There is an intelligent power (whom we call God) who created the Laws of Nature"& as a result of this action the universe came into existence.There would be no universe as we know it,without the existence of these “Laws”They exist because a supreme creative power designed them, brought them into existence & gave them domain over the entire universe rather then they always existed or they spontaneously came into existence Science is limited 2 discovering Laws of Nature God is in control
That means it is more than randomness. It is however as clearly useless as Edison's light first light bulb. The bulb burned only 40 hours. No profitable use for it at all.
And the "Stonehenge" word written is a slam-dunk! If Shermer intended to reject such clear evidence as a lucky hit or a set up, why did he even show? What exactly was "uncontrolled" about the experiment? Shermer didn't raise any objections at all until it worked.
Using a class of beginners to test the efficacy of RV is absurd, even at an anecdotal level. You should give a test to accomplished viewers. That has already been done several times and showed RV works. Just a fact. Seems to me Schermer stacked the deck to get the outcome he wanted.
@alexandria22309 I'm just so thankful Shermer wasn't around when Edison's first light bulb burned only 40 hours. Absolutely no use for that at all, is there?
@matt605 that is such an idiotic claim. Edison was a scientist who was backing up his inventions with science. His results were undeniable, and easily measurable. Having a short life makes something less efficient. Something being less efficient is different from something flaky which may or may not (more likely not) get things right above significantly above random chance.
Fusion reactors are not particularly efficient things right now, it doesn't make them pseudoscience or dismissible.
MsHojat Look at the evidence. The dude wrote, "Stonehenge," and the picture was of Stonehenge. Shermer says it's either a lucky hit or a plant, but he did not raise any issues of scientific control until the evidence appeared. That's bad science and unprofessional to boot. And even Shermer was voicing "London" without knowing why. The Pengaton studies said they had scientific proof, but Shermer has just one guy in opposition. Remote Viewing is weak, like Edison's first light bulb.
@matt605 1. The more people you have guessing, the more likelyhood of being right.
2. The more things being guessed, the more likelyhood of being "right"
3. The more ambiguious the things are which are being guessed, the more likelyhood of being "right"
One guy may have got a hit, but that doesn't mean much when there's so many other words which are misses. How are you supposed to distinguish which word or picture is the right one? The fact is it was not a controlled experiment, regardless
@MsHojat Dude wrote "Stonehenge" and even Shermer said "London." Besides, Shermer never voiced any objection to the controls before he saw the dramatic evidence against him.
@matt605 There were no controls in Part 1. It was just a class which is why he set up a controlled test in part 2. The Stonehenge guy fails miserably in the controlled demonstration. As for London, it's 90 miles away from Stonehenge.
@Smithpolly Sure there were controls. The participants weren't what the photo depicted. And since Shermer's picture choice was the universe, being 90 miles off target is not too bad when the possibilities include places whose distances are measured in light years (about 5.8 trillion miles is one light year). Notice that Shermer does not dispute the scientific controls until evidence for RV is presented to him. That's unfair. Edison's first light bulb was weak, but look at Vegas today.
@matt605 What were the controls? I'm assuming that you mean the participants weren't awere what the photo depicted. Well, since the Stonghenge guy failed in the second experiment, I think there's a good chance he knew what the photo depicted in the first part. And since there were a number of people guessing it's not surprising that one of them, presumably a well travelled man would pick London. If you're impressed with that, I wouldn't look for a job with Google maps, if I were you.
@Smithpolly Experimental controls-- the participants didn't know what the picture showed, the instructor didn't tell them, and an obvserver voiced no concerns about the methodology (until he saw evidence he didn't like). I'm not convinced the Stonehenge guy failed the second time, but unreliable results do occur when testing the unknown. Ben Franklin didn't get a lightning strike every time. Was he wrong? No, Ben Franklin was right, but not according to your standards.
@matt605 It wasn't a controlled experiment. He was just observing a class. How do you know the instructor didn't tell the Stonehenge guy what was in the envelope? You don't . You're taking his word for it. We do know that in the controlled test where the intructor didn't know what was in the envelope the Stonehenge guy couldn't tell what was in the envelope either.
@Smithpolly No one contested the validity of the test until it produced results that proved RV. Even Shermer accepted that the image was not "revealed" to the participants until after they stopped writing-- 3:10. The instructor's PhD is a valid research credential, just as valid as Shermer's PhD. The instructor is an expert in RV, Shermer is not. Shermer failed to cite anything that even remotely proved corruption of the process, but he rejected the results anyway. That's unscientific.
@matt605 All he says is "When the target is finally revealed, the class is startled" That does not mean the same thing as " I accept that the image was not revealed to the Stonehenge guy." As to questioning the validity of the test, you make it sound like this is something bizarre when in fact it is exactly what scientists are supposed to do.
@Smithpolly Scientists do scrutinize test methodologies, that is true. However, Shermer's only criticism was leveled against the integrity of another PhD. Houdini used to reveal spiritualists as charlatans, but they were stealing from people and the grief-stricken. Carr isn't. Shermer's attempt to play Houdini isn't justified. The second test isn't bad either. You can't swap the results and have them look equally valid, and Edison's 1st bulb wasn't Vegas today. Give RV 120 years.
@matt605 Just because someone has a PhD doesn't mean that they can't be a charlatan or incompetent or capable of fooling themselves. All scientists no matter how reputable expect their tests to be questioned by others. And the results of the second test were woeful.
I was mistaken. Shermer has a PhD in history, not science. Carr's PhD in science and MA in educational psychology trump Shermer's sole PhD in history for scrutinizing the test methodology.
Shermer is the charlatan for presenting himself as an expert in scientific research.
The second test generated valid results. They weren't spectacular, but they did catch some non-random descriptions.
@matt605 Once again, just because someone has a PhD doesn't mean that they are infalliable or honest. You are taking it for granted that the Stonehenge guy didn't know what was in the first envelope for no other reason that I can see than you believe in Remote Viewing and your only interest is in looking at "evidence" that supports what you already believe and ignoring any evidence that contradicts were you already believe in.
@Smithpolly Producing valid results don't prove dishonesty, unless you are already sold on the idea that it is impossible. Do you or Shermer possess any information, other than valid results of RV, that anyone acted dishonestly? I'm a fairly good analyst on these things, and I'm not afraid to admit what the results show. Shermer raised no qualms about the process until evidence for RV surfaced. Be fair.
@matt605 Once again.. 1) He was just observing a class. 2) If there were no hits on the first demonstration there would be no need to question the result. Since there was, it's his duty to put the Stonehenge guy to a further test which incidently the Stonehenge guy failed at miserably. This should at least give you a moment's pause. In any case, do you possess information that makes you 100% sure that the Stonehenge guy had no knowldege of what was in the first envelope?
@Smithpolly Shermer voiced no objection to the methodology until the test produced a result that he disliked. If he couldn't accept the results of the test then he should have said that before discussing results. Regarding the Stonehenge guy, there is no indication that there is any conspiracy between him and Carr to falsify the results of the test. It may well be that Shermer was invited to observe from start to finish, in which case, his rejection of the test results is even less valid.
@matt605 One more time. It's not a matter of liking or disliking the result. The result is out of the ordinary. It is not only appropriate for him to ask questions. He would be incompetent if he didn't. Once again, do you have any evidence that makes you 100% sure that the Stonehenge guy didn't know what was in the envelope?
@Smithpolly Telling a test participant what was in the envelope would void the purpose of the test. Do you have any proof that there was a conspiracy at work? I mean other than a test result that Shermer didn't like. You conspiracy theorists are a deluded bunch for sure. Why can't you just accept reality?
@matt605 Do you have any proof that makes you 100% sure that the Stonehenge guy didn't know what was in the first envelope? If you say, "I saw a bird flying today." I'd say OK. But if you say "I saw a tiger flying today." it's reasonable of me to ask for proof. When you say that remote viewing works, you're saying "I saw a tiger fly." It's out of the ordinary and the onus of proof is on you.
@Smithpolly I'm not proving one way or the other. I'm just saying Shermer had no objection until the experiment produced some evidence for RV. What persuades me that the evidence is valid is that some of it is on-target, and the results can't be swapped between tests easily. Just because you don't understand science doesn't mean science is not at work. Edison's 1st bulb was a dud. Now look at Las Vegas. Franklin didnt get a lightning strike with each thunderstorm. Give RV a century.
@Smithpolly PhDs are substantial scientific credentials, and Shermer was mistaken to attack the researcher's integrity and then dismiss the results.
Also, I've experienced widely differing test results based on having two different testers when I was young. Having an authority figure praise every correct answer build's a person's confidence. Then being silent on correct answers can create self-doubt and confusion.
@matt605 On the first video, the Stonehenge guy gets a direct hit. On the second, he's drawing a car for a galaxy. For some reason that I cannot comprehend, you are still impressed.
And I'm don't understand what you are saying in the second paragraph.
@Smithpolly The second test has someone was referencing "swirling motion" or something to that effect for galaxy. Anyway, Shermer wrongly says that the first example is not a controlled test. His only explanation for why the dude wrote "Stonehenge" is that they conspired to cheat. I don't accept conspiracy theories. The truest test is to swap the outcomes and the photographs. Do they still make sense? No they don't. RV isn't random. Give it 120 years like Edison's lamp.
@matt605 "Swirling motion" That could be in the ocean or a swimming pool or a tornado. Back to Stonehenge guy. First test. Direct hit. Brilliant example of remote viewing? Second test, a car for a galaxy.
It's reasonable to ask if he had knew what was in the first envelope? Do you have any reason to be 100% sure that he didn't know? I don't understand what you mean by swapping the outcomes and the photographs.
@Smithpolly In the second test, he produced some valid results. Because you can't make the drawing from the first test match the picture from the second test, and vice-versa, the results are non-random. Edison's first bulb burned only 40 hours. 120 years later, look at the lights on the Vegas strip. Ben Franklin didn't get a lightning strike every time he flew a kite. Does that mean lightning is not electricity? Nope. Give the future a chance, and don't fall prey to a false Houdini.
@matt605 I'm not even vaguely impressed with the results in the second test. I don't understand how anyone never mind someone with a PhD could be. I don't understand what you mean by your second sentence. And just because light bulbs works doesn't mean that remote viewing works. There have been many theories throughout time that have faded away because they're not true. Remote viewing could just as easily be one of them rather than the light bulb that you desperately want it to be.
@Smithpolly One other thing... the second test did not include 10 people and it didn't include the instructor knowing what the image was. They could have included more people and they could have shown the image to the instructor before the test began. Essentially, this implies that they aren't picture-viewing, but mind-reading, and the more people involved, the better the results can be. But no one can read Shermer's mind. It's all mush between his ears.
@Smithpolly Keep an open mind. Disagreement with authority figures is severely punished at every step of our formal educational process. It takes some time to unlearn the bad stuff we learn. I suspect you're off to enjoy the post-hurricane sunshine, but I'm no mind-reader.
@matt605 I have a open mind. If someone shows me reasonable evidence that remote viewing exists, I'm more than happy to believe in it. There was no evidence in these videos. An open mind doesn't mean that I have to believe every fairy story someone makes up without question. As to disagreement with authority figures, you're the one is enamoured with PhDs.
Shermer showing up late to the seminar is a bad excuse for rejecting otherwise solid evidence. The fact that Carr's PhD is in psychology while Shermer's is in history is an important point. Besides, you have failed to provide anything to support your belief in a conspiracy to defraud observers of the experiment.
RV isn't well understood by anyone. It's like Edison's light bulb. But 120 years later, look at Times Square at night!
@matt605 Where does it say that Sherman showed up late for the class? And given that in your last comment you were trying to perusade me that I shouldn't be afraid to disagree with authority figures, I'm not sure why you are now bringing up Carr's PhD in this one. You have failed to provide anything to support your belief that the Stonehenge guy didn't know what was in the first envelope.
Shermer says he wasn't at the start of the session at 7:05 in the clip. Why so late?
Carr has a PhD in psychology, while Shermer's PhD is in history. Those are two very different types of degrees, and Shermer is not a better authority on scientific testing. You have provided no proof to support your conspiracy theory that Carr and Stonehendge Man were scheming. Lacking that proof, there is no reason to believe Shermer's fantasy that the results are random.
@matt605 Maybe the traffic was heavy. In any case, even if he was on time, the Stonehenge guy could have found out what was in the envelope before he arrived. And given that, the Stonehenge guy gave a direct hit in the first video and failed miserably in the second, there is reason to ask if he knew what was in the first envelope.
@Smithpolly Stonhenge Man and Carr were conspiring with the Anti-Castro Cubans all along. See where that leads? There's no evidence of anything wrong with the first test.
RV is not well understood. It's like Edison's electric light or Franklin's experiments with flying kites in thunder storms. But Shermer is no Houdini, who debunked con-artist spiritualists either.
@matt605 He got a direct hit on the first test. He failed miserably on the second. And if all you've done is looked at this video, how can you say that you are certain that Stonehenge guy didn't know what was in the envelope?
@Smithpolly The 2nd test wasn't completely wrong, but he's not consistent. There's also nothing at stake. It's not like spiritualists who Houdini exposed. Spiritualists were doing terrible things to grieving loved ones of the dead, and not just that they were stealing but the way they were stealing. The drawings do require interpretation, but not so much as to conclude they are only random. He's not showman, he's just doing multi-purpose room seminars.
@matt605 The second test results were pathetic. And so what if "Remote Viewers" aren't stalking people at funerals? They are giving classes which presumably they charge for. And even if they don't charge for the classes, if they are saying in public that they have this extraordinary skill, they should take it as a given that people are going to put them to a test and not just take their word for it.
@Smithpolly Because they aren't stealing from people outright, or over-charging for the seminars, there is little incentive to defraud the public with plants and scams. It looks like a community center class, but the instructor has a PhD from a real university, and he is qualified to lecture at most universities. If RVers in the Pentagon were perfect, would you expect them to admit it?
@matt605 He has a PhD from a real university. Great. Then he'll be well aware that the workshop demonstration isn't valid as proof. And he'll know that if he is making extraordinary claims that his methods will be open to being questioned and tested thoroughly.
@matt605 Dr. Carr is the head of the "Western Institute for Remote Viewing." Google it and check out the website; he sells lots of "how-to" remote viewing CDs. The CDs and his workshops are pretty expensive. He is obviously making a fair amount of money. Did you know con artists, such as "Three Card Monte" hucksters, frequently do indeed use audience plants? Carr has every reason to keep his students fooled. He also presumably knew Shermer was coming and might have wanted to put on a show.
@Megaritz And Shermer makes money from his skeptics scams. Shermer did not object to the test construct until the one dude nailed Stonehenge. That's a sleazy thing to do. RV is very new. No one could imagine the Las Vegas strip when Edison's first light bulb glowed. We can be thankful Shermer was not around for that or we would be reading this web page by candle light... or something.
@matt605 I'll agree that Shermer should have pointed out from the beginning that the class was not a controlled experiment, and that therefore he could not take anything occurring in it as good evidence that RV was bonafide. That was his mistake--failing to point it out at the start, so as to avoid accusations of moving the goalposts. He should have known better. I also would have liked to hear more about the session time, since Shermer failed to account for where "field" and "London" came from.
@Megaritz Shermer actually did prove the effectiveness of astrology. Search YouTube for "Shermer astrology" and you'll see. Of nine people, 7 said the readings were accurate. On the last two, when the group pressure was on to go along, he switched the readings. The accuracy dropped even with the pressure to go along. The Las Vegas strip occured less than a century after Edison's first light bulb, but we can all be thankful Shermer wasn't there at the electric light's first glow. Regards.
@matt605 I read your first several comparisons between RV and the lightbulb, you don't need to keep beating that horse. No disrespect intended. I'm currently watching my old Exploring the Unknown VHS tapes (that's the show this clip is from) and when I'm done, I'll look into that astrology clip. Thanks for the reference.
@MsHojat And I'm not talking religion is apart of the world system&has nothing 2 do with what am talking about. Please explain to me were u think the info comes from?How does this knowledge get convey to mankind? U can think there no spirit realm Ephesians 6:12 does apply here I know u think religion has nothing to do with religion The Bible is a tool not a self improvement book,as Book of Miracles would like people to believe.It is a Survival Manual 2 getting out of here by the narrow road
@MsHojat He wrote only two words and one was "Stonehenge," and the picture was Stonehenge. Shermer had no objection to the scientific controls until he saw the dramatic evidence for the RVers. Then he attacked the integrity of the people conducting the experiment. How low can you go? And the guy conducting the workshop is a PhD, so he knows some things about correct experiments too. Remote Viewing is weak, like Edison's first light bulb. Ever seen Vegas at night? Give RV 130 years.
@matt605 Having a doctorate does not make someone knowledgeable in correct test procedures, nor does it make them exempt from being a potential cheater. RV is so "weak" it has not been proven scientifically by proper test conditions in proper studies, and peer-reviewed. If it was the case... EVEN WEAK, then RV would have more credibility. I was following RV like 12 years ago, and it was the same self-supporting style that exists now. Need to prove the small claim before saying it can be big.
@MsHojat But Shermer failed to knock down the evidence presented for RV. He never voiced an objection to any part of the experiment until he was confronted with evidence that disagreed with his pre-set conclusion. A PhD is a research credential. There were less than 10 people, one of them wrote two words, and one word was the test image exactly. And the other scribblings were not so bad either. RV is weak, I agree. Ben Franklin didn't get a lightning strike in every thunderstorm either.
@matt605 If RV was so effective, the RVers could be extremely successful people aside from just teaching others (after getting paid), or showing groupies in their powers in uncontrolled scenarios. RVers could be finding dead bodies, murder weapons, murderers, and winning huge money like JREF's 1million dollars. The fact is they can't be effective when it comes down to things, and like other supernatural claimants, stick in their own small world making money off the gullible
@MsHojat LOL, if you're so smart, how come you're not rich? RVers can be compared to Edison's early light bulbs-- of no commercial use at all. It's like cloning too. They cloned a sheep, but they can't get it to pay for itself until they can reliably clone a racehorse. The dude wrote "Stonehenge."
Q&A A former Remote viewer speaks out. What does the remote viewer tap into?
What do you all think of this? John seems very sincere about his experience has anyone had similar experiences as he has? Such as experiencing intelligent nonhuman entities?
RV is Channel Demonic spirits the info comes from them the fallen this is what they don't tell people.As he said they don't know where the info comes from. This false theologies that cause believers 2 doubt, all kinds of false standards of spirituality that causes believers 2 think that they’re not really required 2 live with Gods Laws. We are warned about this when u contact u open yourself up 2 spirits and most are demonic in this realm I know this to be fact if they say diff they are lying
@zipfreer The US government stopped spending money on it because it doesn't work. It is not taken seriously by corporations because it doesn't work. It is not in any science text or subject to mainstream scientific study because it doesn't work. It has been scientifically tested over several decades but it fails rigorous testing designed to eliminate the problems highlighted by Shermer in these videos. No, RV doesn't work.
@2cabs2toucan U are telling me lol OK pal! The info isn't reliable even the best RV only gets 70% to 80% rate It's where the info comes from it's the problem anyway doesn't matter what u think ..and it won't doesn't matter now anyway ! And I hope people stop trying to RV open them up to bad spirits
@zipfreer Where did those stats come from? Out of your nether regions or a scientific study? How is success was measured? Do you understand the problems with measuring success of RV that were pointed out by Shermer in these videos?
@2cabs2toucan Shermer is wrong. and doesn't have the gift! Remote viewing has been proven to be real and more I was one ! Once again Shermer is wrong than “chance.” If he had bothered to read any of the experiments, or literature about them, he would know that The reason the military abandoned the program was not because there wasn't anything to it, but rather it wasn't consistent enough for their needs and they did really like where the source was coming from Ok I am talking from experience !
@OhmgrownCron Science is limited to discovering “Laws of Nature RV The info isn't reliable even the best RV only gets 70% to 80% rate It all has to do with the source people don't understand where most if not all abilities come from are demonic and these spirits lie and are unreliable Although the source is supernatural ,aka mediation channeling the means of seduction is natural-occurring on the human level.through the hypocrisy of men that speak lies." It the luck of the draw what spirit u get
@zipfreer spirits? Since when was Remote Viewing based on spirits? Obviously there is dissonance between even what the believers in RV believe to explain it.
@MsHojat Where do you think it info comes from?There is dissonance between even what the believers in RV believe Because they don't want to believe it or don't what to know the truth I am not an armchair blogger I know the truth as I was one And if they or whoever in RV is telling u different they are lying or in denial!
@zipfreer Sounds like religion's "I'm right and you're wrong" argument. Just because your personal brain contends that there are spirits used in RV, does not make it the case. If you want to call them wrong, go ahead, but that doesn't help your cause as you're just bashing the people on the same side as you.
My whole point is that the dissonance proves that there's a problem with it.
@zipfreer Ha ha ha, "We are warned about this when u contact u open yourself up 2 spirits and most are demonic in this realm I know this to be fact if they say diff they are lying
" wow well you heard it here first people as we know it, demons and spirits are real, despite all the evidence to the contrary, this person says its fact OR THEY ARE LYING.
I like Michael Shermer. His book Borderlands of Science is classic of understanding the relationship of fringe or pseudoscience to actually science. This video does a good job of demonstrating everything wrong with remote viewing.
However, in fact, little or nothing is done right by the remote viewers in this video. Even the one "hit" is what should have been termed an AOL, or analytic overlay and ignored.
I would not believe in remote viewing if I attended this seminar.
A guy finds one target in the whole world and its a "lucky guess" or maybe he was a paid actor to fool shermer yes that must be it if you can`t find a explaination for a phenomenon invent a Conspiracy theory like all good sceptics.
He wrote Stone henge, but he also wrote nuclear power plant right above it. And he also drew a couple of things. All of which was ignored. And all the painting of the other people were ignored. One hit surrounded by a huge amount of missess is not impressing.
cia poored millions into this program, ray highmen is just a puppet for goverment to try and debunk the whole thing, because the truth for the goverment was too much to handel, public haing the ability to remote view anthong anywhere any place any time, is going to have the worlds goverments dirty little secrets exposed. which are being exposed more and more now anyway , regardless of rv, when to much truth is hidden is will build like a dam ready to burst!
You deal with demons not with good angels. All kind of krysatl, energy, light tricks, oobe, tarot, joga, channeling, success praying etc are demonic and against God`s will. You should pray to God not to some "angels". 100% you are in demons possession and spread their religion to others. They will help you but to get to hell only. Time to wake up.
...impressive stuff from Mark Carr....but here's one for any Americans watching this: Stonehenge is about 200 miles from London :P Well, in Yankland that'd be next door I spose but in UK, it's not what we'd call 'near to London' by any stretch of the imagination! lol!
For those interested in seeing Shermer having his ass handed to him by the brilliant and far more "Bright" Stephen C. Meyer, check out my profile. Once you see the intellectual beatdown Meyer gives him you'll never look at Shermer the same again.
I think it's funny that Shermer ALWAYS finds what he expects to find...that's real psychic power. Check out his firewalking video. 'It's just physics'. Ha.
if 200.000 people see a angel a day in the future, randi will say, just mass hallucination, if he see it himself, he will maybe check how many drugs there is in his coffie, we cant explain everything, and people who always try to debunk, want accept things they cant explain :D
People that are not a telepath or clairvoyant, can be taught to be able to Remote View. It's amazing stuff. I've studied it a bit. Weird and amazing stuff.
Remote viewing (RV) is a fancy name for telepathy or clairvoyance, the alleged psychic ability to perceive places, persons, and actions that are not within the range of the senses.
The term seems to have been invented by physicist Dr. Russell Targ and physicist/scientologist Dr. Harold Puthoff to describe their work with alleged psychics for the U.S. government in a project known as Star Gate.
I would expect better from a guy who claims to be a skeptic. This 'group' you show in your video has none of the tight controls that actual scientific research on these matters observes. Scientific control conditions that obtained significant results with double blind judges. Stop going for the straw-men Shermer.
i saw on a program that the us military used remote viewers to infiltrate russian military bunkers and also bombed somewher that was housing human/animal experiments. possibly bollocks of course.
nope ive done some rv myself , not bollocks at all, its even being explained in scientiffic terms now, well those scientist that are pushing and expanding the boarders of progress, certainly not the ones fozen in a pre made concept of relality
Obviously since you are asking this question you have no idea of what really goes on in this reality. Have you actually researched 9/11 at all or the government and its global connections? Have you ever even read the original Constitution for that matter? I suggest you do some homework instead of just blindly believing everything that is spoon fed to you the by elitist-fueled media. Research, research, research!!!!
@mrcomedy454 - Of course I'm serious. Levity would be totally out of place in a discussion on the potentials of remote viewing for the discovery of major governmental-extraterrestrial conspiracies. The Original Constitution is quite clear on that point.
They are the two scientists (laser physicists) involved in government funded psychic research at SRI (Stanford research institute)
They have written books on the matter. There are also a few videos on youtube, but I recommend the books (Mind-Reach, The Mind Race)
See Also: Soviet (Russian) Psychic Research (The Russians had a psychic program as well. You can find video evidence of these procedures on youtube - see Nina Kulagina)
of course that firefighter is an accomplice dont you get that he has a whole class of 'students' that want to be like that guy and give him money in order to become that.. dont get me wrong I believe in paranormal things and maybe thats only cause those things are not yet proven by science
actually many remote viewing institutes do not charge for information and/or lessons. if they do charge its to fund more research and experiments to make it a more recognized science.
Anyone can learn this, and its 80-100% accurate when properly trained. This has been confirmed with double blind studies.
Although in this video, it seems they were taking too long in sketching. You can only sketch for around 4 seconds, after that you start to fuge it with your imagination.
"80-100% accurate" sounds impressive but can you please cite the study so we can see how it was measured. As Shermer shows in these videos, the proponents are very loose about what they count as a hit. If you couple this with a shotgun approach how can you lose?
Again, have you got any evidence that a shorter period of sketching brings greater success?
Randi's challenge is completely and totally fair -- fine print and all. Different "talents" require different tests. And the tests are agreed upon by BOTH parties. No surprises and no nonsense. There is no evidence for remote viewing. It's total bullshit. A test could easily be devised for any of these clowns, but amazingly no one has tried. Why not win the money and give it to starving children? These psychics are truly heartless, or could it be they are powerless? Nah.
you obviously have not done ANY research into remote viewing (SRV). quantum and metaphysics are actual sciences, same thing here. if it had no validity, then the government wouldn't be interested in it, let alone USING it. the CIA started looking into it to compete with the Soviets and army intelligence continues to use it. look up Detachment G, Grill Flame, Ingo Swann. Try actually researching something before you bash it.
Sounds like the opinion of a dickhead XD im convinced this phenomena should be seriously investigated by the scientiific community ..anyone who disagrees clearly has no understanding of remote viewing...
Right on! I was hoping that would be your response I actually am a huge fan of Randi and the jref ..Yes i will apply in the near future but Rv will not be what ill attempt to demonstrate for them btw I understand your skepticism I had a similar mindset a few years ago but due to the results of my own experiemts ive come to the conclusion this stuff is a reality not fantasy ..
"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" -- Carl Sagan
I wish you luck. Alison Smith is an incredibly capable and open-minded young woman who runs all test protocols for Randi's million dollar challenge. She is imminently fair. No one has ever passed even the preliminary test in roughly 30 years, and the tests have been incredibly simple and straightforward. I have spoken to the guy who is writing a lengthy book on the challenge.
Word. I just starting researching this because I had lost my wedding ring... I found it on my first attempt... I don't care who believes me or who doesn't... That ring was missing for three days, I searched high and low for it... After 5 minutes of attempting RV, I found it.
Every challenge is different and the protocols are agreed on in advance by BOTH parties. Randi always says: "Tell me what you can do and with what degree of accuracy." If testers can do what they say they can do, they win. That's it and that's not "impossible." I have spoken with Alison Smith, the person in charge of working with applicants. She is the most earnest, sincere, and honest person you could ever find.
Obviously if you can only produce the results of chance, you would not win.
Without claiming any inside knowledge of either Randi's foundation or the yellow bamboo people, I rather suspect that the latter were perhaps more the winners of the hearts, or moral winners if you like, than actually passing even the preliminary test, let alone getting the million dollars. Nobody ever has, because Randi keeps spoiling their acts by his negative vibrations, you know. They just "don't feel strong tonight" whenever he's around.
@pitbull103 remote viewers have found missing children, we dont need james randis extreame skeptic mind to prove whats possible, james is a waste of time, remote viewers in some groups are also self funding, by winning on betting games with remote view skills
the followers of randi never fail to amaze me,thinking randi is truely the only right person, its like an obbsession to dissprove all things outside of a excepted possiblillity, well it was once widly acepted the earth was flat, infact you would be considered mad if you said otherwise, just because you cant understand somthing does not mean its not possible.science does not even yet fully understand electricity yet we use it every day,quit being afraid of unknown, your surrounded by unknowns
@realityexplorations I refer you back to my original posting. If remote viewing is so great, it should be extremely easy to develop a simple test protocol. Call up the JREF and ask for Alison Smith. Fill out application, perform test, collect million. Purchase a nice vacation or give the money to starving orphans. Until you do that, credibility equals ZERO.
@realityexplorations The starving orphans are waiting. Surely there is ONE "remote viewer" out there who can pass a simple test. I won't hold my breath.
And you would never insult me to my face, but you are a typical cowardly internet warrior. Go back to mom's basement and do some more remote viewing.
@pitbull103 Please read my other comment here, about Randi.
RV works about 70% of the time. That is enough to use it practically (with more sessions on same target, for redundancy) but not enough to prove anything on a single trial.
I am doing ARV, right now, have put money where my mouth is, and won 5 out of 6 bets so far, where pure chance was 50/50. Tests still ongoing, and the numbers will tell the story soon enough.
But it does mess with one's mind, I'll give you that, it's freaky :)
@pitbull103 What exactly is the test at JREF, on RV ? If you know I mean. I never checked it for myself, but do know viewers with outstanding records that have stated Randi's tests are flawed / skewed pretty bad against the viewer.
@pitbull103 Not so easy friend, Randi wants to do one single trial, and have VERY skewed rules. Now I know RV works, because I use it right now to win sports bets, and have dozens of great sessions. I will let the bets gather and let the numbers speak for themselves, not this "what if" of the internet.
So statistically it can be shown that RV is WAY better than pure chance, in betting for instance. But not on one single trial like Randi wants.
thanks for being at least one of the few who have actually looked into this before shouting fake etc
ive done a few recent rv sessions, privatly in my own home , while the target was in a friends home in a room ive never been in, certainly i had good results i think,
i saw brown and felt soft fabric then a round like a ball shape and some other curves that could of been edge of a chair , but i didnt realy know
it was a cuddly toy of a monky in a chair big and soft and with a round head
@foathkent I am sorry to say it but the people who write comments like this are the real wankers! Does it make you feel clever or something? Get a life mate.
Sherman and the psychologist are the typical foolish sceptics, whose opinions are intellectually-based and worthless.
dawes777 12 hours ago
How the fuck did the guy wrote stonehenge?
NewWaysMusic 4 months ago
There is an intelligent power (whom we call God) who created the Laws of Nature"& as a result of this action the universe came into existence.There would be no universe as we know it,without the existence of these “Laws”They exist because a supreme creative power designed them, brought them into existence & gave them domain over the entire universe rather then they always existed or they spontaneously came into existence Science is limited 2 discovering Laws of Nature God is in control
zipfreer 6 months ago
"consistently tested at a rate above chance"
That means it is more than randomness. It is however as clearly useless as Edison's light first light bulb. The bulb burned only 40 hours. No profitable use for it at all.
And the "Stonehenge" word written is a slam-dunk! If Shermer intended to reject such clear evidence as a lucky hit or a set up, why did he even show? What exactly was "uncontrolled" about the experiment? Shermer didn't raise any objections at all until it worked.
matt605 6 months ago
michael shermer is a Faithless Idiot...And U my Fine Feathered Friend are an Equally Faithless MORON!!!!!!!
CelticBadBoyPoet7 6 months ago
Using a class of beginners to test the efficacy of RV is absurd, even at an anecdotal level. You should give a test to accomplished viewers. That has already been done several times and showed RV works. Just a fact. Seems to me Schermer stacked the deck to get the outcome he wanted.
alexandria22309 7 months ago
@alexandria22309 I'm just so thankful Shermer wasn't around when Edison's first light bulb burned only 40 hours. Absolutely no use for that at all, is there?
matt605 6 months ago
@matt605 that is such an idiotic claim. Edison was a scientist who was backing up his inventions with science. His results were undeniable, and easily measurable. Having a short life makes something less efficient. Something being less efficient is different from something flaky which may or may not (more likely not) get things right above significantly above random chance.
Fusion reactors are not particularly efficient things right now, it doesn't make them pseudoscience or dismissible.
MsHojat 6 months ago
MsHojat Look at the evidence. The dude wrote, "Stonehenge," and the picture was of Stonehenge. Shermer says it's either a lucky hit or a plant, but he did not raise any issues of scientific control until the evidence appeared. That's bad science and unprofessional to boot. And even Shermer was voicing "London" without knowing why. The Pengaton studies said they had scientific proof, but Shermer has just one guy in opposition. Remote Viewing is weak, like Edison's first light bulb.
matt605 6 months ago
@matt605 1. The more people you have guessing, the more likelyhood of being right.
2. The more things being guessed, the more likelyhood of being "right"
3. The more ambiguious the things are which are being guessed, the more likelyhood of being "right"
One guy may have got a hit, but that doesn't mean much when there's so many other words which are misses. How are you supposed to distinguish which word or picture is the right one? The fact is it was not a controlled experiment, regardless
MsHojat 6 months ago
@MsHojat Dude wrote "Stonehenge" and even Shermer said "London." Besides, Shermer never voiced any objection to the controls before he saw the dramatic evidence against him.
matt605 6 months ago
@matt605 There were no controls in Part 1. It was just a class which is why he set up a controlled test in part 2. The Stonehenge guy fails miserably in the controlled demonstration. As for London, it's 90 miles away from Stonehenge.
Smithpolly 5 months ago in playlist Cut the Crap
@Smithpolly Sure there were controls. The participants weren't what the photo depicted. And since Shermer's picture choice was the universe, being 90 miles off target is not too bad when the possibilities include places whose distances are measured in light years (about 5.8 trillion miles is one light year). Notice that Shermer does not dispute the scientific controls until evidence for RV is presented to him. That's unfair. Edison's first light bulb was weak, but look at Vegas today.
matt605 5 months ago
@matt605 What were the controls? I'm assuming that you mean the participants weren't awere what the photo depicted. Well, since the Stonghenge guy failed in the second experiment, I think there's a good chance he knew what the photo depicted in the first part. And since there were a number of people guessing it's not surprising that one of them, presumably a well travelled man would pick London. If you're impressed with that, I wouldn't look for a job with Google maps, if I were you.
Smithpolly 5 months ago
@Smithpolly Experimental controls-- the participants didn't know what the picture showed, the instructor didn't tell them, and an obvserver voiced no concerns about the methodology (until he saw evidence he didn't like). I'm not convinced the Stonehenge guy failed the second time, but unreliable results do occur when testing the unknown. Ben Franklin didn't get a lightning strike every time. Was he wrong? No, Ben Franklin was right, but not according to your standards.
matt605 5 months ago
@matt605 It wasn't a controlled experiment. He was just observing a class. How do you know the instructor didn't tell the Stonehenge guy what was in the envelope? You don't . You're taking his word for it. We do know that in the controlled test where the intructor didn't know what was in the envelope the Stonehenge guy couldn't tell what was in the envelope either.
Smithpolly 5 months ago
@Smithpolly No one contested the validity of the test until it produced results that proved RV. Even Shermer accepted that the image was not "revealed" to the participants until after they stopped writing-- 3:10. The instructor's PhD is a valid research credential, just as valid as Shermer's PhD. The instructor is an expert in RV, Shermer is not. Shermer failed to cite anything that even remotely proved corruption of the process, but he rejected the results anyway. That's unscientific.
matt605 5 months ago
@matt605 All he says is "When the target is finally revealed, the class is startled" That does not mean the same thing as " I accept that the image was not revealed to the Stonehenge guy." As to questioning the validity of the test, you make it sound like this is something bizarre when in fact it is exactly what scientists are supposed to do.
Smithpolly 5 months ago
@Smithpolly Scientists do scrutinize test methodologies, that is true. However, Shermer's only criticism was leveled against the integrity of another PhD. Houdini used to reveal spiritualists as charlatans, but they were stealing from people and the grief-stricken. Carr isn't. Shermer's attempt to play Houdini isn't justified. The second test isn't bad either. You can't swap the results and have them look equally valid, and Edison's 1st bulb wasn't Vegas today. Give RV 120 years.
matt605 5 months ago
@matt605 Just because someone has a PhD doesn't mean that they can't be a charlatan or incompetent or capable of fooling themselves. All scientists no matter how reputable expect their tests to be questioned by others. And the results of the second test were woeful.
Smithpolly 5 months ago
@Smithpolly
I was mistaken. Shermer has a PhD in history, not science. Carr's PhD in science and MA in educational psychology trump Shermer's sole PhD in history for scrutinizing the test methodology.
Shermer is the charlatan for presenting himself as an expert in scientific research.
The second test generated valid results. They weren't spectacular, but they did catch some non-random descriptions.
matt605 5 months ago
@Smithpolly Shermer also has an MA in experimental psychology, but didn't continue it to the PhD level.
matt605 5 months ago
@matt605 Once again, just because someone has a PhD doesn't mean that they are infalliable or honest. You are taking it for granted that the Stonehenge guy didn't know what was in the first envelope for no other reason that I can see than you believe in Remote Viewing and your only interest is in looking at "evidence" that supports what you already believe and ignoring any evidence that contradicts were you already believe in.
Smithpolly 5 months ago
@Smithpolly Producing valid results don't prove dishonesty, unless you are already sold on the idea that it is impossible. Do you or Shermer possess any information, other than valid results of RV, that anyone acted dishonestly? I'm a fairly good analyst on these things, and I'm not afraid to admit what the results show. Shermer raised no qualms about the process until evidence for RV surfaced. Be fair.
matt605 5 months ago
@matt605 Once again.. 1) He was just observing a class. 2) If there were no hits on the first demonstration there would be no need to question the result. Since there was, it's his duty to put the Stonehenge guy to a further test which incidently the Stonehenge guy failed at miserably. This should at least give you a moment's pause. In any case, do you possess information that makes you 100% sure that the Stonehenge guy had no knowldege of what was in the first envelope?
Smithpolly 5 months ago
@Smithpolly Shermer voiced no objection to the methodology until the test produced a result that he disliked. If he couldn't accept the results of the test then he should have said that before discussing results. Regarding the Stonehenge guy, there is no indication that there is any conspiracy between him and Carr to falsify the results of the test. It may well be that Shermer was invited to observe from start to finish, in which case, his rejection of the test results is even less valid.
matt605 5 months ago
@matt605 One more time. It's not a matter of liking or disliking the result. The result is out of the ordinary. It is not only appropriate for him to ask questions. He would be incompetent if he didn't. Once again, do you have any evidence that makes you 100% sure that the Stonehenge guy didn't know what was in the envelope?
Smithpolly 5 months ago
@Smithpolly Telling a test participant what was in the envelope would void the purpose of the test. Do you have any proof that there was a conspiracy at work? I mean other than a test result that Shermer didn't like. You conspiracy theorists are a deluded bunch for sure. Why can't you just accept reality?
matt605 5 months ago
@matt605 Do you have any proof that makes you 100% sure that the Stonehenge guy didn't know what was in the first envelope? If you say, "I saw a bird flying today." I'd say OK. But if you say "I saw a tiger flying today." it's reasonable of me to ask for proof. When you say that remote viewing works, you're saying "I saw a tiger fly." It's out of the ordinary and the onus of proof is on you.
Smithpolly 5 months ago
@Smithpolly I'm not proving one way or the other. I'm just saying Shermer had no objection until the experiment produced some evidence for RV. What persuades me that the evidence is valid is that some of it is on-target, and the results can't be swapped between tests easily. Just because you don't understand science doesn't mean science is not at work. Edison's 1st bulb was a dud. Now look at Las Vegas. Franklin didnt get a lightning strike with each thunderstorm. Give RV a century.
matt605 5 months ago
@Smithpolly PhDs are substantial scientific credentials, and Shermer was mistaken to attack the researcher's integrity and then dismiss the results.
Also, I've experienced widely differing test results based on having two different testers when I was young. Having an authority figure praise every correct answer build's a person's confidence. Then being silent on correct answers can create self-doubt and confusion.
matt605 5 months ago
@matt605 On the first video, the Stonehenge guy gets a direct hit. On the second, he's drawing a car for a galaxy. For some reason that I cannot comprehend, you are still impressed.
And I'm don't understand what you are saying in the second paragraph.
Smithpolly 5 months ago
@Smithpolly The second test has someone was referencing "swirling motion" or something to that effect for galaxy. Anyway, Shermer wrongly says that the first example is not a controlled test. His only explanation for why the dude wrote "Stonehenge" is that they conspired to cheat. I don't accept conspiracy theories. The truest test is to swap the outcomes and the photographs. Do they still make sense? No they don't. RV isn't random. Give it 120 years like Edison's lamp.
matt605 5 months ago
@matt605 "Swirling motion" That could be in the ocean or a swimming pool or a tornado. Back to Stonehenge guy. First test. Direct hit. Brilliant example of remote viewing? Second test, a car for a galaxy.
It's reasonable to ask if he had knew what was in the first envelope? Do you have any reason to be 100% sure that he didn't know? I don't understand what you mean by swapping the outcomes and the photographs.
Smithpolly 5 months ago
@Smithpolly In the second test, he produced some valid results. Because you can't make the drawing from the first test match the picture from the second test, and vice-versa, the results are non-random. Edison's first bulb burned only 40 hours. 120 years later, look at the lights on the Vegas strip. Ben Franklin didn't get a lightning strike every time he flew a kite. Does that mean lightning is not electricity? Nope. Give the future a chance, and don't fall prey to a false Houdini.
matt605 5 months ago
@matt605 I'm not even vaguely impressed with the results in the second test. I don't understand how anyone never mind someone with a PhD could be. I don't understand what you mean by your second sentence. And just because light bulbs works doesn't mean that remote viewing works. There have been many theories throughout time that have faded away because they're not true. Remote viewing could just as easily be one of them rather than the light bulb that you desperately want it to be.
Smithpolly 5 months ago
@Smithpolly One other thing... the second test did not include 10 people and it didn't include the instructor knowing what the image was. They could have included more people and they could have shown the image to the instructor before the test began. Essentially, this implies that they aren't picture-viewing, but mind-reading, and the more people involved, the better the results can be. But no one can read Shermer's mind. It's all mush between his ears.
matt605 5 months ago
@matt605 Ok. Either you've got some shield that deflects all reasonable arguments or you're a troll. I hope for your sake that it's the latter.
Smithpolly 5 months ago
@Smithpolly Keep an open mind. Disagreement with authority figures is severely punished at every step of our formal educational process. It takes some time to unlearn the bad stuff we learn. I suspect you're off to enjoy the post-hurricane sunshine, but I'm no mind-reader.
matt605 5 months ago
@matt605 I have a open mind. If someone shows me reasonable evidence that remote viewing exists, I'm more than happy to believe in it. There was no evidence in these videos. An open mind doesn't mean that I have to believe every fairy story someone makes up without question. As to disagreement with authority figures, you're the one is enamoured with PhDs.
Smithpolly 5 months ago
@Smithpolly
Shermer showing up late to the seminar is a bad excuse for rejecting otherwise solid evidence. The fact that Carr's PhD is in psychology while Shermer's is in history is an important point. Besides, you have failed to provide anything to support your belief in a conspiracy to defraud observers of the experiment.
RV isn't well understood by anyone. It's like Edison's light bulb. But 120 years later, look at Times Square at night!
matt605 5 months ago
@matt605 Where does it say that Sherman showed up late for the class? And given that in your last comment you were trying to perusade me that I shouldn't be afraid to disagree with authority figures, I'm not sure why you are now bringing up Carr's PhD in this one. You have failed to provide anything to support your belief that the Stonehenge guy didn't know what was in the first envelope.
Smithpolly 5 months ago
@Smithpolly
Shermer says he wasn't at the start of the session at 7:05 in the clip. Why so late?
Carr has a PhD in psychology, while Shermer's PhD is in history. Those are two very different types of degrees, and Shermer is not a better authority on scientific testing. You have provided no proof to support your conspiracy theory that Carr and Stonehendge Man were scheming. Lacking that proof, there is no reason to believe Shermer's fantasy that the results are random.
matt605 5 months ago
@matt605 Maybe the traffic was heavy. In any case, even if he was on time, the Stonehenge guy could have found out what was in the envelope before he arrived. And given that, the Stonehenge guy gave a direct hit in the first video and failed miserably in the second, there is reason to ask if he knew what was in the first envelope.
Smithpolly 5 months ago
@Smithpolly Stonhenge Man and Carr were conspiring with the Anti-Castro Cubans all along. See where that leads? There's no evidence of anything wrong with the first test.
RV is not well understood. It's like Edison's electric light or Franklin's experiments with flying kites in thunder storms. But Shermer is no Houdini, who debunked con-artist spiritualists either.
matt605 5 months ago
@matt605 He got a direct hit on the first test. He failed miserably on the second. And if all you've done is looked at this video, how can you say that you are certain that Stonehenge guy didn't know what was in the envelope?
Smithpolly 5 months ago
@Smithpolly The 2nd test wasn't completely wrong, but he's not consistent. There's also nothing at stake. It's not like spiritualists who Houdini exposed. Spiritualists were doing terrible things to grieving loved ones of the dead, and not just that they were stealing but the way they were stealing. The drawings do require interpretation, but not so much as to conclude they are only random. He's not showman, he's just doing multi-purpose room seminars.
matt605 5 months ago
@matt605 The second test results were pathetic. And so what if "Remote Viewers" aren't stalking people at funerals? They are giving classes which presumably they charge for. And even if they don't charge for the classes, if they are saying in public that they have this extraordinary skill, they should take it as a given that people are going to put them to a test and not just take their word for it.
Smithpolly 5 months ago
@Smithpolly Because they aren't stealing from people outright, or over-charging for the seminars, there is little incentive to defraud the public with plants and scams. It looks like a community center class, but the instructor has a PhD from a real university, and he is qualified to lecture at most universities. If RVers in the Pentagon were perfect, would you expect them to admit it?
matt605 5 months ago
@matt605 He has a PhD from a real university. Great. Then he'll be well aware that the workshop demonstration isn't valid as proof. And he'll know that if he is making extraordinary claims that his methods will be open to being questioned and tested thoroughly.
Smithpolly 5 months ago
@matt605 Dr. Carr is the head of the "Western Institute for Remote Viewing." Google it and check out the website; he sells lots of "how-to" remote viewing CDs. The CDs and his workshops are pretty expensive. He is obviously making a fair amount of money. Did you know con artists, such as "Three Card Monte" hucksters, frequently do indeed use audience plants? Carr has every reason to keep his students fooled. He also presumably knew Shermer was coming and might have wanted to put on a show.
Megaritz 3 weeks ago
@Megaritz And Shermer makes money from his skeptics scams. Shermer did not object to the test construct until the one dude nailed Stonehenge. That's a sleazy thing to do. RV is very new. No one could imagine the Las Vegas strip when Edison's first light bulb glowed. We can be thankful Shermer was not around for that or we would be reading this web page by candle light... or something.
matt605 3 weeks ago
@matt605 I'll agree that Shermer should have pointed out from the beginning that the class was not a controlled experiment, and that therefore he could not take anything occurring in it as good evidence that RV was bonafide. That was his mistake--failing to point it out at the start, so as to avoid accusations of moving the goalposts. He should have known better. I also would have liked to hear more about the session time, since Shermer failed to account for where "field" and "London" came from.
Megaritz 3 weeks ago
@Megaritz Shermer actually did prove the effectiveness of astrology. Search YouTube for "Shermer astrology" and you'll see. Of nine people, 7 said the readings were accurate. On the last two, when the group pressure was on to go along, he switched the readings. The accuracy dropped even with the pressure to go along. The Las Vegas strip occured less than a century after Edison's first light bulb, but we can all be thankful Shermer wasn't there at the electric light's first glow. Regards.
matt605 3 weeks ago
@matt605 I read your first several comparisons between RV and the lightbulb, you don't need to keep beating that horse. No disrespect intended. I'm currently watching my old Exploring the Unknown VHS tapes (that's the show this clip is from) and when I'm done, I'll look into that astrology clip. Thanks for the reference.
Megaritz 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@MsHojat And I'm not talking religion is apart of the world system&has nothing 2 do with what am talking about. Please explain to me were u think the info comes from?How does this knowledge get convey to mankind? U can think there no spirit realm Ephesians 6:12 does apply here I know u think religion has nothing to do with religion The Bible is a tool not a self improvement book,as Book of Miracles would like people to believe.It is a Survival Manual 2 getting out of here by the narrow road
zipfreer 6 months ago
@MsHojat He wrote only two words and one was "Stonehenge," and the picture was Stonehenge. Shermer had no objection to the scientific controls until he saw the dramatic evidence for the RVers. Then he attacked the integrity of the people conducting the experiment. How low can you go? And the guy conducting the workshop is a PhD, so he knows some things about correct experiments too. Remote Viewing is weak, like Edison's first light bulb. Ever seen Vegas at night? Give RV 130 years.
matt605 6 months ago
@matt605 Having a doctorate does not make someone knowledgeable in correct test procedures, nor does it make them exempt from being a potential cheater. RV is so "weak" it has not been proven scientifically by proper test conditions in proper studies, and peer-reviewed. If it was the case... EVEN WEAK, then RV would have more credibility. I was following RV like 12 years ago, and it was the same self-supporting style that exists now. Need to prove the small claim before saying it can be big.
MsHojat 6 months ago
@MsHojat But Shermer failed to knock down the evidence presented for RV. He never voiced an objection to any part of the experiment until he was confronted with evidence that disagreed with his pre-set conclusion. A PhD is a research credential. There were less than 10 people, one of them wrote two words, and one word was the test image exactly. And the other scribblings were not so bad either. RV is weak, I agree. Ben Franklin didn't get a lightning strike in every thunderstorm either.
matt605 6 months ago
@matt605 If RV was so effective, the RVers could be extremely successful people aside from just teaching others (after getting paid), or showing groupies in their powers in uncontrolled scenarios. RVers could be finding dead bodies, murder weapons, murderers, and winning huge money like JREF's 1million dollars. The fact is they can't be effective when it comes down to things, and like other supernatural claimants, stick in their own small world making money off the gullible
MsHojat 6 months ago
@MsHojat LOL, if you're so smart, how come you're not rich? RVers can be compared to Edison's early light bulbs-- of no commercial use at all. It's like cloning too. They cloned a sheep, but they can't get it to pay for itself until they can reliably clone a racehorse. The dude wrote "Stonehenge."
matt605 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
/view_play_list?p=65076A562A61D690
Russ Dizdar interviews former remote viewer John.
Q&A A former Remote viewer speaks out. What does the remote viewer tap into?
What do you all think of this? John seems very sincere about his experience has anyone had similar experiences as he has? Such as experiencing intelligent nonhuman entities?
GuarddogForGod 9 months ago
Comment removed
GuarddogForGod 9 months ago
RV is Channel Demonic spirits the info comes from them the fallen this is what they don't tell people.As he said they don't know where the info comes from. This false theologies that cause believers 2 doubt, all kinds of false standards of spirituality that causes believers 2 think that they’re not really required 2 live with Gods Laws. We are warned about this when u contact u open yourself up 2 spirits and most are demonic in this realm I know this to be fact if they say diff they are lying
zipfreer 9 months ago 2
@zipfreer Yeah, nice story. Shame RV doesn't work though.
2cabs2toucan 9 months ago in playlist esp/parapsychology
Comment removed
zipfreer 9 months ago
@2cabs2toucan Oh It works thats why our goverment spent millons on it ! So it may not work for all people but it work this is a fact !
zipfreer 9 months ago
@zipfreer The US government stopped spending money on it because it doesn't work. It is not taken seriously by corporations because it doesn't work. It is not in any science text or subject to mainstream scientific study because it doesn't work. It has been scientifically tested over several decades but it fails rigorous testing designed to eliminate the problems highlighted by Shermer in these videos. No, RV doesn't work.
2cabs2toucan 9 months ago
@2cabs2toucan U are telling me lol OK pal! The info isn't reliable even the best RV only gets 70% to 80% rate It's where the info comes from it's the problem anyway doesn't matter what u think ..and it won't doesn't matter now anyway ! And I hope people stop trying to RV open them up to bad spirits
zipfreer 9 months ago
@zipfreer Where did those stats come from? Out of your nether regions or a scientific study? How is success was measured? Do you understand the problems with measuring success of RV that were pointed out by Shermer in these videos?
2cabs2toucan 9 months ago
@2cabs2toucan Shermer is wrong. and doesn't have the gift! Remote viewing has been proven to be real and more I was one ! Once again Shermer is wrong than “chance.” If he had bothered to read any of the experiments, or literature about them, he would know that The reason the military abandoned the program was not because there wasn't anything to it, but rather it wasn't consistent enough for their needs and they did really like where the source was coming from Ok I am talking from experience !
zipfreer 9 months ago
@zipfreer Please elaborate as to what points Shermer is wrong on and why he is wrong.
2cabs2toucan 9 months ago
@zipfreer The good thing about science is that Eye-witness accounts mean absolutely nothing!
OhmgrownCron 7 months ago
@OhmgrownCron Science is limited to discovering “Laws of Nature RV The info isn't reliable even the best RV only gets 70% to 80% rate It all has to do with the source people don't understand where most if not all abilities come from are demonic and these spirits lie and are unreliable Although the source is supernatural ,aka mediation channeling the means of seduction is natural-occurring on the human level.through the hypocrisy of men that speak lies." It the luck of the draw what spirit u get
zipfreer 7 months ago
@zipfreer spirits? Since when was Remote Viewing based on spirits? Obviously there is dissonance between even what the believers in RV believe to explain it.
MsHojat 6 months ago
@MsHojat Where do you think it info comes from?There is dissonance between even what the believers in RV believe Because they don't want to believe it or don't what to know the truth I am not an armchair blogger I know the truth as I was one And if they or whoever in RV is telling u different they are lying or in denial!
zipfreer 6 months ago
@zipfreer Sounds like religion's "I'm right and you're wrong" argument. Just because your personal brain contends that there are spirits used in RV, does not make it the case. If you want to call them wrong, go ahead, but that doesn't help your cause as you're just bashing the people on the same side as you.
My whole point is that the dissonance proves that there's a problem with it.
MsHojat 6 months ago
@MsHojat U guys just don't get it and probably never will And your not even close of being right !
zipfreer 6 months ago
Comment removed
zipfreer 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@zipfreer Ha ha ha, "We are warned about this when u contact u open yourself up 2 spirits and most are demonic in this realm I know this to be fact if they say diff they are lying
" wow well you heard it here first people as we know it, demons and spirits are real, despite all the evidence to the contrary, this person says its fact OR THEY ARE LYING.
Haizum74 5 months ago
LOL "The similarities are undeniable". Sarcasm is great form of humor.
guydudeasian 1 year ago
I like Michael Shermer. His book Borderlands of Science is classic of understanding the relationship of fringe or pseudoscience to actually science. This video does a good job of demonstrating everything wrong with remote viewing.
However, in fact, little or nothing is done right by the remote viewers in this video. Even the one "hit" is what should have been termed an AOL, or analytic overlay and ignored.
I would not believe in remote viewing if I attended this seminar.
spiritualscientific 1 year ago
Michael Shermer ironically sounds just like Kent Hovind.
Ledwix 1 year ago
there are trillions of possibilties
the stonehenge writer GOT IT
because he has trained himself
charles43110 1 year ago
@charles43110 umm...no technically no, he flagged it as an "aol". AOL = analytical over-lay = A.0.L.
Wolfsbane909 10 months ago
A guy finds one target in the whole world and its a "lucky guess" or maybe he was a paid actor to fool shermer yes that must be it if you can`t find a explaination for a phenomenon invent a Conspiracy theory like all good sceptics.
cartoonhead5 1 year ago
@cartoonhead5 yeah I did almost 70 targets and got at least 30 right, I guess its one heck of an "lucky streak" LMAO
Wolfsbane909 10 months ago
I remember Art Bell going on about remote viewing. The show was bull buy boy, he was a lot of fun.
johneamer 1 year ago
He wrote Stone henge, but he also wrote nuclear power plant right above it. And he also drew a couple of things. All of which was ignored. And all the painting of the other people were ignored. One hit surrounded by a huge amount of missess is not impressing.
omnissient 1 year ago
ok kids get out your crayons and colouring books.
DarkKnightBob1o1 1 year ago
cia poored millions into this program, ray highmen is just a puppet for goverment to try and debunk the whole thing, because the truth for the goverment was too much to handel, public haing the ability to remote view anthong anywhere any place any time, is going to have the worlds goverments dirty little secrets exposed. which are being exposed more and more now anyway , regardless of rv, when to much truth is hidden is will build like a dam ready to burst!
realityexplorations 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
You deal with demons not with good angels. All kind of krysatl, energy, light tricks, oobe, tarot, joga, channeling, success praying etc are demonic and against God`s will. You should pray to God not to some "angels". 100% you are in demons possession and spread their religion to others. They will help you but to get to hell only. Time to wake up.
JezusSlave 1 year ago
The man looks like a pedophile
MCSubliminalSol 1 year ago
...impressive stuff from Mark Carr....but here's one for any Americans watching this: Stonehenge is about 200 miles from London :P Well, in Yankland that'd be next door I spose but in UK, it's not what we'd call 'near to London' by any stretch of the imagination! lol!
MrSimeon76 1 year ago
sorry, Mark Cole*
MrSimeon76 1 year ago
@MrSimeon76 FWIW, Stonehenge is actually only 90 miles from London
kkkaldav 1 year ago
@kkkaldav ...not a lot coz it's 83 miles but cheers anyway lol...
MrSimeon76 1 year ago
Did anyone else see Derren Brown's show? It was remote viewing and the target was stone henge too. People love to draw concentric circles apparently.
EclecticSceptic 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
For those interested in seeing Shermer having his ass handed to him by the brilliant and far more "Bright" Stephen C. Meyer, check out my profile. Once you see the intellectual beatdown Meyer gives him you'll never look at Shermer the same again.
Thanks
signatureinthecell 1 year ago
Wayne Karr? now whos taking the piss?
Foxyon55 1 year ago
i just saw inside your pants!! wow
ReflexiveBeef 2 years ago
Oh, they're just the men who stare at goats!
Cuuka 2 years ago
I think it's funny that Shermer ALWAYS finds what he expects to find...that's real psychic power. Check out his firewalking video. 'It's just physics'. Ha.
carloscarlos13 2 years ago
what show is this?
Paradoxical003 2 years ago
Randy who?
Joesire 2 years ago
if 200.000 people see a angel a day in the future, randi will say, just mass hallucination, if he see it himself, he will maybe check how many drugs there is in his coffie, we cant explain everything, and people who always try to debunk, want accept things they cant explain :D
dalefantom 2 years ago
People that are not a telepath or clairvoyant, can be taught to be able to Remote View. It's amazing stuff. I've studied it a bit. Weird and amazing stuff.
mayyourtruthbetold 2 years ago
Remote viewing (RV) is a fancy name for telepathy or clairvoyance, the alleged psychic ability to perceive places, persons, and actions that are not within the range of the senses.
The term seems to have been invented by physicist Dr. Russell Targ and physicist/scientologist Dr. Harold Puthoff to describe their work with alleged psychics for the U.S. government in a project known as Star Gate.
snakefootak 2 years ago
Ha ha that guys name is Hymen
tokyodave1982 2 years ago 13
Lol
s0utht0wnjr 2 years ago
rv works
wannabeastarrover 2 years ago
LOLreagan!
cultusstultus 2 years ago
Why not just get a REMOTE CONTROL. OLOLOLOLOLOL
HaloUniversedotorg 2 years ago
I would expect better from a guy who claims to be a skeptic. This 'group' you show in your video has none of the tight controls that actual scientific research on these matters observes. Scientific control conditions that obtained significant results with double blind judges. Stop going for the straw-men Shermer.
Brandon4130 2 years ago
It does not matter whether he goes for the straw-men moron because ESP is completely bullshit anyways.
acsmashing 2 years ago
i knew you would say that ,
wannabeastarrover 2 years ago
Wayne Karr lol that's gold
jamesarongray 2 years ago
i saw on a program that the us military used remote viewers to infiltrate russian military bunkers and also bombed somewher that was housing human/animal experiments. possibly bollocks of course.
agentolshki 2 years ago
nope ive done some rv myself , not bollocks at all, its even being explained in scientiffic terms now, well those scientist that are pushing and expanding the boarders of progress, certainly not the ones fozen in a pre made concept of relality
wannabeastarrover 2 years ago
Why can't these remote viewers locate Osama Bin Laden? Huh..huh....huh!
Glefit 2 years ago
He's dead, he's no longer in our plane of existence. Come on, why do you think that we have only received audio and not video in his latest tapes.
joelito101 2 years ago
Obviously since you are asking this question you have no idea of what really goes on in this reality. Have you actually researched 9/11 at all or the government and its global connections? Have you ever even read the original Constitution for that matter? I suggest you do some homework instead of just blindly believing everything that is spoon fed to you the by elitist-fueled media. Research, research, research!!!!
logic2reason 2 years ago
What did the original constitution say? Can u give me a link or something?
SilverApe1428 2 years ago
The Original Constitution says you're going to be brain-washed by the aliens and you have a right to complain about it. Research, research, research!
Hessenkittel 2 years ago 2
@Hessenkittel Are you serious?
mrcomedy454 1 year ago
@mrcomedy454 - Of course I'm serious. Levity would be totally out of place in a discussion on the potentials of remote viewing for the discovery of major governmental-extraterrestrial conspiracies. The Original Constitution is quite clear on that point.
Hessenkittel 1 year ago
can you provide links to the original constitution? or tell me how I can find something relating to it?
mrcomedy454 1 year ago
they found him ages ago, hes tucked up in the white house having tea with obama lol
elbowlickerr 2 years ago
0:23
Its the Fallout Citadel!!
guitarguy93 2 years ago
Check out Russell Targ, or Harold Puthoff
They are the two scientists (laser physicists) involved in government funded psychic research at SRI (Stanford research institute)
They have written books on the matter. There are also a few videos on youtube, but I recommend the books (Mind-Reach, The Mind Race)
See Also: Soviet (Russian) Psychic Research (The Russians had a psychic program as well. You can find video evidence of these procedures on youtube - see Nina Kulagina)
computerhacksaw 2 years ago
of course that firefighter is an accomplice dont you get that he has a whole class of 'students' that want to be like that guy and give him money in order to become that.. dont get me wrong I believe in paranormal things and maybe thats only cause those things are not yet proven by science
MasterMike44 2 years ago
actually many remote viewing institutes do not charge for information and/or lessons. if they do charge its to fund more research and experiments to make it a more recognized science.
logic2reason 2 years ago
1:12 His parents had a sense of humour!!!
RobDeMadrid 2 years ago
Anyone can learn this, and its 80-100% accurate when properly trained. This has been confirmed with double blind studies.
Although in this video, it seems they were taking too long in sketching. You can only sketch for around 4 seconds, after that you start to fuge it with your imagination.
devel155 2 years ago
Id like to see these double blind studies.
helloblah12223 2 years ago 2
"80-100% accurate" sounds impressive but can you please cite the study so we can see how it was measured. As Shermer shows in these videos, the proponents are very loose about what they count as a hit. If you couple this with a shotgun approach how can you lose?
Again, have you got any evidence that a shorter period of sketching brings greater success?
2cabs2toucan 2 years ago
Bullshit sure does exist in every corner.
AllergicBS 2 years ago
Randi's challenge is completely and totally fair -- fine print and all. Different "talents" require different tests. And the tests are agreed upon by BOTH parties. No surprises and no nonsense. There is no evidence for remote viewing. It's total bullshit. A test could easily be devised for any of these clowns, but amazingly no one has tried. Why not win the money and give it to starving children? These psychics are truly heartless, or could it be they are powerless? Nah.
pitbull103 2 years ago
you obviously have not done ANY research into remote viewing (SRV). quantum and metaphysics are actual sciences, same thing here. if it had no validity, then the government wouldn't be interested in it, let alone USING it. the CIA started looking into it to compete with the Soviets and army intelligence continues to use it. look up Detachment G, Grill Flame, Ingo Swann. Try actually researching something before you bash it.
logic2reason 2 years ago
The best remote viewer should go out and get Randi's million. Should be easy.
pitbull103 2 years ago 7
in randis own words ''i will allways find a way out of paying that the million''
randi is a dickhead
wannabeastarrover 2 years ago
Yeah, sure.
The only dickheads are the people who believe this nonsense and can't come up with the goods under controlled circumstances.
Incidentally, I do not believe that is a real quote from Randi.
pitbull103 2 years ago
lol
wannabeastarrover 2 years ago
i've never heard it. read the 'psychic tourist'
BONGOMAN3003 2 years ago
Sounds like the opinion of a dickhead XD im convinced this phenomena should be seriously investigated by the scientiific community ..anyone who disagrees clearly has no understanding of remote viewing...
mindfreak419666 2 years ago
that was in response to pitbulls103***
mindfreak419666 2 years ago
Go get Randi's million and give it to starving orphans -- or keep it for yourself. Until you do that, credibility = zero.
pitbull103 2 years ago 2
Right on! I was hoping that would be your response I actually am a huge fan of Randi and the jref ..Yes i will apply in the near future but Rv will not be what ill attempt to demonstrate for them btw I understand your skepticism I had a similar mindset a few years ago but due to the results of my own experiemts ive come to the conclusion this stuff is a reality not fantasy ..
mindfreak419666 2 years ago
experiments*
mindfreak419666 2 years ago
"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" -- Carl Sagan
I wish you luck. Alison Smith is an incredibly capable and open-minded young woman who runs all test protocols for Randi's million dollar challenge. She is imminently fair. No one has ever passed even the preliminary test in roughly 30 years, and the tests have been incredibly simple and straightforward. I have spoken to the guy who is writing a lengthy book on the challenge.
Again, good luck.
pitbull103 2 years ago
Word. I just starting researching this because I had lost my wedding ring... I found it on my first attempt... I don't care who believes me or who doesn't... That ring was missing for three days, I searched high and low for it... After 5 minutes of attempting RV, I found it.
TricKyMcTrickPants 2 years ago
What if the results are based on probality? Then Randis Asschallenge is impossible.
Wretborn90 2 years ago
Every challenge is different and the protocols are agreed on in advance by BOTH parties. Randi always says: "Tell me what you can do and with what degree of accuracy." If testers can do what they say they can do, they win. That's it and that's not "impossible." I have spoken with Alison Smith, the person in charge of working with applicants. She is the most earnest, sincere, and honest person you could ever find.
Obviously if you can only produce the results of chance, you would not win.
pitbull103 2 years ago
Randi's million dollar challenge was already won by the yellow bamboo people of bali indonesia.
Credibility to them= 100%
hyonchingonchon 2 years ago
Without claiming any inside knowledge of either Randi's foundation or the yellow bamboo people, I rather suspect that the latter were perhaps more the winners of the hearts, or moral winners if you like, than actually passing even the preliminary test, let alone getting the million dollars. Nobody ever has, because Randi keeps spoiling their acts by his negative vibrations, you know. They just "don't feel strong tonight" whenever he's around.
Hessenkittel 2 years ago
Yep. No one has ever passed the preliminary test.
pitbull103 2 years ago
@pitbull103 remote viewers have found missing children, we dont need james randis extreame skeptic mind to prove whats possible, james is a waste of time, remote viewers in some groups are also self funding, by winning on betting games with remote view skills
realityexplorations 1 year ago
the followers of randi never fail to amaze me,thinking randi is truely the only right person, its like an obbsession to dissprove all things outside of a excepted possiblillity, well it was once widly acepted the earth was flat, infact you would be considered mad if you said otherwise, just because you cant understand somthing does not mean its not possible.science does not even yet fully understand electricity yet we use it every day,quit being afraid of unknown, your surrounded by unknowns
realityexplorations 1 year ago
@realityexplorations I refer you back to my original posting. If remote viewing is so great, it should be extremely easy to develop a simple test protocol. Call up the JREF and ask for Alison Smith. Fill out application, perform test, collect million. Purchase a nice vacation or give the money to starving orphans. Until you do that, credibility equals ZERO.
pitbull103 1 year ago
@pitbull103 i heard you the first time you parrot, go wank over jref, im not interested in his games
realityexplorations 1 year ago
@realityexplorations The starving orphans are waiting. Surely there is ONE "remote viewer" out there who can pass a simple test. I won't hold my breath.
And you would never insult me to my face, but you are a typical cowardly internet warrior. Go back to mom's basement and do some more remote viewing.
pitbull103 1 year ago
@pitbull103 Please read my other comment here, about Randi.
RV works about 70% of the time. That is enough to use it practically (with more sessions on same target, for redundancy) but not enough to prove anything on a single trial.
I am doing ARV, right now, have put money where my mouth is, and won 5 out of 6 bets so far, where pure chance was 50/50. Tests still ongoing, and the numbers will tell the story soon enough.
But it does mess with one's mind, I'll give you that, it's freaky :)
firuinthehouse 1 year ago
@pitbull103 What exactly is the test at JREF, on RV ? If you know I mean. I never checked it for myself, but do know viewers with outstanding records that have stated Randi's tests are flawed / skewed pretty bad against the viewer.
firuinthehouse 1 year ago
@pitbull103 Not so easy friend, Randi wants to do one single trial, and have VERY skewed rules. Now I know RV works, because I use it right now to win sports bets, and have dozens of great sessions. I will let the bets gather and let the numbers speak for themselves, not this "what if" of the internet.
So statistically it can be shown that RV is WAY better than pure chance, in betting for instance. But not on one single trial like Randi wants.
firuinthehouse 1 year ago
thanks for being at least one of the few who have actually looked into this before shouting fake etc
ive done a few recent rv sessions, privatly in my own home , while the target was in a friends home in a room ive never been in, certainly i had good results i think,
i saw brown and felt soft fabric then a round like a ball shape and some other curves that could of been edge of a chair , but i didnt realy know
it was a cuddly toy of a monky in a chair big and soft and with a round head
wannabeastarrover 2 years ago
ha ha ha wayne carr == wanker
foathkent 2 years ago 10
@foathkent I am sorry to say it but the people who write comments like this are the real wankers! Does it make you feel clever or something? Get a life mate.
waterkingdavid 1 year ago
@waterkingdavid === wankeringdavid.
foathkent 1 year ago
it brings a whole new meaning to the phrase "Sorry,I was miles away"
netgemiplayer 2 years ago
Wayne Karr lol
Textra1 3 years ago 2
The fact that the government is even admitting to its exi