>Ok. Ultimately we are here searching for the truth. It is unusual to find well respected members of the UT that have enough class to admit that they are wrong. Namely, James Booth and Ed Rauh. Now true you might have to go through a month of sundays before you might catch them in a mistake but they are willing to admit it when they are wrong. When you stop being concerned with being right and searching for the truth instead, it doesn't matter where you started it is only important that together you reach the same goal, The Truth. It's also easier to be less invested in one stance or the other.
>
>My feeling is that you are missing the point of the question and you feel that I am missing the point. I am willing to admit that I might be wrong. Are you?

Dan,

Maybe I am missing the point. I admit I haven't read all the messages. With no facetiousness, was the point that it's Bob Barker rather than Monty Hall (or vice versa)? I don't own a TV, so while I appreciate the joke, I couldn't "get" it, so to speak.

I just logged in here and am picking up messages from Saturday and Sunday. I have been responding to Saturday's. I haven't even gone through most of Sunday's yet. If Jim and/or Ed have reversed their positions, then I'm guilty of beating a dead horse, and for that I deeply apologize.

In my defence, problems with statistical analysis like this are one of my hot buttons. Too many widows and unsophisticated investors fall prey to statistical scams. The entire economy of Albania collapsed because of a Ponzi scheme.

I don't feel I've been unduly harsh to "blue envelopes"; it wouldn't matter if they were SUTM or whatever, my reaction would be the same.