On Oct 12, 2006, at 2:46 PM, Michael Pugliese wrote:
> Questions about this survey and the previous by Lancet,
> http://www.slate.com/id/2108887/
> http://www.casi.org.uk/analysis/2004/msg00477.html
> http://burkeophilia.blogspot.com/2006/10/new-report-on-deaths-in-
> iraq-new-study.html
>
> Iraq Body Count vs. MediaLens,
> http://www.iraqbodycount.org/editorial/defended/2.1.php
>
> Questions about economist Marc Herald's study of Afghan casualties,
> http://www.cursor.org/stories/noncounters.htm
> . William M. Arkin, "Civilian Casualties and the Air War," Washington
> Post [October 21, 2001].(Arkin has worked for Greenpeace, Human Rights
> Watch and the leftist think tank IPS)
> http://www.comw.org/pda/0201oef.html
I'm not disappointed. Because not only did you recycle old crap, you bring it utterly irrelevant material about Afghanistan!
Your pal Kaplan in Slate made a big deal out of the wide confidence intervals in the old study. Well, check out the CIs in the new one: 654,965 (392,979–942,636). So it's somewhere between 400,000 and a million, with the best bet around 650,000. Yeah, that 400k is reassuring!
Doug