Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00787R0001 00060001 -6
to
Mr.
Manfred Gale
(HQDA,
DAMA-ZD)
DATL
3 August
1979
from
H.
E.
Puthoff
location
Bid.
subject
SRI/Gale Committee Meeting
of 24-25 July
cc
We appreciated having an opportunity to discuss with you and members
of your
committee several aspects
of our work during your recent visit
to
SRI.
We
welcome this kind of
dialog and exchange
of views with individuals
of diverse
backgrounds, who are willing to focus on issues
of importance to us and our
program.
There were certain aspects
of the meeting,
however, which we felt were
unsatisfactory,
but
for which we have specific remedial actions
to propose.
As
you know from our agenda, we had intended to cover four major areas
of
interest:
(1) an historical overview, including past applications
to problems
of interest
to clients;
(2)
scientific questions with regard to RV protocols,
judging,
statistics,
and so forth;
(3)
the goals and planned activities on
present
client programs;
and
(4)
committee discussion with program remote viewers.
Unfortunately, with the extended ad hoc discussions
that
took place during the
opening presentation on historical material
(Part
1) and the need to press on
to
a discussion of planned efforts on present
client programs
(Part
3), we all
but skipped Part
2 on scientific questions
(for example,
none
of
the
slides were
shown).
This seemed expedient
at
the time,
given the apparent inappropriateness,
in a group of such diverse interests,
of getting involved in detailed discussions
on specific technical
issues
(e.g.,
nuances
as to protocol procedures,
statistical
evaluation techniques
,
etc,).
This may have been "penny-wise and pound foolish,'
however,
for all
of us
at
SRI realized at
one time
or another in casual discussions
with individual committee members
during dinner breaks,
etc.,
that
there was
a
profound
lack
of understanding of
some very basic issues.
To cite some specific
examples
:
(1)
It was expressed that
the RV target pool should
be chosen and
maintained by someone further removed from the experimentation
than the principal investigators
, and that access
to the target
pool should be
limited.
The above
is in fact the procedure already in force .
An independent
target selection team generated the target pool and turned them
over to the Project
SSO who keeps them stored in a secure
container.
Targets are then withdrawn only under supervision of the SSO
(who
records their withdrawal)
at the beginning of RV sessions.
In
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00787R0001 00060001 -6
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00787R0001 00060001 -6
Mr. Manfred Gale
Page
3 August
1979
particular,
the RV session interviewers
(Targ and Puthoff)
had
never seen the
target
list until your committee asked that
it
be
brought to
the
conference room.
(2)
Concern was expressed that apparently successful RV results
in
our protocols might
be due instead to
a combination of remote viewer
guesses
of known Bay Area
landmarks and/or artifactual sharpening
of
a subject's narrative by cues
from the interviewer who
is
at
least educated,
if not directly knowledgeable
as
to
the
target
possibilities.
(We think that
is was understood that the inter-
viewer never knows
the particular target.)
The
corollary to this
concern
is that although the RV function may exist,
our protocols
can't demonstrate
it
because
of the above-stated circumstances.
In fact,
the statistical procedure we use takes
into account
at
the outset
the possibility that
the target pool
mi ght be completely
known to both remote viewer and interviewer—that
it could be that
the remote viewer and interviewer were poring over the target
list
during the session ;
in short,
that the RV series
is
to be treated
as belonging to that
class
of studies
in which the elements
of the
target pool are known a priori
to both remote viewer and interviewer
,
as
in studies involving numbers
or
cards
as
targets.
(In fact,
we
would go this
apparent
criticism one step further and assert
that
it would be naive to assume that
by any change in protocol one could
in principle avoid the assumption that
the remote viewer knows
the
target pool.)
Thus, when there
is
a statistically significant
result
in our protocols,
the cause must
lie elsewhere than remote viewer
guess
or interviewer cueing,
as
these possibilities are handled at
a fundamental
level by a statistical procedure that assumes
the worst.
This
fact must
be understood by the committee members
if they are
to assess the
SRI program results properly.
(3)
If was
repeatedly suggested that
it would be better to dispense with
the interviewer in an RV session so
as
to have
a
"cleaner" protocol,
and that
the use of an interviewer
is
somehow a methodological
flaw.
Such
a suggestion indicates
a complete failure
to comprehend that
success
as obtained by use
of the
SRI
RV protocols
(as opposed to other
procedures)
is in large part
due to an innovative design which
incorporates
a division of labor between remote viewer and interviewer
designed to mirror the two primary modes
of
cerebral functioning;
namely,
the nonanalytic cognitive style
(brain function)
that pre-
dominates
in spatial pattern recognition and other holistic processing
(and is hypothesized to predominate in psi functioning), and the
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00787R0001 00060001 -6
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00787R0001 00060001 -6
Mr. Manfred Gale
Page
3 August
1979
analytical cognitive style that predominates
in verbal and other
analytical functioning.
(Only very experienced remote viewers
appear to have the ability to handle
both cognitive styles
simultaneously.)
The removal of the burden of analytical functioning
(by the interviewer)
during exercise
of
the RV faculty appears
to be an important
ingredient
for success.
A change
in this
aspect
of
the methodology may give the appearance
of
a cleaner
protocol
(it
is not),
but
it may also yield the
lower
level results
characteristic of classical academic
(as opposed
to operational)
studies.
Our
client programs,
on the
other hand,
force us
to
develop techniques
that
yield results, and it
cannot
be stressed
enough that we have developed the appropriate statistical procedures
to handle such possibilities
as remote viewer
guessing and
interviewer cueing or sharpening.
To the degree that
the committee’s overall evaluation of
the
SRI program will
touch on technical issues
such as these, we would suggest that
it
is incumbent
on the committee members
to obtain a more thorough grounding in the technical
details than was possible in the few hours available during the July meeting at
SRI.
We would doubt,
for example,
that anyone would be in a position to
critique our present
RV statistical procedures fairly and justly
(not
that there
wasn’t
the
potential
because
of
the expertise represented)
simply because we
did
not
have an opportunity to present
them,
and,
being
a new approach in our program
(Scott's direct-count-of-permutations method), we have
not
discussed them at
any
length in publications available to the
committee.
Since the approach
(a)
is
specifically designed to handle narrative material
of
the remote viewing type,
(b)
takes into account the possibility of potential remote viewer/interviewer
guessing and/or knowledge of the target
pool,
and
(c)
has been thoroughly
investigated, used,
and documented in the academic parapsychology community as
the most
conservative reference statistic to fall back
on,
one cannot assess
remarks
such as
(1)
-
(3) above without
at
least an intuitive understanding
of
the
assumptions and implications
of this approach.
Beyond this,
there were other
items that
to our mind need clearing up,
such as
confusion of our work with
other
labs’
work and statements,
and
little awareness
that we have done considerable
experimentation with simpler paranormal functions
than remote viewing
(e.g.,
computer-automated number-perception tasks,
binary card tasks)
to establish
certain parameters
of the more complicated functioning.
(Such scientific legwork
we
did
not
present to the
committee,
as
it
seemed beyond the scope
of
interest
expressed at the time.)
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00787R0001 00060001 -6
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00787R0001 00060001 -6
Mr. Manfred Gale
Page
3 August
1979
To remedy the
shortcomings
inherent
in the brief orientation meeting of 24-25
July,
to ensure that we do justice to the multitudinous
concerns
of the
committee,
and to ensure that the
SRI program obtains
a fair hearing from the committee, we
propose that:
(1)
all committee members receive from your office
a copy of this
memo and the attached protocols to gain a better understanding of our procedures;
(2)
further discussions
be held in smaller groups between SRI personnel and those
members
of
the
committee who are especially concerned with specific issues
(e.g.,
protocol procedures and statistical approaches with Drs .
Synder and
Tang)
.
We are available
for such interactions
at Menlo Park, Washington,
or elsewhere,
and would appreciate the opportunity to resolve these
issues
at the earliest
convenience.
Out
of such interactions we
could also expect
as
a bonus
to define
with greater clarity those scientific issues
that
need to be pursued
in more
detail should fundamentally-oriented research programs
be
set up in the future,
as they must
.
Since we are mutually tasked by our sponsor to provide the best technical
assessment possible of
a field fraught with complex and subtle issues, we believe
that additional actions
such as we have proposed are necessary if we are to
fulfill our mutual goals and responsibilities
.
Enclosed are
copies
of the memo and protocols
for all
the committee members,
which we would appreciate your distributing.
Also enclosed for use
at your
discretion are additional
copies
for
Ma j
.
Gen,
E.
R.
Thompson,
Dr.
Ruth Davis,
and the Hon. Walter Laberge.
We remain at
your disposal
as
to arrangements
should you decide to follow up on
the further interactions we have proposed.
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00787R0001 00060001 -6
|
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00787R0001 00060001 -6
August
1979
STANDARD REMOTE VIEWING
(RV)
PROCEDURES:
LOCAL SITES
Prepared
by:
H.
E.
Puthoff,
Ph.D.
R.
Targ
E.
C.
May,
Ph.D.
333 Ravenswood Ave. • Menlo Park, California 94025
For Re4e®iS©-20OO/^1^i?i<!NA-R!DP9&iO®78(7R©OOtfOOO6OOO1 -6
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00787R0001 00060001 -6
STANDARD REMOTE VIEWING
(RV)
PROCEDURES
(LOCAL SITES)
Our present
standard remote-viewing
(RV) procedures
are similar to
those
in our
Proc.
IEEE paper,
"A Perceptual
Channel
for
Information
Transfer over Kilometer Distances:
Historical
Perspective and Recent
Research."
The elements
of
the protocol,
each
of which
is addressed
below,
consist
of
(1)
basic procedural design;
(2) remote viewer/interviewer
roles;
(3)
target pool selection;
(4)
target storage and access;
(5) remote
viewer orientation;
(6)
interviewer behavior;
(7)
target person behavior;
(8)
post-experiment
feedback;
(9)
evaluation procedure.
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00787R0001 00060001 -6
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00787R0001 00060001 -6
I
BASIC PROCEDURAL DESIGN
At
the beginning
of
a trial,
a
remote viewer
is closeted with an
interviewer
in an isolated windowless room of the Radio Physics
Laboratory
in the
SRI
complex to await an agreed-upon start
time*
At the same
time
a target person
is
sent, without
communication with
the remote viewer or
interviewers remaining at
SRI,
to
a
target
location somewhere
in the
San Francisco Bay Area
(~500 square
km).
The
target
is
determined by
random- number access
to
a target
pool of
sealed travelling orders previously
prepared by an independent experimental
team and kept
locked in
a secure
safe.
The target
pool
consists
of more than 50 target
locations
chosen
from
a target-rich environment.
During a predetermined viewing period
of
15 minutes
duration,
the
remote viewer
is asked
to render drawings
and describe
into
a
tape recorder
his impressions
of the target
site being visited by the outbound target
person.
The interviewer with the remote viewer
is
kept
ignorant
of
the
target and
is therefore
free
to question him to clarify his descriptions
without
fear
of cueing
(overt
or subliminal)
as
to the particular target.*
Since general knowledge
of
the
San Francisco Bay Area
target region on
the part
of
the
remote viewer and interviewer must
be taken as
a given,
and since particular knowledge
of the
contents
of the
target
pool
is
revealed
as
a series progresses,
one must take
into account
the possi-
bility that any particular description may be artifactually sharpened.
(Such sharpening
can in principle increase
the apparent quality of
the
result only
if
there
is functional remote viewing
to begin with.
It
cannot
in the absence
of ESP produce an inflated result.)
This sharpening
possibility in the presence
of an already functioning RV capability is
handled
in the statistical evaluation of
the results
by conservatively
assuming at
the outset
that the
series
is
to
be treated as
belonging
to
that
class
of studies
in which
the elements
of
the
target
pool
are known
a priori
to both remote viewer and interviewer,
as
in studies involving
numbers
or
cards
as
targets.
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00787R0001 00060001 -6
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00787R0001 00060001 -6
When the target person returns
to SRI following
the remote viewing
period,
the
subject
is then taken to the target
site
so that he may obtain
direct
feedback.
Following
a
series
of such trials
over
a several-day
period,
a formal
blind
judging procedure
(described below)
is used
to
evaluate the
data and quantify the results.
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00787R0001 00060001 -6
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00787R0001 00060001 -6
II
REMOTE VIEWER/INTERVIEWER ROLES
An important
methodological aspect
of the
SRI
RV protocols
revolves
around the
fact
that
the remote viewer/interviewer team constitutes
a
single information gathering unit
in which the remote viewer
f s role
is
designed
to be that
of perceiver/information source, and
the interviewer's
role
is
designed to
be
that
of analytical
control.
This
division of
labor
is designed to mirror the
two primary modes
of
cerebral
functioning;
namely,
the
nonana lytic cognitive style
(related
to
brain function)
that predominates
in spatial pattern recognition and other
holistic processing
(and
is hypothesized
to predominate
in psi
functioning),
and the analytical
cognitive style
that predominates
in verbal
and other
analytical functioning.
(Only very experienced remote viewers appear
to have
the ability to handle both cognitive styles simultaneously.)
The
interviewer role, removing
as
it
does
the burden of analytical functioning
during exercise
of
the RV faculty,
appears
to
be
a key element
in generating
the
level
of
success required in operational programs,
and we attribute
the
success
of
the
SRI
RV protocols
in large
part
to this innovative design
which appears
to provide an appropriate match
to the required functioning.
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00787R0001 00060001 -6
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00787R0001 00060001 -6
III
TARGET POOL SELECTION
Target
locations
in the
San Francisco Bay Area are selected by
a
team
of
two Radio Physics Laboratory personnel who
are
not
involved
as
inter-
viewers
in
the experiments
(to prevent direct knowledge
of
the
target
pool
by the interviewers).
The
locations
are
chosen to satisfy the following
criteria
:
(1)
Target
sites
must
be within a half-hour drive
of
the
SRI
Menlo Park
complex
so that
a uniform target
access
time exists
for all experiments.
(2)
The target
pool
is
constructed to contain several targets
of various
types— that
is,
several
fountains,
several
churches,
several boathouses,
and so forth— specifically
to circumvent analysis
strategies
of
the
type
"there was
a fountain yesterday,
so
it
is unlikely that
there
is
a
fountain today."
Furthermore,
targets
of
different types
are
not
chosen
to
be particularly distinct from each other,
so that overlapping features
exist.
In this manner
the
content
of
a given target,
determined
by random entry
into the target
pool,
is essentially independent
of
the
contents
of other targets
("open-deck"
design).
(3)
The definition of what
constitutes each target
is
established
in advance of
the entire RV series
by written descriptions on a
set
of
3" X 5" target
cards.
(Ex:
Four Seasons Restaurant
,
on El Camino
Real,
just north
of San Antonio Road.
Stand under the
entry arch and feel the bricks.)
These
cards
constitute
the outbound team's
instructions
at
the beginning
of the
trial,
and the
judge's target
list
during the
evaluation phase.
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00787R0001 00060001 -6