In the latest Spotlight titled "Heading into New Territory", Courtney said this:

[33:36] "The only thing that we did was to give the AI the transcript of the Domain project that we did. That's all. We gave it the transcript and said: Come up with a video that sort of captures what's going on and combine it with any type of thoughts you have about the larger stuff. And, of course, it had already read the Alien Interview book, but... it knew the state of the world, it knew everything, so we just said: Do this. And it went and read the transcript. It created all of the stills, and it came up with its own narrative. We did not write that narrative. It did everything by itself."

At timestamp 32:33 in the video, which is part of the first NuuSphere video about the Domain, you see that the AI came up with a scene where an instructor is standing in front of remote viewing students. The instructor is pointing at a board that shows "Target Alpha: Cydonia" and "Target Beta: Sirius B" as well as "Anomaly Detected".

This image proves that, when the AI came up with its own narrative, it included the Alien Interview book. The Cydonia region on Mars is mentioned in the book on page 64, while Sirius B is mentioned on page 264.

This is problematic for the following reason:

The AI narrative is not solely based on the remote viewing data of the session, but also on a book that could be fictional. You used AI to mix up remote viewing data with data from other sources. This goes against the mission to give us a picture based on remote viewing data gathered under scientific conditions.

Therefore, this first NuuSphere video must be considered unscientific, as it is contaminated with data from a questionable source.

That's a good argument, actually. Even though they'd argue some information in books like Alien Interview appear accurate to RV results, that doesn't mean everything in the book is accurate (especially given the other controversies around Spencer).
Fan of the book, but not sure it's the best source compared to actual RV data. Possibly worth mentioning the book, but referencing it for claims is more debatable. In reality, performing RV projects on the book's claims, then referencing the RV data on claims would be totally legitimate. It's understandable Farsight can't extend that far when short-staffed, though.

@gary garies:

"It's understandable Farsight can't extend that far when short-staffed, though."

No, it's not.

Prompt 1: Come up with your own narrative based on RV data and Alien Interview by Lawrence Spencer.

Prompt 2: Come up with your own narrative based on RV data.

The second one is even easier to do.

It's obvious that Farsight wants the book to be true. They started to use a possibility as a certainty, and still call it scientific. As far as I'm concerned, Farsight has become unscientific, and Courtney's ego is unable to admit it.

And this is a clear indication that they could be in contact with bad ETs who want to exploit Courtney's ego to implant their own narrative, as the real good ETs would already have told him that he's not scientific anymore.

I still wonder why Farsight doesn't address how the help of the ETs affects the remote viewing process. Courtney explained that the viewers connect to ET consciousness or technology that helps them overcome protections. This is a clear attack vector for manipulation. It's called a Man-in-the-Middle attack. The ETs could feed their own version of reality, while the remote viewer experiences it as a normal remote viewing.

If you ask me, having the ETs between the viewer and the target has nothing to do with clean scientific conditions.

Farsight just ignores this critique.