Approved For Refe^se 2000/08/07 rC3A-RDP96-00WR000400070031 -9
the presence of some undefined paranormal phenomena and none appeared disposed,
even privately,
to question the honesty of the SRI representatives.
My own impressions
were that,
while GELLER's powers seem to have been attenuated by the laboratory
controls (as compared with the claims made in Dr PUHARICII’s paper),
substantial
indications
of some extraordinary power or talent remained.
And,
for what
it may be
worth,
I felt that the SRI representatives were essentially honest in their approach—
although
, being human and in need of financial support to pursue their investigations,
perhaps somewhat self-serving in the selection and manner of presentation of their
data.
Three Bas ic Question s for the Intelligence Community
4. The focus
of this paper, however,
is broader than this one incident.
The whole
field of paranormal phenomena suggests three pragmatic and fundamental questions to
which the intelligence community should address
itself:
WOULD there be SIGNIFICANT potential for the intelligence community?
DOES it exist ?
WHAT is it?
As posed,
the questions may seem too obvious or naive but
I believe there is some
virtue in initially viewing the issue in these simplistic terms and in that order— i* e,
,
judgement, measurement and theorem.
Obviously this break-down is artificial in many
respects
: for instance,
the first question cannot be answered definitively until the last
question is answered; and
,
hopefully,
one should construct his approach to the second
question (’whether
) so as
to be obtaining,
at the same time,
evidence appropriate
to
the third (*what
!
).
But the paranormal field is so delicate,
so suspect and so potentially
explosive that only the most orderly of plebian approaches seems likely to survive in
the bureaucratic atmosphere --no matter what the
’reality
1 or the ’evidence* may prove
to be.
So let us examine these questions in more detail.
~> ° M we establish to our complete satisfaction that such paranormal phenomena DO
exist , would there be SIGNIFICANT potential for application by the intelligence commun-
ity in the national in terest ?
This question is,
I believe, more complex than
it appears
on the surface.
While there
is
little doubt that (particularly if we consider our defensive
responsibilities concerning foreign capabilities in this field) we could safely answer
*yes*
in the abstract, we ought to be quite pragmatic about it from the outset.
No matter how
interesting the field might be to us as individuals or how fraught with significance for
Approved For Revise 2000/08/07
: eiA-RDP96-0dfcf7R000400070031 -9
would be on the basis of demonstrable utility in
: the collection or interpretation of
'intelligence
1 on foreign powers; the recruitment of sources leading to that end; the
conceiving and conducting of physical/psychological/paranormal activities and programs
designed to influence or constrain the attitudes /actions /capabilities of foreign powers
and/or their leaders
to our advantage; or the enhancement of the abilities
of our
(i. e,
,
loosely 'IRS.
?
) personnel to accomplish any of the above by heightening their inter -
and intr a -personal power s - -whether in a truly paranormal mode or not,
There are
several aspects to this overall question,
a
°
5/
Holding in abeyance for a moment the question of
'whether' and limiting the discussion to GELLER (since the most impressive evidence,
the film, was on him and since his claimed powers are broader than SWANN's), we
have apparent instances
of
: mind-reading (primarily
ait perhaps solely numbers and
names of cities) with over 90% accuracy and few baulks; mind projection (where he
'forces' the researchers to name a city previously written-down by him) with apparently
a high order of accuracy (no statistical data, merely anecdotal); perception of unseen,
simple line drawings (apparently 100% accuracy); limited stressing/distortion of metals
after prolonged physical contact but evidentally far beyond normal physical powers;
limited but consistent (though not,
apparently,
predictable in nature) effect on electric
and magnetic energiy fields when in close (almost touching) proximity to them; long-
distance telephone perception of simple designs or letters (anecdotal); detecting presence
or absence
of metals or water in sealed containers without touching them (100%
aaccuracy and two baulks out of 12 attempts); perception of uppermost die -faces in
sealed box on 'double -blind' basis (100% accuracy and two baulks in 12 attempts); percep-
tion of a road (while driving blindfolded at high speeds),
allegedly through the eyes of
his heroic companions (anecdotal); and several other anecdotal episodes
of similar
natures.
While
it would stretch no one's imagination to create specific operational
scenarios
(e, g„
,
recruitment of a given Soviet) in which these manifestations could
be highly useful,
that would also be true
if we were only dealing with a highly skillful
magician.
The real question is
: IF there is a paranormal force at work here how
could we £jqogj appropriately and effectively employ it to our long-range advantage ?
Because (again,
IF) we would then be posed on the threshhold of modes of perception/
communication/ interaction which transcend# our present understanding of physical laws
and of man's nature and of a new awareness and discoveries which would dwarf the
phen^4W®YSAf«nReJea?pgPfip^<p^i,G(4tFiPft9|-t0g71§^RP!J§t4PPP79J^J^veB to the
Approved For Rel^se 2000/08/07 :'cfA-RDP96-00?Cf7R000400070031-9
question of what significance such phenomena might have for our interests - -and this
be
can best/done only if related to the most realistic futurology projections
of the intel-
ligence
community’s (read,
effectively,
the nation’s ) needs /role s /resour ccs /environ-
ments in the next 5-to-15 and 15-to~25 years.
Even
if GELLER can do what he churns
and even if he were a fully cleared staff officer, we would,
I submit, be hard-pressed
to use him appropriately at the present time.
As noted,
the question of utility is more
complex than it appears on the surface and deserves early and serious thought,
b. Transferab ility*
IF the phenomena exists,
its utility for our purposes would be
in direct proportion to the degree to which the
skills could be learned or the powers
acquired or developed by appropriate persons --and the ddgree to which we could develo]
systems for identifying people with the essential attributes.
In the hands
of a GELLER,
certainly,
these powers can do us very little good--and possibly quite a bit of harm,
IF the phenomena exist,
they must be in some sense (though,
perhaps,
in a sense which
eludes our current frame
of reference) a function p£ man’s nature and his environment;
that is,
the potential must exist in some degree in all men.
Just as some men are born
color-blind,
it might be that some are genetically deprived of their
*psi’ sense; and it
might also be that the latent capacity is so attenuated in the vast majority as
to be
effectively useless*
But the basic assumption must be that what some men can do other
can do*
The issue would be
: how to identify the latent capacity and how to surface/
perfect/control
it*
For instance,
100% accuracy in ESPing numbers is impressive (eve:
if we are
’only’ witnessing hypersensitive voice-box readings) but can this facility be
perfected to ’read* attitudes /intents /emotions ?
When I asked this question re GP^LLER
the SRI response was
'yes’ but they admit that they have not begun to investigate this
phenomenon.
These and other questions relating to identification and transferability
have a direct bearing on the utility question.
c* C ontr ol / Pr e die tab ility /M otiva ti on *
Obviously,
the phenomena will be useful
/s
for our purposes only if there^a certain minimal degree of reliability associated with
its functioning at our behest,
in our environment and for our purposes*
Here we get
into the esoteric realm of the ’motivation’ of the forces at work and
it is diffbcult
to
conceive of such ’forces’ having parochial interests - -though
it is relatively easy to
believe that their agents (GELLER et al
) might be psychologically inhibited by their
own subjective attributions in this respect.
Indeed,
virtually all known mystics (in-
cluding GELLER and SWANN) have claimed to be affected by motivational auras in
thei:uApipji3\&dr]EQf.R6fe^e&(^
must
Approved For Refuse 2000/08/07
: ClA-RDP96-00>tf7R000400070031-9
(assuming we come to accept the existence of the phenomena) crank this factor into
the
'utility
1 equation.
6. DO we have incontrovertible evidence of the existence of LEGITIMATE
(i, e.
,
as -profes sed paranormal) phenomena ?
There
is no doubt that something happens but
if we are merely confronted with highly skilled and ingenious practitioners of 'normal'
arts there is no broad significance in
it for us --although,
again,
I can easily imagine
practical operational uses on a case-by-case basis (and in the event of negative para-
normal conclusions this aspect might well deserve limited exploration with the operat-
ional elements).
In any case,
I don't believe that even the SRI representatives would
disagree with the statement that we DO NOT have such evidence at this time.
Certainly
there are highly suggestive indications,
particularly in the ESP field (and some provo-
cative possibilities in other fields), but there is no INCONTROVERTIBLE evidence.
And, moreover,
as matters now stand, we are not going to get such evidence from
SRI.
Even
if appropriate individuals in the bureaucracy go on record as stating that
they fully accept SRI's willingness and competence to institute new and iron-clad
control and analysis procedures,
the bureaucracy as a whole would not (properly,
in
my estimation) accept positive findings from them as definitive evidence in a matter
of this magnitude.
I do not question their honesty but, being so closely identified with
the experiments (historically,
financially and emotionally),
their findings would never,
in the final analysis, be accepted as unbiassed- -however unbiassed they might,
in fact,
be.
If we are serious about the effort we might as well sgpare ourselves the time and
expense of another intermediary step.
This doesn't mean that SRI should be cut out
of the picture (even
if they could be, which is doubtful) but,
rather,
that we reconsider
the nature /mode /degree of our involvement.
I see the purposes and options as follows--
we itLb
and have some reason to believe (though am far from sure) that SRIAfollow our lead if
we doubled our current investment (ca 52K) in the next project year.
a « Option s.
Basically,
there are two functional options: we can (on an Agency-
or community-wide basis) meticulously structure the laboratory controls,
the specific
nature and sequence of investigations and the precise statistical-analytical procedures
and give them to SRI to comply with- -with spot-monitoring by our representative^ ); or
we can, having done our homework, have the procedures carried out under the full-time
supervision of our representative^ )- -either in the SRI installation or (with the SRI
representatives) in a more convenient installation of our choice.
For the obvious
reasoAmai®\ee§l
ReiA-^?§oW§ZiRQPPMQIP^#ic s ,
the