Help needed with a statistic!

[jonronson]

How can you resist such an enticing thread title?

I'm trying to find a reliable statistic: what percentage of Americans/people in general believe 9/11 was an inside job, or believe there has been some kind of official cover-up?

I'm writing a new preface for the forthcoming German edition of my book Them, and I figured that the most significant shift in the past few years has been just how big the conspiracy movement has become, compared to how it was when I wrote the book.

So it would be great if someone might know the answer.

best

Jon

[Bell]

Ah, internet polls. Those are bullsh*t. Start a 'was 9/11 an inside job' poll in this forum, and see what numbers you get then ;)

[brodski]

Here is a link to the Zogby poll which CTists like to claim proves that most of America "knows" that 9/11 was an inside job.
From my layman's perspective the poll looks reasonable, but of coerce it doesn't show anything like what the CTists claim, mainly because it conflates post hoc arse covering by the US government with MIHOP/LIHOP CT's.


http://www.zogby.com/features/features.dbm?ID=231

[fuelair]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9/11_conspiracy_theories

there are a feww listed here that look legitimate by their sources.

[Firestone]

This survey (http://www.newspolls.org/survey.php?survey_id=23) from 2006 has some 9/11-related questions.

[baron]

I'm trying to find a reliable statistic: what percentage of Americans/people in general believe 9/11 was an inside job, or believe there has been some kind of official cover-up?

That's very vague. I'm sure some small item was covered up somewhere, if only for the protection of national security. Additionally, the sheer weight of evidence against 911 being an "inside job" effectively means that everyone who disagrees is either a very, very lazy researcher or a loony.

More useful (IMO) would be a poll asking how many people think the US government is willing and capable of levying such an atrocity against its people, if they believed there was a need. I think this could yeild interesting results.

[jonronson]

that's extrememly kind, thank you

[Architect]

The trouble is that (I suspect) no credible polling agency has ever done a proper survey - you know, Gallup or someone like that. Somebody neutral and with a reputation for proper, balanced survey work!

[jonronson]

The Ohio University poll has a similar result to the Zogby one. But Ohio only had 900 odd respondents.

[JonnyFive]

Ah, internet polls. Those are bullsh*t. Start a 'was 9/11 an inside job' poll in this forum, and see what numbers you get then ;)

Let's see, the one I started a couple weeks ago shows this to date:

139 total respondents.

131 (94.24%) total believe the official story. Of those, 14 (10.07%) were at one point believers in one or more "inside job" theories.

A total of 4 (2.88%) believe 9/11 was an "inside job" of some kind. Of those, 2 (1.44%) at one point believed the official explanation of events.

4 (2.88%) said they were unsure or hadn't formed an opinion.

[HeyLeroy]

http://www.scrippsnews.com/911poll

Thirty-six percent of respondents overall said it is "very likely" or "somewhat likely" that federal officials either participated in the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon or took no action to stop them "because they wanted the United States to go to war in the Middle East."

"One out of three sounds high, but that may very well be right," said Lee Hamilton, former vice chairman of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States (also called the 9/11 commission.) His congressionally appointed investigation concluded that federal officials bungled their attempts to prevent, but did not participate in, the attacks by al Qaeda five years ago.

[uk_dave]

Polls are a lousy way to address whether or not people REALLY believe US govt complicity in 9/11.

I'm sure that you could conduct a poll with the question:

"Do you believe the US government is involved in selling children into slavery in return for pineapples?" and a sizeable number of people would reply 'yes'.

In the first place, to ask whether someone believes the US government was/is involved in some dodgy activity plants in the mind of the respondant the idea that "this might be true, otherwise why would I be asked?"

And then, if one responds with yes and it is later found to be incorrect, we can say we were just expressing our healthy cynicism about the actions of the government.

But if one responds with 'no' and it is later found to be true, we just appear to be gullible.

Also if such a poll were to be taken, I would want the question to be something like:

"Do you believe that the US government was behind the 9/11 attacks? If yes, are you going to do anything about it?"

Saying yes to the usual 'do you think' question requires no further action from the responder so they can say it with impunity. Ask them what action they will then be taking and they may well think twice before answering in the affirmitive.

[MarkyX]

Polls aren't even pieces of evidence anyways. If you know how numbers work, you will soon realize that polling is simply crap. Polls should never be a way to justify one's beliefs, evidence should. Even if it's true that 84% of people believed 9/11 was an inside job, there is no evidence suggesting so. Technically, we are the minority when it comes to religion (or lack of), but that hasn't really stopped people like us, has it?

[Brainster]

This poll (http://www.newspolls.org/survey.php?survey_id=23) estimates 36% find it very likely or somewhat likely (http://www.newspolls.org/question.php?question_id=716) that "People in the federal government either assisted in the 9/11 attacks or took no action to stop the attacks because they wanted to United States to go to war in the Middle East."

I have some problems with the poll; it also asked a bunch of other silly questions like whom you would vote for in hypothetical presidential elections between Hillary and Bill Clinton, and between Ronald Reagan and JFK, for example. So it may have created a mindset in the respondent that these are goofy questions, just go along with it.

But when you get down to specifics, the poll found that 16% believed (http://www.newspolls.org/question.php?question_id=718) in the controlled demolition of the towers (6% very likely and 10% somewhat likely) and 12% in the idea (http://www.newspolls.org/question.php?question_id=717)that a missile hit the Pentagon, not Flight 77 (6% very likely, 6% somewhat likely). Given that the CD of the towers is probably the one thing that almost all the Deniers believe in, I'd say that's probably a better estimate of the percentage that really believe in the conspiracy theories.

[Architect]

92.35% of statistics are made up on the spot.



(Vic Reeves)

[Bell]

Let's see, the one I started a couple weeks ago shows this to date:

139 total respondents.

131 (94.24%) total believe the official story. Of those, 14 (10.07%) were at one point believers in one or more "inside job" theories.

A total of 4 (2.88%) believe 9/11 was an "inside job" of some kind. Of those, 2 (1.44%) at one point believed the official explanation of events.

4 (2.88%) said they were unsure or hadn't formed an opinion.

There you go. It all depends on your target audience. Oh, and rallies on the LC forums to all go and vote in the next "inside job?" internet poll. Multiple times.

[JonnyFive]

There you go. It all depends on your target audience. Oh, and rallies on the LC forums to all go and vote in the next "inside job?" internet poll. Multiple times.

Besides, everyone knows this is a government shill board anyway. All the poll answers are from shills, so they don't count.

Except the four people who said it was an inside job.

[Bell]

Besides, everyone knows this is a government shill board anyway. All the poll answers are from shills, so they don't count.

Except the four people who said it was an inside job.

That's what makes those polls so confusing. We all know it was an inside job, but then again we are not allowed to say it :mad:

[PerryLogan]

I found this at 9/11 Conspiracy Smasher. (http://911conspiracysmasher.blogspot.com/) I believe someone recently quoted the same poll somewhere at JREF:

The collapse of the twin towers in New York was aided by explosives secretly planted in the two buildings.*

Very likely 6%
Somewhat likely 10%
Unlikely 77%
Don't know 6%
Other response 1%

The federal government is withholding proof of the existence of intelligent life from others planets?*

Very likely 16%
Somewhat likely 22%
Unlikely 54%
Don't know 8%

*This question had 993 respondents; it was part of a survey posted on newsPolls.org on July 6, 2006.

newsPolls.org is the official Web site for the Scripps Survey Research Center at Ohio University.

[jaydeehess]

There are three types of lies; lies, damn lies and statistics.

No, I don't remember who said that first.

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

There are three types of lies; lies, damn lies and statistics.

No, I don't remember who said that first.
Twain, irrc.

[beachnut]

There are three types of lies; lies, damn lies and statistics.

No, I don't remember who said that first.

my thesis advisor

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

my thesis advisor
Didn't realize you were that old. :duck:

[brodski]

Twain, irrc.

Or Disreli, Lies, damned lies, and statistics

[tkingdoll]

But Ohio only had 900 odd respondents.

How do you know they were odd?

The Beeb ran an article a few months ago featuring the stat you are looking for, iirc, but I can't find it for love nor money. However, it's likely to be from one of the sources already mentioned in this thread, if it was a more prolific poll than those it would have popped up in Google searches. Maybe.

Helpful? No.

[gumboot]

If I recall correctly, I remember seeing something on statistics that basically said, regardless of what the question is, a certain percentage (6% or something) will ALWAYS provide a given answer.

For example:

If you asked "Is the Prime Minister of Australia a giant flesh-eating lizard" 6% would say yes straight up.

(I think the number they cited was about 6%, it might have been 7% or 5%).

So basically, in a given poll, 6% = your bottom line, or 0%.

Also a lot of polls like that tend to provide multiple options. There's a world of difference between "The Government carried out 9/11" and "The Government is covering up details about 9/11".

Lastly, if I recall correctly Pen and Teller did a thing on polling, and they got a polling guy to demonstrate that he could get conflicting responses from the same person within the one conversation simply by changing the nature of his questions.

-Gumboot

[Brainache]

If I recall correctly, I remember seeing something on statistics that basically said, regardless of what the question is, a certain percentage (6% or something) will ALWAYS provide a given answer.

For example:

If you asked "Is the Prime Minister of Australia a giant flesh-eating lizard" 6% would say yes straight up.

<snip>
-Gumboot

I think the only reason the positive response to that question is as low as 6% is because Mr Howard is quite small. If you'd left out the qualifier "giant" the response might be closer to 25%.

[Gord_in_Toronto]

I think the only reason the positive response to that question is as low as 6% is because Mr Howard is quite small. If you'd left out the qualifier "giant" the response might be closer to 25%.

Oh. Come on. Surely he is giant for a lizard!

[Brainache]

Oh. Come on. Surely he is giant for a lizard!

You should see the size of our lizards! Howard is just medium sized in comparison.
I mean a salt water crocodile is a lizard isn't it?

[Big Les]

So polls are essentially argumentum ad populum...erm...ad populum? Or by proxy. Or something.

[brodski]

How do you know they were odd? A lot of them thought that 9/11 was an inside job, that counts as odd to me. ;)


The Beeb ran an article a few months ago featuring the stat you are looking for, iirc, but I can't find it for love nor money. However, it's likely to be from one of the sources already mentioned in this thread, if it was a more prolific poll than those it would have popped up in Google searches. Maybe.

The Zogby poll was the one which seemed to get most publicity, USA Today ran an article on it, I think.

[jhunter1163]

I'd be very surprised if the actual figure was much above 5%. I only know one person with Twoofer tendencies, among my dozens of acquaintances. She happens to be my direct supervisor, though, so mostly I just nod indulgently when she starts in with the nonsense.

[Coritani]

92.35% of statistics are made up on the spot.



(Vic Reeves)

40% of all people know that.

On a more serious note, I usually don't listen to polls. What does it matter if 70% believe in the Conspiracy? Nothing at all.

[brodski]

40% of all people know that.

On a more serious note, I usually don't listen to polls. What does it matter if 70% believe in the Conspiracy? Nothing at all.

Well it's interesting from a sociological point of view, but it says nothing about the alleged conspiracy itself.

[patnray]

Well it's interesting from a sociological point of view, but it says nothing about the alleged conspiracy itself.
Quite true.
The Ohio University poll has a similar result to the Zogby one. But Ohio only had 900 odd respondents.
So?

Most polls are crap. They are not conducted scientifically, they may use skewed questions, are often designed to give a desired result, and obscure their non-scientific nature to trade on the reputation of scientific pollsters.

Internet and phone in polls are useless. In more formal terms, you can not draw any inferences from the results (they measure only the opinions of the respondents and can not be used as a measure of any other population). I have seen every one of the national media release results of internet and phone-in polls. Most do point out that it is not a scientific poll and no conclusions can be drawn from it. But I always ask, "Then why even broadcast it?"

Years ago, while in college, I spent a year as a poll taker for an opinion research company. There are many organizations whose reputations ride on conducting proper scientific polls. In such polls the pulse of the entire US can be accurately assessed with as few as 900 respondants. But it is expensive and requires careful attention to details.

To be scientific, a poll must be truely random, the respondants must be representative of the population as a whole, the questions must be carefully phrased, and error estimates must be provided.

Randomness is not haphazard. Poll takers are given detailed instructions, such as: "On page 33 of the phone book, take the number that is 4.5 inches from the top in column 2 and add 10 to it". This particular technique is known as Random Digit Dialing. Adding 10 asures that unlisted numbers will be included.

Demographic questions are included to allow the statisticians to compare the respondants to the target population. They may also include questions to help assess the responses, such as questions asked in previous polls or, one of my favorites, asking for one's opinion of a fictitious person (yes, gumboot, while most people will admit they never heard of so-and-so, a small percentage of respondants will have an opinion...).

Often they will ask different versions of a question in pre-polls to assess how the wording affects the response before selecting the wording for the actual poll.

So, polls don't measure the truth of a proposition, but they can, with relatively few respondants, accurately assess the beliefs of a large population.

BTW, having lots of respondants does not guarantee accuracy. Sherry Hite's research into female sexuality was suspect because she relied on self-responding polls. She felt that because she had tens of thousands of respondants, that made up for her lack of rigour. But she had no way to measure how her respondants compared to the population as a whole, nor could she provide an error measurement. Thus it was invalid to draw any inferences from her results.