[lit-ideas] Re: statisticions, anyone?

  • From: JimKandJulieB@xxxxxxx
  • To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2006 14:31:55 EDT

I appreciate what you've said.  I'd be glad to know what your response  to 
the BBC article I posted is.
Julie Krueger

========Original  Message========     Subj: [lit-ideas] Re: statisticions, 
anyone?  Date: 10/12/2006 1:27:11 P.M. Central Standard Time  From: 
_pas@xxxxxxxxx (mailto:pas@xxxxxxxx)   To: _lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
(mailto:lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx)   Sent on:    

>John Mc: Statistics, hell. It looks like  George can't even do arithmetic.

The trouble is, the arithmetic  doesn't support the 'statistics' from the 
study that Julie cited. It  concluded that 654,000 - or 2.5% of the 
population had been  killed.

For Julie, Just a beginning of my analysis, which will  probably be met with 
"oh come on Paul, don't spin for Bush" admonitions from  all the alarmists:

Well let's just take the 100 people a day in the  streets of Baghdad 
"statistic". Over 3 years, if 100 citizens of Baghdad  were killed  --There 
are approximately 5.7 million citizens living  there -- therefore, this only 
represents about 0.19% of the population of  Baghdad. So... for 
approximately 25% of the population of Iraq, living in  what is arguably one 
of the most violent zones of the country, the death  rate is .19%. I would 
like to know, where are all these other of the '47  randomly selected' 
sections where they conducted the  interviews.


Paul  Stone
Kingsville, ON, Canada  

To  change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest  on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html

Other related posts: