pjrv : Messages : 2096-2116 of 4038
(http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pjrv/messages/2096?)

 23:42:29

~~--------ArchivedPostFollows_Yahoo-PJRV_group---------

#2096
 	From: greenmn900...
Date: Sun Jan 26, 2003 6:12 pm
Subject: Re: Re: RV perception time delay, AOLs 	greenmn900...
Send Email Send Email
  	  	

Scott,
You wrote:
"Actually I know a lot about this as I am developing software used in
its research in association with James Spottiswoode."

That's cool!  It must be fascinating to be a part of that kind of research
with quality scientists like that.  Congratulations!  You may end up being
part of a group effort that changes some major paradigms.  I'm jealous as
hell! - just kidding.

You wrote:
"All of the sessions by Ingo that I've read about were not done using
CRV, so I'd be interested in hearing Ingo speak about his non-CRV
methodology."

Yeah, I would too.  From what I understand he based his conception of CRV on
the idea that it would allow people with very little natural psi talent to
demonstrate it anyway, that the structure was designed for that.  But the
structure seems to me to be a very strict way of enforcing  some beahvior
patterns that I now believe all RVers, natural or otherwise, eventually learn
to do themselves.  But I think there's some flaws in some of his basic
precepts, some of the "rules" that he set down (like the bias he seemed to
have aginst visuals) - but this all based on stuff I've read that wasn't
written by him.  I've never been trained in CRV, I work naturally, so I could
be completely wrong on a lot of this.

I'd love to sit down with him and pick his brain about other stuff too.  Like
if he ever retargeted the data he got on aliens, the moon, and aliens on
earth.  If so what did he get?  If not, why not?

If it's not proprietary, can you keep us informed about your work with
Spottiswoode?  I'm sure that's going to be some fascinating research.
Best Regards,
Don

Rich comments:

I read somewhere that Ingo has been asked about retasking those subjects
and he said no.  I think the reason was simply lack of interest and/ or
some fear. I can't imagine anyone being able to "see" these things just
walk away from it.  On the other hand, if I was shot at with a ray gun
from a UFO in the wilds of Alaska........ I might walk pretty fast.  :)

Reply | Forward
	
#2106
 	From: greenmn900...
Date: Mon Jan 27, 2003 6:10 pm
Subject: Re: Re: RV perception time delay, AOLs 	greenmn900...
Send Email Send Email
  	  	

Hi Rich,
You wrote (concerning Ingo and the UFO targets and experiences he had):
" I can't imagine anyone being able to "see" these things just
walk away from it.  On the other hand, if I was shot at with a ray gun
from a UFO in the wilds of Alaska........ I might walk pretty fast.  :)"

LOL!! I've thought exactly the same things before - in the same order, ha, ha!
Don

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Reply | Forward
	
#2116
 	From: greenmn900...
Date: Tue Jan 28, 2003 5:57 pm
Subject: Re: Re: RV perception time delay, AOLs 	greenmn900...
Send Email Send Email
  	  	

Bo,
The examples you give are testing normal senses and the time lag built into
their perception reaching conscious awareness and then a resulting
decision-making process - following that a motor control-involved response.
This doesn't pertain to psi perceptions, imo.  Is there any eveidence that it
DOES pertain to psi perceptions?  or that psi perception operates the same as
normal senses?
Best Regards,
Don

pjrv : Messages : 2079-2235 of 4038
(http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pjrv/messages/2079?)

 23:46:00

~~--------ArchivedPostFollows_Yahoo-PJRV_group---------

#2079
 	From: greenmn900...
Date: Sat Jan 25, 2003 11:19 am
Subject: Re: RV perception time delay, AOLs 	greenmn900...
Send Email Send Email
  	  	

Hi Scott,
You wrote:
"To the best of my knowledge, the MEG and EEG studies have not yet
determined when or where any psi data is received in the brain."

Good point.  I think what is going on here is that a lot of people are
assuming that psi perceptions happen in the same way as normal sensory
perceptions and then make their way into our conscious awareness the same way
ordinary sensory perceptions do.  No one really has any idea if this is true
or not, to the best of my knowledge.

In his book "Conscious Universe", Dean Radin talks about a phenomenon he
called "presentiment effect" where a person's nervous system (things like
galvanic skin resonse, heart rate, blood pressure, etc.) showed a beginning
response to a stimulating target (arousing, disturbing, and shocking
pictures) fractions of a second *before* they were shown the picture.  (This
study was successfully replicated, as well).

As this was a precognitive reaction, it was obviously psi data that they were
perceiving.  To me, this suggests that psi data may not be perceived anything
like normal sensory data at all - and therefore may not follow the same paths
in reaching consciousness either.

Of course in these research subjects, their nervous system responses all
continued to show a greater response once the subject actually, visually,
*saw* the shocking pictures.  This then, was a result of the normal sensory
data reaching consciousness.   But the subjects showed an unconscious
psi-based reaction *prior* to being exposed to the shocking pictures.

This is damned interesting stuff!  With this kind of experiment we might be
able to show the exact moment a person unconsciously perceives psi data.  But
then how would we ever know the exact split-second that it reaches
consciousness?  With normal sensorial input, it's easy.  We can measure
reaction time and we know what it generally is  But we can't assume that
reaction time is the same when a person is exposed to psi perceptions versus
normal sensory perceptions.  When you perceive psi data, you may not be able
to generate a reaction at the same speed you do when you perceive ordinary
sensory data.  And your reaction time may very a hell of a lot depending on
what kind and how deep of an altered state you are in at the time.  I have no
idea how this could ever be realistically measured.

You wrote:
"It is not uncommon for me to have Kodak quality,
full color, flashes of images that I immediately comprehend as to
their form and function and which turn out to match the feedback photo
almost perfectly.  In my book that's not AOL, it's data.  I think it's
impossible to recognize the difference between good data and bad in
that circumstance unless the image seems to be nonsense."

I agree.  I think a lot of these misperceptions have arisen from the fact
that Ingo Swann is the sole developer of the method most people use to RV.
Most of the concepts people use, like AOL, are based on his understanding and
his usage of the terms - which in turn were based on his individual remote
viewing style.  Ingo is a great thinker and Rver.  He had a lot of deep
insights into psi-work, although a lot of them were actually discovered years
earlier by Warcollier and others.

But I wonder what the differences would be if the most popular RV method was
developed by, say, Pat Price instead.  Remember, Pat Price was excellent at
perceiving things like numbers and letters, words and phrases, and
near-photographic-quality sketches of objects and places.  Using Bo's (and
Ingo's and a lot of other people's) understanding of what constitutes AOL, in
Pat Price's case, almost EVERYTHING would be.  You can tell from reading
transcripts of Pat's sessions, almost every perception he got was a
high-quality, clear visual, obvious as to form and function.  It would be a
very different RV field than what we have today, I'm sure of that.
Warm Regards,
Don

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Reply | Forward
	
#2091
 	From: "Glyn" 
Date: Sun Jan 26, 2003 1:41 pm
Subject: RE: RV perception time delay, AOLs 	gebega
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°
  	  	

Hi Don,

You said..:
  Of course in these research subjects, their nervous system responses all
continued to show a greater response once the subject actually, visually,
*saw* the shocking pictures.  This then, was a result of the normal sensory
data reaching consciousness.   But the subjects showed an unconscious
psi-based reaction *prior* to being exposed to the shocking pictures

No, I'm not going to bore you all with that future memory stuff again  ;-).
But it makes you think though doesn't it?  Would be bound to cause a
reaction in the present wouldn't it?

However, whatever it is that turns out to be happening, it is certainly
intriguing research, and may give us a pointer in the right direction;
hopefully.

You said ..
  But I wonder what the differences would be if the most popular RV method
was
developed by, say, Pat Price instead.  Remember, Pat Price was excellent at
perceiving things like numbers and letters, words and phrases, and
near-photographic-quality sketches of objects and places.  Using Bo's (and
Ingo's and a lot of other people's) understanding of what constitutes AOL,
in
Pat Price's case, almost EVERYTHING would be.  You can tell from reading
transcripts of Pat's sessions, almost every perception he got was a
high-quality, clear visual, obvious as to form and function.  It would be a
very different RV field than what we have today, I'm sure of that.

You may be right in thinking that Don.  It's bad to put 'limiters' on our
beliefs regarding what we can and cannot do......self-fulfilling prophecies
and all that :-).

That frustrating visual reading problem though! Personally I don't think it
is solely just because someone is in any altered state of consciousness,
because I've had quite a few lucid dreams and OBE-type experiences where I
have read with absolute clarity, and remembered most of it afterwards. The
problem I've had on those occasions is (as with most ordinary dreams) it's
that 'transfer' between the 'working memory' in the altered state and the
equivalent in the fully conscious state (they do seem to be different),
where most of it is lost or scrambled (but then I've got a bad memory
anyway... :-).

However, in the LDs and the OBE-type experiences I've had (I say  OBE 'type'
because although I have the experience of rolling out of my body etc etc,
and all the usual stuff, they are completely unvalidated and IMO probably
different types of LD),.... I have not been deliberately  trying to pick up
'psi' information; as in ERV. That could involve a different process all
together, or it could even be that if you are not fully immersed, or
bi-located, that the ability to read is not 'available' (the more logical
parts of the brain are not fully 'on-line').

For example. in *some* of my more lucid lucid dreams/OBEs,  I have had
access to my full 'conscious' memories and known absolutely who I was, where
I was, that I was in my body in bed and that it was work tomorrow and I
hadn't finished the project my boss had given me. LOL! I have also been able
to open my eyes to see my bedroom and close them and continue a
'conversation' with characters in my LD. Most people that have that kind of
experience have probably been able to do that too.

The point I am trying to make is that most of the really good RVers seem to
be able to at least bi-locate now and again. I must admit that I have never
been able to  bi-locate or fully immerse when in an ERV session;
unfortunately. By 'bi-locate' or  'fully immerse' I don't necessarily mean
that you 'go' anywhere...it just may mean that the altered state is
more...profound/stronger, and so perhaps gives access to more of the
abilities of the brain, which leads to better interpretation and memory.

So, when doing ERV the level of immersion in the altered state may be
extremely important as far as being able to interpret and read information
retrieved via 'psi'. Thoughts on that?

Kind regards,
Glyn

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Reply | Forward
	
#2093
 	From: "Scott Ellis " 
Date: Sun Jan 26, 2003 12:27 pm
Subject: Re: RV perception time delay, AOLs 	scottrver
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°
  	  	

Don wrote:

> In his book "Conscious Universe", Dean Radin talks about a
phenomenon he
> called "presentiment effect" ...

... This is damned interesting stuff!  With this kind of experiment we
might be
> able to show the exact moment a person unconsciously perceives psi data.

Actually I know a lot about this as I am developing software used in
its research in association with James Spottiswoode.  Research is
going along well in this area and it is hoped that it will lead to new
insights as to psi functioning.  We are about to take lots and lots of
data.

Don wrote:

> But I wonder what the differences would be if the most popular RV
method was
> developed by, say, Pat Price instead.

All of the sessions by Ingo that I've read about were not done using
CRV, so I'd be interested in hearing Ingo speak about his non-CRV
methodology.

Scott

Reply | Forward
	
#2095
 	From: greenmn900...
Date: Sun Jan 26, 2003 6:39 pm
Subject: Re: RV perception time delay, AOLs 	greenmn900...
Send Email Send Email
  	  	

Hi Glyn,
You always come up with some different fascinating ways of looking at things!

You wrote:
"No, I'm not going to bore you all with that future memory stuff again  ;-).
But it makes you think though doesn't it?  Would be bound to cause a
reaction in the present wouldn't it?"

Yeah, it makes sense.  Like I said before, I really think you're on to
something with this line of thought.  And that was kind of my thinking when I
responded with that post to BO about trying to ascertain the exact moment
that psi data is perceived.  I mean, given that time is *meaningless* in
terms of psi activity (the future, past, and present are all one huge
information field), how could we ever design an experiment to figure out the
exact moment (the "exact moment" in our normal, conscious terms of time
focus) that it all happens?  There's already quite a bit of suggestive
evidence that we are always RVing our feedback, even when we think we aren't
- the only exception is times when RVers have gotten correct data and then
died before receiving feedback, but that doesn't rule out them getting the
feedback *after* they died, lol!

You wrote:
"That could involve a different process all
together, or it could even be that if you are not fully immersed, or
bi-located, that the ability to read is not 'available' (the more logical
parts of the brain are not fully 'on-line')."

Now THAT's an interesting idea!  You could be right.  Maybe if "enough of us"
isn't involved, then we are limited to only the more "right brain"
activities.  That would explain why essentially left brain tasks like reading
and understanding numbers don't work that well in RV but yet they do in OBEs.
  The problem with OBEs is that they've barely been researched and the few
times they were, they didn't show much in the way of results.  Myself, I have
very little experience with them.  i could count on one hand the number of
OBEs I've had.

Generally, my best RVsessions have involved bilocation or near-bilocation.
It's uncommon, but not really rare, for me to come up with names of cities,
businesses, people, etc. that are correct.  But they way I perceive them is
just as a single, complete thought.  I've never read anything while RVing.
Come to think of it, I've never even perceived letters written on a page
before.  But usually, when I perceive a string of letters (not "seeing them
written on a page, they just come like a thought or concept does) they're
wrong.

My wife has OBEs once or twice a month on average.  I'm gonna have to talk to
her about this and see what she thinks.
Best Regards,
Don

Rich comments:

Isn't there a story, part of the Star Gate saga, where a remote viewer is
directed by his monitor to go and read the newspaper a man was reading (the man
was the target I believe)?
So the RVers does so and says its in a language he doesn't understand but....
the gist of the information was perceived.

Anyone have better recall on this?

Rich

Reply | Forward
	
#2104
 	From: "Bo Kindstrand <031-7115905...om>" <031-7115905...om>
Date: Tue Jan 28, 2003 10:14 am
Subject: Re: RV perception time delay, AOLs 	bokindstrand
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°
  	  	

Here's another good example what "can be done" during this
crucial time delay. In this ABC News article from Sept. 12, 2000,
Amanda Onion describes an interesting experiment conducted
on subliminal influencing:
http://tbns.net/mpc/references.htm#coc
tbns.net/mpc/references.htm#coc
Excerpt:
(snip)Anthony Greenwald, a psychologist at the University of
Washington in Seattle, recently asked a group of people to
classify words showed to them as pleasant or unpleasant by
pressing one of two buttons.
      To test for subliminal effects, Greenwald flashed another
word for a split second before showing the word subjects could
see clearly. For example, before presenting "sugar," he would
flash a millisecond image of the word "poison" or of the word
"honey."
      The impact was obvious. He found when the subliminal word
had a similar meaning as the word it preceded; the subjects
selected the correct button more quickly. But when the flashed
word had the opposite meaning, their reaction was delayed or
even reversed.

Other links:
Subliminal Influencing
http://tbns.net/mpc/references.htm#coc

Electromagnetics and the Mind
http://tbns.net/mpc/references.htm#coc

Homepage:
Mind Control Technology, Techniques and Politics

http://tbns.net/mpc/references.htm#coc

http://tbns.net/mpc/references.htm#coc

Reply | Forward
	
#2144
 	From: "Glyn" 
Date: Sat Feb 1, 2003 4:29 am
Subject: RE: RV perception time delay, AOLs 	gebega
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°
  	  	

Hi Don,

I'm  a bit  behind in going through my mails..

You said...
I mean, given that time is *meaningless* in
terms of psi activity (the future, past, and present are all one huge
information field), how could we ever design an experiment to figure out the
exact moment (the "exact moment" in our normal, conscious terms of time
focus) that it all happens?  There's already quite a bit of suggestive
evidence that we are always RVing our feedback, even when we think we aren't
- the only exception is times when RVers have gotten correct data and then
died before receiving feedback, but that doesn't rule out them getting the
feedback *after* they died, lol!
..............
.
Mmm yes, that's always the 'stumbling block', and the main reason why I am
not totally happy with FM theory.  The prime example of that sort of thing
happening is Pat Price's viewing of some structures that were not built
until after his death.

Thinking as I go here...................I could never really follow Dunne's
ideas as to how 'versions' of ourselves (he called them 'observers') could
carry on, beyond our lifetime, and maybe  forever, because of the
overlapping nature of what he called Serial Time. He did not think time was
*singularly* linear, but that there were many time lines, overlapping each
other, to infinity. Now this is the confusing bit (for me anyway..and you'd
have to read the book because I may have this wrong, but the same
'ball-park'),....but we 'exist' in these other times too, and because they
overlap....then (at a subconscious level), we *would* have access to our own
memories beyond our present lifetime. Dunne thought that because of this it
could mean we 'go on' forever, and it would be 'life after death' (but not
as we know it, Jim. LOL!).

Well, back to RV... there would be no looking at future feedback beyond our
lifetime consciously of course, not at Observer 1 level in the 'here and
now' anyway (he called the infinite series of 'us'  Obs 1, Obs 2 etc), but
maybe at Observer 2 level beyond our lifetime; well beyond this version of
'us' anyway (Wow! it gets complicated :-). We could have no conscious access
to these other 'selves' of course or we could go insane..........but our sub
would; naturally :-).

I've probably made a complete hash of explaining that  and it's probably a
mish-mash of what Dunne said and what I 'thought' he said.... but it kind of
appeals to me.

I'd be interested in knowing what you think of that....the polite version
anyway LOL!

Kind regards,
Glyn

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Reply | Forward
	
#2159
 	From: greenmn900...
Date: Sun Feb 2, 2003 7:03 am
Subject: Re: RV perception time delay, AOLs 	greenmn900...
Send Email Send Email
  	  	

Hi Glyn,
Ya know, I think Dunne's theories are about as good or bad as any that are
out there.  I'm only briefly familiar with them, but from what I understand
of it, you explained it pretty well.  From reading Joe M's books, especially
"The Ultimate Time Machine", I get the feeling this is kind of along his
lines of thinking.

All this stuff fascinates me to the point of thinking about it so hard I
start making my own head spin - and when I'm not causing my head to spin then
PJ usually is, lol!

My biggest problem with Dunne's theories is the part about "overlaping serial
time".  It just "feels" wrong to me for some reason.  But I'm probably not
understanding it perfectly either.  His ideas about "observer 1, obserevr 2",
etc. also gives me the feeling of too much seperation between parts of
ourselves, almost as if they are different people entirely.  Now I know this
is just a construct that he's using and he doesn't mean it in that way, but
that part also feels wrong to me for some reason.

I recently read about someone's theory - I can't recall who it was - that
"felt" to me like it was right on the money, like it might be right.
Basically, as I understand it, it goes like this:

Our concious mind is focused on a very small interval of time - I think he
called it the "specious present".  And this "specious present" is where we
conciously live all the time.  It's such a very tiny interval of time that it
really seems almost nonexistent, like there's a huge past stretching out
behind us and a vast future laying before us and but we are geared to include
in our conscious awareness only a very small parameter of time and our focus
slides along through time, only being aware of that tiny part he called the
"specious present".  It's what we call "now".

But our subconcious mind has a much larger "specious present".  The
parameters of focus for our subconscious mind are huge, so huge that it
extends out to being aware of all time, past and present.  So, to our
subconscious mind, all time is "now".  The focus of our subconcious is so
large and so inclusive that, to it, everything that has ever happened or ever
will happen, seems to be happening "now", in the present.

I liked that theory - wish I could remember who's it was - and it felt to me
like it might be pretty close to the truth.  If it's right, then it wouldn't
matter if we die before getting feedback on something.  Our subconscious
basically already has the feedback and always has had it.

Both this theory and Dunne's are able to get around the problem of the
conscious mind never getting feedback because the subconscious (in the one I
descibed) or one of the "observers" (in Dunne's) gets the feedback instead.
It's hard to comprehend a part of our minds being omniscient like that but
more and more, it seems to be the case.  I wonder what these kinds of ideas
portend for related ideas, such as that we create our own reality and we
create the future based on our actions in the present, etc.

Sometimes I think I'd be better off if I was more like old Pat Price was.  I
always get the feeling he never worried about any of this stuff or how RV
worked.  He just "did it" and left the teasing out of the concepts that allow
RV to work up to others. :-)
Best Regards,
Don

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Reply | Forward
	
#2170
 	From: "Glyn" 
Date: Mon Feb 3, 2003 5:53 am
Subject: RE: RV perception time delay, AOLs 	gebega
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°
  	  	

Hi Don,

   You said:
   My biggest problem with Dunne's theories is the part about "overlaping
serial
   time".  It just "feels" wrong to me for some reason.  But I'm probably not
   understanding it perfectly either.  His ideas about "observer 1, obserevr
2",
   etc. also gives me the feeling of too much seperation between parts of
   ourselves, almost as if they are different people entirely.  Now I know
this
   is just a construct that he's using and he doesn't mean it in that way,
but
   that part also feels wrong to me for some reason.
   .................................................

   I agree actually, the Serial Time and 'Observers' don't 'sit' all that
well with me either. I always thought it was me not being able to understand
the theory properly, but I have never yet met anyone else who could either,
( which is kind of comforting ;-), and so It may be more to do with him not
being able to get his ideas over to others properly. In person it may have
been different; but concepts like that are so hard to illustrate.

   I like the future memory ideas though, and personally I am quite settled
(for the moment) in thinking that is how RV may work. I can only speak for
myself though, but my own experiences (although relatively minor) seem to
point strongly in that direction; the only 'hang-up' to the whole thing
being 'neat and tidy' in my mind is how we could view out to a time beyond
our physical death.

   The theory you explained is a good one, and I agree that if feedback does
exist then that is one way we could get it.

   Thinking along again............ I feel that in order for  FM theory
(access to our 'own' future memories) to still work and get us info beyond
the lifetime of our physical bodies though, we (as Observer 1 in Time 1)
must be able to  'get at'  information held by ourselves in what appears, at
the moment anyway, to be a different 'dimension' of existence (as Observer 2
in Time 2). This access can be obtained by altering our state of
consciousness so that we can 'bypass' our conscious mind (eg sleep and
dreams...or deliberately as in RV).

   Maybe we can get higher (to the memories of Observer 3 in Time 3...but
perhaps only Obs 2 can do that.  Our other 'selves' appear different to us
here in T1.....but each of them would be their own Observer 1 in Time 1
too..(if you get my drift)...................and it hurts my brain to go any
further :-)).

   Sort of fits in with 'esoteric' accounts of other 'planes' of existence
doesn't it? I'm not into all that stuff, but maybe in flowery terms they are
all talking about the same concept. Maybe there is half forgotten knowledge
out there......or maybe they've been at Observer 2+ as well :-)

   Just a few words from Dunne that sort of sends tingles down my spine...

   "We must live before we can attain to either intelligence or control at
all. We must sleep if we are not to find ourselves, at death, helplessly
strange to the new conditions. And we must die before we can hope to advance
to a broader understanding."

   Phew! Enough for now :-).
   Glyn

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Reply | Forward
	
#2175
 	From: "Glyn" 
Date: Mon Feb 3, 2003 6:39 am
Subject: RE: RV perception time delay, AOLs 	gebega
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°
  	  	

Hi again Don,

Well I think I've finally made up my mind how I think RV may work. I don't
expect anyone else to agree, (except perhaps for Dunne......who, I have come
to believe, is somewhere else in time :-).......but it's nice to have it
sorted out in my own mind at last.

To get to memories which have been/are to be laid down during our own
*physical* lifetime I think we gain access to our future memories of the
disclosure of the target....(the point of access to the memories is
important because changes/distortions to our memories will occur the further
forward in time we go). We do this via an altered state of consciousness,
using subconscious processes and bypassing our conscious mind and therefore
the shackles of linear time..

To get to memories beyond our *physical* lifetime I  think we gain access to
future memories of the feedback held by Obs 2 in Time 2...(still us)..still
via an altered state of consciousness. (See my previous mail about my
thoughts on Dunne's theory of serial time).

I don't think the subconscious holds the info,  I think it obtains its
instructions from the conscious mind and obtains the information from the
memories that will be laid down by us after target disclosure somewhere in
our future(s). It appears that there is also a sub-conscious memory
storage...before transfer to the working/short-term memories of the
conscious mind, and that can involve extensive data-loss  (as in remembering
dreams). The conscious mind also distorts what information gets through by
doing its job and trying to analyse it.

Without feedback I don't think RV can work........but if there is any
feedback at all available to our(selves) in all the dimensions of
Time....then we may be able to get it. It will be imagination distorted,
access-point dependant, and mixed up with all sort of stuff from our sub and
our conscious minds.  Also I think we can view myths (especially if believed
by us or one of our 'selves'), so that's another stumbling block; especially
if the truth can never be ascertained...because we are not viewing absolute
truth, only memories of and after initial target disclosure...

That's why it's so damned difficult :-). But there may be things we can do
to help once we find out how it works; whether similar to my ideas or
completely different.

(Please note that the above opinions are subject to revision or complete
change at any moment in time, depending on whether someone else comes up
with anything better. LOL!!)

Cheers for now,
Glyn

Reply | Forward
	
#2169
 	From: "Sharon Webb" 
Date: Mon Feb 3, 2003 12:24 am
Subject: Re: RV perception time delay, AOLs 	sharwebb_30512
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°
  	  	

Don,

It's the "spacious" present...not "specious."  :-)  And I don't know how it got
to  you, but it is part and parcel of the Seth material, written by Jane
Roberts.

Sharon
sharwebb...net
www.fractalus.com/sharon

   ----- Original Message -----
   From: greenmn900...
   To: pjrv...oups.com
   Sent: Sunday, February 02, 2003 1:03 PM
   Subject: Re: [pjrv] RV perception time delay, AOLs

   Hi Glyn,
   Ya know, I think Dunne's theories are about as good or bad as any that are
   out there.  I'm only briefly familiar with them, but from what I understand
   of it, you explained it pretty well.  From reading Joe M's books, especially
   "The Ultimate Time Machine", I get the feeling this is kind of along his
   lines of thinking.

   All this stuff fascinates me to the point of thinking about it so hard I
   start making my own head spin - and when I'm not causing my head to spin then
   PJ usually is, lol!

   My biggest problem with Dunne's theories is the part about "overlaping serial
   time".  It just "feels" wrong to me for some reason.  But I'm probably not
   understanding it perfectly either.  His ideas about "observer 1, obserevr 2",
   etc. also gives me the feeling of too much seperation between parts of
   ourselves, almost as if they are different people entirely.  Now I know this
   is just a construct that he's using and he doesn't mean it in that way, but
   that part also feels wrong to me for some reason.

   I recently read about someone's theory - I can't recall who it was - that
   "felt" to me like it was right on the money, like it might be right.
   Basically, as I understand it, it goes like this:

   Our concious mind is focused on a very small interval of time - I think he
   called it the "specious present".  And this "specious present" is where we
   conciously live all the time.  It's such a very tiny interval of time that it
   really seems almost nonexistent, like there's a huge past stretching out
   behind us and a vast future laying before us and but we are geared to include
   in our conscious awareness only a very small parameter of time and our focus
   slides along through time, only being aware of that tiny part he called the
   "specious present".  It's what we call "now".

   But our subconcious mind has a much larger "specious present".  The
   parameters of focus for our subconscious mind are huge, so huge that it
   extends out to being aware of all time, past and present.  So, to our
   subconscious mind, all time is "now".  The focus of our subconcious is so
   large and so inclusive that, to it, everything that has ever happened or ever
   will happen, seems to be happening "now", in the present.

   I liked that theory - wish I could remember who's it was - and it felt to me
   like it might be pretty close to the truth.  If it's right, then it wouldn't
   matter if we die before getting feedback on something.  Our subconscious
   basically already has the feedback and always has had it.

   Both this theory and Dunne's are able to get around the problem of the
   conscious mind never getting feedback because the subconscious (in the one I
   descibed) or one of the "observers" (in Dunne's) gets the feedback instead.
   It's hard to comprehend a part of our minds being omniscient like that but
   more and more, it seems to be the case.  I wonder what these kinds of ideas
   portend for related ideas, such as that we create our own reality and we
   create the future based on our actions in the present, etc.

   Sometimes I think I'd be better off if I was more like old Pat Price was.  I
   always get the feeling he never worried about any of this stuff or how RV
   worked.  He just "did it" and left the teasing out of the concepts that allow
   RV to work up to others. :-)
   Best Regards,
   Don

   [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

   .
   ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

   RV Oasis  [pjrv]  Practical Psi with PJ Gaenir
   Subscribe: pjrv-subscribe...oups.com
   Unsubscribe: pjrv-unsubscribe...oups.com
   Visit Group: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pjrv/
   Firedocs RV: http://www.firedocs.com/remoteviewing/
   Owner/Moderator: Email to PJ at pj...s.com

   ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
   .

   Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Reply | Forward
	
#2190
 	From: greenmn900...
Date: Mon Feb 3, 2003 5:19 pm
Subject: Re: RV perception time delay, AOLs 	greenmn900...
Send Email Send Email
  	  	

Hi Sharon,
You wrote:
"It's the "spacious" present...not "specious."  :-)  And I don't know how it
got to  you, but it is part and parcel of the Seth material, written by Jane
Roberts."

No, this wasn't from the Seth material.  I'm familiar with that.  This was
from some scientist.  He had a whole theory that gets pretty complicated and
I just gave the basics (because I'm not sure I even understand the details,
lol!).  I got the impression he used the word "specious" because he didn't
believe there really *is* anything like the *present*.  It was in a huge book
I've had for a long time that I've recently been rereading by Colin Wilson
called "Mysteries".  I just tried to find the scientists' name by looking up
the term in the index but it's not there.  Dunne's theories that Glyn talked
about are in there too.

Seth DID have a lot to say about the nature of time though.  It could be
pretty hard to grasp too..
Best Regards,
Don

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Reply | Forward
	
#2194
 	From: greenmn900...
Date: Mon Feb 3, 2003 6:24 pm
Subject: Re: RV perception time delay, AOLs 	greenmn900...
Send Email Send Email
  	  	

Hi Glyn,
Nice points you're making here.  I wish I'd have read Dunne's theories
directly from him.  All I've ever read are where other people have been
discussing them.

I remember when I first started RVing (about 4-5 months into it, several
hundred targets Rved) I was having a lot of experiences that were forcing me
to think about time a lot and I was really wrestling with all these different
concepts.  I recall doing outbound targets and getting extremely confused.
One in particular:  My wife had taken a photo of a local hotel, wrote the
address and the name of the place on the back of the photo, sealed it in an
envelope, and mixed it in with about 30 other practice targets in envelopes.

When I RVed it - about a week after she took the photo - I picked up on the
hotel concept.  I also saw a blue station wagon parked in front and a woman
holding a little boy by the arm, jerking him around pretty brutally and
putting him in the car.  Then I saw a brown pickup truck parked next to where
it seemed the blue station wagon had been.  I got some more stuff, some of it
just plain wrong (I later realized), some of it right, and some of it
doubtful.

Anyway, when Sheila and I drove to the hotel for feedback several days after
I did the session, there was the brown pickup truck parked out in front.
Sheila said it hadn't been there when she took the photo.  I saw a guy get
out, go into the lobby, and then come back out and start bringing his luggage
in.   "Wow!", I thought, "I Rved the future!"  The guy had obviously just got
there and was checking into the hotel.  Now, at that point for me, that was
mind-blowing enough.

But it got worse.  I showed Sheila the blue station wagon along with the
woman and the little boy I had drawn.  I had written next to my sketch "Woman
being mean to little boy".  Sheila said the car had been there when she took
the photo and, sure enough, it was there in the picture.  But the woman and
the boy weren't.  Sheila said she had seen them come out of the hotel with
the woman pulling the little boy along by the arm just as she was pulling out
to drive home.  The woman must have shoved him into the car immediately after
Sheila left.

By this point my head was spinning.  I couldn't quite grasp how my mind had
been there both *before* the time I did the session and also *after* when we
went for feedback.  I felt like my mind was in a dozen places at once, back
in time at the hotel, forward in time at the hotel, and also right there in
our house as I worked on the session.  It seemed for awhile like everytime we
did an outbound these issues were coming up.  It made me very aware of a
point Joe McMoneagle had emphasized in his book "Mind Trek" (which was all I
had to go on at the time) - how important it is to nail down the *time* you
are supposed to be RVing as well as the place.  Pretty soon I started making
sure that I ALWAYS RVed outbounds at the time I would be there for feedback.
That one rule made a hell of a difference in both my peace of mind and in my
accuracy.

But that night after this particular session, I woke up in the middle of the
night and went to the kitchen for some water.  Still half-asleep, I briefly
thought about all this and suddenly it hit me!  In my mind were images of
huge planetary bodies moving slowly through space.  I suddenly understood
that there can be no time with out space, without matter.  If you don't have
one, you can't have the other.  You *must* have space, things with mass, to
have time.  In an instant I understood it all.  It all made perfect sense.  I
was having a breathrough revelation in which everything came clear to me.  I
was overjoyed.  I went to bed smiling, feeling like I had made some
groundbreaking discovery, some giant leap in my intellectual and
philosophical develepment.  But by morning it was gone.  In the cold light of
day, I was just a normal, struggling human again, not knowing what the hell I
was doiong or what kind of reality I was living in.  Over the night, my big
breakthrough had all slipped away.  It was very frustrating.  I've never been
able to recapture that deep understanding that I  gained that night standing
at the kitchen sink.

I have the feeling that's where you are now, right where I was back then.
Struggling with the same issues, being faced on an almost daily basis with
concepts that make perfect sense and at the same time make no sense at all.
It's a glorious place to be in a lot of ways.  It means you're mind is
expanding and you're growing and developing as a human soul.  If you can, if
you have a good tasker that will set up outbounds for you, I'd strongly
recommend doing a lot of them.  Outbounds can make you begin to conceive our
entire reality in a totally new and different way that no other kinds of
targeting can do.

I just read your next post.  But I've got to get to bed.  Let's take this up
again tomorrow.  Keep thinking and exploring.  You're on the right track, I
believe.  And you're one of the few people who seem to even consider these
intellectual problems and paradoxes that RV throws up to us on a daily basis.
Warmest Regards,
Don

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Reply | Forward
	
#2206
 	From: greenmn900...
Date: Tue Feb 4, 2003 8:12 am
Subject: Re: RV perception time delay, AOLs 	greenmn900...
Send Email Send Email
  	  	

Hi Glyn,
Your opinion of how RV works sounds pretty close to some others I've read.  I
think Joe McMoneagles' is something close to this.

These days - for the past several years actually - I've been leaning toward
Bohm's Holographic theory, especially when it is combines with the theories
of Karl Pribram, a neurophysiologist.  In this view, not just all matter in
the universe but even consciousness itself is seen as only an intereference
pattern within an unbroken wholeness that Bohm called the implicate, or
enfolded, order.  What we experience as reality springs from this and he
calls this the explicate order.  It's the basic
"everything-is-connected-to-everything throry, lol.  But it's much deeper and
much more complicated than that.

What I like about Bohm's theories is that the implicate order comprises
everything to such an extent that something like psi is not only
unsurprising, it's practically expected.  I can't do a very good job of
explaining his theories.  If you haven't read it, you should check out
Michael Talbot's "The Holographic Universe".  It does a very good job of
explaining it in simple, easily-understandable terms, and also goes into how
the theory relates to many kinds of psi and anomalous phenomenon.  It's a
great place to start researching Bohm's work.

I feel like you do, what I happen to believe right now could change at any
second.  I'm not tied to any one belief about how psi operates and I'm always
open to a better, maybe more accurate viewpoint.
Best Regards,
Don

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Reply | Forward
	
#2235
 	From: "Glyn" 
Date: Thu Feb 6, 2003 2:18 am
Subject: RE: RV perception time delay, AOLs 	gebega
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°
  	  	

Hi Don,

You said..
   What I like about Bohm's theories is that the implicate order comprises
   everything to such an extent that something like psi is not only
   unsurprising, it's practically expected.  I can't do a very good job of
   explaining his theories.  If you haven't read it, you should check out
   Michael Talbot's "The Holographic Universe".  It does a very good job of
   explaining it in simple, easily-understandable terms, and also goes into
how
   the theory relates to many kinds of psi and anomalous phenomenon.  It's a
   great place to start researching Bohm's work.

   Will do Don. I'll get back to you when I have read it.

   Kind regards,
   Glyn

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Reply | Forward
	
#2212
 	From: "Sharon Webb" 
Date: Tue Feb 4, 2003 10:37 pm
Subject: Re: RV perception time delay, AOLs 	sharwebb_30512
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°
  	  	

Hi,

I am a Bohm/Pribram junkie, too.  I second your recommendation of "The
Holographic Universe."

Sharon
sharwebb...net
www.fractalus.com/sharon

   ----- Original Message -----
   From: greenmn900...
   To: pjrv...oups.com
   Sent: Tuesday, February 04, 2003 2:12 PM
   Subject: Re: [pjrv] RV perception time delay, AOLs

   Hi Glyn,
   Your opinion of how RV works sounds pretty close to some others I've read.  I
   think Joe McMoneagles' is something close to this.

   These days - for the past several years actually - I've been leaning toward
   Bohm's Holographic theory, especially when it is combines with the theories
   of Karl Pribram, a neurophysiologist.  

Reply | Forward
	
#2231
 	From: "De - Hotmail" 
Date: Wed Feb 5, 2003 10:14 pm
Subject: Re: RV perception time delay, AOLs 	deann_garcia90....com
Send Email Send Email
  	  	

I 'third' your recommendation as well for "The Holographic Universe."  
Excellent book....De
   ----- Original Message -----
   From: Sharon Webb
   To: pjrv...oups.com
   Sent: Tuesday, February 04, 2003 8:37 PM
   Subject: Re: [pjrv] RV perception time delay, AOLs

   Hi,

   I am a Bohm/Pribram junkie, too.  I second your recommendation of "The
Holographic Universe."

   Sharon
   sharwebb...net
   www.fractalus.com/sharon