<RV TESTS

 

  

Stage 1: THE 40 TEST TARGETS

Purpose

To make an initial assessment of any remote viewing skill that I may have, I chose to do these 40 remote viewing test targets to see if I would be able to experience remote viewing based on looking at the numbers that are provided for each target; to make a qualitative assessment of how the impressions that I have from the numbers match up with the actual targets; to see how my remote viewing experience is, to see the methods I use and to see what I can learn of the methods, to see if I can identify problems with the methods and to improve on the method. To summarize the qualitative assessment of the 40 targets and of what was learned of the method in these 40 targets. To see if I qualify for a second stage of remote view testing which would use a more rigorous protocol. In other words, Stage 1 is an initial assessment.

Materials

Remote viewing test targets, provided by the website www.remoteviewed.com, the complete list of targets available are on this page of that website: Entire target feedback list. I think I counted a total of approximately 119 targets on that page. I used 40 of those targets.

My laptop computer on which I record each remote viewing session.

Recording software on my computer: it records audio and video from my webcam, and it also records my computer screen to record when I visit the website to retrieve the target number, while I draw the target impressions, and when I visit the website to reveal the target.

Drawing software on my computer.

Small piece of paper and a pen to write down the target number beside me.

Drawing pad and its pen with which I draw on the computer.

For later targets I used two sheets of a large notebook with pen to write impressions, these notes were not published other than that I read these notes while writing them and sometimes I also read through them at the end before revealing the target.

A note about the targets

Each target consists of ONLY a set of eight numbers and a hyphen, which is presented on the webpage listed. The number set is given as four numbers, connected by a hyphen to another four numbers. This number set of eight numbers with a hyphen is the ONLY reference material which is available to the remote viewer. No other materials or clues are given or available.

The pool (meaning, "list") of targets was very diverse for these targets. Many targets featured prominent buildings of contemporary artistic value or of historical value, other targets were well-known historical events perhaps with an emphasis on assassinations as a topic, some targets represented a feature in nature, and other targets depicted an electronic device or machine. The pool of targets is to be considered diverse, which means that guessing toward the correct answer becomes less likely.

The remote viewer is to be provided with ONLY the number set as a reference material for the remote viewing. Once the remote viewer decides that the session is ended, the number set can be clicked on since it is also a web link on the webpage which then leads to another page which describes the target with a picture and a short text description on that page.

Procedure

1. I prepare for a remote viewing session by getting comfortable on my bed, getting a blanket for my back and another blanket for my legs, and setting up the laptop, recording software, webcam, preparing by opening the website which has the targets, (doing my makeup). I then begin to record the session.

2. Once I am recording the session, I go to the webpage that lists the targets, and this is the time (and not before) when I scroll through the list of targets to choose one of the targets listed. In some sessions I chose a target based on which one was giving me a feeling at this stage of selection, and in other sessions I did my best to randomly select a target by scrolling through the list and simply choosing one as randomly as it gets. Once I have chosen a target, I write down the target number on a small piece of paper that is next to me.

3. I go to my drawing software on the computer and I write down the target number on the page on my screen.

4. Just by looking at the number set, I present and record my impressions that I get from the numbers. The impressions are visual, taste, scent, hearing and touch, as well as also emotions. I draw and I speak the impressions, in later sessions I also write with a pen into my notebook impressions in text form as well.

For these test targets I did not limit the amount of time allowed for a session. I did not look at the time to see how much time I had already spent. For most of the targets I spent about 1 hour and 15 minutes. Some were about half an hour long. One was about 4 hours long, and one was about 3 hours long.

I did not require myself to provide any kind of summary or answer at the end of a session before I reveal the target. I was to record my impressions in a qualitative way. (Qualitative means to describe something, which means that it is not something which can be counted. Qualitative is more vague and has no simple yes no answers or measurements.) I did not pressure myself to provide a geographical location, time (such as year) of the target, nor a summary or "name descriptor" of the target. In later targets I did begin to ask myself to state "what do I think the target is" at the end of a session before I reveal the target.

5. When I decide that I have finished the remote viewing session, I go to the page which lists the targets and I click on the number set which is a web link that opens up the target description page. That page displays a photo or a picture of the target as well as a short text description of the target.

6. I make a qualitative assessment, which I also record, of how my impressions match with the actual target. I may make additional qualitative assessment also at a later time which I can add to the evaluation of a target.

Results: Videos of each session

Between February 5 2018 and April 10 2018 I did a total of 40 remote viewing test targets. Each of the 40 remote viewing sessions is available as a video on this playlist on my YouTube channel.

> Playlist: Remote View Test Target

WARNING! Spoilers! If you want to watch the individual test target videos without knowing beforehand what the targets are then do not read below. Below I discuss the results of the test targets and it reveals many of the surprises that are in the videos.

Results: List of targets

Here are the 40 test targets which I attempted to remote view. They are listed in the order in which they were done.

Target 1. Sydney opera house.
Target 2. Babylon hanging gardens.
Target 3. Lighthouse.
Target 4. Belgium atoms.
Target 5. Bolivia gate.
Target 6. London wheel (first try).
Target 7. The hideout.
Target 8. Mars rover.
Target 9. Chinese pyramids.
Target 10. Taj Mahal.
Target 11. UFO house.
Target 12. Flight 19.
Target 13. Big Ben.
Target 14. Habitat 67.
Target 15. Sirius.
Target 16. Colosseum.
Target 17. Saint Paul's Cathedral.
Target 18. Lotus temple.
Target 19. Normandie.
Target 20. Music house.
Target 21. Sodom and Gomorra.
Target 22. Delta flight formation.
Target 23. Beatles performance.
Target 24. Alcatraz prison island.
Target 25. Mammoth.
Target 26. Mars volcanoes.
Target 27. Holy spear.
Target 28. Voyager.
Target 29. Pat Price.
Target 30. London wheel (second try).
Target 31. Roman pyramid.
Target 32. President Regan.
Target 33. Basket building.
Target 34. Lighthouse (another similar one).
Target 35. Hubble telescope.
Target 36. Air Force Academy.
Target 37. Vietnam freedom.
Target 38. Mexico UFO.
Target 39. Lee Harvey Oswald.
Target 40. Titanic sinking.

Results: Score

There is no straightforward way to score the test targets. Of course an ideal result would be that I am able to say with one word or one sentence "what" the target is and to have it be a perfect match, but I am not at that level yet, nor have I been trying to be that good when I have done these targets. Instead what I have done is to describe what I experience from the numbers and to qualitatively compare my findings with the target to see if the correlation is good or not. This means that scoring the targets will have to be approximate, as well as somewhat subjective, at this time. I suggest to devise the following possible scores for the targets, each score is assigned a color, and I have chosen to call them A, B, C, and F as we do with university grading:

IMPRESSIVE. Better than just very good, this score is for targets that were exceptionally good in correlation between my findings and the target.
VERY GOOD. The correlation is very good.
GOOD. Major elements (details) of the target are described, however the overall description also includes elements that seem not consistent with the target.
WRONG. The correlation is none or very weak, or the correlation is weak and the majority of findings seem not consistent with the target.

I will next give each of the targets one of these four scores. And since the below listing is chronologically presented in the order in which targets were made, this listing also reveals how performance varies as we go along chronologically.

CHRONOLOGICAL LIST
Target 1. Sydney opera house.
Target 2. Babylon hanging gardens.
Target 3. Lighthouse.
Target 4. Belgium atoms.
Target 5. Bolivia gate.
Target 6. London wheel (first try).
Target 7. The hideout.
Target 8. Mars rover.
Target 9. Chinese pyramids.
Target 10. Taj Mahal.
Target 11. UFO house.
Target 12. Flight 19.
Target 13. Big Ben.
Target 14. Habitat 67.
Target 15. Sirius.
Target 16. Colosseum.
Target 17. Saint Paul's Cathedral.
Target 18. Lotus temple.
Target 19. Normandie.
Target 20. Music house.
INCONCLUSIVE. Target 21. Sodom and Gomorra.
Target 22. Delta flight formation.
Target 23. Beatles performance.
Target 24. Alcatraz prison island.
Target 25. Mammoth.
Target 26. Mars volcanoes.
Target 27. Holy spear.
Target 28. Voyager.
Target 29. Pat Price.
Target 30. London wheel (second try).
Target 31. Roman pyramid.
Target 32. President Regan.
Target 33. Basket building.
INCONCLUSIVE. Target 34. Lighthouse (another similar one).
Target 35. Hubble telescope.
Target 36. Air Force Academy.
Target 37. Vietnam freedom.
Target 38. Mexico UFO.
Target 39. Lee Harvey Oswald.
Target 40. Titanic sinking.

Targets 21 and 34 were disqualified because these targets describe something in the historical past where there is no photograph and no "right answer" to check my impressions against.

Next is the list of targets again but this time not in a chronological order but in my personal ranking of best to worst:

RANKING LIST
Target 35. Hubble telescope.
Target 26. Mars volcanoes.
Target 38. Mexico UFO.
Target 10. Taj Mahal.
Target 30. London wheel (second try).
Target 11. UFO house.
Target 8. Mars rover.
Target 37. Vietnam freedom.
Target 2. Babylon hanging gardens.
Target 7. The hideout.
Target 13. Big Ben.
Target 5. Bolivia gate.

Target 23. Beatles performance.
Target 31. Roman pyramid.
Target 39. Lee Harvey Oswald.
Target 12. Flight 19.
Target 19. Normandie.
Target 24. Alcatraz prison island.
Target 16. Colosseum.
Target 40. Titanic sinking.
Target 17. Saint Paul's Cathedral.
Target 32. President Regan.
Target 22. Delta flight formation.

Target 1. Sydney opera house.
Target 25. Mammoth.
Target 18. Lotus temple.
Target 9. Chinese pyramids.
Target 36. Air Force Academy.
Target 27. Holy spear.
Target 14. Habitat 67.
Target 29. Pat Price.
Target 20. Music house.
Target 33. Basket building.
Target 15. Sirius.
Target 3. Lighthouse.

Target 28. Voyager.
Target 4. Belgium atoms.
Target 6. London wheel (first try).

INCONCLUSIVE. Target 21. Sodom and Gomorra.
INCONCLUSIVE. Target 34. Lighthouse (another similar one).

If we count that into numbers, we score them out of a total of 40 minus 2 = 38 total since two were inconclusive and cannot be checked.

12 A = 12 / 38 = 32%
11 B = 11 / 38 = 29%
12 C = 12 / 38 = 32%
3 F = 3 / 38 = 8%

Or 12 + 11 + 12 = 35 with a passing grade = 35 / 38 = 92%. I estimate that in 92% of the targets I have done (excluding the two that are inconclusive) it is possible to see that I was remote viewing.

Let's phrase this differently. In which of the targets do I appear to be remote viewing, meaning that my findings do not seem to be random but instead show a correlation to the target? Then without confusing ourselves with the grading of A, B, and C for positive results of varying degrees, below I show in which I seem to have been remote viewing as opposed to in which of them that could not be said:

Target 1. Sydney opera house.
Target 2. Babylon hanging gardens.
Target 3. Lighthouse.
Target 4. Belgium atoms.
Target 5. Bolivia gate.
Target 6. London wheel (first try).
Target 7. The hideout.
Target 8. Mars rover.
Target 9. Chinese pyramids.
Target 10. Taj Mahal.
Target 11. UFO house.
Target 12. Flight 19.
Target 13. Big Ben.
Target 14. Habitat 67.
Target 15. Sirius.
Target 16. Colosseum.
Target 17. Saint Paul's Cathedral.
Target 18. Lotus temple.
Target 19. Normandie.
Target 20. Music house.
INCONCLUSIVE. Target 21. Sodom and Gomorra.
Target 22. Delta flight formation.
Target 23. Beatles performance.
Target 24. Alcatraz prison island.
Target 25. Mammoth.
Target 26. Mars volcanoes.
Target 27. Holy spear.
Target 28. Voyager.
Target 29. Pat Price.
Target 30. London wheel (second try).
Target 31. Roman pyramid.
Target 32. President Regan.
Target 33. Basket building.
INCONCLUSIVE. Target 34. Lighthouse (another similar one).
Target 35. Hubble telescope.
Target 36. Air Force Academy.
Target 37. Vietnam freedom.
Target 38. Mexico UFO.
Target 39. Lee Harvey Oswald.
Target 40. Titanic sinking.

Discussion

Ideally a remote viewer would be able to state clearly "what" the target is, for example to look at Target 1 and to say it is the "Sydney opera house". I did acchieve this in at least two of the targets: the Hubble telescope and Mars volcanoes, and I described many of the other targets well enough so that we would presume what the target could be. But this is expert level remote viewing. The objective of this stage 1 remote viewing test was to see am I remote viewing at all.

In my own opinion it is clear from the whole of these 40 test targets that I have demonstrated a likely remote viewing skill.

For these 40 targets it would have been possible to cheat by knowing the identity of the target beforehand simply by either by oneself clicking on the link beforehand or by having another person reveal the identity of a target beforehand. The answer sheets of the targets are available for access at all times. For stage 1 remote viewing testing this issue is ok but for future testing this issue will need to be eliminated in order to have a more credible result. Since I have not cheated on any single of these targets and I was completely blind to all of the targets the results of a more rigorous test protocol should be the same as the results found here.

I have shown to myself at least that I do seem to have a remote viewing skill, because I know that I did not cheat on these targets. I saw my remote viewing methods developing progressively and I hope to enjoy becoming a better remote viewer with more experience. There are other remote viewers who demonstrate a much better skill than me so I look forward to becoming better with time as well. I have had no training or practice other than these targets.

Qualitative assessment can be messy, how do we estimate a reliable score for this set of 40 test targets? Fortunately, even with a remote viewing test of this kind, it could be easily made into a matching test. For example, if I remote view ten number sets (targets) and after I have compiled my drawings and descriptions of the ten I am presented with the ten pictures and their short descriptions, would I be expected to be able to match the numbers to the descriptions based on my remote viewing impressions? If the ten targets were distinguishable from one another, it seems by looking at how I did on these 40 test targets, that I should be expected to do very well on a test with such a matching format. Even other persons should be expected to do well with matching my descriptions with the target images and descriptions.

The chronological list reveals a surprising result! I was doing far better in the beginning! Perhaps I was making more of an effort in the beginning, and then once I figured "that I can remote view" I was not making as much of an effort any longer. I then started to make more of an effort and focusing on doing a good job and learning from the good and from the mistakes and the results immediately picked up and got better again, so it is like with any kind of sport, your body and mind have to be in it and you also have to learn how the skill works and every time takes an effort.

Note about a change: Target 36. Air Force Academy, was initially graded by me with the grade of F because I failed to find any sufficient correlation between my remote viewed description and with the information on the target page. However, at the time of creating the video file from the recorded remote view session, at the end of watching through the recording I did an internet search just curious to see if I could find perhaps a bear or such a monument on the site. Instead I came across photographs taken of the inside of the Air Force Academy Chapel and I recognized it as a very good match with what I described and drew (except for the lack of the breathing furry animal). Therefore, now that I realize I was remote viewing the inside of the target building and not the outside as was on the photograph on the target page, I have promoted the grade for Target 36 from an F to a C, which I feel is justified.

Future tests

I look forward to more rigorous tests under stricter conditions where I can show that my results are not due to cheating, so look forward to that in the future!

Longer analysis

To watch through all of the videos and to make careful notes on what can be learned from these 40 targets would take a lot of time and work and is also not necessary for this stage 1 of tests. So this lengthier analysis is based on what I can remember of the targets, meaning that more details would have been available in the videos if I would have bothered to watch them carefully through.

I seem to do good with temperatures. The cold in the ice and snow of the mammoth target, and the heat in the Mars volcanoes.

With some targets I was able to describe the visual exactly as appeared on the target picture, such as the bricks in the grass in the Roman pyramid, or the big grandfather clock in Big Ben.

If I had no remote viewing skill at all, then the descriptions I gave would not have been this consistent with the targets. It really does seem that I was remote viewing.

Let's look at it this way. If we have the descriptions, what targets would me or someone else be likely to match them to? Most of my descriptions were specific and accurate enough that most people would choose the right target based on those descriptions. For example if someone looked at my description for the Big Ben target, I think everyone would have chosen Big Ben as the target out of these 40 targets, but most of my descriptions were good enough that they match that well with their targets. Let's look at some more examples.

My description for Target 40 describes a nature forest landscape with a sparkling water and a man who drowns when he goes under the water. The nature landscape could certainly be matched with many of the targets, such as Sydney opera house (the picture had trees and water), Babylon hanging gardens, Taj Mahal, and many others, however the drowning incident was clearly the main element in my description. In which of the targets could drowning be the main element of the target? Possibly with the Lighthouse who knows, in Flight 19 the pilots of the airplanes may have drowned, Normandie perhaps, the second Lighthouse target perhaps, but most of all Titanic.

For Target 12 Flight 19 I described an aviation testing site where five "flying baskets on a monorail" were successfully launched under cheers but something went wrong which I connected to what feels like military and that the five pilots died. The description I gave matches the best with Target 12 Flight 19.

To analyse all of the targets would take time. Such an analysis is better done for a later stage which follows a different format.

Pros and Cons

Benefits of Stage 1 procedure: Many targets are easily available, I can do a large number of targets to get a feel for what I can do, I can use these targets to practice with, to learn about my methods, to identify problems, to try to correct problems and to improve on my method, the target pool is very diverse so that targets are unexpected each time and cannot be guessed.

Disadvantages of Stage 1 procedure: The correct answers to the targets are available at all times so cheating is possible which lowers the real credibility of any good results, the assessment of results is made subjectively and qualitatively, subjective validation is a concern.