So something from a journalist who is simply filing a
report, ideally one that will be sufficiently sensational to attract interest,
is suddenly more valuable in determining what is occurring overall than that
from an unbiased researcher actually trying to do objective research and
discover the real position ?* I despair of your logic.

Your data is irrelevant because, like all social data, it
includes too many unknown variables. My reports are to the point and are
numerous enough and widespread enough to indicate a general condition
prevailing. Social data is hardly ever scientific. Counting when you do not know
what you are counting is for morons.

Ed, the report from the Lake District Mountain Rescue is hardly 'social data'. Nor is the report from the British Medical Journal on incidents per exposure. This is hard data showing the real situation.

Your scouring the internet for news articles about incidents is not even comparable and has no scientific basis whatsoever.

No Ed, things move forward ... not back.

Actually, most things just go round and round, never any
progress being made.

Sometimes, but clearly in this case we have gone forward the things have changed ... for the better.

So, I reiterate, you meet next to no-one so how is that
supposed to be representative of a population of tens or hundreds of millions
worldwide ?

You're fully entitled to your opinion ... but you cannot
assume that this is commonly shared.

We all make assumptions about everything all the time. It is
what we humans do best.

And, if you're smart, you recognise the limitations of making such assumptions and seek objective confirmation or refutation. If not, well you do what you do and simply assume you're right ... when you're not.

Personal experience is highly limited and is only of
value if we can make assumptions about it.

But, for any such assumptions to be valid you have to prove that others have similar experiences in sufficient numbers to be statistically valid. This is what you've never even attempted to do. You simply assert it to be the case ... which is circular logic.