Statistician William Briggs on his analysis of my New Zealand analysis

Some people believe Briggs is disputing my analysis. Here are the facts right from the source: HE NEVER LOOKED AT MY ANALYSIS.

He simply wanted to do it his own way and failed to find a signal using HIS methods. That does not mean there isn't a signal. It just means that the way he approached it, he didn't find a significant signal. More on that later.

But the key point is he is not claiming that my method is flawed or wrong, only that it smooths over the data because the buckets are 1 week long. Fine. But even with the "smoothing" the signal is HUGE.

Anyone saying Briggs is saying my analysis is flawed is mistaken. He's only saying that HIS method didn't find a big signal and I'll explain why that is shortly (because he didn't look the at it the right way... can you see his big mistake?).