After more than sixteen years of research, the questions that occupy my mind today are no longer the same as those that first set me on this path. In the beginning, I was trying to understand what I was experiencing and why it was happening. Today, however, I find myself drawn to broader questions—questions that are not only about remote viewing, but also about the way people think and respond to ideas that fall outside familiar boundaries.

One question, in particular, continues to intrigue me:

Why do some people reject ideas that, deep down, they seem willing to accept as possible?

For me, this is no longer simply a question about remote viewing. It has become a question about belief, denial, society, and human nature itself.

Over the years, I have found that people’s reactions to these phenomena can be just as fascinating as the phenomena themselves.

From a research perspective, there is one question that has remained with me consistently, and perhaps it is the most important question in all of my work:

How can we determine whether a remote-viewing perception is accurate before the event occurs?

For me, this has never been merely a theoretical question. It was one of the primary motivations behind developing a device designed to evaluate the validity of predictions and impressions.

I continue to believe that finding a clear scientific answer to this question could represent an important step toward understanding the phenomenon in a deeper and more systematic way.

If I were given the opportunity to pursue only one research project in the coming years, it would be to test this device with a group of individuals who possess remote-viewing abilities and to study the results using a structured research methodology.

To me, the significance of the project does not lie in the device itself, but in the question behind it:

The search for the factor—or factors—that determine the accuracy of remote viewing.

Today, my goal is no longer limited to understanding or proving a particular idea. It has become a combination of discovery and practical application.

Many of the ideas I once hoped to pursue have already become part of my current work, and my focus now is on developing these projects and producing results that can be tested, evaluated, and applied.

When I think about the future of this field in the Arab world, I hope to see an environment that is more open-minded and less inclined to dismiss or ridicule unfamiliar ideas simply because they challenge established assumptions.

I do not expect everyone to share the same beliefs, but I do hope for a greater willingness to listen, investigate, and engage in thoughtful, rational discussion before passing judgment.

Despite the many years I have spent on this path, I remain convinced that genuine research never truly ends with a single answer.

Every answer leads to new questions, and every discovery opens the door to further discoveries.

Despite everything I have learned throughout this journey, I still feel that the road has not yet reached its end. There are still questions waiting for answers, hypotheses waiting to be tested, and vast areas that remain unexplored.

If there is one thing that continues to drive me forward today, it is the desire to gain a deeper understanding of the factors that determine the accuracy of remote viewing.

Perhaps one day I will be able to say:

We have discovered what determines the accuracy of remote viewing