Agreed ... little wonder that 'i'rva aren't having a conference next year, probably expecting limited demand.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...
"why such cryptic phrasing?"Loraine said:'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.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?
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...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?
...Even if the monitor knows what the target is and is sitting literally right next to the viewer ? ???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.
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.suspect_0 said:...Even if the monitor knows what the target is and is sitting literally right next to the viewer ?
Sure they can do that. But 90% of my sessions were already done blind.suspect_0 said:...at worst anyone can claim you were simply led to the target by an informed monitor because blind protocol was ignored.
katzenhai2 said: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.suspect_0 said:...Even if the monitor knows what the target is and is sitting literally right next to the viewer ?
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.
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...