Subscribe to Our
Moses: Beyond Exodus
War In Heaven
Area 51
Roswell UFO Crash
Adolf Hitler
JFK Assassination
The Phoenix Lights
Aliens on Iapetus!
Cydonia, Mars
9/11 Project
Time-Cross Project
Atlantis (NEW!
Revised 2016)
Martin Luther King
JFK Afterlife
Great Giza Pyramid
Multiple Universes
Climate Change:
Exploding Planet
Base on Mars
The Young Masters
CRV Instruction
CRV History and Resources
Eight Martinis
(Magazine published
by Daz Smith)
Selected Interviews
Other Resources
(Science Channel)
Farsight VLOG
Farsight Chronicles
(Comic by Vic Guiza)
Transistence (Comic and video web series
by Courtney Brown)
Corporate Structure
Donate to The Farsight Interview
Subscribe to the Farsight Newsletter

Possible Earthquake Event for Los Angeles Involving
Los Angeles International Airport (LAX), 2008
(Prediction posted 27 June 2008)

Los Angeles International Airport

Ongoing Feedback Relating to the Los Angeles Seismic Event Experiment:
(Updated 4 August 2008)

On Tuesday, 29 July 2008, there was a 5.4-5.8 magnitude earthquake in Los Angeles, a significant and unusual seismic event by any measure. It is possible that this is the seismic event described and predicted in the remote-viewing experiment described below. This event exactly matches the predicted timing of the seismic event in the Los Angeles area. Nonetheless, it would be a mistake to rush to any conclusions. The experimental protocols involved in this experiment have an ending window of 1 December 2008 for this event. We need to keep this window open with respect to evaluating the accuracy of the remote-viewing data in order to maintain the integrity of the experiment. There are only two ways to fully evaluate the remote-viewing data for this experiment. The first is to wait until 1 December 2008, and the other is to witness a seismic event in the Los Angeles area that so closely matches the descriptions found in the remote-viewing data as to make the need to wait further a moot point.

At face value, the remote-viewing data seem to suggest a Los Angeles seismic event that is of significantly greater consequence than the one that hit on 29 July 2008.  If another (and larger) seismic event does not occur by 1 December 2008, then we can conclude that the remote-viewing data were sufficiently accurate to predict an earthquake and its timing, but the data and/or the interpretation of the data exaggerated the magnitude of the earthquake. On the other hand, if another seismic event of larger magnitude than the one observed on 29 July 2008 does occur by 1 December 2008, then we can conclude that the remote-viewing data accurately described the event and its magnitude, but the analysis of the data may have been less accurate with respect to the timing of the event. For now, we need to maintain a wait and see attitude.  There is no way to evaluate this experiment further until we complete the experiment's time window. Regardless of what happens, we will learn a great deal through this experiment as we continue to wait until December 1st.

The Original Prediction:(Posted 27 June 2008)

Before reading the information below, everyone should understand that all remote-viewing data are speculative until they are verified. The information below describes an attempt to understand data coming from a remote-viewing experiment involving the near future. As with all scientific experiments, it is possible that they do not work as expected. That is the nature of science, and there is no way to avoid it. That is the bad news. The good news is that we should soon know the outcome of the experiment, and we are certain to learn from it.

While targeting various geographical locations for our Climate Project, the decision was made to look at a near-term future target that was on the West Coast of the U.S. in late 2008. It was hoped that such a target would serve as a baseline to compare with other targets in the more distant future. The decision was made to target Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) on 1 December 2008. LAX is a huge facility that can easily be spotted using Google Earth, and the target would normally be relatively straightforward for remote viewers to perceive due to its unique characteristics.

When the remote-viewing sessions were completed in June 2008, we found that the remote-viewing sessions portrayed a Los Angeles scene that was totally unexpected. Indeed, the remote-viewing data suggest that Los Angeles will experience a significant seismic event prior to 1 December 2008, possibly destroying the airport.

One approach to analyzing such data is to have the analysis guided by the viewer's results who recently performed best across a variety of known targets. In this case, Darryl Smith submitted near perfect sessions across all four of his Climate Project targets with 1 June 2008 target times. Since there were six viewers across two methodologies (CRV and HRVG) who viewed the LAX target, the analysis proceeds by first examining the results of Darryl Smith, and then asking which viewers submitted sessions that parallel Smith's data. This approach is one form of "consensus analysis," and it can often be successful if executed carefully.


Essentially, for Target 25, Darryl Smith's data suggest the aftermath of what appears to be an earthquake. There is no sign of the airport in the data, and taken at face value, the data may suggest that the airport sinks into the sea. There is currently no way to know if this is an exaggeration of what may or may not actually happen, of course. Of the remaining sessions, Dick Allgire's session most closely supports this same theme. Pat Sage's data also support the idea of faulting vertical movement of land, and the terrain seems so destroyed that it resembles natural features. Sita Seery's session seems to support the idea of cracking or breaking base surfaces leading to profound loss. The data from Maria Naulty and Viewer 423 are more difficult to interpret, although these data stand out in that they do not reflect a city environment of any sort. Sometimes viewers have difficulty viewing profoundly disturbing targets, and this may be what happened in these two cases. Thus, we have two highly explicit sessions that appear correspondent with a significant seismic event involving the LAX area of Los Angeles, two sessions that are supportive of this theme, and two sessions that appear to be misses.

The next step is to re-target the Los Angeles International Airport with the same viewers, but using a different target time. In this case the decision was made to target LAX at the moment of greatest activity in changing the fundamental character of this target from the way it exists on 19 June 2008 to the way it exists on 1 December 2008. The hope was that such a target specification would allow us to see what apparently destroys LAX. This new tasking is accomplished as Target 27.

With Target 27, Darryl Smith does an excellent job describing some prominent structures of LAX, especially focusing on the repeated dome topology. This establishes that the airport still exists at the time of the event, and this suggests that the event itself may destroy the airport. But Darryl's data do not capture the activity involved in the event itself. On the other hand, the Dick Allgire's session clearly contains a great deal of data that suggest a massive seismic event, including people holding fabric rings that might be used to catch people leaping from buildings. His data also contain elements that suggest that some structures collapse completely. Sita Seery's data support the idea of structures falling on people. Pat Sage's data suggest the aftermath of a disaster. Viewer 423's data support the idea of masses of people immobilized on the base surface between structures, as one would expect during a major seismic event in which people did not know where to go for safety. Maria Naulty's data are more difficult to interpret, but they do capture the idea of mountains in the background, structures in the foreground, and a beach, all appropriate for Los Angeles.

In combination, these sessions seem to support the hypothesis of a significant seismic event in Los Angeles sometime before 1 December 2008. While other types of phenomena could conceivably produce the remote-viewing results obtained by the viewers, such as a major terrorist event involving a nuclear device or a huge explosion from some other cause, it is probably logical to argue that seismic activity is the more likely causative agent. These remote-viewing data do not contain elements that suggest explosions. But they do contain elements that suggest structures falling down and the ground shifting. Moreover, Los Angeles is well-known to be an area susceptible to seismic events both large and small, and these remote-viewing data appear consistent with such a class of events. Thus, when identifying a cause of change, we can speak only probabilistically. But the probabilities seem to aim in the direction of a seismic event.

If It Happens

When? Assuming that the remote-viewing data are correct (and again, we are assuming it in order to discuss it, not certifying it), then the 1 December 2008 data suggest that the seismic event occurs significantly prior to that date. Indeed, it appears that by 1 December 2008, the scene is relatively calm, with police carefully marking dangerous areas to walk. This would suggest that the earthquake happens a few months prior to that date, possibly as early as the summer months. Here is a possible probability approximation for this event given these data:

Seismic Event Probability LAX

How bad? Remote-viewing data are not always accurate. Sometimes viewers exaggerate when they perceive bad things. On the other hand, sometimes viewers do just the opposite and downplay what appears to be a tragedy. On the surface, these data in combination suggest a huge seismic event that may destroy much of Los Angeles. Indeed, these data suggest that some of the area around Los Angeles may sink into the sea. In some areas near LAX, that would be an approximate 36 meter drop. This would be extraordinary if it actually did happen. Most major seismic events involve plate movements of only one or two meters, often in a lateral direction. Thus, it is not easy to interpret these data directly. We will simply have to wait to see if there even is a seismic event at all, and if there is, we will then see how bad it is and know how to evaluate the remote-viewing data. Remember, this is still a scientific experiment, not a pronouncement of certainty. We could be wrong and the seismic event may not even happen. If a major seismic event does not happen in the Los Angeles area prior to 1 December 2008, then we will use this information to try to better understand the limits of the remote-viewing phenomenon as we currently understand it.

Below are links for the target definition files as well as for all sessions for Targets 25 and 27. Both targets involve the Los Angeles International Airport, from June to December 2008. Target 25 addresses LAX on 1 December 2008, whereas Target 27 addresses LAX at the moment of greatest activity in changing the fundamental character of this target from the way it exists on 19 June 2008 to the way it exists on 1 December 2008.

Target 25: LAX, 1 December 2008, 12 noon target local time

CRV Sessions

HRVG Sessions

Target 27: LAX, The moment of greatest activity in changing the fundamental character of this target from the way it exists on 19 June 2008 to the way it exists on 1 December 2008.

CRV Sessions

HRVG Sessions