Comments on: Remote Viewing Study Hits The Web Via Twitter — Shocking Results

By: Nancy

Nancy — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 18:09:16 +0000

Exactly. Guessing is not remote viewing.

By: Lane

Lane — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 07:15:51 +0000

How funny this all is. Check out Ingo Swann on the web and see what is real about remote viewing. He worked as a remote viewer for the CIA. Why do idiots still have to try and disprove all this? What a waste of time and money. Do they really think we’re all idiots? Everyone is psychic if they’d only tune in. Examine the motives behind this rubbish. Are they trying to discredit our own, innate psychic ability? Do they want us to remain ignorant until we die?

People once thought the world was flat… ho hum. The world is full of flat-worlders still. Pity they couldn’t just fall off and be done with it.

By: Bambie Reed

Bambie Reed — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 04:24:14 +0000

The Twitter experiment was entertaining and not science. I ‘ve been remote viewing since 1999 having received personal training from several professional remote viewers and it takes more then this experiment to stand on any solid ground. This was not a scientific experiment it was more of a social psychic experiment. People in general have not trained their minds to receive clear data and filter out the noise. Twitter was a noise based experiment and you would expect to get what he got given the givens of this entertainment he called experiment.

By: Paul

Paul — Mon, 13 Jul 2009 16:29:16 +0000

This was a poorly constructed, pseudo-scientific, ‘experiment’ by a known skeptic who has been shown in the past to skew data results. Have a look at http://irva.org/twitterex.html for a more balanced analysis of the experiement.

By: Nancy

Nancy — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 17:15:48 +0000

This is a wonderful idea. I purchased Remote Viewing and Remote Influencing by Gerald O’Donnell this January, and have been studying and studying. I’m ready!

But, where is the contest?