| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
TRUTH
Moderate Poster
Joined: 15 Feb 2006
Posts: 376
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Forbin
New Poster
Joined: 07 Aug 2006
Posts: 8
Location: Lincolnshire, UK
|
 Posted: Tue Aug 08, 2006 10:53 am Post subject: |
 |
|
LOL, 71% today 
YES 71% 7796 votes
NO 29% 3108 votes
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
flamesong
Major Poster
Joined: 27 Jul 2005
Posts: 1305
Location: okulo news
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 08, 2006 11:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
To say that these polls are unscientific is an understatement.
Firstly, they are not a representative sample because as one of them states:
| Quote: | | Poll results are not scientific and reflect the opinions of only those users who chose to participate. Poll results are not reflected in real time. |
Secondly, it is possible to vote more than once. I know this because in the early days of 9/11 campaigning I spent a whole night voting and rigging a poll to show that 9/11 was believed to be an inside job. If anybody tries this it isn't immediately possible but it doesn't take much technical knowledge to do so. Just to prove the point I have voted twice in these three polls and in all instances both votes were counted. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John White
Site Admin
Joined: 27 Mar 2006
Posts: 3187
Location: Here to help!
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 08, 2006 12:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Well stop it then, were not helping ourselves skewing the data...
Alternatively, one could view that the propensity to cheat the polls is a given of a percentage of humans with a particular psyche regardless of their actual opinion, so the multi-votes will cancel each other out, especially in a large enough sample...
_________________
Free your Self and Free the World |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
flamesong
Major Poster
Joined: 27 Jul 2005
Posts: 1305
Location: okulo news
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 08, 2006 12:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| John White wrote: | | Well stop it then, were not helping ourselves skewing the data... |
Chill out, will you! And try to take my point on board instead of attacking me for something which I have not done.
I did it about four years ago in a seemingly single-handed attempt to raise awareness of the issue - there wasn't a mass movement to call upon for support back then. And today I voted twice in each poll simply to test the security of the polls and to prove that they are of little value - the extra 3 votes will hardly affect an already seriously flawed poll!
Scientifically conducted surveys, such as the well renowned Zogby poll, are carried out by professional researchers and standard deviation can prove that they are representative of the public at large as accurately as +/- 1%. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
flamesong
Major Poster
Joined: 27 Jul 2005
Posts: 1305
Location: okulo news
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 08, 2006 12:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| John White wrote: | | Alternatively, one could view that the propensity to cheat the polls is a given of a percentage of humans with a particular psyche regardless of their actual opinion, so the multi-votes will cancel each other out, especially in a large enough sample... |
You should have been a scientist!
Even though I am quite adamant that 9/11 was an inside job, I recognise that there are overwhelmingly more activists campaigning for an independent inquiry than there are activists campaigning for a cover-up. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John White
Site Admin
Joined: 27 Mar 2006
Posts: 3187
Location: Here to help!
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 08, 2006 12:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I am chilled Flamesong..dont be sensitive! 
My point is that if polls are unscientific, fine, theyre unscientific, and all polls with that methodology are equally unscientific
And so?
The fact that CNN or AOL polls are unscientific (giving the POV the BOTD) doesn't mean that theyre not paid attention too and dont forumulate opinions
There's loads of stuff which is unscientific: evolutionary theory, or religions, for example: it obviously not a barrier to them forming an important aspect of our consensual world view
Humans, most definately, are unscientific on the whole!
_________________
Free your Self and Free the World |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Forbin
New Poster
Joined: 07 Aug 2006
Posts: 8
Location: Lincolnshire, UK
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 08, 2006 12:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| John White wrote: | | There's loads of stuff which is unscientific: evolutionary theory, or religions, for example.. |
Ouch! I'm sure that comment won't start a flamewar
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John White
Site Admin
Joined: 27 Mar 2006
Posts: 3187
Location: Here to help!
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 08, 2006 12:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Illusions would be happy to host it!
Planting seeds you know, planting seeds...
Anyway, back to the Poll:
Yayy!! POLL!!! Lets emote and vote! Yeah!...
And there always useful as indicators of the number of people who give some kind of damn, even if they arnt a laboratory conditions measure of hard scientific fact...
_________________
Free your Self and Free the World |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
flamesong
Major Poster
Joined: 27 Jul 2005
Posts: 1305
Location: okulo news
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 08, 2006 12:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| John White wrote: | I am chilled Flamesong..dont be sensitive!
My point is that if polls are unscientific, fine, theyre unscientific, and all polls with that methodology are equally unscientific
And so?
The fact that CNN or AOL polls are unscientific (giving the POV the BOTD) doesn't mean that theyre not paid attention too and dont forumulate opinions
There's loads of stuff which is unscientific: evolutionary theory, or religions, for example: it obviously not a barrier to them forming an important aspect of our consensual world view
Humans, most definately, are unscientific on the whole! |
Sure, but to say that X% of people believe in evolution and Y% believe in creationism is scientific, is it not.
To equate this with military intelligence, perhaps if our spies on the ground say that our army outnumbers their army by 2 to 1 we might feel that we have a greater chance of victory. If our spies on the ground have been using dodgy data, it might transpire that they counted all the allies because they knew where they were stationed and only counted the enemy which they could see because they weren't camouflaged.
You may disagree but for me, it is better to be armed with the truth than with suppositions. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John White
Site Admin
Joined: 27 Mar 2006
Posts: 3187
Location: Here to help!
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 08, 2006 1:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | Sure, but to say that X% of people believe in evolution and Y% believe in creationism is scientific, is it not. |
Scientists would tend to say so! however its the methodolgy that either makes the pudding, or a big sticky inedible mess, which is why the word science in itself doesnt prove something is scientific...
I'm not in anyway disagreeing with you btw Flamsong..just adding my perspective on a forum thread y'know: not everything is duality
The most important thing, surely, is to vote in these polls anyway if we feel bothered to do so: and I generally do...
_________________
Free your Self and Free the World |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Chat
Usergroups
Calendar
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
