A collecting forum. CollectingBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » CollectingBanter forum » Collecting newsgroups » Coins
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Darwin, Britain's Hero, Is Still Controversial In U.S.



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old February 10th 09, 01:37 AM posted to rec.collecting.coins
Jud
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,215
Default Darwin, Britain's Hero, Is Still Controversial In U.S.



Mike Marotta wrote:

Depending on where you live, you can probably take an accredited
statistics class at a community college for $350-$500. It will take
13-15 weeks of commitment, but you will know way more than everyone
else about how polling is done and the mental exercise will help stave
off senility.


There are liars, damned liars and statisticians. I took 'stat' in
college, and if there was one thing that I brought home from that
class was when the professor stated "Anytime someone quotes statistics
to you, they are lying. There are so many ways to make the statistics
work in any foregone conclusion."

Also, I am with the majority of the 93.4832% of the population who
don't believe in polls. (No jokes about Poland please!)
Ads
  #12  
Old February 10th 09, 01:42 AM posted to rec.collecting.coins
Bruce Remick
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,391
Default Darwin, Britain's Hero, Is Still Controversial In U.S.


"Mike Marotta" wrote in message
...
On Feb 9, 3:29 pm, "Bruce Remick" wrote:
Makes one wonder about the level of education reached among the people
polled, and how many had to be told who Darwin was before responding to
the
question.


Bruce, that was why I went to the HARRIS POLL website. Harris,
Gallup, Pew and a couple of others are well-known for their
statistical reliability. The "level of education" can be expected to
be statistically representative of the USA. They would be
representative for age, income, gender, race, etc. etc., all the
significant variables. That's what makes Harris, Gallup, etc., worth
paying for.

If you read the print edition of USA Today, you will see that their
polls often give the sample size, margin of error and confidence
level. If I recall my stats class, you need to have 1054 samples to
be 95% confident with +/- 3% error.

I was pleasantly surprised to see all the hits when I googled
"statistics help."

Depending on where you live, you can probably take an accredited
statistics class at a community college for $350-$500. It will take
13-15 weeks of commitment, but you will know way more than everyone
else about how polling is done and the mental exercise will help stave
off senility.


I still would be interested in learning if Harris only counted a response
from individuals who already were familiar with Darwin and his work. I also
wonder how much religion might have played a factor, and from there,
demographics. Just the fact that someone would comission such a poll
suggests to me that the was a built in bias and that the originator had an
interest in seeing some interesting results.

Always skeptical of polls and statistics.




  #13  
Old February 10th 09, 01:57 AM posted to rec.collecting.coins
Bruce Remick
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,391
Default Darwin, Britain's Hero, Is Still Controversial In U.S.


"Bruce Remick" wrote in message
...

"Mike Marotta" wrote in message
...
On Feb 9, 3:29 pm, "Bruce Remick" wrote:
Makes one wonder about the level of education reached among the people
polled, and how many had to be told who Darwin was before responding to
the
question.


Bruce, that was why I went to the HARRIS POLL website. Harris,
Gallup, Pew and a couple of others are well-known for their
statistical reliability. The "level of education" can be expected to
be statistically representative of the USA. They would be
representative for age, income, gender, race, etc. etc., all the
significant variables. That's what makes Harris, Gallup, etc., worth
paying for.

If you read the print edition of USA Today, you will see that their
polls often give the sample size, margin of error and confidence
level. If I recall my stats class, you need to have 1054 samples to
be 95% confident with +/- 3% error.

I was pleasantly surprised to see all the hits when I googled
"statistics help."

Depending on where you live, you can probably take an accredited
statistics class at a community college for $350-$500. It will take
13-15 weeks of commitment, but you will know way more than everyone
else about how polling is done and the mental exercise will help stave
off senility.


I still would be interested in learning if Harris only counted a response
from individuals who already were familiar with Darwin and his work. I
also wonder how much religion might have played a factor, and from there,
demographics. Just the fact that someone would comission such a poll
suggests to me that the was a built in bias and that the originator had an
interest in seeing some interesting results.

Always skeptical of polls and statistics.


......as are 64% of others over 55.


  #14  
Old February 10th 09, 04:25 AM posted to rec.collecting.coins
mazorj
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,169
Default Darwin, Britain's Hero, Is Still Controversial In U.S.


"Mike Marotta" wrote in message
...
On Feb 9, 3:29 pm, "Bruce Remick" wrote:
Makes one wonder about the level of education reached among the
people
polled, and how many had to be told who Darwin was before
responding to the
question.


Bruce, that was why I went to the HARRIS POLL website. Harris,
Gallup, Pew and a couple of others are well-known for their
statistical reliability. The "level of education" can be expected
to
be statistically representative of the USA. They would be
representative for age, income, gender, race, etc. etc., all the
significant variables. That's what makes Harris, Gallup, etc.,
worth
paying for.

If you read the print edition of USA Today, you will see that their
polls often give the sample size, margin of error and confidence
level. If I recall my stats class, you need to have 1054 samples to
be 95% confident with +/- 3% error.

I was pleasantly surprised to see all the hits when I googled
"statistics help."

Depending on where you live, you can probably take an accredited
statistics class at a community college for $350-$500. It will take
13-15 weeks of commitment, but you will know way more than everyone
else about how polling is done and the mental exercise will help
stave
off senility.


There have been recent discussions about potential skewing of random
surveys because the poller has to catch someone who is at home, has
land-line telephone service, and isn't too rushed to answer a battery
of questions. It's been argued that the sets of surveyed respondents
in all polls are a bit heavy on seniors and other stay-at homes, while
those who choose not to keep their land line and just use their mobile
phone, or are out working, or cannot afford land line service are
under-represented. I suspect that the net effect of each of these
factors can tend to skew results toward the opinions of under-educated
and/or old-time, fundamentalist thinkers.

However, this effect is only important in surveys such as political
polling where even a fraction of a percent can count. Regardless of
whether it really is 47% or 52% or just 42% that don't accept
evolution, that's enough to make me fear that the country is going to
hell in a hand basket. (Okay, I don't believe in hell, I'm just
trying to use terms that the ignorati understand.)

mazorj
"Caveat mensore"
"Stats 101 taught me everything I need to know about polling pitfalls"


  #15  
Old February 10th 09, 05:33 AM posted to rec.collecting.coins
mazorj
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,169
Default Darwin, Britain's Hero, Is Still Controversial In U.S.


"Bruce Remick" wrote in message
...

"Mike Marotta" wrote in message
...
On Feb 9, 3:29 pm, "Bruce Remick" wrote:
Makes one wonder about the level of education reached among the
people
polled, and how many had to be told who Darwin was before
responding to the question.


Bruce, that was why I went to the HARRIS POLL website. Harris,
Gallup, Pew and a couple of others are well-known for their
statistical reliability. The "level of education" can be expected
to
be statistically representative of the USA. They would be
representative for age, income, gender, race, etc. etc., all the
significant variables. That's what makes Harris, Gallup, etc.,
worth
paying for.

If you read the print edition of USA Today, you will see that their
polls often give the sample size, margin of error and confidence
level. If I recall my stats class, you need to have 1054 samples
to
be 95% confident with +/- 3% error.

I was pleasantly surprised to see all the hits when I googled
"statistics help."

Depending on where you live, you can probably take an accredited
statistics class at a community college for $350-$500. It will
take
13-15 weeks of commitment, but you will know way more than everyone
else about how polling is done and the mental exercise will help
stave
off senility.


I still would be interested in learning if Harris only counted a
response from individuals who already were familiar with Darwin and
his work.


Right away you run into trouble. Plenty of creationists and ID
advocates think they know their Darwin. You'd have to ask a battery
of questions about Darwin and evolution before you could get any idea
of the accuracy of the responses of "Yes, I am familiar".

For those who tested positive for knowing Darwin and evolution, can
anyone doubt that the percentage of those who accept evolution would
be significantly higher?

I also wonder how much religion might have played a factor, and
from there, demographics. Just the fact that someone would
comission such a poll suggests to me that the was a built in bias
and that the originator had an interest in seeing some interesting
results.


The biases of whoever commisioned the survey for what reasons don't
matter. What matters is the survey design and in particular, whether
the questions are framed in neutral terms or are "push poll" questions
designed to steer responses in one direction. A reputable pollster
will try to keep the questions neutral (they are the experts there)
and prevent the client from putting his thumb on the scale. Even if
the client is trying to keep his questions neutral, a good polling
outfit will point out any problems and suggest better ways to frame
the questions. Been there, done that.

Always skeptical of polls and statistics.


As we all should be - but only for the right reasons. That's why you
have to read everything that is critical to a poll: Who commissioned
it, how the sampling population was defined and respondents were
selected, how they were contacted, the instructions given to the
actual pollers, all the actual survey questions and branching rules
thereof, how "unable to reach" and "refused to answer" cases were
handled, how and why respondents and their responses may have been
stratified, plus the usual statistical information like sample size,
the claimed margin of error PLUS the confidence level for that level
of margin of error (you hardly ever see that last one).

IMO you're reading too much into the motives for the poll. In fact,
sometimes polls like this are commissioned by churches and others who
you might think have a bias in favor of favorable religious views, but
they truly and only want accurate results. However, lacking the
analysis that I just described (and am not going to do), I can't
dispositively refute your concerns.



  #16  
Old February 10th 09, 02:23 PM posted to rec.collecting.coins
Bruce Remick
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,391
Default Darwin, Britain's Hero, Is Still Controversial In U.S.


"mazorj" wrote in message
...

"Bruce Remick" wrote in message
...

"Mike Marotta" wrote in message
...
On Feb 9, 3:29 pm, "Bruce Remick" wrote:
Makes one wonder about the level of education reached among the people
polled, and how many had to be told who Darwin was before responding to
the question.

Bruce, that was why I went to the HARRIS POLL website. Harris,
Gallup, Pew and a couple of others are well-known for their
statistical reliability. The "level of education" can be expected to
be statistically representative of the USA. They would be
representative for age, income, gender, race, etc. etc., all the
significant variables. That's what makes Harris, Gallup, etc., worth
paying for.

If you read the print edition of USA Today, you will see that their
polls often give the sample size, margin of error and confidence
level. If I recall my stats class, you need to have 1054 samples to
be 95% confident with +/- 3% error.

I was pleasantly surprised to see all the hits when I googled
"statistics help."

Depending on where you live, you can probably take an accredited
statistics class at a community college for $350-$500. It will take
13-15 weeks of commitment, but you will know way more than everyone
else about how polling is done and the mental exercise will help stave
off senility.


I still would be interested in learning if Harris only counted a response
from individuals who already were familiar with Darwin and his work.


Right away you run into trouble. Plenty of creationists and ID advocates
think they know their Darwin. You'd have to ask a battery of questions
about Darwin and evolution before you could get any idea of the accuracy
of the responses of "Yes, I am familiar".

For those who tested positive for knowing Darwin and evolution, can anyone
doubt that the percentage of those who accept evolution would be
significantly higher?

I also wonder how much religion might have played a factor, and from
there, demographics. Just the fact that someone would comission such a
poll suggests to me that the was a built in bias and that the originator
had an interest in seeing some interesting results.


The biases of whoever commisioned the survey for what reasons don't
matter. What matters is the survey design and in particular, whether the
questions are framed in neutral terms or are "push poll" questions
designed to steer responses in one direction. A reputable pollster will
try to keep the questions neutral (they are the experts there) and prevent
the client from putting his thumb on the scale. Even if the client is
trying to keep his questions neutral, a good polling outfit will point out
any problems and suggest better ways to frame the questions. Been there,
done that.

Always skeptical of polls and statistics.


As we all should be - but only for the right reasons. That's why you have
to read everything that is critical to a poll: Who commissioned it, how
the sampling population was defined and respondents were selected, how
they were contacted, the instructions given to the actual pollers, all the
actual survey questions and branching rules thereof, how "unable to reach"
and "refused to answer" cases were handled, how and why respondents and
their responses may have been stratified, plus the usual statistical
information like sample size, the claimed margin of error PLUS the
confidence level for that level of margin of error (you hardly ever see
that last one).

IMO you're reading too much into the motives for the poll. In fact,
sometimes polls like this are commissioned by churches and others who you
might think have a bias in favor of favorable religious views, but they
truly and only want accurate results. However, lacking the analysis that
I just described (and am not going to do), I can't dispositively refute
your concerns.


I guess they're not really "concerns". More like skeptical peeves which
seldom affect me personally. Like you pointed out, the only way to truly
judge the validity of any poll results is to have access to the actual
questions asked, a recording of the actual session, personal background
details of each pollee(?) along with what part of the country they lived in.
Totally impractical and unlikely. It just peeves me when any poll results
are announced and then are treated as foundations on which to build
additional projections. But I still get much more upset to find that I'm
out of beer.


..


  #17  
Old February 10th 09, 02:30 PM posted to rec.collecting.coins
Bruce Remick
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,391
Default Darwin, Britain's Hero, Is Still Controversial In U.S.


"mazorj" wrote in message
...

"Bruce Remick" wrote in message
...

"Mike Marotta" wrote in message
...
On Feb 9, 3:29 pm, "Bruce Remick" wrote:
Makes one wonder about the level of education reached among the people
polled, and how many had to be told who Darwin was before responding to
the question.

Bruce, that was why I went to the HARRIS POLL website. Harris,
Gallup, Pew and a couple of others are well-known for their
statistical reliability. The "level of education" can be expected to
be statistically representative of the USA. They would be
representative for age, income, gender, race, etc. etc., all the
significant variables. That's what makes Harris, Gallup, etc., worth
paying for.

If you read the print edition of USA Today, you will see that their
polls often give the sample size, margin of error and confidence
level. If I recall my stats class, you need to have 1054 samples to
be 95% confident with +/- 3% error.

I was pleasantly surprised to see all the hits when I googled
"statistics help."

Depending on where you live, you can probably take an accredited
statistics class at a community college for $350-$500. It will take
13-15 weeks of commitment, but you will know way more than everyone
else about how polling is done and the mental exercise will help stave
off senility.


I still would be interested in learning if Harris only counted a response
from individuals who already were familiar with Darwin and his work.


Right away you run into trouble. Plenty of creationists and ID advocates
think they know their Darwin. You'd have to ask a battery of questions
about Darwin and evolution before you could get any idea of the accuracy
of the responses of "Yes, I am familiar".

For those who tested positive for knowing Darwin and evolution, can anyone
doubt that the percentage of those who accept evolution would be
significantly higher?


So from what you say, it would seem near impossible to corral enough
educated open-minded, unbiased individuals to ever conduct a meaningful
poll. If you know Darwin you're out. If you never heard of him you're out.
If religion plays a significant part in your life you're out. If you're an
atheist you're out. If you own more than one Darwin medal you're
out...........



  #18  
Old February 10th 09, 09:49 PM posted to rec.collecting.coins
note.boy
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,418
Default Darwin, Britain's Hero, Is Still Controversial In U.S.


"Jud" wrote in message
...


Mike Marotta wrote:

Depending on where you live, you can probably take an accredited
statistics class at a community college for $350-$500. It will take
13-15 weeks of commitment, but you will know way more than everyone
else about how polling is done and the mental exercise will help stave
off senility.


There are liars, damned liars and statisticians. I took 'stat' in
college, and if there was one thing that I brought home from that
class was when the professor stated "Anytime someone quotes statistics
to you, they are lying. There are so many ways to make the statistics
work in any foregone conclusion."

Also, I am with the majority of the 93.4832% of the population who
don't believe in polls. (No jokes about Poland please!)



If your head is frozen inside a block of ice and your feet are on fire then
statiscally, on average, you are perfectly fine. Billy


  #19  
Old February 10th 09, 11:34 PM posted to rec.collecting.coins
mazorj
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,169
Default Darwin, Britain's Hero, Is Still Controversial In U.S.


"note.boy" wrote in message
...

"Jud" wrote in message
...


Mike Marotta wrote:

Depending on where you live, you can probably take an accredited
statistics class at a community college for $350-$500. It will
take
13-15 weeks of commitment, but you will know way more than
everyone
else about how polling is done and the mental exercise will help
stave
off senility.


There are liars, damned liars and statisticians. I took 'stat' in
college, and if there was one thing that I brought home from that
class was when the professor stated "Anytime someone quotes
statistics
to you, they are lying. There are so many ways to make the
statistics
work in any foregone conclusion."

Also, I am with the majority of the 93.4832% of the population who
don't believe in polls. (No jokes about Poland please!)


If your head is frozen inside a block of ice and your feet are on
fire then statiscally, on average, you are perfectly fine. Billy


You must be an engineer of some type. :-D

We'd kid ours with the a variant of that: "An engineer is someone who
thinks that if your left foot is in a bucket of boiling water and your
right foot is in a bucket of ice water, on average you're
comfortable." The funny thing was that 81.717% of them agreed!


  #20  
Old February 11th 09, 12:13 AM posted to rec.collecting.coins
mazorj
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,169
Default Darwin, Britain's Hero, Is Still Controversial In U.S.


"Bruce Remick" wrote in message
...

"mazorj" wrote in message
...

"Bruce Remick" wrote in message
...


....
I still would be interested in learning if Harris only counted a
response from individuals who already were familiar with Darwin
and his work.


Right away you run into trouble. Plenty of creationists and ID
advocates think they know their Darwin. You'd have to ask a
battery of questions about Darwin and evolution before you could
get any idea of the accuracy of the responses of "Yes, I am
familiar".

For those who tested positive for knowing Darwin and evolution, can
anyone doubt that the percentage of those who accept evolution
would be significantly higher?


So from what you say, it would seem near impossible to corral enough
educated open-minded, unbiased individuals to ever conduct a
meaningful poll. If you know Darwin you're out. If you never heard
of him you're out. If religion plays a significant part in your life
you're out. If you're an atheist you're out. If you own more than
one Darwin medal you're out...........


Maybe I misunderstood what you were driving at with "I still would be
interested in learning if Harris only counted a response from
individuals who already were familiar with Darwin and his work." My
point was that in order to do that, you can't just ask the question
"Are you familiar with Darwin and his work?" to screen and limit the
participants to those who actually know enough about Darwin and
evolution. Most anti-Darwinians fancy themselves as knowledgeable, as
in "Know thine enemy" even though in the vast majority of cases,
whatever they "know" comes from sermons and diatribes reviling him
(and maybe a feature episode or two on the History Channel). And
since most people don't like to admit ignorance even in an anonymous
poll, you'll have another block of respondents who don't know jack
about Charles but will say they do.

What trips me up here is that you shifted your stated criteria from
"only including those familiar with Darwin and his work," to excluding
just about everybody because in your view they cannot be "educated
open-minded, unbiased individuals" if they know Darwin, if they don't
know Darwin, if they never heard of him, if they are religious or if
they are atheist. Sure, that excludes just about everybody, but
that's not what you asked in your original question.

I took the original question to mean "Did they only poll people with
enough knowledge to intelligently answer the questions" or did they
interview "any warm body that answered the telephone"? In most
surveys you want true random selection (no, not evolutionary random
selection, just statistically random selection) because you want truly
representative slices of all members of the overall population.

So if you wanted to limit respondents only to people who have an
accurate and adequate (even if only a layman's) grasp of Darwin and
evolution, first they'd have to pass a moderately tough quiz on the
topic. I don't know why you'd want to do it that way. The results
would only confirm that "the vast majority of people who really know
evolution think it's a valid scientific model." As I said, that's
already a no-brainer. Most surveys want to know what the entire
population thinks, not just one limited slice of it. And in reporting
the results of the poll, you would have to state your findings with
the limiting condition "Among people who have an accurate and adequate
understanding of Darwin and evolution..."

To keep this on topic, I would only rule you out if you had two or
more Darwin medals. One is just a random selection by you in the
evolution of your holdings. Two or more indicates some intended
design (intelligent or not) in your acquisition of things Darwinian.
;-)


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Darwin Award Tony Vella General Discussion 12 February 17th 07 12:26 AM
Panal approves controversial coin stonej Coins 1 February 2nd 06 07:06 PM
New Austrailian commemorative coin is controversial JSTONE9352 Coins 18 December 13th 04 08:25 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:55 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 CollectingBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.