Editing Remote viewing (section)

==History==

===Early background===

In early [[occult]] and [[Spiritualism (movement)|spiritualist]] literature, remote viewing was known as [[wikt:telesthesia|telesthesia]] and traveling clairvoyance. [[Rosemary Ellen Guiley|Rosemary Guiley]] described it as "seeing remote or hidden objects clairvoyantly with the inner eye, or in alleged out-of-body travel."<ref>{{cite book |author-link= Rosemary Ellen Guiley |last= Guiley |first= Rosemary |date= 1991 |title= Harper's Encyclopedia of Mystical and Paranormal Experience |publisher= Harper |location= San Francisco |page= [https://archive.org/details/harpersencyclope00guil/page/507 507] |isbn= 978-0062503664 |url= https://archive.org/details/harpersencyclope00guil/page/507 }}</ref>

The study of psychic phenomena by major scientists started in the mid-nineteenth century. Early researchers included [[Michael Faraday]], [[Alfred Russel Wallace]], [[Rufus Osgood Mason]], and [[William Crookes]]. Their work predominantly involved carrying out focused experimental tests on individuals thought to be psychically gifted. Reports of apparently successful tests were met with much skepticism from the scientific community.<ref>{{cite book |author-link= Ray Hyman |last= Hyman |first= Ray |date= 1985 |chapter= A Critical Historical Overview of Parapsychology |editor-link= Paul Kurtz |editor-last= Kurtz |editor-first= Paul |title= A Skeptic's Handbook of Parapsychology |publisher= Prometheus Books |pages= 3–96 |isbn= 0879753005}}</ref>

In the 1930s, [[Joseph Banks Rhine|J. B. Rhine]] expanded the study of paranormal performance into larger populations by using standard experimental protocols with unselected human subjects. But, as with the earlier studies, Rhine was reluctant to publicize this work too early because of the fear of criticism from mainstream scientists.<ref name=hyman86>{{cite journal |last= Hyman |first= R |title= Parapsychological research: A tutorial review and critical appraisal |journal= Proceedings of the IEEE |volume= 74 |issue= 6 |pages= 823–849 |date= June 1986 |doi=10.1109/proc.1986.13557|s2cid= 39889367 }}</ref>

Paranormal studies remained a fringe area of scientific exploration. However, by the 1960s, the prevailing counterculture attitudes were sympathetic to paranormal ideas. The emergence of what is termed "[[New Age]]" thinking and the popularity of the [[human potential movement|Human Potential Movement]] provoked a mini-renaissance that renewed public interest in [[consciousness]] studies and psychic phenomena. It also helped to make financial support more available for research into such topics.<ref name=sci181>{{cite journal |last= Wade |first=N |title= Psychical research: The incredible in search of credibility |journal= Science |volume= 181 |date= July 13, 1973 |issue=4095 |pages= 138–143 |doi=10.1126/science.181.4095.138 |pmid= 17746612|bibcode=1973Sci...181..138W }}</ref>

In the early 1970s, [[Harold E. Puthoff|Harold Puthoff]] and [[Russell Targ]] joined the Electronics and Bioengineering Laboratory at Stanford Research Institute (SRI, now [[SRI International]]), where they initiated [[Parapsychology research at SRI|studies of the paranormal]] that were, at first, supported with private funding from the [[Parapsychology Foundation]] and the [[Institute of Noetic Sciences]].<ref>{{cite book|title=How the Hippies Saved Physics: Science, Counterculture, and the Quantum Revival|first1=David|last1=Kaiser|year=2011|publisher=W.W. Norton & Company|pages= 69–71|isbn=978-0393076363}}</ref>

In the late 1970s, the physicists [[John G. Taylor|John Taylor]] and Eduardo Balanovski tested the psychic [[Matthew Manning]] in remote viewing, and the results proved "completely unsuccessful".<ref>{{cite book |author-link= John G. Taylor |last= Taylor |first= John |date=1980 |title= Science and the Supernatural: An Investigation of Paranormal Phenomena Including Psychic Healing, Clairvoyance, Telepathy, and Precognition by a Distinguished Physicist and Mathematician |publisher= Temple Smith |page= 83 |isbn= 0851171915}}</ref>

One of the early experiments, lauded by proponents as having improved the methodology of remote viewing testing and raising future experimental standards, was criticized as leaking information to the participants by inadvertently leaving clues.<ref name="wiseman_may">{{cite journal | journal = [[Journal of Parapsychology]] | url = http://www.richardwiseman.com/resources/SAICreply.pdf | title = Experiment one of the SAIC remote viewing program: A critical re-evaluation. A reply to May. |last1=Wiseman |first1= R  |last2=Milton |first2= J | pages = 3–14 | issue = 1 | volume = 63 | year = 1999 | access-date = 2008-06-26 }}<br />* Obtained from  [http://www.richardwiseman.com/research/papers.html listing of research papers on Wiseman's website]</ref> Some later experiments had negative results when these clues were eliminated.{{refn|group=n|name="Randi Encyclopedia"|From ''[[An Encyclopedia of Claims, Frauds, and Hoaxes of the Occult and Supernatural]]'' by [[James Randi]]: "The data of Puthoff and Targ were reexamined by the other researchers, and it was found that their students were able to solve the locations without use of any psychic powers, using only the clues that had inadvertently been included in the Puthoff and Targ transcripts."<ref name="randi_encyclopedia">{{cite Encyclopedia of Claims |title=Remote Viewing |first-letter=R |access-date=26 January 2022 }}</ref>}}

The viewers' advice in the "[[Stargate project]]" was always so unclear and non-detailed that it has never been used in any intelligence operation.<ref name="jordan"/>{{refn|group=n|name="Eval of RV"}}<ref name="Time" />

===Decline and termination===

In the early 1990s, the [[Military Intelligence Board]], chaired by [[Defense Intelligence Agency]] chief [[Harry E. Soyster]], appointed Army Colonel William Johnson to manage the remote viewing unit and evaluate its objective usefulness. Funding dissipated in late 1994, and the program declined. The project was transferred from DIA to the [[CIA]] in 1995.

In 1995, the CIA hired the [[American Institutes for Research]] (AIR) to perform a retrospective evaluation of the results generated by the [[Stargate Project (U.S. Army unit)|Stargate Project]]. Reviewers included [[Ray Hyman]] and [[Jessica Utts]]. Utts maintained that there had been a [[statistically significant]] positive effect,<ref>{{citation |mode= cs1 |url= http://anson.ucdavis.edu/~utts/air2.html |title= An assessment of the evidence for psychic functioning |first= Jessica |last= Utts |date= 1995 |archive-date= 13 May 2008 |url-status= dead |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20080513174112/http://anson.ucdavis.edu/~utts/air2.html }}</ref> with some subjects scoring 5–15% above chance.{{refn|group=n|name="Eval of RV"}} Hyman argued that Utts' conclusion that ESP had been proven to exist "is premature, to say the least."<ref name=HymanAbstract>{{cite journal |last=Hyman |first=Ray |title=Evaluation of a program on anomalous mental phenomena |journal= Journal of Society for Scientific Exploration |volume= 10 |issue= 1 |page= Article 2 |publisher=Society for Scientific Exploration |url=http://www.scientificexploration.org/jse/abstracts/v10n1a2.php |access-date=2008-06-24 |archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20080603202608/http://www.scientificexploration.org/jse/abstracts/v10n1a2.php |archive-date = June 3, 2008}}</ref> Hyman said the findings had yet to be replicated independently, and that more investigation would be necessary to "legitimately claim the existence of paranormal functioning".<ref name=HymanAbstract /> Based upon both of their studies, which recommended a higher level of critical research and tighter controls, the CIA terminated the $20 million project in 1995.<ref name="Time">{{cite news |magazine= Time |date= 11 December 1995 |page= 45 |url= http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,983829,00.html |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20070209085903/http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,983829,00.html |url-status= dead |archive-date= February 9, 2007 |title= The vision thing |first= Douglas |last= Waller |url-access=subscription }}</ref>  ''[[Time magazine|Time]]'' magazine stated in 1995 that three full-time psychics were still working on a $500,000-a-year budget at [[Fort Meade]], [[Maryland]], which would soon be closed.<ref name="Time" />

The AIR report concluded that no usable intelligence data was produced in the program.{{refn|group=n|name="Eval of RV"}} David Goslin of the American Institute for Research said, "There's no documented evidence it had any value to the intelligence community".<ref name="Time" />

===PEAR's Remote Perception program===

Beginning in the late 1970s, the [[Princeton Engineering Anomalies Research Lab]] (PEAR) carried out extensive research on remote viewing. By 1989, it had conducted 336 formal trials, reporting a composite [[z-score]] of 6.355, with a corresponding [[p-value]] of {{val|1.04e-10}}.<ref name=hansen>{{cite journal |last1=Hansen |first1=George P. |last2=Utts |first2=Jessica |last3=Markwick |first3=Betty |date=June 1992 |title=Critique of the PEAR remote-viewing experiments |url=http://www.tricksterbook.com/ArticlesOnline/PEARCritique.pdf |journal=Journal of Parapsychology |volume=56}}</ref>  In a 1992 critique of these results, Hansen, Utts and Markwick concluded "The PEAR remote-viewing experiments depart from commonly accepted criteria for formal research in science. In fact, they are undoubtedly some of the poorest quality ESP experiments published in many years."<ref name=hansen/>  The lab responded that "none of the stated complaints compromises the PEAR experimental protocols or analytical methods" and reaffirmed their results.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Dobyns |first1=Y.H. |last2=Dunne |first2=B.J. |last3=Jahn |first3=R.G. |last4=Nelson |first4=R.D. |date=June 1992 |title=Response to Hansen, Utts, and Markwick |url=http://icrl.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/1992-response-hansen-utts-markwick.pdf |journal=Journal of Parapsychology |volume=56}}</ref>

Following Utts' emphasis on replication and Hyman's challenge on interlaboratory consistency in the AIR report, PEAR conducted several hundred trials to see if they could replicate the [[Science Applications International Corporation|SAIC]] and SRI experiments. They created an analytical judgment methodology to replace the human judging process criticized in past experiments, and they released a report in 1996. They felt the results of the experiments were consistent with the SRI experiments.<ref>{{cite journal |url= http://www.scientificexploration.org/journal/jse_10_1_nelson.pdf |journal= [[Journal of Scientific Exploration]] |publisher= [[Society for Scientific Exploration]] |volume= 10 |issue= 1 |pages= 109–110 |year= 1996 |title= Precognitive remote perception: Replication of remote viewing |first1= RD |last1= Nelson |first2= BJ |last2= Dunne |first3= YH |last3= Dobyns |first4= RG |last4= Jahn |access-date= 2008-06-02 |url-status= dead |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20100107161704/http://www.scientificexploration.org/journal/jse_10_1_nelson.pdf |archive-date= 2010-01-07 }}</ref>{{unreliable source?|date=February 2020}} However, statistical flaws have been proposed by others in the parapsychological community and within the general scientific community.<ref name="Jeffers2006">{{cite journal |url= http://www.csicop.org/si/show/pear_proposition_fact_or_fallacy/ |title= The PEAR proposition: Fact or fallacy? |publisher= [[Committee for Skeptical Inquiry]] |journal= [[Skeptical Inquirer]] |first= Stanley |last= Jeffers |date= May–June 2006 |access-date= 2014-01-24 |volume= 30 |issue= 3 |archive-date= 2014-02-01 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20140201122738/http://www.csicop.org/si/show/pear_proposition_fact_or_fallacy/ |url-status= dead }}</ref>