Why are they bothering

Laudrup said:
There is little point trying to pick holes in the methodology of a respected polling company like Populus. The figures from these polls always seem to throw up inconvenient truths. It is better to accept there is a problem here with a significant percentage and try to deal with it. Not pretend it isn't there because you know a Muslim that ate a bacon sandwich once.
Click to expand...


The link you posted said it was by Policy Exchange, not the respected Populus? The holes are obvious I don't need to pick them.

You know there is a problem. It's people who are to blinkered to realise that like every other group the vast majority want nothing more then to integrate into society well and refuse to allow that. Do you know anyone like that?
 
Rapscallion said:
The first time I watched it that was my initial impression of that carefully selected portion of a much longer programme. Watch the full hour and you may find she presents quite a balanced viewpoint.
Click to expand...


I'll dig that out. Those highlights don't present anyone in a good light
 
Laudrup said:
It is a sample size calculator. A book by some guy from The Guardian doesn't change it. You think 1000 isn't enough, so how many is according to you?
Click to expand...

'Some guy from The Guardian' - You're embarrassing yourself now, you really are! Yes, what does a multi-disciplined academic and 1st class Medical Doctor know about research eh? You obviously have little to no understanding of what constitutes sound unbiased academic research or study, have you?
 
Last edited:
boyfalldown said:
The link you posted said it was by Policy Exchange, not the respected Populus? The holes are obvious I don't need to pick them.

You know there is a problem. It's people who are to blinkered to realise that like every other group the vast majority want nothing more then to integrate into society well and refuse to allow that. Do you know anyone like that?
Click to expand...

The Policy Exchange is an independent think tank, it commissions polls from companies like Populus who have a respected methodology to their work. On your other point of integration, the most recent ComRes poll had 20% of Muslims responding agreeing that western liberal society could never be compatible with Islam. You can point to the vast majority if you want to spin it that way but 1 in 5 is a large enough number to take on board especially with the rise of Islamic fundamentalists wanting t attack the west.
 
Sam B said:
'Some guy from The Guardian' - You're embarrassing yourself now, you really are! Yes, what does a multi-disciplined academic and 1st class Medical Doctor know about research eh? You obviously have little to no understanding of what constitutes sound unbiased academic research or study, have you?
Click to expand...

Your vague 'read this book' doesn't mean much to me. Either say why is relevant to this or don't bring it up. The polling companies don't exactly have a bunch of idiots working for them churning out stats and crunching numbers. If they weren't accurate with their methodology they wouldn't be in business for long. Try reading this and ask if 1000 is enough:

http://www.britishpollingcouncil.org/questions.html#q6
 
Laudrup said:
Your vague 'read this book' doesn't mean much to me. Either say why is relevant to this or don't bring it up. The polling companies don't exactly have a bunch of idiots working for them churning out stats and crunching numbers. If they weren't accurate with their methodology they wouldn't be in business for long. Try reading this and ask if 1000 is enough:

http://www.britishpollingcouncil.org/questions.html#q6
Click to expand...

I suggest you try reading your links before you just go around posting them thinking they're supporting your 'argument'. People have already tried to explain possible flaws in the survey and you're still blind to it because, for you, you think it fits into your right-wing politics. The fact that you thought Ben Goldacre was just 'some guy from The Guardian' (I'm guessing you had to Google his name?) illustrates to me perfectly how au fait you are with anything to do with research.

As for being a vague 'read this book' comment; I've seen you fail to grasp what people have tried to explain to you on so many levels, I feel you would benefit from reading the lot. Pick anything out. I'm sure you could find some Youtube videos which may help explain some stuff. Whilst aimed at medical clinicians, 'How to read a paper - The basics of evidence based medicine' by Trisha Greenhalgh, will open your eyes a little bit more too.
 
Sam B said:
I suggest you try reading your links before you just go around posting them thinking they're supporting your 'argument'. People have already tried to explain possible flaws in the survey and you're still blind to it because, for you, you think it fits into your right-wing politics. The fact that you thought Ben Goldacre was just 'some guy from The Guardian' (I'm guessing you had to Google his name?) illustrates to me perfectly how au fait you are with anything to do with research.

As for being a vague 'read this book' comment; I've seen you fail to grasp what people have tried to explain to you on so many levels, I feel you would benefit from reading the lot. Pick anything out. I'm sure you could find some Youtube videos which may help explain some stuff. Whilst aimed at medical clinicians, 'How to read a paper - The basics of evidence based medicine' by Trisha Greenhalgh, will open your eyes a little bit more too.
Click to expand...

You said:

Sam B said:
If you're using 'stats' from a survey of 1000 people to support your argument then you have no argument.
Click to expand...

You fundamentally do not understand these polls or the significance of the sampling. Another ignorant 'how can 1000 people tell you anything' type view with a reference to a book that sheds no light on the subject at all. We aren't discussing small unrepresentative samples of biased polls by drug companies looking to shift product or whatever point you are trying to labour from these medical books. A respected polling company with the methodology to back it up and a representative sample commissioned by an independent think tank is hardly 'no argument'. If it yielded terribly inaccurate results these people wouldn't be in business as nobody would be hiring them.

There is a reason why these polls are used time and time again.
 
Last edited:
Laudrup said:
You said:



You fundamentally do not understand these polls or the significance of the sampling. Another ignorant 'how can 1000 people tell you anything' type view with a reference to a book that sheds no light on the subject at all. We aren't discussing small unrepresentative samples of biased polls by drug companies looking to shift product or whatever point you are trying to labour from these medical books. A respected polling company with the methodology to back it up and a representative sample commissioned by an independent think tank is hardly 'no argument'. If it yielded terribly inaccurate results these people wouldn't be in business as nobody would be hiring them.

There is a reason why these polls are used time and time again.
Click to expand...

I think the actual problem is that you have absolutely no idea how representative the sample was, but you are treating the poll results as an absolute truth as they support your right wing views

You've even linked to sites that explain that the results can be skewed by systemic error and that not all errors can be accounted for, yet when that is mentioned as a possibility you revert back to saying that it can't be inaccurate as the polls are used time and time again. I
 
mjScall said:
I think the actual problem is that you have absolutely no idea how representative the sample was, but you are treating the poll results as an absolute truth as they support your right wing views

You've even linked to sites that explain that the results can be skewed by systemic error and that not all errors can be accounted for, yet when that is mentioned as a possibility you revert back to saying that it can't be inaccurate as the polls are used time and time again. I
Click to expand...

The poll was conducted by a respected polling company that the Financial Times quote today:

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/b808e3a2-e740-11e4-8e3f-00144feab7de.html#axzz3XszSbjrY

They simply collect and report the figures, if you choose to accept them and their methodology or want to appease your conscience that everyone else is wrong and you are right based on ignorance then you are free to do that.
 
No poll is simply carried out.
They are commissioned to be carried out.
If you think the results are in no way skewed you probably also still believe in Santa Clause.
 
So I'm not sure if this got missed, or I missed the post, but looks like the family have been found in Turkey and held there. I wonder what in practice can \ will actually be done now. http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-32388481
 
mjScall said:
I think the actual problem is that you have absolutely no idea how representative the sample was, but you are treating the poll results as an absolute truth as they support your right wing views

You've even linked to sites that explain that the results can be skewed by systemic error and that not all errors can be accounted for, yet when that is mentioned as a possibility you revert back to saying that it can't be inaccurate as the polls are used time and time again. I
Click to expand...

Indeed, and when I pointed out some stats that showed a more liberal view by a larger part of the survey respondents when compared to the general population, he felt the need to reinterpret the data to suit his world view to draw a conclusion that was never in the data. And he conveniently ignored the quotes I posted.
 
boyfalldown said:
In fairness, both sides in that video are cocks. Young lady goes looking for a fight, seems surprised when other, equally big cocks give it her....no surprise
Click to expand...

Wow! are you a muslim by any chance or do you just like provoking people?
 
AHILL said:
Wow! are you a muslim by any chance or do you just like provoking people?
Click to expand...

wow! why do you say that? If I walked up to any demo and shouted off I'd expect the response she got. What a foolish thing to say
 
boyfalldown said:
wow! why do you say that? If I walked up to any demo and shouted off I'd expect the response she got. What a foolish thing to say
Click to expand...

not as foolish as you are portraying yourself in this thread.
the young lady was asking perfectly innocent questions trying to understand what they are protesting about.
the only people being racist & aggressive there were the muslims.
 
AHILL said:
not as foolish as you are portraying yourself in this thread.
the young lady was asking perfectly innocent questions trying to understand what they are protesting about.
the only people being racist & aggressive there were the muslims.
Click to expand...


In that highlight video she wasn't, neither was she asking in a sweet innocent way. I'd agree in the full version things are much more balanced.

I disagree with you, get over it. That you can't makes you the fool.
 
viv1969 said:
No poll is simply carried out.
They are commissioned to be carried out.
If you think the results are in no way skewed you probably also still believe in Santa Clause.
Click to expand...

In what way are they skewed?
 
Hugh, you must like the sound of your own voice!

we disagree get over it. no winners, no losers.
 
Laudrup said:
You said:



You fundamentally do not understand these polls or the significance of the sampling. Another ignorant 'how can 1000 people tell you anything' type view with a reference to a book that sheds no light on the subject at all. We aren't discussing small unrepresentative samples of biased polls by drug companies looking to shift product or whatever point you are trying to labour from these medical books. A respected polling company with the methodology to back it up and a representative sample commissioned by an independent think tank is hardly 'no argument'. If it yielded terribly inaccurate results these people wouldn't be in business as nobody would be hiring them.

There is a reason why these polls are used time and time again.
Click to expand...

You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about, have you? I mean, you obviously think you but you clearly don't - This is evident to myself, the other members who have tried to explain flaws in the methodology and I would bet - and I'm going to go out on limb here - any other academic who has read your posts. The way in which clinicians (such as myself) and doctors critically analyse research and evidence (or 'stats' as you seem to call them), is the same way as any other academic would analyse anything else... choose the subject and the structure for appraising it is the same. That's why I suggested the books.

Anyway, you crack on with your Daily Mail politics and I'll take heed to some wise words from George Carlin.
 
Sam B said:
You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about, have you? I mean, you obviously think you but you clearly don't - This is evident to myself, the other members who have tried to explain flaws in the methodology and I would bet - and I'm going to go out on limb here - any other academic who has read your posts. The way in which clinicians (such as myself) and doctors critically analyse research and evidence (or 'stats' as you seem to call them), is the same way as any other academic would analyse anything else... choose the subject and the structure for appraising it is the same. That's why I suggested the books.

Anyway, you crack on with your Daily Mail politics and I'll take heed to some wise words from George Carlin.
Click to expand...

You are just waffling on and saying nothing of value. In what way do you think you know more than Populus in conducting market research? What do you even know about their methodology to criticise it? Have you even read the 101 page report or the Populus poll?

My betting is no.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top