My statements are not claims,just statements of fact.If U are not curious to check it out so be it,Not worth my time to educate a wilfully in the dark naysayer.Magicians were your go to group to prove whether remote viewing was valid or not,last I heard they haunted clubs,theaters etc.not labs.Debate rule#2,do some opposition research,other than"I know U are but what am I.
You shouldn't be worried about educating me. The questions I am asking have easy answers, and you should have asked them yourself. You brought up some half remembered bogus hype and now you expect our brains to be impressed. If it was so wideley reported it would be easy to provide a link for us, yet you have now doged this request three times.
I already know which studies you speak of, because when I was curious about remote vewing, I asked question and sought answers. The program you speak of was called Project Stargate, it had a reported budget of 20 million which it depleted, and was subsequently abandoned after
24 years due to lack of results. The remote viewers had complete control over the testing conditions, and still failed. The participants have
all gone public and gave accounts of their activities. None of them are being paid by the government currently, none have been kidnapped or mysteriously disappeared. The government is no longer interested in these people nor concerned with what they reveal about their time on the project. Does this sound like a successful program?
An independent government panel was assigned to study the merit of project stargate. This is their conclusion.
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.
A CIA report noted that in the case of remote viewing there was a large amount of irrelevant, erroneous information that was provided and there was little agreement observed among the reports of the remote viewers
The most outspoken participant is Joseph McMoneagle, who likes to use his time on the project as a way to give credit to his abilities. (even though he doesn't deny the project ended with the government being disinterested, the government wouldn't fund any more research, ect) Joseph agreed to be tested on a TV show. He was asked to find a girl who producers told to go to one of four possible locations.
The four locations were a life size treehouse in a giant tree, a tall metal waterslide at an amusement park, a dock along the river, and the Water Wall, a huge cement fountain structure. The girl was at the dock. Here is what McMoneagle said:
There's a river or something riverlike nearby, with manmade improvements. Houston is a famous river town, so this was a pretty good bet. It applies equally well to the waterslide and to the dock.
There are perpendicular lines. I challenge anyone to find any location anywhere without perpendicular lines.
She's standing on an incline. She was not standing on an incline, and there were no apparent inclines at any of the four locations.
She's looking up at it. This would apply best to the treehouse, the waterslide, or the Water Wall. There was really nothing to look up at at the dock.
There's a pedestrian bridge nearby. Sounds like a close match for the treehouse or the walkways on the waterslide.
There is a lot of metallic noise. Probably the big metal waterslide structure is the best match for this.
There's something big and tall nearby that's not a building. This applies equally well to all four locations.
There's a platform with a black stripe. Not a clear match for any of the locations.
As you can see, his remote viewing revealed nothing definitive. This was the star of the project, who had complete control over the conditions of the project, and who admits the project failed, failing yet again.
As ginja already pointed out, we only have to look at project alpha to see how magicians tricks can easily be used to supply the results needed to simulate remote viewing. Banachek can pass the remote viewing test every time, difference is he doesn't claim to be psychic at all, just good at deception. These tricks may be enough to keep researchers interested for quite a while, but because they are tricks, they never reveal anything useful, never provide actual external knowledge.
Would you like to continue to call me willfully ignorant and chide me for lack of research?
And since you brought up debate rules, it seems you need to familiarize yourself with the concept of
Burden of Proof.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stargate_Project
http://www.skepdic.com/remotevw.html