I agree that we should take a harder look at Bayesian methods, but I don't think that sweeping comments like this do much to advance the discussion. Any circums

I agree that we should take a harder look at Bayesian methods, but I don't think that sweeping comments like this do much to advance the discussion. Any circumspect person will naturally be suspicious of something that is held up as a panacea. It's much more constructive (and compelling) to call attention to specific problems with how frequentist methods get used in practice, and talk about how Bayesian methods can help with that problem. For example, here's Andrew Gelman talking about multiple comparison bias: https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2016/08/22/bayesian-inference-completely-solves-the-multiple-comparisons-problem/ https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2016/08/22/bayesian-i...