delete

delete

Hi @RViewer88, welcome to the forum.

Mostly, I'm the wrong person to reply here, as I'm probably less familiar with the data than you yourself are. Of course I've looked at this stuff in the past, but often in terms of short video presentations rather than detailed analysis.

What does interest me is this:

I joined PsienceQuest because I'm interested in remote viewing, as you can probably guess from my username. I'm thinking about trying to learn how to do it, but first want to see if I should have any real confidence that there's a "there there."

It's always good to have anyone here who is willing to engage in any sort of practical activities in these areas. It reminds me a little bit of myself when I used to read about out-of-body-experiences. This is quite a number of years ago by now. There was no internet in those days, all I had was whatever could be found in books, usually borrowed from the library. The problem for me was, could I believe or trust what I was reading?

Well, my own answer on that topic, OOBEs was to attempt to learn how to do so myself. I really didn't expect anything, I was pretty sure that what I was reading was some sort of fiction or fantasy. But I did need to believe it was possible, or I could not even begin. I sometimes liken a lot of things in life to "wanting to learn to swim before getting in the water". There is only so far one can get in preparations. At a certain point it has to be put into practice. Only then does one begin to learn.

Well, those are my general musings, not directly related to your question. (By the way, yes out-of-body-experiences do happen, I found that out from my own first-hand attempts.)

Hi @RViewer88 - It really pleases me when people take their time to really understand the data rather than echoing other peoples conclusions. I hope you will find the answers you are looking for.

Hello, RViewer88. Thanks for the kind words. I think the only real implication my work has is that remote viewing isn't good enough for gathering intelligence that's usable in military operations. And that's about it.

As for the statistics, that's a completely different (and quite boring) argument. Especially in this case where the studies themselves are unavailable, have not been peer-reviewed and the statistical methods are not fully explained. You rightly point out that the military ops RV sessions from Fort Meade are absent from the statistical results, so I generally don't give these SRI experiments much thought.

But if you're to take the figures at face value, then it occurs to me that one potential factor is that subjects in lab experiments usually get feedback much sooner than viewers undertaking operational trials, who would not know about their target details (notwithstanding info given to them through the questioning during sessions) for months or even years. This may have an impact on psi-functioning, especially considering that the most successful recent psi paradigm of Precognition while measuring skin conductance concerns looking into the future of just a few seconds. I suspect that time is a major player in psi, but this is just a suspicion and I have scant details to back this up.

Hello, RViewer88. Thanks for the kind words. I think the only real implication my work has is that remote viewing isn't good enough for gathering intelligence that's usable in military operations. And that's about it.

As for the statistics, that's a completely different (and quite boring) argument. Especially in this case where the studies themselves are unavailable, have not been peer-reviewed and the statistical methods are not fully explained. You rightly point out that the military ops RV sessions from Fort Meade are absent from the statistical results, so I generally don't give these SRI experiments much thought.

But if you're to take the figures at face value, then it occurs to me that one potential factor is that subjects in lab experiments usually get feedback much sooner than viewers undertaking operational trials, who would not know about their target details (notwithstanding info given to them through the questioning during sessions) for months or even years. This may have an impact on psi-functioning, especially considering that the most successful recent psi paradigm of Precognition while measuring skin conductance concerns looking into the future of just a few seconds. I suspect that time is a major player in psi, but this is just a suspicion and I have scant details to back this up

Since you appeared Ersby, just thought I'd say that having just found out about it, I really like your blog XD Your criticisms are interesting and well read and you've got a lot of nice articles on there. Thanks to RViewer to posting it too.