with great success apparently.

Given inter agency cooperation, could this article be a Fnord??

Methinks so

"Britain’s military spent taxpayers' money to test out “remote viewing” as recently as 2002, only to conclude the technique had little value."...Ah yes, shades of Frank Whittle Blindness Syndrome in Bland Blended Management. A Bastion of Conservative Inaction is the MOD ...... Ggiven the Tools they are given to work with, would you blame them?

And what would be the current evaluation in the light of HyperRadioProActive NEUKlearer Virtualisation dDevelopments BetaTesting Virtual Vista Applications for Windowed Components.

Such would be priceless in value and thus a bargain at whatever would be paid for IT, for IT would be a Perfect Circle AddAIDVenture...... so nice we said it Twice. ..... or is IT C++Squared? A PerlyGatesPython Acolyte.

Methinks you have been watching a little too much TV, Jon.

Well, considering the expensive stuff like spy satellites doesn't seem to be particularly useful at spotting WMDs we might as well stick to psychics. They aren't much use either but at least they're cheap.

I, personally, have had a number of successes with remote viewing in the past. And as pointed out already, the CIA spent hue amounts of money on RV during various projects throughout the last few decades. The most prolific of which being MKULTRA.

Personally, I would rather have my money going towards psyops than half the rubbish the government wastes it on at the moment.

Remote viewing? Of course it works. Proof is right here:

http://64.72.83.235/view/view.shtml

...if that's not remote viewing, I don't know what is. Can't see how it would be very useful in battle, though.

I have been on an Scientific RV course and believe me it works. No scientist can tell me otherwise so you can print this negative slant on fact if you like but until you have tried it yourself you cannot possibly comment.

http://www.remoteviewinghistory.com/

Methinks you need to do some more reading Will ;o)