Search This Blog


天眼通(Remote Viewer)預言在2013年之前會有災難性的流星撞擊地球

By Dan Eden
This story will blow your mind. That’s what usually happens to us when we learn something about the world that seems totally irrational — but true. In this story we are dealing with time, the future to be exact, and the existence of multiple and different futures.
But wait! If you think this is some pseudo-science, you’re dead wrong. Because the proof of this scientificdiscovery comes with a hefty price tag: a global disaster by 2013.
Back in 2008 some predictions were made by a team of the top, military trained “remote viewers” — each with over a decade of successful service. Lyn Buchanan from US Army Intelligence and Glenn Wheaton, of US Special Forces participated in a project run by Farsight Institute originally designed to detect minute climate changes at selected targets around the globe. Instead of climate change, the remote viewers saw a huge meteoric impact in the ocean with devastating tidal waves and volcanism. All this happening by 2013.
The results were unexpected but should be taken seriously. It appears that the governments of the world are already preparing for such an event. The scientific community believes these predictions to be so strong and reliable that they proposed to let the reputation of remote viewing, as a science, rest upon this horrible prediction.
You need to know about this. It’s real.
First, what is Remote Viewing?
Remote Viewing is a talent where some individuals can get information from events and places that are far away in both distance and time. The phenomenon is not completely understood but has been repeatedly validated by experiments.
Remote viewing was popularized in the 1990s, following the declassification of documents related to the Stargate Project, a $20 million research program sponsored by the U.S. Federal Government to determine if there was any potential military application of psychic phenomena. The program was “terminated” in 1995, citing a lack of documented evidence that the program had any value to the intelligence community. At least that’s the “official” position.
Many believe that the abilities of Remote Viewers are present in most people, and can be developed with the right instruction. That alone is perhaps reason enough to “officially” deny that it has any value.

A brief history of Remote Viewing 
One of the most successful remote viewers was Joseph McMoneagle [pictured on the left]. His track record remains classified, however it was impressive enough to have been awarded the U.S. Army’s Legion of Merit Medal, one of the highest meritorious awards given to a civilian in America.
Joe McMoneagle was originally recruited to join the Stanford Research Institute (SRI) by Skip Atwater [pictured on the right]. Skip worked with the Department of Defense (DoD) to find suitable candidates based on how long they had remained in certain difficult overseas positions. If a certain position had a statistical average of, say, 6 months before the officer either requested or was forced to change his assignment, the recruiter would look for an officer who had remained longer than average. The thinking was that the officer must have some coping mechanism. It was believed that this mechanism was related to psi abilities. In McMoneagle’s case, he remained in his position for a dozen years beyond the average time served in his job.
McMoneagle was the first remote viewer in the program and was given the designation “#001″ and has the reputation as being the best of the best remote viewers. McMoneagle was somewhat unusual in that the way he received his target assignments was what is called a “double blind” method. The photograph or description of the target was placed inside an envelope, which was placed inside yet another envelope and was often in a different room from where Joe did his remote viewing.
In other words: Joe did his remote viewing without being informed of the target. That information did exist, but was not shown to Joe prior to his viewing session.
This elaborate procedure was specifically designed to avoid what remote viewers call “front loading”, where any hint or knowledge of the target can pollute the session and distract the viewer from receiving the subconscious perceptions. McMoneagle was always sure not to have a clue about the target.
This kind of weirdness was a clue that there was something unusual about time.
Remote viewing requires the viewer to get into a kind of trance or meditative state. Over the years, McMoneagle obtained additional training on a meditative technique called “Hemi-Sync©”, developed by the Monroe Institute. This technique uses sounds of different frequencies, delivered through headphones, to harmonize the brain waves of the remote viewer, enabling them to quickly and more efficiently obtain access to their subconscious mind. According to McMoneagle, after using the recorded sounds for many years he no longer needs to use the headphones and can think about the sounds to obtain the same effect.
The team at Stanford explored the abilities of many remote viewers to view and report on real-time events. In some instances they were to explore secret military sites, both domestic and abroad, and they achieved great success. But the most fascinating aspect of remote viewing is the ability of a remote viewer to see and describe the future.
How Remote Viewing Works…
and then those 2012/2013 predictions! In remote viewing there are always three events that take place: the Remote Viewing Attempt (RVA), where the remote viewer actually tries to see the target event in the future. Then there is the target event (TE) — the thing the remote viewer is trying to see — and finally the Task Assignment (TA) — where some person gives the assignment of what the remote viewer should be looking for.
When remote viewing a future event, the traditional protocol was of the order TA – RVA – TE. In other words, some person would sit the remote viewer down and explain the time and location of some future event (TA), then the Remote Viewer would attempt to ‘see’ it and describe it (RVA), and finally there is the actual event that happens later (TE). This makes sense to us. It’s the linear progression of time. But the procedure didn’t always result in good predictions.
Some researchers tried a different sequence of RVA – TE – TA and it worked much better. According to Farsight Institute’s spokesman, Dr. Courtney Brown:
“We have successfully been able to, in a deterministic manner, describe the future each and every time.” [*]
In this protocol, the remote viewer is still attempting to describe a future event, but the person assigning the task does so only after the Remote Viewer has viewed and described the target. Confused?
An example of this highly successful protocol follows: It’s January. The remote viewer is asked to ‘see’ some future event that will be assigned to him in March. With that instruction, some event is seen, written down or drawn and then put in a safe. It is known only to the remote viewer. In March, the target is assigned to the same Remote Viewer — who has already made his predictions two months earlier. The target is some event that happened in February.
It sounds irrational but it works. Why?

The theory is that we live in multiple universes or multiple futures. The path of past-present-future is our reality timeline. From the perspective of the present, the past is fixed and unchangeable. It happened already. But the future appears to take many different paths of possibility. Knowing which path is on our timeline is required to view the real future events. Is this possible?
At each moment we are at an intersection with many paths leading to future events. By placing some known event in the future we are, in effect, calling out or putting up a sign that says, “Over here! This is the real timeline!” In order to “see” the future accurately there must be a “marker” event — an attractor of sorts — to pull us in to certain paths of possibilities. Since the target event was chosen in the future, the unique future where the event happened has been established. The path is then followed by the remote viewer, allowing him to visualize the events of the future. It can therefore be predicted.
Here’s a great video in which Dr. Brown explains the protocol for describing future events. His terms are a bit different from my explanation but the meaning is the same.

Remote Viewing 2012-2013: not good news…
In 2008 a team of 8 military grade remote viewers were asked to view several targets with the understanding that the actual target assignments for each session would be given to them in the future. The sessions were given a number (S1, S2…) and the notes and drawings from each session were collected, scanned, encrypted and subsequently downloaded by tens of thousands of internet users for some future date, when the encryption codes would be published. This guaranteed that the results of the remote viewing sessions could not be changed.
There was a total of 113 sessions. Once the sessions had been recorded, the targets were selected in a random manner, pairing each session with one of three possible target conditions in 9 different locations around the globe:
1. Vaitupu, Tuvalu
2. Fort Jesus, Mombasa Kenya
3. Sydney Opera House, Sydney, Australia
4. Mount Kilimanjaro, Tanzania
5. United States Congress Building, Washington, D.C.
6. Malé International Airport, Malé, Maldives
7. KITV Building, Honolulu, Hawaii
8. The Vehicle Assembly Building at Launch Complex 39, Kennedy Space Center, Merritt Island, Florida
9. Key West, Florida
The three conditions were:
1. The date of June 2008
A. “June 1, 2013, 12 noon target local time, following the timeline in which the leadership of the mainstream global scientific establishment continues to ignore or deny (1) the reality of the remote-viewing phenomenon, and (2) the existence of life not originating from Earth.”
B. “June 1, 2013, 12 noon target local time, following the timeline in which by the end of 2009 leaders of the mainstream global scientific establishment publicly recognize (1) the reality of the remote-viewin phenomenon, and (2) the existence of life not originating from Earth.”
Each remote viewing session that had already been recorded was associated with a specific geographic location and condition. The results, originally thought to show changes in sea levels and climate, were dramatic.
Those sessions which were linked to assignments in 2008 showed the locations as they were. An example is seen below. This session was linked to the Sydney Opera House (at sea level).
The descriptions of Tanzania’s Mt. Kilimanjaro are also as one would expect in 2008 [below].
But something radically wrong happens when either condition 2013-A or 2013-B is assigned.
Descriptions of something bright in the sky, of people looking up in amazement, followed by mass organized migrations from the coastal regions.
A summary of what was seen by these remote viewers looks like this: In general, these remote-viewing data suggest the following types of physical changes across many of the above geographical locations by mid-2013:
1. Impacts from what appear to be large meteors leading to tsunamis and possible volcanism
2. Extensive and forceful flooding of coastal areas
3. Excessive solar radiation
4. Storms and other severe weather
In terms of the effects of these changes on humans, these data also suggest:
1. Massive self-organized relocation from coastal areas (refugees)
2. The breakdown of rescue or other notable governmental functioning
3. The breakdown of the food supply system
4. The breakdown of the vehicular transport system
5. Extensive loss of buildings near coasts