Yesterday the magazine Slate posted this: http://redux.slate.com/cover-storie...ed-esp-is-real-showed-science-is-broken.html? It's the "cover" (they are an online magazine) story of their new issue. And the title is "Daryl Bem proved ESP is real" and the subtitle was "which means science is broken". Of course, the title caught my attention and I thought "Oh, I wasn't aware of any new experiment". And to my surprise there was no new experiment, it was yet another article talking about the famous 2011 paper "Feeling the future". The article is well written, but it's more of the same. I wonder why people keep repeating the same story. Also, there was a lot of unnecesary quote trashing Bem and parapsychology in general (So much drama) Also, the paper barely discuss anything from parapsychology. It appears as if the whole field of parapsychology is just Bem + some unknown wackos vs. the world. Also, they barely touch any related research, for instance there's no mention of Julia Mossbridge, Jessica Utts and Patrizio Tressoldi recent works. Also the article barely mentions Bem early works in parapsychology, the word ganzfeld is nowhere in the text. The article is more balanced during some parts and they also let Daryl Bem have the final word. However, I don't see the point in writing about all this controversy again. The point was already clear 6 years ago: Bem's paper was well made but inconclusive and psychology has some internal problems (specially because psychologists aren't very good statisticians). Also there was no need to publish some harsh comments against Bem and his work.