Remote Viewing: What the Records Show—and Where They Stop
What do CIA-hosted STARGATE files still certify about remote viewing training, and where does certification stop for verified Soviet targets?
The surviving record here is a set of declassified documents hosted by the CIA, plus a small number of curated navigation aids.
- CIA FOIA Reading Room STARGATE collection as archive boundary
- Overview document lists foreign assessment, external research, in-house investigations
- CRV defined as coordinate-based process for ‘perceiving’ remote sites in location and or time
- Training described as six staged progression in CRV manuals
- URDF-3 analysis describes maps-based target WSW of Semipalatinsk as scientific military complex
These points define the stable edge of what this document set can certify without importing claims from outside the file trail.
The CIA FOIA Electronic Reading Room STARGATE collection page (index boundary)
A reader lands on a CIA Reading Room collection page labeled for STARGATE, presented as part of the FOIA Electronic Reading Room.
The page shows a long sequence of entries spread across many pages, and the URL structure fixes a specific page number in that sequence.
An entry can be opened into an individual record, where a PDF is available as the declassified artifact attached to the listing.
The PDFs carry internal document identifiers and appear as scans rather than typeset web text.
In this act of navigation, the administrative fact that can be certified is hosting and availability: the CIA itself provides a dedicated collection endpoint for these records.
The session ends with the same constraint it began with: this page is an index and container, not a complete explanation of what happened or what worked.[1]
This page can certify provenance and containment, but it does not certify outcomes, target accuracy, or who managed each phase of the work; the next question is what the documents inside the container actually claim.
The document STAR GATE PROJECT: AN OVERVIEW and its stated activity areas
One declassified overview document describes STAR GATE activity in three areas: foreign assessment, external research, and in-house investigations.[2]
This certification is narrow because the overview, as provided here, stabilizes only that these areas are named inside the program description.
The record subset does not lock down how tasks were assigned inside each area, or how results were checked, so the next question shifts to what the training documents define as the method.
The CRV training manuals: coordinate-based ‘perceiving’ and a six-stage structure
A CIA-hosted CRV manual defines CRV as a process intended to ‘perceive’ information about a site remote in location and or time, given only geographic coordinates.[3]
The same training material describes training as divided into stages, listing six stages with each stage increasing scope or ability.[4]
These statements can certify a procedural claim in the archive, but they do not certify that the procedure produced verified intelligence about any specific facility.
Once the method is defined in this coordinate-based way, the next open problem is lineage: who the documents name as shaping the technique inside the training record.
Ingo Swann in the training record: a named lineage claim, not an operational proof
A CIA-hosted CRV training document states that Ingo Swann pioneered development of a technique referred to as Coordinate Remote Viewing in the 1960s.[5]
This can certify only that the training record preserves a lineage statement, including a named individual and a decade reference.
The same subset does not certify Swann’s operational role, contractual status, or direct connection to any specific target tasking described elsewhere in the archive.
The next unresolved step is how the broader program record framed trainability and possible applications, without converting that framing into success.
The GRILL FLAME report: trainability language and qualified intelligence application framing
A declassified GRILL FLAME report states that remote viewing ability can be improved by appropriate training procedures.[3]
The same report discusses potential intelligence applications, and the documentary framing is qualified rather than a certified operational result.
This preserves an internal language of potential and procedure, but it does not stabilize what was validated, what was rejected, or what was acted on.
With that limitation in view, the next question is what a concrete example looks like when the archive describes an experiment-style target.
URDF-3: a maps-based experiment record tied to a location description near Semipalatinsk
A CIA-hosted analysis of a remote-viewing experiment labeled URDF-3 describes an experiment using maps and a target location described as a scientific military complex west-southwest of Semipalatinsk.[6]
This can certify that at least one artifact in the collection uses a map-based setup and a geographically anchored target description.
It does not, by itself, certify that anyone successfully saw a base, or that the description was matched to independent confirmation within the same provided subset.
The next unresolved question is how the program’s research record was assessed when it was put under formal evaluation.
AN EVALUATION OF THE REMOTE VIEWING PROGRAM: external reviewers and a documented dispute over strength
A declassified CIA report titled AN EVALUATION OF THE REMOTE VIEWING PROGRAM documents that Jessica Utts and Raymond Hyman were involved in reviewing the program’s research.[7]
Across the briefed record, this evaluation layer is where the archive preserves friction: training and protocol documents use capability and potential language, while evaluation materials emphasize limitations and disputation over evidentiary strength.
The subset provided here does not stabilize a single reconciled conclusion, and it does not supply the full chain of tasking, feedback, and corroboration for specific Soviet targets.
The next question becomes practical and archival: where else these evaluation materials can be accessed, and how navigation aids differ from evidence.
Secondary access points: a curated evaluation package and a navigation hub
A curated declassified package is hosted by the National Security Archive as a secondary access point to evaluation materials.[8]
A separate FAS/IRP hub exists as a navigation cross-reference for STARGATE code-name orientation, and it is framed here as a locating aid rather than evidentiary substitution.[9]
These access points can help a reader find documents, but they do not resolve missing administrative files or provide verification artifacts absent from the subset.
What remains next is the same gap that keeps reappearing: which documents, if any, directly join target tasking to post-session feedback and independent corroboration.
Where the archive can still certify, and where it stops
The CIA-hosted STARGATE collection can certify that a declassified record set exists and that it includes overviews, training manuals, experiment analyses, and evaluation documents.
Within that set, the overview document can certify three activity areas, and the CRV manuals can certify a coordinate-based process framed as ‘perceiving’ and taught through six stages.
It can also certify that at least one experiment artifact, URDF-3, describes a maps-based target location WSW of Semipalatinsk as a scientific military complex.
What it cannot close in this subset is the Spanish claim that people were trained to see Russian bases at a distance as a verified outcome, because tasking sheets, post-session feedback, and independent corroboration are not present here.
It also cannot stabilize chain-of-command or funding authority transitions across multiple code names from the provided materials alone.[1]
FAQs (Decoded)
Did the CIA publish a dedicated declassified STARGATE collection?
Yes. The record set used here is bounded by a dedicated STARGATE collection hosted in the CIA FOIA Electronic Reading Room. Source: CIA, FOIA Electronic Reading Room STARGATE collection.
What activity areas does the overview document list?
The overview document lists foreign assessment, external research, and in-house investigations as activity areas. Source: CIA, STAR GATE PROJECT: AN OVERVIEW declassified document.
How do the training manuals define CRV?
The manuals define CRV as a coordinate-based process intended to ‘perceive’ information about a site remote in location and or time, given only geographic coordinates. Source: CIA, CRV training manuals.
Does the provided record certify verified viewing of specific Soviet or Russian bases?
No. In this subset, the documents support attempts, protocols, and an example of a target description, but they do not provide tasking plus feedback plus independent corroboration for specific facilities. Source: CIA, STARGATE declassified documents.
Who is documented as external reviewers in the evaluation report?
The evaluation report documents Jessica Utts and Raymond Hyman as involved in reviewing the program’s research. Source: CIA, AN EVALUATION OF THE REMOTE VIEWING PROGRAM declassified report.
Why include the National Security Archive and FAS/IRP links at all?
They are used here only as secondary access and navigation aids that point back toward the declassified document trail, not as replacements for CIA-hosted records. Source: National Security Archive, curated declassified package; FAS/IRP, STARGATE navigation hub.
For more structured record sets within this category, visit our forbidden science archive. Additional fringe research files narrow routing to nonstandard research documentation. Related coverage continues in our stargate remote viewing files and parallel clairvoyance evidence research files.
Sources Consulted
- CIA, FOIA Electronic Reading Room STARGATE collection page. cia.gov, accessed 2025-02-17
- CIA, STAR GATE PROJECT: AN OVERVIEW declassified PDF. cia.gov, accessed 2025-02-10
- CIA, CRV stages manual declassified PDF. cia.gov, accessed 2025-02-03
- CIA, CRV training manual describing staged training declassified PDF. cia.gov, accessed 2025-01-27
- CIA, CRV theory and dynamics training document declassified PDF. cia.gov, accessed 2025-01-20
- CIA, URDF-3 experiment analysis declassified PDF. cia.gov, accessed 2025-01-13
- CIA, evaluation report declassified PDF. cia.gov, accessed 2025-01-06
- National Security Archive, curated declassified package PDF. nsarchive2.gwu.edu, accessed 2024-12-30
- FAS/IRP, STARGATE document hub. irp.fas.org, accessed 2024-12-23
A Living Archive
This project is never complete. History is a fluid signal, often distorted by those who record it. We are constantly updating these files as new information is declassified or discovered.
