I wonder what the actual conclusion was, besides that it wasnt of use.
This is an interesting article, thanks; but you do have to wonder why those who where good at doing this refused? It would be a much more sound judgement if they took the sorts of people the Russians and the Americans did, who seemed to have some sort of track record.
The whole conclusion is up in the air until you find unusually consistent people to debunk or otherwise.
Im glad they didnt use those people for the experiment. The biggest show-offs are probably the most deluded ones. On another site they compared it with idols. The ones who sign up for idols and brag about being the best singers, are often the worst during auditions.
But as u say, ones with a track record would be better. The bbc article only says that they looked at psychics who advertised on the internet.
Btw they have a tv show in my country (netherlands)now, which is idols for paranormal people. Last week they did the auditions with 100 self-proclaimed paranormal people and selected 15 of them. Some of them really seemed to sense things.
In defense matters there is always the possibility that something is being hidden. The same does not apply in academic research. After more than a century investigating paranormal phenomena, nothing has been found of real interest.
Most positive results where obtained by fraud or by faulty procedures.
Recently PEAR was closed after more than 20 years and 10 million dollars spent without sensible results.
The mod files (pdf):
Response to British MOD remote viewing experiments
You may be interested in reading Paul H. Smith's response to the British MOD study and the media representation of that study, "http://rviewer.com" [Broken]".
Paul H. Smith, a retired Army intelligence officer and military remote viewer, is president of the http://irva.org" [Broken].
~ Shelia M
Separate names with a comma.