What a foolish set of numbers. Why does Rasmussen have so much trouble counting to 193? [Marginal Revolution]
Rasmussen, Fox News Now Working Together To Destroy Math
Previous post: Previous Post
-
Authors
Kirsten Boyd Johnson (802)
Jim Newell (5435)
Liz Colville (97)
Ken Layne (6696)
Wonkette Jr. (628)
Kaia Mursi (45)
Blair Burke (171)
Garrett Quinn (13)
Matt Langer (40)
Arielle Fleisher (385)
{ 69 comments }
FUDGE PACKERS!
“Per Cent” becomes a figurative term in FoxLand. The meaning isn’t as important as the way the word sounds. Have some imagination, Wonkette!
They use “Ducey” math.
hEER iZ TeH RREEEL LYYAR beehind KLYMAT CHANCH: http://www.infowars.com/images/climatefraud.jpg
Hey, FOX doesn’t understand the zero part of “zero tolerance for errors” either — they’re not even saying this was a mistake:
http://mediamatters.org/blog/200912080051
Really it’s a case of nine of one, half a dozen of the other.
Rasmussen seems to have two objectives.
Objective #1: Create polls specifically for Fox and Right-Wing Radio. Whenever you see a poll used by Fox that reflects poorly on Democrats, you can bet your bottom dollar it came from Rasmussen.
Objective 2: Skew polls so badly that it ruins the average when it is included in a collection of polls.
For proof, just look at Real Clear Politics. Look how far off Rasmussen and Fox polls are to every other Polling company. Their insane numbers throw off the averages of all the other polls.
Just take a look around at the Rasmussen numbers as compared to everyone else. This is obviously not a coincidence.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latestpolls/state_of_the_union.html
Rasmussen is GOP PR firm. They are not a polling organization.
Carry the 1.
FAKE. Any real american knows that when someone says “global warming” to you on the phone you have to shriek as loud as you can until you pass out.
This is what happens when you ask your staff to give 110% effort. Or 120%, in this case.
The actual poll numbers (though FOX took it straight from the Rasmussen press release):
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/business/econ_survey_toplines/december_2009/toplines_climate_change_december_1_2_2009
3* In order to support their own theories and beliefs about global warming, how likely is it that some scientists have falsified research data?
35% Very likely
24% Somewhat likely
21% Not very likely
5% Not at all likely
15% Not sure
Look at all you liberal atheistic elitists, attacking the one true network for getting its math “wrong”. Well, Fox uses faith-based math, and the egghead scientists can’t stop it!
Those who don’t believe in science do poorly in math.
You can look it up.
[re=475096]SayItWithWookies[/re]: OMG. OM-fucking-G.
[re=475100]Escape Goat Nation[/re]: It’s always puzzling when they talk about “Republican pollsters” or “Democratic pollsters.” If polling were anything like a real science, it wouldn’t be any more partisan than proctoscopy. “Doc, I’d like a liberal-centrist scope-job, please.”
100 Percent is just a theory like gravity and evolution. That’s why Sarah Palin was able to ride a flying dinosaur with Jeebus
‘Rithmetic is a librul conspiracy.
Maybe it is like the unnecessary quotation marks…it’s the unnecessary percent signs?
Rasmussen and Fox News believe in giving MORE than 110% … they give 120%!
HEY, I can be a pollster, also.
In order to support their own theories and beliefs about their inherent wonderfulness, how likely is it that FOX NEWZ just makes shit up?
75% Very likely (all the intelligent normal folks)
37% Somewhat likely (all the stoned and slightly confused normal folks)
21% Not very likely (Anybody that thinks Sarah is a decent human being)
10% Not at all likely (Anybody that thinks Sarah is a human being)
15% Go Away, I’m busy fapfapfap (Regular Wonketteers)
[re=475132]PortlandSmartAss[/re]: Git offa mah lawn!
The “3″ is silent, obv.
I don’t know. My coach always spittle-screamed in my face something about if I weren’t giving 110% then I wasn’t giving anything… I know that all those brain damaged teammates ended up employed at the behest of someone else. Fox news is a charity of sorts and we should support them for employing the unemployable.
Mirrorball
Also notice How Fox took the original bullshit numbers from the Rasmussen Poll,
35% Very likely
24% Somewhat likely
21% Not very likely
5% Not at all likely
15% Not sure”
And changed them into,
59% Somewhat Likely
35% Very Likely
26% Not Very Likely
So what the weasels at Fox did was to add the numbers from Very and Somewhat and call it
Somewhat. Then they included Very again and called it Very. Then added Not Very and Not at all
together and called it Not Very. Then completely discarded the Not Sure.
So the original Rasmussen Bullshit Poll numbers do = 100%
After the Weasels got done manipulating it they = 120%.
The extra 20% comes from using the 35% Very Likely number twice and discarding the 15% Not Sure
So not only are they Weasels, but they are stupid Weasels at that!
And this is why I detest Fox News. They pull this kind of shit all day long.
They’re obviously just applying a much higher order of math than us. Quantum physics (that’s basically math, right?) says that reality is affected by an observer, and Fox “observed” that 94% of people thought that it was somewhat or very likely that global warming is false. Ipso Facto, they’re correct – science proves it!
120% is the new ghey.
And here’s the bitch about it. You take all the ones digits and drop them to zero, and the math actually does end up working. So the thing is, it’s like putting the price of something at 99 cents instead of a dollar; there’s a psychological mathematical effect at work.
Like, you get your average, mouth-breathing, knuckle dragging, beer stain in a wife beater shirt and he thinks, “uh… you got a five and a three and a two… Uh. three and two make (one-two-three-four-five) five. And five and a five make (1-2-3-4-5-6-7-8-9-10) ten. And ten times ten equalz… uh (one ten, two ten, three ten….) one hundred… so yeah, the math must work!”
And the intellectual soul of our nation dies a little bit more today. Not that there’s much of anything there in the first place. But whatevs. I’m just waiting for the day when they do torch and pitchfork charges on anyone who can do complex maths like, say, addition.
mercure:
Entirely right.
The original numbers say that Very and Somewhat Likely = 59%
After Fox got their hands on it.
Very and Somewhat Likely = 94%
What do Americans think about the length of the Chinese emperor’s nose?
Everyone with a brain knows Fox just makes shit up. They don’t even pretend anymore. But Fox viewers aren’t good with numbers, which they class with science.
Everyone knows that the wonkeratti girls’ favorite pretend boyfriend, Nate Silver, is the only numbers producer we can trust.
OT but important (to me): I just had a heart-to-heart with my insurance company after they quit paying for Lyrica, which is magic for arthritis pain, and insisted I use a bullshit drug that, after 4 mos, has me limping, my shoulders too sore to pick up a dictionary (and I’m talking Webster’s Ninth New Collegiate, not the OED in a single volume) as a part of their step therapy. Now I have to take another bullshit drug, an anti-depressant (so I won’t care about the fact I feel like shit?) for I don’t know how long, then they’ll give me a pittance for Lyrica. Maybe. I might have to go to a witch doctor first.
Big Pharma is big, sucking, greedy capitalist overpaid pigs. Just saying. We pay for all their research? Fine. I want a rebate on every penny spent on male enhancement, lobbying and their bloated salaries.
Hey, editors: My arthritis would be better if I had less body weight to carry around. That Ben and Jerry’s Maple and Blonde Brownie Ice Cream ad isn’t helping.
[re=475108]mirrorball[/re]: The thing is I’d say “likely”, because many scientists are bought off by Big Oil and have been cooking the numbers to prove that carbon monoxide is actually healthy for children and other living things.
Wait, do two rongs still make a write?
Its just jocks giving the coach 110%
Rasmussen and Fox, fair and balanced?
100% NOT VERY LIKELY
Reminds me of when Democratic Presidential nominee George McGovern announced that he was behind Democratic Vice Presidential nominee Thomas “Electroshock” Eagleton “1000 percent.”
And then dumped him from the ticket.
Anyway, we all know the “global warming” thing is manufactured. Republic Cie Presidential nominee Sarah “Electroshock” Palin said so in her Washington Post Op-Ed earlier this week.
(Wait a minute. That’s not what I meant to say.)
GO SARAH! GO! GO! GO!
Not to be a stick in the mud, but Ken Layne gets very mad when anyone complains about ads. As in, banhammer-mad.
[re=475201]BeWoot[/re]: Isn’t that 148.2% Not Very Likely?
Actually they are transmitting secret messages to US operatives all over the world. So lighten up on the math wonk-offs, this is important homeland security stuff.
You libdonks don’t know math at all…these numbers are perfectly valid, for small values of 120%.
(jejejejejejeje!)
Who the fuck is the COB team that the Maple Leafs are beating 6 – 3? Clearly another false rumour on FOX.
The margin of error on the poll was + or – 113% so the result is perfectly valid.
In order to support their own theories and beliefs about global warming opinion, how likely is it that some pollsters have falsified research data?
Very Likely 100%
120? Does this mean Matt Pinfield is bringing his savant shtick to FOX?
Fox News: We make up numbers, You decide
[re=475204]Sharkey[/re]: Point taken. Still, I’m Xmas shopping in Tulsa tomorrow–where they actually sell Ben and Jerry’s– and you can bet your ass when I’m eating that pint of ice cream, I am totally blaming Ken Layne.
Percentage-gate?
In other news:
Ex-US Rep. Chip Pickering (R-Dumpster, Miss.) Wants to Cuddle with Kids Soccer Coach
http://blog.al.com/live/2009/12/ex-mississippi_congressman_acc_1.html
Where in the Bible does it say the numbers have to add up to 100%?
100 is in the eye of the beholder. Don’t hold me down with your rules, I decide how my number system rolls, not you, NAZI!
Faith-based statistics.
[re=475100]Escape Goat Nation[/re]: [re=475153]Escape Goat Nation[/re]: [re=475167]Escape Goat Nation[/re]:
I’d like to offer a sincere word of thanks for all of your analysis, Nate Silver, and to assure you that your secret identity is safe with us.
6 out of every 5 GOPers recommend Dentyne.
Statistical change is like gravity – a naturally occurring phenomenon that existed long before, and will exist long after, any governmental attempts to affect it.I have never denied the existence of statistical change. I just don’t think we can primarily blame man’s activities for the earth’s cyclical statistical changes.
Former Vice President Gore also claimed today that the scientific community has worked on this issue for 20 years, and therefore it is settled science. Well, the Climategate scandal involves the leading experts in this field, and if Climategate is proof of the larger method used over the past 20 years, then Vice President Gore seriously needs to consider that their findings are flawed, falsified, or inconclusive.
Yours truly,
Sarah
[re=475233]DustBowlBlues[/re]: Just imagine that Ben and Jerry’s is new flavor is really “Sarah Palin’s Craptastic Combo.”
Ewwwww…
[re=475292]CanadianBacon[/re]: Dear Sarah,
Rest assured, we will all start ignoring science now. Science should never get in the way of Business (see how I did that with the captial “B”? Like “Big”?) and this is just a bump in the road along the way.
Copenhagen will fail and then we can just do whatever we want as usual. La la la, la la lala la la.
Sincerely,
Al Gore
I guess it’s about time for the war on math, since they’ve certainly already defeated science. I suppose it’s the next logical thing–-logical things, of course, having been destroyed during the Bush years without anything noticing…
[re=475300]Sharkey[/re]: Dear Al
Glad to see you are on my side now, by golly. My national approval numbers are only 1 % lower than the Kenyan,so you are not alone, you betcha. How about you come over to my place tonight (Todd’s busy babysitting) and we’ll drill, drill, drill.
Truly Yours,
Sarah
[re=475280]ShortShadey[/re]: Win.
Accurate Computation: myth, legend or socialist dogma? To be debated at the next RNC convention.
[re=475112]V572625694[/re]: pollsters are the modern version of augurs and haruspices.
[re=475180]Accordion-o-rama[/re]: There is no emperor of China.
[re=475292]CanadianBacon[/re]: Many of the earlier civilizations destroyed themselves by destroying their environments. Mesopotamia is the biggest example. See Robert McC. Adams’ books, particularly _The Land Behind Baghdad_, for details. (Adams is a well-known archaeologist and former director of the Smithsonian Institute. You can find his books online.)
I don’t see any reason to believe that we are smarter than our ancestors. We do have the ability to do more damage. The idea that we can scatter around poison the way we do without consequences is absurd.
Well, I’ve been lookin’ at them there numbers for ages now, and I’m danged if I can see anything wrong with ‘em…
Best Regards
Sarah P. from Wasilla
Here’s the real killer: even if these numbers somehow added up to 100%, the opinions of a bunch of random poll respondents still doesn’t change the scientific evidence supporting the theory of global warming. And that, in a nutshell, is what is so horribly, tragically wrong with how science is covered by the news media.
[re=475292]CanadianBacon[/re]: The funniest part of “climategate” is that it concerns one area of evidence: tree ring data. The basic physics underlying the greenhouse effect: unchanged. The correlation between higher concentrations of greenhouse gasses and higher temperatures as shown by ice core data: unchanged. The data from dozens of mesoscale experiments supporting the hypothesis that increased [CO2] = increased temperatures: unchanged. The melting of the polar ice caps: still happening. The rise in sea temperatures: still happening. The movement of plant and animal species into new areas made possible by increased temperatures: still happening.
It amazes me that people can look at a couple of emails concerning one research group and throw out the work of thousands of scientists. Even more so that people seem to be assuming there is a grand worldwide conspiracy with no objective other than to make people conserve more.
[re=475344]Cicada[/re]: It amazes me that people can look at a couple of emails concerning one research group and throw out the work of thousands of scientists.
I’m pretty sure that if someone read the internal emails of my research group, they’d pretty much find nothing but “your momma” jokes, and a widespread conspiracy to scavenge free food from meetings. I don’t think this truly reflects on the quality of the research in the field.
I hate to say that I called it back when I said that the “zero-tolerance” policy just meant the errors and distortions would be intentional from here on out, but that’s actually what they’re saying in their own defense: that the second number is actually part of the first number, and they knew that the whole time, and presented them side-by-side in this manner and talked about the sum of those two numbers on-air, completely on purpose anyway.
Good for them!
I’d volunteer that their statisticians and pollsters went to school here, except DPS students are mostly Kenyan muslin socialist libruls, so there’s no way they’d be working at Faux News.
[re=475327]zhubajie[/re]: I guess nobody got the reference, which is to an old scientific saw similar to “garbage in, garbage out”. It goes something like this: No one has ever seen the emperor of China. All the citizens are polled as to the length of his nose, and the average response from 500 million respondents is, say, 3.25 inches with a standard deviation of .25 inches. How accurate is this result?
The answer is, of course, completely inaccurate, since no one is basing their answers on actual information.
Fox’s innumeracy is amusing, but even if they got the numbers right, they don’t mean anything. The number of Americans who have any actual knowledge of whether climate scientist are scrupulous presenting their data is vanishingly small, so the poll is merely a mirror of media hype, which on Fox tends toward “climate scientists not employed by oil companies are crooks”.
I like how the question assumes “scientists” are a monolith. It’s like they all work together, probably in France.
Fox News: From people who can’t count, for people who can’t read.
Comments on this entry are closed.