doesn't that go for the "experts" (especially Martin) in this article, too?
while unsatisfying, the evidence that i put out is from first-hand experience and is at least better than the hand-waving correlation/causation. especially when it's easy to point to at least one obvious factor that isn't mentioned.
Well, sort of. If a professor of finance writes an article about how options work I'll trust it, but if he starts saying "historically options were used to xyz abc political thing whatever" then sure he should back up his argument.
