"The ‘non- fluent’ version of the excerpt was created by waiting until the departmental printer was low on toner"
Nonsense. Bem's work has been rightly criticized for being statistically questionable:
And replication efforts have failed:
Unless you mean "the highest scientific standards" among psychologists, which is an entirely different claim, since psychology's research standards are notoriously low.
> It doesn't matter what he believes concerning ESP: no one doubts his integrity, which means the results are mighty interesting.
The interest in his results revolves around how such a study could be published in the first place -- and this is not my opinion, but that of his many critics, as shown in the above linked articles.
--Duly noted. Thanks for posting.