I can of course see where you are coming from, I was already expecting a similar a reply. However, I stand by my statement. I'm also not talking about all referndums. I think this one is a particular example of why certain ones just won't work. That also depends on the definition of a successul referendum - representing the views of all/making the most sound choice for the benefit of the country as a whole. This can be one and the same but in some situations may well be the opposite.The problem with that is obvious.
If people aren't competent or sufficiently informed to decide to be in or out of the EU, then they aren't competent or sufficiently informed to elect an appropriate government either. What you're apparently advodating is some sort of meritocracy where you have to pass exams to qualify as a citizen and only citizens can vote.
After all, do we elect the government that's going to choose based on fact, or on " 'feeling' and existing bias"?
And why bother with 650 politicians? Maybe we just ought to have a nationwide competition to find the most intelligent and best-informed person and just elect them as dictator to take all decisions for us?
As a principle, democracy has lots of flaws and one advantage. That advantage is that, to paraphrase an old quote, for all it's faults it's better than any other form of government that has been tried.
I have a feeling though both of us know our minds and understand each others point of view but really fundamentally we have differing views on the subject which are unlikely to change.