Brief
Princeton Engineering Anomalies Research (PEAR)
The claims the writer was given for Princeton Engineering Anomalies Research (PEAR), in the order they were given.
1
An increase in effect size at 6 hours local clock time in the analysed anomalous cognition data was found to be due to only 4 data points, 3 of which came from one experiment conducted by Princeton Engineering Anomalies Research, which had a relatively high average effect size of 0.33.
“there is an increase in effect size at 6 h; however, this is due to only 4 data points, 3 of which are from one experiment (PEAR) which had a relatively high average effect size of 0.33”
Remote Viewing Secrets 2013-03-22 ch29:21055-21238 measurement second hand
2
George Hansen raised methodological criticism of the Princeton Engineering Anomalies Research (PEAR) group's data.
“has been subjected to some methodological criticism (Hansen et al., 1992; Bobyns, Y., 1992)”
Remote Viewing Secrets 2013-03-22 ch29:8667-8753 opinion second hand
3
The effect size and associated 95% confidence interval of the Princeton Engineering Anomalies Research (PEAR) data fall within the range reported by other free-response anomalous cognition investigations.
“the effect size and associated 95% confidence interval of the PEAR data fall within the range reported by other free-response investigations”
Remote Viewing Secrets 2013-03-22 ch29:8768-8894 observation first hand
4
The Princeton Engineering Anomalies Research remote viewing experiments were subjected to methodological criticism by George Hansen in 1992.
“The PEAR remote viewing experiments have been subjected to some methodological criticism (Hansen et al, 1992; Dobyns, Y., 1992)”
Remote Viewing Secrets 2013-03-22 ch31:5265-5387 opinion second hand
5
The Princeton Engineering Anomalies Research remote viewing experiments were subjected to methodological criticism by York Dobyns in 1992.
“The PEAR remote viewing experiments have been subjected to some methodological criticism (Hansen et al, 1992; Dobyns, Y., 1992)”
Remote Viewing Secrets 2013-03-22 ch31:5265-5387 opinion second hand
6
S. James P. Spottiswoode included the Princeton Engineering Anomalies Research remote viewing data despite methodological criticism because its observed effect size is comparable to that seen in other laboratories using a similar protocol.
“but they are included here since the effect size observed is comparable to that seen in other laboratories using a similar protocol.”
Remote Viewing Secrets 2013-03-22 ch31:5393-5516 opinion first hand
7
In the Princeton Engineering Anomalies Research (PEAR) study, the overall anomalous cognition (AC) effect size was 0.33, with the Geomagnetic Fluctuations (GMF) correlation close to zero for the whole study but clearly seen in the in-band region of local sidereal time.
“For instance in the large study from PEAR, with an AC effect size of 0.33, the GMF correlation is close to zero for the whole study but clearly seen in the in-band.”
Remote Viewing Secrets 2013-03-22 ch32:131-290 measurement second hand
8
Parapsychologists at institutions such as the Princeton Engineering Anomalies Research (PEAR) Lab and the Stanford Research Institute (SRI) conducted consciousness research studies.
“with all the studies done by parapsychologists at, you know, places like Princeton Parapsychology Lab, SRI, all of this stuff goes through the same thing.”
UFO Witness Reveals CHILLING Daytime Alien Encounter - Peter Khoury - DEBRIEFED ep. 58 2025-10-17 02:09:02.7-02:09:10.6 testimony