Remote Viewing is Evident - But What is its Usefulness now and in the Future?

All the evidence concerning Remote Viewing points to it being an undeniable phenomena. Jessica Utts in another great report on remote Viewing shares some very interesting findings. She also illustrates what the pathway forward for Remote Viewing should be.

It’s about time that we stopped testing for evidence of Remote Viewing. She shares that it’s time to ask a lot more pertinent questions such as:

“How does this ability work?”

She goes on to describe her vision:

“I am confident that the questions are no more elusive than any other questions in science dealing with small to medium sized effects, and that if appropriate resources are targeted to appropriate questions, we can have answers within the next decade.”

 

Usefulness of Remote Viewing

by Jessica Utts

Even if we were all to agree that anomalous cognition is possible, there remains the question of whether or not it would have any practical use for government purposes.  Some speculations can be made about how to increase the usefulness.

3 Great Findings on Remote Viewing

1) Individual Differences

First, it appears that anomalous cognition is to some extent possible in the general population. None of the ganzfeld experiments used exclusively selected subjects. However, it also appears that certain individuals possess more talent than others, and that it is easier to find those individuals than to train people. It also appears to be the case that certain individuals are better at some tasks than others. For instance, Viewer 372 at SAIC appears to have a facility with describing technical sites.

2) Users Trained on its Potential

Second, if remote viewing is to be useful, the end users must be trained in what it can do and what it cannot. Given our current level of understanding, it is rarely 100 percent accurate, and there is no reliable way to learn what is accurate and what is not. The same is probably true of most sources of intelligence data.

3) Breadth of its Uses

Third, what is useful for one purpose may not be useful for another. For instance, suppose a remote viewer could describe the setting in which a hostage is being held. That information may not be any use at all to those unfamiliar with the territory, but could be useful to those familiar with it.

 

Remote Viewing: Where Next?

It is clear to this author that anomalous cognition is possible and has been demonstrated. This conclusion is not based on belief, but rather on commonly accepted scientific criteria. The phenomenon has been replicated in a number of forms across laboratories and cultures.

The various experiments in which it has been observed have been different enough that if some subtle methodological problems can explain the results, then there would have to be a different explanation for each type of experiment, yet the impact would have to be similar across experiments and laboratories. If fraud were responsible, similarly, it would require an equivalent amount of fraud on the part of a large number of experimenters or an even larger number of subjects.

What is not so clear is that we have progressed very far in understanding the mechanism for anomalous cognition. Senders do not appear to be necessary at all; feedback of the correct answer may or may not be necessary. Distance in time and space do not seem to be an impediment. Beyond those conclusions, we know very little.

I believe that it would be wasteful of valuable resources to continue to look for proof. No one who has examined all of the data across laboratories, taken as a collective whole, has been able to suggest methodological or statistical problems to explain the ever-increasing and consistent results to date. Resources should be directed to the pertinent questions about how this ability works.

Witness the full report >>

Are you looking for more information? Why not read up on How to Learn Remote Viewing.

2 comments

 

As the following article explains the Pat Rice Remote Viewing experiments of 1974 are surrounded in a huge wave of controversy that still to this day hasn’t subsided.

According to the CIA and the military it proved to be a resounding failure, however this neglected some quite astonishing occurrences involving Pat’s Remote Viewing skills.

The whole truth has never been uncovered as well, due to the untimely nature of Pat Price’s death in 1975.

In 1977 the Chicago Tribune reported that:

 

“CIA Director Stansfield Turner has disclosed that the agency found a man who could “see” what was going on anywhere in the world through his psychic powers. Scientists and officials would show the man a picture of a place and he would then describe any activity going on there at that time.”

The tight-lipped CIA chief wouldn’t reveal how accurate the man was, but said the agency dropped the project in 1975. “He died,” Turner said, “and we haven’t heard from him since.”

Read this great article on Remote Viewing from Alternative Science and make your mind up about Project Scanate . . .

Remote viewing — The experiment that was too successful

Remote viewing experiments (the respectable modern way of describing second-sight or clairvoyance) by the US intelligence services has been the subject of much speculation but concrete facts have been thin on the ground. Now, a detailed account of one remote viewing experiment, conducted by Drs. Hal Puthoff and Russell Targ at Stanford Research Institute in 1974, has been recently declassified and released in sanitised form on the National Security Agency website. (Click Here to view).  The report makes interesting reading for several reasons; first because it is so detailed and second because its CIA author judged the experiment to be unsuccessful from a military standpoint. Yet in reality, the experiment was, if anything, too successful for comfort and provoked a panic reaction from the military authorities.

In the experiment, the subject (known only as SG1J but actually Pat Price, a retired police commissioner) was informed of the existence of a top secret Soviet military base at a place called Semipalatinsk “25 to 30 miles south west of the Irtysh River” in Siberia. It is inconceivable that the subject could have had any knowledge of such a secret installation by normal means and he was given only its map coordinates.  Not only was it one of the Soviet Union’s most secret nuclear weapons centres, but it was also physically very remote, and some 10,000 miles away from the site of the experiments.

Over three days, Price was asked to describe features of the Russian base by paranormal means in a number of remote viewing sessions. In several important respects, the experiment was considered a failure by the military officer tasked with analyzing the results. Price failed to draw the perimeter of the site even though he was asked twice. When pressed for details he made remarks like, ‘I’ll come back to that’, but seldom did. And when pressed further for concrete specific facts, he did what many ‘psychics’ do — he produced a stream of specific facts that proved to be incorrect.  He thought, for example, that the site was connected with the Soviet space program and ’saw’ cosmonauts in space suits when it is in fact a purely military weapons installation.

However, Price made one statement that proved to be astonishingly accurate. He said that he could see a mobile gantry crane built on a huge scale — its wheels taller than a man. The crane he said was 150 feet tall and its railed tracks 50 feet apart. He also said this crane ran on tracks over an underground building and made a number of detailed sketches, almost of engineering drawing quality.

In his analysis, the anonymous evaluating officer wrote, ‘[Price] supplied the most positive evidence yet for remote viewing with his sketch of the rail-mounted gantry crane. It seems inconceivable to imagine how he could draw such a likeness to the actual crane at [Semipalatinsk] unless:

1) He actually saw it through remote viewing, or  2) he was informed of what to draw by someone knowledgeable of [the site].’

The analyst continued, ‘I only mention this second possibility because the experiment was not controlled to discount the possibility that [Price] could talk to other people - such as the disinformation Section of the KGB. That may sound ridiculous to the reader, but I have to consider all possibilities in the spectrum from his being capable to view remotely to his being supplied data for disinformation purposes by the KGB.’

In his final, overall report on the experiments, the officer had, for reasons not fully explained, become much more skeptical. He says, quite baldly, ‘The remote viewing experiment of [Semipalatinsk] by [Price] proved to be unsuccessful.’

In reality, the experiment was too successful, as one of the experimenters, Dr. Russell Targ, has subsequently revealed on his website (Click Here).  Says Targ, ‘This trial was such a stunning success that we were forced to undergo a formal Congressional investigation to determine if there had been a breach in National Security. Of course, none was ever found, and we were supported by the government for another fifteen years. As I sat with Price in these experiments at SRI, he made the sketch shown, to illustrate his mental impressions of a giant gantry crane that he psychically “saw” rolling back and forth over a building at the target site!’

 

The Price experiment is not conclusive evidence of remote viewing. But it does represent a remarkable controlled experiment that deserves to be taken seriously scientifically. The huge gantry crane at the target site was purpose built and thus a rare feature anywhere — indeed a feature that the overwhelming majority of people have never seen. That Price’s identification should be  merely a guess thus has a very low probability and, as an explanation, is lacking in credibility.

Read the Original Story

Why not read more information on how you can indeed Learn Remote Viewing.

9 comments

Many people when they first learn about Remote Viewing are naturally skeptical. So here at Learn Remote Viewing we want to put you at ease by providing you with the Remote Viewing hard evidence.

I’ve uncovered an academic paper which goes in depth into the practice of remote viewing and reviews the findings extensively by experts Jessica Utts and Brian Josephson. The paper was originally published in 1996 and it’s time that everybody witnessed their findings.

We’ve also had comments saying that the history of remote viewing is quite well known but there’s no concrete evidence to compound this amazing phenomenon . . . so here goes . . .

Here’s their conclusion on Remote Viewing:

“For the past decade the U.S. government experiments were overseen by a very high-level scientific committee, consisting of respected academics from a variety of disciplines, all of whom were required to critique and approve the protocols in advance. There have been no explanations forthcoming that allow an honest observer to dismiss the growing collection of consistent results.”

Don’t get bogged down in the scientific language, this is an exhilarating read.

THE PARANORMAL: THE EVIDENCE AND ITS IMPLICATIONS FOR CONSCIOUSNESS

by Jessica Utts and Brian Josephson

Those who recognize that significant discoveries in science are very often prompted by observations that do not fit expectations will find a stimulating challenge in accumulating evidence that it is possible to elicit psychic functioning in experiments with ordinary volunteers acting as subjects. Even more convincing results occur with specially selected subjects.

Remote Viewing: The Experiment

In one type of experiment, a “target” photograph or video segment is randomly chosen out of a set of four possibilities. A “sender” attempts to transmit it mentally and a “receiver” is then asked to provide an account either verbally or in writing of what she imagines it might be. She is then shown the four possibilities, and selects the one she thinks best matches her perception. By chance alone, a correct match is expected on average one time in four, whereas the experiments typically show the considerably higher success rate of around one in three.

The recent declassification of the US government’s psychical research programme (experiments on “remote viewing”, similar to the type just described except that it used independent judges to assess the matches rather than having the subjects judge themselves) has permitted a comparison to be made of the results of this programme with those described in the open literature.

Despite the different judging procedure, similar success rates were found. In addition, many of the governmental experiments used gifted subjects. The success rate was then even higher, typically over forty percent. The few experiments in the open literature that used gifted subjects found similar success rates.

Remote Viewing: Extensive Repeatable Results

In the past, critics have attempted to discredit positive results in psychical research on grounds of lack of repeatability. But, as anyone with a training in statistics knows, even where an influence exists, an isolated experiment with an insufficient number of trials may not demonstrate a statistically significant effect. Accordingly, without a more sophisticated analysis, “failure to reproduce an effect” does not demonstrate its absence.

Suppose, for example, psychic abilities, in line with the results already described, increase the chances of a successful match from 1/4 to 1/3. Then (according to the accepted statistical theories), an experiment with 30 trials, which has been typical of these experiments, would have less than a 17% chance of achieving a result of statistical significance. The more recent larger experiments still utilize only about 100 trials, and have only about a 57% chance of achieving statistical significance.

Detailed analysis of the complete collection of experiments on this type of phenomenon shows that what holds, despite changes in equipment, experimenter, subjects, judges, targets and laboratories, is far greater consistency with the 1 in 3 success rate already mentioned than with the 1 in 4 chance expectation rate. Such consistency is the hallmark of a genuine effect, and this, together with the very low probability of the overall success rate observed occurring by chance, argues strongly for the phenomena being real and not artifactual.

Reexamination of other types of psychical investigations reveals that they too achieved replicable effects, which went largely unappreciated because of a poor understanding of statistics. For instance, an analysis of experiments in precognitive card guessing and related “forced-choice” experiments, published by Honorton and Ferrari in the Journal of Parapsychology, found that gifted subjects were able to achieve consistently about a 27% success rate when 25% was expected by chance. Similar U.S. government experiments have been revealed to have achieved the same 27% success rate over thousands of trials.

If chance alone were the explanation for these results, it would be truly remarkable to achieve a 27% success rate over thousands of trials, and it would be even more remarkable to see identical results in the government work. For further details about the recent evidence, including both a favorable and a skeptical assessment of the U.S. government experiments, consult the Journal of Scientific Exploration, Vol. 10(1), or http://www-stat.ucdavis.edu/users/utts/ on the Internet.

Remote Viewing: Take a Step back all you Critics

Strong statistical results are of course meaningless if experiments are not properly conducted. Debunkers of parapsychology are fond of showcasing the very few experiments that have been found to have serious problems. But that ignores the fact that the vast majority of experiments were done using excellent protocols, paying close attention to potential subtle cues, using well-tested randomization devices and so on. For the past decade the U.S. government experiments were overseen by a very high-level scientific committee, consisting of respected academics from a variety of disciplines, all of whom were required to critique and approve the protocols in advance. There have been no explanations forthcoming that allow an honest observer to dismiss the growing collection of consistent results.

Read the full paper >>

Keep your eyes peeled for an illustration of how the tests Jessica and Brian carried out would have taken place. Do you want to see Remote Viewing in action??? Why not watch . . .

A Remarkable Remote Viewing Workshop With Ed Dames that Predicts a Terrorist Attack

No comments

 

Remote Viewing as far back as the 70s?

I found this great article on Remote Viewing which talks about the history of Remote Viewing in the United States. The study of psychic phenomena was first received attention in the 1970s, however they were miles off discovering the incredible methods of remote viewing. If you read this article to the end you’ll know all the facts you could imagine about remote viewing and be able to track back the course of history.

In the 80s and 90s Remote Viewing was pretty much a top secret activity only known by a few special people. So read on and discover how Remote Viewing evolved over the years to the mega phenomenon it’s become today.

Remote Viewing History: Facts, Names & Dates

About Its Transfer From Top Secret Military Espionage To Corporate America

The facts regarding Remote Viewing History have become a controversial issue over the past decade.

  When PSI TECH first introduced Remote Viewing to the public in 1989, nobody, except for only a few who were intimately involved, knew of the technology’s existence and that is where the confusion began.

  There were PSI researchers from the 1970’s who had some experience with early involvement researching psychic phenomena and even though they did witness some interesting results, they did not discover anything very new or any great breakthroughs. However, a few years later, world renowned physicist Hal Puthoff picked up the ball and was granted $50,000 to conduct his own investigation to find a way to train people to become psychic. He began working solely with New York psychic, Ingo Swann.

The two discovered the working remote viewing protocols which were then taken from them in 1983 by US Army Intelligence and put to the test by a small operational unit which consisted of only a few trained individuals. The Remote Viewing unit was housed under the directorate of the Defense Intelligence Agency at Fort Meade. Ingo Swann and Hal Puthoff were no longer involved and only a very select few knew of the units existence.

The group was tasked with real world targets and they did provide useful adjunct Intel in many life and death crisis situations. Towards the end of the 80’s word began to trickle out around the Intelligence community about this strange group of army Intel gatherers and people who did not understand it, grew suspicious and afraid.

  In 1988 a turn over of administration caused the unit to fall into a disarray of administrators, so one General, one Major and one Colonel took the initiative to usher the RV technology into the private sector by forming a corporation that would pledge to keep the technology unadulterated and pure, PSI TECH was formed in 1989 to accomplish this mission.

  Normally, privatizing a classified top secret technology would be against army policy but influential folks in high places had witnessed the technology’s effectiveness and feared that it would be lost when the unit fell into chaos.

PSI TECH continued to work for government agencies as a private consulting company and in 1991 moved from Washington DC to Albuquerque, New Mexico.

  In 1994, Jonina Dourif became PSI TECH’s Vice President and PSI TECH relocated from its headquarters in New Mexico to Beverly Hills, California. Shortly afterwards, PSI TECH also opened a satellite office on the island of Maui in the state of Hawaii.

  As the civilian sector learned of this new phenomenal technique that could train anybody to be more consistently accurate then the worlds best psychics, many opportunists began making similar claims and selling their own made-up training systems, consequently misleading the public. The market place has since become littered with hundreds of false Remote Viewing methods and many “make-believe” Remote Viewing claims.

 
  PSI TECH maintains that there is only “one Method” and anybody who claims otherwise is selling you a their own misleading made-up version of Remote Viewing. (Many of these folks are not even familiar or knowledgeable of the real RV protocols.) PSI TECH initially trained everybody in the civilian sector and some early students, like Courtney Brown, formed their own schools and changed what he learned to market his own version of the original TRV protocols.

  PSI TECH does not endorse people who change the TRV protocols before they have even become proficient Remote Viewers in the original protocols they were taught. This would be the equivalent of having a person who only just learned to fly an airplane immediately become a master instructor. Unfortunately, the spread of inexperienced teachers of remote viewing have created a polluted marketplace littered with unskilled practitioners who do not represent the true effectiveness of this very valuable and powerful technology.

  As if the waters weren’t muddied enough, there is also the problem of the pre-discovery researchers from the 70’s who surfaced to cash in on the Remote Viewing fad that was underway. But they are selling older versions of Remote Viewing before the breakthrough discovery of the protocols in the early 80’s.

  It is important to distinguish the difference between the “RV research program” which was funded by the CIA that involved Ed May & Joe McMoneagle, Russell Targ & Keith Herary and the Super Secret “RV Operational Unit” which was initiated by INSCOM and coveted under the umbrella of the DIA to utilize the discovered protocols.

The latter was funded by the US ARMY and was initially run under the supervision of General Albert Stubblebine then handed off to General Edwin Thompson and then, passed over to Dr. Jack Verona. Under Jack Verona the unit fell into chaos when civilian administrators (such as Dale Graff) brought in tarot card readers and Channelors to work with the trained remote viewers. It was at this point that the operational unit split up and the trained RVers went to work for PSI TECH.

  In 1990 “CIA research” picked the Remote Viewing unit up and named it “Stargate.” They hired Ray Hyman and Jessica Utts as professional research evaluators to asses the Remote Viewing program. Although there were no trained Remote viewers left the CIA conducted the study as a strategy in order to document the evaluation as “minimally effective” and then to mount a damage control campaign in the public as a responsive action to a book that PSI TECH was about to release through Random House.

  The funny part is that PSI TECH stopped the release of the book at the last minute while the CIA”s damage control campaign was already under way. The public first saw the CIA’s public relations campaign about the declassification of their Remote Viewing research with Joe McMoneagle, Jessica Utts and Ray Hyman on Night line hosted by Ted Koppel in 1995.

  Remote Viewing historical facts are still quashed by some who want to maintain a premise that the “RV OPs unit” and the “RV Research Program”program were one and the same but this is not the case at all. Joe McMoneagle, who was the main test subject for the “RV research program”, did not even know about the “RV operational unit” until he was paraded on TV in 1995 by the CIA’s public relations damage control campaign. (Note: that is why he did not know who PSI TECH was then).

Read the Full Story

Remote Viewing not Unique to the US

Remote Viewing is not just a phenomenon being used in the US; there is history of Remote Viewing being used by the British Army and in India.

 

First the USA, then Britain - Now India admits to Using Remote Viewing for Military Purposes

1 comment