Posted on 02/04/2009 8:33:36 AM PST by Joiseydude
WASHINGTON -- A prominent group of polling researchers has accused the lead author of a 2006 study suggesting massive civilian deaths in Iraq of violating the polling profession's codes and ethics.
The Executive Council of the American Association for Public Opinion Research said Dr. Gilbert Burnham, a Johns Hopkins University professor, had repeatedly refused to cooperate with an eight-month investigation into his research on the Iraqi death toll that made headlines in October 2006 when it was published by The Lancet, a British medical journal.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
What a surprise ....
A liberal deliberately lied to foster anti-war public sentiment and undermine the moral character of the United States and President Bush.
Gee, I’m shocked.
just more LIES. Doesn’t help now.
Will this be reported by anyone other than FNC?
crickets.
I wonder what the reaction will be when the MSM makes this information front page news?
Deliberately lying to support your leftist agenda, or to protect your boney butt from the IRS or the government is both morally and ethically acceptable to this crowd. In fact, it is cause for admiration and praise.
These people find it quaintly curious that someone would demand that they tell the truth, certainly their Dear Leader has never done so.
Do they use Nancy Pelosi math??? If so, there has been 6.5 billion Iraquis killed since the war started in 2003.
The survey methodology used was that a surveyer asked three different members of an Iraqi family how many people they knew that had died during the war. Each family member said “three”. It was pretty easy to use regression analysis from that point and determine that three out of four people in Iraq were killed by the Americans.
Surveys are more accurate than actual body counts. /sarc
This study apparently suffered from “main street bias”. Supposedly the investigator only talked to people on main streets - much safer than penetrating into the neighborhoods. But main streets are where IEDs and homicidal bombers operate. They’re not setting these things off on side streets. So the sample was biased towards the most likely area for casualties and ignored the areas where they would be a lot lower.
Burnham should expand his research into global warming. He’s got the perfect attitude for that sort of “science”.
Jim Hansen already has his magical mystery algorithms that can turn a deep freezer into a sauna in the bat of an eye.
And he's always reluctant to release his data and methods too.
The worst of they who lie believe the untruth.
I believe this qualifies as "no controlling legal authority."
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.