So I was writing a review of The Cult of Statistical Significance: How the Standard Error Costs Us Jobs, Justice, and Lives, but alas Ziliak & McCloskey have (unsurprisingly) made the task more difficult by making their book important even if their fundamental thesis were wrong. I will write the review, but in the meantime I will offer a bit of trivia:
Imagine you’re at the range with a bunch of shooters all using m4s, m16s, or any other military rifle that uses 5.56 NATO rounds or .223 rounds and a 30 round clip. One fellow shooter talks about her or his position as an officer/soldier/sailor/operator/007/whatever.
Question: how can you tell if this would-be Delta Force operator is lying based upon the number of rounds (30) their rifle/carbine carries?
Answer: If they load 28 into a 30 round clip.
Why post this true but completely irrelevant trivia? Because it will make the contrast between this post and the one and I intended just about as complete as I can make it. Plus it gives y’all time to buy the book.