Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 345
Results 41 to 50 of 50

Thread: Mars- Where Is Everybody?

  1. Default Aloha Daz...

    Aloha Daz,

    The answers lie in things we cannot see or touch. At best we assemble theories of how we think things are working and then test them out to an application. At the last IRVA conference Dick presented his body of knowledge on Masking and Entrainment and ended his presentation with a demonstration that was amazingly successful. This was a demonstration of cause and effect where consciousness was the playground. In this unseen, untouchable playground, Dick set into motion causation with a predicted effect in the real touchable reality. No small task by anyone’s measure and it did not employ Telepathy but the subtle responses of a person to the combined reality of the seen and unseen world.

    Let’s go back to Tanner Dam and look at what was really done by our theory of employment. Let’s pretend when Dick constructed the mask and entrained it to the Stock market he was really 97 years old and that night before the target was put out to the viewer’s he passed away in his sleep dreaming the most amazing fluffy bunny dreams possible. Now the target still went out to the viewers but Dick was no longer here to be the source of origin for any possible Telepathy. Would the viewers have still produced the sessions that they did? Would your session work still be as it was? If none of you knew that Dick had headed off to the Happy Hunting grounds I think your results would have been just as they were. While a difficult theory to test, and I am sure Dick wouldn’t go for it, it would disprove Telepathy as a component in the viewer collection process.

    Knowledge does not imply Telepathy, nor does omniscience. I think most people here believe that they may receive some information, data, or knowledge from a greater reality/consciousness that does not require a point-to-point mind connection with another. The theory we employ assumes that consciousness is pliable and can be shaped. When Dick created Tanner Dam it was not solely in his mind but in the greater field of consciousness. It was designed specifically to have purpose and mirror something else entirely different. Cause and effect are real correlations but what Dick did was create his cause and effect in the world of consciousness. A simpler test would be to set up a double blind condition and have Tanner Dam re-targeted and put back out to another group of viewers. Push the collected data through analysis and see if the results are the same. With Dick disconnected from collection effort I think you will find your answer to what actually happened.

    While we have demonstrated Entrainment in the world of consciousness we have taken it a step further and demonstrated it in the physical reality. Here is a post from the BBS here about the first entrainment demonstration I did for the class. The trick would be to find the Telepathy involvement.

    This is a post from our own Jason…

    Perhaps the entrainment exercise had a stronger impact on myself because I was the person that picked the chips that were *designed* to be picked in the exercise. Besides Glenn, four of us participated in the exercise. The four of us knew nothing about what we going to do, except for one thing Glenn said. We're gonna do a little exercise. Ahhh, an exercise, and it's little.

    Each of the four people was given a blue poker chip and a white poker chip with their first initial written on both chips. All eight chips were placed in the center of the table with the initialed side faced down. The four of us stuck our hands to the center of the table and began mixing the chips up. We pushed chips to the left, chips to the right, this chip that way and that chip this way, mixing them around until no one knew where their chips lay. Then the first person picked a blue chip and a white chip, and only Glenn and that person were shown which initials were written on the chips they had chosen. Those two chips were placed back into the center and the mixing process was repeated. The second person did the same, picked a blue and white chip, and only Glenn and that person were shown which initials were on those chips, then the chips went back into the mix. Then the third person, that’s me, I picked a blue chip and a white chip. Glenn and I looked at the initials that were written on the chips. Glenn placed the two chips on the table with the initials facing up. The blue chip had a “D” written on it and the white chip had a “P” on it.

    Then Glenn said to me while pointing towards the right side of the room, “Lift up the carpet and look for a piece of paper”. So I walked over and lifted up the area carpet and there lay a piece of paper folded in half. I unfolded the paper, and the writing on the paper read 3rd game\ Blue - D White – P.

    Hmmm, so as I stood there with this big grin on my face, the first thing I thought was, How did he do this. The second thing I thought, What was this exercise about. This was not precognition. This was not remote influencing. This was... entrainment. The piece of paper had been placed under the carpet at least an hour before any of us had shown up at the house. The entrainment exercise had been designed so that on the third “game”, the third participant would pick a specific pair of poker chips.

    So how did this happen? As best as I understand it, and in simple lay terms, Glenn had constructed an architecture of the third “game”. The four of us came in and participated in the “game” in the architecture, and played it out as Glenn had designed it to be played out. We were part of the architecture of the third “game”. We had become entrained in the game, with the game, by the game. The third game. Which only lasted a minute or so. Entrainment was briefly discussed in the Masking/Overlay classes we had last year. Hearing about in class was interesting and exciting. But actually seeing it implemented, as with the exercise on Monday, is quite an experience.

    Entrainment may be difficult for some people to grasp. You'll have to stretch your thinking a bit. I spoke to Glenn about entrainment for quite a while after Monday's class. I also talked to him the following day about it. It still boggles my mind. We haven’t been taught the mechanism behind entrainment, yet. Hey Glenn, maybe after Las Vegas we can have a few in-depth classes on this. And we'll probably need to see it implemented a few more times to fully understand it *hint*hint*. Those of you that were at class on Monday, have you sat down and thought about what actually happened in the exercise. Or maybe you're still thinking about it like myself.

    Here’s a few definitions of the word entrain. I pulled these from dictionary.com. They seem to fit, in a certain way: 1. To pull or draw along after itself. 2. Chemistry. To carry (suspended particles, for example) along in a current. To draw along as a current does; as, water entrained by steam.
    Aloha, Jason


    In another post by Dick Titled “Stop Thinking Normally” he illustrates another Entrainment demonstration.

    I’ll explain what happened in class tonight. Debra walked in and Glenn pointed her to a tray full of poker chips surrounding three small boxes. He instructed her to (after he had left the room) pick one of 80 chips (either red, blue, green, or black) and place the chip in one of 3 different ornamental boxes. The boxes are (tan- number 1, black- number 2, and brown- number 3.).

    So Debra had a lot possible choices:

    • A red chip in box number one,
    • A blue chip in box number one.
    • A green chip in box number one.
    • A black chip in box number one.
    • A red chip in box number two.
    • A blue chip in box number two.
    • A green chip in box number two.
    • A black chip in box number two.
    • A red chip in box number three.
    • A blue chip in box number three.
    • A green chip in box number three.
    • A black chip in box number three.

    She selected a chip and put it in a box, with no one observing. (No one physically at that moment.)

    After Debra selected a chip and placed it in the box no one touched the tray, the chips, or the boxes as students arrived for class. The class assembled and Glenn brought in the tray full of chips and set it front of us. He picked up box number one. He opened it and revealed a blue chip.

    He instructed Debra to go lift up the carpet in the front room, where she found a sealed, signed envelope. Inside was a paper that stated:
    “Debra. Box #1 Blue.”

    Parlor trick, or “not normal” thinking? We’ll let Glenn explain this as he posts later. His message tonight was "Stop thinking normally." In other words, don't guess- know, or view the past, or view the future, or cause it to happen, but don't guess.

    Aloha,

    Dick


    My Reply to Dick’s post was the following…

    Aloha Dick,

    Suspension of the guess is a lot harder than most people would think. The puzzle of the chips and boxes lets you confront what you actually think at the time the puzzle is presented. What am I actually asking you to do? Be psychic? The answer to that is a resounding No!

    When Debra picked a colored chip and then selected the box to put it in began a series of possibilities for those who would be asked to solve her puzzle. The most obvious response would be to guess which color and which box. The impulse to guess must be stopped cold. A guess attempts to jump to the solution with literally no intellect or mental management. What you will guess will be influenced by more factors unrelated to the actual solution than you can imagine. While guessing because of the odds may lead to a correct solution within the scale of chance, it is our intention to be correct the first time.

    How is this related to Remote Viewing and why is this important? The last several years as we have played with Entrainment and Masking we have seen the malleability of not only environments, but randomness as well. The Entrainments that I have shown you with the chips and roulette were to show you how one can move within the environment and cause the invisible to be come visible. We saw this with Affinity. In the Affinity demonstration you must understand that what was done was done in the past and we were able to observe it in the now. Now this was a generic or artificial affinity because the objects observed were inert and lacked consciousness. A state of attraction was created in the past that did not materialize until we observed it. This means the actions taken did not perish with the passing of time. For those two (2) inert objects the attraction once created traveled backwards down the timeline and forward into the future and will continue unless it is stopped. It is such a small effort for such a large result.

    When the class formed I stated simply that tonight there was an Entrainment demonstration. I wanted you to see me solve a free will set of choices by Debra with the chips and boxes. While not a complex entrainment I wanted you also to understand there is more than one (1) or two (2) or a dozen ways to solve it and be correct the first time. None of the solutions require that we resort to the "Guess". In the early afternoon before class I designed the entrainment by carefully assembling all the components. We must also realize that none of the Entrainment design would rob from Debra the exercise of her free will.

    When we think of what's to be done to solve her puzzle the possibilities are endless. You are only limited by your own mentality and intellect. I will tell you what I decided to do to solve the puzzle. In those moments in the early afternoon I opted to entrain two (2) streams of affinity. One (1) stream to the 20 blue chips on the tray and one (1) stream to the interior of box number one (1). In lieu of any other attractions the Affinity was free meaning there was no affinity linking the blue chips to the interior of box number one (1). This means that when Debra began her puzzle selection that there were two (2) elements of the puzzle that had free Affinity associations. At the time of selection by Debra the state of randomness would be affected by Affinity much like we saw with the Pawns and Roulette. Now the next step is a bit complex so hang with me while I try and explain it. I was concerned about the noise in the class with all the folks present and wanted to be certain that the Blue chip Box 1 solution would materialize. What I designed then was a way for Debra from the future to leave a memory that she would encounter when she approached the puzzle. This I will have to show you and explain in class because it is simply too complex to elaborate on here. Not a memory of mind but a memory of environment.

    Where does power flow from? It is everywhere and we certainly cannot start or stop it. We must learn to flow within it. When we Remote View it too is a puzzle and we must solve it with an interactive intellect. In the puzzle we see the solution was only hidden from our eyes but not our intellect, in the Remote Viewing target there is no difference. We have a solid methodology to approach the target now let's redefine our intellect to solve it.

    Glenn

    Daz those same streams of affinity used to link chips to their boxes were the same sort of actions Dick used to link the stock market to aspects of Tanner Dam. In this I would say find the Telepathy. Other real tests of Entrainment in Las Vegas have turned out very well for us so our state of belief as a group is high. Your premise, while not illogical, should be explored as both right and wrong, as should ours.

    I have tried to devise ways to demonstrate the forces of time and consciousness so our group could see a consciousness cause and physical effect. Using chips and wheels, boxes and pawns, as well as papers under the carpet is fairly convincing if you are there to take part in it. All things considered equal we have strong reason to discount telepathy in favor of consciousness interplay. These events succeed because I make them happen. I don’t lie, or cheat; I set them into motion and let them happen. When Dick set Tanner Dam into motion he created a data set that can be replicated and evaluated. Now Paul’s tie was a bear but because we were there to see it…it happened.

    Aloha Glenn

  2. Default Aloha Robert...

    Aloha Robert,

    I am thinking that Telepathic Overlay as it is being discussed is a form of mind control. It would take a powerful mind to accomplish such a feat. If it is real then how could one trust any Remote Viewing results if we were all so easily led astray? I spoke with Dick after the last conference about another project in which the goal would be to see if it would be possible to stop someone from remote viewing a specific target. Let’s say the target would be the Washington Monument. Could we make it so that no Remote viewer anywhere could ever successfully view this target? Not only in the now, but in the past and future as well. It would be a large scale denial of service attack on the target. We could then ask viewers all over the world to work the target legitimately tasked and Targeteered as the Washington Monument. There own groups could do the blind or double blind targeting and publish their own target ID’s.
    If successful would the cause be Telepathy?
    Glenn
    Last edited by Glenn B. Wheaton; 2010-May-08 Sat at 03:24.

  3. #43
    daz smith Guest

    Default

    Daz those same streams of affinity used to link chips to their boxes were the same sort of actions Dick used to link the stock market to aspects of Tanner Dam. In this I would say find the Telepathy. Other real tests of Entrainment in Las Vegas have turned out very well for us so our state of belief as a group is high. Your premise, while not illogical, should be explored as both right and wrong, as should ours.
    Maybe but you also cant rule out that in the 'chip' example that the combination of ox1 and blue chip were either communicated unknowingly through body language or from more exotic means like 'mind-to-mind' communication, and that debra's selection of this combination was not as random as you'd like to think but influenced without knowing.
    Your term of 'conciousness interplay' - surely this is just telepathy by another name or I prefer mind-to-mind communication - if conciousness and everything in the universe is connected then so too are our minds.

    The 'tie entrainment demonstration' - Im not convinced on this one as I'm sure paul wore the tie to previous IRVA conferences - Im sure there is a pic of him in the IRVA folder - alas I cannot look any more as I am no longer a member.

    Don't get me wrong I'm not saying anyone cheated or anything - Im just not convinced - its not a properly set up demonstration - but knowing the mind poser of memory someone may have remembered deep inside their minds the ties previous public outing - we just dont know.

    I am thinking that Telepathic Overlay as it is being discussed is a form of mind control. It would take a powerful mind to accomplish such a feat. If it is real then how could one trust any Remote Viewing results if we were all so easily led astray?
    This is why we cant trust RV - especially if there is a lack of feedback. I've perosnally seen it happen time after time that the perosnal beliefs of the tasker/analyst possibly skew the viewing data - like your entrainment exercise.

    Maybe because you guys have generally worked closed in house with each other that you haven't - I don't know. All I know is I've got around and worked long term (years) with CRV, TDS, TRV, SRV students and I've seen overlay 'possibly' be in effect sometimes. Rv needs alot more work yet before we truly cna say 'this' or 'that' is happening.

    Also if we take the possible reality that 'conciousness interpleay' is real and if the theories on quantum universe are correct then it doesn't take a powerful mind to do mind control - we all do mind control every minute of the day and that conciousness creates and has affects.


    All the best...

    Daz

  4. #44

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Glenn B. Wheaton View Post
    Aloha Robert,

    Could we make it so that no Remote viewer anywhere could ever successfully view this target? Not only in the now, but in the past and future as well. It would be a large scale denial of service attack on the target.
    Glenn
    An exhausting task no doubt. I don't think that anyone is really thinking this all the way through. For the mask to be effective, you would have to know every piece and part of detail and that is much easier said than done. Shades of Agatha in Minority Report leap to mind. I was really glad when she got our of her pool! Poor girl. Talk about uncompensated overtime! But, seriously...I have often been in a state of wonder at a piece of simple art. It would be exhausting to sustain it over time. How immersed would someone have to be in the process itself to sustain it.
    Last edited by Michele; 2010-May-08 Sat at 09:01. Reason: Added reference for Agatha

  5. #45

    Default

    [QUOTE=Glenn B. Wheaton;1773]This is a post from our own Jason…

    The entrainment exercise had been designed so that on the third “game”, the third participant would pick a specific pair of poker chips.
    Aloha, Jason


    What about observer effect? Wouldn't it be a bitch if turns out everyone owes Ed Dames an apology? Is it possible to remote view the future without effecting the outcome? (Running for cover!) Just because his predictions didn't come to pass doesn't mean that they weren't probable. How many people does it take to create an observer effect that can change the quantum nature of things. One, twelve, a million?
    Last edited by Michele; 2010-May-08 Sat at 07:56.

  6. #46

    Default

    Glenn:

    >Could we make it so that no Remote viewer anywhere could ever successfully view this target? <

    Good question. It reminds me of the scenes from the Movie "PUSH" where there is a human capable of Shadowing and protects people and even buildings from being viewed.

    I don't think think so and certainly not to the extreme of "shadowing," something not even remotely possible for the human species today.

    I seem to remember Lynn Buchanan saying something about this however in his book, The Seventh Sense. Regardless of his reputation, I don't believe him either.

    >I am thinking that Telepathic Overlay as it is being discussed is a form of mind control.<

    If it, telepathy were something one could consciously "will" I might agree with you; I do not see telepathy or it's overlay characteristic in terms of an act of deliberation; it is something that "happens', an uncalled for experience,so my response is tenative: no,mind control as such is a fiction.

    HOWEVER if that is proven to be true then what can be said about Lynn Buchanan and his "Remote Influencing." Is that too a fiction? I've seen the DVD's from early conferences and as interesting as it all sounds I think Lynn gives himself too much credit, no disrespect to him.

    AND what about viewers who claim they have interrogated people at a target site? If they can interrogate a person in the past, why not the future as well? Is that telepathy/mind control of sorts? It leaves the issue of "telepathy and overlay" a very, very open question.
    Robert

  7. #47

    Default Would you believe......

    I went to Google Earth and switched from Earth to Mars.
    I typed in 19.73 degrees west 3.08 degrees north and it took me to the site the Farsight Project remote viewed but wouldn't you know, they blocked it out. The same is true for the Fortress on Mar's. Actually you can see the fortress but another huge section below it is blanked out. What is it they don't want us to see? Well, I better be careful as I don't want to imply a conspiracy....but you just have to wonder!!!!!
    Robert

  8. #48

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Michele View Post
    Just because his predictions didn't come to pass doesn't mean that they weren't probable.
    Everything is "probable" until it doesn’t happen.

    I'm reminded of an example that my high school physics teacher gave, that there is a finite probability that all the air molecules in the room will travel in the same direction at the same time, leaving the opposite corner in a vacuum. Not very probable, but possible. I don’t remember the details, but I think the probabilities worked out to it happening once in many times the lifetime of the universe.

    After all, isn't that how the "Heart of Gold" works?
    Don't mess with old futs...age and treachery will always overcome youth and skill! B. S. and brilliance only come with age and experience!

  9. #49

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Wodin View Post
    Everything is "probable" until it doesn’t happen.


    After all, isn't that how the "Heart of Gold" works?
    My daughter is a big fan of this book. Maybe my headspace was just not in the right place at the time, but I couldn't get into the book. Maybe I will try again as she was a big fan of the work.

    My perspective really comes from a background in Security as opposed to Intelligence. Security is at it's most effectiveness when nothing is happening. And that becomes a big problem. People (managers) see a big drain of money going into a hole because security never makes money. So, you don't really see how successful 'nothing happening' is until you start to draw down security assets. As bad things begin to occur, only then do you see the value of not understanding something good until it's gone.

    The Chinese Missle crisis at Los Alamos; IMO, is a fine example. So, just because nothing happened didn't mean something was prevented from happening.

  10. #50

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Michele View Post
    My daughter is a big fan of this book. Maybe my headspace was just not in the right place at the time, but I couldn't get into the book. Maybe I will try again as she was a big fan of the work.
    It's much like remote viewing, you have to suspend (re-orient?) your belief system to enjoy it.

    I think we could learn much from Doug Adams.

    Quote Originally Posted by Michele View Post
    My perspective really comes from a background in Security as opposed to Intelligence. Security is at it's most effectiveness when nothing is happening. And that becomes a big problem. People (managers) see a big drain of money going into a hole because security never makes money. So, you don't really see how successful 'nothing happening' is until you start to draw down security assets. As bad things begin to occur, only then do you see the value of not understanding something good until it's gone.

    The Chinese Missle crisis at Los Alamos; IMO, is a fine example. So, just because nothing happened didn't mean something was prevented from happening.
    Ahhh; Mordred, the preventer of information!
    Don't mess with old futs...age and treachery will always overcome youth and skill! B. S. and brilliance only come with age and experience!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •