Planetarion Forums - View Single Post

milo · 26 Oct 2006, 22:03

The methodology used in this report and in the previous one has been and is used in other areas of research. Assuming you think the research itself was rigorous (ie the lancet isn't a comic book, which it isnt) then you're either

questioning the maths of the sampling (which would have serious implications for statisticians)

questioning the samples themselves (ie the iraqis questioned were bullshitting)

Personally i choose to 'believe' or 'accept' these reports above ones based on media reporting because they aren't ad-hoc. I'd be fine with another report using population sampling showing something completely different, but its a tad laughable to criticise a report assembled using maths tools with one based on media coverage from 'approved sources'. The criticism by the IBC isn't doing anything for me one way or the other, they say its absurd that hundreds of thousands of death certificates weren't registered by the central government, on the other hand since 92% of the people showed a death certificate it would suggest massive death certificate fraud for no apparent reason. And the report does give sources for media based sampling only accounting for ~20% of final casualties in the past.

I'd be fine if the two reports were to be disprooved, but it has to be with something that is statistically valid.

26 Oct 2006, 22:03	#14
milo Registered User Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 1,094	Re: 654,965 Dead Iraqis Later The methodology used in this report and in the previous one has been and is used in other areas of research. Assuming you think the research itself was rigorous (ie the lancet isn't a comic book, which it isnt) then you're either questioning the maths of the sampling (which would have serious implications for statisticians) questioning the samples themselves (ie the iraqis questioned were bullshitting) Personally i choose to 'believe' or 'accept' these reports above ones based on media reporting because they aren't ad-hoc. I'd be fine with another report using population sampling showing something completely different, but its a tad laughable to criticise a report assembled using maths tools with one based on media coverage from 'approved sources'. The criticism by the IBC isn't doing anything for me one way or the other, they say its absurd that hundreds of thousands of death certificates weren't registered by the central government, on the other hand since 92% of the people showed a death certificate it would suggest massive death certificate fraud for no apparent reason. And the report does give sources for media based sampling only accounting for ~20% of final casualties in the past. I'd be fine if the two reports were to be disprooved, but it has to be with something that is statistically valid. __________________ boobs Last edited by milo; 26 Oct 2006 at 22:19.