ArchPundit writes:
The simple question to Lott is why did he stop correcting for clustering in the observations. Hear the silence?
More like this
Mark Kleiman has a excellent summary of the recent developments. Mark ends with a plea to gun-rights folks ---they should consider cutting Lott loose. (I would add, either that, or defend him---right now, Lott's side is losing the argument by default.)
Archpundit has reply from Lott…
Lott has made some more responses to some of the questions asked and comments made. First, he has responded to my remaining questions I asked a while ago. Let's see how he went:
Why did Lott repeatedly make false claims that the 98% figure came from other studies and from Kleck?
Lott…
ArchPundit continues to ponder on Lott's amateurish surveys. One further point you might like to consider: If the surveyors in Lott's 2002 survey were aware that it was vital for Lott to reproduce his low firing rate result, then that introduces a strong source of interviewer…
It would seem that some wag has had some fun at poor Professor Reynolds' expense. Reynolds has an update with an email supposedly from one Brendan Dooher that reads:
I worked with the study director at the National Academy of Sciences (he is actually in the National Academy of…