### Conclusions

Not too many, I'm afraid. I'm still suspicious of many of the grandiose claims made by Ed Dames and others in the operational units. Their results, which were uncontrolled and still classified, were much more impressive than those obtained in research, which consisted in rough shapes and impressions. Anytime that results go down as controls get stricter is cause for suspicion. Also, I couldn't help to notice that none of the historical examples I've seen ended up with a successful mission.

I don't completely discount the possibility that research at SRI and SAIC might have been on to something, but history would be very much different if the US had a team of consistently accurate psychics on its payroll. There are just far too many military and intelligence blunders, and too many criminals still at large, since the 1980s for me to believe it.

But my main suspicion against the program stems from the fact that it was an intelligence and military operation, and amazingly enough, these people lie, even to their own people. Here are some of the alternative explanations that have been suggested.

### Disinformation against the Russians:

It's been suggested that published American research has served to get Russia to waste time and resources exploring this field. It has also been suggested that the reverse is true - that Russians fooled the US into researching the field. There are also variations on this theme. One side could have started the disinformation, the other side fell for it, and then the original side, years later with different personnel, fell for their own disinformation. This happens more often that either country would like to admit. Also, another variation is that the research started as disinformation, but that the researchers actually started to come up with something useful (or thought they did).

It seems that the CIA had more to do with this angle than the DIA, which oversaw the program starting in the late 70s. Other US government agencies got interested in the SRI studies after the CIA sponsored SCANATE experiment involving a military base. Since these agencies took the CIA's claim of success at face value, the CIA could have used these experiments to fool other agencies into spending their resources to unwittingly carry out the CIA's agenda. This would also explain in part why the CIA didn't want to take over the program in 1995: the disinformation served no purpose.

I have some problems with this theory. From what I have seen, the Russians needed no encouragement from the US to research psychic phenomena.

There are some other angles which would cover disinformation, and I'd like to say in advance that these could work whether or not remote-viewing is valid.

One theory, held by Jack Sarfatti and others, is that the remote-viewing program was part of a psychological warfare project, intended to make the Russians even more paranoid than they already were. There is evidence to support the theory that the KGB used at least the idea, if not the reality, of psychic powers to keep its own people in line.

Another disinformation angle I haven't seen explored by anyone else involves hiding the source of intelligence data. A common problem of intelligence work is that by acting on a piece of information, you run the risk of revealing the source, whether it be a human agent or a new piece of surveillance technology that America would prefer that the Soviets not know about. If a piece of information is gathered by conventional sources, the CIA or other agencies could attribute it to psychics. While the Soviets might not completely accept the attribution, it might serve to lessen the severity of a mole-hunt.

### Cover:

Most of the criticism towards the psychic spying program has stemmed from the cost, which many critics and professional skeptics feel was a waste of money. Likewise, assuming that the field was worthless, is seems strange that the miltary would invest the talents of several military intelligence officers and brilliant scientists to the task. This has led many, myself included, to conclude that the program was, in whole or part, a cover story for other operations or areas of research.

For some reason, the topic of mind control inevitably pops up in discussions of remote viewing, even in mainstream accounts. Taken at face value, there seems to be no reason for this union. However, as we have seen, there is an enormous overlap between the two fields. One hypothesis is that the studies done were actual experiments in artificially inducing thoughts and sensory input. The subjects are then told that the input is the result of "remote viewing". We must remember that the individuals in the operational remote viewing units did not independently confirm the results of their sessions - they were told of their success by their monitors.

It also seems odd that two laser and microwave experts (Hal Puthoff and Russell Targ) would spend a decade or more of their lives dedicated to listening to a person in a room describe a scene outside where the other is standing. The experiments seemed simple enough for college grad students to carry out.

If the remote viewing program was, at least in part, a cover story, it may very well be for something other than mind control, like direct energy weapons. At any rate, being a government psychic is a good indicator for being involved with mind control studies. For this reason alone, they deserve the scrutiny of researchers, even if their efforts in psychic research are sincere.

### Sincerity

Most of the individuals involved at least seem to be sincere about their studies in the paranormal. However, we are dealing largely with intelligence officers, so the appearance of sincerity is somewhat suspect.

According to most mainstream reports, the program was supported by individuals in the military and Congress who were "true believers", that is to say that they supported the research for its own sake regardless of the results. We've had "true believers" in other areas of research apart from the paranormal: the "Star Wars" SDI program comes to mind. Of course, there are always "true believers" on the other side, too, who deny a phenomena regardless of the results. As with business and politics, scientific research and military policy have more to do with the attitudes of those in control than objective reality.

And, of course, there is always the possibility that the sincerity stemmed from actual positive results. The researchers may very well have been on to something, though probably not to the extent of some of the more extreme claims.

As with the rest of life, this phenomena is complex, and the answer does not rest with any one of the possible explanations. There are always varied motivations and factors underlying human interaction, and the research into psychic phenomena is no exception. As more details emerge and more information is declassified, I would urge everyone looking into this area to be cautious and not take the word of intelligence agencies at face value.

FAIR USE COPYRIGHT NOTICE

> This article contains copyrighted material that has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. MCF is offering this article available to our readers for the general purpose of criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching and/or research. We believe that our use of this material falls under the "fair use" provision of Title 17, Section 107 of the United States Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes other than that provided by law, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

Back to MFC Index | Back to Hambones Index