Book Review:

Remote Viewing Secrets

Joseph McMoneagle

Reviewed: March 28, 2001

Joseph McMoneagle
ISBN: 1-57174-159-3
Hampton Roads Publishing Company Inc.
Copyright 2000
Paper back, 296 pages, suggested price $14.95 US

The whole idea, Eleanor White's paraphrasing:

The whole idea behind remote viewing is that all people are getting 
continuous input from their 5 senses constantly, and their mind is 
constantly interpreting this input.  The theory is that they are ALSO
getting continuous psychic impressions too, but that since so much of
our mind's interpretive work is automatic, we aren't consciously aware
of what came in as psychic impressions and what came in from 5 senses.

From the back cover:

"Remote Viewing" is not simply using psycic ability to obtain
information.  It is using scientific PROTOCOL to develop and extend
that ability, so that ordinary people can learn to do what "psychics" do.

This book teaches you how to teach yourself.

Joseph McMoneagle learned remote viewing in the U.S. Army - he was
Remote Viewer #001 in the Army's STARGATE program - and was awarded
the Legion of Merit for his contribution to various intelligence 
operations.  In Remote Viewing Secrets, the author of Mind Trek 
and The Ultimate Time Machine uses examples, exercises, and anecdotes
to share what he learned and how he learned it, and gives you everything 
you need to begin developing your own abilities.


Well, this reader isn't so sure it's quite that easy to follow this
dense text, fixated on PROTOCOL, and it is NOT cookbook-simple.  However,
there is no question that if you read it diligently from cover to cover
you will know what needs to be done to start into remote viewing.

What I've done in this review is to extract small tidbits which seem 
to point the way to what RV is and what it can and cannot do.

Right up front, the author makes it painfully plain that RV is a PSYCHIC
ability, and although everyone probably has some, the biggest mistake
anyone who undertakes RV can make is to expect you will get a television
quality picture of some remote place on demand.  Remote viewers get a
series of "impressions" which are different features of a place but they
don't usually come together as a single picture at the same instant.

The end result is that the remote viewer assembles these flashes into a 
sketch (often), or a verbal description.  Mistakes are plentiful and even 
the best don't hit it right all the time.  McMoneagle makes it clear that
anyone claiming more than part time success is a fraud.

He also states that researchers generally find that people who totally 
and uncritically accept remote viewing, and those who are absolute
non-believers, both have little chance of developing much if any RV skill.

Here's a quote from page 205 about the occurrence of top notch RV 
ability in the population:

"...the number of world-class remote viewers (world-class in this case
means viewers who can systematically and consistently defy chance results
in controlled studies in a lab) probably comes in at around one half of
one percent of any randomly tested group of people, or about one person
in two hundred."

Don't be discouraged by that - he's talking WORLD CLASS, meaning, RV
talent is much like other skills, and he also says on page 206:

"...just about everyone who's ever walked into a lab and been tested
shows some degree of remote viewing ability."

Notice I've put the word PROTOCOL into upper case.  At least half of
the book hammers on the necessity of strict PROTOCOL for remote viewing
success.  Personally I think the book could be much shorter, since the
need for PROTOCOL could be explained on a couple of pages.

What PROTOCOL means to the remote viewer is that unless you go to truly
religious lengths to eliminate clues from other sources, which he calls
"leakage paths", any successes you have cannot be called remote viewing.

Even body language from someone who knows what the target looks like
disqualifies an RV attempt from being a genuine remote viewing attempt.
Both in research settings or "application" settings (like a remote viewer
working for pay) strict measures are taken to avoid "front loading" the
viewer with clues.

Some general idea of a target of interest may be given, but even the 
composition of the words used to convey the general idea takes lots of 
practice to avoid "violating protocol".

The whole idea behind remote viewing is that all people are getting 
continuous input from their 5 senses constantly, and their mind is 
constantly interpreting this input.  The theory is that they are ALSO
getting continuous psychic impressions too, but that since so much of
our mind's interpretive work is automatic, we aren't consciously aware
of what came in as psychic impressions and what came in from 5 senses.

So to learn to do remote viewing, two things are a must:

1.  Some effort must be made to choose a target the learner does
    NOT know beforehand.  In a learning situation, this is best done
    by having someone ELSE choose a target, often a photo, perhaps
    seal it in an opaque envelope, and hand it to the viewer with
    a non-specific request like "Tell me about this."

2.  Since the problem is that the 5 senses plus the psychic impression
    stream give us TOO MUCH information, a quiet, undisturbed setting
    is essential.  McMoneagle points out this does not mean a pristine
    laboratory acoustic anechoic chamber, but a comfortable setting
    away from disturbances.  (This is my guess but a light dose of
    white noise, fan noise, or softer air condioner noise which is
    constant would seem to be OK given what I've read in this book.)

Then in a relaxed unhurried manner, the viewer jots down what are likely
disjointed "flashes" of what are hopefully the psychic impressions.  At the
viewer's decision, the impressions are sketched or words written, and are
then handed back to the person helping the viewer.  McMoneagle makes the
point that the slightest "Oh, I forgot ..." information after the decision
to hand in the sketch and words invalidates the information.  Like writing 
an exam for a very strict and fussy instructor.

After the papers are handed in, the person who originally chose the target 
will make the comparison and share it with the viewer.

So the technique is akin to "tuning" your perception to that "weak station",
your psychic sense, that everyone apparently has.

The above example is much oversimplified compared with what the research and
application guys do professionally - they have more people involved so that
the person who hands the viewer the envelope has no knowledge of what is

Also, in training, it is necessary to have some way to verify what the 
actual target looks like.

That is a nutshell account of how remote viewing works.

Here are some clips from the text which point out some interesting things
about this field:

Page 27:

"Remote viewing always operates best when it is used for producing 
information on something that is known to exist.  In other words,
one should be assured the target is real."  (Kind of puts a damper
on the 'fishing expeditions' victims would like to run for getting
info on the perps.)

Page 29:

"Therefore, I would say that remote viewing is very good for:

1.  Describing people, events, things, concepts, places, etc.
    which are real.

2.  Producing new leads. No one should be expected to trust
    remote viewing as a stand-alone source of information.

3.  Reconstructing events.  (Filling in the details.)

4.  Making decisions.  (Especially true for yes-no or "binary"

5.  Making projections.  (...remote viewing can produce some
    amazing detail about things that have not yet happened.)"

Page 32:

"Contrary to general opinion, using remote viewing to produce a
location is also not a good idea.  This is probably one of the
least accurate ways of using this capability."

Page 84:

"The viewer's likes and dislikes, preferences for outcome, and 
even a reluctance to deliver bad news alters the way [the viewer]

Page 98:

["CRV" stands for "coordinate remote viewing" which is the practice
of supplying the viewer with geographical coordinates.]

"The premise behind CRV is that all human beings receive and deal
with psychic information on a day-by-day basis.  The problem is, in
order to recognize psychic information, it has to bubble up to 
cognition, where we can attempt to control it."

Page 116:

"When a viewer 'tastes' the target, it is only for a few nanoseconds
and then contact is broken.  The rest of the exercise is internalized
processing ...  It is definitely not a full-scale model or pictogram
laid out in total wonderment before our mind's eye."

"You will have perceptions about the target that are as vague as a
movement you caught with the corner of your eye, the faint hint of
an aroma, or a feeling that puts goose bumps on the backs of your
arms.  It is almost never direct but needs to be interpreted in 
some way."

Page 123:

"Give up on the idea that you will ever have the perfect answer 
or the total answer delivered to you on a platter.  Lose your need
for a conclusion, and automatically trash your assumptions.  Bits
and pieces - these are the skills of a psychic."

Page 134:

[CONDENSED, not a quote]

Possible "irritations" that can interfere with remote viewing:

Hunger, thirst, discomfort, need for bathroom, irritating or 
repetitive noise, anxiety, upset, anger, worry, pets, people 
present, telephones, expected guests soon, incomplete 
writing/drawing materials present, too much ambient light.

Pages 135 - 137:

[Suggested training photos]

- cave
- church steeple
- cliff near water
- domed building
- hillside house
- cliff dwelling ruins
- mountain top
- Mount Rushmore
- pier
- rocky shoreline
- roller coaster
- statue
- strip mine
- tall building
- unique building
- waterfall

Page 152 - 153:

"What if I told you that, in my experience, most remote viewers
who target something in the present usually provide some information
that is pertinent to the target in the past and future?  Well, that's
exactly what happens in MOST cases.  The first target I ever did
worked that way, and I'm sure it won't be the last.  I saw a red
bicycle in a bicycle rack outside the front door of the target
building.  The [person at that location to provide verification]
didn't see one, because there was no bicycle there when it was
being targetted.  But when the remote viewing was completed and 
we all went back to the target for my feedback, someone rode in 
on a red bicycle and parked it in the rack, sort of fulfilling
the prophecy."

Page 153:

"I once did a whole series of targets at SRI-International for 
which no specific time of interest was mentioned.  Every single one
failed.  It was years later that buildings I had described in those
remote-viewing sessions were actually built at those specific target

Eleanor White

ALPHABETICAL Site index page
SUBJECT Site index page