Instructor: Rainsong
Date: October 26, 2019 (Saturday)
Seminar: Topic: Remote Viewing – mostly Stage V and VI– Saturday, 26 October, 2019 at 6:30pm/1830hr New York Time — text format in the PSC #lecture room (Discord) — Instructor: Rainsong — Search LECTURE99
Rainsong: Good evening, ladies and gentlemen,
Rainsong: Welcome to another psionics seminar here at the social club
Rainsong: Our topic tonight is ‘remote viewing’
Rainsong: The planned part of it would be Stages V and VI, but that is subject to change based on who (if anyone) is here
Rainsong: Any questions, commentary, or the like?
Chirotractor: o/
Meridian: None from me
Rainsong: Hi, Chiro
Rainsong: Hi, Meridian
Meridian: Hi Rainsong
Rainsong: Last time we looked at Stage V was about a year and a half ago. Of course, there’s a large amount of data available on the ‘net
Rainsong: Would you prefer I start with a review of it, or with a Q&A?
Meridian: I’m not that familiar with stage V or what a stage is in this context – would love a review.
Rainsong: (I’m more or less aware of Chiro’s level of knowledge, but not of Meridian’s… and no point in discussing fine details, when there are broad strokes missing)
Rainsong: Sure thing. A review it is
Meridian: Thanks so much!
Rainsong: You’re welcome, of course. 🙂
Rainsong: Because you mentioned that you’re not sure what a ‘stage’ is, the review will be a bit broader than just Stage V, to start.
Rainsong: that way, we have a lower risk of missing something important, and at the very least, that should be useful for some folks reading the logs
Rainsong: To make sure we’re all on the same proverbial page, I’m going to start with a ‘friendly definition’
Rainsong: When I refer to ‘remote viewing’, as in the topic of tonight’s seminar, I’m referring to the formal protocol sets developed by the American military and intelligence services over the course of a few decades, tossing the project between agencies like a ‘hot potato’ because of the combination of controversy and usefulness of the procedure
Rainsong: It’s a form of espionage, using psychic abilities, within very specific parameters
Rainsong: So far so froody?
Meridian: All froody here 🙂
Rainsong: Excellent
Rainsong: Making life interesting, there is more than one set of protocols. Not too surprising, really, seeing as they were developing an operational procedure, and there was rather a lot of trial and error involved.
Rainsong: Since the existence of the projects was declassified, and various people started teaching it publicly, to civilians, there have been modifications made from time to time.
Rainsong: Sometimes, the modification is to change the cover of the manual Paul Smith assembled. And sometimes it wanders further afield
TehOldeSourcerer: Wi-Fi started working again
TehOldeSourcerer: Hello
Rainsong: Within the procedures for the standard remote viewing methods, whether written or verbal, you generally start with a very basic gestalt on initial contact with the ‘signal line’ / data stream / matrix / (insert name of choice for ‘whatever it is we’re pulling the information from here)
Rainsong: Hi, TehOldeSourcerer
Rainsong: Getting that very basic gestalt (often, but not always, in the form of an ideogram, and two descriptors, depending on the protocol set being used), is Stage I
Rainsong: Stage II opens out a bit, to give more details: sensory data, recorded as adjectives, such as colours, scents, temperatures, and such
Rainsong: Stage III adds dimensions such as height and velocity
Rainsong: Stage IV goes into intangible details, and some new tangible bits with further details, getting into the apparent uses of the previous elements (“feels churchlike”, “contains many people”, and such)
Rainsong: At Stage V, instead of gathering new data, you start putting together what’s already there, and getting a more coherent impression of the target to report
Rainsong: Stage VI often involves sculpting or otherwise physical representation of the target… but not always. This is where things diverge more often.
Rainsong: For example, if you’re going to be doing RV ‘in real time’, that’ll be a Stage VI operation
Rainsong: Questions? Commentary?
Jael: The overview has been helpful.
Meridian: What a great overview – I feel very much up to speed now.
Rainsong: Thanks. I’m glad it’s been helpful
Rainsong: For some purposes, it isn’t necessary to go much beyond stage III.
TehOldeSourcerer: That gives me a lot of insight into how to approach RV 🙂
Rainsong: This is handy, seeing has it took professionals, working on it full time, about a year to become sufficiently skilled at the Stage III level to progress to Stage IV
Rainsong: Excellent 🙂
Rainsong: There’s considerable detail about each of the early stages in the class logs from earlier RV classes
Rainsong: Another bit that’s important to know – and so we’ll review it here — is that the ‘logical’ part of the mind will keep trying to assemble the very scattered data from the first few stages into pictures or concepts that it can name.
Rainsong: That’s part of the reason for only using adjectives in Stage 2. If you allow nouns, the imagination will take that noun and run with it.
Rainsong: If you have a coherent description, or have an impression of a picture of something, early on in the procedure (such as Stage II), assume it is the imagination trying to piece together something coherent out of apparently random bits
Rainsong: This is known as ‘Analytical Overlay”, or AOL
Rainsong: It’s recorded off to the right side of the page, and you stop and take a short break and put the pen down, once you’ve recorded it
Rainsong: If you get to the end of Stage III and you don’t have any AOL recorded, it’s a garbage session, by the way
Rainsong: AOL is a product of how the human mind works. Don’t try to suppress it — that will backfire spectacularly. Just record it and move on
Rainsong: At Stage V, you’ll be taking a closer look at those AOL parts, as well as the regular data bits, because AOL almost always has some accurate data in it. It’s just generally surrounded by lots of inaccurate data
Rainsong: The thing is, though, with remote viewing, accuracy’s the analyst’s problem. Not the viewer’s.
Rainsong: Just follow the procedure, and don’t concern yourself with whether whatever’s coming through is correct.
Rainsong: Otherwise, you’ll ensure that it isn’t, because you’ll be sabotaging yourself.
Rainsong: Questions and/or commentary about AOL?
Meridian: So AOL is the brain prematurely jumping to conclusions about what the thing is in question?
Rainsong: Exactly so
Rainsong: The human mind likes to recognise patterns. And if there isn’t a pattern there, the mind will invent one.
Rainsong: Example: constellations, or seeing a trenchcoat hanging on the frame of a set of tubular bells and misdtaking it for the tall kettle-drum player (okay, so that one was a little specific…)
Meridian: Hahah
Meridian: I hear you.
Jael: 🙂
TehOldeSourcerer: Is the idea also that with practice the AOL results will generally slowly have more accurate data than not?
Rainsong: It is hoped, generally. However, it isn’t necessarily so.
Rainsong: Don’t worry about it. Just record it as AOL, eplore it further if you continue to Stage V or further in that session, or leave it entirely to the analyst otherwise
Rainsong: Sure, you might also be the analyst, but in that case, still leave that process until after you’re finished the viewing session
Meridian: If the session is a complete miss is the viewer’s initial step of ‘connecting to the data stream’ thrown into into doubt? If so how is this part usually troubleshooted? Or is it usually a hit and miss thing?
Rainsong: It happens sometimes that a miss involves not connecting at all to the right part of the data stream… or even connecting to the data stream at all. Other times, the miss comes from not recognising an AOL for what it is, and following it down the proverbial rabbit hole (a particular kind of AOL called ‘peacocking’, as the imaginary data unfolds and expands like the display plumage of a peacock)
Rainsong: Other times, a miss is the result of grabbing something else at or near the site of the target, other than what the target actually is
Rainsong: One of the countermeasures against RV, in fact, is to make sure something more emotionally interesting is going on or had been going on, near whatever you don’t want to have viewed.
Rainsong: For example, having a super-secret meeting in a brothel
Rainsong: Another source of that kind of miss is having a viewer who’s good at one kind of target assigned to a different kind, but with his/her ‘favoured kind of target’ nearby
TehOldeSourcerer: The idea is to note all the information rather than trying to get it all into one thing correct? I mean, from the steps it seems you’d have more than one interpretation of the whole rather than just one
Rainsong: One of my favourite examples is when Wayfarer ran a practice target that was a picture of a woman boating on the Rideau Canal. He sketched a usable map of the area, but missed the woman completely
Rainsong: That’s correct. A really good session that gets well into the various stages will often be detailed enough to point to one specific thing… but those often take days of subsequent ‘partial sessions’
Rainsong: A single run, 90-minute-or-less session is almost always going to be open to interpretation
Rainsong: And, like any intelligence-gathering method, it’s supposed to be used in conjunction with other intelligence, and not a stand-alone procedure
Meridian: That all makes sense.
Meridian: I know this isn’t so much a ‘how-to’ lecture, but I was wondering – how does the viewer link with the day stream?
Meridian: Data stream*
Rainsong: Exactly how is variable, but the basic version is to calm your mind, clear the mental desk by jotting down anything that’s bugging or distracting you (and yep, that is formally a part of the protocol before getting to Stage I). Then using the target ID as a prompt, put pen to paper and allow your arm to make the pen draw an ‘ideogram’… a squiggle on the page. It’ll be the anchor that holds the packet of data for you… kind of
Rainsong: The paket’s actually in your mind.
Rainsong: There;s nothing magical about the ink on the paper. It just serves as a focus and mental anchor
Rainsong: Through the session, you’ll poke at it with the pen to get back on track… and by ‘poke’, I mean literally jab at it with the nib of the pen
Rainsong: Any other questions or commentary?
Rainsong: I’m thinking it might be good to continue on this track next week
Jael: I’d be interested in continuing it next week.
Meridian: I do have on more question – how is the target ID assigned to the target ?
Meridian: Me too – great Lecture Raising.
Meridian: Rainsong*
Rainsong: Thanks. I’m glad you’re finding it interesting
Rainsong: The target ID is assigned by the ‘tasker’… the person who sets up the target
Rainsong: And it can have any of several configurations. I personally favour the split eight-digit numeric format: 2050-2949. Sometimes I put brackets around it and/or split it with a slash instead of a hyphen, because one of my instructors does it that way
Rainsong: Originally, the numbers were geographical coordinates (hence ‘coordinate remote viewing’ which is one of the standard protocol sets), but coordinates have a few obvious problems: frontloading the viewer with an idea of what the target is likely to be, and limited to locations that you can pin a geographical coordinate to. Not all targets are locations, and you won’t always know the location of a target in any case
Rainsong: So, the tasker picks a set of numbers (or alpha-numeric combination, if they prefer) and writes or types the combination at the top of the target sheet, whether that sheet is physical or made of pixels
Rainsong: Then, the tasker either attaches a picture or a set of descriptors (ex “Earth / Vancouver / airport / most recent arrival of Aeroflot passenger liner / describe the person in the first starboard row)
Rainsong: Only the Target ID / coordinates are given to the viewer, typically via a middleman such as a monitor, in team workings
Rainsong: The actual numbers can be consciously chosen, as I do, for example: I usually use the date when I set the target plus a sequential number to indicate which of several I might have set up that day. For example, if I set one up today, it would be 1910-2601
Rainsong: Some other people, such as the aforementioned instructor, just use a ten-sided gaming die or a dicebot
Rainsong: Short version: assigning a target ID is pretty easy
Rainsong: Any other questions or comments before we close up for the night?
Meridian: Oh wow it’s a whole process. Really appreciate the detail of your explanation
Rainsong: Thanks 🙂
Rainsong: You may have seen that I’ve posted some practice targets.
Rainsong: The set I’ve been posting a few at a time of don’t entirely follow my usually naming convention, as described a moment ago. I got a bit bored and started tossing in assorted numbers for the second half.
Rainsong: They are listed in the #rules-announcements room for easier finding, along with a link to the tasking data that you can compare your viewing data to
Meridian: Awesome – defintiely keen on trying this out.
Rainsong: Excellent. The logs for earlier RV classes are on the website http://psc-online.org/class-logs/ Scroll down to the second half of the Anomolous Cognition section
Rainsong: As always, thanks to ShadowRain for posting logs
Jael: Thanks for the class, Rainsong.
Rainsong: Thanks for participating 🙂
Meridian: Yes many thanks!
Rainsong: Thank you for participating 😀