10 ms·

Clairvoyant Remote Viewing: The US Sponsored Psychic Spying

28 points by myrloc 3y ago

Bo0kerDeWitt 3y ago
David Grusch (UAP whistleblower) seemed to believe this was a legitimate thing on his recent appearance on Joe Rogan. As interested as I am in the UAP phenomena, I just can't seriously believe this is real.
- spacebacon 3y ago
  Do a deep dive into Ingo Swann and form a more informed opinion.
  - observationist 3y ago
    Ingo Swann was a charlatan and fraud. Human credulity is no substitute for science.
    - spacebacon 3y ago
      Care to present any facts with your opinion? I am neither for or against your statement.
- nradov 3y ago
  So far all of David Grusch's claims are a total nothingburger. All secondhand hearsay with no actual evidence.
- rngname22 3y ago
  I heard his comments as 'this is a thing the military has studied and taken seriously, and there were real programs with funding towards it' not 'this is a real thing that works'.
jiveturkey42 3y ago
The CIA is well aware of out-of-body experiences and remote viewing https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP96-00788R001700210016-5.pdf https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP96-00788R0017002...
- spacebacon 3y ago
  The Monroe Institute and early pioneers like Jose Silva normalized the method amongst a small group of “Psychonauts” and self improvement hobbyist that were willing to dive deep enough into the unknown to form their own opinions on the topic. I’m not sure that knowing or experiencing the ability actually improves your life but it is an interesting study if you are willing part ways with a well padded and comfortable reality.
tetris11 3y ago
I quite like that they were willing to try, even if it was a waste of resources. Sometimes you just have to do experiments, even if the outcome isn't wholly known.
- observationist 3y ago
  To a point - some questions aren't worth testing. Questions like "What if I can eat uranium?" or "What happens if I fill my car's gas tank with water" are costly and avoidable. Using basic reasoning skills instead of credulous consideration of magical powers seems a reasonable threshold for discarding certain research. I don't need to spend billions of dollars trying to figure out how to cut people in half and put them back together like a magician, even if thousands or even billions of people have "witnessed" such an event. Science doesn't allow for a rational mechanism that would enable psychic powers like telepathy, seeing the future, and remote viewing without augmenting the brain with a technological interface and machines that captured and transmitted the information. There's simply no room for reasonable experimentation around these types of claims, unless it's psychological in nature; things which are known and provable limit any possible mechanism by which psychic powers can operate. If you wanted to posit some sort of technological mechanism, then you're getting into simulations, aliens, secret government implants, or other theories that lack plausibility as well. We'll likely have common BCI augmentations within the next century. Networked human brains will exhibit psychic-like abilities and the potential is amazing, but until that happens, claims about such things are fraudulent, deceptive, or deluded.
  - AnnaPoll 3y ago
    [dead]
  - electrondood 3y ago
    > Science doesn't allow for a rational mechanism that would enable psychic powers like telepathy Yet. Keep in mind that everyone thought getting sick was magic until germs were discovered, we used to be completely unaware of electromagnetism, etc. etc. > If you wanted to posit some sort of technological mechanism, then you're getting into simulations, aliens, secret government implants, or other theories that lack plausibility as well. This isn't a statement made in good faith, you're pre-poisoning the well with a slippery slope. There appears to be ample scientific evidence that at least some future events already exist. Check out _Time Loops_ by Eric Wargo for a good summary.
gregw2 3y ago
@dang, this title should be labelled (2002). (This is old news; I first heard about remote viewing projects back then myself.) The article is hosted at "Columbia.edu" but the underlying publication is an Indian foreign policy strategy journal mirrored there, not from a Columbia.edu university academic. Of note is the biographical footnote on the author who was a retired physicist studying cold fusion among other things: "Dr. M. Srinivasan was formerly Associate Director, Physics Group, Bhabha Atomic Research Centre, Mumbai. He is an experimental Physicist who has specialized in fast breeder reactor physics and Cold Fusion. Since retirement, he has been studying anomalous phenomena not explainable currently by Science." It's nice to see some of the specific remote viewing anecdotes in print in a relatively short not overly sensationalistic piece. The whole matter of blinding, double blinding, possible cheating, priming, statistical significance, etc is unfortunately not really addressed in a way that would ameliorate anyone with much skepticism.
- mistermann 3y ago
  Don't forget that proper skepticism works in both directions though.
spacebacon 3y ago
Ingo Swann is known for a remote viewing session where he was asked to describe the contents of a sealed envelope placed inside a safe. This experiment took place at the Stanford Research Institute (SRI) during the early stages of the remote viewing program. Swann accurately described the contents of the envelope within the safe, reporting drawings of mountains, a horse, and an individual riding the horse. To the surprise of the researchers, the actual contents matched Swann's descriptions, which he could not physically access or see through conventional means. This demonstration was part of the initial efforts to test and explore the potential capabilities of remote viewing. It's often cited as a compelling instance showcasing Swann's purported abilities, but like other remote viewing cases, it remains a subject of debate within scientific circles regarding its reliability and reproducibility under controlled conditions.
- spacebacon 3y ago
  Swann also viewed rings around Jupiter as well as a thin atmosphere on Mercury. Both findings were later confirmed by NASA.
  - aredox 3y ago
    "Bull indeed. He described them like this: "Maybe the stripes are like bands of crystals, maybe like rings of Saturn, though not far out like that. Very close within the atmosphere." As it happens, the rings of Jupiter are very far out from the planet. His description was nothing but rank generalities and bet hedging. Ice crystals in Jupiter's atmosphere were already predicted to be there, and him describing them as "bands of crystals, maybe like rings of Saturn" is bet-hedging at its worst. He made an educated guess that ice crystals appear in bands, and gave a carefully crafted sentence that could be interpreted as "right" regardless of whether actual rings were found. Rings found? Then pay attention to the "...like rings of Saturn..." part. No rings found? Then pay attention to the "...Very close within the atmosphere..." part. Regardless of which way it goes, try to convince people your meaningless declaration means something after the fact. Ingo Swann is the worst sort of fraud." https://www.reddit.com/r/skeptic/comments/hvryx/need_help_debunking_a_specific_remote_viewing/ https://www.reddit.com/r/skeptic/comments/hvryx/need_help_de...
getpost 3y ago
I first read about this in the 2007 book, Extraordinary Knowing: Science, Skepticism, and the Inexplicable Powers of the Human Mind by Elizabeth Mayer. I don't remember what she says about Swann, but the book made a big impression on me at the time, and I bought copies for a couple friends. https://www.amazon.com/Extraordinary-Knowing-Science-Skepticism-Inexplicable/dp/0553382233 https://www.amazon.com/Extraordinary-Knowing-Science-Skeptic...

28 points by myrloc 3y ago

David Grusch (UAP whistleblower) seemed to believe this was a legitimate thing on his recent appearance on Joe Rogan. As interested as I am in the UAP phenomena, I just can't seriously believe this is real.

spacebacon 3y ago
Do a deep dive into Ingo Swann and form a more informed opinion.
- observationist 3y ago
  Ingo Swann was a charlatan and fraud. Human credulity is no substitute for science.
  - spacebacon 3y ago
    Care to present any facts with your opinion? I am neither for or against your statement.
nradov 3y ago
So far all of David Grusch's claims are a total nothingburger. All secondhand hearsay with no actual evidence.
rngname22 3y ago
I heard his comments as 'this is a thing the military has studied and taken seriously, and there were real programs with funding towards it' not 'this is a real thing that works'.

jiveturkey42 3y ago

The CIA is well aware of out-of-body experiences and remote viewing https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP96-00788R001700210016-5.pdf https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP96-00788R0017002...

spacebacon 3y ago
The Monroe Institute and early pioneers like Jose Silva normalized the method amongst a small group of “Psychonauts” and self improvement hobbyist that were willing to dive deep enough into the unknown to form their own opinions on the topic. I’m not sure that knowing or experiencing the ability actually improves your life but it is an interesting study if you are willing part ways with a well padded and comfortable reality.

tetris11 3y ago

I quite like that they were willing to try, even if it was a waste of resources. Sometimes you just have to do experiments, even if the outcome isn't wholly known.

observationist 3y ago
To a point - some questions aren't worth testing. Questions like "What if I can eat uranium?" or "What happens if I fill my car's gas tank with water" are costly and avoidable. Using basic reasoning skills instead of credulous consideration of magical powers seems a reasonable threshold for discarding certain research. I don't need to spend billions of dollars trying to figure out how to cut people in half and put them back together like a magician, even if thousands or even billions of people have "witnessed" such an event. Science doesn't allow for a rational mechanism that would enable psychic powers like telepathy, seeing the future, and remote viewing without augmenting the brain with a technological interface and machines that captured and transmitted the information. There's simply no room for reasonable experimentation around these types of claims, unless it's psychological in nature; things which are known and provable limit any possible mechanism by which psychic powers can operate. If you wanted to posit some sort of technological mechanism, then you're getting into simulations, aliens, secret government implants, or other theories that lack plausibility as well. We'll likely have common BCI augmentations within the next century. Networked human brains will exhibit psychic-like abilities and the potential is amazing, but until that happens, claims about such things are fraudulent, deceptive, or deluded.
- AnnaPoll 3y ago
  [dead]
- electrondood 3y ago
  > Science doesn't allow for a rational mechanism that would enable psychic powers like telepathy Yet. Keep in mind that everyone thought getting sick was magic until germs were discovered, we used to be completely unaware of electromagnetism, etc. etc. > If you wanted to posit some sort of technological mechanism, then you're getting into simulations, aliens, secret government implants, or other theories that lack plausibility as well. This isn't a statement made in good faith, you're pre-poisoning the well with a slippery slope. There appears to be ample scientific evidence that at least some future events already exist. Check out _Time Loops_ by Eric Wargo for a good summary.

gregw2 3y ago

@dang, this title should be labelled (2002). (This is old news; I first heard about remote viewing projects back then myself.) The article is hosted at "Columbia.edu" but the underlying publication is an Indian foreign policy strategy journal mirrored there, not from a Columbia.edu university academic. Of note is the biographical footnote on the author who was a retired physicist studying cold fusion among other things: "Dr. M. Srinivasan was formerly Associate Director, Physics Group, Bhabha Atomic Research Centre, Mumbai. He is an experimental Physicist who has specialized in fast breeder reactor physics and Cold Fusion. Since retirement, he has been studying anomalous phenomena not explainable currently by Science." It's nice to see some of the specific remote viewing anecdotes in print in a relatively short not overly sensationalistic piece. The whole matter of blinding, double blinding, possible cheating, priming, statistical significance, etc is unfortunately not really addressed in a way that would ameliorate anyone with much skepticism.

mistermann 3y ago
Don't forget that proper skepticism works in both directions though.

spacebacon 3y ago

Ingo Swann is known for a remote viewing session where he was asked to describe the contents of a sealed envelope placed inside a safe. This experiment took place at the Stanford Research Institute (SRI) during the early stages of the remote viewing program. Swann accurately described the contents of the envelope within the safe, reporting drawings of mountains, a horse, and an individual riding the horse. To the surprise of the researchers, the actual contents matched Swann's descriptions, which he could not physically access or see through conventional means. This demonstration was part of the initial efforts to test and explore the potential capabilities of remote viewing. It's often cited as a compelling instance showcasing Swann's purported abilities, but like other remote viewing cases, it remains a subject of debate within scientific circles regarding its reliability and reproducibility under controlled conditions.

spacebacon 3y ago
Swann also viewed rings around Jupiter as well as a thin atmosphere on Mercury. Both findings were later confirmed by NASA.
- aredox 3y ago
  "Bull indeed. He described them like this: "Maybe the stripes are like bands of crystals, maybe like rings of Saturn, though not far out like that. Very close within the atmosphere." As it happens, the rings of Jupiter are very far out from the planet. His description was nothing but rank generalities and bet hedging. Ice crystals in Jupiter's atmosphere were already predicted to be there, and him describing them as "bands of crystals, maybe like rings of Saturn" is bet-hedging at its worst. He made an educated guess that ice crystals appear in bands, and gave a carefully crafted sentence that could be interpreted as "right" regardless of whether actual rings were found. Rings found? Then pay attention to the "...like rings of Saturn..." part. No rings found? Then pay attention to the "...Very close within the atmosphere..." part. Regardless of which way it goes, try to convince people your meaningless declaration means something after the fact. Ingo Swann is the worst sort of fraud." https://www.reddit.com/r/skeptic/comments/hvryx/need_help_debunking_a_specific_remote_viewing/ https://www.reddit.com/r/skeptic/comments/hvryx/need_help_de...

getpost 3y ago

I first read about this in the 2007 book, Extraordinary Knowing: Science, Skepticism, and the Inexplicable Powers of the Human Mind by Elizabeth Mayer. I don't remember what she says about Swann, but the book made a big impression on me at the time, and I bought copies for a couple friends. https://www.amazon.com/Extraordinary-Knowing-Science-Skepticism-Inexplicable/dp/0553382233 https://www.amazon.com/Extraordinary-Knowing-Science-Skeptic...