On August 18, in his interview with Chris Mooney, when he was asked if there were coding errors, Lott replied:
There are a couple minor errors, the data is on, the data is available for anybody to look at, anybody can go and download the data, I've made it so that people can go and easily replicate the results, if you went to the website...
Two days later Lott admitted that there were "a few hundred data entries that contained mistakes". Now when Lott talked to Mooney, he must have known how many errors there were, since he had corrected them when constructing the corrected tables that he posted to his website in May. He lied to Mooney about how many errors there were.
More like this
Summary: Lott now claims that an incriminating file where he had been caught cooking his results was not meant to have been on his website and was only there because his webmaster screwed up. Unfortunately, his latest story is full of holes.
Way back in September last year I…
I've discovered another one of John Lott's attempts to rewrite history. Read on.
Lott has written a response to Kevin Drum's summary of Lott's model changing antics. Here's Drum:
1. Lott and two coauthors produced a statistical model ("Model 1") that showed significant crime decreases when…
Chris Mooney has published an article on Lott in Mother Jones. The whole article is well worth reading, but the way that Lott kept changing his story about the coding errors is particularly interesting:
In the face of this evidence, how can Lott continue to claim the coding errors…
Lott has posted some criticism of Chris Mooney's article.
Let's see how many errors he has successfully identified:
1) Paraphrasing claim from the Chronicle of Higher Education stating that the "coding errors had not been reviewed by a third party." I was never asked by the…