Practical

 
 
 
 

 

CSL Home

 
 
  CSL Logo

Operational Anomalous Cognition

Test-Bed Trials

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.

Photo: Target: Static Dust Cloud Static Test Dust Cloud The data shown for this session is complete.
Photo: Target: Rocket Engine Rocket engine and the response.
 

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:

 
0800 Hours Receiver 372 was asked to describe the geographical area and the gestalt of the area of interest. He was also asked to provide as much detail as possible in real-time (i.e., at 0835) and was targeted upon the sponsor's on-site representative.
1010 Hours The receiver was asked to describe the details and activity at the site designated by the sponsor's on-site representative as of 0000 hours 7 May (i.e., the previous night).
1600 Hours The receiver was asked to describe, in real-time, the details and activity at the site designated by the sponsor's on-site representative.
2400 Hours The receiver was asked to describe, in real-time the details and activity at the site designated by two SRI personnel.

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.

Accuracy and Reliability for High Technology Trial 1
  Accuracy Reliability
Accelerator 67 63
Windmill Farm 95 100
LLNL West Gate 85 95
Combined Total 77 78

Raw Data — Accelerator

Photo: Target: Accelerator Accelerator The data shown for this target is only a sample of the total. Sixty three percent of what the receiver said was identified at the site.
Photo: Target: Windmill Farm Windmill Electric Generation Farm The data shown for this target is complete.

Photo: Target: West Gate of LLNL West Gate of LLNL The data shown for this target is complete.

A paper describing this example has been submitted for publication in The Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research.


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:

 
1008 August 24 Receiver 372 was asked to describe the location and details of an event in progress. Details about the pertinent personnel were also requested.
1500 August 24 Receiver 372 was asked to describe the details and activity at the site demarked by the presence of the sponsor's on-site representative.
0910 August 25 The receiver was asked to expand his upon his descriptions from the previous day.
1120 August 25 The receiver was asked to consolidate the information from the previous scans and to provide his concluding remarks.

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

Photo: Target; Generator Pic 1 Microwave Generator The data shown for this target is selected.
Photo: Target: Generator Pic2 Microwave Generator The data shown for this target is selected.

 

CSL is a part of the Laboratories for Fundamental Research (www.lfr.org).
For questions or comments about the web site, email the Webmaster.
All page layouts, text, graphics, photographs, and other inclusions in the CSL web site are Copyright © 1999-2001 by Cognitive Sciences Laboratories. All rights reserved. To request permissions, email CSL.
CSL Logo