That American courts apparently think “you can’t prove a negative” means you can’t demonstrate X decreases Y (rather than saying you can’t prove a null) and rule on that basis. Theyre doing a whole lot worse these days, but I still think about this one. papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers....
The Negative Effect Fallacy: A Case Study of Incorrect Statistical Reasoning by Federal CourtsThis article examines the negative effect fallacy, a flawed statistical argument first utilized by the Warren Court in Elkins v. United States. The Court arguedpapers.ssrn.comSanjay SrivastavaWhat is an extremely nerdy/obscure/specific thing you hate with a white-hot wrath?