CTers have front page news!

[ReFLeX]

Actually it was yesterday's paper, but it was literally on the front page of the National Post yesterday:

One in five believes in conspiracy (http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/story.html?id=a4a797bf-067d-47e5-bc13-91cf59b1c79d)

Apparently a phone survey had as much as 26% of Canadians aged 18-34 saying they believe the US attacked its own buildings. Ugh.University of Victoria professor Dr. Arthur Kroker says the Internet has given staying power to theories that in the past might have had a shorter lifespan.

"People can do their own research and talk to one another," he said. "Before, it was only in the hands of elites. Now people can get different sources of information and make judgments on their own. They can also do it globally and do it fast."

Dr. Kroker said some of the 9/11 skeptics raise valid questions, the most credible coming from the Scholars For 9/11 Truth. The non-partisan association of faculty, students, and scholars from U.S. think-tanks and colleges hopes to use scientific reasoning to explain the events of 9/11.

But for Winnipeg terrorism expert Peter St. John, who teaches courses at the University of Manitoba and the University of Winnipeg, the interest in 9/11 conspiracies is a sad commentary on Western culture.

People believe what they find easy to digest without actually being critical, he said.

"Why do they want the truth? Don't they expect to be lied to?" he said.

"That's the real problem of the Internet," he added. "These theories are fun, but they can play fast and loose with the facts. It makes it easy to jump to conclusions. People believe without really checking it.

"And human gullibility makes it even more confusing."

[KingMerv00]

That's it Canada. You're out of the family.

[Sword_Of_Truth]

Forgive my countrymen... they're idiots.

[WildCat]

To be fair to our neighbors to the north, that is also the percentage of Canadiens who are drunk at any given time.


:runaway

[KingMerv00]

You can have back Trebek but we are keeping Randi.

[Sword_Of_Truth]

You got Pam Anderson for most of her useful lifespan... can we get Jessica Simpson in exchange?

[carlvs]

The National Post... wasn't that the same paper that several months ago had to retract a story stating that the Iranian government was planning to order all Jews to wear a Star of David aka like what the Nazis did?

(I know that government is nuts, but thats pushing it...)

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

You got Pam Anderson for most of her useful lifespan... can we get Jessica Simpson in exchange?

Only if you promise not to let her come back no matter what.

[WildCat]

You got Pam Anderson for most of her useful lifespan... can we get Jessica Simpson in exchange?
We'll consider it if you first take back and apologize for Bryan Adams.

[Dog Town]

Only if you promise not to let her come back no matter what.


And her sister!

[Sword_Of_Truth]

We gave you Bryan Adams to try to make up for Celine Dion. :p

If you want some GOOD canuck rock, I reccomend Rush (http://www.rush.com/php/home.php?f=0) (no relation to Limbaugh).

[negativ]

We'll consider it if you first take back and apologize for Bryan Adams.

<southpark>
Now now, the Canadian government has apologized for Bryan Adams on several occasions.
</southpark>

[jhunter1163]

Yes, but they have NEVER apologized for Anne Murray OR Michael J. Fox.

[Arus808]

but we have we can't dis william shatner.

[Mince]

From the linked article:
A telephone poll conducted for CanWest News Service reveals 22% of Canadians believe in a conspiracy theory...


From w.w.w.prisonplanet(dot)com:


20% of Canadians believe 9/11 conspiracy.


This is a rare instance in which the fanatics actually understate perceived favorable data.

Also from pp(dot)com:


9/11 Truth Movement Needs Legal Action Group
The momentum of the 9/11 truth movement is accelerating like never before after enjoying a cacophony of attention during yesterday's 5th anniversary coverage. The next stage needs to be the formation of a 9/11 Legal Action organization and commencement of criminal indictments following the likely Republican loss of Congress in November.


Um, Alex, nearly all democrats also don't believe your spurious claims and pseudoscience.



**empasis added

[Foolmewunz]

Actually, depending on your definition of "chops" (a loose jazz-oid expression for "hmm, he/she can play/sing"), an astonishing array of top female vocalists come from Canada.
Celine Dion, Anne Murray, KD Lang, Alanis Morisette, Joni Mitchell, Shania Twayne.... There must be something in the snow!
And let us hold our collective breaths for a moment - The Band. Say no more!

(Cleverly forgetting to mention Lorne Greene and Paul Anka he sneaks off to get some coffee..... )

[Class]

I hope this can be answered here, but how do these polls accurately reflect the opinions of an entire nation? CTists often boast about the 9/11 denial movement gaining steam because a poll says 1 in 3 Americans believe the US Government was somehow compliant in 9/11. Only 1,000 were polled and I do not understand how people use these sorts of polls as evidence of anything.

For example, in the poll in the OP, at the end it says "The U.S. foreign policy question was asked of 887 adults by Ipsos Reid on Sept. 6-7, and is considered accurate within 3.5 percentage points, 19 times out of 20. All other questions in the poll were asked of 1,000 adults on Aug. 29-31. Those results have a margin of error of plus or minus 3.1 percentage points, 19 times out of 20."
Bolding mine. So 220 Canadians polled out of 1,000 believe 9/11 was an inside job means that 22% of Canada thinks it was an inside job?

Or is there something I'm not getting?:confused:

[Arus808]

to echo penn and teller "polls are bull----"

[bjb]

The Law of Large Numbers (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_large_numbers) says that as sample size increases, the accuracy of the poll increases, but at some point, increasing the sample size does not greatly increase accuracy. As long as the sample size is greater than or equal to this theoretical 'large number', the statistic will be valid.

It turns out 1,000 is large enough to represent a population of millions. I believe the polls we hear about most often use a sample size of 2,500 to represent the population of the United States (if someone has a better number, go ahead and correct me). As such, I don't have a problem of only 1,000 being interviewed to determine the response of the Canadian population.

[Dog Town]

There must be something in the snow!
And let us hold our collective breaths for a moment - The Band

Yes, and it's yellow. Got us with Robbie and crew, but the Big Pink was in the states!

[T.A.M.]

Oh Canada...

seriously though, that 1:5 seems about the same it would be in the USA.

TAM

[Elizabeth I]

You can have back Trebek but we are keeping Randi.

What about Shatner?

[Dog Town]

And let us hold our collective breaths for a moment - The Band

And O' ya Levon Helm ? Ahhemm. Some of the best Band songs ever!!
Anyone that does not own " The Last Waltz" Go buy it. NOW!
/derail

[ReFLeX]

I hope this can be answered here, but how do these polls accurately reflect the opinions of an entire nation? CTists often boast about the 9/11 denial movement gaining steam because a poll says 1 in 3 Americans believe the US Government was somehow compliant in 9/11. Only 1,000 were polled and I do not understand how people use these sorts of polls as evidence of anything.

For example, in the poll in the OP, at the end it says "The U.S. foreign policy question was asked of 887 adults by Ipsos Reid on Sept. 6-7, and is considered accurate within 3.5 percentage points, 19 times out of 20. All other questions in the poll were asked of 1,000 adults on Aug. 29-31. Those results have a margin of error of plus or minus 3.1 percentage points, 19 times out of 20."
Bolding mine. So 220 Canadians polled out of 1,000 believe 9/11 was an inside job means that 22% of Canada thinks it was an inside job?

Or is there something I'm not getting?:confused:

Yes. Basic statistics. I couldn't find a quick and dirty explanation of central limit theorem in the time I have but as I understood from stats class, out of 95% of possible samples of a population (19 times out of 20), the survey will accurately reflect Canadian opinions within 3.1%. There are many possible groups of 1000 people from Canada. This is saying that 95% of groups of 1000 people from Canada would have reported either the same result or as much as 3% higher or lower.

The numbers are solid. Problems with polls enter into how the population is sampled (most methods have error), the form of the questions, and how the numbers are conveyed.

[Sword_Of_Truth]

Canada has a history of some pretty @#$%ed up poll questions. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1995_Quebec_referendum#The_question)

[KingMerv00]

What about Shatner?

Well, we did a comedy roast of him already. I don't think he is good for much else.

America agrees to keep Shatner in America if Canada agrees to stop blowing all that cold air into our weather patterns.