This ended up being a great recommendation, and I wish it had been around thirty years ago, but I'm glad to read it now. It definitely does a good job of balancing anecdotes with clear explanations + a narrative path on how we think about, well, "proof".
The discussion of CI's reminded me of this: "In this study, 120 researchers and 442 students—all in the field of psychology—were asked to assess the truth value of six particular statements involving different interpretations of a CI. (continued below) link.springer.com/article/10.3...
Although all six statements were false, both researchers and students endorsed, on average, more than three statements, indicating a gross misunderstanding of CIs."