PsiPog.net : View topic - Remote Viewing Protocol...

# PsiPog.net

# View topic - Remote Viewing Protocol...

PsiPog.net Forum Index » Clairvoyance » Remote Viewing Protocol...

Remote Viewing Protocol...
Author | Message
--- | ---
Remote Viewing Protocol... on Wed May 10, 2006 7:26 pm

### Aphanas

Joined: 14 Jan 2006
Posts: 17

I was browsing the "Applied Psionics" forum this evening, and thought it might be helpful to share a few quotes on proper RV protocol, by Joe McMoneagle. Joe is easily considered one of the world's best and most consistent remote viewers, if you're not familiar with his name from the Stargate project.
There is currently a major violation of protocol in the "Applied Psionics" forum target posts, and while I'm not at all a purist when it comes to methodologies for RV, protocol _is_ important, if you want to see consistent results. The problem is that people are posting descriptions of targets for their prospective remote viewers, rather than keeping the RV'er blind to all target information until the feedback stage. As Joe comments, in his book Remote Viewing Secrets: A Handbook:

Quote:

Most of the training systems in use today do not recognize the necessity for keeping everyone in proximity to the remote viewing totally blind to the target. The argument usually made is something like, "How can we reinforce a correct response and not encourage an incorrect response, if we don't know what the target is?"
Not following the protocols during training, for any reason, leaves the door wide open to a result which is not necessarily being produced through psychic means. The student may have gotten the information through psychic means, but then again, may have gotten it through any one of a number of other ways.
Remote viewing protocol requires the remote viewer be blind, or have no other form of access to the target they are being asked to provide information on. This means no hints, no front-loading, no bending of the rules?
The point is if you want psychic information, you have to eliminate all other forms or possibilities of information transfer. These are commonly referred to as "paths of leakage" or "leakage paths." True, we could train to increase our other sensitivities [Aphanas' note: from the context, non-psychic, straight analysis, etc.] and this will be effective in how we deal with problems, and that's nice, but it isn't remote viewing. Calling it that does a clear disservice to both.
So, we need to identify violations of protocol within a training schema and eliminate them. In the case of most training programs extant, that means no one knowing the target while you are attempting to collect information on it.

In several other places in the book, he comments on errors introduced in applied RV results due to front-loading the RVer or the monitor with information on the target. So, in the interest of better performance in your RV attempts, I would suggest correcting the protocol violations in the "Applied Psionics" forum. Specifically, if you're going to use CRV as your protocol of choice, I would recommend that targets be posted _without_ any descriptive information on the nature of the target - only the target coordinates. The only persons that should have information on the target beforehand are the target requester, and the person assigning coordinates.
Your analysis will also be simplified by correcting protocol violations, through correlating known data about the target with an RVer's results. If they successfully describe accurate information related to the target with no front-loaded information, you can more easily assess whether a person was "on target" with a particular attempt, which adds weight to the rest of their information.
One final note: Even Joe says that RV isn't actually a terribly good method for location-based psionics. If you're actually trying to find something, the descriptors and gestalts coming from an RV session are oftentimes not useful in placing an object's location. He recommends (and I agree), that folks use dowsing in combination with RV targeting if they are attempting to locate a specific object.
Hope that helps,
--Aphanas
***************
Reference: McMoneagle, Joseph. Remote Viewing Secrets: A Handbook. Hampton Roads Publishing Co: Charlottesville, VA. 2000. pp. 109-110. (ISBN: 1-57174-159-3)

Back to top
Posted on Wed May 17, 2006 1:03 am

### The_Musician

Joined: 01 Mar 2006
Posts: 323

Also, (i hope you dont mind if i add something....) If people would use simple adjectives, and work their way to more complex answers, that would also give better results. I see way too many complex answers, that could contribute alot to the AOL of anyone that isnt the first or second poster. Just seems like people want to get right answers, and kudos, rather than train their ability. Or lack there of.

Back to top
Posted on Wed May 17, 2006 9:02 am

### LOTRfool

Joined: 13 Jan 2006
Posts: 518

Nice Post, should clear up some false results and help . Thanks for the protocol info.

Back to top
Posted on Sun Jun 04, 2006 10:12 pm

### Elliptic

Joined: 19 Jan 2006
Posts: 199

Looking in that forum somewhat hurt my brain. I was referred to this post by my friend, Aphanas, and felt I ought to come out of the posting closet to comment on some basic RV protocol.
The applied psionics forum seems a bit full of way, way, way too much frontloading and absolutely no proper remote viewing. My recommendation for such might be something along the lines of entitling posts with coordinates, and then RVing or dowsing those coordinates without actually clicking the post first.
For example:
Post Title: 1915-2774
I view that target, and then and only then click the post, and submit my answers.
This prevents frontloading and inclemencies. Analytical overlay is already removed as a concern because the viewer knows, by the very nature of the forum, that they are looking for a site or location. I don't see anyone here using a proper protocol that even allows for them to take AOLBks, so I don't see a major concern with that. Let's keep in mind, also, that Analytical Overlay is only a major concern until the B phase in CRV, or the phase after the initial ideogram markings and the initial statement of adjectives.
Applied Psionics forum may not be purist RV, I don't know, but a post like "Lost: Shoes" scares me when I think to look in it.

Back to top
Posted on Sun Jun 04, 2006 10:34 pm

### bladeslinger

Joined: 10 Feb 2006
Posts: 1337

what if you don't use coordinates? That leaves us in quite the quandry

Back to top
Posted on Sun Jun 04, 2006 10:39 pm

### Elliptic

Joined: 19 Jan 2006
Posts: 199

Virtually every remote viewing protocol with which I am familiar utilizes targets in order to maintain the blind, as mentioned in the original post. Using anything aside from an anonymous target leaves a very real risk of frontloading the viewer.
It is possible to clairvoyantly ascertain information about a target without the use of an RV protocol, but it's not remote viewing. Remote viewing is remote viewing because of the use of structured protocol to control the session. Other alternatives exist, but they are not remote viewing.

Back to top
Posted on Tue Jun 13, 2006 2:08 pm

### PsiGuy60

Joined: 05 Jun 2006
Posts: 900

Wow, what a passage that was. Try to sum it up next time

Back to top
Posted on Tue Jun 13, 2006 5:10 pm

### Aphanas

Joined: 14 Jan 2006
Posts: 17

PsiGuy60 wrote:
Wow, what a passage that was. Try to sum it up next time

Take a look at this sentence from the second paragraph of my original post, given just before the quote by Joe McMoneagle.

Aphanas wrote:
The problem is that people are posting descriptions of targets for their prospective remote viewers, rather than keeping the RV'er blind to all target information until the feedback stage.

That would be a summary...
--Aphanas

Back to top
Posted on Wed Jun 14, 2006 7:58 am

### Elliptic

Joined: 19 Jan 2006
Posts: 199

PsiGuy60 wrote:
Wow, what a passage that was. Try to sum it up next time

It was probably originally intended for a literate audience who would not have a problem reading what amounts to less than a single written page.

Back to top
Posted on Fri Jun 16, 2006 10:49 am

### PsiGuy60

Joined: 05 Jun 2006
Posts: 900

Quote:
The problem is that people are posting descriptions of targets for their prospective remote viewers, rather than keeping the RV'er blind to all target information until the feedback stage.

Didnt see that, probably scrolled too much, or just not noticed. sorry for the interruption!

Back to top
Posted on Tue Jun 27, 2006 8:34 pm

### pepsiboy

Joined: 25 Jun 2006
Posts: 562

Its almost as if i've read this post before, but i know i haven't.
wtf

Back to top
Posted on Wed Jun 28, 2006 3:37 pm

### stony1205

Joined: 27 Nov 2005
Posts: 170

As far a protocols go there are some things you should know.
The original CRV protocol by Ingo Swann is actually really bulked down with documentation and redundency, as it was meant to be used in research studies. Its actually kind of boring to do RV when you use this method. The protocol is freely avaliable on the internet, with all of its CIA glory.
McMoneagle was part of Scannate/STARGATE and used the CRV protocols. I've read through his works, and its just an alteration of CRV, its nothing new. According to Ed Dames he (put in simple terms) sucked, and didn't do much. However, those who were involved in STARGATE are still arguing with eachother like 5 year olds so who knows what really went on.
I think the best way to get anything done is to experiment with different things yourself, and see what works best for YOU.
~ Stony

Back to top
Posted on Wed Jun 28, 2006 10:48 pm

### Elliptic

Joined: 19 Jan 2006
Posts: 199

Or buy my book, which I'm still working on, so I'll let you all know when it's done.
Dames has viewed the earth getting wiped out by a solar flare several times now, with dates, but he's been off target. Calls it "the Killshot."
McMoneagle talks about aliens.
I think the government went about discrediting all of them on purpose.
Ingo Swann had nothing to do with the original CRV manual - it was written by Paul Smith in order to show the brass that STARGATE had actually come up with something. (I believe it was under GRILL FLAME at the time)

Back to top

PsiPog.net Forum Index » Clairvoyance » Remote Viewing Protocol...

All Content, Images, Video, Text, and Software is © Copyright 2000-2006 PsiPog.net and their respective authors. All Rights Reserved.

You must agree to the Terms of Service and Privacy Policy to view this website. Click here to contact the webmaster.