pjrv : Messages : 3556-3558 of 4038
(http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pjrv/messages/3556?)
15:41:57
~~--------ArchivedPostFollows_Yahoo-PJRV_group---------
#3556
From: Weatherly-Hawaii...m
Date: Tue Dec 2, 2003 2:16 pm
Subject: Re: Re: Retro-tasking - Experiment #2 (P
art 2) maliolana
Aloha Oasis siblings!,
> Hi Glyn,
>
> I am following with interest{
Hey...Were posting again over here...I love it!...YEAH!!!...I missed
PJRV...
Lx3ME
Reply | Forward
#3558
From: "Glyn"
Date: Wed Dec 3, 2003 12:39 pm
Subject: RE: Re: Retro-tasking - Experiment #2 (P
art 2) glynis5799
Hi Dawna, glad you're back with us :-).
Glyn
pjrv : Messages : 3550-3561 of 4038
(http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pjrv/messages/3550?)
15:42:52
~~--------ArchivedPostFollows_Yahoo-PJRV_group---------
#3550
From: "Glyn"
Date: Tue Nov 25, 2003 1:53 pm
Subject: Retro-tasking - Experiment #2 (P
art 2) glynis5799
Hi PJ (and anyone else who is following these informal experiments),
I have just posted Part 1 which was my mail to Liz after the experiment (her
feedback if you will). Please read first.
Here is part of a subsequent mail that I received from Liz; together with my
reply. It is interesting because it seems she may just have picked up something
after all, but not a lot, but many of us have experienced this sort of thing
happening, so it is fascinating to see it here.
Personally I think maybe 100s of experiments would be needed to come to any
conclusions about what is happening in retro-tasking, and I am only going to
do ten here, but some people may be interested to read it, and if it gives
anyone any ideas for experiments of their own then all the better. :-)
PJ, let me know if you are happy for me to continue posting these here&there
will be quite a few mails I think.
Regards,
Glyn
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&..
This is what I received from Liz after I sent the mail copied in my previous
post..&
-----Original Message-----
From: Elizabeth Hambrook [mailto:elizabeth...t.au]
Sent: 25 November 2003 10:39
To: Glyn
Subject: Re: Retro-tasking - Experiment #2
Hi Glyn,
This one was interesting to me as well. I chose it sort of on purpose because
half way thorough the original session everything seemed to change from outdoors
(and the Pine Gap photo was outdoors) to a piece of lovely tapestry, although I
couldn't make out the picture or pattern on it. I was absorbed in the stitches
because I saw it close up and I was too tired at the time to try and get any
extra details.
Interestingly enough I read your e-mail first and then opened the scan of #2. M
y
very first thought was, "Oh I must have read the e-mail incorrectly because
there is the tapestry!"
The photo open up showing a very close up view of just one corner. (top left) It
looked just like a tapestry for that first flash until I realized it was so
close up the grains in the scan looked like a tapestry. LOL How weird is that!
So did I get the second half of that session directly from the scan I received?
Who knows, but it's sort of uncanny.
-----Original Message-----
From: Glyn [mailto:glyn.flyers...net.com]
Sent: 25 November 2003 19:17
To: Elizabeth Hambrook
Subject: RE: Retro-tasking - Experiment #2
Hi Liz,
Oh that *is* interesting! Something like that is what I wanted to hear, but I
thought it too much to hope for :-)
OK it may seem I am grasping at straws here, but that would be exactly what I
would expect if future memory was at work. I did not retro-task you, all I did
was retro-feedback you. :-). There lies the method for manipulation I think.
It is much much too early to jump to any conclusions at all about what is
happening, but as well as trying to convince myself that you may have scanned
down the timeline for anything in your memory in the future associated with the
eventual feedback you would receive on your *session*, you also went a little
further ahead and picked up a small amount of my feedback (my mail to you) after
the experiment.
(OK, I keep reminding myself that there is an apparent paradox associated with
FM which is along the lines of the chicken and egg situation&and Im avoiding
that for the moment&LOL!!!)
It is possible that with tighter focus that viewers would not leave themselves
open to retro-tasking (or I think it would be better to call it retro-feedback
;-).
When you send your next session Liz (no hurry), could you try and dig out one
that is a few years old (or as old as you can make it anyway).
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Reply | Forward
#3553
From: "smitty97006"
Date: Tue Dec 2, 2003 5:30 am
Subject: Re: Retro-tasking - Experiment #2 (P
art 2) smitty97006
Hi Glyn,
I am following with interest your retrotasking experiments and really
appreciate you taking the time to post the results. When I first
read of this it seemed very improbable and honestly just plain silly
to my very left brained self, but doing some experimentation was not
that difficult or time consuming, so I did a dozen or so experiments
and also got a fellow viewer to do a couple where I did the
retrotasking and he choose the session from his stack of completed
ones.
Though I still cannot get myself to buy into it as a real phenomenon
as theorized, it did produce some results that I still ponder.
Specifically I got a significant first time effect. Meaning that the
first retrotask I did using one of my own sessions, the first
retrotask I did one of my friends sessions, and the first retrotask I
did using my sessions for an ARV type of tasking all produced uncanny
and I mean uncanny, seemingly dead on results. Then it all just
tapered off, the more retrotasking I did the less significant was the
hit wherein by the time I hit double digits in my experiments I was
just getting nothing but the occasional, maybe vaguely matching kind
of thing.
Now my left brain still doesn't accept the retrotasking theory but
something is going on, what I'm not sure of. But people like you
publishing results really does help in shedding some light on the
phenomenon.
Thanks again,
Gene Smith
Reply | Forward
#3557
From: "Glyn"
Date: Tue Dec 2, 2003 12:45 pm
Subject: RE: Re: Retro-tasking - Experiment #2 (P
art 2) glynis5799
Hi Gene,
Thanks very much for your mail, its great to know that there are others out
there besides PJ, and of course Liz, who are following this :-).
I only plan to do 10 of these informal experiments, and I know PJ and some
others did some as well, but its really interesting that you went into double
figures, and also encountered a really good start, but afterwards a tail-off.
I have now posted the third one, and you will see that is was a bit of a no no
, but I was actually hoping to see something like that. I have also done #4
shortly, but I havent mailed Liz with her feedback yet.
I am following a particular train of thought at the moment, and it will either
pan out or not :-). I would love to compare overall findings with you (and any
others who may have done a number of such tests) when I have finished&to see if
we can spot any apparent consistencies.
Kind regards,
Glyn
Reply | Forward
#3560
From: Bill Pendragon
Date: Fri Dec 5, 2003 12:57 am
Subject: Re: Re: Retro-tasking - Experiment #2 (P
art 2) docsavagebill
Hi Liz, Gene, Glyn, PJ
This is more of the "Beginners Luck" phenomenae that
seems to haunt much psi activity especially psi
activity,like ARV and "retrotasking" that involve TIME
LOOPING. In ARV you send the feedback back thru time
to yourself in the past. IN Retrotasking you send a
retargeting suggestion back thru time to the viewer.
The loop is similiar enough to ARV, that I had little
trouble accepting it. And in fact it suggests some
reasons that ARV sometimes produces great descriptions
of the (wrong) decoy targets ( self retrotasking (or
by an "independent" judge) during matching of sessions
to the multiple choices presented).
Back to the Beginners Luck problem. It's as if the
time loops that one tries to set up in ARV or
Retrotasking builds a resistance , or gets corrupted
by repeated useage. Many times a simple change in the
procedure leads to success again ....for awhile.
Marty Rosenblatt documented it statisticallty in our
ARV trials which went on for over a year with 100's of
trials. BTW..
Glyn I hope you will summarize the results at the end.
I missed the beginning of the trials.
Best Regards,
Bill
Reply | Forward
#3561
From: "Glyn"
Date: Sat Dec 6, 2003 12:21 pm
Subject: RE: Re: Retro-tasking - Experiment #2 (P
art 2) glynis5799
Hi Bill,
You said..
> This is more of the "Beginners Luck" phenomenae that
> seems to haunt much psi activity especially psi
> activity,like ARV and "retrotasking" that involve TIME
> LOOPING.
Yes, it seems that way. 'Beginners Luck' happens in golf too I bet ;-).
You said.
> In ARV you send the feedback back thru time
> to yourself in the past. IN Retrotasking you send a
> retargeting suggestion back thru time to the viewer.
IMO they may both happen the same way, and that it is the Viewer focusing,
somehow across time, on the feedback they are going to get in the future, but it
is all different ways of looking at the same thing I think :-).
> Back to the Beginners Luck problem. It's as if the
> time loops that one tries to set up in ARV or
> Retrotasking builds a resistance , or gets corrupted
> by repeated useage. Many times a simple change in the
> procedure leads to success again ....for awhile.
> Marty Rosenblatt documented it statisticallty in our
> ARV trials which went on for over a year with 100's of
> trials. BTW..
Yes, lots of things could be at work. I don't have much hope of proving anything
definite with a series of 10 very informal 'experiments' where everyone has to
take my word for anyway :-). but I am looking for something in particular which
may or may not happen; that is connected with future memory theory (which I don'
t think Marty Rosenblatt may have tested for specifically (?).I do not know.
Anyway, if there is even a hint that it is happening then I'll jump up and down
in excitement and probably look at things a little more deeply. LOL!
> Glyn I hope you will summarize the results at the end.
> I missed the beginning of the trials.
I definitely will. Thanks for your interest Bill.
Regards,
Glyn
|