In a related matter, rumors that Lambert once asked a date for “96″ on the ground that it’s “similar to” 69 are probably false.
Randy Paul emailed Reynolds, suggesting that he “Grow up”. Reynolds shot back:
Jeez, get a sense of humor. Lambert and I go back over a decade,
and he’s been an insufferable prick for all that time. I usually
ignore him, and this time I decided to jab back a bit.
And Reynolds sure does like to jab at me. For example, he linked to this rant from joshd and wrote that he was cheering him on:
Tim, you’re a bald-faced liar … do you really need to be such a monumental fraud and liar to puff up this Lancet study?
And here he links to a post attacking me. There wasn’t anything in the post of interest to Reynolds, except for the fact that it accused me of wrongdoing.
I agree that Mr. Lambert’s “payback for Bellesiles” angle is pretty obvious.
Now his guess at my motives was wrong (why would I even care about Bellesiles?), but it does tell us how Reynolds thinks — his “payback for Lott” angle is pretty obvious.