The only truly intuitive user interface is the nipple. Everything else is learned.

I would only emphasize the points made in this post. Daubert analysis and these kinds of evidentiary hearings are enormously complicated. Daubert itself is part of a triology of cases, the other two being Kumho Tire and Joiner. To get a real sense of what is going on, you need to also post the opinions of these two cases. Additionally, it seems to make little sense to post the opinion or discuss its holding on this forum without a discussion of the Federal Rules of Evidence and other issues of procedure. "relevant and reliable" might mean one thing in this forum and stripped out of the legal context but in this case "relevant and reliable" cannot be understood without understading legal relevance, materiality, causation, burdens, presumptions, etc. While this discussion is interesting, it bears little concerete relevance to important legal issues of mass tort, medical malpractice, criminal proof, etc. These issues are far more complex and legal than scientific. As a lawyer, I can't help but feel that these discussions are glossing over the enormously complex issues of legal procedure and torts to devolve into mere shallowing ranting about torts, class actions and uninformed opinions about the function, nature and role of the American judiciary and legal system.