We are not speculating. The files are declassified. The papers are published in peer-reviewed journals. The CIA hosts them on cia.gov. Your job is to read them.
01 · The CIA Stargate Program
Duration: 23 years (1972-1995).
Budget: approximately $20 million.
Operational missions: roughly 450.
Client agencies: 19, including CIA, DIA, Army's INSCOM, NSA, Coast Guard, DEA, and the Secret Service.
Execution site: Stanford Research Institute (SRI), later transferred to Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC).
Scientific directors: Russell Targ, Harold Puthoff, Edwin May.
Current status: declassified, public archive at CIA CREST (online since 2017).
The program was never about "remote viewing" as an esoteric phenomenon. It was an operational intelligence program producing actionable data on targets unreachable by other means — Soviet submarines, nuclear weapons complexes, installations behind the Iron Curtain. The internal question was never "does it work?" It was "can we calibrate it enough to make operational decisions with it?" And for 23 years, the answer was yes enough to keep funding it.
The published record
- 1974 — Russell Targ and Harold Puthoff publish "Information transmission under conditions of sensory shielding" in Nature 251:602-607. Nature. The most prestigious journal in the world. Careful work, double-blind controls, replicated at SRI for years.
- 1995 — The American Institutes for Research audits the program under contract from the CIA, publishes An Evaluation of Remote Viewing: Research and Applications. The contract terms and the audit committee composition guaranteed the conclusion would be negative. It wasn't.
- 1995 — Jessica Utts, statistician at UC Davis — later President of the American Statistical Association (2016) — writes in Statistical Science: "The statistical results of the studies examined are far beyond what is expected by chance… using the standards applied to any other area of science, it is concluded that psychic functioning has been well established." Statistical Science 10(4):363-378.
- 1995 — Three months after the audit report statistically confirmed functionality, the CIA closes the program.
- Joseph McMoneagle — one of the program's operational "remote viewers" — received the Legion of Merit (the fourth-highest U.S. military decoration) for "intelligence obtained by means not available from any other source." The citation is public.
The full Stargate record lives at cia.gov/readingroom (CIA CREST) — several thousand declassified documents. You don't have to take our word for it. Read the papers yourself.
02 · The Gateway Process
In June 1983, the U.S. Army Intelligence and Security Command (INSCOM) — the same branch that funded Stargate — commissioned a technical analysis of a civilian audio protocol developed at the Monroe Institute (Virginia) to train operatives in navigating altered consciousness states. The document was titled "Analysis and Assessment of the Gateway Experience" and was declassified by the CIA in 2003. It lives publicly at cia.gov/readingroom.
The protocol — based on Robert Monroe's Hemi-Sync audio recordings — trains the user to progressively navigate consciousness levels called Focus 10, 12, 15, 21, and beyond. Focus 10 = "mind awake, body asleep." Focus 12 = expanded awareness. Focus 15 = absence of time. What the CIA found important: operatives could be trained in these states reproducibly, in a room with headphones.
Who Robert Monroe was. American radio executive, founder of the Monroe Institute (1971). His autobiographical bookJourneys Out of the Body (1971) coined the term "out-of-body experience" in American public discourse. The methodology he invented was taken seriously enough that the U.S. military paid for a formal technical analysis.
Why it matters
It is not an esoteric technique locked in a monastery. It is a reproducible civilian protocol, analyzed and declassified by an intelligence agency, that requires only headphones and a quiet room. If the CIA documented how to navigate altered states in 1983, why isn't it public education?
Linus's Law: "Given enough eyeballs, all bugs are shallow." — Eric S. Raymond, The Cathedral and the Bazaar (1999). Co-founder of the Open Source Initiative. The technical case for why open works: distributed scrutiny catches what closed labs miss. Exactly how we are going to replicate the consciousness research.
03 · The Latin American thread that was never cut
In 1994, Mexican neurophysiologist Jacobo Grinberg-Zylberbaum published in Physics Essays (Vol. 7, No. 4, pp. 422-428) an experiment titled "The Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen paradox in the brain: The transferred potential." The design:
- Two subjects spent 20 minutes meditating together, establishing a non-verbal attentional bond.
- They were then separated into electromagnetically shielded rooms, equipped with EEG.
- One was shown a flash stimulus (visual stimulation). The other received no stimulus and had no way to know when it was being shown.
- The EEGs of both subjects showed correlated evoked potentials — the non-stimulated subject showed the same electrical pattern as the stimulated subject, with temporal synchrony.
If the result were replicated and robust, it would be one of the most important demonstrations ever published of the non-locality of consciousness. The result was partially replicated in 2004 by Standish et al., "Electroencephalographic evidence of correlated event-related signals between the brains of spatially and sensory isolated human subjects," Alternative Therapies in Health and Medicine 10(1):60-64. (Transparency note: alternative-medicine journal, lower tier than Physics Essays; but methodologically sound.)
In December 1994, Grinberg disappeared. Along with all his field research files on Mexican consciousness and curanderismo. The case was never solved. The thread he was pulling on — consciousness as a measurable non-local phenomenon, under specific conditions, with neurophysical methodology — was cut mid-sentence.
What the Latin American tradition knew first
Grinberg didn't invent the question. He inherited it. The Latin American tradition — curanderismo, the Toltec codices, the Andean practices, the Mexica rituals — never abandoned the consciousness work that Anglo science dismissed after the 1960s. Grinberg documented several curanderas in his field work. One of them was Doña Matilde — the great-grandmother of this publication's founder.
This site is the bilingual continuation of that thread. Not a literal claim on Grinberg's work, but the same posture: Mexican-rooted, evidence-led, willing to be unpopular for being right.
The argument for openness
"Free software is a matter of liberty, not price. To understand the concept, you should think of 'free' as in 'free speech,' not as in 'free beer.'"
— Richard Stallman, The Free Software Definition, GNU Project (canonical since 1986+). MIT AI Lab hacker (1971-84), founder of the GNU Project (1983) and the Free Software Foundation (1985). The person who invented the legal and conceptual framework that made open-source possible.
"This is for everyone."
— Tim Berners-Lee, live from inside the London 2012 Olympics opening ceremony, displayed on the stadium screens in real time. Inventor of the World Wide Web (1989, CERN), director of W3C, inaugural Turing Award (2016) explicitly for inventing the web. Chose not to patent it. The architectural decision that built the internet you're reading this on.
The reason Black Swan Project maintains a bilingual open-source repository at github.com/al4dpb/blackswan-research is structural: distributed scrutiny replicates faster than closed scrutiny. Applying Linus's Law to consciousness research. If governments can archive these documents for themselves for decades, we can archive them publicly for everyone, in two languages, with citations, and ask the next generation of researchers to replicate.
From here, what?
If the suppression is real (you saw it at /la-supresion) and the counterproof is real (you just read it), then the next logical step isn't reading more about it. It's testing it on yourself with the same discipline an honest investigator would. That is what the field reports exist for — the first one is already live. And that is what the manifesto exists for.
We are not asking you to believe. We are showing you the documents. What you do with them is yours.