Instructor: Rainsong & Wayfarer
Date: April 14, 2017 (Friday)
Note: This class was conducted in the Order of the Golden Pyramid community’s chatroom
Rainsong
Good evening, ladies and gentlemen.
Welcome to another session of our ongoing series about Remote Viewing.
Our primary topic for the evening is Stage 3.
Those of you who’ve been taking part in the practice sessions have been working on stages 1 and 2 so far.
And while this is a good time to learn about Stage 3, you won’t be doing much with it yet. It’s very important to get solid practice in the first two stages before venturing further.
In the same way, it’s very important to pay attention to AOL and other parts of the structure that seem like they “are just for beginners”… If you’re not getting AOL, recording AOL, and taking AOL breaks, you’re doing it wrong.
Hobbetian
And AOLs should always be recorded, but never treated as actually representative of what is being viewed, right?
Rainsong
That’s right.
They should be recorded because if you try to “ignore” or “repress” them, you’re interfering with the process, and the bits that would otherwise be recorded as AOL will corrupt all your data from that point.
Also, it should be noted that sometimes the data in the AOL is correct.
Wayfarer
Recorded separately from the sensory data, in the right hand column, noted with time as a break. And take a break. But also skip a few lines on the left hand column in which you are recording sensory information, to maintain linear flow.
Rainsong
For example, if you get an AOL-type image of a church, that doesn’t preclude the possibility of the target actually *being* a church.
Wayfarer
The issue of AOL is an issue of top down versus bottom up processing. The analytical overlay is your brain’s attempt to create a full image from the fragments it is receiving (bottom up processing). The danger is that once that image is created, you’ll start reporting components of that fully formed image (top down processing), rather than actual signal information.
Hobbetian
Yes, having done the practice sessions, it’s become very clear that the analytical component starts to take over in ways that are unhelpful.
Rainsong
And that’s just a part of how the human mind processes stuff. So the protocols are arranged to account for that.
Any other questions or comments about what we’ve covered in the series so far? (Makes sense to handle those sorts of things before proceeding…)
Hobbetian
I have a view questions:
I saw an interview that stated that RV is clairvoyance under protocol.
Can we distinguish the kinds of mental phenomena that are present, broadly?… Say, clairvoyance vs telekinesis, etc.
Rainsong
Remote Viewing protocols are used primarily for handling clairvoyant data, yes, if we use the broadest definition of “clairvoyance”: to psychically perceive information hidden by distance, time, or obstruction.
This includes precognition, retrocognition, farsight, “Second sight”, clairsentience, and other “generally psychic perception”….
*Usually* the telepathic/empathic perceptions are not included in clairvoyance…
Wayfarer
The 1985 working paper I have here in fact proposes the use of RV for telepathic targeting, however.
Rainsong
*nods*
And telepathic data *does* show up in regular RV sessions.
In some cases, it interferes, such as when you get telepathic data about the target from the monitor or the tasker. That kind of situation is described as “Telepathic Overlay.”
Hobbetian
Yes, but that’s one of the elements I find interesting.
Wayfarer
TPOL can only be identified by the monitor, generally post session, incidentally.
Hobbetian
It seems that telepathy could be done by RV.
That’s why I asked.
Wayfarer
It can.
Hobbetian
Since it seems to be blended, and not just ‘one thing.’
Wayfarer
You use the same protocols, tasking is different.
Rainsong
Telekinesis, in the English sense of the word, is generally affective, rather than perceptive… sort of by definition.
In the Russian sense of the word, it could be used for RV purposes, in that it is a sort of half-projected not-quite-astral-projection thing…
Wayfarer
The protocol’d variation of psychokinesis would fall under “remote influence” and is something I’m not terribly familiar with outside of micro-PK applications generally targeting computer systems.
Rainsong
That said, I can affirm from personal experience that telekinesis can interfere with practice sessions, if you use coin tosses (for example) as targets for ARV and so on.
TL:DR – It can be very difficult to tell the different kinds of psychic activity apart.
Hobbetian
Here’s another kind of issue that I’ve encountered:
Realizing that I needed to quiet my mind, instead of ‘think,’ has been the key.
Now, I’ve been doing a few esp testing games, and have done very well.
Here’s one thing I’ve found though —
I sometimes get the data impressions, but sorting them out is difficult.
In this particular instance, it’s the order, so I see why writing down is helpful.
To enter into that state, do you think a trance-like state is helpful?
Any view on the use of things like binaural beats, etc ?
Wayfarer
A trance-like state can be helpful but it can also interfere with command of structure. But “trance-like state” has such a broad meaning that it’s difficult to answer.
Rainsong
The binaural beat thing is a bit controversial. I find it useful, personally, but I hope I don’t need to qualify that statement with “but only when the recordings are composed and recorded competently.”
Hobbetian
Gotcha
Well, for me, I can ‘feel’ the brain being different, and I can tell the difference between ‘knowing’ it and ‘hunch’…
The hunch can be right, but it’s a very different feeling from ‘knowing.’
Rainsong
Keep in mind that the “music” component of binaural bear recordings is “information”, and it is generally stronger than incoming psychic data. So, using it *during* a session would not be wise. You want to avoid as much sensory input as practical: cover shiny reflective objects, turn off the radio/TV/computer, etc.
Hobbetian
Yes.
Marcus
Hi. I am here, sorry I am late.
I will catch up.
Rainsong
Also, for the record, my bailiwick is more the remote influence than remote viewing. I’m interested in our topic at hand, obviously, but its practice is not my forte.
Hi, Marcus.
Wayfarer
(Hence why I’m here at all, actually)
Rainsong
The difference in focus will have an influence in what we see as useful, yea?
Wayfarer’s the resident expert in RV 😀
Hobbetian
Glad you’re both here 😀
Rainsong
Thank you.
Wayfarer
I wouldn’t say *expert*.
Hobbetian
In terms of the stages, stage 1 is kind of immediate in that you write the ideograph and just get a quick impression, to prevent too much analytical overlay.
Are there basic rules of thumb about how much time to spend on stage 2?
Rainsong
Sort of?
The data tends to show up in little bits, because only a small amount comes through before analysis by the “conscious” part of the brain gets in the way, so you’ll get perhaps three little data points at a time, then a pause, and three little points, and a pause, and so on…
That process might be thirty seconds or it might be more than an hour.
I’d hazard that Stage 2 is usually between five and twenty minutes, though, as a ballpark figure.
What do you figure, Wayfarer?
Wayfarer
I go too fast usually. It would depend on how many AOL breaks one is taking.
And how long those last.
Between 5 – 20 minutes is a good ballpark figure.
Sometimes more.
Sometimes less if you’re being sloppy.
Rainsong
Quite a few years back, Ed Dames had a published game-thing with a pack of picture targets, and an egg timer. The idea was to do entire sessions in three minutes. “Sloppy” doesn’t even *begin* to cover it, but – at the same time – it can be a way to get started, if you are one of the people who get “Stuck” because you’re afraid of being wrong….
Just write down everything that comes to mind when you focus on the target, until the egg timer goes off, and then put down your pen. At least half of what you wrote will be AOL, but it gets you recording stuff
Wayfarer
Would also be a good way to ensure command of structure, going fast like that while still focusing on structure.
Rainsong
Indeed, adding structure to that, and still going fast would be great practice.
Hobbetian
Yes.
My problem is not just on worrying about being wrong but more like worried about being ‘right.’
So that I take some of the data and focus on that.
Rainsong
Congratulations. You’re human.
Marcus
xD
Hobbetian
And start ignoring the elements that would be seemingly ‘contradictory.’
haha
My last session with Wayfarer really brought it to light
Rainsong
Being able to look at what you’re doing – which requires *doing* – is an important part of the learning process.
So, good work, there.
Any other comments or questions before we get to Stage 3?
Hobbetian
Not at the moment
Marcus
Nope :]
Rainsong
Alrighty then.
As you can imagine, Stage 3 typically follows Stage 2. Perhaps you can detect a pattern here.
Marcus
:3
Rainsong
You’ll have done your ideogram bit, and your stage 2 bits….
Wayfarer
We’re now adding new components. Whereas Stage 2 was sensory data, stage 3 is more conceptual information: dimension, motion, and mobility. Stage 3 usually concludes with the “widening of the aperture,” where the viewer gains an appreciation for a much fuller idea of the site.
Rainsong
This is also the point at which the monitor might give rather strange-sounding instructions. “Fifty feet to the west, something should be perceptible.”
You’ll notice that it isn’t phrased as “Fifty feet to the west, you should be able to perceive something” or “Look fifty feet to the west.”
Marcus
I thought the monitor didn’t know what the target is to make sure telepathy didn’t interfere?
Rainsong
That’s generally true, yes. And that’s a good observation. 😀
Marcus
Okay, so if they say that, there may be nothing there?
Rainsong
That may well be true. And even if the monitor expects there to be something there (possibly because of a “hint” in his/her record of the tasking…sometimes there is some frontloading), that doesn’t mean the viewer will perceive it.
To give a bizarre example from my own experience…
If you’d looked at the data in the session to that point, you’d probably have the impression of a farm kitchen. Lots of AOL breaks, too, with gingham curtains, and snippets of voices and words….
The one thing I wasn’t getting was any impression of people… in spite of the voices and movement and such. About the only time I pick up on people being there is if the target is a movie or suchlike.
Some people tend to get lots of details from the surroundings/buildings/solid-inorganic stuff, and less about the organic/critter stuff.
So, even if there is something perceptible, it might not be perceived.
All that rambled, the monitor might also be working on what amounts to a hunch based on prior data you’ve recorded.
Also, if you’ve gotten yourself confused, the monitor might use such a phrase to shift your perspective, to get you “feeling/sensing” at the target from a different angle.
Wayfarer
The monitor may also know the target, but not what is at the target.
Rainsong
Good point.
Wayfarer
Remember that often RV is used in military applications as a quick “we need to know now and the satellites can’t tell us” thing to verify either human or signal intelligence prior to operations launching. In such a case the monitor may very well know that you’re looking at a cave complex or somesuch, but won’t know what is there (hence why the viewer is being called up).
Hobbetian
Interesting. Wonder if they are still doing it actively today.
Rainsong
They’d also have more than one viewer target the same “basic thing”, knowing that each of them tends to clue into different aspects of the target.
Hobbetian
There are certain things I was always ‘good at’, and I took those to be attributes of certain kinds of analytical processes. Now I really don’t think of them like that, I think of them more along the lines of a form of being psychic that bleeds into conscious perception that we just don’t recognize as such.
Wayfarer
Right. With our team here, I’d probably be used as the spatial/mapping guy, Rainsong might be the specific object person, Marcus for verifying my thing, and Hobbetian for verifying Rainsong’s. But we’d all be issued the same target coordinate with the same task.
Hobbetian
I’m sure it would make the accuracy that much stronger, but it would all have to be processed in stage 3.
Rainsong
Hobbetian: If you mean the Americans specifically, umm, the proverbial grapevine has it that they are ramping it up again. That does not necessarily mean that it was as completely shut down as they’d have you believe. Wink wink nudge nudge, if you take my meaning.
Wayfarer
You don’t process anything in Stage 3.
Hobbetian
I do, yes 😀
Wayfarer
Data analysis and interpretation is strictly a Stage 5 thing, sometimes Stage 4.
Hobbetian
Okay
So what is stage 3, or the components that make it up as a distinct process?
Rainsong
I think the simplest way to describe the difference from stage 2 is that stage 3 data gets into more abstract concepts than the sensory data of stage 2.
As you’ll recall, Wayfarer described them as being “more conceptual”… dimensions, movement
Wayfarer
Dimensions, Movement, and Mobility.
Hobbetian
Could you give a couple of examples?
Wayfarer
The first element of Stage 3 is the aesthetic impact. This comes usually after four or more dimensional descriptors in Stage 2. It usually takes the form of some kind of emotional information. “I don’t like it here.” When AI first arises it needs to be identified and a break declared.
Following the return form that break, you begin to get aspects of dimensionality. These include horizontal, vertical, diagonal, mass, volume, space, and so on.
Dimensions give an idea of size, scale, and scope. This can be very tricky because they are often relativistic. Something might seem “huge” next to something “tiny” but that can be a grain silo next to a person, or a salt shaker next to a raisin.
Motion and mobility are the third component. This is more or less what’s on the label. How the site moves, and whether the site is mobile or not.
The next two are trackers and sketches. Trackers are very similar in process to geomantic dot-poking. You use the pen to draw, very slowly, dots which comprise an image. I’ll be honest, I’ve never really gotten a good feel for trackers and I don’t believe they are used in most modern RV systems anymore.
Sketches are, again, what it says on the label – you sketch something. Sketches are slower and more deliberate than ideograms, and are representative, rather than purely conceptual.
Sometimes, during a sketch, you do get a spontaneous ideogram. This should be recognized by being very fast, like an ideogram, rather than slow and deliberate, like a sketch.
Hobbetian
Is there an online site or book that had a collection of RV sessions, that kind of helps to illustrate the different stages?
Okay
Rainsong
(If you thought psionicists are unimaginative when naming things, you’re possibly discovering that we’re downright poetic compared to the military…)
Wayfarer
When you get spontaneous ideograms, they should be immediately given an A and B component, as in Stage 1.
Rainsong
Mc Moneagle’s Remote Viewing Secrets, and http://www.mceagle.com/remote-viewing/examples/
Hobbetian
Thanks
Never heard of trackers, seems interesting but also a bit difficult, but I see why it might be the way to represent something without imposing too much analytical resumptions.
Rainsong
*nods* Guessing is all well and good in “Guess the Fruit” games, but you don’t want guesses interfering with RV.
It’s also why frontloading – knowing something about the target ahead of time – is to be avoided
Wayfarer
Trackers like I said might not even be in modern protocol. Rainsong?
Rainsong
They might be, but not in any version of protocols my instructors have taught me.
Wayfarer
Okay. Basically trackers are manual dot matrix printing and I suspect it’s gone rather out of style, it always struck me as a kind of hang-up that one of the early theorists really liked but which in practice didn’t yield much.
Rainsong
I wouldn’t completely dismiss the idea, because, um, let’s just say the Americans aren’t the only ones using such protocols these days, and sometimes folks modify said protocols…
It might have also been connected to the specific kind of drawing practice the soldiers in question were required to study.
Hobbetian
What art form/method might that be?
Rainsong
The specific book is “Drawing on the Right Side of the Brain” https://www.amazon.ca/Drawing-Right-Side-Brain-Definitive/dp/1585429201
Hobbetian
So funny, I’ve come across that book before in a completely unrelated way… It was only now that I’m studying remote viewing and seeing how the right side is critical that its value really becomes clear.
Wayfarer
Makes sense.
Rainsong
(And sorry… my brain – right and left sides both – seems to be going a bit slower than usual tonight)
Hobbetian
I see that the drawing has a workbook as well.
Will check out and begin practicing.
Wayfarer
I will not be able to grade or assess or make suggestions regarding trackers, I basically sketch and use verbals.
Hobbetian
Seems like it might make the process more complicated
Rainsong
It might. I might give it a try sometime, just because.
Wayfarer
It depends on what comes naturally to you, the viewer. Remember also that making the process complicated is part of the goal of the protocol.
Hobbetian
Yes, though for me, the protocol simplifies things, since it helps to minimize the noise.
Have you found a particular form of meditation helpful as a regular practice?
Rainsong
Counting breaths… nice, comfy, easy breaths. Letting any random thoughts drift by, but not paying attention to them.
Wayfarer
Yes, I mean I’d be a real bad Buddhist if I didn’t find meditation useful.
Like just a real silly guy.
Rainsong
ProTip: Avoid RV sessions in deep trance, if you’re working without a monitor.
It might make for a nice nap, but you won’t get any recording done. 😉
Hobbetian
Right
I’m still very new to RV, but in the esp stuff I’ve done online,
I feel I do it best when I enter into an altered state of awareness, not a deep trance but definitely distinct.
Rainsong
*nods* And that’s to be expected. But if you wander too deep (without going as deep as the “sleepwalking” stage), you won’t get much done.
Any other questions or comments at this point?
Wayfarer
Looks like a wrap. 😀
Hobbetian
Not at the moment, though I’m sure as practice more I will.
Thanks for the lecture guys.
Rainsong
You’re welcome.
Thanks for participating.
Hobbetian
Glad to.
I’ve learned a lot in a short time.
Rainsong
Good stuff
Hobbetian
…and I definitely would not have learned as well if I’d relied just on books
Rainsong
There *is* something different about it, even though it’s text-based. Of course, the practice sessions are especially important, so you can discover any “problems” before they become bad habits.
Hobbetian
Oh, just a quick question. Is there a particularly good site that lets to practice RV, so I can start trying to do it daily? Is the Ed Dames game available somewhere for purchase?
Rainsong
http://www.remoteviewed.com/target/ I like this one.
I haven’t seen Dames’ game for sale within the last decade, so I’m thinking it might be out of print.
The concept is good, though, so try an egg timer with other picture targets, such as Target Monkey (link above.)
Hobbetian
Thanks
Looking forward to the next class
Have a great weekend.
Rainsong
http://www.remote-viewing.com/arvcourse/targetpracticepage.html
Here’s another set of practice targets.
Thanks. Have a great weekend, too.
Next class is probably in a week. Wayfarer is still running practices, too, I believe
Hobbetian
Yes, I’ll definitely be attending both.