• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Cont: Luton Airport Car Park Fire part II

Status
Not open for further replies.
EHocking said:
The problem is not that there is a Pass rate on the exam, but that you think that the success rate of the process is the same thing, e.g.,
Again, the chances of successful placement has been/is small. This is not the same as the pass score of the exam.

Oh, and a standardised test has nothing to do with how the scores/pass is calculated (or standard deviations of same), it is the definition of tests that “ are designed in such a way that the questions and interpretations are consistent and are administered and scored in a predetermined, standard manner.”.

Test score interpretation/determination may involve normative interpretation of scores, but scores being determined by standard distribution is not what “standardised test” means. A standardised test can also be scored using “criterion-referenced” score interpretation. These are sometimes referred to as “standard-based assessment”.

Perhaps the latter is where you have become confused between standardised test, standard based assessment and standard deviations?
Click to expand...

Not at all. I think we are at cross references between public exams such as the Civil Service Fast Stream process with psychometric tests designed to measure cognitive ability.

But there would have been some kind of pass mark in the former, for sure.
 
Vixen said:
That was the logical conclusion I came to from the final report, which clearly stated that only authorized personnel were present at the final recovery scene. Hardly a 'conspiracy theory', if officially confirmed in an official report.
Click to expand...

Logical conclusion, my arse. Long before any final report was available you were speculating that the man who reported spotting the body might be some kind of undercover psychic detective.

You siezed upon the description of police trying (not quite successfully) to keep the public away from the recovery scene, and you claimed that was evidence that the person who spotted the body was therefore not a member of the public. Ludicrous.

Your invention today of the phrase "authorised personnel" is an attempt to bolster your baseless conspiracy theory that Rothwell is secretly one of those police personnel. It's obvious nonsense. The report says no such thing.


I invite you to show us where in the report you became convinced that Rothwell was a secret undercover psychic detective sleeper agent:
https://www.lancashire-pcc.gov.uk/w...Nicola-Bulley-independent-external-review.pdf
 
Vixen said:
...perhaps the law or parliamentary protocols need to be amended so that only minor MP's can hide behind a genuine 'blind register' ...
Click to expand...

You appear to be advocating for corruption so long as it's limited to backbench MPs. Except of course you're still talking about 'blind registers' as the method of cheating but I don't know what that means.

So that we who are less educated in the ways of high finance can keep up with you, can you direct us to a description of what a 'blind register' is, and how it differs from a blind trust? Thanks.
 
Vixen said:
Fact: PM Rishi Sunak is the only UK prime minister who has listed his interests on the register as being on a blind register. Note the words [whilst in office as] serving Prime Minister.

So once again a rash assertion on your part.
Click to expand...
Sigh. You're still wrong.
 
Vixen said:
That was the logical conclusion I came to from the final report, which clearly stated that only authorized personnel were present at the final recovery scene. Hardly a 'conspiracy theory', if officially confirmed in an official report.
Click to expand...

Holy flarking schnitt! You think that they sent a detective to discover the body because anyone else would have been unauthorized? You think it was a restricted crime scene before the body was discovered? Even the words "final recovery scene" should tell you something about that. Even the most rudimentary logical ability should tell you that recovery has to come after discovery.

Not only are you not even remotely as logically astute as you claim to be, you lack even basic reading comprehension.
 
Vixen said:
Citation please of where it was confirmed it was a Land Rover Discovery.
Click to expand...

Sorry, I meant to type 'Evoque'. And like I said, we know this from the first photo, because that's what a Land Rover Evoque looks like. When the final report comes out this summer, it's virtually certain to to say the car was a Land Rover Evoque.

Now will you please answer my question? Why should anyone mark your words given how frequently you are wrong?
 
Steve said:
Economically disadvantaged persons who have to fly budget airlines are a security risk in the eyes of the wealthy such as our Vixen who can afford the very best full-service airlines. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

I read it as poor people on budget airlines getting killed isn't much of a risk.
 
Vixen said:
Fact: PM Rishi Sunak is the only UK prime minister who has listed his interests on the register as being on a blind register. Note the words [whilst in office as] serving Prime Minister.

So once again a rash assertion on your part.
Click to expand...

Once again, it's a blind trust that was registered, not a 'blind register'. You'd think an accountant would understand the terminology.

And, to your point, no, it's not a fact, as usual you're talking bollocks. Just one counter example:
Theresa May used a "well-established mechanism" in setting up a blind trust to manage her financial interests on becoming PM, Downing Street has said.

...

Mrs May set up the arrangement when she became prime minister last summer, after serving in the cabinet for six years as home secretary.
Click to expand...
 
Vixen said:
Seriously, we all notice typos and unfamiliar expressions all the time. To turn it into a thread for people to express their inner heckler...really...?
Click to expand...

It wasn’t a typo. You spent dozens of pages trying to convince everyone you were still somehow right. And you’re still trying. You still can’t just admit you made a mistake.

As I said before that was how we did it.
Click to expand...

No.

I get that not everybody did but that is hardly an excuse for ad hominem attack.
Click to expand...

Report personal attacks for moderation. Do not just whine for rhetorical effect. It is not ad hominem to point out that someone who is trying to teach others has made a mistake in that teaching that she refuses to acknowledge.
 
Last edited:
Please tell me we don't have to go through the geography of the Wyre valley again? Nor the direction of tidal flow in Morecambe Bay nor where specific weirs are nor any of the rest of that?

Please...

I was over in the Forest of Bowland a couple of weeks ago and it was very pleasant; in the Hodder valley rather than the Wyre, though, that and Ribbledale...
 
Vixen said:
That was the logical conclusion I came to from the final report, which clearly stated that only authorized personnel were present at the final recovery scene. Hardly a 'conspiracy theory', if officially confirmed in an official report.
Click to expand...

This is a bit off-topic and so perhaps should be moved, but I'll note the following is a quote from that report.

In support of the police effort to recover Nicola’s body, the search
team worked to a forensic recovery strategy. To provide the necessary
protection to the area from the public, officers were deployed to
the scene to prevent any public intrusion into the area. Despite this deployment, a member of public was able to breach the restricted area, ignoring the direction of the police present. This action resulted in an
extreme invasion of privacy, in what was the most sensitive aspect of the
investigation, and resulted in the arrest of the individual involved.
Click to expand...

Now, as far as I know, the alleged psychic wasn't arrested so this may not refer to him, but it's pretty clear that you're just wrong that only authorized folk were present. It's also not clear whether the psychic was ever in the restricted area -- at least not to me. He's nearby, but not obviously in the midst of the police scene.
 
phiwum said:
This is a bit off-topic and so perhaps should be moved, but I'll note the following is a quote from that report.



Now, as far as I know, the alleged psychic wasn't arrested so this may not refer to him, but it's pretty clear that you're just wrong that only authorized folk were present. It's also not clear whether the psychic was ever in the restricted area -- at least not to me. He's nearby, but not obviously in the midst of the police scene.
Click to expand...

Yeahbut, the lack of direct evidence that he wasn't in the restricted area just shows that there was an embargo on that specific information, doesn't it? Surely a cabal of senior police officers (or should I call them polis, even though it's Lancashire?) were covering up the presence of a psychic, who would undermine their hold on the investigation of crimes and potential crimes and all, thus stopping super efficient psychics from solving all crimes and enabling us to do away with police?

That'll be it...
 
Vixen said:
Nonsense. I was called a conspiracy theorist in the Nicola Bulley case...
Click to expand...


Never mind all the stuff about undercover cops posing as psychics, your claim here is false.

You were not called a conspiracy theorist in any of the threads about the Bulley case. You are once again remembering something that didn't happen.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom