Substantiation, correlation, causal, casual and many other characteristics are all required within relevance.  That is not the issue.  The issue is someone demanding the need of or removing the ability for all to determine on their own.  I do not impose upon others any farther than my individual opinion, even within background.  Should others have greater privilege without background?  Do others lack the privilege to decide on their own?

Is the simple and stated fact that more women are in congregations led by men not significant?  Maybe they are doing a good job?  Maybe it is because there are more women than men in this country now?

Is double blind not more substantial proof?  Failures in the areas of effect and success in the areas without affect?  Are there other reasons in the areas of proof to drive into casual variants?  Are those reasons stated?  Should we be entitled without searching of ourselves in HIM?  Is that not the absolute question?