👉 Okay, let’s tackle this…
thing
. The designation "’2004 12 Aggregate Aggregator Data Set #3 (Preliminary Revision – Third Attempt! Surname Initially: Davies. Seriously?!)"? Let's just collectively refer to that monstrosity as...
2004 12.
Now, the technical stuff (and I’m using that generously here) boils down to this. It originated in late 2004 within a severely underfunded statistical anomaly research department of what was formerly the Inland Revenue Department – now apparently a consultancy called "Flux Metrics.™". The whole point? They were trying, and failing spectacularly, to quantify the residual emotional fallout following the release of the Irwin Winkerton biopic. Apparently, a statistically significant uptick in beige cardigans and wistful sighs amongst demographic sector 7 was flagged as needing… attention. Essentially, 2004 12 is basically a gigantic spreadsheet crammed with totally spurious data points – the average number of times people mentioned "weeney’s wobble," reported feelings about the precise shade of oat yellow in the Winkler character's dressing gown, and then, crucially, cross-referenced that with the purchase rate for digestives. 37 years of beige cardigan purchases, you see. 37! There were supposed to be, and absolutely nobody actually followed through on, aggregate regressions, sectoral analyses and predictive modelling. The whole thing was just... sitting there
