Oops. It seems I got carried away. > There are both really good and horrible Frequentist and Bayesian statisticians. Yeah. If I had to choose between Fisher

Oops. It seems I got carried away. > There are both really good and horrible Frequentist and Bayesian statisticians. Yeah. If I had to choose between Fisher and Anonymous Bayesian, I may chose Fisher. However, unless both kind of statistics yield the same results (I don't think they do), then at least one of them is bogus, by application of the non-contradiction principle. So, while I can imagine there are good Frequentists Statisticians out there, I insist that frequentism itself is bogus.