This is utterly ridiculous.

Keith ... select = limited

ie - not enough evidence

Why not enough?

Because of limitations of geography AND SIZE ..

... DID YOU READ THAT? ... SIZE ... THE STATS COVER TOO SMALL A SAMPLE ... ie ITS TOO SELECT ...

The study does not corroborate your view unless its results are deliberately misrepresented - the authors have made that clear.

The reasons given by its authors are scientific, not political.

The study also SPECIFICALLY contradicts the OPINION of Straw, Cryer etc.

Yet Keith states that it "corroborates" their "evidence"


Cryer Straw etc have given no evidence.

They have only said what they SUSPECT.


Keith is asserting that if someone suspects you of a crime, then that is evidence enough that you have committed it.

This is another attempt to put the onus of proof on the denier.

Its YOUR hypothesis - you, Straw and cryer have to provide the evidence.

Just saying "a high profile politician suspects it therefore it is true" is NONSENSE.

Keith is inventing racist bullshit for which there is no supporting evidence and deliberately misrepresenting research done to support his agenda, even though those who carried out the researh specifically point out that his interpretation of their work is wrong.