Approved For Release 2001/03/07
: CIA-RDP96-00787R000200070003-2
SCHEDULE
Wednesday
Thursday
Friday
1: 30 A. M. arrive motel
9: 30 A.M. arrive SRI, tour and meetings
10: 00 RV #1 and
its debriefing
12: 00 lunch and review of Nature paper critiques
1: 00 met Hella Hammid, observed her performance
at Stanford chapel.
3: 00 witnessed critique of Hella's performance
4: 30 discussions with Targ and Puthoff regarding
schedule for the next days, obtained further
background reading on Remote Viewing and
Ryzl's paper on redundant coding
7: 30 dinner meeting including Puthoff and
off-site.
Followed by discussion with
SG1I
regarding handling of Hella's data and my
further activities.
K*ta?ar.T
10:00 RV #2 and
its debriefing
1:00 select target, Hella's RV and
its critique
3: 00 Hella leaves, further discussion of her results
4: 00 Obtain tape of Hella performing an RV on
scientific apparatus,
to try repeating the drill
press experiment.
4: 15 make several runs on the ESP teaching machine,
using various techniques
6: 30 listen to Hella's RV tape,
identify keywords;
read coding theory papers.
9: 30 obtain Hella's drawings from the RV and
again listen to tape
10: 00 debriefing on my performance
11:00 RV #3 and debriefing
2:00 abacus experiment
2: 20 teaching machine experiment
4: 00 correct RV #2 transcript, obtain copies
of drawings and photos
6:00 total debriefing: my results, my criticisms,
expected follow-on, alternative funding sources,
what my trip accomplished, outlook for
operational uti lity
10 : 00 flight out
i w >
,
; v;_.
..
Release 2001/03/07
: CIArRDP96-OO787ROO02OOQ7OOO3-2
Approved For Release 2001/03/07
: CIA-RDP96-00787R000200070003-2
RV #1
Mood
The first experiment utilizing me as subject was run immediately upon
my arrival at the SRI
lab.
The standard mood adjective assessment was not
done in this case or on the subsequent days for lack of time and because
I
was already noting my experiences
in detail.
At this time
I was very tired and
suffering from a bad head cold, and so was certain no one could expect a good
performance from me.
As a result,
I was completed relaxed.
Puthoff and Targ
seemed anxious to run such an experiment at once as a way of calibrating me,
and defining our schedule for the three days.
Protocol
Hal Puthoff obtained a standard target site from the office safe, under their
usual protocol, and proceeded to the place.
I remained in the experiment room
with Russell Targ, discussing a variety of topics.
At the agreed time,
I turned
on the tape recorder and described the images that came to mind.
At various
points, Russell encouraged me to talk in further detail.
I drew no pictures.
Another tape was made when Hal returned and
I was debriefed.
Data
Transcripts of these tapes were not completed before
I
left and so are not
contained here.
They will be included in SRI's report on my visit.
From my
notes, key points in my description were:
Hal
is shuffling about an area that is 50 feet from parked cars.
The area has a geometrical shape
(not round) which he has de-
cided to stay inside, although
it is not a physical constraint in the
sense that he can get out of the area
if he wants.
There
is a railing
more than waist high.
He is looking both out and down.
There
is
movement,
in the sense of a breeze, past him.
He walks back to
our room.
When Hal returned and asked how
it went,
I began to confess that
I had
avoided describing my initial impressions.
At that point he turned on a second
tape recorder, and
I continued with a description of Hal standing on a wooden
dock with rippling water going past him.
There were two reasons why
I had
not described these feelings:
first, the image seemed too much like my own
apartment dock and
I thought
I was just remembering
it.
Second,
I had driven
around SRI's periphery in locating the lab, and was certain there was no water
around.
Since
I wanted to do well,
I had not mentioned those impressions,
although
I
later realized that
I wanted them on tape for completeness of the
documentation.
VA
i
A
:.f-
m
,JV
;
’."
tsW;
"
f::
ft
• v'.'*'. V*'
r
’
fait??'
Approved f G»f Release 2001/03/07
: C]A^RPP96-0p787R00020O0700p3:2
, ty
<
Approved For Release 2001/03/07
: CIA-RDP96-00787R000200070003-2
Subjective Assessment
The impressions came easily to mind.
It was like daydreaming except
I had Russ as director, and the impressions had to be translated into words
and pictures with conscious effort.
As a result,
I was reluctant to talk.
I
'
did not expect that
I had done well.
I was, however, surprised that
I had
been able to really clear my mind, and had then gotten a consistent set of
impressions for 15-20 minutes.
Also in the past experiments
I had reviewed,
there seemed to be no impressions of time or motion
(as well as no sounds)
and so
I had not expected to receive such impressions when following that
protocol.
Analysis
of Results
Hal became obviously either pleased or amused at listening to my tape
during debriefing.
I was too impatient to make any drawings and so we
proceeded to revisit the target site.
My initially surpressed description
was very accurate, as were my other statements.
From my impressions
I could
have identified the actual target location, which was a bridge across a man-
made brook on the SRI grounds.
I was extremely surprised by that, and later
analyzed the proceedings for possible explanation.
Critique
It was frustrating to attempt a 15-20 minute session, as my mind started
to wander.
The questioning sometimes was distracting.
The process
I was performing
seemed to involve getting an impression, then searching for a word or image
to match - sometimes an entire experience would result from the search.
The
process was analogous to smelling something, which may recall the name of
a fragrance, or may recall an entire event complete with sounds and emotional
memories.
Sometimes the questions would get me off on such a side track.
I questioned how
I could be certain the site was not manufactured after-
the-fact either by monitoring my description as
I made
it or during debriefing.
Either Hal's cleverness or computer assistance could then select a site similar
to my description.
There were three retorts to this:
1)
Originally, the outbound experimenter did tape his movements
and destination.
This procedure was later dropped since
it did not
seem to add to the analysis, but merely generated more tapes to be
catalogued.
Wf
***&4i*'-
Approved For Release 20Q1/03/07
: CIArRDP96-00787Rp0020007Q0Q3-2
Approved For Release 2001/03/07
: CIA-RDP96-00787R000200070003-2
2)
The high strangeness of the sites would make
it difficult
to manufacture such places within the required range,
if any
specific description were given.
Due to my unfamiliarity with the
area,
I could not effectively counter their challenge to match my
total description to any other site within 15 minutes from SRI.
However,
I did attempt to construct such a site near my D.C.
office and could not.
If some of the details were ignored
it
became possible.
3)
We decided that we would tape a complete record of the
outbound experimenter's journey and activities at the site, both
to eliminate such a possibility of manufacture after the fact; and
to provide time calibration data for my impressions of body move-
ment, posture, and intent.
Unfortunately,
this was not done until
the third experiment.
Much discussion has been made concerning the "symbolism" used by RV
subjects.
This term carries incorrect connotations,
referring to a pur-
poseful obscurring of details.
Rather, the process which occurs
is a pure
translation from experience to words, which may necessitate analogy but
not symbolism.
By a discussion of symbolic content in the RV data,
experimenters imply that the deep psychological make-up of a subject must
be probed before his data can be assessed.
That is not true.
w»£,**'*
pm-
l
‘
'
Approved For Release 2001/03/07
: CIA-RDP96-00787R000200070003-2
With Hella
at the Church
As described in the objective report,
I accompanied Hella to the church
primarily to observe her , although
I did have a number of questions in mind
regarding my own performance potential and possible interaction with her.
She did extremely well, as described elsewhere in this report and as
attested to by a letter from the officer in charge.
1 will add here only a few
of my own observations.
Hella's performance indicates the durability of the phenomenon
involved.
The environment was totally uncontrolled and the task
was completely new to her, since
it involved perception of past
events, with no assistance from a "transmitting" experimenter.
The attending officer knew full details of the case, so that
Hella could theoretically have gotten all the verifiable results
from him via telepathy.
She did add information regarding the
suspect's description and identity which have yet to be verified.
The possibility that the entire event was staged for me
is not
worth consideration.
Since
I viewed official reports and video
tapes at the Menlo Park police barracks, the staging would have
required police co-operation.
Hella's results support the frequent assertion that subjects
perform better on more difficult and important tasks, rather than
when playing games.
In attempting to establish rapport with Hella,
I directed some
questioning of her.
She in turn began asking me for my impressions
and confirmation of hers.
Since the entire proceedings were being
taped,
I backed off and said
I wanted to
walk around.
However,
we did briefly work together on the description of the victim, and
I
believe that was at least a psychological boost to her performance,
(She directed the officer at one point to question me further since
I
seemed to be on to something, but
I was able to avoid his further
interest by describing aspects of the case that were completely wrong.
He paid me no more attention, and
I receive no notice
in his further
correspondence with SRI.)
K
pmwwwn
i/t
.
“ k
-
iWiW-AV.
CIA-RPP96-Q0787R00020Q070003-2.
Approved For Release 2001/03/07
: CIA-RDP96-00787R000200070003-2
I found
it was possible to get a number of impressions
myself as
I walked about the church, although they were not
as specific as Hella's.
I do believe that a group discussion
following independent observations would effectively integrate
out some of the noise involved in such a process.
Hella
is very much concerned with her performance.
After
the visit to the church, she several times cited statements she
had made and the fact that no one had told her the data before
hand.
She was somewhat surprised at how well she had done,
and joked about how much further she should go.
She is
attempting further efforts on the case, and
it will be interesting
to follow them.
• w- v:
Appr.oy^
Approved For Release 2001/03/07
: CIA-RDP96-00787R000200070003-2
RV‘ #2
Mood
Of my three RV experiments,
I talked most freely during this one, and
a mood indicator would probably have shown me to be still excited over the
events of the previous day.
As a result,
I talked more in this experiment,
giving elaborate detail, and drew a set of pictures.
Protocol
The desire was to duplicate the standard protocol as performed the
previous day.
I made a number of mental adjustments:
I would dictate every-
thing that came to mind,
I would concentrate on body movements,
I would
work on detail rather than overall impressions
Data
A completely checked and verified transcript of my tape
is included in
a later section, along with a detailed attempt at objective analysis.
The
RV occurred in three parts:
1)
First,
I attempted to predict the site at a time when
I
expected Hal was on his way there.
2)
Second,
at the agreed time
I get an
initial impression
of shielding and then perception of geometrical forms.
3)
Third,
I then get an impression of a building interior,
and continue to be involved with the building for the remainder
of the experiment.
Subjective Assessment
1)
At the time of my first attempt, Hal was in fact still
waiting in Bart Cox's office for a site to be selected from the
safe*
He was leaning against a more than waist high counter
which has a light wood top.
My impression of him leaning
against a light wood workbench of similar height, and my later
statement that this
is not a prediction but a viewing at the time,
are both essentially correct.
In addition,
I correctly describe
"papers and small items, no large equipment" on the counter top.
«
lr
Mm-
.)y
.
Approved For Release 2001/03/0 / TCSIA-KUH96-00 /8 / K0002Q007Q003-2
4V
'V-
Approved For Release 2001/03/07
: CIA-RDP96-00787R000200070003-2
2)
The second perception,
at the actual start of the
experiment later provided the most satisfying single piece of
feedback of the entire trip.
Initially,
I describe a positive
feeling of an absence of emissions, and guess that Hal
is in
the shielded room which
I have not seen but know to exist.
Soon after that statement,
I get a sensation of moving triangles
which
I describe as looking through a prism or shooting a movie
through a Kallidescope.
In addition,
I see Hal grinning and
chuckling to himself.
The scene then shifts inside a building.
At the time of this description, Hal was reportedly standing
inside the
left tower shown in Figure RV #2-1
.
Upon re-
membering that Pat Price had gotten a shielded sensation under
the same conditions, he decided to move out, but first wanted
to give me a good target in case
I was getting an impression.
Therefore, he looked up through the tower, and spun around.
The weather was too wet for me to get any good pictures but,
as SRI's photos should show, and as
I verified for myself, my
description gives a very good picture of the actual scenes.
3)
For the remainder of the experiment
I describe the interior
of a building which
is a museum and art gallery where movies are
shown;
a tourist type place for walking around which
is not a
business place.
The architecture is busy, with the main room
about 40 x 40.
It is not really a museum.
Also, just before he leaves, Hal
turns a complete circle and scans the whole place.
Those facts are all correct.
The details of the description are
a
little better than 50% correct as later discussed.
I
felt frustrated at my inability to achieve the precise overview
I had
expected remote viewing to entail.
I was beginning to suspect that what
I
must really be doing was picking up unprocessed sensory data from Hal,
along with his intentions and body posturing.
However,
in the third portion
of the experiment,
I am concerned with the interior of the building, while he
remains outside.
Either
I am getting impressions from his unconscious
memories of the interior, or
1 am merely using him as a beacon,
in the true
RV sense.
Unfortunately,
I do not have the ability to raise up and clearly see
the entire site, but am restricted to more myopic views.
tssssz
t
-
:
t: ;
ApprovedJ-^or ReleaseimyQ3IQ7:g\b
ee meee — Somers zt SLE t. 0 bh ig Dela ay fe . . , i Rin penNT le pea Rw. ab Fae eet oe teak tenet cl dutattltee aah y aialnd Ue gad ng Ral Sout Renee wactened = Halted e | SF
Approved For Release 2001/03/07
: CIA-RDP96-00787R000200070003-2
Analysis
of Results
During debriefing, Hal was delighted with my Kallidescope description,
as well as with the general content of the building description.
I was
particularly surprised by my impressions
(correct) of absolute compass
directions since
I am characteristically poor at directions, and could not
even figure out the heading of my own house.
Critique
Although
it would seem impossible to manufacture a site having
both the Kallidescope and museum aspects,
it is very unfortunate that no
record was made of Hal's movements.
At the time, we wished to duplicate
the preceeding day's protocol, and so did not wish to introduce the need
for Hal to dictate all his moves and intentions into a recorder.
(In retrospect,
there was no sufficient reason for this decision.
The shortness of my stay
made us continually choose between replication of results and trials of new
experiments.)
There were particularly bad effects in this instance from the interrogation
procedure.
In certain cases, the questions served to distract me by either
drawing my attention to something else in my perception or to Hal's
perceptions.
In other cases, the questions were completely misleading,
either in making wrong suppositions
("describe the room Hal
is in" when
he
is outside)
, or asking for further detail on an incorrect point of description
("what color is the floor?" When what
I have described
is the outside area)
.
I was not consciously able to distinguish between the perceptions that Hal was
getting, and the remaining ones
I got.
Therefore, any question which
directed me to go and get a specific piece of information might lead me to
give conflicting descriptions.
Due to the effects stated above,
it is additionally difficult to analyze
information received under the interrogation process.
My next RV would use
no interrogator.
The question of personality dependance
is now raised, since
I wonder
whether
I can perform with Russell on the outbound end.
In addition, the
effect of multiple outbounders should be studied.
Due to the lack of time,
all of these changes are made in RV #3.
,,Approye0 For Re|e
2001/03/07
: CIA-RDP96-00787R00020007pp03-2