Chomper Higgot

Putting aside the concept of ‘margin of error’, there is another issue with voter polls that are published in the immediate run up to elections. The published poll results themselves Drive media coverage and in turn that impacts voter turnout. This is obviously a bigger issue when the polls are indicating a close run race, as with BREXIT. https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/323018021.pdf

If you believe that then I suggest you think very carefully before getting on an aircraft against. Nobody tested 100% of all the components to make sure they’re strong enough, including the bolts that hold the engines on. The manufacturers used the very same sampling maths as are used to sample the opinions populations.

‘All the best people’

Yes, let’s blame the mothers of his child victims.

Glitter, a pedophile, is by definition a sicko. But then I’m of the opinion people who obsess over pedophiles aren’t quite right either. There’s evidence they’re often not too bright either: https://amp.theguardian.com/uk/2000/aug/30/childprotection.society

That’s not the only arrow in Labour’s quiver.

This makes perfect sense to the extremists in the Tory Party if the believe two things: 1. They will not win the next election and very likely the election after that. 2. The public mood is growing for a return to the EU and a return to the EU will be on the ballot in the next two parliaments. It then becomes clear that the extremists on the right of the Tory Party and their extreme rightwing financial backers are running out of time to completely deregulate the UK. Its now or never, the last chance for ‘Singapore on Thames’.

And if it has passed anyone’s notice this Bill to rip up all the EU laws and regulations that were passed by the British Parliament comes from Rees Mogg. Moreover, it is not simply ripping up laws and regulations, it is removing the sovereign power of Parliament to decide what laws and regulations govern the UK and handing it to the Executive. An open attack on the democratic process and sovereignty of Parliament. Brought to you without an iota of irony, let alone a blush, by BREXIT. You’ll recall that thing about a vote for BREXIT sending a message to ‘the Elite’, well Rees Mogg got the message.

Your over exposure to black and white war movies is revealing itself again.

I think the crew of the aircraft that shot the ballon down deserve a medal. Flying through all those bullets being fired by MTG was surely a dangerous mission.

The balloons are navigated by taking advantage of the different wind directions at different altitudes. Piloting the ballon up and down through these altitudes enables directional changes.

From the OP: “The US Department of Defense said three other of these crafts 'briefly transited the continental United States at least three times during the prior administration.' “

That only makes sense if you swallow the Chinese propaganda.

You made that point earlier, and I have provided verifiable data from reputable sources, including the ONS. The views I have expressed are consistent with the data from these sources. Feel free to present data that substantiates the experiences/observations you report.

Once again, we see evidence of Republican accusations tiring out to be confessions.

Not at all. You have your experiences, data from numerous reputable sources, including the ONS, contradict the experiences you report. That data is verifiable.

Again, the lack of understanding of how statistics works raises its head. This might help: https://www.qualtrics.com/uk/experience-management/research/determine-sample-size/

Some data comes from people, polls, surveys and the like. Other data comes from records, example registers of children receiving free meals, supermarket database transactions, bank records, bankruptcy court records, welfare records etc. All verifiable.

Not quite. He might, if he were to visit the UK, educate himself on the difference between poverty in the UK and some photo he’s ripped off the internet. His observations would be informative but would not hold more weight than verifiable data, they certainly would hold more weight and be more relevant to the topic under discussion than an image ripped off the internet of poverty in some other part of the world Let’s remind ourselves of what is the topic of discussion is: “UK economy only G7 nation to shrink in 2023 - IMF” Here’s an overview of the G7 for those who don’t understand why photos ripped off the internet of poverty elsewhere in the world are an irrelevance to to topic under discussion: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/G7

Erm, no. Those people in the photo you’ve ripped from some corner of the internet is not a photo of poverty in the UK. Perhaps you should visit the UK for an update, you might then not confuse what’s happening outside of the UK with what is happening in the UK.

I prefer you stick with the actual comments I’ve made in the context I made them. I’ve responded to your post on passports. Oh look, you’ve found evidence of poverty elsewhere in the world. That’s relevant to poverty in the UK how?

Who needs photos we have official Government data on food poverty and I have already posted a link to the ONS Report. And let’s not misquote each other: “I mean, a bloke here says millions are foodless...” I’m sure you mean it, but that is a misrepresentation of my posts on the matter. Feel free to quote me directly, but do not misrepresent posts I have made.

I don’t need to ‘debunk personal experience’, I simply point out their inherent flaws, a) they are not verifiable, which might not matter so much if, b) they may fictitious. Nobody has debunked ‘so called verifiable data’. Posts demonstrating a the extent of ignorance of statistics and data are not debunking statistics or data.

I think we first need to ask ourselves if we believe the claimed personal knowledge is true.

There is the potential in all data for flaws. Reputable data collators and analysts declare the flaws. Just like all observations have flaws and reputable observers declare the flaws in their observations. Anecdotes posted on an anonymous online forum are perhaps the best example of ‘flawed’, being as they are, completely unverifiable.