this is fine but these are only theories, right? - neither of these has been been proved.Daz, please watch this video... it has a non-alien theory that includes the water seen on the missions you've made.
Daz Smith said:Kiara,
tis sad when a person cant debate and has to result to petty insults?
You present theories, which are just like the theories that predate them about a slave/master relationship - there is as yet NO 100% solid evidence on any of this as far as the pyramids go. I present a statement from a famed greek historian (about slaves) and you come back with a petty insult????
Look, if you are a student of history then by all means download the raw sessions from here: http://www.farsight.org/demo/Mysteries/Mysteries_7/Mysteries_Project_7_Sessions.html
analyze them against the taskings and the feedback as you know it, and present your interpretations of the data - after all Courtney's video is only his interpretation - if you know better, show us - I for one would read it.
tbone said:Is this really just a sales pitch to sell a video?
Loraine said:He expressly said if paper sessions for his projects were good enough, viewers would be retasked to do whiteboard sessions for videos to sell.
Kiara said:Loraine said:He expressly said if paper sessions for his projects were good enough, viewers would be retasked to do whiteboard sessions for videos to sell.
I'm starting to get confused : : : : : :
Let me see if I understand correctly: There weren't any white board sessions besides the ones recorded on video?????? :
If he things this way is better... why not do all the sessions on a white board????? :
Is the only purpose of changing from paper to white board to look good on camera???? 8) : : : : 8) : : : :
I believe the reason so many people were so angry about the outcome is because from the beginning, Brown has overwhelmingly implied that:From the very beginning, the anticipated date of the announcement was 28 February 2014. But there were some uncertainties due to the international nature of the issues involved, so we held off releasing the date. It was wise we did that. Nothing can stop the announcement, but the date involved a lot of coordination with various parties. The problem has been further exacerbated due to the fact that the announcement involves a location which at the present time is not entirely stable politically. Also, shipping of critical materials was involved, and one shipment turned out to have been corrupted, apparently while in transit. This is now being addressed. After lots of discussion with people all over the world who are involved one way or another, we are now expecting the announcement to happen in mid-March, about two weeks later than originally anticipated. Again, nothing can stop the announcement. But this announcement can happen only once, and it has to be done correctly. Given the amount of coordination involved, mid-March 2014 seems to be optimal.
Apparently by "we" he means "I" because he's the one making the decision it seems. This was part of the implying the announcement was coming also from others, separate/independent from him. Since being a manager, one does not phrase issues of vendors/employees as if they are somehow independent entities equally responsible for the decisions.But there were some uncertainties due to the international nature of the issues involved, so we held off releasing
Making it out like he was helpless here, part of the implying the announcement was coming also from others, separate/independent from him.Nothing can stop the announcement,
Intentionally worded, I think, to help 'imply' along with the international references that some kind of "possibly archeological artifacts" (hard proof, which would be released by some legitimate source) were involved.shipping of critical materials was involved, and one shipment turned out to have been corrupted, apparently while in transit.
Again implying something far larger, more complex, and more independent from himself, than "two people who viewed from me, who happen to live in different countries."people all over the world who are involved one way or another,
With two viewers? Again he implies it is something far larger, more complex, and more independent from himself, than a simple RV project.Given the amount of coordination involved
he then promptly puts it off YET AGAIN saying,Again, nothing can stop the announcement.
1. Apparently not unstoppable at all.I have decided to wait some days before posting the next part of the announcement
Except somehow didn't plan for it so had to suddenly change timing plans yet again. (I bet you see all the, "If you were psychic..." jokes coming.)to give some time for the dust to settle. We always knew this "noise" would happen when we released the project.
It was a MIS-sell, by way of being such a profound oversell that it actually implied something wholly different than remote viewing was the source of the information behind the much-hyped 'announcement' which 'couldn't be stopped' and depended on objects-in-transit and international-people.First, the build up to the announcement was not an "oversell" in my opinion. It was exactly correct.
And thank you, Brown and Dames, for continuing to introduce them to it through disinformation and hyperbole instead of anything that might win the respect of anybody with half a brain.Most of the world does not know about remote viewing.
We all feel that way when we first learn of RV. Most of us get more realistic about the world not long later. Why he has spent 18 years thinking his ongoing obliteration of remote viewing's reputation in the public will in any way contribute to it being "taken seriously" is beyond me.Recognizing it is real will truly change this planet. With that recognition will come the recognition of so many findings that have been discovered using remote viewing. It will revolutionize almost everything that is taught in schools in nearly all fields. Nothing will be the same.
The 'storm' of public opinion had very little to do with "the ideas" with rare exceptions. They had to do with the fact that he set everybody up to expect something "unambiguous" and "conclusive" and that was "proof" and not a single thing he has presented comes anywhere near being any of those things.I knew there would be a storm, and it would be impossible to guide the discussions delicately once the storm broke. So the ideas needed to be introduced before the storm.
Unless, in the second part of his "revelation", he presents archaeological and or documental evidences to suport is "pyramid story".
There is also a bit of room for the philosophical and practical question about the nature of tasking and pre-existing beliefs of the tasker being somewhat built-in to the very definition of a 'target.' I suppose that's a third thing.