Subscribe to Our
War In Heaven
Area 51
Roswell UFO Crash
Martin Luther King
Adolf Hitler
JFK Assassination
The Phoenix Lights
Aliens on Iapetus!
Cydonia, Mars
9/11 Project
Time-Cross Project
Atlantis (NEW!
Revised 2016)
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

Multiple Universes RV Project Session Download Page

Overview:These sessions were done in May 2009, and they describe a paragliding event that occurred in Turin, Italy during June 2009. Please click on the yellow banner below to see the full target specification. This uses remote viewing to accurately predict a future event.

"Clarity scores" follow the session comments below, beginning with a "C" followed by a number. Clarity scores evaluate the sessions with respect to the known and verifiable characteristics of the target. Clarity scores can range from 0 to 3, and they convey the following meaning:

3: The known and verifiable target aspects are described exceptionally well with few, minor, or no decoding errors.
2: The known and verifiable target aspects are described well. There may be some notable decoding errors.
1: The known and verifiable target aspects are described minimally. There may also be significant decoding errors.
0: The known and verifiable target aspects are described very poorly or not at all.

Decoding errors occur when a remote viewer perceives something that is real at the target, but the description of this perception is not entirely correct. Again, the perception is real, but the description of it is only partially accurate. For example, if someone describes a city with tall skyscrapers as a mountain range, that is a decoding error. The perception is correct in terms of the topology, but the characterization of it as a mountain range is incorrect. Also, if a person places trees or animals in a barren natural landscape, that is a decoding error. The perception of a natural landscape is correct, but the conscious mind added things that it thought would be normal for a natural landscape. Experienced remote viewers are trained to minimize decoding errors, and analysts are trained to discount decoding errors that would be more common with certain types of targets.

Some of the clarity scores are followed by a "UEP" marker, which stands for "Unique Element Portrayal." A Unique Element Portrayal indicator, or UEP marker, signifies that the session contains at least one description that unambiguously describes a unique element in the target. A unique target element is some target component that is not a normal element in other targets. For example, flat land would not be a unique target element since many targets are located on flat land. However, something much more specific with, say, a unique shape, purpose, or energy would be a possible unique target element. Unique Element Portrayals often involve highly specific sketches of some element of the target, although a highly specific verbal description could also qualify. If the session does contain at least one Unique Element Portrayal, then a UEP marker is appended to the clarity score. Sessions with clarity scores of 3 that are also appended with UEP markers are normally considered unambiguous evidence of profound remote viewing, and such sessions should normally satisfy the judging concerns of all reasonable people as being accurate descriptions of the given target.

Tasker for this experiment: Glenn Wheaton

Experimental Design Architect and Analyst: Courtney Brown

Date target was assigned: 14 July 2009

Nature of the target: An event that occurs during June 2009

Number of sessions conducted in May and posted as of 1 June 2009: 8

This Experiment's Target (Click)

Viewer Name
Sessions done in May describing a June event
CRV Sessions: Encrypted Decrypted Comments
Daz Smith Download Download This session develops some excellent descriptions of the target. Especially note the sketch on page 6 (viewer numbering) in which there is a body of water in between two shores with structures. Also note on page 8 (viewer numbering) there are two flying objects descending over the water area that separates the structures on both shores. C3:UEP
Romferd Download Download This solid session correctly describes the landing area for the paragliding event as an object that has rectangular and circular components and which is lying horizontally on a flat surface (page 9, viewer numbering). Note (from the actual target) that the landing surface is a rectangular floating thin surface with circular designs on it. Also, (again, page 9, viewer numbering) the surface of the object is described as "wavy," and it is "cheaply built," not of "durable design." The viewer also describes an outside event in a bright and warm enviroment in which there are spectators. Also note on page 4 (viewer numbering) that the viewer correctly perceives that the target location has a dark flat bottom surface with some objects suspended above the surface. C2
HRVG Sessions:
Viewer 212 Download Download The first few pages of this session are fine, with perceptions of spectators watching an event with flying objects near water. But the later parts of the session tend to develop interpretation that differs from actual target characteristics. C1
Debra Download Download The sketch on page 11 (pdf numbering) does correctly describe a scene with water in the center surrounded by mountains. Other parts of the session tend to develop interpretation that differs from actual target characteristics. C1
Maria Download Download By the end of the session, the viewer does correctly describe the target as containing central water surrounded by structures and mountains. The paragliders are incorrectly perceived as "gaseous," but the general idea of something moving over the water is correct. C1
Anne Download Download The session mixes clear target contact with interpretation that differs from actual target characteristics. The viewer does perceive that the target is in Europe, and that there are spectators watching an event. The viewer also correctly perceives that the target involves subjects in motion such that they impact a surface, although the viewer's interpretation of this differs from actual target characteristics. C1
Sita Download Download This session starts out very strong, with a near perfect sketch of a paraglider on page 1. Page 3 (viewer numbering) contains a sketch that similarly captures the idea of the body posture of a person hanging from a parachute. Later parts of the session develop interpretation that differs from actual target characteristics. C1
Michele Download Download This is a new viewer still in training. The viewer had some interesting comments to say about the interpretation of this session. Regarding page 6 (pdf numbering), the viewer writes "stamping out-punch out." This viewer is an ex-gymnast, and "punch out" is a phrase that is used to designate the part of an aerial movement that puts you in the proper position to land. C1


This is a challenging target since it involves relatively small objects (paragligers) descending onto a small platform on water. Some of the viewers for this target tried to make more of the target than what it was, so some interpretive content appears in some of the sessions. Viewers normally try to avoid interpretive comments, but sometimes it happens anyway to the best of viewers when a viewer tries to push the session in search of "something more." Analysts of remote-viewing data normally strip interpretive comments from the remote-viewing data as part of the analysis process. Nonetheless, many of the raw (non-interpretive) descriptions of the target are very good in these sessions.