Protocol & source record Aug 31, 2026
Source standard
Evidence ledger / revision 03

The record,
without the mythology.

This workspace follows procedures that appear in released program material while keeping the documents’ claims separate from experimental confirmation and operational usefulness.

documented procedure source claim app control disputed / unestablished
Released training structure

What “staged capture” means here

Historical description → exact app adaptation

I

First response

Released description: Rapid response to the cue, ideogram, broad gestalt, and early analytical-overlay control.

Signal Room implementation

First-mark notes, broad gestalt, then a raw fragment stream.

II

Sensory contact

Released description: Colors, sounds, textures, temperatures, tastes, smells, and other basic sensory qualities, often described as clusters.

Signal Room implementation

Dedicated sensory fields that keep qualities separate from object names.

III

Dimension & sketch

Released description: Dimensional qualities, motion, perspective, spatial relationships, and site sketching.

Signal Room implementation

Dimensionals, movement, spatial description, and a locked canvas sketch.

IV

Matrix / specific elements

Released description: A structured matrix for increasingly specific sensory, dimensional, aesthetic, emotional, and conceptual information while controlling AOL.

Signal Room implementation

Concept/function and impact fields, followed by a visibly separate AOL parking lot.

V–VI

Interrogate & model

Released description: Later training described interrogating perceptions and constructing three-dimensional models of major site characteristics.

Signal Room implementation

Not simulated. Signal Room stops at Stage IV-derived capture rather than inventing advanced certification.

Training boundary: the released precis describes progressive instruction over months, monitored sessions, restrictive reporting formats, and advancement by demonstrated competence. A self-guided web notebook can reproduce ordering and record controls; it cannot honestly confer the original training status.

Documented

What the programs actually did

  • Maintained controlled target pools and selected targets randomly.
  • Withheld target identity from the viewer; some experiments also blinded the monitor.
  • Captured verbal impressions and sketches before feedback.
  • Used stage structure to move from broad gestalt toward sensory and spatial detail.
  • Used blind ranking or comparison methods in parts of the research record.
Not established by release

What declassification does not prove

  • A released document is evidence that a claim or program existed—not that the CIA validated every claim.
  • The Gateway paper’s theoretical model is an Army officer’s assessment, not a controlled demonstration of its physics.
  • No public Focus 10 / 12 / 15 / 21 frequency map appears in that assessment.
  • The 1995 review found disagreement over laboratory evidence and limited operational intelligence value.
  • No app-generated percentage can turn subjective overlap into objective proof.
One canonical workflow

From unknown target to closed record

01—04
01Task

Random draw from the least-used eligible target tier. Only an opaque cue enters the room.

→
02Capture

Preparation is logged. Raw sensory fragments stay separate from interpretation and confidence.

→
03Judge

The immutable transcript is compared against one target packet and three randomized decoys.

→
04Reflect

The actual assignment is revealed; correspondences, contradictions, and integrity problems are recorded.

Consciousness preparation

The described Gateway sequence

§28–30

These steps are adapted as attention and state-preparation practices. Language about energy, hemispheric coherence, nonphysical perception, and expanded states is presented as the report’s model—not settled mechanism.

  1. 01
    Reduce external load

    Settle the room, body, and immediate obligations before collecting impressions.

    Protocol control
  2. 02
    Energy conversion box

    Use the document’s visualization to set aside concerns. Treat it as an attentional exercise, not a demonstrated energy mechanism.

    Gateway §28
  3. 03
    Resonant tuning

    Use a sustained comfortable hum and notice vibration and breathing without straining.

    Gateway §28
  4. 04
    Affirmation

    State an intention to perceive carefully, remain discerning, and record without forcing an answer.

    Gateway §28
  5. 05
    Progressive relaxation

    Let the body approach sleep while attention stays present—the state Gateway labels Focus 10.

    Gateway §§29–30
  6. 06
    Open, then collect

    Shift from preparation to brief raw descriptors before interpretation begins.

    CRV session discipline
Working hypothesisYour conceptual note, preserved as a testable model

Perception as translation,
not a camera feed.

The model is that an uncertain or nonordinary impression—if anything is being acquired—is rendered through the viewer’s existing sensory associations, memory, and symbolic vocabulary. “Stone” may be a translation of density, age, mineral texture, enclosure, or something else nearby in the viewer’s internal network.

This predicts that forced narrative will add error, that primitive descriptors should outperform early naming, and that an individual translation dictionary may emerge only across many blinded trials.

Unknown inputunverified source→ Personal translationmemory · senses · symbols→ Conscious renderingfragments · imagery · feeling→ Blind feedbacktest the mapping

Boundary: the spiritual interpretation of that unknown input can coexist with the practice, but the ledger measures only what was recorded before feedback and how it compared afterward.

Primary record + critical context

Source ledger

Open the original record, not a social-media summary.

1983
U.S. Army / INSCOMAnalysis and Assessment of Gateway Process

Primary description of the Gateway sequence, Hemi-Sync claims, Focus states, and proposed consciousness model.

Primary document · claims are not validationCIA-RDP96-00788R001700210016-5
↗ 1984
U.S. Army / INSCOMINSCOM Center Lane Project

Documents controlled target pools, random selection, withheld feedback, raw-perception guidance, and staged CRV training.

Primary operational recordCIA-RDP96-00788R001500090010-7
↗ c. 1980s
U.S. Army / STARGATE collectionCoordinate Remote Viewing — Working Paper

The detailed CRV training paper used here to distinguish Stage I first response, Stage II sensory data, Stage III dimensional/sketch work, Stage IV matrix work, and analytical overlay.

Primary training document · theory language retained as source claimCIA-RDP96-00788R001000400001-7
↗ c. 1980s
SRI / STARGATE collectionTraining Precis for Coordinate Remote Viewing

Summarizes the staged curriculum, restrictive reporting format, controlled room, limited interviewer patter, progressive training, and site classes.

Primary training summaryCIA-RDP96-00789R001800500001-6
↗ 1985
STARGATE collectionRemote Viewing Training Session RV-018

A released session packet showing cue, timing, stage reached, transcript/sketch material, target, and evaluation.

Primary session recordCIA-RDP96-00789R001500060001-9
↗ 1975
SRI research reportPerceptual Augmentation Techniques — Part Two

Describes early long-distance and natural-target experiments, controls, transcripts, and the investigators’ interpretations.

Primary research report · disputed interpretationCIA-RDP96-00791R000300030003-0
↗ 1970s
SRI research recordRemote Viewing of Natural Targets

Describes an outbound experimenter drawing a target from a pool while the viewer and in-room experimenter remain blind, followed by independent blind judging.

Primary experimental record · disputed interpretationCIA-RDP81B00401R002600010013-2
↗ 1995
American Institutes for Research / CIA reviewAn Evaluation of Remote Viewing: Research and Applications

The essential counterweight: reviewers disagreed about laboratory interpretation, while the operational assessment found limited intelligence value.

Independent program evaluationCIA-RDP96-00791R000200180006-4
↗ 2023
Psychological ResearchBinaural beats to entrain the brain? A systematic review of EEG studies

Modern context for the audio claims: heterogeneous methods and inconsistent EEG entrainment findings.

Peer-reviewed systematic reviewPMID 37205669
↗ Current method
Center for Open Science / OSFRegistrations & Preregistrations

Modern research-practice basis for freezing hypotheses, variables, analysis, exclusions, and decision rules before viewing outcomes.

Methodological standard · not a remote-viewing sourceOSF support guide
↗
Blinding terminology

Self-managed is self-blind—not automatically double-blind.

The software can randomize and conceal the assignment, lock the transcript, hide the pool during unresolved work, and create a blind judging set. If you authored the pool, you still possess prior knowledge of its contents. Literal double-blind work requires a separate tasker and a viewer/monitor who do not know the selected target.