Dublin scores higher that Amsterdam? If it is that wrong in that instance it makes me question is there anything useful in there at all?

Just fyi, Dublin has a rather dense core (too dense) surrounded by a 10km wide ring of extremely low density suburbs where services can't function efficiently. Everyone has to drive a car. It's a Detroit model disaster.

Whereas Amsterdam is a uniform medium density throughout and at its border it just ends and gives way to farmland. It has the right density throughout for services like transport, hospitals, schools, recreation, shops etc. to work.

A lot of which isn't under the purview of Dublin City Council - what you're talking about is the M50 ring, and the purview of the other 3 councils - Fingal (e.g. Swords and Malahide) South Dublin County Council (Tallaght and Clondalkin), and Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown County Council (self-explanatory).

In terms of where they're talking about, it's basically the area between the canals - i.e. Dublin City 'proper' - Smithfield/Stoneybatter, The Liberties/Coombe, Christchurch/Temple Bar, and IFSC/Grand Canal Dock. Far more walkable and inundated with history and sites of huge cultural significance even compared to Paris or Amsterdam, and a different experience completely compared to the impersonal and often dangerous nature of London for the pedestrian.

The vast majority of people working in the CBD are commuting in on the LUAS Green and Red lines, or the DART/Train into Tara/Connolly. Whatever about Dublin Bus, these are perfectly good and regular public transport options.

> Amsterdam is a uniform medium density throughout and at its border it just ends and gives way to farmland.

Except Amstelveen. But then, there isn't much of a change in density there.