I like wine. And cheese. I like pairing them. I am French. No French person, at least of my generation would be complete without knowing a little bit about wine and appreciating it as a delectable, and subtle nectar. I did not learn about wine by myself, no! I was raised in a happy family of “bons vivants”, in which good wine was always on the table for all family reunions. And we had many such reunions! Uncles and aunts, grandparents and cousins, all generations would sit around the table in a joyful buoyant manner, eating, drinking and singing. We did not need a reason. Life was good reason enough to celebrate together.
Wine is more than just a drink that gives a buzz. Wine encapsulates all that I described above and is source of great family memories of happiness for me.
Naturally, since we had so many family reunions through the years, my uncles and my dad would exchange tips of which wine to buy this year more than that year. However, my dad had his favorites. And among his favorites, there was one favorite that found its way to our lunch and dinner table for many years: Chateau Giscours. A 3rd Grand Cru Classé of Bordeaux, Chateau Giscours is a really fine wine: “Features a lightly firm, singed alder frame around a core of dark plum, cherry and cassis bush notes. Taut tar and warm paving stone notes fill in on the finish. Shows serious, well-embedded grip, and the core of fruit is spot on. This has the range, length and cut for the cellar” _ James Suckling, or “Aromas of mint and currants with hints of fresh herbs. Then turns to plum jam. Full body, with well-integrated tannins and pretty fruit. Long and caressing. This is really outstanding” _Neal Martin's Wine Journal
Each year, when I was a teenager, my dad would always order one or two cases of Giscours to put them in the cellar.
I grew up with that wine name in my mind, knowing it was a good wine and it was my dad’s favorite.
I have been living in the US for over 20 years now. During all these years, I have bought wine, many times. I bought simple wines, I bought good wines and great wines (like the 1959 Vosnes Romanée I got for my sister’s 40th birthday when I was living in San Francisco. She was born in 1956 and I figured it was close enough a date that she would be ok with it…). Never have I bought, been offered or even seen on a menu a Chateau Giscours.
My dad passed away this past September 1st, 2016. My dad was a scientific man who did not believe in the continuity of consciousness. He was a lover of nature. He had a special relationship with trees. When he was in the hospital during the summer, his health slowly deteriorating from the terminal process of prostate cancer, trees kept falling on our family property, as if to say, “if he’s going, we’re going too”. I took the trees falling as a sign that the universe was ready to welcome him back home and that he would not be alone.
The day he passed, I did a séance, during which I asked my dad to prove to me with scientific words, now that he knew, that he was still around. One word appeared on my phone: ATOM. My dad in his youth had been working with professor de Broglie, at the Diderot University in Paris on particle trajectories and x-rays, in the Physics of the Atom Laboratory of the University. It was in my dad’s style. One word, to the point. He was not much of a talker and would rather be alone not socializing than having a conversation with anyone, including his family. So, I felt I had a connection there.
Yet, I also felt that it was not enough. It is never enough. Signs from our lost oved ones are always a blessing. But time passed and nothing else happened. No more words, no more trees falling, nothing. Silence.
A few months later, my friends Melvin Morse and Melissa Bennett came to visit for the Holidays. Dr. Morse and I share the same interest in the inquiry about consciousness and its nature and we always have great conversations going. During his stay, Melvin told me that my dad had come to him while he was meditating a couple of weeks before and that he was startled by it, as he had never met him. It was very interesting as it was just before I had met over social media Melissa, Melvin’s partner, and that I had told her I considered Melvin like a big brother or a father-mentor figure.
Melissa and Melvin stayed with us about one week. We had fun celebrating the New Year together and a few of our good friends drinking Champagne and laughing. The day before they were to leave to go back home, they told me they had to go run errands.
In fact, they went to a wine store with the idea of buying my husband a special liquor from Peru, and for me a bottle of Champagne to thank us.
While at the store, Melissa suggested to instead get me a bottle of wine. As they debated between wine and Champagne, a sales person came to their rescue and when they asked what he recommended, he showed them three different bottles of very good red wine. Not knowing what to do anymore, they just decided in a split second to not go for Champagne and picked one of the 3 bottles of red wine the sales person had recommended, almost in a mini mani moo fashion.
When they came back home, my husband and I were outside relaxing on our lounge chairs. Melvin and Melissa gave my husband his liquor and handed to me a wine bag.
I was about to say “Oh you shouldn’t have…” as I was pulling the bottle up from the bag, but I never were able to finish my sentence. Faster than I could even realize, my eyes filled up with tears and I started to cry uncontrollably. I had never cried at anyone offering me a bottle of wine before!!!
I was holding a bottle of Chateau Giscours 2009. But you see, I did not even have time to actually look at the bottle and process the name of the bottle and analyze anything. I just burst in tears immediately. There was nothing I could do. It took me minutes to regain composure as my poor friends were wondering if they had bought the wrong bottle of wine!
They had no idea! On the contrary, this was the RIGHT bottle of wine!!!
I had to tell them the story of my Dad’s favorite wine… Truth came out of that bottle of wine!
So, you see, there is another meaning to “in vino veritas”, my dad went out of his way to give me a big sign. After that, I felt like I heard in my dad’s unmistakable “Parisian” grumpy accent: “Ok, that’s good now, you’ve got it, I’m done”.
I recently received a request from a client to remote view the random number 613 269 868.
(Scroll down for the photos of my viewing and its comparative with the subject of the viewing)
For those who are not familiar with Spiritual Sight and Remote Viewing, I invite you to visit this page where the technique of viewing blindly an object or a subject or a photo is explained.
Like for any session, I first meditated for about 15 minutes. Once I felt ready, I started my session prompting myself with the writing of the target number 613 269 868.
As usual, I had no idea what I was remote viewing. However, as I progressed, I could feel a sense of biological essence all the way down to cells.
It became clear that I was seeing some sort of biological components. Many of them. Yet one of many was more prominent, like a “mother dot” as I called it.
I carried on with sketching what I was sensing and finally sent my session via email to my client.
That same night I got a phone call from my client who was ecstatic! He told me, he could not believe what I had written, but that he couldn’t tell me yet what it was, as other people were also working on the target. Instead he asked me to further review the target with a second viewing and told me to ask the target what needed to be done. He also asked me to send the target to some of my students.
I proceeded to remote view the target a second time, working on “what needed to be done”.
Weeks later I finally received the photos of what I had reviewed.
It turns out I had reviewed the cat scan of my client’s lungs.
He had been confirmed to have multiple nodules, all less than 1mm in size, except for one that was 8mm (the “one of many”). There was also a sense of that there was a mother one, a mother lesion as these were metastatic nodules that came from a mother lesion in the thyroid, which had been removed a while back.
My viewing about “what needed to be done” confirmed the treatment he was going to undergo: an infusion of a radioactive iodine solution through his blood stream, which would target only the multiple nodules and kill them from inside-out. (I got confused with iron and rust for the red and and smell, but I was in fact remote viewing iodine).
Spiritual Sight is just not a hobby or a pointless method of seeing non-local things. It has true purpose and value. If properly taught to scientists, doctors and physicists, it could potentially give them another perspective into their research and diagnosis.
Below is the gallery of pictures showing my viewing and the photos of the scan. There is a picture outlining the parallel between my sketching and the scan.
"During my viewing, I remember wondering what these lines with squares in them could be. However, I have learned that nonsensical imagery or sensory inputs MUST be listened to as they come from the source of all information. I was surprised, yet amused when I realized I had viewed the ribs of my client in a transversal cut of the scan!"
Such an experiment has been done with the Tobacco Mosaic Virus and tomato plants... Stay tuned for the complete report on this compelling study.
"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