> An analysis also needs to start by testing a null hypothesis, not deciding on the conclusion and setting out to "prove" it. > I do not think that in its pres

> An analysis also needs to start by testing a null hypothesis, not deciding on the conclusion and setting out to "prove" it. > I do not think that in its present form, the evidence presented in this study is as robust as it should be. > the manuscript in its current condition is deemed incomplete and inadequate, and should not be viewed as finalized scholarship. I mean they sound polite, but if you strip back the polite language and understatements they're pretty much calling the authors quacks.