> there are also people that are just remarkably unaware of how to be remotely statistically rigorous That reminds me of D. Kahneman's self-righteous book wher

> there are also people that are just remarkably unaware of how to be remotely statistically rigorous That reminds me of D. Kahneman's self-righteous book where he recounts teaching statistics for years "without it ever occuring to him that it might be used in his research". Claiming to have learned this lesson, he proceeds to promote his book while half of it's claims have failed to reproduce. He's still a celebrity im his field. My point being: you really think this situation ever used to be better?