3 ms·

I've been following Madeline Sumption on Twitter for a while. I think she has a political motivation and I don't consider the Migration Observatory to be a vali

by fixxer 10y ago

I've been following Madeline Sumption on Twitter for a while. I think she has a political motivation and I don't consider the Migration Observatory to be a valid source. Sorry.

ciaranm 10y ago
Everyone has political motivations. You're going to entirely discount a group that studies migration from the most esteemed university in the UK because you don't like what someone puts on their twitter feed?
- fixxer 10y ago
  Yep. It suggests bias in the methods used to collect and publish data. This is perfectly rational. Do you trust political polling from pollsters with party affiliation? I hope not.
  - ciaranm 10y ago
    Who do you know who's genuinely not political? People have biases all over the place. They're not going to disappear - understand them, acknowledge them, interpret them. Don't just shrug your shoulders and say "nah I don't like that". They're not publishing opinion pieces - it's research.
    - fixxer 10y ago
      Now we're making progress: I don't. Over the last couple years, I've started mentally putting a "P(BULLSHIT)" next to every source I read. The estimate keeps growing. While you might want to make this an ad hominem attack, all I can say is that my probability estimates are pretty darn bipartisan.
- coldtea 10y ago
  >from the most esteemed university in the UK Isn't usually the most "esteemed" establishments that are closer to the party line? That's par for the course of being "esteemed".
aomurphy 10y ago
These figures are similar from 2009: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1057%2Fpt.2009.5 https://link.springer.com/article/10.1057%2Fpt.2009.5 from Population Trends March 2009, Volume 135, Issue 1, pp 20–28 by Amy Ellis Office for National Statistics. What figures do you believe are accurate?
pimmen89 10y ago
But you think Channel 4 is better when it comes to academic honesty and not biasing their polls?
BeetleB 10y ago
>I've been following Madeline Sumption on Twitter for a while. I think she has a political motivation and I don't consider the Migration Observatory to be a valid source. Sorry. I don't know them, but I'll take your word for it. However, will point out that it is in no way worse than the source you provided (no source) How about Migration Watch? https://www.migrationwatchuk.org/statistics-population-country-birth/#create-graph https://www.migrationwatchuk.org/statistics-population-count... Compared to the total non-UK born population, Pakistan + Bangladesh are a tiny blip. Another source: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/general-election-2015/politics-blog/11622718/Immigration-nation-where-are-the-Britains-migrants-coming-from-and-why.html http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/general-election-2015/politi... More from the ONS: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign-born_population_of_the_United_Kingdom#Countries_of_origin https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign-born_population_of_the...

by fixxer 10y ago

I've been following Madeline Sumption on Twitter for a while. I think she has a political motivation and I don't consider the Migration Observatory to be a valid source. Sorry.

ciaranm 10y ago

Everyone has political motivations. You're going to entirely discount a group that studies migration from the most esteemed university in the UK because you don't like what someone puts on their twitter feed?

fixxer 10y ago
Yep. It suggests bias in the methods used to collect and publish data. This is perfectly rational. Do you trust political polling from pollsters with party affiliation? I hope not.
- ciaranm 10y ago
  Who do you know who's genuinely not political? People have biases all over the place. They're not going to disappear - understand them, acknowledge them, interpret them. Don't just shrug your shoulders and say "nah I don't like that". They're not publishing opinion pieces - it's research.
  - fixxer 10y ago
    Now we're making progress: I don't. Over the last couple years, I've started mentally putting a "P(BULLSHIT)" next to every source I read. The estimate keeps growing. While you might want to make this an ad hominem attack, all I can say is that my probability estimates are pretty darn bipartisan.
coldtea 10y ago
>from the most esteemed university in the UK Isn't usually the most "esteemed" establishments that are closer to the party line? That's par for the course of being "esteemed".

aomurphy 10y ago

These figures are similar from 2009: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1057%2Fpt.2009.5 https://link.springer.com/article/10.1057%2Fpt.2009.5 from Population Trends March 2009, Volume 135, Issue 1, pp 20–28 by Amy Ellis Office for National Statistics. What figures do you believe are accurate?

pimmen89 10y ago

But you think Channel 4 is better when it comes to academic honesty and not biasing their polls?

BeetleB 10y ago

>I've been following Madeline Sumption on Twitter for a while. I think she has a political motivation and I don't consider the Migration Observatory to be a valid source. Sorry. I don't know them, but I'll take your word for it. However, will point out that it is in no way worse than the source you provided (no source) How about Migration Watch? https://www.migrationwatchuk.org/statistics-population-country-birth/#create-graph https://www.migrationwatchuk.org/statistics-population-count... Compared to the total non-UK born population, Pakistan + Bangladesh are a tiny blip. Another source: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/general-election-2015/politics-blog/11622718/Immigration-nation-where-are-the-Britains-migrants-coming-from-and-why.html http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/general-election-2015/politi... More from the ONS: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign-born_population_of_the_United_Kingdom#Countries_of_origin https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign-born_population_of_the...