Methodology to Calculate Iraqi Civilian Deaths is Questionable
From Greece, Harry Papasotiriou writes: I eagerly await Phyllis Gardner's scientific evaluation, as well as other scientific examinations, of this study that produced the estimate, that 100,000 Iraqi civilians were killed since the US and allied invasion in Iraq. The fact that this estimate was released ten days before the November 2 election makes me suspicious. As a strategic analyst, I find this estimate very implausible. I suspect that academic reputations will be ruined once the methodology behind this estimate is thoroughly examined.
Harry Papasotiriou questioned the figures quoted by Phyllis
Gardner about the number of civilian deaths in Iraq: As a strategic analyst, I
find this estimate very implausible. I suspect that academic reputations will be ruined once the methodology behind this estimate is thoroughly examined. Phyllis replies: Well, I am not the one to evaluate the methodology, but I will send this article out when it is published. I will say, however, that Lancet is a highly respected peer-reviewed, rigorous journal, so it is highly unlikely that academic reputations will be ruined upon publication. It is also highly unlikely that the methodology is suspect, given the rigorous peer review that each manuscript goes through prior to publication. Usually, academic reputations are ruined after that process only because of fraud. It is also unlikely that these academics were fraudulent. Finally, I strongly doubt that the release before the election was a political event - most medical scientists are not that overtly political ( I wish they were more so!).
Your comments are invited. Read the home page of the World Association of International Studies (WAIS) by simply double-clicking on: http://wais.stanford.edu Mail to Ronald Hilton, Hoover Institution, Stanford, CA 94305-6010. Please inform us of any change of e-mail address.