JJ Lumsden's Paranormal and Parapsychology Blog

What was the Star Gate Project?

The Star Gate Project was a US government research program (funded by the Defense Intelligence Agency, and subsequently transferred to the CIA) that sought to investigate the effectiveness of Remote Viewing.

Remote Viewing is the purported ability to gather information on places (that one has not seen before) ‘from a distance’. In other words, the descriptional information is obtained through psychic functioning. Why would the military be interested in this? Well, it would be good to know what is hidden inside that Chinese aircraft hangar.

The Stargate movie and television franchise, where a Stargate device creates wormholes in space and time enabling Kurt Russell, James Spader, McGyver Richard Dean Anderson and others to explore the universe, is not related.

The Star Gate Project was initiated in the 1970s and used more than 20 remote viewers to view distant locations. There were reported to be some intriguing successes, including the viewing and detailed description of an as-yet-unknown Russian submarine which spy satellites subsequently confirmed some months later (it was the Typhoon Class submarine for cold war history fans out there).

In the 1990s, a review of the programme was commissioned from the American Institutes (sic) for Research. It was published in 1994, and I’ll draw out some of the main conclusions:

When looking at forced choice laboratory research, the authors concluded that: “A statistically significant laboratory effort has been demonstrated in the sense that hits occur more often than chance.”

However, the root cause of these effects was unclear (paranormal functioning versus experimental/methodological effects, etc), and they went on to write: “Evidence has not been provided that clearly demonstrates that the causes of hits are due to the operation of paranormal phenomena; the laboratory experiments have not identified the origins or nature of the remote viewing phenomenon, if, indeed, it exists at all.”

In turn, operational effectiveness was discussed (after all the Star Gate project was meant to enrich military intelligence gathering): “The conditions under which the remote viewing phenomenon is observed in laboratory settings do not apply in intelligence gathering situations…  although some accuracy was observed with regard to broad background characteristics, the remote viewing reports failed to produce the concrete, specific information valued in intelligence gathering. …The information provided was inconsistent, inaccurate with regard to specifics, and required substantial subjective interpretation.”

They concluded:
“The foregoing observations provide a compelling argument against continuation of the program within the intelligence community. Even though a statistically significant effect has been observed in the laboratory, it remains unclear whether the existence of a paranormal phenomenon, remote viewing, has been  demonstrated. The laboratory studies do not provide evidence regarding the origins or nature of the phenomenon, assuming it exists, nor do they address an important methodological issue of inter-judge reliability.

Further, even if it could be demonstrated unequivocally that a paranormal phenomenon occurs under the conditions present in the laboratory paradigm, these conditions have limited applicability and utility for intelligence gathering operations. For example, the nature of the remote viewing targets are vastly dissimilar, as are the specific tasks required of the remote viewers. Most importantly, the information provided by remote viewing is vague and ambiguous, making it difficult, if not impossible, for the technique to yield information of sufficient quality and accuracy of information for actionable intelligence. Thus, we conclude that continued use of remote viewing in intelligence gathering operations is not warranted.”

The report actually came out after the CIA had terminated the programme, explaining that there was a lack of evidence the programme provided value to intelligence gathering.

So what do we make of all this? Well, the findings in favour of laboratory RV effects (albeit laced with caveats) lends credence to the idea that some form of paranormal functioning might be going on under particular remote viewing protocols. In turn, the lack of overall support for operational RV functioning suggests that remote viewing is not valid, or, that if it does work - it might only work within certain confines or under certain conditions. The history of Star Gate helps demonstrate how there are no definitive experiments in parapsychology - instead, it is about accumulating a body of data, taking proper stock, and then moving ideas, protocols and understanding forwards. It’s all about cumulative, circumstantial evidence.

You can read the full AIR report here: http://www.lfr.org/lfr/csl/library/AirReport.pdf

Amazon Book reviews

A great blog post from MobyLives about the Amazon reviews for:
How To Avoid Huge Ships

Enjoy.

Joke of the day

Thank you to the emailer who sent in this joke:

(Q) What do you call a possessed chicken?

(A) A poultry-geist

I then found out, there’s even a movie called Poultrygeist.
From 2008. Anybody seen it?

I notice the top of the three disc boxset has some eggs-cellent punnery.

Online Parapsychology Course (June 29 - Aug 31)

The Rhine Education Center has announced that it is running an online parapsychology course - starting at the end of the month.

It’s billed as: “…an academic course designed to provide professional education in the field of parapsychology”, lasts 10 weeks (Wednesday evenings), and is $240 per person ($195 if you are enrolled in a degree programme).

Full details here: Rhine

Improve your CV… you were Time Magazine’s person of the year (2006)

Atlanta, GA

I’ve buzzed into Atlanta, Georgia for a few days. If anyone would care to share their wisdom on places to see, eat, etc. - it would be most appreciated!

The Hidden Whisper now in the Kindle store (promo price)

Although you could download The Hidden Whisper ebook from Smashwords onto your Kindle - I have finally got my act together, and sorted out the relevant file for Amazon.

The great thing about it is that the endnotes are anchored to the text, so you can read the narrative then click to the linked endote (and back). I think the book works pretty well on it :)

http://www.amazon.com/The-Hidden-Whisper-ebook/dp/B004XR0BCI/

To celebrate the upcoming (3rd) anniversary of the book, the Kindle edition is just $3; well, $2.99 ;)

Haunt sites - Dragsholm Castle, Engso Castle, Edinburgh Vaults

(endnote 38) from The Hidden Whisper

Is there something special with the environment at haunt sites?
Often with haunted buildings, one particular room might get a reputation for being especially ‘active’. This has led to research examining whether there’s something tangibly different about that room compared to others, and one line of consideration has been to ask whether there are particularly unusual/strong electromagnetic or geomagnetic fields present.

It has been found that many older building have stonework with high iron content in the walls, and if the iron becomes magnetised, it can lead to a pretty decent localised electromagnetic field effect. In much the same vein as the explanation given in endnote 34, it has been suggested that when a person stands within certain electromagnetic fields, there may be some sort of ‘influence’ over neuronal firing that causes visions.

Two venues that have been investigated for such electromagnetic effects were Dragsholm Castle, Denmark and Engso Castle, Sweden (Nichols & Roll, 1999). By focusing on areas in each building where staff and visitors had reported anomalous experiences previously, some support was found for the electromagnetic field explanation. Interestingly, at Dragsholm Castle, Nichols was standing in an area associated with ghost sightings when he reported seeing a figure pass by.

It may be that anomalous electromagnetic fields do not need to interact solely with visual systems to create paranormal experiences. Stevens (2001), has shown in the laboratory how exposure to such fields (at levels similar to those found in allegedly haunted venues) can prompt physiological and psychological changes. It may be that ‘a sense of unease’ is generated by these fields, which is then attributed to some sort of paranormal source in certain places, or under certain circumstances.

One study conducted in April 2001 (see Wiseman, Watt, Stevens, Greening & O’Keeffe, 2003) tried to examine whether environmental factors such as localised electromagnetic fields or air temperature correlated with areas where people reported ‘haunt’ (i.e. paranormal) experiences. The researchers asked over 200 participants to spend time alone in various rooms of Edinburgh’s underground vaults (subterranean rooms with limited artificial lighting), and note whether they had any unusual experiences (e.g. the feeling of being watched, seeing strange phenomena, etc) in particular spaces.

Edinburgh’s vaults are a tourist attraction, and the tour company responsible for guiding visitors has kept historical records of the times and places when tourists have encountered unusual experiences. The experimenters were thus able to rank the rooms in order of how haunted they were perceived to be. (Participants who knew which rooms were regarded as haunted were not included in the data analysis).

The researchers found a significant correlation between the historical records of haunted-ness, and the number of mean experiences the experimental participants had. In other words, there was consistency across time that certain areas within the vaults saw higher numbers of experiences than others. However, analysis of the environmental factors failed to confirm that the venue’s electromagnetic fields, air temperature, or air flows were correlated with unusual experiences. Instead the best predictors as to whether any particular room would prompt an experience were: the existence of a dimly lit doorway off the room, a high ceiling and a large floor space. It may be that an individual’s sense of vulnerability is heightened by these ‘exaggerated’ environmental factors.

Interview with Professor Christopher French on Scepticism

Chris French is Professor of Psychology at Goldsmiths College, University of London. Chris heads up their Anomalistic Psychology Research Unit, is the co-editor of The Skeptic Magazine (UK), and his main research interest is the psychology of paranormal beliefs and of ostensibly paranormal experiences.

In the book “Debating Psychic Experience”, your first contributing chapter is entitled: “Reflections of a (relatively) moderate skeptic”. Perhaps you could expand upon this, and explain what you mean by moderate scepticism?

I think that there are at least two types of sceptic. For me, true scepticism is not about denying that certain things are possible without even considering the evidence, it is about critical evaluation of the evidence put forward in support of claims. Scepticism should be about doubt, not denial, and for me a true sceptic is someone who always acknowledges that they may be wrong. Most sceptics, I believe, do fit this description. Like me, many of them have spent a lot of time considering the evidence put forward in support of paranormal claims and remain unconvinced that psi is real. This moderate scepticism may be contrasted with a more extreme approach which is taken by a few people, some of them quite vocal, who label themselves as “sceptics”. Such people would claim to KNOW that paranormal forces cannot possibly exist and they therefore do not feel any need to actually examine the available evidence or to run experiments of their own.

In many ways, the discussion(s) between sceptics and psi advocates is a well worn path. We tend to see, at least from certain quarters, familiar differences, disagreements and rebuttals offered. Do you feel that the debate has ‘fossilized’ in recent years, or that it remains lively and current?

I think the debate goes in phases. Back in the 1970s, I’d say the sceptics had the upper hand. Critics of the claims of self-proclaimed psychic superstars like Uri Geller argued convincingly that many apparently paranormal phenomena could be replicated by conjuring techniques. Claims from experimental parapsychology such as those relating to remote viewing were seriously undermined when critics pointed out major flaws in methodology. I was heartened by the constructive collaboration between Ray Hyman and Charles Honorton with respect to the ganzfeld technique in the mid-1980s and the meta-analysis of the auto-ganzfeld data by Bem and Honorton in 1994 was a serious challenge to sceptics. After that, the debate did become rather predictable again for a while but I’d say it’s getting quite interesting again recently (see below).

Of course, to a large extent the debate about whether psi is real or not is of secondary importance to me. As an anomalistic psychologist, I am much more interested in what looks like it’s psychic but isn’t. Although anomalistic psychology has been around for a much shorter period than parapsychology, it can already boast of having made real progress. Anomalistic psychology – in sharp contrast to parapsychology – feels “lively and current” and like it has a very promising future.

If you were to identify the top three areas that psi researchers and advocates needed to push forward, to better satisfy sceptics - what would they be?

There are some areas that I feel are more promising than others even though I do not think the available evidence is yet anywhere near compelling enough to constitute “proof” that psi exists. These areas would include the ganzfeld studies, presentiment-type studies, and possibly telephone telepathy. I would once have included PK studies in that list but recent critiques have made me even more doubtful about that body of research. More important than identifying particular areas of research, however, I think is the challenge to parapsychologists to take steps to meet their critics head-on by agreeing to pre-register studies before data collection commences and to accept and publish the results even when the null hypothesis cannot be rejected.

What challenges, do you think, face contemporary scepticism?

I think contemporary scepticism is in a very healthy state, at least in the UK. Grassroots scepticism has, for whatever reason, really taken off over the last few years. I think we need to avoid presenting issues in too simplistic a fashion though. People like a nice simple story with black and white answers to complex questions but the real world isn’t like that. Complex questions usually require nuanced answers however much we might prefer it to be otherwise. I actually used to believe in the paranormal but when I first began to think of myself as a “sceptic”, I had a fairly simplistic view of the issues involved. It was reassuring then to think that all psychics were either fraudulent or mad and that all parapsychologists were idiots. I now know that this is just not true (not of all of them, anyway!).

Research is the lifeblood of better understanding paranormal phenomena. What research (to-be-started or ongoing) have you got in place at Goldsmiths right now?

The research that we do at the Anomalistic Psychology Research Unit falls into two main categories. Most of it revolves around attempting to develop and, where possible, test non-paranormal explanations for ostensibly paranormal experiences. We have a number of ongoing projects that are investigating the relevance of false memories, suggestibility, inattentional blindness, tendency towards hallucinations, and so on, with respect to paranormal experiences and belief. You can find out more about our research and other activities at www.goldsmiths.ac.uk/apru

However, we also put a considerable amount of time into directly testing paranormal claims in recognition of the fact that our current scepticism may conceivably prove to be unfounded. We have tested many psychic claimants over the years and are currently engaged in collaborative research into telephone telepathy (with Rupert Sheldrake) as well as an attempt to replicate some of the highly publicised effects reported by Bem recently. It is worth noting that we actually put a lot more time into actually directly testing paranormal claims experimentally than do some of the more vocal proponents of the paranormal who would label us as “closed-minded”! So far, however, we have never managed to produce any convincing evidence for the reality of psi.

Thank you, Chris.

Interview with Chris Carter: Near Death Experiences and Skepticism

Chris Carter is the author of Parapsychology and the Skeptics, and  Science and the Near Death Experience. He was educated at Oxford in Economics and Philosophy.

1. It’s always interesting to find out what motivates people. Can you  explain what drives your interest in parapsychology.

I have always been fascinated by science, and also by controversial topics in science and philosophy.  So, dealing with this issue has been a natural progression from my other interests.

2. Your latest book “Science and the Near-Death Experience: How Consciousness Survives Death” came out in August. What prompted you to write  the book?

It grew out of a lengthy debate I had with a very stubborn and dogmatic skeptic.  I was shocked by his ignorance, and by the crudity of his arguments.  So I decided that a book was needed to examine the evidence for psi, and evidence that the mind can function independently of the brain.   What had been planned as one book became three.  The first was Parapsychology and the Skeptics, the second is Science and the Near Death Experience, and the third is not yet published.

3. Where does NDE research find itself in 2010?

Research into the NDE is largely carried out by cardiologists around the world.  This is because they are often dealing with victims of heart attacks who have been resuscitated, and then report that they left their bodies and observed the surrounding scene. 

4. One theory of NDEs that seems to attract a lot of commentary is the oxygen deprivation model. Why do you think that is?
I suppose it attracts attention because oxygen deprivation seems to be an obvious explanation, at least to some people.  However, on close examination oxygen deprivation utterly fails to explain the classic NDE. 

The effects of oxygen deprivation are well known.  Mountain climbers often experience it, and pilots flying at high altitude have experienced it.   It’s well known that as the brain is deprived of oxygen, it ceases to function properly. As the oxygen supply is reduced, the person becomes progressively more disoriented and confused.  This is in sharp contrast to the clarity of thought and perception described over and over again in the reports of near-death experiencers.

Pilots in training regularly undergo acute anoxia in flight simulators to make sure they can get their masks on in time. Those who fail do not have NDEs: they experience confusion and disorientation, sometimes trying to land their simulated planes on top of clouds before losing consciousness.

Finally, I mention in my new book Science and the Near Death Experience the report of a man who has experienced both anoxia and the tunnel while near death. Allan Pring was a British Royal Air Force pilot during the Second World War, and experienced anoxia while flying at high altitude.   Several years later he suffered a heart attack, and experienced an NDE.

  I found myself “floating” along in a dark tunnel, peacefully and calmly but wide
  awake and aware. I know that the tunnel experience has been attributed to the
  brain being deprived of oxygen, but as an ex-pilot who has experienced lack of
  oxygen at altitude I can state that for me there was no similarity. On the
  contrary, the whole [NDE] experience from beginning to end was crystal clear.

5. Your first book was “Parapsychology and the Skeptics” and you wrote two thought provoking chapters in “Debating Psychic Experience: Human Potential  or Human Illusion?” What is your view on the current state of skepticism?

In the first place, the term “skepticism” is inappropriate when referring to debunkers such as James Randi, Michael Shermer, or Richard Wiseman.  True skepticism involves the suspension of belief, not the refusal of belief.  These people are not truly skeptics, and so a more accurate term would be deniers.

At any rate, the current state of pseudo-skepticism is extremely impoverished.  The Ganzfeld, the micro-PK experiments, Sheldrake’s experiments with telephone telepathy and with animals, and many others, have provided indubitable proof that psi is real.  However, most of the deniers simply ignore the evidence; when they can’t ignore it, they try to dismiss it; when they can’t dismiss it, they try to suppress it.  I provided several shameful examples of this in my first book Parapsychology and the Skeptics, and in the chapters I wrote for Debating Psychic Experience.

Remember, strenuous denial of disagreeable data is the defining characteristic of pseudo-science.  And these people have been strenuously denying the data for over a century.

Essentially, as I argued in my first book, this debate is not primarily about evidence. Rather, the debunkers and deniers are defending an out-moded world view in which psychic phenomena are simply not allowed to exist.  It is essential to realize that most of the deniers and phony-skeptics are militant atheists and secular humanists.  For various reasons, these people have an ideological agenda which is anti-religious and anti-superstitious.  One of the pillars of their opposition to religion and superstition is the doctrine of materialism: that is, the doctrine that all events have a physical cause, and that the brain therefore produces the mind.  If they conceded the existence of psychic abilities, and of the NDE as a genuine separation of mind from body, then this pillar of their opposition would crumble.  Hence, their dogmatic denial of the evidence that proves materialism false.

Thank you Chris.

You can learn more about Chris’s books by clicking on these links.

Parapsychology and the Skeptics      Science and the Near Death Experience

Precognition in New Scientist

Precognition research has been around a long time. This month’s New Scientist reports on a number of recent experiments by Daryl Bem which offer further evidence for its validity.

You can read the New Scientist article here.

The full paper is due out in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology later this year.

What is Parapsychology ?

Parapsychology is a field of study that seeks to investigate the existence of (and causal factors underpinning) psychic abilities, Near Death Experiences, post mortem survival (aka Life After Death), and elements of Out of Body Experiences. Phenomena such as poltergeists and ghosts are all also applicable.

Psychic abilities include forms of Extra Sensory Perception, and Psychokinesis (Mind over Matter effects). Scientific methods and techniques are employed to research the phenomena in question.

Various academic institutions and research organisations across the world carry out parapsychological research. For example, I studied at the Koestler Parapsychology Unit (University of Edinburgh). The unit was created in 1985, and its remit neatly encapsulates one side to parapsychology, namely - to conduct scientific research into “…the capacity attributed to some individuals to interact with their environment by means other than the recognised sensory and motor channels.”

Paul the Psychic Octopus - no longer with us

Paul the Psychic Octopus - the real star(?) of the 2010 World Cup - is no longer with us.

http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/nature/paul-the-world-cuppredicting-octopus-dies-2117224.html

Psychokinesis (Telekinesis) - What is it ?

I sometimes get asked what the difference between Telekinesis and Psychokinesis is. The answer? In every day use, Psychokinesis (mind movement) has simply replaced the term Telekinesis (distant movement). Both refer to the phenomenon of the mind being able to influence events and objects without using any known physical means (either consciously or sub-consciously).

More technically, some people prefer to define Telekinesis as ‘object movement’ - nothing more - and Telekinesis is therefore a particular subset of Psychokinesis. But I wouldn’t get bogged down by that. I, for one, only use the term Psychokinesis.

Psychokinesis is also known as ‘Mind over Matter’.

To explain more about Psychokinesis (and its two types: Macro and Micro), here’s endnote 39 taken from The Hidden Whisper. The endnote is ‘as is’, so if anybody would like the source references mentioned within - please feel free to email me.

39 Macro and micro Psychokinesis (PK).
A macro PK event is where the mind is able to affect an object in the
environment (e.g. making a chair levitate) and you don’t need
statistics to see the effect. It’s obvious what has happened. Micro-PK,
on the other hand requires statistical analysis. If you roll lots of dice
and try to make sixes show up more often than not, you need to
maintain a record of each throw and then analyse whether sixes
actually appeared more frequently than they should have. Micro PK
has become the method of choice when investigating such ‘mind matter’
events as it seems easier to generate in the laboratory, the
safeguards are much stronger, data collection can be fully automated
and there is a stronger tie-in with some theoretical explanations as to
what might be taking place (e.g. Observation Theories). Modern
micro-PK measures use quantum processes (like white noise in
circuitry) and the suggestion is that consciousness interacts at a
quantum level (see endnote 59).

The experimental literature suggests certain variables can boost PK
functioning. It may be that people skilled in meditation are more
capable (Matas & Pantas, 1972; Braud & Hartgrove, 1976; Honorton,
1977), and that trial feedback is useful (Braud, 1978). Other factors
that can aid performance include false feedback (Isaacs, 1981),
competition (Debes & Morris, 1982), hypnosis, and good old
fashioned Pavlovian reinforcement. See Gissurarson (1992) for a
review.

Here’s a post on Micro PK research.