or Connect
Cycling Forums › Forums › Bikes › Cycling Equipment › Re: I crash into religion
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Re: I crash into religion - Page 2

post #16 of 231

Re: I crash into religion

dkahn400 wrote:
>
> Anything but answer the question...
>


This sub-thread remind me of that time on Newsnight when Paxman was
trying to get a straight answer out of that politico.

Translation for Leftpondians:
There is a nightly current affairs program on BBC2 called "Newsnight".
Jeremy Paxman was interviewing some political figure and was wanting an
answer to a question. The evasion went on for ages with JP just asking
the same question over & over again and getting nothing but evasive
answers. I can't remember the political figure, the question, or any of
the responses. I have no doubt that someone will be able to provide them.

--
Don Whybrow

Sequi Bonum Non Time

"To communicate with Mars, converse with spirits, To report the
behaviour of the sea monster, Describe the horoscope,
haruspicate or scry, Observe disease in signatures." (T.S.Eliot)
post #17 of 231

Re: I crash into religion

Don Whybrow wrote:
> Translation for Leftpondians:
> There is a nightly current affairs program on BBC2 called
> "Newsnight". Jeremy Paxman was interviewing some political
> figure and was wanting an answer to a question. The evasion
> went on for ages with JP just asking the same question over &
> over again and getting nothing but evasive answers. I can't
> remember the political figure, the question, or any of the
> responses. I have no doubt that someone will be able to
> provide them.


Watch the video:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programme...25/4182569.stm

--
Cheers
the.Mark
post #18 of 231

Re: I crash into religion

Don Whybrow wrote:
> dkahn400 wrote:
>>
>> Anything but answer the question...
>>

>
> This sub-thread remind me of that time on Newsnight when Paxman was
> trying to get a straight answer out of that politico.
>
> Translation for Leftpondians:
> There is a nightly current affairs program on BBC2 called "Newsnight".
> Jeremy Paxman was interviewing some political figure and was wanting
> an answer to a question. The evasion went on for ages with JP just
> asking the same question over & over again and getting nothing but
> evasive answers. I can't remember the political figure, the question,
> or any of the responses. I have no doubt that someone will be able to
> provide them.


The back story to that, was (From Paxman himself in an iterview) that he was
being told that the next story/film clip was not ready and could he please
continue the Howrd interview. Paxman had run out of material and had nothing
else to cover anyway!

pk
post #19 of 231
Thread Starter 

Re: I crash into religion

On Mon, 15 May 2006 16:00:06 GMT, "Sorni"
<soryousucknyoureallyreallysucki@san.rr.com> wrote:
>Said the guy who wouldn't answer MY simple question with a yes or no, but
>kept putting qualifiers on it.
>

Because the question doesn't have a yes or no answer. I exposed my,
and tried to be more honest, but given a more explanatory answer.

>Give it a freaking rest already.


When you either answer or shut up.

JT

****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************
post #20 of 231
Thread Starter 

Re: I crash into religion

On Mon, 15 May 2006 23:06:12 GMT, "Sorni"
<soryousucknyoureallyreallysucki@san.rr.com> wrote:

>
>I did answer. Clearer than yours.


Yeah, I guess it was clear in that it's clear you're afraid of
something. What are you afraid of? Wait, don't answer that. Just
answer the question.

JT

****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************
post #21 of 231
Thread Starter 

Re: I crash into religion

On 15 May 2006 18:08:28 -0700, "Ozark Bicycle"
<bicycleatelier@ozarkbicycleservice.com> wrote:


>"To troll is life
> everything else
> is just waiting" - John Furtivesnips Trollinsum


Another example of the lack of substance in your writing and thinking.

JT

****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************
post #22 of 231

Re: I crash into religion

Ozark Bicycle wrote:
> Sorni wrote:
>> Ozark Bicycle wrote:
>>> jtaylor wrote:
>>>> So, if you were to find yourself in a nice place for a walk, but had
>>>> no helmet, would you walk?
>>> Huh?

>> OMG, I think it made a joke.
>>

>
> The question is so ludicrous that it *must* be a joke, right? ;-)
>


One so ludicrous it was discussed in the British Medical Journal. That's
irony by the way.

--
Tony

"The best way I know of to win an argument is to start by being in the
right."
- Lord Hailsham
post #23 of 231

Re: I crash into religion

Ozark Bicycle wrote:
> Tony Raven wrote:
>> Ozark Bicycle wrote:
>>> Sorni wrote:
>>>> Ozark Bicycle wrote:
>>>>> jtaylor wrote:
>>>>>> So, if you were to find yourself in a nice place for a walk, but had
>>>>>> no helmet, would you walk?
>>>>> Huh?
>>>> OMG, I think it made a joke.
>>>>
>>> The question is so ludicrous that it *must* be a joke, right? ;-)
>>>

>> One so ludicrous it was discussed in the British Medical Journal. That's
>> irony by the way.
>>
>>

>
>
> The British Medical Journal wanted to know if *I* would walk sans
> helmet?
>


No, but why people would walk sans helmet but not cycle sans helmet. It
starts:

"It began in America, as so many trends do, but for years no one in
Europe took any notice. American tourists wearing helmets around the
streets of London first drew media attention. And although public
response to walking helmets was initially amusement, the appeal of extra
safety drew some pioneers to the habit, especially academics and
competitive walkers."
Wardlaw MJ BMJ 2000;321:1582-1585

--
Tony

"The best way I know of to win an argument is to start by being in the
right."
- Lord Hailsham
post #24 of 231

Re: I crash into religion

Sorni wrote:
> dkahn400 wrote:


> > The interesting thing here is the use of the word "knew". If you
> > continue to "know" something is true in the face of convincing
> > evidence to the contrary then that is the kind of "knowledge" that
> > comes from faith rather than reasoning.

>
> Experience is faith? Hmm.


No. Neither is that implied by what I said, as you are perfectly well
aware.

--
Dave...
post #25 of 231

Re: I crash into religion

in message <1147795452.917938.8550@v46g2000cwv.googlegroups.com>, Ozark
Bicycle ('bicycleatelier@ozarkbicycleservice.com') wrote:

>> > jtaylor wrote:

>>
>> >> So, if you were to find yourself in a nice place for a walk, but
>> >> had no helmet, would you walk?


In Britain, at any rate, you have a substantially higher risk of head
injury walking one kilometer than cycling one kilometer. If you wear a
helmet when cycling, why don't you wear one when walking?

Genuine question.

--
simon@jasmine.org.uk (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/
.::;===r==\
/ /___||___\____
//==\- ||- | /__\( MS Windows IS an operating environment.
//____\__||___|_// \|: C++ IS an object oriented programming language.
\__/ ~~~~~~~~~ \__/ Citroen 2cv6 IS a four door family saloon.
post #26 of 231

Re: I crash into religion

In article <mcupj3-j8f.ln1@gododdin.internal.jasmine.org.uk>,
simon@jasmine.org.uk says...
> in message <1147795452.917938.8550@v46g2000cwv.googlegroups.com>, Ozark
> Bicycle ('bicycleatelier@ozarkbicycleservice.com') wrote:
>
> >> > jtaylor wrote:
> >>
> >> >> So, if you were to find yourself in a nice place for a walk, but
> >> >> had no helmet, would you walk?

>
> In Britain, at any rate, you have a substantially higher risk of head
> injury walking one kilometer than cycling one kilometer. If you wear a
> helmet when cycling, why don't you wear one when walking?
>
> Genuine question.
>

Because the risk of head injury per trip is lower while walking?

Rick
post #27 of 231

Re: I crash into religion

Ozark Bicycle wrote:
> Espressopithecus (Java Man) wrote:
> > In article <mcupj3-j8f.ln1@gododdin.internal.jasmine.org.uk>,
> > simon@jasmine.org.uk says...
> > >
> > >
> > > In Britain, at any rate, you have a substantially higher risk of head
> > > injury walking one kilometer than cycling one kilometer. If you wear a
> > > helmet when cycling, why don't you wear one when walking?
> > >
> > > Genuine question.
> > >

> > Because the risk of head injury per trip is lower while walking?
> >

> ....and I don't walk down twisty descents at ~35-40mph?


Let's summarize.

Simon gives data based on the typical averages - the per-kilometer and
per-hour comparisons that are used in almost all comparisons of risk.

Java Man looks for some other metric, so he can cling to the idea that
cycling is more dangerous.

And Ozark brings in a special case, one that few cyclists ever
experience, and for which he doubtlessly has no data. (He never has
data.)

IOW: "No, you don't realize. Cycling is really, really dangerous!
Really! Or at least, it can be! Um... sometimes! If you measure it
in just the right way..."

Hopefully, we've at least gotten you two to agree that _ordinary_
cycling is not _very_ dangerous.

Can you agree that ordinary cycling should not be depicted as requiring
a helmet?

- Frank Krygowski
post #28 of 231

Re: I crash into religion

Espressopithecus (Java Man) wrote:
> In article <mcupj3-j8f.ln1@gododdin.internal.jasmine.org.uk>,
> simon@jasmine.org.uk says...
>> In Britain, at any rate, you have a substantially higher risk of head
>> injury walking one kilometer than cycling one kilometer. If you wear a
>> helmet when cycling, why don't you wear one when walking?
>>
>> Genuine question.
>>

> Because the risk of head injury per trip is lower while walking?
>


Actually it's not. The risk of head injury while cycling is lower than
while walking and a higher percentage of pedestrian hospital admission
have head injuries than cyclists - for the UK at least.

So what's your answer now?

--
Tony

"The best way I know of to win an argument is to start by being in the
right."
- Lord Hailsham
post #29 of 231

Re: I crash into religion

Ozark Bicycle wrote:
>>> In Britain, at any rate, you have a substantially higher risk of head
>>> injury walking one kilometer than cycling one kilometer. If you wear a
>>> helmet when cycling, why don't you wear one when walking?
>>>
>>> Genuine question.
>>>

>> Because the risk of head injury per trip is lower while walking?
>>
>>

>
> .....and I don't walk down twisty descents at ~35-40mph?
>


Well that's only 8 to 10 times the design limit of a helmet. Do you use
all your equipment at 8-10 time its design limit?

Of all hospital admissions for serious head injuries in the UK, 42% are
from trips and falls, 11% from physical assaults and just 7% from
cycling (with or without a helmet). The risk of a head injury while
walking is higher than for cycling. So what is your answer now

--
Tony

"The best way I know of to win an argument is to start by being in the
right."
- Lord Hailsham
post #30 of 231

Re: I crash into religion

Ozark Bicycle wrote:
> Simon Brooke wrote:
>
> <snipped>
>
> -rule Britannia!-
>
>> In Britain, at any rate, you have a substantially higher risk of head
>> injury walking one kilometer than cycling one kilometer.

>
> If you Brits can't learn to walk, don't look for help here.....
>


Actually per km its about 1.5 time more dangerous to walk than cycle in
the UK but 3.3 times more dangerous in the US (Source: Pucher J &
Dijkstra L, Transportation. Quarterly 2000; 54 (3):25-50). Seems the
Brits are not the ones who need the help.

>
>> If you wear a
>> helmet when cycling, why don't you wear one when walking?
>>

>
> 'Cuz I'm not a Brit?
>


Seems you have even more reason to wear a helmet walking then. So what
is your answer now?

--
Tony

"The best way I know of to win an argument is to start by being in the
right."
- Lord Hailsham
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Cycling Equipment
Cycling Forums › Forums › Bikes › Cycling Equipment › Re: I crash into religion