MEMO TO MR. MANFRED GALE FROM HARRY L. SNYDER, PH.D.

CIA-STARGATE

PDF Scan: PDF

Open AI Summary

Summary: In a letter addressed to Mr. Manfred Gale at the Department of the Army, it is stated that further research and development on RV (Remote Viewing) should be recommended, despite the skepticism surrounding its existence. The letter acknowledges the difficulty in accepting the possibility of RV due to the lack of concrete evidence, but argues that there is enough anecdotal "evidence" to warrant further investigation. The potential benefits of controlled RV in the intelligence community are highlighted, while the major argument against it pertains to potential loss of scientific reputation. The letter concludes with a recommendation for future R&D in the RV area.

Text

Body:  SGFOIA3
 Approved For Release 2003/09/10 : CIA-RDP96-00788R00120023.0542-9
 Mr. Manfred Gale
 HQ,  Department of the Army
 ATTN:   DAMA-ZD
 The Pentagon
 Washington, D. C.
 Following our last meeting, I have given considerable thought to what
 was obviously a minority viewpoint on the need for further, better,
 more-controlled R&D on RV.   I find myself still in favor of recommending
 such, with the same degree of uncertainty I indicated at that meeting.
 It is difficult to take a positive position toward the possible (let
 alone probable) existence of RV.  Everything we are taught in scientific
 inquiry, in both the physical and the behavioral sciences, suggests that
 such a phenomenon cannot and should not exist.   Indeed, because plausible
 evidence of. its existence is so difficult to obtain, the acceptance of a
 physically measured PK phenomenon is more palatable to us.  At least, the
 PK decision can be placed upon the output of physical instruments, thereby
 taking our "decision making" out of consideration, and avoiding any guilt
 or conflict feelings we, as scientists, might have by accepting the
 existence of PK.
 Such is not the case with RV, because we have not yet learned how to
 remote the decision making aspects of its possible existence.   Thus, to
 state that it may exist is to be willing to place one's scientific
 rigidity (if not sanity) on the line.   That is rough--and none of us can
 do it. comfortably or objectively.
 Nonetheless, I believe there is enough anecdotal "evidence" to prevent
 our disregarding its possibility of existence.  At least, there appear
 to be adequate, though nonscientific,. examples.   That, I feel, should
 cause us to research the possiblity further.
 The major argument FOR this R&D is that, if the RV phenomenon exists,
 and it can be controlled and used in the intelligence community, then
 the payoff is potentially large.   The major argument AGAINST seems to be
 the combination of notoriety, disbelief, incredulity, and loss of
 scientific reputation of the proponents.   (I can certainly identify with
 the latter.)   Cost has really very little to do with it--the cost of a
 3-5 year, controlled scientific program would be small in the overall
 scheme of DoD R&D (e.g., DARPA).   To hide behind the cost cloak is, I
 think, convenient but invalid.
 For the above reasons, I'm willing to stick my neck out, perhaps too far,
 and take a positive position that future R&D is indicated in the RV area.
 In the attachment to this letter I've tried to provide my "Findings and
 Recommendations"  for your use, along with some rationale.   I've tried to
 keep the rationale unclassified, and I think you can fill in the details.
 Approved For Release 2003/09/10 : CIA-RDP96-00788R001200230042-9
 Approved For Release 2003/09/10 : CIA-RDP96-00788R001200230042-9
 Manfred Gale                                                               19 November 1979
 HQ, Dept. of the Army                                                      page 2
 One last comment is perhaps in order.  As our team is constituted, we have
 some exceedingly brilliant and competent people.   They have not all had,
 the opportunity to review all detailed "research" and "experimental"
 reports.  While I would certainly agree with Jesse that no unequivocal
 scientific evidence for the existence of RV is available, we deal in a
 probabilistic world.  My subjective impression of the probabilities of
 the existence of RV is that p (existence) is greater than zero.  Whether
 we should pursue it further depends on the utility side of the payoff
 matrix.
 Harry L.  Snyder,  Ph.D.
 /edm
 Encl.
 P.S.   If we choose not to recommend further work, how would we explain
 a possible positive result on the shipbuilding details to be evaluated
 on 1/1/80?  Such, if valid, would be a reasonably positive result and
 potentially embarrassing (to say the least.!) to a negative recommendation..
 Approved For Release 2003/09/10 : CIA-RDP96-00788R001200230042-9