - - - -

My own personal view on the matter is that standard ARV has been proved to be flawed due to displacement issues. I am excited and encouraged however by various exploratory techniques (the unitary ARV attempt being one).

the pervading mentality that ARV can't work I think does a disservice to RV in general.

To return to this quote...I don't think it does a disservice to new viewers to ensure that they are up to speed with the 'knowledge' earned by previous generations of viewers. If something doesn't work then it doesn't work; if, after repeated experiment, something is found to be impossible when attempted time and again under the same circumstances, well, it doesn't do any harm to wave the white flag and try something else.

TRY SOMETHING ELSE. That's the key - some other way of accessing the future information that you seek. Something different from standard ARV. Here's to all those currently engaged on such a mission.

'Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.'

- Albert Einstein

[Loraine]

In my opinion non of those are the case.

[Marv]

In my opinion non of those are the case.

State the alternative then...?

[tbone]

To return to this quote...I don't think it does a disservice to new viewers to ensure that they are up to speed with the 'knowledge' earned by previous generations of viewers. If something doesn't work then it doesn't work; if, after repeated experiment, something is found to be impossible when attempted time and again under the same circumstances, well, it doesn't do any harm to wave the white flag and try something else.

TRY SOMETHING ELSE. That's the key - some other way of accessing the future information that you seek. Something different from standard ARV. Here's to all those currently engaged on such a mission.

'Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.'

- Albert Einstein

This exactly my point.  Many people come looking for ARV success.  They do some trials and fail.  Instead of changing things up and trying new things they give up and say this doesn't work.  It is only my opinion that it is a pervasive belief that ARV doesn't work, I suppose.  However, log onto an RV forum and tell them that you can make ARV work and see how many people believe you.

I'm not against people sharing what hasn't worked for them, it is just that there are so many variables that could be throwing things off that I suspect most people don't know why they are failing and they don't use tight enough protocols to establish that.

[Marv]

They do some trials and fail.

Quite the opposite IMO - the standard finding amongst many ARV experimenters is an instant rush of good results followed by a slow tailing off or worse. I have heard this mentioned countless times by various trialsters and have encountered it several times myself.

What tends to fail and fall off are the long term ARV projects (or at least those using the standard ARV protocols).

PLEASE SOMEONE TELL ME I AM WRONG AND SHOW ME PROOF THAT THIS IS NOT SO. That's all I ask. You have 30+ years of RV history to go through to find me examples of ARVers making profitable public predictions.

Greg K made a good job of it over 3389 trials (http://www.remote-viewing.com/indexmain.html) but that's just one instance and IMO isn't proof that ARV works - just a scrap of evidence that it might.

Marv 

Username:
Password: