You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

0
1

[–] think- [M] 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago  (edited ago)

...and said when you were asked to read more so that it did not strain your incredulity

@Vindicator is right - it's not his job to read tons of stuff about remote viewing - that's the story that Ms. Arrigo is pushing - on the internet, he has already read about it, and we treat it like we treat stories about alien sightings or reptilians.

Please note that the flair in question says 'Possible Disinfo', not 'Debunked' (another flair we also have).

And no, I also don't believe in her remote viewing claims. I never came across a report about remote viewing that I thought to be credible. (In contrast to precognition f.i.).

And frankly - she claims to have saved 200 people after the spring uprising in Prague, but she can't even spell the name of the country right? Yes?

I don't even doubt that she was likely MKUltra'ed, and her family worked for the CIA, and she also was a possible CIA asset. But I doubt parts of her story.

And re this current post here: If there are things that you think are not correct, please feel free to point them out in detail. We will then discuss it, and neither Vindicator or me would be aversed to an 'Accuracy in Question', 'Possible Disinfo' or 'Debunked' flair, if it should turn out that the post contains Disinfo.

0
0

[–] garlicbulb ago 

yes its easy to buy the cia disinfo on remote viewing rather than read books whoich may be the only source of info on some subjects https://www.goodreads.com/list/show/35326.The_Best_Books_on_Remote_Viewing

I prefer to spend my time doing actual research and publishing than trying to persuade people who have not bothered to read or suffer cognitive dissonance on issues. Even trying to point out an obvious differential in how two posts are treated meets various excuses rather than admitting a non consistent approach.

0
0

[–] think- [M] ago  (edited ago)

Even trying to point out an obvious differential in how two posts are treated meets various excuses rather than admitting a non consistent approach.

This is your take on it, @garlicbulb. I don't think asking for details about alleged Disinfo, or offering to discuss them are 'excuses' tbh.

Thanks for the list of books, I will look into it when I'll have some time next week.

@Vindicator @EricKaliberhall