Where did these statistics come from?
Posted By: Lurker on 2005-08-18
In Reply to: From ANWR.com - Reality check
Just curious. The oil supply is still finite and it is our mindset that needs to change, not the search for more sites of drilling. ANWR is a bandaid which will do more harm that good. If you cannot wrap your mind around environmental issues, how about survival. The state of our environment is a good predictor of our future. When the animals go, and the rivers go and the trees, etc. and all those other ridiculous things that conservatives believe to be an unnecessary bother to our quest for more, more, more...we go too. We are the stewards of our world but we live in it and rely on it too. Squander it, environment first, humans next. I realize it might not happen in our lifetime so who gives a flip but it will happen.
"Only after the last tree has been cut down, only after the last river has been poisoned, only after the last fish has been caught, only then will you find that money cannot be eaten." Cree Proverb
I know conservatives see this as tree-hugging drivel, but its true. No environment, no life.
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
Statistics don't lie. sm
In Franklin D. Roosevelt's sixth year in 1938, Democrats lost 71 seats in the House and six in the Senate.
In Dwight Eisenhower's sixth year in 1958, Republicans lost 47 House seats, 13 in the Senate.
In John F. Kennedy/Lyndon Johnson's sixth year, Democrats lost 47 seats in the House and three in the Senate.
In Richard Nixon/Gerald Ford's sixth year in office in 1974, Republicans lost 43 House seats and three Senate seats.
Even America's greatest president, Ronald Reagan, lost five House seats and eight Senate seats in his sixth year in office.
But in the middle of what the media tell us is a massively unpopular war, the Democrats picked up about 30 House seats and five to six Senate seats in a sixth-year election, with lots of seats still too close to call. Only for half-brights with absolutely no concept of yesterday is this a tsunami -- as MSNBC calls it -- rather than the death throes of a dying party.
During eight years of Clinton -- the man Democrats tell us was the greatest campaigner ever, a political genius, a heartthrob, Elvis! -- Republicans picked up a total of 49 House seats and nine Senate seats in two midterm elections. Also, when Clinton won the presidency in 1992, his party actually lost 10 seats in the House -- only the second time in the 20th century that a party won the White House but lost seats in the House.
Meanwhile, the Democrats' epic victory this week, about which songs will be sung for generations, means that in two midterm elections Democrats were only able to pick up about 30 seats in the House and four seats in the Senate -- and that's assuming they pick up every seat that is currently too close to call. (The Democrats' total gain is less than this week's gain because Bush won six House and two Senate seats in the first midterm election.)
So however you cut it, this midterm proves that the Iraq war is at least more popular than Bill Clinton was.
Maybe statistics should say...
Maybe instead of statistics saying how many white, hispanics, blacks or whatever races there are in America (after all it doesn't matter what nationality your heritage is from as long as you pay your taxes), maybe a better poll (statistics or whatever you want to call it) would be to tell let us know how many illegals we have versus the people who came here and are legally working and paying their taxes like the rest of us. I could give a you know what about races. I come from a family of diverse people (grandmother born and raised in Puerto Rico, grandfather born and raised in Canada, other grandmother from England, and other grandfather from Ireland - but they all went through the correct channels to be American citizens and are legal and paid their taxes along with the rest of Americans.
I seriously doubt your statistics.
And the truth is, the man whose article you posted has an agenda. I don't listen to things like this from either side. Conspiracy theories are tiresome.
Statistics can be spun anyway you want.
none
depression statistics
This sounds familiar:
http://eh.net/Clio/Publications/unemployment.html
The statistics lie then? Dont think so. They are
nm
Some interesting statistics
Cost breakdown between House and Senate"
http://www.c-span.org/special/econ_stimulus2.aspx
How much each state will get:
http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/info-STIMULUS0109.html
And where do you get your statistics, other than Canada?
#
And where do you get your statistics, other than Canada?
#
OMG. Fine...go look at the crime statistics.
nm
Apparently you don't understand statistics or science. Get educated, please!!
It's not scientifically sound to make pseudo-scientific statements about U.S. obesity based on a television program you saw that featured some obese people in it. But it seems when it comes to scientific fact, statistics or the truth - you CONS don't have a clue.
Rankings: Obesity Rates Grew In Every State But Oregon
Mississippi Ranked Heaviest State
POSTED: 8:29 am PDT August 23, 2005
UPDATED: 9:34 am PDT August 23, 2005
The obesity epidemic isn't winding down -- in fact, it's expanding, according to state rankings released Tuesday by Trust for America's Health, a nonprofit health advocacy group.
Obesity rates continued to rise last year in every state but Oregon. Mississippi ranked as the heaviest state, Colorado as the least heavy, according to the report, titled F as in Fat: How Obesity Policies are Failing in America, 2005.
The rankings are based on averages of three years of data from 2002 to 2004 from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Hawaii was not included in the report.
About 64.5 percent of adult Americans are either overweight or obese. The report found that more than 25 percent of adults in 10 states are obese, including in Mississippi, Alabama, West Virginia, Louisiana, Tennessee, Texas, Michigan, Kentucky, Indiana and South Carolina.
Funny thing about those infant mortality statistics.
Rather than my doing the homework for you, I'll let you scour around and see if you can identify the problems with comparative infant mortality statistics, saying only that they don't quite prove what a lot of people think or want them to prove.
((Hint: The problems start with the definitions of "prenatal care" and "infant mortality" - which are of course the main independent and dependent variables of interest, and only get worse from there.)
Just look at statistics on infant mortality rate for mothers without prenatal care - nm
z
|
