7 Jan
2003
7 Jan
'03
4:04 p.m.
While it is true that these adjusted data were not "better" at the block
level, it is my understanding that the Bureau believed the adjusted
numbers were more accurate for larger geographic entities--like the cities
of Chicago, New York, Los Angeles, etc, as well as for states. I don't
know/remember what the population needed to be for these numbers to be
statistically significant and or of "improved accuracy".
Jim Bash
On Tue, 7 Jan 2003, Warren Glimpse wrote:
You might wish to note that both officially and
statistically these data are
neither "corrected" data nor "more accurate" data than the data
released to
the public by the Census Bureau. It is misleading to less informed data
users to suggest that these data are somehow better than the official Census
2000 data. These data were not used by the Census Bureau as it was
concluded that there waa more "noise" added to the tabulations (by their
prospective use) than improvement of accuracy.
Warren Glimpse