I haven't made any wild and unsubstantiated claims and therefore don't need to prove anything. Where's your evidence that "...every one prefers to be around people like themselves"?

I strongly suspect you don't have any proof and are just wildly generalising about people whose views you know nothing about. Go ahead and prove me wrong, if you're able.

"You can feel the stadium jumping. The stadium is actually physically moving up and down"
FA Cup MOTD 24/4/16

Even the person who you "agreed" with disagrees with you.

Not the brightest?

"Everything is air-droppable at least once."

"When the going gets tough, the tough call for close air support."

Were you not the poster who not long ago attacked the University College London academics' report about the economic benefits of immigration on the basis that those kind of statistics were not perfect and therefore couldn't reasonably be used as evidence to support a credible argument?

Or would that only apply where statistics are used in support of a point of view you agree with?

Edited by legaleagle (24 Apr 2015 10.41pm)

Sorry legal but that's hardly a logical answer.

You either accept the statistics for a reason or you don't for a reason. What someone else does is not the point.

He was moaned at to provide proof, he provides it and then you moan at him......He said he didn't feel there was a need for proof on such an obvious thing in the first place.

But yet you have a moan and play the man instead of the ball.

Edited by Stirlingsays (24 Apr 2015 10.54pm)

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

I think his post in question that his link related to was:

"Just as about every one prefers to be around people like themselves as you now full well. That is why Britain is becoming divided".

What is interesting in his statistics is that it seems from his link he may actually (I hope not) be talking about race not culture when he refers to "people like themselves" since the statistics he uses in support of his point are largely based on race.The categories in them,forming it seems research carried out for the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, are "white british","white non British","Black/Black british" and "Asian/Asian British". Nothing whatsoever to do with cultures unless someone is one of those ignoramuses who,for example, think all "Blacks" or "Asians" or "non british whites" are of the same culture,and that "people like themselves" could only ever be,for example, "white British".

So,"non British whites" all prefer to live together, whether from Poland,New Zealand, Iceland, Portugal or Argentina,and apart from all of the other three categories then do they? That's the logic...that is if anyone wants to suggest the map in question is something to be relied on in the context of his post...as showing what you say is "obvious".

Is he suggesting people of differing races in the UK all generally prefer to live apart? Would you suggest that?

One place with an ideology which took the view that "races" preferred to live apart was Apartheid in South Africa.So,maybe any adherents of that general viewpoint here might have more in common with the philosophical roots of Apartheid than they might think.

I think he earlier posted that Britain was also becoming divided on religious lines geographically.There may be something in that.The 2011 census did indicate higher proportions of people declaring themselves to be of the "Jedi Knight" religion in places like Portsmouth,Norwich and Brighton,than elsewhere.

Edited by legaleagle (25 Apr 2015 1.47am)

So you back up your first inane generalisation with yet another inane generalisation, which again proves the square root of f*ck all.

You're not very good at this debating lark are you? Been taking lessons from susmik by any chance?

Edited by Seth (25 Apr 2015 1.28am)

"You can feel the stadium jumping. The stadium is actually physically moving up and down"
FA Cup MOTD 24/4/16