Your intuition that the world's best forensic accounting game would produce a generation of the world's best forensics accountants might be useful, but it is not evidence. And the requirement here is for extraordinary evidence.
What do you see as my corresponding extraordinary claim?
Once again: the idea that computer science is unique among virtually all the professions in that performance at the median level of competence requires, like a concert violinist, exposure at the earliest possible age. This despite the fact that most of what programmers do is simply plumbing and diagnostics.
> performance at the median level of competence requires [...] exposure at the earliest possible age.
I never claimed that, though. I think my actual claims were pretty mundane:
1. Children who play with computers have an advantage when, later in life, they're learning programming.
2. Young girls, in many places, are not encouraged to play with computers the way that young boys are.
Actually, aerospace engineering might have a bit of that. Have there been studies to see if children with the opportunity and encouragement to design, build, and fly their own model aircraft might perhaps be more likely to grow up to be successful aerospace engineers than children who aren't exposed to such things?