Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00787R0002001 50004-2
explanation of hemispheric specialization and the investigators'
EEG
work to determine whether paranormal
functioning was 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.
h.
The Costa Rica Remote Viewing Experiment
'
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
Targets with Azimuth Bearing
This
brief description cannot be evaluated.
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00787R0002001 50004-2
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00787R0002001 50004-2
B .
Basic Research
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.
Summary 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 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00787R0002001 50004-2
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00787R0002001 50004-2
The scope of the undertaking
has
been very broad and the plans
seems
comprehensive.
If all
can
be accomplished and
the final
report contains
the data promised
then
this will
have been
a very worthwhile undertaking.
Unfortunately throughout one feels
that the experimenters
have not gone
far enough
to
"milk"
the experimental
situation, and the research design may not
hav©
been totally 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 multidisciplined
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 postulated 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 2000/08/10
: ClA-RDP96-00787R0002001 50004-2