Correspondence

To the Editor:

The recent review by Angela Thompson of my book Remote Viewing Secrets (JP, 65, 179-182) was overwhelmingly positive and very much appreciated. However, there are a few historical inaccuracies that need to be corrected.

Within her review, she refers to Mr. Ingo Swann as being both my teacher and my trainer. This is inaccurate. While I did learn his Controlled Remote Viewing (CRV) training method after beginning work at SRI-International in 1985, I did not learn it from him. While I believe CRV might have some value in the initial exposure to the remote viewing process, it did not provide me with any improvement over continued use of my own methodology And while I have always considered Ingo as both a friend and a peer, I have never considered him to be my teacher. I have always professed that there are numerous methods that can be used to produce information within a scientifically approved remote viewing protocol.

I specifically did not mention Ingo's name in reference to remote viewing the far side of the moon for a couple of reasons. First, in a number of cases, he has successfully produced information on distant planets within the solar system, which has been verified by outbound satellite collection platforms. Second, he has provided other information of significant value, which could yet be verified about distant planets that may prove quite valuable in the verification of long-distance remote viewing. This aside, it does not outweigh the fact that almost all other remote viewing of the far side of the moon by most other people who call themselves remote viewers is to address the existence or nonexistence of aliens, substantiate the existence of alien bases of operation, or underscore the involvement of governments with aliens as some sort of secret conspiracy. I believe this to be a bogus enterprise, which only dilutes or demeans the efficacy of remote viewing in general. By not mentioning Ingo within this venue, I was attempting to preserve the value of his prior work.

My "need" to use the terms Analytic Overlay (AOL) and Aesthetic Impact (AI) stem from their common usage within the Star Gate project as early as 1979, prior to development of and usage within CRV. I have no idea where or when they were generated, only that they were in common usage throughout our office. Implying they stem only from development of CRV, or usage within the CRV training, would be an historical inaccuracy. Did Ingo invent these terms? Possibly. In which case, I say bravo for his contribution.

As for not heeding my own advice regarding blind targets in the distant future (re. The Ultimate Time Machine, Hampton Roads, 1999), I would point out, to those interested, the beginning of chapter 9, page 129 of that same publication, which qualifies the predictions made as a "meaningful test of remote viewing, psychic functioning, and the creation process." It was my intention within UTM to demonstrate how much we participate in the creation of our own future by the construction of our beliefs and the effects of our actions, even our statements. The entire reason for the predictions portion of the book was dealing with control of the future and has no bearing on how the predictions might have been made.

However, for those who are interested, I did an outline of what would be interesting to the common reader and then broke these interests down into a series of questions; for example, where will energy come from in the year 2075? I wrote over 300 of these questions down on individual 3 x 5 cards, which were then sealed in nontransparent envelopes and placed in a large dark-green bag. I would then pseudorandomly draw an envelope from the bag and place it on the top of my computer. Then opening my mind to whatever information might be available from the targeted card, I would write whatever flooded into my mind. When the information ceased, I would then open the envelope and read the question. If it seemed to match the card, I labeled the information on the screen with the question written on the card and saved it to file, then destroyed the card. If it did not match, I erased the screen and put the card into a new envelope and returned it to the bag. This method was not intended to be a scientifically approved method of targeting; however, it did keep me fairly blind to the questions of interest. Also, some of the information used was also extracted or acquired from past remote viewing efforts, prior to publication.

The entire book was simply a statement about what we believe based on our behavior as going a long way toward creating the very world we then experience and/or eventually have to live within.

As regards my exposure to CRV. Ingo Swann was commissioned to teach his CRV method in the latter portion of 1983. I was exposed to numerous methods, not just Extended Remote Viewing, or ERV, at Fort Meade from 1978 through 1984, but I was never trained or taught CRV at Meade. I was trained in CRV while working at SRI-International in 1985. The reason I was never trained in CRV at Meade was because, at the time, the commander of the unit felt it would ultimately interfere with those who were being trained by Ingo. This could be interpreted to mean Joe did not agree with Ingo's training method; Joe was doing all the remote viewing while CRV training was being done; Joe was producing excellent remote viewing, so why change something that wasn't broken; or all of the above. Whichever is a more accurate assumption here, CRV bears no relationship to either my ability as a viewer or my Legion of Merit, and this should not be implied.