Wednesday :: Nov 24, 2004

Open Thread


by Mary

The SCLM ignores scientific studies if they don't fit into their convenient storyline. Media Matters reports that after the Berkeley study on voting anomolies in Florida was mostly ignored, two later studies on that same topic were given even less attention.

  • "A November 19 article in the Oakland Tribune on the Berkeley study noted that a Massachusetts Institute of Technology political scientist was asked by the Tribune and the Associated Press to replicate the analysis of the study. He succeeded in doing so, and said that an investigation into the discrepancy was "warranted."
  • "The technology news website CNET News.com published a November 19 article on the study, which also appeared on The New York Times website. The report quotes a Princeton University professor of microbiology who conducted an independent analysis, using different methods, that produced results similar to those of the Berkeley study. The Princeton professor also lent credence to the study, saying: 'Their analysis indicates that even when all these variables [within the study] are accounted for, a significant difference remains between counties that used electronic voting and counties that used optical scanning or paper ballots.'"

Meanwhile, move along, folks, nothing to see here.

(via the irrepressible Avedon Carol, who won't let a good story get buried. BTW: if you have a link to The SideShow, do remember to update it to http://sideshow.me.uk to catch her latest stuff.)

Mary :: 1:08 AM :: Comments (15) :: Digg It!