Remote Viewing History in Question

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

[DeuxesMachina]

There is a very interesting and enlightening discussion going on here about the details of RV history.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TechnicalRemoteViewers/message/1644


What do you think?

[PJ]

Well if I responded to each part I thought merited response, I'd be typing all week.  Maybe it's best to say there are myriad versions of history in this field, and each individual feels their version is accurate.

It's been my experience most people have good faith in what they know, and are confused by why others don't agree with them. (This is common psychology I realize, but I still maintain optimistic amazement that the rest of planet earth doesn't agree with me about everything.)

Maybe I've just had a very long day... others might like to respond or post here. But just my two cents, after considering that maybe I 'should' respond ... I don't see the use in my debating all that I could.

To be honest, I am so weary of arguing everything or anything in this subject.  Sometimes it seems like it's worth it, and I get caught up in the stupid social politics, and then I just want to kick myself a day or week later for getting so far out of centered.  With a few exceptions I can't hold a grudge worth a damn and keeping track of it all just exhausts me and upsets me.

I am weary of a 2nd and 3rd generation of viewers living out the political battles of a bunch of soldiers and CIA agendas and still-classified info and media-aggrandizement and reinvented pasts and so forth.

And I respect experience but while I'm griping, I'm also weary of expertise being based on history (alleged or documented), like kingship granted by lineage; we are whatever we are right now, and we're all growing.  Our competition should be with ourselves, to expand our own horizons, not with others, to trench and barbwire the borders of our territories or reputations.

I feel this field is dragging history like a ball and chain, instead of 'standing on the shoulders of the giants who came before' as Descartes put it.

I disagree with most that article, but if I'd written my version, she'd disagree with me too.  I imagine we are both sincere, despite this.

It would be nice if field-wide, we could all just agree to totally disagree and go forward.  You know, maybe salt the polar relations with a gigantic dose of humor.  I can live in a world with people who hold radically different views than I do on profoundly important topics, and feel no need to accost them or make sure others know how wrong they are, so I suppose it's not logical I'd have that tendency re: RV history.  (But I have, at times.)

I think what matters is not where anybody else was years ago or what we think they knew or didn't, or were doing or weren't, but rather how we are as people and viewers right now that helps define us.  Regardless of history, today the rest of us have to forge our paths and often without the people who taught us the history we know, or who helped us create our own history.  

Most of us completely disagree with each other.  Most of us are also genuinely doing what we think is best.

That article is one history version.  Joe has his own version.  In fact, I've talked with at least 16 people from various parts of the former gov't program over time (maybe more), and I'd say that makes at least 16 versions of history. Well, add the article. That's 17.

People who respect Joe's long experience in intell and science RV, and live demos of viewing, can read his book to see what he's like, how he thinks and what he has to say about things.  

Several books from other parties are scheduled to come out before too long, and just like all the ones that have come previous, they will probably all disagree with each other on something (if not everything).  In fact I'm about at the point of thinking if any two versions of history totally agreed, hell might freeze over.

Remote Viewing history is a great case made for the physics of infinite probable universes.

PJ

[intuitwolf]

Well I quite reading the enlightened discussion after the first four paragraphs -- but thought I could add a little further enlightenment to the mix.  

You said:

Incidentally, The RV unit was renamed "STARGATE" in 1990 .  .  .  So, anyone claiming to be a part of Stargate who was not one of those three people is manipulating facts and isn't really telling the truth.

All of these military funded Remote Viewing research and operational programs had separate names for the different years they were in existence. None of the current people claiming to be a part of Stargate were actually in Stargate.

You are correct that the name changed over time. But the program was one program and was located in one place. It had a variety of participants and sponsors over time. Stargate was the name in use when the program ended -- and thus the reason for it's use.

An RV Timeline is on the IRVA website that details the dates of when the name/sponsor/participants etc. changes occur.

http://www.irva.org/papers/RVTimeline.shtml

Shelia

[PJ]

I was telling someone recently that in late 95, officially the entire program, inclusive of all project names including star gate, were 'bundled' under the single-program-name STAR GATE.  I saw a doc on that and I wish I could remember where.  

Right now, that's the name used for FOIA stuff etc.  If you FOIA ask for STAR GATE you also get info on GRILL FLAME and other projects, because that name now represents the whole program, not just one of the many projects within it.  

I have often referred to this as "the projects now collectively called STAR GATE".  But after awhile the caveats get long, it's easier just to refer to 'stargate' since most everybody in RV now knows what is being referred to is the program.

PJ

[Paul]

Hey, Palyne -- don't know how much I'll get on here, as it gets fairly laborious to access a graphics-heavy web-based discussion group when all you have is 28k access (it's supposed to be 56k but I never see it...).

Interesting user agreement -- you can land yourself in trouble just for posting something that is "innacurate."  That would make most of us guilty at one time or another!  ;-)  I'm presuming what I agreed to is actually just not to _intentionally_ post something inaccurate....at least, that's what I'll take it to mean for now.

Reference the history discussion.  I skimmed through Jonina's post.  She has corrected some few of her facts since past such writings, but there are still many more to be corrected.  The question I have is, do I really want to sign up for yet one more e-mail group...

...but you're welcome to try and convince me!  LOL

Let me know if I did all this right and this message actually gets through.

Enjoy,
Paul

[wizopeva]

HI Paul, I have dialup too and the loading has only been taking seconds, much less than most stuff on the net these days.  I'd be the first to scream otherwise.   If you are worred about your message, just go immediately to the main thread and see if it's been added.  THis is a message board so stuff goes up immediately for all to see, similar in idea to it's physical counterpart the cork board only way more organized.  And unlike an email group, it doesn't send you anything as email.  You just go and observe what  goes on at the website/board at your leasure.  All the signing up required is what you already did in order to post your post.   Too late, now there's no escape, RESISTANCE IS FUTILE!!!!!    But seriously, we hope that the quality of the board will speak for itself and people will come because they want to, not because I might be tempted to tell all their secrets on the board otherwise, hehehe hehe he.  
-E  

Hey, Palyne -- don't know how much I'll get on here, as it gets fairly laborious to access a graphics-heavy web-based discussion group when all you have is 28k access (it's supposed to be 56k but I never see it...).
...................snip...........
Reference the history discussion.  I skimmed through Jonina's post.  She has corrected some few of her facts since past such writings, but there are still many more to be corrected.  The question I have is, do I really want to sign up for yet one more e-mail group...

...but you're welcome to try and convince me!  LOL

Let me know if I did all this right and this message actually gets through.

Enjoy,
Paul

[Paul]

Eva --

Since I have e-mail notification of responses which includes a handy url that all I need do is double click on, maybe it will be more painless than I thought!

Enjoy,
Paul

[PJ]

Aha!  We have him now Eva.  And Bill stopped by (though he's out of town for a week now, so much for my 10.7 billion questions I had ready).  A few more and it'll be like the old days...  PJ

[DeuxesMachina]

It is interesting that a tool that is so revered to be able to uncover the hidden depths of truth and was used for spying is so mired down in controversial historys.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TechnicalRemoteViewers/message/1644

I almost hate to ask you Mr. Paul,  but which part of Jonina's "version" do you disagree?

I have read the many star gate versions of RV history and they all are very contradictory.

She undoubtedly knows her stuff and she doesn't seem to need a convoluted military history or charity to succeed.

I know she can be radical and she is not afraid to challenge the expertise of the IRVA but she teaches the real thing and works her students hard until they perform at peak.

So while everybody else is still establishing their histories she appears to be working real world projects using RV.

Why should I believe the IRVA's version over hers?

 

[PJ]

I think you should believe whatever you want to believe.  It isn't anybody else's job to be constantly essaying on every small detail of something somebody else wrote that they don't agree with.  And then it's taken as attack if they do, so why bother.

In some cases, it would take paragraphs to dispute smaller portions with numerous issues to address.  One ends up having to write an entire book.  It isn't worth the time.  After this many years public, people are going to believe whatever they want to believe.  That's fine.

It's rare enough to find anybody who agrees on anything in this field.  She wrote it. You agree with it.  Great.  There's at least two.  I'm happy to see people agreeing on something.  I think I'll choose to look at that aspect of it instead.

PJ