Gary Langford's RV Teaching Method

[morgan]

that was definitely pretty awesome!

i think i need to let that sit for a bit now...

this is like walking across an amazing bridge and admiring the architecture and wondering how it all came to be there and what those funny little divety things near the top are supposed to do - and then suddenly a car pulls over and an architect springs out and explains it to you personally. its like... wow. thanks!

 

[Greywolf]

Thank you for your response Gary. We all appreciate it. Very insightful stuff.

I'll write down a couple questions in case I forget to ask them, but please, answer other people's questions to be fair to them

1) How much do you believe an RVer should invest (time, effort, money wise) into the methods developped by others. How should a student RVer go about selecting a starting point, or how long to spend on one method or another, and how to succesfully identify what works and what doesn't work for them.

2)I guess my first question lead to this. Do you believe each RVer needs to find out the method that works best for them, by trying other people's methods, and then experimenting and changing them by seeing what works and doesn't work for them? Or do you believe people should stick to what others have spent years developping for extended periods of time to let those methods sink in before they move on to others, or even create their own. Basically, what I'm asking is, do you encourage RV students to experiment with other methods, their own creations, and mix them up to see what best works for them, or do you reccomend following methods developped by others with more experience and knowledge?

3)Tied to the above two questions, do you believe one method can work for every person, or do each of us have to find our own methods that work best for us?

Thanx again,

Greywolf

 

[restful]

That was definitely a good read and thought provoking for me.  I appreciate that you took the time to share your knowledge.  I'm editing this question but I didn't want to totally delete since everyone is watching this thread.

I guess the real bottom line question is how do you know if you are going to get better, 100% or if you are wasting time trying to do something you may not be equipped to do?

Thanks again for your time
Brayden

 

[Scott_Ellis]

Hi Gary,

I greatly appreciate your participation in this dialogue. Would you be willing to describe your methodology? There are two aspects I'm especially interested in:

1) What is your state of mind while remote viewing (meditative, alert, brainwave power spectrum, etc.) and what do you do to get there?

2) How do you arrive at complex information from the target? Do you get it all at once within the 40 second window? Do you get it in smaller chunks which you put together after the 40 second window? Do you get it over several windows, or some other way?

Lastly, are there any resources you'd recommend on learning to increase the number of independent thoughts held in one's mind simultaneously?


Sincerely,

Scott

 

[Winter]

Hi Gary, just wondered, have you ever remote viewed a future remote viewing session? If so, do you remember it after the session?

Winter

 

[Linda]

Hi Gary,

1. You gave us so many interesting things to think about, thank you for that. The one that struck a cord with me was this paragraph about the key. Can you elaborate a little more about your theory, how you go about using the key and what would be a few other category examples.

"The third notion is that you can remember things completely and thoroughly by simply applying a “key”. All that is needed to recall the entire sequence is to recall that key. There are a great variety of keys, but all keys seem to be classified into 11 categories. An example category is the target’s interfaces. "

2. In your experience, do you sometimes think that not only are you getting information that is straightforward, but sometimes "tongue in cheek"? Similar to how a creative game of charades might be, but usually, for me, with humor. I do get information in that manner fairly often which makes me think there is something more than just facts and figures of a universal mind.

Thanks for doing this, I am truly enjoying your comments,
Linda

 

[morgan]

i would also be interested in hearing more about possible categories and how to apply keys. i have been finding myself increasingly bored with the few modes of info it occurs to me to search for, but i dont really know what else to consider so i'm reacting by becoming unorganised to break up the monotony and getting less information because of it.
any methods of pulling and retaining more information or different kinds of information through forms of organisation would be really helpful!

 

[Rich]

Hello Gary. Thanks for joining us.

What are your thoughts on RVing the future? Is it different than RVing current or past targets?

There is a huge interest in RVing lottery numbers. What is your view on this?

There is a huge tie-in between RV/RVers(ex-government and subsequent) and UFO/aliens. What are your thoughts about this?

There are persistent rumors of other government sponsored RV projects, past and current, such as a Special Forces group whose methods are being taught in Hawaii. What are your comments on this?

Can you relate some of your favorite "WOW" RV experiences?

Assuming that everyone has at least some ability to RV (or use any form of psi), It's been said that only a fraction of a percent of people have the talent to provide consistant usefull
data. Another person has said that there are probably only 25 or so "world class" remote viewers. What do you think?

What types of operational targets do you find easiest...most difficult?

What do you think it will take to get RV out of the giggle factor rating withthe public?

Thanks Rich

 

[PJ]

Gary had hoped to have time for a brief public outing that was a bit... er, less brief than this turned out to be. His available time vanished and though I hoped it'd come back, it hasn't. He said he greatly appreciates people here taking the time to talk with him, but he has to say goodbye for now.
Sorry you guys. Well it was fun.
Best, PJ


I did a quick read of the most recent posts and find the questions and comments to be very good ones. But I do not think I have any more to add. Sounds like some people are struggling to find a way to do better work. That is the right place to start their quest.
With Kindest Regards,
Gary

 

[morgan]

what a bummer! its like coming to the end of ice-cream.
oh well.. {:-/
i guess it cant be be helped. other people have lives.
thank you for spontaneously deciding to speak to us! The things you have said have been much appreciated and will continue to seed further thought.
should you at ANY time think of something, anything at all, and suddenly feel like sharing it - just GO AHEAD! dont suppress that urge! eager listeners abound who are working on gathering experience and discovering answers to questions that you have probably already looked into in one way or another. although, it does seem increasingly clear that there are some things not easily taught that have to be realised by each person in their own time - signposts along the wayside are always reassuring.

thanks again!

 

[Greywolf]

Indeed morgan, and like not getting the the bottom of the cone where the choccolate is hidden

But I would like to add my thanx to Gary for having shared even a couple of thoughts with us, and to let him know it is always highly appreciated when the pros come to talk to us students of RV.

And good job to us all at TKR, we managed to look semi-knowledgeable and made some intelligent questions as Gary stated himself

*patpats everyone on the shoulder*

GW

 

[Benton]

I was not smart to catch this thread when Gary was around and responding. I finally got around to reading the thread, and few other related ones, and found some things I just have to ask about, even though the thread has grown cold.

First off... in his 10/5/05 post he stated

1. RV is the sum of many processes that stimulate the brain to provide information about a target. The first notion is to determine what is a target. Are the features of the target really the target, or is the relationship between an object and its surroundings the target. And therein lays the basis for my recent work. The essential feature of a target is its interface with other things. “Things” is used in the most general sense of the word.

Stop the presses! We have talked about this many times here on these boards, but having Mr. Langford restate this is pretty important. It all gets back to that "Networks of Meaning" by Dr. Hardy book, the Indra's web, and the Buddhist notion that "things" are inherantly empty, and defined by their relationships with other things. This is the basis of my understanding of the "way PSI works" and I would really love to hear what Mr. Langford has figured out in his "recent work" he mentions.

Later, he says:

3. The third notion is that you can remember things completely and thoroughly by simply applying a “key”. All that is needed to recall the entire sequence is to recall that key. There are a great variety of keys, but all keys seem to be classified into 11 categories. An example category is the target’s interfaces.

Again, he mentions the target's interfaces. Does anyone know what the other 10 catagories are?

He does not go into a lot of explaination there, but my experience in dream recall, or conscious recall during the day, is that one "thought", one fleeting thought that drifts through the noggin and is caught and looked at, suddenly opens up a recalled event, a whole world of information, related events, meanings. Do you know how to find that key?

In early morning dream recall, its almost like letting gravity settle you back there to the spot where the dream universe opens up.... where that dream "signal line" sits.... just stop thinking, and it comes back to you...or you to it... and you grasp it and all that info is there.

What do you folks have to contribute to this? Educate me!

Thanks for any feedback.

 

[Benton]

Okay, I tried Gary's method of doing a bit, break, bit, break, and wow, its darn effective. I just want to comment on it so I can get some feedback from others more experienced than me (ie, everyone).

Go to the Peanut Gallery and see my session. I am happy with it. Its my first RV in months.... many months.... many many months.... and I did it at 6am after a shower. I was listening to some binaural beat noise, and it took about 15 minutes. Maybe those are the important variables, I don't know. I'll try to do a scan of my paperwork this evening, to show the "bits" and my "interpretation" of them.

The first thing that struck me is how my hand/pen automatically plopped down the graphic. I am sitting there watching the graphic appear on the paper, not contolling the pen, and saying to myself "what is that?" I had to stop myself from asking "What does that look like?", and instead ask "what does that archetypically represent?" or "What aspect or property of the target does that represent?" Am I doing this right?

The second weird new thing was having to force myself to take breaks, put the pen down, heavy sign, look around, scratch my head, stretch, get back to it for another graphic "bit". My habit in the past was to just go with the flow of ideas. Not any more. This new method makes it easier to avoid AOL and squirrel chasing, IMHO.

And I seem to have been getting a lot of info on the EVENT if not the target photograph. Did Gary comment on getting info on the Event when he mentioned interfaces?

Have others started working with Gary's method? Am I on the right track?

thanks.

 

[daz]

Hi dude!
not sure as I cant remember the Gary stuff - ill have to go back and re-read, but in CRV I always put the pen down and take a break when I get an AOL - its really good at expelling and dispatching it. I know it sounds crazy but I :

put the pen down
then out loud - i say thanks to my subconcious for the information, hence letting go of it
pick up the pen
and move on.

it works for me and Im sure its standard procedure of CRV

all the best...

daz

 

[Don_Williams]

Pausing or putting the pen down momentarily doesn't work for me. The AOL will still haunt me, lol. But I've found that quickly crossing out the AOL works.

Benton,
First off - congratulations on a great session!

Don't worry too much about doing everything right, because Langford's method is just one of many methods that you could follow precisely or mix and match or not follow at all. Even if you're not doing it exactly as he suggests, you might STILL get better results than if you did. We're all different. Only you can figure out what's best for you.

As long as you are happy with your results and you see yourself improving - who can argue with that? Besides, the explanations of his method weren't very clear. I still don't understand everything he meant, myself. I don't know if anyone does. LOL.
Don

 

[Benton]

daz,

It doesn't sound crazy at all. I think your procedure is quite smart and effective. I am a firm believer in verbally talking to the subconscious, I think it can't "hear" what you are thinking any better than you can "hear" what it's thinking, so verbalize it.

The frequent breaks seem to really stop AOLs and let the subconscious know you are ready for a NEW aspect. It also seems to stop the conscious-ego-mind from coming into play as easily. What is required is to start NEW each bit. I saw Joe McMoneagle do a session, and his process seems to work like this. He keeps coming back to the target for new info, not just sitting there letting it stream out.

Don_,

Mr. Langford's clarification on some of his pithy points would be nice, but half the fun is getting there so.... if I get the info from him or somewhere else, I am happy. Heck, I am happy just to ask the question....<g>. This is great stuff.

Please don't think for a moment that I am some stickler for orthodoxy. My own procedure is a mixture of this method and that, so I take what works and experiment, all with strong intentions to do well and get better.

Practically speaking, as I said to Daz, it seems the short takes at the target are important, and the breaking of the mind-flow. I think ALL the methods have you working somehow to do that, either through intense, rituialistic focus on "the process" or interjecting silliness to divert the conscious mind.

Maybe the target info is always right there on the edge, and if we can stay on the edge ourselves, and not let the mind wander to its imaginings, then we get more target info. I think I read this same idea is some Hindu text years ago.... <g>

I think this is ANOTHER great reason meditation practice HELPS RVers, cuz the process of calming the "monkey mind" is the same.

Thanks so much for ya'll's replies. Keep sharing your reflections on my posts.

 

[Benton]

Oh yeah, btw.

In the manual Mr. Langford developed, there is a page or two of "bits", tiny graphics that stand for stuff, like mountains, sky, water, structures, etc.

Is there a "dictionary" somewhere of "bits" or ideograms for "translating" these pictographs?

thanks

 

[Tunde]

Pausing or putting the pen down momentarily doesn't work for me.  The AOL will still haunt me, lol.  But I've found that quickly crossing out the AOL works. 

yep i can relate to that. The sooner you
declare an AOL and move on the more chance you have of picking up another
bit of relavant data rather than allowing your concious mind to jump on a moment of indecision regarding high level descriptors or AOLs.

In the initial stages of the viewing, every line should be done
as if you were starting afresh. Hence the reason for speed.
Later on you can slow down and depending on what
method your using begin to process the WHOLE data and allow
the session to take form.

stop/starting probably might help 'forget' bugging aols
but if the viewer does not let go of the AOL it will show its head again later on in the session even if you go back to it a year later

Tunde

 

[Don_Williams]

Benton,
you wrote:
"Is there a "dictionary" somewhere of "bits" or ideograms for "translating" these pictographs?"

Not really, not that I'm aware of, anyway. In MIND TREK, Joe has a page that shows a group of symbols that he says are pretty much species-wide, things like caves, mountains, steeples, etc. along with the short, one-line drawing of them.

Speaking of breaks in the RV process, your last post reminded me of something. I went to an ARV seminar last summer that was put on by Marty Rosenblatt and Skip Atwater at the Monroe Institute. They asked me if I would stand up in front of the class and do an example of a session on a chalk board because I was the only person there who'd done any remote viewing at all. I was nervous as hell (to say the least) and pretty much blew the target.

But anyway, after each sketch or word I wrote, I'd take a brief pause to "listen" or "feel" for the next perception. I didn't even think about it but afterwards, Skip told the class that, in all his years with Stargate, it was always that sort of rhythm that produced good results, that I was doing it perfectly. Sort of a beat-pause-beat-pause kind of rhythm.

Skip said not to pause too long or you tend to lose target contact. Not pausing, on the other hand, he said makes the perceptions bleed together and can lead to pre-conscious AOLs forming (without the RVer even realizing it). So, my rhythm was great - but I missed the target anyway, lol!
Don

 

[Benton]

Don_ and Tunde,

Thanks, you make excellent points. I will make sure to declare AOLs more. In my session, I had an AOL of "bird" and declared that, but didn't do as much on the "storm" motiff that plauged me. But I was fascinated by by how little things fit together when I tried to make sense of it, but I think that's how it should work. I need to get more info out, and then start getting info that connects bits. I though for a first application, it did fine. I am eager to give it another go.

But the breaks taken after each bit really put the kibosh on squirrel chasing, I liked that.