> The experimenter driving the car insisted that he wasn’t allowed to deviate from protocol. Green told him, “I’m the contract monitor, and I say stop the car.”

> The experimenter driving the car insisted that he wasn’t allowed to deviate from protocol. Green told him, “I’m the contract monitor, and I say stop the car.” So the experimenter stopped. “But I’m supposed to drive to the target,” he said. This breach of protocol makes the experiment near-worthless. Even if this anecdote is truthful, and even if there was no deliberate collusion: some impulse prompted Green to stop at the church. Was there a common event, earlier in the day, that led both to this conclusion? > Green intended to devise a fail-safe remote-viewing test. Rule of thumb: never trust a science experiment devised to prove something. Only trust one designed to disprove something.