Posted: Apr 17, 2013 8:23 pm
I have the Star Gate archive which was declassified around 2004. I'm slowly making my way through it. It's fascinating, but not due to any evidence of psychic functioning, more to do with how they kept the project going on some very questionable results. There are some remarkable hits but you'd expect a few in twenty years of trying.
I still feel as if I'm just getting started (there are tens of thousands of pages), but I've read a fair amount and I can make some statements about the project with some confidence.
Mostly, the remote viewing sessions are conducted with a viewer who may not know anything about the target, or s/he may be given a little information about the target or, on rare occasions, may be given a lot of information.
The interviewer who guides the viewer almost always knows what the target is in operational sessions (ie, viewing hostages, military installations) but hardly ever during training sessions (ie, local targets chosen at random).
As for those remarkable hits that are described in books, articles and talks, they deserve more time. Especially since just finding the original session notes can be difficult.
The best hits are from the earliest part of the project, during the 1970s when the session notes weren't kept with such diligence as they were post-1979. As such, we are left with descriptions of these successes based on memory or on the summaries and reports of those sessions. This can be problematic. We all know how slippery memory can be, and as for the reports, they can sometimes change from one published version to the next.
Most of the famous hits have had their stories changed. Sometimes only a little, but sometimes quite drastically. For example, Paul Smith did have a remote viewing session in which he described an American ship being attacked, two days before the USS Stark was attacked. But in his version of events it was lasers from a Russian aircraft, not missiles from an Iraqi one.
On the other hand, the idea that remote viewers found the hostage BG Dozier but their information was not passed on to the relevant authorities is the complete opposite to what actually occurred: They didn't find him, and their information was passed on (without the psychic nature of the source being revealed), with embarrassing consequences for the Italian authorities who ordered operations to be carried out. I write about it in more detail on my blog
http://ersby.blogspot.co.uk/2013/02/kid ... -1981.html
My impression so far is that the CIA were right to end it. Whether psi exists or not, it was obviously not useful in an operational environment. However, if some clandestine RV project is still going on, it would not surprise me. There were enough people in the secret services who believed in psi, or were willing to try it, that the project was able to survive for a little over 20 years, so it wouldn't surprise me if this was still the case. But that doesn't mean they're any good, though.
I still feel as if I'm just getting started (there are tens of thousands of pages), but I've read a fair amount and I can make some statements about the project with some confidence.
Mostly, the remote viewing sessions are conducted with a viewer who may not know anything about the target, or s/he may be given a little information about the target or, on rare occasions, may be given a lot of information.
The interviewer who guides the viewer almost always knows what the target is in operational sessions (ie, viewing hostages, military installations) but hardly ever during training sessions (ie, local targets chosen at random).
As for those remarkable hits that are described in books, articles and talks, they deserve more time. Especially since just finding the original session notes can be difficult.
The best hits are from the earliest part of the project, during the 1970s when the session notes weren't kept with such diligence as they were post-1979. As such, we are left with descriptions of these successes based on memory or on the summaries and reports of those sessions. This can be problematic. We all know how slippery memory can be, and as for the reports, they can sometimes change from one published version to the next.
Most of the famous hits have had their stories changed. Sometimes only a little, but sometimes quite drastically. For example, Paul Smith did have a remote viewing session in which he described an American ship being attacked, two days before the USS Stark was attacked. But in his version of events it was lasers from a Russian aircraft, not missiles from an Iraqi one.
On the other hand, the idea that remote viewers found the hostage BG Dozier but their information was not passed on to the relevant authorities is the complete opposite to what actually occurred: They didn't find him, and their information was passed on (without the psychic nature of the source being revealed), with embarrassing consequences for the Italian authorities who ordered operations to be carried out. I write about it in more detail on my blog
http://ersby.blogspot.co.uk/2013/02/kid ... -1981.html
My impression so far is that the CIA were right to end it. Whether psi exists or not, it was obviously not useful in an operational environment. However, if some clandestine RV project is still going on, it would not surprise me. There were enough people in the secret services who believed in psi, or were willing to try it, that the project was able to survive for a little over 20 years, so it wouldn't surprise me if this was still the case. But that doesn't mean they're any good, though.