And that's what I get for not editing my comment to say, "Edit: Thanks!"

Speaking of which....

Indeed he did - but the two quotes were in the same comment until after I posted my request. That's why there's an asterisk after the timestamp on the original quote post - the comment was edited to remove the Bas van Fraassen quote.

How would you rephrase that using Bayesian language, I wonder?

I think I read that book, but I can't put my hands on it just this second.

Great video, too.

That answers my question, thanks! In my experience, any citation that does not refer to some printed reference should not be believed - a line saying "as quoted in How to lie with statistics by Darrell Huff" was what I was looking for.

One quote per post, please.

Edit: Belated thanks!

Why that citation?

Edit: Question answered below.

You may be able to delete the words on either side of the adjective as well.

Bear in mind that it's often not worth the effort. I think the skill to train would be recognizing when it might be.

Besides, in the prediction-hash case, they may well not post right away.