The data is probably good, but SA has a habit of dumping 48 different sources into an article, and pulling out 250 short snippets from those sources. So things tend to get misunderstood or misrepresented. The original researchers are often very careful to put a bunch of context in, and he just strips all of that out. Because there's so much stuff there it takes an age to go through and verify it all, so any debunking happens in two weeks time. And by then the HN thread has closed and no-one cares.
I'm most familiar with the English data and SA gets a fair amount wrong. In England the message is very much "no rise yet, but we need to be cautious about the future".
I'm most familiar with the English data and SA gets a fair amount wrong. In England the message is very much "no rise yet, but we need to be cautious about the future".