Remote Viewing Protocols
The protocols are simple, clear rules that define what and if remote Viewing has occurred – nothing more.
Remote viewing is?
Anything psychic, any kind of intuitive impression be it clairvoyant, from tools like tarot cards, even channelled information, but more often than not its handwritten impressions, sketches and words on sheets of paper. BUT and yes there is a BUT to this.
The act of Remote Viewing is defined by how it’s produced. SRI (Stanford Research Institute) was required to create a set of rule or protocols to both define what remote viewing was and to also make it scientifically testable.
These protocols that define Remote Viewing are:
- Planned and Aimed. The psychic session must be planned and done on purpose. If you get a “spontaneous insight” or have a dream, that is not Remote Viewing. RV is when you intend to collect information about a specific target.
- Double-Blind. In most experiments, if the person giving the answers does not know the question, it would be called “blind” or “single-blind”. Remote Viewing is required to be “double-blind”. That means there are two (double) layers of “blinding”. It means the psychic cannot know the target, AND, nobody else who is present with the psychic during the session (even by remote means such as webcam or phone) can know the target either. This is because even pheremones, voice-frequencies, and many other “invisible” physiological senses can transfer information below the conscious level. (See Ingo Swann’s article ‘Your 17 Senses.‘)
- Feedback. Although you can be psychic about anything (the future, for example), in order to “validate” the data IS psychic and not just a wild guess, it has to be at least partly correct. In order to know what is correct, we need the real info to ‘compare to’ the session data. We call that info “feedback.”
Joe McMonegale says:
“Remote viewing is the ability to produce information that is correct about a place, event, person, object or concept which is located somewhere else in time and space, and which is completely blind to the remote viewer and others taking part in the process of collecting the information.
Two other requirements are:
- All persons present during a remote viewing should essentially be blind to the target.
- There should be some form or means of validating the material after the remote viewing has been accomplished.
In other words there should e feedback of some kind.
These requirements certainly set remote viewing apart from other forms or paranormal information collection, and there is a reason for this. Currently about 60 people, and the years of work, sweat, thought and a considerable amount of money, establishing the veracity of remote viewing through very extensive study. During this time, these peoples were very clear in defining the ground rules and protocols that were necessary in order to call it remote viewing. They did not do this just to separate remote viewing form other forms of the paranormal. They did it so that remote viewing would NOT be viewed like any other form of paranormal. They did it so that their new research techniques could bring some validity and credibility to the study of paranormal functioning…
Those who throw something together and call it remote viewing do a disservice to these people, these labs and dilute the very value and significance that these studies have brought to the paranormal field.
So regardless how you might be trained, when you agree applying remote viewing, the target should be blind to whomever in the room”.
Joe McMoneagle – Remote Viewing Secrets – pages, 22-23, 268.
Ingo Swann the Creator of Remote viewing and CRV (Controlled Remote Viewing) the method used by the military for over 20 years, has this to say on the definition of Remote Viewing:
“Remote Viewing is composed of a five part protocol, and when any one of the five parts are omitted (such as confirmatory feedback), then what has taken place is something other than remote viewing…..
If these important definitional boundaries are not understood and maintained, the ultimate result will be ambiguous definitional quagmire of benefit to no one, and the demolition of what the remote viewing protocol achieved in terms of respect and repute”
Ingo Swann – Fate article – On remote viewing UFOS and extraterrestrials September 1993.
So, if you encounter anyone claiming to be a remote viewer and/or remote viewing and yet you find that these protocols have been disregarded, then firstly they have not been remote viewing and secondly, be very careful what you decide based on this material as there is no way to assess its accuracy or validity. To be honest most long time practitioners in the field of remote viewing should know and abide by these defining rules, but alas some don’t. So be careful.