Frequently Asked Questions

From 2002 to 2009 I facilitated CRV courses in Canada for Lyn Buchanan and his company, Problems Solutions Innovations (P>S>I). The questions below are a compilation of the most frequently asked questions received from newcomers to Controlled Remote Viewing. The responses below are from Lyn Buchanan.

What is Controlled Remote Viewing?

CRV is a specific form of applied parapsychology.

There are three parts to the process and structure of any form of applied parapsychology:

A person who wants information.
A much-debated source of psychic information – defined as various things.
A person who acts as a “conduit” between the two – in the case of CRV, a “Controlled Remote Viewer”, or “CRVer”.

There is no way to control the random needs of random people who need information. There is also no way to control the much debated “source of psychic information”, no matter how it is defined by any one person or group. Therefore, if you want to control the process, you control the “conduit” (in this case, the remote viewer).

Better yet, you teach the remote viewer to control him/herself. This is far from being as easy as it sounds. It takes strenuous training, practice, and a strict set of procedures, or “protocols” for a remote viewer to keep his/her mind from polluting the information as it passes through. Therefore, CONTROLLED Remote Viewing is defined as follows:

Controlled Remote Viewing (CRV) is a very highly controlled set of physical/mental protocols which allow a person to bring something which lies hidden within the subconscious mind to the surface, and objectify it.

The protocols not only take care of the processes of finding the hidden thoughts/emotions/etc., and bringing them to the surface, but also the process of keeping them “clean” of pollution from the imagination, and from emotions, desires, fears, and other contaminants which lie closer to the surface of a person’s conscious awareness, and which would tend to “color” them incorrectly.

Put most simply, CRV is a highly structured methodology which allows a person to set up a path between his/her conscious and subconscious minds for the purpose of passing questions one way and answers the other, without the fear of pollution along the way.

During the days the U.S. military used CRV, it gave this definition for it to its would-be customers:

“Controlled remote viewing is the structured, scientific use of natural human potential for the acquisition of no-nonsense, real-world information without being dependent on:

The normal five senses
Prior or existing knowledge about the target
Help or information from other people
Logical deductions
“Equipment” such as photographs, electronics or other devices.” (in remote viewing, the person is the equipment)

However, as said above, CRV is a SPECIFIC form of applied parapsychology. It has the following features:

1.	It is a physical activity, not a purely mental one, in that it uses the body’s autonomic nervous system to act as a “translator” between the subconscious and conscious minds – which normally don’t “talk” to each other. This requires a discipline of physical, as well as mental training.
2.	It is done in the waking state, not in a trance, altered state, or state of “rapture” or “possession” by some “entity”.
3.	It doesn’t care about the source of the information, but instead about the process of getting that information out onto paper where it can be reported. Each viewer, according to his/her own religious or cosmological frame of mind is free to believe in anything they want as the information’s source. CRV is only concerned with the process of retrieving that information and reporting it.
4.	It was developed for “real world” applications, not for spiritual, “other dimensional”, or other such reasons. It was developed for military and political information gathering. As such, it is best suited for “real world” applications, such as medical (physical) diagnostics, business information collection, police work, and other applications which apply to the real, physical world around us. It is not well suited to working with people’s auras, with ETs (UFOs), other dimensions, past lives, etc. etc.
5.	It takes a great deal of training and practice. While the beginner can do amazingly well on simple targets, the progress from beginner to master is a long one, and requires not only learning and practicing the structure and protocols, but also a mastery over self.
6.	It does not take great quantities of natural talent. It is trainable to almost anyone. What is required to go from beginner to master is nothing more than enough self-discipline to do the practice and exercises.
7.	The public is now being deluged with advertising about other forms of “RV”, usually termed “SRV”, “TRV”, “XRV”, etc. These are usually very shallow and less structured derivatives of the CRV process, while others are simply unstructured methods being called “remote viewing”. Many of these forms of “?RV” training courses train their students with etherial, spiritual, or “other worldly” targets. Standard CRV uses ONLY “real-world” targets for training: targets which can provide exact feedback on and accurate evaluation of work performed in the class. Many of these courses say that if the student finds information found by a majority of other students, then their information must be correct. This is totally unacceptable to proper CRV training.
8.	CRV develops “viewer profiles” on each viewer. This is performed through modern databasing of work performed, using absolutely no-nonsense evaluation against real-world feedback.

What do you 'see' in a session?

Question:

“…I’m confused about when you view something – do you see it as if you were standing there or when you’re in this altered state do you just sort get a feel for what’s happening at the site not really seeing anything and I’ve heard about how people bi-locate and how they’re at two places at once. Is that what they mean like when you bi-locate that’s when you see, feel, hear, smell, taste everything that’s there and is that short lived?”
Answer:

That’s a lot of questions. Let me take them one at a time:

“Do you see it as if you were standing there…”

At the beginning of EVERY session, you get mainly words or very vague concepts… things you would normally tend to ignore completely. As you catch them and write them down, the process of actually acting on those vague impressions tells your subconscious mind that you are listening and will honor what it has to say. So then, the impressions begin to get sort of like they would be in a daydream – you can see the real world through the visuals, you can tell the difference between your imagined sounds & smells and the real world. But you continue to act on these impressions by writing them down. Your subconscious mind realizes that you are serious, and it starts feeding you more realistic stuff. At some point, the words fail and the subconscious mind has to start pumping the information to you via the senses. That is when you actually start to feel a roughness or smell a certain smell. It is slight and still vague, but it is now a real thing, and no longer a “daydream” type of impression.

As you continue to pay attention and act on each impression, the “signal” gets stronger and the impressions more real. At some point, it is possible for your conscious mind to start paying so much attention to the signals coming from your subconscious mind that it starts to completely ignore the signals coming from your skin, your ears, nose, etc. You can sometimes enter a sort of “virtual reality” where the things coming from your subconscious appear to be totally real. That is the CRV state of “bilocation”.

Now, I’m not saying that this is a process which happens in textbook order and through full completion every session. It isn’t. I have been doing CRV for over 14 years, and MOST of the steps of the process have happened every session – usually in the order described. However, the “bilocation” experience is something which you can’t cause to happen. Causing it would be a conscious activity, and it can only happen when the conscious mind is totally out of the way. In all those years, the “bilocation” experience has only happened to me about 9 or 10 times.

Untrained people write to me to be used on the Assigned Witness Program, saying that they write down the coordinates and go immediately into “bilocation”, and everything is exactly as though they are there, etc. I don’t believe it. I think they are fooling themselves. If it is so, they are doing something which is drastically different from CRV, and is probably so undependable as to be unusable in real-world applications. I have tried giving targets to some of these people, and without exception, they have produced very little good stuff, but so much garbage as to be unusable. Now, that’s not to say that they haven’t accessed the target… The process of “bilocation”, as sexy and dramatic as it may seem to people, is fraught with problems for the viewer. In CRV, the “bilocation” state is actually discouraged because when you begin experiencing the target fully, you are no longer aware of the monitor and pen and paper in front of you. When you finish the experience, all you can do is give the best summary you can come up with. Then, you are dependant on your memory, your biases, etc. – a process which is extremely prone to error and gross misinterpretation.

But to answer your question, the CRVer works progressively from vague, random thoughts, through daydream-type impressions, through very realistic impressions, and can possibly work up to the point where it APPEARS to the viewer that he/she is actually at the target site (CRV is NEVER the same as an out of body experience).

“…when you’re in this altered state…”

There is the common falacy that CRV is like all other forms of parapsychological functioning, but your question points up one major difference: CRV is done in the wide-awake state, not in an “altered state”.

“…and I’ve heard about how people bi-locate and how they’re at two places at once.”

Actually, that is only true if you define it that way. In CRV, it is accepted that you are simply “buying into” the virtual reality you have built for yourself, and not that you are actually at the target site. You are physically sitting at the desk doing a session, while (in CRV understanding) only your ATTENTION is focused at the target site. In CRV, it is generally understood that even your mind is located in the room with your body.

“…and is (it) that short lived?”

Generally, the “bilocation” experience in CRV is very short-lived. That’s especially true if the monitor, whose job it is to keep you from having such an experience, sees what is going on and brings you back out of it. Any monitor worth his/her salt will generally keep it from happening, in the first place.

A word about scientific evaluation

Question:

This wasn’t actually a question from a reader, but I received an envelope yesterday which invited me, by name, to join CSICOPS (the Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal). Inside was a form letter which had a list of names down the left side of the page, obviously designed to impress me. It was a rather impressive list of leading scientists. In the center, the letter started with recent “National Inquirer”-type headlines, one of which was:

“BIGFOOT SIGHTED IN OREGON, LEAVES UNMISTAKABLE TRACKS”.

Below that, the letter to me began to “debunk” each of the headlines in what attempted to be a scientific-sounding manner. The one about Bigfoot was debunked with the following statement:

“The Bigfoot tracks in Oregon were either planted by a Forest Service patrolman who reported the sighting and admitted to previously faking Bigfoot footprints or by a human with very large feet.”
Answer:

I didn’t get the sudden urge to send a lot of my money so I could join.

Controlled Remote Viewing is “scientifically based”, but in light of the above, I would like to stress that it is not the same “scintific” as that evidenced by CSICOPS – which is, in fact, no science at all. I hope that the reputation of Controlled Remote Viewing never drops to the level shown in their letter.

However, I continually hear people saying that they are Remote Viewers “like those used by the CIA”, and upon questioning, find that they haven’t the slightest idea what CRV actually is. One person wrote that he had learned “Military Remote Viewing like the CIA used to use”. His teacher’s name is probably only known to the US government through tax returns. Just today, I received an email asking about a person in Washington State who is teaching a Remote Viewing course and is evidently, by inference, if not by direct claims, trying to tie his training to the “CRV which was used by the US government.”

Another teacher is a student of someone who was proven to be most decidedly unscientific in his training and protocols, and yet is calling the offerings “controlled remote viewing” (Not capitalized, so it supposedly doesn’t violate Ingo’s proprietary ownership), and is even calling the group of graduates “The Unit” – making it sound like it has ties to the government project because that is what the ex-military members call the military unit which existed at Fort Meade, MD.

Please bear with me while I once again mount my soapbox and yell for all to hear: “Remote Viewing and Controlled Remote Viewing are not in any way the same thing!” “Remote Viewing” (RV) is the modern buzz-word for “psychic”, and includes clairvoyance, mental telepathy, dowsing, palm reading, aura reading, and the whole gammut of other psychic disciplines. CONTROLLED Remote Viewing is one form of Remote Viewing, and one of the disciplines within the range. However, that doesn’t mean that all forms of Remote Viewing (RV) – meaning being psychic – are the same as Controlled Remote Viewing (CRV).

The differences between CRV and the other forms of RV are as vast as the differences between day and night.

What then, are those differences? CRV differs from “normal” (if you can call paranormal normal) psychic functioning in several ways, only a few of which are given here:

Every step of the CRV process is STRICTLY controlled and must follow a set, established, formal structure.

CRV does not depend on natural talent, but on training. It can be performed by anyone off the street, after proper training.

The CRV process is formalized. It is performed the same by all CRVers with such regularity that a CRV analyst can take the session transcript of a CRVer he/she has never met, and instantly understand the session content and analyze it for hidden information, for answers to tasked questions, and for errors.

The STRUCTURE of the CRVer’s transcript indicates where the CRVer’s errors are. The analyst is not left to LOGICALLY figure out what fits and what doesn’t.

The CRVer is not allowed to have any contact with the person whose question must be answered.

If there is any “frontloading” at all, it must be so neutrally worded as to give no information about the target or the question being asked about the target. For example, the monitor may start the session by saying, “The target is a location.”. The monitor would NEVER tell the viewer anything more than that.

The CRVer is NEVER allowed to ask questions, and is rarely ever given any other starting information than a target number. For example, “The target is target number 960011 / 123456. Describe the target.” The CRVer must gain all information from there on, no questions allowed, and nothing more is told to the CRVer about the target throughout the entire span of the session.

Practioners of other forms of RV often try to tell the person who has come to them what the perceptions mean. This is not so with the CRVer. If, at any time, a CRVer draws a conclusion, the session must be stopped while the CRVer clears the conclusion out of his/her mind, and that information is set aside and later held in question by the CRV analyst.

CRV is not a “feel good” or “get in touch with the universe (or yourself)” kind of process. It’s primary purpose is for gathering valuable and practical information, for answering questions. CRV is real-world and real-life oriented, not etherial and universe oriented.

RV attempts to retrieve concepts. CRV attempts to retrieve facts. An RVer, using another discipline, may tell you that you will meet a tall, dark stranger. A CRV tries to tell you when and where, and what his name will be.

While natural psychics were found to be helpful by various branches of the government and military, they were also found to be largely undisciplined, non-standardized, and were found to have widely fluxuating dependability ratings. Little, if any, statistical analysis of their results was capable, so evaluations of their “track records” were generally made by the feelings and undisciplined estimatations of those who used them, and who tended to remember the successes and forget the failures. CRVers, by their very definition, are disciplined, their work was standardized, and their dependability ratings can be known from databased track records which includ both successes and failures, accurately analyzed and scored to two decimal places.

Other forms of RV deserve the praise and credit which they have rightfully earned. In spite of what the CSICOPs would try to trick you into believing, other forms of RV have a proven track record in laboratories which have rigorously and scientifically studied the phenomena. I have never known a CRVer to belittle true natural talent, and such will not happen on this page. I have yet to meet a CRVer who has not wished that he/she had more of this natural talent. While CRV does use a person’s natural abilities, it brings it out through scientifically controlled means.

In short, other forms of RV are art- or talent-based. CRV is a DISCIPLINE. Anyone who is willing to stick with the practice can do it.

CRV doesn’t depend on the illogic of believers or the illogic of disbelievers. It is databasable, and each viewer’s track record stands on cold, hard, well-proven records.

Can a CRVers results be influenced by someone else?

Question:

“I read the book recently by Jim Schnabel, as well as the abstracts that you suggested. Remote Viewing is not what I thought it was. It seems to be helpful as a descriptive tool, but doesn’t really help you to identify what a target is. You even have instructions on the practice targets that we should “describe, not identify”. Do I understand it right? Can a viewer ever identify what a target is?”
Answer:

Well… remote viewing is about acquiring data. Part of the RV process requires that one train themselves out of assumptions about “what” something is — referred to as “analysis” in CRV but in its most basic form what we’re really talking about is “recognition.” So, much RV data is not going to include “what” the target is specifically, but instead, a great deal of detail about it. BUT. That being said, this does not mean that a Viewer is not, often, going to recognize what something is in general or even in specific. Especially if the target is some high- consciousness target, something lots of people see or think about. (It is generally easier to RV the great pyramid than someone’s uncle George’s woodshed in Kansas, for instance.) I don’t think it would be too surprising for a Viewer to say, “I think this is the Statue of Liberty.” However, it would be fairly unusual for a Viewer to say something like, “this is a 1968 Ford Mustang convertible.” They’d probably get that there was an object, it was a vehicle, it was a car, it was blue… maybe things like, it is kind of old, or it is shiny, or it is in motion. If they were personally really “into” cars they might get more. But the degree of “energy” of the target (some scientists refer to this as a matter of Shannon Entropy, but that isn’t really known yet) is part of what influences what degree of contact, and that relates to how much ‘identity’ as well, that a Viewer gets.

Note: in the vast majority of RV sessions, the target is already known to the analyst, so the issue of recognition is not quite such a big deal. The analyst knows what they are looking for. It is not always relevant that the Viewer doesn’t know what they are describing. Their job is to describe; the analyst, who knows either the target or the site or the suspicions about them, is responsible for putting the data into context.

Palyne (PJ) Gaenir
webmaster of the Firedocs web site

——————————————————————————–

I would like to also add that a viewer often recognizes what the target is during a session. At that time, it is most important for the monitor to shift the viewer to what is unknown about the site, as though giving him/her a new target to work on. For example, there is a practice target of the Empire State Building, and the viewer, recognizing it, declares that the site is the Empire State Building. Let us further say that the viewer, at some earlier point during the session had described a “high, windowed part”. Then the monitor might say, “OK. Now, move to the “high, windowed part” and describe.” There are two reasons for this:

First, if the viewer is allowed to coalesce his/her thinking into the identification, then all the viewer’s preconceived ideas about the Empire State Building, as well as any and all related memories, emotions, etc. about it must be dealt with. Along with this, all >>>related<<< memories, emotions, etc. creep in. In this example, the viewer would not only have to deal with all STRAY CATs about the Empire State Building, but about New York City, New York weather, traffic, people, etc. Pretty soon, the burden would be too much, and would shut the viewer down. As long as you keep the viewer viewing an unidentifiable, there are fewer problems with STRAY CATs.

In a real-world situation, the viewer is not there to view what you already know. The viewer is there to give information that you don’t already know. Let us take an example where the police are looking for a hostage and have narrowed the location down to a certain building – let’s say, the Ajax Warehouse, a recognizable landmark on the edge of town. If the viewer says, “large”, “red”, “brick-like”, etc., and suddenly says, “This is the Ajax Warehouse!” and shuts down, then the viewer has done you no good. If, however, the the monitor/viewer team is trained, practiced, and conditioned to move from knowns to unknowns, the monitor can say, “Good. Now, move to the target person’s location within the Ajax Warehouse and describe.” The viewer, having gotten the overall location, now provides detailed information of exactly where the hostage is within the location. Further, if the viewer says, “This is the basement!” You have what you want, right? Maybe so, but still not exactly. Let’s say that it is a big basement with a catacomb-like layout, miles of pipes, etc. You still don’t know where within the basement the hostage is. Now, though, the viewer is working against a double-whammy. He/she knows that 1) it is a basement 2) of a warehouse. You must be aware of the fact that all the viewer’s memories and preconceptions of both basements and warehouses will tend to pollute the impressions gained from there on, unless the monitor moves the viewer to another unknown. Otherwise, the viewer will tend to describe it as cold, dark and damp, when in fact, the hostage’s exact location withing the basement may be a warm, well-lit room. The simple act of having identified “warehouse” and “basement” may lead the police to the wrong place and thereby give the criminals time to kill the hostage. At this point, the viewer may become more of a burden to the police than an asset. Therefore, it could be best in this situation for the monitor to either end the session, or just shift the viewer to a complete unknown. The monitor could say something like, “OK. Now, move to the target person and describe. Condition? Position? Activities?” (Remember, the fact that the “target person” is a hostage is still not known to the viewer.)

By keeping the viewer continually working unknowns and never allowing them to identify anything, you keep the viewer’s information as pollution-free as possible. The job of viewer is often a very unsatisfying one for this very reason. As a viewer, your mind is continually trying to stabilize itself by identifying where it is or by identifying something in its surroundings. The very minute success is gained, it is pulled out from under you and you are thrown back to unknowns. It is something you never really get used to, but once you help save that first hostage or help rescue that first abducted child, somehow you don’t mind so much, any more.

Lyn Buchanan

Can you help me believe that CRV actually works?

Question:

“As one should be in scientific studies, I believe in skepticism, but not without dreamy aspiration. Carl Sagan put it best, “you can’t have one without the other.” It has been a fantasy of mine to be able to travel in time and >experience past events and cultures, just as it is Sagan’s dream to find extraterrestrial life, but it seems incredibly unlikely. I’ll believe it when I see it. Can you make me believe this process works?”
Answer:

No. I can show you the results, I can show you the process, and I can answer your questions as honestly as possible. I wouldn’t even bother wasting the time and effort to try and MAKE you or anyone else believe anything. You can think it works, you can see it work, and with enough data, you can know it works. But you will only BELIEVE it works when you do it. I like to use the analogy which defines “faith” in things: A person hires on at a high-rise construction site. He has to carry a load of bricks across a board which is stretched between two girders, 30 floors up. He looks at the board and reasons that it wouldn’t be there if it wouldn’t hold him up. He then sees someone else carry a load of bricks across and he belives it would hold him up. He then sees a really big guy walk across with two loads of bricks, and he absolutely knows it will hold him up. But when he, himself, steps out onto that board – that’s faith. Want to believe that CRV works? Find a CRVer and get them to guide you through working some sessions for yourself. But believing it works isn’t enough. Once you believe it, take some training, learn how the hard stuff is done, and one day, you’ll sit down to a session and have the faith in the system which will carry you through it to a successful answer.

Can your imagination mess things up?

Question:

“How will I know CRV works and that it’s not just my very vivid imagination? I assume I’d be taught this, but if you can describe it briefly, I might just shell out all my money for you.”
Answer:

Herein lies the importance of databasing and real-world targeting. If you work targets like “sub-space beings”, “other dimensional entities” and even this-world stuff like “aura enhancement” or “chakra alignment”, you are working things which have no hard and fast feedback. There is no way to tell whether you are remote viewing or imagining. The fact that 2 or 10 or even hundreds of people get the same information on these targets is no indicator of validity. The “Shelldrake effect”, cultural patterns, public dispersal of information, telepathy, and a myriad of other factors can produce hundreds of people “getting” the same thing, without remote viewing taking place at all. However, if you use targets (especially during training) which do have hard feedback, you can look at your session and judge it in light of the real target. So what is it that lets you know if you were imagining things? Being able to judge your session against real-world, hard, no-nonsense feedback. But beyond that, what is it that lets you avoid just imagining things each time you work and actually trains you to never let your imagination run wild? Databasing and analyzing your results and learning from them. In the process, you find out what works and what doesn’t. Keep doing what works, stop doing what doesn’t. That principle holds true for anything you try to do. The big thing that CRV training offers is over 24 years of the collected trial and error experiences of a lot of people trying everything they could imagine, finding out what does and doesn’t work, and adding that information into a central database repository for all the others to learn. You could buy yourself a computer and do the same, but then it would take you the next 24 years to catch up to where we are now, and then only if you had a lot of other people working on it with you.

Lyn Buchanan

How do dowsing and CRV relate?

Answer:

The main thrust of Controlled Remote Viewing is to describe, not to identify. CRV describes. That can cause a problem when someone asks for a location. A dowser will take a map and make an X at a certain point on it. A CRVer will describe the location and let the person find it themselves, through other means. The formal CRV protocol originally created by Ingo Swann does not allow for dowsing as one of its standardized “tools”, but during the span of its use, a method of “plugging in” a form of dowsing has been found and has now become one of the standard Phase 6 tools. Of course, nothing “plugs into” the CRV methodology without a lot of datakeeping, and that means a strong and unforgiving method of analysis. The “tool” of Phase 6 dowsing will not be explained here, since there are several variations of it, each for a different purpose, and since an explanation of the tool without an understanding of the methodology which surrounds it would be virtually meaningless. The method of analysis and judging, however, is pertinent to all forms of dowsing. Let us say that a PRACTICE target is located at point D4 on a map which starts at A1 in the upper left hand corner and goes to J10 in the lower right hand corner. Let us further say that you work this target and make your mark at C7. In order to judge how good you were, one would measure the distance from D4 to the farthest corner from it (in this case, J10). That measurement shows the distance of the greatest possible error he could make. Now, he measures the distance from D4 to his mark at C7. This measurement shows the amount of error he actually made. If you divide the maximum possible error into the actual error, you get the percentage of error. Subtract this percentage from 100% and you have the percentage of success. This method of measurement is totally independent of map size, map scale, map shape (square or rectangle, for example), and even works on portions of a spherical map as well as a flat one. What is the advantage of this? I hate to sound like a broken record, but it helps build a CRVer’s profile of strengths and weaknesses. For example, if one viewer consistently makes his/her mark with a 70% success rate, and another CRVer (or normal dowser) makes his/hers with only a 40% dependability, you would ask the one with the higher consistent success rate to dowse for you. When training, a dowser can know his/her average success rate and try to improve on it. I have found no other way to fairly and consistently judge a dowser’s ability to perform.

Lyn Buchanan

How does CRV relate to being psychic?

Question:

“How does CRV relate to “being psychic”? I keep hearing that it is a science rather than a mystical experience kind of thing. What’s the difference?”
Answer:

CRV is a set of psychological and psychophysical protocols designed to allow a structured method for bringing information from the subconscious mind to conscious awareness. The protocols also provide methods for preventing contamination of those perceptions/emotions/feelings/etc. by the conscious-level memories, fears, desires, imagination, and logical thought.
CRV relates to “being psychic” only in that it provides an excellent methodology for getting “psychic” information from the subconscious to the conscious, where it can be objectified, either verbally or in writing.

The fact that the protocols are designed to prevent contamination of thought make CRV training ideal for consultants, psychotherapists, interviewers, and psychiatrists to keep their interviewing pure of personal contamination. There is presently a furor in the psychiatric community about a doctor’s ability to – even unintentionally – plant “false memories” into the mind of a susceptable patient. The suspicions, desires, belief systems, or fears of the doctor find their way into the interview process, and the susceptable patient, on an unconscious level, accepts the doctor’s “STRAY CATs” as a part of his/her own mental condition. The tendency is very subtle, and there are presently no FIRMLY STANDARDIZED methodologies set up to prevent the doctor/patient relationship from creating false memory syndrome (FMS).

Although the protocols of CRV are useful for many other such human endeavors, it is in the area of psychic performance where it has gained it widest acceptance. In fact, it was for that purpose that CRV was first developed. CRV allows a person to “cue” him/herself, or to be “cued” by someone else, for information which could only be gained through psychic means. For example, a CRV task which is given to a viewer rarely ever contains information about the target. You might task a regular psychic with, “What will my chances be of getting the job?”. Not so with a CRVer. You would task that question to a CRVer by writing it on a sheet of paper as a question, giving that question a specific number, say, “95121201”, and then asking the CRVer, “What is the answer to question number 95121201?” (without ever showing the question to the viewer). The CRVer is forced to answer on a purely psychic level, without contaminating information. Any information other than that starts the viewer’s imagination, emotions, etc., and produces “STRAY CATs” which can totally ruin a CRV session.

So the CRV process is not the same as “being psychic”, but is, instead, a tool to allow someone who “is psychic” to do their work. Further, it is a learnable skill, so that people who aren’t natural psychics can do the work, too – if they just learn to use the tool. As an analogy, if you were to liken “being psychic” to taking a trip, then CRV would be the likened to the car in which the trip is taken. If you can learn to drive, you can take the trip. The relationship of CRV to “being psychic”, then, is that “being psychic” is the use of your natural talents, and CRV is a tool which lets you use them. It is merely a tool which allows a trained person to access that part of his/her which has access to intuitive information, and to do so on a dependable, repeatable basis.

“Being psychic” is a condition of the human species. CRV is merely a methodology which allows for the accurate, dependable and repeatable use of that condition.

Lyn Buchanan

How does CRV relate to the Out of Body Experience?

Question:

“I’ve had OOBEs and I’ve wondered if it is the same thing as CRV? There are a lot of people on the internet chat groups who act like they know, and some say the two are the same, some say they aren’t. Are they the same?”
Answer:

No. I attended the Monroe Institute Gateway course the summer before I first started learning CRV. I had an OOBE there, and can tell you from experience that they are totally different. There is a phenomenon which occurs for very advanced CRVers called “Perfect Site Integration” (PSI)*. You are working on your session, writing down your perceptions, and you look up from the table to find yourself actually at the site. You can see, hear, smell, taste, etc. just as though you were actually there. It is absolutely amazing. Even that, though, is not the same as an OOBE. In an OOBE, your mind separates from your body and actually goes to the site. The problem is that in OOBE, there is a lot of misinterpretation of what’s there, simply for one reason: your mind is there, but your brain is back at home.

Remember that CRV is simply a process whereby you are able to get impressions from your subconscious mind, become consciously aware of them and then write them down. In CRV, your conscious mind stays in the body (with brain intact), and you begin a structured process whereby the brain begins to accept the perceptions which the subconscious is picking up from the site as input from its normal senses, thereby allowing you to become aware of them. Hence, you sit in the CRV room and perceive smells, colors, etc., as though they were in some way real. However, throughout the CRV process, you normally maintain the awareness that they are only “virtually real”. When the phenomenon of Perfect Site Integration happens, your brain has has simply become so accepting of those perceptions that it stops paying attention to the real input from your normal senses. It buys into the virtual reality and begins to perceive it as the only reality. Sort of like tuning out all the background noise in a cafe so you can have a conversation with a single person there. As a result, you start to perceive the site as though it were the only input to your senses. The clarity is phenomenal.

The first time this happened to me was during a practice session – and I was totally unprepared for it to happen. The monitor asked me something, and I looked up at him. Suddenly, the monitor, the room around me, the table where I was sitting, and everything I knew to be my surroundings were gone, and I found myself standing in a very cold, uninhabited place with a sharp bite to the thin air. I looked out and saw an expanse of rocky sand with the sun low to the horizon and the sky much darker than it should have been. There was something large behind me – a stone structure of some kind that I could see out of the corner of my eye. I was just turning to see what it was when the realization struck me that this was crazy. I wasn’t supposed to be here. The shock of the realization snapped me out of it, and I turned my head back forward to see the monitor (who had seen this sort of thing before) chuckling at me from across the table. Although I hadn’t known it at the time, the target site was the pyramids on Mars. To this day, every time I see a picture of the Martian landscape, I get the feeling, “Been there – done it.”
——————————————————————————–
* Ingo Swann calls this “bi-location”, but that term has since been denegrated by others to mean nothing more than the process of perceiving a site separate from your own location. You will hear others speak of “bi-location” as the method by which CRV works. While it does give a name to the process, it still doesn’t explain how it works. It does, however, indicate to me that they may have never had the experience of TOTAL “bi-location”, which is what I have started calling “Perfect Site Integration” – where you become perfectly attuned to the site. Once you’ve had that experience, you realize that anything less is just sitting at a table perceiving things.

Lyn Buchanan

Is this CRV stuff overrated?

Question:

” … This is the stuff of science fiction, Star Trek or Heavy Metal, not real life. The capacity to “view” history alone will turn many prevalent notions on their heads. It opens up the most wonderful can of worms. My gut tells me that I am giving too much power to this skill because of my ignorance of it. I am I overrating CRV? On the other hand, because the universe is more complex than I could consciously imagine, I tend to think that I am not. I think what I am asking is, are you people overrating CRV to the public?”
Answer:

It has always struck me that people who are REALLY “psychic” (or REALLY anything else) almost get confused when people who “aren’t” make a big deal out of it. For them, it’s a normal thing, and although they get used to peoples’ reactions, there is always an amazement that the other people can’t do the same. If you ever watched the old show, “Kung Fu”, you might remember the “grasshopper at your feet” scene, when the student told the blind master, “I am amazed that you can see these things, when you have no eyes.” And the blind master replied, “I am amazed that you have eyes, and cannot.”

Of those people who have been WELL trained in CRV (for end application purposes, not just to do endless experiments in the lab or for looking into things which have no feedback), the amazement does continue, but with the growth, there is rarely a feeling that they are doing some miracle or something impossible. I don’t think I’ve met a well-trained CRVer who isn’t fascinated with it, but who doesn’t also accept it as being nothing really special. A few of the military CRVers have spoken out and told of their involvement in the project, but there are more who are now living in their 2.5 bedroom houses with their 2.5 children and who are most satisfied with their “normal” lives. They might be able to do what other people would call miracles, but to them, it’s really just another part of the day, or just a tool to call on when needed. They can find lost children, reveal the plans and intentions of foreign leaders, predict the progress and outcome of battles, or describe the insides of concealed bunkers and safe drawers, if needed. But until then, there’s dinner to be made, or the lawn to be mowed. I think that if you asked each one whether or not you were overrating CRV, each would answer, “Well, yes and no.”

Lyn Buchanan

What makes CRV work?

Answer:

Controlled Remote Viewing (CRV) began in the late 1970’s when a natural psychic, Ingo Swann, and several other members of the American Society for Parapsychological Research (ASPR) decided to solve one of the oldest and hardest problems of psychic functioning: the fact that it is neither controllable, reliable, nor repeatable on command.

The problem is not that a person cannot be psychic. The problem is that the perceptual information is buried deeply in the mind, and often gets lost in the process of “bringing it out”. In fact, the more one tries to bring it out, the more the process gets in the way, and the less gets out. What to do?

The already existing fields of psychology, physiology, and the then newly emerging fields of psychophysiology, and other mind/body fields had already developed methods for enhancing awareness of what goes on in the subconscious mind. Indeed, this is one of the major purposes of psychology.

It was actually the newly emerging field of psychophysiology which rendered the key to the solution. When there is a thought, feeling, or emotion, no matter how deeply buried, it appears to have some physical counterpart. This is the one basis upon which the whole study of “body language” has been built.

The physical reactions range from the broader, more overt expressions (such as smiling when happy and frowning when sad) to barely conscious ones (such as sweating when nervous, “goosebumps”, etc.). More subtle still are the “autonomic reactions”, which are controlled by the body’s autonomic nervous system. These are such things as blushing when you are embarrassed, your heart beating faster when you are excited, etc. Beyond this level, there are much more subtle reactions.

More recently, it has been discovered by the psychophysiologists that people even store some memories in parts of thier bodies, rather than in their minds. Message therapists have long known that when there is a mental or emotional problem, certain muscles react by tightening, aching, or by refusing to perform their normal activities. They have also often seen that massaging, say, a person’s shoulder will not only bring out the surface reaction of smiling with relief, and the autonomic reaction of muscle relaxation, but can also often bring out the causal memory or emotion, usually through visual or auditory impressions. If the patient talks about these sensations, they can then be discussed in a psychotheraputic manner and the cause can thereby be objectifed and released.

Beginning with the neurophysiological connections, a system of protocols was developed to bring the information which is sensed into consciousness, for the purpose of writing it down. While this process would appear easy to do, it is extremely difficult to do WELL. The problem is that a portion of the psyche, which we can call the Namer and Guesser (NAG), feels compelled to jump on every perception and identify it. We have survived as a species through the fact that this is a very fast and well developed function of our brains.

The perceptions coming up from the subconscious mind, however, are very vague, usually consist of only partial answers, and often have double meanings. If the NAG portion of the psyche is allowed to pounce on these incoming perceptions and identify them too quickly, everything gets misinterpreted. The viewer must be trained to control his/her own psyche’s strongest survival instinct before the information can “come through” in pure, uncontaminated form.

Through over 20 years of testing and learning against actual, real-world targets, the CRV originators and the people they have trained have developed the necessary procedures and protocols to do just that, and have placed them into a standardized “structure” which allows the remote viewer to purify his/her work.

It was not long after initial development that experimentation showed that the “structure” works so well that even a person who has never had any psychic experiences or “talent”, if trained to follow the “structure”, can produce information with the purity of most “good” psychics.

Lyn Buchanan

Are there any dangers to learning CRV?

Answer:

For some people, yes. For those people, the dangers are very real and serious ones.

There are two times when CRV can be dangerous to the viewer. One of the times of danger comes in the early stages of training. The other comes after you are fully trained into the advanced stages, and are working certain aspects of a target. The one which happens later on is taken care of in the training and the viewer is trained to avoid it, or to handle it if it happens. However, the one in the early stages – for some people – is unavoidable, happens almost without warning, and can cause some serious problems. That is the one I will discuss here.

The beginning of CRV training sets up a line of communication between your conscious and subconscious minds so the two can speak to each other in a clear and distinct fashion. That’s great as far as it goes, but there is a dark side to it. Let’s say that you are 30 years old. There are problems which your conscious and subconscious minds have been waiting to work out for up to 30 years. For extensive parts of your lifetime, grudges have been building up between the two. Suddenly, they are free to work things out – and they do. This is something which every beginning viewer must face.

Now, for most people, this isn’t too much of a problem. All their lives they have accepted themselves for what they are, dealt with their own inner problems and conflicts, and “gotten by”. Now that things can be worked out, they have some emotional upheavals at unexpected moments, and evidence some moments of emotion that they don’t understand. However, they have dealt with their own inner self for years, and they take the process in stride as the conscious and subconscious minds “clear out the cobwebs”, “settle their differences” and start on the road to being better friends.

A few other people, though, have not had the life-long experience of dealing with their inner selves on a friendly basis. They haven’t “gotten along” in life too well, and to put it honestly, they just aren’t friends with themselves. For these people, the process of working out their differences can make for a very rough ride. I have seen people burst out crying at having to write down “water”, after drawing an ideogram for water. I have seen people completely fly off the handle when someone says “Good morning!” to them. I have seen even more violent reactions for even less outward reason.

The good part is that, even for these people, the conscious and subconscious minds tend to finally work things out and become friends. After that initial span of turmoil, things get worked out, fewer conflicts and moments of emotional upheaval arise, and they arise less often. Within a much less span of time than psychotherapy takes, these people start becoming emotionally whole. For these people, the emotional and psychological improvements are often startling. Their social lives and inner lives improve drastically.*** However, the road to this improved mental, emotional and psychological state will usually have cost them a lot of turmoil and emotional upheaval in the process, according to how quickly and how well they adapt.

There are those VERY few who never adapt. They hold onto their self-hatred and grudges tenaciously, and never become friends with themselves. They are not willing to work out their inner differences and come to terms with themselves for this reason or that. The problem is that now, the conscious and subconscious minds can speak clearly to each other, and the fighting between them is horrendously worse than it was before that line of communications was set up. These are the people for whom learning CRV is most dangerous of all.

P>S>I has developed methods for “weeding out” those people who we feel would be hurt by the process of learning CRV, even if that hurt were temporary and led to an eventual improvement in the person’s life. While one spin-off of CRV’s development is a set of very productive tools for the psychiatric profession, we are neither qualified to be psychiatrists, ourselves, nor do we have the interest to do so. Therefore, we try to weed out potential problems along this line. The process of weeding out is in no way perfected, and now and then a person slips through the selection process and winds up having emotional problems which we then help them through as best we can. If necessary, we refer them to professional help for the duration of the turmoil.

P>S>I is not in business to just make money and pack in all the students we can. We care about each and every student. Our main goal is to develop a good and productive cadre of CRVers. It would be counterproductive for us to allow someone to take training without these warnings, and without finding out whether or not we believe they would have problems.

This is another reason we do not encourage the production of home training courses in the form of how-to books, tapes and videos. The possibility does exist and is very real that the housewife from Peoria could be sitting in front of her VCR trying to learn remote viewing, open up that line of communications, and there, in the comfort of her own home, have her life torn apart as a sudden battle started raging within her. At P>S>I, we believe that every student should have full access to comsultation and the services of a trained and experienced instructor at all times.

So, to answer your question, “Yes, there IS a very real danger >>>for some people<<< in learning CRV.” While, like I say, this is a problem for only a very small number of people, and P>S>I does everything in its power to weed out those who might run into this problem, I would be negligent to dismiss and not warn people about it, just to get another student. One of the twelve “caveats” which a person must read as a part of the enrollment process goes into this subject at length. I will not have a student who hasn’t been made aware of this problem, and who isn’t watchful for signs of it.

*** One of the paragraphs in the enrollment packet speaks to another danger a person can face at this point. The example is given of the hardened alcoholic who takes CRV training, works out his/her problems, and realizes that he/she no longer needs the alcohol which has been the sustainer of life all along. So that person stops drinking, and life improves so drastically that he/she becomes like a brand new person. That person’s spouse and friends, though, have lost a drinking partner. The person who has improved must be ready to make new friends when the old friends lose interest and must be ready for the fact that the spouse may start going out looking for a new person to drink with. Becoming a new person always means building a new life – as well as giving up the old one.

Lyn Buchanan

Can a CRVer ever identify things?

Question:

Palyne (PJ) Gaenir,
webmaster of the Firedocs web site

——————————————————————————–

Lyn Buchanan

Can a CRVer work alone?

Question:

“I was wondering.. is it possible for a remote viewer to remote view by himself and without any instruments or other technology? jut the remoteviewer and a pencil and paper?”
Answer:

Actually, that is the way it is usually done these days. However, the system was originally designed to use both a viewer and a monitor. The monitor is there to watch the viewer and keep him/her in proper structure, to note when the viewer goes into imagination mode, etc. The monitor is not there to monitor what the viewer FINDS, but to monitor what the viewer DOES and make note of it. After the session, both the monitor’s and the viewer’s information are sent to an analyst. That’s the ideal situation. Now that the military project has been disbanded, most viewers are left to work alone. It can be done, but doesn’t make for as dependable results. It also makes for a generally harder and less pleasant session, as the viewer has to be his/her own monitor. Quite often, the monitor is only there as a sort of security blanket for the viewer, and during those times when the viewer is feeling lost or confused, not having a monitor there can be quite unsettling. In short, if you have the opportunity to have a monitor, do so. I have one word of caution, though, if you can’t get a trained monitor who knows what he/she is doing, it is often better to have no monitor at all. If you train your own monitor, the best thing to do is to begin by training them to give you the coordinates and then just sit there and keep quiet.

Lyn Buchanan

Can CRV be targeted against subspace beings and UFOs?

Question:

“You keep saying that CRV is meant for “real-world” targets and keep discounting things like sub-space entities, alternate realities, ETs, and such things as that. But if CRV is so good, why can’t it access these things?”
Answer:

While CRV is probably the best tool available for gaining information about extraterrestrials, UFOs, and other questions which don’t seem to be answerable by other means, neither P>S>I’s training nor normal operations address these things in any way. That is not the fault of CRV, but the result of a policy which P>S>I has to keep ourselves oriented toward “real-world” applications.

Avoidance of this subject during training is not out of disbelief or disapproval, but simply because of the practical fact that there is no feedback. CRV training is grounded in feedback. I don’t care how good the teacher thinks he/she is or how many degrees he/she holds (in whatever fields), the student learns by doing the work and comparing the results to the feedback.

Avoidance of this subject during operations is simply because no one tasks us with the stuff. P>S>I’s operations are designed toward solving the problems of and gathering information about the “real-world” (this world). I think that CRV is probably as good a method as any other for alien contact, since nothing else seems to work. If hard evidence that such contact is possible ever surfaces, it will very likely either involve CRV or come about as a result of someone’s CRV work. Until then, I am much more concerned about gathering information which will find missing children, help diagnose illnesses, etc.

A MORE PERSONAL ANSWER:

I firmly believe that there are aliens, but I don’t seem to be a part of the ETs’ everyday life, and they aren’t a part of mine. On a purely personal note, by the way, I also firmly believe that the ETs are physical in form. While I am fully open to the concept of other-dimensional beings and interdimensional travel, when people start talking about sub-space entities suddenly appearing to them (and to them alone, even in a crowd…. “Oh! I can see one now!”), I get the feeling that the person “seeing” them is – how should I say this – well, CRV is a science, but maybe the wrong science… maybe psychiatry could deal with it better.

Can you access the thoughts of people?

Question:

“Is it possible for a remote viewer to view what another person is thinking and feeling?”
Answer:

Absolutely. Finding the plans and intentions of foreign leaders was one of the things CRV was invented for. This is not, however, something taught in the P>S>I’s Basic course, since it involves some rather sophisticated work, and a good deal of experience, in order to do it correctly. It is therefore taught in the Intermediate course. I know that some other places are teaching mental access, even calling it such names as “Deep Mind Probe”. What they are teaching, however, is not deep probing at all, but only elemental access of a person’s personality and/or basic feelings. This would more accurately be called (and used for) “personality profiling”, and is, in its own rights, a very useful ability. Accessing a person’s actual thoughts and innermost feelings, however, requires that the viewer all but integrate his/her own personality with the person being viewed. To do such a thing requires that you (the viewer) begin to identify with that person, with that person’s thoughts and feelings, motivations, etc. When you do such, you become, to an extent, the same as that person in a very real way. Therein lies the danger of what you are asking: let’s say that you are viewing a criminal or other “less than desirable” person. (In the military, for example, I personally did such targets as Idi Amin, Khadafi, Saddim Hussein, Columbian drug lords, etc.) One of the first things that happens is that you begin to see things from their point of view. You begin to understand why it is both good and necessary to kill people who get in your way, to be ruthless and heartless in governing the masses, etc. In fact, it is this “identification” with the person being viewed which allows you to gain greater access. In this type of viewing, you can gain and report the actual thoughts, plans and intentions of anyone you choose, but unless your target is someone like Mother Teresa, it is done at a cost to your own inner self. If you return from such a session and fail to properly “detox”, you are in danger of having – in effect – Idi Amin going home to your family that night, or some child molester going home to your children. The “detox” process is long and intricate, and cannot be abbreviated without serious consequences. There are no shortcuts. It is in this area of CRV that you are no longer “playing parlor games”. This type of viewing is VERY serious and can have permanent consequences if not done properly. This is not something any experienced, knowledgable, or responsible teacher would try to teach to a beginner who hasn’t the experience to safely handle it. I would give the advice to anyone who seeks training anywhere to ask about this matter. If the trainer does teach it before the student is ready, shy away from that trainer. He/she is dangerous.

Lyn Buchanan

Do you just see what you want to see?

Question:

“On the Art Bell Show, you said, “Viewers tend to see what they want to see. If they live and breath ETs, then that’s what they see in everything.” If that is so, then how do remote viewers ever get the real information?”
Answer:

The following answer may sound very simplistic, but in actual practice, it is very hard and really requires discipline:

Viewers tend to see what they want to see so in order to see the truth, you have to want to see the truth.

Sound overly simplified? Actually, it is very hard. When you go into a session, you have no idea what the target is going to be. You have to be open for everything life, the world, and human existance can throw at you. There is a rule in remote viewing that says, “Anything you tend to turn your eyes away from, you will tend to turn your mind away from, too.” It is one thing to view happy and scenic places, but if you are going to be a viewer who can really do the job, you will have to view some pretty awful things, as well. In advanced training, when the viewer has already developed his/her remote viewing skills and is now working on honing them, we sometimes give a target such as the dead animal portion of the city dump, or a murder scene, a car wreck, or something like that, in order to train the viewer to see the truth in spite of their fears and/or distaste for the truth. We sometimes simply give a bland target, like the middle of the ocean, or an open field with nothing in it, in order to train the viewer to see the truth, in spite of their desire to go to a “neat” target site. We sometimes target the ugly hovels of poor people in the district of town which is only a block or so away from glitzy and glamorous casinos, with their bright neon lights and attractions. Will the viewer be diverted from the poverty and drawn to the glitz? If so, they need more training and practice – they’re not yet willing to see the truth. In real life, a viewer must enter every session wanting the truth even more than he/she wants to find the missing child alive. The viewer must want the truth more than he/she wants to see a good outcome or the recovery of a loved one to good health. The viewer, not knowing what the target may be, has to go into a session wanting the truth, even if the monitor, for some wierd reason, has tasked the viewer to see his/her own death (a dirty trick that has been done by inexperienced monitors and trainers, but is something that no valid, responsible, experienced monitor or trainer should ever do). When the parents or the police are sitting there, watching the session, wanting you to say something hopeful or enlightening, you have to want the truth more than you want to satisfy their hopes. When the TV camera is there filming you, you have to want the truth more than you want something sensational. When the target is something which is so revulsive to you that you could never even force yourself to think of such a thing, you have to want the truth more than you want to avoid the truth. When you are hoping with every fiber of your being that the ETs will make an appearance on your front lawn, or that they have chosen you as their spokesman, you have to want the truth more than you want the glory. That’s the kind of discipline which is required to get the job done. It isn’t easy, and there are a lot of people who call themselves remote viewers, and who even teach others, who want something beside the truth so badly that all they can “see” is what they want to see. That’s why they can view a blank and barren desert and “get” pregnant Martian virgins appearing to them out of hidden, underground UFO bases. That’s why they can view a comet and “see” hollow spaceships 7 times the size of the earth, filled with billions of lizard people who one viewer “sees” as benevolent and coming here to help us, while another viewer “sees” them coming here to drop cannisters of plant pathogens on our crops, and another group of people “sees” them coming here to take them away to a better existance — when the truth is that it’s just a comet – but who wants to see something normal? Some people will tell you that by strictly following a stringent set of protocols, you will get the truth. That only shows that they don’t understand the purpose behind the protocols. The protocols are there to >>>guide<<< your mental processes, not to govern what you will find. If you want to see something which exists only in your own desires or fears or imagination, and you want that more than you want to see the truth, then all the protocols in the world won’t keep your mind from doing so. Bottom line: if you go into remote viewing at all, you have to do it wanting to find one thing more than anything else in the world… you have to want the truth.

Lyn Buchanan

What are some applications for CRV?

Question:

“…I resist the “factual” potential of CRV. If one thinks for a moment on the social, political, religious, historical and revolutionary capacity of CRV it is not too difficult to begin to wonder what its potential applications are.”
Answer:

The great potential of CRV is, so far, mostly untapped and unexplored. To date, the main impetus in researching and developing CRV has been to provide another scientific method for collecting strategic and logistical information (as you call it, the “factual potential”) in the arena of national defense. In spite of what one might think from the lack of good information and the wealth of outright disinformation which is being placed before the public, it repeatedly served that purpose, and served it very well. But no longer.
The withdrawal of federal support and funding is both a curse and a blessing to CRV. First of all, it is a curse because funding is necessary for the development of many of the new applications for which CRV would be beneficial. It is a blessing, however, because those further avenues of development weren’t being investigated by CRV’s past owners. The exposure of the already-developed CRV to a curious and inventive public will open up many new applications – ill funded as they might be – simply because people can have it as a new tool to use in the everyday situations of personal, business, and academic life.

Examples:

1) At its most basic level, CRV is nothing more than training a person to establish a dependable, understandable, and repeatable path of communication between his/her conscious and subconsious minds. The “psychic” information comes into the subconscious, but because of lack of efficient pathways, rarely ever makes its way to consciousness. When it does, it is usually contaminated by “things” it picks up along the way. CRV training establishes and clears that path. Once people can communicate with their subconscious minds, whole new worlds of applications open up, psychological (mental health, for example) and psychophysical (sports and other physical ability enhancement – being able to achieve “the zone” on command, for example) to name only a few.

2) With my heavy background in computer science, I am convinced that it is possible to set up virtual environments where the impressions of the subconscious can be translated into graphical representations to give greater substance to their understanding. The VR environment would also allow the subconscious minds of multiple CRVers to join, interact, and strengthen each other. I have the capabilities in place to do such work. Without the huge amounts of funding, however, I fear it will not be done.

3) The Monitor’s course is presently designed to teach people how to administer, help, guide, and assist the CRVer in his/her effort to bring the true subconscious impressions to the surface unpolluted, WITHOUT INJECTING INFORMATION OR BIASES INTO THE PROCESS. Only slight changes in the course would help train psychiatrists and psychologists to interact with their patients in the same way. I have found in the past months that almost all reporters and the majority of researchers are also in strong need of the same training. The Monitor’s course offers hard-core, provable and repeatable methods for the prevention of such artifacts as false-memory syndrome, interviewer bias, etc.

4) As has already been started with the Assigned Witness Program, CRV offers a way to “witness” events for which there are no available witnesses. It is not limited to time or location. As such, it is a good tool for providing that crucial bit of information which would get a stalled criminal investigation back on track for normal working methods.

5) There are several trained CRVers right now, who are looking into the use of CRV as a medical diagnostic tool.

6) There is very strong evidence that CRV allows for a technique designed to influence (not change) the past. I am presently starting some research on this topic, which will hopefully allow people to affect their own past decisions. I will take as large a set of uninfluenced decisions and their outcomes as possible as baseline data, then begin a time of documenting decisions, waiting for the outcome, performing the Controlled Remote Influencing process in light of what the best decision would have been, and seeing if an overall rise in correct decisions results. I will be starting with stock market actions (buy/sell/do nothing), simply because they are so numerous, already so well documented, and provide hard and fast feedback. Also, success might help in funding. If things work out, the research may be moved into the realm of more personal decisions. Then, one distant day, IF success can be documented over thousands of trials, and years of time, it may finally become incorporated into the formalized CRV training.

7) As with any other tool Mankind has at its disposal, CRV can also be used to do some harm. I wish I knew a way around that, but I don’t. I can do things to control CRV, but there is no way to control the people who leave here having learned it. People are people and always will be. Like Shane said to the little boy who asked why his mother thought guns were evil, “It ain’t the gun, kid. It’s the guy using it.”

At the present time, I feel that the development of new applications will probably be very slow in coming. Any funded research being done is in the area of pure research, not applications research. That, in my opinion, is a huge mistake. The research people are still in the “tell me what’s in the envelope” mentality in order to prove CRV’s existance. Any applications developments are presently being done on by small, “shadetree”-type individuals, generally working alone, or in small, unfunded and unsupervised groups of “dabblers”. The funding for past applications was, by necessity, oriented along the line of information collection on specific categories of targets, and now that funding has dried up. It looks like there is no new applications-oriented funding on the horizon. Therefore, the research that I and others are doing, goes on at a small level and will probably continue to do so while the research labs keep getting millions for predicting whether a card has a star or a wavy line. Such is the way of things.

Lyn Buchanan

Are children better at learning CRV than adults?

Question:

“I have three kids; do you foresee any problems with them being taught CRV’ing by their dad (along with the requisite training in integrity, of course)?” Is there any data on teaching CRV to children? It seems like they could learn it better than already-ruined adults.
Answer:

If their dad isn’t, himself, trained in CRV, then yes, I see problems with both that topic and possibly teaching them brain surgery, too.

It might surprise you how many adults these days are completely open to the concept of parapsychology, as well as the various methods for evidencing it. In fact, people seem hungry for it, and seem willing to go to almost any lengths to satisfy that hunger. Linda Georgian isn’t bringing in millions by accident. Surprisingly, it seems that many people are closed to the idea of learning to do it themselves. I guess it’s part of the American way that we hire things done rather than doing them ourselves. Yet, the outcome of this attitude brings about a surprising result: many people who would never think of taking training in parapsychology are all in favor of their children doing so. As to the question of how much data has been collected concerning teaching the field of parapsychology to children, there are quite a few people teaching one form or another of parapsychological functioning to children, and having, I hear, very good results. The problem is that “good results” is usually open to interpretation by the person collecting the data. The problem is not that data isn’t being collected. The problem is that most of the people doing the collecting are doing so informally, and don’t really have a decent background in how to do data collection cleanly and properly. Therefore, a suspected majority of the data being collected is virtually useless, scientifically. Now… is there any data specifically on training children to perform CRV? Only a miniscule amount. Certainly not enough to be of scientific significance. Due to CRV’s military background, there has been no formal training (to include accurate data analysis and record keeping) that I know of to relate children’s psi abilities to CRV. The fact that it was only recently released to the public means that no significant body of such data has had time to build up. Many of the formally trained CRVers have, of course, taught their children on an ad hoc basis, but as for formal training with accurate data analysis and record keeping, they have done almost none at all. Of those ex-military who are teaching, there is secretly some trepidation about teaching other people’s children, even with legal papers, since there are so many legal factors to be considered, and since the legal system is so quixotic where parapsychological functioning is concerned. There are lots of things left for us to do in the development of CRV.

Lyn Buchanan

Does telepathy enter into group training?

Question:

“I just recently read( of a comment you made) that training in groups has its benefits in that the students seem to learn faster. Might you think that the “learning” may be telepathic overlay of the group rather than the individual student creating the connection between conscious and unconscious?”
Answer:

I think that’s a large part of it, but with a very interesting twist:

The students are all working on different targets, not the same target.

If one considers the role of telepathic overlay in this situation, then what is getting shared between minds is not information about a target, but actual remote viewing skills. That is, as each person connects with his/her subconscious, the actual process of learning how to do so is shared. That’s neat! I know that skills can be passed from one person to another telepathically, just the same as information or ideas. I hadn’t realized that the group dynamic might help the process along. If that is truely what is happening in the group training, then I think it’s one of the greatest benefits to come out of it. If the students were all working the same target, the information about that target would be passed back & forth. When everyone’s session was over, that would be that. However, when it is the skills which are getting passed back & forth, the result is more permanent. Once those skills are experienced, whether through hard work or telepathic overlay, the student becomes aware of new pathways: of new ways of thinking. Then, even if only vaguely and partially remembered afterwards, the experience of that awareness allows the student to more easily work toward his/her final goal of establishing a clear, open and active communication between the conscious and subconscious minds.

Lyn Buchanan