View original postYou know as well as I do that a statistically proven correlation doesn't mean that exceptions don't exist. And you also know that the plural of anecdote isn't data.

Ghav, I could be wrong but that's not anecdotal evidence, because it is establishing my prejudice on the subject, I'm a singleton in this context, the sample set for 'Isaac's prejudice' is one, uno, three minus two. Not subject to statistical analysis and thus it doesn't apply, I'm not at risk of cherry-picking my sample set of one.

I already did my proper scientific duty, admittedly in very sardonic fashion, by pointing out that many such studies have flaws, which is sufficient since you never cited a specific study or studies for me to challenge and you have the burden of proof and a pretty high one when you say 'soundly debunked'. What I said was the equivalent of "Although I have long being a vocal skeptic of Dark Energy, I find the recent Planck data compelling", which is totally acceptable scientific commentary.