Freaky

I don't mean to harp on the the guy who gets his Freak-On. But I wonder why someone who's made their career finding odd conculsions embedded in data would decide to make such a dismissive statment about this. I'm not endorsing the view; it looks a little too tin-foil hat for my tastes, and since I'm not a structural engineer I'll have to defer to the experts. I'm just curious why the "rogue" of all people would find it necessary to dismiss the possibility. What if the data showed otherwise?