You don't form your hypothesis after you've looked at the data, just as you don't prove what a great shot you are by drawing a target around the bullet hole.

I normally form hypotheses after I've looked at the data, although before placing high credence in them I would prefer to have confirmation using different data.

I agree that I made at least one error in that post (as in most things I write). But what exactly are you calling out?

I believe an intelligence explosion is likely (and have believed this for a good decade). I know the SIAI purports to try to positively influence an explosion. I have observed that some smart people are behind this effort and believe it is worth spending their time on. This is enough motivation for me to seriously consider how effective I think that the SIAI will be. It is also enough for me to question the claim that many people supporting SIAI is clear evidence of irrationality.