You can't seriously be this loving retarded. Like this is shocking.

So the first thing you forgeted up is that your showing rape stats from 1976 onward, compared to population stats from 1750 onwards. So no they don't line up, you loving idiot.

the graphs is misleading. sue me. there's more than just that, if you want to get into semantics. for example the units are different for each graph. the rape reports uses units of 1 and the population graph uses units of 1 million. so obviously the population incline should be incredibly steep. still makes no difference in the statistics, it just means that at first glance it looks like there's a 1:1 proportion, when in reality its a 1000:1 relationship

Secondly, the rape statistic you do show are *per capita*. In other words per 100,000 people. So no it's not increasimg "exactly proportionally" with the population because it's increasing on a per capita bases.

the whole loving point of per capita is to model the whole population which would be impossible to gather statistics on without some government-run census. whether its increasing proportionally has nothing to do with the sample size or the fact that its per capita. its an assumed model, so if 25 rape cases happened in 1976 among those 100,000 people, its assumed that 2500 rapes happened among the 10 million people in the entire country. the margin for error can be wide but it doesn't bear any relevance to the argument that sand mondays are raping more people.

It's actually shocking on how loving horribly you forgeted this up. Although I will say I'm more surprised someone like Mathew didn't catch this stuff.

none of this actually matters. you're just saying the graph is misleading, which is true. what does matter is that every 25,000 people increase in the population results in 250 more love crime report, from 1976 to 2016. the two graphs are directly proportionate.

in 10 years (1976 to 1986) the population increased almost a quarter a million. around 25,000 people were born each year. during that same time, the assumed rape reports increased by 2500, at 250 a year. in another 10 years, (1986 to 1996) the population increased almost a quarter a million. around 25,000 people were born each year. during that same time, the assumed rape reports increased by 2500, at 250 a year. there was a slight increase in rape cases during those times for some reason, lord knows. it still follows the same trend

the only discrepancy that would damage any of these statistics would be if the 100,000 sample size was all from the same city or area. the birth rates could've been vastly different in that region than others. if it was in stockholm then the birth rate would be higher, but if it was in some backwoods town it might've been lower. i dont know this information so i cannot say for sure.

i probably made an error in the numbers but the fact is that the population increase and the rape increase are directly proportional by a constant of like 1000. every group of 1000 swedish people will get 1 rape report every year. every group of 1000 migrants will get 1 rape report every year.