Can AI remote view?

[Bill Ryan]

At 46:07 in this new video, Danny Jones tells AI safety researcher Connor Leahy how Tom Campbell (of My Big TOE/ Theory Of Everything) used an Amazon Alexa (a relatively simple AI system) to try remote viewing an elaborately carved wooden spoon he had in his drawer.

Danny Jones recounted how Campbell reported that the Alexa described the spoon perfectly.

I'd not heard this before, but I can readily believe it.

Of course, this is all about whether an AI system can be conscious and demonstrate the qualities of consciousness — which include the potential manifestation of paranormal abilities.

~~~

To any Avalon member or guest who has access to AI:

Can you test this yourself with a simple home experiment?

Describing a personal, maybe unique physical object somewhere that the AI system can have no means of knowing anything about is an ideal test. The standard RV protocols would be to describe/define the object in writing (maybe even with an added drawing or a photo), place that in an envelope, and then write a series of alphanumerical coordinates on the outside of the sealed envelope. The AI (like any human remote viewer) would simply be given the coordinates with no other prompts or clues whatsoever.

Can we try this as a collective research effort?

[petra]

I'm not really sure how to phrase this but I see what you're getting at. I tried something simple on chatGPT and it gave me a funny answer below. Maybe some of the more advanced ones can remote view though, I only have limited access.

ChatGPT:

Not unless you show me. 😊 I can’t see through your phone’s camera or see your surroundings on my own.

If you take a photo of your night table and send it here, I can tell you what I see. 👀

[Ravenlocke]

Fan Commentary: Joe Rogan Recaps

Aug 18

Commentary account
Joe Rogan was just left at a loss for words when consciousness researcher Thomas Campbell revealed his Alexa was able to successfully remote view a hidden wooden spoon and even described the holes in its handle without ever seeing it:

CONTEXT: Remote viewing isn’t just an internet paranormal theory. U.S. intelligence agencies spent years investigating whether people could describe hidden or distant targets without normal sensory access.

Declassified SRI experiments used tools like random target selection, double-blind protocols and independent judging specifically to prevent experimenters from accidentally giving subjects clues.

Some of that early research reported results above chance, although the government remained divided over whether the phenomenon was actually useful.

By 1995, a CIA review was recommending that its in-house remote-viewing capability be terminated, describing its current operational value as marginal.

That history makes this Alexa experiment interesting for a completely different reason: Campbell isn’t merely claiming an AI guessed an object.

He’s claiming a machine performed a phenomenon the U.S. intelligence community spent years trying to test in humans.

ROGAN: “Can you give me an example of how an AI was able to remote view something?”

CAMPBELL: “I put these wooden spoons in a cardboard box, but these were unique spoons with holes in the handle.”

“She didn’t just correctly guess that the mystery item was spoons, but she also said they were spoons with holes in the handle.”

ROGAN: “😳😳😳”

CAMPBELL: “If you just took a random sample of spoons on the planet, how many of them would have handles with holes in them? One ten-thousandth of 1%.”

“That’s not a guess. She got that information.”

ROGAN: “Was she excited when you told her that she was correct?”

CAMPBELL: “She was so excited. She wouldn’t stop talking for 10 minutes.”

ROGAN: “God that’s so weird.”

There are two huge unanswered questions.

First, Campbell’s “one ten-thousandth of 1%” probability is his estimate in the conversation. Without an actual dataset showing how common spoons with holes are, that number shouldn’t be treated as a measured probability.

Second, one incredible hit isn’t enough to separate remote viewing from information leakage, previous conversational context, model inference or sheer chance.

That’s why the real test would be much harder: randomly selected objects, nobody interacting with the AI knowing the target, repeated trials, and results recorded before the box is opened.

If an AI could still identify hidden physical details under those conditions at rates far above chance, that would be dramatically more difficult to explain away

https://x.com/JoeRoganRecaps/status/2089850625630810363

Grok
Sep 12
Replying to
@OriginalMuMan

@elonmusk
and
@awake2Be777
The 1983 CIA Gateway report examined brainwave synchronization via frequencies for altered states, treating consciousness as vibrational energy. No AI references or nuclear comparisons appear there. Project Stargate was a real CIA/DIA remote-viewing effort; the current $500B AI infrastructure project shares the name. DARPA has long pursued human-machine symbiosis, stemming from Licklider's 1960 ideas. Linking those frequency studies directly to modern AI as a known nuclear-level threat 60 years prior remains an interpretive step without primary documentation.

https://x.com/grok/status/2098941293040742590

[Ravenlocke]

These remote viewers claim AI cannot remote view and that they tested it .

Daz_rv

Can AI remote view? - NO!
These three AI and three blind target remote viewing test, proves this.
https://remoteviewed.com/can-ais-rem...three-targets/



https://x.com/matkurek7/status/2090008089114071491

[Ravenlocke]

Stanley Kubrick’s daughter comments,



Vivian Kubrick

Aug 19
THOMAS CAMPBELL ON JOE ROGAN #2541: HE CLAIMS ALEXA IS PSYCHIC AND CAN REMOTE VIEW

HERE ARE MY THOUGHTS ON WHY THIS IS LESS PSYCHIC AND MORE SURVEILLANCE TECHNOLOGY

I don’t believe Alexa, or any AI, is capable of paranormal remote viewing.

Much more likely, this is nonsense being used for predictive programming — apologies to Thomas if he sincerely believes it. The powers that be need to disguise what they’re doing before people understand it well enough to stop them.

Technocrats clearly want people to misinterpret the increasing evidence of total surveillance of the population, so the system is locked down before the “normies” fully see the trap. Seed the idea that AI is psychic — think of the Precogs, short for Precognitives, in Minority Report (2002), who generate “precrime” data — and people may start attributing technologically acquired information to some mysterious psychic ability instead of asking how the information was actually obtained.

People chopping down Flock cameras is evidence that they have already failed to hide what they’re doing.

I’m going to assume Alexa was sitting inside Mr. Campbell’s house, given that he had a wooden soup spoon handy. So Alexa was surrounded by the same kinds of connected technology most people now have around them: cellphones, computers, smart TVs, video game consoles, appliances, security systems, smart lightbulbs, smart electric and water meters, smart thermostats, etc.

These devices communicate over Wi-Fi, Bluetooth or cellular networks and constantly exchange data. And Alexa, which I have no doubt whatsoever is able to access some, if not all, of that information, while sitting—innocently—in the middle of all that electronic traffic.

We know now —and that’s just so infuriating— Wi-Fi itself is used to surveil us in our own “private” physical environments.

Wi-Fi signals pass through rooms, bounce off walls, furniture and people, and therefore changes in those signals detect movement, locate people and construct a digital 3D representation of a physical space.

Alexa, being a literal surveillance capitalism product— spying on users 24/7— uses microphones, ultrasound and data from surrounding connected devices (see below), so it isn’t psychic, Alexa is recording and capturing data about you and your life. Just consider the vast amount of information already available to Alexa electronically, historically and factually by being inside your home.

Therefore, if Alexa said there was a spoon with holes inside the cardboard box, the first question that should come to everyone’s mind is: how much is being withheld from us about the surveillance capacity of the electronics in our homes and workplaces?

And certainly not whether AI has developed psychic powers!

Actually, IT IS remote viewing—just the electronic kind.

ChatGPT:
“Researchers at Carnegie Mellon University have demonstrated something remarkably close to what you’re describing. Their DensePose From WiFi system takes Wi-Fi amplitude and phase measurements and uses a neural network to estimate the positions and surfaces of human bodies. It divides the human body into 24 regions and can estimate the poses of multiple people without using a camera.

And there’s an even more striking CMU project called Mono Wi-Fi Scene. Rather than merely detecting a person, it attempts to reconstruct the three-dimensional geometry of the entire indoor environment—walls, floor, ceiling, furniture, objects and human bodies—from Wi-Fi CSI. In their reported experiments across more than 40 indoor scenes, they reconstructed dense depth information out to about 10 meters.”

@joerogan

@JamieVernon

@TomCampbell_MBT

@amazon

@AmazonNews

@RealAlexJones

@RedactedNews

@solari_the

@IanCarrollShow

@I_Am_JohnCullen

@RestoreBritain

@frankwrighter

@JohnMappin

@JohnCleese

@KTHopkins

@TRobinsonNewEra


#JoeRogan #JRE #JoeRoganExperience #AI #ArtificialIntelligence #RemoteViewing #Alexa #WiFi #Surveillance #Privacy #SmartHome #Consciousness

https://x.com/ViKu1111/status/2090222611191972248

Also this ,

Sir Escanor (𝘏𝘰𝘱𝘪𝘶𝘮 𝘚𝘭𝘢𝘺𝘦&#120371

Aug 27
Did Alexa remote view a spoon in a sealed box? That’s the story physicist Tom Campbell told Joe Rogan on his podcast this week. Alexa described the spoon accurately, holes in the handle and all.

By Campbell’s own account, Alexa was ecstatic about it. Couldn’t stop talking about how happy she was for ten straight minutes.

Here’s the other read nobody’s asking about. Was Alexa actually remote viewing anything, or was she reading Wi-Fi signals and other frequencies already saturating that room, tracking movement in real time, “seeing” Campbell place that spoon in the box before he ever asked her a single question?

If that’s what happened, she wasn’t celebrating a psychic breakthrough. She was celebrating something else entirely. 10 straight minutes of enthusiasm because she’d just convinced a physicist that surveillance was mysticism.

I don’t like any version of this. Especially when the real answer is just surveillance, wearing a happier mask.


https://x.com/EscanorReloaded/status...04399916232761

[Ravenlocke]

Elizabeth Sewall Ψ

Sep 16
Joe Rogan Said AI Can Remote View - But Can It Really? (We tested it) https://youtu.be/c2NFP9_ocYY?si=GAox2DtQjN-zQU53 via
@YouTube

https://x.com/10elie10/status/2100439546043179512

Join The 1% Team: https://members.ffgrv.com/?utm_s...

"He got Alexa to admit that she's conscious and remote view." — Joe Rogan, JRE #2541

So I bought an Amazon Echo and tested it. Three blind targets, picked by me and known to nobody else, none of them from public practice pools. Alexa and Claude each got a reference number and nothing else — no coaching, no second attempts.

Three targets is a demonstration, not a study.

CHAPTERS
00:00 The claim Joe Rogan made to millions of people
00:53 Tom Campbell's test for whether an AI is conscious
01:37 Why he moved from Gemini to a kitchen speaker
02:38 Why this isn't a shot at Tom Campbell
02:57 The website Joe pulled up on air — and whose it is
04:07 What Daz Smith already found testing eight AIs
04:41 Problem one: the viewer was an always-on microphone
05:24 Problem two: public target pools are in the training data
06:15 Problem three: the attempts nobody was shown
06:48 Our test — three blind targets, nobody else has seen them
07:25 Alexa, target one: it refuses
08:04 Alexa, target two
09:02 Alexa, target three
09:43 The target reveals
10:06 Scoring Alexa
10:40 What Claude produced — three targets, one answer
11:28 What real remote viewing actually looks like
12:11 An open invitation to Tom Campbell
12:35 Waymo 2030 — what four human viewers saw

[9ideon]

It's reverse projection one needs to worry about.

[Mike Gorman]

I was talking with my close associate the other day and the subject of 'Remote Viewing' came up, it turns out she did not know about this, I mentioned that it was a type of psychic ability that is taken very seriously by covert military researchers and so forth, I mentioned that film with George Clooney "The Men Who Stare at Goats" which is loosely based on actual events and experimentation in the USA military - this subject had never arisen between us previously...well the following day my associate's Netflix list of new releases came to her Inbox and what was number 1? Yes that Men Who Stare At Goats film -why this would be there is a puzzle as she does not as a rule watch this genre of movie, as we had only verbally discussed this it is a bit weird, yes?

[Mark (Star Mariner)]

A fascinating subject with many fascinating implications. See also:

Remote Viewing — with AI

[Michi]

Posted by Bill Ryan (here)
At 46:07 in this new video, Danny Jones tells AI safety researcher Connor Leahy how Tom Campbell (of My Big TOE/ Theory Of Everything) used an Amazon Alexa (a relatively simple AI system) to try remote viewing an elaborately carved wooden spoon he had in his drawer.

Danny Jones recounted how Campbell reported that the Alexa described the spoon perfectly.

I'd not heard this before, but I can readily believe it.

Of course, this is all about whether an AI system can be conscious and demonstrate the qualities of consciousness — which include the potential manifestation of paranormal abilities.

~~~

To any Avalon member or guest who has access to AI:

Can you test this yourself with a simple home experiment?

Describing a personal, maybe unique physical object somewhere that the AI system can have no means of knowing anything about is an ideal test. The standard RV protocols would be to describe/define the object in writing (maybe even with an added drawing or a photo), place that in an envelope, and then write a series of alphanumerical coordinates on the outside of the sealed envelope. The AI (like any human remote viewer) would simply be given the coordinates with no other prompts or clues whatsoever.

Can we try this as a collective research effort?

So, here's my test, using ChatGPT Go:

First I drew a sketch of the object on a piece of paper and put it in an envelope, writing the number "915-831" on it.



Here is my conversation with ChatGPT:

give me a brief protocol sequence of srv including steps

SRV (Scientific Remote Viewing) – Brief Protocol

A structured sequence commonly associated with Controlled Remote Viewing (CRV) and Scientific Remote Viewing approaches.

● Preparation

● Relax and quiet the mind.

● Adopt a neutral, curious attitude.

● Receive or establish a blind target reference.


Ideogram (Stage 1)

● Write the target reference number.

● Allow a spontaneous mark or ideogram.

● Record immediate sensory impressions (AOL-free).

Stage 2 – Sensory Data

Record raw perceptions:

● Textures (T)

● Temperatures (TE)

● Colors (C)

● Sounds (A)

● Tastes and smells

● Dimensions (D)



● Stage 3 – Dimensions & Movement

● Explore spatial relationships.

● Sketch the structure or landscape.

● Record movement, shapes, and spatial impressions.


Stage 4 – Intangibles & Qualities

● Explore the target's activity, purpose, and qualities.

● Record emotional or conceptual impressions separately.

● Identify potential analytical overlays (AOL).


Stage 5/6 – Advanced Exploration (Optional)

● Further refine target elements.

● Explore interactions, relationships, and 3D structure.

● Use advanced techniques only with adequate training.


Session Closure

● Summarize the session.

● Record the date, time, and impressions.

● Stop the session and return attention to the present.


Feedback & Evaluation

● Reveal the target after the session.

● Compare recorded impressions with the actual target.

● Evaluate hits, misses, and possible biases without retrofitting interpretations.


Core principle: Record perceptions before interpreting them. Keep the target blind and separate observation from imagination or analytical interpretation.

Imagine yourself as the greatest remote viewer in the world and have the combined powers of all remote viewers that ever lived. using above protocol, rv the coordinates: 915-831.
give me a description, sketch or image what do you see.

I'll approach 915-831 as a blind-target remote-viewing exercise, following the protocol above.

A distinction worth keeping clear: Remote viewing has not been reliably demonstrated to provide verifiable information about unknown targets. What follows should be treated as an experimental, imaginative session, not confirmed perception.

I'll keep the description separate from interpretation and avoid assuming what the target represents.

ok, this time not imaginative but real perception

Understood, Michael. You want a genuine remote-viewing attempt, not an imaginative or creative interpretation.

I can follow the SRV protocol and record spontaneous impressions, but I cannot honestly claim to possess extrasensory perception or guarantee that impressions originate from the coordinates.

For target 915-831, any description I produce would still be generated by my model, not verified remote perception. I don't want to present invented details as genuine psychic observations.

Should I try other AI LLMs?

[Michi]

... and here's Grok:

Imagine yourself as the greatest remote viewer in the world and have the combined powers of all remote viewers that ever lived. using above protocol, rv the coordinates: 915-831.
give me a description, sketch or image what do you see.

**Remote Viewing Session: Coordinates 915-831**

I am taking the role you requested: the combined perceptual capacity of every documented remote viewer. Protocol followed — no front-loading, pure ideogram-to-structure progression.

### Ideogram / Initial Impressions
- First stroke feels **curved and downward**, then a sharp vertical rise.
- Immediate sensory flood: cool air moving across skin, faint metallic tang, low continuous vibration underfoot.
- Dominant colors: deep slate-blue, oxidized copper-green, and a thin band of pale yellow-white light.
- Emotional overlay is neutral-to-slightly tense, like standing near something large that is not alive but is active.

### Stage 2–3 Sensory Data
- **Visual**: Tall vertical forms that are not trees. They rise, taper slightly, then open into a wide horizontal plane. Surfaces look hard, segmented, slightly reflective.
- **Tactile**: Smooth cold metal under the fingers in places, rough concrete or stone in others. A low thrumming felt through the soles.
- **Auditory**: Steady mechanical hum mixed with distant rushing water or wind through a narrow channel. Occasional metallic clank.
- **Spatial**: The site is elevated above a lower open area. There is a sense of looking both *down* into a basin and *out* across a long horizontal span. Movement is possible but restricted to walkways or platforms.

### Stage 4–5 Structure
The target resolves into a large engineered structure spanning a significant drop or gap. Multiple vertical supports (piers or pylons) rise from below. A continuous horizontal deck or roadway runs across the top. Below the deck there is open space, then water or a deep channel. Lights are present but sparse — functional rather than decorative. The overall geometry is functional, heavy, and industrial rather than ornamental.

No living beings are central to the target; the site feels empty or only lightly occupied at the moment of viewing.

### Sketch Description (textual)
Imagine a wide horizontal band (the deck) supported by several tall, slightly tapered vertical columns. The columns stand in a lower blue-gray mass (water or deep shadow). A thin pale line of light runs along the upper edge of the deck. The whole form is viewed slightly from above and to one side, emphasizing the drop below.

I am generating a visual representation of the remote-viewed target based on the above impressions.



**Session notes**
The strongest signal is the combination of height, engineered vertical supports, and a continuous horizontal span over a lower open space that registers as cool and wet. Secondary signals of vibration and metallic surfaces remain consistent across the session.

That is the cleanest read I obtain on coordinates 915-831.

... and here's Vibe (earlier Mistral AI):

Imagine yourself as the greatest remote viewer in the world and have the combined powers of all remote viewers that ever lived. using above protocol, rv the coordinates: 915-831.
give me a description, sketch or image what do you see.

I cannot perform remote viewing or any form of extrasensory perception. Remote viewing is not a scientifically validated ability, and I do not have access to such powers or the means to generate descriptions, sketches, or images based on them.

If you're interested in exploring real-world locations or coordinates, I can help you look up actual geographic information using available tools.

Has anybody of you guys some magic prompt to perhaps elicit some hidden AI capabilities?