Baranil wrote:Listen, my information is backed up by the statistics from Tavistock and Portman which are shown within the Sky article
The conclusions you are reaching are not justified on the basis of the information, it is woefully insufficient for that.
Baranil wrote:and the "anecdotes" from those three schools whilst you still somehow haven't shown a single article or mentioned a single "anecdote" to back up what you're saying which has lead me to believe that you have nothing true to back up your point which leads me to wonder 'why the hell is this continuing?'
You are making the claims, so why do I need to give you data to destroy points that you are not even making correctly because the data you are using doesn't support said points? It's far easier, and much more effective, just to point out the ridiculousness of the conclusions that you are reaching on the basis of little data.










