The sampling method used to determin this is tired and true and John Hopkins University is world-renown. The truth hurts....
2006-10-26 13:44:59 · 24 answers · asked by Cold Stone 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Johns Hopkins didn't release the study because the sampling was of only 49 families, far below what anyone would consider a proper random sampling of the population.
Johns Hopkins generally releases major studies in the New England Journal of Medicine, not the Lancet.
The sampling method is admittedly speculative, it is not "tried and true". The sampling method used is for tribal zones of Africa or remotes islands in the Pacific where there is not much government influence. Iraq has a strong records of births and deaths so that method is not applicable at all.
Just over 65,000 graves have been dug and deaths registered, that is the accurate number.
2006-10-26 13:50:14 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 8⤊ 1⤋
You can use statistics (especially "sampling") to make any claim "true." I doubt that number because its outrageous.
If you added up casualties from Saddam's army, foreign terrorists, Iraqi civilians, and coalition troops, then you might approach half that number.
Of course the study is part of a political campaign to feign the appearance that 650,000 innocent people have died, which is just plain silly.
Assuming the ridiculous 650,000 number...it still doesn't add up to how many people Saddam killed during his reign.
-Aztec276
2006-10-26 20:54:58 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Okay let's put this tried and true method to the test. I'll go the Republican convention and interview 2,000 people how many people in their families like President Bush. Okay have out of those numbers calculate use the number of people in the US 300 million and come up with a popularity of 213 million people like Bush plus or minus 100 Million-400 Million...
Now if you are a Bush fan of course you'd like to believe and if you didn't you would dismiss the whole thing as false right?
It's flawed study and John Hopkins should be ashamed of entering into political propaganda arena.
2006-10-26 20:54:30 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
And you can agree that wikipedia says that 500,000 children died in Iraq while Clinton was in office according to UNICEF
Sanctions on Iraq that were imposed after the Gulf War remained in place under Clinton. UNICEF estimated that 500,000 children had died as a result by 1999
2006-10-26 20:56:40 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
considering what Jesi said is true (and she is pretty good, if you read her answers, no matter what side)...
maybe someone decided to add a 0 to the number...
I think it's a bit high... anyone would realize that.
and like many, many others said, that got numerous thumbs down... it's terrorists killing civilians. right? all those suicide bombers at market places? well, that certainly isn't an American troop with a bomb strapped to his chest.
people hate freedom and hate what we are trying to give to Iraq....
2006-10-26 21:20:36 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Being a liberal myself, I don't believe the 650,000 number. Think about it, there have been a number of other independent investigations that have come up with numbers between 50-100K. THis is the only study to have such a huge number, makes it hard to believe. Furthermore, being a scientist, I can tell you that numbers can be massaged to say just about anything if you really want to. Just because the researcher is from John Hopkins does not mean he doesn't have an axe to grind. All studies need to be taken together.
2006-10-26 20:48:56 · answer #6 · answered by Josh550 2 · 11⤊ 4⤋
This Sir, has been my point. The truth hurts indeed. It is easier to cover one's head in the sand tan accept the inevitable.
To question the John Hopkins study is to bring into disrepute the good name of a world renowned institution.
The Reds go into apaplexy when the media attempt to educate us with the truth and facts.
2006-10-26 20:52:18 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 5⤋
the number seems to suit the mentality of the ,world opinion. but still were is the 100% proof,untill such its to be speculated for all time,thus is human nature.truth must be absolute sir.
2006-10-26 20:57:37 · answer #8 · answered by CIVILIAN 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Has this study been posted on YouTube along side Loosechange? There are plenty of logical explanations here, including one from a liberal. Nuf said.
2006-10-26 20:51:51 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
That is 512 Iraqi's a day, about 1 every 3 minutes.
So, how is it world-renown? Maybe the method itself when used correctly, but your telling me it was used correctly? LMAO!!!
2006-10-26 20:48:06 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 4⤋