Michelle Bulgatz

Michelle Bulgatz is a graduate of the Alternative Practitioner Academy in Arlington Heights, IL and received certification from the National Guild of Hypnotism. She serves as an example of someone who is doing the work they love and do best: helping people achieve their true desires, create harmony, and a sense of inner peace and well-being. She achieves this through utilizing a blend of her skills as a hypnotist, clairvoyant, and remote viewer.

She completed the beginning, intermediate, and advanced training programs through the International School of Clairvoyance, where she learned to integrate her intuitive gifts with her hypnosis skills.

Michelle is a talented remote viewer and remote viewing instructor. Fully-certified in all forms of Controlled Remote Viewing, She completed the beginning through advanced training programs through Right Hemisphere, Intuitive Specialists, APP, and received additional training from Joe McMoneagle.

Michelle is a prominent member of IRVA (International Remote Viewing Association) and received the Warcollier Prize for 2017. She is a member of APP (Applied Precognition Project) and the National Guild of Hypnotists. She has Research related to Remote Viewing and Parapsychology Published with The Journal of Psychical Research, The Parapsychology Association, and Eight Martinis Magazine. Michelle works on special remote viewing projects with IONS (Institute of Noetic Sciences).


    IRVA 2017 – Remote Viewing the Outcome of the 2016 Presidential Election using Associative Remote Viewing

    In this double blind Associative Remote Viewing Project, 41 moderate to highly experienced Remote Viewers were tasked with describing a feedback photo they would see at a future date. The photo was to be associated with the winner of the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election. Researchers compared the remote viewers written transcripts to a set of four photos – two associated with to the Republican and Democratic front-runners, one with a third party candidate option and one with an impossible option that served as the control group. A formal prediction was issued for a short period with some viewers being exposed to it and some not, in order to assess whether exposure to a potentially wrong prediction might result in displacement to the wrong photo. Other variables such as viewer preferences and voting behaviors were also assessed. Based on the suggestion to reject the null hypothesis during the hypothesis test summary a Wilcoxon test was conducted to assess the judge’s scoring value of viewer transcript across photos. The results indicated a significant difference where, z = -3.147, p<.01. The mean of the ranks of Hilary (the popular vote front-runner) was 13.71, while the mean of the ranks in favor of Trump (the electoral vote front-runner) was 17.28. Results indicated that rather then describing the photo the remote viewers consciously saw at the future date, they instead tuned into photos they would not see. Why did this happen? Is a large group consensus based approach really the best to use in projects such as these? And what does this mean for the future of Associative Remote Viewing projects that encounter similar incidents of displaced psi despite what seems to be a logical and theoretically sound design?

    IRVA 2016 – Objects as Remote Viewing Targets and the Role of Context and Setting

    What makes a good remote viewing target? And do the surroundings in which a target is perceived affect how well it can be remote viewed? Twelve experienced remote viewers tried their hand at 30 open response tasks, which required them to describe photographs of a complex object positioned within one of three background conditions. Learn what the conditions were and how well the viewers did under each of the conditions in this carefully controlled project that was awarded the 2015 IRVA/IRIS Warcollier prize. Debra Lynne Katz will lead you through the conception, structuring, and execution of this fascinating and important project that she and Michelle Bulgatz organized and conducted, with help from 18 judges and guidance from some of the leading scientists in the remote viewing field. The results will surprise you–and you may learn something about why that last remote viewing attempt you made didn’t turn out so well. Or why it did!