Self (Not So) Remote Viewing Tests

[gattino]

Having been maintaining a record here of apparently telepathic dreams, i recently branched out into trying to test waking telepathy between myself and the friend most often involved in the dream hits. The form was very simple. While on the phone one person would look for a random image to concentrate on while the other would close their eyes and describe the random mental images, thoughts, concepts that bubbled to the surface. Did the latter describe the former?

The few times we've tried it its appeared to be successful or highly suggestive of being so. Though directly identifying the target image is very elusive. With only personal recollection of the words spoken to go on, and - in my case at least - almost immediate loss of recall of what ive just said, it took the other party to point out to me where and how my words seemed relevant.


What was not obvious however is what there was to distinguish this process from remote viewing. In other words is the other person remotely necessary...is one just honing in on the target, rather than another person's thoughts?

Last night i finally settled on a formula by which to repeatedly test and practice myself at seeing things. Remote viewing without the CIA training if you like.

On my phone (or computer if you prefer) i use the random picture generator website. I press the button to generate a new photo. There's a momentary delay and a flash of an ad while a new random photo is supplied. This is enough time to turn the phone away before i catch any glimpse of the next image. I then use a digital voice recorder to speak my closed-eye images and impressions into for about a minute Finally i look at the photo that was the target....while listening back to the my own recording. That's the all important innovation. It's only in hearing my own throw away remarks while looking at the photo that the apparent relevance of some of them becomes evident.

The following were all done last night or this morning in bed. The transcripted words are very openly cherry picked..ive omitted all the random objects and shapes i may have mentioned that don't seem to apply to the target image. Nonetheless the words printed are as spoken by me on tape while the as yet unseen image was targeted.

Make your own mind up if they show anything. But far more importantly, its an invitation to try it yourself and report back.

 

[gattino]

I made a habit of doing this in bed (we all get lonely) each night and morning over the next week. It became less consistent in effect - there were many complete failures or connections so weak it wasn't worth making a record of. But there were also far more instances where, among many other random words, shapes and objects my minds eye offered up, the target image or one of part of it was specifically and directly name checked, or near as damn it.

 

[gattino]

4 in a row (ill stop posting these now)

 

[blessmycottonsocks]

Interesting stuff!

Your statement "ive omitted all the random objects and shapes i may have mentioned that don't seem to apply to the target image" seems critical here and I would be interested in what proportion you feel were a good or reasonable match, as opposed to a complete mismatch.

Just out of interest, I tried it myself just now. The first five or six were nowhere near - I thought of cat, when it was a tree, thought of bird when it was a bottle of poison, thought of a vehicle when it was a building etc.
Was about to give up, when, in my mind's eye, I thought of something hooked or grasping.
When I turned my phone around, the image was this:

Far too small a sample to extrapolate any statistical significance, but a pleasing surprise nonetheless!

 

[gattino]

It's difficult to estimate a percentage of the mental imagery that is typically relevant as opposed to the minds flotsam and jetsam. It's certainly the minority. But in overall terms Im not speaking for a significantly long time..a minute maybe two and with long pauses..so it's not a case of I mention every object under the sun so am bound to include the right ones.

 

[gattino]

Your nowhere nears may have been closer than you think. As I say in most cases if I just say the impressions out loud then look at the target photo MY reaction is " no I didn't see that". It's only either having another person observing the target while you describe, or else hearing your own verbalising back on tape that you realise you were saying things describing some aspect of the target

Two important things I've picked up from reading about remote viewing

1) describe rather than trying to identify the mental images. A circle with spokes rather than a wheel .a tube with a band around it rather than just a cigar . Obviously you can't avoid nouns, but say what it's like rather than confidently what it must be.

2) specify and detail what your trying to do before you start. " My target is the next image on the random photo generator. I want to see and identify clearly what is in the photo" etc.

 

[Frideswide]

fascinating stuff @gattino

 

[gattino]

Many many failed or weak ones, but when they hit strongly, it pulls you up.

 

[gattino]

For a few weeks the success rate on these efforts all but disappeared. Which oddly i found to be supportive of their reality. It ruled out the possibility that the successive successes (10 times, fast!) were in some way inevitable..that simply saying 2 dozen random words would produce some kind of correlation to most photos for example. This, I can no assure you, isn't true. Over the last several days however they've been relatively successful again. Perhaps its weather related. Who knows.

So in the midst of a patch of hits an unusual opportunity presented itself today.

I saw earlier my best friend Y posting he was being taken for whatever reason to a mystery location/day out in London and had no idea where he was going. As I was walking to Aldi I thought this is the perfect opportunity for me to try actual remote viewing. If he's not in a place he'd expect to be then I can't just be basing anything I might "see" in my mind's eyes on what I could logically deduce or assume ( ie he's sitting at his desk doing work etc). When I got home I wrote down the initial thoughts that had entered my head in the street at the time I had decided to do it and then I did the actual close my eyes and record my impressions thing. I then wrote those down too. Well he's since checked in from a place called Park Row. Which is apparently a "DC inspired" restaurant/bar (!). Here are pics of the place and then I'll show you my notes.

And here's what i had written:

The (white display) shaped like a swan and Bertie Bassett ( who has a top hat and cane) are especially interesting given the big sculpture of the penguin in the middle of the place!

 

[gattino]

An addendum to the above. I finally spoke to him on the phone tonight and read out the notes above to see if any of the other references were pertinent. When i came to the egyptian figure with arms/wings raised above their head (I wrote horus but was thinking, it turns out, of Isis) he said doesn't that describe the fountain outside buckhingam palace - the location he visited and from which he checked in immediately before going to the bar. I didn't know what he was talking about, so had to look it up to jog my memory.