Oh, and in amusing side note, Julian Sanchez uncovered evidence that determined Lott defender Mary Rosh is actually John Lott, and Lott actually confessed. Atrios, Roger Ailes, Kevin Drum and Tom Spencer also seem amused. I've had some discussions with "Mary" on Usenet. Her argument style is that if the facts disagree with Lott, then so much the worse for the facts. You can see an example here. You can read her Amazon review of More Guns, Less Crime here. And check this posting out, where "Mary" defends John from a criticism of his 98% brandishing number and rips into Bellesiles for repeatedly changing his story.
More like this
Kevin Drum suggests that the large scale of the Lott/Rosh deception suggests that Lott maybe could have carried off a conspiracy with this witness. Sorry, but I still don't buy it. Lott's a liar, but he's a clumsy one. He could have saved himself most of the embarrassment of this Mary…
Julian Sanchez is on the case again. This time he has a bit more detail from Mustard. The key point is that Mustard is "fairly confident" that Lott told him in 1997 that he had done a survey. This suggests that Lott didn't invent the survey in 1999 to explain his 98% figure. Well,…
Lott's responses to Michelle Malkin's op-ed are in a fixed-width font, while my comments on his response are in italics like this. Lott's responses were downloaded on 25 April 2005.
Below is Malkin's op-ed with commentary by me (my comments are indented and in italics and start…
Lindgren has updated his report. Main changes are the inclusion of a reply from John Lott and a dissection of Lott's new "Did I say three months? I meant one month. Yeah, that's the ticket!" claim.
Lots more people have blogged on this: Glenn Reynolds, Pejman Yousefzadeh, skippy,…