Remote Viewers Predict Catastrophic Meteor Impact Before 2013

reply to post by Unity_99

I cannot even begin to believe your posts. You are lying outright. And with no proof of anything but expect everyone to spend years of their lives proving every last thing that is there. Why?

Her eis what you posted:

There are thousands upon thousands of research findings that give complete evidence that this is real.

I asked for some verification of this claim. I only asked for a few. You say there are thousands upon thousands. Why are you balking? What is the big deal?

My opinion is that you were untruthful about those thousands upon thousands of research findings. I think you made this up. I think you make up most of what you post.

This is your chance to demonstrate me wrong by posting a few of the thousands upon thousands of research articles that are out there as you claim.

Either admit that you made it up or post of the journal articles. That is what universities do. They publish. So please tell us all where they were published.

Further notes on the video, "Science and the Taboo of psi".

Now we just had an academic step forward from McGill University, Montreal, sharing with the world some of the studies that have taken place. There was a big thread about this.

Over the years, the kinds of studies have improved with equipment, and also, not just telepathy. So the stats shared here are just relating to a limited range of studies.
With 7% above the neutral to 40% range. Also with the coincidence ruled out at about 29 quintillion to 1, and frequently repeated, this more than meets the requirement for evidence and proof in any other field of science.

"Science and the taboo of psi" with Dean Radin :

---12 20 on for a bit explains very well, the limitations in the model of science we are using, which creates the taboo. The box they've put us in to hault progression,not to mention this box was put over the all the religons to to trap consciousness.

He goes on to say, these two ways of looking at the world (western lower material way versus the eastern energetic subjective) create theoretical boundries and you notice that I stuck psi into the Eastern Sciences, becuase it is compatible at that level. Whereas in the Western sciences, there is no room for it, ad that is what sustains the taboo, trained as a western scientist you look at these phenomena and you cannot imagine any conceivable way that it can fit within the world view that you wre trained to understand.

---He goes on to discuss a radio and using western investigation we hear Led Zeppelin and take it apart, looking for Led Zeppelin wihtin and can't find him. In the end, studing circuitry within in better ways we have developed the neurosciences.

Western thought is that the circuitry is generating the music.

From the East, someone would say, this is not correct, for the object is not creating the music, at all, its a reciever.

The West assumes the Brain Generates The Mind, The East Maintains It is the Equipment Which Receives The Mind.


---At 15 50 minutes into the video it disusses the frequency rates of people reporting mundane psi, gut feelings, feelings of being stared at, most people have this, all the way up to the Saints and their revelations.

Now oddly enough scientists often accept the saints/religions, due to their shaping of civilization.


But at the other end, the common every day, is highly controversial.

A paradox.

---At 17 35 he discusses the types of psi. Energy, energy out, slips in time.

Ability to perform varies even at level of expertise.

---At 18 47 he shows the data on aspirin preventing a second heart attack, its small but the stats are still there. Less than 1 %. He says, Small effects are real.

---Silicone Breast Implants were removed from the market. The effect size was less than 0.00%.

Really tiny, but real enough to be taken off the market.


By comparison, telepathy has an effect size which is 5 X greater.

And somehow that is not considered real.

---21 43: on, Ganzfeld studies have been done.

---24 20, these are places that have done this kind of experiment from about the 1920's until today:

-Harvard University
-Duke University
-City College, City Univeristy of New York
-University of California, Los Angeles
-McGill University, Montreal
-University of Leningrad
-Cambridge University
-University of Amsterdam
-University of Gotenberg, Sweden
-Cornell University
-University of Edinburgh, Scotland,
-Stanford University

(The comulative resulsts of somewhat over 3,000 such sessions from about 25 labs around the world.
88 experiments the odds against chance are about 29 quintillion to 1.)

Once again more notes, and the video gets very interesting but I'm not going to explain all of the experiments. Just want to note, these are open not classified, simpler ones that still would have been costly overall, until the fancy brain scans are used.

The overall general population is not trained in any way, in the ganzfeld tests, so I see this as everyone is psi, with various performance levels fluxuating, and that 7% left hemisphere dominant crowd could move their stats up to much higher levels, possibly 50% above normal, if not become CHRISTED even, not to mention the other groups who are more open to the field to begin with.

We're all psi, very psi, and if we trained these atrophied abilities within ourselves, we would not be under their control systems any longer.


"Science and the taboo of psi" with Dean Radin

One really interesting video, very informative.

The last of the notes, because there are others equally interesting, so you really have to do some research yourself:


--THis topic has been discussed in grey query detail in technical literature and also in psychological bulletin in a couple of articles.


---What happens when people reveiw this data?

1985, Honorton (yes) (Honorton was one of the principal researchers did a Meta-anaylsis and they concluded that the results looked like there really was telepathy going on.

In 1985,Hyman (no). Ray Hyman who we've already met, looked at the same data, and he said no.

--Ten psychologists & staisticians where then asked to comment on both what Hyman and Honorton had written. None agreed with Hyma, including 4 people who had no previously known opinion about the topic.

---In 1994, Daryl Bem and Chuck Honorton published in the Psychological Bulletin and they concluded (yes), something was going on.

---In 1999, Milton and Wiseman published another Meta-analysis on new data which was collected up to that point. What they reported was (no), but it turned out their analysis was incorrect.

If they use the same analysis, a very simple analysis based on hits and myths, as everyone else had done, actually, they did find a significant effect.

---2001, Storm & Ertel did another update (yes).


So wehn you go through the Meta-analysis, the only person who wasn't convinced was Ray Hyman.

---What happens when skeptical researchers try the same experiment?

2005, this very interesting article was published in the Humanistic Psychologist by two skeptical psychologists who did 8 Ganzfeld studies and after that had an overall significant hit rate of 32%, which turns out to be exactly the same overall hit rate that you find in the Meta-analysis.

They then said, "this was precariously close to demonstrating humans do have psychic powers."

So they ran one more experiment, using an Ad Hoc Mdel of how they think psychic stuff would work, which no one had previously tested and they got a significant negative result in that one study, so they concluded that due to this last data set, we do not not believe that humans possess telepathic powers.

Further, the approximately 32% correct figure in an enormous number of psi studies remains perplexing. Perhaps this 7% phenomenon is comparable to Meehl's "crud factor."

So I wrote a letter to the editor saying, "Well, I'm not sure that "crud factor" is atually a good explanation. Well, what it does do again is show, a very clear indicator of a kind of taboo we're dealing with because if you come into this as a skeptic. You run 8 studies and getting allover significant result which is the same as everyone else had been reporting and then you're compelled to say that this is precariously close to demonstrating something I don't believe, well why do people do that?

I would have stopped after 8 studies and said, "Well, looks pretty good to me." But some people are not willing to do that.

---Then they go on in the studies involving equipment and brain scans.

Roughly 29 57 the other studies are gone into.

I also think this is an interesting place to work:

www.princeton.edu...

reply to post by Unity_99


Lots of claims and nothing shows any publications from any universities.

Where are the journal articles?

Where are any of the "thousands up thousands" you claimed?

reply to post by Unity_99


Again, where are the journal articles you have claimed exist by the "thousands upon thousands"?

reply to post by stereologist


I don't have to be the professor of a university and have access to that, and report it. I can actually just take notes on what the academia, giving a university lecture, has shared.

And to you, who claim no studies done. Which was a mind boggling statement, and your whole stance of trying to overhwelm threads with posts and demand information that is impossible unless you are academia yourself, which would negate the whole forum, as a place to share information, and good information is that which comes from good sources.

So you can remain in the dark all you wish, but you don't have the right to walk over people's threads over and over with heavy boots but no substance.

I found this also a little interesting, decided to try out that google scholar search engine. Nice opening of an article.

www.ips.gu.se...

A REVIEW OF THE GANZFELD WORK AT GOTHENBURG UNIVERSITY
BY ADRIAN PARKER1
ABSTRACT
The results of five standard ganzfeld studies and one multiple target ganzfeld (the serial
ganzfeld) study are reported. The standard ganzfeld studies form a highly significant and
consistent data base with an overall hit-rate of 36% (40% in the case of auditory monitored
studies) and a mean effect size of .25 (.34 in the case of the monitored studies). This
database has been used to study psychological correlates of psi in terms of psychometric
tests. The most successful of these tests are the Australian Sheep Goat Scale, the Magical
Ideation Scale, and ”Feeling” scores on the Myers-Briggs Inventory.

reply to post by Unity_99


The link is to PEAR. It has been shut down for 5 years. You might not find that easy to discern from the page, but it shut down in 2007.

Seems that not much has happened since their experiments yielded little and were not replicated in a German study.

reply to post by stereologist


Still articles on it And it must have been a wonderful place to work.

But when I wrote mind boggling above, I didn't mean that in a good way. You'll have to trust me on that.

You wrote outright that no studies were done in universities and that all of that was a lie. But there have been, and its been demonstrated. Yet you still carry on, not even opening your mind more.

reply to post by Unity_99

I don't have to be the professor of a university and have access to that, and report it. I can actually just take notes on what the academia, giving a university lecture, has shared.

That means that the work is incomplete and not worth publishing.

And to you, who claim no studies done. Which was a mind boggling statement, and your whole stance of trying to overhwelm threads with posts and demand information that is impossible unless you are academia yourself, which would negate the whole forum, as a place to share information, and good information is that which comes from good sources.

You made the claim and yet you continue to balk instead of giving us the references to the articles.

So you can remain in the dark all you wish, but you don't have the right to walk over people's threads over and over with heavy boots but no substance.

You made a claim of thousands up on thousands and I asked for a few articles and you can't produce anything from this thousands of thousands. I am not surprised.

Here is what you posted.

There are thousands upon thousands of research findings that give complete evidence that this is real.

Can you tell us where in this article, the first you link to, that there is evidence that this is real?

reply to post by Unity_99

You wrote outright that no studies were done in universities and that all of that was a lie.

False. That is the way you are trying to hide your own failure to show where:

There are thousands upon thousands of research findings that give complete evidence that this is real.

You have provided nothing to substantiate that claim.

But there have been, and its been demonstrated. Yet you still carry on, not even opening your mind more.

I am well aware of the failures to substantiate psi claims.

You claimed that there were thousands upon thousands. I am calling your bluff.

www.questia.com...

This is an interesting paper, but it doesnt really mention the problem inherent in not studying the more gifted ones.

Ie. here they are saying, its less likely there is fraud if you just do random large bodies of studies on subjects, which would eliminate doing more intensive studies paring couples that are more gifted. They're so worried about fraud, but the words, GIFTED, means PSI IS VERY REAL, so they should be afraid, since there seems be a huge vested interest by our controllers, and even the religious leaders in keeping people out of this loop.

I mean oh dear, just think of it, we would have the same advantages they've been using over us. But probably better. Ie. a little light goes a long long ways at shining away a big chunk of darkness!

I had a dream. I see a wall of water going upriver, the Mississippi. I remember i could not get to my car in time and got swept down river and ended up in a cornfield. I remember i needed to get to the other side for some reason and later remembered that i was on the opposite side of the river and i needed to get to family. I remember the corn field was green and the corn was tall. The river had somehow widened immensely and i could not swim across. All this happened when traffic stopped me and i wanted to get around, so i took back roads to get around traffic. I stopped just before the bridge. Still stuck. I went to the park next to the river and wandered away from my car to let the traffic die down. I walked to the boat landing and walked all the way out to look at the river. Up river i saw this huge wave comming towards me. I tried to run, but it was to late and i got swept in the current. I woke up in a corn field, muddy and wet. I woke up from the dream in a sweat and i desperately needed water.
My sis had a wake dream. She said that the sky was full of grey snowflakes falling down from the sky. I asked when and she said in August. and she fears that park everyone goes to visit. I cain't spell it, yo sem i tee. wierd dreams aye. I guess if a meteor impacted or SHOCKWAVE of such occurred , it might push water up the mississippi and put dust ash in the sky. But my sis disagrees with me on that. She fears yo sem i tee. interesting conversation we had when i brang up my dream i had to her.

psycnet.apa.org...
A lot of information costs money.

www.boundaryinstitute.org...

Now this coincides with

www.abovetopsecret.com...
Big Name Neuroscientist Announces Telepathy as Proven Fact!

Another University study, in fact, Dr. Michael Persinger of Ontario, so was wrong him being from McGill, this is another not mentioned on the list. I'm sure its very common.

A growing body of evidence suggests that psi performance in perceptual tasks is related to
fluctuations in the planetary geomagnetic field (Adams, 1986, 1987; Arango & Persinger, 1988;
Berger & Persinger, 1991; Haraldsson & Gissurarson, 1987; Lewicki, Schaut & Persinger, 1987;
Makarec & Persinger, 1987; Persinger & Schaut, 1988; Persinger, 1985, 1987; Persinger &
Krippner, 1989; Schaut & Persinger, 1985; Spottiswoode, 1990; Wilkinson & Gauld, 1993). The
basic claim is that psi perception (i.e., telepathy, remote viewing, clairvoyance) as reported both in
controlled laboratory studies and spontaneously in real life is better when geomagnetic field
fluctuations are low, or quiescent, and worse when geomagnetic fluctuations are high, or stormy.
Other geomagnetic relationships are claimed for psychokinetic effects (e.g., Braud & Dennis,
1989), but in this paper we only consider psi perception.
The literature is surprisingly consistent in suggesting the existence of a geomagnetic-psi
relationship, but to date no studies have explored how the geomagnetic effect might interact with
other factors thought to be related to psi performance, such as personality, creativity, or special
talents. As a start in this direction, we examined the effect of geomagnetic field fluctuations on the
outcomes of two ganzfeld telepathy studies using different subject populations...

Apparently it does.

www.unibem.br...

Again results between 33-35% no special amount for the creative group, but then they didn't choose the artists or others chosen by the other studies, but allowed self-evaluation and I gather nearly everyone considers themselves creative, which is good, everyone is in their own way, and so they brought this up that that may have skewed those results.


These studies are being conducted in many universities.

Psi has been proven.

So the remote viewing which would involve far greater expense and military investment, would be probably quite high.

Joe Mcmoneagle relayed that they had to study Vedas and TM, and Monroe Institute courses, and he had his own special ones made for him.

The only thing that would have retired remote viewers is much more advanced black op technology and mind/machine interactions, and yet they still have programs for milabs and abductees that involve psi and espionage. So how far they have been retired, considering psy ops are used, is debatable.

reply to post by Unity_99


That's a paper about doing the work right, not about positive results.

Such papers are found in other areas of research.

reply to post by Unity_99

Psi has been proven.

Where are the journal articles you claim that show psi is real?

Where was the Dr. Michael Persinger work published? There has been time for that to happen since the interview you linked to (indirectly) was from 2009.

You provided a link to a paper that states that there were no statistically significant results.

RV was dropped because it was deemed unreliable. You have not provided even a hint that psi is real yet you claimed.

There are thousands upon thousands of research findings that give complete evidence that this is real.

Looks like you were not being truthful when you posted that claim.

reply to post by rebellender


Thank you for this thread and the information. I have seen something about remote viewers before but not in this much detail. Also the documentary the Killshot was very informative. To me it sheds some light on events that are happening.

Originally posted by redrose123
reply to post by rebellender

 

Thank you for this thread and the information. I have seen something about remote viewers before but not in this much detail. Also the documentary the Killshot was very informative. To me it sheds some light on events that are happening.

remember that these are not predictions so unless the first in a chain of events happens likely nothing will happen. Its just info right now.

Myself I have to wonder what the heck is going on in Wyoming legislation right now.

RV is not predictive. It is not useful.

remember that these are not predictions so unless the first in a chain of events happens likely nothing will happen.

This is precisely what is not information. It is worthless words unless by some unbelievable chance it happens and then people will claim victory.

This can be restated as,

Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain unless by some weird chance he is correct. At that point please pretend not to hear anything else other than this claim and pretend that the man behind the current is always correct.

There were over 3000 studies of one type of test at that, the ganzfeld kind, and these are just university studies. I provided links in a scholarly field, from university and their journals where you could pay for your reveiws to deal with one poster who said there were none. The disagreement is over. There is only proof on one side of it, that the studies were done.

So hopefully everyone can now learn to ignore certain posts that are not provided meaningfully discussion and enjoy the thread. Its very interesting.