This post is a reply to questions asked of me here: in a TED forum.
Yes, RV is trainable, no special skills are required.
I learned through Ed Dames’ DVD course, which is not free, but I found the training structure, pacing, homework and training modules to be incredibly helpful (took me about 60 days to complete). He also goes over “cueing” (how to write the question for which you want to receive an answer), which is quite valuable and I haven’t seen that covered anywhere else. That course also covers a bit of RV theory. Suffice to say the mechanism by which this occurs is still a mystery but there is good material about how our mind interprets (or rather misinterprets) incoming signals.
All of this training is based on declassified government documents. The best resource I’ve found for those documents is here:
A sizable amount of what is covered in Ed’s course can also be found here, though not in a training format, so a bit harder to grasp. One nice thing about the DVD course is that he forces you to just jump right in and try it for yourself, with these declassified documents is easy to read and yet not know when or where to start and try it for yourself. The course also reassures you that you will have poor results from time to time and should not let that get you down. You will fall quite a bit when learning to ski or skate, but if you let that stop you you would never get any good at it.
SRV (scientific remote viewing) is a branch off of CRV (control remote viewing). Now that I understand the basics of the latter, I started reading about the former, and found it very similar, and its differences are certainly interesting and I can see why they made changes. This site is run by Courtney Brown:
That site is the best resource for learning SRV, and the best free training material I have found for any RV.
I wish he would speak more naturally in his videos and audio training sessions. Also, he focuses more on getting into a meditative state than Ed did, which I didn’t seem to need but may yield better results, and he has some goofy YouTube videos which I think hurt his credibility [but so does Ed]).
The RV community has its own magazine, and you can download every issue free:
The interviews in these magazines are terrific!
Lastly, I wanted to comment on my own method with dreams. To understand my dream technique you should first understand a little bit about RV theory. During a session, your analytical mind becomes frustrated with the incomplete information it receives and so nags (names and guesses) at the incomplete signal. It will overlay its guesses on top of the signal, this is called analytic overlay (AOL). Part of the training is learning to notice when that is happening. In short, if you are perceiving something that is a noun too early in a session, it is analytic overlay. Really you should be perceiving verbs/adjectives, descriptions, not items. So, for instance, if you feel compelled too early in a session to say that you perceive a “windmill”, that is analytic overlay. There is however some good news… you can “interrogate” the AOL. You can ask how was the target like a windmill, and your mind will produce a correct answer: “it was spinning around a central axis”.
So, often AOL is based on the similarity of the incorrect item to the target (AOL can be caused by other factors, e.g. personal expectations, but that is for another article). For me, this was a key lesson. Our analytical mind is doing this constantly. So, when we recognize our mind is latching on to an AOL, then we know that there is a real signal in there somewhere, and when we “interrogate” the item, then we have learned something about the target. Ever notice how dreams contain metaphors?
Another key is that part of the mechanism for receiving a signal seems to be intention. All that is required to begin receiving a signal is to have the intention to learn about it.
The protocol has all sorts of other stuff, but knowing that intention is at the core, then one could set then intention to get information before going to bed, and let your brain do the rest. Keep in mind two things: First, I’m oversimplifying because it would take too much space here to try to condense into one blog post (I’m leaving out info about proper cueing and that because of our unique sets of interests, we will be more inclined to perceive certain things, and conversely less inclined to perceive other things… a doctor, an artist and a police officer at a crime scene will make very different observations). Second, based on my experience, RV is considerably more reliable than this dream technique (my response rate is maybe 1 in 10). But hey, I go to sleep every night, so why not throw in a question before I fall asleep and see what happens? No harm done.
I don’t always get answers, but that can be a topic in and of itself (there may be a good reason why no answer came in, e.g. poor cueing). When I do get answers, often they come in metaphorically (AOL!). Interpret the metaphor and you have your answer. This is not a guarantee that any particular dream is a signal. I’ve erroneously considered some dreams as signal only to find out later that they definitely were not.
A couple of times however, I received incredibly clear precognitions of a fleeting moment (which has not yet happened to me when doing straight RV). I knew the dreams were important, but I did not know how accurate they were until the moment that they depicted came to pass in reality (in the next day or two). It was the kind of moment that has your hair stand up; it wasn’t déjà vu, since I kept thinking about the dream all day, and as the day became more similar I knew the moment was about to happen, then it did, without my conscious meddling.
Keep reading: Remote Viewing Challenges Scientific Fundamentals
Your purchases support this site: