At the Husick Group, when we say “Remote Viewing,” we are referring primarily to a specific form of Remote Viewing known as “Controlled Remote Viewing.” Controlled Remote Viewing – or CRV – consists of a rigorous, step-by-step methodology designed to allow a viewer to perceive and describe information about a designated target that would not ordinarily be accessible to the physical senses due to time, distance or shielding.
For example, a viewer could use CRV to obtain information about a distant location or object, or an event in the past or future, or even the unexpressed thoughts and emotions of another human being. The terms “viewer” and “viewing” are actually misnomers, as CRV enables not only the perception of visual information, but also the perception of information about a target’s sounds, smells, tastes, textures, temperatures, etc. Additionally, CRV can be used to gather conceptual information about a target such as its purpose, history, function, relationships, or other intangible qualities.
The CRV methodology is premised on the idea that almost unlimited amounts of data are available to the subconscious mind, but that most people cannot access this information in a useful way due to noise from the conscious mind. The CRV methodology is designed to enable a viewer to overcome this obstacle and prevent logical thought, memories, anxieties, desires and imagination from interfering with the information-accessing and reporting process. In order to avoid “pollution” that would engage the conscious mind in attempts to reason out what a target might be, CRVers usually perform their work without any information about the target other than neutrally worded “frontloading” about which aspects of the target require their attention – “person,” “location,” “object,” “activity, ”etc. During a CRV session, a viewer follows a detailed, multi-stage protocol and records perceptions with written words, sketches and, sometimes, 3D modeling, timelines or other tools.
The human ability to access information hidden from the physical senses is quite ancient if oracles, shamans, prophets and the like are taken into account. But the modern history of CRV begins during the Cold War, when U.S. intelligence services received evidence that the Soviets were using psychic spies to gain access to highly classified U.S. information. Although this claim seemed incredible at the time, the possibility was investigated through a project in which American psychics attempted to spy on American secret projects, and results could be compared to known data. The highly accurate results of this project demonstrated that psychic spying was, in fact, possible.
The U.S. government then funded a research project at Stanford Research Institute (SRI) in Menlo Park, CA, to determine whether a methodology could be developed for teaching soldiers to function at the level of natural psychics. At SRI, Drs. Harold Puthoff and Russell Targ, together with natural psychic Ingo Swann, developed a highly structured methodology for this purpose called “Coordinate Remote Viewing,” later re-named “Controlled Remote Viewing” or “CRV.”
Throughout the 1970’s and 1980’s, Remote Viewing was used by various U.S. intelligence agencies, including the CIA, the DIA and other military organizations, and a military unit was established at Ft. Meade specifically for the purpose of using Remote Viewing to gather information about foreign adversaries. By the mid-1990’s, information about CRV intelligence programs was declassified by the CIA. Since that time, many of the individuals involved in the early military intelligence applications of CRV have published books about their experiences and have offered CRV training to civilians.
All Remote Viewing professionals at the Husick Group have been trained in CRV, and are experienced in applying the CRV methodology in operational settings.
In a word…carefully. Although the CRV methodology is the result of many years of scientific research and development, like anything dependent on the human mind and human perception, it rarely yields results that are 100% accurate.
Even when CRV results are highly accurate, their meaning may not be immediately evident. For example, an image of a tombstone perceived by a viewer on a missing-person case could mean that the target person is deceased, or it could just mean that the target person’s current location is near a cemetery. To get the best use out of a piece of CRV data, the user needs to avoid projecting his or her own hopes and desires onto results, and instead should simply consider the information as presented and evaluate it with an open mind in conjunction with other available data.
Next, it is important to understand that one of the greatest challenges faced by a viewer is distinguishing genuine impressions communicated by the subconscious mind from the viewer’s own imagination and logical analysis. Strict adherence to the CRV structure used by viewers at The Husick Group helps to minimize this problem, but it is something that is nearly always present to some degree, even for the most disciplined viewers. In order to separate the correct information from a viewer’s analytic overlay, reported results may need to be stripped down to their most basic descriptors. For example, if a viewer tasked to describe a location reports the presence of a smokestack, it would be worth considering that what the viewer’s subconscious mind really perceived was a man-made structure that has heat energy or particulate matter coming out the top. It may have been a smokestack, or it may have been something like an Olympic Cauldron or Eternal Flame monument. Rather than narrowing a search area exclusively to factory districts based on this one piece of information, broadening the search area to include public park-like spaces that have fire-topped sculptures could prove productive.
When working with a team of viewers, it is not uncommon to receive information that is apparently contradictory. One reason for this has to do with the way Remote Viewing works – during a CRV session, impressions from the subconscious mind often come to a viewer in short bursts, like an aperture rapidly opening and closing just long enough to reveal a flash of an image. In that brief moment, a viewer may become aware of some elements of a target, but remain unaware of certain other elements. And, as any seasoned investigator would confirm, the statements of two eyewitnesses to the same event are never identical. Different people see things from different vantage points, and their attention is drawn to different aspects due to their own differing backgrounds, interests, concerns or perceptual strengths. The same is true of viewers. Add to that the fact that two viewers may be viewing a target not only from different spatial perspectives, but also from different points in time. One of the advantages of the team-based approach used by The Husick Group is that the perceptions of several viewers can be considered on a combined basis to gain a more complete picture of a target.