Targets ~ the data we get ...

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

[polka_dot PUH_JOMMIES]

     Another posting prompted this question.

    When using photos of a target :

Using the same example I used in another topic. An Amish buggy, with horse and 2 Amish children.

Will data pick up info on the picture be according to the date I selected it ( a few days ago) or will the data go back to the time when the picture was actually taken...say it was 10 years ago?

Example: 10 years ago the buggy existed. Since then, the buggy has been destroyed.  Does the fact that the target no longer exists as shown in the photo have any impact on the current data we get?

    My experience has been that I 'go back in time' when doing targets.  I did one on a sculpture where the history was that the artist had a make shift home in his studio while doing his work. In his environment, he had a wood burning stove and containers of water. While his sculpture was not made of wood, he did make some of his own tools fashioned of wood to work on this piece.  At the time, he was experiencing personal turmoil in his life. yada yada

    Among other things, I got this:
smelled wood burning
enclosed water
sadness
sand,grit

    None of these things were in the photo. None of these things existed on the day the photo was chosen or the day I did the session. The photo was taken of the piece while in a current museum...not on the location where it was created.

    mmm...guess the sand/grit do still exist as they were compounded into the material that made the sculpture, however, I got the 'before' componets - in the raw material stage.

    For those of you who do the analysis of target sessions, please comment on how viewers doing the sessions relate to targets of long ago.  

    This has a lot to do with the time/space theory.


   

[Wizard]

Hello Polka


RV data is a function of intent defined by you or your monitor.

if you have a pool of photos that dont have any tasking/intent for the viewer then when you pick a picture blindly and go view you should have an intention.

like going to the time and place the picture has been taken.

Allen
--------------------------------------------
http://www.deepawareness.com

[polka_dot PUH_JOMMIES]

Thanks....I didn't realize that.

    So, with no particular intent, you are apt to pick up anything having to do with the target.

    My intent, without knowing it was in fact an intent, is always to describe the target- which I can do fairly well...just can't name it.  Are you saying that the intent needs to be more focused such as: to describe and identify by assigning a name label to it?

    So far, I've not done any target work that has asked for specific information....only to just do the session and report what you got having to do with the target. The practice targets available on the internet also seem to be set up in this general way.

   

[Tigr50]

Hi there:
I'm new, but what you call "RV". call psychomentry, and I always let the info come according to the questions I ask.  I have a firm belief that important RVing should be done by a team, because everyone has a different "talent" (taste, smell, vision, speech, emotions, facts, etc.)  Combining them all would give you a really well-rounded picture and narrow down the actual item--whether it existed past, present or future.  

The Amish buggy could have been picked up as "dead," or no longer in existence by an RVer with that talent--for example, when you just know a missing person is dead.  I think it is important to focus with your best talent and move out from there.  Or, rely on your first major impressions and build on them.  They might not always make sense, but it works for me.  Some people cannot RV certain things (too personal,  I think).

I have a real problem with direction (NESW) and time ("what time is it?)  I guess I could just look up the time, but when working on the other side of the globe, it's often dark and I can't see the landmarks.  I often wish I had something from the place or person to hold while I was doing this stuff.

I am one of those peope who thinks the target should always be identified and not hidden.  Cut to the chase sort of thing.  A photo is a great start, and so is a map.  I like anything metal too.  You can get a whole life from a set of car keys--and the condition of the car!

I'd  love to do some team target practice on important targets.  Like fugatives, stolen art, other felons.  They are fair game and don't have any protection (psychic).

Just some thoughts
Deb

[polka_dot PUH_JOMMIES]

Hi again Deb  

    Somewhere on this forum, (it's growing and wouldn't it be nice if most message forums had a search option --- or is this yet another thing we can remote LOL ?? ) that I worked as an intuitive with a group for the purpose of locating missing children. Sadly, it is no longer in operation, but the set up was exactly along your lines of thinking.

   Briefly, the set up was comprised of approx 100 intuitives. We all did the same case at the same time and we did them on an individual basis by whatever means worked for us.

    We sent in our reports to our team leader. Each team had 10 intuitives. Each team would come together to go over the findings as a group. The leader by this time would have done an analysis on the findings and would present them again to the group. The purpose was for each of us to yes, no, don't know to the responses or add whatever new info came to us on the spot. This would take about 45 mins. At the very end, all was gone over one more time for a final analysis.

    What was so excellent about this is that all input was important for just the very reasons you mentioned...we all have things that we are better at...some emotions, some directions, some time lines...so all put together, gave a wonderful overall report.  Also, statistically, the votes were important. If 10 out of 10 got that this child was in Montana, then this was a very important finding. If only one got Montana, then the info didn't merit much consideration.

    We were only given the name of the child, a picture, last known location and then we followed a template of information we were to seek (the intent) which consisted of info that could be followed up on by the authorities. We never got into the sadness, the methods of deaths etc. ....only valid info that could be tracked and verified.

    What was truly amazing was to see that we 10 strangers, from all walks of life, came up with a huge percentage of same information. Then add to this the other 9 teams and you can see what a powerful method this was.

    and yes, children were found ~~ and happily, a few were alive.

[Tigr50]

Now that is great to hear!  That sounds like the way it should be done. I would also suggest a "moderator" to do some analysis and bypass egos on decisions made about what seems a concensus and what does not.   I would love to work with a group like that, because I think it really works.  About four years ago, I worked with a group in MN--my main concern was OBL.  At that time, I felt very much in tune with his comings and goings and really wanted him picked up--it was so much easier then to get a lock on him, and he was quite easy to get at.   A lot of things would have been different now had he been.

But, water under the bridge.  The group became very MN oriented and started not to record my RV sessions or add them to the mix and they preferred to go after  kidnap victims, and lost children, which are hard for me to do.  At any rate , group work is extremely valuable because you can use all the talent available and put much less pressure on one person.  Everyone's  input is  valuable, even if it is symbolic.    

Someday, I hope there will be groups that work like this and just send in reports and those reports get sent in to the "right" people so action can be taken if need be--or not.  There may be some "misses" but my guess is that there will be a lot more "hits."  And then if you combine RV info with other data like satellite or communications, some events might take a different turn, shall we say.

Enjoy all your posts from all of you.
Deb

[PJ]

It depends on your tasking, but practice targets with photo feedback should be self-tasked as, "The target is the focus of the photograph at the time the photograph was taken. Describe the target."  

So the target AS IT IS REPRESENTED IN THE FEEDBACK is literally what you are viewing.  There may be elements not apparent from feedback, or only inferred from feedback, but in general the session focus the focus of the feedback photo.  If that were not the case, there would be limited value to have such specific feedback.

PJ

[PJ]

pdPJ -- this forum has a great search function.  At the top near the title, click on the little icon that says 'search'.  It will let you search one or all forums, for text or other options.

PJ

[polka_dot PUH_JOMMIES]

ta da!  thanks for the meat and potatoes PJ !

......and about the search option....ooops  

[River]

Are you saying that the intent needs to be more focused such as: to describe and identify by assigning a name label to it?

I'm so used to people saying that we should 'describe' the target that it has never occured to me to add a personal instruction to aslo 'name' the target! :-/

No wonder I always just get a description and can't name it.  

Thanks for that idea PDPJ. I'm going to try it next time and see what I get.

Liz