I recently joined so this is a very late response. I am a 'beginner RVer' (less than 2 years) and recently reviewed the Tunguska project and noticed the concerns expressed. Although, I am too 'inexperienced' in RV to be taken with much more than a grain of salt as my work just may be a coincidence, I did a general RV of Tunguska and it supported a lot of the 'last viewers' RV information. I follow many RV projects and 'we' all have attitudes but Dick needs to relax ----- it is possible for 'any' RVer to get more accurately than he does on any given project. We all are attracted at 'shiny objects' which objects we are attracted to is based on our 'sub' to decide what it will give us.

For example, I got the 'main target' was a oval shaped area (around 100 yards), approximately 200 ft underground which did have various tunnels off of it at the bottom. There was a lot of 'energy' associated with this target area. I also got that 'people/aliens' were watching screens intensely for something that was about to 'occur' there. It seemed 'very planned and expected' what was to occur. Nothing 'random' about it!!!

I just assumed I didn't do very well on the tasking when just a pic of the destruction was shown. However, after watching Farsights' RV I feel my sub did try to give me something important about this 'event and area'.

Regarding dick Allgire's reaction - several things could be going on there - we are, after all, offered an incredible evolution of style from say Dick and Daz to the current Farsight team approach. It is a 'quantum leap' in assurance, smoothness of delivery and an apparently effortless diving into timelines, minds and inter-species communication. I imagine some of this apparent precocity derives from the presentation and production values developed by the Farsight Institute and perhaps some of it represents a generational change. The Farsight training method is evidently promoting a greater 'fluidity' of practice and expression and clearly a 'product' that has much greater appeal to younger minds. But Farsight has a great and noble mission. Our judgement has to be about Farsight's integrity in choosing veracity over populism.

So I perceive in Dick's reaction an uneasiness - a mistrust even - of RV done and delivered in this way. I love Dick and Daz's work and I also love the work of the Farsight team. But I am not qualified to make a clear judgement in the rightness in these differing styles. I like the fact that the RV of Dick and Daz does not try to dazzle - it is often tentative and delicately reaching - it occasionally trips over itself - they allow us to see this to help prevent us from being swept away by an idea that they themselves are not fully convinced of. They have learned the pitfalls of their trade. The present Farsight team - although occasionally seeming brash - allows us to have a different experience where intense emotion is allowed to show and the immediacy of the subject is transmitted through their body language and their clear open delivery. I am also convinced by their integrity and willingness to show uncertainty.

I believe all concerned have an interest in truth but Courtenay Brown wants to infect us with a sense of urgency about our personal responsibility to get involved sooner rather than later. Now is the time! I do not think Dick's decades of experience are to be brushed aside - I suspect he felt that they were - but he should trust us the viewers of the viewing to find our own way through the maze. We may not have access to the same insights or experiences but we the interested ones are perhaps more sophisticated than we are given credit for by all concerned.

There is another topic related to all this that interests me and that concerns the issue of influence. The episode looking at external influence over leaders must make us consider the possible exercise of influence over Remote Viewers. The precursor to RV that I have read about was the Western Occultism of groups like the Golden Dawn at the turn of the 20th Century. Theirs was a different perception of the same territory that we are exploring. They developed very intricate safety measures to protect themselves from external interference and indeed danger - whether they worked or not is a matter of conjecture; I am interested to know if RV has a corollary approach to practitioner safety especially given that telepathy is now a bread and butter concept for this discipline. Surely it does?

You do realize Dick and Das have had a number of misses on Crypto prices on Cryptoviewing. I don't think they count these in their 'record'. They are given 2 'easy' pics that relate to price movement and their 'team' has picked the wrong one so many times they seem to have dropped/changed what they will RV now. Obviously, if Dick, Das or Farsight was able to 'accurately predict stock/crypto/whatever prices ---- they would not be 'working' any other projects until they were wealthy. Hint --- most of these viewers are not 'wealthy' from RVing prices or anything else. I will admit financial forecasting is sort of a 'separate' ability in RVing most 'experts in RV' are not any more gifted than new people in this area based on the research I have seen and done.

I have not found influence but 'beliefs from life' seem to impact peoples RV ability in predicting prices based on research from APP who does a lot of financial forecasting. I have read peoples mind in RV and know of 'no' specific 'safety measures' anyone is advocating.

I talked with some pros and asked if they would support a RVer of the year contest ---- they were concerned when I mentioned what kinds of 'verifiable skills' (financial, descriptions, telepathy) they would be tested on. Interesting!!! I think if the prize money was right we would still get most ---- but I suspect it would show a lot more misses than 'non RV followers' would expect. I would actually give the advantage to a Farsight viewer based on my reviews of peoples work.

I am associated with groups of RVers trying to predict sporting events and stock market movements. Many including myself can have good runs up with high accuracy rates then see the trend reverse. 'Some' with the passage of time and 'whatever' do get very good looking 'accuracy' charts that go up then cycle at smaller and higher levels 60-80% so they maintain a higher average. So some viewers seem to get 'higher levels' of proficiency than others with time and 'persistence?' or whatever. I have seen some charts that 'appear' to show that.

As far as forecasting future news events ---- it seems to me that Cryptoviewing (Dick, Daz, etc.) and Farsight have consistently high accuracy rates ---- not exactly sure what they are but based on talking with these people. I also dabbled at this and did it and got high accuracy (over 80%) but noted I never got enough information to 'save or aid' anyone. I got annoyed seeing airplane crashes, auto crashes, fires, slides, etc. Knowing, people were suffering and I never got 'enough' information to help. So that is why I say 'betting, etc.' seems to bring in extra challenges, for whatever reason. Possibly deaths in the future are 'clearer/better signal' than 'market movements'.

Interesting discussion. You have a much deeper knowledge of all this than I Norman. I will have to read more and think more.

Or remote view the next opportunity for the person to be involved with, to bring benefit into his life.
Many opportunities come and go in life, and its hard to know in advance what would be beneficial for us.
If someone remote viewed a future beneficial opportunity, and it truely appears in life, than taking action on it would be much easier.

If you watch some of the Farsight and other RV material on the Internet aimed at the future and listen to Courtenay Brown on the subject I think you might agree that this would not be a good idea. RV is not a Window onto a perfect fully explained scene but a complementary vision of things whether looking at past present or future. Also a lot is down to the interpretation of the data. The Tunguska viewing is not called Tunguska Complexity for nothing.

But - I know it sounds mad - we have to go through bad things to grow, to gain experience in this life and as many believe in a few more to come. In avoiding a bit of suffering now who knows how much suffering we might have to endure later because of the repercussions of sidestepping a learning experience. I used to study Astrology - a long time ago - one thing you learn there is that frequently the most despicable and evil of people have the easiest of charts - everything is easy for them so they have little grasp of the injury and suffering experienced by others and inflict misery without the slightest sense of empathy.

So - in answer to your question - my life is difficult and I am proud that I am the one in charge of it - I would trust no one else with it. Oh boy have I made some awful mistakes. Good luck with avoiding life's troubles but make sure you learn from the ones you have and it will all get better.

Courtney, your introduction to Tunguska Complexity, with a softer voice than usual, I like it the best so far. It feels like you are talking to me. Big Thank-you to Dick Allgire for the extra effort camera work to document the processes he uses.

I have another interpretation of the data. I think that there are two theories that could integrate all the remote viewers input... everything is possible and the rock/meteor data and the alien craft data are not necessarily mutually exclusive... 1) there was an underground base in Tunguska, it was destroyed by ETs who didn't want to interfere with humans/earth and wanted to stop the activities happening in that base. But instead of using an atomic device in the form of a rocket or bomb (tech that humans didn't yet have), they disguised it as a meteor, to make it look like a natural event, in the minds of humans... but in order to minimise damage on earth, they blew up the device close to the base but before it hit the ground... the bunker could have been run by either humans or aliens or both, but the goal was to destroy it... but without leaving any alien tech as potential evidence for the explosion, and without creating a big crater that would have revealed the tunnels and underground facilities, while burning and destroying all surface evidence of the entrance to the base... ... this would explain why their was no crater, and why the mineral signature was different than a normal meteor, and the lack of meteor debris... and why Dick saw a rock... it would not be hard to implant an atomic device in a rock looking projectile, that would get propelled in a calculated manner, and blown up just before hitting the earth surface... and this would have been an operation that was supervised closely from space... Which confirms the other viewers' input... You can get Dick to do a new RV session with the tag/target being "What was on/in/under the ground at the Tunguska location, and what was it used for, and by whom, in 1907 - one year before the event (focusing exclusively on the underground facility), and another RV session with the tag, What was in space, in and above the atmosphere of Earth, at the exact moment/place of the Tunguska blast (Focusing only on spaceships and alien presence).
or 2) There was an actual meteor, headed right for the base... a chance in a gazillion, but improbable does not mean impossible... this meteor and its trajectory was known by the ETs, and they knew it would either come close to, or hit, the base. The plan involved waiting till the last minute to see if it was even worth intervening... whereas the meteor may hit far enough away from the base, and all would be well... but upon realisation that the meteor would indeed hit the base, they had to take action - they could not let the meteor hit the base, as it would kill people (it did anyway), maybe blow up some precious tech, and/or with the creation of the crater, reveal the underground base to locals...so they had to destroy it in its descent, before it hit the ground... maybe they tried to do that, to hopefully save some of those within the base, but it was too late, someone died... but maybe not everyone, further in the tunnels... yet the blast still caved in part of the underground infrastructure. Blowing up the meteor before it hit the ground ensured secrecy of the base, so as to not reveal the underground tunnels which would have been a huge liability... The Alien space craft that had to blow up the meteor or the meteor-looking atomic projectile, had to operate swiftly, and as stealthily as possible, thereby explaining why it came in and out of visibility/dimension, to shoot the rock,... the wave thing that Van saw/felt, could have been the wave of energy of the ship as it came out of a dimension to shoot the meteor travelling along the same path, and which he didn't see...the same way that Dick didn't see the spacecraft...

It is obvious that I am eliminating the option of a real meteor naturally heading towards the base which was already a target for a race of ETs that coincidentally wanted to destroy it... because that would be an extraordinarily mind boggling fluke.

Sometimes, I think it would help to have more sets of eyes to look at the data... I sometimes differ in my interpretation of RV data, and can come up with slightly different ideas - Courtney could use analysts that intuitively can put more of the pieces together and propose alternative theories, especially when data from different remote viewers doesn't produce consistent results... this is a case where more remote viewing session with other remote viewers, could eventually lead to data triangulation as well as saturation. If you had 25 distinct remote viewers, all looking at 3 tags: what was "on" "in" and "under" the ground before the blast; what was the blast cause by - What exploded - the actual object; and what/who was in space, or in the sky/atmosphere above the blast - just before and during the blast... you could review the cumulative data and enhance the validity of one or another hypothesis...
Also, I am not sure whether the Farsight institute uses a data analysis software, but a program like MaxQDA or Atlas.Ti would be really helpful to code the data, especially because these two software packages also provide tools to code maps, images (drawing and pictures) and even video. ... in fact, increasing the sample of remote viewers, and honing in on tags, along with the use of analytical software, might make publishing in peer reviewed journals easier...

I was not thinking I would even write on Farsight forum a day... .but I must say that I LOVE your interpretation of the Tunguska Courtney!... The Meteo being used as a distracting thing or excuse to do something else is what I thought as well! It makes so much sense ! Brilliant interpretation!