Sorry I don't focus on the psychophysical, I don't focus on the mundane, I don't care about the worldly, I don't think materially. I don't see with the organs, I don't think with the physical flesh bag organs, I don't hear with the physical senses, I wasn't borne/excreted from the physical, I don't identify with the existence. I was miraculously inconceived

>>43001012
take your meds

>>43001012
Bodied that freak

sorry....im just...not gonna do it!!! Unfhh.
stupid ahh honeypot poster
get some friends to do it with you

File: 0929wallpaper-10_1280.jpg (177 KB, 1280x960)

177 KB JPG

TARGET ID
(7391846205)

File: attempt1.png (14 KB, 464x462)

14 KB PNG

>>43000983

File: Screenshot_20260902_01240(...).jpg (126 KB, 511x753)

126 KB JPG

get screwed :3

>>43000983
Can't draw right now, I'm gonna guess a bunch of pipes, water, probably underground like some water storage or sanitation system.

File: 18496984639846.jpg (217 KB, 784x1168)

217 KB JPG

>>43000983
It's all good. You will be good buddy. Have you been up to anything lately that you want to tell us?

>>43001143
>>43001100
WATER GOOD!

I don't do that.

Now, I dream of claws clawing the lands. Hitting the lands, nations with a fist, and dragging giant claws and tearing them to shreds.

Thrusting the hand/claw into the soils of nations and lifting the dirt up and throwing it down with extreme force ipon them. Mercilessly. As waters polite, dust enters the eyes and blinds them, wrath and sheer destruction follows.

>>43000983
Outside a trailer house in NW Texas, white trailer skirting, a power pole, a kids toy car, bare dirt.

File: tenor.gif (128 KB, 498x449)

128 KB GIF

>>43000983
>7391846205
rv code too long cant memorize

>>43002012
Just make a binding to it.
You don't actually need to memorize it.

>>43000983
It would be more interesting to collectively target someone in the thread and have them verify accuracy afterwards.

bump
I guess I'll try but thread might die by then

File: sickmind.png (412 KB, 716x657)

412 KB PNG

>>43000983
>PICS REQUIRED!!
I'm getting these vibes.

>>43000983
Long rods, multiples of them across the field.
Rods have circular metals around them? Maybe.

It is avarage in tempeture and it has wet feeling. Water is chill though, but air is good.

everything seems to too flat.
like air base kind of flat.
bonus:
also you have a generic house with wooden bed just like I see in the supernatural tv series :D

File: 846205 because the code i(...).png (21 KB, 1280x720)

21 KB PNG

>>43000983
Difficult to get specifics, but some remote views are easy mode, others are opaque. Could be a skill issue on my part.

Couldn't get a good read of the geography. The "ceiling" of the environment was high but not particularly high, I'd rule out skyscrapers or massive landmarks. Not too much interesting on the surface, slightly bumpy but a largely uniform area of land. Wasn't characteristically mechanical. Didn't sense flowing water, it might be there but not directly in the vicinity since it's one of the easiest impressions to get. This one is a bit low confidence, but there was something like a small wooden shed/trailer/rv; a lone dwelling space there.

For some reason all of a sudden I had a very strong conscious impression, like imagine a big exclamation mark, then nothing after. It wasn't a feeling of being watched, more like "something important here, also time's up". Saw two symbols but that might just be hypnogogia.

My educated guess is something akin to a hiking environment topography wise. Tried two times at first, got literally nothing but a black void and my imagination. Third time I got the tiny bit of information you see here, but risks being contaminated by my own impatience. That massive jolt was interesting though.

gib score

whats the state of the art of remote viewing? how much detail can be extracted from a session, and how reliable/relevant are those details?

>>43007178
inconclusive

File: Haze_concept_art.png (3.03 MB, 2820x4395)

3.03 MB PNG

>>43007178
We don't know for a few reasons.
>impossible to tell the difference between larpers, lucky guesses, and genuine practitioners
>the govt doesn't want us to research anything adjacent to psi/mk ultra/etc, so they actively impede online discourse with misinformation and disinformation
So as a result we're constantly starting from zero and never go anywhere. Online "remote view experts" often have an abysmal track record and don't even know what it is.

To answer your question, the most reliable process I've found
>get a code that was bound to a target
>meditate on the code, silence your own thoughts, make note of any passing thoughts
>write it down as soon as possible as the meditative state might put this info in very short term memory
Each of those three steps could be developed further, but again, we don't really have a proper psi research community.

>>43007256
cont.
>how much detail can be extracted from a session
Very little. If someone writes a four digit code on a piece of paper, you can read 3/4 of them if you're exceptionally lucky, but you aren't winning the lottery. Imagine you're trying to figure out what a soccer game is like from screams in a stadium.
>how reliable/relevant are those details?
The most reliable "character" in this space would be Ingo Swann with a self proclaimed 70% hit rate. If you're trying to engage in intelligence agency type shit, you want a small handful of blindfolded remote viewers with little to no contact with each other and look for overlaps.

>>43007178
If you want detail, forget about remote viewing and learn clairvoyance, then it's as if you had a camera there and you could watch the recording.
It's similar to lucid dreaming that you're there watching what happens, so I proposed the girl in bathroom test to differentiate it, but every time I mention this, I get a strong reaction against me.

>>43007256
>>43007273
ty for the info. are some people able to remote view more "effectively" than others? can this ability be improved?

>>43007303
is clairvoyance something can be controlled and utilized like remote viewing? and are some more capable of utilizing than others?

>>43007313
>are some people able to remote view more "effectively" than others? can this ability be improved?
Some people's brains are good at visualizing images but in contrast others are more reliant on making patterns based on feelings or inner monologue. Remote viewing is effectively directed meditation, so one would assume yes and yes.

If you want a starting point, I'd recommend the Gateway Experience Wave 1. Focus 10-12 are basically the states you want to get into for this kind of thing.
>>43007303
>lucid dreaming
Isn't that hallucination HQ? It's already hard enough to sort your own thoughts from external signals.

>>43000983
I am going to try this and get back to this thread. Could someone post the website where there is a number or something on a white board where it's devoted to debunking to remote viewing because no one has gotten it correct yet? I am also going to remote view potential threats like feds trying to co-opt psychics.

>>43009603
>Could someone post the website where there is a number or something on a white board where it's devoted to debunking to remote viewing because no one has gotten it correct yet?
I do remember there was the popular challenge by James Randi and after he died, someone that knew him made it clear he never intended to treat it with any seriousness and was never going to give anyone an award. Wish I could find the article or whatever.
>I am also going to remote view potential threats like feds trying to co-opt psychics.
Try remote viewing that first, because there is (some) info in the public facing net but it's a potential psyop.

My question is if it's even possible to remote view an assumption. A better route would be to remote view specific counter intelligence operations in relation to psychic research, and try to pull some names from old documents.

Target IDs are counterproductive considering they're random google images.

>>43009644
>Can you remote view an assumption?
Yes.
>Can you remote view documents?
Yes.

>>43007313
>is clairvoyance something can be controlled and utilized like remote viewing?
Yes, real mediums do it all the time.
>and are some more capable of utilizing than others?
Yes, there are people that develop these powers naturally, unfortunately, it's related to disassociation and abuse, but we all have those latent abilities.
>43007332
>Isn't that hallucination HQ?
It's like dreaming, we dream with our third eye, and it can be used to see far away unlike the normal eyes that are limited to what is in front of you.
I suggest to manifest those powers like you could anything else, you're currently identifying yourself as someone without those powers, so you stop that and identify as someone with the powers, that it already happened and you are a clairvoyant, just like you can manifest wealth to yourself or a loving partner, psychic powers aren't different.
People go after Remote Viewing because there are protocols they can follow to learn it, but then, you see a tower and the target turns out to be a cat because the cat's fur resembled some bricks.
Most successful remote viewers were using their clairvoyant powers anyway, and others were just communicating with their future selves that will see what the target was, as if OP showed the target, you see it and pass that info to your present self that can make a correct guess. It's not remote viewing but very effective.

>>43009603
Best I got was something from Brazil?
Nothing fed related, sorry.

>>43013815
Was this regarding OP's RV code or the fed RV? If you actually remote viewed something and just got (nothing), then that's probably a good sign that you aren't completely subjecting yourself to your own imagination.

>>43014571
Op's code was maybe something from Brazil. Couldn't see anything from the feds.

blue bird
tree
red sand

>>43017082
Honestly that tracks with what I've gotten, but I worry I might have been cross contaminated from the thread, glancing at a few posts.

File: file_0000000015c881f6ac9c(...).png (3.1 MB, 1370x1148)

3.1 MB PNG

>>43000983
how's this

>>43009946
I've found I've had a lower success rate with those websites where target IDs are entirely set by software. Maybe that's just me but the idea that no conscious effort was done to create the target IDs could be something.

Why would I want to be recognized by those looking for tools?

>>43013815
>>43017082
>>43017200
>https://www.npr.org/2026/07/31/nx-s1-5913705/brazils-president-accuses-u-s-of-attempting-to-interfere-with-countrys-election
>https://apnews.com/article/un-united-nations-general-assembly-lula-brazil-767e63e2ffd5a2898c84f290de816ff7
>https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/sep/25/lula-says-trump-wants-to-colonise-and-capture-brazils-resources-by-meddling-in-election
Can OP say something?

>>43020252
Because you're not remote viewing, you're mind reading the person that chooses the targets. When it's an algorithm, there's no mind to read.
And someone successfully identifying OP's target is probably mind reading, or using ESP to mind control him in the past to make him pick something that matches the "guess".

File: necoarcwithlemon.png (326 KB, 660x660)

326 KB PNG

I swear to god if OP just gave us a RV code and bailed because he just wanted the results