Farsight's Climate Project
A Global Climate Change Remote-Viewing Study
Multiple Realities, Timelines, and Events
Introduction: We at The Farsight Institute
are currently engaged in a fascinating study using remote viewing to study climate
and planetary change between the 1 June 2008 and 1 June 2013. The initial results appear dramatic, but our "Early Update" published February 2013 (see below) suggests something much more limited. Our web site visitors are reminded that this is research, not certitude. Remember what Albert Einstein once said, "If we knew what we were doing, it wouldn't be called research, would it?" Web site visitors are encouraged to examine all of our results carefully, and learn with us as we complete this experiment in mid-2013. We will not fully understand these remote-viewing data until the experiment is completed at that time. Importantly, this experiment has no connection with the Mayan Calendar hysteria related to 21 December 2012. This is an experiment that ends on 1 June 2013, and the data will be fully evaluated only after that date. Also, note that these analyses are the product of the Chief Investigator for this project, Courtney Brown. Other investigators using other methods of analyses may analyze these data and come to different conclusions. HRVG and CRV methods of analysis in particular tend to be more nuanced than some of the analyses presented below.
Special Note #1: The Internet is a wild place, and we cannot stop some people from making false statements regarding our experiments. For this experiment, everyone should take special note that we are not "predicting" global catastrophe, and truthfully, we are not "predicting" anything. Indeed, as can be seen from our "Early Update" below that was published in mid-February 2013, we are saying just the opposite. Our "Climate Project" is a public experiment in remote viewing, and whenever one invites the public to watch an experiment, one runs the risk that some members of the public will misunderstand what is being done. But the benefits to our society of educating the public by conducting public experiments such as this one are far greater than the costs of occasional misunderstanding. We are waiting until 1 June 2013 to close our experiment. At that point, we will understand more about the remote-viewing process. We will also likely have more questions than answers, which is what research is all about.
Special Note #2:Daz Smith is keeping track of news stories that suggest possible feedback for this project. You can follow this effort on his climate change web site: www.climatechange2013.com.
Here (and immediately below) is an update of this project for 16 February 2013 relating to the meteor and asteroid events of mid-February 2013.
Below is the original report.
Principal Investigator: Courtney Brown
Remote Viewers: HRVG viewers led by Glenn Wheaton and CRV viewers led by Lyn Buchanan.
This project describes change between the years 2008 and 2013 across nine geographical locations with a global spread. The locations are
Fort Jesus, Mombasa Kenya
Sydney Opera House, Sydney, Australia
Mount Kilimanjaro, Tanzania
United States Congress Building, Washington, D.C.
Malé International Airport, Malé, Maldives
KITV Building, Honolulu, Hawaii
The Vehicle Assembly Building at Launch Complex 39, Kennedy Space Center, Merritt Island, Florida
Key West, Florida
In general, these remote-viewing data suggest the following types of physical changes across many of the above geographical locations by mid-2013:
Impacts from what appear to be large meteors leading to tsunamis and possible volcanism
Extensive and forceful flooding of coastal areas
Excessive solar radiation
Storms and other severe weather
In terms of the effects of these changes on humans, these data also suggest:
Massive self-organized relocation from coastal areas (refugees)
The breakdown of rescue or other notable governmental functioning
The breakdown of the food supply system
The breakdown of the vehicular transport system
Extensive loss of buildings near coasts
We currently do not know why the remote-viewing data appear to show these things. Web site visitors should remember that this is a public experiment, and we hope the public will learn along with us as we complete the experiment. We are not predicting anything with this experiment. We are only looking at the data and comparing it with what actually happens.
For this project, all targets are assigned two timelines for the date 1 June 2013. This allows us to attempt to use remote viewing to describe alternative futures by specifying characteristics of future timelines. Web site visitors who are not familiar with our research into multiple realities might want to view this introductory video presentation on the subject.
The two 2013 timelines examined in this study are
Timeline A: 1 June 2013, 12 noon target local time, following the timeline in which the leadership of the mainstream global scientific establishment continues to ignore or deny (1) the reality of the remote-viewing phenomenon, and (2) the existence of life not originating from Earth.
Timeline B: 1 June 2013, 12 noon target local time, following the timeline in which by the end of 2009 leaders of the mainstream global scientific establishment publicly recognize (1) the reality of the remote-viewing phenomenon, and (2) the existence of life not originating from Earth.
The results of this study do suggest that there is a difference between the two timelines. These data suggest that the impact of planetary change is less severe for Timeline B as compared with Timeline A. This suggests that having the mainstream scientific community openly acknowledge the reality of remote viewing and life (even microbial) not originating on Earth may help ameliorate the impact of severe planetary change, perhaps by giving people a greater chance to prepare for the changes. The Key West target was added late in the study to explore a timeline in which the scientific community recognizes the reality of remote viewing and the existence of extraterrestrial life by 2011.
Here are links to some of the data and analyses for the current project.
Predicting any event on a single timeline may involve (1) using remote viewing to examine alternate timelines to check for unusual events, and (2) looking for clues in a given present to see if anything that is currently happening suggests that the future events perceived in the alternate timelines might be possible for our most likely future. Thus, if the above results are indeed correct for the two specified timelines (Timelines A and B), then it is natural to ask if the results are relevant for our most likely future timeline. Since it seems likely that major governments would be aware in advance of most near term global threats, then it also seems likely that they would take some actions that would reflect their anticipation of those events. These actions would likely not be explained to the masses to avoid panic. Below is a list of largely anomalous governmental actions that may indicate an awareness of a near term global threat that is suggested by these remote-viewing data. Again, these are only speculations, none of which "prove" anything. But considered collectively, they are odd.
The U.S. Space Shuttle will launch its last mission in mid-2011. At that time, NASA is entirely abandoning its government-funded manned spaceflight program. Given the investment that the U.S. has made in launching humans into space since the 1960s, this is odd, especially since private efforts to launch humans into space are years away, and currently unproven. It is as if the government does not anticipate being able to launch humans into space in the near future for reasons not currently stated.
The Svalbard Global Seed Vault is now finished and fully stocked. This will allow the world to restart agriculture given a global catastrophe. The United Nations formally inspected the facility, which might seem odd for a Norwegian project. The timing of this project seems like a strange coincidence.
U.S. and global debt. It is as if various governments are not expecting to have to pay back their debts, perhaps anticipating a global economic reset due to reasons not currently stated.
The devaluing of the U.S. dollar seems to be a trend that will stay. Moody, Standard and Poor, and Fitch have announced that they may be devaluing the rating of U.S. Treasury bonds (see NY Times article, 15 March 2010, as well as the editorial on 20 March 2010), and there have been discussions within the United Nations of the International Monetary Fund phasing out its dependency on the U.S. dollar. The governments seem to be acting as if the U.S. dollar will be replaced as the global currency.
Digging, digging is everywhere. The U.S. has no nuclear enemies, yet it is digging huge underground facilities in inhospitable regions difficult for the masses to reach. Why? On the other hand, the Chinese tend to think collectively, and China is digging extraordinary subway complexes under most of its major cities in a crash program that seems odd in terms of timing and scope. See, for example, the NY Times article by Keith Bradsher, 27 March 2009. Subways are, of course, conveniently located underground tunnels, and such tunnels could house millions of people in an emergency. Russia announced in 2011 that it is adding 5,000 new nuclear bomb shelters in Moscow, enabling it to protect all of Moscow's residents. The program is to be rushed so that it is finished in 2012. Why? Russia has no nuclear enemies. Russia's new subway systems have also been placed deeper than needed so that they can be used as deep emergency shelters. Again, why? Why all these preparations, and why the rush?
NASA is now predicting that the Sun may generate unprecedented solar storms for a lengthy period in 2012-13. We cannot accurately predict Earth's normal weather a week in advance, and it is by no means clear how NASA can do this with respect unprecedented weather on the Sun years in advance. They are saying that we are more dependent on vulnerable computer technology now. But we had similar dependencies in 2001 and 1990 when previous 11-year solar cycles hit. What is different about the current cycle? Some might suggest that NASA is acting as if it has some extra information that is not currently stated.
Project Overview for the 1 June 2008 and 1 June 2013 Experiments:
The remote viewers participating in this study have remote viewed various
geographically determined targets during two time periods: 1 June 2008
and 1 June 2013. This five-year gap will allow us to look for planetary
change that may occur over that period. We are also aware that popular
culture views the year 2012 as potentially significant, and some people
may be interested in following our results because of this. (No reason
scientific studies can't be fun!)
From our past research
we know that the future is probabilistic. (See also, the Multiple Universes Project.) If multiple realities emerge from every moment of now, then there is no single future timeline. Thus we hope that by specifying certain timeline conditions with our remote-viewing tasking, it is possible to perceive a specific future (for a specific timeline) correctly.
For this reason, our participating remote viewers have perceived the 2013 targets along two
separate timelines, with each timeline offering the potential for significant
differences in future events given specific possible actions taken by
the mainstream scientific community. Thus, we are hoping to discern what
the future looks like if the mainstream scientific community pursues one
policy as compared with a future in which the mainstream scientific community
pursues a different policy. In the former case, the policy is a continuation
of a current policy. In the latter case, the policy is an alternate policy
that might produce a significantly different future. We are attempting
to learn if the publication of information about two future timelines based on differences in current policies can change the future that our current now evolves into.
The various 2008 targets establish a baseline set of criteria by which
the accuracy of the remote-viewing results in general may be evaluated.
Thus, if the 1 June 2008 targets are perceived accurately by the remote
viewers participating in the study, then it is reasonable to assume that
the results for the future dates for those same targets will be comparably
accurate. Since each geographically determined target is evaluated three
times (once in 2008, and twice in 2013 — once for each future timeline),
there are three times as many total targets as there are geographically
determined targets in this study.
The remote-viewing sessions were conducted prior to the targets
being assigned to those sessions by a truly random process
(explained in "Experiment Details" below as well as in the video presentation that appears at the top of this page) that took place on Wednesday, 4 June 2008. It was not possible for a remote viewer (or anyone else) to know the
identity of a target at the time the target was being remote viewed since the remote-viewing sessions were conducted before 4 June 2008.
Thus, the targets are assigned in the future with respect to when the sessions were done, and the remote-viewing data
describe the future target assignments.
Here is where you can find links to the remote-viewing sessions, all decrypted and organized for easy viewing.
Here is where you can read about how the experiment was conducted. You can also see all of the support files that were used for this experiment.