Indeed that seems to be what they are claiming from the article. This to me sounds shady in the extreme. A later poster argues for a "50%" error rate on both

Indeed that seems to be what they are claiming from the article. This to me sounds shady in the extreme. A later poster argues for a "50%" error rate on both sides. Try building a bridge with that. Social Science methodology is piss poor and needs to improve. People don't take it seriously for a reason.