pjrv : Messages : ?49-?56 of 4038 
(http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pjrv/messages/?49?? )
?
 ?1:13:45

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

#?49 	From: Timelord?0?9...
Date: Sun Jul ?8, ?00? 1?:33 am
Subject: Deciphering Multiple events within a Target 	psitrooper?4



Hi all,
Been doing alot of targets this week
after my spectacular 'bridge' session 
(amazing what a good session can do for ones confidence? )

*would be nice to see other's session posted up here once
in a while too *

I think ive done about 8 in total at different times
of the day. I even did one at work on my desk which
again i did within a short space of time and nailed.

out of the 8 i would say 4 hit the target quite easily.
the other 4 had similarities that may or may not
have hindered my sessions.(? iam still waiting for feedback? )
but am not holding my breath to see how well i did.

Maybe its because iam still a beginner i don't know
but the ? targets i struggled on (struggle being i did not
describe enough data in my summary of the target? )

consisted of photos which had too much going on
in them. The photos were of distant horizons
and the targets themselves not quite distinct.
One  had scenes of a lightening storm over
a 'historical' town, with hills/mountains in the background.
I think my sub just tried to get what it could
out of the picture but it turned out to be a nightmare.
I got "display" as a description but also ended up with
an all powerful AIRCRAFT CARRIER in my summary.
(bear in mind the target is in the middle of ARIZONA 

Feedback:
Lightning storm / Camelback mountain, central Arizona / photographic timeline

Now if i had put more time into the sessions
i might have got the lighting bit in the end but
not after being dragged around the entire camelback mountain range as well.
It would have been a long session indeed.

In contrast my other good sessions were pretty much
target specific and fully focused in the feedback photos.
You looked at the photo and knew exactly what you were looking at.

Is this a target issue or just me not being focused enough
or abit of both?

Peace,
Tunde

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

	#?5? 	From: "Jason S. Shapiro" 
Date: Sun Jul ?8, ?00? 1?:04 pm
Subject: Re: Deciphering Multiple events within a Target 	fetik3



On ?8 Jul ?00? at 5:33, Timelord?0?9...rote:

> *would be nice to see other's session posted up here once
> in a while too *

I am in the process of uploading some of my work (both
hits and misses? ), and look forward to
sharing/discussing some of the lessons I have learned.

> I think ive done about 8 in total at different times
> of the day. I even did one at work on my desk which
> again i did within a short space of time and nailed.

When I was taught remote viewing, the issue of ones
"workplace" was highly stressed.  In particular (with
CRV / derivatives? ), it was said (or perhaps, I
interpreted? ) that one should sit up right, with both feet
firmly on the floor, and if possible a clean, quiet area.

In the last month, I decided to start experimenting with
different types of workplaces, and interestingly enough,
Much to my surprise, I found that my best work was
done sitting in a relaxed position (legs crossed, and
board across my knees for a writing surface? ).  For a
while, I would add a line "location: bed" or "location:
couch" to my work, so I could later judge and see what
environments worked for me and what didn't.

> Maybe its because iam still a beginner i don't know
> but the ? targets i struggled on (struggle being i did not
> describe enough data in my summary of the target? )
> consisted of photos which had too much going on
> in them.

I have found that my worst sessions are the ones where
there is hardly any data available in the picture (an open
desert, or a picture of one balloon? ).  I believe that this is
because I view a lack of data as a flaw in my ability.  So
what I start to do is demand more data, and I happily
supply it :? )  I've added more simple pictures to my target
pool to help develop the skill of "trusting the end of the
flow."

> In contrast my other good sessions were pretty much
> target specific and fully focused in the feedback photos.
> You looked at the photo and knew exactly what you were looking at.

Do you *really* know what you are looking at?  I don't
mean this in any sort of metaphysical sense, but just in
terms of identifying the sensory impressions.  I have
found, that even though I can identify a picture (i.e. this
is a picture of a forest? ), that I actually have some
difficulty in *describing* the picture with simple S?
descriptions.  For example, how does a tree look and
feel.  The branches are curving and pointing in all
directions, the leaves are oddly shaped, etc.  How do
you describe this?  Often people just simply put
"diagonal", "narrow", (describing branches? ), and
"circular" (describing the leaves? ), and then move on to
other aspects.  How does one produce a sketch that
vaguely resembles a tree from just those tree words?

What I have done to get around this issue, is to allow
for repeating descriptions during the session (some
people frown upon this, believing that this means the
viewer has run out of dimensions at the site? ).  That way,
if I have a bunch of "diagonal, "narrow" over and over
again, followed by lots of "circular", I am more likely to
draw something similar to a tree.  Otherwise, I end up
drawing a balloon.

- Jason

	#?53 	From: Timelord?0?9...
Date: Sun Jul ?8, ?00? 9:08 am
Subject: Re: Deciphering Multiple events within a Target 	psitrooper?4



> rv...m writes:
> What I have done to get around this issue, is to allow
> for repeating descriptions during the session (some
> people frown upon this,

Hi Jason

Hey, thats what i do  too :? )? )
and seven times out of ten if its not aol intensive
the repeated descriptors are correct.
They are always repeated at the  start of a new stage
and sometimes at the end of a stage as well.
for instance  as a recent example
i did a HRVG target which featured college cheerleaders.

I kept getting dancing and play and alot of zig zag movement
with my pen - i kept declaring dancing
and other decs like 'hat' and 'game' throughout the session
and by S? i got 'sport' as well. at this point i felt
i had really fluffed the target but remembered to TRUST the data
and eventually the repeated dancing/ play/sport/ event/ men and women
yes there were even men cheerleaders in the photo 
it all paid off  at feedback time.
In the background one could vaguely see football players wearing
white 'hats' but i didnt even see this first time round
and i also missed the men cheerleaders in the photo first time i saw
the feedback then i spotted one or two guys behind the cheerleaders
mimicking their movenments.
That was  soo weird :? )? )

So if people are frowning at repeating descriptors in ones session
then i dont know whats going on there.
if it works 4 you ...use it:? )? )

Peace,
Tunde

	#?55 	From: joan003....net
Date: Sun Jul ?8, ?00? 9:?6 pm
Subject: Re: Deciphering Multiple events within a Target 	joanie003



> rv...m writes:
> What I have done to get around this issue, is to allow
> for repeating descriptions during the session (some
> people frown upon this,
> and Tunde writes:
> So if people are frowning at repeating descriptors in
> ones session then i dont know whats going on there.
> if it works 4 you ...use it:? )? )

I think the repeating descriptors are trying to get your attention...

I agree if it works for you, use it!!!

also you may be describing different aspects of the target which share the
same descriptors...

say a whole bunch of red balloons...red round and floating...all over the
place....

I recall one session in which I kept getting Kurosawa's Dreams...the
movie...a metaphor of a child playing in a field of flowers...I couldn't
shake off this image...so it kept coming back and back...well it turned out
to be a child standing on a Vietnamese water lily in a pool of lilies.  not
exactly VCR..but good enough for government work :-? )? )

In the Spirit,
Joanie

	#?56
Date: Sun Jul ?8, ?00? 10:05 pm
Subject: Re: Deciphering Multiple events within a Target 	dennanm



I don't pay any attention to 'how many times' I get a descriptor (or
anything else? ) in a session except to note it the way anybody would
notice something.  I'd have to hear some good reasoning to agree with
any prohibition on data in a session.

As a Viewer I am writing down what data is coming to me at that
moment.  If I get, "soft, stringy, soft, wet," I do not consider that
to necessarily be two instances of the same data (soft? ).  To me, if I
got it more than once, there is probably a reason for it.  The target
may have two 'soft' things in it which are different, for example.
Soft and stringy may be one, soft and wet may be another. Or not!

But I don't know, and certainly not at the simple descriptor point of
data collection, I don't know, so if I as the viewer start making
decisions to internally edit the data I am getting when I obviously
don't know the answer, I'm pretty seriously interfering with my
session results.

The first RV target I put online back in '98 that I exampled early in
the list -- yes it's pathetic I only did one, it took eons to get it
online, and I quit for four years (but I'm here NOW, right?! :-? )? ) --
http://www.firedocs.com/remoteviewing/exit/pjrv/001/
has an example of just this.

In this session, I said, "Green, more green."  That was just my way
of phrasing.  Another viewer might have said "Green, flat, green" --
or said green a few times, who knows.

I had a problem in that session, I kept getting a repeating AOL, and
a couple others, and after I got feedback, I discovered why.  I had
gotten already that it was a metal bridge with a railing.  But I was
NOT getting the info that the bridge itself was GREEN.  I AOL'd on a
bridge from my childhood that was a green metal bridge, and a photo
I'd seen of a green metal railing in french New Orleans, but I didn't
grok at the time that that my mind was showing me GREEN things -- I
was focused on the fact that there was 'metal' and 'railing' and some
kind of 'pattern' in the two AOL's (an inaccurate piece of data I
transferred to the session? ).

I just missed the green. [<--bang! duh!]

But the fact that the descriptor repeated was one clue that I (or an
analyst? ) might have had that there was more than just green trees in
the target.

Usually when I get repeating descriptors, it is because I'm getting a
repeated sense of something in the target.  In reviewing my practice
sessions, I find that if I said something a number of times, it is
guaranteed to be either utterly true or utterly false, LOL -- never
in between.  It's either AOL drive or valid data or it just doesn't
usually come more than once.  And multiples of data happens more
seldom in AOL drive (which is usually too busy creating out of thin
air to repeat itself, LOL!? ).

I think of sessions as multi-dimensional in terms of data.  In other
words, some might say that listing "red" in a session seven times is
overkill in a big way.  But for all I know, the target is seven red
things.  Or something red with the number 7. The WAY the data comes
can ITSELF be form of data.

Or it may simply be a personal trait of the viewer that manifests in
certain situations - but, that is also worth knowing. This is the
kind of thing that usually only analysts and viewers reviewing
practice see, but it has to be considered that the session itself -
its process - is data too.  Any attempt to parse/filter session data
affects not just the primary data but the 'other data' seen by the
session itself.

As a last note, in Swann's concepts, getting psi data in a session
and NOT writing it down (for any reason? ) can create analytical
interference -- the concept being that recording the data is a type
of 'venting' of that data from the mind.  If you vent it and
it 'comes back' then it was likely accurate.  (If you love something,
set it free.  If it comes back.... never mind. LOL.? )

PJ