So there I was, reading a paper by Paul Kingsbury about dating texts in the Pali Canon based on aorist forms that appears in them [PDF], when I came across this:

I'm no Greek-'n'-Latin-only traditionalist, but I think this is taking academic obscurantism too far. The bunny-ears operator was not covered in any of my stats courses.

It's not as bad as the equation on page 5, though:

Pretty sure I saw that in some ancient Sumatran ruins one time. If I recall correctly it was carved on a blasphemous altar of cyclopean scale, past which my native porters violently refused to proceed.

Still, I have to admire any paper that explains its parameter selection in a footnote that reads, in its entirety, "Why 10? Why not?"