By Daz Smith

Version: 1.0 – June 2022.

What is ‘the flow’ and why is it different?
As a practitioners and daily user or Remote Viewing for over twenty five years it has become a part of me.
The method itself is an ever changing symbiosis of creativity, intuition and myself all working together to
express remotely located information about people, things, events, locations and times.

My initial training in CRV or Controlled remote Viewing has expanded and adapted to the long time, real
world use of the amazing tool created by Ingo Swann in the years 1976 – mid 2000’s. Although debated,
it’s clear that CRV as envisioned by Ingo, was never a set or stagnant set of stages, but was once
constantly under refinement and revision. As one of the very few people using CRV day in and day out for
real world projects for decades – it’s clear to me that its best used as a tool that evolves with the
practitioner and for the circumstances it’s needed, to me – it’s never been a finished set of limited stages
stuck in 1984.

My personal practices of CRV and how it’s evolved with me mirrors the belief and description of a
practice within Zen called Enso. The creative drawn flow of Enso, its meaning, it’s decoding and
expression is a mirror to the Ideogram process first created by Ingo Swann and used in many different
forms today.

In Zen, an ensō ("circular form") is a circle that can be written in the air, drawn in the dirt, or, most
typically, brushed on paper in one or two uninhibited brushstrokes to express a moment when the mind
is free to let the body create. (much like the Ideogram).

The ensō symbolizes absolute enlightenment, strength, elegance, the universe, and mu (the void). It is
characterised by a minimalism born of Japanese aesthetics. It also represents the infinite void, the "no-
thing", the perfect meditative state, and Satori (enlightenment.)

Drawing ensō is a disciplined-creative practice of Japanese ink painting, sumi-e. The circle may be open or
closed. In the former case, the circle is incomplete, allowing for movement and development as well as
the perfection of all things. When the circle is closed, it represents perfection, akin to Plato's perfect
form.
Usually, a person draws the ensō in one fluid, expressive stroke. When drawn according to the sōsho
(cursive) style of Japanese calligraphy, the brushstroke is especially swift. Once the ensō is drawn, one
does not change it. It evidences the character of its creator and the context of its creation in a brief,
continuous period of time. Drawing ensō is a spiritual practice that one might perform as often as once
per day.

This spiritual practice of drawing ensō or writing Japanese calligraphy for self-realization is called
hitsuzendō.

Each Zen master has his or her own style, and that individuality is clearly expressed in the enso’s they
brush. Some Zen circles are perfectly symmetrical; others are completely lopsided. Some are done in one
bold stroke; others are composed with two half circles. Some are thick and massive; others are thin and
delicate. Most begin in the left-hand corner of the paper, but others start at the top or bottom.

This is why I have named what I now practice as a remote viewing ‘method’ as ‘flow’. It’s a Remote
Viewing method with a structure that over time adapts and changes as it symbiotically works within the
user. It encompasses the intuitive and creative expression of the Ideogram process, but also the
unfinished elegance and nature of the universe allowing for development. This flowing, expressive and
developmental approach is one quite different from what is currently being taught by other CRV
practitioners who stick regimentally to what they were taught in 1984.

In essence ‘flow’ has a core of Ingo’s CRV but a heart of Zen and the belief of change, or expression and
individuality, of growth. Something most current CRV thinking does not promote. Hence my change of
name and philosophy of how I use and teach it.

So there you have it. ‘the flow’ for me is at its core CRV but with a different way of thinking behind it, a
different philosophy of its form, function and its use by us as individuals. It’s a remote viewing method
born of Ingo Swann’s CRV, but one that promotes a symbiotic relationship with its practitioners that
allows a flowing development of practitioner and method together in their developing ever changing
symbiotic relationship.

Here is a video explaining why I changed what I was trained-in as CRV to flow -
https://youtu.be/sJLZUg9ujVY

Daz Smith – June, 2022.

What is Remote Viewing?
Remote viewing is the seemingly magical ability to gather information about a blind or unknown target,
which can be anything, located anywhere, in time and space.

Remote viewing is a mental martial art that takes the raw natural intuitive ability and moulds it using a set
of scientifically created stages and a set of protocols. These stages act to filter the psychic data gathered
during remote viewing sorting the ‘noise’ from the raw 'real' impressions and they also act as a great tool
to format and present the psychic data in a usable format for real world use.

Remote viewing isn't how it sounds – A romantic type vision, like viewing a movie in your head of the
remote target. Remote viewing is a gradual opening of a window to the target, where each impression
builds on the one before, slowly revealing the target piece by piece. This process involves more than
vision, it includes; touch, taste, smell, hearing and much, much more. The majority of rv impressions take
the form of; feelings, of knowing and vague blurred, hard-to-grasp imagery.

With ‘flow’ - You can sketch the target and because you are in control of the psychic process you can
move around the target at will; go into it, above it, or below the target, wherever you want or need to go
to get the information. There are no limitations within remote viewing. The only limitation is YOU and
YOUR mind and YOUR ability to DESCRIBE.

To be clear - Remote Viewing is NOT just being psychic and looking at things far away. Remote Viewing
has rules – these help make Remote Viewing different and better than other classical psychic techniques.
These rules or protocols were designed in the 70’s at SRI (Stanford Research Institute) when Remote
viewing was created in a laboratory atmosphere to make sure that what was being reported was psychic
data and nothing else.

These protocols are:

1. The Remote Viewing experiment or project must be planned in advance and not be spontaneous
intuition.

2. There must be a chosen target.

3. The Remote Viewer must be BLIND to the target. This means that they must have no information
what-so-ever up front and have no one in the vicinity of them remote viewing who has any
information about the target.

4. The Remote Viewing data must be recorded in some format. (for review)

5. There must be feedback information for the target. (to check accuracy of the data)

If any of these rules/protocols are not being used in what you are doing then it’s not Remote Viewing.
What is flow?
Flow has the heart of Ingo swans vision of CRV but a twenty first century philosophy based on decades of
using CRV for real world projects. So for the purposes of this overview we will reference (CRV) as such,
but then will revert to the ‘flow’ moniker when we pass the historical contexts.

Controlled Remote Viewing (CRV) and now ‘flow’ is an art form. Its nearest comparison I can find is a
martial art. The practice and use of drills and their repetition until a reflex action and structure are
embedded within, are a genius of creation from Ingo Swann, Hal Puthoff and others within SRI and their
years of research at SRI from 1972 to 1986, developing a remote viewing training method for the U.S.
Military.

Ingo and Hal analysed every element of internal processing that Ingo and other psychics experienced
when remote viewing to create a method that ‘helps’ the intuitive take control of what had always been a
spontaneous mechanism. As well as giving the intuitive control, the (CRV) process gives the remote
viewer tools to lessen the hindrance of ‘noise’ in the intuitive process as the ego tries desperately to
please and to recognise the incoming data. Now you’ll notice I said lessen and not stop. At this moment in
time there will always be some kind of ‘noise’ in the process.

Remote viewing is NOT 100% accurate 1oo% of the time. The very best remote viewers still have ‘noise’
within their work.

The (CRV) method created by Ingo in the 80’s was a six stage process. Each stage builds on the one
before, opening an ever wider aperture to the target. The entire (CRV) process is a creative process - it’s
an artistic expression from start to finish. It’s why the Ideogram works so ingeniously. It’s also why
sketches within RV capture so much data with a few, sharp sketchy lines. The same place from where
inspiration, ideas, and artistic flow comes from, is the same place as Remote viewing data flows - it’s the
same thing.

(CRV) is expression of a remote target through an ideogram, then sketches of the target, then more
detailed sketches, later still maybe even a sculpture (model) of the target - it’s art and creativity hidden
within a structured environment to report data in a way that most people feel comfortable with.

In simple terms (CRV) starts with a doodle, then it moves to basic sketches, then more detailed
sketches then models and sculptures. All this within a few rules and six small stages.
Introduction to this document
Quite a few years ago now, I decided to create the document ‘Open Source cRV’ for people to use with
the Official military CRV/ Remote Viewing manuals that can be found online at:
https://www.remoteviewed.com/

Since the 1995 Public outing of remote viewing, it has grown to become a worldwide interest with tens of
thousands of ‘trained’ remote viewers across an ever-expanding list of methods and teachers. A list of
these can be found here: https://www.remoteviewed.com/remote-viewing-methods-map/

(CRV) (Controlled Remote Viewing) the creation of Ingo Swann and supported by Hal Puthoff of SRI, has
become the dominant method being taught today.

Ingo Swann created (CRV) as a prototype training technology, under contract to SRI, for SRI’s clients. The
CRV training technology was/is proprietary to Ingo Swann. Ingo Swann in 2001, and after his death, his
estate has NEVER given any endorsement, in any form, verbal, written or implied for commercialization of
any aspect of remote viewing – please bear this in mind if/when seeking any (CRV) training.
As you can see from the included link to the RV methods (page above) – there are various forms of (CRV)
being trained here in 2021. What is clear from this viewpoint in 2022, is that (CRV) has now potentially
gone through as many as six or so generations of training and six different teachers before it gets to you –
the prospective student. So, keep that in mind - like a photocopy, copied over and over, some of the
initial details will inherently get lost or changed in the process from the original. Some of these changes
are good, some will be bad.

For a listing of MOST RV teachers and an idea of their background

and services, I interviewed most in this issue of
eight Martinis RV magazine (FREE download):
http://www.eightmartinis.com/eight-martinis-issue-16-april-2018.

This includes;

An article: Remote Viewing Training Survey – Debra Lynne Katz.

Interviews with seventeen Remote Viewing trainers, including:

Angela T Smith, Brett Stuart, Coleen Marenich, Courtney Brown,
Daz Smith, Debra Lynne Katz, Dick Allgire, Lauren Kott, Lyn Buchanan,
Lori Williams, Morgan Farrell, Patty Gallagher, Paul O’ Connor,
Paul H Smith, Rick Hilleard, Stephan Schwartz, & Todd Ronan.
Background to the 1985 & 86 CRV manuals
Ingo Swann the owner & creator of (CRV), was a participant and sub-contractor at SRI (Stanford Research
Institute) and their in-house (CRV) remote viewing effort from 1974 - 1985.

From 1979-1985 Ingo Swann was the lead in an effort to create a Remote Viewing training methodology
that was to be taught to and later utilized by Intelligence clients of SRI. During this period (CRV) went
through four (known) stages of development:

1. Ingo Swann (viewer 002) - 1979-81

2. SRI trainees - 1981
3. Military/intel people - 1981-84
4. Public (Durant, Schnabel, Tom B) – 1996 – mid 2000’s.

In the years 1979-1981, Ingo was the first test subject in this new methodology CRV, He later went on to
teach it to: Hal Puthoff, Jacques Vallee, Hella Hammid, Marsha Adams and a few other prototype trainees
within SRI, circa 1981. Then in 1981 he also started to train two military participants; Tom McNear and
Rob Cowart, (CRV).

The initial results were promising allowing the Prototype training method to be expanded and later
taught to the first wave of Intelligence people. Two people were selected for this but due to an illness
only one trainee (Tom McNear) completed the full six stage (CRV) training in the prototype RV method.
Tom McNear and a later student from the mid-nineties were the only two (known) people to have been
trained by Ingo, in Ingo’s timescale in the full six stages of (CRV).*

The initial prototype (CRV) training was comprised of one-to-one lectures, drills and lessons with Ingo
Swann, repeated targets and lots of notes and essay writing that lasted a period of approx. two years.

Initially (CRV) was developed to have eight stages. (Coordinate remote viewing technology 1981-83), 4
August 1983, Author Ingo Swann). Two of these (7,8) were later dropped or not included in the 1986
Military (CRV) manual.

A second wave of four trainees started (CRV) training in 1984, these included known RV personalities;
Paul H Smith, Bill Ray and Edward Dames. This second wave of trainees did not complete the full six stage
training as funding was cut short (end of Stage 3) and the training program not continued with Ingo
Swann teaching and at the helm. The (CRV) training then continued in-house at INSCOM (January 1985),
led mainly by the knowledge from Tom McNear and the partly trained students.

Whilst in (CRV) training with Ingo Swann, As proprietary owner of CRV, Ingo kept ALL the training
materials and documents, he retained all the student lecture notes, and all the student essays and notes.
(Some of these today can be seen in the Ingo Swann archives at the University of West Georgia, on
request.)

Mainly because of this and Ingo’s reluctance - the (CRV) trainees had to write their own manuals or
training notes of which (CRV) is most notably taught from today. First Tom McNear wrote his notes up in
the 1985 version. The later 1986 Manual headed by Paul H Smith - a joint effort from his students.

*Robert Durant and Jim Schnabel were also taught six stages of CRV by Ingo in the mid nineties but only for a period to two weeks
– Ingos proper full CRV training was an approx. Two years.
A copy of the 1986 manual was sent to Ingo In 1986 by the Military viewers - Ingo replied with the letter
(below):

When Remote viewing net public in 1995 there was an immediate rush of people wanting to learn RV and
especially (CRV). Ed Dames started teaching (CRV) with permission and support from Ingo Swann in
approx. 1992 under his company name PSI-TECH. PSI-TECH essentially at this time used the 1986 (CRV)
manual with a PSI-TECH front cover.

This and the new influx of interested people created a want for the (CRV) manual to be distributed
publically which was ignored whilst Lyn Buchannan, Paul H Smith and Ed Dames started their new RV
companies and training. The (CRV) manual eventually went public in 1997.
Pj Gaenir was the first to publically post the CRV manual online in 1997. She states:

The copyright of this document is attributed to Ingo Swann. Ingo however denies any credit for,
participation in, or responsibility toward the document or its copyright. I called him and asked if I
could post it. He said it wasn't his and he didn't care. It was written by Paul H. Smith.

Paul however wrote it as a work for hire while employed by the DOD/DIA. The DIA did not classify
the document, which in legal terms puts it in the public domain (the gov't cannot copyright, they
can only classify; unclassified materials are public record; nobody else can then claim ownership of
what began a gov't document).

https://www.firedocs.com/remoteviewing/answers/crvmanual/swann01.html

I asked Ingo Swann for copyright permission to post this document in a phone call Sunday, 24 May
1998, 4:15pm Eastern Time. -- PJ

To which Ingo replied:

I did not write it.

PJ: But the copyright is credited to you.

I can't help that.

PJ: Paul Smith says he's the main author, but the methods are yours.

I have seen it, I don't remember exactly what's in it. It's been re-edited a few times by various
people to suit their needs. I believe it was a group-written document... [it wasn't written by just
one person].

PJ: I don't have any way to know if the info in the manual is accurate....?

{pause...} I wasn't asked to participate in [the writing of] it. I found out it existed sometime after.

PJ: Your methods have become a very big deal, high priced, even cults have grown up around
them or versions of them.

Just because I once played a role in the research, does not mean this role can be extended to cover
everything that has happened in the field since then.

PJ: I could take the copyright cover off if you think it's misleading.

If you do that people will say you're editing it.

PJ: You don't mind if I put it on the web?

I don't care. You can say -- please say this first, then I don't care what is said after that -- I did not
write it. I have never, ever written a document like that.

PJ: OK.
When the manual was first released online - Paul H Smith said this about the manual.

In 1983-1984, six personnel from the military remote viewing unit at Ft. Meade participated in
training contracted from SRI-International. This was the recently-developed coordinate remote
viewing training, and the primary developer and trainer was the legendary Ingo Swann. One of
the first trainees, was diagnosed with cancer, and was medically retired from active duty,
terminating his training after only a few months. (The second, Tom McNear (his completed all
training through Stage VI as the proof-of-principle "guinea pig." His results were not just
impressive. Some could even be considered spectacular.

Beginning in January of 1984, the remaining four of us began training with Ingo in California and
New York. This contract lasted for a full year. Ed Dames, "Liam," Charlene, and myself continued
through until December (though Ed dropped out just before completion due to the birth of a son).
We completed through Stage III training with Ingo. Towards the end of 1984 our patron and

commander, Major General Burt Stubblebine was forced to retire and the RV program was
threatened with termination. Consequently, no further contracts were let for training.

During the course of 1985, our future was very uncertain. However, the branch chief, together
with Fred "Skip" Atwater (the training and operations officer), were hopeful that the unit would
find a sponsor (which indeed happened) and decided to continue our training through Stage VI,
with the help of Nance’s experience and considerable documentation and theoretical
understanding that Atwater and others had managed to accrue.

At the conclusion of our training, and with a number of successful operational and training
projects under our belts to show that CRV really did work, the further decision was made to try
and capture in as pure a form as possible the Ingo methodology. The reasoning was that we might
never get any more out-of-house training approved, yet we needed to be able to perpetuate the
methodology even after the folks with the "institutional memory" eventually left the unit. I had
developed the reputation of being the "word man" in the unit, plus Skip and the branch chief
seemed to think I had a firm understanding and grasp of the theory and methodology, so I was
asked to write a manual capturing as much of the CRV methodology as possible, with the
assistance of the others who had been trained.

We pooled our notes, and I wrote each section, then ran it by the others for their suggestions and
comments. Corrections and suggestions were evaluated and added if it could be established that
they matched true "Ingo theory." Skip and Tom both reviewed the manuscript and provided their
input as well. When the thing was finally done, a copy was forwarded to Ingo, who deemed it a
"comprehensive and accurate document." Finally, Skip provided a three-page introductory section
which it now turns out was apparently originally drafted by Joe McMoneagle. The finished version
was printed at the DIA press in May 1986. It was a specialty run, and was never given an official
DIA document number. I don’t believe any more than thirty or so were printed.

Things to keep in mind about the CRV manual: It wasn't intended as a training manual per se, and
certainly not as a standalone training manual. It’s primary purpose was to capture and preserve
for posterity Ingo’s methodology. The very first page declares that it was "prepared to serve as a
comprehensive explanation of the theory and mechanics" of CRV, and as a "guide for future
training programs." We certainly didn't develop it as a "how to." Since we always assumed any
further training to be done would either involve Ingo or someone who had already been trained,
the manual did not incorporate lessons-learned, nor the practical implementation of CRV in an
operational setting, nor even to explain how one taught people to do CRV, nor why CRV included
certain points of theory and process in its methodological base. There are of course lots of things
to be said about all these points, and we had ambitions at one time of writing a practical hands-
on RV training manual. Unfortunately, events conspired against us and it never happened.
My Background in all this.
Over these last few decades I have seen Remote Viewing grow from a small selected group of interested
people on email groups like ‘Star Gate email group’ in the mid nineties, to it becoming the new trendy
catchword that every tom, dick and psychic now uses to explain and sell their wares.

During this time I have seen people who desperately want to learn this skill flounder with the technical
elements of the 1986 Military (CRV) manual as they try to use this as a basis for learning how to Remote
View without help of a mentor. In the words from Paul Smith an ex military remote viewer who
responded to my putting the (CRV) manual online in 1998:

“It wasn't intended as a training manual per se, and certainly not as a stand alone
training manual. Its primary purpose was to capture and preserve for posterity Ingo’s
methodology. The very first page declares that it was "prepared to serve as a
comprehensive explanation of the theory and mechanics" of CRV, and as a "guide for
future training programs." We certainly didn't develop it as a "how to." Since we always
assumed any further training to be done would either involve Ingo or someone who had
already been trained.
”
Paul H. Smith
Austin, TX, 3 July 1998

Before we go any further - Please note:

I was trained in a close version to the classical (CRV)/Ingo approach in 1997. I was NOT trained by a
Military person from the Ingo Swann Lineage (that I know). It’s been said to me by a prominent (CRV)
teacher from that lineage – ‘Daz - what do you know of (CRV), you were not trained by a military CRV’er?’

To this I say – well quite a bit actually, I have spent decade’s extensively researching RV and (CRV) history,
I was invited to and visited Ingo Swann in NY in 2011. I have extensive archives of RV videos, books,
articles, emails, audio, and papers from both the Star Gate archives (110,000 pages+) and from Ingo
Swan’s personal papers donated to the University of West Georgia. I also have over twenty five years of
continual (CRV) project work for most of the prominent researchers in the field. How many (CRV) trainers
can say that they have continuously used (CRV) every week for well over two decades? How many
generally just teach (CRV) for money. (Please Research your mentor diligently).

I have now spent the good part of twenty five years and counting using (CRV). This use includes practice,
client projects, operational use and more. Over this time I have found that learning the art of (CRV) is
more about learning about oneself than anything else. You learn to recognise YOUR own internal psi
processing mechanisms, quirks, and subtleties. So, yes, I feel I can comment on (CRV) and its history.

It’s my current belief that ANY method will eventually teach you to Remote View. Saying this I have
changed and personalised my approach to (CRV) from the Ingo version I was taught and that some people
still teach unchanged from 1984.
I also truly believe that once (CRV) (or any other method) has been fully learnt and ingrained in a sort of
muscle memory, that a practitioner should allow themselves to adapt and form new tools, pathways and
methods that suit THEM as a ‘person’ and their RV work. My personal belief is that IF a person is still using
(CRV) as it comes ‘out of the box’ after a decade – then they just haven’t grown as a remote viewer.

I know from my personal research that Ingo himself changed how he taught (CRV) past the 1981-84
version he taught the military (the basis for the 1986 (CRV) manual). Ingo also went on to also further
develop ‘technologies’ he felt would further enhance Remote viewing and he detailed these in some of
his papers and letters (available in the University of West Georgia). These were not official changes, but it
shows that (CRV) was and is not a set thing stuck in the 80’s. Nothing is static.

Absorb what is useful, discard what is useless

and add what is specifically your own.
– Bruce Lee
What changes have you made?
Upfront, I have adapted the Ideogram approach to allow students I mentor to use either a ‘no form’
ideogram or a ‘common gestalt form’ Ideogram approach. (Ingo’s (CRV) Ideogram structure was for a ‘no
form’).

My approach to Ideograms also takes into consideration the last thirty years of ideogram knowledge and
expansion in society, my thirty plus year experience is creating, designing and using Ideograms,
pictograms and UI (User Interface design) in my day-to-day work life as a logo/graphic designer and, why I
believe that to ignore the natural common gestalt part of Ideograms is wrong. (more on this and why –
later).

I have also added an extra level to Stage2 – the Sensories. I always felt that a few listed sensory elements
after the (Ideogram) I/A/B stage 1 process was not enough and that Sensories offered way more. So I
added an extra part or component to capture more Stage 2 data.

Finally, I changed the traditional Stage5 of (CRV) to one that ‘flowed’ more for me as a creative process –
this is changed from listing words to Mind Mapping. Mind Mapping is a process most creative people use
in day-to-day work/lives to ‘flow’ ideas. For me it works better than the traditional (CRV) Stage 5
approach which I found clinical and too wordy, as I tried to work out if the data was a subject, topic or
something else – it just didn’t work for me. Later on, I also found that David Morehouse, one of the
trained Military Remote Viewers also changed his Stage 5 (CRV) for a mind mapping process. I like to think
I did it first – but I can’t verify that one.

Other than this, my approach is similar to the standard (CRV) way of doing things except my philosophy of
allowing change into the method and its use by individuals. Ingo Swann created a genius method to
capture psychic information in a way that flowed, reduced the noise and enhanced the signal, and also in
a format that is very clear to understand and use for reports and analysis. But there were issues in the
original (CRV) training including the way its taught, non blind monitors in early training and its rigidity and
not allowing change from the origin.

If you don’t want to use any of my changes and my philosophy I understand this. There are people
teaching very close Ingo (CRV) methods – like Paul H Smith. I suggest you contact Paul if this is your aim.
Why flow?
What I have tried to create with this document is a simplified description of the (CRV) process, and an
adapted version of (CRV) that works for me in 2022. One that can be used in tandem with the ‘official’
(CRV) manual to learn Remote viewing. This is NOT a replacement for the 1985, 86 CRV manuals.

As described above, I have deviated from the original trained (CRV) method by a few degrees, this is due
to my knowledge that any art form needs to be adaptable to the individual user and over time – I have
adapted how I work with CRV during this time base on emerging knowledge, attitudes, real world use and
experience of using (CRV)in business applications for over a decade.

This is why I call this document and philosophy ‘flow’ – FLOW is a method that should be learnt and
drilled until it’s completely absorbed by the user as a foundation. Usually this is a process that I would say
takes between two and five years. Then, in my opinion, the user can and should adapt, add and delete
the things that help them work better with the art. flow should always be a transformation process as it
grows and expands with the person using the art. Flow should be open to future development.

You must be shapeless, formless, like water.

When you pour water in a cup, it becomes the cup.
When you pour water in a bottle, it becomes the
bottle. When you pour water in a teapot, it becomes
the teapot. Water can drip and it can crash.
Become like water my friend.
― Bruce Lee

‘Flow’ is a philosophy. Past Training – (CRV), in my opinion, should never be a solid and rigidly structured
‘thing’ with no change, Ingo would not have wanted this. (CRV) should be a solid base from where a
remote viewer can develop and expand a mental martial art that grows with them as they grow. (CRV)
should also be shared and expanded, new things tried and in some cases taken up, and others discarded.
‘Flow’ is a way of thinking; of taking the great method that Ingo Swann spent many years creating from
his own internal experiences and over time expanding this to fit mine and maybe your individual or
project needs.

This document is NOT a full and complete training method. It is merely a guide and a philosophy. Its how
I interpret and now use the original (CRV) processes and how I work with it. I have created this GUIDE for
you to use.

Daz Smith, July, 2022.

Tools & getting started

Tools:
CRV and Remote viewing requires very few tools. These are:

 A stack of plain white paper or a tablet computer

 A flowing pen (preferably black)

 Modelling clay/ Play Doh or similar – for ease of use I have found that the little tubs of children’s
Play Doh are fantastic for this as they are transportable – last forever – and are easily packaged.

 Oh and of course an open/learning state of mind and a commitment to learn & practise.

Getting started:
Firstly pick a time of the day where you can spend anything up to 1-2 hours remote viewing. This can
include a cool down, the remote viewing session and any analysis or scanning of the paper session at the
end.

A cool down period is definitely recommended before any remote viewing practices. Day-to-day living
creates a lot of busy noise within our daily lives and this need to be subdued before any successful
remote viewing session and practice can start. The mind and body must be relaxed and ready to work
together. Meditation is clearly the best process to create a relaxed mind and body state. This can be done
in silence or by listening to specially created tapes or music. I find that a cool down period of at least
fifteen minutes is recommended when first starting to remote view.

Try to pick a reasonably quiet space to practice, try to make this un-cluttered with minimal distractions
and noise. Make sure you are comfortably seated and that your clothes also feel comfortable. Remove
any distracting objects and things with high vibrant colours from your surroundings, use the toilet, make
sure you are fed, hide that mobile phone and start to relax!
Important terms
Before we start – let’s review a few commonly used and VERY important terms.

Structure:
As said many times in remote viewing circles; ‘structure, structure, structure – content be damned’

Keeping to the set structure is THE most important part of the staged process. The stages are created to
flow from one to another, and within each stage there are set tasks that have to be done in sequence.
These involve formatting of each page, and objectifying data too strong for that stage as AOL’s.

The best definition of structure comes from the military manual;

“Structure is the key to usable RV technology. It is through proper structure-discipline that mental
noise is suppressed and signal line information allowed to emerge cleanly. As expressed by one
early student, “Structure! Content be damned!” is the universal motto of the remote viewer. As
long as proper structure is maintained information obtained may be relied on. If the viewer starts
speculating about content--wondering, “what it is”--he will begin to depart from proper structure
and AOL will inevitably result.”

AOL (Analytical OverLay):

In the most basic terms an AOL is a guess! The mind sees data coming in from the target like;
‘Tall, hard, constructed’ – and this generates a guess inside you of ‘lighthouse’ as the subconscious tries to
please us with conclusions and answers to the incoming data.

If there is no backup data in the stage or previous stages to indicate a ‘lighthouse’ like; ‘light, beaming,
guiding’ then the data tall, hard, constructed – could be anything from a tower, to a telegraph pole. Or it
could just be a lighthouse. But you need more data before you can say this. So when this happens we
objectify and mark that piece of data as an AOL.

Please note: an AOL is usually wrong but will have some valid elements of the site that cause the
AOL/Guess to generate.

When I get an AOL I write it in the specific location (shown later) I then put my pen down for a second and
say the AOL out loud, signalling my acknowledgement of the data. If I don’t do this, the data becomes a
nagging irritation hanging around in my mind. Objectifying the AOL allows you to move on freely. This
process is covered in the section ‘Breaks’ in Military CRV the manual.

Rule of thumb to remember is that if the image in your mind is clear and sharp – it’s probably an AOL.
Another is that if the data is a ‘naming word’ or noun then this is an AOL.

Remote Viewing is all about describing targets – not identifying them.

Keep to this rule and you won’t go far wrong.

The Ideogram:
Essentially a Doodle - This is a reflexive mark made by the viewer when first contacting the target.
Ideograms to me are like a personal language. Everyone has a different way of doing them, visual
shorthand.

Ideograms generally take two forms;

Single – a single drawing that represents a single target element

Multiple – an ideogram with several linked drawings showing several target elements.

We will go more into this – the, most important stage, later on.
The ‘flow’ process
flow is split into a six-stage process. Each of these stages increasingly opens an aperture to the target
allowing more information at each stage of the process to filter through. Each stage has a set level of
allowable ‘information’ that can flow through the aperture. This serves to gradually build an accurate
picture of the target rather than getting say ‘two pieces’ of information and guessing.

Below we have indicated the hypothetical aperture and how this expands at each stage of the process
revealing more of the target and allowing more accurate data through. We have also indicated the level
of data allowed at each stage. As you can see the end of Stage 2, moving into Stage 3, opens quite a
significant aperture to the target information than in previous stages.
Format
The method denotes that there is a set format, which carries on through all the stages. This promotes
clear recording of remote viewing data and also acts as a deflector giving the mind something to occupy
itself with when moving between the stages – this stops it from enquiring and starting to guess at the
data, which creates noise. It also allows the remote viewing data to be recorded and shared in a useful,
common format that is easy to understand and analyse.

The overall page format for the Stage: 1 is:

 Page number – top left

 Stage number (1-6): - top/centre
 Viewer name - or ‘nom de plume’ – top right
 Date of session – below name
 Time of session – below date
 I: (inclemency’s) – how the viewer feels before they are about to start. For example a feeling of
being hungry or feeling ill or angry may affect the remote viewing – so we note this before we
start.
 Breaks column – right hand side – to record AOL’s
 The target coordinate or name – left
 Ideogram – immediately after the coordinate
o A: decode data
o B: data

Page:1 Stage: 1 Daz

I: feel great! 25.07.05
1.00pm
Breaks:
xxxx-1234

A: across, down, across

Hard
B: structure
Aol-B
Church!

In the example sheet (above) you can see how the information is presented on the page.
Stage 1 – The Ideogram process
The Ideogram process is the most important part of (CRV) (from this point on I will reference as ‘flow) and
modern remote viewing. It’s an absolute genius piece of work created by Ingo Swann. In a letter from
Ingo to myself, he stated;

The objective of Stage 1 is to make contact with the target and to record the ‘elements’ that make the
target what it is; (It’s Gestalts). To do this we use Ideograms. Think of ideograms as automatic
unconscious doodles that contain a hint of what the target is about. An ideogram is a very fast automatic
action created without conscious thought – just by letting go with the mind and letting your hand make a
movement with the pen. An Ideogram is usually created in a micro second. Nothing more!
The Ideogram
Simply put ideograms are quick automatic response doodles of the target broken down into its most basic
form - its gestalts. To show how this works, a target of the Eiffel Tower could be broken down into these
ideograms and ‘common gestalts forms’:

Land

Structure

Life form/s

Now, these (above) are my ideograms. Each instinctive, unconscious mark is a doodle-like expression of
the target’s gestalts. I have learnt and practiced my ideograms over several decades and they are both
instantaneous and also personal to me – yours may not be like the ones presented here – don’t worry
about this – we are all different and we all can have different ideograms (kind of).

The Ideogram Debate.

This is where that previous kind of fits in. For quite some years there has been a debate within the larger
(CRV) community of the Ideogram Process. Some practitioners use Ideograms that are practiced and
can/do take on (common universal gestaltic shapes), and those who follow the pure ‘Ingo’ approach don’t
because they are taught to ignore the visual look of the Ideogram.

What does this mean?

In the Ingo Swann training which was interpreted into the (CRV) manuals, the trainee was encouraged to
NOT take notice of the Ideogram form or shape of the gestalt it represented. The data describing this
gestalt was to come from probing the Ideogram.

The Tom McNear 1985 training notes state:

In Stage I the viewer is trained to provide a quick-reaction response to the reading of geographic
coordinates by the interviewer. The response takes the form of an immediate, primitive"squiggle"
on paper. This "squiggle" is known as an ideogram. The ideogram captures the overall
feeling/motion of the gestalt of the site (e.g., fluid/wavy for water). This response is kinesthetic
and not visual. In Stage I visual images are noted and labeled as AOL.
The manual goes on to further state:

It is important that the ideogram only be expressed in terms of the feeling/motion and not in
terms of its visual appearance. Do not look at the ideogram and expect to see something in it.
This will lead to an A0L-DRIVE

This is where I feel the 1980’s (CRV) manuals are slightly wrong or probably outdated. Ideograms by
process of what they are: quick doodles of target gestalts – they can and do take the form of ‘universal
common forms’.

As I mentioned earlier in the document – a large proportion of my working life (thirty plus years) has been
in creating Ideograms and pictograms to work within branding, logos and interface design. These
Ideograms also usually take universal form or shapes that cross all boundaries of society, language, race
and time. Across all boundaries people have doodled land as straight lines, water as wavy lines,
mountains as up/down lines and people as simple stick figure representations. These are a universal and
common visual language. It’s my theory and belief that to ignore this is wrong.

So let’s look at what Ideograms are in modern interpretation:

Well, by their very natural MOST Ideograms or pictograms are visual or do have visual aspects that can be
recognised. Like these modern Ideograms we all see and use every day.

Email Home
These visual forms have been used by humans in art
and communication for thousands of years, they
can be seen on cave paintings and throughout art.
Over the past few decades Ideograms like these and
thousands more have permeated how we interact
and communicate in society, they are universally
accepted and express more than the visual image –
BUT the visual image does impart correct
information – in my opinion, just like Ideograms in
the CRV process.

It’s my experience that the early (CRV) research on

Ideograms is slightly wrong and that sometimes
ideograms do take ‘universal common forms’ that can be accurate. Meaning – if an Ideogram looks like a
structure – it could be a structure, or if it looks like water – it could actually be water.

Even when researching the hundreds of (CRV) sessions created by the Star Gate remote viewers both in
training and in use, common and universal gestalt forms do present and accurately so, and are also
labelled as so. Even with the early (CRV) training saying NO to an Ideograms visual appearance. Hence the
debate. Some of the (CRV) instructors DO teach that Ideograms can be visual – and the hardcore (CRV)
ones don’t.

Enclosed next are some background resources on Ideograms and pictograms.

Wikipedia
https://is.gd/B6ZwmT

An ideogram or ideograph (from Greek ἰδέα idéa "idea" and γράφω gráphō "to write") is a
graphic symbol that represents an idea or concept, independent of any particular language, and
specific words or phrases. Some ideograms are comprehensible only by familiarity with prior
convention; others convey their meaning through pictorial resemblance to a physical object, and
thus may also be referred to as pictograms.

An example of ideograms is the collection of 50 signs developed in the 1970s by the American
Institute of Graphic Arts at the request of the US Department of Transportation.[3] The system
was initially used to mark airports and gradually became more widespread.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DOT_pictograms

The History of Visual Communication - https://www.historyofvisualcommunication.com/02-ideograms

An ideogram or ideograph is a graphical symbol that represents an idea, rather than a group of
letters arranged according to the phonemes of a spoken language, as is done in alphabetic
languages. Examples of ideograms include wayfinding signage, such as in airports and other
environments where many people may not be familiar with the language of the place they are in,
as well as Arabic numerals and mathematical notation, which are used worldwide regardless of
how they are pronounced in different languages. The term "ideogram" is commonly used to
describe logographic writing systems such as Egyptian hieroglyphs and Chinese characters.
However, symbols in logographic systems generally represent words or morphemes rather than
pure ideas.

A logogram, or logograph, is a single grapheme which represents a word or a morpheme (a

meaningful unit of language). This stands in contrast to other writing systems, such as alphabets,
where each symbol (letter) primarily represents a sound or a combination of sounds.

A brief history of pictograms and ideograms - https://saffroninteractive.com/?p=10981

Ideograms are graphical symbols that represent an idea or concept. Good examples of ideogram
are the red circle that means “not allowed”, or the orange or yellow triangle that means
“attention” or “danger”.

Today there are thousands of pictograms and ideograms that have been universally accepted
and we directly recognise them at a first glance. Popular examples are the email icon, the
telephone icon, the play button, the download button, etc. Some of them are pictograms, others
are ideograms and some are a mix of both.

Sometimes a pictogram is also playing the role of an ideogram. For example, the icon that
represents the meaning of the idea is represented by a light bulb. Even if the light bulb is in fact
the representation of an object (a pictogram), it conveys the message of the idea, a concept (an
ideogram).
What does this mean in regards to Ideograms within CRV
and now my ‘flow’?

In a Video: Tom McNear – Remote Viewing structure and improving Synergy between Viewer and analyst,
Tom comments (36.30 onwards). In response to a question from Teresa:

I have had people tell me that. I’ve had people say that when they produce this characteristic
ideogram it’s always the same thing, and I won’t dispute that. You know for certain people that
may be the case. And when I look back at some of mine, I did have normal ones for land/water
interface, for water and for mountains, that’s usually look sort of like a mountain although I just
told you, you shouldn’t pay attention to what it looks like, it sort of looked and felt like a
mountain. I have been told numerous times by people that if they draw a certain ideogram they
know exactly what it is because for the last five years it’s always been the same.

He later says:

There is no right or wrong to this, there are people who do things that to me would be wrong but
it works perfectly well for them so who am I to say it’s wrong. They may look at what I’m telling
you right now and say that wrong, but I’m telling you what Ingo Swann the father of remote
viewing taught me thirty eight years ago.

It’s my experience that the early (CRV) research on Ideograms is slightly wrong and that sometimes
ideograms do take ‘universal common forms’ that can be accurate. Meaning – if an Ideogram looks like a
structure – it could be a structure, or if it looks like water – it could actually be water.

Some universal/common gestalt shapes are:

I totally agree with early CRV thinking that we should not 100% take
it on face value that a ‘common universal’ ideogram for say: LAND
(simple straight line) IS actually land. I disagree though, that its
visual interpretation should be AOL’d or put to one side based on
visual form alone.
More often than not, if the Ideogram looks like land, when probed in the B: part of the I/A/B process – it
WILL be land. But I do agree – this is not always the case. Which is why the B: probing is necessary.

I absolutely do agree with early (CRV) thinking in that sometimes the visual gestalt look isn’t correct.
Sometimes my LAND Ideogram, when I probe it for the B: first analytical response, it comes through as
something else NOT land. Therefore the visual feeling is not to be fully trusted. Where I differ, is that I
do give ‘common universal gestalt forms’ in my Ideogram language some credence, and my experience
has shown me that Ideograms are best used with a combination of both the visual look (if it has one) and
the B: analytical response to clarify that visual data.

IMPORTANT NOTE: Visual form gestalt Ideograms can be correct for the target. BUT The B: part of the
Ideogram process should over-ride the initial visual recognised visual form if different.

So, in summary: I believe Ingo’s use of Ideograms in early (CRV) stages is pure genius. The early Ingo/CRV
approach is that Ideograms are ONLY Kinaesthetic. My experience, research, the decades of change since
shows me that are that Ideograms can be both visual and kinaesthetic.

Sometimes it may look like what it actually is, and sometimes it may not – the A:/B: probing confirms this.

This updated Ideogram approach is both a kinaesthetic response and visual a response. In my opinion, the
best of both worlds. Ideograms as gestalts are inherently visual and this should not be ignored outright,
but also because Ideograms and RV is a complex evolving personal language, confirmation and
clarification through feeling/motion and the analytical probing, confirms and overrides any initial visual
impressions.

Now, recognising that we all have a ‘universal common gestalt language’, we can start to look at my ‘flow’
Ideogram process in more detail.
Stage1 – The Ideogram
To me, the ideogram process becomes an intuitive visual shorthand learnt and then created differently by
each individual remote viewer. As discussed above - There are two schools of thought on Ideogram use;

1. Classical (CRV) - The ideograms are different every time you do it – no universal gestalt– school of
thought

2. My updated viewpoint - The ideograms can have ‘universal common gestalt forms’, which can be
practiced as they are universal in nature.

As per the previous Ideogram pages - I belong to the second. When learning my ideograms I keyed myself
with the major gestalts over and over until on reflex I drew a corresponding mark with each keyed word.
This created an ideogram language within me that for the most, mirrors ‘universal common gestalt
shapes’. This allows me to decode most targets –sometimes visually, BUT always confirmed by the B:
probing. If a target has an element not in my ‘local’ ideogram vocabulary then the process is intelligent
enough to create a new ideogram – or it indicates to me something in the A:/B: probing

Learning stage 1 ideograms for flow is very much like learning a whole new language of communication.

I find that Ideogram drills are a great way to create and establish YOUR ideogram ‘shorthand’.
Get a friend to randomly say out loud key target gestalts or create an audio playlist on your phone with
common target gestalts like;

1. Land,
2. manmade structure,
3. natural structure,
4. life form,
5. space,
6. object,
7. energy,
8. water,
9. gaseous.

As you hear this, as fast as you can, record a sketch or scribble that feels instinctive. Over time get the
person or audio to speed up their keying and try to keep up with your ideograms. This exercise will also
help establish your ideogram shorthand – and it’s also fun!
Example of my common ideograms are:

Most of my common ideograms mirror the universal common ideograms for those things – most people
represent water as a wavy line. Your may or may not – there is no right or wrong way here.

Use these as a guide to start and if something else develops – then great! Remember Ideograms are
specific to you and are your personal language that will help YOU decode the target. Your ideograms may
always look the same and may always look like swirling squiggles where the information mainly comes
from the A: B: probing and NOT the visual look – this is also fine.

In the thousands of remote viewing sessions I have participated, the one accurate constant is my
ideograms. If I feel like I may be off target or influenced by an AOL or a problem, then I just write the
target coordinates and do a new ideogram to get me back on focus. This can then be probed and the data
flow restarted.

Creating YOUR Ideogram language will take time and effort, but believe me once you have this down you
will understand how accurate and powerful a tool they can be. I have had discussions with other remote
viewers online and some of these have dropped or don’t use Ideograms – I would say that this is a huge
mistake, and if you want to follow the RV process – then learn your ideogram process .
Multiple ideograms:
In flow Sometimes I get Ideograms come through as multiple Ideograms. Here all the target gestalts are
combined in one ideogram motion. (A single continuous line but with different feeling gestalt elements).

Using my visual &probed Ideogram language (above) I can decode this ideogram example below as three
separate but connected ideograms;

1.

1. Structure
2.

3. 2. Life form/s

3. Water

Depending on how your Ideogram language develops you may get multiple ideograms as well, don’t
worry, this isn’t a mistake, just separate them and decode them separately – remembering everyone
does Ideograms differently as they are a personal language and expression. Go with the flow, don’t fight
it.

For each of these separate Ideogram parts: 1, 2, 3 do the standard A:B: sequence and decode.

As you develop, RV develops with you – targets that are complex may start to show themselves in
complex multiple ideograms – this is fine – it’s part of the process. Just remember the structure and
decode.

So, that’s the basic Ideogram description, history and theory over with, so let’s look at how to do them in
flow.
How to use the Ideogram is stage1
Flow was initially designed to be used with a second person – a monitor. This person would be there as an
observer and as a person outside the process who could maybe see things you miss and bring you on
track if you wander. Because most remote viewers will now work from home alone without a monitor
they will generally give themselves the target prompting information – the coordinate. The viewer then
writes this on the left hand side of the paper (as per the diagram) then immediately executes an ideogram
without the pen leaving the paper from writing the coordinate.

Within stage1 we create an ideogram for each of the target elements and then decode this ideogram
recording very basic data. This is generally done between three and six times, which then signals a move
on to stage 2.

Ideograms set the foundations for the entire remote viewing session so it’s very important to follow
structure when doing stage 1.
Starting an RV session for the first time.

Okay, so first we write all the mandatory admin details on the paper. Name, stage, date, time,
inclemency’s and so on. Now you’re ready to start. As part of the RV and remote viewing process a target
must have been set. When this was done a random number was generated and given to you the remote
viewer – this is now your focal point.

Page:1 Stage: 1 Daz

I: feel great! 25.07.05
1.00pm
Breaks:
xxxx-1234

In the example sheet (above) you can see how the information is presented on the page just before the Ideogram is expressed.

So now that all the admin details are recorded you write the target number you’ve been given and on the
last stroke of the last number in that sequence you let your hand flow and create a scribble, doodle or
what we call an Ideogram.

Great! Now we have to probe the ideogram to see what it represents about the target.
Decoding the Ideogram
So you have your ideogram language established. If not don’t worry it takes a lot of time and practice –
repetition and practice are key to remote viewing.

So first we write the coordinate. (On the right hand side of the page).
Then without taking the pen off the paper on the last stroke of the last character of the coordinate
number we just let the pen move automatically in a little ‘doodle’ - well done - this is your first ideogram.

Remember: the ideogram is automatic, its takes a millisecond to create with no conscious thought to it –
just let your hand move of its own. If you stall or take longer than this – just write break in the right hand
side of the page – take a short break, put the pen down, take a breath. Pick the pen up and start again.

Now it’s time to decode the Ideogram and record the data.
After creating your ideogram you move your pen to the right of the Ideogram and write;

A:
This is for the ‘A’ component. Here we write the motion and then the feeling of the site manifested within
the ideogram you have drawn, for example;

A: across, down, across

Hard
The ‘across down across’ data is the motion part of the decoding and the ‘Hard’ is the feeling part of the
decode. The motion you write is essentially the feeling path the pen took you on when you drew it. In the
case of this example – I felt the pen went across, down then back across.

When I internally ask myself ‘what this feels like to touch’ – I wrote ‘hard’. Generally the feeling
component in stage 1 ideograms will be one of these impressions;

Hard, soft, gaseous, wet, fluid.

Very, very basic details at this stage – nothing more at this stage – it’s all about baby steps – a little a
time.

Immediately after the ‘A component’ the viewer then records the ‘B component’. You move your pen to
the right of the Ideogram under the ‘A component’ and write;
B:
This will be your first Analytical response to the ideogram and data. From my ideogram language and
years of experience I know this to be a ‘structure’ in my language from its ‘common visual form’. I touch
the ideograms with either a pen or my finger and I again ask myself’ is this really a structure’ if it feels
right, I write this – if it feels like something different then write that. For me though if it looks like a
structure ideogram it usually is – but not in all cases so be careful – probe, ask and then write.

All the time consciously trying not to analyse and interpret any impressions – so work speedily, don’t
dawdle – the whole I,A,B (Ideogram, A component, B component) process should take seconds.

A: across, down, across

Hard
B: structure
The viewer the repeats then this entire I, A, B (Ideogram A component, B component) process a number
of times. How many? Only you will know when you have them right and get a feeling that its time to
move on. Like 99% of things within Remote viewing it’s a feeling you’ll get when you know you are ready
to go to stage2.

If anything other than the level of data shown here pops into your mind at ANY time – then this needs to
be recorded in the BREAKS column as an AOL (see page 7 diagram). It’s too much information, too early.

For example when you write Structure – if you get ‘oh it could be a church’ pop into your head or
something similar – it’s way too much information for Stage 1 so AOL it! It’s only your mind trying to
interpret what has flowed in and is making a guess!

Why do we call this a ‘break’? Because you write it in the breaks column then put the pen down and take
a few seconds ‘break’ to help dispel the data. You essentially ‘take a break’ from the flow of data.

Stage1 in Summary:
1. You format your page
2. You write the coordinate
3. You create an ideogram
4. You decode A & B
5. You repeat the process 1-3 times or more
6. When it feels right to you, you move on to stage2
Stage 2 – Sensory data
An example of my Stage:2 page format:

Page:2 Stage: 2 Daz

Breaks:
xxxx-1234

A: voices,
T1: hard, cold, solid Aol-B
T2: warm Church!
V-
Colors: grey, red, blue
Lum: bright
Cont: high
T3: bitter, salty, gritty
O: fresh, food!
E: buzzing
D: tall, long, lines
AI: This target feels nice

The previous stage opened an aperture to the target and allowed very basic target data to come through.
Stage 2 will build on those initial impressions opening the aperture further still. We initially had big gestalt
feelings of the target – this stage elaborates on these big views with expanding data from your senses.

Stage 2 data is sensory data – which means it comes from the five physical senses as if you were
physically at the target. These are:
 Touch
 Smell
 Sound
 Sight
 Taste

From this point forward the target data tends to come in small clusters of words.
For example;

Red, green and dark grey! Hot, sweaty, hard and solid.
It seems that when writing one piece of data on the paper this easily allows another to quickly follow and
be recorded. (How this all works is due to how the brain stores information – but this is all you need to
know for now). Within stage 2 only basic sensory words are allowed, anything else is still considered out
of structure, and when out of structure the data is an AOL and is still recorded as such in the ‘breaks’
column of the page.

Now, this is one of those areas where the ‘flow’ differs from the Military CRV manual format of recording
stage2 data. In the Official CRV manual and in ex-military sessions they record basic stage 2 data after
each ideogram. I too use this way but have found that for beginners a simple and separate stage 2 works
just as well and allows even more valuable and rich Stage 2 sensory data to be recorded. As I said this
document is a guide not a definitive solution.

I format the page (as above) and in a column down the left hand side write these elements:

A: (Auditory – sounds at the target) - I ask can I hear anything at the target?

T1: (Touch at the target) – if I touch the target what does if feel like?

T2: (Temperature at the target) - What is the temp at the target – cold, warm, hot?

V- (Visuals – sub divided below into three sections)

Colours: (colours at the target) – do I see any colours?

Lum: (luminescence at the target) – is the target bright, dark?
Con: (contrast at the target) – what is the contrast at the target like?

T3: (Taste at the target) – if I lick the target what does it taste like?

O: (Olfactory or smells at the target) – does the target smell?

E: (Energies at the target) – can I feel any energies at the target?

D: (Dimensionals at the target) – do I see any horizontal, vertical or diagonals?

AI: (Aesthetic impact OR how do you feel about the target?)

After I write the category header, for example;

A:
I then ask myself do I hear any sounds at the target? – Whatever pops into my head I then write down
next to the A. - this is psychic or RV data.

Remember don’t ever filter anything out, if it pops in to your mind and is in keeping with the allowed
data for that stage - record it. If the data is too high, record is as an AOL and move on!
I repeat this process for each of the stage 2 categories. Sometimes I get data and sometimes none comes.
If it doesn’t don’t force it just move on to the next category heading, probe it and record.

As you proceed through stage 2 the data that flows starts to form chains or chunks. These are three of
four words that come tight in fast clusters. This widens the aperture allowing even more data to come
through. This usually heralds the dimensional data at the end of stage two.

These clusters and then dimensional data signals a move allowing you to progress to stage 3 where you
can explore just that little bit further. Your impressions and view of the target by the end of stage 2 has
expanded allowing you to comprehend more than the simple gestalt data from stage1. This section is
covered very well in the CRV manual. The dimensional data has now given the target a small amount of
shape, density, form and scale – and this can be best recorded as sketches in stage 3.

Before moving on to stage3 the viewer declares how they feel about the target called:
AI: (aesthetic impact). This ranges from OK! To surprise, pleasure, revulsion. There is no right or wrong
it’s just how you feel about the target to date – how it makes you feel. This usually starts to open the
hypothetical aperture to the target significantly, which is great as we are moving into Stage 3.

In Summary
The aperture to the target is starting to widen. With this - stage 2 allows you to record data that would
come from the five physical senses about the target – sound, sight, smell, touch and taste. At the end of
stage two, basic dimensional data is recorded and an AI – this data really starts to open the flow of
information and heralds a move to stage 3 where dimensional data can be expanded as sketches.
Stage 3 - Sketching
Stage3 page format:

Page:3 Stage: 3 Daz

Breaks:
xxxx-1234

Move to the centre of the target

and sketch

In the example sheet (above) you can see how the information is presented on the page in a typical Stage 3

This stage now allows you to expand on the growing data from stage 1 and 2, by allowing you to sketch
the target. The Military (CRV) manual/s goes into more detail on the different forms of sketches –
spontaneous, analytical, & trackers. Please refer to these.

To be simple - stage 3 is all about sketching the target or parts of the target.

These sketches CAN look like the actual target or parts of it or can just be basic representations of shapes
and forms from the target. The main point of the stage 3 sketches is to stimulate the flow of data and
generate a larger flow of information. I find that just by sketching lines on the paper this is enough to
start a whole stream of new data clusters.
Enclosed below is a stage3 page from a real session – the target was Stonehenge. As you can see this
simple sketch data does look like a little like the actual target on this occasion – this is not always the
case.

In the session page above you can also see that I have labelled some of the sketch elements.
I labelled then probe these for stage2 data. To do this, label part of the sketch (for example: A.) then
underneath write A: and then ask yourself questions like;

 What does this feel like?

 What does it tastes like?
 What colour is it?
 Is it cold?

Whilst asking the questions write the responses. But remember anything too high level is an AOL and this
goes in the BREAKS column marked as such (right hand side of page).
Stage 3 also allows the viewer to really start to investigate the target and get the data for himself. The
previous stages I feel are more of an observer role for the viewer whereas stage3 allows the viewer to
control himself and move about always trying to squeeze more and more data from the target. The
Official CRV manual/s does detail how to move about the target within stage 3, but some of the more
common movement key phrases are:

 Move 'XXX' ft above the target and something should be visible

 Move to the centre of the target - something should be visible

 Move to a position where the entire target is visible

 Move inside the target - something should be visible

If a movement command is used then this is recorded on the session sheet before the movement) –
allowing clear and concise tracking of the data. What will usually happen is that this will generate a new
sketch and maybe an influx of clusters of word data.

Watch out - AOL’s – about…

Because you are more actively involved in the stage3 process, so is your mind! AOLS can develop easier in
stage3 as the mind now becomes more active. To guard against this the viewer must be careful over the
choice of words used in movement exercises. The best fit is keying words that elicit a response based on
stage2 sensory data, like;

 Should be visible
 Should be heard
 Should be touchable

Always remembering that if an image is clear and sharp in your mind – it’s probably an AOL.

I start off by just sketching whatever my mind wants to do. I do this by placing my pen in the centre of the
paper and seeing where it moves. If I get any data cluster of words I also record these by the sketch or
parts of the sketch – wherever I feel it feel right to do so. Later on I ‘key’ myself by moving above and
around the target trying to pick up and get data from different angles, hoping to build a bigger picture of
the target.

Please, please, please remember these sketches do NOT have to be actual sketches of the whole target or
accurate. Most commonly you will sketch basic shapes, curves and lines. With the opening of data in
stage 4 you might create more accurate sketches there. Also remember that there are no set rules and
you might be one of the lucky few that can accurately sketch the target.
Stage: 4 – The Matrix (Not the film – but just as awesome)
First, this stage is not as complicated as it looks, and secondly NO it has nothing to do with Neo! 

By this stage your aperture to the target should be fairly wide and the sketching from the previous stage
should have triggered streams of small clusters of data. This is where the Matrix comes in. The structure
of the matrix allows you to record the data in managed columns. This helps keep the data managed and
helps keep you the viewer focussed.

Stage 4 page format:

Page:4 Stage: 4 Daz

S2 D AI EI T I Aol Aol/s

Hard
Solid
Tall
Linear
Surfaces

AOL
Church!

Thick
Tall
Walls
Cold
Hard
White
Long

Firstly, the page format changes in stage 4. The breaks column now becomes more integrated into the
data as the aperture and data flow is wide so the AOL’s or guessing will generally be a close match to the
actual target.
So to start stage 4, write your page number, stage and name at the top in their places. Then write the
headings:

S2 D AI EI T I AOL AOL/s
Under these draw a horizontal line. We will then enter our data below this ‘work line’.

The Military CRV manual does give a good description of the headers and the data that goes below them,
but for clarity I will explain them again below.

S2 – (Stage 2 data) - under this heading we record all the data that is stage 2 or
sensory data. Data like; hard, soft, wet, cold, warm, hear voices, whistling, taste
bitter, smells mouldy, grey, red, bright, musty.

D – (Dimensional data) - Here we record all the dimensional data for the target. In
stage 4 dimensional data will be more complex than previous stages with data like;
twisted, spires, partitioned, sectioned, edged, Long, horizontal, flat, thick,
heavy, hollow, small, airy, dense, compact, boxed.

AI – (Aesthetic Impact) – Here you record your feelings about the target, for
example; It feels like death, I don’t like this place, I get the feeling of joy and
happiness here!

EI – (Emotional Impact) – Within this column you record the emotions of life forms
at the target or of yourself. Sometime as with old buildings the structure itself has
an emotional feeling. Examples are; happy, oppressed, joy, elated, feels nice,
feels sad, feels distressed.

T – (tangibles) – Tangible means discernible by the touch. So within this column

we record objects at the target that could be touched, things like; tables, chairs,
trees, people, cars, rocks, stone, metal, wood, walls, water, clothes.

I - (intangibles) – These are essentially the opposite from tangibles and are target
elements that cant be touched or that are abstract. Things like; medical, foreign,
religious, business, government, spiritual, work like, war like, scientific,
purposeful,

AOL – (Analytical Overlay) – As with the previous stages this column holds any
data that has a clear sharp image in the mind, or that doesn’t match the data or
that feels like the mind guessing.

AOL/S – (Analytical Overlay/Signal) – As with the previous stages but now

because we have much more information and contact with the target AOL’s are
generally very close matches or have a lot of similar data to the target.
How to work stage 4
The data in stage 4 come thick and fast, usually in clusters of single words, or in clusters of three of four
pieces of data, like; cold, hard long, flat, wall.

We fill the matrix in from the left to right and it’s best to start by probing the S2 column to initiate a flow
of data. Within stage 4 we work moving down the page filling-in data in the relevant categories. Each
piece of data is essentially on its own line, which means as we write we progressively move down the
page, like so.

S2 D AI EI T I AOL AOL/s

Hard
Solid
Angled
Structure!
AOL
Church!

A probe of S2 (sensory data) then carries on through to slightly higher data moving across the page. This
also allows the information to be clearly recorded and read. The matrix data will tend to move down the
page at a slant but with some moving back and forth from column to column.

I personally LOVE stage 4 because the viewer has control over the data. If you find that the data stops or
that you want more data from say the ‘tangible’ aspects of the target, you just place your pen on the
tangibles header and ask yourself a keying question like – what tangibles can I see/hear/or feel? This will
then create a new stream of data clusters of which you put in the right columns. This can be done to as
many of the columns and as many times as you wish. The choice is yours and you are in control.

You may find yourself doing any number of pages of data for stage 4, and when your reach the bottom of
the page, create a new one title it as shown and start again with the data flow.

Remember: This is controlled remote viewing – you are in control. In every stage you get out of it what
you ask. Always enquire, ask questions and investigate.
Movement exercises
As in stage 4, when the data dries up I key myself with the same kind of movement exercises as I do in
stage 3. This usually re-ignites the flow of information all from a new perspective at the target. For
example:

 [Move 50ft above the target and describe.]

 [Move to the target centre - something should be visible – describe.]
 [Move inside the structure and describe.]

As done in stage 3 write the movement ‘keying’ words on the paper for future references and analysis
before you initiate the feed of impressions.

In summary
Contact with the signal line from the target has expanded sufficiently, advanced data can be probed and
decoded by the viewer using the information matrix. Data comes fast in clusters, and when this runs dry
the viewer can probe a column heading to re initialise the flow.

Stage 4 allows the viewer to take control of the pace and flow of data and to tease and work as much
data as possible from the target. I personally love the way that in stage 4 I can move around touching,
tasting and smelling the target from any position. Also remember that within the stage 4 matrix, because
the data flow is advanced now you might get an urge to draw a sketch – if you do then sketch. Once you
have, try probing the sketch – put your pen on a part of the sketch and then ask questions like;

 What does this part feel like?

 What’s the temp?

 What colour is this?

Remembering to record the probed data by the side of the sketch or in the matrix as new information.
Above all else, ask questions, move around, investigate – you are in total control here.
Stage – 5 – emanations
OK, now this is where the 1980’s (CRV) manual goes into word overdrive. In basic definition stage 5 is the
only stage whereby you aren’t accessing the signal line to the target but are accessing information that
has already come from the target and that may be hiding within you.

This data has usually been added to the stage 4 matrix as abstract concepts and intangibles. These are
impressions like; religious, spiritual, and business. In stage 5 we look back at some of this intangible data
or other data of note and interrogate it to divide it down finding the smaller elements that led to a word
like; ‘religious’ coming into your mind.

Classic CRV Stage 5 page format:

Page:5 Stage: 5 Daz

Religious Religious Religious Religious

Objects attributes subjects topics
E’s E’s E’s E’s

Robes
Candles
Incense
Quiet
Echoing
Large

Worship
Respect
Xhanting
Mass
Priest
communion

To be honest I found this Stage cumbersome and distracting as I would wander into thoughts of ‘ is this a
topic or a subject’ and hence would lose the momentum. Also it took me forever to write out
‘emanations’ over and over. So, one day I had my own idea – why not break the data down as I do when
involved in creative projects and in a method that is commonly taught in most schools now ‘mind map’.
Mind Mapping – background.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mind_map

A mind map is a diagram used to visually organize information. A mind map is hierarchical and
shows relationships among pieces of the whole. It is often created around a single concept,
drawn as an image in the centre of a blank page, to which associated representations of ideas
such as images, words and parts of words are added. Major ideas are connected directly to the
central concept, and other ideas branch out from those major ideas.

Mind maps can also be drawn by hand, either as "notes" during a lecture, meeting or planning
session, for example, or as higher quality pictures when more time is available. Mind maps are
considered to be a type of spider diagram

https://www.mindtools.com/pages/article/newISS_01.htm

Mind Maps were popularized by author and consultant, Tony Buzan. They use a two-dimensional
structure, instead of the list format conventionally used to take notes. This makes information
easier to remember, as it's held in a format that our minds find easy to recall and quick to review.

A good Mind Map shows the "shape" of the subject, the relative importance of individual points,
and the ways in which facts relate to one another. Research shows that this is of particular benefit
when dealing with complex information, such as during business planning and strategy
development.

Mind Maps are more compact than conventional notes, and often take up just one side of paper.
This helps you to make associations and to generate new ideas

Mind Mapping can also help you to break down large projects or topics into manageable chunks,
so that you can plan effectively without getting overwhelmed and without forgetting something
important.

There are many reasons why mind mapping is used by millions of professionals, creative’s and students
all over the world. Here are the top 5:

1. Mind maps structure information.

Mind maps can store and structure vast amounts of information. They display hierarchy, show
relationships between individual ideas and enable you to see the “big picture” at a glance. These
features also make mind maps an ideal tool to present information to others, create knowledge
pools and solve complex problems.
2. Mind maps improve comprehension.

In both school and university education, mind maps have proved to be popular and effective
learning aids. By structuring information in a way that is more compatible with visual learning
styles, and by filtering long texts into shorter mind map topics, learners can absorb large amounts
of information faster.

A 2013 study¹ published in the Modern Journal of Language Teaching Methods (MJLTM) examined
how students in Iran reacted to mind mapping as a tool for learning English as a foreign language.
From the sample group, 83.4 percent of students had a positive view of mind mapping in reading
comprehension, while only 16.7 percent responded negatively. Tellingly, in a questionnaire issued
after the study, the statement “When I use mind maps for a reading passage, I’m more able to
solve post-reading activities” scored most highly.

3. Mind maps enhance productivity.

The benefits of mind mapping are not limited to education; they can be useful in a commercial
sphere as well. Mind mapping enables you to learn faster, communicate more efficiently and
brainstorm more effectively, which is why ever more businesses are using tools like MindMeister
to get the most out of their teams.

Whether you’re planning a project at work or writing a scientific paper — mind mapping will help
you save tremendous amounts of time. According to a survey by the Mind Mapping Software
Blog, mind mapping software can increase productivity by an average of 23 percent.

4. Mind maps foster creativity.

Two things make mind maps the best brainstorming tool out there.
One: The act of developing a mind map stimulates our brain like no other technique and fosters a
creative flow of ideas.

Two: Mind maps allow you to transcribe those ideas with incredible speed, making for a virtually
frictionless thought organization.

During a 2004 study2 into the effectiveness of mind mapping for students’ writing assignments,
10 out of 12 people found that mind mapping improved their writing. Not only is it an excellent
technique for students to prepare their essays and papers, it’s also a fantastic method for
bloggers to outline articles and for authors to overcome writer’s block.

5. Mind maps improve memory and recall.

Mind maps present information visually. They feature several powerful mental triggers such as
images, colors, shapes and connections, which help our brain process and memorize large
amounts of information. Studies have found that mind maps can improve memory by 10-15
percent, others go even higher and estimate improvements of up to 32 percent³. Interestingly,
students with learning difficulties such as dyslexia or high-functioning autism have reported that
they find mind maps to be invaluable study aids.
How to Mind Mapping it in ‘flow’ stage 5.
When I go thru my RV session in my normal way I make notes to myself when a price of data emerges
that is unusual for me. Most of the time this comes in the form of a word that I know isn’t one from my
common day-to-day usage. When this occurs I underline this word – which is a visual note for me when
going back thru the session to maybe take this into stage 5 and to interrogate it for further information.
Also I take some AOLS into Stage 5 and do the same – this breakdown then will allow you to find the real
data in the AOL and the ‘guessed’ data.

On the following page is a typical stage 5 in my format – MIND MAPPING:

I start by writing the AOL or word in the middle of the page and encircling this. Then I move outwards
one leg at a time writing down any and all words that come from my mind when thinking of the AOL or
word.

In this example the first leg was: Tall, Hard, Solid, Metal, Iconic, structure.

The second leg started with the word ‘French’ I started a new leg with this word because although it was
the next word in my mind – it wasn’t a S2/ sensory impression like those in leg one – so I started a new
leg for it. Like the way data clusters when in the previous stages of CRV I find it also does the same when
I’m doing stage 5.

I add arrows later to make it clear where my thought pattern happened. And when new data emerges like
when I thought about the word ‘Tourism’ I start a sub-leg off of this word and write any new data that
bubbles up from the mind.

That’s pretty much it.

Now you could have some fun or even develop new things here within this stage – most mind maps can
and do include sketches and colour elements – see here for real world examples:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mind_map

It’s a versatile tool and it’s up to you how to develop it to work with you really. I have found though that
it does produces very interesting and accurate data but if a more fun and flowing format than the classical
CRV stage5. Again try each approach and use what works best for you – none of this is wrong!

In summary:
Stage 5 allows you to interrogate generally intangible data/impressions already gathered in previous
stages and to release the hidden data that led you to form those impressions.

Break this data down as much as possible into data chunks.

Stage: 6 – Modelling
Stage 6 is simple but at the same time you either hate it or love it.

Now that the aperture to the target is at its fullest and that you have completed five stages where the
target impressions have built and expanded until you now have some very clear impressions of the target
elements. Stage 6 now allows you to try and pull these separate pieces of data especially the dimensional
data together and to create a 3D model of the target.

For this part of RV you will need modelling material – I find normal Children’s Play Doh or modelling clay
excellent for this purpose. This can be found at any major craft store, Toy’s R Us or Early leaning centre.
It’s cheap, and it can be put away in little pots for the next session - just take a picture/s of your model
first for your records.

Stage4 page format:

Page:6 Stage: 6 Daz

S2 D AI EI T I Aol Aol/s

Hard
Solid
Tall
Linear
Surfaces

AOL
Church!

Thick
Tall
Walls
Cold
Hard
White
Long

As in stage4 we create a matrix and when modelling if any impressions enter the mind express them in
the appropriate columns as before.
Please Remember that:

The model CAN but does NOT have to be a precise or accurate rendering of the target, and that the
viewer MUST focus on the stream of data from the target and not on the modelling process itself – just
let this process flow.

Stage 6 examples from a remote viewing session (above) and a feedback image (below).
The 1980’s CRV manual discusses ‘detect’ and’decode’ elements to stage 6, but what we essentially do is
try to model the target as a whole or in parts. This has the dual purpose of;

 Creating a 3D model of the target as data

 It also allows the mind to be fully distracted allowing more target data kinaesthetically to seep
through during the creative process.

Firstly we create a matrix for stage 6 as we did in stage 4 an example format (on page 24).

I then look back at my sketches in stage 3 and pick sketches or elements, which I feel would be enriched
by modelling. I find that as I play with the modelling material this generates further data and sketches,
which I write in the stage 6 matrix or draw as sketches on a separate sheet of paper. These sketches can
then in turn be probed for extra data if you feel it necessary.

In the example supplied (above), by modelling the struts and the base with the struts, this led me to also
model the ‘stairs’ shape. As with probing and movement exercises in earlier stages the modelling process
opens up new data flows as you build. Again as before these will form in three-four word clusters.

If anything else in your session feels to YOU as though it would benefits from 3D modelling then go
ahead, follow the format and try it - it can't do any harm. The only thing I would stay away from and NOT
model are AOL’s. Although these may be a close or even an exact match to the target, they may also be
wrong and lead you in the wrong direction.

Remember NEVER edit anything out of your sessions and make sure you record all modelled data in
photo form if you are not going to keep it as a model. When doing this, also photograph a few different
angles – just in case.

If you get the feel of new impressions whilst modelling then just write them down in a matrix as you did
in stage 4. You may even get new or more detailed sketches – great!

Remember you are in control and modelling opens up a creative channel and allows more data to flow
freely.

In Summary
Stage 6 allows you to take your impressions, stage 3 sketches and ANY data and use these to model the
target. This process may also generate more data, which then needs to be entered into the stage 6
matrix.

1. You create a matrix with the standard headings

2. You play with the modelling material moulding from one of your sketches or from intuition

3. If you feel or get any impressions you record them in the appropriate category of the matrix
Viewer Summary
Now this part is not a part of the six stage CRV process, but if you ever want to put your RV data to good
use then it's a skill which is well worth developing and an addition to all Rv methods including 1980’s CRV.

As part of the RV process and at the end of a session, it’s good to summarise all the elements for the
tasker or analysts and to clarify what data YOU actually have. This also helps with that last forgotten
impression that may need to be included.

Take a small break - I try to take at least five minutes – I usually use this time to make a fresh coffee. I
then come back and review all my pages. The amount of data during a typical session can be anything up
to 20+ pages.

In my summaries I try to break the target into the key components and the descriptive data about each
component. The viewer should go through the session notes and write down all the data in clear
complete sentences. If the data is a small cluster or one word then the sentence may read;

‘There is blue’

OR

‘There is energy’

A larger data cluster will create a sentence like:

‘There is a tall, boxed, structure with white surfaces, which are walls’

This process causes You to think about how you present your data and the relationships between
different pieces of data. It also clarifies the picture of the data for analysis.

Creating a summary of the information creates a clear impression of what you are trying to convey and
allows easier judging against the target feedback. A secondary factor is that a viewers summary can also
be easier to analyse and record the accuracy for your own uses. This can be stored in a database. So for
example over a period of say 100 sessions you can build a picture that could tell you that you are 78%
accurate on colours but only 34% accurate on smells.

The next page shows a viewer profile sheet – this can be used to score and record each RV session for
overall and sub element accuracy.
Remote Viewing Session Profile Sheet

Remote Viewer Date

Target No. StartTime

Viewer location EndTime

Feedback Lst (local Sidereal)

Notes:
CATEGORY DATA AOL DATA AOL
Y N ? Y N ? Y N ? Y N ?
Alignment Position
Shapes Energies
Colours Relationship
Smells Composition
Sounds Sizes
Taste Mass/Density
Texture Dimensions
Temperature Structure
Life form/s Tangibles
Luminescence Emotions
Measure Ambience
Movement Intangibles
Objects Other
Y N ? Y N ? Y N ? Y N ?
TOTAL 1 TOTAL 2
COMBINED 1 & 2 TOTAL
1. Total qty perceptions (Y+N+?) Do not include AOLs.
2. Total qty of no-feedback items (?) No data points without feedback.
3. Subtract Line 2 from Line 1. Total scorable for this session.
4. Total correct perceptions (Y) As determined by feedback.
5. Divide Line 4 by Line 3 (Y/total) % of accurate scorable data.
6. Multiple Line 5 by 100, add a %. Overall 'general' session profile.

The viewer profile sheet

The enclosed sheet allows you as a viewer to score and database your accuracy upon feedback. These
should be kept with the session as a reference tool. This is even better if you save the data into a small
database for yourself. This will allow you over time to gauge the parts of RV you are the most competent
at. Over time this will also show you how you are improving and the accuracy for each component as well
as the whole session. AT the very least fill-in one of these sheets and attach it to your RV session to give
an approximate level of accuracy and where.
How to use the Profile sheet?

In simple terms after the feedback, go through your session data or summary data and mark the data;
 Correct
 Incorrect
 Or unknown

Once done then add these numbers to the categories where they fit.
Next run through the six stages of sums at the bottom of the sheet – and this should give you an indicator
of the target accuracy.

Further and more in-depth instructions than I can give you on filling out these profile sheets can be found
here: http://www.firedocs.com/remoteviewing/answers/docs/vp-inst1.html

An example of a filled-in sheet

A sample RV session of mine (2005)
Viewer: Daz Blind to the target Tasked in SiriusRV, 2005
Feedback/Tasking for the sample RV session

DESCRIBE THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE GREAT PYRAMID OF EGYPT IN GIZA

DESCRIBE ITS MAIN PRIMARY FUNCTION AS DESIGNED BY THE ORIGINAL BUILDERS OF THIS PYRAMID
Viewers data will be 100% clear to you and anyone else Looking at the target upon completion.

Related links:
Note: As you can see, ive selected an array of links supporting the academic views on the Great
pyramid and the alternative or esoteric ideas about its intended use and construction.
What is surprising is the data seems to fit a common theme I let you decide ;-)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Pyramid_of_Giza
The Supernatural World :: The Great Pyramid
http://tinyurl.com/64enc
http://www.crystalinks.com/zeptepi.html
http://www.marsearthconnection.com/etot.html
A few helpful resources:
RV Descriptor Word List
Textures
Hairy, bristly, bumpy, coarse, dimpled, edged, feathery, filmy, fluffy, fuzzy, gaseous, glassy, grainy,
greasy, gritty, hairy, hard, leathery, lumpy, matte, metallic, moist, mushy, oily, powdery, prickly,
resilient, rough, rubbery, sandy, semi-hard, semi-soft, sharp, silky, slick, slippery, smooth, soft,
spongy, velvety, wet, wooden

Colors
amber, beige, black, blue, bright, bronze, brown, dark, dim, faded, fluorescent, golden, green, gray,
light, luminescent, mottled, orange, pale, patterned, pink, purple, red, reflective, shadowed, shiny,
silver, speckled, tan, transparent, turquoise, white, yellow

Smells
acrid, aromatic, chemical, earthy, fragrant, fresh, moist, moldy, musty, pungent, stale, sweet

Tastes
bitter, bland, chalky, chemical, fresh, metallic, rancid, salty, sour, stony, sweet, tart, wooden

Temperatures
ambient, arid, body, cold, cool, frigid, hot, humid, room, warm

Sounds
banging, booming, buzzing, chirping, chugging, clanging, clanking, clicking, crackling, distant, dripping,
echoes, grinding, gurgling, high-pitched, hissing, humming, jingling, loud, mechanical, metallic,
muffled, noisy, quiet, rattling, rhythmic, ringing, roaring, rumbling, rushing, rustling, scraping,
splashing, squeaking, tapping, thrumming, thumping, tinkling, voices, whirring, whooshing

Dimensions
above, across, angular, around, back and forth, below, big, circling, circular, close, curved, curving,
cylindrical, deep, dense, diagonal, down, empty, enclosed, far, fast, flat, heavy, high, hollow,
horizontal, huge, in, inside, light, long, looping, low, medium, moving, narrow, near, oblong, off, on,
open, out, outside, oval, over, peaked, pointed, rectangular, round, scattered, shallow, slow, small,
spinning, spiraling, square, squat, straight, tall, thick, tiny, tubular, under, up, vast, vertical, wavy,
wide

Aesthetic Impact (AI)

afraid, alert, amazed, anxious, awed, bored, cheerful, confused, content, curious, depressed,
disoriented, dizzy, dreamy, excited, familiar, fearful, friendly, frightened, frustrated, happy,
impressed, interested, intimidated, intrigued, joyful, lonely, lost, nervous, observant, overwhelmed,
peaceful, pleasant, pleased, reflective, relaxed, respectful, reverent, sad, shocked, surprised, tense,
thoughtful, tired, unfamiliar
RV CRIB SHEET

Why: Movement
 Remember to constantly ask and explore s:
 If you get data – explore it?  Move to the CENTER of the target & describe.
 If a word, phrase or piece of data comes  Move ABOVE the target & describe in detail
through which is not part of your day‐to‐  Move to the TAKSERS objective at the
day language highlight this and come target & describe in detail
back to it later and explore it but probing  Move to the PRIMARY part of the target
or breaking it down – it may be important. & describe in detail
 If things get complex ask ‘what are  Pull AWAY from the target to a
you trying to show me?’ position where the entire target can
 Probe everything; try to squeeze as much be seen & describe.
data as you can from every flow.

Sketching: Before Finishing:

Use these ‘cues’ to move 1. Read through the session – have you missed
around & sketch the target anything? (especially your first impressions)
 Move to the optimum position & sketch the 2. Do any of the sketches or words stand out –
target in detail
and if they do – have you explored them?
 Move above the target & sketch in detail
3. Have you compiled the data into a final sketch
 Move to the primary part of the target &
sketch this in detail or organised flow?
 Pull away from the target to a 4. Don’t forget to create a summary of the data
position where the entire target can
be seen & sketch.
Links and resources:
A Remote viewing overview history – map - https://www.remoteviewed.com/rvhistorymap.html
The 1985 and 1986 Military CRV manuals - https://www.remoteviewed.com/crv-manuals/
Other RV manuals - https://www.remoteviewed.com/remote-viewing-manuals/
Remote viewing Videos - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCECjkD8Q1Vrj7x6cT-5fy2Q/videos
A map of RV methods - https://www.remoteviewed.com/remote-viewing-methods-map/
Remote Viewing Books - https://www.remoteviewed.com/remote-viewing-books/
Remote viewing papers - https://www.remoteviewed.com/papers3/
Remote Viewing articles: - https://www.remoteviewed.com/remote-viewing-bibliography-articles/
Remote viewing magazine (free) - http://www.eightmartinis.com/

Social media:
Facebook Group Remote viewers and remote viewing:
https://www.facebook.com/groups/remoteviewers

Reddit - https://www.reddit.com/r/remoteviewing/
CRV-Reddit - https://www.reddit.com/r/CRV_remoteviewing/

Remote viewing Videos - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCECjkD8Q1Vrj7x6cT-5fy2Q/videos