I openly said you can take issue with the data collection

thank you for your permission. my issue is more with studying small subset of the data carefully chosen to support your theory and then presenting it as if it applied to the whole group.

but the link makes clear

the link makes it anything but clear. it ultimately admits that the sample is manipulated, but doesn't say how and why.

Even if you took that stat and spread it over all of aviation it’d still be more than cops

it would be more than "no data"? 😂

https://hostux.pics/images/2026/08/25/Screenshot-from-2026-08-25-14-27-0984d2800ddf65be81.png

one number manipulated, one non-existent, but the conclusion is one is bigger than the other?

acting like the meme is misleading seems disingenuous, especially when you consider the brevity of the format.

the "meme" is tabloid trash. brevity of the format is not an excuse, no one forced the author to present misleading data.