I won't discuss this point further with either you or @QuincyWagstaff as you have seemingly no desire to change your ways. This is unfortunate and we all lose out.
For others, perhaps more interested in learning about things, statistical significance can be found in any non-zero correlation given a sufficient sample size despite the differentiation that QW distinguishes as being an important one. It is something that has also given rise to the term "practical significance", to which QW and CH appear to be unware of. To put is succinctly, the difference between significant and insignificant is not itself significant.
Edit -Then again, I am on the spectrum. So maybe it's that.
Hey, so I'm planning to retake the LSAT in Jan and wondering if i should include an addendum saying I'm retaking in Jan, was not able to do as well on my initial test. I have not registered for the Jan test, I'm just scared they'll pass my application after seeing my score. I did indicate on OLSAS that I intend to take the Jan test, but have not physically registered for it yet.
Well I have no idea if that was stupid of me but I just rescheduled for January. The deadline for 0 fees has passed. Determined to get that 170. I guess absolute worst case I'll reapply really early for 2022
@allanrc that’s one of the most absurdly pedantic posts I’ve ever read.
From the context it’s clear to all but the most autistic that the OP wasn’t referring to a nonzero correlation in the statistical sense, but to a relatively significant one.