>They don't say their result isn't erroneous. They say there is statistically only a very tiny chance that the correlation is due to chance.
Again, a p-value is not the chance that a result is erroneous - the statement you made is 100% mathematically incorrect. That was a major point of my previous post that you missed. It's a common misconception that the authors of this work are victims of. The linked PDF from the American Statistical Society explains things in more detail.
You misread me. I said that no one said a p-value is the chance the result is erroneous. They said nothing about errors whatsoever in the quoted statement.
Apologies for the double negative in my last comment.
Again, a p-value is not the chance that a result is erroneous - the statement you made is 100% mathematically incorrect. That was a major point of my previous post that you missed. It's a common misconception that the authors of this work are victims of. The linked PDF from the American Statistical Society explains things in more detail.