> Right, but that doesn't tell me how many other ways they carved the data up and didn't report it in the paper. i understand that and i don't believe i contra

> Right, but that doesn't tell me how many other ways they carved the data up and didn't report it in the paper. i understand that and i don't believe i contradicted you, rather i was emphasizing: they _admitted_ to 9 different carvings and only got 1 interesting one. what they did under the hood had to be even worse!