Do liberals know the difference between "data" and an "estimate"?

Question

Not only do we know how many Iraqi civilians have died as a direct result of the US-led invasion, we know who they were and where they lived.

The following information was published by the University of California Press (which, by the way operates out of Berkeley and LA, not exactly conservative bastions of all out Bush adoration). The first number represents the number of Iraqi police killed through Jan 2006, and second number represents civilians.

1 and 3 (Dahuk)
162 and 1303 (Ninawa)
183 and 2359 (Anbar)
60 and 140 (Arbil)
0 and 85 (Sulaymaniyah)
118 and 779 (Tamim)
171 and 1106 (Salahuddin)
498 and 14,996 (Baghdad)
208 and 1126 (Diyala)
18 and 978 (Karbala)
130 and 1308 (Babil)
12 and 438 (Wasit)
1 and 68 (Qadisiya)
26 and 749 (Najaf)
8 and 974 (Dhiqar)
10 and 31 (Misan)
2 and 121 (Muthanna)
39 and 1625 (Basra)

When you listen to the information liberals put out, do you ever think to ask how or where they got it?

(Where are the other 570,000 dead bodies? How can liberal estimates be off by 2000% Do liberals hate their country so much that they would actually lie to make us look bad? Is it a coincidence that their estimates are always exaggerated AGAINST the US and never in favor?)

When you elect liberals to office, how do you know that the information they offer to the public is real or as inflated like these, which have obvious political motivations?

Should we be afraid of electing liberals to powerful public offices?

dukefenton: When you conduct a "survey", you gather actual data, but the data is never released. Instead, you guess based on the data, and the guesses are NEVER to be confused with the data. That's whay they call them "estimates".

kcl_30: Yes, there actually are effective data reporting agencies in Iraq. In this case, they're called "medical examiners", and they publish death certificates.

You see, the problem with estimates is that for ever statistical death, there has to be a rotten, decaying body to go with it, you know, the kind that's real hard to miss.

Hence the question, "where are the other 570,000 bodies?" Did they disappear into thin air? Or are they in Johns Hopkins Laboratories?

MC Hummer: I'm trained in these "scientific statistical" studies you're boasting. Want me to educate you on the faulty assumptions that under pin the word "scientific"?

Estimates are guesses. The information I've given you is called a "census" from a known "population". The difference between a "census" and a "statistic" is that a "census" (in strictly scientific terms) contains the entirety of data to be drawn from.

Hey, MC: no fair editing your answer while I'm reading it!

Instead of calling me "clueless" and a "coward" who will never sign up for war, why don't you read my profile! I got OUT of the military in 2005!

(doh!)

Answer 1

Those crazies from John Hopkins and the Lancet Report would have us believe that more Iraqi civilians have been killed in an era of precision guided warfare than Japanese civilians being fire and carpet bombed in WWII (Not included Hiroshima and Nagasaki). As a matter of fact it says more Iraqis have been killed than people on both sides of the American Civil War, 4 years of mass bloodshed. They used very shoddy techniques taking 1 population center and working out from there. That barely works in the US civilian hospitals, it's total bunk when put into a war zone.

Yes there have been a lot of civilian deaths, but no there is no way that 13% of the Iraqi population has died. The real truth is they couldn't care less about the person, one more dead Iraqi=more Anti-American sentiment to them. I think liberals actually want to see Iraqis die so they can use it against the US.

What's the difference between Darfur and Iraqi dead? Dead African kids can't be used to bash the President.

Answer 2

Overall there have been around 60,000 Iraqi deaths since the war began and the US must take responsibility because the Bush Circus didn't implement the Powell Doctrine (Thanks Rummy) to control the borders which led to al-qaeda and other anti American terrorists flooding Iraq. Our US security forces have been pathetic at best and as a result numerous Iraqis are dead.

Now the Bush Circus has manipulated the US casualty count, which you should be upset about.

Cut and paste:

The New York Times reports today, "Statistics on a Pentagon Web site have been reorganized in a way that lowers the published totals of American nonfatal casualties in Iraq and Afghanistan." On Monday, the Defense Department's website listed a total of 47,657 "nonmortal casualties" in Iraq. But on Tuesday, "the same page no longer showed a total for nonmortal casualties. The bottom line is now 'total -- medical air transported,' and the figure is 31,493." The new figure no longer includes minor injuries, gastrointestinal illnesses, or mental illnesses. Paul Sullivan of Veterans for America "said the changes actually meant the Pentagon was trying to conceal the rising toll of injuries and illness." Earlier this week, the Veterans Affairs Department also revised the casualty number on its website at the request of the Defense Department.

Answer 3

Do conservative actually understand that there is no effective casualty reporting structure in Iraq and many go unreported. Thus statisticians us extrapolation of data. That means that data from families of victims whose dead go unreported is extrapolated to give an estimate of the unreported dead and this is added to so called "official" figures. I guess the data that the conservative neo cons presented to justify the war in iraq was so trustworthy that we just have to believe the official figures from the Bush Administration!!!!!

If bodies aren't brought to medical examiniers then certs can't be issued. In the research carried out many families have buried their dead because they simply don't have access to the medical care, to any type of care, and so many victims are simply buried without any type of examination. Sure maybe in a big city blast victims and bodies will go to a morgue but in small cities and towns that simply ain't going to happen.

You are only talking about reported deaths. The simply fact is that the study looked at the numbers of UNREPORTED deaths. You are working on an assumption that all deaths will be reported and that there will even be a body to report.

Answer 4

I think you mean actual vs. estimated. Estimates can be data if properly identified as such. Even then, of course, a reliable estimate is not the same thing as a wild-*** guess or a deliberate exaggeration.

Answer 5

It is their agenda to get their way. If it means lying, then lying it will be. If it means keeping truth away from the people so that only their voice is heard, then that is what they will do. They know the difference, they just don't want anyone else to know. Their agenda, their goals, that is all that matters to them. Besides, they are the only ones smart enough to know what is best for anyone, and everyone. The rank and file of Americans, to their way of thinking, are just to stupid to know better, much less care.

Answer 6

Hey, clueless!

Don't you know that the US doesn't do body counts? You're not fit to question human rights groups and medical associations that use proven scientific statistical methods to make estimates.

Prove me wrong. Sign up for military service, go there and count the dead yourself. Or are you too much of a coward to enlist in your war?


.

Answer 7

Yes, we know the difference.

Do you have similar 'facts' to prove the numbers Repugs say Saddam killed, smartie pants?

Answer 8

Yes, liberals hate their country so much that they would actually lie to make us look bad! You got it exactly. In Liberal world it's vogue to hate America and love America's enemy.

Attempting to confront Liberal lies with facts will either result in silence or more Liberal lies.

Check out the following for reference...

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=ArDRMi1h.QP5K0wuF2LY9H7sy6IX?qid=20070224221049AA4eOVz

Answer 9

do Conservatives know that one is to many for an unnecessary war started by two cowards that had their rich daddy get them out of the draft!

Answer 10

First you have to learn your azz from your elbow