"Spiritual Sight is a natural ability to access information about a place with or without living beings in it that is not available to the ordinary senses. This innate ability of human beings validates scientific theories that we live in an information-based interconnected energetic universe. The Spiritual Sight protocol echoes a basic spiritual wisdom found in Vedic scripture, Buddhist teachings and in contemporary Christian thought. Both ancient cultural wisdom and modern evolutionary Gaia theory conceptualize all life on earth as being one conscious evolving creative organism. Each one of us is part of a greater consciousness. As such, each one of us has direct access to the creator God and a universal source of knowledge. Spiritual Sight demonstrates this access in an unmistakable fashion that can be life affirming and transformational."
Dr. Melvin Morse and I have written Spiritual Sight, The Manual. This hands-on book, introduced by the description above, tells us that although accurately depicting the concept, the aforementioned statement does not suffice to truly understand Spiritual Sight. The only way to fully grasp its concept, which is an advanced technique of remote viewing, is to actually immerse oneself in its practice. From one random number associated with a subject, a site or a person to remote view, the remote viewer goes through stages of sensory input descriptions, which are in the end encapsulated in a descriptive summary accompanied with sketches. Experimenting the method is most likely what will open pathways to this long awaited scientific paradigm shift. Spiritual Sight is not a preaching hobby, nor is it an unrealistic metaphysical utopia. It is a true, factual protocol, which uses our brain capacities to a fuller potential than the one we usually rely on. Stemming from the use of our first five senses, our typical brain processes are undeniably efficient at keeping us alive and at explaining our surrounding classical world. However, the number of physical and conceptual barriers that we encounter in science (neuroscience, quantum mechanics, and general relativity) forces us to question the reliability of said senses. Absent the evidence of the non-existence of other sensory perception modalities, the question remains valid: how does remote viewing work? Dr. Morse and I (and many others) know that it is a component of our capabilities, as humans. However, science still has to identify, qualify and quantify its processes.
For a lot of physicists, this is total aberration. Sean Carroll, in his February 6th, 2017 paper Why Boltzmann Brains Are Bad, postulates that our five senses give us a true enough rendition of our reality from which we can make observations and infer conclusions through rationality and mathematical equations. He says: “We use the evidence of our senses as the basis of the scientific process; we collect data, and use that to test and refine models that describe the world. If that evidence were completely unreliable, science itself would be impossible. But even without a Cartesian bedrock of certainty to undergird trust in our senses, it seems reasonable (at least for working scientists, if not always for more fastidious philosophers) to take the reliability of what we see as an assumption. Absent some strong reason to believe that there actually is an evil demon trying to trick us, it seems natural to put a high credence in the basic accuracy of our manifest picture of the world, and work from there.”
With all due respect to Dr. Carroll’s extraordinary experience and credentials, I must respectfully disagree. Who am I to dare resist Dr. Carroll’s argument? I have no physics degree, no neuroscience degree, no credentials.
What I have, that Dr. Carroll and most other physicists and neuroscientists might not, is first-hand extensive experience in remote viewing practice. In the many years of using my brain in a different way than from the processes of our usual sensory inputs, I have noticed a pattern of accuracy that cannot be attributed to random chance events. I have also taught the method to others and have noticed the same pattern. However, Dr. Morse and I offer an even more compelling amount of data that we would love to share with any physicist keen on taking the task of exploring with us. This data is coming from the most unlikely place for the start of a research: prison. Dr. Morse has taught Spiritual Sight to inmates in the harshest and most hazardous conditions imaginable. Yet, the results and level of accuracy are just plain inspiring.
Dr. Melvin Morse states: “we want to actually teach scientists to remote view, so that they can directly experience the clinical applications of their theories. It is one thing to mathematically prove that the universe is entangled, quite another to start with a seemingly random number and draw and describe a picture linked to that number.”
As science uses trials and errors in any experimenting process, the point that Dr. Morse makes, quoting physicist Russel Targ, “In order to successfully remote view, you have to be willing to be wrong" is reinforced by the words of physicist Max Tegmark, when he says: "There is no better guarantee of failure than convincing yourself that success is impossible and therefore never even trying." If prisoners have learned the protocol and successfully yielded strong evidential results, imagine what physicists could do with the same amount of first-hand data?
So, we invite Dr. Sean Carroll, Dr. Max Tegmark, Dr. Catherine Pepin, Dr. Michio Kaku, Dr. Christof Koch, Dr. David Eagleman, Dr. Susan Hockfield, and all other prominent physicists and neuroscientists to try. Try learning remote viewing and “see” for yourself what we have been seeing for a while. Work with us so that we can be the team, which sets protocols where YOU can be a blind experimenter among many others. Dr. Morse and I are at your full disposal to start a discussion.
Re-read the story of Dr. Frederik McKay and the revolution he started in the world of dentistry, thanks to an observation and a “crazy idea.” https://www.nidcr.nih.gov/oralhealth/topics/fluoride/thestoryoffluoridation.htm