Lucianarchy and remote viewing

[thaiboxerken]

So, Luci, do you think that you can divine what's in Randi's "remote viewing" locker? Read the Randi comments for the details.

When you beat that simple challenge, I'll apologize and admit that you have superpowers.

[Lucianarchy]

Quote:

Originally posted by thaiboxerken
So, Luci, do you think that you can divine what's in Randi's "remote viewing" locker? Read the Randi comments for the details.

When you beat that simple challenge, I'll apologize and admit that you have superpowers.

The psi effect works only through co-operation, that is why Randi has the "Out" in his challenge, a challenge is not co-operation. ladybrook

[c0rbin]

Quote:

The psi effect works only through co-operation, that is why Randi has the "Out" in his challenge, a challenge is not co-operation. ladybrook

The object in the locker has to co-operate?

The locker has to co-operate?

The air between you ans the object has to co-operate?

Etc, etc, etc.

Some super power...

[Chupacabras]

That should explain why they didn't catch the snipers back then, or why corpses and kidnaped people (the Lindberg's son case comes to mind) cannot be located by remote viewing.

Sheesh, nobody seems to cooperate ever!

[EdipisReks]

Quote:

Originally posted by Lucianarchy


The psi effect works only through co-operation, that is why Randi has the "Out" in his challenge, a challenge is not co-operation. ladybrook

[thaiboxerken]

Quote:

Originally posted by Lucianarchy


The psi effect works only through co-operation, that is why Randi has the "Out" in his challenge, a challenge is not co-operation. ladybrook

This is an silly statement. Randi is more than willing to work with remote-viewers. What more does Randi need to do in order to be "cooperative" in this challenge. Maybe if he sent you an e-mail telling you what's in the locker, you'd be able to remote-view it, is that what you mean?

Yet again, Luci has come up with a lame-ass excuse for not being able to show off his superpowers.

[SteveGrenard]

Why doesn't Randi just put one or several unusual objects on his desk at JREF and see if a RVer can see his desk and what's on them, keeping more in line with their claims. I am not familiar with their claim that they can remote view the inside of blacked out boxes such as lockers. Randi always seems to want to change the claimant's claim. The penchant for doing this seems to pervade a number of members here who also facetiously offer up feats they think psychics or remote viewers should be able to accomplish. I think it is extremely important to see what the claim is and then stick to it.

When Brig. General Dozer, was kidnapped by the Red Brigades in 1981, remote viewers identified the block, by description he was on, named the city (Padua-He was kidnapped from Verona) that he was in an apartment and in the apartment they had seen a blue tent set-up in the middle of the floor. Dozer was kept inside this tent in the apartment but an RVer could not see inside the darkened tent. Nevertheless, this info passed by US intelligence to Italian anti-terrorist police, and was later verified as veridical.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Er this is the account Claus also asked me to report immediately to the authorities. He said I was witholding vital information about this kidnapping and that I must report it. Needless to say I didn't report it but now, do so here:

On December 17, 1981, Red Brigade terrorists kidnapped Brigadier General James Dozier from his apartment in Verona, Italy. Dozier, the highest ranking U.S. NATO officer in Italy, was eventually rescued in Padua by an elite Italian anti-terrorist police unit, which also effected the arrests of five of his captors. The rescue team was comprised of elements from the Nucleo Operativo Centrale di Sicurezza (NOCS).

In January 1982, members of NOCS carried out a lightning raid on an apartment in Padua to free Gen. Dozier. Assaulting at just after 11:30 a.m. to take advantage of the bustle on the streets and the noise of a construction crew's bulldozer nearby, ten NOCS men arrived in front of the apartment building in a moving van and were dressed in civilian clothes (though they wore ballistic vests and balaclavas). One assault team member split off to seal a supermarket door near the apartment entrance so the innocent bystanders could not wander out, while the other nine men assaulted the apartment. One member of NOCS - a competitive weightlifter - took out the door quickly; another NOCS man efficiently took out a terrorist encountered in the hall with a karate blow to the forehead. As still another terrorist prepared to execute Gen. Dozier, a NOCS man felled him with a blow from the butt of his M12. The layout, as given by remote viewers in the U.S. was obviously crucial to the success of this operation.

In a recent interview with Jeff Rense, McMoneagle had this to say, "the only information that I was given was a photograph of the General, his name, and I was asked to describe the location in which he was being held. No one had any idea which country he was even being held in at the time." When asked if he was correct, he responded, "Yes, I was the only one who produced the actual name of the city that he was being held in."

[thaiboxerken]

Why doesn't Randi just put one or several unusual objects on his desk at JREF and see if a RVer can see his desk and what's on them, keeping more in line with their claims.

Why is having an object in a locker different?

I am not familiar with their claim that they can remote view the inside of blacked out boxes such as lockers. Randi always seems to want to change the claimant's claim.

So, remote-viewers can see without their eyes around the globe.. but put it in a locker and they can't? Is this what you are asserting? Their claim is that they can see anything, anywhere. Inside of a locker qualifies as anywhere.

I think it is extremely important to see what the claim is and then stick to it.

The locker is well within their claimed abilities.

When Brig. General Dozer, was kidnapped by the Red Brigades in 1981, remote viewers identified the block, by description he was on, named the city (Padua-He was kidnapped from Verona) that he was in an apartment and in the apartment they had seen a blue tent set-up in the middle of the floor. Dozer was kept inside this tent in the apartment but an RVer could not see inside the darkened tent. Nevertheless, this info passed by US intelligence to Italian anti-terrorist police, and was later verified as veridical.

So goes the story. But this fictional account is just that. Are you asserting that remote viewers can't see inside of a dark locker? Or they can't see in the dark? Or that they can't see inside of tents? What are you asserting here?


In a recent interview with Jeff Rense, McMoneagle had this to say, "the only information that I was given was a photograph of the General, his name, and I was asked to describe the location in which he was being held. No one had any idea which country he was even being held in at the time." When asked if he was correct, he responded, "Yes, I was the only one who produced the actual name of the city that he was being held in."

Yep, and I turn big and green when I get angry.

So, bring on a remote-viewer that you know and have that person apply for the JREF challenge. I'm sure Randi can cater a test more inline with what that particular remote-viewer claims. Right now, Randi's little challenge is just exactly what it says, he's challenging anyone to use paranormal ability to find out what's in his locker.

If you don't think remote-viewers can do it, just say so and quit making excuses for why they can't.

[thaiboxerken]

I'd like to also point out that self-proclaimed remote-viewer, Lucianarchy, has stated "uncooperative" as the reason he can't do the locker test. He didn't mention that lockers and dark places being a limit.

Why would mundane factors, like lockers and light, be a limit to remote-viewers anyway?

[Hexxenhammer]

Quote:

Why would mundane factors, like lockers and light, be a limit to remote-viewers anyway?

All superpowers have a weakness. Superman can't see through lead with his x-ray vision, Green Lantern's powers are countered by the color yellow, and remote viewers can see anywhere except a dark locker. Makes sense to me.

[SteveGrenard]

THAI: Why would mundane factors, like lockers and light, be a limit to remote-viewers anyway?


Reply: Your remarks ignore my statement. These mundane factors which you call them are not part of their claim. Are you saying you would ask a remote viewer to do something which they do not claim to do? That is what Randi is asking with this new little farce of his. This ishis game and he plays it so well he's got you and a lot of people fooled. He could set up a much simpler experiment that meets RV's relatively simple conditions and fits its claims.

Randi tried to do this with Natalia as well -- placing her reading material inside a black box. This was not her claim. And you thai,
are now doing it also ........... Randi loves black boxes and doing experiments in he dark. I wonder why that is.

If learn anything here, please learn that if you want to test some extrasensory form of perception you should do so in
response to the claim of the posessor and not make up your own
claims.

[Ratman_tf]

Of course you are assuming that the inside of the locker is not lit.

Perhaps a remote viewer could take a peek and tell if they need some light on the subject? I'm sure Randi could put a battery powered lamp in there. Perhaps a cooperative lamp for Lucianarchy?

[Lucianarchy]

Quote:

Originally posted by c0rbin


The object in the locker has to co-operate?

The locker has to co-operate?

The air between you ans the object has to co-operate?

Etc, etc, etc.

Some super power...

No, just the living systems which are consciously involved. You are more likely to get a positive result that way.

[thaiboxerken]

Reply: Your remarks ignore my statement. These mundane factors which you call them are not part of their claim. Are you saying you would ask a remote viewer to do something which they do not claim to do?

What, exactly, is their claim? Randi is making a broad challenge, it's not a specific challenge aimed at a specific remote-viewer. It's not uncommon for a remote-viewer to claim the ability to see into places.

He could set up a much simpler experiment that meets RV's relatively simple conditions and fits its claims.

Feel free to e-mail Randi and give some advice then.

Randi tried to do this with Natalia as well -- placing her reading material inside a black box. This was not her claim. And you thai,
are now doing it also ........... Randi loves black boxes and doing experiments in he dark. I wonder why that is.

LOL. She claimed she can read without her eyes. A box sufficiently would demonstrate her ability, if she had one.

If learn anything here, please learn that if you want to test some extrasensory form of perception you should do so in
response to the claim of the posessor and not make up your own
claims.

Or that some people will make any excuse as to why remote-viewers fail.

[SteveGrenard]

Luci: No, just the living systems which are consciously involved. You are more likely to get a positive result that way.

Luci, surely you know that during the cold war our remote viewers rv'd many soviet targets and they were not exactly on friendly terms with us let alone cooperative. If you are concerned about the experimenter effect, which would be present in Randi, then this could be a problem. I do know that all their best known targets have not been locked up in the pitch darkness because they purport to see their targets in the light. I cant think of any precedents for RVing in total darkness but I could be wrong.
Variations including map RVing and coordinate RVing could probably be in the dark but not target RVing such as Randi is
proposing.

I think this is another Randi effort to foist unclaimed abiliies on
claimants and he knows better than all of us that what he proposes is not their claim, its his perception of how to screw them over. Hence the experimenter effect.

[Ratman_tf]

Lucianarchy, can you do remote viewing? If so, what would it take for you to, say for example, describe the poster on my bedroom wall?

[NoZed Avenger]

If any remote viewer actually . . . oh, I don't know . . . ACCEPTED the challenge, they could request a lighted area. At the moment, you are throwing out hypothetical objections from hypothetical people with hypothetical powers with hypothetical limitations who might, one day, if the stars align, actually deign to get up off the couch and have world-changing powers tested.

But UNTIL THEN, since no one has actually accepted the challenge, I would say that neither they nor you -- speaking on their behalf hypothetically -- have much say.

If they can see things and if they need light, they can fill out the form and give that as a condition of the test.


The form can be downloaded; many Notaries will verify your document for free; stamps are cheap; the form can be filled out and mailed inside 10 minutes.

It would shut up the critics, it would shake the very foundations of what we know about the human body, it would earn a million dollars for the hypothetical person or their hypothetical charity of choice.

So if any of these gifted people actually need a lighted area for remote viewing, have them use their awsome powers to find a pen or pencil and fill out the bleeding form.

Good night.

[SteveGrenard]

I absolutely agree. If anyone accepts the challenge they should be able to stipulate the conditions by which they can exert their claim.

Randi's offer, however, is not hypothetical. My understanding is its on the table. He really should not be setting conditions without consulting an actual challenger. In other words he
should familiarize himself with all the flavors of remote viewing
and agree to stipulate to the conditions required before
publicizing any of his own... but what the hey, its his challenge
or thats's what everybody says.

[NoZed Avenger]

Quote:

Originally posted by SteveGrenard
I absolutely agree. If anyone accepts the challenge they should be able to stipulate the conditions by which they can exert their claim.

Randi's offer, however, is not hypothetical. My understanding is its on the table. He really should not be setting conditions without consulting an actual challenger. In other words he
should familiarize himself with all the flavors of remote viewing
and agree to stipulate to the conditions required before
publicizing any of his own... but what the hey, its his challenge
or thats's what everybody says.

(1) What "actual challenger?" As no one has come forward to say whether their hypothetical power may or may not hypothetically work this way, -there- -IS- -no- -challenger-.

You seem to be willfully confusing this remote viewing "challenge" with the standard JREF challenge which sets no conditions apart from what both parties agree to.

Quote:

Me: At the moment, you are throwing out hypothetical objections from hypothetical people with hypothetical powers with hypothetical limitations who might, one day, if the stars align, actually deign to get up off the couch and have world-changing powers tested.

Randi does not have any duty to scout the globe for people who won't fill out a form and accept his challenge to find singularly ill-named "challengers" who don't actually challenge.

(2) As above. If a "challenger" wants input in how anything is set up, then they can "accept" the "challenge."

Again, for those in the back row: If someone with these abilities has an actual problem with this test, they can come to an arrangement with Randi concerning test conditions by taking a very small amount of time and filling out the form. If they want a lighted room, great. If they only view vegetables, fine. If they need a color-wheel plugged in nearby and Nirvana playing in the background, just ask.

NA

[UnrepentantSinner]

Quote:

Originally posted by Lucianarchy


No, just the living systems which are consciously involved. You are more likely to get a positive result that way.

This must be why RVers have such difficulty finded dead bodies.

Steve,

If physical factors such as darkness can be so limiting as to negate the TRV ability, why was Psi Tech so positive that Elizabeth Smart's body was located in the crypt it was supposedly located in. I can't imagine it was would have had any light in there, or any more light than might seep under the door.

I also am continually bemused at how Psi powers that seem to be completely unrestrained by the laws of physics can suddenly be rendered useless by something as mundane as a burned out light bulb.

[CFLarsen]

Quote:

Originally posted by SteveGrenard
When Brig. General Dozer, was kidnapped by the Red Brigades in 1981, remote viewers identified the block, by description he was on, named the city (Padua-He was kidnapped from Verona) that he was in an apartment and in the apartment they had seen a blue tent set-up in the middle of the floor. Dozer was kept inside this tent in the apartment but an RVer could not see inside the darkened tent. Nevertheless, this info passed by US intelligence to Italian anti-terrorist police, and was later verified as veridical.

Please provide evidence of this.

Could not see inside a darkened tent? Why not??? Since when do RVers need light to see something??

Quote:

Originally posted by SteveGrenard
Er this is the account Claus also asked me to report immediately to the authorities. He said I was witholding vital information about this kidnapping and that I must report it. Needless to say I didn't report it but now, do so here:

What on earth are you blabbering about?

Quote:

Originally posted by SteveGrenard
In a recent interview with Jeff Rense, McMoneagle had this to say, "the only information that I was given was a photograph of the General, his name, and I was asked to describe the location in which he was being held. No one had any idea which country he was even being held in at the time." When asked if he was correct, he responded, "Yes, I was the only one who produced the actual name of the city that he was being held in."

Evidence? Sworn affidavits? Anything?

Quote:

Originally posted by SteveGrenard
Reply: Your remarks ignore my statement. These mundane factors which you call them are not part of their claim. Are you saying you would ask a remote viewer to do something which they do not claim to do? That is what Randi is asking with this new little farce of his. This ishis game and he plays it so well he's got you and a lot of people fooled. He could set up a much simpler experiment that meets RV's relatively simple conditions and fits its claims.

Where, specifically, did the RVers say that lockers and light were not part of their claim? Did they say it before or after?

Quote:

Originally posted by SteveGrenard
Randi tried to do this with Natalia as well -- placing her reading material inside a black box. This was not her claim.

Steve, Natalie cheated, OK? You are not saying that Natalie really had a paranormal ability, are you?

Quote:

Originally posted by SteveGrenard
And you thai, are now doing it also ........... Randi loves black boxes and doing experiments in he dark. I wonder why that is.

Come out in the open, Steve. State your case, don't make these hidden allegations. What are you trying to say here?

Quote:

Originally posted by SteveGrenard
If learn anything here, please learn that if you want to test some extrasensory form of perception you should do so in response to the claim of the posessor and not make up your own claims.

So, what were the claims?

Quote:

Originally posted by SteveGrenard
If you are concerned about the experimenter effect, which would be present in Randi, then this could be a problem.

The experimenter effect works both ways: Usually, an experimenter favoring the theory being tested can influence the results. Only solid protocols can eliminate (or work to eliminate) experimenter bias.

Quote:

Originally posted by SteveGrenard
Variations including map RVing and coordinate RVing could probably be in the dark but not target RVing such as Randi is proposing.

Why not?

Quote:

Originally posted by SteveGrenard
I think this is another Randi effort to foist unclaimed abiliies on claimants and he knows better than all of us that what he proposes is not their claim, its his perception of how to screw them over. Hence the experimenter effect.

Then propose something better to Randi, instead of whining about it here.

[Lucianarchy]

Quote:

Originally posted by SteveGrenard

Luci, surely you know that during the cold war our remote viewers rv'd many soviet targets and they were not exactly on friendly terms with us let alone cooperative.

They were not consciously aware that they were being 'viewed'. This is crucial and perhaps one reason why it currently cannot be given any 'official' recognition. There are security issues involved here that may still take generations to be fully resolved.

[Chupacabras]

Quote:

Originally posted by Lucianarchy


They were not consciously aware that they were being 'viewed'.

The Humor forum is elsewere in this site!

So it's the Abracadabra effect or, in retrospective, the Great Conspiration Theory. Now, how in the world could such a claim be tested? Will you argue that someone of all of the involved was not cooperating?

And SteveGrenard, why argue and whine for so long? Where are the RV bounty hunters? Anyway, If I was to claim that million bucks (bad vibes are no problem with me) I would start by stating very clearly my claim, such as:

"I claim that I can Remote View any object if and only if all of the following conditions are met:

* I am given the exact address, city, postal code, etc... one month in advance.
* The object of experiment is not wrapped, boxed or cointained in any form that could block the sight in presence.
* The object is in a first floor.
* The object is atop a table, and this table is in a livingroom or any other open area of the building. No private offices, cubicles, etc... are allowed.
* A list of just three items is provided one month in advance, with one of those three items being the target. This list must include the MSRP for that item in the location of the experiment.
* The object is in a non-aligned country.
* Etc...

I would be willing to design an experiment in cooperation with the tester (just as stated in the conditions for the JREF challenge, BTW) so I can look at any detail that I may have skipped in the above statement".

Now, Lucianarchy, SteveGrenard, can you tell us of any RV event in history in like a detailed form? If you don't want the million, then at least you could shut our mouths up.

[Lucianarchy]

Quote:

Originally posted by Chupacabras


The Humor forum is elsewere in this site!

So it's the Abracadabra effect or, in retrospective, the Great Conspiration Theory. Now, how in the world could such a claim be tested?

The SAIC experiments have done this. They used the scientific method. All participants were co-operative. Ray Hyman (CSICOP) was unable to identify any suitable candidate for error or flaw. He wanted other similar replications. The PEAR PRP replicate the SAIC expriments.

The 'experimenter' or 'sheep / goat' effect has been well demonstrated and documented in the scientific literature. I have not heard it called the 'abracadabra effect', but certainly, 'belief' and 'will' play an inherent role in the production of the effect.

[EdipisReks]

Quote:

Originally posted by Lucianarchy


The SAIC experiments have done this. They used the scientific method. All participants were co-operative. Ray Hyman (CSICOP) was unable to identify any suitable candidate for error or flaw. He wanted other similar replications. The PEAR PRP replicate the SAIC expriments.

The 'experimenter' or 'sheep / goat' effect has been well demonstrated and documented in the scientific literature. I have not heard it called the 'abracadabra effect', but certainly, 'belief' and 'will' play an inherent role in the production of the effect.

*yawn*

[Darat]

Quote:

Originally posted by SteveGrenard
...snip...

I think this is another Randi effort to foist unclaimed abiliies on
claimants and he knows better than all of us that what he proposes is not their claim, its his perception of how to screw them over. Hence the experimenter effect.

Here is what some "professional" remote viewers have to say about their abilities (bold by me).

Quote:

From PsiTech http://www.psitech.net/

PSI TECH, Inc. is home to the breakthrough skill of Technical Remote Viewing (TRV.) Originally developed for and utilized by The Department Of Defense for intelligence collection purposes, Technical Remote Viewing is the trained ability to acquire accurate direct knowledge of things and events — targets — distant in time or space, in the past, present, or future, while conscious awareness remains totally “blind” to details about the target itself. TRV is a highly structured and standardized data collection skill. Like any other skill, practice is required to become proficient.

So they can see past, present and future. Light has no bearing on the “viewing” of targets.

From the videos on the site this is what Dane Spotts , CEO of PSI Tech says in his video in the “Questions and Answers” section. I’ve quickly transcribed some relevant sections, hopefully fairly accurately but anyway just go and view the video yourself.

About where the “viewing” information comes from he says:

Quote:

“the matrix”

He describes the matrix as

Quote:

“…gigantic library of information that contains every idea every thought every event that has ever happened is currently happening or is destined to happen…”

And this is what the remote viewers do

Quote:

…queue/cue (?) a target how to consistently download accurate information about any person place thing or event anywhere in time or place…

In conclusion Randi’s idea to test remote viewing is totally in line of what this “professional” remote viewing organisation claims they can do. And not only what they claim they can do, what they claim anyone can do (and not only do but get better and better at “like going to the gym”).

[Mike D.]

Quote:

Originally posted by Darat

And not only what they claim they can do, what they claim anyone can do (and not only do but get better and better at “like going to the gym”).

Darat,

If they claim anyone can do it, then that means they claim that you, Darat, can do it too. Have you ever thought of testing this claim by taking a remote viewing class and seeing if you get results?

Mike

[SteveGrenard]

Clausen asks for evidence of statements made abut the Dozier Kidnapping and Remote Viewing. You can enter these in Google and get that "evidence." Here are a few snippets and their sources. Clausen still hasn't gone on the record with what he considers evidence so folks keeping count can consider this the 40th or 50th time he asks for evidence but refuses to specify what constitutes that evidence. I hope the following helps in placing this story in context and provides the "evidence" at the very least that the kidnapping ocurred, it was RV'd by the U.S government and that most if not all (there are discrepancies in some minor internal details) of information proved veridical.

I mentioned the Dozier kidnapping to Claus a few weeks ago He immediately wrote back and said I was witholding information from the police and should contact them immediately with that info. He probably forgot. I ignored him. Its not that important, just typical of his knee jerk reactions to jump on me re this subject.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Washington Post
30 December 1996
Military Psychic Unit's 'Hits' and Misses
by Jack Anderson
and Jan Moller


(SG: snipped - much longer critical article on subject, this part refers again to the Dozier kidnapping and remote viewing input as requested by CLaus; the various press accounts all seem to
differ slightly. In the Wash Post article Dozier is chained to a wall heater; in another article below to a bed. None mention the tent which the remote viewer himself mentions in his book which just came out. He was a chained inside the tent to pipes which could have been the railings of the cot or, I suppose, hot water pipes along the back wall).


"An important U.S. Army general was kidnapped in Italy by the Red Brigades terrorists. The U.S. government pulled out all the stops, shook up every intelligence source and scanned every photo but had no luck locating the general.

"The government turned to the ghost-finders -- an ultra-secret psychic unit run by the Army under the code name "Project Grill Flame." Three psychics turned their "remote viewing" vision to find Brig. Gen. James Dozier, being held by the brutal terrorists, in late 1981.

"One remote viewer, Joe McMoneagle, was particularly successful. He zeroed in on the room where Dozier was held, chained to a wall heater. He described it, but couldn't get the house number. Yet he did get the location, the Italian city of Padua.
The information was slowly sent up the chain of command, and finally arrived on the right desk. But it didn't arrive until a day after Dozier was released -- in Padua -- in early 1982.
Some of these events are noted in a highly sensitive secret log that recorded the unit's activities from 1979 to 1989, which was obtained by our associate Dale Van Atta. In the Dozier case, Project No. 8125, it is noted that McMoneagle "provided 'Padua' eight days before [Dozier's] release." The log further brags that "all other info was confirmed during a debriefing conducted by project personnel." (end Wash Post snippet)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This is snipped from a much larger article in the Vancouver Courier and is re the Dozier case as Larsen demands. I see from this that McMoneagle claims he can see inside darkened file cabinets so I retract my statement that Randi's non-hypothetical challenege wouldn't apply. I did state that I was not aware of a claim that fit this but I was wrong. (SG)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sunday June 2 1996
The Vancouver Courier

The Cold War induced powers to explore information gathering through psychic phenomena
by Geoff Olson
Contributing writer

(snipped fr much longer article)

"Under the DIA's wing, however, several successes were cited, including the finding of Brig.-Gen. James Dozier, kidnapped by the Italian Red Brigade. According to the physicist in charge of the DIA Stargate project, one remote viewer gave the name of the town where Dozier was being hid--Padua--and another gave the name of the building. Details down to the bed where Dozier was chained were apparently accurate. "

(SG: he was inside a tent chained to a cot acc to McMoneagle)


This is an account from CBS NEWS snipped from a much larger story they were doing on Remote Viewing:
June 30, 2000 - 48 HRS

(CBS) Although often treated with scientific disdain, the concept of extrasensory perception is well known throughout the world. But as 48 Hours Correspondent Harold Dow reports, a group of researchers in California say they have proof of its existence.

(snip snip snipped)

"Perhaps even more extraordinary was the case of U.S. General James Dozier, kidnapped in northern Italy by Red brigades in 1981. Remote viewer Joe McMoneagle, a Vietnam veteran, was called in.

""I named the city....I drew a street map that was about as accurate as you can get....I gave them descriptions of the building [where] he was being held," says McMoneagle. "My information didn't get there till he was released, but it probably would have resulted in his release.""

(SG) As I indicated, this information was turned over to the Italian authorities and determined to be accurate. Here information was
obtained by the RVer in the US before (8 days) Dozier was released, given to intelligence agents, but as later learned was not received by the Italian authorities until after the raid. It was verified, however.

[Darat]

Quote:

Originally posted by Mike D.


Darat,

If they claim anyone can do it, then that means they claim that you, Darat, can do it too. Have you ever thought of testing this claim by taking a remote viewing class and seeing if you get results?

Mike

When I found that website - I did consider sending off for some of their materials until I found the cost out! (See https://trv.com/store/productlist.ht...id=trvtraining)

The prices start at $449.95 for the basic, then $499.95 for the advance.

But to be totally honest the thing that turned me away from even trying their courses is the "special applications", which include

"Find Your Ideal Mate - In this program, you'll learn how to apply TRV Advanced level skills to retrieve detailed descriptions of your optimum mate or partner."

and

"Winning At Gambling - In this program, you'll learn how to apply TRV Advanced level skills to determine outcomes of common games of chance, such as horse races, slot machines, and sports games. "

I get spam emails about these things everyday - and many of them offer a “money back guarantee" - something that PsiTech doesn't seem to do... So I may as well try one of them if I want to find my ideal mate

(Edited to put the back back in.)

[Darat]

Quote:

By SteveGrenard

...snip...

This is snipped from a much larger article in the Vancouver Courier and is re the Dozier case as Larsen demands. I see from this that McMoneagle claims he can see inside darkened file cabinets so I retract my statement that Randi's non-hypothetical challenege wouldn't apply. I did state that I was not aware of a claim that fit this but I was wrong. (SG)

...snip...

Good to see that you admit you were wrong Steve.

Have you thought that perhaps this will make you re-consider your opinion about Randi and his "challenges" in the furture? It does seem then that he does do some of the required research beforehand his mouth doesn't it? Perhaps you will be willing to give him more "benefit of doubt" in future?

[Psiload]

Quote:

Originally posted by Mike D.


Darat,

If they claim anyone can do it, then that means they claim that you, Darat, can do it too. Have you ever thought of testing this claim by taking a remote viewing class and seeing if you get results?

Mike

TRV University Enrollment

http://www.trvu.com/

TRV 101 Basic Technical Remote Viewing Skills, Instructor Joni Douriff , Tuition $1295

TRV 201 Advanced Technical Remote Viewing Skills, Instructor Joni Douriff , Tuition $1295.00

TRV 301 Optimum Trajectories $295

TRV 302 Finding Your Optimum Mate $295

TRV 303 Winning at Gambling $295

TRV 304 Solving Murders & Abductions $295

TRV 305 Finding Missing Persons $295

TRV 306 Finding Lost Objects $295

TRV 307 In Search of UFO's and Other Anomalies $295

How is this not a criminal enterprise?!! Claiming that they can teach you to use psychic powers to cheat at gambling? Claiming that they can teach you to solve murder, and missing persons cases when they themselves have done nothing of the sort?!!

In the words of Ebenezer Scrooge...

"Are there no prisons?!"

[SteveGrenard]

D: Good to see that you admit you were wrong Steve.

Reply: When I verify something as not to be the case of my original lack of knowledge on a subject, I am always willing to admit it. If you read carefully what I said before, I said I was not aware of this (what Randi was suggesting) as a claim ... not
that it didn't exist. The claim of being able to RV an object in a closed, blackened box was made by McMoneagle in the Vancouver article (which I read in its entirety but which I snipped as irrelevant to the Dozier issue). This was a specific quoted claim by a person who is an acknowledged RVer. It was good enough for me that Randi could expect that his hypothetical set-up met
such a requirement.

D: Have you thought that perhaps this will make you re-consider your opinion about Randi and his "challenges" in the furture? It does seem then that he does do some of the required research beforehand his mouth doesn't it? Perhaps you will be willing to give him more "benefit of doubt" in future?

Reply: This needs to be done on a case by case basis. I will not generalize. I do not support the validity of a particular medium with blind fervor either or give them the benefit of the doubt if you want to call it that. Persons have to be dealt with as individuals as do the nature of claims. My next logical question would be is who is going to witness and corroborate that Randi has such a locker and what the object inside it is?

[CFLarsen]

Quote:

Originally posted by SteveGrenard
Clausen asks for evidence of statements made abut the Dozier Kidnapping and Remote Viewing. You can enter these in Google and get that "evidence."

Steve, Steve....

Quote:

Originally posted by SteveGrenard
Here are a few snippets and their sources. Clausen still hasn't gone on the record with what he considers evidence so folks keeping count can consider this the 40th or 50th time he asks for evidence but refuses to specify what constitutes that evidence.

Yes, I have:

Thread: Michael Shermer's Cold Reading Demo
My post: 07-20-2003 03:05 AM

And, Steve? My name is "Claus".

Quote:

Originally posted by SteveGrenard
I hope the following helps in placing this story in context and provides the "evidence" at the very least that the kidnapping ocurred, it was RV'd by the U.S government and that most if not all (there are discrepancies in some minor internal details) of information proved veridical.

What? Discrepancies? Nooooo......

Quote:

Originally posted by SteveGrenard
I mentioned the Dozier kidnapping to Claus a few weeks ago He immediately wrote back and said I was witholding information from the police and should contact them immediately with that info. He probably forgot. I ignored him. Its not that important, just typical of his knee jerk reactions to jump on me re this subject.

No, you did not "mention" the Dozier kidnapping to me. Please point to where you did, or retract the claim.

Quote:

Originally posted by SteveGrenard
Washington Post
30 December 1996
Military Psychic Unit's 'Hits' and Misses
by Jack Anderson
and Jan Moller

Let's see what you choose to post:

Quote:

Originally posted by SteveGrenard
(SG: snipped - much longer critical article on subject, this part refers again to the Dozier kidnapping and remote viewing input as requested by CLaus; the various press accounts all seem to
differ slightly. In the Wash Post article Dozier is chained to a wall heater; in another article below to a bed. None mention the tent which the remote viewer himself mentions in his book which just came out. He was a chained inside the tent to pipes which could have been the railings of the cot or, I suppose, hot water pipes along the back wall).

Steve, do you have the actual account of the remote viewer?

Quote:

Originally posted by SteveGrenard
"An important U.S. Army general was kidnapped in Italy by the Red Brigades terrorists. The U.S. government pulled out all the stops, shook up every intelligence source and scanned every photo but had no luck locating the general.

Scanned photo - for what?

Quote:

Originally posted by SteveGrenard
"The government turned to the ghost-finders -- an ultra-secret psychic unit run by the Army under the code name "Project Grill Flame." Three psychics turned their "remote viewing" vision to find Brig. Gen. James Dozier, being held by the brutal terrorists, in late 1981.

Please state who and what organization in the "government" "turned to" the ghost-finders.

Quote:

Originally posted by SteveGrenard
"One remote viewer, Joe McMoneagle, was particularly successful. He zeroed in on the room where Dozier was held, chained to a wall heater. He described it, but couldn't get the house number. Yet he did get the location, the Italian city of Padua.

Did they find Dozier because of McMoneagle, yes or no?

Quote:

Originally posted by SteveGrenard
The information was slowly sent up the chain of command, and finally arrived on the right desk. But it didn't arrive until a day after Dozier was released -- in Padua -- in early 1982.

"Slowly"? Doesn't seem as if people were all that confident that McMoneagle was all that great.

Quote:

Originally posted by SteveGrenard
Some of these events are noted in a highly sensitive secret log that recorded the unit's activities from 1979 to 1989, which was obtained by our associate Dale Van Atta. In the Dozier case, Project No. 8125, it is noted that McMoneagle "provided 'Padua' eight days before [Dozier's] release." The log further brags that "all other info was confirmed during a debriefing conducted by project personnel." (end Wash Post snippet)

Ah, the cloak-and-dagger stuff. A "highly sensitive secret log" means we - conveniently - won't be able to get our hands on how this group really did....

Quote:

Originally posted by SteveGrenard
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This is snipped from a much larger article in the Vancouver Courier and is re the Dozier case as Larsen demands. I see from this that McMoneagle claims he can see inside darkened file cabinets so I retract my statement that Randi's non-hypothetical challenege wouldn't apply. I did state that I was not aware of a claim that fit this but I was wrong. (SG)

Good for you, Steve. Now let's see if anyone can guess what Randi has....

Quote:

Originally posted by SteveGrenard
"Under the DIA's wing, however, several successes were cited, including the finding of Brig.-Gen. James Dozier, kidnapped by the Italian Red Brigade. According to the physicist in charge of the DIA Stargate project, one remote viewer gave the name of the town where Dozier was being hid--Padua--and another gave the name of the building. Details down to the bed where Dozier was chained were apparently accurate. "

Duh! Standard procedure with kidnappers: Chain the victim to something immovable. What is suitable in European houses? Pipes, radiators.

Quote:

Originally posted by SteveGrenard
This is an account from CBS NEWS snipped from a much larger story they were doing on Remote Viewing:
June 30, 2000 - 48 HRS

(CBS) Although often treated with scientific disdain, the concept of extrasensory perception is well known throughout the world. But as 48 Hours Correspondent Harold Dow reports, a group of researchers in California say they have proof of its existence.

And the rest of the scientific world, as well as victims all over the world, have yet to discover this proof? How has this helped victims, Steve? Has this been incorporated in standard police procedures?

Why not, if it is so successful?

Quote:

Originally posted by SteveGrenard
"Perhaps even more extraordinary was the case of U.S. General James Dozier, kidnapped in northern Italy by Red brigades in 1981. Remote viewer Joe McMoneagle, a Vietnam veteran, was called in.

""I named the city....I drew a street map that was about as accurate as you can get....I gave them descriptions of the building [where] he was being held," says McMoneagle. "My information didn't get there till he was released, but it probably would have resulted in his release.""

If the street map was as "accurate as you can get", that would mean street names. Can we see this map? Why didn't they just go there?

Quote:

Originally posted by SteveGrenard
(SG) As I indicated, this information was turned over to the Italian authorities and determined to be accurate.

How accurate? They sure didn't find Dozier because of it.

Quote:

Originally posted by SteveGrenard
Here information was obtained by the RVer in the US before (8 days) Dozier was released, given to intelligence agents, but as later learned was not received by the Italian authorities until after the raid. It was verified, however.

"Verified", how, by whom?

Steve, in what ways did McMoneagle "miss"?

[thaiboxerken]

I think this is another Randi effort to foist unclaimed abiliies on
claimants and he knows better than all of us that what he proposes is not their claim, its his perception of how to screw them over.

Maybe you should e-mail Randi and suggest that he place a light in the locker to keep it luminated. I'm positive that the results from a dark locker, vice a well-lit locker will be the same. Except that some remote-viewers might guess that there is a lightbulb in there at that moment.

Lucian: They were not consciously aware that they were being 'viewed'.

Do you think Randi ever knows when and if he's being consciously remotely viewed? Would it not require some sort of belief that people can actually remotely view people in order to suspect that they are being viewed? You have a poor excuse for not viewing what's in the Randi locker. I know the real reason, it's because you really don't have the superpowers you claim to have.

Mike D. :If they claim anyone can do it, then that means they claim that you, Darat, can do it too. Have you ever thought of testing this claim by taking a remote viewing class and seeing if you get results?

I'd be happy to take a class, if someone else pays for it. I'd rather not pay a con-artist my own money.

My next logical question would be is who is going to witness and corroborate that Randi has such a locker and what the object inside it is?

Randi does have other people that work out there. But, I'm sure that if this were an actual, official challenge by an individual, a 3rd party could be introduced. This is just a simple, silly challenge and we can only trust that Randi isn't cheating.

He has shown a picture of the outside of the locker, and he's had the locker for quite some time. If you'd like to see it yourself, the JREF is open to the public during normal business hours. Maybe you can have a friend that lives in Florida check it out.

[thaiboxerken]

"Verified", how, by whom?

Steve does like to believe the fiction, doesn't he?

Steve, find a remote-viewer to beat the JREF or the CSICOP tests and I'll believe your fiction.

[Darat]

Quote:

Originally posted by SteveGrenard
D: Good to see that you admit you were wrong Steve.

Reply: When I verify something as not to be the case of my original lack of knowledge on a subject, I am always willing to admit it. If you read carefully what I said before, I said I was not aware of this (what Randi was suggesting) as a claim ... not that it didn't exist. The claim of being able to RV an object in a closed, blackened box was made by McMoneagle in the Vancouver article (which I read in its entirety but which I snipped as irrelevant to the Dozier issue). This was a specific quoted claim by a person who is an acknowledged RVer. It was good enough for me that Randi could expect that his hypothetical set-up met such a requirement.

Steve – I think if you had just said something like “Pointless exercise because my information is that RV needs light so Randi has set up a challenge that no RV could undertake and succeed” then I could go along with your restatement of your posts however since you went far beyond that, e.g.

Quote:

Originally posted by SteveGrenard
…snip…

Randi always seems to want to change the claimant's claim. The penchant for doing this seems to pervade a number of members here who also facetiously offer up feats they think psychics or remote viewers should be able to accomplish. I think it is extremely important to see what the claim is and then stick to it.

…snip…

followed with

Quote:

Originally posted by SteveGrenard
…snip…

Are you saying you would ask a remote viewer to do something which they do not claim to do? That is what Randi is asking with this new little farce of his. This ishis game and he plays it so well he's got you and a lot of people fooled.

…snip…

Randi loves black boxes and doing experiments in he dark. I wonder why that is.

…snip…

followed with

Quote:

Originally posted by SteveGrenard
…snip…

Randi always seems to want to change the claimant's claim. The penchant for doing this seems to pervade a number of members here who also facetiously offer up feats they think psychics or remote viewers should be able to accomplish. I think it is extremely important to see what the claim is and then stick to it.

…snip…

Quote:

Originally posted by SteveGrenard
…snip…

He really should not be setting conditions without consulting an actual challenger. In other words he
should familiarize himself with all the flavors of remote viewing
and agree to stipulate to the conditions required before
publicizing any of his own...

…snip…

All showing that you went far beyond any claim that Randi had made a mistake or hadn’t done his research. All your posts show an attempt to portray actions by Randi is a less then “flattering” light.

Quote:

Originally posted by SteveGrenard


D: Have you thought that perhaps this will make you re-consider your opinion about Randi and his "challenges" in the furture? It does seem then that he does do some of the required research beforehand his mouth doesn't it? Perhaps you will be willing to give him more "benefit of doubt" in future?

Reply: This needs to be done on a case by case basis. I will not generalize. I do not support the validity of a particular medium with blind fervor either or give them the benefit of the doubt if you want to call it that. Persons have to be dealt with as individuals as do the nature of claims. My next logical question would be is who is going to witness and corroborate that Randi has such a locker and what the object inside it is?

Steve - you say “I will not generalize.” Yet the above quotes all show that you do! The posts in this thread that talk about the Randi “RV challenge” (by you) shows nothing but generalisation and bias against Randi.

I’m not saying you should generalise or not (or have a bias or not) against anyone – just that you say you don’t when the evidence is plain to see that you do.

[thaiboxerken]

Quote:

Originally posted by Darat

All showing that you went far beyond any claim that Randi had made a mistake or hadn’t done his research. All your posts show an attempt to portray actions by Randi is a less then “flattering” light.

Yes, the ad-hominem tactic is a popular one among believers. They will come up with all kinds of excuses as to why the locker challenge won't be beaten, while ignoring the real reason... .it's because people do not have superpowers.

[Darat]

Quote:

Originally posted by thaiboxerken


Yes, the ad-hominem tactic is a popular one among believers. They will come up with all kinds of excuses as to why the locker challenge won't be beaten, while ignoring the real reason... .it's because people do not have superpowers.

Read your PMs - some of us do have superpowers!

[thaiboxerken]

Quote:

Originally posted by Darat


Read your PMs - some of us do have superpowers!

I have validated all of your predictions, so you must have superpowers.

[SteveGrenard]

In brief response to Claus questions, the agency of the U.S. Government that initiated the RVing of Dozier is known as The Defense Intelligence Agency. Their website is:

http://www.dia.mil/

In additional to operational responsibility for the original RV program, they also comissioned several studies of psychic warfare programs in the former USSR and other eastern bloc nations. These reports can be obtained under FOIA but are also on the web at:

http://www.dia.mil/Public/Foia/index.html


The paraphysics papers are down near the bottom of the list of released documents.


In response to Claus question as to whether I have McMoneagle's original accounts yes, I do. They are in his recent book which I mentioned. Information on this book can be found at:

http://www.mceagle.com/remote-viewin...ate/index.html

Please forgive me for only describing what the RVer J.Mc says but I cannot quote large portions of text from this work. The book also contains photographic or photocopies back up materials.
I cannot say whether any reviewer or others involved with the DIA have chosen to dispute anything in this book as yet.