Excited to say that I have finally gotten to the bottom of what is up with this latest There-Is-No-Evidence-for-Planet-Nine paper. And there is definitely SOMETHING up, because the conclusions are pretty counter-intuitive compared to the data in the paper. Let's take a look.

Here's a measurement of the clustering of distant objects from our 2019 paper. Think of it as 14 arrows from (0,0) to each of the black points showing the direction that these elongated orbits are pointing. 11 of 14 point towards one quadrant. That's (allegedly) due to P9.

Napier et al. do a new analysis adding in more recently discovered objects. They conclude that there is little evidence for clustering. But wait: LOOK AT THEIR NEW OBJECTS (green and purple). WHAT???

The newly added objects are 100% consistent with the previously measured clustering. So what gives? It took a while, but I think I figured it out. You can read the full story here:
http://findplanetnine.blogspot.com/2021/02/is-planet-nine-finally-dead.html

Bottom line? Statistical evidence for P9 is still good (look at the figures above and believe your eyes!). Also papers should publish their uncertainties.

(also: looks like I forgot to renew http://findplanetnine.com  so here we are at the less impressive sounding http://findplanetnine.blogspot.com )