pjrv : Messages : 2663-2672 of 4038
(http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pjrv/messages/2663?)

 00:10:41

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

#2663
 	From: "Elizabeth Hambrook" 
Date: Thu Mar 13, 2003 5:57 am
Subject: Testing that theory 	ozblueriver
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°
  	  	

PJ,

I couldn't wait until the weekend. I wasn't sure how we are supposed to re-task
something so I asked someone to give me a target and I got out one of my old
sessions at random and applied it to the new target. Here is what happened:

Original Target was a photo of the Andromeda Galaxy. It looked like an oval of
dark space filled with points of lights.

Re-tasked for one of our local monuments that resembles an obelisk, is
surrounded by a chain fence, is high on a hill backed by shrubs and trees
overlooking our town.

Using Pru's method for the original session:

SCAN 1

B:man made
metal

C: cold
sharp edges
horizontally aligned
severe
torture
tall and thin
metal
structure
chain
jagged horizon
alloy
broken
sharp points scissors/razor

SCAN 2
A: peaked
B: hard
C:
broken
shifted
jagged
triangles (lots of)
disfigure
high
a light on
manure smell
hydrogen/gas
pneumatic AOL
solid
heavy
water

SCAN 3

curves
poles
structure
incense
light green
soft
tepid
ovoid
sensual
sentient being
fixed
spacious
innovative
rounded
swing
loose
favourable

As you can see there seems to be quite a few good descriptions of the new target
(the monument). And if that session, which was posted on Pru's site, has been
assigned yet another target by unknown persons it gives me a great excuse as to
why it stunk in the first place. LOL

cheers Liz

--------------------------
Moderator's note: LOL.  Well you see, that is what some are afraid of, that this
concept of retasking is somehow an "excuse" for bad sessions, e.g., "Well if it
was retasked, that explains how that data ended up in there!"  That is not
really the slant Calabrese was taken.  The few experiments I've done so far, the
matching was actually better with good sessions than with bad sessions, which
kills the "just an excuse" theory.  On the other hand, I still maintain that
there may be other explanations for this than retrocausal quantum effects on the
session/viewer.  Mundane things. -- PJ

Reply | Forward
	
#2672
 	From: "Eva" 
Date: Thu Mar 13, 2003 10:22 pm
Subject: Re: Testing that theory 	k9caninek9
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°
  	  	

I retasked/reanalyzed one session with a new target of 'this piece of
salami and cheese in my hand.'  At the time, I was eating a snack.
Well the restasked session had buttery, soft, etc in it.  It was
hilarious really.  For my experiments, I have started using a lot of
weird unusual and simple targets to retask with so that the
impressions are harder to write off if they match.  Another good one
to use has been something like a hurricane which has strong but
simple dynamics.  I have also done my best to retask with targets
that seem very opposite of each other.

I do agree there is a danger of this becoming an excuse.  But I think
if you don't post your sessions and you know you didn't retask them,
then that eliminates all of the excuses you can get out of it.  Since
most people don't post many of their sessions, I think the excuse
mileage is rather weak.  Siderial time, mood swings, noisy neighbors,
lack of time, bad tasking, TO, and other excuses seem to cover a lot
more ground if you ask me!  ;-)
-E

pjrv : Messages : 2687-2801 of 4038
(http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pjrv/messages/2687?)

 00:17:14

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

#2687
 	From: "Elizabeth Hambrook" 
Date: Fri Mar 14, 2003 5:19 am
Subject: Re: Re: Testing that theory 	ozblueriver
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°
  	  	

Hi E,

I don't need re-tasking as an excuse for a bad session. I've perfected bad
sessions and would rather not have anyone else take the credit for that. LOL

cheers Liz

> I do agree there is a danger of this becoming an excuse.  But I think
> if you don't post your sessions and you know you didn't retask them,
> then that eliminates all of the excuses you can get out of it.  Since
> most people don't post many of their sessions, I think the excuse
> mileage is rather weak.  Siderial time, mood swings, noisy neighbors,
> lack of time, bad tasking, TO, and other excuses seem to cover a lot
> more ground if you ask me!  ;-) -E

Reply | Forward
	
#2701
 	From: Richard Krankoski 
Date: Fri Mar 14, 2003 8:55 pm
Subject: Re: Re: Testing that theory 	Rich_crv
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°
  	  	

> Eva wrote:
> I retasked/reanalyzed one session with a new target of 'this piece of
> salami and cheese in my hand.'  At the time, I was eating a snack.
> Well the restasked session had buttery, soft, etc in it.  It was
> hilarious really.

Maybe there is an opportunity here.  How about creating a CD with
500 or so sessions on it then task a target and randomly select one of the
sessions.

Nice parlor game?

:)

Rich

----------------------
Moderator's note: Yeah, you know what it reminds me of?  Opening a book at
random to find an 'answer' to any question. :-)  Is it PK?  Is it 'guidance'? Or
is it the amazing ability of our minds to 'allegorize' (as I say) nearly any
info into the form we wish?  Do you suppose I'm influencing the dudes who wrote
the torah if I do this with the old testament? ;-)  PJ

Reply | Forward
	
#2706
 	From: "Eva" 
Date: Sat Mar 15, 2003 1:49 am
Subject: Re: Testing that theory 	k9caninek9
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°
  	  	

It's funny you mentioned that.  I was thinking about this whole in
relation to the Bible and the search for a BIble code.  It made me
wonder if all the analysis might have somehow influenced the writing
and many revisions of the Bible over time as if the Bible were one
big huge session.  There was the original subject matter but what
exact sentences and translations were used over time probably had a
fair amount of leeway.  It's a strange way of thinking about it.  If
you try to expand the theory into the world around you, it's starts
to get really bizarre.
-E

> Moderator's note: Yeah, you know what it reminds me of?  Opening a
> book at random to find an 'answer' to any question. :-)  Is it PK?
> Is it 'guidance'? Or is it the amazing ability of our minds
> to 'allegorize' (as I say) nearly any info into the form we wish?  Do
> you suppose I'm influencing the dudes who wrote the torah if I do
> this with the old testament? ;-)  PJ

Reply | Forward
	
#2717
 	From: Bill Pendragon 
Date: Sat Mar 15, 2003 1:58 pm
Subject: Re: Re: Testing that theory 	docsavagebill
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°
  	  	

Hi Eva,

It's been an old metaphysical tradition.. if you want
an answer to something.. open some inspired writing
randomly. But think of all the millions who must have
done that with the bible..your retasking would be
greatly diluted by now.. perhaps a collection of less
know mystical writers... or then do we get to
something like Tarot, I ching, ??

> It made me wonder if all the analysis might have somehow
> influenced the writing  and many revisions of the Bible over
> time as if the Bible were one  big huge session.  There was
> the original subject matter but what
> exact sentences and translations were used over time
> probably had a fair amount of leeway.  It's a strange way of
> thinking about it.  If you try to expand the theory into the
> world around you, it's starts to get really bizarre. -E

-------------------------
Moderator's note: It is only an assumption that retasking would 'dilute', I
think?, although that might bear out in study.  But what if instead, every time
someone focused on a work of written materials, they were contributing energy to
it in some regard?

What we might get out of the bible or such works then would be (a) a massively
powerful work and (b) a work which holds within it infinite wisdom.  As if every
question ever asked of it throughout time, the answer is within.

Tarot and I-Ching are surely at least as well known than the bible, being much
older and more diversely spread in heavily populated areas (e.g., asias and
indias) wouldn't you think.  The difference is both Tarot and I-Ching are
frameworks to hang intuition upon; whereas the use of the bible is usually
considered fairly literal.

Which is of course the reason we have about a million 'denominations' of
Christianity -- apparently, no matter how LITERAL the text of that session --
er, writing -- might be, everybody finds their own answers in it. :-)  PJ

Reply | Forward
	
#2749
 	From: Rocheleh 
Date: Tue Mar 18, 2003 12:34 pm
Subject: Re: Re: Testing that theory 	rochelehhakt...
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°
  	  	

> Opening a book at random to find an 'answer' to any
> question. :-)  Is it PK?  Is it 'guidance'? Or is it the amazing
> ability of our minds to 'allegorize' (as I say) nearly any info into
> the form we wish?  Do you suppose I'm influencing the dudes who wrote
> the torah if I do this with the old testament? ;-)  PJ

Wait-- (not again! One of my more frequently-used phrases. :) )

If you say that it is only allegorizing, then why shouldn't one do
sessions in public? I see those statements contradict each other. Or is
it only being safe in case it's not 100% allegorizing?

Rachel

Reply | Forward
	
#2779
 	From: Weatherly-Hawaii...m
Date: Fri Mar 21, 2003 11:38 pm
Subject: Re: Re: Testing that theory 	maliolana
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°
  	  	

Don't forget the bible went through several language changes (badly
interpreted)...before it landed in English...and got changed some more...
Can we understand Arabic/Greek/Hebrew... during RV...if we don't know how
in real life?...Is it necessary to be able to read it ...to change it?

> Eva wrote: I was thinking about this whole in
> relation to the Bible and the search for a BIble code.

Reply | Forward
	
#2782
 	From: "Eva" 
Date: Sat Mar 22, 2003 5:29 pm
Subject: Re: Testing that theory 	k9caninek9
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°
  	  	

IF you are asking if it's necessary to know what you are doing in
order to do it, I would guess that not always.
-E

> Can we understand Arabic/Greek/Hebrew... during RV...
> if we don't know how
> in real life?...Is it necessary to be able to read it
> ...to change it?

Reply | Forward
	
#2801
 	From: "Nita Hickok" 
Date: Sun Mar 23, 2003 12:31 pm
Subject: Re: Re: Testing that theory 	nitahickok
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°
  	  	

Hello Fortune
    You are to me. I perceive a information stream when we have
moments of dealing with information from other dimensions, or
whatever you want to call it. I think the more the mind is trained
then the more layers of information we can access where it isn't a
big puzzle to be figured out. We never really know it for sure but
once we accept that we need to work at it to access all of the
information it becomes easier.
    Nita

> in a sense we can't expect we ever reaLLY "KNOW" it. Am I making the
> least bit of sense here?