Evidence of remote viewing

Unfortunately, the viewers' advice in the "Stargate project" was always so unclear and non-detailed that it has never been used in any intelligence operation.[7][n 1][9] Despite this, SRI scientists and remote viewers have claimed that a number of "natural" psychics were crucial in a number of intelligence operations. The most famous claimed results from these years were the description of "a big crane" at a Soviet nuclear research facility by Joseph McMoneagle,[22] a description of a new class of Soviet strategic submarine by a team of three viewers which included McMoneagle, (Smith 2005, McMoneagle 2002) and Rosemary Smith's location of a downed Soviet bomber in Africa.[23] By the early 1980s numerous offices throughout the intelligence community were providing taskings to SRI's psychics, (Schnabel 1997, Smith 2005) but the collaboration never resulted in useful intelligence information.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remote_viewing

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

http://www.greaterreality.com/rv/instruct.htm

REmote viewing test. Make your mind an empty rice bowl...

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

All science is anecdotal. It consists of claims by scientists of what they accomplished in their own labs.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

"In 1984 I organized a pair of successful 10,000 mile remote viewing experiments between Moscow and San Francisco with famed Russian healer, Djuna Davitashvili.� Djuna�s task was to describe where our colleague would be hiding in San Francisco. She had to focus her attention ten thousand miles to the west, and two hours into the future to correctly describe his location. These experiments were performed under the auspices and control of the USSR Academy of Sciences. �

Ten years earlier, in 1974, my colleague Hal Puthoff and I carried out a demonstration of psychic abilities for the CIA in which Pat Price, a retired police commissioner, described the inside and outside of a secret Soviet weapons laboratory in the far reaches of Siberia � given only the geographical coordinates of latitude and longitude for a reference. (That is, with no on- site cooperation.) This trial was such a stunning success that we were forced to undergo a formal Congressional investigation to determine if there had been a breach in National Security. Of course, none was ever found, and we were supported by the government for another fifteen years. As I sat with Price in these experiments at SRI, he made the sketch shown below right, to illustrate his mental impressions of a giant gantry crane that he psychically �saw� rolling back and forth over a building at the target site!

Data from our formal and controlled SRI investigations were highly statistically significant (thousands of times greater than chance expectation), and have been published in the world�s most prestigious journals, such as Nature, The Proceedings of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, and The Proceedings of the American Academy of Sciences. 3� The twenty years of remote viewing research we conducted for the CIA is outlined in Miracles of Mind: Exploring Nonlocal Consciousness and Spiritual Healing, co-authored by Targ and Katra."

 

You either do not know what anecdotal means or you do not know what science is. Of course it may be that you don't understand what either of those words mean.

 

100 CIA documents of remote viewing sessions:

http://www.remoteviewed.com/remote_viewing_history_military.htm#Remote_viewing_sessions

 

Perhaps you have seen the documentary about the CIA involvement in the paranormal The Men Who Stare at Goats?

 

Science was once partially anecdotal. People described what they saw, and then pondered the significance of those observations.
This was called "Natural History", and was the forerunner of modern science.
It was more primitive than modern science, but is still respected because dreams and imaginings played no part in it.
The most respected practitioners, such as Gilbert White, a curate at Selbourne, Hampshire,
presented factual information which would still be trusted today.
http://www.nhm.ac.uk/nature-online/science-of-natural-history/biographies/gilbert-white/

Good science is not anecdotal at all.
Unfortunately, due to commercial and other pressures, not 100% of it is good, I accept.

 

You dismiss all this remote viewing research as anecdotal because it is reported by the actual scientists that were involved in the studies. On that same basis, EVERY scientific study would equally have to be dismissed as anecdotal because it is reported by the actual scientists who did the experiments. Claims about what the experiments showed, how they were controlled, and what was ruled out, are ALL anecdotal claims based on the way you are using it. And yet I take such claims as especially reliable because they are reported by the scientists who did the work. Who else are we going to rely on? A bunch of armchair skeptics who nitpick over details and flaws in the attempt to debunk the findings. Not me.

 

Keep in mind that MR believes everything.

 

And here we go with the insults. lol!