What Did Intelligence Users Say Went Wrong?

Introduction

One of the most important parts of the 1995 evaluation of the U.S. government’s remote-viewing programme was not the debate over laboratory experiments but the assessment of whether intelligence officers could actually use the reports they received. The review found that this operational question weakened the programme more than any statistical dispute. While some experimental results remained controversial, the people expected to turn remote-viewing sessions into usable intelligence generally reported that the material was too vague, inconsistent or difficult to act upon. That distinction shaped the CIA’s decision: a capability that occasionally produces intriguing descriptions is not the same as one that reliably supports intelligence analysis or operational decisions.[alice.id.tue.nl]alice.id.tue.nlAn Evaluation of Remote Viewing: Research and…by MD Mumford · 1995 · Cited by 75 — Utts and Hyman were asked to prepare independent re…

What Did Intelligence Users Say Went Wrong?

Who counted as an end user in the review?

The 1995 American Institutes for Research (AIR) evaluation distinguished between researchers who conducted remote-viewing experiments and the intelligence personnel who consumed the resulting reports. These end users included intelligence analysts, operations staff and government officials who received remote-viewing products alongside information from conventional collection methods. Their judgement mattered because they were responsible for determining whether a report could influence a real investigation or decision rather than merely appear interesting in retrospect.[alice.id.tue.nl]alice.id.tue.nlAn Evaluation of Remote Viewing: Research and…by MD Mumford · 1995 · Cited by 75 — Utts and Hyman were asked to prepare independent re…

Rather than asking whether viewers occasionally described distant targets in striking ways, the operational review examined how recipients experienced the information at the time it was delivered. Interviews with intelligence consumers formed an important part of this assessment, shifting attention from laboratory scoring methods to practical usefulness.[www.slideshare.net]slideshare.netEvaluation of Remote Viewing, Research and…The review consisted of evaluating past laboratory research on remote viewing and interview…

Why background accuracy did not equal value

A recurring finding was that a report could contain some correct-looking details without becoming operationally useful. Intelligence work depends on specificity, timeliness and confidence. Analysts must decide which information deserves action before the true answer is known.

The review found several reasons why apparent accuracy often failed to translate into value:

• Reports frequently contained broad or ambiguous descriptions that could fit many different situations.
• Accurate elements were mixed with incorrect or unverifiable claims, making it difficult to distinguish signal from noise.
• Products rarely provided enough precise information to guide operational planning or analytical conclusions.
• Successes were often recognised only after events had unfolded, limiting their prospective intelligence value. alice.id.tue.nl+2Center for Inquiry[alice.id.tue.nl]alice.id.tue.nlAn Evaluation of Remote Viewing: Research and…by MD Mumford · 1995 · Cited by 75 — Utts and Hyman were asked to prepare independent re…

This distinction became central to the evaluation. Intelligence organisations require information that improves decisions under uncertainty, not simply material that can later be interpreted as partially correct.

How User Feedback Weakened the Programme Case

The AIR review reported that interviews with intelligence consumers did not establish that remote viewing had produced intelligence of demonstrable operational value. Some users described individual reports as interesting or occasionally suggestive, but there was no convincing documentation that the programme consistently influenced successful intelligence operations or provided unique information unavailable from conventional sources. www.slideshare.net+2alice.id.tue.nl[slideshare.net]slideshare.netEvaluation of Remote Viewing, Research and…The review consisted of evaluating past laboratory research on remote viewing and interview…

This finding carried particular weight because it addressed the programme’s original purpose. Even if researchers continued debating whether laboratory experiments revealed an anomalous psychological effect, the government had funded remote viewing as a potential intelligence tool. The end-user evidence indicated that this objective had not been met.[alice.id.tue.nl]alice.id.tue.nlAn Evaluation of Remote Viewing: Research and…by MD Mumford · 1995 · Cited by 75 — Utts and Hyman were asked to prepare independent re…

The reviewers also noted that intelligence organisations already possess established methods for evaluating sources according to reliability, corroboration and predictive performance. Remote-viewing reports generally failed to satisfy these practical standards because recipients could not determine which statements deserved confidence before independent evidence became available.[Center for Inquiry]cdn.centerforinquiry.orgCenter for InquiryEvaluation of the Military's Twenty-Year Program on…by RAY HYMAN · 1996 · Cited by 8 — In 1995 the Central Intellige…

Why Operational Feedback Mattered More Than Laboratory Debate

The well-known disagreement between Jessica Utts and Ray Hyman concerned the interpretation of experimental evidence. Utts argued that the statistical findings supported the existence of a genuine phenomenon, whereas Hyman maintained that methodological concerns and the lack of independent replication prevented such a conclusion. Despite their disagreement, neither position overturned the operational assessment.

The broader AIR evaluation concluded that whatever the laboratory findings might mean scientifically, they did not establish a dependable intelligence capability. The conditions that appeared to produce positive laboratory results differed substantially from the demands of intelligence work, where information must be timely, specific and consistently useful to decision-makers.[alice.id.tue.nl+2CIA]alice.id.tue.nlAn Evaluation of Remote Viewing: Research and…by MD Mumford · 1995 · Cited by 75 — Utts and Hyman were asked to prepare independent re…

This explains why popular summaries that focus only on the scientific controversy miss the programme’s administrative outcome. The CIA was deciding whether to continue funding an intelligence programme, not whether every laboratory anomaly had been explained.

The Lasting Significance of the End-User Evidence

The operational review ultimately reframed the remote-viewing debate. Instead of asking, “Did some sessions contain surprisingly accurate descriptions?”, it asked, “Did intelligence professionals receive information they could reliably use?”

The available evidence pointed to the latter question receiving a negative answer. End users reported that the products were generally too uncertain, too imprecise and too difficult to integrate into intelligence analysis. As a result, the programme lacked documented operational value even if aspects of the experimental research remained disputed. That practical judgement became one of the strongest reasons for ending government sponsorship of psychic spying as an intelligence programme.[www.slideshare.net+2CIA]slideshare.netEvaluation of Remote Viewing, Research and…The review consisted of evaluating past laboratory research on remote viewing and interview…

Amazon book picks

Further Reading

Books and field guides related to What Did Intelligence Users Say Went Wrong?. Use these as the next step if you want deeper reading beyond the article.

Book

The conscious universe

By Unknown author

Separates evidence for effects from practical applications.

See on Amazon

Book

The Stargate chronicles

By Joseph McMoneagle

First published 2002. Subjects: Remote viewing (Parapsychology), Psychics.

See on Amazon

Book

Remote viewing secrets

By Joseph McMoneagle

First published 2000. Subjects: Remote viewing (Parapsychology), Parapsychology, Prophecies (occultism), Astral projection.

See on Amazon

Book

Parapsychology

By Etzel Cardeña, John Palmer et al.

First published 2015. Subjects: Parapsychology.

See on Amazon

Browse more on Amazon:The conscious universeThe Stargate chroniclesRemote viewing secrets

As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.

eBay marketplace picks

Marketplace Samples

Example marketplace items related to this page. Use the search link to explore similar finds on eBay.

Shop location

UsingUSA USA USAUKCanadaAustraliaIreland

Example eBay listing

Central Intelligence Agency CIA Paramilitary Operations Operator Challenge Coin

SearcheBay.co.uk: intelligence challenge coin

Browse similar oneBay.co.uk

Example eBay listing

USA CIA Central Intelligence Agency gold plated 40mm Challenge Coin.

SearcheBay.co.uk: intelligence challenge coin

Browse similar oneBay.co.uk

Example eBay listing

Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) Challenge Coin in Blue Velvet Case ·GREAT GIFT

SearcheBay.co.uk: intelligence challenge coin

Browse similar oneBay.co.uk

Example eBay listing

British Army Intelligence Corps EIIR Challenge Coin - 50mm

SearcheBay.co.uk: intelligence challenge coin

Browse similar oneBay.co.uk

Browse more oneBay.co.uk

Example items shown for inspiration; availability and pricing can change. Branchoria may earn a commission if you purchase through outbound eBay links.

Endnotes

1. Source: alice.id.tue.nl
Link:https://www.alice.id.tue.nl/references/mumford-rose-goslin-1995.pdf

2. Source: cia.gov
Link:https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP96-00791R000200180005-5.pdf

3. Source: slideshare.net
Link:https://www.slideshare.net/slideshow/an-evaluation-of-remote-viewing-research-and-applications-air1995pdf/257460594

4. Source: cia.gov
Link:https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP96-00791R000200180006-4.pdf

5. Source: cdn.centerforinquiry.org
Link:https://cdn.centerforinquiry.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/29/1996/03/22165045/p21.pdf

6. Source: Wikipedia
Title: Remote viewing
Link:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remote_viewing

Additional References

7. Source: skepsis.nl
Link:https://skepsis.nl/[stargate

8. Source: rviewer.com
Link:https://rviewer.com/a-review-of-the-cia-air-report-on-the-star-gate-remote-viewing-program/bologna-on-wry-bread-part-1-of-a-review-of-an-evaluation-of-remote-viewing-research-and-applications/

9. Source: researchprofiles.herts.ac.uk
Title: experiment one of the saic remote viewing program a critical re e
Link:https://researchprofiles.herts.ac.uk/en/publications/experiment-one-of-the-saic-remote-viewing-program-a-critical-re-e

10. Source: researchgate.net
Link:https://www.researchgate.net/publication/267978941Evaluation_of_Program_on%27Anomalous_Mental_Phenomena%27

11. Source: skeptics.stackexchange.com
Title: have remote viewing tests shown a positive effect 5 15 above chance
Link:https://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/17741/have-remote-viewing-tests-shown-a-positive-effect-5-15-above-chance

12. Source: reddit.com
Link:https://www.reddit.com/r/StargateFiles/comments/1rjeasm/structural_breakdown_of_the_1995_cia_star_gate/

13. Source: popularmechanics.com
Title: cia psychic espionage secrets revealed
Link:https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/a65932697/cia-psychic-espionage-secrets-revealed/

14. Source: Wikipedia
Title: Stargate Project (U.S. Army unit)
Link:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stargate_Project_%28U.S._Army_unit%29

15. Source: researchgate.net
Link:https://www.researchgate.net/publication/403178755_The_Star_Gate_Archives_Reports_of_the_United_States_Government_Sponsored_Psi_Program_1972-1995_Volume_4_Operational_Remote_Viewing_Memorandums_and_Reports

16. Source: pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
Link:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10275521/