But the clones will either miss or prevaricate upon.
Before the summer of 1950, Pusan was a fishing and mineral export port city on the southeast of the Korean peninsula. The average resident was thus most probably a dock worker, who would mostly handle bulk cargo. The area was isolated by a ring of hills and was fairly self suficient.
There was very little mixture of the population with the rest of Korea. It was very analogous to placing a shuffled single deck intact into the rest of a shoe.
After North Korea attacked, fully 45% percent of the pre-war population of South Korea, and several defectors from the North Korean army (KPLA) was within the line of hills, as refugees, that became known as the Pusan perimeter. The mean was a whole different mean due to this shuffling of people that occured. The mean was now more that of the South Korean people as a whole.
After the Inchon landing there was another mass shuffling of the population of Pusan. From that time to the Chinese counterattack, to Walker's killing box attrition strategy to the statlemate and to the industrialization of the early 1960s in the rest of South Korea, skilled people tended to move north to the new industrial areas, and the population of Pusan tended to be more rural and be made up of the fairly radical "red farmers" from families who used to be part of the peasant communes that opposed the Japanese occupation. Another mean applied.
Then Park Chung He began the second phase of industrial developement that resulted in the South Koreans trying to dominate the small cargo ship market, where Pusan became a ship building zone. Still another mean applied.
In all such situations there were national changes that disrupted what a mean is. Every such change stratified how the local population related to the total population of South Korea.
So what is such a heresy for me to claim that there can be a different mean for a neutral pack, and a pack for a given true count, and the means that can be drawn from prior subsets of a given starting pack? ML has switched means several times in his posts, the same as if one were to to mix the mean for what is a typical Korean in Pusan from all of the historical situations I have given above. A mean is just as much out of context if it is for all possible true counts at a given penetration point, and pounded in to the spectrum of means possible from prior subsets of a given pack of cards, as it would have been to take the average resident of South Korea, circa April 1950, and claim this is the same as the average resident of Pusan circa September 1950. Each is an example of subsets that must be carefully evaluated.