No time to address most of your comment (or most of the new comments, unfortunately) due to new baby :) ... but just briefly, about the brief time window of presentiment experiments: Good point, although this applies to the presentiment findings specifically, versus precognitive remote viewing findings that have a much bigger time window. Still, I think the presentiment effect is the building block of precognition as traditionally understood. My hypothesis is that precognitive/presentimental circuitry that are being detected in presentiment experiments would continually pass back "information" into the brain's past (in the form of altered neural/synaptic potentials) almost like a relay race. So for instance a RV-er "sees" a target, which may really be the exciting/rewarding confirmation he gets in his future, and this acts the same way a salient stimulus in the individual's past would. In memory, we are really remembering our remembering, not remembering the event. Same way with precognition.
Congratulations.
----
About remote viewing, although I lean towards the "proponent" side, that is the one that I'm not convinced about. A skeptic named ersby made an argument about inconsistencies in the narrative of the events as described by one of the viewers and I took a look at the experiment recordings and found them reasonable. I have seen Dean Radin, who was in one way or another involved with the government project, acknowledge that the idea of remote viewing that we have is somewhat warped (overblown) and some of the viewers admit that their visions are not always accurate or pertinent. The way that some elements in these visions resemble the concept that the person has of an object instead of its actual features (recalling a submarine with canted tubes, a distinctly American feature, while remote viewing a Soviet base) is pointing me towards more of a construct than a recall.