I like the final outcome of that analysis in ’it figures’ but there is much wrong with that approach. Firstly, those measures are not strictly independent, so you give benefit of one parameter more than once. Secondly, I find it funny that he says that he gives equal weight to all parameter because he doesn't want to bring in subjectivity. Equal weight is as arbitrary as unequal weight in absence of any justification. Finally, what he has got is a number that doesn't have any physical meaning. In Pews' or DoG's analysis we at least know what the final number roughly stands for. To critic this analysis is not to critic application of stats in general but abuse of stats.