I never said anything about "science". Only that your accusations are garbage. It's one thing to say "let's not take this too seriously because they haven't pu

I never said anything about "science". Only that your accusations are garbage. It's one thing to say "let's not take this too seriously because they haven't published anything yet", which I don't even know is true, but whatever. However you went above and beyond that: * claiming their methodology was "retrospective design" * claiming they picked statistical outliers and didn't bother to test if they continued to make good predictions: "The described program collects forecasts, forecasts that can be expected to be half right and half wrong for binary questions, throws out those that by chance were wrong, and preserves those that by chance were right." * various insults: they don't understand logic, statistics, it's pseudoscience, etc. * claim they twisted language to make failed forecasts look successful. * claim they didn't do any statistical analysis