Wow. The issue discussed in the beginning of the article is really basic (evidence of absence vs absence of evidence). There are much more intellectually challe

Wow. The issue discussed in the beginning of the article is really basic (evidence of absence vs absence of evidence). There are much more intellectually challenging issues with statistical significance. If scientists don't understand this one, it's a really sad sign. I'm not sure how well a difference in nomenclature can fix such serious misunderstandings, but I do like the "compatibility" suggestions and the way they talk about the point estimate and endpoints of the confidence interval.