Posts Tagged ‘Military’

…is doing our fighting for us.

A pilot from Mathewson’s squadron at Creech Air Force base guided his drone over the Ranger position. The Predator had never been used in a hot battle to support ground troops, and the Air Force controller embedded with the Rangers was hesitant to let it fire.

To prove its accuracy, the Predator crew launched one of its two Hellfire missiles at an empty hilltop. The hit was accurate, but it left the drone with only one missile. The pilot steadied his plane and squeezed the “pickle” button on his stick, setting loose his last missile and obliterating the Taliban machine-gun nest. “We would have all died without the Predator,” the controller recalled months later to Air Force officials.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/27/AR2010022703754_4.html?sid=ST2010022801204

…maybe we all are.

What most skeptics ignore is the fact that Remote Viewing was SUCCESSFULLY used by the military. And most experiments offer statistical proof of psychic ability, as well. Just because the talking heads on the news scoff at the idea doesn’t mean it’s not true.

In 1995, the US Congress asked two independent scientists to assess whether the $20 million that the government had spent on psychic research had produced anything of value. And the conclusions proved to be somewhat unexpected.

Professor Jessica Utts, a statistician from the University of California, discovered that remote viewers were correct 34 per cent of the time, a figure way beyond what chance guessing would allow.

She says: “Using the standards applied to any other area of science, you have to conclude that certain psychic phenomena, such as remote viewing, have been well established.

“The results are not due to chance or flaws in the experiments.”

Of course, this doesn’t wash with sceptical scientists.

Professor Richard Wiseman, a psychologist at the University of Hertfordshire, refuses to believe in remote viewing.

He says: “I agree that by the standards of any other area of science that remote viewing is proven, but begs the question: do we need higher standards of evidence when we study the paranormal? I think we do.

“If I said that there is a red car outside my house, you would probably believe me.

“But if I said that a UFO had just landed, you’d probably want a lot more evidence.

“Because remote viewing is such an outlandish claim that will revolutionise the world, we need overwhelming evidence before we draw any conclusions. Right now we don’t have that evidence.”

Could there be proof to the theory that we’re ALL psychic?