From: "Maestro Joshua" Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Remote View This Date: Tue, 8 Dec 1998 18:42:54 -0000 Organization: Virgin News Service Lines: 32 Message-ID: <74js0r$dk$1@nclient5-gui.server.virgin.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.168.236.24 X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.5 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!newsfeed-zh.ip-plus.net!news-nyc.telia.net!newsfeed.cwix.com!209.244.253.199!newsfeed.xcom.net!news.shore.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!news7-gui.server.ntli.net!news-feed.ntli.net!not-for-mail There's still a load of threads about proof / lack of proof in this newsgroup. A few people are (still) saying that proof comes about not from hard experimental fact but from experience. They have left their bodies and viewed parts of the globe many miles away. They've met up astrally with their friends and gone on wonderful jaunts over hill and vale. They say they have done this and state it as proof. Anybody who questions it is dismissed as a critic or sceptic out to spoil everyone's fun. So, you people, riddle me this: The house that I live in has a substantial distinctive feature that is often remarked upon. My car tends to stand out also, but for a different reason. (When at home, I always park it in my driveway.) In my living room, I have a pair of objects that again usually provoke discussion, and my study has an unusual colour scheme. If anybody can specify (using any method as long as you don't set foot on my street) any two or more of the above unusual aspects (even one would be surprising) then this will go quite some way to convincing me that I am wrong in my definition of proof, and that proof can indeed be obtained using several different methods. I will post a govelling apology in return. Of course, I could lie and say someone had got it wrong when they hadn't but that wouldn't be of much use to anybody. Nobody'll manage it, I guarantee. Meanwhile I can happily listen to people for hours on end about how they left their bodies and travelled the world but I'll still get aggravated when they patronise the rest of us and snigger knowingly at us for not having open minds. ********************** (Do you have TP?) ###### Message-ID: <366D8A38.C7511F76@netparadise.no> Date: Tue, 08 Dec 1998 20:21:12 +0000 From: Lars Foleide X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [en] (WinNT; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: Remote View This References: <74js0r$dk$1@nclient5-gui.server.virgin.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit NNTP-Posting-Host: t1o204p54.telia.com X-NNTP-Posting-Host: t1o204p54.telia.com Lines: 57 X-Complaints-To: abuse@telia.no Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!newsfeed-zh.ip-plus.net!news-nyc.telia.net!howland.erols.net!uninett.no!newsfeed1.telia.no!d2o204.telia.com!t1o204p54.telia.com This challange could probably been handled with success by some on a psionics list, I knew of one, but it was closed down because of PSI attact on the moderator. (Boy that was a great list, the largest gathering of psychics ever...) And a similar challange was sent to the ImageStreaming list a while back, by someone practicing remote viewing, with some success... (The results should at least surprise you...) But I doubt anyone here will have much success... First of all since they don't know where you live, that information is not needed by a good psionic. But it might be that someone, if willing to give a try on the challenge, can be lucky and find out where you live. Anyhow... Skeptics sucks... :) (But a challenge is always fun, too bad I can't contribute..) Lars Maestro Joshua wrote: > There's still a load of threads about proof / lack of proof in this > newsgroup. A few people are (still) saying that proof comes about not from > hard experimental fact but from experience. They have left their bodies and > viewed parts of the globe many miles away. They've met up astrally with > their friends and gone on wonderful jaunts over hill and vale. They say they > have done this and state it as proof. Anybody who questions it is dismissed > as a critic or sceptic out to spoil everyone's fun. So, you people, riddle > me this: > > The house that I live in has a substantial distinctive feature that is often > remarked upon. My car tends to stand out also, but for a different reason. > (When at home, I always park it in my driveway.) In my living room, I have a > pair of objects that again usually provoke discussion, and my study has an > unusual colour scheme. > > If anybody can specify (using any method as long as you don't set foot on my > street) any two or more of the above unusual aspects (even one would be > surprising) then this will go quite some way to convincing me that I am > wrong in my definition of proof, and that proof can indeed be obtained using > several different methods. I will post a govelling apology in return. Of > course, I could lie and say someone had got it wrong when they hadn't but > that wouldn't be of much use to anybody. > > Nobody'll manage it, I guarantee. Meanwhile I can happily listen to people > for hours on end about how they left their bodies and travelled the world > but I'll still get aggravated when they patronise the rest of us and snigger > knowingly at us for not having open minds. > > ********************** > (Do you have TP?) TP??! ###### From: "Bart" Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: Remote View This Date: Tue, 8 Dec 1998 21:47:39 -0500 Organization: ICGNetcom Lines: 52 Message-ID: <74kor2$f3j@sjx-ixn3.ix.netcom.com> References: <74js0r$dk$1@nclient5-gui.server.virgin.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: clv-oh44-02.ix.netcom.com X-NETCOM-Date: Tue Dec 08 6:55:30 PM PST 1998 X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.1 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!newsfeed-zh.ip-plus.net!news-nyc.telia.net!newshub.northeast.verio.net!ix.netcom.com!news Maestro Joshua wrote in message <74js0r$dk$1@nclient5-gui.server.virgin.net>... >The house that I live in has a substantial distinctive feature that is often >remarked upon. My car tends to stand out also, but for a different reason. >(When at home, I always park it in my driveway.) In my living room, I have a >pair of objects that again usually provoke discussion, and my study has an >unusual colour scheme. We are explorers - not entertainers. Nor are we saints. If you want your soul saved - go to a saint. >If anybody can specify (using any method as long as you don't set foot on my >street) any two or more of the above unusual aspects (even one would be >surprising) then this will go quite some way to convincing me that I am >wrong in my definition of proof, and that proof can indeed be obtained using >several different methods. I will post a govelling apology in return. I really don't think we need an apology from you. Your opinions really aren't worth much here. Perhaps you might be better off in another newsgroup? >Nobody'll manage it, I guarantee. I doubt anybody is really interested at this time. Perhaps, when the NG regains its energy, we might consider your proposal as a meeting point for one of our excursions - but, for now, I hope you enjoy your sense of uniqueness. >Meanwhile I can happily listen to people >for hours on end about how they left their bodies and travelled the world >but I'll still get aggravated when they patronise the rest of us and snigger >knowingly at us for not having open minds. Oh, come on, Maestro.... you are the one who is "sniggering". >********************** >(Do you have TP?) Yes I do. I wipe and I wipe and I wipe - but you are still there... Bart ###### From: "Maestro Joshua" Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: Remote View This Date: Wed, 9 Dec 1998 17:52:50 -0000 Organization: Virgin Net Usenet Service Lines: 43 Message-ID: <74mdfb$svf$1@nclient1-gui.server.virgin.net> References: <74js0r$dk$1@nclient5-gui.server.virgin.net> <366D8A38.C7511F76@netparadise.no> NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.168.62.140 X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.5 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!newsfeed-zh.ip-plus.net!news-nyc.telia.net!howland.erols.net!news-a.ais.net!news-b.ais.net!ais.net!ameritech.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!news1-gui.server.ntli.net!news-feed.ntli.net!news7-gui.server.ntli.net!news-feed.ntli.net!not-for-mail Lars Foleide wrote in message <366D8A38.C7511F76@netparadise.no>... >This challange could probably been handled with success by some on a psionics >list, >I knew of one, but it was closed down because of PSI attact on the moderator. They should have seen it coming... > >And a similar challange was sent to the ImageStreaming list a while back, >by someone practicing remote viewing, with some success... >(The results should at least surprise you...) > >But I doubt anyone here will have much success... >First of all since they don't know where you live, Exactly! >that information is not needed by a good psionic. I don't know what a psionic is. Is it the same as a remote viewer? Because a remote viewer apparently only needs a random target identifier to do the job, assigned by the experiment moderator. The target identifier of my house is 37828000122. > >But it might be that someone, if willing to give a try on the challenge, >can be lucky and find out where you live. That would be cheating, although it's likely the only way. > > >Anyhow... Skeptics sucks... :) Who said I was a sceptic? >(But a challenge is always fun, too bad I can't contribute..) >Lars ###### From: "Maestro Joshua" Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: Remote View This Date: Wed, 9 Dec 1998 17:58:59 -0000 Organization: Virgin Net Usenet Service Lines: 72 Message-ID: <74mdpf$t1k$1@nclient1-gui.server.virgin.net> References: <74js0r$dk$1@nclient5-gui.server.virgin.net> <74kor2$f3j@sjx-ixn3.ix.netcom.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.168.62.140 X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.5 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!newsfeed-zh.ip-plus.net!news-nyc.telia.net!nntp.abs.net!newsfeed.enteract.com!cyclone.i1.net!uunet!in4.uu.net!news7-gui.server.ntli.net!news-feed.ntli.net!not-for-mail -----Original Message----- From: Bart Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Date: 09 December 1998 02:47am Subject: Re: Remote View This > >Maestro Joshua wrote in message ><74js0r$dk$1@nclient5-gui.server.virgin.net>... >We are explorers - not entertainers. <...> Oh no, Bart. By your post I can see that you, at least, are an entertainer. In my eyes anyway. >><...>I will post a govelling apology in return. > >I really don't think we need an apology from you. Your opinions really >aren't worth much here. That's a very interesting point. Thank you for pointing it out to me. You know, I was in this newsgroup (and many other similar ones) a long time ago and it's interesting to see that little has changed. Alternate points of view and potential debate are still stifled by the ever-present, self-appointed newsgroup 'kings', of which you are one. >Perhaps you might be better off in another newsgroup? Hmm. Maybe. Or perhaps I'll just stick around a while to annoy you. Better put me in your kill file! Now, that really would teach me a lesson. > >>Nobody'll manage it, I guarantee. > >I doubt anybody is really interested at this time. Perhaps, when the NG >regains its energy, we might consider your proposal as a meeting point for >one of our excursions Regained its energy? Where's this energy gone? I demand that whoever has this newsgroup's energy return it at once! Huh! I remember the time when you could leave your front door unlocked... > - but, for now, I hope you enjoy your sense of >uniqueness. I don't consider myself to be unique in not having my house invaded by astral travellers. In fact, in this respect I think I've got a lot in common with every other home-owner on the planet. But then I know that's not what you meant (what you did mean is anybody's guess.) >>Meanwhile I can happily listen to people >>for hours on end about how they left their bodies and travelled the world >>but I'll still get aggravated when they patronise the rest of us and >snigger >>knowingly at us for not having open minds. > >Oh, come on, Maestro.... you are the one who is "sniggering". Only at you, my jaundiced cartoon friend. > >>********************** >>(Do you have TP?) > > >Yes I do. I wipe and I wipe and I wipe - but you are still there... Uh, right. Don't give up the day job. ###### From: "Richard" Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: Remote View This Date: Wed, 9 Dec 1998 18:29:15 -0800 Organization: Posted via RemarQ, http://www.remarQ.com - Discussions start here! Lines: 148 Message-ID: <74nbq4$jvs$2@remarQ.com> References: <74js0r$dk$1@nclient5-gui.server.virgin.net> <366EF986.4D2EB94@the.end.of.the.message> NNTP-Posting-Host: 207.48.95.48 X-Trace: 913257092 I0G4.QBCE5F30CF30C usenet58.supernews.com X-Complaints-To: newsabuse@remarQ.com X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.1 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!newsfeed-zh.ip-plus.net!news-nyc.telia.net!feeder.qis.net!newsfeed-east.supernews.com!supernews.com!Supernews69!not-for-mail My own experience with proof is that specifically going for a set target does not work. That is no doubt a reason that this is hard to prove scientifically. But what happens for me is that I can find something that I have no prior knowledge of that in fact is significant to the person I have as a target. Proofs I have experienced. . . I have acquired the name of the supervisor of a target after seemingly projecting into a dream the target was having about being at work with her supervisor. Some one I very recently met and then taught to go OOB visited a place that he targeted that would hold significance to me. With no prior knowledge of where I lived, he described the church across the street from my apartment at the time. He described it in terms I had thought of it in, a building that looked like a restaurant. . . He had details about the large expanses of glass, and the fact that the color of the interior floor clashed with the exterior brick work. These are details of my dislike of the building design. But he did not know the building he was describing was a church, or that it was across the street from my home. I have been seen. While targeting a woman I had just met, I lost my way. I was in darkness. I heard my name called out repeated, and then a demand to say who I was. This was followed by a light. My experience ended. The next day I traveled back to the place I was spending the summer. The first thing my room mate said when I went in the house was that he had seen a ghost the night before. And that he had first thought I had come home early because he thought what he saw looked like me. He called my name, repeated it. And turned on the light. When he turned on the light he said what ever it had been faded away. The time he saw this coincided with the time of my experience. This is the type of things that happen. These can not be controlled. But they are convincing for the people who experience them. That is the reason most will tell you this has to be a experienced on a personal level to be proven to the OOBEr. My stories may be interesting to read (or not) . But they are not proof to you. Only to me and the people I shared the experience with. -- RBWalton Visit this web page for some useful OOB links. . . www.angelfire.com/ca/onestepbeyond/ To respond, delete #nospam# rbwalton@#nospam#bigfoot.com Craig wrote in message <366EF986.4D2EB94@the.end.of.the.message>... >Maestro Joshua wrote: >> >> There's still a load of threads about proof / lack of proof in this >> newsgroup. A few people are (still) saying that proof comes about not from >> hard experimental fact but from experience. They have left their bodies and >> viewed parts of the globe many miles away. They've met up astrally with >> their friends and gone on wonderful jaunts over hill and vale. They say they >> have done this and state it as proof. > >Where has this been stated as proof, except proof for the individual >informed? > >> Anybody who questions it is dismissed >> as a critic or sceptic out to spoil everyone's fun. > >Not from what I have seen. sceptics are more than welcomed here. If you >have been reading the threads you will have noticed that. > >> So, you people, riddle >> me this: >> >> The house that I live in has a substantial distinctive feature that is often >> remarked upon. > >So has mine! So has everybody's! > >> My car tends to stand out also, but for a different reason. >> (When at home, I always park it in my driveway.) > >That's what the driveway is for. ;-) > >> In my living room, I have a >> pair of objects that again usually provoke discussion, > >Living rooms are the place for such objects. Stop being so ambiguous! > >> and my study has an >> unusual colour scheme. >> >> If anybody can specify (using any method as long as you don't set foot on my >> street) any two or more of the above unusual aspects (even one would be >> surprising) then this will go quite some way to convincing me that I am >> wrong in my definition of proof, and that proof can indeed be obtained using >> several different methods. I will post a govelling apology in return. Of >> course, I could lie and say someone had got it wrong when they hadn't but >> that wouldn't be of much use to anybody. > >A serious question. :-) Why, exactly, do YOU want proof? Have you tried >and failed? You must have an interest in this for you to want proof. If >you want proof, then you must believe it is possible, for if it is >proved, you will believe. But, if you are asking for proof, because you >believe it cannot be proven, then you are only out to belittle people >who seriously believe this is real. If the latter is the case, why don't >you just let us believe what we believe and we'll let you believe what >you believe. No harm done then. We never set out to push this on anyone, >actually, usually when someone experiences this, they tend to keep to >themselves. > >> Nobody'll manage it, I guarantee. > >Well, if you guarantee no one will manage it, why ask someone to do it. >Self gratification? That is a very dangerous thing. How old are you? >What do you do for a living? Are your parents alive? Do you still live >with them? > >>Meanwhile I can happily listen to people >> for hours on end about how they left their bodies and travelled the world >> but I'll still get aggravated when they patronise the rest of us and snigger >> knowingly at us for not having open minds. > >Where have we patronized 'the rest of you'? How have we offended you? >Remember, you came into our house and shouted at us first. We don't lock >the door, maybe we should, but then, that would give you something else >to go on about wouldn't it. ;-) > >> (Do you have TP?) >Do you have LB? >-- >The sure way to make a thing impossible- > -is to think it so. --- Franklin > >To respond, delete _nospam_ >scrappy@_nospam_netconnect.com.au >-- > ###### From: "Bart" Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: Remote View This Date: Wed, 9 Dec 1998 23:09:36 -0500 Organization: ICGNetcom Lines: 78 Message-ID: <74nhvq$bmt@dfw-ixnews4.ix.netcom.com> References: <74js0r$dk$1@nclient5-gui.server.virgin.net> <74kor2$f3j@sjx-ixn3.ix.netcom.com> <74mdpf$t1k$1@nclient1-gui.server.virgin.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: clv-oh42-08.ix.netcom.com X-NETCOM-Date: Wed Dec 09 10:16:58 PM CST 1998 X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.1 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!news.maxwell.syr.edu!ix.netcom.com!news Maestro Joshua wrote in message <74mdpf$t1k$1@nclient1-gui.server.virgin.net>... >-----Original Message----- >From: Bart >Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body >Date: 09 December 1998 02:47am >Subject: Re: Remote View This > > >> >>Maestro Joshua wrote in message >><74js0r$dk$1@nclient5-gui.server.virgin.net>... > >>We are explorers - not entertainers. <...> > >Oh no, Bart. By your post I can see that you, at least, are an entertainer. >In my eyes anyway. I imagine you would see it that way since you've made it clear that you have nothing of value to contribute to the newsgroup other than your own sniggers and that you are merely trolling with intellectual flame-bait for the purpose of entertainment. >>><...>I will post a govelling apology in return. >> >>I really don't think we need an apology from you. Your opinions really >>aren't worth much here. > >That's a very interesting point. Thank you for pointing it out to me. You >know, I was in this newsgroup (and many other similar ones) a long time ago >and it's interesting to see that little has changed. Alternate points of >view and potential debate are still stifled by the ever-present, >self-appointed newsgroup 'kings', of which you are one. If you were in this NG a long time ago and met the same personalities as now, then you obviously havn't learned much over that time frame. It's your attitude that makes your opinion carry little value. Making fun of people by demanding that they prove something they never claimed to be able to skillfully achieve in the first place - and then making fun of them some more.... That doesn't invite cordial responses. >>Perhaps you might be better off in another newsgroup? >Hmm. Maybe. Or perhaps I'll just stick around a while to annoy you. Well, I guess I should make some popcorn then... >Better >put me in your kill file! Now, that really would teach me a lesson. I don't use kill files. Every once in a while a dink will stop being a dink. I wouldn't want to miss that fleeting moment should it ever happen for you. >>>Nobody'll manage it, I guarantee. >> >>I doubt anybody is really interested at this time. Perhaps, when the NG >>regains its energy, we might consider your proposal as a meeting point for >>one of our excursions > >Regained its energy? Where's this energy gone? I demand that whoever has >this newsgroup's energy return it at once! Nobody took it. The energy comes in cycles. >Huh! I remember the time when you >could leave your front door unlocked... This NG does not have a lock on its front door. Now look what walked in.... another dink wanting us to jump through hoops for his personal pleasure. Bart ###### Message-ID: <366EF986.4D2EB94@the.end.of.the.message> Date: Thu, 10 Dec 1998 09:28:23 +1100 From: Craig Organization: Deja Vous X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: Remote View This References: <74js0r$dk$1@nclient5-gui.server.virgin.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit NNTP-Posting-Host: 203.18.28.19 X-Trace: 10 Dec 1998 09:23:46 +1000, 203.18.28.19 Lines: 85 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!newsfeed-zh.ip-plus.net!news-nyc.telia.net!newshub.northeast.verio.net!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.gtei.net!rill.news.pipex.net!pipex!uunet!in1.uu.net!nap-ns1!203.18.28.19 Maestro Joshua wrote: > > There's still a load of threads about proof / lack of proof in this > newsgroup. A few people are (still) saying that proof comes about not from > hard experimental fact but from experience. They have left their bodies and > viewed parts of the globe many miles away. They've met up astrally with > their friends and gone on wonderful jaunts over hill and vale. They say they > have done this and state it as proof. Where has this been stated as proof, except proof for the individual informed? > Anybody who questions it is dismissed > as a critic or sceptic out to spoil everyone's fun. Not from what I have seen. sceptics are more than welcomed here. If you have been reading the threads you will have noticed that. > So, you people, riddle > me this: > > The house that I live in has a substantial distinctive feature that is often > remarked upon. So has mine! So has everybody's! > My car tends to stand out also, but for a different reason. > (When at home, I always park it in my driveway.) That's what the driveway is for. ;-) > In my living room, I have a > pair of objects that again usually provoke discussion, Living rooms are the place for such objects. Stop being so ambiguous! > and my study has an > unusual colour scheme. > > If anybody can specify (using any method as long as you don't set foot on my > street) any two or more of the above unusual aspects (even one would be > surprising) then this will go quite some way to convincing me that I am > wrong in my definition of proof, and that proof can indeed be obtained using > several different methods. I will post a govelling apology in return. Of > course, I could lie and say someone had got it wrong when they hadn't but > that wouldn't be of much use to anybody. A serious question. :-) Why, exactly, do YOU want proof? Have you tried and failed? You must have an interest in this for you to want proof. If you want proof, then you must believe it is possible, for if it is proved, you will believe. But, if you are asking for proof, because you believe it cannot be proven, then you are only out to belittle people who seriously believe this is real. If the latter is the case, why don't you just let us believe what we believe and we'll let you believe what you believe. No harm done then. We never set out to push this on anyone, actually, usually when someone experiences this, they tend to keep to themselves. > Nobody'll manage it, I guarantee. Well, if you guarantee no one will manage it, why ask someone to do it. Self gratification? That is a very dangerous thing. How old are you? What do you do for a living? Are your parents alive? Do you still live with them? >Meanwhile I can happily listen to people > for hours on end about how they left their bodies and travelled the world > but I'll still get aggravated when they patronise the rest of us and snigger > knowingly at us for not having open minds. Where have we patronized 'the rest of you'? How have we offended you? Remember, you came into our house and shouted at us first. We don't lock the door, maybe we should, but then, that would give you something else to go on about wouldn't it. ;-) > (Do you have TP?) Do you have LB? -- The sure way to make a thing impossible- -is to think it so. --- Franklin To respond, delete _nospam_ scrappy@_nospam_netconnect.com.au -- ###### Message-ID: <366F96C0.1D22F2AD@netparadise.no> Date: Thu, 10 Dec 1998 10:39:13 +0100 From: Lars Foleide X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: Remote View This References: <74js0r$dk$1@nclient5-gui.server.virgin.net> <366D8A38.C7511F76@netparadise.no> <74mdfb$svf$1@nclient1-gui.server.virgin.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit NNTP-Posting-Host: t1o204p21.telia.com X-NNTP-Posting-Host: t1o204p21.telia.com Lines: 66 X-Complaints-To: abuse@telia.no Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!newsfeed-zh.ip-plus.net!news-nyc.telia.net!masternews.telia.net!newsfeed1.telia.no!d2o204.telia.com!t1o204p21.telia.com Maestro Joshua wrote: > Lars Foleide wrote in message <366D8A38.C7511F76@netparadise.no>... > >This challange could probably been handled with success by some on a > psionics > >list, > >I knew of one, but it was closed down because of PSI attact on the > moderator. > > They should have seen it coming... Yeah, the moderator had the problem right from the start. But I kind of liked the group, there was a lot to learn. But the activity was maybe a bit too high, like that voyagers group on the monroe site. > > > >And a similar challange was sent to the ImageStreaming list a while back, > >by someone practicing remote viewing, with some success... > >(The results should at least surprise you...) > > > >But I doubt anyone here will have much success... > >First of all since they don't know where you live, > > Exactly! Think you misunderstood what I was trying to say, some people might get lucky in the sense that their intention will lead them to the desired location. Like a psychic wind or magick wind. > > >that information is not needed by a good psionic. > > I don't know what a psionic is. Is it the same as a remote viewer? Because a > remote viewer apparently only needs a random target identifier to do the > job, assigned by the experiment moderator. The target identifier of my house > is 37828000122. That number means nothing... :) A psionic can also be called a psychic. They deal more with energy, think it is called drowsing... Think the range is around 3000 miles... > > > >But it might be that someone, if willing to give a try on the challenge, > >can be lucky and find out where you live. > > That would be cheating, although it's likely the only way. The address isn't necessary, but it would help... > > > > > >Anyhow... Skeptics sucks... :) > > Who said I was a sceptic? I didn't, did you? Just giving my general view of skeptics... Cheers, Lars ###### From: "Richard" Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: Remote View This Date: Thu, 10 Dec 1998 18:13:38 -0800 Organization: Posted via RemarQ, http://www.remarQ.com - Discussions start here! Lines: 70 Message-ID: <74pvu8$fv4$1@remarQ.com> References: <74js0r$dk$1@nclient5-gui.server.virgin.net> <366EF986.4D2EB94@the.end.of.the.message> <74nbq4$jvs$2@remarQ.com> <74p3ep$k96$1@nclient1-gui.server.virgin.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: 207.48.95.3 X-Trace: 913343240 I0G4.QBCE5F03CF30C usenet58.supernews.com X-Complaints-To: newsabuse@remarQ.com X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.1 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.belnet.be!212.63.192.161.MISMATCH!newshub.bart.net!news.tele2.nl!newsfeed1.swip.net!swipnet!news-feed.inet.tele.dk!bofh.vszbr.cz!SupernewsUK!supernews.com!SnNA!Supernews69!not-for-mail Maestro Joshua wrote in message <74p3ep$k96$1@nclient1-gui.server.virgin.net>... >Richard wrote in message <74nbq4$jvs$2@remarQ.com>... ><...> >> >>This is the type of things that happen. These can not be controlled. But >>they are convincing for the people who experience them. That is the reason >>most will tell you this has to be a experienced on a personal level to be >>proven to the OOBEr. My stories may be interesting to read (or not) . >But >>they are not proof to you. Only to me and the people I shared the >>experience with. > > >Well, I was interested in your account although you're right, it's not proof >to me. But I'm not asking anybody to justify their personal experiences. >That would just be intrusive and pointless. Nor am I challenging anybody to >tell me why they believe. What I am saying, though, is that if people state >a thing is fact then they should be prepared to back up that reasoning. If >somebody says 'When you OBE your mind leaves your body and all that brain >function stuff is plain rubbish', I can respond 'Yeah, right, empty words,' >because they've nothing to back it up. I will give you that. Even after having had this happen to me for most of my life I am still not entirely sure about what is real about it 100% of the time. I am only sure that when it is happening to me, it feels as if I am travelling outside the limits of my physical body. I could also have the same sensation if I was simply projecting awareness to a particular space. In fact this seems to be more the case with me anyway. I have sensations suggesting outward travel with passage of time. When the experience is going on I feel as if my awareness in centered at the point I have targeted. While there I feel as if I can direct a certain part of my awareness back to my body as if to monitor what is going on. When the experience ends there is sometimes a sensation of traveling back, but most times it just stops, and I seem to be back in an instant. While this might suggest a problem for belief in the actual projection, it does seem to suggest a possibility that in some cases we actually just project an awareness. When we are done, we simply cease projection and there is no sensation of coming back. The awareness just shifts back to "normal." -- RBWalton Visit this web page for some useful OOB links. . . www.angelfire.com/ca/onestepbeyond/ Join the search for Intelligent Life in the Universe at home http://setiathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/ To respond, delete #nospam# rbwalton@#nospam#bigfoot.com >James 'The Amazing' Randi lives off the interest of a $1.1m bank account >which he has pledged will go to the first person who demonstrates anything >that cannot be explained through known laws of science. I think he's been >sitting on this tidy sum for about 20 years now, and everybody knows it. He >exposes only those who state their ideas to be fact. > > ###### From: "Maestro Joshua" Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: Remote View This Date: Thu, 10 Dec 1998 18:19:54 -0000 Organization: Virgin Net Usenet Service Lines: 76 Message-ID: <74p3cl$k84$1@nclient1-gui.server.virgin.net> References: <74js0r$dk$1@nclient5-gui.server.virgin.net> <36704dda.49574261@news.dial.pipex.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.168.67.188 X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.5 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!news.maxwell.syr.edu!news-feed.fnsi.net!cyclone.i1.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!news1-gui.server.ntli.net!news-feed.ntli.net!news7-gui.server.ntli.net!news-feed.ntli.net!not-for-mail Julia Hawkes-Moore wrote in message <36704dda.49574261@news.dial.pipex.com>... >On Tue, 8 Dec 1998 18:42:54 -0000, "Maestro Joshua" > wrote: >>The house that I live in has a substantial distinctive feature that is often >>remarked upon. My car tends to stand out also, but for a different reason. >>(When at home, I always park it in my driveway.) In my living room, I have a >>pair of objects that again usually provoke discussion, and my study has an >>unusual colour scheme. >>Nobody'll manage it, I guarantee. Meanwhile I can happily listen to people >>for hours on end about how they left their bodies and travelled the world >>but I'll still get aggravated when they patronise the rest of us and snigger >>knowingly at us for not having open minds. > > Well, I don't know why I bothered, but this man actually annoyed me >enough into me having a go at his little quiz. I hereby generously >expose myself to his sniggering by recording what I saw. In that case I won't offer an opinion, just report truthfully on your account. > If it wasn't >his house I visited, then whose was it? > > The house was in a long thin village, middle England, Lincolnshire >perhaps. A long thin village, yes. But in the far north of England. > To the right of the main house is a tower with a tapering >top, perhaps a former windmill. The nearest such building is a church with a steeple approximately 250 metres away, and although it is to the right of the house as you look at it (ish) it is not visible from the anywhere near the house. >There was no car in the L-shaped drive >(11pm Tuesday 8 Dec). There was. >The living room was large and low, Correct. > with a pair >of ebony and tarnished gilt life-size 'slaveboy' lampholders in it. A >large chess table had no chessmen on it. None of the above. > Red tiled fireplace. Tiled yes. Red no. Black. >There >were also a pair of large slim dogs with pointed noses (Afghans or >Selukis) looking at me. No dogs, real or ornamental or pictorial. >The study had dark bottle green walls, No. >A computer with a Windows 95 screen saver, and hanging on the back of >the desk chair was a Burgundy jacket with plaited leather buttons. No screen saver, no jacket on a chair. I do own a burgundy jacket but I always hang it in the wardrobe. ###### From: "Maestro Joshua" Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: Remote View This Date: Thu, 10 Dec 1998 18:21:02 -0000 Organization: Virgin Net Usenet Service Lines: 28 Message-ID: <74p3ep$k96$1@nclient1-gui.server.virgin.net> References: <74js0r$dk$1@nclient5-gui.server.virgin.net> <366EF986.4D2EB94@the.end.of.the.message> <74nbq4$jvs$2@remarQ.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.168.67.188 X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.5 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!newsfeed-zh.ip-plus.net!news-nyc.telia.net!howland.erols.net!news.idt.net!news.globix.net!uunet!in5.uu.net!news7-gui.server.ntli.net!news-feed.ntli.net!not-for-mail Richard wrote in message <74nbq4$jvs$2@remarQ.com>... <...> > >This is the type of things that happen. These can not be controlled. But >they are convincing for the people who experience them. That is the reason >most will tell you this has to be a experienced on a personal level to be >proven to the OOBEr. My stories may be interesting to read (or not) . But >they are not proof to you. Only to me and the people I shared the >experience with. Well, I was interested in your account although you're right, it's not proof to me. But I'm not asking anybody to justify their personal experiences. That would just be intrusive and pointless. Nor am I challenging anybody to tell me why they believe. What I am saying, though, is that if people state a thing is fact then they should be prepared to back up that reasoning. If somebody says 'When you OBE your mind leaves your body and all that brain function stuff is plain rubbish', I can respond 'Yeah, right, empty words,' because they've nothing to back it up. James 'The Amazing' Randi lives off the interest of a $1.1m bank account which he has pledged will go to the first person who demonstrates anything that cannot be explained through known laws of science. I think he's been sitting on this tidy sum for about 20 years now, and everybody knows it. He exposes only those who state their ideas to be fact. ###### From: "Maestro Joshua" Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: Remote View This Date: Thu, 10 Dec 1998 18:46:50 -0000 Organization: Virgin Net Usenet Service Lines: 113 Message-ID: <74p4v5$l23$1@nclient1-gui.server.virgin.net> References: <74js0r$dk$1@nclient5-gui.server.virgin.net> <366EF986.4D2EB94@the.end.of.the.message> NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.168.67.188 X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.5 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!newsfeed-zh.ip-plus.net!news-nyc.telia.net!howland.erols.net!netnews.com!newsfeed.enteract.com!news-a.ais.net!ais.net!ameritech.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!news7-gui.server.ntli.net!news-feed.ntli.net!not-for-mail Craig wrote in message <366EF986.4D2EB94@the.end.of.the.message>... >Maestro Joshua wrote: <...> >Not from what I have seen. sceptics are more than welcomed here. If you >have been reading the threads you will have noticed that. > Evidently I have not. As amazing as it may seem, my conclusions are rather dissimilar to your own. <...> >> The house that I live in has a substantial distinctive feature that is often >> remarked upon. > >So has mine! So has everybody's! > >> My car tends to stand out also, but for a different reason. >> (When at home, I always park it in my driveway.) > >That's what the driveway is for. ;-) > >> In my living room, I have a >> pair of objects that again usually provoke discussion, > >Living rooms are the place for such objects. Stop being so ambiguous! So says Craig, of 155, Miss The Point St., Miss-The-Points-Ville, Miss The Point County, MI55 PNT. And seeing we're in the business of being clever, most driveways' primary function is to provide vehicular access to a garage or forecourt, not to park cars on. It's a bit tedious, this 'being clever' business, isn't it? <...> >A serious question. :-) Why, exactly, do YOU want proof? Have you tried >and failed? Indeed I have, but that's not why I'm asking for proof. Proof is knowledge. Are you suggesting that the acquisition of knowledge is a bad thing? Oh, hang on... >You must have an interest in this for you to want proof. If >you want proof, then you must believe it is possible, for if it is >proved, you will believe. I do have an interest in it. I would like to believe these things (e.g. RV, true OBE) are possible. Once I did. Now I do not. >But, if you are asking for proof, because you >believe it cannot be proven, then you are only out to belittle people >who seriously believe this is real. If the latter is the case, why don't >you just let us believe what we believe and we'll let you believe what >you believe. Gee thanks, but where exactly have I told you what to believe? I merely invited those of you extol your own beliefs to others to step up and give a bit of oomph to your assertions. Practice what you preach, put your money where your mouth is, all that kind of thing. >No harm done then. We never set out to push this on anyone, >actually, usually when someone experiences this, they tend to keep to >themselves. A newsgroup doesn't lend itself to people who've got nothing to say and anyway, my post wasn't aimed at such people. > >> Nobody'll manage it, I guarantee. > >Well, if you guarantee no one will manage it, why ask someone to do it. To be proved wrong. >Self gratification? That is a very dangerous thing. How old are you? Five. A couple of years younger than your good self, at a guess. >What do you do for a living? I design and implement computer systems for the nuclear industry. And you? > Are your parents alive? Very much so. > Do you still live with them? No, I left home at 18, like all guys should. > >>Meanwhile I can happily listen to people >> for hours on end about how they left their bodies and travelled the world >> but I'll still get aggravated when they patronise the rest of us and snigger >> knowingly at us for not having open minds. > >Where have we patronized 'the rest of you'? How have we offended you? I am not offended, but you are patronizing me now. >Remember, you came into our house and shouted at us first. I am unaware of having shouted. And you have no more ownership over this 'house' than I do. >We don't lock >the door, maybe we should, but then, that would give you something else >to go on about wouldn't it. ;-) Thank you for your contribution. I hope I have answered your questions succinctly and pertinently. Don't hesitate to call again. ###### From: speshialk@aol.com (SpeshialK) Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: Remote View This Lines: 4 NNTP-Posting-Host: ladder03.news.aol.com X-Admin: news@aol.com Date: 10 Dec 1998 19:45:28 GMT Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com References: <74p4v5$l23$1@nclient1-gui.server.virgin.net> Message-ID: <19981210144528.08866.00000551@ng115.aol.com> Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!news.maxwell.syr.edu!news-peer.gip.net!news.gsl.net!gip.net!portc01.blue.aol.com!audrey03.news.aol.com!not-for-mail I agree with MJ ------ Keith ###### From: "Bart" Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: Remote View This Date: Thu, 10 Dec 1998 20:35:15 -0500 Organization: ICGNetcom Lines: 78 Message-ID: <74ptb0$fb5@sjx-ixn6.ix.netcom.com> References: <74js0r$dk$1@nclient5-gui.server.virgin.net> <366EF986.4D2EB94@the.end.of.the.message> <74nbq4$jvs$2@remarQ.com> <74p3ep$k96$1@nclient1-gui.server.virgin.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: clv-oh42-06.ix.netcom.com X-NETCOM-Date: Thu Dec 10 5:42:56 PM PST 1998 X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.1 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!newsfeed-zh.ip-plus.net!news-nyc.telia.net!newshub.northeast.verio.net!ix.netcom.com!news Maestro Joshua wrote in message <74p3ep$k96$1@nclient1-gui.server.virgin.net>... >What I am saying, though, is that if people state >a thing is fact then they should be prepared to back up that reasoning. If they do it in this newsgroup - why should they be expected to back it up? They claim to have had an experience so they come to this NG to share it. Some accept it - some don't. Many experiences related here match with nothing more than lucid dreams, but every once in a while someone comes up with a rather convincing story. It's not our responsibility to provide proof for those who have decided against our personal conclusions. If we, on the other hand, went to the scientific community and claimed to be able to see physical reality at a distance - then we *should* be expected to back it up. To my knowledge, nobody here has made that claim in such an arena. There have been, on the other hand, a few who have come into this NG and made loud claims to such an ability. As I recall, they were promptly challenged, exposed, and discharged. >If >somebody says 'When you OBE your mind leaves your body and all that brain >function stuff is plain rubbish', I can respond 'Yeah, right, empty words,' >because they've nothing to back it up. I can't blame you for your response because it is a valid observation from your point of view. But to come into a newsgroup like this and pop *everyone* here - including those who have had experiences which go beyond present day science - is to be somewhat disrespectful. We may not be able to back it up to your satisfaction - but that is not our responsibility. Not as long as we stay in this little group. When one of us is ready to walk out of this newsgroup and make a major claim to the scientific community, only then will it be that individual's responsibility. ...and what a responsibility that will be - for millions of people will smother that individual with their personal needs while others may even attempt to kill him/her... history is full of such examples. .... add to that - many of us (including myself) attempt to explain some of our experiences through the functions of the brain. That should indicate to you that a good number of posters here do not consider brain functions 'rubbish' - we simply do not *think* the brain is finite in its physical existence. Some would say that even the 'astral body' has a brain. The 'Mental Plane' still includes a brain function - because it is 'mental'. >James 'The Amazing' Randi lives off the interest of a $1.1m bank account >which he has pledged will go to the first person who demonstrates anything >that cannot be explained through known laws of science. I think he's been >sitting on this tidy sum for about 20 years now, and everybody knows it. He >exposes only those who state their ideas to be fact. But... almost everything about science is theory... Theory is not fact - and if science makes a theory, writes up a paper where the theory *seems* to work over and over, then the general populace accepts it as fact - even though it is not, in fact, fact... Fact is - stigmata happens - science only has that fact and a theory about it. Fact is - people have had a wide variety of incredible, documented, experiences. Science only has theories as to what may have happened - it does not have facts on what actually happened. So many engineers use PI in their calculations - but PI is not a fact because it is not finite. I can stand here and honestly say that PI does not exist within the bounaries of known science - shouldn't that win me the million bucks right there? Science is based on theory - and so is this newsgroup. Nothing wrong with that... Nothing there to be justifiably laughed at. By the way, $1.1 million collected by 'The Amazing' Randi's intentional trickery is a pitiful sum compared to the amount that 'The Humble' Padre Pio brought in with his examples of honesty and faith. Bart PS: I've noticed that you have, for the moment, stopped acting like a dink... Thanks. Here, have some popcorn... ###### From: "Bart" Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: Remote View This Date: Thu, 10 Dec 1998 21:45:37 -0500 Organization: ICGNetcom Lines: 32 Message-ID: <74q1et$h9e@sjx-ixn6.ix.netcom.com> References: <74p4v5$l23$1@nclient1-gui.server.virgin.net> <19981210144528.08866.00000551@ng115.aol.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: clv-oh42-60.ix.netcom.com X-NETCOM-Date: Thu Dec 10 6:53:17 PM PST 1998 X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.1 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!newsfeed-zh.ip-plus.net!news-nyc.telia.net!newshub.northeast.verio.net!ix.netcom.com!news SpeshialK wrote in message <19981210144528.08866.00000551@ng115.aol.com>... >I agree with MJ >------ >Keith Your choice. 'Agreeing' is one thing. 'Acting like' is another. To date I haven't seen you go into a newsgroup and immediately start rubbing peoples noses in the fact that they have, as yet, failed to meet up to your standards of proof. I've seen you question... but that is not the same. I have not seen you make fun of everyone upon your immediate entry. There is an important difference. I know you've been having a difficult time accepting much of what has been said in this group and at least one other. I can't blame you for that. At least you have been respectful. I don't know exactly what you are looking for, but I do know that you've been looking for it for a long time and have stayed with that search out of some sort of faith - expecting to eventually find it. Don't forget, we are humans - you may not find what you are looking for through us. What you are looking for is most likely within yourself. The 'true you' is divine - look there. That's what this newsgroup is about - looking inside. Bart ###### From: hawksmoor@dial.pipex.com (Julia Hawkes-Moore) Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: Remote View This Date: Thu, 10 Dec 1998 22:51:59 GMT Organization: UUNET WorldCom server (post doesn't reflect views of UUNET WorldCom) Lines: 29 Message-ID: <36704dda.49574261@news.dial.pipex.com> References: <74js0r$dk$1@nclient5-gui.server.virgin.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: aa210.du.pipex.com X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.1/16.230 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!newsfeed-zh.ip-plus.net!news-nyc.telia.net!newsfeed.cwix.com!194.162.162.196!newsfeed.nacamar.de!rill.news.pipex.net!pipex!bore.news.pipex.net!pipex!not-for-mail On Tue, 8 Dec 1998 18:42:54 -0000, "Maestro Joshua" wrote: >The house that I live in has a substantial distinctive feature that is often >remarked upon. My car tends to stand out also, but for a different reason. >(When at home, I always park it in my driveway.) In my living room, I have a >pair of objects that again usually provoke discussion, and my study has an >unusual colour scheme. >Nobody'll manage it, I guarantee. Meanwhile I can happily listen to people >for hours on end about how they left their bodies and travelled the world >but I'll still get aggravated when they patronise the rest of us and snigger >knowingly at us for not having open minds. Well, I don't know why I bothered, but this man actually annoyed me enough into me having a go at his little quiz. I hereby generously expose myself to his sniggering by recording what I saw. If it wasn't his house I visited, then whose was it? The house was in a long thin village, middle England, Lincolnshire perhaps. To the right of the main house is a tower with a tapering top, perhaps a former windmill. There was no car in the L-shaped drive (11pm Tuesday 8 Dec). The living room was large and low, with a pair of ebony and tarnished gilt life-size 'slaveboy' lampholders in it. A large chess table had no chessmen on it. Red tiled fireplace. There were also a pair of large slim dogs with pointed noses (Afghans or Selukis) looking at me. The study had dark bottle green walls, a computer with a Windows 95 screen saver, and hanging on the back of the desk chair was a Burgundy jacket with plaited leather buttons. All best wishes, Julia Hawkes-Moore. ###### From: johnf@melbpc.org.au (John Fitzsimons) Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: Remote View This Date: Thu, 10 Dec 1998 23:08:03 GMT Organization: Melbourne PC User Group Inc, Australia Lines: 23 Message-ID: <36734f6b.8686279@news.melbpc.org.au> References: <74js0r$dk$1@nclient5-gui.server.virgin.net> <366EF986.4D2EB94@the.end.of.the.message> <74nbq4$jvs$2@remarQ.com> <74p3ep$k96$1@nclient1-gui.server.virgin.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: bilby15.melbpc.org.au Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.5/32.451 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!newscore.univie.ac.at!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!news.mel.connect.com.au!news2.melbpc.org.au!not-for-mail On Thu, 10 Dec 1998 18:21:02 -0000, "Maestro Joshua" wrote: < snip > >James 'The Amazing' Randi lives off the interest of a $1.1m bank account < snip > Please advise what proof you have of this. Regards, John. P.S. I do not consider "I read it on a web page" to be proof. If you are that gullible save us both the bother of replying. **************************************************** ,-._|\ John Fitzsimons - Melbourne, Australia. / Oz \ johnf@melbpc.org.au, Fidonet 3:632/309 \_,--.x/ http://www.vicnet.net.au/~johnf/welcome.htm v http://www.alphalink.com.au/~johnf/ ###### From: johnf@melbpc.org.au (John Fitzsimons) Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: Remote View This Date: Thu, 10 Dec 1998 23:08:03 GMT Organization: Melbourne PC User Group Inc, Australia Lines: 30 Message-ID: <3674514c.9167763@news.melbpc.org.au> References: <74js0r$dk$1@nclient5-gui.server.virgin.net> <36704dda.49574261@news.dial.pipex.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: bilby15.melbpc.org.au Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.5/32.451 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!news.maxwell.syr.edu!news.mel.connect.com.au!news2.melbpc.org.au!not-for-mail On Thu, 10 Dec 1998 22:51:59 GMT, hawksmoor@dial.pipex.com (Julia Hawkes-Moore) wrote: >On Tue, 8 Dec 1998 18:42:54 -0000, "Maestro Joshua" > wrote: >>The house that I live in has a substantial distinctive feature that is often >>remarked upon. < snip > > Well, I don't know why I bothered, but this man actually annoyed me >enough into me having a go at his little quiz. I hereby generously >expose myself to his sniggering by recording what I saw. If it wasn't >his house I visited, then whose was it? < snip > Why bother ? What makes you think he would tell you that you were correct even if you were ? Regards, John. **************************************************** ,-._|\ John Fitzsimons - Melbourne, Australia. / Oz \ johnf@melbpc.org.au, Fidonet 3:632/309 \_,--.x/ http://www.vicnet.net.au/~johnf/welcome.htm v http://www.alphalink.com.au/~johnf/ ###### From: "Bob Powers" Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: Remote View This Date: 11 Dec 1998 01:42:10 GMT Organization: Posted via RemarQ, http://www.remarQ.com - Discussions start here! Lines: 78 Message-ID: <01be24a7$73493af0$0206eecc@host2> References: <74js0r$dk$1@nclient5-gui.server.virgin.net> <36704dda.49574261@news.dial.pipex.com> <74p3cl$k84$1@nclient1-gui.server.virgin.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: 216.41.47.42 X-Trace: 913340530 TWNY2XU9G2F2AD829C usenet87.supernews.com X-Complaints-To: newsabuse@remarQ.com X-Newsreader: Microsoft Internet News 4.70.1155 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.belnet.be!news-raspail.gip.net!news-peer.gip.net!news.gsl.net!gip.net!howland.erols.net!netnews.com!newspeer.monmouth.com!newsfeed-east.supernews.com!supernews.com!Supernews69!not-for-mail Maestro Joshua wrote in article <74p3cl$k84$1@nclient1-gui.server.virgin.net>... > > Julia Hawkes-Moore wrote in message > <36704dda.49574261@news.dial.pipex.com>... > > > > > > > > Well, I don't know why I bothered, but this man actually annoyed me > >enough into me having a go at his little quiz. I hereby generously > >expose myself to his sniggering by recording what I saw. > > In that case I won't offer an opinion, just report truthfully on your > account. > > > If it wasn't > >his house I visited, then whose was it? > > > > The house was in a long thin village, middle England, Lincolnshire > >perhaps. > > A long thin village, yes. But in the far north of England. > > > To the right of the main house is a tower with a tapering > >top, perhaps a former windmill. > > The nearest such building is a church with a steeple approximately 250 > metres away, and although it is to the right of the house as you look at it > (ish) it is not visible from the anywhere near the house. > > >There was no car in the L-shaped drive > >(11pm Tuesday 8 Dec). > > There was. > > >The living room was large and low, > > Correct. > > > with a pair > >of ebony and tarnished gilt life-size 'slaveboy' lampholders in it. A > >large chess table had no chessmen on it. > > None of the above. > > > Red tiled fireplace. > > Tiled yes. Red no. Black. > > >There > >were also a pair of large slim dogs with pointed noses (Afghans or > >Selukis) looking at me. > > No dogs, real or ornamental or pictorial. > > >The study had dark bottle green walls, > > No. > > >A computer with a Windows 95 screen saver, and hanging on the back of > >the desk chair was a Burgundy jacket with plaited leather buttons. > > No screen saver, no jacket on a chair. I do own a burgundy jacket but I > always hang it in the wardrobe. > Nice hit ratio, Julia. Colors can sometimes be a problem, don't you think? Wouldn't it also be interesting if you were handy at sketching? Then you might give Mr. Joshua even more corroboration than is possible with several paragraphs (a picture's worth a thousand words?). I'd also like to know how closely your vision of the 'tower' compares to the actual church. Structures seem to get somewhat distorted but still present recognizable features sometimes. ###### From: "Bob Powers" Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: Remote View This Date: 11 Dec 1998 03:04:40 GMT Organization: Posted via RemarQ, http://www.remarQ.com - Discussions start here! Lines: 31 Message-ID: <01be24b3$efa0a0a0$0206eecc@host2> References: <74js0r$dk$1@nclient5-gui.server.virgin.net> <366EF986.4D2EB94@the.end.of.the.message> <74nbq4$jvs$2@remarQ.com> <74p3ep$k96$1@nclient1-gui.server.virgin.net> <74pvu8$fv4$1@remarQ.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 216.41.47.2 X-Trace: 913345480 TWNY2XU9G2F02D829C usenet54.supernews.com X-Complaints-To: newsabuse@remarQ.com X-Newsreader: Microsoft Internet News 4.70.1155 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!newsfeed-zh.ip-plus.net!news-nyc.telia.net!feeder.qis.net!newsfeed-east.supernews.com!supernews.com!Supernews69!not-for-mail Richard wrote in article <74pvu8$fv4$1@remarQ.com>... > > ><...> > my body as if to monitor what is going on. When the experience ends there > is sometimes a sensation of traveling back, but most times it just stops, > and I seem to be back in an instant. While this might suggest a problem for > belief in the actual projection, it does seem to suggest a possibility that > in some cases we actually just project an awareness. When we are done, we > simply cease projection and there is no sensation of coming back. The > awareness just shifts back to "normal." > > -- > RBWalton > I've also had this same type of experience on occasion. I've thought of it or described it as just my eyes moving, because that's what it feels like as I move around 'outside'. And the return is almost immediate, seemingly triggered by just the desire to go back. Interesting way of looking at it. Thanks. Bob P. ###### From: speshialk@aol.com (SpeshialK) Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: Remote View This Lines: 64 NNTP-Posting-Host: ladder03.news.aol.com X-Admin: news@aol.com Date: 11 Dec 1998 06:15:29 GMT Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com References: <74q1et$h9e@sjx-ixn6.ix.netcom.com> Message-ID: <19981211011529.04736.00000687@ng-ce1.aol.com> Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!newsfeed-zh.ip-plus.net!news-nyc.telia.net!newshub.northeast.verio.net!news-peer.gip.net!news.gsl.net!gip.net!portc01.blue.aol.com!audrey03.news.aol.com!not-for-mail Eloquently and well put. I am not the type of person to put someone down, unless of course, their views are so outlandish as to be offensive. Most of those people have disappeared or died or something. But I have put down both believers and skeptics alike. What I am looking for, is what MJ and many others are looking for, obviously, the Answer. I try to remain neutral and open. To me, that seems the logical and correct path. To be drawn one way or the other without careful study and experience would be foolish. There is just too much belief in that scenario. At least, that is my opinion. 99% of what I read in these NGs is complete dribble. Spread evenly between believers and skeptics alike. I do think that the ONLY edge and argument that the skeptics do have, is that I believe there is a universal constant or ultimate truth. To find truth, at least to know, or be confident in something requires the disintegration of mere belief. That HAS to require some sort of study and rigorous examination. Why do I say this? Simple. Way too many believers claim to KNOW things, and just rattle their "scripture" as if it was common knowledge or taught in school. And this scripture is rarely ever the same. The brain is an extremely mysterious device. It fools many people extremely well. And I do think many people, may not be experiencing "reality" when they think they are. I am not saying there is not a spiritual component in or connected to the brain, it is just that I think these studies are still in their infancy. (See Dr. Melvin Morse's webpage, he covers that theory well, and I love his theories) There should be one common truth and path for all of us. And I've said it before, and all so it again. No one is even close to figuring out what that path is, or if it even leads anywhere at all... Keith >Your choice. > >'Agreeing' is one thing. 'Acting like' is another. To date I haven't seen >you go into a newsgroup and immediately start rubbing peoples noses in the >fact that they have, as yet, failed to meet up to your standards of proof. >I've seen you question... but that is not the same. I have not seen you >make fun of everyone upon your immediate entry. There is an important >difference. > >I know you've been having a difficult time accepting much of what has been >said in this group and at least one other. I can't blame you for that. > At >least you have been respectful. > >I don't know exactly what you are looking for, but I do know that you've >been looking for it for a long time and have stayed with that search out >of >some sort of faith - expecting to eventually find it. Don't forget, we >are >humans - you may not find what you are looking for through us. What you >are >looking for is most likely within yourself. The 'true you' is divine - >look >there. That's what this newsgroup is about - looking inside. > >Bart ------ Keith ###### Message-ID: <36704C26.BA7F354C@the.end.of.the.message> Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1998 09:33:10 +1100 From: Craig Organization: Deja Vous X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: Remote View This References: <74js0r$dk$1@nclient5-gui.server.virgin.net> <366EF986.4D2EB94@the.end.of.the.message> <74p4v5$l23$1@nclient1-gui.server.virgin.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit NNTP-Posting-Host: 203.18.28.15 X-Trace: 11 Dec 1998 09:30:39 +1000, 203.18.28.15 Lines: 208 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!newsfeed-zh.ip-plus.net!news-nyc.telia.net!feeder.qis.net!news-peer.gip.net!news.gsl.net!gip.net!news.idt.net!news-a.ais.net!ais.net!ameritech.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!nap-ns1!203.18.28.15 Maestro Joshua wrote: > >> The house that I live in has a substantial distinctive feature that is > often > >> remarked upon. > > > >So has mine! So has everybody's! > > > >> My car tends to stand out also, but for a different reason. > >> (When at home, I always park it in my driveway.) > > > >That's what the driveway is for. ;-) > > > >> In my living room, I have a > >> pair of objects that again usually provoke discussion, > > > >Living rooms are the place for such objects. Stop being so ambiguous! > > So says Craig, of 155, Miss The Point St., Miss-The-Points-Ville, Miss The > Point County, MI55 PNT. And seeing we're in the business of being clever, > most driveways' primary function is to provide vehicular access to a garage > or forecourt, not to park cars on. It's a bit tedious, this 'being clever' > business, isn't it? > Oh Joshua. :-) I didn't miss the point, I was suggesting that for someone to get to 'your' house, it could be a hit and miss thing with the info you have given. I mean, at least give us a picture of you so we have something to aim for. If we have nothing to work with, we could end up anywhere that has the distinctive features that you mention. Btw, if you looked closely at my email addy, you would have seen I am from Australia, therefore I could not possibly live at 'Miss The Point County' plus, here, most people DO park their cars in their driveways. I agree that a function of a driveway is to drive a car on, whether it be into a garage or not, but most normal people park their cars in their driveways. Go for a drive, have a look, count how many cars are parked in driveways, not garaged. I would suggest the primary function of a driveway is to park your car on too. :-) At least it's that way here, maybe it's different where you are. :-) **It's a bit tedious, this 'being clever' business, isn't it?** > >A serious question. :-) Why, exactly, do YOU want proof? Have you tried > >and failed? > > Indeed I have, but that's not why I'm asking for proof. Proof is knowledge. > Are you suggesting that the acquisition of knowledge is a bad thing? Oh, > hang on... No, you are right, the acquisition of knowledge is a good thing. But you are going about getting that knowledge the wrong way. It's one thing to learn something yourself, it's another thing to be so frustrated about something, that the only way you are to gain knowledge about it is to seek absolute proof on it, second person. If we could gain knowledge on things only by second person proof, then individual experience would be worth nothing. How many times do we see someone see proof of something in such a fashion, but still, they need to prove it to themselves. You will never have concrete proof on this matter, FOR YOURSELF, until such a time that you have done it yourself. You may well believe it is possible if someone else can prove it to you, but you will never know the proof for yourself, IMO. :-) > >You must have an interest in this for you to want proof. If > >you want proof, then you must believe it is possible, for if it is > >proved, you will believe. > > I do have an interest in it. I would like to believe these things (e.g. RV, > true OBE) are possible. Once I did. Now I do not. Why did you change how you feel about such things? If you don't mind me asking. Do you believe in NDE's? > >But, if you are asking for proof, because you > >believe it cannot be proven, then you are only out to belittle people > >who seriously believe this is real. If the latter is the case, why don't > >you just let us believe what we believe and we'll let you believe what > >you believe. > > Gee thanks, but where exactly have I told you what to believe? I merely > invited those of you extol your own beliefs to others to step up and give a > bit of oomph to your assertions. Practice what you preach, put your money > where your mouth is, all that kind of thing. I never mentioned you told us what to believe(?) I said, we'll do what we want to, you do what you do. Well go our merry ways and not interfere with each other, until ...... We do practice what we preach, we practice very hard too. We have no need to assert what we believe on anybody, we simply share information about our experiences with each other, discuss differences and try to help those who are new to the experience better understand what may be happening to them according to our beliefs. They either go with that or not. We are all individuals and all have our own beliefs and opinions. The one thing we all have in common though, we don't *need* to prove anything to each other. > >No harm done then. We never set out to push this on anyone, > >actually, usually when someone experiences this, they tend to keep to > >themselves. > > A newsgroup doesn't lend itself to people who've got nothing to say and > anyway, my post wasn't aimed at such people. Agreed, but what I was trying to say was that we often get people come here and ask us to prove what we believe we do, we never go out and tell people outside of our own groups what we do, or push this upon anyone. These people usually come in here and ask us to just prove what we believe without provocation, that's probably why we tend to attack or defend ourselves so easily. It's not as easy as just getting OOB and going somewhere and reporting what we see. We are not in the physical when we are OOB, therefore it is hard to interpret what we see in physical terms. I mean, we don't 'see' like we see physically, we see with our consciousness, and that can be very misleading when reporting in a physical sense. If you know what I mean. :-) Look at the experiments the CIA did with RV. They must have believed it was really worth the try, they spent so much money and put so much effort into it, but in the end, the results were mixed because of the way the subjects were reporting what they were seeing. They are still running those programs today, btw. Are they having delusions? > > > >> Nobody'll manage it, I guarantee. > > > >Well, if you guarantee no one will manage it, why ask someone to do it. > > To be proved wrong. I don't think anyone in their right mind sets out to be proved wrong, unless that is what they want to happen for them personally to believe. > >Self gratification? That is a very dangerous thing. How old are you? > > Five. A couple of years younger than your good self, at a guess. No. I think you are a tad older than I. :-) > >What do you do for a living? > > I design and implement computer systems for the nuclear industry. And you? I don't believe you for some reason. I work the night shift at a Supermarket. :-) > > Are your parents alive? > > Very much so. > > > Do you still live with them? > > No, I left home at 18, like all guys should. > > > > >>Meanwhile I can happily listen to people > >> for hours on end about how they left their bodies and travelled the world > >> but I'll still get aggravated when they patronise the rest of us and > snigger > >> knowingly at us for not having open minds. > > > >Where have we patronized 'the rest of you'? How have we offended you? > > I am not offended, but you are patronizing me now. But you say *we* snigger at you for not having an open mind. Of cause we do, the way you come here and ask us to perform for you and you will believe. Would you not do the same thing if you were in the same boat? Seriously. You may not be offended, but we do get offended at this intrusion in our news group. If this was alt.discuss.disscussion then you would have every reason in the world to ask the what you do, and we would have every reason in the world to prove what we say to be true. Instead of asking for proof, why don't you stick around and suggest what you think may be happening to us when we talk about our experiences? > >Remember, you came into our house and shouted at us first. > > I am unaware of having shouted. And you have no more ownership over this > 'house' than I do. I have not got ownership of this 'house' but you read the sign above the door before you came in, you knew what was discussed here. > >We don't lock > >the door, maybe we should, but then, that would give you something else > >to go on about wouldn't it. ;-) > > Thank you for your contribution. I hope I have answered your questions > succinctly and pertinently. Don't hesitate to call again. Well, we can be civil, which you seem to have been so far, but don't lose sight of the main issue will you. I think your contribution, if directed courteously, could be of benefit here Joshua. I don't think you will find proof here though, I just don't think it is something that can be proven outwardly at this time. Some things just have to be either believed or not believed I guess, not everything is simple. :-( I wish I could somehow prove, just to you, that what I do, I really believe I do, but I really don't feel the need to have others believe what I do. It's enough, for me anyway, that I believe I can get OOB myself. I would never push that fact on anybody, neither do I claim to have so much control over it that I could even think about proving it anyway. It's hard enough for me to control when I do get OOB, let alone where I go when I get out, then try to understand what the experience was for me, when I come back to the physical. You must understand how difficult what you ask us to do is. I hope you do. :-) All the best Craig -- The sure way to make a thing impossible- -is to think it so. --- Franklin To respond, delete _nospam_ scrappy@_nospam_netconnect.com.au -- ###### Message-ID: <3670EE38.A607371A@netparadise.no> Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1998 11:04:40 +0100 From: Lars Foleide X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: Remote View This References: <74js0r$dk$1@nclient5-gui.server.virgin.net> <366EF986.4D2EB94@the.end.of.the.message> <74nbq4$jvs$2@remarQ.com> <74p3ep$k96$1@nclient1-gui.server.virgin.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit NNTP-Posting-Host: t2o204p5.telia.com X-NNTP-Posting-Host: t2o204p5.telia.com Lines: 25 X-Complaints-To: abuse@telia.no Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.belnet.be!newsgate.cistron.nl!het.net!news-feed.inet.tele.dk!bofh.vszbr.cz!newsfeed.online.no!newsfeed1.telia.no!d2o204.telia.com!t2o204p5.telia.com Maestro Joshua wrote: > James 'The Amazing' Randi lives off the interest of a $1.1m bank account > which he has pledged will go to the first person who demonstrates anything > that cannot be explained through known laws of science. I think he's been > sitting on this tidy sum for about 20 years now, and everybody knows it. He > exposes only those who state their ideas to be fact. And you state this a proof? He could be a fraud, and I have a good understanding about those that doesn't want to go public with their abilities. And money are usually not important to a spiritual person. And you sure it is _anything_ that cannot be explained through known laws of science? Does that mean that if I can conduct an experiment that makes a particle go faster than the speed of light, that I will win $1.1 million? Cheers, Lars ###### Message-ID: <3670EF74.C654B537@netparadise.no> Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1998 11:09:56 +0100 From: Lars Foleide X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: Remote View This References: <74p4v5$l23$1@nclient1-gui.server.virgin.net> <19981210144528.08866.00000551@ng115.aol.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit NNTP-Posting-Host: t2o204p5.telia.com X-NNTP-Posting-Host: t2o204p5.telia.com Lines: 13 X-Complaints-To: abuse@telia.no Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.belnet.be!newsgate.cistron.nl!het.net!news-feed.inet.tele.dk!bofh.vszbr.cz!uninett.no!newsfeed1.telia.no!d2o204.telia.com!t2o204p5.telia.com In what area, on what subject, in what post? Quoting makes things so much easier... Thanks, Lars SpeshialK wrote: > I agree with MJ > ------ > Keith ###### From: "Maestro Joshua" Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: Remote View This Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1998 17:45:24 -0000 Organization: Virgin News Service Lines: 43 Message-ID: <74rlpb$oui$1@nclient5-gui.server.virgin.net> References: <74js0r$dk$1@nclient5-gui.server.virgin.net> <366EF986.4D2EB94@the.end.of.the.message> <74p4v5$l23$1@nclient1-gui.server.virgin.net> <36704C26.BA7F354C@the.end.of.the.message> NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.168.66.83 X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.5 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!newsfeed-zh.ip-plus.net!news-nyc.telia.net!newspump.monmouth.com!newspeer.monmouth.com!newsfeed.enteract.com!news-a.ais.net!ais.net!news.ais.net!ameritech.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!news7-gui.server.ntli.net!news-feed.ntli.net!not-for-mail Craig wrote in message <36704C26.BA7F354C@the.end.of.the.message>... >Why did you change how you feel about such things? If you don't mind me >asking. After I'd failed to find any consistent and reasonable externalised explanations for (most aspects of) the paranormal I began to research how brain function might impact on it. I expected to find nothing. To cut a long story short, I'm now of the opinion that there is very little in the paranormal 'repertoire' that cannot be fully explained by current knowledge of the workings of the brain, and this includes almost every major paranormal category from UFOs to OBEs. It's my belief that those valid (my definition) paranormal events that are not yet explicable (including telepathy, psychokinesis and precognition) will have been explained inside of 50 years' time without recourse to anything but the physical. It's interesting to note (for me, at least) that if someone had, a couple of years ago, suggested that point-of-view to me then I probably would have declined to discuss the issue further, believing him (or her) to be an imbecile sceptic. How a little research can change a lot of things! >Do you believe in NDE's? Yes and no. I believe people experience NDE's, but I don't believe that they are anything other than an hallucination. At most, I think an NDE is an OBE with a touch of sensory-deprivation-induced telepathy thrown in. And before anyone asks me 'Well, can *you* OBE?' the answer's yes I can. Normally I can LD and OBE at will. My OBEs last anything from 5 seconds to 2 hours (perceived time), my LDs up to 2 or 3 days (again, obviously perceived time.) The reason I don't accept RV to be a valid skill (apart from lack of proof) is that, unlike telepathy & precognition etc., it adds no survival value to the human race. Which basically means that on an individual level, a person skilled in RV would have no survival advantage over someone who isn't. And nature quickly eradicates redundant skills. ...Unfortunately I don't have time to address the rest of your post as I'm kind of in a rush... Apart from to say that I bet you are older than me, and I *do* develop s/w for the nuclear industry, although I don't work directly for it any more. ###### From: "Maestro Joshua" Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: Remote View This Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1998 17:47:03 -0000 Organization: Virgin News Service Lines: 27 Message-ID: <74rlr3$oup$1@nclient5-gui.server.virgin.net> References: <74js0r$dk$1@nclient5-gui.server.virgin.net> <36704dda.49574261@news.dial.pipex.com> <74p3cl$k84$1@nclient1-gui.server.virgin.net> <3671b3ac.28093039@news.dial.pipex.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.168.66.83 X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.5 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.belnet.be!news-raspail.gip.net!news-peer.gip.net!news.gsl.net!gip.net!news.idt.net!news-feed.fnsi.net!cyclone.i1.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!news1-gui.server.ntli.net!news-feed.ntli.net!news7-gui.server.ntli.net!news-feed.ntli.net!not-for-mail Julia Hawkes-Moore wrote in message <3671b3ac.28093039@news.dial.pipex.com>... >On Thu, 10 Dec 1998 18:19:54 -0000, "Maestro Joshua" > wrote: >>No screen saver, no jacket on a chair. I do own a burgundy jacket but I >>always hang it in the wardrobe. >> >What kind of buttons does it have? Smooth leather. > Well, there you are. Thank you for not sniggering. Did you learn >anything useful? Yes I did, although I'll not disclose it unless invited. >Learning is living. Absolutely, and vice-versa. Apologies for my brevity, it's a busy week. >Join the learning curve and stop being so confrontational. >We are all very delightful people and more fun to play with than to >fight with... > All best wishes, >Julia. ###### From: "Maestro Joshua" Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: Remote View This Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1998 17:47:22 -0000 Organization: Virgin News Service Lines: 15 Message-ID: <74rlrn$ouq$1@nclient5-gui.server.virgin.net> References: <74js0r$dk$1@nclient5-gui.server.virgin.net> <36704dda.49574261@news.dial.pipex.com> <3674514c.9167763@news.melbpc.org.au> <3671b33b.27979893@news.dial.pipex.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.168.66.83 X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.5 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.belnet.be!newsgate.cistron.nl!het.net!news.tele2.nl!newsfeed1.swip.net!swipnet!chippy.visi.com!news-out.visi.com!uunet!in3.uu.net!news7-gui.server.ntli.net!news-feed.ntli.net!not-for-mail Julia Hawkes-Moore wrote in message <3671b33b.27979893@news.dial.pipex.com>... >On Thu, 10 Dec 1998 23:08:03 GMT, johnf@melbpc.org.au (John >Fitzsimons) wrote: >>Why bother ? What makes you think he would tell you that you were >>correct even if you were ? > > Because I was bored with having nowhere to go this last full moon. >Because he is an English gentleman... >Julia. An English gentleman. Yeah, I like that... ###### From: Sue Mitchell Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: Remote View This Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1998 21:32:39 +0000 Organization: Schroedinger Home for Distressed Felines Message-ID: References: <74js0r$dk$1@nclient5-gui.server.virgin.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: imps.demon.co.uk X-NNTP-Posting-Host: imps.demon.co.uk:158.152.201.222 X-Trace: news.demon.co.uk 913425268 nnrp-04:1912 NO-IDENT imps.demon.co.uk:158.152.201.222 X-Complaints-To: abuse@demon.net MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Newsreader: Turnpike (32) Version 4.00 Lines: 23 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.belnet.be!news-raspail.gip.net!news-lond.gip.net!news.gsl.net!gip.net!dispose.news.demon.net!demon!news.demon.co.uk!demon!imps.demon.co.uk!sue In article <74js0r$dk$1@nclient5-gui.server.virgin.net>, Maestro Joshua writes >If anybody can specify (using any method as long as you don't set foot on my >street) any two or more of the above unusual aspects (even one would be >surprising) then this will go quite some way to convincing me that I am >wrong in my definition of proof, and that proof can indeed be obtained using >several different methods. I will post a govelling apology in return. Why would anyone be interested in providing you with 'proof'? If you want proof, why not put in the effort to look for it for yourself? Just curious... Sue -- __ __ {{{{\ /}}}} Sue Mitchell {{::\ V /::}} sue@imps.demon.co.uk >--->8<---< {:.;/ 0 \;.:} "My soul is painted like the wings of butterflies" ~~ ~~ - B.H.M. ###### From: hawksmoor@dial.pipex.com (Julia Hawkes-Moore) Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: Remote View This Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1998 00:06:36 GMT Organization: UUNET WorldCom server (post doesn't reflect views of UUNET WorldCom) Lines: 8 Message-ID: <3671b33b.27979893@news.dial.pipex.com> References: <74js0r$dk$1@nclient5-gui.server.virgin.net> <36704dda.49574261@news.dial.pipex.com> <3674514c.9167763@news.melbpc.org.au> NNTP-Posting-Host: aa167.du.pipex.com X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.1/16.230 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newspeer1.nac.net!newspeer.monmouth.com!rill.news.pipex.net!pipex!bore.news.pipex.net!pipex!not-for-mail On Thu, 10 Dec 1998 23:08:03 GMT, johnf@melbpc.org.au (John Fitzsimons) wrote: >Why bother ? What makes you think he would tell you that you were >correct even if you were ? Because I was bored with having nowhere to go this last full moon. Because he is an English gentleman... Julia. ###### From: hawksmoor@dial.pipex.com (Julia Hawkes-Moore) Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: Remote View This Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1998 00:18:38 GMT Organization: UUNET WorldCom server (post doesn't reflect views of UUNET WorldCom) Message-ID: <3671b3ac.28093039@news.dial.pipex.com> References: <74js0r$dk$1@nclient5-gui.server.virgin.net> <36704dda.49574261@news.dial.pipex.com> <74p3cl$k84$1@nclient1-gui.server.virgin.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: aa164.du.pipex.com X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.1/16.230 Lines: 69 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!newsfeed.uk.ibm.net!ibm.net!dispose.news.demon.net!demon!newsfeed.nacamar.de!rill.news.pipex.net!pipex!bore.news.pipex.net!pipex!not-for-mail On Thu, 10 Dec 1998 18:19:54 -0000, "Maestro Joshua" wrote: >> The house was in a long thin village, middle England, Lincolnshire >>perhaps. > >A long thin village, yes. But in the far north of England. > >> To the right of the main house is a tower with a tapering >>top, perhaps a former windmill. > >The nearest such building is a church with a steeple approximately 250 >metres away, and although it is to the right of the house as you look at it >(ish) it is not visible from the anywhere near the house. > >>There was no car in the L-shaped drive >>(11pm Tuesday 8 Dec). > >There was. > >>The living room was large and low, > >Correct. > >> with a pair >>of ebony and tarnished gilt life-size 'slaveboy' lampholders in it. A >>large chess table had no chessmen on it. > >None of the above. > >> Red tiled fireplace. > >Tiled yes. Red no. Black. > >>There >>were also a pair of large slim dogs with pointed noses (Afghans or >>Selukis) looking at me. > >No dogs, real or ornamental or pictorial. > >>The study had dark bottle green walls, > >No. > >>A computer with a Windows 95 screen saver, and hanging on the back of >>the desk chair was a Burgundy jacket with plaited leather buttons. > >No screen saver, no jacket on a chair. I do own a burgundy jacket but I >always hang it in the wardrobe. > What kind of buttons does it have? Well, there you are. Thank you for not sniggering. Did you learn anything useful? Did I? What we have been learning is that remote viewing (as in all the books about it, most of which I have recently read - have you?) is a hit and miss process. If I was to study and practice it eight hours a day, five days a week, I am certain that I could become eerily good at it, just as Monaghan etc have become. It has vast usefulness. I too could locate lost children, investigate Saddam's armoury, talk to friends around the world without a telephone etc. But is anyone willing to employ me full-time to do so? MI6? DTI? I think not. I would be delighted if they would. Job offers to the above email adrress, please. But in the meantime, I'll continue doing it in my limited spare time, as a hobby and entertainment, and see what I can learn. Learning is living. Join the learning curve and stop being so confrontational. We are all very delightful people and more fun to play with than to fight with... All best wishes, Julia. ###### From: hawksmoor@dial.pipex.com (Julia Hawkes-Moore) Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: Remote View This Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1998 08:23:42 GMT Organization: UUNET WorldCom server (post doesn't reflect views of UUNET WorldCom) Lines: 30 Message-ID: <367225af.2515400@news.dial.pipex.com> References: <74js0r$dk$1@nclient5-gui.server.virgin.net> <36704dda.49574261@news.dial.pipex.com> <74p3cl$k84$1@nclient1-gui.server.virgin.net> <01be24a7$73493af0$0206eecc@host2> NNTP-Posting-Host: aa140.du.pipex.com X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.1/16.230 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.belnet.be!newsgate.cistron.nl!het.net!news.tele2.nl!newsfeed1.swip.net!swipnet!rill.news.pipex.net!pipex!bore.news.pipex.net!pipex!not-for-mail On 11 Dec 1998 01:42:10 GMT, "Bob Powers" wrote: >Nice hit ratio, Julia. Colors can sometimes be a problem, don't you >think? Certainly in this case! I usually don't bother with colours at all. > Wouldn't it also be interesting if you were handy at sketching? I am. But this newsgroup doesn't have any pictures! >Then you might give Mr. Joshua even more corroboration than is >possible with several paragraphs (a picture's worth a thousand words?). >I'd also like to know how closely your vision of the 'tower' compares to >the actual church. Structures seem to get somewhat distorted but >still present recognizable features sometimes. This illustrates several of the many reasons why we don't bother playing these silly games in this group. There is distortion and error in the 'best' of the remote viewers' work, according to the books, and this certainly is what disbelievers will latch onto as proof for their unhelpful little crusades. A two-year old child was recently lost in Wales, and the police searched for him for three days. I tried to remote view him, but all that I could see was fronds of bracken. These could mean anything and be found anywhere in Britain. Eventually, the police found the tiny boy, safe and well thank goodness. He had been hiding in a nest of bracken for the whole time. So an excellent 'hit', and no use whatsoever to anyone. Anyway, I hope that this so-called experiment has been of interest. All best wishes, Julia. ###### From: "Lars Rune Foleide" Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body References: <74js0r$dk$1@nclient5-gui.server.virgin.net> <366EF986.4D2EB94@the.end.of.the.message> <74p4v5$l23$1@nclient1-gui.server.virgin.net> <36704C26.BA7F354C@the.end.of.the.message> <74rlpb$oui$1@nclient5-gui.server.virgin.net> Subject: Re: Remote View This Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1998 00:26:28 +0100 Lines: 37 X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.1 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 NNTP-Posting-Host: t5o204p19.telia.com X-NNTP-Posting-Host: t5o204p19.telia.com Message-ID: <3672fb59.0@d2o204.telia.com> X-Complaints-To: abuse@telia.no Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!newsfeed-zh.ip-plus.net!news-nyc.telia.net!masternews.telia.net!newsfeed1.telia.no!d2o204.telia.com!t5o204p19.telia.com Maestro Joshua wrote in message <74rlpb$oui$1@nclient5-gui.server.virgin.net>... > >>Do you believe in NDE's? > >Yes and no. I believe people experience NDE's, but I don't believe that they >are anything other than an hallucination. At most, I think an NDE is an OBE >with a touch of sensory-deprivation-induced telepathy thrown in. And before >anyone asks me 'Well, can *you* OBE?' the answer's yes I can. Normally I can >LD and OBE at will. My OBEs last anything from 5 seconds to 2 hours >(perceived time), my LDs up to 2 or 3 days (again, obviously perceived >time.) LDs that last up to 2-3 days? This is an area that I have huge interest in. Ever since one guy claimed to experience a LD that lasted 4 days. Far more than what elapsed in real time. My explanation for this is slowed down/stopped time. But I'm sure you have another.... But the important thing is that the experience remains the same... So I was wondering if you have done anything to have so long LDs, or if they simply just happen by accident? And have you still no been able to validate if your OOBEs are real or not? Cheers, Lars ###### Message-ID: <3674DDBF.D5AEF0E1@netparadise.no> Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 10:43:27 +0100 From: Lars Foleide X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [en] (Win95; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: Remote View This References: <74js0r$dk$1@nclient5-gui.server.virgin.net> <36704dda.49574261@news.dial.pipex.com> <74p3cl$k84$1@nclient1-gui.server.virgin.net> <3671b3ac.28093039@news.dial.pipex.com> <74rlr3$oup$1@nclient5-gui.server.virgin.net> <3675592e.695899@news.dial.pipex.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit NNTP-Posting-Host: t3o204p23.telia.com X-NNTP-Posting-Host: t3o204p23.telia.com Lines: 13 X-Complaints-To: abuse@telia.no Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!news.maxwell.syr.edu!news-feed.inet.tele.dk!bofh.vszbr.cz!masternews.telia.net!newsfeed1.telia.no!d2o204.telia.com!t3o204p23.telia.com Julia Hawkes-Moore wrote: > *Sigh* , go on then, disclose. > Julia. Just wanted to mention that you have a time problem... Your time isn't what it should be... Maybe you got AM and PM wrong or something... Hope you find the error... Lars ###### From: "Bart" Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: Remote View This Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 17:19:51 -0500 Organization: ICGNetcom Lines: 18 Message-ID: <7543cp$2st@dfw-ixnews6.ix.netcom.com> References: <74js0r$dk$1@nclient5-gui.server.virgin.net> <36704dda.49574261@news.dial.pipex.com> <74p3cl$k84$1@nclient1-gui.server.virgin.net> <3671b3ac.28093039@news.dial.pipex.com> <74rlr3$oup$1@nclient5-gui.server.virgin.net> <3675592e.695899@news.dial.pipex.com> <3674DDBF.D5AEF0E1@netparadise.no> <36763034.8367933@news.dial.pipex.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: clv-oh38-14.ix.netcom.com X-NETCOM-Date: Mon Dec 14 4:27:37 PM CST 1998 X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.1 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.belnet.be!newsfeed.wirehub.nl!newspeer1.nac.net!netnews.com!ix.netcom.com!news Julia Hawkes-Moore wrote in message <36763034.8367933@news.dial.pipex.com>... >On Mon, 14 Dec 1998 10:43:27 +0100, Lars Foleide >wrote: > >>Julia Hawkes-Moore wrote: > Um, I have a permanent time problem... >JHM But this one is curable ;-) Bart ###### From: hawksmoor@dial.pipex.com (Julia Hawkes-Moore) Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: Remote View This Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 18:30:00 GMT Organization: UUNET WorldCom server (post doesn't reflect views of UUNET WorldCom) Lines: 11 Message-ID: <367558d0.602801@news.dial.pipex.com> References: <74js0r$dk$1@nclient5-gui.server.virgin.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: aa183.du.pipex.com X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.1/16.230 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.belnet.be!news-raspail.gip.net!news.gsl.net!gip.net!newsfeed.ecrc.net!join.news.pipex.net!pipex!warm.news.pipex.net!bore.news.pipex.net!pipex!not-for-mail On Fri, 11 Dec 1998 21:32:39 +0000, Sue Mitchell wrote: >Why would anyone be interested in providing you with 'proof'? >If you want proof, why not put in the effort to look for it for >yourself? >>Just curious... Welcome, Sue! Glad you made it . Did you read the rest of this thread? All best wishes, Julia. ###### From: hawksmoor@dial.pipex.com (Julia Hawkes-Moore) Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: Remote View This Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 18:31:03 GMT Organization: UUNET WorldCom server (post doesn't reflect views of UUNET WorldCom) Lines: 11 Message-ID: <3675592e.695899@news.dial.pipex.com> References: <74js0r$dk$1@nclient5-gui.server.virgin.net> <36704dda.49574261@news.dial.pipex.com> <74p3cl$k84$1@nclient1-gui.server.virgin.net> <3671b3ac.28093039@news.dial.pipex.com> <74rlr3$oup$1@nclient5-gui.server.virgin.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: aa183.du.pipex.com X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.1/16.230 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.belnet.be!newsgate.cistron.nl!het.net!news-feed.inet.tele.dk!bofh.vszbr.cz!news-lond.gip.net!news.gsl.net!gip.net!rill.news.pipex.net!pipex!bore.news.pipex.net!pipex!not-for-mail On Fri, 11 Dec 1998 17:47:03 -0000, "Maestro Joshua" wrote: >Julia Hawkes-Moore wrote >> Well, there you are. Thank you for not sniggering. Did you learn >>anything useful? > >Yes I did, although I'll not disclose it unless invited. *Sigh* , go on then, disclose. Julia. ###### Message-ID: <367574ED.25F30825@the.end.of.the.message> Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1998 07:28:29 +1100 From: Craig Organization: Deja Vous X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: Remote View This References: <74js0r$dk$1@nclient5-gui.server.virgin.net> <366EF986.4D2EB94@the.end.of.the.message> <74p4v5$l23$1@nclient1-gui.server.virgin.net> <36704C26.BA7F354C@the.end.of.the.message> <74rlpb$oui$1@nclient5-gui.server.virgin.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit NNTP-Posting-Host: 203.18.28.13 X-Trace: 15 Dec 1998 10:01:26 +1000, 203.18.28.13 Lines: 82 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.belnet.be!newsfeed.wirehub.nl!sun4nl!rill.news.pipex.net!pipex!ams.news.uu.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!nap-ns1!203.18.28.13 Maestro Joshua wrote: > > Craig wrote in message <36704C26.BA7F354C@the.end.of.the.message>... > >Why did you change how you feel about such things? If you don't mind me > >asking. > > After I'd failed to find any consistent and reasonable externalised > explanations for (most aspects of) the paranormal I began to research how > brain function might impact on it. I expected to find nothing. To cut a long > story short, I'm now of the opinion that there is very little in the > paranormal 'repertoire' that cannot be fully explained by current knowledge > of the workings of the brain, and this includes almost every major > paranormal category from UFOs to OBEs. It's my belief that those valid (my > definition) paranormal events that are not yet explicable (including > telepathy, psychokinesis and precognition) will have been explained inside > of 50 years' time without recourse to anything but the physical. Hmmmm, have you read 'Communion'? I ask this only because some ufo abductees have sometimes unexplainable physical markings left upon their bodies. I'm not opposing you opinion here, I sort of agree with you about UFO's, at least the physical side of them, just wondering what you thoughts on the physical effects left on some people are. :-) > It's interesting to note (for me, at least) that if someone had, a couple of > years ago, suggested that point-of-view to me then I probably would have > declined to discuss the issue further, believing him (or her) to be an > imbecile sceptic. How a little research can change a lot of things! Oh yeah, what a wonderful valid point you have there. For me, it's the research I have done personally, that has still kept me knowing that the experiences I have, are for me, as real as being awake. It IS, no matter how we choose to look at it, an altered state of consciousness. It's just how we choose to define it that makes us all different and individual about what we think we are experiencing. :-) > >Do you believe in NDE's? > > Yes and no. I believe people experience NDE's, but I don't believe that they > are anything other than an hallucination. At most, I think an NDE is an OBE > with a touch of sensory-deprivation-induced telepathy thrown in. And before > anyone asks me 'Well, can *you* OBE?' the answer's yes I can. Normally I can > LD and OBE at will. My OBEs last anything from 5 seconds to 2 hours > (perceived time), my LDs up to 2 or 3 days (again, obviously perceived > time.) Wow. 2 hours, even perceived time for an OBE is great. :-) Were your OBE's spontaneous or induced? I'm very interested to know what techniques you used, and what states you went through, if you induced any OBE's. :-) > The reason I don't accept RV to be a valid skill (apart from lack of proof) > is that, unlike telepathy & precognition etc., it adds no survival value to > the human race. Which basically means that on an individual level, a person > skilled in RV would have no survival advantage over someone who isn't. And > nature quickly eradicates redundant skills. Well, I feel that most anything would have a 'survival' value to most people. I would feel that RVing would be on a par with telepathy, without the auditory, but then, that is just my opinion. Although, I do feel that RV lack somewhat in the accuracy stakes, as compared to the other paranormal skills. > ...Unfortunately I don't have time to address the rest of your post as I'm > kind of in a rush... > > Apart from to say that I bet you are older than me, and I *do* develop s/w > for the nuclear industry, although I don't work directly for it any more. Ahhhh, but you can cheat and find out how old I am, or do you know some other way maybe. ;-) ALl the best Craig -- The sure way to make a thing impossible- -is to think it so. --- Franklin To respond, delete _nospam_ scrappy@_nospam_netconnect.com.au -- ###### From: hawksmoor@dial.pipex.com (Julia Hawkes-Moore) Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: Remote View This Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1998 09:48:32 GMT Organization: UUNET WorldCom server (post doesn't reflect views of UUNET WorldCom) Lines: 18 Message-ID: <36763034.8367933@news.dial.pipex.com> References: <74js0r$dk$1@nclient5-gui.server.virgin.net> <36704dda.49574261@news.dial.pipex.com> <74p3cl$k84$1@nclient1-gui.server.virgin.net> <3671b3ac.28093039@news.dial.pipex.com> <74rlr3$oup$1@nclient5-gui.server.virgin.net> <3675592e.695899@news.dial.pipex.com> <3674DDBF.D5AEF0E1@netparadise.no> NNTP-Posting-Host: aa132.du.pipex.com X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.1/16.230 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!newscore.univie.ac.at!howland.erols.net!rill.news.pipex.net!pipex!bore.news.pipex.net!pipex!not-for-mail On Mon, 14 Dec 1998 10:43:27 +0100, Lars Foleide wrote: >Julia Hawkes-Moore wrote: > >> *Sigh* , go on then, disclose. >> Julia. > >Just wanted to mention that you have a time problem... >Your time isn't what it should be... > >Maybe you got AM and PM wrong or something... > >Hope you find the error... >Lars Um, I have a permanent time problem... JHM