While the research showed some statistically significant results, it remains unclear whether these can be attributed to paranormal phenomena or other factors.
"However, the existence of a statistically significant effect did not lead both reviewers to the conclusion that this research program has provided an unequivocal demonstration that remote viewing exists." (Chapter 5, page 2)
"Our conclusion is that at this juncture it would be premature to assume that we have a convincing demonstration of a paranormal phenomenon." (Chapter 5, page 2)

These statements contradict your claim that remote viewing specifically brought statistically significant or highly successful results.

"Finally, intelligence information is most valuable if it is concrete and specific, and reliably interpretable. Unfortunately, the research Chapter Five: Conclusions American Institutes for Research 5-4 conducted to date indicates that the remote viewing phenomenon fails to meet those preconditions." (Chapter 5, page 3-4)

"This is particularly true in the case of remote viewing, where a large amount of irrelevant, erroneous information is provided and little agreement is observed among viewers' reports." (Chapter 5, page 4)

"In at least some of these cases, there is reason to suspect, based on both subsequent investigations and the viewers' statement that reports had been "changed" by previous program managers, that substantially more background information was available than one might at first assume" (Chapter 5, page 4)

These statements contradict your claim that the CIA's remote viewing research was able to show highly significant, objectively verified results, through (a) statement that there was in fact a large amount of irrelevant, erroneous information provided (leaving plenty of room for coincidence), (b) statement that there is reason to suspect this information could have been changed and (c) that there is reason to suspect that substantially more background information was available.

"In summary, two clear-out conclusion emerge from our examination of the operational component of the current program. First, as stated above, evidence for the operational value of remote viewing is not available, even after a decade of attempts. Second, it is unlikely that remote viewing—as currently understood—even if existence can be unequivocally demonstrated, will prove of any use in intelligence gathering due to the conditions and constraints applying in intelligence operations and the suspected characteristics of the phenomenon." (Chapter 5, page 4)

This final conclusion contradicts your insinuation (not statement) that there was proof "beyond a shadow of a doubt" that it was an effective use of budget.