body count, redux
I’ve written before about serious challenges to the credibility of the 2004 Lancet study, especially in light of its dubious conclusions and even more shaky methodology, but today Michelle Malkin publishes the most serious (and far-reaching) critique of the study that I’ve yet seen:
There were attempts made by lay journalists to debunk the 2004 study (as well as the 2006 follow-up study that purported to back up the first). But none of those dissections comes close to a damning new statistical analysis of the 2004 study authored by David Kane, Institute Fellow at the Institute for Quantitative Social Science at Harvard University. I read of Kane’s new paper at this science blog and e-mailed him for permission to reprint his analysis in its entirety here so that a wider blog readership could have a look. He has given me his permission and adds that he welcomes comments and feedback. He’ll be presenting the paper at the Joint Statistical Meetings in Salt Lake City on Monday — the largest conference of statisticians in North America.
The infamous study initially turned heads due to its outrageous conclusions– will its critics get as much time in the spotlight?
You can’t put serious and michelle malkin in the same paragraph, my friend.
Dear god. She’s a slut of the highest order.
Whatever your opinion of Malkin, the included study raises serious questions about the Lancet study.
That was certainly not from this JD. Notice how the inferior JD, rather than even looking at the critique of the study, simply lobbed an ad hom at MM. I am no fan of hers, but the vile piled on her by the left should be enough to prove that the Left is home to many a racist and sexist.
Ah– indeed! You are correct. I didn’t even think to check the IP, even after I was somewhat confused by the comment– not expecting someone such as yourself to engage in that sort of lowly mudslinging. In any case, I’ve edited the comment in order to reflect the obvious difference.
Thanks. I can say stuff plenty stupid, all on my own. This kind of fits in nicely with the recent diatribes over at proteinwisdom. Those on the enlightened Left put themselves out as the arbiters of correct behavior, and claim the mantel of being not racist, not sexist, etc … But, all one has to do is view the way they treat a minority woman who does not share their views, or how they speak of Justice Thomas, to see that they only value those that share the correct ideology, plumbing and skin color be damned.