*****

Why people who are interested in remote viewing feel such a strong need to be considered “expert remote viewers” rather than using the opportunity for understanding more about how their own minds work or how they process information, or how this might impact on their relationships and spiritual nature?

What questions about psi would you ultimately like to see answered?

Aside from the above - the real nature of time/space, and how we interface with it. Where does it come from and how much effect can we exercise over it through thought processes alone. I want to know how this ties into our perceptions of mental and physical health, how it affects it.

I would also like to know why we can’t seem to find a different reason for living and pursuing knowledge other than money?

Do you still hold to the idea of the Matrix, like the CRV theory? (Did you ever hold to that idea?) Has that idea evolved? If so, into what exactly? If not, what do you think is the source of psi information?

The idea of the "matrix" is a cool idea, but I do not believe it has anything to do with reality or at least the reality that drives us or how we access information. If there was anything that related to something like the Matrix, then it's something we've created within our own minds, not that which someone or something else creates for us, or that we might be beguiled into believing is true. Whatever our beliefs, they are ours and ours alone. We can blame no one for what we believe to be true. It is our responsibility to determine what is true or not true for us in our own universe of experience.

The whole idea of a matrix or akashic record stems from the idea that there is some sort of signal line that we tap into or strip information from. This idea of signal line is a metaphor for the line of information or thoughts we deal with in our heads that may or may not be relevant to a remote viewing target.

That's one of the reasons you can't take the CRV theory seriously. If you do, it sucks, it won't work. It's the reason I've detested it from the outset as a method of producing valid information. It just lays one more line of fences between your conscious mind and the unconscious information.

If you consider that everything that you might ever remote view is something you will eventually know about anyway, then the information always exists/originates within your own mind at some point

in time. The only difference between knowing something right now and knowing something at some future date is time. We create time, so why not the information or the format within which it occurs.

It would take about a week to outline what I’m talking about here, so this will have to suffice for now.

If time doesn’t exist as is often said in RV, is it possible that “facts about” the past are as variable as those about the future? If there really is no time, why shouldn’t RV on things past be as difficult as RV on things future?

Neither is more difficult than the next. Your logic is faulty.

What I think you meant to say is that since we have errors in RV in the present, they should be expected to be about the same in the past or future if time is not real. Which would be correct.

All that happens in RV is a prediction (assumed truth made from whole cloth) is made about the past, present, or future. If the assumption turns out to be judged correct based on information at hand for that specific time, then it is assumed to be correct. If it is wrong, it is nothing more than that, it is simply wrong.

What is interesting about RV, is that sometimes what is judged to be incorrect at the time turns out later to be correct, or vice versa. With RV, one is stuck with trying to describe a truth about a specific time within the vernacular of when it occurs - sort of like lining up the sights of understanding over a word to capture its meaning at the precise point in time that it stops moving.

We assume that is the only time the word is going to stop. But, in reality the word moves and stops many times. Again, it would take a few days to make clear here what I am saying.

All things exist simultaneously. Past, present, and future all just “are.” We pick where we focus and understand through intent or expectation and that creates reality. The only problem is that we are usually not awake while we are deciding.

It’s the most perfect example of free will that I think could ever exist. In this way, all things are possible, but the only reality at the time is the one we chose to experience.

The future can be predicted very simply - with a good guess made in as alert and understanding a state as possible.

First, the researchers are correct, because they have tested for many years to determine that to be true. But, what does that have to do with one’s personal belief? Because they say it, so what?

The point is that no one ever knows how good or how bad they are ever going to be at this thing called RV, until they put energy into it and find out. If I believed what half the people on the planet say about things, I probably would have skipped this lifetime altogether. The only person who knows is the person doing it.

Unfortunately, most do not invest the energy necessary to find out. They believe erroneously that they can pay a lot of money to someone who will teach them the “secret” to how it’s done and that’s all that’s required. Wrong! There are no secrets. There’s no one specific method that works better than any other.

I’ve talked about RV needing to be within a specific protocol to be called RV - that’s true. Many will say this has no bearing on how good or how bad someone will be at RV. That too is wrong. In fact, the hardest person to convince that RV is real and works is called “self.” If you leave one iota of doubt in your own mind that it is possible, you will never be good at it. You have to set up the circumstances that are the most difficult to beat and then when you succeed, you will understand more about RV than all the lessons in the world can teach you.

It doesn’t work all the time for anyone, it isn’t perfect all the time for anyone, it isn’t nearly as accurate as many would tell you it is. The fact is, that it will work reasonably well for anyone who is able to convince themselves that it will - there are no other secrets.

I practice in order to maintain my capacity to translate what I sense into usable information. The only way I’ve improved over time is in my reliability. I’ve not improved very much in accuracy.

One has to remember that there is always an expected improvement that takes place simply from understanding the rules. The research shows (that’s testing under controls over long periods of time in a lab) that there is very little improvement over time in the quality of remote viewing (accuracy.)

Over time, many who do RV within applications scenarios begin to feel that the scientific controls get in the way of getting to the target. They are able to convince themselves that such draconian controls are no longer necessary - that they are able to differentiate between the right and wrong way to approach a target. This is called deluding oneself. Even scientists who study something in a lab over long periods of time sometimes fall prey to this self-delusion.

As one slowly moves away from the strict controls the remote viewing will improve, but only because other things come into play - neuro-linguistics, inappropriate leading, etc. People will make up excuses as to why this okay - we get information that seems to be correct anyway - right? Well in not too delicate terms, this is called cheating. All it does for someone trying to learn that remote viewing is possible is that it produces doubt in their mind. This makes what they are actually trying to do more difficult, to the point of significant failure at a latter date, when they try to accomplish the same accuracy and reliability under severe controls.

It’s the reason a lot of self-proclaimed experts in RV won’t do RV under those severe controls in public.

Failure. I had to learn how to deal with failure. This means I also had to learn to deal with ego investment in the outcome.

All of it. That comes from “knowing” it’s real, not believing it to be so.

Yes, I practice all the time. I probably do five or six targets a week. Between practiced and tasked it’s probably about 1/3 practice and 2/3 tasked.

My practice targets are all photographic targets taken from a pool of targets developed for use within the Laboratories for Fundamental Research. Mixed in with those are other targets of greater interest that pop up once in awhile. I put enough of those in there to not know what or when they might occur.

All practice targets are always done under the strictest of controls and are always a total surprise to me. More so than the tasked, since I sometimes know who the Tasker is (this does not imply that I know what the target will be ahead of time. I never know this. I’m sometimes just not surprised at what it turns out to be based on who the Tasker is that is asking for it).

The best, was demonstrating remote viewing live and within scientific, double blind controls, before the Senate and House Committees on Intelligence.

The worst, was fighting for ten hours to get an ignorant county sheriff to accept my location info for a missing child, only to find my information was correct and we were two hours too late.

I’ve been working on my remote viewing ability now for 26 years. I will continue to work on my “competency” with it. No one ever gets to a point where they are satisfied. It’s just like any other skill, you always find things you want to modify or change, or improve on.

I was doing remote viewing targets three or four times a day for six days a week for about three years before I felt I had any control over it at all.

What I find humorous is that so many think that there is a trick to it, that such a trick can be taught, and from that point on you will be graced with accuracy and dependability. Accuracy and dependability is an illusion one must fight for on a day-to-day basis and has more to do with your faith in self, the depth of your understanding for how reality might really work, and how you deal with ego. You can win a lot of the battles, but I’m not sure it’s a war you can ever win. It takes a lot of heart.

If someone says that this is not a problem for them - then I would say they have never communicated with their unconscious mind.

It’s a major issue, and one that never goes away. It’s a fear that’s not just culture wide, it’s pervasive in all cultures. Even those that are practitioners of PSI have fear of it. It speaks to the dark side for most. It’s an uncomfortable window to things we “shouldn’t have access to.”

There are no suggestions for dealing with it - since there is no way of truly conquering it. It’s one more battle that’s constantly waged in doing RV - a battle you sometimes win and sometimes don’t.

Yes. I won’t talk about them.

Yes I did. Yes there was. I am unable to talk about those differences.

Anything that opens up perception, defuses ego or the necessity to be right, anything that eliminates fear (of rejection, failure, topic matter, etc.) and anything that teaches mental discipline is important.

Look - you have to understand that this is the important part of RV, not the RV itself. It’s what you learn about yourself, how you process or manipulate information, how you put the slant on it that you desire or don’t desire, how you apply it to your reality, what constitutes good or bad focus and self-discipline.

The RV part is totally secondary and a by-product to all the other things you bring to the table. That’s not where the actual focus should be. Focus instead on where your place in reality lies and why. What is your responsibility to reality and why?

Sure. This is a no-brainer. Set up a large selection of random target sites and locations across the planet. Put representative pictures of them in a computer file. Set up a web site and open it to remote viewers to set up their own record files. Design it so they can log on and file the materials for a target that will be selected after they hit the selection - Remote Viewing completed and filed. A reference to the target is then filed with the material (but not its identity).

Someone will then have to volunteer to judge the result. This can be accomplished by having someone log on to the site and identifying themselves as a judge, and then requesting a session to work on. They are then presented with a group of five photographs, one of which is the actual target, and the session data that goes with it. They match the session results to the first best selection, then the second best, third best, etc. Once they have done that and the results are filed, an automatic email is forwarded to the person who did the original remote viewing, showing them the result (picture and location), along with an update of their statistics.

I would set the system up so that in order to do a remote viewing, you would be required to do a judging first after which you would be authorized access to the viewing portion of the system. Do a judging, you get a to do a viewing. I would also insure that the system statistical file and results would only be accessible to one or two people for management purposes.

Deciding who you’d want to do that job would be both difficult as well as burdensome, as obviously that would include at least the webmaster and a scientist. So, you could charge some small dues to cover their expenses.

These are basically the conditions under which many of us were forced to learn and work.

What I actually said was that an area of the brain would be identified that specifically deals with PSI functioning. It will enable us to understand when the information is actually being processed. I’m not sure I ever said there would be that kind of accuracy.

Captain Thomas McNear produced a clay model of an Aztec temple in a double-blind remote viewing exercise that was a nearly perfect example of the structure. Hartleigh Trent produced a near perfect drawing of a specific military device in double blind targeting at Fort Meade, Maryland. There are dozens of these examples that are very impressive, at least to me.

They try to do too much to quickly. They do the RV too quickly. They want the results too quickly. They go to the next target too quickly. They don’t think about what they are going to do, what they are actually doing, or what happened after the fact. No real focus on what’s going on.

They are doing it just “to get to being an expert ” faster. When they should be doing it to understand why they process a certain way. Where the information comes from in their own mind, why they deal with it the way they do, what’s wrong with how they deal with it, etc.

That’s always a possibility. At the moment, I’m not buying that, however.

I think in RV we are dealing solely with information. That is also the possibility with OBE’s as well as NDE’s. Since there is no demonstrated physical interaction with a remote location vis-à-vis OBE’s or NDE’s, at least one that’s provable, that will also have to remain an open question.

I believe we have a tendency to jump to conclusions about energy states because they present the easiest answer to the conundrum, but there could be a multitude of other possibilities we have not yet conjectured. I’d rather keep my mind open to those not yet extant possibilities.

There are lots of rumors running rampant about telekinesis, but to my knowledge, I have never seen it demonstrated within a lab anywhere on the planet.

The Chinese make claims of being able to do it with young children, and I’ve see the tapes, but they are heavily cut and edited so highly questionable.

I’ve met people over the years that have experienced losing something by having it disappear right in front of them - that’s happened to me as well. Where does an object like a pencil, pen, paperclip, quarter, that sort of thing go when it disappears is beyond my ken.

In terms of seeing something appear - well, again there are lots of stories about that. Some of the incidents, which were filmed were quite convincing to those doing the observing but on analyzing the films later frame by frame, you can clearly see slight of hand. Usually the things that appear and disappear are small enough to hide within the hand or palm which again raises some difficult questions around the entire subject.

I personally think that there are items that sort of morph in and out of real-time space, but so far it hasn’t been accomplished on demand while under controls. Until that time, well…it’s still going to be questionable.

Yes to all the above. They exist at the very least as mental or thought form creations as real as when they are experienced. When we cease to be, our intellects appear to carry on, so then must the intellect thought forms. Do they have thought forms of their own? That is an interesting question and one that I believe to be true, although that is instinctive and difficult to prove otherwise.

There is a common belief that because the project lasted for nearly 19 years and did support so many agencies in so many ways that this automatically means they accept Remote Viewing without reservation. In fact, that is not true. There are still lots of reasons not to trust it, and using it if at all should be done with great care -- and only then for very limited or specific reasons.

It’s when people disregard these caveats that things go to hell in a hand basket.

An idea of what it’s actually like doing what I do.

In remote viewing it would be Rene’ Warcollier, who was doing the work for 30+ years in a culture that didn’t support it. My close friend, Edwin C. May, who has spent almost as much of his own personal money and energy in researching remote viewing, as he has ever made or experienced from it. The Honorable Senator Claiborne Pell, who was a standup guy and had the courage to state his beliefs about remote viewing when the project was exposed on National Television.

And I really wish I had access to some of the people who went back up the staircases in the WTC on 9/11 - just so I could thank them personally for showing us what real human beings are like. Aside from remote viewing of course I have others I respect and admire as a hero - Thomas Jefferson, Abe Lincoln, Neil Armstrong, Buzz Aldrin, Gene Cernan, George Patton, and of course my Father.

A: Nothing’s hopeless. Not all things have easy answers either.

Where's the curiosity for what goes on in RV, how it might work, why information gets transferred? I hear a lot about doing things with it that are meaningful. But I've not heard much about, “What makes it tick?” That's the part that keeps me going. I want to know “why?” “How?” “Because…?”

In my quest for those things, I've gotten better and people hunt me down to do things for them. Those things sometimes work. I attempt to display it within appropriate rules to the public.

Much of the public doesn’t seem to grasp the fact that there are rules-they just want to be psychic like me, and figure there must be some trick, some magic that I'm not sharing.

I think if people can't find the reason for pursuing it within themselves (their need to develop in that way), as opposed to the reason being outside them (what they’ll “do” with it), they should find something else to pursue.

*****

Interview by PJ Gaenir, September 2002 Copyright (c) 2002 by Palyne 'PJ' Gaenir. All rights reserved. Published electronically as part of the Firedocs Remote Viewing Collection http://www.firedocs.com/remoteviewing/ Emergent Mind has reprinted selections from this interview(s) with permission. 

*Joseph W. McMoneagle is author of THE STARGATE CHRONICLES and other books http://www.mceagle.com/remote-viewing/.   Joe is a professional associate of the Laboratories for Fundamental Research, Cognitive Sciences Laboratory, Palo Alto CA USA http://www.lfr.org/csl/.  He is also a full member of the Parapsychological Association (an affiliate of the American Association for the Advancement of Science) http://www.parapsych.org