[Vision2020] tony's worries for american women

[Andreas Schou]

On 12/16/06, g. crabtree <jampot at adelphia.net> wrote:
> The first time around the guesstimate was 100,000 and now you'd like for us
> to believe the number cooked up in the "more reliable study" is on the order
> of 650,000? A difference of over half a million more people all because the
> surveyors could travel with a bit less difficulty and were more stringent in
> their requirements for proof? Or is it the two additional years? A quarter
> of a million people per year is some mighty fine killin'. I'm sorry but I
> don't care what your position on the war is, a person has to find something
> fishy in such a major disparity in the figures. Unless, of course, the
> numbers support preconceived notions and biases...

G. --

When examining empirical evidence, unless you're asserting that the
statistics are being pulled from thin air, the proof's in the pudding.
Or, in this case, the methodology. Man-on-the-street verification is
the gold standard for mortality estimates. It's what researchers did
during the Congolese civil war, in Rwanda, and in Liberia. Civil wars
kill a hell of a lot of people, Gary, and we've been sitting in the
middle of a civil war for quite a long time.

-- ACS