Thomas Herndon, BI, Exclusive: The Grad Student Who Took Down Reinhart And Rogoff Explains Why His Paper Refutes Their Main Result, here. She wants to know when your thesis defense is scheduled.
I want to address here what I feel are the major misinterpretations of our work, which will in part require engaging with the claims made in Reinhart’s and Rogoff’s response. First, we categorically did not impute any negative motives to the authors; and second, our results are not consistent with and do not confirm their findings.
I want to start by stating in the strongest possible terms that the purpose of our paper was not to imply that the selective omissions and unconventional weighting were, as R&R asserted in response to us, “intentionally used to bias the results.” The purpose of our paper was strictly to ascertain the veracity of their results. We know nothing whatsoever about their motives, and did not speculate on this at all in our paper. Throughout our paper we assume that their errors were honest mistakes. We also have honest differences over the appropriate methods for calculating average GDP growth figures.