vault backup: 2026-09-21 23:37:10
This commit is contained in:
parent
698f6427f6
commit
a697678725
49 changed files with 603 additions and 294 deletions
|
|
@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ aliases:
|
|||
- AIR
|
||||
- American Institutes for Research
|
||||
created: 2026-05-17
|
||||
updated: 2026-05-17
|
||||
updated: 2026-09-21
|
||||
category: "Research Organization"
|
||||
tags:
|
||||
- Organization
|
||||
|
|
@ -18,7 +18,7 @@ start: 1946-01-01
|
|||
location: "Washington, D.C."
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
The American Institutes for Research (AIR) is a nonprofit behavioral and social science research organization founded in 1946, headquartered in the Washington, D.C. area. It conducts applied research in education, health, workforce development, and related fields under government and private contracts. AIR's primary relevance to intelligence history is its 1995 evaluation of the [[STARGATE PROJECT|STAR GATE]] program, the classified remote viewing research effort that had operated under various designations since 1978 under [[Defense Intelligence Agency]] and, from 1991, [[Central Intelligence Agency|CIA]] sponsorship.[^1]
|
||||
The American Institutes for Research (AIR) is a nonprofit behavioral and social science research organization founded in 1946, headquartered in the Washington, D.C. area. It conducts applied research in education, health, workforce development, and related fields under government and private contracts. AIR's primary relevance to intelligence history is its 1995 evaluation of the [[STARGATE PROJECT|STAR GATE]] program, the classified remote viewing research effort that had operated under various designations since 1978 under Army and [[Defense Intelligence Agency]] sponsorship, and passed to the [[Central Intelligence Agency|CIA]] in 1995.[^1]
|
||||
|
||||
### Cold War Classified Military Psychology Work
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -26,23 +26,10 @@ Long before the STAR GATE evaluation, AIR appeared in the classified military-ps
|
|||
|
||||
### The 1995 STAR GATE Evaluation
|
||||
|
||||
When the CIA took over management of the STAR GATE program in 1991 and began a review of its scientific and operational value, it contracted AIR to conduct an independent assessment. The evaluation was led by two researchers with opposing predispositions toward the subject: Ray Hyman, a University of Oregon cognitive psychologist and longtime skeptic of parapsychology who had evaluated [[Stanford Research Institute|SRI]] remote viewing research since 1973, and Jessica Utts, a University of California Davis statistician with expertise in experimental design and more open views on the statistical evidence for psi phenomena.[^1]
|
||||
|
||||
The AIR report, formally titled "An Evaluation of Remote Viewing: Research and Applications," was delivered to the CIA on September 29, 1995. [[Jessica Utts]] concluded in her portion of the report that the statistical evidence across the accumulated STAR GATE experiments was sufficiently robust to warrant the conclusion that some form of anomalous cognition was occurring - she found the effect size comparable to that considered sufficient for publication in mainstream behavioral science. [[Ray Hyman]]'s portion of the report argued that the experimental protocols contained sufficient methodological weaknesses, including inadequate controls against sensory leakage and experimenter bias, that no firm conclusions could be drawn.[^1]
|
||||
|
||||
The overall AIR assessment, reconciling these divided conclusions, recommended against continuing the program. The CIA accepted this recommendation. STAR GATE was declassified and formally terminated in 1995, with the program's archives transferred to the American Institute of Research and later made available through declassification requests. Approximately 80,000 pages of documents were eventually released by the CIA.[^1]
|
||||
|
||||
### Significance of the Split Finding
|
||||
|
||||
The divided Utts-Hyman finding reflected a genuine methodological disagreement that had characterized the entire history of parapsychology research: whether statistically significant but small effect sizes in carefully controlled experiments constitute evidence for anomalous phenomena, or whether undetected methodological artifacts explain such results. Utts's positive assessment was unusual in that she was a mainstream academic statistician, not a parapsychology proponent; her endorsement of the statistical case attracted attention from researchers on both sides of the debate.
|
||||
|
||||
The AIR evaluation was criticized from multiple directions. Proponents of the research, including former program participants and researchers at Stanford Research Institute, argued that Hyman's portion of the review applied higher methodological standards than would be applied to equivalent evidence in other fields, and that the operational record - instances of remote viewing that had produced actionable intelligence - was not adequately weighted. Skeptics argued that any positive finding was the product of accumulated methodological weaknesses that neither evaluator had fully identified.[^1]
|
||||
|
||||
### Role of Ray Hyman
|
||||
|
||||
Ray Hyman had been involved in government-sponsored evaluations of parapsychology research since 1973, when the [[Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency|DARPA]] contracted him to evaluate [[Uri Geller]]'s sessions at SRI. His consistent position was that methodological controls in remote viewing research were insufficient to rule out conventional explanations. The 1995 AIR evaluation represented the culmination of more than two decades of his critical engagement with the field. His portion of the report documented specific methodological concerns about the protocols used in STAR GATE's operational and research phases and argued that the database did not support conclusions about anomalous information transfer.[^1]
|
||||
In June 1995 the CIA's Office of Research and Development, having taken custody of the DIA's Star Gate program at the direction of Congress and declassified its own 1970s parapsychology work "to facilitate a new, external review," contracted AIR to evaluate the program's research and operations ([[1995 AIR evaluation of Star Gate]]). Michael Mumford and Andrew Rose of AIR conducted the operational review, interviewing seven customer representatives, three viewers, and the program manager; David Goslin, AIR's president, coordinated; the research review went to [[Jessica Utts]] and [[Ray Hyman]], with Lincoln Moses of Stanford as statistical adviser. One program document stayed classified during the review and Mumford summarized it for the panel. The report, "An Evaluation of Remote Viewing: Research and Applications," was delivered on September 29, 1995. It found "a statistically significant 'anomaly'" in the laboratory work, no "convincing demonstration that a paranormal ability is involved," and that remote viewing "has not been shown to have value in intelligence operations"; the customer ratings of forty viewings from 1994 and 1995 averaged 3.0 on a six-point accuracy scale and 3.5 on a five-point value scale. Its last conclusion read: "Continued support for the operational component of the current program is not justified." The report was released publicly on November 28, 1995.[^3]
|
||||
|
||||
### Footnotes
|
||||
|
||||
[^1]: Jacobsen, Annie. *Phenomena: The Secret History of the U.S. Government's Investigations into Extrasensory Perception and Psychokinesis.* Little, Brown and Company, 2017, pp. 303-320. Hyman, Ray, and Jessica Utts. "An Evaluation of Remote Viewing: Research and Applications." American Institutes for Research, September 29, 1995 (declassified). Schnabel, Jim. *Remote Viewers: The Secret History of America's Psychic Spies.* Dell, 1997.
|
||||
[^2]: Peter Watson, *War on the Mind: The Military Uses and Abuses of Psychology*. Basic Books, 1978, Appendix I and Appendix II.
|
||||
[^3]: Mumford, Michael D., Andrew M. Rose, and David A. Goslin. *An Evaluation of Remote Viewing: Research and Applications.* American Institutes for Research, September 29, 1995, pp. E-1 to E-5, 1-4, 2-3 to 2-8, 4-13, 5-1 to 5-5. https://nsarchive2.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB438/docs/doc_57.pdf Release date from May, Edwin C., *Journal of Parapsychology,* vol. 60, no. 1, 1996, abstract.
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -36,7 +36,7 @@ Whether CIA employees who received computer training at Future Enterprises had a
|
|||
|
||||
### The 1993 DOJ Investigation
|
||||
|
||||
The Future Enterprises connection was a central element of the 1993 Department of Justice and FBI reinvestigation of The Finders, prompted by congressional pressure from Representatives Tom Lewis (R-FL) and Charlie Rose (D-NC). Reporter Paul M. Rodriguez of the *Washington Times* published the key investigative article on December 17, 1993, citing the MPD document identifying Future Enterprises as "Finders Corp."[^1] The *U.S. News & World Report* contemporaneous investigation also cited the CIA training relationship as one of three documented overlaps between The Finders and the intelligence community, alongside [[Isabelle Pettie]]'s CIA employment and [[George Pettie|George Pettie's]] work for [[Air America]].[^1]
|
||||
The Future Enterprises connection was a central element of the 1993 Department of Justice and FBI reinvestigation of The Finders, prompted by congressional pressure from Representatives Tom Lewis (R-FL) and [[Charlie Rose]] (D-NC). Reporter Paul M. Rodriguez of the *Washington Times* published the key investigative article on December 17, 1993, citing the MPD document identifying Future Enterprises as "Finders Corp."[^1] The *U.S. News & World Report* contemporaneous investigation also cited the CIA training relationship as one of three documented overlaps between The Finders and the intelligence community, alongside [[Isabelle Pettie]]'s CIA employment and [[George Pettie|George Pettie's]] work for [[Air America]].[^1]
|
||||
|
||||
The DOJ inquiry concluded without criminal charges. The CIA maintained its characterization of the training relationship as an incidental procurement arrangement.
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
|
|||
---
|
||||
created: 2025-07-22
|
||||
updated: 2025-07-22
|
||||
updated: 2026-09-21
|
||||
title: Monroe Institute
|
||||
tags:
|
||||
- organization
|
||||
|
|
@ -15,6 +15,11 @@ location: "Faber, Virginia, USA"
|
|||
|
||||
The [[Monroe Institute]] is a non-profit organization dedicated to the exploration of human consciousness, known for its Hemi-Sync audio technology. It was founded by [[Robert Monroe]]. In the context of the *Remote Viewers* narrative, [[Frederick Atwater|Skip Atwater]] became the director of research for the Institute after retiring from the [[U.S. Army]], and later served as its president. The Institute is mentioned as a place where Atwater continued his work in consciousness research, building upon his experiences with remote viewing.[^1]
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
### The Army Record
|
||||
|
||||
[^1]: Schnabel, Jim. *Remote Viewers*. Dell, 1997.
|
||||
A memorandum of the 902d Military Intelligence Group of September 25, 1978, recording the arrangements that turned Gondola Wish into Grill Flame, noted that the institute was "not cleared." An INSCOM information paper of January 5, 1984, stated: "USAINSCOM association with MIAS dates to 1978, when the potentials of the Hemi-Sync process were considered for application within INSCOM's initial psychoenergetic efforts." By then "CENTER LANE Advanced Training with MIAS consists of four progressive phases that lead to full use of the Hemi-Sync process during CENTER LANE intelligence collection missions," and "Rapid Acquisition Personnel Training (RAPT) is an application of the Hemi-Sync process designed to improve managerial and intra-personal relations skills," "used to screen prospective source personnel and sensitize intelligence managers and consumers to intelligence applications of psychoenergetics"; INSCOM's Center for Excellence planned to use the tapes "for accelerated learning of foreign language skills." The Center Lane briefing dated the unit's advanced training with Hemi-Sync to the end of 1980, and an INSCOM request of about 1981 asked to write the institute's "Frequency Following Response" and "Hemispheric Synchronization" tapes into the Grill Flame protocol, "3-5 times per week," at no more than 20 decibels. The institute of "Nellys Ford, VA" appears in the vendor roster of INSCOM's High Performance Task Force report of March 1983, *Beyond Excellence,* beside the Pacific Institute, neuro-linguistic programming, and "New Age Thinking," its technique described as "a machine aided process which more closely aligns brain wave activity (frequency/amplitude) in both left and right brain hemispheres."[^2]
|
||||
|
||||
### Footnotes
|
||||
|
||||
[^1]: Schnabel, Jim. *Remote Viewers*. Dell, 1997.
|
||||
[^2]: Keenan, Robert E., memorandum "GRILL FLAME," 902d Military Intelligence Group, September 25, 1978, CIA-RDP96-00788R001200240011-2. Read in the archive.org mirror of the CIA FOIA Reading Room STARGATE collection. US Army Intelligence and Security Command, information paper "The Monroe Institute of Applied Sciences," ITAGPA-F-SD, January 5, 1984, CIA-RDP96-00788R001700270004-2. Read in the archive.org mirror of the CIA FOIA Reading Room STARGATE collection. US Army Intelligence and Security Command. *An INSCOM Beyond Excellence: Army High Performance Task Force Report,* March 1983, archive.org item INSCOMHPTFReport. "Request for Administrative Review of INSCOM Grill Flame Protocol," c. 1981-83, CIA-RDP96-00788R001100200005-4.
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
Loading…
Add table
Add a link
Reference in a new issue