It was one of many problems. The biggest problem, in my opinion, was excluding some years from their analysis without any explanation or reasoning behind why t

It was one of many problems. The biggest problem, in my opinion, was excluding some years from their analysis without any explanation or reasoning behind why they did so. Again, peer review would have crushed this paper before it got out the door. The really amazing thing is that the authors have not retracted the study, and, last I heard, they claimed that their analysis was correct in spite of the errors and exclusion of data which did not support their thesis.