REVIEW OF STANFORD RESEARCH INSTITUTE (SRI) PROJECT, MENLO PARK, CALIFORNIA 14-16 OCTOBER 1974

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: STARGATE
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP79-00999A000300100015-5
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: C
• Document Page Count: 5
• Document Creation Date: November 4, 2016
• Document Release Date: June 11, 2003
• Sequence Number: 15
• Publication Date: October 31, 1974
• Content Type: MFR

SG1A
Approved Forlease 2003/06/24: CIA-RDP79-0099903001
MEMORANDUM FOR THE RECORD
SUBJECT: Review of Stanford Research Institute (SRI)
Project, Menlo Park, California 14-16 October 1974
1. ORD/LS and myself reviewed the para-
normal research activities at SRI with the two principal
investigators, Dr. H. Puthoff and Mr. R. Targ. During the
visit three remote viewing experiments were completed with
mixed results. Plans for another visit to SRI with intention
of completing a series of experiments with agency personnel
in control of target selection were finalized for 4-5 November.
2. It is expected that will review the pro- SG1A
gress on the basic research in detail in a separate memorandum.
A brief summary follows. The medical and psychological tests
for the six subjects are more than one half completed with the
remainder scheduled to be completed in 30-60 days, Raw data
has been included in progress reports #3 and #4 with more to
follow. No significant comparisons and characteristics have
yet been noted. Mid-test random neurological data is partially
complete. Delays have been encountered because the SRI division
originally taking data proved slow and did not have the desired
analogue read out. Four physiological functions are now being
monitored on in-house equipment. The data on the psylTok.inetic
experiments has been completed. Remote Magnetometer interaction
data was taken for subjects 1, 2 and 6. S-1 got statistically
positive results, null results for others. The interaction
with laser beam experiment has produced positive results one
standard deviation above change. In summary, the P.K. experi-
ments are indicative of psycl(okinetic phenomena only in a
modest statistical sense. A review of the screening of the
subjects by measuring their performance at three tasks, remote
.viewing, ESP teaching machine and remote viewing of line draw-
ings indicated little multiplicity of talents among subjects.
About half of these screening tests are completed.
3. Remote viewing experiments have continued to maintain
first priority attention for the applied research (OTS fraction)
of the project. A series of local remote viewing experiments
SG1A
Approved For Release 2003/06/24: CIA-RDP79-00999A000300100015-5
 Approved For-, lease 2003/06/24: CIA-RDP79-00999,UO0300100015-5
have now been performed at my request to assess the ability
to obtain information within a short distance of the subject
(a few feet to a few miles). Claims of good results prompted
a review of this data and a request for a demonstration.
These results are described below.
4. To avoid redundancy, "successful" remote viewing
experiments are summarized in progress report #4 (attached)
pp. 1-24 and will not be reviewed in detail here. The purpose
of these experiments was to remotely describe objects several
rooms or buildings away. The complete raw data for several
of these experiments was reviewed while at SRI. The original
tape recordings of two of the technology series viewing experi-
ments were reviewed and the targets visited. Copies and photo-
graphics of the tapes and targets were made. These supported
the claim of best results yet obtained. Unambigious identi-
fication of the target would be unlikely from the data without
a prior knowledge of the target but the remotely obtained
description has many correspondence with the actual target.
Many more correspondences than expected by chance in my judg-
ment. These materials are available for inspection and review.
Assuming the integrity of the experimenters and their pro-
cedures remain intact, their data is a strong indicator of an,
as yet, unexplained information channel.
5. To test the reproducibility of these remote viewing
experiments, the investigators were asked to prepare a demon-
stration of the close range remote viewing. The request was
made one week before the visit. The investigators were not
able to obtain the services of the "best" subject (H.H.) during
this visit but agreed to have her available 4-5 November for a
series of experiments under our control. The SRI investigators
suggested we attempt the experiment with a more readily avail-
able subject (D.E.) who had not been used for these short range
remote viewing experiments but had previously performed a
successful remote viewing experiment and was also one of the
project test subjects. Descriptions of the experiments follows:
6. Remote viewing experiment #1 by D.E.
a. The first demonstration was attempted the afternoon
of 16 October. The experimenters included D.E., an SRI
analyst and Mr. R. Targ, one of the project principal
investigators. These two remained at SRI. Dr. H.
Puthoff, the other project principal investigator,
Ms. "P. C." another SRI employee and test subject, II SG1A
ORD/LS and myself were to choose and visi
the place to be remotely viewed. At a prearranged
time D.E. would describe his impressions of the choosen
target. Targ would record the entire description as it
was given. Targ was not aware of the target selection
C
Approved For Release 2663/Q 2
A-9 ilP79-00999A000300100015-5
 Approved For Tease 2003/06/24: CIA ,RDP79-00999 p0300100015-5
as zne viewer. Mr. Targ and myself left. and
-Dr. Puthoff were situated in a work area. r. arg offered a
list of targets to choose from. I rejected them and asked for
a second list. I agreed on a visit to the Xerox copier sug-
gested in the second list. We proceeded there and at the
appropriate time began to make copies of handy objects which
included pocket change, a wrist watch, etc. After 10 minutes,
before we returned. On the way I suggested a site,
the Palo Alto City tennis courts. Having played
at these courts I felt they were distinctive and
simple so we could easily evaluate the description.
We went to the courts and parked the car along the
fence which surrounds them. We walked towards the
end of the courts where bleachers sit and watched
the play for the agreed upon length of time. After-
wards we walked to the other end of the court to
view the two swimming pools nearby and returned to
SRI.
b. Upon arriving back at SRI and being introduced
to D.E. the results were casually evaluated. Con-
siderable conversation was recorded and five or six
sketches made. The discussion centered on the idea
we were in an indoor environment. Strong impres-
sions'of a certain children's museum southwest of SRI
ran throughout. The sketches showed several different
scenes. Several comments are as follows. We were, as
D.E. predicted, southwest of SRI. However, the chil-
dren's museum named was nearby across the city park
(one hundred yards away) but we were never in it.
Correctly,'the first sketches showed us walking across
a gravel path towards an enbankment or wall (it was a
fence) and gives the correct orientation of our cir-
cumnavigation of the wall. Another sketch, described
as Puthoff and P.C. separated by a waist-high railing
could easily be two people separated by a tennis net.
Another sketch appears to have little resemblance to
anything encountered and is probably an accurate
rendition of the inside of the children's museum. A
final sketch of a "mechanical" object "interacted with"
appears to be a pitch fork or tennis racket like object
held in one hand by a person. A round object is sus-
pended in space in front of the "mechanical object."
D.E. could not identify this object so he put a question
mark on it. When asked, D.E. said he had no impression
of violent physical activity or running.
7. A second experiment was performed with SG1A
SG1A
1 42,
4 L
Approved For Release 2003/06/24: CIA-RDP79-00999A000300100015-5
 Approved For,&lease 2003/06/24: CI4gg-DP79-00999UO0300100015-5
FJiyiSaj~
the experiment was terminated and results immediately
evaluated. The discussion and sketch appear unrelated to
the visit with the possible exception of concentration on
a scene including a brightly lit box or window.
8. The third experiment used D.E. as the viewer again.
Complications arose in the implementation of this experiment.
D.E. said he had impressions of the results already prepared
before the experiment. He further said he submitted his
precognitive results to Puthoff's secretary. Since the
secretar had been called to a staff meeting, it was decided
to have sit in the office to varify the precog-
nitive results were not altered. Then Mr. Targ and myself
left to choose a target. I suggested we repeat the Xerox
experiment. Repeating an experiment has never been part of
the SRI protocal. This was agreed to an done. After about
eight minutes of copying we exhausted things to copy. I
suggested we terminate the experiment. Mr. Targ said that
was not a good idea because it would inject a breach of faith
between ourselves and the experimenter. We discussed this
point for several minutes then left the area after the pre-
scribed period of time. D.E. provided conversion and sketches
again which contained some elements that could be associated
with the visit. Most elements, however, were ambiguous at
best. The most interesting result occurred about eight minutes
into the experiment when D.E. said he had the strong impression
we were terminating the experiment and leaving the area. Dr.
Puthoff attempted to keep D.E. describing his impressions,
since Dr. Puthoff could not believe the experiment would be
terminated before the agreed upon time. The subsequent de-
scription by D.E. is not of value. All the above data will be
discussed in more detail in the progress reports.
9. The above descriptions are not recorded as proof of
paranormal abilities. Rather they are recorded to document
the results of our first attempt to demonstrate the remote
viewing ability with the available personnel under more fluid
conditions and with agency personnel in control of target
selection. It is felt that the performance of the subjects
under controlled laboratory conditions is an important char-
acteristic but the performance under conditions more closely
analogous to field operations is also important.
10. During our visit the SRI paranormal paper was published
in "Nature", a prestigious British journal. Puthoff was be-
sieged by many phone calls and it is clear that much attention
will be given to the paranormal research activities at SRI.
On the short term, it will be important to avoid allowing this
attention to effect the performance. A long range assessment
Approved For Release 200 f4 E #f 79-00999A000300100015-5
 SG1A
Approved Forelease 2003/06/24 : CIA-RDP79-0099,00300100015-5
is more positive. The scrutiny and criticism of the total
scientific community will be applied to the SRI results.
This should result in attempts to replicate the results at
other laboratories and attempts to understand the phenomenum
by others. This should stimulate and hasten the understanding
of the phenomenum at the price of losing exclusive agency
control of any potential applications.
11. It is apparent that SRI has more data than can possibly
be analyzed and reported during the remaining three months of
tht- Tact. It will be the responsibility of myself and iI SG1A
to tightly control the generation of new data and assure
the highest priority data be analyzed and reported,
12. Tentative arrangement for a full one day project review
in Washington were discussed. This review would possibly in-
clude the opinions of Dr. J. Ball, a theoretical physicist,
currently evaluating theoretical explanations of paranormal
abilities. The first or second week in December appears to be
an appropriate time.
SG1A
5
Approved For Release 2003/06/24: CIA-RDP79-00999A000300100015-5