A "net" reduction in something is where the negative outflow exceeds the positive inflow and produces a decrease in the overall number. Take a town for example where one year 50 babies are born, 40 people die, 80 people move into the town from elsewhere, and 60 people leave the town to live elsewhere. In that example 60 people left the town, but that does not mean there was a "net" decrease in the town's population of 60 people. To work out the "net" change you add up the positive figures and subtract the negative: 50+80-40-60=30. So although 60 people left the town to live elsewhere, overall there was a "net" increase in the town's population of 30 people.
World map showing net reduction in publisher numbers
by cedars 188 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
besty
@steve2
Besty, absolutely no argument with the clear and informative expected growth chart. Nice work! However, the attempt to explain the significantly lower than expected growth is a bit skimpy and hardly backed up by what we see happening among the JWs.
the content is from jwfacts - the link I gave at the bottom has more details
-
slimboyfat
I agree with Steve that apathy plays a much bigger role in people leaving the Witnesses than outright apostasy. The impact of the Internet is much harder to define. We tend to think sites like this have the greatest impact, but perhaps, through a more indirect influence, sites like Facebook and Youtube promote non-JW friendships and interests, and have a more oblique yet nevertheless more potent impact on young JWs leaving the Wa tchtower mental universe.
-
cedars
slimboyfat
"A "net" reduction in something is where the negative outflow exceeds the positive inflow and produces a decrease in the overall number."
That's exactly what we have here, most notably in the USA and Brazil. I could produce another world chart showing net increase, where countries like Mexico went the other way? However, it's fairly easy to spot where those countries are - they're most of the countries in white!
Your analogy of a town provides for a number of variables which I simply don't have at my disposal. I only have two variables, the total growth in publishers and the number baptized. As I've noted elsewhere on this thread, the Society don't tell you how many "move in from outside". You can therefore only produce the net reduction figure, and bear in mind that once a number of positive factors are taken into consideration (new unbaptized publishers, pubs moving in from elsewhere) even accounting for negative factors (mortality rates, pubs moving out) the numbers may be even more dramatic. I can produce estimates based on world statistics, but it's always just a guess. The mortality rates for JWs could very well be above or below average.
I'm still not sure where you're going with this. What do you think I should call the chart? If it means so much to you, I can change it in photoshop. If that were to happen, I would rather the new name was more accurate than the existing name.
Cedars
-
slimboyfat
My head hurts. When did the USA and Brazil have net decreases? I think the last time the USA had a net decrease was 1978.
-
cedars
Last year! lol - take the baptism figures off the publisher growth, and you have net decrease!
You're making my head hurt too! I said at the beginning I'm no statistician - however, calculating net reduction by the method I've described seems quite straightforward.
Cedars
-
Phizzy
I did a similar calculation years ago to your present one Cedars, and of course only had the same data to deal with, so it was a poor guess. The reason I did it (and I wish I had kept the results !) was because I had a discussion with an Elder in which I spoke of my concern at the numbers who "went missing".
He maintained that it might be that my perception was based on local observation, so I produced my figures.
I did a ten year survey, baptisms compared with growth adjusted for death.
I did show that, however inaccurate the result, there was a huge problem globally, I am only going from memory, but it looks to me as though the problem is quite a bit larger now than then (around 6 or 7 years ago). It is still though, only a "hole in the bucket" and not the mass exodus I would love to see !
-
slimboyfat
Last year! lol - take the baptism figures off the publisher growth, and you have net decrease!
A net decrease in what exactly? Not a net decrease in publishers! Because the overall number of publishers has gone up.
The baptism figure will almost always be larger that the net increase in publishers because of deaths and people who leave. If that's all you are showing then I have to wonder what the point is.
Plus any comparison of baptism figures with publisher figures suffers from the fact that they are not measuring exactly the same thing anyway. Not all publishers are baptised, and not all who stop being publishers ever were baptised.
-
cedars
slimboyfat
A net decrease in what exactly? Not a net decrease in publishers! Because the overall number of publishers has gone up.
Yes, precisely - a net reduction in publisher figures. The overall publishers has gone up, but only because of baptisms (and bear in mind, the rate of baptisms is dwindling, especially the rate of baptisms per hour). This hasn't happened in every country, i.e. Mexico. However, it's happened in all the countries highlighted on my map.
The baptism figure will almost always be larger that the net increase in publishers because of deaths and people who leave.
Not so. Mexico is one example, but there are many others (mostly those countries in white). Do you want the complete list?
I suspect my head is hurting more than yours. It looks like you're just trying to find reasons to discredit stats that were presented as "approximate" and a "rough indication" in the first place. I personally think the map shows a best case scenario for the Society. Once deaths/unbaptized pubs are factored in, I actually think the numbers would be far more damning.
When you starting poking at this I thought you might have one up on me in the maths stakes, but I'm starting to wonder!
Cedars
-
slimboyfat
Yes, precisely - a net reduction in publisher figures. The overall publishers has gone up
Come again? I think you simply misunderstand what a net figure is. A net figure is one that takes account of all pluses and minuses. An overall increase in the publisher number is a net increase. They are the same thing.
The net increase in publishers, in the long run, can never be equal to or greater than the number baptisms. (Assuming a sufficiently close correlation between baptisms and new publishers, and leaving to one side the small but important distinction I pointed out my the last post) So any comparison of the two is always going to show a "decrease" in your terms. Even if no one ever left the Witnesses, your methodology would still show a "net(!?) decrease" in publishers, simply because people die.
The baptism figure may be larger than the increase in publishers for a given year in Mexico, but not over many years. Obviously so, because growth can't outstrip baptisms in the long run. It's a one time anomaly when it happens in any given country (or even worldwide, as has happened a couple of times in the past), not a significant statistical discovery in itself.