Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » How strong political views can impact on our ability to ana

SystemSystem Posts: 11,693
edited January 2014 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » How strong political views can impact on our ability to analyse data

An interesting infographic from the US.

Source: BestPsychologyDegrees.com

Read the full story here


Comments

  • Options
    NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    Whoever dreamt up that infographic to "explain" the outcome should be shot.
  • Options
    FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,052
    Neil said:

    Whoever dreamt up that infographic to "explain" the outcome should be shot.

    I couldn't agree more.

    And I hate it when I'm the last person to post on a particular thread.
  • Options
    compouter1compouter1 Posts: 642
    edited January 2014
    .Err....I understand the what the header means, and agree with whole heartedly. The infograph seems to drag out the explanation just a tad.
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 39,054
    The study came out (or was at least publicised) a few months ago.

    It's certainly intriguing, and also probably all too real an effect. We all want our views reinforced to some extent, and are therefore liable to reject items that contradict our world view. It'd be interesting to know if this effect increases or decreases with intelligence.

    We see this effect on PB every day, especially when Avery posts one of his yellow boxes ... ;-)

    Oh, and the Infographic is pretty pants.
  • Options
    OGH - You didn't really have to place the infograph on, just a printed few responses on here to a few graphs and data showing the 2010 Lib Dem to Labour switchers.
  • Options
    CD13CD13 Posts: 6,351
    Is anyone else amazed by the cheek of Southampton FC?

    The referee is accosted by Lallana because he wouldn't award Saints a penalty. He should have been sent off immediately and banned. Instead the ref tells him he's changed since he's played for England (i.e. he's become too gobby).

    Southamptom refuse to accept it. How peculiar is that? By comparison, people believing what they want to believe is quite normal
  • Options
    CD13 said:

    Is anyone else amazed by the cheek of Southampton FC?

    The referee is accosted by Lallana because he wouldn't award Saints a penalty. He should have been sent off immediately and banned. Instead the ref tells him he's changed since he's played for England (i.e. he's become too gobby).

    Southamptom refuse to accept it. How peculiar is that? By comparison, people believing what they want to believe is quite normal

    The fact that Lallana had been mouthing off to the ref for most of the game has been ignored. I am amazed he wasn't booked for dissent much earlier in the game.
  • Options
    CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    Neil said:

    Whoever dreamt up that infographic to "explain" the outcome should be shot.

    I couldn't agree more.

    And I hate it when I'm the last person to post on a particular thread.

    Don't worry. I posted twice after you.

    Think of it as an act of charity ;-)
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,942
    First poll of the year should be out soon.

    I'm sure everyone will be able to put a spin on it:

    MoE, no change, Broken sleazy (Insert party here) on the slide...
  • Options
    Pulpstar said:

    First poll of the year should be out soon.

    I'm sure everyone will be able to put a spin on it:

    MoE, no change, Broken sleazy (Insert party here) on the slide...

    Show me the crossover.....Show me the crossover !!!
  • Options
    compouter1compouter1 Posts: 642
    edited January 2014
    It is all about timing....http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/environment-agency-cuts-will-hit-flood-management-9037111.html

    Don't you just love PR disasters. Wonder who's bright idea it was to bury this today?
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,942

    Pulpstar said:

    First poll of the year should be out soon.

    I'm sure everyone will be able to put a spin on it:

    MoE, no change, Broken sleazy (Insert party here) on the slide...

    Show me the crossover.....Show me the crossover !!!
    Badgers stole AveryLP's goalposts I'm afraid.
  • Options
    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    First poll of the year should be out soon.

    I'm sure everyone will be able to put a spin on it:

    MoE, no change, Broken sleazy (Insert party here) on the slide...

    Show me the crossover.....Show me the crossover !!!
    Badgers stole AveryLP's goalposts I'm afraid.
    No wonder the Tories are fixated with killing them.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,942
    edited January 2014
    Gove's always seemed on top of his brief to me, a most intelligent minister. But not a popular one amongst his remit:

    http://yougov.co.uk/news/2014/01/02/teachers-vote-labour-lead-41/
  • Options
    Owen Patterson said "I had a meeting this morning with the chief executive of the Environment Agency. He has assured me he has every intention of protecting front-line services concerned with flooding. His intention is to protect front-line services as he makes his efficiencies."

    Paul Leinster the Environment Agency chief executive later said "Flood risk maintenance will be [further] impacted. All of our work on mapping and modelling and new developments in things like flood warning will also have to be resized. And we're looking at a proportionate reduction in the number of people in flood risk management."

    One exactly doesn't back the other up does it.
  • Options
    Pulpstar said:

    Gove's always seemed on top of his brief to me, a most intelligent minister. But not a popular one amongst his remit:

    http://yougov.co.uk/news/2014/01/02/teachers-vote-labour-lead-41/

    As popular as a fart in a lift.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,031
    edited January 2014
    FPT, @Charles said...

    She supported reunification as the expression of the German people's democratic will. She was nervous about the implications for Europe given the huge weight that a prosperous Germany would have in the continent. She perhaps under-estimated the cost and pain and time to get there, but equally a lot of the challenges at the moment arise from Germany's preponderance (and the disquiet that breeds in Southern Europe)

    I think we should all remember that during the period 1990 to 2002 or so, Germany was the sick man of Europe.The costs of reunification were high, and the country was hide-bound by a highly inflexible labour market. How could, people asked, Germany compete with the dynamic economies of Ireland, Spain and Italy?

    Germany was able to compete, it turned out, by freeing up its labour market, while on the periphery, governments in boom-time Spain, Portugal and others implemented laws to help protect workers. German labour markets become more efficient, peripheral ones became less.

    And, of course, the monetary policy of the ECB - which was designed to help Germany exit its late 1990s slump - threw fuel on the fires of speculative excess in Ireland, Portugal and Spain, creating crazy building booms that only collapsed following the GFC and the Eurozone sovereign debt crisis,
  • Options
    I'm totally lost by what question is being asked. Perhaps instead of the vast overuse of fancy graphics they could say exactly what they asked. The inference of the top-left box is that the cream works less well than not using the cream but I suspect this isn't what was asked.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,942

    Owen Patterson said "I had a meeting this morning with the chief executive of the Environment Agency. He has assured me he has every intention of protecting front-line services concerned with flooding. His intention is to protect front-line services as he makes his efficiencies."

    Paul Leinster the Environment Agency chief executive later said "Flood risk maintenance will be [further] impacted. All of our work on mapping and modelling and new developments in things like flood warning will also have to be resized. And we're looking at a proportionate reduction in the number of people in flood risk management."

    One exactly doesn't back the other up does it.

    They do.

    Read the ministers words carefully: Note the word INTENTION (Of Leinster)

    Moyes may well have the INTENTION to win the prem, but my bet on that is up shit creek with no paddle atm.

  • Options
    Pulpstar said:

    Owen Patterson said "I had a meeting this morning with the chief executive of the Environment Agency. He has assured me he has every intention of protecting front-line services concerned with flooding. His intention is to protect front-line services as he makes his efficiencies."

    Paul Leinster the Environment Agency chief executive later said "Flood risk maintenance will be [further] impacted. All of our work on mapping and modelling and new developments in things like flood warning will also have to be resized. And we're looking at a proportionate reduction in the number of people in flood risk management."

    One exactly doesn't back the other up does it.

    They do.

    Read the ministers words carefully: Note the word INTENTION (Of Leinster)

    Moyes may well have the INTENTION to win the prem, but my bet on that is up shit creek with no paddle atm.

    I may have 1p to spend on feeding a house containing fifteen adults for a week and intend to feed them. Doesn't mean I will actually do it.

    One fed the headline "Flood defences "will be protected".

    The other fed ""Environment Agency cuts"will hit" flood defences".
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,942




    One fed the headline "Flood defences "will be protected".

    Whichever news outlet has ran with that is either lazy or bias.

    Which news source was it ?

    Not Reuters I'm thinking...

  • Options

    Pulpstar said:

    Owen Patterson said "I had a meeting this morning with the chief executive of the Environment Agency. He has assured me he has every intention of protecting front-line services concerned with flooding. His intention is to protect front-line services as he makes his efficiencies."

    Paul Leinster the Environment Agency chief executive later said "Flood risk maintenance will be [further] impacted. All of our work on mapping and modelling and new developments in things like flood warning will also have to be resized. And we're looking at a proportionate reduction in the number of people in flood risk management."

    One exactly doesn't back the other up does it.

    They do.

    Read the ministers words carefully: Note the word INTENTION (Of Leinster)

    Moyes may well have the INTENTION to win the prem, but my bet on that is up shit creek with no paddle atm.

    I may have 1p to spend on feeding a house containing fifteen adults for a week and intend to feed them. Doesn't mean I will actually do it.

    One fed the headline "Flood defences "will be protected".

    The other fed ""Environment Agency cuts"will hit" flood defences".
    Nigel has weighed in:

    UKIP leader Nigel Farage said much more needed to be done to prevent flooding and protect homeowners - and called the government "appallingly inept".

    He said: "There are three million homes at risk of flooding in the UK and yet the government is cutting flood defences, allowing thousands of new homes to be built on flood plains, and sitting back and watching the EU block an insurance scheme designed to protect those most vulnerable from losing everything."
  • Options
    compouter1compouter1 Posts: 642
    edited January 2014
    Pulpstar said:




    One fed the headline "Flood defences "will be protected".

    Whichever news outlet has ran with that is either lazy or bias.

    Which news source was it ?

    Not Reuters I'm thinking...

    That defender of the Tory Party.....the BBC.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-25594526

    "The Environment Agency will protect front-line flood defence services despite confirming hundreds of job cuts, the environment secretary says."

    Bias BBC !!!!!!
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,942

    Pulpstar said:




    One fed the headline "Flood defences "will be protected".

    Whichever news outlet has ran with that is either lazy or bias.

    Which news source was it ?

    Not Reuters I'm thinking...

    That defender of the Tory Party.....the BBC.
    Piss poor journalism.
  • Options
    compouter1compouter1 Posts: 642
    edited January 2014
    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:




    One fed the headline "Flood defences "will be protected".

    Whichever news outlet has ran with that is either lazy or bias.

    Which news source was it ?

    Not Reuters I'm thinking...

    That defender of the Tory Party.....the BBC.
    Piss poor journalism.
    To go with piss poor timing and PR.
  • Options
    TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633

    Pulpstar said:

    Gove's always seemed on top of his brief to me, a most intelligent minister. But not a popular one amongst his remit:

    http://yougov.co.uk/news/2014/01/02/teachers-vote-labour-lead-41/

    As popular as a fart in a lift.
    Gove needs to appeal to parents, british business and taxpayers.

    Appealing to teachers shouldn't be a priority.

  • Options
    TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    "A new YouGov survey commissioned by the National Union of Teachers (NUT).............."

    Lol.

  • Options
    CarolaCarola Posts: 1,805
    Blimey. That's like a bad trip on acid.

    Research in other areas re attitudes/beliefs etc shows pretty much the same. Not only political views.

    OT Hail and thunderstorms here in Brighton. I'm pretty near/exposed to the coast so I'm hoping my roof's still on when I get back - if I get back :) - from a night out later. First time ever a thunderclap has rattled my windows.
  • Options
    SMukeshSMukesh Posts: 1,650

    Pulpstar said:

    Owen Patterson said "I had a meeting this morning with the chief executive of the Environment Agency. He has assured me he has every intention of protecting front-line services concerned with flooding. His intention is to protect front-line services as he makes his efficiencies."

    Paul Leinster the Environment Agency chief executive later said "Flood risk maintenance will be [further] impacted. All of our work on mapping and modelling and new developments in things like flood warning will also have to be resized. And we're looking at a proportionate reduction in the number of people in flood risk management."

    One exactly doesn't back the other up does it.

    They do.

    Read the ministers words carefully: Note the word INTENTION (Of Leinster)

    Moyes may well have the INTENTION to win the prem, but my bet on that is up shit creek with no paddle atm.

    I may have 1p to spend on feeding a house containing fifteen adults for a week and intend to feed them. Doesn't mean I will actually do it.

    One fed the headline "Flood defences "will be protected".

    The other fed ""Environment Agency cuts"will hit" flood defences".
    Nigel has weighed in:

    UKIP leader Nigel Farage said much more needed to be done to prevent flooding and protect homeowners - and called the government "appallingly inept".

    He said: "There are three million homes at risk of flooding in the UK and yet the government is cutting flood defences, allowing thousands of new homes to be built on flood plains, and sitting back and watching the EU block an insurance scheme designed to protect those most vulnerable from losing everything."
    Atleast Nigel is keen to take on the government.Perhaps he should be LOTO instead of the totally docile Ed Miliband who never criticises the government for anything.
  • Options
    TGOHF said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Gove's always seemed on top of his brief to me, a most intelligent minister. But not a popular one amongst his remit:

    http://yougov.co.uk/news/2014/01/02/teachers-vote-labour-lead-41/

    As popular as a fart in a lift.
    Gove needs to appeal to parents, british business and taxpayers.

    Appealing to teachers shouldn't be a priority.

    This is my favourite picture of right wing hero Gove:

    http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-9ryU0KE7CIY/TggvkwPreuI/AAAAAAAAF88/fV2M95W0rfo/s400/Gove+on+Strike.JPG

    "The image depicts the education secretary alongside union colleagues from Aberdeen’s Press and Journal, distributed across the northern counties of Scotland. He went on a strike for as long as four months after his employers de-recognised the National Union of Journalists.

    Indeed, Gove was described by his former shop steward as quite the firebrand:

    “He was an active striker, willingly taking his turn on picket duty and going on a small delegation to Strasbourg to press the union’s case”

    Not because he went on strike but it showed his hypocrisy up very well.
  • Options
    TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633

    TGOHF said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Gove's always seemed on top of his brief to me, a most intelligent minister. But not a popular one amongst his remit:

    http://yougov.co.uk/news/2014/01/02/teachers-vote-labour-lead-41/

    As popular as a fart in a lift.
    Gove needs to appeal to parents, british business and taxpayers.

    Appealing to teachers shouldn't be a priority.

    This is my favourite picture of right wing hero Gove:

    http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-9ryU0KE7CIY/TggvkwPreuI/AAAAAAAAF88/fV2M95W0rfo/s400/Gove+on+Strike.JPG

    "The image depicts the education secretary alongside union colleagues from Aberdeen’s Press and Journal, distributed across the northern counties of Scotland. He went on a strike for as long as four months after his employers de-recognised the National Union of Journalists.

    Indeed, Gove was described by his former shop steward as quite the firebrand:

    “He was an active striker, willingly taking his turn on picket duty and going on a small delegation to Strasbourg to press the union’s case”

    Not because he went on strike but it showed his hypocrisy up very well.
    What hypocrisy ?



  • Options
    SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,976
    ‘strong political views can impact on our ability to analyse data’

    They can indeed – and I’m obviously afflicted with it as I can’t make head nor tail of the diagram.!
  • Options
    SMukesh said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Owen Patterson said "I had a meeting this morning with the chief executive of the Environment Agency. He has assured me he has every intention of protecting front-line services concerned with flooding. His intention is to protect front-line services as he makes his efficiencies."

    Paul Leinster the Environment Agency chief executive later said "Flood risk maintenance will be [further] impacted. All of our work on mapping and modelling and new developments in things like flood warning will also have to be resized. And we're looking at a proportionate reduction in the number of people in flood risk management."

    One exactly doesn't back the other up does it.

    They do.

    Read the ministers words carefully: Note the word INTENTION (Of Leinster)

    Moyes may well have the INTENTION to win the prem, but my bet on that is up shit creek with no paddle atm.

    I may have 1p to spend on feeding a house containing fifteen adults for a week and intend to feed them. Doesn't mean I will actually do it.

    One fed the headline "Flood defences "will be protected".

    The other fed ""Environment Agency cuts"will hit" flood defences".
    Nigel has weighed in:

    UKIP leader Nigel Farage said much more needed to be done to prevent flooding and protect homeowners - and called the government "appallingly inept".

    He said: "There are three million homes at risk of flooding in the UK and yet the government is cutting flood defences, allowing thousands of new homes to be built on flood plains, and sitting back and watching the EU block an insurance scheme designed to protect those most vulnerable from losing everything."
    Atleast Nigel is keen to take on the government.Perhaps he should be LOTO instead of the totally docile Ed Miliband who never criticises the government for anything.
    He would obviously have to resign from UKIP, join Labour and run for the leadership first.
  • Options
    MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053
    edited January 2014
    SMukesh said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Owen Patterson said "I had a meeting this morning with the chief executive of the Environment Agency. He has assured me he has every intention of protecting front-line services concerned with flooding. His intention is to protect front-line services as he makes his efficiencies."

    Paul Leinster the Environment Agency chief executive later said "Flood risk maintenance will be [further] impacted. All of our work on mapping and modelling and new developments in things like flood warning will also have to be resized. And we're looking at a proportionate reduction in the number of people in flood risk management."

    One exactly doesn't back the other up does it.

    They do.

    Read the ministers words carefully: Note the word INTENTION (Of Leinster)

    Moyes may well have the INTENTION to win the prem, but my bet on that is up shit creek with no paddle atm.

    I may have 1p to spend on feeding a house containing fifteen adults for a week and intend to feed them. Doesn't mean I will actually do it.

    One fed the headline "Flood defences "will be protected".

    The other fed ""Environment Agency cuts"will hit" flood defences".
    Nigel has weighed in:

    UKIP leader Nigel Farage said much more needed to be done to prevent flooding and protect homeowners - and called the government "appallingly inept".

    He said: "There are three million homes at risk of flooding in the UK and yet the government is cutting flood defences, allowing thousands of new homes to be built on flood plains, and sitting back and watching the EU block an insurance scheme designed to protect those most vulnerable from losing everything."
    Atleast Nigel is keen to take on the government.Perhaps he should be LOTO instead of the totally docile Ed Miliband who never criticises the government for anything.
    The perfect reply from Farage. How many new voters for UKIP will that mean, when people who are threatened by floods, read and realise what that berk, Owen Paterson is actually saying?
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,942
    Quick voodoo poll:

    t-witter.com/MartWes/status/419162240479424512/photo/1/large

    2 or 4 ?
  • Options
    PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    Me neither - I'm ODing on just all the fonts!

    ‘strong political views can impact on our ability to analyse data’

    They can indeed – and I’m obviously afflicted with it as I can’t make head nor tail of the diagram.!

  • Options
    Pulpstar said:

    Quick voodoo poll:

    t-witter.com/MartWes/status/419162240479424512/photo/1/large

    2 or 4 ?

    4
  • Options
    richardDoddrichardDodd Posts: 5,472
    Milliband and Farage will just be able to wave their magic wands and stop the rain falling, the tides from rising and the winds blowing...all magic in their world..and the fools who believe them
  • Options
    Pulpstar said:

    Quick voodoo poll:

    t-witter.com/MartWes/status/419162240479424512/photo/1/large

    2 or 4 ?



    Not as close as this though

    http://cdn.images.express.co.uk/img/dynamic/1/285x214/224406_1.jpg
  • Options
    SMukeshSMukesh Posts: 1,650

    SMukesh said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Owen Patterson said "I had a meeting this morning with the chief executive of the Environment Agency. He has assured me he has every intention of protecting front-line services concerned with flooding. His intention is to protect front-line services as he makes his efficiencies."

    Paul Leinster the Environment Agency chief executive later said "Flood risk maintenance will be [further] impacted. All of our work on mapping and modelling and new developments in things like flood warning will also have to be resized. And we're looking at a proportionate reduction in the number of people in flood risk management."

    One exactly doesn't back the other up does it.

    They do.

    Read the ministers words carefully: Note the word INTENTION (Of Leinster)

    Moyes may well have the INTENTION to win the prem, but my bet on that is up shit creek with no paddle atm.

    I may have 1p to spend on feeding a house containing fifteen adults for a week and intend to feed them. Doesn't mean I will actually do it.

    One fed the headline "Flood defences "will be protected".

    The other fed ""Environment Agency cuts"will hit" flood defences".
    Nigel has weighed in:

    UKIP leader Nigel Farage said much more needed to be done to prevent flooding and protect homeowners - and called the government "appallingly inept".

    He said: "There are three million homes at risk of flooding in the UK and yet the government is cutting flood defences, allowing thousands of new homes to be built on flood plains, and sitting back and watching the EU block an insurance scheme designed to protect those most vulnerable from losing everything."
    Atleast Nigel is keen to take on the government.Perhaps he should be LOTO instead of the totally docile Ed Miliband who never criticises the government for anything.
    He would obviously have to resign from UKIP, join Labour and run for the leadership first.
    There is clear discrepancy between what the Environment secretary and the CEO of Environment Agency are saying.And with massive problems expected,should it not the LOTO leading the debate against cuts to flood protection.

    I haven`t seen Ed Miliband on TV for the last month.Is he abroad?
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,942
    edited January 2014

    Pulpstar said:

    Quick voodoo poll:

    t-witter.com/MartWes/status/419162240479424512/photo/1/large

    2 or 4 ?



    Not as close as this though

    http://cdn.images.express.co.uk/img/dynamic/1/285x214/224406_1.jpg
    If in doubt back the horse/dog with the more flarey nostrils :D ?
  • Options
    TheWatcherTheWatcher Posts: 5,262
    edited January 2014
    SMukesh said:

    SMukesh said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Owen Patterson said "I had a meeting this morning with the chief executive of the Environment Agency. He has assured me he has every intention of protecting front-line services concerned with flooding. His intention is to protect front-line services as he makes his efficiencies."

    Paul Leinster the Environment Agency chief executive later said "Flood risk maintenance will be [further] impacted. All of our work on mapping and modelling and new developments in things like flood warning will also have to be resized. And we're looking at a proportionate reduction in the number of people in flood risk management."

    One exactly doesn't back the other up does it.

    They do.

    Read the ministers words carefully: Note the word INTENTION (Of Leinster)

    Moyes may well have the INTENTION to win the prem, but my bet on that is up shit creek with no paddle atm.

    I may have 1p to spend on feeding a house containing fifteen adults for a week and intend to feed them. Doesn't mean I will actually do it.

    One fed the headline "Flood defences "will be protected".

    The other fed ""Environment Agency cuts"will hit" flood defences".
    Nigel has weighed in:

    UKIP leader Nigel Farage said much more needed to be done to prevent flooding and protect homeowners - and called the government "appallingly inept".

    He said: "There are three million homes at risk of flooding in the UK and yet the government is cutting flood defences, allowing thousands of new homes to be built on flood plains, and sitting back and watching the EU block an insurance scheme designed to protect those most vulnerable from losing everything."
    Atleast Nigel is keen to take on the government.Perhaps he should be LOTO instead of the totally docile Ed Miliband who never criticises the government for anything.
    He would obviously have to resign from UKIP, join Labour and run for the leadership first.
    There is clear discrepancy between what the Environment secretary and the CEO of Environment Agency are saying.And with massive problems expected,should it not the LOTO leading the debate against cuts to flood protection.

    I haven`t seen Ed Miliband on TV for the last month.Is he abroad?
    Probably busy in the gym working off the Xmas pudding; fingers crossed, Luciana negotiated a discount on the membership fee.
  • Options
    compouter1compouter1 Posts: 642
    edited January 2014


    There is clear discrepancy between what the Environment secretary and the CEO of Environment Agency are saying.And with massive problems expected,should it not the LOTO leading the debate against cuts to flood protection.

    I haven`t seen Ed Miliband on TV for the last month.Is he abroad?

    SMukesh - I Haven't a clue where Milibad is, however, Patersons shadow has already questioned him a few weeks back:

    "Responding to remarks by Owen Paterson that energy companies “let customers down” by not having enough staff on duty to cope with Christmas power cuts, Maria Eagle MP, Labour’s Shadow Environment Secretary, said:

    "As the country faces more severe weather, households that went a week without power and suffered devastating flooding expect to see some action from Ministers at long last, not attempts to pass the buck.

    "Of course the energy companies must explain why it took so long to get power restored, but Owen Paterson has a nerve pointing the finger at staff being on holiday when he himself has not been seen for days.

    "The Environment Secretary has his own questions to answer about his failure to prioritise flood defence investment and deliver the vital flood reinsurance scheme on time, leaving homes without affordable insurance until 2015 and, even then, excluding many properties at risk."
  • Options
    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Quick voodoo poll:

    t-witter.com/MartWes/status/419162240479424512/photo/1/large

    2 or 4 ?



    Not as close as this though

    http://cdn.images.express.co.uk/img/dynamic/1/285x214/224406_1.jpg
    If in doubt back the horse/dog with the more flarey nostrils :D ?
    First time there was a three way dead heat on the tele apparently.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,343
    As a piece of presentation the material in the header is pants.

    As a proposition it is self evident.

    Someone mentioned a study on an earlier thread that took this one stage further. There was apparently a study which suggested that those that work in an industry tended to be poorer investors in it than those that were not because they over exaggerated the importance of their knowledge and analysed the data in ways that met their preconceptions.

    That struck me as a more interesting study for this site. Does having a very detailed knowledge of politics actually help or hinder people on here with their betting?

    One obvious point is the gross over reaction to every little bump in the road for any politician. Owen Paterson might be the latest example of this but it is an almost daily occurance. If people gambled on next cabinet minister out on this basis they seem likely to lose money. IMO those gambling on success for UKIP might well be guilty of the same fault (but then I would say that wouldn't I?)
  • Options
    CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,220
    I've just seen the PQ17 documentary. Brilliant stuff and quite humbling.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,031
    MikeK said:

    SMukesh said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Owen Patterson said "I had a meeting this morning with the chief executive of the Environment Agency. He has assured me he has every intention of protecting front-line services concerned with flooding. His intention is to protect front-line services as he makes his efficiencies."

    Paul Leinster the Environment Agency chief executive later said "Flood risk maintenance will be [further] impacted. All of our work on mapping and modelling and new developments in things like flood warning will also have to be resized. And we're looking at a proportionate reduction in the number of people in flood risk management."

    One exactly doesn't back the other up does it.

    They do.

    Read the ministers words carefully: Note the word INTENTION (Of Leinster)

    Moyes may well have the INTENTION to win the prem, but my bet on that is up shit creek with no paddle atm.

    I may have 1p to spend on feeding a house containing fifteen adults for a week and intend to feed them. Doesn't mean I will actually do it.

    One fed the headline "Flood defences "will be protected".

    The other fed ""Environment Agency cuts"will hit" flood defences".
    Nigel has weighed in:

    UKIP leader Nigel Farage said much more needed to be done to prevent flooding and protect homeowners - and called the government "appallingly inept".

    He said: "There are three million homes at risk of flooding in the UK and yet the government is cutting flood defences, allowing thousands of new homes to be built on flood plains, and sitting back and watching the EU block an insurance scheme designed to protect those most vulnerable from losing everything."
    Atleast Nigel is keen to take on the government.Perhaps he should be LOTO instead of the totally docile Ed Miliband who never criticises the government for anything.
    The perfect reply from Farage. How many new voters for UKIP will that mean, when people who are threatened by floods, read and realise what that berk, Owen Paterson is actually saying?
    MikeK, I think you are inadvertently proving OGH's point...
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,942
    DavidL said:

    As a piece of presentation the material in the header is pants.

    As a proposition it is self evident.

    Someone mentioned a study on an earlier thread that took this one stage further. There was apparently a study which suggested that those that work in an industry tended to be poorer investors in it than those that were not because they over exaggerated the importance of their knowledge and analysed the data in ways that met their preconceptions.

    That struck me as a more interesting study for this site. Does having a very detailed knowledge of politics actually help or hinder people on here with their betting?

    One obvious point is the gross over reaction to every little bump in the road for any politician. Owen Paterson might be the latest example of this but it is an almost daily occurance. If people gambled on next cabinet minister out on this basis they seem likely to lose money. IMO those gambling on success for UKIP might well be guilty of the same fault (but then I would say that wouldn't I?)

    Not sure - I bet when I think the odds are wrong ;)
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,942
    edited January 2014
    Need more votes on my horse poll, 4 or 2 people ;)

    (It is relevant to the piece actually)
  • Options
    Pulpstar said:

    Gove's always seemed on top of his brief to me, a most intelligent minister. But not a popular one amongst his remit:

    http://yougov.co.uk/news/2014/01/02/teachers-vote-labour-lead-41/

    I like Give a lot and think most of his teaching reforms are long overdue. But he really should think before he opens his mouth about subjects he is not familiar with. His comments on WW1 and blaming entertainment like Blackadder or Oh What a lovely War for our perception of the conflict is just plain daft. To add that they are some sort of left wing propaganda is even more ludicrous given that their perception of WW1 was probably itself formed by the writings of those well known lefties Alan Clark and Winston Churchill.
  • Options
    DavidL said:

    One obvious point is the gross over reaction to every little bump in the road for any politician. Owen Paterson might be the latest example of this but it is an almost daily occurance. If people gambled on next cabinet minister out on this basis they seem likely to lose money. IMO those gambling on success for UKIP might well be guilty of the same fault (but then I would say that wouldn't I?)

    Very true. Each member of the current government must have been proclaimed 'next one out' on several separate occasions by now. It's odd that people go in for all that - honing in on the shortening odds, posting them gleefully on PB.com etc. - when resignations over or sackings for incompetence are almost non-existent these days.
  • Options
    NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,352

    The study came out (or was at least publicised) a few months ago.

    It's certainly intriguing, and also probably all too real an effect. We all want our views reinforced to some extent, and are therefore liable to reject items that contradict our world view. It'd be interesting to know if this effect increases or decreases with intelligence.

    We see this effect on PB every day, especially when Avery posts one of his yellow boxes ... ;-)

    Oh, and the Infographic is pretty pants.

    Agree with the other comments on both content (interesting) and graphicvs (yeuch). The Nate Silver book that I keep plugging reinforces the study with evidence that people with strong opinions predict LESS accurately when given more information (presumably because they use the information to embellish their certainties).

    No poll expected till tomorrow evening, fellow-addicts.
  • Options

    Milliband and Farage will just be able to wave their magic wands and stop the rain falling, the tides from rising and the winds blowing...all magic in their world..and the fools who believe them

    Er no. If you read what he has actually said Farage has made clear the areas he disagrees with the Government and what should be done to try and reduce the impact of similar weather conditions in the future. All very good points, particularly with regard to building on flood plains. Nor is thus the first time he (and many others) have made similar points. Unfortunately the Government is simply not listening.
  • Options

    The study came out (or was at least publicised) a few months ago.

    It's certainly intriguing, and also probably all too real an effect. We all want our views reinforced to some extent, and are therefore liable to reject items that contradict our world view. It'd be interesting to know if this effect increases or decreases with intelligence.

    We see this effect on PB every day, especially when Avery posts one of his yellow boxes ... ;-)

    Oh, and the Infographic is pretty pants.

    Agree with the other comments on both content (interesting) and graphicvs (yeuch). The Nate Silver book that I keep plugging reinforces the study with evidence that people with strong opinions predict LESS accurately when given more information (presumably because they use the information to embellish their certainties).

    No poll expected till tomorrow evening, fellow-addicts.
    Oh bummer! These polling crossover goalposts are killing my back.
  • Options
    anotherDaveanotherDave Posts: 6,746
    edited January 2014




    "The Environment Secretary has his own questions to answer about his failure to prioritise flood defence investment and deliver the vital flood reinsurance scheme on time, leaving homes without affordable insurance until 2015 and, even then, excluding many properties at risk."

    Before the election I thought the Conservatives were in favour of returning responsibility for flood defences to local government.
  • Options
    Pulpstar said:

    Need more votes on my horse poll, 4 or 2 people ;)

    (It is relevant to the piece actually)

    Looks like number 4 is polling 100% at the moment.

    So who won?
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 39,054
    edited January 2014



    SMukesh - I Haven't a clue where Milibad is, however, Patersons shadow has already questioned him a few weeks back:

    "Responding to remarks by Owen Paterson that energy companies “let customers down” by not having enough staff on duty to cope with Christmas power cuts, Maria Eagle MP, Labour’s Shadow Environment Secretary, said:

    "As the country faces more severe weather, households that went a week without power and suffered devastating flooding expect to see some action from Ministers at long last, not attempts to pass the buck.

    "Of course the energy companies must explain why it took so long to get power restored, but Owen Paterson has a nerve pointing the finger at staff being on holiday when he himself has not been seen for days.

    "The Environment Secretary has his own questions to answer about his failure to prioritise flood defence investment and deliver the vital flood reinsurance scheme on time, leaving homes without affordable insurance until 2015 and, even then, excluding many properties at risk."

    Labour has to be careful with flood protection. They listened far too much to the RSPB lobby when it came to developing protection.

    And LOL wrt Hilary Benn and Stangate Farm.
  • Options
    perdixperdix Posts: 1,806


    Milliband and Farage will just be able to wave their magic wands and stop the rain falling, the tides from rising and the winds blowing...all magic in their world..and the fools who believe them

    Er no. If you read what he has actually said Farage has made clear the areas he disagrees with the Government and what should be done to try and reduce the impact of similar weather conditions in the future. All very good points, particularly with regard to building on flood plains. Nor is thus the first time he (and many others) have made similar points. Unfortunately the Government is simply not listening.
    No doubt the next time we have a drought Farage will say we should have a national water pipeline network.

  • Options




    "The Environment Secretary has his own questions to answer about his failure to prioritise flood defence investment and deliver the vital flood reinsurance scheme on time, leaving homes without affordable insurance until 2015 and, even then, excluding many properties at risk."

    Before the election I thought the Conservatives were in favour of returning responsibility for flood defences to local government.
    I think they have but then cut the money they gave to them. There is another band of heavy wind and rain arriving on Sunday apparently.
  • Options
    perdix said:


    Milliband and Farage will just be able to wave their magic wands and stop the rain falling, the tides from rising and the winds blowing...all magic in their world..and the fools who believe them

    Er no. If you read what he has actually said Farage has made clear the areas he disagrees with the Government and what should be done to try and reduce the impact of similar weather conditions in the future. All very good points, particularly with regard to building on flood plains. Nor is thus the first time he (and many others) have made similar points. Unfortunately the Government is simply not listening.
    No doubt the next time we have a drought Farage will say we should have a national water pipeline network.

    No idea but I would be much happier if he said we should stop building so many houses in areas which lack the resources - particularly water - to support them.
  • Options
    RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737
    The actual answer is we can only cautiously reject the null hypothesis that there is no difference between use/non-use of the cream/gun-ban (p=4.7%)...
  • Options
    MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053
    perdix said:


    Milliband and Farage will just be able to wave their magic wands and stop the rain falling, the tides from rising and the winds blowing...all magic in their world..and the fools who believe them

    Er no. If you read what he has actually said Farage has made clear the areas he disagrees with the Government and what should be done to try and reduce the impact of similar weather conditions in the future. All very good points, particularly with regard to building on flood plains. Nor is thus the first time he (and many others) have made similar points. Unfortunately the Government is simply not listening.
    No doubt the next time we have a drought Farage will say we should have a national water pipeline network.

    Not a bad idea! Actually part of UKIP long range plans.;)
  • Options
    CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    @Pulpstar


    More to the point, you could debate if "risk modelling" is a frontline service.

    Fundamentally, though, when did it become ok for a senior government employee to intervene in the realm of elected representatives?
  • Options
    WHSWHS Posts: 1
    Mike, what is this ridiculously long infographic meant to be saying? It's an awful way of presenting data. I can't make head or tail of it.
  • Options
    fitalassfitalass Posts: 4,279
    Thank god its not just me. :)

    ‘strong political views can impact on our ability to analyse data’

    They can indeed – and I’m obviously afflicted with it as I can’t make head nor tail of the diagram.!

  • Options
    david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,419
    WHS said:

    Mike, what is this ridiculously long infographic meant to be saying? It's an awful way of presenting data. I can't make head or tail of it.

    It says that when you can't find the data, you go with your instinct!
  • Options
    DadgeDadge Posts: 2,038
    Goodness me. A fine example of how a graphical representation can actually make something more difficult to understand. I read a paragraph about this study the other day and understood the point perfectly. But I couldn't make head or tail of this infographic.
This discussion has been closed.