Apiwrgxv^Qliff^F Bje|l§9fifet2iftQ1jfQ3i[Q7i;iQIA^RBf?09tOQ7£^al?l)(yi7QfelTOOOO7-9
times
that the descriptions
contained
inaccuracies.
There
is
a question
of
the
value of
the
technique of having judges
compare
narratives
and
then
visit
the
sites
to match
tliem.
How many
factors
are considered
as matches
or misses
in
a nature preserve or
the
Redwood City Arena
or a drive-in
theater
is difficult
to
know.
There are
too
many unexplained variables
here
for
a
proper review.
Additionally,
from
the pragmatic
point of view of
the client,
one
has
to
know the accuracy that
is
necesary
in
these narratives
to make
remote viewing valuable.
The
EEG Research
The findings
of
the Targ-Putoff initial
work measuring
EEG activity
as
an
indicator of
information
transmission
between
an
isolated
receiver
and
a remote
sender
is
interesting
but certainly preliminary.
Six
subjects
were used.
The second analyses
gave
no evidence
of
EEG driving
in any
receiver although
in
control
runs
the receivers
did exhibit driving when
physically stimulated with
the
flashes.
One of
the
six
subjects,
HH,
showed
a consistent alpha
blocking
effort.
Therefore,
this
subject was
studied
further and most of
the data
recorded
is
based
on
HH's
performance.
The only other data offered were
the guesses
or
the subjects'
conscious
assessment for each
trial
to
see
if
they could
say when
the stimulus was
generated.
This was
found
to
be
at chance
level.
Thus,
only HH's work
showed
significant EEG changes
associated with
the
presence of remote
stimuli
under conditions
of sensory shielding.
No judgement can
be made
of
this preliminary work
on
such
limited
data.
The summary or discussion
session
section of
this Targ-Putoff report
seems
to
be
the
basis
for background
in
the present proposal
for work.
Here
they
state
a channel
exists which may involve either direct reception
of hidden
information content,
perception of mental
images
of persons
knowledgeable about target
information,
precognition,
or
some combination
of these
or other
information channels.
The authors
feel
that
they
have
obtained
some evidence
that suggests
a
channel
exists whereby information
about
a
remote
location can
be obtained
by
a means
that
is
an
as yet
unidentified perceptual
modality.
The
reviewer cannot challence
this finding
but cautions
only
that
these data,
like other data
submitted
for
the
same
hypothesis over
the years,
may
leave many unconvinced.
The second
containing
noise along with
the signal.
This
is
not
a
useful
conclusion
because
it does
not define
noise,
it does
not consider
intensity or of
signal,
it does
not explain what other channels
of information
and
biological
systems may contribute.
Their third conclusion
is
that "while
a quantative signal-to-noise ratio information-theoretical
sense cannot
as yet
be determined,
the results
of our experinrents
indicate
that
the
functioning
is at
a
useful
level
of information
transfer."
The use of
signal-to-noise ratio
has
been discussed previously.
The concept
of
usefeulness
is
undefined,
and
it
has yet
to
be determined whether such
information
so obtained
is
useful
for
interesting.
This
is
not
to deny
that people obtain
information of some quality as yet
to
be determined
through methods
we
do
not understand.
To
immediately hypothesize
that
it
is
extrasensory,
beyond
the ordinary channels of
information,
is
not
in
the
revie
mind supportable or parsimonious.
Science
has yet
to
exhaust potential
information obtained
through
the
known and studied
sense mechanisms.
More-
over, .the ways
in which
these
information channels
are
sources
of data
and
function
as
integrators
is
still
not thoroughly
known.
The authors
go
on
to
say
that
"the remote perceptual
ability may
be widely distributed
in
the
general
population
but because perception
is generally
below
an
individual's
level
of awareness
it
is
repressed
or not noticed."
These are
loose
statements without evidence
for repression
or
"not noticed."
We
have
little
evidence whether the perception
is
below
a
person's
level
of awareness.
This
criticism
is directed
solely
at use of words
that tend
to offer
little
explanation.
The
statement
by the authors
that our cultural
constraints
have
prevented
the
surfacing
of these abilities
is of interest.
The
reviewer's experience would
indicate
that the present cultural
freedom
for new ideas,
life
styles,
and
the
like,
is much more conducive
to
the
study and awareness
of these phenomena
than conditions
for
the
last
75 years
have
been.
If good
cases
are
to surface,
if people with
high
ability are going
to
feel
free
to express
this
gift,
this
is
the
time.
.
Approved For Release 2001/03/07
: CIA-RDP96-00787R0007001 00007-9
The authors conclude
that experiments
in
the area of so-called
paranormal
phenomena
can
be scientifically conducted
and
that
these results offer
a
basis
from which departures
as
a
function
of other observables
can
be
studied.
The
reviewer cannot disagree with
this
statement
as
long
as
it
is
not meant
to
imply that previous
studies
or others
now under way are
being
conducted
in
an
unscientific or un-reliable fashion.
The experimenters
have produced
no
new technologies
untried
in
some fashion
in
the
pas-t or present.
The
reviewer believes
the current methodologies are adequate
for the study of
these pehnomena
but at present and
in
this
study there
is
too great dependence
on probability and mathematical
determinations of events.
Although
such
figures are impressive,
they do
not offer much explanation of the
events.
They
only
tend
to
prove,
that something
is
happening above chance
level.
It may
be
that
they
have chosen,
in
the case
of using judges,
the wrong methodology
or wrong variable
to examine.
Similarly,
the
use
of such terminology
as
noise- to-signal
ratio
also
does
not really get at
the
problem,
but
introduces
a concept that
is
neither
applicable
nor
helpful,
at
least
as
far
as describing ongoing events.
Progress
Report
Progress
report
2 mentions
the continuation of remote viewing,
including
targets
in Costa
Rica.
It gives
no
real
data
for examination.
The report
talks
about detection of variable-density target material
in
which
the
goal
was differentiation
of
low-density cards,
six
pencil
and
nine blank cards.
These were
to
be
sorted
by
the
subject after
they
had
been
randomized
and
placed
inside unnumbered opaque envelopes.
The
two
series
proved
to give results
that did
not differ significantly
by change.
They do mention,
however,
the ranking
of cards
by number of times
chosen.
This was evidently perceiv
ed
to
be significant,
but does
not appear
to
this
reviewer
to signify much.
Too
little
information
is given
to do
a
careful
analysis
of what these results mean.
These data
should
be
looked
at carefully
and discussed
to determine whether
they are
of value,
but
this
cannot
be
accomplished
in progress
report
form.
Approved For Release 2001/03/07
: CIA-RDP96-00787R0007001 00007-9
Approved For Release 2001/03/07
: CIA-RDP96-00787R0007001 00007-9
Basic Research
There
is
nothing
in
the program
of the psychological
testing
to
be
commented
upon.
The reviewer does
not know that
the hypotheses
are associated
with
the
hemisphere specialization of
the
brain,
except
as
reported
in
the
appendix.
Since
there are
no
results of data available,
this matter cannot
be
reviewed.
The Measurement Program EEG
There
is
reference
here
to
the
EEG work reported
in
the first progress
report.
Three trials
or observations
are repeated
in order
to
test the
hypothesis
that certain observed characteristics
of paranormal
functioning might
involve right hemispheric
specialization.
In
the three sessions
the
right
and
left occipital
regions
v^ere monitored,
and
a section of alpha activity
(arousal
response)
that correlated
vrith remote
stimuli,
as
reported
in
the
previous
experiments was
found.
As
will
be recalled,
the
results did
not
seem very promising
for remote
receiving except
in
one
individual,
so
the
meaning
and
importance of
this
section
of
the report are
unclear.
The
authors
now believe
or
say
that
this occurred eseentially only
in
the right
hemisphere where
the average alpha reduction was
16 percent
(2 percent
in
the
left)
during
the
16Hz
trials,
as compared woth
no flash
trials.
These results,
the authors
suggest,
indicate
initial
support for
the hypothesis
of right
hemisphere specialization and
that further investigations
of that hemisphere
are
indicated.
Their reasoning
concerning
the placing paranormal
functioning
in
the right
hemisphere
is quite unclear.
It
is certainly confusing
to
hear
now that there were results
from remote
stimulation
in
the earlier
studies.
Until
the data
are available,
one must trust only
the progress
report.
Physical
Measurements
The section
on
physical
measures
is
a description
of what
they
plan
to
do and data
they plan
to
have
in April.
The only other part of the
second
progress
report
is
an appendix which,
a very
interesting
paper entitled
"Hemispheric Specialization
in
the Duality of Consciousness,"
by Galin
and
Ornstein from
the
Institute
for
the Study of Human Consciousness,
Langley
Porter Neuropsychiatric
Institute.
The reviewer's assumption
is
that this
paper
is
not
to
be
reviewed,
since
it evidently
is
included merely
as
an
Approved For Release 2001/03/07
: CIA-RDP96-00787R0007001 00007-9
.
‘
Approved For Release 2001/03/07
: CIA-RDP96-00787R0007001 00007-9
explanation of hemispheric specialization and
the
investigators'
EEG
work
to determine whether paranormal
functioning
v/as
related
to
the right
or
left hemispheres.
The paper
is most fascinating and may
be
helpful
as
a model
for looking at paranormal
functioning,
although
it seems
to
be
somewhat
beyond
the purposes
of this particular contract.
Obviously,
one
should
follow basic research
leads,
but when
so much
is
devoted
in
the second
progress
report
to this particular
item,
and
so
little on
the data collection,
the emphasis
seems unbalanced.
Progress
Report
The first part of the progress
report discusses
Project Atlas remote
viewing
(European
R&D Test facility).
This
subject matter can
best
be evaluated
by
the client and will
not
be commented on
by
the reviewer
who
has
no access
to
the evaluation
of
the data
or
the data
themselves.
B.
The Costa
Rica
Remote Viewing
E x periment
The results are
said
to
be
of
high quality and presently
being evaluated
in detail.
Only samples are given
there.
The descriptions
are
such
that one does
not
feel
able
to determine
the accuracy.
The data given
is
impressive and would
seem
to give an accurate
description of
the target described.
However,
it
is difficult
to give
a
hard evaluation
on
"sample"
data.
C.
Local
Targets with
Feedback
The data
and
the
one example
of
a description
in
the form of
communications
between
person
on
site and
the person
in
the
lab
is just
too confusing
to draw any
real
conclusions.
It would
be necessary
to accept
their findings
at this
time
including
their statement about where viewing
is weak.
If one accepts
this rather sketchy presentation,
the data
looks
impressive.
D.
Local
Target s with
Azi muth Bearing
This
brief description cannot
be evaluated.
2001/03/07
: CIA-RDP96-00787R0007001 00007-9
This
section describes procedures which would
best
be commented
upon
when
all
the data are
in.
Some of
the
information
has already been
referred
to while discussing
specific
findings.
The section
C
on 4-state Electronic Random Stimulus Generator describes
procedures and statistical
analyses.
There
is
no
real
way
in which
to
evaluate
these
findings
until
more subject data
are available.
#2.
Identification
of Measureable Characteristics Possessed
by Gifted Subjects.
A.
Medical
Evaluation
^
This describes
test procedures
and
the
status
of the various
subjects.
Again
not enough data
are available for
a
review.
It
is assumed
that
these data will
be
included
in
the
final
report and
can
be reviewed
at
that
time.
Few results are available
on certain
tests.
Review would now give
an
incomplete evaluation
Appendices
Appendix
-
Personal
Observations
of the use of the 4-State
Electronic Random Stimulus Generator
is
a most interesting and
insightful
paper of one
subject.
Never
before
has
the reviewer
seen
a more detailed
self-analysis
of how one prepares oneself for each response
in
a
series
of
hundreds
of responses.
The paper
is
well
written and will
make
a valuable
contribution
to
the understanding of how at
least one subject perceives
clues
for judgement
on
4 choice generator.
Hopefully data will
be collected
from other subjects
in
the same manner.
Nummary Thoughts of the Reviewer
Reviewing
these progress
reports
has
been most frustrating because at
times
one
feels
that
the experiments
are going
to offer excellent examples
of the paranormal
functioning.
Unfortunately
as was
stated
in
the
introduction
they
(progress
reports)
do
not
include sufficient analysis
for
final
interpretation
to substantiate
this
view.
;;
Approved For Release 2001/03/07
: CIA-RDP96-00787R0007001 00007-9
The
scope of
the undertaking
has
been very broad and
the
plans
seems
comprehensive.
If
all
can
be accompi isfied
and
the
final
report contains
the data promised
then
this vnll
have been
a
very v;orthwhile undertaking.
Unfortunately throughout one
feels
that
the experimenters
have not gone
far enough
to
"milk"
the experimental
situation,
and
the research design may not
havei
been
total ly adequate to prevent critics from finding
flaws.
Finally
that
too many avenues may
have
been explored
so that time and money will
not permit conclusive evidence
in
some of the major undertakings.
There
is also
the
feeling
by
the reviewer that this
has
not been
the multidiscipl ined
investigation
that one
initially
hoped
for.
It
is
assumed that the principal
writing
has
been accomplished
by
the
two
investigators who
interpreted much
of
the data collected
by consultants.
This of course
is
a customary procedure but one would
have
hoped
that
other specialists might
have
been
brought more emphasis
to
the
final
presentation of data.
Of course,
this may well
be
the case
in
the
final
report
but
is not reflected
in
the progress
reviews.
One
still
has
the feeling
that the prevailing philosophy
is
to
"prove"
the existence'^ an
information
channel
beyond
those
that customarily postulates' and
the effort
to support
this
hypothesis
will
certainly affect
the
tone of
the
report.
The
reviewer
looks
forward
to
seeing
the
final
data.
Approved For Release 2001/03/07
: CIA-RDP96-00787R0007001 00007-9