Cycling Forums › Forums › Bikes › Cycling Equipment › Paramount
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Paramount - Page 16

post #226 of 339
7/8/07 at 7:43am

Re: Helmets

On Sat, 7 Jul 2007 19:10:43 -0700, "Bill Sornson" <askme@ask.me>
wrote:

>I distinctly recall /many/ encounters with you where you say "well
>you refuse to learn" or "those who can't learn from their betters" or some
>such crap. It's condescending, period.

But it's true. At least in the helmet discussions you refuse to think
critically or to learn.

Condescending? Ha! He's doing you a favor.

Think back to your math error. You make a mistake. You have several
guys with engineering, science or math expertise telling you you are
wrong. And you push back at them several times.

*Finally* you learned the source of your error. I guess that means
you don't really completely refuse to learn -- in that case you were
just irrationally resistant.
--
JT
****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************
Reply
Reply
post #227 of 339
7/8/07 at 7:44am

Re: Helmets

On Sat, 7 Jul 2007 20:26:46 -0700, "Bill Sornson" <askme@ask.me>
wrote:

>Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote:
>> Bill Sornson wrote: {context removed; shock et surprise, n'est-ce pas?}
>>> ...
>
>>> So fine, ride without a lid. Who's stoppin' ya?
>
>> In quite a few jurisdictions, the police would, due to the lies of the
>> pro-helmet propagandists on the effectiveness of foam hats on
>> preventing serious injury and death.
>
>So work against MHLs and stop attacking people who merely choose to wear
>helmets.

He's attacking people who say things about the efficacy of helmets
that are not true. Those false statement play into the hands of the
MHL crowd.
--
JT
****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************
Reply
Reply
post #228 of 339
7/8/07 at 7:49am

Re: Helmets

On Sat, 7 Jul 2007 19:10:43 -0700, "Bill Sornson" <askme@ask.me>
wrote:

>The pro-lid people come
>from both ends; the anti-lid people are without exception lefties. Name
>just one conservative or "non liberal" who's anti-helmet! Just one???

What is your problem? Did some woman get a job over you in the 1960s
and you blame it on "women's libbers and pinkos." Two many
industrious Mexicans and Koreans where you live and not enough "normal
Americans." Left-wing media daring to question the US of A on TV
really pissing you off? Feel like life is passing you by?

Where does your political anger come from?

I'd guess you listen to too many guys like Rush Limbaugh on the radio.
--
JT
****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************
Reply
Reply
post #229 of 339
7/8/07 at 7:53am

Re: Helmets

"Bill Sornson" <askme@ask.me> wrote:

> I see the opposite -- especially on here. People (like Frank,
> Flailor, JFT, can't remember the rest) who don't just argue against
> lids, they badger and belittle those who choose to wear them.

As you know (and have derided me for, for so-called inconsistency), I
wear bike helmets some fo the time when I ride. Most of the time in
fact, due to law, the competitive endeavor I'm in, and habit. But not
all the time -- didn't wear one yesterday but will today because of
where I'm going. (For years I wore a helmet every single time I rode
untill I read more about it here and in other places.)

So how can it possible be that I belittle people for simply choosing
to wear a helmet?

I criticize false information about the importance or effeciveness of
helmets and belittle people who argue irrationally and obnxiously
about it. Like you.
--
JT
****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************
Reply
Reply
post #230 of 339
7/8/07 at 7:59am

Re: Paramount

On Sun, 08 Jul 2007 01:41:48 -0500, Tim McNamara
<timmcn@bitstream.net> wrote:

>I am much more contentious in these discussions than I am in person,
>because it's a "tech" newsgroup. In real life, someone as argumentative
>as most of us are here would soon have no friends. I overlook many
>foibles in my friends and vice versa, for the sake of those friendships
>unless the foible is clearly going to cause harm.

For some topics, with friends of mine, if they start talking about
stuff I disagree with I say "Don't say that or I'll tell you why I
think you're wrong." But we have the discussion once or twice anyway.
Not repeatedly.

And there are some people who I simply don't hang around with because,
despite their otherwise being nice, I strongly disagree with some of
their beliefs despite them being nice to me.

No loss, I know far too many people and too many people think they are
sorta friends with me anyway.



--
JT
****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************
Reply
Reply
post #231 of 339
7/8/07 at 8:00am

Re: Helmets (was: Paramount)

On Sat, 7 Jul 2007 23:57:38 -0700, "Bill Sornson" <askme@ask.me>
wrote:

>Tim McNamara wrote:
>> In article <46904876$0$30606$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>,
>> "Bill Sornson" <askme@ask.me> wrote:

>>> Tell you what. Prove that a hammer has less impact on a table with
>>> no pad in place and I'll retract every word. Hell, I'll even stop
>>> wearing a lid! (Maybe.)
>>
>> Force = mass * acceleration.
>
>"Impact". Not "force". HTH!

Do you know what those words really mean?

--
JT
****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************
Reply
Reply
post #232 of 339
7/8/07 at 8:02am

Re: Helmets

On Sun, 08 Jul 2007 01:30:42 -0700, r15757@aol.com wrote:


>Anyway, you obviously don't ride without a helmet. If you did you
>would know that uninvited helmet lectures from strangers are not an
>unusual occurence. Kudos to you for biting your tongue when given the
>chance though. I have never seen or heard of anyone getting harassed
>for wearing a helmet.

I have heard of Americans riding bikes with helmets in places in which
doing so is rare being teased with comments such as "Do you crash a
lot?" But not the aggressive "Where's your helmet!?" stuff we get
here in the USA.
--
JT
****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************
Reply
Reply
post #233 of 339
7/8/07 at 8:19am

Re: Helmets

On Jul 7, 10:47 pm, Michael Press <rub...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> In article
> <timmcn-CA556F.20482007072...@news.iphouse.com>,
> Tim McNamara <tim...@bitstream.net> wrote:
>
> > In article <1183848228.785835.11...@o61g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>,
> > "andresm...@aol.com" <andresm...@aol.com> wrote:
> > > the skull, as you probably know, has no organic function. It simply
> > > protects the brain.
>
> > WTF? I guess you don't chew, talk, hear, smile or look around. This is
> > one of the most ludicrous statements I have read in r.b.t.
>
> I use my skull to keep out the bad ideas.
>
> --
> Michael Press

Maybe mine holds bad ideas in and keeps good ones out. I ought to stop
wearing my helmet. Maybe I'll crack it open and all the stupidity will
go out and some brilliance will sneak in.

Andres
Reply
Reply
post #234 of 339
7/8/07 at 9:46am

Re: Paramount

On Fri, 6 Jul 2007 08:34:12 -0700, Bill Sornson wrote:

(Note: injecting arguments about MHLs is a strawman
> technique unless the pro-lid person actually is in favor of them; can't
> recall even ONE being so.)

Your cohort Ozark is.
Reply
Reply
post #235 of 339
7/8/07 at 10:47am

Re: Helmets

John Forrest Tomlinson wrote:
> On Sat, 7 Jul 2007 20:26:46 -0700, "Bill Sornson" <askme@ask.me>
> wrote:
>
>> Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote:
>>> Bill Sornson wrote: {context removed; shock et surprise, n'est-ce pas?}
>>>> ...
>>>> So fine, ride without a lid. Who's stoppin' ya?
>>> In quite a few jurisdictions, the police would, due to the lies of the
>>> pro-helmet propagandists on the effectiveness of foam hats on
>>> preventing serious injury and death.
>>
>> So work against MHLs and stop attacking people who merely choose to wear
>> helmets.
>
> He's attacking people who say things about the efficacy of helmets
> that are not true. Those false statement play into the hands of the
> MHL crowd.

I think B. Sornson has me confused with someone else. When have I ever
attached someone for choosing to wear a helmet?

In fact, I normally wear a foam hat while riding an upright bicycle and
even on the 'bents [1], since an impact that would NOT cause brain
trauma may still produce a nasty scalp wound. I wish something like the
old "Skid Lid" was still being made, since I think it could actually
provide more real world protection (as opposed to the tests designed to
promote solid foam hats).

[1] Where I am much less likely to land on my head during a fall.

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
Reply
Reply
post #236 of 339
7/8/07 at 10:49am

Re: Helmets

Bill Sornson wrote:
> Tim McNamara wrote: {please excuse missing attributions}
>
>> I believe those hits would have hurt like hell. I also
>> believe that you might be well-served by reassessing your choice of
>> trails vis a vis your riding skills.
>
> Absurd. Technical mtb trails often cause even the best riders to crash.
> (Besides, this was long ago. I'm mostly roadie nowadays, and don't try some
> trail sections I once rode without hesitation.)...

If you are not bleeding somewhere at the end, it is not a proper MTB ride.

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
Reply
Reply
post #237 of 339
7/8/07 at 11:02am

Re: Helmets

carlfogel@comcast.net aka Carl Fogel wrote:
> ...
> (This is why tall chimneys break as they fall. They're not stiff
> enough to accelerate the upper part without breaking....

"Dear Carl" is confusing stiffness with strength. Older chimneys have
very low ductility [1] and tensile strength, and will fail in tension at
a weak point in the area where the bending moment is being applied.

The stiffness of the structure is not relevant in this case.

Never forget P/A + My/I! [2]

[1] Compared to a modern reinforced concrete structure that will have a
failure mode of the reinforcing steel yielding in tension.
[2] This is the "tech" group, after all.

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
Reply
Reply
post #238 of 339
7/8/07 at 11:08am

Re: Helmets (was: Paramount)

John Forrest Tomlinson wrote:
> On Sat, 7 Jul 2007 23:57:38 -0700, "Bill Sornson" <askme@ask.me>
> wrote:
>
>> Tim McNamara wrote:
>>> In article <46904876$0$30606$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>,
>>> "Bill Sornson" <askme@ask.me> wrote:
>
>>>> Tell you what. Prove that a hammer has less impact on a table with
>>>> no pad in place and I'll retract every word. Hell, I'll even stop
>>>> wearing a lid! (Maybe.)
>>> Force = mass * acceleration.
>> "Impact". Not "force". HTH!
>
> Do you know what those words really mean?

21st Century USians use "impact" when they can not figure out the
difference between "affect" and "effect".

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful


--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
Reply
Reply
post #239 of 339
7/8/07 at 11:14am

Re: Paramount

J. Taylor wrote:
> On Fri, 6 Jul 2007 08:34:12 -0700, Bill Sornson wrote:
>
> (Note: injecting arguments about MHLs is a strawman
>> technique unless the pro-lid person actually is in favor of them; can't
>> recall even ONE being so.)
>
> Your cohort Ozark is.

Welcome Back! Sorni was missing you.

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful


--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
Reply
Reply
post #240 of 339
7/8/07 at 11:57am

Re: Helmets

Ozark Bicycle wrote:
> On Jul 5, 8:10 pm, Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote:
>> On Jul 5, 6:31 pm, John Forrest Tomlinson wrote:
>>
>>> How about some reality? You're at least as likely to die in a car so
>>> why don't you wear a helmet in a car? I'm asking you seriously? Why
>>> don't you?
>>> Tens of thousands of people are dying in cars every year in the US and
>>> a helmet may help. Do you advocate they wear one? And if not, why
>>> not?
>>> I'm not saying you should -- I'm just asking. Why or why not? And if
>>> not, what makes cycling so special that it warrants extra protection?
>>> These are simple questions.
>> HOT DOG! WE HAVE A WEINER!
>>
>> It's not a real helmet flame war until this point is brought up.
>>
>
> All we need now is that flaming ass from Halifax, and the picture will
> be complete.

ASK AND YE SHALL RECEIVE!

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful


--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Cycling Equipment
Cycling Forums › Forums › Bikes › Cycling Equipment › Paramount