Kevin Drum is rather annoyed than the LA Times has published an op-ed by Lott. Lott's argument is that if someone doesn't answer a question he can attribute to them whatever answer is most damaging to them. If we applied the same standard to Lott, then since he never answered my question as to why he removed the clustering correction from his model, we could assume that the answer was "I was trying to cook the results".
More like this
So, was the attribution of the 98% to Kleck's study in the Lott quote below made by Lott, or did Dave Kopel add it?
"Guns clearly deter criminals, with Americans using guns defensively over 2 million times each year---five times more frequently than the 430,000 times guns were used to…
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…
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…
Mac Diva is trying to figure out why Lott does the things he does. Atrios explains why he cares about Lott. Brad Delong says that I have "a very strong case". Matt Yglesias has some thoughtful comments on appropriate behaviour in this case. ArchPundit has one two posts.
On Monday Glenn Reynolds…