Skip to main content

View Diary: A closer look at DGU numbers (117 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  That wasn't a mistake (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    gramofsam1, Wee Mama, Sandino, vcmvo2, devis1

    when you survey 5000 people, the false positive rate is applied to the entire survey population, especially since the 2.5 million is computed by taking the 'confirmed' DGU respondents of 66 and deriving the fraction by comparing to 5000. It wouldn't make sense to derive the 2.5 million from the 5000, but only apply the false positive rate to the 222.

    And the other studies did attempt to compare false positives to other activities, some more seriously than others. It was on Kleck's head to estimate and include this number in his study and error bars. His failure doesn't mean that the 2.5 million number is then without reproach.

    Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. 2.5 million DGUs, even in 1993, is 7000 per day. The fact that our newspapers, TV reports, and personal experience is completely at odds with those numbers mean something. It means that either there is a huge effort to suppress or hide all of these DGUs, or they just aren't happening in that number.

    I was alive, watching TV, reading the newspaper, and meeting people in 1993 as well. There was no amount of significantly higher DGU activity that I was aware of then compared to now.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (128)
  • Community (60)
  • Media (32)
  • Elections (32)
  • Trans-Pacific Partnership (30)
  • 2016 (29)
  • Law (28)
  • Environment (28)
  • Civil Rights (26)
  • Culture (24)
  • Barack Obama (24)
  • Hillary Clinton (23)
  • Republicans (22)
  • Science (21)
  • Climate Change (21)
  • Labor (19)
  • Economy (19)
  • Josh Duggar (18)
  • Jeb Bush (18)
  • Bernie Sanders (17)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site