9/11 Truth - By the Numbers

[UNLoVedRebel]

This is a response to TAM’s request to see the regression study published in the J&MC Quarterly.

The Pentagon was not struck by an airliner but instead was hit by a cruise missile fired by the military.
Very likely 6.1
Somewhat likely 6.0
Not likely 80.4
Don’t know 7.4
Other 0.1

The collapse of the Twin Towers in New York was aided by explosives secretly planted in the two buildings.
Very likely 5.8
Somewhat likely 10.2
Not likely 77.4
Don't know 6.5
Other 0.1

above numbers in Percent
N= 1,010

Education
Twin Towers bombed / Missile hit Pentagon

High school grad beta -.660 p=(.141) odds.517 / beta-.582 p=(.215) odds .559
Some college beta -.882 p=(.050) odds .414 / beta -.880 p=(.069) odds .415
College grad beta -.548 p=(.268) odds .578 / beta -1.211 p=(.027)* odds .298
Postgraduate beta -.964 p=(.097) odds .381 / beta -1.314 p=(.030)*odds .269

Race
Twin Towers bombed / Missile hit pentagon

African American beta .790 p=(.042)* odds 2.203 / beta .795 p=(.054) odds 2.214
Asian American beta .635 p=(.264) odds 1.887 / beta 1.382 p=(.015)* odds 3.983
Hispanic beta .618 p=(.164) odds 1.855 / beta 1.148 p=(.013)* odds 3.152


Marital Status
Twin Towers bombed / Missile Hit Pentagon

Not Married beta.602 p=(.022)* odds .546 / beta .315 p=(.265) odds .730

Sex
Twin Towers Bombed / Missile Hit Pentagon

Female beta.732 p=(.010)* odds 2.065 / beta .319 p=(.273) odds 1.385

Age
Twin Towers Bombed / Missile Hit Pentagon

Age 18-24 beta .686 p=(.192) odds 2.061 / beta .222 p=(.711) odds 1.207
Age 25-34 beta.902 p=(.047)* odds 2.542 / beta 1.332 p=(.005)* odds 3.691
Age 35-44 beta.272 p=(.543) odds 1.338 / beta -.050 p=(.925) odds .937
Age 45-54 beta.163 p=(.666) odds 1.192 / beta .604 p=(.131) odds 1.813
Age 55-64 beta -.737 p=(.128) odds .489 / beta -.352 p=(.487) odds .693


Reference Groups (respectively): Less than high school diploma, White, Married, Male, & Age 65 and over.

* means statistically significant difference; set at p <.05.

Education
There was a negative association with education and belief in the "Twin Towers" conspiracy, but there was no statistically significant difference between the groups. There was, however, a statistically significant difference for the “Pentagon” conspiracy, confirming that the lowest educated people will be more likely to believe in at least one of the 9/11 conspiracy theories.

Race
There was a statistically significant difference between African American and the reference group (whites) for the "Twin Towers" conspiracy, but none between the other minority groups. There was a statistically significant difference between Hispanics and Asian American/other and the reference group for the "Pentagon" conspiracy, but none between the reference group and African Americans.

Marital status
There was a statistically significant difference between the two groups for the "Twin Towers" conspiracy, but not the “Pentagon conspiracy.” The findings show what was expected, unmarried people are more likely to believe in at least one 9/11 conspiracy theory.

Age
The regression showed that persons aged 24-34 are positively associated with both conspiracy theories.

All number from:
Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly
Vol. 84, No. 2
Summer 2007
Stempel, C., Hargrove, T., Stempel III, G.

[UNLoVedRebel]

Wow, this came out sloppy.

[Dr Adequate]

How to make tables (http://forums.randi.org/misc.php?do=bbcode#table).

[UNLoVedRebel]

How to make tables (http://forums.randi.org/misc.php?do=bbcode#table).

So now you tell me...

[UNLoVedRebel]

If anyone has any questions about what the numbers mean, let me know. As of now, the one of most interest to us is probably the odds analysis.

For example, look at the education table, go the missile hits pentagon column, and find the postgraduate row. The odds give us a .269. Now the reference group was less than high school diploma. This means that for every 1.000 person with a high school diploma or less who believe a missile hit the pentagon, there are .269 persons with a postgraduate degree who believe a missile hit the pentagon.

For every 1.000 male who believes the twin towers were brought down by explosives, there are 2.065 females who believe the twin towers were brought down by explosives.

[Bad_Doggie]

Do you have a link to the data? It would be helpful and save googling time.

Thanks

Woof!

[Alex Libman]

This is one of the worst cases of a straw-man argument I have ever seen!

(1) The nutty "no planes" / "bombs in buildings" speculation has as much to do with 9/11 Truth as Adolf Hitler has to do with vegetarianism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vegetarianism_of_Adolf_Hitler)!

(2) As a Truther, I would answer "somewhat likely", but I can imagine other Truthers answering any other way while still fitting the definition of a Truther. The non-Truthers (aka "government kool-aid drinkers") would answer "there is no doubt in my mind the government couldn't possibly lie", which isn't an option.

(3) In any society, the political dissidents are likely more likely to be young, male, single, and college drop-outs. This was the case in Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union, and it is the case in modern-day America. Furthermore, you will probably find the same demographic probability patterns for anti-government beliefs that are accepted mainstream facts (ex Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuskegee_Study_of_Untreated_Syphilis_in_the_Negro_ Male), Operation Northwoods (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods), etc).

So this is completely irrelevant to any discussion of 9/11 Truth!

[funk de fino]

You dont understand what a strawman is then? Nice of you let us know.

[Dr Adequate]

This is one of the worst cases of a straw-man argument I have ever seen! Hmm, "strawman", let's look that up in the 9/11 Glossary ...

... ah yes. When used by a Truther, it denotes "any widespread piece of Truther nonsense that he personally doesn't believe in".

[PhantomWolf]

You dont understand what a strawman is then? Nice of you let us know.

Well he do claims too, but it doesn't stop him using them....

The non-Truthers (aka "government kool-aid drinkers") would answer "there is no doubt in my mind the government couldn't possibly lie", which isn't an option.

So I'm going to go with..... no.

[Dave Rogers]

Unusually, I find myself agreeing with Alex on a couple of points.

This is one of the worst cases of a straw-man argument I have ever seen!

Yes, as an illustration of the strawman fallacy it is indeed a spectacularly poor choice, since it is in no sense an example of attributing a false position to one's opponent and then attacking that false position. Well spotted.

(1) The nutty "no planes" / "bombs in buildings" speculation has as much to do with 9/11 Truth as Adolf Hitler has to do with vegetarianism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vegetarianism_of_Adolf_Hitler)!

Agreed. Bombs in buildings and related speculation, the central thesis of Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, a major component of Loose Change, the subject of the last remaining gasps of debate from the truth movement following the NIST WTC7 report, and quite possibly the commonest topic of discussion on this forum, indeed have nothing to do with the truth of what happened on 9/11. Even the bulk of the "9/11 truth movement" admits that this is also true of the ideas of the no-planes fraternity.

The non-Truthers (aka "government kool-aid drinkers") would answer "there is no doubt in my mind the government couldn't possibly lie", which isn't an option.

Now that is a much better example of the strawman fallacy. Well chosen.

Dave

[UNLoVedRebel]

This is one of the worst cases of a straw-man argument I have ever seen!


So this is completely irrelevant to any discussion of 9/11 Truth!

Nonsense, the twin towers collapses are the lynchpen of the 9/11 TM. The 'no-plane at the pentagon' maybe the gutter of the TM, but this survey treats them separately. There was a LIHOP question, but I left it out for lack of space.

[DavidJames]

I find nothing remarkable about the numbers. It's pretty much exactly what has been speculated. 9/11 CTists are relatively young, white and unmarried. I would further speculate when we look at those who don't fit that demographic we would find higher incidences of mental disorders.

[MarkyX]

This is one of the worst cases of a straw-man argument I have ever seen!

(1) The nutty "no planes" / "bombs in buildings" speculation has as much to do with 9/11 Truth as Adolf Hitler has to do with vegetarianism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vegetarianism_of_Adolf_Hitler)!

http://img504.imageshack.us/img504/6682/hyenalaughingbr3.jpg

[dudalb]

3) In any society, the political dissidents are likely more likely to be young, male, single, and college drop-outs. ).

They are also a group that tends to be very receptive to any nutty anti authority theory that comes along.
And most of them grow out of it...which should tell you something about it's validity.
Alex fails again.

[JamesB]

The Zogby poll commissioned by 911truth.org shows the same thing, believing in MIHOP/LIHOP is inversely correlated with both education and age.

[T.A.M.]

Rebel:

Excellent post. Top notch OP, and well worth its own thread. I find fascinating, the "devil in the details" of such analysis.

For instance, why are single people more likely to agree with CTs, as opposed to married? Why the 24-34 age demographic?

Some might speculate that married people tend to be more settled, and that believing in such disturbing, life changing things as the CTs is too much for them, so they fall back to a safer position.

Some might speculate that the 24-34 age group are still suffering from anger and rebellion wrt authority, and that many CTs fit in with their world view from that perspective.

Once again, thank you for the study/survey data. well done.

TAM:)

[1337m4n]

This is one of the worst cases of a straw-man argument I have ever seen!

As someone who was on the debate team for the four years of high school, I would like to point out how utterly disgusted I am with people who think that memorizing the names of all the logical fallacies makes them good debaters.

Especially when they get them wrong. How in [insert patron deity's name here]'s name could you POSSIBLY consider the OP a "straw-man"? That doesn't make the slightest bit of sense.

Maybe this explains it:

There was, however, a statistically significant difference for the “Pentagon” conspiracy, confirming that the lowest educated people will be more likely to believe in at least one of the 9/11 conspiracy theories.

[Alex Libman]

(I stand by my statements, and I have nothing to add to them.)

[adversity1]

(I stand by my statements, and I have nothing to add to them.)

Except for parantheses apparently?

[funk de fino]

(I stand by my statements, and I have nothing to add to them.)

Which confirms you have no idea what a strawman is. Well done.

[Dr Adequate]

(I stand by my statements, and I have nothing to add to them.) So, for exampe, you would not care to argue that your own personal version of The Truth is actually The Truth.

Your reluctance is understandable,

[UNLoVedRebel]

Thanks for the feedback everyone. I've always been good at statistics, and TAM gave me an opportunity to showcase my skills, and there's been a lot of trolling lately, so I said what the hell. Looking at the data, it's not quite what the debunker crowd would've wanted. In the education category, there was no statistically significant difference in the "twin towers" conspiracy in any of the two groups, even the bivariate relationship between postgraduate and less than high school diploma. A larger sampling size would've most likely given us a statistically significant difference. Maybe undergraduates majoring in a humanities might say 'somewhat likely' for the twins being bombs, considering universities, and the humanities colleges, are known to be notoriously liberal. But there was a statistically significant difference for the "Pentagon" conspiracy, confirming what everyone's been saying all along; the no Boeing 757 at the pentagon is the gutter of the 9/11 Truth movement. Unmarried people being more likely to believe in at least one conspiracy comes as no surprise, people with this kind of mindset don't typically do well in relationships.

[Alex Libman]

So, for exampe, you would not care to argue that your own personal version of The Truth is actually The Truth.

What's in it for me?

[Dr Adequate]

What's in it for me? That would depend on your goals.

* If you really want other people to believe your version of The Truth, then you should try and find some evidence for it.

* If you really don't want people to believe your version of The Truth, then you're doing a great job.

* If you don't give a damn either way, then I have to wonder why you bother writing all these posts about 9/11.

[Alex Libman]

Um, how many times do I need to say: there is no evidence! How could there possibly be evidence? Even if one of the planes malfunctioned on 9/11, dropped in my back yard intact, and I could enter the cockpit and see that the plane was robotically controlled (or whatever) - how much time would I have to get this information out? And who would take my word over the government's? I would be just like the FBI whistle-blowers (http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0905-25.htm) claiming that the hijacker patsies were being watched and protected...

As for what I want, very simple - freedom. For myself. That's it.

[Dr Adequate]

Um, how many times do I need to say: there is no evidence! How many times? That again depends on your goals.

If you want me to nominate you for a Stundie, then once will suffice.

If, on the other hand, you want to convert me to your version of Truthism, then saying it a million times will not be sufficient.

[Alex Libman]

Why would I want to convert anyone? You want to worship your government, fine: pay taxes to it, be regulated by it, fight wars for it, get planes hacked into your office (though thankfully too early in the morning for you to be there, statistically speaking). Etc. But I don't!

[Dave Rogers]

You want to worship your government, fine: pay taxes to it, be regulated by it, fight wars for it, get planes hacked into your office (though thankfully too early in the morning for you to be there, statistically speaking). Etc. But I don't!

And you think that pretending the planes crashing into offices were flown by someone other than the people who actually flew them will somehow prevent it happening to you?

Dave

[Dr Adequate]

Why would I want to convert anyone? I assume that you do not. You wouldn't post such a lot of ridiculous crap if you wanted to convert people.

So what puzzles me, and what I have asked you, is what goal you do have in mind.

Do tell.

[funk de fino]

Why would I want to convert anyone? You want to worship your government, fine: pay taxes to it, be regulated by it, fight wars for it, get planes hacked into your office (though thankfully too early in the morning for you to be there, statistically speaking). Etc. But I don't!

You are deluded, very few here worship their govt and quite a lot are not even american and the majority would also not fight a war.

If the govt want to get you bad enough its going to happen, you would not be able to stop it, get over it. However, why would they bother with a nobody on an internet messageboard who says nothing?

[PhantomWolf]

Why would I want to convert anyone? You want to worship your government, fine: pay taxes to it, be regulated by it, fight wars for it, get planes hacked into your office (though thankfully too early in the morning for you to be there, statistically speaking). Etc. But I don't!

I don't pay taxes to the US Government, I'm not regulated by it, I don't fight wars for it, and a grand total of zero planes have hit office buildings in my country. How do I fit into your beliefs that debunkers are all US Government sheep?

[Dr Adequate]

I don't pay taxes to the US Government, I'm not regulated by it, I don't fight wars for it, and a grand total of zero planes have hit office buildings in my country. How do I fit into your beliefs that debunkers are all US Government sheep? A close study of Truther rhetoric suggests that you don't exist.

[Alex Libman]

And you think [contemplating the possibility that] the planes crashing into offices were flown by someone other than the people who [mommy government says] flew them will somehow prevent it happening to you?

FTFY.


So what puzzles me, and what I have asked you, is what goal you do have in mind.

Self-expression.

And, to quote Ron Paul, "let it not be said that we did nothing".


If the govt want to get you bad enough its going to happen, you would not be able to stop it, get over it.

It doesn't mean I have to like it.


How do I fit into your beliefs that debunkers are all US Government sheep?

Ah, yes, you're from down under (if you can say that about NZ), but I don't see what difference that makes.

All governments are one entity as far as I'm concerned.

[JoeyDonuts]

Ah, yes, you're from down under, but I don't see what difference that makes.

All governments are one entity as far as I'm concerned.

Oh yeah...I remember hearing this.

Don't they meet tri-annually at a secret country mansion in Colorado known only as...

:eek: S U S P E N S E :eek:

TPMS6tGOACo

[PhantomWolf]

Ah, yes, you're from down under (if you can say that about NZ), but I don't see what difference that makes.

All governments are one entity as far as I'm concerned.

Which quckly shows how little you understand the world. Our last PM was almost rabidly anti-US and one of the first things her Govt did was scrap a deal with the US to buy F-16s off of them. Add that to our refusal to allow US Warships into our harbours or have our troops involved in conflicts such as Iraq with them, how do you defend that statment that "All governments are one entity" when quite clearly the US Government and the NZ Government have been poles apart in their positions to such a point that it has made the good things we'd like such as trade deals and the like extremely difficult?

[PhantomWolf]

All governments are one entity as far as I'm concerned.

Do you honestly believe that the Governments of Iran, Israel, Palastine, North Korea, Lybia, China, South Korea, the US, France, and Russia are all one entity?

[Alex Libman]

This shows how little you understand of the world. There are minor frictions, sure, but ultimately the fight is fixed. Or do you think professional wrestling is real also?

Governments represent an illusion of order, but in reality they're just run by self-interested individuals, and holding on to power is their primary concerns. They have more to gain from cooperation than competition. The U.S. needs Kim Jong-il for our military presence in the region, and Mr Kim's whole power structure depends on keeping his people in fear of a U.S. invasion (you'll find plenty of North Korean TV clips online to see how that works). And of course that's probably the most extreme example, U.S. is N.Z.'s #2 export and #3 import partner (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_New_Zealand). Different branches, same church.

[Bad_Doggie]

To save Googling time.

For anyone interested in reading the report I believe it is here.

.aejmc.org/_scholarship/research_use/jmcq/07sum/stempel_text.pdf

Woof!

[T.A.M.]

Unmarried people being more likely to believe in at least one conspiracy comes as no surprise, people with this kind of mindset don't typically do well in relationships.

Interesting take, that I should have thought of. So I now think the difference between married and singles COULD BE a combination of (A) Married people, in general, falling back to a safer position, and (B) People who actually believe in CT tripe not doing well in relationships.

TAM:)

[A W Smith]

(I stand by my statements, and I have nothing to add to them.)


Nothing more to say to the world alex (http://www.alexlibman.com/)?

[JoeyDonuts]

This shows how little you understand of the world. There are minor frictions, sure, but ultimately the fight is fixed. Or do you think professional wrestling is real also?

My God. You've done it. You've shattered my entire worldview with that one statement.

Now that I've realized that country I served with honor is nothing but an enormous pyramid scheme, puppeted from behind closed doors by (insert shadowy group here) I need something new to believe in.

Do you have any pamphlets you can recommend? I'm sure you have a few left over from passing them out at the student union.

You, sir, are deserving of a 540 frog splash off the top rope.

[PhantomWolf]

This shows how little you understand of the world. There are minor frictions, sure, but ultimately the fight is fixed. Or do you think professional wrestling is real also?

Governments represent an illusion of order, but in reality they're just run by self-interested individuals, and holding on to power is their primary concerns. They have more to gain from cooperation than competition. The U.S. needs Kim Jong-il for our military presence in the region, and Mr Kim's whole power structure depends on keeping his people in fear of a U.S. invasion (you'll find plenty of North Korean TV clips online to see how that works). And of course that's probably the most extreme example, U.S. is N.Z.'s #2 export and #3 import partner (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_New_Zealand). Different branches, same church.

Gee wow, you found that we export and import a lot from the States, probably why we want that free trade deal they keep denying us, it'd be saving NZ millions of dollars a year that they wouldn't have to pay in tariffs and allow us to open up new markets in the US. I guess that sort of cooperation doesn't count hmmm?

Have you ever considered the idea that many politicians that go into Government are really normal folks who think they can run the country to the benefit of all their fellow people? Probably not, but then I suspect you have never actually got to know anyone in Government. I come from a small country, while it doesn't mean I know Bob in Rotorua, I have personally known my past 3 representatives in Parliment, two of whom were ministers meaning they had direct influence on Government policies. One I knew through his son who was a classmate that I tutored in Chemistry. One I knew through my Father and his service club connections, and the other I knew because before going into politics he was a teacher at my high school, and though he never taught me, I had contact with him via other school activities. None of the three are self-interested individuals wanting to hold on to power, in fact the last just lost his seat because he didn't take up the option of being on the party list and there was a huge swing against his party. These people aren't some sort of Elite who are appointed to positions, they are common every day folk that get voted in by other common every day people.

Now to some of your other claims. If Countries are so co-operative, why would the US actually need military bases in Asia? You say "The U.S. needs Kim Jong-il for our military presence in the region" but this assumes that there is a need for the US to have military in the region other than North Korea or another Government. If Governments are as cooperative, as you claim, so they are almost a single entity, why would the US need to have forces in Asia? Surely the Governments are already doing what it needs without having to station forces there. Why go into Iraq and depose Saddam? Why attack the Taliban? You're saying that they don't have to compete, so all they had to do is ask the other and cooperate as their single entity. Your world view seems to have serious issues.

[UNLoVedRebel]

Thanks for the link bad doggie. I didn't mean to ignore your first post, I just hate googling. If anyone is interested in the full article here (http://www.aejmc.org/_scholarship/research_use/jmcq/07sum/stempel_text.pdf) it is. It has a lot more categories, like where most CTists get their "information" from.

I made the data easier to read. I was nice enough to explain the numbers and put a * for all statistically significant interactions. You're welcome.

[Corsair 115]

Um, how many times do I need to say: there is no evidence!


So, you admit you have no evidence whatsoever to support your claims, but you maintain your claims are correct anyway? You don't see a little problem there?

[Magenta]

And of course that's probably the most extreme example, U.S. is N.Z.'s #2 export and #3 import partner (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_New_Zealand). Different branches, same church.

Gee wow, you found that we export and import a lot from the States, probably why we want that free trade deal they keep denying us, it'd be saving NZ millions of dollars a year that they wouldn't have to pay in tariffs and allow us to open up new markets in the US. I guess that sort of cooperation doesn't count hmmm?


That reminds me, how's ANZUS (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anzus)going? ;)

[PhantomWolf]

That reminds me, how's ANZUS (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anzus)going? ;)

Alex probably thinks that it still exists, just that we're keeping it on the qt so no-one knows and thinks that the Governments don't agree about certain things.

[Mince]

Why would I want to convert anyone? You want to worship your government, fine: pay taxes to it, be regulated by it, fight wars for it, get planes hacked into your office (though thankfully too early in the morning for you to be there, statistically speaking). Etc. But I don't!

Ah, complete independence of government. How nice it must be for you, to grow your own food; build your own automobile; produce your own fuel; build and maintain your own roads (or perhaps you don't drive on your planet?); defend yourself against enemy aggression and domestic criminals...



...be regulated by it...


You mean, like, assuring the aircraft we fly don't crash every other flight? Yeah, regulation, like, sucks man.


...pay taxes to it...

What magical planet do you live on where you pay no taxes? Pssst. If you live on planet Earth and work in the United States; guess what? You pay taxes. You may not know this on your planet, but here in the U.S. on planet Earth, taxes are taken directly from your paycheck (with exceptions) before you're even paid. OMG! Not only that, but guess what again: the people of our planet (Earth) actually benefit from paying these "extortions". We enjoy roads to drive on, defense of our liberties, grants and loans to help us pay the sometimes prohibitive costs of ecucation, and much, much more.

[JamesB]

I swear, most troofers are bipolar. Their only two choices are "worship your government" or "complete anarchy".

[twinstead]

I for one welcome our bipolar overlords...

[Mince]

I for one welcome our bipolar overlords...


I'd like to remind them that as a trusted JREF personality, I can be helpful in rounding up other JREFers to toil in their underground truth caves.

[parky76]

I swear, most troofers are bipolar. Their only two choices are "worship your government" or "complete anarchy".

its called "polar" thinking. i know many communists who do the same thing.

i know a guy who sees the choice of economic systems as either "socialism or barbarism".

=)

[Bad_Doggie]

Thanks for the link bad doggie. I didn't mean to ignore your first post, I just hate googling. If anyone is interested in the full article here it is. It has a lot more categories, like where most CTists get their "information" from.

I made the data easier to read. I was nice enough to explain the numbers and put a * for all statistically significant interactions. You're welcome.

You are not alone in your dislike of Googling. It’s never fun when searching a document that isn’t well tagged. Your post was interesting enough to make me wanna see the data and how it was gathered etc.

I realize the effort that you put in to make the data easier to read and the explanation. I thank-you.

As well as interest, if I wish to use this data in another debate at some point I need the data. As I am sure you are well aware that any truther will require that I dot all the i’s a cross all the t’s and couldn’t use it without the supporting data. The fact that they don’t is by-the-by.

Thanks once again. Good find by the way.

Woof!

[UNLoVedRebel]

I'm bumping this thread. I spent 3 hours writing the OP so the regulars here wouldn't be completely clueless about the TM's numbers a mere three weeks later.