So...by now many of you have this condition whereby it is dawning on you that perhaps you might have been trained to signal to an operator by your "other than conscious mind" by looking up and to the right that your are composing a picture...now then if an operator of your altered state could gain the compliance of your other than conscious mind to signal whether or not it was willing to communicate at all say by a finger signal or whatever why couldn't the operator of your altered state train you to signal when you are composing,reviewing,talking or feeling an experience?The choice of eye movements may be only a matter of convenience for the operator.It seems to me that the distictions could be A.modeling of M.Erikson or V Satir B. A scientifically provable,improvable or disprovalbe fact. If it has been trained into your behaviour can you train a different pattern? What would be a better pattern? When and where would you not want a person to read you? Given the statements of John Grinder "I invented meta-programs to amuse Richard Bandler." ,"The best induction is the one you don't know you did",did John Grander and Richard Blinder invent eye accessing cues to amuse themselves? Were this even a slick piece of creativity by John and Richard with back up in science by Robert Dilts what else has been slipped into this field? Even so, it seems to me to be a part of the Bath water.Can you find the Baby in it? In that John has declared that there are printed material that he wished he hadn't endorsed such a the life span of primary representational systems and there are other writing with his name attached will he clean that up? (Oh, dah/nyet?)