The 2nd quote was a direct observation of the data in the study, which you kindly explained should not be taken as indicative of what is showed because of the limitations of the data.
In the raw data provided, the lowest death rate was when the pilots had between 5000 and 9999 hours of experience; pilots with 9999+ hours of experience actually had a much higher passenger death rate.
I am still looking for a study that proves what some people here are arguing, that flight hours experience correlates with lower death rates by a sufficient amount to make it worth the cost to require higher hours experience.
Wrong again. Not passenger death rate, pilot death rate. Again, you miss the point that the 27 GA accidents skewed the data, in turn skewing the graph. If the graphed data were based solely on passenger risk, the data would not have been skewed by the 27 off-duty GA accidents.
This is tiresome. Like talking to a wall, only less productive. And to make matters worse, I didn't even bother to address some of your more unconventional ideas.