600K + Iraqis killed since 2003?

Originally Posted by Skybird

For statistical experts in the audience, the calculation in that analysis bases on the principle of so-called cluster-analysis. This is a method that is often used in psychological projects as well as in estimations concerning the number of deaths after natural desasters. Cluster-Analysis shares some theoretical intention with factor analysis and regroups variables in multi-variable designs by fuctions that in principle are intercorrelations.

In English??

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by waste gate

In English??

Hm...?

whatever your question should mean, maybe this helps:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_clustering

[bradclark1]

Originally Posted by Skybird

For statistical experts in the audience, the calculation in that analysis bases on the principle of so-called cluster-analysis. This is a method that is often used in psychological projects as well as in estimations concerning the number of deaths after natural desasters. Cluster-Analysis shares some theoretical intention with factor analysis and regroups variables in multi-variable designs by fuctions that in principle are intercorrelations. Cluster analysis for the most delivers reliable results with medium or low chances for huge errors.

My head hurts.

[The Avon Lady]

and decide whether you would buy leftist statistical data from this propagandist with a PHD.

Over 3 years, Lancet's claims would mean 600 killed per day. It's also something like a 250 to 1 kill ratio. Yeh. Sure. And all this is done without seeing a single corpse.

They say September was a bad month for Iraq, with some 2700 people killed. Do the math over 3 years.

I don't buy it, not for a moment.

[STEED]

Well said AL.

[Hylander_1314]

It also states that 31% were attributable to US actions, so who commited the other 69%? Terrorists maybe?

[Skybird]

http://www.spiegel.de/international/...442049,00.html

It's not a precise count, and researchers acknowledged a range of 426,369 to 793,663 deaths -- a margin of error of almost 200,000.

[blue3golf]

I might be reading it wrong but the artice said they interviewed the families. If that is the case then of course the number is going to be huge because I guarantee that if the "victim" was a militant or insurgent or terrorist, whatever you wanna call them now days the family will deny it and they chalk it up as a civilian death. I'm sure there are thousands of legitimate civilian deaths, but I would bet that at least half of those numbers were combatants without a uniform.

Just my two cents for what its worth.

[NEON DEON]

Originally Posted by The Avon Lady

and decide whether you would buy leftist statistical data from this propagandist with a PHD.

Over 3 years, Lancet's claims would mean 600 killed per day. It's also something like a 250 to 1 kill ratio. Yeh. Sure. And all this is done without seeing a single corpse.

They say September was a bad month for Iraq, with some 2700 people killed. Do the math over 3 years.

I don't buy it, not for a moment.

If it is 3 years they speak of then it breaks down to about 550 a day.

2,660 + lets say for the sake a padding it a bit 340 Iraqi military deaths.

3,000 a month

That is 100 vs 550

The actual count is off by 5 and half times! (if you believe the report)

Now that is one hell of a variance.

I Don't believe it and I am not even a Republican.

More examples of extremist views being pawned off as facts.

600 k my #%s! :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

[The Avon Lady]

Since the poll included asking for death certificates to verify the claims, there should be no problem, going through the appropriate Iraqi ministry (Interior?) and finding all 600K of the death certificates, right?

Fun with math.

"Estimates are pure fantasy".

No consideration of the facts, that more are dying in Iraq due to Sunni and Shia Muslims killing each other.

The BBC used to be respected, they are now regarded on the same lines as the Mirror.

Classic example, The London Anti War protest figures.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/2765041.stm


This BBC article says in its heading “million march in London”
In its article below the picture it says “Hundreds of Thousands”
Below that figure it says “750,000”
Below that it mentions, estimation of “Two million”

Well, this is BBC reporting, Slap stick any figure. AS long as gullible people out their believe the BBC. Then we can see many reapeating the ignorant BBC waffle.

[Skybird]

It has nothing to do with the BBC this time - they didn't do the calculations.

Death certificates: i would be surprised if in a war zone all killed persons really receive their certifiocate. So, AL, if I take your argument, then I would expect that there are even more killed people than those 600K for whom you wish to find detah certificates in Iraqi interior ministry (that is said to have even no complete personnel records on it's security organization - and these people are still alive).

The number of kills per day varied over three years, linear projections like being done by AL and Neon do not work well here. If the statistics are competently done, i would expect to see some accoirding "weighting" of values, in that regard.

the authors themselves admit that the m,argin of error is not small, 430K to 790K. However, I think it is safe to assume that the real numbers are much higher than what the Iraqi government, the military and Bush (60K, 50K, 30K) are saying, becasue all three of these have massive interest to keep the published numbers as low as possible, and add a better shine to the miserable overall situation. Iraq is a great success and full of promises for the future, isn't it...?

I do not defend the number in this new statistics and say they are right. However, I say that the official numbers are probably as wrong as well, and that the real kill rates are much higher. I also do not believe anyone telling peole that the events in regions that are more distanced from the central government and the known hotspots of activity are as wellknown and have their informational input considered by medias or governmental statistics as well. Many regions of the country are warzones, with broken comm lines, and rugged terrain.

So, the truth is to be found somewehere between the military's 60K and the 430-790K of the new statistics.

The new study samples 1,849 families in 47 different neighborhoods across Iraq. Researchers said the selection of geographical areas in 18 regions across the country was based on population size, not the level of violence. In 92 percent of the sampled homes, they said, families had death certificates.

"The best of what you can expect"
Statistics experts in the United States who reviewed the study said the interviewing methods looked legitimate. Robert Blendon, director of the Harvard Program on Public Opinion and Health and Social Policy, said talking to urban dwellers chosen at random was "the best of what you can expect in a war zone."

But he added that the number of deaths in the families interviewed -- 547 in the post-invasion period versus 82 in a similar period before the invasion -- was too few to extrapolate up to more than 600,000 deaths across the country during the war.

The study included about 53,000 non-violent deaths that the authors said should be attributed to the war because of its effect on health care. Gilbert Burnham, the study's lead author, defended the figures by saying they showed an increase in death rates that was similar to the increase shown by another civilian casualty project, Iraq Body Count, which collates deaths reported in the news media. But Iraq Body Count puts the current maximum death toll at just short of 49,000.

[The Avon Lady]

Originally Posted by Skybird

So, the truth is to be found somewehere between the military's 60K and the 430-790K of the new statistics.

Fine.

That statement alone debunks the phonies at Lancet.

I have yet to understand how the Iraqi government figures are debunked.

[STEED]

The way things are going on out there, there will be no government. I heard on the radio America's patience is running out and Iraq has got three months to get it's act together. So better get those death certificates quick.

[NEON DEON]

These guys present as being anti US and anti Iraq war and look at their total dead

Max: 48,693

http://www.iraqbodycount.org/