What most surprises me about the paper, given its Harvard authorship, is its poor quality. Quibbles like misspelling names of cited authors are sadly routine in academic writing today. But the citations... there are almost ten pages of references, but if they're not to other papers by the same authors, they're "first google result" quality. Mostly to paranormal blogs, but the highlight is when the paper cites British tabloids summarizing History Channel shows. Which it does more than once!