Cantor's defense, is the outrageous claim that one can generalize from the sampled group to the unsampled group if the "control" is also "similarly" erroneous.

His version is that sampling prisoners on both ends cancels out the fact that the subject is Pedophilia in criminals, not Pedophilia among the law-abiding.

I believe that this paves the way to far more subjects to study than his limited imagination allows.

Forinstance, "Pedophilia" has been observed in many other species. And by Cantorian standards we can generalize from those samples to humans so long as the non-Pedo control group are the same species.

Never mind the obvious objection raised at BC that some crimes require a mind capable of great forethought, abstract thinking capacity and restraint ( embezzlement. ) While other crimes are committed by brain damaged types with generally poor impulse control ( rape. ) Not all kinds of crime are equal even if we accept the fraudulent notion that you can make claims about populations you never sampled.

There are reasons why he is so hesitant to discuss the sampling when self-promoting in the media.

Dante