Half a million people march in London for Palestine

originally posted by: FlyersFan

originally posted by: quintessentone
And the same can be said for the 100,000 figure which nobody can confirm is accurate.

It is the official figure by the unbiased trained professionals who worked crowd control and who are trained in how to count crowds and who actually worked the crowds that day. It's a hell of a lot more accurate than some muslim dude in India with an agenda and no access to crowd information, and it's a hell of a lot more accurate than two 'anti-colonizing' socialist rags that have an agenda and that also don't have access to crowd information.

If they used the Jacob's method and if the crowd was a mosh crowd then they would have a 30% inaccurate estimate.

a reply to: Leviathan4

It's your thread, mate? Stop moving the goalposts, please?

You have made plenty of assertions,which you now deny having made, quite incredibly, it's up to you to prove them rather than simply trying to run away.

originally posted by: SprocketUK

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: SprocketUK

originally posted by: SourGrapes

originally posted by: Leviathan4

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: Leviathan4

This is getting tiresome.

You said, amongst other things about our Police:

"An estimation by the Police that has an interest in downplaying the event for reasons of safety and security as well as public order and for discouraging others from participating (it makes it much easier to police a smaller crowd)."

Clear as daylight.

Any comment on my own direct personal experience?

I am explaining why I have doubts about the claim made when the other poster made repeated claims that we need to accept these numbers because the police are independent and unbiased.

The burden of proof is on them.
They made a claim and i answered.

Yet, you don't have the same doubt, reading the sources you provided and are spreading? The 500k claim?

You immediately believe those sources, without doubt.

Why is that?

Confirmation Bias.

And the same can be said for the 100,000 figure which nobody can confirm is accurate.

god you are hard work.

I have zero reason not to trust the Met police on this, as I stated earlier, it is absolutely not in their interests to get it wrong, they are subject to oversight from the home office and ultimately the elected home secretary. Get it wrong, get caught out lying and you are fired from your job. No way are they gonna risk that over soemething so minor.

I doubt a flatfoot released that figure, it was a higher up within government that may or may not have a reason to deflate the number. Conspiracy theory much?

With all the technology we have today, surely there's a high definition satellite picture out there, somewhere. Maybe, Lev could count the heads in the crowd and come back and update us?

a reply to: SourGrapes

That would be a nice relief from the spam for awhile.

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: SprocketUK

originally posted by: SourGrapes

originally posted by: Leviathan4

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: Leviathan4

This is getting tiresome.

You said, amongst other things about our Police:

"An estimation by the Police that has an interest in downplaying the event for reasons of safety and security as well as public order and for discouraging others from participating (it makes it much easier to police a smaller crowd)."

Clear as daylight.

Any comment on my own direct personal experience?

I am explaining why I have doubts about the claim made when the other poster made repeated claims that we need to accept these numbers because the police are independent and unbiased.

The burden of proof is on them.
They made a claim and i answered.

Yet, you don't have the same doubt, reading the sources you provided and are spreading? The 500k claim?

You immediately believe those sources, without doubt.

Why is that?

Confirmation Bias.

And the same can be said for the 100,000 figure which nobody can confirm is accurate.

The difference is that I haven't made any claim that the police is biased and not independent.

The other poster has made the claims the police is unbiased and independent and hence we need to accept the numbers given. they also asked me to disprove their assertions..

Comedy gold!!!

originally posted by: Leviathan4
The quotes are my answers to you who has made a range of claims ...

BULL. You are really trying to wiggle out of this one. Pages 24 and 25. You accused the professional and unbiased UK police of a massive conspiracy to downplay the numbers of protestors in order to somehow make their job easier.

You made the false claim. You fail to prove it. It's RIDICULOUS.

You reject the trained professionals who worked the event ... but you embrace the muslim dude in India and the two socialist outlets ... all of which have bias and agenda .... just because they further your own anti-Israel agenda here. The amount of emotional investment you are giving it is truly disturbing.

originally posted by: SourGrapes
With all the technology we have today, surely there's a high definition satellite picture out there, somewhere. Maybe, Lev could count the heads in the crowd and come back and update us?

There's a problem with that, that being when crowds, especially dense crowds, occupy city streets the accuracy rates go down substantially. That's how difficult it is to estimate crowd size.

a reply to: Leviathan4

"Imagine this poster who comes and says we need to take the number given by the police for granted because they are unbiased and independent. And then they want to disprove their assertions when you challenge them..."

Imagine the poster that wants us to believe a Muslim journalist in India, the World Socialist Website or a communist rag like the Morning Star rather than our Police?

originally posted by: Leviathan4

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: SprocketUK

originally posted by: SourGrapes

originally posted by: Leviathan4

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: Leviathan4

This is getting tiresome.

You said, amongst other things about our Police:

"An estimation by the Police that has an interest in downplaying the event for reasons of safety and security as well as public order and for discouraging others from participating (it makes it much easier to police a smaller crowd)."

Clear as daylight.

Any comment on my own direct personal experience?

I am explaining why I have doubts about the claim made when the other poster made repeated claims that we need to accept these numbers because the police are independent and unbiased.

The burden of proof is on them.
They made a claim and i answered.

Yet, you don't have the same doubt, reading the sources you provided and are spreading? The 500k claim?

You immediately believe those sources, without doubt.

Why is that?

Confirmation Bias.

And the same can be said for the 100,000 figure which nobody can confirm is accurate.

The difference is that I haven't made any claim that the police is biased and not independent.

The other poster has made the claims the police is unbiased and independent and hence we need to accept the numbers given. they also asked me to disprove their assertions..

Comedy gold!!!

I know you have not made the claim that police are biased, but the videos I am watching are all saying government, police and activists are all biased when it comes to inflating or deflating crowd sizes. It's political.

originally posted by: quintessentone
If they used the Jacob's method and if the crowd was a mosh crowd then they would have a 30% inaccurate estimate.

Putting the crowd at 70,000 - 130,000.
100,000 being the median number.
No where near 500,000.

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: SprocketUK

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: SprocketUK

originally posted by: SourGrapes

originally posted by: Leviathan4

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: Leviathan4

This is getting tiresome.

You said, amongst other things about our Police:

"An estimation by the Police that has an interest in downplaying the event for reasons of safety and security as well as public order and for discouraging others from participating (it makes it much easier to police a smaller crowd)."

Clear as daylight.

Any comment on my own direct personal experience?

I am explaining why I have doubts about the claim made when the other poster made repeated claims that we need to accept these numbers because the police are independent and unbiased.

The burden of proof is on them.
They made a claim and i answered.

Yet, you don't have the same doubt, reading the sources you provided and are spreading? The 500k claim?

You immediately believe those sources, without doubt.

Why is that?

Confirmation Bias.

And the same can be said for the 100,000 figure which nobody can confirm is accurate.

god you are hard work.

I have zero reason not to trust the Met police on this, as I stated earlier, it is absolutely not in their interests to get it wrong, they are subject to oversight from the home office and ultimately the elected home secretary. Get it wrong, get caught out lying and you are fired from your job. No way are they gonna risk that over soemething so minor.

I doubt a flatfoot released that figure, it was a higher up within government that may or may not have a reason to deflate the number. Conspiracy theory much?

crikey we are not talking about the Ankh Morpork watch here, there are thousands involved in policing such a large demo and the figures travel up until they reach the officer liasing with the home office.

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: Leviathan4

It's your thread, mate? Stop moving the goalposts, please?

You have made plenty of assertions,which you now deny having made, quite incredibly, it's up to you to prove them rather than simply trying to run away.

I haven't made any claims of the sort you have implied and I only said what I have doubts to the claims made by the other poster who has saif the police is unbiased and independent and hence we need to accept the numbers given. they also asked me to disprove their assertions..

The burden of proof is on them I am afraid. They started with the police thing and they need to prove it.

originally posted by: FlyersFan

originally posted by: quintessentone
If they used the Jacob's method and if the crowd was a mosh crowd then they would have a 30% inaccurate estimate.

Putting the crowd at 70,000 - 130,000.
100,000 being the median number.
No where near 500,000.

Putting the crowd at any number, how did they put the crowd at that number, inquiring minds want to know?

I can't find any information on how the Met police or London police, which one or both?, which crowd counting method they used.

a reply to: quintessentone

Of course it's difficult. It's no exact science.

But pulling a figure of 500,000, out of thin air, to support a pro Hamas anti Israel agenda is going to get challenged. And rightly so.

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: Leviathan4

"Imagine this poster who comes and says we need to take the number given by the police for granted because they are unbiased and independent. And then they want to disprove their assertions when you challenge them..."

Imagine the poster that wants us to believe a .uslim journalist in India, the World Socialist Website or a communist rag like the Morning Star rather than our Police?

I didn't say you had to believe it.
That's a false argument...

a reply to: Leviathan4

That, again, is brazenly untrue, as we can see from your various posts which have been quoted by myself and others, above.

This denialism of what is plain for all to see, to put it mildly and politely, does you little credit.

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: quintessentone

Of course it's difficult. It's no exact science.

But pulling a figure of 500,000, out of thin air, to support a pro Hamas anti Israel agenda is going to get challenged. And rightly so.

And vice versa with the 100,000 figure we need the maths involved in both calculations because from what I am learning about crowd counting there's a lot more to it than just math, also political bias to deflate or inflate numbers.

originally posted by: FlyersFan

originally posted by: Leviathan4
The quotes are my answers to you who has made a range of claims ...

BULL. You are really trying to wiggle out of this one. Pages 24 and 25. You accused the professional and unbiased UK police of a massive conspiracy to downplay the numbers of protestors in order to somehow make their job easier.

You made the false claim. You fail to prove it. It's RIDICULOUS.

You reject the trained professionals who worked the event ... but you embrace the muslim dude in India and the two socialist outlets ... all of which have bias and agenda .... just because they further your own anti-Israel agenda here. The amount of emotional investment you are giving it is truly disturbing.

The difference is that I haven't made any claim that the police is biased and not independent.

You made the claims the police is unbiased and independent and hence we need to accept the numbers given. You also asked me to disprove your assertions....

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: sendhelp
So much pro genocide, pro WW3, and anti protest, anti peace, anti justice in here lmao. Thread should have just gone a few pages, but went 30+ lol lol.

Yeah, it's the way of ATS to discredit each other, it's a shame when we could be having more intelligent discussions.

Well their news sources are like The Patriot Times or the Epoch Times or whatever similar sites and completely ignoring first hand accounts on Instagram. Their posts make it glaringly obvious, it's sad...I agree with you, cutting edge, mature conversations would be much better.

For example the conspiracy of Israel forming Hamas, that Netanyahu had Yitzahk Rabin killed, that US is providing the bombs and funding the genocide, and all the rabbit holes you could go down, and there's nothing.

There's about 4-5 super dedicated trolls, we all know who they are too.