Playing in the Major Leagues

Just as the full swing of games that the boys of summer play begin in order to rack up batting statistics for the 2013 season, I received a very timely and fascinating communiqué from professional remote viewer, Alex DiChiara:

“For the last 6-7 years I have been working on perfecting a Remote Viewing (RV) application that can accurately predict future events. For three good reasons I use sporting events as targets:

1. The events are unequivocal
2. There are games that occur every day, so they are readily accessible
3. They provide sustainability (a daily profit), which is necessary in order to keep any RV group motivated, focused and cohesive.

I also recognize that any successful research endeavor requires the final application to be simple, practical, and ultimately one in which any viewer can execute alone, or within a group.

Over the last 6 months, with the collaboration of a Professional Gambler (PG), we have developed a ‘next generation’ of our specific RV protocols. This is the culmination of over 15 years’ worth of work which resulted in ‘uncoupling the target’; thus avoiding the problematic binary fading issues by making the protocols direct. We do not use associated photos in our remote viewing. Instead, we employ a ‘compound cue’. The PG sets up a list of winning picks for the day, assigning his list a specific TRN (target reference number). I then incorporate that TRN in my cue, assigning my own ‘new’ TRN which directs my team of viewers to target the ‘optimum winner’ on the PG’s list. Our cue does not restrain the data and allows the Matrix (the source of all information) total free range to identify the optimum target. We do a short 8-10 minute session of the most recognizable architectural feature of the arena where the actual win occurs.

I theorize that our failures in earlier research (the classic early success that later faded to random), was in large part due to:

1. The very close association between the two teams. The winner was intrinsically associated with the loser and at some point the novelty (which carried the earlier work) would pale and although we were getting spot-on RV work, the results became random. It was as though the viewers simply viewed whatever target was more interesting to them, individually.
2. The use of old photo targets, where the viewer is directed to that photo site at a time different to the actual target event. Simple chance offers the researchers the false conclusion that ARV (Associative Remote Viewing) works because of a slight percentage increase up to 63%, which actually is only 1 additional hit out of 10 in success rate over random.

Our Next Generation of protocols uncoupled the winner/loser association. The viewers now simply target the optimum winner and sketch the arena where the win occurs…so there is no longer any binary viewing. This Next Gen is the same as if viewing the current primary residence of a murderer, or the current primary residence of the next US President, for example, both of which are commonly used in age-tested successful cues.

We have just completed our ‘Spring Training’, so-to-speak, consisting of 5 weeks’ worth of testing with a 85% + success rate despite housekeeping mistakes! I have not observed any fading or false positives. We all hope that this Next Gen application will hold and therefore be expanded and applied to all sorts of future predictions. Just in time for the new season, for example, we have started working on targeting baseball games.

We are always interested in adding viewers to the group to increase target confidence. If anyone is interested in joining this group, please contact me at alex141@pacbell.net”

Congratulations, in advance, to Alex DiChiara and his team of dedicated professionals who will be, no doubt, making history on the RV timeline in the art of future event prediction.

Be sure to read Alex DiChiara's blog: http://rv4real.blogspot.com/

©2013 Debbie Ballard