Posted by James @ 4:15 pm on July 25th 2007

Lancet Iraq death toll study full of holes?

Michelle Malkin may be the result of Ann Coulter, Lou Dobbs, and Lucy Liu getting beamed down to exactly the same coordinates, but this article she has posted on her website today is rather interesting. I personally know about as much about statistics as I do about knitting tea cozies (well, that may be over the top, but I am not talking about it), so I was hoping maybe Adam or some other statistics wonk here might shed some light on the merits of David Kane’s commentary on the Lancet death toll study.

2 Comments »

  1. This is the sort of debate that can be best settled through the course that Kane has taken, submitting his case to scrutiny. I have no idea why Malkin has posted the poor bastard’s email address.

    It’s not my direct area of expertise and I’m pretty busy, to boot. I might look at it later (it doesn’t look ‘mind-numbingly complicated’, whatever Malkin might say, but it’d probably require a fair amount of time) but no promises there, because I have a lot of other stuff to do right now.

    Comment by Adam — 7/25/2007 @ 4:27 pm

  2. That’s ok, I want someone good anyway. I was just didn’t want to hurt your feelings.

    Comment by James — 7/25/2007 @ 4:34 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Leave a comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.