Isn't that just an example of what I said earlier? I can believe that you looked at the "skeptical garbage" critically. Your prejudices would ensure that you would do so. But I would be much more hesitant to believe that you have studied parapsychology critically.
For one, you have recently come up with some statements which were quite markedly mistaken. For example, in the Presentiment thread you claimed "they were also published in an extremely prestigious journal so flaws in the protocols can be presumed to be imaginary". Not only are there published articles which outline the flaws in Bem's research (in spite of their "imaginary" existence), but I pointed you to research which shows that he is hardly alone in this when it comes to finding systematic patterns of flaws in extremely prestigious journals (Science, in this case).
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0114255
Second, in this very thread Vortex provided an example of parapsychology research where p-hacking would be suspected based on using the recommended test for p-hacking (not the insensitive test which the researchers used), which contradicts your claim that p-hacking never happens in parapsychology research.
http://www.skeptiko-forum.com/threa...-helps-weight-loss-heres-how.2288/#post-68599
Third, plenty of examples can be found of parapsychology researchers using the threshold of p<0.1 (one-tailed 0.05) for their significance testing, rather than the much lower threshold of p<0.001. Just looking at Bem's paper, here are some of the larger p-values he specified as "significant".
http://dbem.ws/FeelingFuture.pdf
(p-values given as two-tailed values for consistency)
0.02
0.062
0.022
0.070
0.046
0.028
0.082
0.078
Another way to find more examples is to look through the ganzfeld database and pick out those with z-scores near 1.65 (a p<0.1 cut-off) and see if they were reported as "significant". I did so for the first one from this list (Morris et. al. 2003) and discovered that it was reported as "statistically significant" with it's p=0.10 p-value.
http://www.deanradin.com/FOC2014/Storm2010MetaFreeResp.pdf (appendix A)
http://www.koestler-parapsychology.psy.ed.ac.uk/cwatt/Documents/WattJP07.pdf (table 1)
Please note that this is a minuscule sampling of all that is out there.
Linda