The following test-bed trials have recently been declassified. Each of them were designed to test specific aspects of future anomalous cognition operations.
Rocket Test in Utah (October, 1976)
The target for this test-bed trial was a static test firing of a solid-propellant Minuteman missile at Hill Air Force Base. The SRI team remained blind to the target, and anomalous cognition technology was competing with a variety of traditional sensors to determine if and when the engine tests occurred. (Note: The CSL was under the direction of Harold E. Puthoff, Ph.D. at the time of this test.)Protocol Rocket Test
During the week of 21 October 1976, two receivers were asked to "observe" for one hour each day for five days.Raw Data and Results Rocket Test
One receiver described a dust-raising device resembling a "locomotive," and produced a schematic diagram of the test layout. A second receiver described the event in terms of a "drawn-out muffled roars" which raised dust clouds and involved "glowing melting materials." This same receiver, asked to observe altogether five similar events over a several-day period, correctly noted a sequence of three go, two no-go conditions, corresponding to three tests and two cancellations. In addition, this receiver was able to indicate the actual event time to within ten seconds in one of the tests for which precise timing information was obtained.
We were later told by the government representative who had responsibility for the test, that because of a variety of reasons such as weather conditions, the anomalous cognition "sensor" was the only one to correctly identify the event on one of the days.
Accelerator: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (May, 1987)
This trial was designed to measure the accuracy and reliability of anomalous cognition on directed energy systems. Obtaining receiver-dependent values in a test environment would provide reasonable estimates for actual operations. (Note: At this time the CSL was under the direction of Edwin C. May, Ph.D.)Protocol Accelerator
On 6 May 1987 receiver 372 traveled to Menlo Park in preparation for a 24-hour trial that was to begin at 0800 hours on 7 May. Receiver 372 and the monitor were told that an individual from the sponsoring organization, who was described by name and Social Security number and who was not known to any of the SRI staff, was in the target area during the AC sessions. In addition, they were told that, as part of the trial, two members of the SRI Cognitive Sciences Laboratory staff who were known to them, would serve as a "beacon" and would be at the specific target of interest between 2200 hours on 7 May and 0800 hours on 8 May. No other information was provide to the receiver or the monitor. The out-bound team could be anywhere within a 100 mile radius of the CSL.
Four sessions were conducted to provide information at approximately 8-hour intervals. The time and circumstances were as follows:
During each session receiver 372's responses were tape recorded, and he was encouraged to draw details whenever possible. The monitor was free to seek clarification of specific points throughout the sessions. We note that the data were lost for the 1010h session because of a tape recorder failure.Results Accelerator
The primary target for the session was a 50-MeV electron accelerator located at a remote site near Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. During the 0800h session, the target person was located in building A at LLNL; at 1600h he was driving through the windmill electric power farm at the Altamont pass; at 2400h, he and the SRI personnel were located within the accelerator building at the remote site.
In the fuzzy set analysis, the accuracy is defined as the percent of the target elements that was described correctly by the receiver. The reliability is the percent of the receiver's response that was correct. The following table shows the accuracy and reliability for the three targets for this 1987 example.
Raw Data Accelerator
Microwave Generator (August, 1987)
This trial was designed to measure the accuracy and reliability of anomalous cognition on directed energy systems. Obtaining receiver-dependent values in a test environment would provide reasonable estimates for actual operations. (Note: At this time the CSL was under the direction of Edwin C. May, Ph.D.)Protocol Microwave Generator
In this trial, the SRI team was completely blind to all details with the exception that we knew that an event was to take place within the continental USA on 24-25 August 1988. As in the first trial, we were provided the name and Social Security number of an individual who would be on-site during the event.
On 23 August 1988 an SRI monitor flew to the East coast home of receiver 372 in preparation for the 24-hour trial that was to begin at 1000 hours on 24 August. Four sessions were conducted to provide information at approximately 8-hour intervals. The time and circumstances were as follows:
As before, receiver 372's responses were tape recorded, and he was encouraged to draw details whenever possible. The monitor was free to seek clarification of specific points throughout the sessions.
Results Microwave Generator
The target for this trial was a high-power microwave generator in the New Mexico desert. It was being used to test the vulnerability of electronic components. Using fuzzy set analysis, we found that the accuracy for the microwave generator target was 80 percent and the reliability was 69 percent. That is, 80 percent of the intended target elements were described correctly and 69 percent of what receiver 372 said was correct.
Raw Data Microwave Generator