[philomath]

i agree that the study show very little except the tantalizing possibility that prayer influenced events. my point here is that refuting scientific studies takes more than saying that the authors are dirtbags. that they are indeed dirtbags makes me very suspicious of the result, but we shouldn't make a beta error and assume the null hypothesis based on their excursions as miscreants. quite strange that they were anxious to make a statement promoting a highly prescriptive religion through proscribed means....

[snarks_when_bored]

You've read Flamm's piece, and perhaps you've read the original study. In your view, how likely is it that the study proves what it claims to prove?

(BTW, I enjoy discussing these things and am glad you responded. Looks like nobody else has anything at all to say about this.)