Actually Kevn, it just shows how fallacious polls are, in the last US election, several post voting polls were taken, a sample of far more than 2000, and they seemed to indicate a democrat victory.
They were within the 3.5% error margin.
Welcome to the Second Life Forums Archive
These forums are CLOSED. Please visit the new forums HERE
Evolution, a myth for non-theists |
|
|
Kevn Klein
God is Love!
Join date: 5 Nov 2004
Posts: 3,422
|
03-06-2006 08:07
They were within the 3.5% error margin. |
|
Joy Honey
Not just another dumass
Join date: 17 Jun 2005
Posts: 3,751
|
03-06-2006 08:12
They were within the 3.5% error margin. I guess the 1992 election results were too... and 1980, 1952, 1948, 1936? And these are just election polls.. they generally do tend to be accurate. The problem with many polls that are not "who do you think will win the election" are the questions posed. _____________________
Reality continues to ruin my life. - Calvin
You have delighted us long enough. - Jane Austen Sometimes I need what only you can provide: your absence. - Ashleigh Brilliant |
|
Kevn Klein
God is Love!
Join date: 5 Nov 2004
Posts: 3,422
|
03-06-2006 08:13
One would think when trying to express the accuracy of statistics in polls, one would use accurate numbers in a provided example. Going to address this Kevn, or just ignore it? Ask the question in a way that makes sense. 45 million wasn't a number I posted. I stated a poll of 2000 voters is accurate within 3.5% points in the USA, where there are 250 million people. Of course polls generally exclude children or non-voters in some cases. I don't think that makes either group nonhuman. |
|
Taco Rubio
also quite creepy
Join date: 15 Feb 2004
Posts: 3,349
|
03-06-2006 08:17
Ask the question in a way that makes sense. 45 million wasn't a number I posted. I stated a poll of 2000 voters is accurate within 3.5% points in the USA, where there are 250 million people. Of course polls generally exclude children or non-voters in some cases. I don't think that makes either group nonhuman. I'm sorry, I assumed you could do subtraction. United States — Population: 295,734,134 (source: http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/rankorder/2119rank.html) before you continue with the idea that you were excluding children or non-voters, i'll save you some time: In 2003, there were 73 million children ages 0–17 in the United States. (source: www.childstats.gov/americaschildren/ ) I'm trying to see where you got the number 250 Million from. I believe you made that number up. _____________________
We can't be clear enough, ever, in our communication.  |
|
Kevn Klein
God is Love!
Join date: 5 Nov 2004
Posts: 3,422
|
03-06-2006 08:23
I'm sorry, I assumed you could do subtraction. United States — Population: 295,734,134 (source: http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/rankorder/2119rank.html) before you continue with the idea that you were excluding children or non-voters, i'll save you some time: In 2003, there were 73 million children ages 0–17 in the United States. (source: www.childstats.gov/americaschildren/ ) I'm trying to see where you got the number 250 Million from. I believe you made that number up. 250 million was the population of the USA the last time I concerned myself enough to check. The fact it's even larger makes my point that much stronger. I think the last time I checked was in the early 1990s, so you can check to see what the population was then to see if I "made it up". I was being conservative with my numbers so you couldn't say I inflated the number. |
|
Taco Rubio
also quite creepy
Join date: 15 Feb 2004
Posts: 3,349
|
03-06-2006 08:26
250 million was the population of the USA the last time I concerned myself enough to check. The fact it's even larger makes my point that much stronger. I think the last time I checked was in the early 1990s, so you can check to see what the population was then to see if I "made it up". I was being conservative with my numbers so you couldn't say I inflated the number. Are you forming all of your opinions on 16 year old data, or just some of them? _____________________
We can't be clear enough, ever, in our communication. |
|
Jake Reitveld
Emperor of Second Life
Join date: 9 Mar 2005
Posts: 2,690
|
03-06-2006 08:34
Yeah but my evolution myth is so much better than the whole judeo christian myth. It might not be as good as the gnostic myth that the old testament god is evil and lesser than the transcenting deity that is found within, but the gnostics make more sense to me as a buddhist.
But really, if I were going to simply pick mythologies and world views, I might go with the ancient greeks-"By Zeus!" Or "Athena's Supple Tit!" or even "By the cold ass of hades!" are much more fun to say than "Jesus H. Christ" or any old "God Damn!" _____________________
ALCHEMY -clothes for men.
Lebeda 208,209 |
|
Zuzu Fassbinder
Little Miss No Tomorrow
Join date: 17 Sep 2004
Posts: 2,048
|
03-06-2006 08:35
The Catholic church, along with most people, agree that animals adapt. Adaptation isn't what the evolutionists support. The Catholic church does not accept the notion life originated without God. So if you want to use that religion to support your belief, follow them to their conclusion God created all life. wow, we've reached Stage 3 already? 3. At this point start ignoring the evolution debate and say that its really about ID vs. abiogenesis _____________________
I don't want no commies in my car. No Christians either. |
|
Kevn Klein
God is Love!
Join date: 5 Nov 2004
Posts: 3,422
|
03-06-2006 08:36
Are you forming all of your opinions on 16 year old data, or just some of them? How does it matter that the population is 250 million or 295 million in my post? I'll tell you how it matters. 295 million makes my point stronger. The difference between 250 million and 295 million makes no difference to the point made, other than the fact the number was a conservative estimate, showing I don't inflate numbers to strengthen my point. So, basically, you are saying I use older population numbers when it makes no difference to the point made, or when it is being conservative, to avoid tainting my point. I'm fine with either. |
|
Gabe Lippmann
"Phone's ringing, Dude."
Join date: 14 Jun 2004
Posts: 4,219
|
03-06-2006 08:37
"A public-opinion poll is no substitute for thought."
Warren Buffett _____________________
go to Nocturnal Threads
 |
|
Jake Reitveld
Emperor of Second Life
Join date: 9 Mar 2005
Posts: 2,690
|
03-06-2006 08:39
How does it matter that the population is 250 million or 295 million in my post? I'll tell you how it matters. 295 million makes my point stronger. The difference between 250 million and 295 million makes no difference to the point made, other than the fact the number was a conservative estimate, showing I don't inflate numbers to strengthen my point. So, basically, you are saying I use older population numbers when it makes no difference to the point made, or when it is being conservative, to avoid tainting my point. I'm fine with either. seems to me that 295 million people who are wrong about how the world was created are not really any smarter than 250 million people who are wrong about how the world was created. Just because something is popular does not make it true. _____________________
ALCHEMY -clothes for men.
Lebeda 208,209 |
|
Kevn Klein
God is Love!
Join date: 5 Nov 2004
Posts: 3,422
|
03-06-2006 08:41
wow, we've reached Stage 3 already? Oh goody, please show how I am avoiding the debate by pointing out that if one will use the Catholic church to support their belief in evolution, they should follow the Catholic church to their conclusion. It's hardly ignoring the debate. It's logic 101. |
|
Kevn Klein
God is Love!
Join date: 5 Nov 2004
Posts: 3,422
|
03-06-2006 08:43
.....Just because something is popular does not make it true. Amen brother.... Evolution may be popular, but that doesn't make it correct. |
|
Taco Rubio
also quite creepy
Join date: 15 Feb 2004
Posts: 3,349
|
03-06-2006 08:43
How does it matter that the population is 250 million or 295 million in my post? I'll tell you how it matters. I'll tell you how it matters to me: You're continuing your very bad habit of making statements based on easily searchable 'facts' that are in fact not accurate. Do you not see that your viewpoint is undermined by your inability to do your homework before making declarations of facts? _____________________
We can't be clear enough, ever, in our communication. |
|
Joy Honey
Not just another dumass
Join date: 17 Jun 2005
Posts: 3,751
|
03-06-2006 08:46
How does it matter that the population is 250 million or 295 million in my post? I'll tell you how it matters. 295 million makes my point stronger. The difference between 250 million and 295 million makes no difference to the point made, other than the fact the number was a conservative estimate, showing I don't inflate numbers to strengthen my point. So, basically, you are saying I use older population numbers when it makes no difference to the point made, or when it is being conservative, to avoid tainting my point. I'm fine with either. Again, Kevn, polls that say "who did you vote for" are much more accurate than polls with slanted questions. _____________________
Reality continues to ruin my life. - Calvin
You have delighted us long enough. - Jane Austen Sometimes I need what only you can provide: your absence. - Ashleigh Brilliant |
|
Kevn Klein
God is Love!
Join date: 5 Nov 2004
Posts: 3,422
|
03-06-2006 08:47
I'll tell you how it matters to me: You're continuing your very bad habit of making statements based on easily searchable 'facts' that are in fact not accurate. Do you not see that your viewpoint is undermined by your inability to do your homework before making declarations of facts? Your logic is failing in this, I won't restate the illogic of your statement again. Believe as you will. I don't hope to sway your biased opinion my way anyhow. |
|
Zepp Zaftig
Unregistered Abuser
Join date: 20 Mar 2005
Posts: 470
|
03-06-2006 08:54
Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah... blah? Blah blah blah.. Blah blah blah blah blah blah.... Blah Blah? Blah! Blah blah blah blah blah Apes.. Blah Blah.. Blah! Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah.. Blah blah blah Blah Blah blah blah? Blah Blah blah.... Evolution.. Something something blah blah. Blah blah blah.. Blah blah blah blah blah blah.... Blah Blah? Blah! Blah blah blah blah blah Apes.. Blah Blah.. Blah! Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah.. Blah blah blah Blah Blah blah blah? Blah Blah blah....Blah blah blah.. Blah blah blah blah blah blah.... Blah Blah? Blah! Blah blah blah blah blah Apes.. Blah Blah.. Blah! Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah.. Blah blah blah Blah Blah blah blah? Blah Blah blah.... |
|
Magnum Serpentine
Registered User
Join date: 20 Nov 2003
Posts: 1,811
|
03-06-2006 08:55
Polls of 2000 are very accurate, we use that size poll for 250 million people in the USA and it's accurate within 3.5+/- point. there are 300 million people in the United States and the latest polls show by 61% that the people do NOT want Creationism/Intelligent design taught in the schools |
|
Magnum Serpentine
Registered User
Join date: 20 Nov 2003
Posts: 1,811
|
03-06-2006 08:56
seems to me that 295 million people who are wrong about how the world was created are not really any smarter than 250 million people who are wrong about how the world was created. Just because something is popular does not make it true. Oh boy Oh Boy Oh BOy, Fundamentalist are now against the Democratic Process where the Majority of the people decide... Sounds just like George W. Bush |
|
Kevn Klein
God is Love!
Join date: 5 Nov 2004
Posts: 3,422
|
03-06-2006 08:59
Oh boy Oh Boy Oh BOy, Fundamentalist are now against the Democratic Process where the Majority of the people decide... Sounds just like George W. Bush Are you calling Jake a fundy? Too funny  |
|
Gabe Lippmann
"Phone's ringing, Dude."
Join date: 14 Jun 2004
Posts: 4,219
|
03-06-2006 09:02
This is all very enlightening.
_____________________
go to Nocturnal Threads
|
|
Jonas Pierterson
Dark Harlequin
Join date: 27 Dec 2005
Posts: 3,660
|
03-06-2006 09:07
Amen brother.... Evolution may be popular, but that doesn't make it correct. Same can be said for the 'popular' belief that christianity has any real history behind it. Keep science in school. Not faery tales. if you want to teach intelligent design in school,s show there is a designing entity. At least most evolutionists don't outright say 'this is how the world came to be.' ID does. Prove there was that creator using logical scientific method. |
|
Taco Rubio
also quite creepy
Join date: 15 Feb 2004
Posts: 3,349
|
03-06-2006 09:09
Your logic is failing in this, I won't restate the illogic of your statement again. Believe as you will. I don't hope to sway your biased opinion my way anyhow. Umm, if you meant about evolution, look back, I haven't posted my opinion it - so how is my opinion biased? Oh I know, you made that up because you were too lazy to seach to see what (if anything) I had posted in this thread regarding evolution, so you made a huge and false assumption. If you meant "you do not like it when I make up 'facts'" - yes, I'm biased against that. _____________________
We can't be clear enough, ever, in our communication. |
|
Kevn Klein
God is Love!
Join date: 5 Nov 2004
Posts: 3,422
|
03-06-2006 09:21
Same can be said for the 'popular' belief that christianity has any real history behind it. Keep science in school. Not faery tales. if you want to teach intelligent design in school,s show there is a designing entity. At least most evolutionists don't outright say 'this is how the world came to be.' ID does. Prove there was that creator using logical scientific method. Actually, evolutionists do say 'this is how the world came to be.' |
|
Zuzu Fassbinder
Little Miss No Tomorrow
Join date: 17 Sep 2004
Posts: 2,048
|
03-06-2006 09:23
Oh goody, please show how I am avoiding the debate by pointing out that if one will use the Catholic church to support their belief in evolution, they should follow the Catholic church to their conclusion. It's hardly ignoring the debate. It's logic 101. Its not logical at all. Evolutionists (group A) supports the theory of evolution The Catholic church (group B) supports the theory of evolution The Cathoic church (group B) supports the creation of life by god This does not imply that Evolutionists (group A) supports the creation of life by god. The only conclusion I can reach is that you seem to think that evolutionary theory requires a description of the origin of life. It doesn't. It describes the decent of species from another species. Using logic 101 it seemed clear to me that you were trying to shift the debate to the origin of life (what I refer to as Stage 3 of the Method). Knowing that you like no nitpick, I framed my post as a question asking if others thought that this was a logical conclusion. Have a misinterpreted your post, Kevn? If so, how? _____________________
I don't want no commies in my car. No Christians either. |