Econometric Forecasting and the Science Court

Abstract

The science court provides safeguards. Because most of the seven scientists took exception to the conclusions in Folklore versus Fact, one gains confidence that the evidence against these conclusions has been fairly presented. However, little new evidence was generated. The science court produced a number of recommendations - some agreeing with those in Folklore versus Fact, and others disagreeing. The point of most agreement was that econometricians should use simpler methods. In my opinion, the science court provides a useful procedure to increase the value of advocacy. Note, however, that the method of multiple hypotheses, as employed in Folklore versus Fact, led to an efficient and apparently unbiased collection of the evidence (additional evidence by the science court tended to support the conclusions in Folklore versus Fact). And the collection of evidence is a key function of the scientists. Once this is done, the scientist can promote his findings but this can also be done by the readers, who are the ultimate judges in our science court.

Keywords: Econometric, forecasting, science court, folklore vs. fact