bickster

I believe some of the perverts on here would eat that

Global Times

You are AOC I claim my $5

I think they've just done it that way for ease of viewing

Upthread we were talking about population density in Japan

What he's saying for WeBull is probably correct but part of the issue with RobinHood is that its been selling its trade data to Citadel and that relationship appears to be what has prompted their change (on the surface anyway)

Motorik beat and very F***ed up

I don't think our supply of vaccines is an issue atm, our supply of staff qualified to administer them is a different issue

Is this the one dose only needs a fridge one?

Never really like 2nd Generation punk bands

Looks like Radar

I've heard it said that this family have a reality TV show, which would give people that can't read this exceptionally interesting knowledge

How far away can you detect the German bombers?

I'll start grassing them up when the Megacorps start paying their fair share of tax, until that point its fair game for us all.

in through your nose out through your mouth

As we say about many things in these parts... only in Birkenhead! The truth in this story probably lies somewhere between the two tales (apologies for the Reach Group link)

No, Saltaire

If a ferret can get in your washing machine, you haven't put enough clothes in to justify a wash

He clearly hadn't from what he actually said. I've posted it twice

Occupational hazard for me

Because it is exactly that and saying that does not disagree with anthying that was actually said. Please look up and learn that Statistically Significant is not an opinion it is a mathmatical term meaning that the change in the data is not likely to happen because of chance. This change is not statistically significant because it could have happened through chance this is an opinion, you're entitled to it but it has nothing to do with statistical analysis Again point us in the direction of where anyone said 0.2% in order "to play it down" this is your interpretation of peoples motives, I happen to think I saw no-one doing that This is idiotic

I think some show or other played that on 6Music yesterday

Please, point us in the direction of where someone actually said that? No one has said they were wrong or probably wrong. What was said was the change between the two isn't in itself statistically significant. Those scientists you talk about actually said as much themseleves. No-one here is disagreeing with the scientists you mention. Here's what valance said (for the seond time of posting today). BBC All that has happened in this thread is that people have posted a different way of saying the exact same thing as the governments figures, one that sounds far less horrendous If you don't understand this, I can help you no further