CRV website TXCEPTION

Tunde

"Keep Moving Forward"
Already posted on a previous thread on "interviewing in a session"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TvP0q7TP-Sw


T
 

Millenium

New Member
hmmmmm

Statement released by the website owner :

"Following standard Controlled Remote Viewing (CRV) protocols, CRVer DELTA takes on a Class-3 Beamship. Preliminary analysis: The object IS the real deal. A preliminary analysis of this session can be found in this press release:

beforeitsnews.com/alternative/2012/12/military-style-controlled-remote-viewer-confirms-billy-meiers-beamship-is-real-2514090.html



http://vimeopro.com/txception/enigmatic-targets/video/55423347

http://www.txception.com/
 

katzenhai2

Ambassador
I have a strong problem with the used task:

"Describe the most important aspects of this beamship,
including its pilot, at the instant captured in this photograph."


1. Imply it is a beamship (and not a model to fake the viewer [of the photo]).
2. Imply there is a pilot.

Several years ago I RVed a photo taken by Billy Meier with an U.F.O. on it. The result looked like a model made to fake people and an older person was present which had problems with his wife... :-\

Even without RV I would never take something by Billy Meier for real. It crys on all edges fake...

I'm not so sure if TXCeption will do no harm to RV with such targets... is there a difference to what Ed Dames predicts through RV (and fail)?
In my opinion RV in the public domain - if someone is really interested to spread the word about the reality of "human superpowers" - should be done by the protocol. That includes feedback. But theres none. Same goes for the Apollo-Projects...
 

Loraine

New Member
katzenhai2 said:
I have a strong problem with the used task:

"Describe the most important aspects of this beamship,
including its pilot, at the instant captured in this photograph."


1. Imply it is a beamship (and not a model to fake the viewer [of the photo]).
2. Imply there is a pilot.

Several years ago I RVed a photo taken by Billy Meier with an U.F.O. on it. The result looked like a model made to fake people and an older person was present which had problems with his wife... :-\

Even without RV I would never take something by Billy Meier for real. It crys on all edges fake...

I'm not so sure if TXCeption will do no harm to RV with such targets... is there a difference to what Ed Dames predicts through RV (and fail)?
In my opinion RV in the public domain - if someone is really interested to spread the word about the reality of "human superpowers" - should be done by the protocol. That includes feedback. But theres none. Same goes for the Apollo-Projects...
Agreed ... little wonder that 'i'rva aren't having a conference next year, probably expecting limited demand.
 

Loraine

New Member
Loraine said:
toad said:
Sounds to me like their selling point: TRANSCEPTION has shown that technology can be transferred lawfully from the state of nature from any place in the Universe, in time or space, using a team of highly trained/skilled Controlled Remote Viewers. ..." taken in light of one of the videos is to acquire via CRV the technological 'secrets' of equipment left on the moon (abandoned, therefore 'in a state of nature') during one/any of the moon missions and then sell that info. Oh, and by the way, prospective buyers, this is legal. I agree, why such cyptic phrasing? Do you think my interpretation is wrong?
'Lawfully transferred from the state of nature' - seems meaningless when applied to abstractions, probably is legally meaningless, but sounds as right on and innocent as picking a daisy to make a chain. When I read the phrase I assumed it was just a non incriminating catch all description to side step any accusations, criticisms or ethical objections to mind probing.
"why such cryptic phrasing?"

Ho, ho, ho, out it pops like a bad joke from a cheapskate xmas cracker -
Txception = next topic
lawfully transferred = fretfully raw slander
state of nature = fortunate East

Btw, just trying to pen a viewers' version of 12 days of xmas. Can't decide whether to have -
'... and a psychic desire to be free!'
or '... and a psyche designed to be me!' (or free!)
 

Millenium

New Member
Its a bit disturbing watching this all play out to be honest. Clearly advice or
training has not been given properly which is a shame because the targets themselves are
quite interesting regardless of feedback or the lack of it in this case.

All the tasker had to do was give the target to Edward leave him alone in the RV to RV (yeah I know ;D) and then let us see what he gets. Although
as katz correctly pointed out even the cue was just wrong.

They way I read the data it seemed like the viewer was describing a hoaxed event.
he even adds, "I need to be carefull I feel like im being sucked in to something" well thats one way of describing feelings of being hoodwinked.

Why are viewers compromising basic protocol? I just dont understand it at all.
 

MadManMal

New Member
Well i for one am impressed with Edwards abilites and i,m sure he does equally as well on his own...one question i do have though is that he is able to pause for long periods
without getting flooding with aol.... is he just casting those aside at will do you think?
I have to be honest thou i would find it hard to concentrate with the monitor on my case all the time, but he seems to be unphased by it!
I think its great these sessions are out there though :)
Mal
 

Tunde

"Keep Moving Forward"
MadManMal said:
one question i do have though is that he is able to pause for long periods
without getting flooding with aol.... is he just casting those aside at will do you think?
I dont mean to sound cynical but there are two ways to look at the long pauses. One he could just be taking time out to process the data internally and focus his attention or...
two... he is waiting for prompts from the monitor who incidentally just happens to know what the target is.

This is why you should never ever be in the same room as the tasker who knows what the target is for operational viewing. Its a complete invalidation of the RV protocol unless it was for training purposes only.

As for the pauses well many viewers have been known to take breaks as long as a few days before going back to their data. Nothing unusual about it. I know for example Joe
McMoneagle has claimed he can RV anywhere while even doing odd jobs round the house.
Some of my best work has been done over a couple of days taking upto two or more sessions for one target.

T
 

katzenhai2

Ambassador
As I've said at another thread: I have no problem when others are being interviewed/monitored in operational RV projects... if the monitor has some experience under his belt what is going on in a viewer throughout a session being monitored.

But the tasking is one of the main crucial processes in RVing... :(

For the long pauses... they are not uncommon for me if I'm monitored. Because I get a deeper target contact and more data which I need to arrange and organise internally... its only in this Monitor-RV-Setup I've experience targets in a way of being present in different information levels, zooming in and out of them, totally in control of the session and the perceptions.

I assume it has to do with humans being very social animals - and feeling more secure when others present in the same room. Able to reduce more awareness for the environment (like in the wild - a member of the same social group will watch out for predators so others can chill out at the same time).
 

suspect_0

New Member
katzenhai2 said:
As I've said at another thread: I have no problem when others are being interviewed/monitored in operational RV projects... if the monitor has some experience under his belt what is going on in a viewer throughout a session being monitored.
...Even if the monitor knows what the target is and is sitting literally right next to the viewer ? ???

Sorry that's not Operational RV protocol. I have a huge problem with the lack of protocol here.
 

katzenhai2

Ambassador
suspect_0 said:
...Even if the monitor knows what the target is and is sitting literally right next to the viewer ?
Exactly! Did you try it? If not... don't condemn it if you haven't experience such an RV setup. It is easy to pray for protocol and solo sessions - in scientific studies it is a must for sure!! But I'm not a scientist. The impact on the viewer and the results are far less than most people think. Instead you get more details and clearer results in my experience.

That Dames, Brown and others failed is not because of their monitoring RV-setup... its bad tasking (presumes), bad analysis (see what you want) and frontloading (knowing the target). And marketing schemes as well... at least on Dames side.

In this example, on TXCeption, you have bad tasking.
 

suspect_0

New Member
Katz,
I have tried it and have seen the damage it causes
First hand throughout the history of this field.
It is not proper RV protocol.

Tell me, what is the point of claiming to do RV when
There is the possibility you are being led by your monitor?

Why did you need a monitor sitting in your face staring at you
Smilling and clapping or pointing at your work when he already
Knows the target?

What is the definition of RV?

Why do you need a monitor so badly who knows what the target is?

Yes its possible to get data from someone sitting across the room
No you cannot call that RV.

All you have done is demonstrate Psychic ability at best
at worst anyone can claim you were simply
Led to the target by an informed monitor because blind protocol
Was ignored.

I can now see every palm reader now claiming to be
Remote Viewers ::)
 

katzenhai2

Ambassador
I'm the viewer and if there is a good monitor I know when I'm led by him or not (except for telepathic overlay). I don't need a monitor and never said so. But there is huge difference between RVing solo or being monitored. When I work with a monitor I never look into his face nor is he pointing at my work - never. That is a big no no. BTW, what do you mean by clapping?? ;D

suspect_0 said:
...at worst anyone can claim you were simply led to the target by an informed monitor because blind protocol was ignored.
Sure they can do that. But 90% of my sessions were already done blind. :p
 

Red_Star

New Member
katzenhai2 said:
suspect_0 said:
...Even if the monitor knows what the target is and is sitting literally right next to the viewer ?
Exactly! Did you try it? If not... don't condemn it if you haven't experience such an RV setup. It is easy to pray for protocol and solo sessions - in scientific studies it is a must for sure!! But I'm not a scientist. The impact on the viewer and the results are far less than most people think. Instead you get more details and clearer results in my experience.

That Dames, Brown and others failed is not because of their monitoring RV-setup... its bad tasking (presumes), bad analysis (see what you want) and frontloading (knowing the target). And marketing schemes as well... at least on Dames side.

In this example, on TXCeption, you have bad tasking.
[/quote


Yes, I agree to a certain point. Frontloading has it's benefits, it's more exact because you're given specifics. Much like searching for a specific book in Akashic records, you have to be specific. I mean even if I look into the phone book there are multiple listings of the same name sometimes. So narrow it down by providing extra specifics, surnames, birthday, occupation...etc. I find with frontloading too there's more data, percision because the viewer knows what questions to ask.
I wonder what would happen if I used standard protocol to view deceased celebrities just via their cell numbers, I've always wanted to ask Christ Farley who he was talking to at the time of death. i wonder what his cell phone number was hmm...
 
Top