A discussion on remote viewing

[signal_line]

 

[Red_desert]

I try to keep remote viewing (for myself) limited to dowsing satellite images or photos. Then I also belong to a FB pendulum group and there are in it already, enough people just like her. The remote viewing is only a small part of what she is describing. A large part of the video is sharing what should be called "Spiritual Journey" or simply "Awakening" if you want to label things.

 

[Red_desert]

I try to keep remote viewing (for myself) limited to dowsing satellite images or photos. Then I also belong to a FB pendulum group and there are in it already, enough people just like her. The remote viewing is only a small part of what she is describing. A large part of the video is sharing what should be called "Spiritual Journey" or simply "Awakening" if you want to label things.

Checked out her FB page and just as I suspected, she belongs to a Spiritual Awakening group. She does have a photo of her remote viewing certificate. Did not see any dowsing groups on her page. Being able to remote view does not automatically qualify a person to make psychic predictions.

 

[Red-Coat]

Checked out her FB page and just as I suspected, she belongs to a Spiritual Awakening group.

... and she claims to have had a life-changing experience when she was abducted by interdimensional, tall white alien beings at the age of 18 while sitting in a chair during a silent meditation retreat.

Tells you everything you need to know!

 

[Tesorodeoro]

I don’t see the issue. I’m remote viewing this communication.

 

[Red_desert]

... and she claims to have had a life-changing experience when she was abducted by interdimensional, tall white alien beings at the age of 18 while sitting in a chair during a silent meditation retreat.

Tells you everything you need to know!

I did not see any reference to dowsing anywhere. Psychics normally use pendulums or Tarot cards, in years past crystal balls were popular also. One reel she posted just now, on a new virus prediction made a couple years back, was mingled with virus conspiracy theories.

 

[Red-Coat]

I did not see any reference to dowsing anywhere. Psychics normally use pendulums or Tarot cards, in years past crystal balls were popular also. One reel she posted just now, on a new virus prediction made a couple years back, was mingled with virus conspiracy theories.

No, not in that video, but this is what Ai has to say:

Elizabeth April uses and speaks about dowsing rods as a tool to tap into subconscious, energetic, or "galactic" information. Based on her recent content, here are key points and quotes regarding her approach to dowsing:

- Dowsing for Truth vs. Deception: Elizabeth April explains that when properly calibrated, dowsing rods can respond to truthfulness versus deception in real-time.

- Methodology: She describes a unique approach where she calibrates the rods and then holds them while listening to someone else speak, observing how they move in response to the information.

- "Take it or leave it": Followers note that she presents her information—including her dowsing results—as her own experience rather than demanding it be accepted as universal truth.

- Tool for Unlocking Abilities: She connects dowsing to the broader idea of tapping into psychic and spiritual abilities.

 

[Tesorodeoro]

No, not in that video, but this is what Ai has to say:

Elizabeth April uses and speaks about dowsing rods as a tool to tap into subconscious, energetic, or "galactic" information. Based on her recent content, here are key points and quotes regarding her approach to dowsing:

- Dowsing for Truth vs. Deception: Elizabeth April explains that when properly calibrated, dowsing rods can respond to truthfulness versus deception in real-time.

- Methodology: She describes a unique approach where she calibrates the rods and then holds them while listening to someone else speak, observing how they move in response to the information.

- "Take it or leave it": Followers note that she presents her information—including her dowsing results—as her own experience rather than demanding it be accepted as universal truth.

- Tool for Unlocking Abilities: She connects dowsing to the broader idea of tapping into psychic and spiritual abilities.

I’m curious as to your opinion on the validity of dowsing. Do you think there is anything to people using bent brazing rods to find buried pipes?

 

[Red-Coat]

I’m curious as to your opinion on the validity of dowsing. Do you think there is anything to people using bent brazing rods to find buried pipes?

While I am sceptical, I remain open to the possibility, but have yet to see any convincing published blind-trial evidence to support that belief. Those studies alleging positive results (of which there are few compared to studies showing results no better than chance) are subject to a high degree of criticism with respect to experimental design and/or statistical interpretation of results.

Notably, the 1991 Kassel double-blind study under the direction of the Society for the Scientific Investigation of the Parasciences in Germany, conducted with 30 dowsers over a period of three days showed no success better than chance. All of the dowsers signed an affirmation that their abilities were being fairly tested, but none of them were able to reliably determine whether water was running through plastic pipes buried 20 inches under a level field. The $10,000 prize offered by the stage magician and sceptical debunker of pseudoscience, James Randi, went unclaimed.

What I am not open to, is the possibility that dowsing can be conducted with a wooden twig, nor that it can be conducted on a map or photograph of the target area rather than the actual target.

Just my opinion of course (since you asked), but those who believe will continue to do so whether they have supporting evidence or not.

 

[Red_desert]

A couple years back, I posted 4 photos in the FB group and explained how remote viewing works. Did not mention the name of the site or location, kept all the details secret. Only 3 people participated and first to respond was a person who looks a lot like this girl in video. She was good and her name was Elizabeth also. But her last name was different than the person we are discussing in this thread.

 

[Tesorodeoro]

That’s a fair optinion. I think I’m an intelligent person that believes in science and the associated methods. My Dad can dowse pipes, faults, and water with wire rods. I’ve seen some things that are not explained away. So I retain the concept that there are things unknown and unexplained to mankind. That should be the basis of science, the beliefs that there is still things yet to be learned.

I too find it difficult to believe certain things. Let’s take your “Twigs” example. The science side of me believes that metal rods somehow might interact with magnetic fields in order to find buried pipes. Right that kind of aligns with things we know? Willow branches? Well difficult for me to believe. However my dad “witched” a well for a neighbor once and he spent all afternoon lining up his “signals”. They all intersected in one particular spot in this 40 acre parcel, so he painted a mark on the ground. Brought the land owner back to show him and he questioned it. “Who told you?” “How did you know?”, ect. My dad explained where the faults were and how they intersected at the paint mark. The guy walks over about 4 feet away and started kicking at a grass clump and turned a rock over. He bent down and uncovered a rotten red rag tied to a wooden stob. “That’s where old lady Smith witched the well in the 1940’s with a willow branch!”

I know this rancher family whose grandma witched the spot with a willow branch. I told the story to my boss and he said he had held onto a willow branch while she was witching as a kid and it had a mind of its own.
BTW they did drill at that location and got a good well in an area where it was kind of hit and miss. No telling if they had drilled somewhere else would they have gotten the same or more.
Weird yes. My boss my dad and I come from land surveyor and engineering background. I don’t know how it works, but there IS something to it that we do not understand and are unable to prove. Who knows maybe it’s like spooky entanglement. It collapsed when you look?

It’s actually one of my best adult life lessons. Do not ever convince yourself that you completely understand this world. I have many other examples were it has come in handy as a tool to fix things.

Easy to dismiss as crazy talk as I routinely do to people talking about map dowsing. But if one unexplained thing works?

 

[Red_desert]

 

[Tesorodeoro]

See now…I got 30 seconds into that video and I already dismissed it.
Why do I believe the way my dad finds buried things? Because it’s been a practical skill over the years.

Why do I dismiss that video so quickly if I believe the unexplainable with “witching” buried objects? I struggle with that answer, but I’m solid in the non/believer side as it pertains to healing stones and crystals.

Do I believe in self healing ? I. E. Placebo effect? Yup! But that too is unexplained by science.

 

[Tesorodeoro]

Mr. Red Coat. I am also curious as to your understanding of the placebo affect in medicine? If you don’t mind sharing your thoughts? Please take this as a complement, my curiosity in your opinion.

 

[Red_desert]

She is into Spiritual Awakening groups also, but does a lot of Tarot predictions.

 

[Tesorodeoro]

She is into Spiritual Awakening groups also, but does a lot of Tarot predictions.

Reminds me of some really earth based religion/UFO groups we have in my area. They pull power from a volcano.

I’ve got nothing against people focusing their inner power, but as I said I firmly on the side of a skeptic. I’m sure it’s beneficial for many people. Self reflection usually is.

 

[Red-Coat]

Mr. Red Coat. I am also curious as to your understanding of the placebo affect in medicine? If you don’t mind sharing your thoughts? Please take this as a complement, my curiosity in your opinion.

Thank you for that.

I am convinced that the Placebo effect is real. It’s well-documented (and observed most frequently in trials related to pain-relief), but the meaning of the term is widely misunderstood by lay people. Given that many patients will ‘get better’ naturally without any kind of treatment, the question to be answered is: "does active treatment work better than a placebo treatment, or no treatment at all?" (and if placebos have a positive effect, then “why?”) In my opinion the effect is demonstrably real, but the “why?” is an unanswered question on which the jury is still out. The underlying question is whether placebos could ever constitute a risk-free alternative treatment, on which I am personally very dubious.

The problem with testing in randomised blinded or even double-blinded experiments is ‘unblinding’. The purpose of blinding is to ensure that those being tested are unaware whether they are receiving true treatment (such as a drug known to have a positive effect), or a placebo (that should have no effect). In addition, such tests usually (or should, if well-designed) include a control group who receive no treatment at all, for statistical comparison.

However, it’s nigh-on impossible to eliminate ‘unblinding’ (at least in drug trials). Participants in such trials are routinely required to sign an acknowledgement that they may be receiving either an active drug or a placebo, without knowing which. But, since active drugs almost invariably have some kind of side effect symptoms (or other noticeable sensations), it can be easy for participants to conclude which group they are in (from either presence or absence of those secondary effects). This leads to ‘unblinding’ which, as well as introducing awareness, can influence expectations (in either a positive or negative way with regard to perceived outcomes).

The best trials use placebos which have been doctored to include substances that mimic the side-effect sensations of active drugs in an effort to eliminate the bias, but it can never be completely eliminated. The difficulties are summarised in the abstract for “The hidden effects of blinded, placebo-controlled randomized trials: an experimental investigation” by Rief & Glombiewski, published by the U.S. National Library of Medicine’s MedPub in 2012. I only provide a link since the abstract is copyrighted:

Checking your browser - reCAPTCHA

Furthermore, evaluation of results from such trials is vulnerable to a statistical phenomenon known as “regression towards the mean”. It’s an inevitable mathematical effect that undermines the concept of random testing. If a random variable is ‘extreme’ (unusually high or low) on first measurement, it will be less extreme and closer to the mean (average) on second measurement. The consequence is that it can affect the conclusions from gathered data by artificially inflating performance improvements, creating false trends, or mimicking intervention effectiveness.

 

[dowser]

Thank you for that.

I am convinced that the Placebo effect is real. It’s well-documented (and observed most frequently in trials related to pain-relief), but the meaning of the term is widely misunderstood by lay people. Given that many patients will ‘get better’ naturally without any kind of treatment, the question to be answered is: "does active treatment work better than a placebo treatment, or no treatment at all?" (and if placebos have a positive effect, then “why?”) In my opinion the effect is demonstrably real, but the “why?” is an unanswered question on which the jury is still out. The underlying question is whether placebos could ever constitute a risk-free alternative treatment, on which I am personally very dubious.

The problem with testing in randomised blinded or even double-blinded experiments is ‘unblinding’. The purpose of blinding is to ensure that those being tested are unaware whether they are receiving true treatment (such as a drug known to have a positive effect), or a placebo (that should have no effect). In addition, such tests usually (or should, if well-designed) include a control group who receive no treatment at all, for statistical comparison.

However, it’s nigh-on impossible to eliminate ‘unblinding’ (at least in drug trials). Participants in such trials are routinely required to sign an acknowledgement that they may be receiving either an active drug or a placebo, without knowing which. But, since active drugs almost invariably have some kind of side effect symptoms (or other noticeable sensations), it can be easy for participants to conclude which group they are in (from either presence or absence of those secondary effects). This leads to ‘unblinding’ which, as well as introducing awareness, can influence expectations (in either a positive or negative way with regard to perceived outcomes).

The best trials use placebos which have been doctored to include substances that mimic the side-effect sensations of active drugs in an effort to eliminate the bias, but it can never be completely eliminated. The difficulties are summarised in the abstract for “The hidden effects of blinded, placebo-controlled randomized trials: an experimental investigation” by Rief & Glombiewski, published by the U.S. National Library of Medicine’s MedPub in 2012. I only provide a link since the abstract is copyrighted:

Checking your browser - reCAPTCHA

Furthermore, evaluation of results from such trials is vulnerable to a statistical phenomenon known as “regression towards the mean”. It’s an inevitable mathematical effect that undermines the concept of random testing. If a random variable is ‘extreme’ (unusually high or low) on first measurement, it will be less extreme and closer to the mean (average) on second measurement. The consequence is that it can affect the conclusions from gathered data by artificially inflating performance improvements, creating false trends, or mimicking intervention effectiveness.

Not many people put thought in their Dowsing discussions, and it looks to me Ai is strong with you.
Sure, Disregard all the scientific theories and Dowsing tests, observed and recorded by an actual Dowser, me!
I was double blinded myself, in front of 5 skeptics and passed, and I wasn't in that group being tested that failed. That was before my time.
If you don't want to believe in Dowsing, that's fine with me, but comparing or putting all Dowsers in a ancient failed Dowsing test, never happened to me, just so you know..

 

[Red-Coat]

Not many people put thought in their Dowsing discussions, and it looks to me Ai is strong with you.
Sure, Disregard all the scientific theories and Dowsing tests, observed and recorded by an actual Dowser, me!
I was double blinded myself, in front of 5 skeptics and passed, and I wasn't in that group being tested that failed. That was before my time.
If you don't want to believe in Dowsing, that's fine with me, but comparing or putting all Dowsers in a ancient failed Dowsing test, never happened to me, just so you know..

- I don’t rely on AI unless the information is verifiable from source. If I provide a purely AI-generated answer, I say that is the case.

- From what I have seen of your posts, you have not provided a verifiable account of finding something by dowsing. What you frequently provide are accounts claiming to have located something that you were unable to recover (too deep, wrong time of year, not allowed to dig, too much interference… or whatever).

- I didn’t say I don’t believe in dowsing. I said I am sceptical, but open to the possibility… although I also said there are some claimed aspects of dowsing in which I don’t believe (such as map and photograph dowsing or using a twig).

- Far from ‘disregarding all the scientific theories and dowsing tests’, I am very much focussed on them and the degree to which they have evidential support or not.

- I do not ‘put all dowsers in an ancient failed dowsing test’ and there are numerous other studies subsequent to the 1991 Kassel study which have yielded the same results of ‘no better than chance’. Studies providing positive results are pretty thin on the ground and subject to a high degree of criticism with respect to experimental design and/or statistical interpretation of results, as I said.

Just so you know.

 

[dowser]

No offense
I thought it was funny.
Every single bit of Dowsing and rv info has been discussed on this website Forum.
People look elsewhere for answers.