Oh Dear: Is there any other country in Europe where this would cause outrage ?

[Causus Deli]

This is not a book and as the other poster suggested these figures are quite simply out there if you care to look. Also out there is the fact that amongst Asians 60% marry from their homelands and so 3.5 is very low indeed.

The overall population of the UK will reduce based on these figures until 2-3 generations and then the overall number will be greater than 60 million. It is therefore unlikely with a diminishing population that breeding patterns will change.

It’s approximate deary, change the numbers to what the hell you like. 2.8 and 57.2 (allocate all the new people to non-asian). Take off the Chinese if you wish to be a pedant (I haven’t in what follows). Then the population will decline with 1.7 and say 3.0 and breeding is likely to continue on, and in 4 generations we will have 25.4 and 21.3 Million respectively. Of course things change but not as shown here enough to modify the situation leading to the demise of this country.

[Causus Deli]

I was going to respond but that is a masterly ripping apart. And this guy claims to be a professor of Pure Mathematics?
One point I looked up - the ethnic group with the largest number of children is the Bangladeshi, only 40% of whom have more than 3 children. The younger British-born Indian and Chinese generations have numbers of children that are roughly in line with the white population, which suggests that rates will fall with the generations
source: National Stats Office.

I respectfully submit that this idiot is insulting our intelligence.

Oh dear pedigree gloatery based on a silly appraisal of my example data. That's childish.

[sasguru]

Oh dear pedigree gloatery based on a silly appraisal of my example data. That's childish.

Fair enough. Lets deal with the numbers. Please respond to Greg's criticism of your numbers and methodology.

[sasguru]

This is not a book and as the other poster suggested these figures are quite simply out there if you care to look. Also out there is the fact that amongst Asians 60% marry from their homelands and so 3.5 is very low indeed.

The overall population of the UK will reduce based on these figures until 2-3 generations and then the overall number will be greater than 60 million. It is therefore unlikely with a diminishing population that breeding patterns will change.

It’s approximate deary, change the numbers to what the hell you like. 2.8 and 57.2 (allocate all the new people to non-asian). Take off the Chinese if you wish to be a pedant (I haven’t in what follows). Then the population will decline with 1.7 and say 3.0 and breeding is likely to continue on, and in 4 generations we will have 25.4 and 21.3 Million respectively. Of course things change but not as shown here enough to modify the situation leading to the demise of this country.

Why are you stuck with this 3 number? The stats don't bear it out.

[The Lone Gunman]

O dear. Let's go through this bit by bit.

Most of this is suposition and guesswork as to where he gets his figures from, which is exactly what you are accusing him of. Why do that? You can publish your own figures and leave him to hang or back up his source. Deriding him adds nothing to your argument.

Why not link to here? http://www.statistics.gov.uk/cci/nugget.asp?id=455

[sasguru]

Most of this is suposition and guesswork as to where he gets his figures from, which is exactly what you are accusing him of. Why do that? You can publish your own figures and leave him to hang or back up his source. Deriding him adds nothing to your argument.

Why not link to here? http://www.statistics.gov.uk/cci/nugget.asp?id=455

It is incumbent on CD to back up his figures. Greg was simply criticising his flawed methodology which is standard scientific practice.

[The Lone Gunman]

It is incumbent on CD to back up his figures. Greg was simply criticising his flawed methodology which is standard scientific practice.

Greg is guessing as to where the figures came from. Without direct reference to the original source the only method he can use is to show evidence to the contrary which he has failed to do.

While we are at it, who questioned the birth rates thing? Try here.

http://www.statistics.gov.uk/cci/nugget.asp?id=458

[sasguru]

Some evidence that immigrant fertility rates decline

http://www.ppic.org/content/pubs/rb/RB_402LHRB.pdf
http://www.statcan.ca/Daily/English/031222/d031222c.htm

[sasguru]

Greg is guessing as to where the figures came from. Without direct reference to the original source the only method he can use is to show evidence to the contrary which he has failed to do.

While we are at it, who questioned the birth rates thing? Try here.

http://www.statistics.gov.uk/cci/nugget.asp?id=458

Well the point is whether these higher fertility rates are maintained over the generations as CD claims, which would indeed change the ethnic composition of the country. However the evidence suggests otherwise. It is more likely that the immigrant population percentage will stabilise, probably at a slightly higher level than now. Also current immigration is mainly from Eastern Europe. What you will get in the next generation is plenty of British looking and sounding people with names like Kyslowski.

[Old Greg]

This is not a book and as the other poster suggested these figures are quite simply out there if you care to look. Also out there is the fact that amongst Asians 60% marry from their homelands and so 3.5 is very low indeed.

The overall population of the UK will reduce based on these figures until 2-3 generations and then the overall number will be greater than 60 million. It is therefore unlikely with a diminishing population that breeding patterns will change.

It’s approximate deary, change the numbers to what the hell you like. 2.8 and 57.2 (allocate all the new people to non-asian). Take off the Chinese if you wish to be a pedant (I haven’t in what follows). Then the population will decline with 1.7 and say 3.0 and breeding is likely to continue on, and in 4 generations we will have 25.4 and 21.3 Million respectively. Of course things change but not as shown here enough to modify the situation leading to the demise of this country.

You address none of the criticisms I made of your post, but just bring up new nonsense. Let's pick out the whopper:

'Also out there is the fact that amongst Asians 60% marry from their homelands and so 3.5 is very low indeed'

This does nothing to justify the figure of 3.5. Where does the figure come from?

Other parts of your post entirely (and I assume disingenuously miss the point): 'Take off the Chinese if you wish to be a pedant'. I criticised you for including 'Others' in 'Asian' - not 'Chinese'. It's not just that the figures keep creeping up, it's that you are clearly falsifying figures to support your argument and figure of 3 to 4 generations.

'It’s approximate deary, change the numbers to what the hell you like. 2.8 and 57.2 (allocate all the new people to non-asian). Take off the Chinese if you wish to be a pedant (I haven’t in what follows). Then the population will decline with 1.7 and say 3.0 and breeding is likely to continue on, and in 4 generations we will have 25.4 and 21.3 Million respectively.' - I assume you mean 1.7 children per white couple and 3.0 children per Asian couple. So: 57,200,000 multiplied by (0.85 to the power of 4) = 29,858,756.2,800,000 multiplied by (1.5 to the power of 4) = 14,175,000. But as I said on an earlier post, I've only got an 'O level' in mathematics. Aren't numbers fab?


And your figures are still based on the assumption that the number of children per couple in the white and Asian populations will not change from generation to generation and that all Asians will have children with other Asians. How I wish we might be allowed a glimpse of your published research!