By Lyn Buchanan
QUESTION: How do you feel about using Remote Viewing with respect to past or future events? Is it useful for, say, seeing the future with any degree of accuracy?
ANSWER: Using CRV to get information on past events is extremely useful and has a high degree of accuracy. In dealing with future events, there is a saying which seems to apply:
"The future's not what it used to be."
A lot of work has been done in CRV circles to improving "predictive" results, but the databasing indicates that one rule appears to hold steady: the further into the future it is, the less dependable the prediction - for most things. For example, I can almost always get at least two of the Pick-3 numbers... right before each ball pops up - which is about 5 minutes AFTER they have stopped selling the Pick-3 tickets for that day.
(Small aside... I was at DIA one day, waiting for one of those endless meetings to finally let out, and decided to develop some numbers for the Pick-6 drawing which was that evening. I felt like I was having a good session, while trying to appear like I was actually paying attention to what appeared to be of interest to only the person speaking. I rarely ever buy lottery tickets, but this time, it just "felt right", so on the way home, I stopped at a 7-11 and bought a ticket using those numbers. The next morning, I looked in the paper and realized that I had gotten all six numbers right... The kicker to this story? I was in DC for the meeting, and bought the ticket on the way home -- at a store in Maryland. No matter how many numbers on a Maryland lotto ticket match the drawing for the DC lotto, they just won't pay.)
There is also a thing called "paradoxical tasking": Let's say that you are asked by the police to tell you where a criminal will be at 9PM. You describe his location as Joe's Bar & Grill. The police are in place outside the bar at 8:30, and the criminal comes there at 8:45. The police jump out of the bushes and arrest him. At 9PM, the criminal is in jail. Everyone's happy with your results (except the criminal), but inside you, your subconscious mind knows that it's been had. Your prediction was wrong. If it had told you the criminal would be in jail at 9PM, the police wouldn't have gone to the bar, and your prediction would have been wrong, again. The subconscious mind doesn't take this kind of treatment lightly. If you don't 1) stay alert to possible "paradoxical tasking" and take measures to avoid it, or 2) have an understanding with the "customer" about the actions he/she will take, you can very quickly wreck havoc with your viewers' ability to perform in future time. This is a lesson learned the hard way.
I like to use an analogy of us in the ocean of time as being like a bug on the water. Wherever the bug has been as it skirts across the water, it can turn and see its wake. That much is done and fixed on the surface. It can also look ahead and see definite ripples and obstacles in front of it, and those things are fact as well -- at the moment it is looking. However, there are many things in the water making other ripples -- and as the bug approaches whatever it sees up ahead, a wake of its own ripples preceeds it. By the time the bug actually gets there, the condition of the water has changed. Let's say the bug sees a smaller bug in the distance and thinks that it would make a good meal. But the very act of racing toward it makes the other bug fly away. However, the rocks and the water which it saw "up ahead" will still be there. There are some things that our approach won't change and some things that it will.
We can see ahead in time and can very accurately describe conditions at the "future time" the way they are >as of this moment<, but the very act of traversing the distance from now to then changes many of those conditions as we go. The further away the "then" is, the more variations will occur before we get there. Does that mean that we didn't describe the future accurately? No. It just means that we described the future -- probably very accurately -- as it WAS when we were looking at it across the pond. But when we get there, we find that the future's not what it used to be.
The bottom line? If you want your accuracy rate to stay high in this field, don't do too much work too far in the future. It makes you look bad to those who don't understand what's going on.
Original file name: .CNI - RV for future? 7.12
This file was converted with TextToHTML - (c) Logic n.v.