REVIEW OF STANFORD RESEARCH INSTITUTE (SRI) PROJECT, MENLO PARK, CALIFORNIA 14-16 OCTOBER 1974

CIA-STARGATE

PDF Scan: PDF

Open AI Summary

Text

Body:  SG1A
 Approved Forlease 2003/06/24: CIA-RDP79-0099903001
 MEMORANDUM FOR THE RECORD
 SUBJECT:        Review of Stanford Research Institute  (SRI)
 Project,  Menlo Park,  California 14-16 October 1974
 1.                       ORD/LS and myself reviewed the para-
 normal research activities at SRI with the two principal
 investigators,  Dr. H. Puthoff and Mr. R. Targ.        During the
 visit three remote viewing experiments were completed with
 mixed results.   Plans for another visit to SRI with intention
 of completing a series of experiments with agency personnel
 in control of target selection were finalized for 4-5 November.
 2.   It is expected that                will review the pro-     SG1A
 gress on the basic research in detail in a separate memorandum.
 A brief summary follows.   The medical and psychological tests
 for the six subjects are more than one half completed with the
 remainder scheduled to be completed in 30-60 days,   Raw data
 has been included in progress reports #3 and #4 with more to
 follow.   No significant comparisons and characteristics have
 yet been noted.   Mid-test random neurological data is partially
 complete.   Delays have been encountered because the SRI division
 originally taking data proved slow and did not have the desired
 analogue read out.   Four physiological functions are now being
 monitored on in-house equipment.   The data on the psylTok.inetic
 experiments has been completed.   Remote Magnetometer interaction
 data was taken for subjects 1, 2 and 6.   S-1 got statistically
 positive results,  null results for others.   The interaction
 with laser beam experiment has produced positive results one
 standard deviation above change. In summary,  the P.K.  experi-
 ments are indicative of psycl(okinetic phenomena only in a
 modest statistical sense.  A review of the screening of the
 subjects by measuring their performance at three tasks, remote
 .viewing,  ESP teaching machine and remote viewing of line draw-
 ings indicated little multiplicity of talents among subjects.
 About half of these screening tests are completed.
 3.  Remote viewing experiments have continued to maintain
 first priority attention for the applied research (OTS fraction)
 of the project.   A series of local remote viewing experiments
 SG1A
 Approved For Release 2003/06/24: CIA-RDP79-00999A000300100015-5
 Approved For-,  lease 2003/06/24: CIA-RDP79-00999,UO0300100015-5
 have now been performed at my request to assess the ability
 to obtain information within a short distance of the subject
 (a few feet to a few miles).   Claims of good results prompted
 a review of this data and a request for a demonstration.
 These results are described below.
 4.   To avoid redundancy, "successful" remote viewing
 experiments are summarized in progress report #4 (attached)
 pp. 1-24 and will not be reviewed in detail here.   The purpose
 of these experiments was to remotely describe objects several
 rooms or buildings away.   The complete raw data for several
 of these experiments was reviewed while at SRI.   The original
 tape recordings of two of the technology series viewing experi-
 ments were reviewed and the targets visited.                        Copies and photo-
 graphics of the tapes and targets were made.   These supported
 the claim of best results yet obtained.   Unambigious identi-
 fication of the target would be unlikely from the data without
 a prior knowledge of the target but the remotely obtained
 description has many correspondence with the actual target.
 Many more correspondences than expected by chance in my judg-
 ment.   These materials are available for inspection and review.
 Assuming the integrity of the experimenters and their pro-
 cedures remain intact,  their data is a strong indicator of an,
 as yet,  unexplained information channel.
 5.   To test the reproducibility of these remote viewing
 experiments, the investigators were asked to prepare a demon-
 stration of the close range remote viewing.   The request was
 made one week before the visit.   The investigators were not
 able to obtain the services of the "best" subject (H.H.) during
 this visit but agreed to have her available 4-5 November for a
 series of experiments under our control.   The SRI investigators
 suggested we attempt the experiment with a more readily avail-
 able subject  (D.E.) who had not been used for these short range
 remote viewing experiments but had previously performed a
 successful remote viewing experiment and was also one of the
 project test subjects.   Descriptions of the experiments follows:
 6.   Remote viewing experiment #1 by D.E.
 a.   The first demonstration was attempted the afternoon
 of 16 October. The experimenters included D.E., an SRI
 analyst and Mr. R. Targ, one of the project principal
 investigators.   These two remained at SRI.   Dr. H.
 Puthoff, the other project principal investigator,
 Ms. "P. C."  another SRI employee and test subject, II      SG1A
 ORD/LS and myself were to choose and visi
 the place to be remotely viewed.   At a prearranged
 time D.E. would describe his impressions of the choosen
 target.   Targ would record the entire description as it
 was given.   Targ was not aware of the target selection
 C
 Approved For Release 2663/Q 2
 A-9 ilP79-00999A000300100015-5
 Approved For Tease 2003/06/24: CIA ,RDP79-00999  p0300100015-5
 as zne viewer.   Mr.   Targ and myself left.                    and
 -Dr. Puthoff were situated in a work area.                r.   arg offered a
 list of targets to choose from.   I rejected them and asked for
 a second list.   I agreed on a visit to the Xerox copier sug-
 gested in the second list.   We proceeded there and at the
 appropriate time began to make copies of handy objects which
 included pocket change,  a wrist watch,  etc.            After 10 minutes,
 before we returned.   On the way I suggested a site,
 the Palo Alto City tennis courts.   Having played
 at these courts I felt they were distinctive and
 simple so we could easily evaluate the description.
 We went to the courts and parked the car along the
 fence which surrounds them.   We walked towards the
 end of the courts where bleachers sit and watched
 the play for the agreed upon length of time.   After-
 wards we walked to the other end of the court to
 view the two swimming pools nearby and returned to
 SRI.
 b.   Upon arriving back at SRI and being introduced
 to D.E.  the results were casually evaluated.  Con-
 siderable conversation was recorded and five or six
 sketches made.   The discussion centered on the idea
 we were in an indoor environment.   Strong impres-
 sions'of a certain children's museum southwest of SRI
 ran throughout.   The sketches showed several different
 scenes.   Several comments are as follows.   We were, as
 D.E.  predicted, southwest of SRI.  However,  the chil-
 dren's museum named was nearby across the city park
 (one hundred yards away) but we were never in it.
 Correctly,'the first sketches showed us walking across
 a gravel path towards an enbankment or wall   (it was a
 fence) and gives the correct orientation of our cir-
 cumnavigation of the wall.   Another sketch,                                      described
 as Puthoff and P.C.  separated by a waist-high railing
 could easily be two people separated by a tennis net.
 Another sketch appears to have little resemblance to
 anything encountered and is probably an accurate
 rendition of the inside of the children's museum.   A
 final sketch of a "mechanical" object "interacted with"
 appears to be a pitch fork or tennis racket like object
 held in one hand by a person.   A round object is sus-
 pended in space in front of the "mechanical object."
 D.E.  could not identify this object so he put a question
 mark on it.   When asked,  D.E. said he had no impression
 of violent physical activity or running.
 7.   A second experiment was performed with                         SG1A
 SG1A
 1 42,
 4 L
 Approved For Release 2003/06/24: CIA-RDP79-00999A000300100015-5
 Approved For,&lease 2003/06/24: CI4gg-DP79-00999UO0300100015-5
 FJiyiSaj~
 the experiment was terminated and results immediately
 evaluated.   The discussion and sketch appear unrelated to
 the visit with the possible exception of concentration on
 a scene including a brightly lit box or window.
 8.   The third experiment used D.E.  as the viewer again.
 Complications arose in the implementation of this experiment.
 D.E. said he had impressions of the results already prepared
 before the experiment.   He further said he submitted his
 precognitive results to Puthoff's secretary.   Since the
 secretar   had been called to a staff meeting, it was decided
 to have                  sit in the office to varify the precog-
 nitive results were not altered.   Then Mr.  Targ and myself
 left to choose a target.   I suggested we repeat the Xerox
 experiment.   Repeating an experiment has never been part of
 the SRI protocal.       This was agreed to an done.   After about
 eight minutes of copying we exhausted things to copy.   I
 suggested we terminate the experiment.   Mr.  Targ said that
 was not a good idea because it would inject a breach of faith
 between ourselves and the experimenter.  We discussed this
 point for several minutes then left the area after the pre-
 scribed period of time.   D.E.  provided conversion and sketches
 again which contained some elements that could be associated
 with the visit.   Most elements,  however, were ambiguous at
 best.   The most interesting result occurred about eight minutes
 into the experiment when D.E. said he had the strong impression
 we were terminating the experiment and leaving the area.   Dr.
 Puthoff attempted to keep D.E.  describing his impressions,
 since Dr. Puthoff could not believe the experiment would be
 terminated before the agreed upon time.   The subsequent de-
 scription by D.E. is not of value.   All the above data will be
 discussed in more detail in the progress reports.
 9.   The above descriptions are not recorded as proof of
 paranormal abilities.   Rather they are recorded to document
 the results of our first attempt to demonstrate the remote
 viewing ability with the available personnel under more fluid
 conditions and with agency personnel in control of target
 selection.   It is felt that the performance of the subjects
 under controlled laboratory conditions is an important char-
 acteristic but the performance under conditions more closely
 analogous to field operations is also important.
 10.   During our visit the SRI paranormal paper was published
 in "Nature", a prestigious British journal.   Puthoff was be-
 sieged by many phone calls and it is clear that much attention
 will be given to the paranormal research activities at SRI.
 On the short term,  it will be important to avoid allowing this
 attention to effect the performance.   A long range assessment
 Approved For Release 200    f4 E   #f  79-00999A000300100015-5
 SG1A
 Approved Forelease 2003/06/24 : CIA-RDP79-0099,00300100015-5
 is more positive.   The scrutiny and criticism of the total
 scientific community will be applied to the SRI results.
 This should result in attempts to replicate the results at
 other laboratories and attempts to understand the phenomenum
 by others.   This should stimulate and hasten the understanding
 of the phenomenum at the price of losing exclusive agency
 control of any potential applications.
 11.   It is apparent that SRI has more data than can possibly
 be analyzed and reported during the remaining three months of
 tht-        Tact.   It will be the responsibility of myself and iI    SG1A
 to tightly control the generation of new data and assure
 the highest priority data be analyzed and reported,
 12.   Tentative arrangement for a full one day project review
 in Washington were discussed.   This review would possibly in-
 clude the opinions of Dr. J. Ball, a theoretical physicist,
 currently evaluating theoretical explanations of paranormal
 abilities.   The first or second week in December appears to be
 an appropriate time.
 SG1A
 5
 Approved For Release 2003/06/24: CIA-RDP79-00999A000300100015-5