re: #273 gwangung

Well not quite, not quite. If the courts accept his judgement as an expert, it’s allowable. Courts accept “subjective judgement” that all the time.

(It’s the courts accepting it that’s the hurdle, of course. On the other hand, you have two different methodologies leading to the same results. In the sciences, that can raise your confidence in the end results).

What “not quite”? We’re not in a court.

Call me after Owen’s expertise is accepted and doesn’t fall down under cross-examination, because the principles laid out in his interview sure as heck don’t look like they support his conclusions in this case.

And if the court accepts a judgment of the other guy - who has no verifiable methodology to offer whatsoever, but rather relies on his “experience”, that will be a circus, not a court.