3 ms·
You can verify the authors credentials. The idea it was paid for by the NRA has no basis in facts. You're free to disagree with it.
by etchalon 9y ago
You can verify the authors credentials. The idea it was paid for by the NRA has no basis in facts.
You're free to disagree with it.
- lisper 9y agoAll of the people who published anti-climate-change studies on behalf of the oil industry also had credentials. Even people with credentials can succumb to temptation. And I didn't say that this piece was commission by the NRA. I said that it would not surprise me to learn that it was. I'm advancing that as one hypothesis to explain the very strange too-good-to-be-true correspondence between the author's rhetoric and the classic tropes and talking points of the NRA. That might all be a coincidence, and it might be that all of the oversights and faulty reasoning are really Leah Libresco's work alone. But that would imply that Leah Libresco is incredibly stupid and a really bad statistician, and that seems unlikely to me.
- JCzynski 9y agoI know her personally, and she's a better statistician than you. Also, I've independently done a lot of the same research, going to primary sources. It's correct.
- MagnumOpus 9y agoReally? Do you also know lisper personally? I don't have a horse in the race, but if we are doing argument by authority, I would trust the CS PhD and JPL researcher more than the blogger with a PoliSci degree undergrad who dabbled in data visualisation and SPSS and thinks she is an authority.
- lisper 9y agoTo say nothing of the fact that one of the reasons I think she might be a shill for the NRA is that I don't think that she's stupid.