Approved For Release 2001/03/07
: CIA-RDP96-00789R003200160001-9
Table
1, Continued
(U)
UNIVERSE OF TARGET AND RESPONSE ELEMENTS
Element
w
T(n)
ROO
Objects (0.50)
Microwave generator (tubular 3 m)
Pulsed operation
1 n
Peak power ~200 MW
|
Extremely short duration
i
4 x 6-inch wave guides
0.8
Conic horn antenna
0.7
Frequency of
1 GHz
10-Angstrom wavelength
0.05
People optimizing device
Incoherent wave front
0.1
Lots of massive coils
Circuit boards as targets
Support .vacuum equipment
0.6
Diagnostic E&M hardware
0.6
People collecting data
Magnification
Cavity
Double tower with antennae
1.74
Headng metal to vapor
1.74
Like spherical WWII mine
1.74
Buried sensors
1.74
Lots of ovals
1.74
Bunch of polished mirrors
1.74
Spokes from “clam" shape
1.74
Constant mirror tuning
1.74
Power supplies
0.6
Electrical/optical cables
Two-axle, white trailer for source
0.3
Opdcal digitizer
!
Tens of people
Changes of state
0.3
Molecular disintegradon
0.2
Collector fibers
0.1
Three-step function in rapid succession
0.3
Uses large amount of energy
0.1
Capacitor storage
Tubes carrying fluid
Lifesaver-like objects
0.2
Plasma
0.1
Flat desert
0.5
Distant mountains
0.5
Hot
0.5
Dry
0.5
Starburst, lightening discharge
0.5
0.1
Death ray
0.5
0.1
Football-field-size area—open ended
0.5
0.6
Square block
0.5
0.1
Earthbound experiment
0.5
\
Approved For Release 2001/03/07
: CIA-RDP96-00789R00320016Q001-9
Approved For Release 2001/03/07
: CIA-RDP96-00789R003200160001-9
IV RESULTS AND DISCUSSION (U)
Table
2 shows the figure-of -merit analysis for the
experiment using
the fuzzy sets defined
in Table
1.
The target was the
microwave generator,
support equipment,
and testing environment.
The
target -response intersection
is shown as
|7'nR|,
and the sigma counts of
the target and response sets are shown as
1 7*1
and
|/?|
,
respectively.
N
is
tjhe number of elements that were identified for each category.
All
quantities include the relative weights shown
in Table
1.
j
"The weighted accuracy total of 0.80
(i.e.,
80% of
the
identifiable elements at
the
target site were correctly described by V372)
agrees well with the qualitative correspondence shown
in Figures
1 and 2.*
Figure
shows V372's drawing of a plan view of the target area, which
appears
to match
the experimental situation almost exactly.
The figures
of merit show that,
since the first experiment
in this series,
V372's
ability to sense functions and objects has
increased modestly,
and his
ability to sense relationships has
increased by a factor of
four.
The
relatively low value of 0.57 for the combined
(weighted by the category
weighting factors)
target elements
is consistent with the elaborate nature
of ^372's response
(see the original response
in Appendices A and
B)
.
Table 2
FIGURE OF MERIT SUMMARY-j
Element Type
N
|T f|R|
|T|
|R|
Acc.
Rel.
M
F
R
C
UNCTIONS
ELATIONSHIPS
EJECTS
11.40
21.95
56.70
12.43
23.45
72.92 H H
TOTAL
-
-
-
0.80
0.65
0.52
*
(U)
All figures are to be taken as indicators of qualitative correspondence. The drawings and
photographs have been selected to illustrate the correspondence.
Approved For Release 2001/03/07
: CIA
-
(|rDP96-00789R003200160001-9
>(^1/03/07
: CIAJSBP
Approved For Release 20101/03/07
: CIA^DP96-00789R003200160001-9
Approved For Release 2001/03/07
: CIA-RDP96-00789R003200160001-9
FIGURE
VIEWER
372:
RESPONSE
TO
DETAILS
OF
THE
GENERATOR
Approved For Release |2001/03/07
: CIA^RDP96-00789R0032001 60001 -9
lJfllfc HfitJT
i\
•
wteswr#"
OfiS? F*+*X~
zff&crs*
v
FIGURE 3
VIEWER 372: PLAN VIEW OF THE TARGET
Approved For Release ^01/03/07
: CI^-RDP96-00789R003200160001-9
Approved For Release 2001/03/07
: CIA-RDP96-00789R003200160001-9
\
Viewer 372 responded to the primary target with a single
concept
that was mostly correct,
but with a significant number of
incorrect elements.
As can be seen
in the response
(Figures
1 through
and Appendix
B)
,
V372 recognized that the device
is
"some kind of gun"
that emits
a high-power,
short-duration electromagnetic pulse.
This
description,
however,
is embedded
in approximately 30% incorrect material
(i
. e.
,
noise)
T
A persistent problem
in
|
RV
is the
boundary of
the
intended target
location.
The
experiment was
_
T/QG /Wrt.'BASS
approximately
km south of the main runway at
Jand
km west
of an experimental
solar energy collection facility.
Also
in the area
were electromagnetic pulse evaluation stations with their associated
large
antennae.
In the formal analysis of this experiment,
all data were
considered
a response
to
the
intended target.
*
:
It
is
tempting,
however,
to
identify certain elements of
V372 '
data
as* responses
to
the solar collection facility.
Such
post hoc
assessment
is always
risky,
but
in this case
the qualitative
correspondence
is quite striking.
For example,
on page B-7 of the
transcript,
V372 recognizes
".
.
.a bunch of mirrors,
some kind of
polished metal mirrors ..."
but
is unable
to recognize two distinctly
different high-technology areas.
This two-fold theme
is
intermingled
throughout
the response.
Figures
4 and
show the correspondence of some
of
these response elements
to the nearby solar collection facility.
j
The access road
to the Prancer experiment passes directly
adjacent
to the solar facility.
During the feedback phase of the
experiment,
V372 and
the experiment team were fascinated with this complex
and stopped for a moment on
the way
to the^
degree
to which distracting elements
(unrelated
data
is
a current research topic.
^experimental area.
The
to the target)
affects
the
Approved For Release 2001/02W07
: CTA'-RDP96-O0789ROO32OO16OOO1-9
f&rr£
.
FIGURE 4
VIEWER 372:
POSSIBLE RESPONSE TO THE SOLAR FACI LITY
£do
Approved For Release 2001/03/07
: CIMRDP96-00789R003200160001-9
Approved For Release 2001163107 : CIA-RDH96-00789R003200160001-9 FIGURE 5 VIEWER 372: RESPONSE DETAILS TO THE SOLAR FACILITY 16 Approved For Release cade ClA-RDPSF-00789R003200160001-9
Approved For Release 2001/03/07
: CIA=RDP96-00789R003200160001-9
After SRI personnel had been debriefed about
the
target,
a
second long-term participant,
V009,
was asked to view the same event.
He
was
told to provide whatever information he could about an event
that had
taken place approximately two weeks
earlier.
Viewer V009 was told nothing
else about
the nature of the target or target event,
and he worked without
an RV monitor.
Since this was an ad hoc test,
not
intended to be part of the
series,
we have not conducted
a formal analysis of V009's response.
Qualitatively,
however,
V009 appeared to do as well
as V372,
given that he
remained
in session,
unmonitored,
for only 20 minutes.
Figure
shows one
part of his drawing response that captures V009's
theme.
Interestingly,
V009 also appeared
to be confused by the multitude of potential
target
material
in the
immediate area.
He drew an airport and recognized that
it
was not
the
intended target.
Approved For Release £001/03/07
: CIA-RDP96-00789R003200160001-9
2,
Approved For Release 2(|01/03/07
CIA-lj?DP96-00789R0032001 60001 -9
V CONCLUSIONS (U)
(
Viewer V372 was asked to use RV to describe the activity of
Project
jj
'during August
24 and
25,
1988.
He described approximately
80% of the identifiable target elements correctly,
and 71% of his
responses corresponded with the
intended target.
Although 29% noise
remains,
if this experiment had been an actual^
'activity,
the
noise probably would not have been a significant distracting factor.
Approved For Release 2001703/07
CIA-RpP96-00789R0032001 60001 -9
Approved For Release 2001 /03/0(7^CIA-RDP96-^0789R0032001 60001 -9
1.
2 .
3.
REFERENCES (U)
Puthoff, H. E. and Targ, R.,
“Perceptual Augmentation Techniques (U),” Final Report,
SRI Project 3183,
SRI International, Menlo Park, California (December 1975)
Puthoff, H.
E.
and Targ,
R., “A
Perceptual Channel
for Information Transfer Over
Kilometer Distances:
historical
Perspective and Recent Research,”
Proceedings of the
(March 1976) UNCLASSIFIED.
(“Advanced Threat Technique Assessment (U),” Final Report, SRI
International,
Menlo
Park,
California
(October
1978)
IEEE,
Vol.
64, No.
Puthoff, H. E., et al.,
Project
5309,
SRI
—
}
4.
I
Jahn,
R.
G.,
"The
Persistent
Paradox
of
Psychic
Phenomena:
An
Engineering
Perspective,”
Proceedings
of
the
IEEE,
Vol.
70,
No.
2,
pp.
136-170
(1982).
UNCLASSIFIED
•
5.
Puthoff, H.
E.,
“RV Reliability, Enhancement, and Evaluation (U)," Final Report, SRI
Project
'4028-1..
SRI
International,
Menlo
Park,
California
(January
1984)
I
I
6.
May, E. C., “A Remote Viewing Evaluation Protocol (U),” Final Report
(revised), SRI
Project 4028,
SRI International, Menlo Park, California (July
1 9 8 3
) |
T
7.
May,
E.
C., Humphrey,
B.
S., and
Puthoff, H.
E.,
“An Automated RV Evaluation
Procedure
(U),”
Final
Report,
SRI
Project
7408,
SRI
International,
Menlo
Park,
California (May 1985)
j
8.
May,
E.
C.,
Humphrey,
B.
S.,
and Mathews,
C., “A
Figure
of Merit
Analysis
for
Free-Response
Material,”
Proceedings
of
the
28th
Annual
Convention
of
the
Parapsychological Association,
pp. 343-354,
Tufts
University, Medford, Massachusetts
(August 1985) UNCLASSIFIED.
9.
Humphrey,
B.
S., Trask, V.
V., May,
E.
C., and Thomson M.
J.,
"Remote Viewing
Evaluation Techniques (U),” Final Report—Objective A, Task- 4, SRI Project 1291,
SRI
International, Menlo Park, California (December 1986)
|
Approved For Release 2001/03/QT: CIA-RDP96-00789R0032001 60001*9
: CIA-RDP96-00789R0032001 60001 -9
April
1988
AN APPLICATION ORIENTED REMOTE VIEWING
EXPERIMENT
(U)
I& ppr^x/Pri tnr Release 2001/03/07
: CIA-RDlf96-00789R003^00160001-9
Final Report
Covering
the Period
1 May
1987
to April
1988
AN APPLICATION ORIENTED REMOTE VIEWING
EXPERIMENT
(U)
April
191
Approved For Release
01/03/07
: Cl
RDP96-00789R0032001 60001 -9
LIST OF FIGURES (U)
)
(U)
Baylands Nature Interpretive Center, with RV Response
(U)
Part of the 0800 Response Compared with Photograph of the Altamont ....
Wind-Power Electric Generator Farm
(U)
Pan of the 0800 Response Compared With the West Gate of LLNL
(U)
Pan of the 0800 Response Compared with a Map of the Livermore Area
.
.
LIST OF TABLES (U)
(U)
Universe of Target/Response Elements
i Figure of Merit (FM) Summary—|
'
iv
Approved For Release/ 2001/03/07 riS.RDP96-00789R0032001 60001 -9
I
,b
Approved For Release 2001/03/07
: CIA-RDP9J5-00789R003200160001-9
4-C
I
OBJECTIVE (U)
^The objectives of
this experiment were
to:
•
Demonstrate the potential
of a novel-
1-collection
technique,
known as remote viewing)
L
•
Determine the degree
to which a specific analysis technique
is applicable.
Approved For Release 2001/03/0(7
: CIA-RDP9§-00789R003200160001-9
Approved For Release 2CJ01/03/07
CIAJRDP96-00789R0032001 60001 -9
II BACKGROUND (U)
(U)
Since
1972,
SRI
International
has been
investigating remote
viewing
(RV)—an
apparent human ability to gain access, by mental means alone, to information that is secured by
shielding,
distance,
or time. 1-6 *
At
least three
elements
are
necessary
to conduct an RV
experiment:
(1)
An individual, called a viewer, with an RV ability,
(2)
Specific
target
material
(not
available
to
the
viewer
at
the
time
of
the
experiment), and
(3)
An analysis technique to determine the degree to which RV occurred.
In a typical protocol; a viewer and a monitor—an interviewer who
is also unaware of the target
material—are sequestered at time T0
.
At T0 + 5 minutes, an assistant selects the intended target
by accessing a large pool of potential targets (e.g., a
list of locations within a half-hour drive from
the laboratory) using a random procedure.
At Tq + 30 minutes, the assistant
is positioned at the
selected
site and, back at the laboratory, the viewing begins.
At T0 + 45 minutes, the viewing
ends and the assistant returns to the laboratory. To provide feedback, the viewer, monitor, and
the assistant, return to the selected
site and review the RV data.
(U) To determine
if RV occurred, a number of similar experiments are conducted using a
newly selected target for each
trial.
Usually, the
trials are done with target replacement
(i.e.,
each target
is returned to the pool and may be selected again by the random process).
Since
1972, many procedures
have been developed
to
determine
whether
information
has been
obtained beyond chance expectation. e -8
In the current method, 9 the targets and responses are
described as fuzzy sets of descriptor elements
(e.g., water
is present).
An RV figure of merit
is
related to the normalized intersection of the target set and the response
set.
( U.
^
* When RV
is applied]
”
1 the analysis
procedures vary considerably.
In laboratory experiments,
much
is known
about
the
target,
but
in
[
applications very little target
information
is known.
Thus,
the analysis technique must be modified
in
(U)
References may be found at the end of this report.
Approved For Release 2^01/03/07
: <>IA-fcDP96-00789R003200160001-9
Approved For Release 2001/03/07
: CIA-RDP96-00789R003200160001-9
ordpr to assess the
"correct" RV response elements before confirming
evidence can be obtained.
i
T
j We were asked [
*\o participate
in an experiment
conducted during May,
1987 £
of Lawrence Livermore National
Laboratory
fusing the advanced test accelerator
(ATA)
.
The primary
objectives were to demonstrate
,
remote viewing ^
and to apply fuzzy set technology
in the analysis
of
the data.
SRI's activity occurred over a 24-hour period beginning at
0800 on May
7,
1987.
L
J
Approved For Release 2001/03/07
: CIA-RDP96-00789R003200160001-9
Approved For Release 200^1/03/07
: CfA^RDP96-00789R003200160001-9
III METHOD OF APPROACH (U)
(U)
SRI conducted a 27-hour RV experiment beginning at 0800 on May 7,
1987.
The
viewer provided data in four different work periods spaced at 8-hour intervals.
The details of
the experiment are described below.
A.
(U)
Selection of a Remote Viewer
I SRI
selected Viewer V372
to participate
in this experiment
because of his/her 10-year experience
as
a viewer.
In 1979,
V372 was
calibrated at SRI
as part of a "technology"
transfer
investigation and
found
to possess an RV ability. 10
Since then,
V372 has participated
in
approximately 300
RVs.
Since SRI does not have access
to most
of those data,
we conducted a second calibration series,
as part of
another program,
during FY 1986.
In ^e 1986 calibration series,
the target material was
fsites within a half-hour drive
from SRI.
A protocol was used
that was similar to the one described above,
and a total of 12 RV sessions
were conducted over two weeks.
Remote viewing results of the
series were
found
to be statistically significant and Figure
shows one of the
three
most successful
sessions.
It
is beyond the scope of this report
to
describe
this calibration series
in detail,
but
the
two- other successful
responses were of the same quality as
shown
in Figure
1.
B.
(U) Target Material
~ The primary target was the ATA facility*^
In
particular,
the accelerator itself was targeted during operation with an
external beam.
u(o:
Approved For Release 2QQ1/03/07
: CIAjpP96-00789R003200160001-9
Approved For Release 2001/03/07
: CIA-RDP96-00789R003200160001^^ ^
[
we have also identified targets of lesser interest
in the
environment-
We have designated a wind-power electric generator farm at
Altamoht Pass but adjacent
2 ^ a secondary target,
and the
^"^main complex, which
is farther away geographically but
is
functionally associated withL
1 as
a tertiary target.
M
~
VVl
ClajiW
"1
The intent of this RV experiment was
to obtain as much
information as possible about the target environment
in general and ATA
external beam operation
in particular.
C.
(p) Experiment Protocol
^
~
viewer 372 and a viewing monitor were aware that the target
material was
of \
significance and was located within the
^
greater San Francisco Bay area.
They were told that an individual
t
misdescribed by name and Social Security number^
was
irj the target area during the viewing sessions,
and that two members
of thi
SRI staff (known
to V372 and the monitor) would serve as
a
"beacon"
and would be at
the specific target of
interest between 2200 hours on May
7 and 0800 hours on May
8,
1987.
(The purpose of the
"beacon" person
is
to define
the target
area.
Our past experience has shown that viewers
rarely describe
the experiences of the
"beacon.")
Other than
this,
all
aspects and details of
the experiment were withheld from V372 and the
monitor.
j
The San Francisco Bay Area
is rich
in
_
target possibilities.
For example,
there are many aerospace companies,
semiconductor manufacturing facilities,
particle accelerators
(e.g.
,
Lawrepce Berkeley Laboratory complex,
Stanford Linear Accelerator),
radar
installations,
military air fields,
and Naval bases.
that
to have
the viewer know that the target was of *
interest
and w^s
in the greater Bay Area would not compromise the experiment.
f]
> Four sessions were conducted to provide
information at
approximately 8-hour intervals during May
7,
1987.
The time and
circumstances are
as follows:
(1) 0800
May
7—V372
was
asked
to
describe
the
geographical
area,
and
the gestalt of the area of interest.
He/she was
Approved For Release 2001/0^/07
: CIA-RDP96-0JD789R003200160001-9
Approved For Release 2001/03/07
: CIA-RDP96-00789R003200160001-9
i
also
asked
to
provide
as
much
detail
as
possible
in
real
time
(i.e.,
at
0835),
and
was
targeted
upon
the
sponsor's
on—site
representative.
At
this
time,
the
representative
was
sleeping
(approximately
miles
from^
-
.after having
been awake the entire previous night.
(2) 1010 May
7—V372 was
asked
to
describe
details
and activity
at
the
site
designated
by
the
sponsor's
on-site
representative as of 0000 hours May
(the previous night)
.
(3) 1600 May
7—V372 was
asked
to
describe details
and activity
in real time
at
the
site designated by the
sponsor's on-site
representative.
At
this
time,
this
individual
was
eating
dinner
(approximately
2 miles
from
(4) 2400 May
7—V372 was
asked
to
describe
details
and activity
at
the site designated by two SRI personnel
in real
time.
\
-f During each session,
V372's responses were tape recorded and
he/she was encouraged to draw details whenever possible.
Drawings are
contained
in Appendix
A,
and Appendix B contains verbatim transcripts
of
the
last
two sessions and portions of the first
two.
(Because of
technical difficulties,
most
of
the taped record of the first
two viewings
was
lost.
Since the remaining data are
intact and since the drawings from
the
first two viewings are complete,
this gap
is not significant.)
D.
(U)
Analysis Technique
t
» As discussed
in Section
II,
quantitative analysis'
*
poses problems.
Any analysis of remote viewing data
must be accomplished within the context
of a mission statement,
A system
that
is designed
to demonstrate remote viewing
is inadequate
to enable an
assessment and
vice versa.
A generalized analysis system that
allows
for a defined
a priori mission statement has been developed under
another program, 9 and a brief overview of
it
follows.
1.
(U)
Definitions
'i
^The mos ^
important aspect of any RV data analysis
is
the definition of
the target and the RV response.
For this experiment,
the target
is defined as
a fuzzy set of target elements T[ek,nk,wk]
.
The
kth element,
ek,
in
the
set
is defined by
its membership value,
nk, on the
Approved For Release 2
/
Li/03/07
: OA=lDP96-00789R0032001 60001 -9
Approved For Release 2001/03^7
: CIA-RDP9|6-00789R003200160001-9
closed
interval
[0,1].
The
p.k always represents the degree
to which
ek is
present at
the
target.
For example,
suppose that
the target
is
the ATA
facility,
and the target element under consideration
is the concept
of
"testing shielding effectiveness."
Its membership value, which
is
determined subjectively,
is 0.2
indicating that only 20% of that concept
applies
to this
target.
To allow for differing missions,
wk is an
arbitrary weighting factor.
M
.simulation requires
that
certain elements be more
important
than others.
For example,
the
\
-energy aspect
is very important and
is assigned a weight of
compared
to a cooling tower with a weight of 0.5.
JALI
| The RV response
is similarly defined as
a fuzzy
set
of response elements
R[ek,p.k,wk]
.
The membership values for response
elements,
however,
have a somewhat different meaning than those for target
elements.
Thd
jjik represent
the analyst's assessment as
to the degree of
presence
(on the closed interval
[0,1])
of
ek in the response.
For
declarative statements,
jik =
1 unless V372 volunteers a specific or
implied
importance
to the overall
target.
A degree of interpretation
is allowed
for non-declarative statements by letting
p.k <
1.
The response wk
are
identical
to
the target
wk.
For the purpose of analysis,
all
target and
response
information
is defined as
the fuzzy sets T and
R,
respectively.
'
\lL
i We have defined Accuracy as
the percent of
the
target
material
that was described correctly by a response.
Likewise,
we have
defined Reliability
(of the viewer)
as
the percent of the
response that was
confect.
The FM
is the product of
the
two;
to obtain a high FM,
a viewer
has
to describe a large portion of
the target material correctly
in as
parsimonious
a way as possible.
In fuzzy set terminology,
these
quantities
for the jth target/response pair are as follows:
Approved For Release 2001/03|p7
CIA-RDP9^-00789R0032001 60001 -9
Approved For Release
01/03/07
: G
RDP96-00789R0032001 60001 -9
\
2 wk (R,nTj) k
Accuracy,
=
a,
=
>
£ w„ T„
k
E WkCRjfiTjX
Reliability
=
r
= —
E Wk Rj>k
k
and
Figure of Merit^ =
x r
f
The sum over k
is called the sigma count
in fuzzy set terminology,
and
is
defined as the .sum of the membership values,
n,
for the elements of
the
response,
target,
or their intersection— i.e.,
Rj,
Tj. and
(RiflTj)
,
respectively.
2.
(U) Target and Response Data
The universe
of target/response elements are drawn
from the May
7,
1987,
ATA experiment.
We have defined three element
categories;
functions,
relationships,
and objects.
These categories are
used
to guide
the weighting factors
(i.e.,
the default weights are
1.0,
0.50,
and 0.25,
respectively),
and are used as multipliers of the relative
weights
to form the
wk.
(U) With such
a complex response,
a number of options are
available
for
analysis.
Rather than analyzing the data scan by scan,
all scans were considered together to
provide the response input to the universe of elements.
(U) Table
1 shows the universe of target/response elements and the formal
definition of T and R.
The various scaling weights are shown in parentheses adjacent to the
appropriate
factors.
The
relative
weights
are
derived
from
SRI’s
best
assessment
of
the
operational
utility of each element.
The response membership values, R(p), were determined
from
the raw data
(see Appendices A and
B).
The
target membership
values T(n),
were
determined by SRI personnel prior to the start of the experiment. A few elements, however,
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 :Cll-RDP96-00789R0032001 60001 -9
Approved For Release 2001/03/07
: CIA-RDP96v00789R003200160001-9
were determined by an SRI analyst on a post hoc basis in order to allow for a more accurate
assessment of reliability.
Table
(U)
UNIVERSE OF TARGET/RESPONSE ELEMENTS
r
Element
[
w
TOO
RGO
V
PRIMARY ELEMENTS
(1.0)
Functions
(1.0)
energy
0.9
Electron accelerator
Operation in air
Test experiment
High intensity electron beam production
Problems related to vacuum/air
Destructive beam that dissipates quickly in air
Beam ionizes air
0.6
Two experiments:
one local, one not
Calibration exercises
0.4
Testing penetration power in air
0.5
0.8
Emulation for a much larger scale device
0.5
0.5
Ultimate aim
is to destroy missile parts
0.5
0.5
Testing shielding effectiveness
0.5
0.2
Electronics survivability testing
Testing new form of laser
Operation in space
Satellite detection
is difficult
Nuclear production of electrons to excite new laser
Output results from nuclear process
|
Controlled explosion
Laser output in microwave
i
i
i
Relationships
(0.75)
Power source above beam line
0.75
Linear array of buildings
0.75
0.1
Tunnel under buildings
0.75
0.5
One-story buildings
0.75
0.3
Curvilinear beam Tine
0.75
0.2
Electrons flow through beam line
0.75
0.7
Test equipment both sides of target building
0.75
E&M radiation <10 Angstroms
0.75
0.1
Ignition at core of sphere
0.75
Energy radiates out and
is reflected back into sphere
0.75
15-foot diameter sphere
0.75
Pipes into and out of sphere
0.75
Approved For Release 2001/03/07
: CIA-RDR9Q-00789R003200160001-9
Approved For Release 20(](i/o370TmSSr^P96-00789R003200160001-9
Table
1, Continued
(U)
UNIVERSE OF TARGET/RESPONSE ELEMENTS
Element
w
T(n)
RQO
PRIMARY ELEMENTS
(1.0), continued
Objects
(0.5)
External electron beam
2.5
Very dangerous to humans
2.5
Atmosphere “glows” when operating
2.5
Multiple teams of people
E&M radiation
High security area
Beam visible in air
Electron injector
Tunnel
Electric «power
0.5
Control room
0.5
Monitoring equipment
0.5
Piping
0.5
0.7
Vacuum
0.5
ATA
facility
(buildings)
0.5
0.4
Shielding
0.5
Power substation
0.5
0.2
Cooling towers
0.5
Massive door
0.5
External piping
0.5
Laser
0.5
Control computer
0.5
0.9
Electron beam
0.5
Timing
is critical
0.5
Hard target
0.5
0.4
Loud noise
0.5
0.3
Wave guide
0.5
0.2
Free electron laser (not operating)
0.3
0.2
Coherent wave
0.3
0.3
Roads
a.i
-
Two events
0.1
0.5
Film presentation
0.1
0.1
0.5
Hollow polished
(internal) sphere
0.5
Bundled metal rods
0.5
Approved For Release 2qfel/03/Q
^gi^-Rj)P96-00789R0032001 60001 -9
Approved For Release 2001/03/07
: CIA-RBP96-00789R003200160001-9
Table
1, Continued
(U)
UNIVERSE OF TARGET/RESPONSE ELEMENTS
Element
SECONDARY ELEMENTS
(0.50)
Functions
(1.0)
Wind-power electricity generation
Relationships
(0.75)
Poles scattered in
hills
Poles connected in a grid
Objects
(0.5)
Foothills
Electrical grid
Rotating blades
Multiple wind generators
TERTIARY ELEMENTS
(0.25)
w
T(p)
RGO
Functions
(1.0)
Multipurpose
1;
Multipurpose laboratory complex
Six-story administration building
Relationships
(0.75)
T-shaped, six-story building
Round-topped building just east of fall building
Swimming pool north and east of tal| building
Large parking lot just west of tall building
Linear array of trees adjacent to parking lot
Larage, segmented, one-story building complex 0.5
mile north of tall building
!
Main roads bordering complex
City to west of complex
Main entrance at west of complex
Laboratory
is two miles from
city
City
is north of laboratory
Air field
is southeast of laboratory
Mountains surround laboratory
Freeway
is north of laboratory
Objects
(0.5)
Tall building
Parking lot
Linear array of trees
Road
Many buildings
Main entrance
.
,
,
,
Building with cylindrical shaped root
Air field
Flat valley
Mountains
Large mountain
1.3
0.8
0.6
0.2
0.4
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.7
0.2
"
•
0.2
0.5
0.2
0.6
0.2
0.6
0.2
0.3
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.4
0.1
0.05
0.05
0.1
Approved For Release 2001/03^07^ IjMKP) 96-0^789R003200160001-9
Approved For Release 2001/03/07
: cJa-RDP96-00789R003200160001-9
IV RESULTS AND DISCUSSION (U)
Table
shows
the
figure of merit analysis for the ATA
experiment using the fuzzy sets defined
in Table
1.
The target/response
intersection
is shown as
|Tf|R|
.
and the sigma-count of the target and
response sets are shown as
|T|
and
|R|
,
respectively.
All quantities
include the
full weights
shown
in Table
1.
The primary target was the ATA
external electron beam experiment.
The secondary target was
the adjacent
wind-power generation farm,
and
the tertiary target was
the
^
laboratory complex and surrounding area.
Viewed as separate targets,
the
,
figures of merjt of 0.94 and 0.81 for the wind-power farm and the^
complex respectively are
in good agreement with the qualitative
*
correspondence shown
in Figures
2 and
3.
Figure
shows additional
da.t&
on the tertiary target viewing compared
to a map of
the
Jarea.
\jThese
figures represent data obtained during the 0800 scan and are consistent
with
the tasking and location of
the beacon person
(see page
6)
.
The
relatively lower value
of 0.56 for the primary target
is also consistent
for the
"scattered" nature of
the response
(see
the original transcript
in
Appendix
B)
.
The combined value of 0.61 reflects
the weighting factor
in
favor
of
the primary
target.
Table 2
«
(S/NF)
FIGURE OF MERIT (FM) SUMMARY-*
to
Target Type
it n ri
|T|
|R|
Acc.
Rel.
FM
PRIMARY
Function
20.50
22.00
29.50
0.93
0.69
0.65
Relation
1.80
4.95
5.85
0.36
0.31
0.11
Object
16.86
23.00
19.21
0.73
0.88
0.64
Total
39.16
49.95
54.56
0.78
0.72
0.56
SECONDARY
Total
5.08
5.08
5.38
0.94
1.00
0.94
TERTIARY
Total
5.48
6.42
5.76
0.85
0.95
0.81
TOTAL
49.72
61.45
65.70
0.81
0.76
0.61
i
Approved For Release 2^01/03/07
: C!^-RDP96-00789R003200160001-9
I.D.
372
FIGURE 2
(U) PART OF THE 0800 RESPONSE COMPARED WITH PHOTOGRAPH OF THE
ALTAMONT WIND-POWER ELECTRIC GENERATION FARM
Approved For Release 2001/03/0'i
CIA-RDP96-
6-0j)789R0032001 60001 -9
•J •]
ill
ill
1T1T1
maam
&MU.
.*• —=r
. *
',
---i
'
s'
_
Si
•
,
r
-
A
JX
«** “ *
'l: >
\ $-?*
»:
.
\
,
f
I
*>ir.r
-
.V
Jr-^ ^
~
lwn
vi^J
rW.
<
.
•*•:
**
«'
. «w .
sgjg?
.«-?
fe2'«£2g
V
" ’*<c£
l
FIGURE
(U)
PART OF THE 0800 RESPONSE COMPARED TO THE WEST GATE OF
Jtaiau-'. d 4
Approved For Release 2001
,-RDP96-00789R0032001 60001 -9
Approved iz Re le aaEet a Chia OP Spo 9pg0Osgae Copa -° mm am = CPYRGHT Csueer 3) 1.0. 372 APPROX. DISTANCE 2 MILE AIRFIELD STREET MAP OF LIVERMORE — aganeen aqure 4 QPPERVeE Fir Reteasra0ss lo3ORAEOINRDPYSO7SUROUSINGTECH01-9
Approved For Release 2001/03/07
CIA-RJDP96-00789R0032001 60001 -9
Viewer 372 responded with a single concept
to the primary
target that was
incorrect;
it contained,
however,
many individual elements
that were correct.
One aspect of RV responses that has been a recurring
theme
is
that a surprise element
(to the viewer)
frequently indicates
correct
information about
the
site.
In this experiment,
the following
sentence
is embedded
in a lot of incorrect data
(see page B-18 of the 2400
scan
in the transcript,
Appendix B)
"What
I
keep
wanting
to
do,
is
I
keep
wanting
to
put
the
whole
thing
into
an
apparatus
that
captures
electrons
and
accelerates
them.
This
sentence appears
in
a general discussion of a
"Star Trek" phaser
system initiated by controlled nuclear explosions,
and represents
a
significant cognitive surprise.
It
is
important
to determine whether or
not
this
type of linguistic surprise might
serve as a reliability
indicator.
Long-standing difficulties
in applying the RV phenomena
to
applications are
at
least
twofold.
In a lengthy response,
those elements of genuine
|
t significance must be
identified
a
priori.
Second,
even excellent examples of remote viewing do not
necessarily imply
usefulness.
As an example of the
latter,
consider the response
to the Altamont pass wind-power generation farm.
It
is
an excellent example of remote viewing,
but
it
is not of
value.
^In summary,
V372's response
to
the ATA experiment has mixed
results.
Even though there are excellent examples of remote viewing,
the
value
is mixed.
It does not appear
to be the case
that V372
simply responded with everything he/she knows about technical material.
This viewer has been involved with all kinds of technical activity
in past
careers.
Yet,
hidden among a significant amount of incorrect data,
lies
a
nearly complete description of
the external electron beam and details
of
the ATA experiment of May
7,
1987.
Approved For Release 2(^01/03/07
: CIA-Rpjp*96-00789R0032001 60001 -9
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Approved For Release 2001/03/0
A-2
ClA-RDPOB-bp789R0032001 60001 -9
Approved For Release 2001f03/07
|o3
CIA-RDPP6-00789R0032001 60001 -9
A-5
Approved For Release 20&1/03/07
: CIA-RDR96-00789R003200160001-9
^-RDp|9
Approved For Release 1q£LZ03/07
: etA^DP96-00789R0032001 60001 -9
Approved For Release 20^0^/03/07
'
: ClA~RbP96-00789R0032001 60001 -9
Approved For Release 2001/03/07
: CIA-RQR96-00789R003200160001-9
)^6 -(
A-8
Approved For Release 2001/0^0,1
5^00789R0032001 60001 -9
J
Approved For Release 2001/03/0^: CIA-RDP96jP0789R003200160001-9
A-10
Approved For Release 2001 /03/^CIA-RDP96^0789R0032001 60001 -9
Approved For Release 20^1/03/07
CIA-RDP96-00789R0032001 60001 -9
1A5
APPENDIX B (U)
Remote Viewing Response (Transcript)
May 1987
(This Appendix is
j
Approved For Release 20
P96-00789R0032001 60001 -9
Approved For Release 2001/03/07
: CIA-RDP96-b0789R003200160001-9
SESSION
1, 8:35 a.m. (U)
May, 1987 (U)
M:
I
^ Just
to reiterate what was
said earlier,
we do have extensive
photos and information about
the site currently locked up
in the
COTR's
safe.
The name of the person who
is acting as
a beacon at
this
point
in time
is XXXXXX.
He
is
a Physicist.
He
is on the site and he
has been there since 8:00 this morning and will be there for a period
of time.
This
first session
is
a real
time session.
We are going to
be doing
total
sessions.
We will be doing one at 4:00 this
afternoon and one at midnight.
Between now and 4:00 this afternoon
there will be another one
that will be
a retrocognitive one
to
midnight of
last night.
(S/NF)
'N.ow,
to
start off,
we are
first of all
interested
in the
geographical
area,
we are
interested
in the gestalt
of
the
area,
what
is the area
like.
We are
interested
in
the manmade sorts of things
in
the area.
And then we are going
to focus
in on
items of interest
in
as much detail
as possible.
What's
the function of the place and
what's happening.
And,
what
is
the difference between what's
happening now and what's happening later.
That will be kind of a
summary thing we'll do at midnight tonight.
But generally anything of
specific
interest
at this particular point
in time
in terms
of the
activity
V:
^This
time?
M:
[ Right
now.
Yep.
V:
joK,
what
M:
_
t So anytime you're ready
to
start,
why... are
there any other
questions?
V:
No.
What I'm gonna do
is
M:
j Just prepare yourself,
cause
I know you had a rough night.
V:
;
J So, what
I'm gonna do
is,
I'm gonna probably sketch
lightly
in pencil.
everything
M:
(
OK.
V:
^ An then
I will
ink
it
in afterwords.
B-2
Approved For Release 2001 /03/07-jlPIA-RDP96-00789R0032001 60001 ^9
' J
36-007J
Approved For Release^001/03/07
: CIA-F^DP96-00789R003200160001-9
M:
1 OK.
V:
{ Because
I do more accurate drawing
in pencil than
I do
in
ink.
M:
\
OK,
let me get you a pencil
then.
!
V:
I have
one.
M:
Oh,
OK.
(They both speak at once here and
it
is garbled.)
We
gotta be precise
in our detail here.
So we can take as
long as we
want,
there
is no time
limit on what we're doing.
But we will
try to
bring some closure
to each one of the four sessions.
V:
(_
1 OK.
Some kind of a general layout here,
I guess.
This
is a
very light pencil.
I brought
a Stephen King book
if you get bored.
We'll start with something real dynamic
like a line that we'll call
a
road.
Uh,
that doesn't feel right.
You got an eraser somewhere?
(M
get
eraser.)
Thanks.
A road,
parking area,
building.
There seems
to
be,
uh,
there seems
to be,
is
that running?
M:
^
Um,
hum.
*
V:
i
There seems
to be,
um,
a whole
lot more buildings than I'm
drawing.
But what
I'm trying to
do,
is
I'm trying to draw buildings
that are meaningful.
M:
\
( Um,
hum.
V:
Versus buildings
that are useless.
By useless
I mean that
there
is probably a million buildings here which have
a desk and
typical.
. .this office,
that office type
of arrangement.
(Could not
make out what he said after this.)
M:
>1
So,
do you mean that what you're drawing here are buildings
that are
important to the function that we're after here?
V:
l Exactly.
M:
OK.
V:
(
And,
uh,
in trying to do
this,
I'm trying to put
it
in. .. (tape
^ts out
- it's about
99 on the counter)
B-3
Approved For Release 2001/03/07
: CIA-RDP96-00789R003200160001-9
SESSION 2, 10:10 a.m. (U)
May, 1987 (U)
M:
j
,
OK,
it's about
10 minutes after,
12 minutes after
10.
V:
J Right.
M:
Q_.
) May
7.
And what we're about
to do now
is the
retrocog.
. .retrocognition part
of
the outbound experiment
that we're
working on,
and that
involves going back to 12:00
last night,
midnight,
May
6 and giving
a description of what was happening at
this
site at that time
that
is
of special
interest
to us during this
targeting period.
V:
C~
OK.
There's
a really distinct different feeling,
uh,
in the
initial session we were targeting the general
layout onto the
(tape
cuts out here,
in
30' s on counter)
B-4
Approved For Release 2001/03/07
: CIA-RDP96-00789R003200160001-9