datamatters24/research-document-archive huggingface dataset:
i { Approved For Release 2000/08/16_: CIA-RDP96.00787R000300140001-5 ANNEX Examples of Stage 1 progress in graph form ee ew eee oe With reference to the consolidation/plateau pattern as shown in figure 6, each trainee proceeds to learn through four recognizable patterns of learning: spontaneous success, increase of noise as separate elements are dealt with separately, consolidation of the elements, and, finally, a new plateau of skill. In the following figure 11 and 12, the elements of two q ~—™ selected trainees J & K are shown, and these are compared with first group trainees B & C, It can be seen that the learning patterns are approximately the same’ tthe end product being conscious control of the signal and a generating of an accurate and noiseles signal line. Following figure 12 are four consecutive examples of | a selected trainee K at the culmination of the new plateau achieved as a result of stage 2. Stage 2 involves signal-line perception of delicate site features that must be handled and achieved in a manner totally different from Stage 1 techniques. Stage 2 techniques, however, often can generate a total site-comprehension, as the four samples indicate, : , As of the writing of this report, two trainees (I & K) are nearing completion of stage 3. An additional report will be tendered concerning stage 3 upon their completion. Stage 4 has been confirmed, packaged, and is awaiting delivery to training candidates who have successfully completed stage 3, 22 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96- 787R000300140001-5
2 2 Approved For Release —e—wees TRAINING PERFORMANCE Fay 2-043 (P9175 10:2) PISLOPE) < 255 10:2 NUMBER SESSION ELEMENTS (VIEWER J) yy © O58 (Pots 10°3) PISLOPED +: $0 10-9 NUMBER SESSION ELEMENTS Z 5 g z : 5 TRIAL NUMaER (Sh. Pop et (VIEWER k) G URE 11 TRAINEES J & K PROGRESS GRAPHS, STAGE 1,pl 23 Approved For Release waa : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300140001-5
Approved For Release zooefio: ClA-RDP9-00787R000300140001-5 TRAINING PERFORMANCE hy > O58 (P45 10-2) PISLOPE) <&x 10-2 NUMBER SESSION ELEMENTS SPONTANEOUS RESPONSE s TRIAL NUMBER {SI, 94.1) (VIEWER 8B) 1,7 O58 Pe 190 10-2) PISLOPED. 25210 2 NUMBER SESSION € LEMENTS : é ~ “ § wd « TRIAL NUMBER (Si, PHI) (VIEWER C) FIGURE 12 TRAINEES B & C PROGRESS GRAPHS, STAGE L,pl. 24 Approved For Release 4000/08/10 : CIA-R P96-00787R000300140001-5
- Approved Fore cAbb SécodehoV EfA-RDPBY-00787RVOIAINL 4009} -5 32° 38° 45° CPYRGHT 108° zi” Be eae ee aes cad ~ i “T MODE GC whee am Y : ~ SS 1 ee, +, , )0747R000300140001-5 ;
em . ppréed Pot MASEL 2bbGiba 1b! EDALedHeslb6 Fad Adaostibl £0009. S IN ; Te . bJ CPYRGHT 9° 5x g ~“
cpa proved For Medea tH ETO PSIG: ICLE-RDPARRIOTRT RAP 99914 901-8 ‘at, eee ’. ed . Lenn. 2 agmantnenneyt ber eee AO ty aw . ms ; . on " “meat, shad Peri aaa hath eed : on. om. Gs 5 ™ tw os View “Ao Ne See. ee ang one ee a ee aad cane ws fs eT ng SES
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP9B-00787R000300140001-5
I
V
WHAT HAS BEEN ACHIEVED
A.
Training Has
Been Achieved
Relevant
to Stages
through
3,
all
trainees who embarked on
the
training course responded exceedingly well
to
the training procedures.
The
second group worked quite slowly due
to other personal committments
and scheduling.
Among
the first
t
"
'
t trainees,
Trainee K
is nearing
completion of
Stage
3;
Trainee
J has temporarily
left
the course due
to
serious health problems.
The
second
: ~
-candidate only
entered
the program
in
1983,
but
is progressing satisfactorily.
DATES
TRAINEES
j
STAGES
1978
TRAINING
A
( R
—
MONITOR
FIRST
C
B
GROUP
l
I
L_
r E
|
—
1981 TO
1983
SECOND
F -
|
GROUP
G
i
H
d
r
I
CANDIDATES
J
bhih
1982 TO
1983
1983
\
{l
*
CANDIDATE
L -
FIGURE
THREE-YEAR PROGRAM CRV TRAINEES /ACCOMPLISHMENTS
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00787R000300140001-5
[ Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000306444001-5 i 97° 51! ail 82° 24 J0°V CPYRGHT ‘? = oO oO oO + = oO oO eo oO ne
Approved For Release 2003/09/10
: CIA-RDP96-00788R001 400260001 -9
INSCOM
GRILL
FLAME
PROGRAM
SESSION REPORT
f.
CLASSIFIED
REVIEW
ON:
BY:
MSG, DAMI-ISH
051630Z JUL78
NOT RELEASABLE
TO FOREIGN NATIONALS
ORCON
Gu
Jl t.
Approved For Release 2003/09/10
: CIA-RDP96-00788R001400260001-9
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300150002-3 Some (heTimns Rela dred eeu a bKA ate plus Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000300150002-3
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00787R0003001 50002-3
UCV ft'*.
us_t
\j )a
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00787R0003001 50002-3
Approved For Release 2003/09/11
: CIA-RDP96-00788R001 400300001 -4
INSCOM
GRILL
FLAME
PROGRAM
SESSION REPORT
CLASSIFIED BY:
REVIEW ON:
MSG,
DAMI-ISH
0516302 JUL78
NOT RELEASABLE
TO FOREIGN NATIONALS
ORCON
Approved For Release 2003/09/11
: CIA-RDP96-00788R001 400300001 -4
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CLIA-RDP96-00787R000400040021-3 SEC. CL.| ORIGIN CONTROL NO, su .NSE DATE| CROSS REFERENCE OR! . DATE OF DOG | DATE:*REC’D | DATE OUT 5 POINT OF FILING an TO FROM ROUTING SUBJ. ‘ COURIER NO. ANSWERED NO REPLY Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000400040021-3
mn ne i i i Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : CH@Ga>aUnUN? ,9¢ ase, 7:c8 R000499070001-2 19 April 73 MEMO FOR THE RECORD SUBJECT Telecon with Mr TARG of SRI 1. Called SRI at 1330 hrs this date and. tala Russ Targe that funds for the project extension had been approved and chet RR contract people would be in touch with them in due course. He was pleased and stated that they would be starting work with Geller on 23 April (the delay due, presumably, to the Jewish holidays). 2, He asked me if we would send out some materials for them to work with but I told him we'd rather$ stick to the scenario in my letter--i.e., that they establish the new procedures with Geller from scratch (i.e., double-blind, delayed. feedback) using their own materials; then, when we know how that is working out, we will prepare appropriate materials here and send them to SRI. Targ agreed to this procedure$ and also promised to send us copies of the SRI material requested in my letter. 9% I asked whether any of the earlier envelope-work with Geller had been on the double-blind basis and he gaid that only one had been done in that @ashion--amd that Geller had had no défficulty with it. Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000400070001-2
Approved For Release 2000/08/07
: CfiW^IS^SPI^WZROOO^ggOTOOOl^
19 April 73
MEMO FOR THE RECORD
SUBJECT
Telseon with Mr TARG of SRI
1.
Called SRI at 1330 hrs this date and^Of) Russ Targe that funds for the
(contract people would he
project extension had been approved and that^^^^^J^^
in touch with them in due course.
He was pleased and stated that they would he
starting work with Geller on 23 April
(the delay due, presumably,
to the Jewish
holidays )
.
2.
He asked me if we would send out
some materials for them to work with hut
I told him we'd rather^ stick to the scenario in my letter— i.e.,
that they establish
the new procedures with Geller from scratch (i.e.,
double-blind, delayed feedback)
using their own materials;
then, when we know how that
is working out, we will
prepare appropriate materials here and send them to SRI.
Targ agreed to this
procedure^ and also promised to send us copies of the SRI material requested m
my letter.
I asked whether any of the earlier envelope-work with Geller
had been on the double-blind basis and he said that only one had been done in
that {fashion—and that Geller had had no difficulty with it.
SGI
I
Approved For Release 2000/08/07
: CIA-RDP96-00787R000400070001-2
Approved For Release,2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00787RQ00400070002-1 6 April 73 MEMO FOR THE RECORD SUBJECT Telecon with Dr PUTHOFF of SRI 1. I called Dr Puthoff at 1215 hrs this date to ¥4 inform him that, while there were no guarantees as yet, the paper-work relating to the expansion of the project was in process and there seemed to be no hitches in sight. Also told him that I'd try to call him again on 10 April with more and hopefully definitive news. Explained also that I'd airmailed a letter to him on 5 April--with some views and suggestions concerning the structuring of their next sessions with Geller. 2. Putheff stated that Geller was now arriving on 13 April and they hoped to start work with him soon# afterwards--ppoviding that we accept their proposal and the money is forthcoming. 3- Puthoff also mentioned that Geller had been on the Jack PARR Show for over an hour on the night of 4 April--and that he seemed to go over rather well. Mostly he was interviewed by Parr but he did do a couple of tricks : reproduced a sealed drawing which Parr had in his pocket and bent one of several six-inch spikes Parr had brought with him. SRI made a copy of the program, SG1I Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000400070002-1
Approved For Releaso.2000/08/07
: CIA-RDP96-00787l^|p0400070002-1
6 April 73
MEMO FOR THE RECORD
SUBJECT
Telecon with Dr FUTHOFF of SRI
1.
I called Dr Puthoff at 1215 hrs this date to $$$ inform him that, while there
were no guarantees
as yet, the paper-work relating to the expansion of the project
was in process and there seemed to be no hitches in sight.
Also told him that I'd
try to call him again on 10 April with more and hopefully definitive news.
Explained
also that
I d airmailed a letter to him on 5 April--with some views and suggestions
concerning the structuring of their next sessions with Geller.
2. Puthaff stated that Geller was now arriving on 13 April and they hoped to
start work with him soon$ afterwards--ppoviding that we accept their proposal and the
money is forthcoming.
3. Puthoff also mentioned that Geller had been on the Jack PARR Show for over
an hour on the night of 4 April—and that he seemed to go over rather well.
Mostly
he was interviewed by Parr but he did do
a couple of tricks
: reproduced a sealed
drawing which Parr had in his pocket and bent one of several six-inch spikes Parr
had brought with him.
SRI made a copy of the program.
SGI
I
Approved For Release 2000/08/07
: CIA-RDP96-00787R000400070002-1
SG1I eR Approved FarRelease 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDPS4#00787R000400070010-2 ee ntan  a in nt nt — A POO 13 March 1973 SUBJECT : Paranormal Research REFERENCE : Your solicitation of comments on proposed research program 1. The only observation I would offer at this time concerns the basic strategy of approach to research in this area. It seems to me that when those with scientific training set out to do research of this sort, they typically set up a group of impressive controls based on the rules of logic and probability as these generally apply to the scientific acceptability of evidence in their respective fields. The trouble is that these same people are also usually completely ignorant of the methods by which the phenomena they seek to study are typically faked by stage performers. Lacking this knowledge, they overlook the critical (and often very simple) variables, and, impressed with the soundness of their elaborate methodology, are sitting ducks for the skilled magician. On the other hand, the stage performer, called in to observe and critique, is quick to dismiss the phenomena with the claim that he can duplicate it by trickery. Whether he demonstrates his claim or not, the matter of whether or not the particular instance in question is real or faked is neither proved nor disproved. What is really needed is a teaming up of the skilled stage performer with the scientific investigator so that experiments can be de- signed to specifically zero in on the alleged fakery. rset 2. In Geller's case, the recent TIME magazine article (12 March 73, p. 112) alleges that Geller "came under suspicion when a group of psychologists and computer experts from Hebrew University duplicated all of his feats and called him a fraud." But until someone subjects Geller to tests specifically designed to rule out the methods these people used to duplicate his feats, nothing has been proved about Geller. To test the phenomena, this Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-0 eninienGchtajane
Approved Fox Belease 2008ees : CIA-RDP96880787R000400070010-2 SUBJECT: Paranormal Research is the place to begin. All else,--the nature of the phenomena, application, etc.--comes later. SG1I Chief, .Psyfhological Services Staff “Offi¢e of Medical Services Approved For Release 2000/5se bik. RDP96-00787R000400070010-2 2
SUBJECT: (Optional) Paranormal Research FROM: C/PSS/OMS 706 CofC TO: (Officer designation, room number, and building) Ssc1| =i” 726 Ames 10. 12. 13. 14, 15. sg ea neat ha BS ( USE PREVIOUS EDITIONS [| SECRET DATE | EXTENSION | NO. [oro # /pF- 73 3250 DATE 13 Mar 73 COMMENTS (Number each comment to show from whom to whom. Draw a line across column after each comment.) OFFICER'S INITIALS RECEIVED FORWARDED | —+— — | —_ 4 __ —— al —-— | 4 - — 4 + 4 Approved For Release 2000/08/07): TT) CONF | ___ _CIA- RD P96 00787R000400070010- “INTERNAL USE ONLY Oo UNCLASSIFIED
SG1I ved For Release 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000400070010-2 Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00787R00040007
HSCCftCT
.
Approved Fq^elease 2000/08/07
: CIA-RDP9fi»00787R000400070010-2
QRD #
/Iff)
13 March 1973
SGI
I
MEMORANDUM FOR:
SUBJECT
REFERENCE
:
Paranormal Research
Your solicitation of comments on proposed
research program
1.
The only observation
I would offer at this time
concerns the basic strategy of approach to research
in
^
this
area.
It seems
to me that when those with scientific
training set out to do research of this
sort/
they typically
set up
a group of impressive controls based on the rules
of
logic and probability as these generally apply to the
scientific acceptability of evidence in their respective
fields.
The trouble
is that these same people are also
usually completely ignorant of the methods by which the
phenomena they seek to study are typically faked by stage
performers.
Lacking this knowledge,
they overlook the
critical
(and often very simple)
variables,
and,
impressed
with the soundness of their elaborate methodology ,
are
sitting ducks
for the skilled magician.
On the other
hand,
the stage performer,
called in
to observe and
critique,
is quick to dismiss
the phenomena with the
claim that he can duplicate it by trickery.
Whether he
demonstrates his claim or not,
the matter of whether or
not the particular instance in question
is real or faked
is neither proved nor disproved.
What
is really
. needed
is
a teaming up of
the skilled stage performer with the
scientific investigator
so that experiments can be de-
signed to specifically zero in on the alleged fakery.
2.
In Geller' s case,
the recent TIME magazine article
(12 March 73,
p.
112)
alleges that Geller
"came under
suspicion when
a group of psychologists and computer
experts from Hebrew University duplicated all of his
_
feats and called him a fraud."
But until someone subjects
Geller
to tests specifically designed to rule out the
methods these people used to duplicate his feats,
nothing
has been proved about Geller.
To test the phenomena ,
this
Approved For Release 2000/08/07
: CIA-RDP96-0
Jl-2
IE.VX..JM PD ET CL
BY.;
fiCCUCT
Approved Fo^elease 2000708707
: CIA-RDP9«0787R000400070010-2
SUBJECT:
Paranormal Research
is the pLace to begin.
All else,— the nature of
the
phenomena,
application,
etc.
comes
later.
SGI
I
Chief, Psychological Services Staff
Office of Medical Services
Approved For Release 2000/0
-RDP96-00787R00040007001 0-2
re Ro004000 F019 GRET . SUBJECT: (Optional) Paranormal EXTENSION C/PSS/OMS 706 CofC 3250 TO: (Officer designation, room number, and building) OFFICER'S COMMENTS (Number each comment to show from whom INITIALS to whom. Draw a line across column after each comment.) YS EE CONFIDENTIAL —L] INTERNAL —-«]_UUNCLASSIFIED
SGI
I
>ved For Release 2000/08/07
: CIA-RDP96-00787R000400070010-2
Approved For Release 2000/08/07
: CIA-RDP96-00787R00040007(
Approved For Ffcrkase 2000/08/07
: CIA-RDP96-(Jetf87R000400070023-8
28 Feb 73
MEMORANDUM FOR
•
INFO
SUBJECT
SGI
h. o Per
C/ORD
DC/ORD
SG1|
Discussion of 'Paranormal' Issue with
) on 27 F^b ,
h
C °n
I
eyed
I called and met Mr
SG1
TO and a Jlf
Th
r ™dl3cussed Paranormal and related matters for
ana a naif.
The salrent points covered were, briefly, as follows.
present
1‘“r
“* SW
;
P
ther pursuit of the basic research with TSD and SRI
to ensure that appropriate Aeenrv
^
ear -*-Y attempts
by the phenomena {if validated)
with
v-
6 *1 8 WSre aware of tke potential represented
and wholly extraneous 'technnln "T
lth hls Primary concern being that,
as a brand-new
.
,
^ extraneous
technology',
it would fall between the stools
TWofn,
to have been substantiated by the indifference and/or
i a „>
f
\
Thls fear seems
he has run into in virtually every quirted
Het
l
which
flap potential in it for the Ae^Z
*1
I
He fears that thera might be a large
incumbent upon us to ptoct d to any c^se
~ ” d°- bot *hat « is
that a quick,
'big bite' immersion (even mulU-mmionT S’™*
‘° '“T*
06 C/DDS&T
for -but with uncertain success thus far
w
,
J
?•
’
necessar Y) ™aY be called
briefed and warned of the flap potentill but
so f
S °
bT “** ““ DCI shooM b<s
been done.
Mr S's basic nosufo
*
1 b
tf
f
aS he knows -
this has not yet
trickery bv GELLP'R
y
/ OI »
ln part at least, some
more Jan^e u^der^nd^ grtj t^-
**“ Pl”°a
can quantify,
predict and-to soLe
^
™
Agency^lement^h^i^g^a^^gittoiate^ntere's^fCl'st^ff
approach by all
TSD)--^on the need for kfeping the matter Sfo
k
SeCurlty> OMS ' ORD '
°SI,
evidence is in
We also Hie
?
low keY as Possible until all the
philosophy prevaU-e
E
setting SRI*
P ° SSible Procedures should the
'big bite'
and possibly withHHaiiaiiili
T-
111 a new
ab near here 011,161 our contro1
3611H
ri
putting
P
up the 100Kneces
Jry
P
f
r
o°r
g
rftoi
n
yet“1°^ u ““ *?““ ^
agreed- -stating that he felt C/DDqjiT
Y
ia u
1 research),
he emphatically
slowly and. fo/instance,
let^GE^TefLa^Trom us°' H
“7 “"" d
Pleased by my description of the wholly cooperative TSDtoSSet
March)
f~ 2
of Recor^rfjjj.^^ p(9|.R^e^2aap;MUa7seeiArRR^flP^i^(Pf®pWfi)^|8M6Ino
ments.
^intends,
1 believe, UdAitewise
sbF
op-
| Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : CifckDP96-00787R000400080007-5 17 October 73 MEMO FOR THE RECORD SUBJECT . Proposal for Paranormal Research at SRI SG1I | | SG1I 1. On 16 October 73MM of ors bricfea MM and me on a proposal which (as a consequence of a specific OTS request). SRI had just submitted for a new, one year program of paranormal research. The proposal (attached) calls, essentially, for a contin- uation of their ‘coordinates' work with SWANN and PRICE, their 'sealed envelopes' work with GELLER and their EEG studies with 'normal' subjects to determine whether there are subliminal correlations with remote stimuli; most of the attached proposal consists of a rehash of their earlier work--with the substance of the new proposal being contained in \ pages o- lle of the larger document. The price tag is 149K. \ SG1I 2. On 17 October MMM calied me to state that, largely in vesponse® to D/ors' desire to ensure that someone is doing something in the paranormal field and to use the SRI proposal as a test case to spark a management decision, they are going to start paper- SG1l work in support of the SRI proposal. He also said that his boss, C/OTS/Development & Engineering pe is going to forward the proposal to D/OTS with the recom- mendation that OTS and ORD be jointly in charge of the program and split the costs. I SGil told RE tnat I had both practical and philosophic reservations on that score (see para 3) but that I would undertake to acquaint ORD management with these developments so that they could be prepared to respond when the proposal is officially surfaced. 3. With reference to my 26 September 73 memo on this topic, my primary objections to this proposal are: it would be a continuation of the same undisciplined approach which has given us so much trouble in the past, with no well-defined research goals, no internal focal-point of authority and control, little control over the contaactor!s efforts and almost certainly equivocal results; an objective management decision should come first and, ‘if positive, the effort should be a serious one--selecting the best (not merely an opportune) vehicle for the postulated goals and handled in a highly secure, need-to- ‘know fashion. I do not question the SRO investigators' motivation at all and I do feel that their work has been interesting and very possibly of some real value--but there is some doubt as to the soundness, of some of their methodologies and, in any case, the controversy surrounding them and their subjects still has a 'flap' potential which would unnecessarily preoccupy and distract us even if the DCI gave his approval (whichis doubtful at best). SRI's efforts could be supported on a sub-contract basis by whatever vehicle we might chose for the overall effort--leaving us securely out of the picture. h. Comments: SG1I Be b. Appr se 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00
Approved For Release 2000/08/07
: QI&J-SBP96-00787R000400080007-5
17 October 73
MEMO FOR THE RECORD
SUBJECT
Proposal for Paranormal Research at SRI
SGI
I
SGI
I
1.
On 16 October 73
of OTS briefed
and me on a proposal which
(as
a consequence of a specific OTS request)
SRI had just submitted for a new,
one year
program of paranormal research.
The proposal
( attached )
calls,
essentially,
for a contin-
uation of their
'coordinates' work with SWANN and PRICE,
their
'sealed envelopes' work
with GELLER and their EEG studies with
'normal'
subjects
to determine whether there are
subliminal correlations with remote
stimuli; most of the attached proposal consists of a
rehash of their earlier work—with the
substance of the new proposal being contained in
pages 40-44 of the larger document.
The price tag is
l4$)K.
\
SGI
I
2.
On 17 October^^^^^^called me to state that, largely in response
' to D/OTS'
desire to ensure that someone
is doing something in the paranormal field and to use
the
SRI proposal
as
a test case
to spark a management decision,
they are going to start paper-
SG1I
work
in support
of the
SRI proposal.
He also said that his boss,
C/OTS/Development &
Engineering
is going to forward the proposal to D/0TS with the recom-
mendation that OTS and ORD be jointly in charge of the program and split the costs.
I
told||m^ that
I had both practical and philosophic reservations
on that
score
(see
para
3) but that
1 would undertake to acquaint ORD management with these developments
so
that they could be prepared to respond when
the proposal
is officially surfaced.
3. With reference to my 26 September 73 memo on this topic, my primary objections’
to this proposal are:
it would be
a continuation of the
same undisciplined approach which
has given us so much trouble
in the past, with no well-defined research goals,
no internal
focal-point
of authority and control,
little control over the contsactor's
efforts and
almost certainly equivocal results;
an objective management decision should come
first
and,
if positive,
the effort should be
a serious one— selecting the best
(not merely an opportune
vehicle for the postulated goals and handled in
a highly secure, need-to-know fashion;
I
do
question the SRI investigators' motivation at all and I do feel that their work has
been interesting and very possibly of some real value --but
there
is some doubt
as to the
soundness, of some of .their methodologies
and,
in any case,
the controversy surrounding them
and their subjects still has
a
'flap'
potential which would unnecessarily preoccupy and
distract
us even if the DCI gave his approval
(which. is doubtful at best);
SRI’s efforts
could be supported on a sub-contract basis by whatever vehicle we might chose for the
overall effort --leaving us securely out of the picture.
4.
Comments
:
SGI
I
SGI
I
se 2000/08/07
: CIA-RDP96-00