11–20 of 136 posts
It’s hard to believe that so recently, “serious” people would fund research of literal mumbo jumbo. By all means, the 90s was a different time epistemologically. We aren’t immune to this today, far from it, though the hoaxes have become way more believable in my assessment.
It’s hard to believe that so recently, “serious” people would fund research of literal mumbo jumbo. By all means, the 90s was a different time epistemologically. We aren’t immune to this today, far from it, though the hoaxes have become way more believable in my assessment.
> By all means, the 90s was a different time epistemologically We're in an age when vaccines are treated as the enemy and the us health secretary believes paracetamol causes autism.
I always thought this was interesting. May 15, 1987: https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP96-00789R0017000... May 17, 1987: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Stark_incident
What does the first pdf mean? (And does it remind anyone else of an ee cummings poem or is it just me)
It’s hard to believe that so recently, “serious” people would fund research of literal mumbo jumbo. By all means, the 90s was a different time epistemologically. We aren’t immune to this today, far from it, though the hoaxes have become way more believable in my assessment.
TLDR? Goat-staring is real?
"real" in that remote viewing and psychic powers actually exist? No.
The CIA researched a ton of "mind-control" techniques under MKULTRA too but that doesn't mean they can control your mind.
The government has programs to research UFOs but that doesn't mean aliens are buzzing our skies and kidnapping our cattle.
I think what we're really seeing here is just money laundering and confirmation bias.
I always thought this was interesting. May 15, 1987: https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP96-00789R0017000... May 17, 1987: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Stark_incident
What does the first pdf mean? (And does it remind anyone else of an ee cummings poem or is it just me)
For example:
1. The drawing on p. 7 looks like the superstructure of a warship.
2. The next few pages might describe what it feels like to wonder if your ship is actually under missile attack.
3. On page 10 it records "aircraft--large, multiengined; distant; orbiting; distraction controlled, directed. 'Under orders.'" This USNI article has a little more detail on the AWACS plane detecting the incoming attack: https://www.usni.org/magazines/naval-history-magazine/2017/j...
There are other similarities, but the CIA report predates the attack, which is especially strange.
It’s hard to believe that so recently, “serious” people would fund research of literal mumbo jumbo. By all means, the 90s was a different time epistemologically. We aren’t immune to this today, far from it, though the hoaxes have become way more believable in my assessment.
The CIA has been this way since basically its inception. It's where a bunch of lead-lined brains are given unreasonable budgets and discretion. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Directorate_of_Science_and_Tec...
“ In the FY 1991 Defense Authorization Act, the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) was identified as executive agent for initiating a new program to investigate parapsychological/ anomalous phenomena. A funding level of $2 million was authorized for DIA to undertake specific research and other activities relative to this activity. Objectives of this authorization were to enable a systematic and scientifically sound approach to the R&D effort, to permit wider and more systematic review of potential intelligence applications, and to assess foreign developments in this area.”
It was taken serious enough to be funded for two decades starting in the 70s. Eventually it was terminated when the strategic pressure eased.
AIR was commissioned to look at the research and says in this [1]
“A three-component program involving basic research, operations, and foreign assessment has been in place for some time… beginning in the 1970s, it has conducted a program intended to investigate the application of one paranormal phenomenon — remote viewing, or the ability to describe locations one has not visited.”
“The AIR review found that remote viewing produced occasional hits that were statistically better than chance, but it remains unclear whether the observed effects can unambiguously be attributed to paranormal phenomena, and the laboratory conditions under which effects were seen do not generalize to real intelligence problems. The information provided by remote viewing was judged vague and ambiguous, making it difficult or impossible for the technique to yield information of sufficient quality and accuracy for actionable intelligence.”
1. https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP96-00791R0002001...
It’s hard to believe that so recently, “serious” people would fund research of literal mumbo jumbo. By all means, the 90s was a different time epistemologically. We aren’t immune to this today, far from it, though the hoaxes have become way more believable in my assessment.
It’s hard to believe that so recently, “serious” people would fund research of literal mumbo jumbo. By all means, the 90s was a different time epistemologically. We aren’t immune to this today, far from it, though the hoaxes have become way more believable in my assessment.
I always thought this was interesting. May 15, 1987: https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP96-00789R0017000... May 17, 1987: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Stark_incident