"His sample set is flawed" - Agreed, but that is not the argument most commenters are using, as I have pointed out elsewhere his sample sizes are definitely NOT "too small to give meaningful results". Weak confidence levels and "meaningless" are two very different things, one is useless, the other provides a low resolution picture of the real distribution.

So why are half the comments incorrectly claiming that the sample size is too small to give meaningful results? Yes the samples he has give a weak confidence level and he points that out, but that is an entirely different thing to "meaningless".

Disclaimer: Majored in Comp Sci and Operations Research (logistics to americans). That doesn't make me a statistician but it does mean I can recognise a valid statistical argument when I see one.

The sample sizes he used are not a problem from a statistical POV. He has two small samples so he can legitimately use the central limit theorem to find the mean. He also has more than the minimum sample size of 32 required to calculate variance and confidence levels. The only thing likely to show significant improvement with a larger sample sizes is the confidence level, since he admits his confidence is weak I don't see a problem.

"It's more interesting not knowing" - Feynman.

In my experience the "peak" doesn't matter much, the best strategy is to go out for half an hour or so over the next few days when Leo is visible in the sky, after midnight local time is always preferable since the meteors will be hitting the atmosphere square on.

I've lost count of the number of Leonids I've seen since I saw my first (and best) leonid shower in the late 60's (17 thru my bedroom windows in about an hour). Saw a nice slow moving green one last night from my hotel balcony in Broome, completely accidental, it was only after I spotted it that I remembered what the date was. Having said that, the easily accessible dark sky here in Oz does give me an unfair advantage.

But it's ok for people like Inhofe and the GP to deliberately misrepresent what the models say, right?

That's too general to be useful, yes life is a process not a thing, but it's a process that has a particular set of properties, we don't have a universal definition of life but one thing that all definitions agree is required is self-replication. However self-replication alone is not sufficient to define life since crystal growth has the property of self-replication but few people believe animals are a form of protein crystal that spontaneously replicates.

Maths is an axiomatic system, it is accurate by definition. The universe is not axiomatic therefore if there are inaccuracies in it's mathematical description they are a fundamental property of the universe itself, not maths.

Given enough time every point in our existing universe will expand into a universe of it's own, currently we think those universes will be empty. Personally I don't think it's possible to have a physical "nothing", there is always something even if just a 'quantum fluctuation'.

Fornication.

The current law is broken, there is no need for the law to require YT to give away the personal info of either side to anyone other than a judge - but your answer is "fuck the little guy"?

Your spacebar is evil.

Which particular religion? There are lots of different types of muslims just as there are lots of different types of Christians, within each sect there are different races, white, black, mediterranean, Persian, Arab, SE Asian, etc. This is what currently happening in Iraq, ISIS broke off from the Sunni's and is now fighting Sunni, Shia and Kurds, they all hate each other almost as much as they hate ISIS.

Aside from that, following strict apostate rules has nothing to do with race, there is nothing in your genes that makes you a muslim therefore hating a muslim just for being a muslim is bigoted and ignorant, but it's not racist.

They are talking about a commercial fishing operation, not two blokes in a tinny.