Privately Funded Research

Since the early 1970’s several research institutes around the world have taken an interest in Remote Viewing an Anomalous Cognition. Many of these projects were funded by (mainly) government agencies, for the purpose of military and law enforcement intelligence applications. For decades most of this research was classified. After 1995 there has been an increase in public awareness of these programs and many members of the public received training from some of the former “psychic spies” or those who claimed to be.

Developments in Remote Viewing

It appears the original purpose of “training people” was to recruit people who had “secret and/or top-secret” clearances, who were already displaying some natural abilities. In order to measure their performance, consistent means of reporting had to be developed. It had to be the type of report that would be useful to intelligence analysts.

Another issue they were facing at the time, was that of establishing credibility by obtaining solid evidence that this information was indeed obtained by means of Extrasensory Perception alone. They would have to be able to justify the funding and show results that would not only be extraordinary, but also practically useful.

From the fact that these projects were funded from the early 1970’s to the mid 1990’s, we can conclude that there were useful applications for this tool. Considering each financial year the budget was reviewed and it was a relatively low cost solution, that could have very valuable results in terms of intelligence information.

Why Did they Stop?

It appears increasingly likely the program was officially terminated on political grounds rather than practical grounds. The program was being exposed and it seemed the people in power at the time were not happy being associated with any kind of “psychic-stuff” even though it was a very cost effective and valuable application of their resources. It makes perfect sense that for political reasons this could not continue. However, would they really terminate a program that has produced results for decades?

Research in this field continues in different laboratories and institutes. Science Applications International Corporation, the Institute of Noetic Science, the Rhine Institute, the Monroe Institute just to name a few are still doing active research in this field. These are only the ones in the USA, there are plenty more in the UK, China, Germany, Russia, the Czech Republic, the Netherlands and that is probably only the tip of the iceberg.

Interestingly enough there is no government funded research in Australia! The University of Adelaide has a Parapsychology Department, dealing mostly with mediumship, past lives, phenomenology, but nothing specifically related to Remote Viewing.

Non-Military Remote Viewers

The second and third generation Remote Viewers are usually not related to the military. They have been taught the importance of a double-blind scientific protocol and they have been taught to format their work in such a way that perceptions and interpretations are separated, which is a great advantage to learning about personal subconscious processes! However there is one thing that Military Remote Viewers did not have to worry about and that is:”How their information was being used.” Obviously it was their job to “spy” on whatever the target was. They simply followed orders.

This is not the case with non-military Remote Viewers who have had the same training. They are often taught how to collect data, and how to distinguish between true data and personal interpretation and imagination, but they are usually not taught what they can or cannot do with this kind of information. There is generally little to no guidance on this, simply because the former “psychic spies” never had to deal with this issue in their line of work. Remote Viewing training should at least include some examples of legal and ethical issues these new Remote Viewers can face.

Development of Remote Viewing Techniques

Currently it is estimated there are thousands of trained Remote Viewers all over the world. Only few of them are active or professional Remote Viewers. Remote Viewing Techniques have not changed much over the last decades, the basics are the same, but certain methodologies differ in their terminology and emphasis on what is important and what is not. We cannot objectively determine if certain techniques work better than others, because there is no consistent double blind recording of thousands of Remote Viewers using different techniques.

If we want to clear up some of the unsubstantiated claims of performance of Remote Viewers, there needs to be a consistent record of sessions of those Remote Viewers over a longer period of time. Simply recording session work on video, is not enough to demonstrate consistency and accuracy, because the videos could be edited or the feedback may have been known to the Remote Viewer before the start of the video. Even time-stamps on the video are insufficient evidence as the camera could have an incorrect date setting.

Data has to be recorded in such a way that doesn’t allow the Remote Viewer to have access to any of the Target information until the Remote Viewing Session has been submitted, only then Feedback can be provided to the Viewer.

Another issue is “Judging” or “Self-Judging” of Remote Viewing performance. Obviously we all try our very best to get it right and ‘hit the target’, we all like to believe that we are really good at Remote Viewing or that we are improving our skill. This gives rise to human bias, especially when it comes to “Self-Judging” of sessions, but it can also happen with independent judges, who want to please the Remote Viewer or the researcher. Once you see the Feedback, you are more prone to make your session data fit the Target Feedback. Are we really as good as we claim to be, or are we just deluding ourselves?¬†Hind-sight is a wonderful thing!

The major difference between practice targets and real life applications is that feedback is usually not available. There is a problem to be solved, a person or item to be found. Nobody knows the location or the solution! This is the reason for the request in the first place. Only enough, specific and detailed information can lead to the solution or the location. Wrong information can lead to a “wild goose chase”.

From this point of view, we need a practice tool that has preset information about the target that would be useful in practical applications. Once some or most of these preset identifiable features have been identified by the Remote Viewer, this would consist of a “hit” in a real life target situation.

For example: The practice target is “The Eiffel Tower at night in Paris – France”. A person looking at the photo would say: “That’s the Eiffel Tower at night in Paris France.” Or, if the person has never seen the Eiffel Tower would probably describe it as a large, pointy, illuminated tower, in the middle of a large city. A Remote Viewer would describe it more like: Target appears to be a large, curved tall, open, metallic structure, that appears to be glowing or is lit like a candle. There appears to be some signal coming from the top of this structure. Concepts perceived are of a National or Nation’s symbol. Perceived the phonetic words: “Champ” and “Mars”.

All of the above are describing the same target, but the more specific and detailed the information is the easier it is to identify the target if it is a complete unknown.

The Eiffel Tower is located at “Champ du Mars” in Paris, it is dark (evening) and it is illuminated (lit like a candle), it is a large, curved, open, metallic structure and the signal coming from the top is radio waves and light. It is specific enough to indicate a certain location. Which makes this useful for practical applications.

ProjectX is a privately funded research project that is making a serious attempt to have computer aided “unbiased” assessments score the Remote Viewing Sessions. Using input from Princeton University’s “Wordnet” to provide synonyms for most likely and possible alternative descriptions of the same target.