the dojo psi

Spontaneous Remote Viewing (SRV) is a random format of wiring between virtual reality and levels of consciousness; Controlled Remote Viewing (CRV) is composed of discovering the correct wiring and bringing the random format under conscious control.

Psychics were once condemned as heretics and burnt at stakes, which definitely gave our species psi potentials a negative spin. In modern times, the spins were that human species psi was irrational, of illusion, of abnormal psychiatric disorders and, worst of all --- unscientific. Negative spin factors, one and all. I then pointed out that everyone develops mental grids via which they process information. This meant that everyone has processing information about our species psi faculties through mental grids engineered by anti-psi spin doctors. Many, but not all, people think through spin-grids not through knowledge grids. It was, therefore, not surprising that no one knew anything about real psi faculties, and probably feared them as well.

Thousands upon thousands of psi formats have been documented since about 3,000 BC, in all cultures, in all countries, down until today.

Granted, [remote viewing] might "see" some bad things; but beyond those occasions the experienced sensations of the sustained up- linking are wonderful, beautiful and fabulous. Experiencing Connections to shared universals makes for a new reality.

The raw data needed to be independently guarded so that it could not be said it was altered after the fact. Thirty copies of the raw data were prepared, including statements regarding the purposes and design of the experiment. . . . One copy each was offered to a noted American astronomer, and a famous science popularizer. Both of these copies were rejected and returned, one with a signed letter of ridicule which resides in my archives. Telephone requests to two noted skeptics to safeguard the raw data were refused. . . . A copy was offered to the leading Skeptical Organization in our fair country. The offer was declined.

The raw data indicate that the viewer had identified a Ring around Jupiter, a sketch of which appears in the raw data (included) and is also verbally identified. Conventional scientific wisdom held that Jupiter did not possess any Rings. This particular datum was one reason the experiment was laughed out of town by many. The existence of the Ring was discovered and confirmed in early 1979, six years after the Jupiter Probe had taken place.

Two viewers simultaneously took part in the Jupiter Probe -- myself (in California) and Mr. Harold Sherman (in Arkansas). . . . The reason for inviting Mr. Sherman to participate was to see if two viewers, separated by over 2,000 miles, would report the same or different data. With certain exceptions, the two sets of data corresponded nicely. Mr. Sherman's contributions were not included in the 1980 formal report because he was not a consultant of SRI and the costs of analyzing his data could not be justified.

1. Hydrogen mantle:
Swann (April 27, 1973): "I think that it must have an extremely large hydrogen mantle. If a space probe made contact with that, it would be maybe 80,000-120,000 miles out from the planet's surface."
Scientific American (September, 1973, p. 121): "Above the hypothetical core is a thick stratum in which hydrogen is by far the most abundant element; this stratum makes up almost all the mass and volume of the planet. The hydrogen is separated into two layers; in both it is liquid, but it is in different physical states.
"The inner layer extends from the core to a distance of approximately 45,000 kilometers from the center, where the pressure is estimated to be about three million earth atmospheres ... In this layer the hydrogen is in the liquid metallic state, a form of the element that has not yet been observed in the laboratory because it exists only at extremely high pressures. ... The outer layer extends to about 70,000 kilometers and consists mainly of liquid hydrogen in its molecular form.
"Above the layer of molecular hydrogen, and extending another 1,000 kilometers to the cloud tops is the gaseous hydrogen atmosphere."
Science (Vol. 183, January 25, 1974, p. 317): "Jupiter appears to have an extensive hydrogen torus surrounding it in the orbital plane of Io."
(Remote Viewing the planet Jupiter)

Swann (April 27, 1973): "Tremendous winds sort of like maybe the prevailing winds of Earth, but very close to the surface. I see something that looks like a tornado."
Scientific American (March, 1976, p. 50): "On Jupiter the zones and the Great Red Spot are high-pressure regions (anti-cyclonic) and the belts are low-pressure (cyclonic). ... In that respect they resemble tropical cyclones (rotating hurricanes) and mature extratropical cyclones on the earth."
Time (March 12, 1979, p. 87): "Yet it was Jupiter's stormy weather that caused the greatest excitement. Voyager's electronic eyes spotted dozens of storms across Jupiter's banded face. Most of them measure about 6,000 miles wide, far larger than their earthly counterparts. ... University of Arizona astronomer Bradford A. Smith was both awed and puzzled by these storms."
(Remote Viewing the planet Jupiter)

Swann (April 27, 1973): "I bet you that the surface of Jupiter will give a very high infrared count (?), reading (?). The heat is held down."
Science (Vol. 183, Jan. 25, 1974, p. 303): "The Pioneer 10 infrared radiometer has established that the excess radiation is 2 to 2.5 times the solar input and that there is no temperature change at the cloud top levels across the evening terminator of the planet.
Science News (Vol. 105, Apr. 13, 1974, p. 236): "The surprise is that the heating should begin at such lofty altitudes, particularly with no indications either from earthly observations or from the infrared mapping device aboard. 'It's a huge discrepancy,' admits Kilore. 'I can't explain it.' The closest thing to a theory is that perhaps a haze or dust layer, while confusing watchers on earth, created a greater greenhouse effect than anyone had expected, trapping and building the sun's incoming energy to unanticipated heights."
(Remote Viewing the planet Jupiter)

Swann (April 27, 1973): "Is there a thermal inversion here? I bet there is."
Science (Vol. 188, May 2, 1975, p. 475): "In particular, the appearance of the inversion at about 260 K is strikingly similar to the Pioneer 10 entry profile, although the Pioneer 11 measurement was obtained on the dark limb of Jupiter. Thus, the inversion cannot be ascribed to heating by particulate absorption of solar radiation, unless rapid circulation at the polar latitude is sufficient to maintain this effect across the terminator."
(Remote Viewing the planet Jupiter)

Swann (April 27, 1973): "From that view, the horizon looks orangish or rose-colored, but overhead it's kind of greenish-yellow. You know, I had a dream once -- something like this, where the cloud cover was a great arc... sweeps over the entire heaven."
Science News (Vol. 115, March 10, 1979, p. 148): "Still, striking reds, oranges, yellows, brown and even blue make Jupiter's convoluted patterns seem all the more fantastic. ... A major goal of Voyager is to find out the nature and chemistry of the coloring agents. ... Phosphene and other candidates have been suggested, but they have been far from certain."
(Remote Viewing the planet Jupiter)

Swann (April 27, 1973): "I get the impression, though I don't see, that it is liquid. I get the impression that that must be a band of crystals similar to the outer ones, kind of bluish. They seem to be sort of in orbit, permanent orbit down through another layer farther down which are like our clouds but moving fast. There's another area: liquid like water. Looks like it's got icebergs in it but they're not icebergs."
Science News (Vol. 106, September 21, 1974, p. 186): "Farther down may be frozen water crystals and possibly even liquid water, the Pioneer researchers suggest, although water has never been observed there."
Ibid. (February 15, 1975, p. 102): "Water vapor in the atmosphere of Jupiter -- 'The first oxygen-bearing molecule identified in the outer planets' -- has been discovered by a team of astronomers from the University of Arizona."
(Remote Viewing the planet Jupiter)

Swann (April 27, 1973): "Inside those cloud layers, those crystal layers, they look beautiful from the outside [i.e., spaceside], but from the inside they look like rolling gas clouds -- eerie yellow light, rainbows."
Time (March 12, 1979, p. 87): "Voyager also discovered a dazzling, doughnut-shaped cloud of electrically charged particles that formed displays similar to the earth's northern lights."
Science News (Vol. 118, July 21, 1979): "One major product of the field is the region of brilliant auroras discovered around the planet by Voyager 1 and further studied by its successor [Voyager 2]."
(Remote Viewing the planet Jupiter)

Swann (April 27, 1973): "Very high in the atmosphere there are crystals, they glitter, maybe the stripes are like bands of crystals, maybe --like rings-- [emphasis added] on Saturn, --though not far out-- [emphasis added] like that, very close within the atmosphere. I bet you they'll reflect radio probes. Is that possible if you had a cloud of crystals that were assaulted by different radio waves?"
(See sketch of Ring in raw data.)
Time (March 19, 1979, p. 86): "Coming within 278,000 km (172,400 miles) of the swirling Jovian cloud tops, the robot survived intense radiation, peered deep into the planet's storm-tossed cloud cover, provided startling views of the larger Jovian moons --and, most surprising of all, revealed the presence of a thin, flat ring around the great planet-- [emphasis added]. Said University of Arizona Astronomer Bradford Smith: 'We're standing here with our mouths open, reluctant to tear ourselves away'."
(Remote Viewing the planet Jupiter)

Swann (April 27, 1973): "I feel that there's liquid somewhere. If I turn, the whole thing seems enormously flat. I mean, if I get the feeling that if a man stood on those sands, I think he would sink into them (laughs). Maybe that's where the liquid feeling comes from.
Aviation Week & Space Technology (November 19, 1973, p. 53): "A reason is that Jupiter may be all atmosphere. Lack of radar reflectivity points to a gel-like rather than solid core."
Science News (Vol. 110, July 17, 1976, p. 44): "In fact, liquidity seems to be the most salient overall characteristic of Jupiter. ... The outer layer [the --mantle--] is gaseous hydrogen mostly. As the pressure increases the hydrogen gradually passes into a liquid state. ... The liquid molecular hydrogen changes to liquid metallic hydrogen at 25,000 kilometers down."
(Remote Viewing the planet Jupiter)

Swann (April 27, 1973): "If I look to the right here there is an a enormous mountain range. Those mountains are very huge but they still don't poke up through the crystal cloud cover. And off in the distance, I guess, to the East, was a very high mountain chain 30,000 feet or so, quite large mountains."
(Discussion: This mountain range thing, plus the Ring thing, damned the Jupiter Probe from the start because prevailing scientific opinion denied their possibility.)
Science (Vol. 183, January 25, 1974): "The magnetic field measurements at Jupiter will also enable us to investigate more exactly the core of the planet. Several models of the core have been proposed which include either frozen or liquid metallic hydrogen as well as a rocky core consisting of several tens of earth masses."
{Now pay attention here: "a rocky core consisting of --several tens of earth masses--"? several tens of earth masses! Well, if you enlarge Earth's mass by ten or twenty or more times, then a --30,000-foot mountain range-- would seem like a hill there.>>>
Science News (Vol. 110, July 10, 1975): "One of the most famous features of Jupiter's atmosphere is the great Red Spot. Astronomers have engaged in endless speculation and argument about its nature. Observers have suggested that it was a column of the atmosphere hooked on the top of an extra-high mountain ...".
(Remote Viewing the planet Jupiter)

But now in retrospect, it was fortunate that the thefts took place because the entirety and parts of the raw data early appeared in the media, including The National Enquirer. Thus, the raw data was publicly available as of 1974. . . . The 1979 scientific discovery and confirmation of the Jovian Ring came as one of the larger shocks and --surprises-- in astronomical history.
(Remote Viewing the planet Jupiter)

No one yet wanted to be officially seen with me, so I was taken by an Army major to a bowling parlor somewhere in Maryland.

If you are involved with any of the martial arts, especially Akhido or Jujitsu, then you'll agree that mind does possess superpower faculties which can be identified, and developed and utilized.

Remote viewing represents one "set" of superpower faculties -- our innate perceptual channels across distances. Rudiments of RV faculties occasionally manifest in almost everyone, even if only in dream states. For the most part, it is only in the United States where their faculties are laughed at and where skeptics control mainstream antagonism to them. If you out there who feel we have superpower faculties don't speak up and shout down the skeptics, then it's YOUR nascent superpowers that are quailing before their ridiculous stupidities. And you belong to the great but --silent-- superpowerless majority. The WorldWide Web is --yours,-- you know. Not theirs.

[N]ow that the CIA is occupying itself with minimalizing and disowning remote viewing, there is no longer any reason to keep the substantive and technical matters from public view.

What remote viewing consists of is a fairly complex matter that is not easily reduced to simplistic or familiar stereotype concepts. Very few have inspected the long history of remote viewing among our species.

Under other names, remote viewing and other superpowers of mind have been noted from time immemorial, while elements of it have manifested in most pre-modern cultures. And since this has continuously been so, remote viewing is a species thing, as it were --- a power inherent in our species.

As it happens, though, English and the Romance languages don't contain nomenclature either sufficient or precise enough to do so. Nomenclature is largely derived from concepts, but . . . the relevant concepts have never really been identified. For example, "telepathy" and "intuition" are both elements of human superpowers of mind. But some thirty types of telepathy can be listed, and about two dozen regarding intuition. Yet we persist, in English, in utilizing only the two terms. Precision of concepts is therefore lacking, and this accounts for the missing nomenclature. . . . We use only the two terms as hammers to deal with very refined matters which need precision "brain surgery" tools.

As a term, "remote viewing" emerged in 1971 and was at first quite obscure. . . . Since then remote viewing has been thought of in different ways, depending on whose thinking was involved. . . . It is to be understood that different people think of things in different ways. . . . At about 1980, the term began being popularly utilized as a descriptor for random affairs which might not be remote viewing. Many have most incorrectly used it as a replacement term for "psychic."

[A] precise technical definition (or descriptor) for remote viewing does exist. But it is a complicated one in that remote viewing is --not-- a singular thing in itself, but a compounded series of awareness-dynamic processes.

Realization, perception and knowledge are usually considered somewhat passive states. So the term "dynamic" needs to be associated with "awareness" in order to get at the needed --active-- potentials. Generally speaking, remote viewing is a form of active perception and realization as contrasted to their usual states as passive reception or passive experiencing.

Remote viewing is a form of "hacking" the information-bearing terminals of our species bio- mind - -- which itself is a very impressive and sophisticated "net." Each born individual is not only a "terminal" in that net, but carries within itself a replica of it.

In other words, all of us are more the same than we are different. That we give overwhelming attention to our perceived differences gives rise to much of the human drama.

[T]hat the concept of "normalcy" should have been used as the central focus for modern mind research, is one of the greatest flaws of the Twentieth Century.

One of the earliest sources which refers to remote viewing --faculties-- is found in the Yoga teachings of ancient India, with echoes of them throughout the Far East. There are also elements to be found in most early pre-Modern cultures in lower Africa, Egypt, Babylon, Scandinavia, among the Amerindians, among the ancient traditions of the Bushmen of Australia, in early Greece, among Siberian and Persian shamans, and among the Polynesian Islanders, including Hawaii. Elements of remote viewing were also found in early Europe before the Inquisitions of the Middle Ages. And elements of remote viewing again emerged early in the eighteenth through and into the twentieth centuries. . . . such elements have manifested in the past, in the present, and will continue to do so into the indeterminate future. The formats of the manifesting may be different, but the essential nature of what does manifest is the same.

The terms used among these many older cultures are very many. But in English the general concept can be adequately rendered as "distant-seeing" --- a hyphenated term not too difficult to deal with. We need only combine "dynamic-awareness" (of) "distant-seeing" to get the general drift of what is meant. For unless distant- seeing is expressed via dynamic awareness, then its fundamentals will remain latent and invisible. . .

The modern concept that has long prevailed held that the Biomind human organism possessed only five limited physical senses, and that how much we perceive is constrained within their limits. The question is now pertinent whether there are more than five physical senses. To save time and space here, I now refer you to "Deciphering the Senses: The Expanding World of Human Perception" by Robert Rivlin and Karen Gravelle (Simon and Schuster, 1984). This book reports on SEVENTEEN physical senses identified by bio-neurologists during the 1970s. . . . The historical evidence is very good that the ancient Yogins taught that the abundantly- more- than- five physical senses could, by practice, be so perfected as to achieve many hundreds of highly specialized senses. The distinction between the perfected MANIFOLD physical senses and the superpower sidhis is thus very narrow -- because a highly-developed physical sense might indeed be a sidhi. All highly-skilled martial arts persons will immediately understand what is meant here.

Rather than thinking of distant-seeing as a psychic aptitude, it is more to the point to think of it as a correct series of sensory transducers that permit the integration of Biomind hard drive faculties that result in cognitively controlled distant-seeing. Thus, distant-seeing it is not at first a thing in itself, but can become one (a sidhi) AFTER the needed sensory transducers are cognitively located and integrated. When it became possible, during the mid-1970s, to lift remote viewing up and out of its spontaneous "psychic" nature and to tutor others in it with increasing SELF-PERFECTION - -- well, remote viewing, as a format of distant-seeing, indeed seemed to equate to one of the sidhis of ancient India.

It was then seen that while spontaneous remote viewing is an "experiencing," CRV is a form of "controlled and directed meditation."

None of the names of Einstein's skeptics are remembered. And this is the ignominious fate of most skeptics --- because the times and tides of discovery march on and forget they existed.

The introduction of Machiavellianism into skepticism and debunking runs counter to their original ethical function . . . I refer the truly interested to the paper entitled "Science Versus Showmanship: A History of the Randi Hoax" by Michael A. Thalbourne just published in The Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research (Oct. 1995, Vol.89, No. 4).

The second larger background issue concerns the fact that there is nothing essentially wrong with researching the superpowers, both to confirm their existence or not, and if confirmed to identify their particular functions of mind.
Resistance to such research before the facts of the superpowers can be ascertained is therefore puzzling. The only possible explanation must involve not discoverable facts which could speak for themselves but motives and agendas. Most of us recognize that this is the usual case regarding most human confusions -- assuming that mere stupidity or lack of knowledge are not involved as the first instance.

The ethical, and even logical goal of the true skeptic is to resolve doubt by identifying facts, not to reinforce doubt in the absence of discovered facts -- and certainly not to underwrite Machiavellian debunking tactics to prevent the needed research. True skepticism does not begin by being anti- anything. The processes of open consideration and examination (i.e., research) will ultimately establish whether something exists or not.

It is quite probable, then, that people who fear having their minds (or what passes for them) invaded and read by a telepath probably not only don't want telepaths around but don't want the topic opened up for research and development.

In the contexts of remote viewing, telepathic overlay would introduce into the responses of a remote viewer a kind of dirty-data contamination originating in the mind of someone else. The pathway for the contamination probably would not be a conscious one, but a subconscious one. So the telepathic introduction of the dirty data would take place without much realization on the parts of anyone associated with the viewing.

SOME will get what telepathic overlay means and implies even though very little is said about it; OTHERS will never get it no matter how much is said of it. People with very strong and overpowering egos usually reject the possibility of telepathic overlay, as do those who don't seem to have any naturally active superpowers of bio-mind.

As it is, however, when it is said that telepathy is mind-to-mind contact, the above definitions imply CONSCIOUS perception or awareness of something telepathic. The above definitions also imply that if we cannot consciously identify something as being telepathic, then telepathy doesn't exist. In this regard, that there may be subconscious or pre- conscious telepathy of which one is unaware sort of falls by the wayside. The idea of subconscious or subliminal telepathy is thus somewhat alien to the usual concepts of telepathy.

A large number of studies regarding the effects of hypnosis clearly establish that the hypnotee not only responds to the conscious commands of the hypnotist, but also is often found to be in telepathic rapport with the unexpressed or subconscious motives and agendas of the hypnotist. This type of thing is occasionally referred to as telepathic bonding at levels beneath the consciousness of the hypnotist.
But if we introduce the concept of telepathic overlay, then it could be said that some kind of information overlay from the hypnotist is being transferred to the hypnotee via telepathic routes that are not known to or even suspected by the hypnotist. As a gross example of this, the hypnotee then gives the answers the hypnotist wants, or which answers fit into the unexpressed expectations and convictions of the hypnotist which have somehow become overlaid into the hypnotee. There can be no doubt, however, that ALL hypnoid states are also sympathetic and rapport states in which the telepathic exchanges of information can and do result in ways which not only include conscious but subconscious content. . . . deep hypnosis or even light hypnosis is not necessary for this kind of telepathic overlay to take place. Such can occur as a result of even light rapport and which would not be considered as hypnotic.

Within the contexts of all of the above, then, the problem or the situation of telepathy is, first of all, a matter of sympathetic states and rapport. Rapport is defined as relation marked by harmony, conformity, accord or affinity. Sympathetic is defined as (1) existing or operating through an affinity, interdependence, or mutual association; (2) showing or being linked by empathy; and (3) sensitivity to the emotions or moods of others.
If we add to this "empathic sensitivity to the thought- forms or thoughts of others," then we do arrive at a combined, approximate definition of telepathy -- one which goes far beyond the simplistic mind-to-mind thing. Within the remote viewing contexts, Telepathic Overlay would consist of picking up on information from someone else's head and mistaking that information for the "signal." The signal, of course, would consist of information pertinent to the distant location or "target." Picking up on "signals" from someone else's head and accepting them for the RV signals can be called telepathic overlay. The question now emerges: Does this kind of thing happen? Yes, it certainly does -- but only within certain kinds of circumstances. Accessing the target information is the goal of remote viewing. Accessing any other kind of information is "noise," in the sense of being contamination which distorts the clear reception of actual signals. Accessing telepathic overlay information is therefore noise -- and, as it might easily be understood, would be quite deadly to the remote viewing faculties, processes, and results of RV.

Telepathic overlay is not the only form of noise which degrades the remote viewing signals.
But it can be an important noise source if the ostensible remote viewer is unaware that telepathic overlay not only exists but does so in very subtle ways. Where telepathic overlay is present, its information content overlays and contaminates the signal line, usually obscuring the latter from cognitive perception of the viewer.

Telepathic overlay was identified by myself and Dr. H.E. Puthoff in about 1975, and together we worked to determine its causes, its relationship to remote viewing, and how to avoid or eradicate it. We were quite concerned that the viewer was picking up information from the minds of those associated with the viewings rather than from the distant site itself. This was also a problem which worried the sponsors very much, and for reasons which should be obvious. If telepathic overlay was the case, then we didn't have remote viewing at all. We had some format of telepathy. At first we felt that the sources or causes must be quite complicated. But in the end we discovered that a single situation was the source of most telepathic overlay. When that situation was cured, telepathic overlay tended to vanish. That single situation revolved around Who had power over Whom not only during the RV work but as regards the relationships of all involved.

That single situation revolved around Who had power over Whom not only during the RV work but as regards the relationships of all involved. In other words, the telepathic overlay situation somewhat resembled the subtle telepathic situation of the hypnotist and the hypnotee. The hypnotist was in power-control of the situation AND the hypnotee. The hypnotee was in some kind of rapport with the hypnotist in which the hypnotee accepted the commands and suggestions of the hypnotist. The hypnotist expected the hypnotee to follow commands and suggestions -- which the hypnotee usually did. But another unexpected effect could be observed regarding a subliminal or subconscious transfer of information from the hypnotist to the hypnotee. The hypnotee often became telepathically connected to the motives, agendas, and desires of the hypnotist.

To aid in clarifying this, we now have to distinguish between: (1) telepathy which one or both parties might be consciously aware of, and (2) subconscious or subliminal telepathy which neither the hypnotee nor the hypnotist are consciously aware of (and which might be termed sub-telepathy to distinguish it from the former. . . . It is well understood in psychology that if one person has suggestive power over another, the latter will not only accept the suggestions (or commands) but often will somehow mysteriously emulate that person in more subtle ways. The controllee will often sense the controller's wishes, desires and wants without their being vocalized. The whole of this is a kind of rapport, and certainly a type of sympathetic state with the controller.
Controllees often go so far as to non-consciously emulate the controller's dress, posture, preferences, mannerisms, and etc. Thus, what we termed telepathic overlay regarding remote viewing has a larger picture and an historical past under many other names in that the whole of this is typical of what is sometimes called charismatic influencing.
Charismatic influencing is also a situation regarding who has power over whom, even if only very subtly so. Charismatic influencing is also a situation which involves rapport and sympathetic states.

Both mob and mass behavior demonstrate quite remarkable phenomena, and one particular phenomenon seems to stand out regarding both types of behavior. This has to do with the removing of individuals from their individualizing sense of logic, reason and common sense -- and somehow replacing those with a sense of emotional participation which is collective and rapport-like rather than individualizing in nature. This type of thing was first referred to as emotional rapprochement, the latter word meaning to bring together -- and, in the case of mob and mass psychology to bring emotionally together in a shared rapport or sympathetic kind of way. . . . The term eventually settled on was entrainment . . . when used in a psychological meaning, it obviously refers to thinking, acting, and responding in ways which are collective rather than individual -- in ways which are quite like sympathetic or rapport states. It was this type of thing which was meant by entrainMENT. And in this sense, although entrainment can be thought of as intellectual, it usually refers to emotional or empathic subconscious strata of our species . . . The use of the term "empathic" in mob behavior research documents brought the whole problem very close to some kind of telepathy -- whose original definition was empathy communicated between human specimens across a distance by means unknown.

The psychic hypothesis of the early mob psychology researchers focused on the possibility of some kind of subtle, non-conscious telepathic hookups or channels.
At the subconscious emotional response levels, individuals were sensitive to the "entrainment factors" which "infected" all or most of those exposed to them -- and which reduced individuals back into some kind of collective, hive-like behavior. There is only one suitable word for this: rapport -- via which sympathetic sub-telepathic infections can be induced into those, well, into those infected by them.

[T]here is a second definition regarding INFECT: to work upon or seize upon so as to induce sympathy, belief, or support. And INDUCED sympathy puts us within the realms of sympathetic states, rapport, and entrainment -- whether such are consciously perceived or subconsciously present in some kind of a psycho-active way. And all of this is not very far removed from the "psychic hypothesis" of the early researchers of mob psychology -- an hypothesis seeking to explain the infectious telepathic nature of the overpowering emotionality which literally sucks people into subconscious entrainment and participation.

One of the on-going situational problems regarding telepathy is that there are many different kinds of it -- only a few of which seem to fit in with the sender-receiver model.
In the past, I was able to identify some thirty-five or thirty-six kinds of telepathy -- some of which, for example, show that information can be absorbed without being either "sent" or "received." From this latter category can be derived the concept of "telepathic osmosis" -- osmosis referring to a process of absorption or diffusion suggestive of the flow of osmotic action.
We need only to suppose that such a kind of telepathic osmosis can exist at the subconscious levels -- and thus we achieve the model for the existence of telepathic overlay regarding remote viewing.

[W]hat we call telepathy appears to exist along a spectrum of some kind. Subconscious telepathy would absolutely have to be included in this spectrum. The concept of subconscious mind-linking (as opposed to conscious or intellectual mind-linking) would actually serve better to bring the existence of this spectrum into better view. People can say that they are not telepathically linked consciously -- but they well may be subconsciously. I suppose that mind-linking may more easily be thought of as intellectual agreement. But it is quite easy to show that other formats of mind-linking exist with or without intellectual agreement.
As an example of one kind of mind-linking that is never thought of as telepathic entrainment, it can easily be observed that an individual who personally is very charismatic can, even without trying to do so, induce certain entrainment states in his or her followers.
Examples are very numerous along these lines. Such a charismatic individual can utter the most amazing nonsense - - but even so can accumulate a dedicated, hypnoid-like following whose entrained members will give up everything in order to be part of it. Thus, it can be witnessed that charismatic examples of our species can have some kind of telepathic power over others, a type of power which is explainable only by introducing a psychic hypothesis consisting of rapport and sympathetic states.

[F]ormats of telepathy appear to have their basis in empathetic and rapport states. For one thing, it might be noticed that telepathy of any kind is hardly ever reported between people who are not sympathetic, or are out of rapport with, each other.

[T]the question remains regarding remote viewing and telepathic overlay and how to eliminate the latter. To discuss this, we have to incorporate the probable existence of conscious AND subconscious telepathic information.
We also have to incorporate, theoretically at least, the high probability that subconscious telepathy goes on all of the time. We also have to resort to the hypnotist-hypnotee model and the concept of who is to have power over whom.

This may be the same as saying that the weaker is influenced by the stronger -- and this IS unambiguously the formula for who is to have power over whom even though many manifestations of this formula are very subtle. But this is almost the same as considering who goes into rapport with whom, for if the weaker is influenced by the stronger, then the weaker has gone into rapport with the stronger.
If subconscious telepathic signals are involved, which they are most likely to be, then the signals flow from the stronger to the weaker -- which is to say, flow from those accepted as having power to those accepted as having none or very little. Now, in the typical parapsychology laboratory situation, consisting of experimenters and test subjects, the experimenters are accepted as having governing power. It is THEY who are conducting the experiments, while the subjects are just participating in them as guinea pigs.
In the first instance, the subjects do want to please the experimenters -- and so one of the bases for rapport comes into existence.
The experimenters then tell the subjects what to do, when to do it, and for how much and for how long. If the subjects have gone into rapport with the experimenters, a variety of strange situations then ensue.

If, for example, it was discovered after the fact of the experiment that an experimenter did not expect the subject to succeed, then the subject usually didn't -- even though the same subject occasionally succeeded elsewhere under other more positive experimenter auspices. In such a case, it is quite feasible to suspect the existence of telepathic overlay at the subconscious level in which the experimenter's expectation of non-success somehow overlaid the subject's effort. Indeed, many subjects themselves have stated that they cannot perform if someone involved in the experiment is sensed as "negative" either consciously or non-consciously. Within this context, it might be assumed that if the experimenter through and through wants the subject to succeed, then the subject ought to be able to produce stunning results. Something here does depend on the subject's capabilities in the first place. But if rapport has been established, then it is quite probable that the subject will do no better than the experimenter could if he or she undertook the same experiment -- because the experimenter's incapability has telepathically overlaid the subconscious strata of the subject.
Most parapsychologists themselves are not "psychic." Indeed, as a social subset of science in general, they have a commitment NOT to be psychic in order to retain their scientific objectivity. Admittedly, the whole of this is quite subtle and many of its aspects are debatable -- especially if the phenomena of sympathetic and rapport states are rejected to start with. But the issue here is not experiments themselves or their power-dynamic pitfalls, but whether telepathic connectiveness does exist at other than conscious levels. If it does, then much which usually is never taken into account, or even thought of, has to be brought up for serious consideration.

Another type of experiment which is sensitive to the power-dynamic pitfalls are those in which the experimenter guides, interrogates, or questions the subjects. Even though this relationship between experimenter and subject is not seen as a power one, there is no question about who is in power here -- rather, who is in control. And if rapport is to arise, there is no question of who is going to go into rapport with whom. If the existence of sympathetic and rapport states is accepted, then it is easy enough to see that the subject could easily go into rapport with his or her [monitor - Ed.] experimenter interrogator.

But if the entire overall experimental process, its environment, and participating personnel were put on film, such would reveal that many experiments somewhat resemble a psychological zoo. It would be seen that some, but certainly not all, experimenters have very little real interest in the subjects, but a great deal of interest regarding their experiment. In my own experience of many years, even social graces are sometimes not observed regarding the subjects. I've talked with many subjects who at first enthusiastically wanted to be "tested" via an experiment, but who felt they were a piece of crud afterward.

Before this had been understood, however, several effects of the guided remote viewing session were identified. For one thing, this particular model tended to increase the interactive dependency of the viewer on the guide (later referred to as the "monitor").

This guide-the-viewer procedure was undertaken in good faith by all concerned, and it certainly needed to be investigated, and in no sense did the guide-monitor consciously want to control the viewer nor did the viewer want to be controlled. But in the final analysis it could be seen anyway that the focus of control-power had subtly shifted to the guide- monitor, that the viewer had probably fallen into sympathetic rapport with him, and thereafter the viewer did not interact with the distant location but with the conscious and subconscious mind of the monitor.
In this sense, then, the formula of who was to have power over whom was subtly present, even if no one involved consciously thought about implementing it.

Up until that time, it seems that no one really realized, or didn't admit to, the possibility that people are continuously interactive at some deep telepathic levels -- and which levels are very interactive at least in sympathetic and rapport states.

[In] remote viewing precisely, the transfer of information could be seen only as telepathic contamination. Some form of this contamination might easily emerge if the viewer is dependent on the monitor for anything at all.

[If] telepathic overlay flowed from the stronger to the weaker (the impressionable, or the suggestible,) then the only feasible way to try to eliminate telepathic overlay was to create controlled remote viewers who could maintain themselves and their performance as the central power core of any viewing -- and this regardless of whomever else might be involved around the edges of the viewing process. . . . The only initial problem with all this was to get the potential RV'ers themselves and everybody else to agree to this. Almost everyone likes to direct something or someone in order to have a "place" within what is going on.

The modern elements of thought-transference and traveling clairvoyance arose from research successors to Anton Mesmer during the early 1800s -- and who studied sympathetic and rapport states during which the phenomena of both often manifested with exceeding clarity.
However, this is an epoch of history which has been almost totally erased from access.

The problem here, though, is not that intuition transcends time and space but that the modern sciences held that time and space could not be transcended. This is a very important point . . . [in] most, or even all, premodern societies the fact that intuition existed was never in question, either in theory or in practice. Noted skeptics of intuition did exist, of course. But their objections were centered on the often proven failure of intuition -- focused on the failure, not on the existence of it. With the onset of the modern technological period, however, at about 1845, what is now called "classical" physics began enumerating the laws of the physical universe. The "laws" became laws because back then none of the steady states of matter, energy, space and time they represented could be seen as "disobeying" the laws. Thereafter, and by a series of unfortunate situations, it began to be thought that NOTHING could disobey the laws of matter, energy, space and time. And this "nothing" came to include, by assumption, the faculties of the human biomind -- even though it was well-known that the human mind thinks in terms of past, present and future.

[It should be] clear that high-stage intuition can take place only via information grids that are properly and positively constructed regarding the time-space transcending faculties of the human biomind. Any information point which denies this will cause the intuitive faculties to crash, or at least malfunction.

[T]he differences are extreme between the ancient meaning of "intuitus" and the modern meaning of "intuition". Intuition (the modern meaning): immediate apprehension or cognition; the faculty of attaining direct knowledge or cognition without rational thought or inference. Intuitus (the ancient meaning): to look at and contemplate felt relationships. . . . Yet, even today when someone experiences or suffers an intuitive episode, they are very likely to speak of it as a "feeling," often as a "gut feeling" or a felt "hunch," or merely as "I've got a feeling about" thus or so. . . . the modern definition of "intuition" identifies apprehension, cognition, or knowledge --- but does not specify about what. The ancient definition, however, specifies that "intuitus" refers to felt relationships (such as between or among things). . . . the modern definitions of intuition do not fit with the chief phenomenology of intuition -- which is always expressed as feelings by those who experience some kind of intuition. The modern definitions do not even include the word "feeling."

It now must clearly be stated that if the parameters of the signal-to-noise issue, and its attendant problems, are not thoroughly understood, then remote viewing cannot, and will not, be understood in any real, functional clarity. It does not matter what else you might think you (pro or con) understand regarding remote viewing. This single issue is axiomatic not only to remote viewing but to ALL of the other superpowers of the human bio- mind. . . . [we can] shorten [the] definitions. "Signal" is the message or information. "Noise" is whatever distorts, deforms, prevents, interferes with, disorganizes, changes or aborts the signal down to the point where the signal might not be locatable or received at all. . . . When our eye receptors or their system become damaged or eroded, we say we can't see as well. But actually, the eye-sensors conveying information are suffering an increase of noise.

With regard to remote viewing, then, or to any other of the superpowers of the biomind, it is important to know that our species does possess the basic faculties for them. But beyond that, this importance is secondary if those faculties are submerged in more noise than signal. And, with some notable exceptions, this is the average case among most specimens of our species -- more noise than signal. At this point, then, the only thing that matters is the signal-to-noise ratio. For, you see, our species might possess extraordinary faculties for a lot of things. But by inspection, it is also an extremely noisy species in many more ways than one.

So, after the baseline had been determined, the next entirely logical step was to figure out how to enhance the signal, right? Well, this particular goal has never been invisible to anyone. Very many methods have been evolved purporting to enhance psi signals under the rubric of "developing your psychic potentials." I was the first to point out, even before I heard of Puthoff or SRI, that if any of these methods had worked, our world would already be populated with a very large number of achieved superpsychics. Well, would it not be? C'mon, Netsurfers, think this through --- and there are now more of You than there are superpsychics, and many of You know the important difference between noise and signal.

You can also encounter certain specimens of our species who don't want to process certain kinds of information --- and some of whom belabor themselves with ensuring that other specimens don't process it either.

The ideas of the noise-free environment and the quite mind are, of course, familiar to just about anyone with an interest in the biomind faculties which detect subtle signals. These ideas have been pursued during the modern period, sometimes quite broadly and vigorously. And it is generally believed that if these two noise-freeing factors can be established, then the outcome will be the acquisition of enhanced superpower information. In other words, a wholesale number of "superpsychics" would emerge, the question regarding the existence of the superpowers would have been settled once and for all, and the human world would be a different thing. In spite of the expectations, not much of the kind has happened. The incidence of high-stage superpowers remains quite low, while the most convincing manifestations of them remain spontaneous and frequently occur within circumstances that are decidedly not noise-free.

For example, the fabled out-of-body experience appears to have a number of different states or gradients, some of which are not completely independent of the biobody.
Yet we tend to think of the OOBE only within one context having to do with the two-part division typical of Western philosophical dualism. Dualism divides the human biomind entity into only two parts, the biological part and another part commonly thought of as The Spirit and/or the Mind. If one digs deeper into this two-part simplicity, it becomes quite clear that the human biomind is multi-aspected, multi-dimensional, and capable of many gradient sensory states and conditions that can find no home or reality within the Western two-part concept of dualism.

[W]e tend to judge the efficacy of psychic functioning mostly in regard to physical parameters. For example, parapsychologists use only physical targets in testing for psi.
Psychics are used to solve physical crimes and find lost or dead bio-bodies. Psychic readers, sometimes very good, are required to address physical situations for their clients -- sex or matrimonial partners, money, when physical circumstances will get better. Even foreseeing the future has no real importance unless its outcomes can be judged against future, but quite physical manifestations. Our concepts of telepathy exclusively involve physical situations, most specifically minds in bio-bodies. Even spiritualistic mediums are expected to be in touch with departed bio-bodies, and other remarkable seance phenomena have to be very near to being physical in order to be appreciated. Indeed, we in the modern West SAY that psychic faculties are non-material and non-material in origin. But we test and utilize them against physicality aspects.
Even when psychic faculties are used, hypothetically speaking, to spot extraterrestrials, the result is that we assume that the ETs are somewhere in physicality and themselves are physical entities of some kind.
In this sense, then, we are trapped within the "gross usage" which the ancient Yogins most likely were referring to.

[T]hrough the long-duration of the research work at SRI, the functional discoveries made there increasingly seemed to emulate the meanings and contexts of the ancient Yoga Sutras in which the sidhis are discussed in ways which equate with the superpowers.
Thus, there was every reason to assess the ancient Yoga texts in light of our own work -- and in this sense the ancient texts became a treasure trove of additional information. In this sense, the old axiom that there is nothing new takes on renewed meaning. If one discovers or rediscovers what is already there -- well, what else can ever be discovered except what it already there?

The remote-viewing discovery work uncovered very delicate sense receptors which, when properly transduced into accurate intellect meaning resulted in controlled remote viewing. Thus, if perhaps not exactly so, the discoveries of the delicate sense receptors and proper sensory transducers must closely resemble the knowledge of the ancient Yogins and their concepts of the distant-seeing sidhi.

Largely speaking, even the basic five senses are useless unless their sensory inputs are mitigated and analyzed by the intellect or some other analyzing part of the biomind -- after which a great deal seems to depend on the loads of information accumulated and actively contained in the intellect at the individual level and via which the sensory inputs are analyzed. . . The meaning here is that one's sensory receptors may indeed be receiving certain kinds of signals. But if one's intellect is not prepared to deal with their information loads, then the signals will remain invisible -- at least to one's non-sensitized, unaware cognitive intellect.

[T]he thoughts one experiences are the end-products of the processes that produce them, and few are ever really aware of those processes. It is quite probable that the products of one's thinking processes are based exclusively in whatever sensory transducers have been formatted -- or NOT been formatted. The processes are therefore invisible and, usually intangible.

[It] has often been deduced that people are trapped in the limits of their perceptions. But such is not actually the case. They are trapped within the sensory transducers which apparently produce the meanings which have been assigned to what they perceive -- and then only if they perceive it and actually have assigned some kind of meaning to the perceptions.

There are two subtle facets about information which seems to escape many. 1. Information is not information if it does not take on meaning relative to other information factors which have ALREADY taken on meaning. 2. By itself, information is not information unless it corresponds to and integrates with factors already established as having meaning -- and thus even if information exists everywhere, it will not enter into information systems which cannot accommodate it. Thus the problem becomes one not so much dealing with "new" information, but with "old" information already acquired and accepted as meaningful by this or that individual biomind organism or collective social organism. And old information, perhaps composed of millions of data bytes, needs to be held in some kind of a biomind meaning system(s) established precisely for that purpose. New information would need to find a home or place within the meanings of the old information.

[A]rtificial stimulating by electrodes of various synapses and neurons produces sensations, feelings, sounds and images as if the senses were themselves actually experiencing them.
This was considered desirable evidence for the functional physicality of the brain, and this evidence was acceptable. But electrode stimulation of certain parts of the brain sometimes produced "evidence" which was not acceptable -- and so this kind of "evidence" is hardly to be found in official scientific reports and papers. As but one example, under artificial electrode stimulation, the experiencers sometimes reported vivid visual images and sensations which they interpreted as past-life memories. . . . Some people who were undergoing open brain stimulation also reported certain kinds of experiencing which had something to do with clairvoyance or telepathic faculties . . . Since there is no place to fit these peculiar perceptual phenomena in the modern scientific paradigm, they were of course set aside and very little in the way of official reference has ever been made to them.

Beginning somewhere before the 1970s, various researchers began to understand that the not only the neural nets of the brain process information. It increasingly became understood that the neurological networks throughout the whole bio-body itself also process information. And since the 1970s it has become understood that certain kinds of information are processed at the cellular level throughout the surface and internal organs of the bio-body.

[Our] mental information processing grids must have information points consisting not only of sensory transducers, but also consisting of meaning transducers. If it is a case of becoming aware of gross and subtle signals, then appropriate meaning transducers must be established to cope with both kinds. And it must follow that the lack of such meaning transducers will leave what might be called "experiential holes or pits" in one's mental information processing grids. I prefer to call these "meaning defaults," though. . . . It is meaning which governs our understanding. . . . And meaning defaults will "mean" that we will not know or understand what has been experienced -- or we will either not experience it or perhaps know that we have.

[R]egarding the superpowers of the biomind, it is easy enough to see why defense mechanisms against them might get dynamically set up within the grids of given individuals. We in the cultural West tend to idealize the superpowers as highly desirable. But, for example, the superpowers of intuition and future-seeing can easily inform one of dreadful things as well as benign things. For instance, I recoil from psychically sighting, as it were, stuff like cruelty, murders, locating dead and decomposing bodies, and other forms of carnage -- because contacting and reliving those events wrecks not only my emotions but even impacts on my physiology. Thus I don't make for a very good psychic crime detective in the way other more stalwart psychics do. I don't have grid defense mechanisms against such "seeing." But there is another way of avoiding the psychic reliving of the horrors -- just not do it, and which, I suppose, is one form of defense mechanisms anyway. . . . if one becomes psychic, one WILL "see" horrors, and it is this aspect which is never mentioned in how-to psychic development books. In this sense, many achieved psychics realize that psychic superpowers are both a blessing and an agony as well.

One of the larger deficits of the few terms we do use is that they refer to what we call "psychic phenomena." But in clinical fact, they are not phenomena but are results of phenomena whose workings and processes are unknown and concealed behind the results they produce.
All that we witness or experience as "psychic phenomena" are the end-products of the mysterious superpower processes which produce them. In other words, they are Epiphenomena -- a perfectly good, but seldom used English word meaning "secondary phenomena accompanying another and caused by it." [Emphasis added.] This is to say that what we experience or witness as intuition, telepathy, clairvoyance, remote viewing and so forth are secondary phenomena (epiphenomena) which have been caused or brought into manifesting by something else -- and which might be called "primary phenomena" to emphasize the difference. People also refer to the results of remote viewing AS remote viewing. But indeed, the results are epiphenomena of remote viewing primary phenomena, and it is the cognitive control of the primary phenomena which are the substance of controlled remote viewing.

[If] the past rationales which permitted the rejection of psi continue to be proliferated by mainstream pressures, then the scientific advances which substantiate the real existence of certain psi faculties must be ignored or pushed into the shadow of unawareness. Thus, the discoveries cannot and will not be integrated into advancing scientific thought, academic tutoring and fair media representation. And in this suppressed or hidden state, the discoveries cannot be integrated into the overall goals of the Society for Enlightenment and Transformation which I have the honor of addressing today. The . . . Situation I have outlined above is, well, deplorable.

Largely speaking, scientists are more likely to be theoreticians. But technicians are more likely to be engineers. Scientists theorize and try to test their theories. But technicians build things, often just to see what the things can do. Indeed, technical advances can often be several generations AHEAD of scientific thinking. This is certainly the case with the computer industry evolved largely by technician-types, not by scientists. Indeed, many technological advances have been achieved by technologists who possessed little in the way of legitimate or conventional scientific backgrounds.

I could adumbrate upon more than a thousand scientific papers about these discoveries published in the science literature, even in the esteemed leading science periodicals such as NATURE, SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN and DISCOVER. The authors of those papers, though, never use the terms psi, psychic, or parapsychology, etc., since the mere introduction of them would cause their papers to be rejected. The editors and peer-review systems of such publications apparently don't realize, for example, that "bioinformation transfer over distance" means about the same thing as "telepathy" and/or "clairvoyance," or "remote viewing."

[D]iscovered bio-electromagnetic fields extending outside the scalp and outside of the skin clearly equate to the "auras" that many clairvoyants have specialized in "seeing." . . . Rivlan and Gravelle even hypothesize that, and I quote, "thoughts may, indeed, have wings, and some of us may have the ability to sense what others are thinking" via these newly discovered bio-electromagnetic receptor-sensing networks. The two authors wonder: "Do some psychics and mystics have this ability, vastly magnified, so they can sense the electricity from considerable distances?" Well, there would have been no question of this in antiquity - or even among Arabian or Mongolian nomads today, as well as "street-smart" New Yorkers. Actually, this is the same question that those researching electromagnetism and bio-electromagnetism have been wondering about for over fifty years. So it's worth pointing up here that the existence of extensive bio-electromagnetism essentially was demonstrated late during the last century, but its existence has not figured very much either into scientific psychology or in scientific parapsychology - both of these two field having managed mutually to ignore it altogether.

Bob Becker . . . published in PSYCHOENERGETIC SYSTEMS, 1977, Vol. 2, pp. 189-196, an article entitled "An Application of Direct Current Neural Systems to Psychic Phenomena." He stated that "The concept of a primitive electronic communication system in all living things can be a useful tool in understanding both `normal' and `paranormal' phenomena that have lacked a rational biological explanation. Indeed, it appears that human beings are tied to the universe in a web of electromagnetic energy." . . . Did you know that the soles of your feet and the palms of your hands contain minute magnetic receptors and sensors that "recognize" minute and gross changes in local magnetism? Here are the rudiments of dowsing, healing, and various rough forms of psychometry which means psyching-out what something is by merely holding it. Alas, though. If you haven't built neural pathways linking these sensors to your cognitive faculties, you probably won't be able to sense what the receptors in the soles of your feet picking up.

9. Receptors that identify positive and negative charged particles at the atomic level. (The term utilized for this in psychical research is "micro-psi" but which is rare. However, it has been convincingly demonstrated, especially in the case of C. W. Leadbeater who published Occult Chemistry (1908). Thirty years before the invention of the electron-microscope he correctly described sub-atomic particles, many undiscovered at the time, but discovered since. Micro-psi faculties are mentioned as one of the ancient Sidhis of ancient India (see, for example, Yoga Sutras of Patanjali).)

With the invention of the electron microscope in the early 1930s, large amounts of data had accumulated by the 1950s which irrevocably substantiated that the human being possessed very many more senses than only the infamous physical five. As of the late 1950s, then, there was no longer any justifiable reason to continue teaching and emphasizing the five physical senses. And, as well, there was no longer any justifiable reason to continue the mainstream debunking of so-called psychic perceptions - because bio-mind receptors have been located and confirmed for a lot of them. During the 1960s and 1970s, the scientific information pool of this kind of discovery had increased enormously - the sum of which brought a complete end to the concept of the five physical senses only. A "complete end" at least in a scientific sense. But not in a cultural sense - because the meaning of these sensory discoveries is still being completely ignored in the cultural and ideological milieus, even though technical and popular books became available. . . . Today there is no justification at all for the continuation of anti-psychic belief systems. There is no justification to teach that we have ONLY five physical senses, and there is every justification to teach that we have very many others. . . . There is also no justification to continue suggesting that there is a difference between sensory and extra-sensory perceptions and information. The discoveries regarding our numerous senses and sensing systems obliterated the boundaries which, in the uninformed past, tended to artificially separate them.

If we think only in terms of senses and/or sensing systems, then in very subtle ways we may be distinguishing between them and ourselves. It is true that we do "have" or "possess" senses and sensing systems. But something else is also true, and it is very important that it should be grasped. We ARE our sensing systems. And what we call "WE" or "US" or "SELF" is in some full part neither no more nor no less than our sensing systems are acknowledged, developed, and utilized.