In this case there really is only half a page from Kass and Raftery that these guys could conceivably cite, and it's non-technical enough that there's not much room for blustering about how to interpret it. For the rest of KR95, well, I'd like to see either Dale try to explain how appreciating their work depends on understanding the merits of adaptive Gaussian quadrature.
But okay, they can always retreat to debating the meaning of "is". I don't hold real hope that either Dale will ever see the light here. It might be possible to make clear to some of their readers how totally wrong they are, though. The fields are white for harvest, as it were. Something like that anyway.
Gadianton wrote:I'm sure Kass and Raftery would be thrilled to learn what their work has led to.
That's a thought. There's an outside chance that one of them might be willing to comment. Since the chance can't be less than 2% no matter what, it could be worth a try.
They are both still alive and apparently active, at CMU and UW, respectively. Now that I have the idea I'm faltering, however. What else could they do, on the remote chance that they wanted to do anything, besides reach down to crush some poor little incompetent buggers with a comment? If I were in their shoes I'd just feel bad about that. This topic is not important enough to shatter anyone's ego over it.