Happy Face

Nice little film review... http://michaelleggesblog.blogspot.com/

I've not seen this lassies video, but beyonces is fannytastic.

It's like Ashutosh Gowarikar versus Sajid Khan all over again.

Nah. Just kidding. Sufjan Stevens & Kanye West - Zombie's Walk

Bit of a god botherer too.

Unless Khay was listening to Beck. Am i being touchy?

No. To be fair (which Khay wasn't) you said nothing unreasonable. Titus Andronicus - No Future part two: The Day After No Future

You people have no decorum. You can't take the piss out of someone who's taking the piss out of themself.

Beyonce - Single Ladies (shoulda put a ring on it) As i don't follow the charts and I drink predominantly in bars that are too cool for school this hadn't entered my conscience until the weekend. What a tune. I've been twisting my hand in anyone and everyones face ever since. Just found out that American Boy is by a wifey called Estelle too. Lovely song. Finger on the pulse.

I think you're right, after all, I can't imagine anyone choosing to wear it.

It didn't have anything to do with the 24 people. They were just to bulk out an hour of tv. Nice message though. Will it and it will be so.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_MnYI3_FRbbQ/SqpU...-h/tomorrow.png

"Woot the Fock?" Wikus was mint man.

Mind you that's a 1% growth to 4% in the last 8 years (est), or a whopping 25% increase in the total UK Muslim population in <8 years (and of course the total UK population has rise in that time by about 2 million). Statistics are lying whores. Interestingly Chris, did you see that Bill Gates now agree with Fop on population reduction? The all break in the end. He's been at it a lot longer than you....What do you think his foundation in Africa is all about?? I'm yet to see how anyone can "agree with Fop on population reduction" when he's never stated a view on population reduction.

Wouldn't have happened on Owen's watch.

Happy Birthday. Hope you have a canny day.

Steps - Tragedy

It's like Flight of the Navigator, Enemy Mine and Close Encounters all rolled into one.

...and just to go back to this. You're the lying whore in this case. You can't say based on what proprtion of the population was muslim 8 years ago, and what proportion is now. How much that population has increased. You can only say how much the proportion has increased. So even if your 4% IS a reported best guess. In no way shape or form does that correlate with a 25% increase in muslim population. If the entire UK population has grown by 0.5% and the Muslim population grew by (say) 1% in the same time it might have caused the jump from 3% to 4% as a proportion. That assumes your 4% is a researched figure. Yes you can, you can do anything with statistics, it's all in how you present them (as you should well know). You can if you make them up as you go along...as you did just then. Again only if Fop make up your figures too What? Indeed. I'm sorry Fop but if you seem to have real trouble with expressing yourself clearly. Are you still insisting that the muslim population of the UK has grown 25% in the last year? Or are you disagreeing with something I've said? If so, what exactly, I'll be happy to discuss it in more detail sensibly and concede wherever I've made a mistake (which is often the case). If your point is that ALL statistics are useless, then you're more of a dunce than anyone could have imagined. The national office of statistics produce very accurate data, that when interpreted correctly illuminate many issues. When you come along and bastardise the numbers to come up with 25% bollocks, I agree it's useless. It's as bad as those fuckwit scientists in The Sun who come up with an imaginary formula for the perfect penalty, or the best pair of tits to advertise a new beer. Fop is saying that you don't pay attention (you really don't, as this thread shows to those paying attention) and then get cross about it , that you don't seem to be sure about what you quote for what, and that statistics never lie, however how you present them can be disingenuous to say the least. Does that about cover it? Not really. But I never expected you to.

...and just to go back to this. You're the lying whore in this case. You can't say based on what proprtion of the population was muslim 8 years ago, and what proportion is now. How much that population has increased. You can only say how much the proportion has increased. So even if your 4% IS a reported best guess. In no way shape or form does that correlate with a 25% increase in muslim population. If the entire UK population has grown by 0.5% and the Muslim population grew by (say) 1% in the same time it might have caused the jump from 3% to 4% as a proportion. That assumes your 4% is a researched figure. Yes you can, you can do anything with statistics, it's all in how you present them (as you should well know). You can if you make them up as you go along...as you did just then. Again only if Fop make up your figures too What? Indeed. I'm sorry Fop but you seem to have real trouble with expressing yourself clearly. Are you still insisting that the muslim population of the UK has grown 25% in the last year? Or are you disagreeing with something I've said? If so, what exactly, I'll be happy to discuss it in more detail sensibly and concede wherever I've made a mistake (which is often the case). If your point is that ALL statistics are useless, then you're more of a dunce than anyone could have imagined. The national office of statistics produce very accurate data, that when interpreted correctly illuminate many issues. When you come along and bastardise the numbers to come up with 25% bollocks, I agree it's useless. It's as bad as those fuckwit scientists in The Sun who come up with an imaginary formula for the perfect penalty, or the best pair of tits to advertise a new beer.

Grizzly Man is on Ch4 at 11.05pm tonight.

Muslims only have kids call Mohammed? Only if they figures you originally used, Chris, were only in Fops head too....... were they? What do you mean? I've linked to the data i quoted. You're yet to. See what is there, not just what you want to see. I already responded to the "all kids are called mohammed" question when it was asked earlier. ALL non-muslim names aren't in the top 100. We're talking about a proportion of the figures available. Then why quote the figure you did? Do you know what a sample is? Do you know why you quoted the figure you did? Because it came from actual research I quoted the source for.