On Sep 5, 6:38 pm, "Greens" <
[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
> > You cannot argue base jumping risk versus bicycle risk
> > until you can quote per hour numbers for valid
> > comparison. Quoting raw numbers is misleading.
>
>
> I can't get those figures until somebody does a study using those
> parameters. They won't do the study until enough people get killed that it's
> worth studying.
>
> Can't you figure this out for yourself. Not enough people get killed base
> jumping for them to do studies and therefore it's not that dangerous. It
> just looks dangerous and it's probably scary as hell.
"Greens" is, yet again, posting from a position of ignorance.
Here's a link to a table of risks per hour.
http://www.magma.ca/~ocbc/comparat.html
Note that the most dangerous activity listed is skydiving, at 128
fatalities per hour of participation. Cycling is rated at 0.26
fatalities per hour.
Base jumping is reckoned to be much more dangerous than ordinary
skydiving, but I think we can use 128 fatalities per hour as a very
conservative estimate. Obviously, its danger completely eclipses the
tiny danger of bicycling, by a 500-to-1 margin.
Not that there's much point to this. The anonymous "Greens" is
absolutely intent on ignoring any and all data, and on mocking anyone
who knows more than he does - which, it seems, is a huge number of
people.
I'm going to suggest, once again, that "Greens" simply give up
cycling. It's something he's afraid of, something he's not very good
at, and something he's hurting by his continued whining.
I'm also going to suggest he stop reading these discussions. He's
obviously not willing to learn anything, and I think we've reached the
point where even the lurkers have decided he's a complete waste of
time.
"Greens," if you want to discuss something more substantial than your
phobias and your weird videos, let me know. Until then, I'm hoping to
bow out.
Oh, and good luck on designing your odd little gizmo. Let us know
when you've got it working. ;-)
- Frank Krygowski
