He didn’t wake up one day and say, “Antibiotics must be real!
Bem’s tale is equally interesting and disturbing because he’s no Brian Wansink (though that story is also equal parts interesting and disturbing).
In other words, the crazy effects he describes in his paper are seemingly not a result of fraud — he didn’t fabricate his data, he did not purposefully mislead readers with his description of his methodology, and he encouraged others to attempt to replicate his findings.
In fact the history of this work is a really interesting study in scientific controversy and it tracks quite nicely with much of the replication crisis I’ve talked about.
This makes it a really interesting topic for anyone wanting to know a bit more about the pluses/minuses of current research methods.