Survey of American Muslims
- Thread starter Keltoi
- Start date
- Replies 108
- Views 14K
British Wholesales - Certified Wholesale Linen & Towels | Halal Food Gastronomy | PHP 8.4 patch for vBulletin 4.2.5
- Status
are you suggesting that CNN, ABC, and other polling institutions only call up about 1000 americans for presidential election polls? and then, do they just flip open a phone book and pick out names that 'sound like' they could be registered voters?
i'm willing to bet you that presidential election polls are a *tiny* bit more scientific
well, now that just makes the survey that more accurate...your guesses
Your suspicion of the wording of a poll is a valid point and I would agree that the selection criteria seem somewhat amateurish, but, on the other hand, the London bombers were home grown, so it also glib of you to dismiss it so lightly.
If they achieved a true random sample, 1000 is a good-sized number and would have quite a bit of statistical power, allowing one to generalize.
My guess is they may have achieved a random sample of people with listed telephone numbers and Arabic-soundig names.It does make me wonder, if they called everyone with "al" in their name, did they call Al Gore?
the latest numbers i found of the crime rate in Britain
these are actual statistics of the crime rate in britian...not a survey of how many britons would comit a crime if they could....
there are a little under 2 million muslims in the united states as of 2001...using that number, that means for this survey, .0005 or .05% of the possible muslim population (after all, they went after muslim/arabic sounding names) were polled for this survey....
i'm sure for a presidential election, only .05% of registered voters are polled.
i'm sure for a presidential election, only .05% of registered voters are polled.
Cognescenti
Account Disabled
- Messages
- 1,308
- Reaction score
- 110
You are right, for most Presidential polls in the US the fraction of the target population polled is nowhere near .05%....it's more in the range of .001 %. (that is 50x less as a fraction of the population of interest)
For example, here is a poll from 2004 with 1500 respondents in a potential population of likely voters of >120,000,000
http://americanresearchgroup.com/presballot/
this size poll yields a 95% confidence interval of +/- 2.5%
Therefore, a truly random poll of 1000 respondents in a population of 2 M (your figure) would have a very narrow confidence interval. You can argue perhaps that the questions are stupid or that the sample was not random but you can't fault the poll for statistical power based on the poll size. Sorry.
Instead of painting it as some kind of propaganda weapon, you might ask yourself where in the heck did some 40% of the respondents get the idea that "Arab men" were not responsible for the 9-11 destruction (one of the poll questions).
Cognescenti
Account Disabled
- Messages
- 1,308
- Reaction score
- 110
Ah, thanks for that clarification. Not to be pedantic, but that is not the actual crime rate. That is an estimate of the rate based on crimes reported to law enforcement agencies and passed along to some other body for record-keeping. It includes many potential biases.
While we are at it, the Dow Jones Industrial Average is a sample. The weather report on the news is a sample. When you go to the doctor and they take a hematocrit...that is a sample. It is possible, of course, to withdraw most of the blood and measure the hematocrit in a 5 gallon water bottle, but it is not a very popular option.
a majority of those men were allegedly saudi...why haven't we invaded??? it's because we already own saudi arabia.. the minute the oil supply is cut, the invasion will begin.. as i recall, this whole thing with iraq began when sadam threatened our oil supply...er, i mean when he invaded kwuait....before then, we didn't give a hoot about what he did to his people. protect americna interest! save the oil! save the oil! .....er that is, stop terrorism!
but there are many issues surrounding the 9-11 attack that have left legit questions in many americans AND arabs minds...but if you ask, then your a conspiracy theorist...you're not supposed to ask quesions on what you've already been told by the federal government what happened.
but this isn't what the topic is about, so won't go there...
Cognescenti
Account Disabled
- Messages
- 1,308
- Reaction score
- 110
"allegedly saudi"????? :? Where do you think they were from Lichtenstein? Good thing you weren't one of those questioned or the number of 9-11 deniers among the sample might have been higher.
I think you mean the "free flow of oil at market prices"
mg:i am willing to admit that there are facts about 9/11 i am not aware and ignorant about, hence the word 'allegedly' because that is what i was told by honest bushie, do feel sure and confident in what the government tells you? especially when they are using said events to justify an illegal war?
also, since there was never really a serious trial, when somebody commits a crime and wasn't tried, the term used is 'alleged' and 'suspected'...right?
but, i have many reasons to be skeptical after the 7 or so years of the bush administration
but once again, that's getting off topic, which was the anti islamic slant of the survey posted.... i say a more accurate headline is 'Majority of muslims say suicide bombing is not ok!' but the later just sells more papers or gets more clicks.
we could get a real survey going on this board, but i'm afraid trolls and islamophobes would ruin the results....
Last edited:
Cognescenti
Account Disabled
- Messages
- 1,308
- Reaction score
- 110
I'm not sure "skepticism" is the right word. After all, there are pictures of the happy trio getting through airport screeing at Logan International.
Are you saying the whole survey was anti-Islamic or just the headline? Neither one can reasonably be seen to be defaming Islam. I suppose you could say that, from your perspective, the headline portrays Islamic Americans in a poor light, but is the headline really intentionally biased or does it incisively highlight the salient finding of the study...because, after all, that is what a headline is supposed to do.
When Kim Philby, the famous Russian spy, was uncovered with his little cabal of former Cambridge students (I think it was) the headline wouldn't read...."99.999% of Cambridge graduates found to not be Russian spies"
Last edited:
Instead it would have read "Some Cambridge graduates are Russian Spies"
I'm saying the survey could have been flawed based on how they found the participants, and the headline is defaming Muslims as a group... afterall, if the majority of muslim americans disaprove of suicide bombing, there would be no story....
Keltoi
IB Legend
- Messages
- 5,061
- Reaction score
- 463
The headline was a product of the media, who chose to highlight that particular part of the survey for obvious reasons.
well, this muslim...as fanatic and extremist in her religon as they come, believe suicide bombing is a crime with no religous basis and goes against anything Islam teaches
a majority of muslims believe me, and i believe the ones that don't...don't know their religon as well as they should....
but that won't make headlines
jmo
a majority of muslims believe me, and i believe the ones that don't...don't know their religon as well as they should....
but that won't make headlines
jmo
let me rephrase that before somebody runsaway with that... 'as extremely orthodox in my religon'....
Keltoi
IB Legend
- Messages
- 5,061
- Reaction score
- 463
Cognescenti
Account Disabled
- Messages
- 1,308
- Reaction score
- 110
islamirama
Account Disabled
- Messages
- 4,194
- Reaction score
- 608
- Gender
- Male
- Religion
- Islam
Survey of 25 Muslim countries showed majority do not believe Muslims did 9-11, when asked who did? some sayd they don't know, some said inside job, and some said israel was involved.
What do i say?.....
- Status