Zac Moilanen, the latest "crowd expert" that the teabaggers cling to

[Tarc]

Moilanen's "evidence" website; http://www.scribd.com/doc/19743935/The-Real-Number-of-Protesters-Zac-Moilanen

Media Matters debunks it; http://mediamatters.org/blog/200909160019

[malaise]

1. It does not matter who or what they cling to

70,000 people or less attended that crap rally. Nothing changes that fact.

[FSogol]

2. Hilarious.

"In all precise studies of crowds, it is important to subtract "a hundred thousand or two" for old people being distracted by statues, etc."

:rofl:

[WeDidIt]

3. I'll give Zac Moilanen credit for one thing with his document

Unlike the asshole, "Polarik", he apparently put his real name on the steaming pilke of crap.

[WePurrsevere]

4. Wow.. this just proves it... .

the Teabagging twits really are incredibly stupid and desperate.

For goodness sake.. there are real pictures of the event that can prove that the Mall was not even full no less with tea party fools and bigots. There are people who live there and have for years saying it was far from the numbers they're claiming.

The real numbers of people that showed up (generously using the Fire Dept figures of 70,000) is actually pretty impressive for neo-twits and Libertarians but they feel they need to LIE and make it more then it is. They remind me of those people who pad things to be more "attractive" but the reality when you get down to the real stuff is terribly disappointing. :eyes:

[NYCGirl]

5. Is he fron "I Don't Remember" University? NT

[Falldog]

6. Debunked

Was Googling and found this forum.

I've crafted my own response to his article, http://otakurevolution.com/content/9-12-dc-tea-bag-protest-debunking-moilanen-and-creating-an-estimate

I've identified some of the issues in his reasoning and tried to show that his 1.7 million people wouldn't have fit.

[drewmm10]

7. Debunked again

I wrote a quick thing up to debunk Mr. Moilanen's paper. It criticizes all of his approximations and bad assumptions, but concentrates the most on the fact that his math hides a crucial assumption: that people take up only 2.5 square feet of space. That's because he based his crowd numbers on a standing crowd at Obama's inauguration, and a march is very different.

Even if we assume that the YouTube video is accurate (and why should we, it's posted by someone obviously biased and we only have his word for it) that demonstrates no more than 400-500,000 people could possibly have been there.

Pass this link around, get the word out: http://j.mp/912turnout

[merh]

8. He also relies on the image posted at FreeRepublic

that is from 1997. See his page 7

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2009/sep/14/tea-party-photo-shows-large-crowd-different-event/