Thursday, January 8, 2009

Why is Sykes' Threshold for Proof so Low?

I love this type of thing:

Charlie Sykes cites one academic econ paper that argues the action FDR took to stave off the Depression actually made it worse and suddenly 50+ years of historical consensus is null and void.

Just one. That's all it apparently takes to convince Sykes.

He, perhaps mercifully, doesn't even bother to offer Amity Shales' contribution to Cole and Ohanian's argument -- likely because at the moment it's just that, an argument contrary to popular consensus ... and one that has yet to take the economic world by storm (and here and here).

If that's all it takes to convince Sykes, then this paper should close the case on anthropogenic climate change...

And this one should make clear that contraception reduces abortions...

And here's another one that does much to validate Darwinian evolution.

Now that the petty and divisive questions in the world have been solved can we move on to the really important stuff like if being admired by John Tesh is something one should brag about or not?

No comments: