> I agree that it was wrong for him to be denied scope time. But, even
> today, few accept his analysis. If his analysis was so good, don't you
> think he could convince a few more people? Statistical analyses of what
> Arp suggested have failed to confirm his hypothesis:
I fail to see what statistics has to do with the validity of a point
observation. If I pick out a black ping pong ball in a sea of white
ones, statistically they are all white.
You will always be able to find in print that outlier
observations/interpretations are invalid for some seemingly good
reason. Without understanding the perhaps unconcious bias of the
author, it is virtually impossible to know whether he is slanting his
observations to support his position, or giving us a candid look at his
data. In my opinion, the latter is a rarity.