So, no one ever won an internet argument. There are no winners, only many losers.
The Sun is no better source of information than The Guardian. People make 5hlt up, whether they are journalists or world leaders.

The use of statistics is mildly amusing to me. It is only relevant if you know where the raw data came from. Was the extraction of data verifiable, and were the data sources representative of the wider population ? Did the data gatherers have an agenda (e.g were they funded by a particular group ?)

Then we get into the processing of data,...statistics. If you want to do this properly, then it's not just about percentages. It's about percentiles of probability (google it). And nothing is fool-proof.

So go ahead and fill your boots.

Quote sources and data as much as you want, but nothing can ever be proven, scientifically. It can only be dis-proven

FACT

"The facts have changed", Rishi Sunak

Statistically proven obviously.

I'd agree with quite a lot there.

If someone is really interested in truth, then they will have no agendas and hold it up as the only virtue.

As Richard P. Feynman said, 'It doesn't matter how beautiful your theory is, it doesn't matter how smart you are. If it doesn't agree with experiment, it's wrong.'

In reality true objectivity is very difficult as humans view reality through the sensory lens and their experiences often colour how they interpret data and its outcomes.

This is unavoidable.....the progressives like to call that unconscious bias - but I won't portray my views on that.

This means that a correct interpretation of data on any contentious issue will always be subject to bias and subjectivity and hence receive multiple interpretations depending upon worldview.

I'll always respect the individual who is genuinely interested in truth regardless of how society treats it. However it comes at cost....As George Orwell wrote in his classic dystopian novel 1984, 'In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.'

We are indeed in those times. As those who control the narrative fed to the masses are less interested in the messiness of truth and more interested in the oldest human motive....power.

Edited by Stirlingsays (25 Aug 2020 4.20am)

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Statistics show that there are really only two types of people; those who divide people into two types, and those who don’t.

And that’s all you need to know.

those with guns, and those who dig.

you dig.

Eze Peasy at Anfield....