My vote is probably not. The plausibility of these things is pretty important. With the aspirin heart attack prevention example mentioned in the text, we have a plausible biological mechanism to give us reason to expect an effect, so we can be satisfied with more equivocal data. I'm not aware of a plausible mechanism for precognition - in fact, it seems like precognition would probably require a bunch of other things we think true to be false to work - so I'll need much stronger evidence than this to accept it.
Also, a thought - if precognition is possible, why don't we see more of it? Being able to improve recall of words is nifty and all, but it seems like it'd give you a huge advantage catching prey or evading predators so I'd expect to see evidence of it all over the place.
Also, a thought - if precognition is possible, why don't we see more of it? Being able to improve recall of words is nifty and all, but it seems like it'd give you a huge advantage catching prey or evading predators so I'd expect to see evidence of it all over the place.