<<<Can you say that with a straight face, given the conspiratorial theories which you yourself have promulgated in this forum;
theories whereby emotional political editorials...blogs...and conspiracy theory websites are assumed to trump reason and
examination at the onset?>>>
I'm not sure what a "blog" is. As close as I can tell, it's not even a word. As far as "conspiracy theory websites" are concerned, the majority of those I've seen contain literally hundreds of links to sources even the most discriminating juror would be forced to treat as having a high degree of reliability.
<<<Do you think I'm challenging your innumeracy without knowing well the answers?>>>
I would suggest you consult your dictionary in order to avoid sense free phrases. Do I think you know what you're talking about half the time? As close as I can tell, you either don't bother to read most of what is posted, or have such poor memory retention you've forgotten the information by the next mouse click.
For example I post an article about a recent poll. You then ask how many people were polled, which is information contained in the article. I post a follow up link to the source of the poll, which contains information on how their polls are conducted, and you demand to know how their polls are conducted. The remarkable part is we just got through with a similar conversation over an ABC poll about a month ago, which contained similar research.
Since I have neither the time nor the inclination to stand over you with a switch to make sure you're getting everything, I think there's a point where it's reasonable to suggest you attempt to acquire information through your own efforts. I suppose I could charter a flight to the various research centers, observe their techniques, then follow it up with personal interviews of the 1000 individuals surveyed, but that strikes me as an unreasonable amount of effort on my part to make a point, when two separate polls are statistically significant even if the margin of error was 50% rather than 3%.
If as you imply, you are already aware of certain facts, then there is no reason why I should spend an hour digging up stuff, that has already been posted, everytime you want to rehash the subject. Since you openly question my credibility, sources and quality of research anyhow, why should I waste my time when you are perfectly able to look it up yourself and target resources that will meet your own information standards? |
