PaperS810
Remote Viewing Experiments Through Computer Conferencing
Computer-mediated descriptions of hidden mineral targets are compared in an exploratory remote-viewing experiment.
Supplied text partly reconstructed4 sources for “Remote viewing”
Results
InterviewS7628
Our Second Open-Ended Conversation — Lyn Buchanan / Jeffrey Mishlove, published dialogue
Buchanan recounts military remote-viewing work, unnamed corporate and space-related work, an archive request and claimed access to a conventional classified rocket-test area. He says retirement leaves him unaware whether the military programme continues. Remote-viewing interpretations, planned travel and generic private approaches are retained as his accounts, with recipients and records unresolved. Swann is discussed as a methodology source.
Complete bounded publisher dialogue and qualified page layouts; original AV gapsReportS7629
Rice MS0773 Edwin C. May papers — public finding aid, Box48 metadata and digital index
Rice’s public finding aid describes the Edwin May collection, donated in2018–2019, and lists remote-viewing folders and six digital groups. This review covers catalogue text. The underlying archival documents and recordings remain unread. The listing supports the existence of catalogued material; it does not confirm Buchanan’s later donation request was fulfilled or establish claims made within the collection.
Complete public finding-aid, digital-object metadata and access policy; originals unreadBookS7406
Messengers of Deception: UFO Contacts and Cults — reviewed reflow and 2008 scan
Vallée distinguishes interviews, anonymous insider relays and speculative explanations. A reported base visit and Adamski’s alleged request from unnamed scientists do not authenticate secret programmes. Recantations, alibis and ordinary alternatives remain. His human-stratagem and control-system theories retain explicit shortcomings; reported remote-viewing comparisons lack original data. David Swift’s separate epilogue distinguishes influential beliefs from scientific confirmation and notes unexplained who/how questions.
All 272 supplied scan layouts viewed; book coverage remains qualifiedA curated public selection. Source review describes what was read; it does not establish that a claim is true. Our research approach