13 ms·

How come nobody can replicate this in less opaque settings? Anyone can get 100% accuracy by guessing trivial things that are always true regardless of the natu

How come nobody can replicate this in less opaque settings? Anyone can get 100% accuracy by guessing trivial things that are always true regardless of the nature of the target. Without more information these numbers aren't meaningful

keepamovin 2y ago
> Anyone can get 100% accuracy by guessing trivial things that are always true regardless of the nature of the target But trivial things that are always true does not describe the information sought by government customers from these programs, to which the above data refer. > How come nobody can replicate this in less opaque settings? You can, right now! You can try it yourself, see my other comments in this thread for resources.
- energy123 2y ago
  > information sought by government customers from these programs, to which the above data refer. Those numbers aren't described with the level of rigor needed to be considered evidence. No examples, no methodology, etc. We don't know what "usable intelligence" means. You have taken the liberty of interpreting that in a particularly generous way. > You can, right now! I mean under controlled conditions. Why didn't any of these people in /r/remoteviewing sign up for the JREF $1 million prize? Or at least contact parapsychologists (e.g. Dean Radin or Daryl Bem) who would have been happy to facilitate rigorous public experiments? The best we have from experiments is statistical effects, e.g. guessing a coinflip correctly 51% of the time over large numbers of trials. Not the kind of large, obvious effects that "50% useable intelligence" or "85% accuracy" is hinting at.
  - keepamovin 2y ago
    And you will always take the liberty of interpreting any 3rd-party data in a particularly conservative way until you correct your prior data deficit with first hand experience. That's the key issue. So you need to try if you are serious about getting the truth. Think of it like doing the required pre-requisite work to understand a new topic. This is the same. Why would you enter a competition you believe was a rigged attempt to disprove what you know through first hand experience to be real?
lobocinza 2y ago
"Remote viewing has demonstrated it is of value and has a high rate of success... We do not evaluate our product. All evaluations are done by the professional intelligence analysts who assign the project. Collection of intelligence through remote viewing is not an experiment. It is a successful collection method. The army effort is not research and development, it is operational collection..." https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP96-00788R001100290005-5.pdf¨ https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP96-00788R0011002... Obviously people lie but a compelling report.
- keepamovin 2y ago
  Hey, nice find! You don't need to rely on liars tho - if you're worried about it - just try for yourself. Tho you probably know it's real!
  - keepamovin 2y ago
    But sadly your OG link was borked! The actual link is: https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP96-00788R001100290005-5.pdf Page 12 (final page)
  - lobocinza 2y ago
    > just try for yourself. More probably the conclusions from the project manager are positive exaggerations because it would directly benefit from the continuation of the project but let's consider the possibility that RV works! This would be a fantastic evidence of psychic/paranormal phenomena that would make anyone reconsider other paranormal/spiritual claims that we're previously dismissed. Which creates a dilemma because if I'm non-receptive to paranormal phenomena it will not work and there's no point in trying and if I'm receptive then it's unwise because divination is sinful according to the majority of religions. I imagine there's a "reality" be it real or fictitious where RV and other forms of divination works but ain't widespread enough to be scientifically acknowledged because those really capable of it knows it leads to eternal damnation so they don't practice it or share it publicly. In this same "reality" it's possible that the CIA as other intelligence agencies successfully used divination to acquire intel but discontinued it as they did with Blackbird because nowadays the have much better ways like software backdoors, spy satellites and even OSINT. And to note at best RV produces subjective intel which is non-optimal.

keepamovin 2y ago

> Anyone can get 100% accuracy by guessing trivial things that are always true regardless of the nature of the target But trivial things that are always true does not describe the information sought by government customers from these programs, to which the above data refer. > How come nobody can replicate this in less opaque settings? You can, right now! You can try it yourself, see my other comments in this thread for resources.

energy123 2y ago
> information sought by government customers from these programs, to which the above data refer. Those numbers aren't described with the level of rigor needed to be considered evidence. No examples, no methodology, etc. We don't know what "usable intelligence" means. You have taken the liberty of interpreting that in a particularly generous way. > You can, right now! I mean under controlled conditions. Why didn't any of these people in /r/remoteviewing sign up for the JREF $1 million prize? Or at least contact parapsychologists (e.g. Dean Radin or Daryl Bem) who would have been happy to facilitate rigorous public experiments? The best we have from experiments is statistical effects, e.g. guessing a coinflip correctly 51% of the time over large numbers of trials. Not the kind of large, obvious effects that "50% useable intelligence" or "85% accuracy" is hinting at.
- keepamovin 2y ago
  And you will always take the liberty of interpreting any 3rd-party data in a particularly conservative way until you correct your prior data deficit with first hand experience. That's the key issue. So you need to try if you are serious about getting the truth. Think of it like doing the required pre-requisite work to understand a new topic. This is the same. Why would you enter a competition you believe was a rigged attempt to disprove what you know through first hand experience to be real?

lobocinza 2y ago

"Remote viewing has demonstrated it is of value and has a high rate of success... We do not evaluate our product. All evaluations are done by the professional intelligence analysts who assign the project. Collection of intelligence through remote viewing is not an experiment. It is a successful collection method. The army effort is not research and development, it is operational collection..." https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP96-00788R001100290005-5.pdf¨ https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP96-00788R0011002... Obviously people lie but a compelling report.

keepamovin 2y ago
Hey, nice find! You don't need to rely on liars tho - if you're worried about it - just try for yourself. Tho you probably know it's real!
- keepamovin 2y ago
  But sadly your OG link was borked! The actual link is: https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP96-00788R001100290005-5.pdf Page 12 (final page)
- lobocinza 2y ago
  > just try for yourself. More probably the conclusions from the project manager are positive exaggerations because it would directly benefit from the continuation of the project but let's consider the possibility that RV works! This would be a fantastic evidence of psychic/paranormal phenomena that would make anyone reconsider other paranormal/spiritual claims that we're previously dismissed. Which creates a dilemma because if I'm non-receptive to paranormal phenomena it will not work and there's no point in trying and if I'm receptive then it's unwise because divination is sinful according to the majority of religions. I imagine there's a "reality" be it real or fictitious where RV and other forms of divination works but ain't widespread enough to be scientifically acknowledged because those really capable of it knows it leads to eternal damnation so they don't practice it or share it publicly. In this same "reality" it's possible that the CIA as other intelligence agencies successfully used divination to acquire intel but discontinued it as they did with Blackbird because nowadays the have much better ways like software backdoors, spy satellites and even OSINT. And to note at best RV produces subjective intel which is non-optimal.