Can Remote Viewing Claim the Future?

Introduction

Future-target remote viewing is the part of the remote-viewing debate where the claim stops being only about distance and becomes a claim about time. In these experiments, the viewer records impressions before the target is chosen, visited, displayed, or finally known. The central question is therefore not simply whether someone can describe a hidden place, but whether a later event can somehow anchor an earlier description.

That makes future-target work both intriguing and harder to interpret. Supporters argue that several laboratory and applied protocols reported above-chance results, including experiments in which targets were randomly selected only after the viewing session. Critics reply that such claims raise the evidential bar: randomisation, judging, feedback, target pools, and statistical stopping rules must be extremely tight, because ordinary ambiguity can look more impressive when the result is judged after the fact. The fairest summary is that future-target remote viewing has produced a body of disputed positive findings, but not a settled demonstration of usable precognition.

Future-Selected Images

The core mechanism in future-target remote viewing is simple to describe. A viewer produces notes, sketches, or verbal impressions at time one. Only later is the target chosen, visited, or paired with a real-world outcome. After that, judges compare the viewer’s material with the eventual target and with decoys. If the correct target is ranked unusually highly across many trials, proponents treat that as evidence for precognition rather than ordinary remote perception.

One early concrete example is Brenda Dunne and John Bisaha’s 1979 Journal of Parapsychology paper, “Precognitive Remote Viewing in the Chicago Area”. Its abstract describes eight trials in which untrained participants attempted to describe a geographical site before an agent was sent there and before the target location had been determined. The paper reported that independent judges matched transcripts against target locations at a level stated as significant at p<.008, one-tailed.[Pear Lab]pear-lab.comPear Lab

The design was explicitly framed as a replication and tightening of earlier Stanford Research Institute work. In the protocol described by Dunne and Bisaha, the viewing period began before the target was selected and before the outbound experimenter arrived at the site; the later procedure used eight separate judges, each ranking one description against eight possible targets, to reduce a possible dependence problem in the earlier analysis.[Pear Lab]pear-lab.comPear Lab

That sequence is what makes these studies distinct from ordinary remote viewing. In a normal outbounder experiment, a person or “beacon” may already be at a hidden location while the viewer records impressions. In a future-selected design, the claimed informational source cannot be the current physical target in the usual sense, because the target has not yet been fixed. The interpretation therefore shifts from “the mind perceived a distant place” to “the later target or later feedback somehow corresponded with earlier mental content”.

A declassified CIA-linked report on “feedback and precognition dependent remote viewing” makes the same distinction directly: in the precognition condition, both target selection and beacon activity occurred after the remote viewing had ended.[CIA]cia.govFEEDBACK AND PRECOGNITION DEPENDENT REMOTE…In the precognition condition, both the target selection and the beacon activity occurre… This is why future-target protocols are often treated as a harder test case. If the controls are sound, they appear to remove ordinary present-time access to the target. If the controls are weak, they create more room for retrospective matching, cueing, or unnoticed selection effects.

Timing Problems

The timing problem is not only philosophical. It is procedural. A future-target experiment must specify exactly when the viewer’s response is locked, when the target pool is created, when randomisation occurs, who knows the target options, when feedback is given, and how judging is done. Small slips in any of those steps can make a result look like precognition when it may be a product of human judgement, flexible scoring, or information leakage.

The 1995 American Institutes for Research evaluation of the U.S. remote-viewing programme, later released through CIA records, shows why this matters. Jessica Utts, one of the two expert reviewers, argued that some remote-viewing data provided strong statistical evidence, including for precognitive cases where the target was selected after the description. Ray Hyman, the other reviewer, rejected the conclusion that psychic functioning had been established, arguing that the evidence still required independent replication under conditions designed to exclude alternative explanations.[National Security Archive]nsarchive2.gwu.eduNational Security ArchiveAn Evaluation of Remote Viewing: Research and…March 13, 2015 — by MD Mumford · 1995 · Cited by 76 — There is…Published: March 13, 2015

The most important timing vulnerabilities are practical rather than dramatic:

This is why future-target work is more demanding than it first appears. Randomly selecting a target after the session is helpful, but it is not enough on its own. The whole chain must be insulated: pre-registration, locked transcripts, independently managed randomisation, blind judges, fixed scoring rules, and publication of misses as well as hits all matter.

Critics of early remote-viewing work often focused on cueing and judging rather than on time itself. David Marks and Richard Kammann argued that some early remote-viewing transcripts contained ordinary cues that could assist matching, such as order-related information. Later debate over those criticisms became part of the wider remote-viewing controversy, but the lesson for future-target experiments is clear: when the target is supposedly in the future, any present-time cue becomes especially damaging because it offers a simpler explanation than precognition.[Center for Inquiry]centerforinquiry.s3.amazonaws.comCenter for Inquiry Remote Viewing RevisitedCenter for Inquiry Remote Viewing Revisited

Associative Remote Viewing Turns Precognition into a Choice

A major branch of future-target practice is associative remote viewing, usually shortened to ARV. Instead of asking a viewer to describe a future event directly, ARV pairs each possible future outcome with a different image or object. For example, an “up” market movement might be associated with one photograph and a “down” movement with another. The viewer describes the target blindly; a judge decides which image the description better matches; and the associated outcome becomes the prediction.

This is a clever workaround for a real problem. Many future events are abstract: a stock index rising by 0.7%, a football team winning, or a currency pair moving down is not visually rich. ARV converts the abstract future outcome into a concrete target image, making it more compatible with remote-viewing methods. A source discussing Courtney Brown’s future-oriented remote-viewing work gives exactly this kind of example: one image can represent the Dow Jones Average going up, another can represent it going down, and the viewer’s match is treated as a prediction.[ResearchGate]researchgate.netResearch Gate(PDF) Remote Viewing the Future with a Tasking TemporalResearch Gate(PDF) Remote Viewing the Future with a Tasking Temporal

But ARV also exposes a deep weakness: the result depends heavily on judging. A 2021 study in the Journal of the Society for Psychical Research examined 86 completed ARV trials involving 220 transcripts for sporting or financial events. Three teams of blind judges repeated the judging process while other variables were held stable. The study found clear rating variance, with judges in full agreement in only six of the 86 trials.[Academia]academia.eduOpen source on academia.edu.

That finding cuts to the heart of the mechanism. If the same transcript can lead different blind judges to different predictions, then the claimed precognitive signal is not being extracted in a stable way. For ARV to work as a practical forecasting method, it is not enough for viewers to produce interesting impressions; the judging system must reliably convert those impressions into the same choice.

The financial and sporting applications also create a public misunderstanding. A few successful ARV runs can sound impressive, because binary prediction feels easy to evaluate. Yet binary outcomes are also vulnerable to small samples, streaks, and selective attention. Even a method with no predictive power can appear briefly successful if many groups try many predictions and only the striking runs are remembered.

Why Precognition Raises the Stakes

Future-target claims raise the stakes because they challenge the ordinary direction of information flow. A claim about a hidden current target already sits outside mainstream science; a claim about a not-yet-selected target goes further. It suggests either that the future is in some sense accessible, that later feedback can influence earlier cognition, or that the experiment is not actually isolating time in the way it appears to.

Supporters sometimes argue that the data should be treated statistically rather than philosophically. On that view, if properly run experiments repeatedly show above-chance matching, then theory can come later. A 2023 systematic review and meta-analysis of remote-viewing studies up to December 2022 reported 36 studies and 40 effect sizes, with an average effect size of.34 after excluding outliers and an estimated hit-score difference of 19.3% above chance. It also reported only a small, non-statistical difference between precognitive and clairvoyance tasks.[ResearchGate]researchgate.net374881423 Remote Viewing A 1974 2022 Systematic Review and Meta Analysis374881423 Remote Viewing A 1974 2022 Systematic Review and Meta Analysis

That meta-analysis is useful evidence for understanding the pro-remote-viewing position, but it does not settle the issue. It was published in the Journal of Scientific Exploration, a venue sympathetic to frontier and anomalistic research, and its conclusions remain outside mainstream consensus. The more cautious interpretation is that it documents a claimed pattern in the parapsychology literature, while leaving open the central question of whether the pattern survives stricter independent replication, publication-bias correction, and adversarially designed controls.

Recent online precognitive remote-viewing work shows the same mixture of positive and limiting findings. A study in the Journal of Anomalous Experience and Cognition reported two online experiments: one forced-choice, uncontrolled-time, self-judged task with 682 unpaid participants and 5,432 trials, and one free-response, controlled-time, independently judged task with 307 paid participants. The first experiment found no significant target precognition, while the second reported significant target precognition and suggested that target “interestingness” was related to accuracy.[OJLU]journals.lub.lu.seState, Trait, and Target Parameters Associated with Accuracy in Two Online Tests of Precognitive Remote Viewing | Journal of Anomalous Ex…

That contrast is important for readers. It suggests that claimed future-target effects may be highly sensitive to task design, target type, participant state, judging procedure, and statistical treatment. It also means that “precognitive remote viewing works” and “precognitive remote viewing has been disproved” are both too blunt. The live dispute is over whether positive results reflect a real anomaly or the accumulated effects of flexible methods, expectancy, target appeal, selective reporting, and judgement variance.

What Would Make a Future-Target Claim Stronger?

A strong future-target remote-viewing experiment would not merely report a striking match. It would make the ordinary explanations hard to use. The target pool would be created or cryptographically fixed before analysis, the viewer’s response would be timestamped and locked before target selection, randomisation would be automated and auditable, judges would be blind to all trial metadata, and the scoring plan would be published before results were known.

The best design would also separate discovery from confirmation. Exploratory work can look for promising target types, viewer selection rules, or judging methods. Confirmatory work must then test those rules without changing them midstream. This distinction matters because future-target experiments are especially vulnerable to hindsight: once the target is known, vague phrases can feel unexpectedly meaningful.

A convincing practical ARV claim would need an even higher bar. It would have to publish all trials, including passes, misses, ambiguous sessions, and losses; define in advance how judges handle weak matches; and show that any financial or sporting success exceeds transaction costs, chance streaks, and ordinary forecasting baselines. The 2021 judging-reliability study shows why this is essential: if blind judges do not consistently reach the same prediction from the same material, the procedure is not yet a reliable forecasting mechanism.[Academia]academia.eduOpen source on academia.edu.

The Takeaway on Future Targets

Future-selected targets are the sharpest version of the remote-viewing question because they remove the target from the present and force the debate onto time. Early studies such as the Dunne and Bisaha Chicago replication reported significant results under protocols where the target was not yet selected, and later CIA-linked and civilian work continued to treat precognition as a serious experimental variant.[Pear Lab+2Pear Lab]pear-lab.comPear LabPear Lab

The unresolved problem is that the more extraordinary the timing claim becomes, the more the evidence depends on mundane details: who knew what, when the target was fixed, how judges scored the transcript, whether misses were reported, and whether independent groups can reproduce the same result without shared assumptions. Future-target remote viewing remains an important sub-branch because it shows exactly where the controversy is most concentrated: not in whether people can produce suggestive descriptions, but in whether those descriptions survive rigorous timing, judging, and replication tests as evidence for precognition.

Amazon book picks

Further Reading

Books and field guides related to Can Remote Viewing Claim the Future?. Use these as the next step if you want deeper reading beyond the article.

Book

The conscious universe

By Dean I. Radin, Radin

First published 1997. Subjects: Parapsychology, Case studies, Cas, Études de, Paranormale verschijnselen, Parapsychologie.

See on Amazon

Book

Limitless Mind

By Russell Targ

First published 2004. Subjects: Remote viewing (Parapsychology), Extrasensory perception, Spiritual life, Peace of mind.

See on Amazon

Book

Real magic

By Dean I. Radin

First published 2018. Subjects: Parapsychology, Magic, Telepathy.

See on Amazon

Book

The elusive quarry

By Ray Hyman

First published 1989. Subjects: Book reviews, Controversial literature, Parapsychology, Psychical research.

See on Amazon

Browse more on Amazon:The conscious universeLimitless MindReal magic

As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.

eBay marketplace picks

Marketplace Samples

Live-tested eBay searches with available results related to this page.

Shop location

UsingUSA USA USAUKCanadaAustraliaIreland

Example eBay listing

PSIONIC REMOTE VIEWING Wall Art, Psychic Telepathy Medium Empath Meditate Poster

SearcheBay.co.uk: remote viewing poster

Browse similar oneBay.co.uk

Example eBay listing

PSIONIC REMOTE VIEWING Wall Art, Psychic Telepathy Medium Empath Meditate Poster

SearcheBay.co.uk: remote viewing poster

Browse similar oneBay.co.uk

Example eBay listing

Remote Viewing Framed Art Print Framed Wall Art Poster Canvas Print Picture

SearcheBay.co.uk: remote viewing poster

Browse similar oneBay.co.uk

Example eBay listing

Retro REMOTE VIEWING Wall Art, Psychic Telepathy Medium Empath UFO Occult Poster

SearcheBay.co.uk: remote viewing poster

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: pear-lab.com
Title: Pear Lab
Link:https://www.pear-lab.com/pdfs/1979-precognitive-remote-viewing-stanford.pdf

2. Source: cia.gov
Link:https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP96-00789R002200200001-5.pdf

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

4. Source: researchgate.net
Title: Research Gate(PDF) Remote Viewing the Future with a [Tasking]({{ ‘tasking/’ | relative_url }}) Temporal
Link:https://www.researchgate.net/publication/267684161_Remote_Viewing_the_Future_with_a_Tasking_Temporal_Outbounder

5. Source: academia.edu
Link:https://www.academia.edu/61485193/Associative_Remote_Viewing_Projects_Assessing_Rater_Reliability_and_Factors_Affecting_Successful_Predictions

6. Source: researchgate.net
Title: 374881423 Remote Viewing A 1974 2022 Systematic Review and Meta Analysis
Link:https://www.researchgate.net/publication/374881423_Remote_Viewing_A_1974-2022_Systematic_Review_and_Meta-Analysis

7. Source: journals.lub.lu.se
Link:https://journals.lub.lu.se/jaex/article/view/24743

8. Source: cia.gov
Link:https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/document/cia-rdp96-00791r000200180006-4

9. Source: cia.gov
Link:https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP96-00789R002200210001-4.pdf

10. Source: cia.gov
Link:https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP96-00787R000200080023-9.pdf

11. Source: remote.com
Link:https://remote.com/en-ca/

12. Source: remote.com
Link:https://remote.com/jobs

13. Source: researchgate.net
Link:https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Showing-the-nine-phases-of-a-typical-ARV-protocol_tbl1_344470071

14. Source: researchgate.net
Link:https://www.researchgate.net/publication/381233684_State_Trait_and_Target_Parameters_Associated_with_Accuracy_in_Two_Online_Tests_of_Precognitive_Remote_Viewing

15. Source: researchgate.net
Link:https://www.researchgate.net/publication/340914519Performance_at_a_Precognitive_Remote_Viewing_Task_with_and_without[Ganzfeld

16. Source: researchgate.net
Title: 369604750 Remote Viewing a 1974 2022 systematic review and meta analysis
Link:https://www.researchgate.net/publication/369604750_Remote_Viewing_a_1974-2022_systematic_review_and_meta-analysis

17. Source: researchgate.net
Link:https://www.researchgate.net/publication/248497861_Remote_viewing_as_applied_to_futures_studies

18. Source: researchgate.net
Title: 251752421 Precognitive Remote Perception Replication of Remote Viewing
Link:https://www.researchgate.net/publication/251752421_Precognitive_Remote_Perception_Replication_of_Remote_Viewing

19. Source: researchgate.net
Link:https://www.researchgate.net/publication/324526120_An_Ethnographical_Assessment_of_Project_Firefly_A_Yearlong_Endeavor_to_Create_Wealth_by_Predicting_FOREX_Currency_Moves_with_Associative_Remote_Viewing

20. Source: researchgate.net
Link:https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Showing-various-levels-of-training-experience-for-the-six-remote-viewers_tbl2_344470071

21. Source: researchgate.net
Title: 15839349 Information transmission in remote viewing experiments
Link:https://www.researchgate.net/publication/15839349_Information_transmission_in_remote_viewing_experiments

22. Source: researchgate.net
Link:https://www.researchgate.net/scientific-contributions/Russell-Targ-2127157609

23. Source: researchgate.net
Link:https://www.researchgate.net/publication/292543553_Greg_Kolodziejzyk%27s_13-Year_associative_remote_viewing_experiment_results

24. Source: academia.edu
Title: Remote Viewing a 1974 2022 systematic review and meta analysis
Link:https://www.academia.edu/111635854/Remote_Viewing_a_1974_2022_systematic_review_and_meta_analysis

25. Source: academia.edu
Link:https://www.academia.edu/29470010/Stock_market_prediction_using_associative_remote_viewing_by_inexperienced_remote_viewers

26. Source: academia.edu
Title: Remote Viewing A 1974 2022 Systematic Review and Meta Analysis
Link:https://www.academia.edu/108445581/Remote_Viewing_A_1974_2022_Systematic_Review_and_Meta_Analysis

27. Source: academia.edu
Title: Remote viewing in a group setting
Link:https://www.academia.edu/82136832/Remote_viewing_in_a_group_setting

28. Source: academia.edu
Link:https://www.academia.edu/38286031/Remote_Viewing_of_Concealed_Target_Pictures_Under_Light_and_Dark_Conditions

29. Source: academia.edu
Link:https://www.academia.edu/39751216/The_Associative_Remote_Dreaming_Experiment_A_Novel_Approach_to_Predicting_Future_Outcomes_of_Sporting_Events

30. Source: archive.org
Title: Tales Part 14 djvu.txt
Link:https://archive.org/stream/TalesPart14/Tales_Part_14_djvu.txt

31. Source: remote.co
Title: Work: Jobs, Companies & Virtual Teams
Link:https://remote.co/

32. Source: nsarchive2.gwu.edu
Link:https://nsarchive2.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB438/docs/doc_57.pdf

Published: March 13, 2015

33. Source: centerforinquiry.s3.amazonaws.com
Title: Center for Inquiry Remote Viewing Revisited
Link:https://centerforinquiry.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/29/1982/07/22165420/p20.pdf

34. Source: scribd.com
Title: Journal of Scientific Exploration
Link:https://www.scribd.com/document/78205127/Journal-of-Scientific-Exploration-Volume-14-Number

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

36. Source: journalofscientificexploration.org
Link:https://journalofscientificexploration.org/index.php/jse/article/view/1371/841

37. Source: journalofscientificexploration.org
Link:https://journalofscientificexploration.org/index.php/jse/article/view/3687/2559

38. Source: journalofscientificexploration.org
Link:https://journalofscientificexploration.org/index.php/jse/article/view/1923/1427

39. Source: dictionary.cambridge.org
Link:https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/remote

40. Source: ics.uci.edu
Link:https://www.ics.uci.edu/~jutts/hyman.html

41. Source: acadintuition.com
Link:https://acadintuition.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/Applications.pdf

Additional References

42. Source: youtube.com
Title: Marty Rosenblatt ~ [Associative Remote Viewing (ARV)]({{ ‘associative-remote-viewing-arv/’ | relative_url }}) ~ Cat’s Eye on the Future
Link:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jSKWP9Ib8hw

43. Source: youtube.com
Link:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wh-E8-HGEIQ

44. Source: youtube.com
Title: Marty Rosenblatt Associative Remote Viewing
Link:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gsMwtp69k1w

45. Source: youtube.com
Title: The Universe of Collective Consciousness with Marty Rosenblatt
Link:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ql_Wngm72ao

46. Source: semanticscholar.org
Link:https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/53bc4f446cc30b642ba7810b69b9c13b3fee61c8

47. Source: p-i-a.com
Link:https://p-i-a.com/Magazine/Issue10/Applications_10.htm

48. Source: reddit.com
Link:https://www.reddit.com/r/remoteviewing/comments/1dazs09/creation_of_study_on_statistical_evidence_of/

49. Source: facebook.com
Link:https://www.facebook.com/100090372200308/posts/during-the-[cold-war

50. Source: scribd.com
Link:https://www.scribd.com/doc/92017954/Air-Report

51. Source: scribd.com
Link:https://www.scribd.com/document/78101263/Joseph-W-McMoneagle-and-Edwin-C-May-The-Possible-Role-of-Intention-Attention-and-Expectation-in-Remote-Viewing