| |
Main
Date: 04 Aug 2007 01:30:53
From: Tom Keats
Subject: Re: Can you make it to the market on a bike?
|
> Krygowski has been on my case for decades for not agreeing with
> his idiotic position on bicycle helmets (he objects to my opinion
> that wearing one is a reaonable choice one might make). He's been
> on a vendetta ever since.
>
> Keats, of course, is another one of these nuts: see
> message ID <lv1qtc.s4b.ln@bud.garden.local> where he says:
>
> I'm more inclined to the opinion that the more vehement
> proponents of MHLs are car drivers who feel uncomfortable
> sharing the streets and roads with bicyclists, because they
> simply don't understand cycling, and nothing will un-convince
> them that riding bicycles in traffic is daredevilry. If they
> see us 'daredevil cyclists' (I say that with tongue in cheek)
> wearing helmets, those drivers' comfort levels are somewhat
> increased. So they want /all/ cyclists to wear helmets.
>
Thank you. I still maintain that position.
We cyclists are compelled to wear helmets in MHL jurisdictions
so drivers near us can continue to drive like idiots while
pretending that we cyclists are impediments to the general
traffic flow.
MHLs are all about the convenience of drivers. Even those
who run-over little 9 year old girls in California or wherever.
Forcing cyclists to wear helmets misplaces the onus of care.
Anyways, back to La Brea for you.
And fuck off with your cowardly trying to futz the headers
in your half-assedly vain attempt to prevent replies.
The best way to deal with a Tar Baby is to wrap it up in
burlap, and carry it off to some environmentally-neutral
place, like a granite quarry, where it can't do any harm.
And then just leave it alone.
Buh-bye.
--
Nothing is safe from me.
I'm really at:
tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca
|
|
| |
Date: 04 Aug 2007 08:41:43
From: Bill Z.
Subject: Re: Can you make it to the market on a bike?
|
tkeats2005@hotmail.com (Tom Keats) writes:
>
> Anyways, back to La Brea for you.
> And fuck off with your cowardly trying to futz the headers
> in your half-assedly vain attempt to prevent replies.
Sorry for a second reply. I found the post you are talking about on
Google, and my server came back with old posts.The one you claimed to
try to reply to has a message ID of
<873ayzn6jx.fsf@nospam.pacbell.net > (it has the text you quoted in
it). Krygowksi posted a message whose ID is
<1186239186.493691.251970@q3g2000prf.googlegroups.com >, and that was a
reply to that same message.
It is impossible for anyone to "futz the headers" in such a way that
you cannot reply to a post but someone else can.
So, we can conclude that your "cowardly trying to futz the headers"
is simply a bald-faced lie of yours that now has been completely
discredited.
And that's the trouble with the lot of you. Your thing about
bike lanes, helmets, or whatever is so consuming that you will do
anything, no matter how low, to further it. It is really pathetic.
--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB
|
| | |
Date: 04 Aug 2007 10:43:34
From: Tom \Johnny_Sunset\ Sherman
Subject: Re: Can you make it to the market on a bike?
|
Bill Zaumen wrote:
> ...
> And that's the trouble with the lot of you. Your thing about
> bike lanes, helmets, or whatever is so consuming that you will do
> anything, no matter how low, to further it. It is really pathetic.
butbutbut, we are right about these issues, so why not be passionate
when someone insists on posting misinformation?
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
|
| | | |
Date: 04 Aug 2007 14:45:56
From: Bill Z.
Subject: Re: Can you make it to the market on a bike?
|
"Tom \"Johnny_Sunset\" Sherman" <sunsetss0003@invalida.com > writes:
> Bill Zaumen wrote:
> > ...
> > And that's the trouble with the lot of you. Your thing about
> > bike lanes, helmets, or whatever is so consuming that you will do
> > anything, no matter how low, to further it. It is really pathetic.
>
> butbutbut, we are right about these issues, so why not be passionate
> when someone insists on posting misinformation?
No, you are wrong about them.
--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB
|
| | | | |
Date: 04 Aug 2007 17:08:01
From: Tom \Johnny Sunset\ Sherman
Subject: Re: Can you make it to the market on a bike?
|
Bill Zaumen wrote:
> "Tom \"Johnny_Sunset\" Sherman" <sunsetss0003@invalida.com> writes:
>
>> Bill Zaumen wrote:
>>> ...
>>> And that's the trouble with the lot of you. Your thing about
>>> bike lanes, helmets, or whatever is so consuming that you will do
>>> anything, no matter how low, to further it. It is really pathetic.
>> butbutbut, we are right about these issues, so why not be passionate
>> when someone insists on posting misinformation?
>
> No, you are wrong about them.
Not in the world outside Silicon/Silly Cone Valley we are not, but
Zaumen has his mind made up and is not about to let it be changed by
real world experience.
My experience has been that I can ride on most streets/roads like a
vehicular cyclist without problems. When in the ignorance of early
adulthood I tried using bike lanes and bike paths, I was frustrated by
the restrictions imposed by motorist behavior and severely scared at how
the bike lanes and paths put me in the path of the motor vehicles when
they were not expecting it.
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
|
| | | | | |
Date: 04 Aug 2007 17:07:43
From: Bill Z.
Subject: Re: Can you make it to the market on a bike?
|
"Tom \"Johnny Sunset\" Sherman" <sunsetss0003@iinvalid.com > writes:
> Bill Zaumen wrote:
> > "Tom \"Johnny_Sunset\" Sherman" <sunsetss0003@invalida.com> writes:
> >
> >> Bill Zaumen wrote:
> >>> ...
> >>> And that's the trouble with the lot of you. Your thing about
> >>> bike lanes, helmets, or whatever is so consuming that you will do
> >>> anything, no matter how low, to further it. It is really pathetic.
> >> butbutbut, we are right about these issues, so why not be passionate
> >> when someone insists on posting misinformation?
> > No, you are wrong about them.
>
> Not in the world outside Silicon/Silly Cone Valley we are not, but
> Zaumen has his mind made up and is not about to let it be changed by
> real world experience.
Silicon Valley *is* part of the real world, your silly name calling
notwithstanding. We get plenty of "real world" experience in a region
with some of the worst congestion in the U.S.
> My experience has been that I can ride on most streets/roads like a
> vehicular cyclist without problems. When in the ignorance of early
> adulthood I tried using bike lanes and bike paths, I was frustrated by
> the restrictions imposed by motorist behavior and severely scared at
> how the bike lanes and paths put me in the path of the motor vehicles
> when they were not expecting it.
Oh, so you were a young, inexerpienced cyclist at one point and had
problems that cleared up when you had more experience, but for some
reason you attributed your former problems to bike lanes rather than
to your lack of experience.
--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 05 Aug 2007 11:59:47
From: Just zis Guy, you know?
Subject: Re: Can you make it to the market on a bike?
|
On 04 Aug 2007 17:07:43 -0700, nobody@nospam.pacbell.net (Bill Z.)
said in <87ejiin8s0.fsf@nospam.pacbell.net >:
>so you were a young, inexerpienced cyclist at one point and had
>problems that cleared up when you had more experience, but for some
>reason you attributed your former problems to bike lanes rather than
>to your lack of experience.
What always amuses me about your posts, Bill, is that you make
comments like this without spotting the self-evident irony. See how
Tome points out what happened as he became a more experienced and
skilful cyclist? He took to not using cycle "facilities", just as
many other experienced cyclists choose to avoid them, and for the
same reasons: they fix a problem which is largely illusory (danger
from same direction traffic) at the expense of increasing a danger
which absolutely is not (danger at junctions and from opposing
traffic).
I give you credit, though, for sticking to your guns for so very
long in the face of so very many arguments from people who are so
very obviously vastly better informed than you; like all true
zealots, your instinctive rejection of any fact which contradicts
your pre-existing prejudices is more a statement of the strength of
your faith than an attempt at reasoned argument. It is just a pity
that you are devoting so much energy to preaching a gospel which is
at best completely irrelevant (better cycle skills is the way to
live longer, not using this or that product or this or that kind of
facility) and at worst actively dangerous, as proven by research
figures previously cited.
Your assertion of dogma as fact is amusing but unproductive, based
as appears to be on some idealised and genericised view of the
roadscape, and being written wholly from the perspective of someone
who it seems is actively hostile to the idea of following up the
evidence.
Having ridden my bike in a small number of countries and a much
larger number of locations within those countries, I would say that
it is very rarely prudent to gainsay local knowledge, such as that
offered by Tom here. Indeed, following the most experienced local
cyclist you can find is pretty much guaranteed to be good advice
everywhere in the world. And just about everyone here but you seems
to recognise that. Was it you who told me as an absolute fact that
no roads are as narrow as the ones I ride on, or was it some other
idiot? I can no longer remember. All I can remember is the hours
of hilarity you provided back then, and apparently continue to
provide now.
Keep up the comedy, Bill, it's better to waste your idiocies here
where they are so trivially easily rebutted than to take them into
the real world where they might do genuine harm. Above all, never
ever feel tempted to get a life - Usenet needs you to keep from
degenerating into rational discussion. That would never do.
Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk
85% of helmet statistics are made up, 69% of them at CHS, Puget Sound
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 06 Aug 2007 23:22:23
From: Tom Keats
Subject: Re: Can you make it to the market on a bike?
|
In article <UDQti.10213$S91.7123@newsfe7-win.ntli.net >,
Martin Dann <martin.dann@virgin.net > writes:
> Bill Z. wrote:
>> "Tom \"Johnny Sunset\" Sherman" <sunsetss0003@invailid.com> writes:
>>
>>> LOL! ;)
>>
>> As Tom Sherman, having nothing to say, tries to help "Guy" get the
>> troll of the month award.
>
> I think that one has already been awarded to Bill Z. for
> the second month running.
So far in this current discussion, /nobody/ has said
anything to actually promote the cause of bicycling.
If awards are to be given, shouldn't they be for
positively promoting bicycling in a manner that
doesn't make us all look like a bunch of asses?
I see mostly a silly clash of egos, vainly pitting
themselves against the inexorable gravitational pull
of a Tar Baby from which no light escapes.
cheers,
Tom
--
Nothing is safe from me.
I'm really at:
tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca
|
| | | | | | | | |
Date: 13 Aug 2007 20:23:02
From: Dane Buson
Subject: Re: Can you make it to the market on a bike?
|
In rec.bicycles.misc Tom Keats <tkeats2005@hotmail.com > wrote:
>
> So far in this current discussion, /nobody/ has said
> anything to actually promote the cause of bicycling.
>
> If awards are to be given, shouldn't they be for
> positively promoting bicycling in a manner that
> doesn't make us all look like a bunch of asses?
Well, on topic for the original topic of the thread; I went shopping
earlier on my bicycle for some fresh fruit and veggies down at my
favorite Asian grocer. [1] I also hit the hardware store to return a
drill extension that died about 5 minutes after I started using it
(jamming my spade bit in it too :-(
The stop at the auto shop was fruitless though. They were out of the
cheaper battery chargers, so I'll try again tomorrow. No real rush I
suppose, I probably won't need the car again until I go to pick up the
wife and kids from the airport at the end of the month.
> I see mostly a silly clash of egos, vainly pitting
> themselves against the inexorable gravitational pull
> of a Tar Baby from which no light escapes.
Zaumen has been in my killfile for so long, I almost forgot his name and
MO. DimQuijote has nymshifted a few times, so I'm reminded every now
and again what a deluded cretin he is.
[1] Makings for Hummus, Morrocan Chickpea Salad, red bells and cucumber
for crudite. I might make a big pot of Chana Dal, but I haven't
decided if I want to go to the trouble yet.
--
Dane Buson - sigdane@unixbigots.org
The Buddha, the Godhead, resides quite as comfortably in the circuits of a
digital computer or the gears of a cycle transmission as he does at the top
of a mountain or in the petals of a flower. To think otherwise is to demean
the Buddha -- which is to demean oneself.
-- Robert Pirsig, "Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance"
|
| | | | | | | | | |
Date: 24 Aug 2007 07:09:12
From: Claire Petersky
Subject: Re: Can you make it to the market on a bike?
|
"Dane Buson" <dane@unseen.edu > wrote in message
news:mpj7p4-b07.ln1@curare.zuvembi.homelinux.org...
> Well, on topic for the original topic of the thread; I went shopping
> earlier on my bicycle for some fresh fruit and veggies down at my
> favorite Asian grocer. [1]
> [1] Makings for Hummus, Morrocan Chickpea Salad, red bells and cucumber
> for crudite. I might make a big pot of Chana Dal, but I haven't
> decided if I want to go to the trouble yet.
Hey Dane, my husband's out of town - with your wife and kidlets out of town
too, can me and the girls come over for dinner?
--
Warm Regards,
Claire Petersky
http://www.bicyclemeditations.org/
See the books I've set free at: http://bookcrossing.com/referral/Cpetersky
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 04 Sep 2007 09:21:33
From: Dane Buson
Subject: Re: Can you make it to the market on a bike?
|
In rec.bicycles.misc Claire Petersky <cpetersky@mouse-potato.com > wrote:
> "Dane Buson" <dane@unseen.edu> wrote in message
> news:mpj7p4-b07.ln1@curare.zuvembi.homelinux.org...
>
>> Well, on topic for the original topic of the thread; I went shopping
>> earlier on my bicycle for some fresh fruit and veggies down at my
>> favorite Asian grocer. [1]
>
>> [1] Makings for Hummus, Morrocan Chickpea Salad, red bells and cucumber
>> for crudite. I might make a big pot of Chana Dal, but I haven't
>> decided if I want to go to the trouble yet.
>
> Hey Dane, my husband's out of town - with your wife and kidlets out of town
> too, can me and the girls come over for dinner?
Doh! I've been busy doing things about the house and working on various
projects. This is the first time I've read rbm for a couple weeks. You
would have been more than welcome.
--
Dane Buson - sigdane@unixbigots.org
In the beginning there was data. The data was without form and
null, and darkness was upon the face of the console; and the Spirit of
IBM was moving over the face of the market. And DEC said, "Let there
be registers"; and there were registers. And DEC saw that they
carried; and DEC separated the data from the instructions. DEC called
the data Stack, and the instructions they called Code. And there was
evening and there was morning, one interrupt.
-- Rico Tudor, "The Story of Creation or, The Myth of Urk"
|
| | | | | | | | |
Date: 07 Aug 2007 18:27:32
From: Bill Z.
Subject: Re: Can you make it to the market on a bike?
|
tkeats2005@hotmail.com (Tom Keats) writes:
> In article <UDQti.10213$S91.7123@newsfe7-win.ntli.net>,
> Martin Dann <martin.dann@virgin.net> writes:
>
> So far in this current discussion, /nobody/ has said
> anything to actually promote the cause of bicycling.
WHich includes you in particular.
> I see mostly a silly clash of egos, vainly pitting themselves
> against the inexorable gravitational pull of a Tar Baby from which
> no light escapes.
I see a bunch of babies who whine about helmets and bike lanes and
call anyone who thinks their whines are silly whines all sorts of
names.
--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 06 Aug 2007 19:00:52
From: Tom Keats
Subject: Re: Can you make it to the market on a bike?
|
In article <46b7c598$0$16403$88260bb3@free.teranews.com >,
"Tom \"Johnny Sunset\" Sherman" <sunsetss0003@invailid.com > writes:
> Bill Zaumen wrote:
>> "Tom \"Johnny Sunset\" Sherman" <sunsetss0003@invailid.com> writes:
>>
>>> LOL! ;)
>>
>> As Tom Sherman, having nothing to say, tries to help "Guy" get the
>> troll of the month award.
>
> Zaumen is a bike lane and helmet fundamentalist - ain't going to change
> his mind with reality!
Tar-Baby ain't sayin' nuthin',
and Brer Fox, he just lay low.
cheers,
Tom
--
Nothing is safe from me.
I'm really at:
tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca
|
| | | | | | | | |
Date: 07 Aug 2007 04:26:34
From: Bill Z.
Subject: Re: Can you make it to the market on a bike?
|
tkeats2005@hotmail.com (Tom Keats) writes:
> In article <46b7c598$0$16403$88260bb3@free.teranews.com>,
> "Tom \"Johnny Sunset\" Sherman" <sunsetss0003@invailid.com> writes:
> > Bill Zaumen wrote:
> >> "Tom \"Johnny Sunset\" Sherman" <sunsetss0003@invailid.com> writes:
> >>
> >>> LOL! ;)
> >>
> >> As Tom Sherman, having nothing to say, tries to help "Guy" get the
> >> troll of the month award.
> >
> > Zaumen is a bike lane and helmet fundamentalist - ain't going to change
> > his mind with reality!
>
> Tar-Baby ain't sayin' nuthin',
> and Brer Fox, he just lay low.
Are both of you practicing so you'll fit in at a trailer park?
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 05 Aug 2007 13:26:33
From: Bill Z.
Subject: Re: Can you make it to the market on a bike?
|
"Just zis Guy, you know?" <uce@ftc.gov > writes:
> On 04 Aug 2007 17:07:43 -0700, nobody@nospam.pacbell.net (Bill Z.)
> said in <87ejiin8s0.fsf@nospam.pacbell.net>:
>
> >so you were a young, inexerpienced cyclist at one point and had
> >problems that cleared up when you had more experience, but for some
> >reason you attributed your former problems to bike lanes rather than
> >to your lack of experience.
>
> What always amuses me about your posts, Bill, is that you make
> comments like this without spotting the self-evident irony.
What's always amusing about you anti-bikelane fanatics is how you
act like a bull in a china shop whenever anyone doesn't disparage
bike lanes. :-)
> See how Tome points out what happened as he became a more
> experienced and skilful cyclist? He took to not using cycle
> "facilities", just as many other experienced cyclists choose to
> avoid them, and for the same reasons: they fix a problem which is
> largely illusory (danger from same direction traffic) at the expense
> of increasing a danger which absolutely is not (danger at junctions
> and from opposing traffic).
Nope, he merely developed the skills needed to ride safely in traffic,
and then got some sort of anti-bike lane religion, possibly from reading
the idiotic rants about bike lanes in _Effective Cycling_ (which has
good advise about how to ride a bike and complete rubbish when the
author gets onto his various pet peeves) or similar sources.
> I give you credit, though, for sticking to your guns for so very
> long in the face of so very many arguments from people who are so
> very obviously vastly better informed than you; like all true
> zealots, your instinctive rejection of any fact which contradicts
> your pre-existing prejudices is more a statement of the strength of
> your faith than an attempt at reasoned argument.
What a friggin liar you are! All I said about bike lanes is that ones
conforming to the latest design standards are pretty much harmless.
That's hardly being a "zealot" and any sensible person should know
that. Regarding sidewaks, I provided a citation to a study that
appeared in a peer-reviewed journal that showed (a) an increased risk
for all users of 1.8 compared to those riding on the road in the same
direction as traffic, and a far lower increase (1.2 to 1.3) for those
riding on the sidewalk in the same direction as traffic. And that was
posted in response to a claim by Krygwoski that every study he knew of
showed a manyfold increase in risk (i.e, at least a factor of 2 and
probably higher).
Did it occur to you that such data shows that most people riding on
a sidewalk are simply proceding at an appropriate speed and showing
due care, but are not aware of the risks associated with wrong-way
riding on a sidewalk? I happen to live in the same area where this
research was done and am familiar with all the roads in question.
Most people who ride bikes on the sidewalks go fairly slowly, but
you also have a few "speed demons" (typically teenage boys with the
usual hormone problems, and the "over 18" group includes a fair
number of college students who ride bikes pretty much the same way
that they did in high school, excluding the wheelies and other
stunts).
> It is just a pity that you are devoting so much energy to preaching
> a gospel which is at best completely irrelevant (better cycle skills
> is the way to live longer, not using this or that product or this or
> that kind of facility) and at worst actively dangerous, as proven by
> research figures previously cited.
Another lie as I haven't been preaching anything and all the
preaching, which mostly seems to be of the fire and brimstone variety,
is coming from your side of the argument.
> Your assertion of dogma as fact is amusing but unproductive, based
> as appears to be on some idealised and genericised view of the
> roadscape, and being written wholly from the perspective of someone
> who it seems is actively hostile to the idea of following up the
> evidence.
ROTFLMAO! Are you really that stupid? Regarding sidewalks, I gave
you a citation to a peer reviewed article published in the ITE Journal
(ITE is the Institute of Transportation Engineers), and backed up what
I was saying with real data. Regarding bike lanes, I merely stated
that they are harmless and the the ones in my area are clear of
debris. When you look at the requirements in the CVC and the current
design standards, and when you put a normal width traffic lane next to
a bike lane, cyclists end up being able to ride where an expert would
ride if there were no bike lane at all - about 14 feet from the
traffic lane's stripe (on its left side). In _Effective Cycling_,
Forester even mentions 14 feet explicitly as the nominal distance from
a lane stripe you would ride at in a wide outside lane when going at
less than the speed of traffic.
So, the argument regarding bike lanes amounts to showing that the bike
lane has no effect on where you would ride anyway, so it doesn't cause
a problem. And you have the nerve to call that "dogma"? Meanwhile, the
anti-bike lane fanatics are pushing arguments about perceptions, "the
back of the bus", and using various other loaded language, ethnic
insults and more or less treating bike lanes as the work of the devil
instead of merely being one design option that a transportation engineer
might use. So who has "religiion" should be obvious and it is
certainly not me.
> Having ridden my bike in a small number of countries and a much
> larger number of locations within those countries, I would say that
> it is very rarely prudent to gainsay local knowledge, such as that
> offered by Tom here.
As you ignore the "local knowledge" that I have with well designed
bike lanes that are competely harmless for experts and that seem
to make novices more comfortable.
<snip of similar nonsense from this "guy" troll >
> Keep up the comedy, Bill, it's better to waste your idiocies here
> where they are so trivially easily rebutted than to take them into
> the real world where they might do genuine harm. Above all, never
> ever feel tempted to get a life - Usenet needs you to keep from
> degenerating into rational discussion. That would never do.
The real comedy, however, is you when you start bathering, as you
have been here.
> May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
> http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk
>
> 85% of helmet statistics are made up, 69% of them at CHS, Puget Sound
(And as should be obvious, this character is also an anti-helmet nut,
as his past posts clearly show).
--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB
|
| | | | | | | | |
Date: 05 Aug 2007 23:06:28
From: Just zis Guy, you know?
Subject: Re: Can you make it to the market on a bike?
|
On 05 Aug 2007 13:26:33 -0700, nobody@nospam.pacbell.net (Bill Z.)
said in <874pjdvibq.fsf@nospam.pacbell.net >:
>What's always amusing about you anti-bikelane fanatics is how you
>act like a bull in a china shop whenever anyone doesn't disparage
>bike lanes. :-)
Well hell you just missed the point completely. As always.
See, there are essentially two kinds of advice on offer here.
Recently, I had the render come off a wall in my house. I got the
same two kinds of advice there. There was the "far too difficult,
uch too hazardous, don't even think of doing it yourself, I never
have and never would" kind of advice - what one might call Zaumen
advice, in this context - and there was the good, practical kind of
advice: how to render and plaster a wall, how to mix the mortar and
the gypsum, how to handle the materials, and how big a job you
should be prepared to tackel without calling for the marines.
Unsurprisingly, I found the second type of advice much more helpful.
Same here. You advocate something based on the fact that you would
not want to do the alternative. Your choice, you can stick to the
bike facilities if you like. Me, I make a choice based on the local
conditions, local knowledge, and the best advice and evidence I can
find from people who have actully ridden in the area. Sure, I could
listen to people like you, but I'd rather listen to people who are
less consistent in disagreeing with everybody who actually shows
some sign of actually knowing which way is up.
I will continue to treat your "advice" as the comedy it undoubtedly
is right up to the time I become convinced that you could find your
arse with both hands and a map. Looking back over the last couple
of months, that time is getting firther away, not closer.
However, since you are the canonical example of the pig who enjoys
it, I think I'll leave you to those who have slightly more time to
deal with wilful clue-evaders like you.
Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk
85% of helmet statistics are made up, 69% of them at CHS, Puget Sound
|
| | | | | | | | | |
Date: 05 Aug 2007 22:32:32
From: Bill Z.
Subject: Re: Can you make it to the market on a bike?
|
"Just zis Guy, you know?" <uce@ftc.gov > writes:
> On 05 Aug 2007 13:26:33 -0700, nobody@nospam.pacbell.net (Bill Z.)
> said in <874pjdvibq.fsf@nospam.pacbell.net>:
>
> >What's always amusing about you anti-bikelane fanatics is how you
> >act like a bull in a china shop whenever anyone doesn't disparage
> >bike lanes. :-)
>
> Well hell you just missed the point completely. As always.
> See, there are essentially two kinds of advice on offer here.
<snip >
Guy, you are a mindless troll, as previous discussions with you have
shown. I'm simply going to ignore your red herrings, misstatments,
and other musings because all you do is run around in circles posting
the same unsubstantiated garbage over and over.
--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB
|
| | | | | | | | |
Date: 05 Aug 2007 15:52:43
From: Tom \Johnny Sunset\ Sherman
Subject: Re: Can you make it to the market on a bike?
|
Bill Zaumen wrote:
> "Just zis Guy, you know?" <uce@ftc.gov> writes:
>
>> On 04 Aug 2007 17:07:43 -0700, nobody@nospam.pacbell.net (Bill Z.)
>> said in <87ejiin8s0.fsf@nospam.pacbell.net>:
>>
>>> so you were a young, inexerpienced cyclist at one point and had
>>> problems that cleared up when you had more experience, but for some
>>> reason you attributed your former problems to bike lanes rather than
>>> to your lack of experience.
>> What always amuses me about your posts, Bill, is that you make
>> comments like this without spotting the self-evident irony.
>
> What's always amusing about you anti-bikelane fanatics is how you
> act like a bull in a china shop whenever anyone doesn't disparage
> bike lanes. :-)
>
>> See how Tom[e] points out what happened as he became a more
>> experienced and skilful cyclist? He took to not using cycle
>> "facilities", just as many other experienced cyclists choose to
>> avoid them, and for the same reasons: they fix a problem which is
>> largely illusory (danger from same direction traffic) at the expense
>> of increasing a danger which absolutely is not (danger at junctions
>> and from opposing traffic).
>
> Nope, he merely developed the skills needed to ride safely in traffic,
> and then got some sort of anti-bike lane religion, possibly from reading
> the idiotic rants about bike lanes in _Effective Cycling_ (which has
> good advise about how to ride a bike and complete rubbish when the
> author gets onto his various pet peeves) or similar sources....
Oops, wrong again, Zaumen.
> <snip of similar nonsense from this "guy" troll >
Since when has Guy Chapman been a troll?
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
|
| | | | | | | | | |
Date: 05 Aug 2007 14:41:13
From: Bill Z.
Subject: Re: Can you make it to the market on a bike?
|
"Tom \"Johnny Sunset\" Sherman" <sunsetss0003@invailid.com > writes:
> Bill Zaumen wrote:
> > "Just zis Guy, you know?" <uce@ftc.gov> writes:
> >
> >> On 04 Aug 2007 17:07:43 -0700, nobody@nospam.pacbell.net (Bill Z.)
> >> said in <87ejiin8s0.fsf@nospam.pacbell.net>:
>
> Oops, wrong again, Zaumen.
>
No, right as usual (which is why you were unable to make a substantive
comment).
> Since when has Guy Chapman been a troll?
Ever since his first post on the subject of bicycle helmets. It's
funny how the rabidly anti-bikelane crowd seems to have som many
members in common with the rabidly anti-helmet crowd, but maybe
earlier for all I know. :-)
--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 05 Aug 2007 16:50:44
From: Tom \Johnny Sunset\ Sherman
Subject: Re: Can you make it to the market on a bike?
|
Bill Zaumen wrote:
> "Tom \"Johnny Sunset\" Sherman" <sunsetss0003@invailid.com> writes:
>
>> Bill Zaumen wrote:
>>> "Just zis Guy, you know?" <uce@ftc.gov> writes:
>>>
>>>> On 04 Aug 2007 17:07:43 -0700, nobody@nospam.pacbell.net (Bill Z.)
>>>> said in <87ejiin8s0.fsf@nospam.pacbell.net>:
>> Oops, wrong again, Zaumen.
>>
> No, right as usual (which is why you were unable to make a substantive
> comment).
So now Zaumen knows my life experience better than I do?
>> Since when has Guy Chapman been a troll?
>
> Ever since his first post on the subject of bicycle helmets. It's
> funny how the rabidly anti-bikelane crowd seems to have so[] many
> members in common with the rabidly anti-helmet crowd, but maybe
> earlier for all I know. :-)
Both bike-lanes and h*lm*ts are promoted by either the ignorant or those
who believe cyclists are second class road users.
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
|
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 05 Aug 2007 22:11:05
From: Bill Z.
Subject: Re: Can you make it to the market on a bike?
|
"Tom \"Johnny Sunset\" Sherman" <sunsetss0003@invailid.com > writes:
> Bill Zaumen wrote:
> > "Tom \"Johnny Sunset\" Sherman" <sunsetss0003@invailid.com> writes:
> >
> >> Bill Zaumen wrote:
> >>> "Just zis Guy, you know?" <uce@ftc.gov> writes:
> >>>
> >>>> On 04 Aug 2007 17:07:43 -0700, nobody@nospam.pacbell.net (Bill Z.)
> >>>> said in <87ejiin8s0.fsf@nospam.pacbell.net>:
> >> Oops, wrong again, Zaumen.
> >>
> > No, right as usual (which is why you were unable to make a substantive
> > comment).
>
> So now Zaumen knows my life experience better than I do?
Another lie - I never talked about your "life experience" in general,
and you yourself provided all the other information. I merely
pointed out that your current hostility against bike lanes is more
or less a delusion.
> >> Since when has Guy Chapman been a troll?
> > Ever since his first post on the subject of bicycle helmets. It's
> > funny how the rabidly anti-bikelane crowd seems to have so[] many
> > members in common with the rabidly anti-helmet crowd, but maybe
> > earlier for all I know. :-)
>
> Both bike-lanes and h*lm*ts are promoted by either the ignorant or
> those who believe cyclists are second class road users.
ROTFLMAO. So you are an anti-helmet nut too! It figures.
And your crowd's de facto definition of "promote" seems to
conflict with the dictionary one as they accuse people of
"promoting" things for even mildly non-negative statements
about those things.
--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 05 Aug 2007 18:29:29
From: Tom \Johnny Sunset\ Sherman
Subject: Re: Can you make it to the market on a bike?
|
Bill Zaumen wrote:
> "Tom \"Johnny Sunset\" Sherman" <sunsetss0003@invailid.com> writes:
>
>> Bill Zaumen wrote:
>>> "Tom \"Johnny Sunset\" Sherman" <sunsetss0003@invailid.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> Bill Zaumen wrote:
>>>>> "Just zis Guy, you know?" <uce@ftc.gov> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 04 Aug 2007 17:07:43 -0700, nobody@nospam.pacbell.net (Bill Z.)
>>>>>> said in <87ejiin8s0.fsf@nospam.pacbell.net>:
>>>> Oops, wrong again, Zaumen.
>>>>
>>> No, right as usual (which is why you were unable to make a substantive
>>> comment).
>> So now Zaumen knows my life experience better than I do?
>
> Another lie - I never talked about your "life experience" in general,
> and you yourself provided all the other information. I merely
> pointed out that your current hostility against bike lanes is more
> or less a delusion.
No Zaumen, you speculated that I "then got some sort of anti-bike lane
religion, possibly from reading the idiotic rants about bike lanes in
_Effective Cycling_ (which has good advise about how to ride a bike and
complete rubbish when the author gets onto his various pet peeves) or
similar sources." I did not read "Effective Cycling" until developing
the dislike of bicycle "farcilities" (sic).
>>>> Since when has Guy Chapman been a troll?
>>> Ever since his first post on the subject of bicycle helmets. It's
>>> funny how the rabidly anti-bikelane crowd seems to have so[] many
>>> members in common with the rabidly anti-helmet crowd, but maybe
>>> earlier for all I know. :-)
>> Both bike-lanes and h*lm*ts are promoted by either the ignorant or
>> those who believe cyclists are second class road users.
>
> ROTFLMAO. So you are an anti-helmet nut too! It figures.
> And your crowd's de facto definition of "promote" seems to
> conflict with the dictionary one as they accuse people of
> "promoting" things for even mildly non-negative statements
> about those things.
Please provide citations to any CREDIBLE studies that show that bicycle
h*lm*ts are effective in reducing serious head injuries and/or deaths
resulting from serious head injuries.
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 06 Aug 2007 03:55:57
From: Bill Z.
Subject: Re: Can you make it to the market on a bike?
|
"Tom \"Johnny Sunset\" Sherman" <sunsetss0003@invailid.com > writes:
> Bill Zaumen wrote:
> > "Tom \"Johnny Sunset\" Sherman" <sunsetss0003@invailid.com> writes:
> >
> >> Bill Zaumen wrote:
> >>> "Tom \"Johnny Sunset\" Sherman" <sunsetss0003@invailid.com> writes:
> >>>
> >>>> Bill Zaumen wrote:
> >>>>> "Just zis Guy, you know?" <uce@ftc.gov> writes:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> On 04 Aug 2007 17:07:43 -0700, nobody@nospam.pacbell.net (Bill Z.)
> >>>>>> said in <87ejiin8s0.fsf@nospam.pacbell.net>:
> >>>> Oops, wrong again, Zaumen.
> >>>>
> >>> No, right as usual (which is why you were unable to make a substantive
> >>> comment).
> >> So now Zaumen knows my life experience better than I do?
> > Another lie - I never talked about your "life experience" in general,
> > and you yourself provided all the other information. I merely
> > pointed out that your current hostility against bike lanes is more
> > or less a delusion.
>
> No Zaumen, you speculated that I "then got some sort of anti-bike lane
> religion, possibly from reading the idiotic rants about bike lanes in
> _Effective Cycling_ (which has good advise about how to ride a bike
> and complete rubbish when the author gets onto his various pet peeves)
> or similar sources." I did not read "Effective Cycling" until
> developing the dislike of bicycle "farcilities" (sic).
ROTFLMAO - you call that "life experience"??? Dude, if you are not lying
about it, as they say, "get a life".
>
> Please provide citations to any CREDIBLE studies that show that
> bicycle h*lm*ts are effective in reducing serious head injuries and/or
> deaths resulting from serious head injuries.
Yep, another anti-helmet nut. See the archives. This whole discussion
has been beaten to death quite a number of times over the last decade
or two. There is no reason to repeat it (other than your attempt at
trolling).
--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 05 Aug 2007 23:05:32
From: Tom \Johnny Sunset\ Sherman
Subject: Re: Can you make it to the market on a bike?
|
Bill Zaumen wrote:
> "Tom \"Johnny Sunset\" Sherman" <sunsetss0003@invailid.com> writes:
>
>> Bill Zaumen wrote:
>>> "Tom \"Johnny Sunset\" Sherman" <sunsetss0003@invailid.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> Bill Zaumen wrote:
>>>>> "Tom \"Johnny Sunset\" Sherman" <sunsetss0003@invailid.com> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Bill Zaumen wrote:
>>>>>>> "Just zis Guy, you know?" <uce@ftc.gov> writes:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 04 Aug 2007 17:07:43 -0700, nobody@nospam.pacbell.net (Bill Z.)
>>>>>>>> said in <87ejiin8s0.fsf@nospam.pacbell.net>:
>>>>>> Oops, wrong again, Zaumen.
>>>>>>
>>>>> No, right as usual (which is why you were unable to make a substantive
>>>>> comment).
>>>> So now Zaumen knows my life experience better than I do?
>>> Another lie - I never talked about your "life experience" in general,
>>> and you yourself provided all the other information. I merely
>>> pointed out that your current hostility against bike lanes is more
>>> or less a delusion.
>> No Zaumen, you speculated that I "then got some sort of anti-bike lane
>> religion, possibly from reading the idiotic rants about bike lanes in
>> _Effective Cycling_ (which has good advise about how to ride a bike
>> and complete rubbish when the author gets onto his various pet peeves)
>> or similar sources." I did not read "Effective Cycling" until
>> developing the dislike of bicycle "farcilities" (sic).
>
> ROTFLMAO - you call that "life experience"??? Dude, if you are not lying
> about it, as they say, "get a life".
Huh?
>> Please provide citations to any CREDIBLE studies that show that
>> bicycle h*lm*ts are effective in reducing serious head injuries and/or
>> deaths resulting from serious head injuries.
>
> Yep, another anti-helmet nut. See the archives. This whole discussion
> has been beaten to death quite a number of times over the last decade
> or two. There is no reason to repeat it (other than your attempt at
> trolling).
Well Zaumen, you were the one to bring up the h*lm*t subject.
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 06 Aug 2007 00:15:55
From: Bill Z.
Subject: Re: Can you make it to the market on a bike?
|
"Tom \"Johnny Sunset\" Sherman" <sunsetss0003@invailid.com > writes:
> Bill Zaumen wrote:
>>>> So now Zaumen knows my life experience better than I do?
>>> Another lie - I never talked about your "life experience" in general,
>>> and you yourself provided all the other information. I merely
>>> pointed out that your current hostility against bike lanes is more
>>> or less a delusion.
> >> No Zaumen, you speculated that I "then got some sort of anti-bike lane
> >> religion, possibly from reading the idiotic rants about bike lanes in
> >> _Effective Cycling_ (which has good advise about how to ride a bike
> >> and complete rubbish when the author gets onto his various pet peeves)
> >> or similar sources." I did not read "Effective Cycling" until
> >> developing the dislike of bicycle "farcilities" (sic).
> > ROTFLMAO - you call that "life experience"??? Dude, if you are not
> > lying
> > about it, as they say, "get a life".
>
> Huh?
People generally wouldn't take "possibly from reading ... in _Effective
Cycling_" and turn that into a definitive statement about your life
experiences, and using the term "life experiences" to catagorize a
comment about possibly reading some rant in a single book is a misuse
of the term.
> >> Please provide citations to any CREDIBLE studies that show that
> >> bicycle h*lm*ts are effective in reducing serious head injuries and/or
> >> deaths resulting from serious head injuries.
> > Yep, another anti-helmet nut. See the archives. This whole
> > discussion
> > has been beaten to death quite a number of times over the last decade
> > or two. There is no reason to repeat it (other than your attempt at
> > trolling).
>
> Well Zaumen, you were the one to bring up the h*lm*t subject.
Actually, I didn't bring up the "helmet subject" but rather pointed
out the overlap between the people in the anti-helmet crowd and the
anti-bikelane crowd, small as that crowd may be.
--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 06 Aug 2007 06:06:17
From: Tom \Johnny Sunset\ Sherman
Subject: Re: Can you make it to the market on a bike?
|
Bill Zaumen wrote:
> "Tom \"Johnny Sunset\" Sherman" <sunsetss0003@invailid.com> writes:
>
>> Bill Zaumen wrote:
>>>>> So now Zaumen knows my life experience better than I do?
>>>> Another lie - I never talked about your "life experience" in general,
>>>> and you yourself provided all the other information. I merely
>>>> pointed out that your current hostility against bike lanes is more
>>>> or less a delusion.
>>>> No Zaumen, you speculated that I "then got some sort of anti-bike lane
>>>> religion, possibly from reading the idiotic rants about bike lanes in
>>>> _Effective Cycling_ (which has good advise about how to ride a bike
>>>> and complete rubbish when the author gets onto his various pet peeves)
>>>> or similar sources." I did not read "Effective Cycling" until
>>>> developing the dislike of bicycle "farcilities" (sic).
>>> ROTFLMAO - you call that "life experience"??? Dude, if you are not
>>> lying
>>> about it, as they say, "get a life".
>> Huh?
>
> People generally wouldn't take "possibly from reading ... in _Effective
> Cycling_" and turn that into a definitive statement about your life
> experiences, and using the term "life experiences" to catagorize a
> comment about possibly reading some rant in a single book is a misuse
> of the term.
Whatever are you talking about? Some editing of the above is in order.
>>>> Please provide citations to any CREDIBLE studies that show that
>>>> bicycle h*lm*ts are effective in reducing serious head injuries and/or
>>>> deaths resulting from serious head injuries.
>>> Yep, another anti-helmet nut. See the archives. This whole
>>> discussion
>>> has been beaten to death quite a number of times over the last decade
>>> or two. There is no reason to repeat it (other than your attempt at
>>> trolling).
>> Well Zaumen, you were the one to bring up the h*lm*t subject.
>
> Actually, I didn't bring up the "helmet subject" but rather pointed
> out the overlap between the people in the anti-helmet crowd and the
> anti-bikelane crowd, small as that crowd may be.
That is bringing up h*lm*ts, at least in the real world.
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 06 Aug 2007 16:20:18
From: Bill Z.
Subject: Re: Can you make it to the market on a bike?
|
"Tom \"Johnny Sunset\" Sherman" <sunsetss0003@invailid.com > writes:
> Bill Zaumen wrote:
> > "Tom \"Johnny Sunset\" Sherman" <sunsetss0003@invailid.com> writes:
> >
> >> Bill Zaumen wrote:
> >>>>> So now Zaumen knows my life experience better than I do?
> >>>> Another lie - I never talked about your "life experience" in general,
> >>>> and you yourself provided all the other information. I merely
> >>>> pointed out that your current hostility against bike lanes is more
> >>>> or less a delusion.
> >>>> No Zaumen, you speculated that I "then got some sort of anti-bike lane
> >>>> religion, possibly from reading the idiotic rants about bike lanes in
> >>>> _Effective Cycling_ (which has good advise about how to ride a bike
> >>>> and complete rubbish when the author gets onto his various pet peeves)
> >>>> or similar sources." I did not read "Effective Cycling" until
> >>>> developing the dislike of bicycle "farcilities" (sic).
> >>> ROTFLMAO - you call that "life experience"??? Dude, if you are not
> >>> lying
> >>> about it, as they say, "get a life".
> >> Huh?
> > People generally wouldn't take "possibly from reading ... in
> > _Effective
> > Cycling_" and turn that into a definitive statement about your life
> > experiences, and using the term "life experiences" to catagorize a
> > comment about possibly reading some rant in a single book is a misuse
> > of the term.
>
> Whatever are you talking about? Some editing of the above is in order.
What I'm talking baobut should be clear to everyone (in spite of your
bad text formating).
> >> Well Zaumen, you were the one to bring up the h*lm*t subject.
> > Actually, I didn't bring up the "helmet subject" but rather pointed
> > out the overlap between the people in the anti-helmet crowd and the
> > anti-bikelane crowd, small as that crowd may be.
>
> That is bringing up h*lm*ts, at least in the real world.
No it isn't. It was a comment about people, not about helmets.
You seem to have a problem with understanding the real world.
--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 06 Aug 2007 19:44:03
From: Tom \Johnny Sunset\ Sherman
Subject: Re: Can you make it to the market on a bike?
|
Bill Zaumen wrote:
> "Tom \"Johnny Sunset\" Sherman" <sunsetss0003@invailid.com> writes:
>
>> Bill Zaumen wrote:
>>> "Tom \"Johnny Sunset\" Sherman" <sunsetss0003@invailid.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> Bill Zaumen wrote:
>>>>>>> So now Zaumen knows my life experience better than I do?
>>>>>> Another lie - I never talked about your "life experience" in general,
>>>>>> and you yourself provided all the other information. I merely
>>>>>> pointed out that your current hostility against bike lanes is more
>>>>>> or less a delusion.
>>>>>> No Zaumen, you speculated that I "then got some sort of anti-bike lane
>>>>>> religion, possibly from reading the idiotic rants about bike lanes in
>>>>>> _Effective Cycling_ (which has good advise about how to ride a bike
>>>>>> and complete rubbish when the author gets onto his various pet peeves)
>>>>>> or similar sources." I did not read "Effective Cycling" until
>>>>>> developing the dislike of bicycle "farcilities" (sic).
>>>>> ROTFLMAO - you call that "life experience"??? Dude, if you are not
>>>>> lying
>>>>> about it, as they say, "get a life".
>>>> Huh?
>>> People generally wouldn't take "possibly from reading ... in
>>> _Effective
>>> Cycling_" and turn that into a definitive statement about your life
>>> experiences, and using the term "life experiences" to catagorize a
>>> comment about possibly reading some rant in a single book is a misuse
>>> of the term.
>> Whatever are you talking about? Some editing of the above is in order.
>
> What I'm talking baobut should be clear to everyone (in spite of your
> bad text formating).
>
>>>> Well Zaumen, you were the one to bring up the h*lm*t subject.
>>> Actually, I didn't bring up the "helmet subject" but rather pointed
>>> out the overlap between the people in the anti-helmet crowd and the
>>> anti-bikelane crowd, small as that crowd may be.
>> That is bringing up h*lm*ts, at least in the real world.
>
> No it isn't. It was a comment about people, not about helmets.
> You seem to have a problem with understanding the real world.
This Zaumen guy is a lot like Ed Dolan in his argument technique. ;)
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 07 Aug 2007 01:38:50
From: Bill Z.
Subject: Re: Can you make it to the market on a bike?
|
"Tom \"Johnny Sunset\" Sherman" <sunsetss0003@invailid.com > writes:
> >>>> Well Zaumen, you were the one to bring up the h*lm*t subject.
> >>> Actually, I didn't bring up the "helmet subject" but rather pointed
> >>> out the overlap between the people in the anti-helmet crowd and the
> >>> anti-bikelane crowd, small as that crowd may be.
> >> That is bringing up h*lm*ts, at least in the real world.
> > No it isn't. It was a comment about people, not about helmets.
> > You seem to have a problem with understanding the real world.
>
> This Zaumen guy is a lot like Ed Dolan in his argument technique. ;)
Projection on the part of Tom Sherman. Having lost the argument,
his ilk always resorts to argumentum ad hominem as they repeat
lie after lie ad infinitum.
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 06 Aug 2007 20:56:36
From: Tom \Johnny Sunset\ Sherman
Subject: Re: Can you make it to the market on a bike?
|
Bill Zaumen wrote:
> "Tom \"Johnny Sunset\" Sherman" <sunsetss0003@invailid.com> writes:
>
>>>>>> Well Zaumen, you were the one to bring up the h*lm*t subject.
>>>>> Actually, I didn't bring up the "helmet subject" but rather pointed
>>>>> out the overlap between the people in the anti-helmet crowd and the
>>>>> anti-bikelane crowd, small as that crowd may be.
>>>> That is bringing up h*lm*ts, at least in the real world.
>>> No it isn't. It was a comment about people, not about helmets.
>>> You seem to have a problem with understanding the real world.
>> This Zaumen guy is a lot like Ed Dolan in his argument technique. ;)
>
> Projection on the part of Tom Sherman. Having lost the argument,
> his ilk always resorts to argumentum ad hominem as they repeat
> lie after lie ad infinitum.
You remind me of the person who told me to shut up because I had lost
the argument (in late winter 2002) about WMD in Iraq. ;)
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 06 Aug 2007 22:32:27
From: Bill Sornson
Subject: Re: Can you make it to the market on a bike?
|
Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
> You remind me of the person who told me to shut up because I had lost
> the argument (in late winter 2002) about WMD in Iraq. ;)
Hillary? LOL (Google her /and/ her hubby's words on the matter.)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 07 Aug 2007 01:59:29
From: Tom \Johnny Sunset\ Sherman
Subject: Re: Can you make it to the market on a bike?
|
Bill Sornson wrote:
> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
>
>> You remind me of the person who told me to shut up because I had lost
>> the argument (in late winter 2002) about WMD in Iraq. ;)
>
> Hillary? LOL (Google her /and/ her hubby's words on the matter.)
Hillary and Bill, the Republicans in Democratic clothing?
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 07 Aug 2007 00:35:27
From: Bill Sornson
Subject: Re: Can you make it to the market on a bike?
|
Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
> Bill Sornson wrote:
>> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
>>
>>> You remind me of the person who told me to shut up because I had
>>> lost the argument (in late winter 2002) about WMD in Iraq. ;)
>>
>> Hillary? LOL (Google her /and/ her hubby's words on the matter.)
>
> Hillary and Bill, the Republicans in Democratic clothing?
So why does no one (read: media) call them on it?
You saying you won't vote for Mrs. Bill? (Oh, nooooooooooo.)
Bluto Bill
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 07 Aug 2007 04:23:50
From: Bill Z.
Subject: Re: Can you make it to the market on a bike?
|
"Tom \"Johnny Sunset\" Sherman" <sunsetss0003@invailid.com > writes:
> Bill Zaumen wrote:
> > "Tom \"Johnny Sunset\" Sherman" <sunsetss0003@invailid.com> writes:
> >
> >>>>>> Well Zaumen, you were the one to bring up the h*lm*t subject.
> >>>>> Actually, I didn't bring up the "helmet subject" but rather pointed
> >>>>> out the overlap between the people in the anti-helmet crowd and the
> >>>>> anti-bikelane crowd, small as that crowd may be.
> >>>> That is bringing up h*lm*ts, at least in the real world.
> >>> No it isn't. It was a comment about people, not about helmets.
> >>> You seem to have a problem with understanding the real world.
> >> This Zaumen guy is a lot like Ed Dolan in his argument technique. ;)
> > Projection on the part of Tom Sherman. Having lost the argument,
> > his ilk always resorts to argumentum ad hominem as they repeat
> > lie after lie ad infinitum.
>
> You remind me of the person who told me to shut up because I had lost
> the argument (in late winter 2002) about WMD in Iraq. ;)
You remind me of George Bush declaring "mission accomplished" as he
opened the monetary valves to scuttle the country.
--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 05 Aug 2007 17:14:42
From: Bill Sornson
Subject: Re: Can you make it to the market on a bike?
|
Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
> Please provide citations to any CREDIBLE studies that show that
> bicycle h*lm*ts are effective in reducing serious head injuries
> and/or deaths resulting from serious head injuries.
Your Google broken or something?
Bill "since AHZs discount common sense and personal experience, that is" S.
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 05 Aug 2007 19:37:57
From: Tom \Johnny Sunset\ Sherman
Subject: Re: Can you make it to the market on a bike?
|
Bill Sornson wrote:
> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
>
>> Please provide citations to any CREDIBLE studies that show that
>> bicycle h*lm*ts are effective in reducing serious head injuries
>> and/or deaths resulting from serious head injuries.
>
> Your Google broken or something?
There do not seem to be any non-discredited studies out there showing
h*lm*ts are effective. Maybe Zaumen is aware of some?
> Bill "since AHZs discount common sense and personal experience, that is" S.
There have been many cases where scientific study has proven common
sense wrong.
As for personal experience, show me two accidents that are IDENTICAL
except for h*lm*t use and outcome. Anything else is meaningless, since
the outcome if a h*lm*t had or had not been used is unknown.
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 05 Aug 2007 18:29:08
From: Bill Sornson
Subject: Re: Can you make it to the market on a bike?
|
Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
> Bill Sornson wrote:
>> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
>>
>>> Please provide citations to any CREDIBLE studies that show that
>>> bicycle h*lm*ts are effective in reducing serious head injuries
>>> and/or deaths resulting from serious head injuries.
>>
>> Your Google broken or something?
>
> There do not seem to be any non-discredited studies out there showing
> h*lm*ts are effective. Maybe Zaumen is aware of some?
Your Google broken or something? (Hint: type in something and click some
of the links.)
>> Bill "since AHZs discount common sense and personal experience, that
>> is" S.
>
> There have been many cases where scientific study has proven common
> sense wrong.
>
> As for personal experience, show me two accidents that are IDENTICAL
> except for h*lm*t use and outcome. Anything else is meaningless, since
> the outcome if a h*lm*t had or had not been used is unknown.
Absurd. If I feel a seatbelt restrain me in a panic stop, then I /know/ it
worked as intended. Similarly, if I do an endo in a rock garden and bang my
lidded melon off a sharp, jagged surface (or even a smooth, rounded one),
then I /know/ the helmet worked as intended (that is, took and absorbed the
blow so my skull didn't have to).
It's really not that complicated.
Bill "OUT!" S.
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 07 Aug 2007 02:14:57
From: Martin Dann
Subject: Re: Can you make it to the market on a bike?
|
Bill Sornson wrote:
> Absurd. If I feel a seatbelt restrain me in a panic stop, then I /know/ it
> worked as intended.
Yes you will know it will work as intended. Next time you
will drive faster knowing your seatbelt will restrain you
if you have an accident. It is called risk compensation.
Next time you have an accident, you are just as likely to
get KSI, as you will be travelling faster, but will be
better protected.
However you are more likely to kill innocent third parties
by your own actions.
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 06 Aug 2007 22:30:09
From: Bill Sornson
Subject: Re: Can you make it to the market on a bike?
|
Martin Dann wrote:
> Bill Sornson wrote:
>> Absurd. If I feel a seatbelt restrain me in a panic stop, then I
>> /know/ it worked as intended.
> Yes you will know it will work as intended. Next time you
> will drive faster knowing your seatbelt will restrain you
> if you have an accident.
Horseshit.
HTH
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 07 Aug 2007 10:24:29
From: Just zis Guy, you know?
Subject: Re: Can you make it to the market on a bike?
|
On Mon, 6 Aug 2007 22:30:09 -0700, "Bill Sornson" <askme@ask.me >
said in <46b80368$0$28647$4c368faf@roadrunner.com >:
>> Yes you will know it will work as intended. Next time you
>> will drive faster knowing your seatbelt will restrain you
>> if you have an accident.
>
>Horseshit.
I see you have not read the work of Adams or Wilde, or the various
studies which confirm the risk compensation hypothesis. Perhaps you
should, it's quite illuminating stuff.
Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk
85% of helmet statistics are made up, 69% of them at CHS, Puget Sound
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 07 Aug 2007 10:30:26
From: Peter Clinch
Subject: Re: Can you make it to the market on a bike?
|
Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:
> I see you have not read the work of Adams or Wilde, or the various
> studies which confirm the risk compensation hypothesis. Perhaps you
> should, it's quite illuminating stuff.
You're not /seriously/ suggesting that real-world observations could
possibly create a more accurate picture than a gut feeling are you?
Deary me, you'll be telling us that the Earth is a ball several billion
years old going around the sun next!
Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net p.j.clinch@dundee.ac.uk http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 07 Aug 2007 08:23:34
From: Bill Sornson
Subject: Re: Can you make it to the market on a bike?
|
Peter Clinch wrote:
> Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:
>
>> I see you have not read the work of Adams or Wilde, or the various
>> studies which confirm the risk compensation hypothesis. Perhaps you
>> should, it's quite illuminating stuff.
>
> You're not /seriously/ suggesting that real-world observations could
> possibly create a more accurate picture than a gut feeling are you?
>
> Deary me, you'll be telling us that the Earth is a ball several
> billion years old going around the sun next!
Bully Morons,
If I'm driving down a street and a child runs out from in-between two cars
and I have to panic stop to avoid hitting him or her, then I am NOT going to
start driving faster afterwards. If anything, I'd be even more
cautious...at least for a while.
HTH (but doubt it)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 07 Aug 2007 16:29:15
From: Clive George
Subject: Re: Can you make it to the market on a bike?
|
"Bill Sornson" <askme@ask.me > wrote in message
news:46b88e7d$0$20557$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
> Peter Clinch wrote:
>> Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:
>>
>>> I see you have not read the work of Adams or Wilde, or the various
>>> studies which confirm the risk compensation hypothesis. Perhaps you
>>> should, it's quite illuminating stuff.
>>
>> You're not /seriously/ suggesting that real-world observations could
>> possibly create a more accurate picture than a gut feeling are you?
>>
>> Deary me, you'll be telling us that the Earth is a ball several
>> billion years old going around the sun next!
>
> Bully Morons,
>
> If I'm driving down a street and a child runs out from in-between two cars
> and I have to panic stop to avoid hitting him or her, then I am NOT going
> to start driving faster afterwards. If anything, I'd be even more
> cautious...at least for a while.
Um - in what way doesn't that confirm the risk compensation hypothesis?
Seems to me that it supports it completely. You've been reminded that the
risk is rather higher than you thought it was, so you compensate by driving
slower after your panic stop.
clive
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 07 Aug 2007 08:43:11
From: Bill Sornson
Subject: Re: Can you make it to the market on a bike?
|
Clive George wrote:
> "Bill Sornson" <askme@ask.me> wrote in message
> news:46b88e7d$0$20557$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
>> Peter Clinch wrote:
>>> Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:
>>>
>>>> I see you have not read the work of Adams or Wilde, or the various
>>>> studies which confirm the risk compensation hypothesis. Perhaps
>>>> you should, it's quite illuminating stuff.
>>>
>>> You're not /seriously/ suggesting that real-world observations could
>>> possibly create a more accurate picture than a gut feeling are you?
>>>
>>> Deary me, you'll be telling us that the Earth is a ball several
>>> billion years old going around the sun next!
>>
>> Bully Morons,
>>
>> If I'm driving down a street and a child runs out from in-between
>> two cars and I have to panic stop to avoid hitting him or her, then
>> I am NOT going to start driving faster afterwards. If anything, I'd
>> be even more cautious...at least for a while.
>
> Um - in what way doesn't that confirm the risk compensation
> hypothesis? Seems to me that it supports it completely. You've been
> reminded that the risk is rather higher than you thought it was, so
> you compensate by driving slower after your panic stop.
Because the bully morons /always/ delete content in order to post personal
insults that sound spot-on but are in fact disingeuous at best (outright
lies more often), you might not recall that to which I originally responded.
Here, I'll go get it...
I wrote: "If I feel a seatbelt restrain me in a panic stop, then I /know/
it worked as intended."
Someone replied: "Yes you will know it will work as intended. Next time you
will drive faster knowing your seatbelt will restrain you if you have an
accident. It is called risk compensation."
So which is it? I'll drive faster as a result of risk compensation (BM #1),
or I'll drive slower (BM you)?
Here's a thought: your precious phenomenom does not apply to the particular
situation I posited. I shan't hold my breath waiting for you or any of the
bully morons (esp. Guy) to admit this.
HTH!
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 07 Aug 2007 16:52:26
From: Clive George
Subject: Re: Can you make it to the market on a bike?
|
"Bill Sornson" <askme@ask.me > wrote in message
news:46b89317$0$12234$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
> Clive George wrote:
>> "Bill Sornson" <askme@ask.me> wrote in message
>> news:46b88e7d$0$20557$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
>>> Peter Clinch wrote:
>>>> Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I see you have not read the work of Adams or Wilde, or the various
>>>>> studies which confirm the risk compensation hypothesis. Perhaps
>>>>> you should, it's quite illuminating stuff.
>>>>
>>>> You're not /seriously/ suggesting that real-world observations could
>>>> possibly create a more accurate picture than a gut feeling are you?
>>>>
>>>> Deary me, you'll be telling us that the Earth is a ball several
>>>> billion years old going around the sun next!
>>>
>>> Bully Morons,
>>>
>>> If I'm driving down a street and a child runs out from in-between
>>> two cars and I have to panic stop to avoid hitting him or her, then
>>> I am NOT going to start driving faster afterwards. If anything, I'd
>>> be even more cautious...at least for a while.
>>
>> Um - in what way doesn't that confirm the risk compensation
>> hypothesis? Seems to me that it supports it completely. You've been
>> reminded that the risk is rather higher than you thought it was, so
>> you compensate by driving slower after your panic stop.
>
> Because the bully morons /always/ delete content in order to post personal
> insults that sound spot-on but are in fact disingeuous at best (outright
> lies more often), you might not recall that to which I originally
> responded. Here, I'll go get it...
>
> I wrote: "If I feel a seatbelt restrain me in a panic stop, then I /know/
> it worked as intended."
>
> Someone replied: "Yes you will know it will work as intended. Next time
> you will drive faster knowing your seatbelt will restrain you if you have
> an accident. It is called risk compensation."
>
> So which is it? I'll drive faster as a result of risk compensation (BM
> #1), or I'll drive slower (BM you)?
Both. HTH.
Short term you'll be driving slower. Not as a result of the seatbelt
restraining you, but as a result of you having to make the panic stop in the
first place. The seatbelt isn't the important thing in your example, the
stop is.
Without the panic stop, the feeling of security the seatbelt gives you will
probably make you drive faster. Provided you don't have to do another such
stop, your "risk thermostat" will correct itself back towards where the
seatbelt is having an effect - and you will then be driving faster as a
result of risk compensation.
clive
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 07 Aug 2007 09:14:44
From: Bill Sornson
Subject: Re: Can you make it to the market on a bike?
|
Clive George wrote:
> "Bill Sornson" <askme@ask.me> wrote in message
> news:46b89317$0$12234$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
>> Clive George wrote:
>>> "Bill Sornson" <askme@ask.me> wrote in message
>>> news:46b88e7d$0$20557$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
>>>> Peter Clinch wrote:
>>>>> Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I see you have not read the work of Adams or Wilde, or the
>>>>>> various studies which confirm the risk compensation hypothesis.
>>>>>> Perhaps you should, it's quite illuminating stuff.
>>>>>
>>>>> You're not /seriously/ suggesting that real-world observations
>>>>> could possibly create a more accurate picture than a gut feeling
>>>>> are you? Deary me, you'll be telling us that the Earth is a ball
>>>>> several
>>>>> billion years old going around the sun next!
>>>>
>>>> Bully Morons,
>>>>
>>>> If I'm driving down a street and a child runs out from in-between
>>>> two cars and I have to panic stop to avoid hitting him or her, then
>>>> I am NOT going to start driving faster afterwards. If anything,
>>>> I'd be even more cautious...at least for a while.
>>>
>>> Um - in what way doesn't that confirm the risk compensation
>>> hypothesis? Seems to me that it supports it completely. You've been
>>> reminded that the risk is rather higher than you thought it was, so
>>> you compensate by driving slower after your panic stop.
>>
>> Because the bully morons /always/ delete content in order to post
>> personal insults that sound spot-on but are in fact disingeuous at
>> best (outright lies more often), you might not recall that to which
>> I originally responded. Here, I'll go get it...
>>
>> I wrote: "If I feel a seatbelt restrain me in a panic stop, then I
>> /know/ it worked as intended."
>>
>> Someone replied: "Yes you will know it will work as intended. Next
>> time you will drive faster knowing your seatbelt will restrain you
>> if you have an accident. It is called risk compensation."
>>
>> So which is it? I'll drive faster as a result of risk compensation
>> (BM #1), or I'll drive slower (BM you)?
> Both. HTH.
{SNIP TAKEN BUT NOT NOTED. SHOCKING}
> Short term you'll be driving slower. Not as a result of the seatbelt
> restraining you, but as a result of you having to make the panic stop
> in the first place. The seatbelt isn't the important thing in your
> example, the stop is.
>
> Without the panic stop, the feeling of security the seatbelt gives
> you will probably make you drive faster. Provided you don't have to
> do another such stop, your "risk thermostat" will correct itself back
> towards where the seatbelt is having an effect - and you will then be
> driving faster as a result of risk compensation.
So are you and the other BMs saying we should never use anything that
involves risk compensation? Or that these things are somehow bad by their
very existence? Garden
gloves...helmets...seatbelts...shoes...sunscreen...EVIL!!!
You guys (and Guy) reach new levels of absurdity weekly...and weakly.
HTH!
>
> clive
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 07 Aug 2007 17:32:15
From: Mark McNeill
Subject: Re: Can you make it to the market on a bike?
|
Response to Bill Sornson:
> So are you and the other BMs saying we should never use anything that
> involves risk compensation? Or that these things are somehow bad by their
> very existence? Garden
> gloves...helmets...seatbelts...shoes...sunscreen...EVIL!!!
Funny you should mention sunscreen:
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/4058.php
___
Sunscreen blamed for cancer
Sun worshippers may be increasing their risk of developing skin cancer
by using sunscreens that encourage them to stay too long in the glare,
researchers say.
Sunburn has long been regarded as an important cause of melanoma, the
most serious form of skin cancer, especially in children under 15. But
some experts argue that the real risk comes from spending too long in
the sun, and that using sun creams to protect against sunburn may
instead promote the cancer.
___
So it seems that some people increase the risk of injury, because they
think they're better protected than they are.
--
Mark, UK
"The great enemy of clear language is insincerity."
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 07 Aug 2007 17:27:11
From: Clive George
Subject: Re: Can you make it to the market on a bike?
|
"Bill Sornson" <askme@ask.me > wrote in message
news:46b89a8f$0$8919$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
> {SNIP TAKEN BUT NOT NOTED. SHOCKING}
WFT are you on whining about here?
>> Short term you'll be driving slower. Not as a result of the seatbelt
>> restraining you, but as a result of you having to make the panic stop
>> in the first place. The seatbelt isn't the important thing in your
>> example, the stop is.
>>
>> Without the panic stop, the feeling of security the seatbelt gives
>> you will probably make you drive faster. Provided you don't have to
>> do another such stop, your "risk thermostat" will correct itself back
>> towards where the seatbelt is having an effect - and you will then be
>> driving faster as a result of risk compensation.
>
> So are you and the other BMs saying we should never use anything that
> involves risk compensation? Or that these things are somehow bad by their
> very existence? Garden
> gloves...helmets...seatbelts...shoes...sunscreen...EVIL!!!
Um - perhaps you can point to where I've said that. I don't believe I ever
have. So, why did you write the above? If you have a point, perhaps you
could make it in a clear, concise manner, without attributing to others
things which haven't been said.
clive
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 07 Aug 2007 10:30:09
From: Mark McNeill
Subject: Re: Can you make it to the market on a bike?
|
Response to Just zis Guy, you know?:
> >> Yes you will know it will work as intended. Next time you
> >> will drive faster knowing your seatbelt will restrain you
> >> if you have an accident.
> >
> >Horseshit.
>
> I see you have not read the work of Adams or Wilde, or the various
> studies which confirm the risk compensation hypothesis. Perhaps you
> should, it's quite illuminating stuff.
Maybe, but what's the worth of evidence compared to the persuasive power
of a dirty word? ;-)
--
Mark, UK
"When you've told someone that you've left them a legacy the only decent
thing to do is to die at once."
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 07 Aug 2007 02:01:49
From: Tom \Johnny Sunset\ Sherman
Subject: Re: Can you make it to the market on a bike?
|
Bill "Sorni" Sornson wrote:
>
> Horseshit.
I highly recommend fenders for your bicycle when riding in Amish and
Mennonite country, because the substance Sorni mentions.
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 05 Aug 2007 20:43:11
From: Tom \Johnny Sunset\ Sherman
Subject: Re: Can you make it to the market on a bike?
|
Bill Sornson wrote:
> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
>> Bill Sornson wrote:
>>> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
>>>
>>>> Please provide citations to any CREDIBLE studies that show that
>>>> bicycle h*lm*ts are effective in reducing serious head injuries
>>>> and/or deaths resulting from serious head injuries.
>>> Your Google broken or something?
>> There do not seem to be any non-discredited studies out there showing
>> h*lm*ts are effective. Maybe Zaumen is aware of some?
>
> Your Google broken or something? (Hint: type in something and click some
> of the links.)
If this is SO SIMPLE, just do it, and post the links to the
NON-DISCREDITED STUDIES SHOWING BICYCLE H*LM*TS SIGNIFICANTLY REDUCE THE
RATES OF SERIOUS HEAD INJURY AND FATALITY.
>>> Bill "since AHZs discount common sense and personal experience, that
>>> is" S.
>> There have been many cases where scientific study has proven common
>> sense wrong.
>>
>> As for personal experience, show me two accidents that are IDENTICAL
>> except for h*lm*t use and outcome. Anything else is meaningless, since
>> the outcome if a h*lm*t had or had not been used is unknown.
>
> Absurd. If I feel a seatbelt restrain me in a panic stop, then I /know/ it
> worked as intended. Similarly, if I do an endo in a rock garden and bang my
> lidded melon off a sharp, jagged surface (or even a smooth, rounded one),
> then I /know/ the helmet worked as intended (that is, took and absorbed the
> blow so my skull didn't have to).
>
> It's really not that complicated.
>
> Bill "OUT!" S.
That is not proof that the h*lm*t prevented serious head injury or death.
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 06 Aug 2007 22:07:32
From: Just zis Guy, you know?
Subject: Re: Can you make it to the market on a bike?
|
On Sun, 05 Aug 2007 20:43:11 -0500, "Tom \"Johnny Sunset\" Sherman"
<sunsetss0003@invailid.com > said in
<46b67097$0$8173$88260bb3@free.teranews.com >:
>If this is SO SIMPLE, just do it, and post the links to the
>NON-DISCREDITED STUDIES SHOWING BICYCLE H*LM*TS SIGNIFICANTLY REDUCE THE
> RATES OF SERIOUS HEAD INJURY AND FATALITY.
Hey, Tom, you've started now - you'll be needing some translation in
the thread that follows so here is the Abbreviated Dictionary of
Zaumenisms. I think there's a more complete one but I couldn't be
bothered to keep it, since unlike some loons of his ilk he is not in
any way influential in the real world.
The abbreviated dictionary of Zaumenisms
========================================
Authoritative: Agreeing with Zaumen
Babble: Trouncing Zaumen's bogus arguments
Baseless: Supported by evidence, e.g. transcripts or cited studies
Content-free: Containing content Zaumen dislikes, esp. when Zaumen
feels the need to evade it in order to maintain his cherished
illusions
Garbage: Reasoned argument, generally with links
Idiocy: Proving that Zaumen is wrong
Ignored: 1. Zaumen response to inconvenient facts
2. Where a Zaumen assertion is so self-evidently risible as to
be beyond parody, one is said to have "ignored" it if one fails
to dignify it with a full and authoritative response.
Lie: Disagreeing with Zaumen
Misrepresentation: Any statement which disagrees with Zaumen's
interpretation, especially when based on more detailed knowledge
Obvious: That which is self-evidently false but fits with Zaumen's
cherished beliefs
On-Message: Consistency, especially when conflicting with
Zaumen's cherished beliefs
Peeve: Issue on which one disagrees with Zaumen
Rant: Disagreeing with Zaumen, citing evidence
Reasonable: Agreeing with Zaumen, especially when this also means
disagreeing with those who have any actual knowledge of the
subject
Shameless: Daring to disagree with Zaumen
Snipped: Evaded by Zaumen, especially of inconvenient facts
Spin: Presenting facts in a way which conflicts with Zaumen's
cherished beliefs
Transference: Challenging Bill's behaviour
Troll: Refusing to let Zaumen get away with a bogus assertion
Untenable: A position is said to be untenable when it conflicts
with Zaumen's cherished beliefs to the extent that he cannot
bear to see it stated
Whining: 1. Poking fun at Zaumen's trolling;
2. Calling Zaumen on his double standards.
Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk
85% of helmet statistics are made up, 69% of them at CHS, Puget Sound
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 06 Aug 2007 19:41:06
From: Tom \Johnny Sunset\ Sherman
Subject: Re: Can you make it to the market on a bike?
|
Just zis Guy, you know? aka Guy Chapman wrote:
> On Sun, 05 Aug 2007 20:43:11 -0500, "Tom \"Johnny Sunset\" Sherman"
> <sunsetss0003@invailid.com> said in
> <46b67097$0$8173$88260bb3@free.teranews.com>:
>
>> If this is SO SIMPLE, just do it, and post the links to the
>> NON-DISCREDITED STUDIES SHOWING BICYCLE H*LM*TS SIGNIFICANTLY REDUCE THE
>> RATES OF SERIOUS HEAD INJURY AND FATALITY.
>
> Hey, Tom, you've started now - you'll be needing some translation in
> the thread that follows so here is the Abbreviated Dictionary of
> Zaumenisms. I think there's a more complete one but I couldn't be
> bothered to keep it, since unlike some loons of his ilk he is not in
> any way influential in the real world.
>
> The abbreviated dictionary of Zaumenisms
> ========================================
> Authoritative: Agreeing with Zaumen
> Babble: Trouncing Zaumen's bogus arguments
> Baseless: Supported by evidence, e.g. transcripts or cited studies
> Content-free: Containing content Zaumen dislikes, esp. when Zaumen
> feels the need to evade it in order to maintain his cherished
> illusions
> Garbage: Reasoned argument, generally with links
> Idiocy: Proving that Zaumen is wrong
> Ignored: 1. Zaumen response to inconvenient facts
> 2. Where a Zaumen assertion is so self-evidently risible as to
> be beyond parody, one is said to have "ignored" it if one fails
> to dignify it with a full and authoritative response.
> Lie: Disagreeing with Zaumen
> Misrepresentation: Any statement which disagrees with Zaumen's
> interpretation, especially when based on more detailed knowledge
> Obvious: That which is self-evidently false but fits with Zaumen's
> cherished beliefs
> On-Message: Consistency, especially when conflicting with
> Zaumen's cherished beliefs
> Peeve: Issue on which one disagrees with Zaumen
> Rant: Disagreeing with Zaumen, citing evidence
> Reasonable: Agreeing with Zaumen, especially when this also means
> disagreeing with those who have any actual knowledge of the
> subject
> Shameless: Daring to disagree with Zaumen
> Snipped: Evaded by Zaumen, especially of inconvenient facts
> Spin: Presenting facts in a way which conflicts with Zaumen's
> cherished beliefs
> Transference: Challenging Bill's behaviour
> Troll: Refusing to let Zaumen get away with a bogus assertion
> Untenable: A position is said to be untenable when it conflicts
> with Zaumen's cherished beliefs to the extent that he cannot
> bear to see it stated
> Whining: 1. Poking fun at Zaumen's trolling;
> 2. Calling Zaumen on his double standards.
LOL! ;)
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 07 Aug 2007 01:40:39
From: Bill Z.
Subject: Re: Can you make it to the market on a bike?
|
"Tom \"Johnny Sunset\" Sherman" <sunsetss0003@invailid.com > writes:
> LOL! ;)
As Tom Sherman, having nothing to say, tries to help "Guy" get the
troll of the month award.
--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 07 Aug 2007 02:18:28
From: Martin Dann
Subject: Re: Can you make it to the market on a bike?
|
Bill Z. wrote:
> "Tom \"Johnny Sunset\" Sherman" <sunsetss0003@invailid.com> writes:
>
>> LOL! ;)
>
> As Tom Sherman, having nothing to say, tries to help "Guy" get the
> troll of the month award.
I think that one has already been awarded to Bill Z. for
the second month running.
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 07 Aug 2007 04:33:17
From: Bill Z.
Subject: Re: Can you make it to the market on a bike?
|
Martin Dann <martin.dann@virgin.net > writes:
> Bill Z. wrote:
> > "Tom \"Johnny Sunset\" Sherman" <sunsetss0003@invailid.com> writes:
> >
> >> LOL! ;)
> > As Tom Sherman, having nothing to say, tries to help "Guy" get the
> > troll of the month award.
>
> I think that one has already been awarded to Bill Z. for the second
> month running.
Marting Dunn is going for argumentum ad homimen to cover up the fact
that he doesn't have a leg to stand on.
--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 06 Aug 2007 20:58:13
From: Tom \Johnny Sunset\ Sherman
Subject: Re: Can you make it to the market on a bike?
|
Bill Zaumen wrote:
> "Tom \"Johnny Sunset\" Sherman" <sunsetss0003@invailid.com> writes:
>
>> LOL! ;)
>
> As Tom Sherman, having nothing to say, tries to help "Guy" get the
> troll of the month award.
Zaumen is a bike lane and helmet fundamentalist - ain't going to change
his mind with reality!
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 07 Aug 2007 04:25:43
From: Bill Z.
Subject: Re: Can you make it to the market on a bike?
|
"Tom \"Johnny Sunset\" Sherman" <sunsetss0003@invailid.com > writes:
> Bill Zaumen wrote:
> > "Tom \"Johnny Sunset\" Sherman" <sunsetss0003@invailid.com> writes:
> >
> >> LOL! ;)
> > As Tom Sherman, having nothing to say, tries to help "Guy" get the
> > troll of the month award.
>
> Zaumen is a bike lane and helmet fundamentalist - ain't going to
> change his mind with reality!
You guys are the one preaching fire and brimstone - how bike lanes and
helmets are the work of the devil, without any proof whatsoever. Now
you are reduced to silly name calling, which is all you have to offer.
--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 06 Aug 2007 16:25:54
From: Bill Z.
Subject: Re: Can you make it to the market on a bike?
|
"Just zis Guy, you know?" <uce@ftc.gov > writes:
> On Sun, 05 Aug 2007 20:43:11 -0500, "Tom \"Johnny Sunset\" Sherman"
> <sunsetss0003@invailid.com> said in
> <46b67097$0$8173$88260bb3@free.teranews.com>:
>
> >If this is SO SIMPLE, just do it, and post the links to the
> >NON-DISCREDITED STUDIES SHOWING BICYCLE H*LM*TS SIGNIFICANTLY REDUCE THE
> > RATES OF SERIOUS HEAD INJURY AND FATALITY.
>
> Hey, Tom, you've started now - you'll be needing some translation in
> the thread that follows so here is the Abbreviated Dictionary of
> Zaumenisms. I think there's a more complete one but I couldn't be
> bothered to keep it, since unlike some loons of his ilk he is not in
> any way influential in the real world.
<Personal insults snipped >
The anti-helmet, anti-bikelane zealots always go into character
assassination mode when they realize that they've run out of real
arguments, and this is no exception. It's a pattern they've followed
for well over a decade.
--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 06 Aug 2007 04:05:22
From: Bill Z.
Subject: Re: Can you make it to the market on a bike?
|
"Tom \"Johnny Sunset\" Sherman" <sunsetss0003@invailid.com > writes:
> Bill Sornson wrote:
> >> As for personal experience, show me two accidents that are IDENTICAL
> >> except for h*lm*t use and outcome. Anything else is meaningless, since
> >> the outcome if a h*lm*t had or had not been used is unknown.
> > Absurd. If I feel a seatbelt restrain me in a panic stop, then I
> > /know/ it worked as intended. Similarly, if I do an endo in a rock
> > garden and bang my lidded melon off a sharp, jagged surface (or even
> > a smooth, rounded one), then I /know/ the helmet worked as intended
> > (that is, took and absorbed the blow so my skull didn't have to).
> > It's really not that complicated.
> > Bill "OUT!" S.
>
> That is not proof that the h*lm*t prevented serious head injury or death.
For Bill Sornson's edification (base on participating in some of the
former dicussions on this topic), the de facto definition of a
"serious head injury" that the AHZs use is one caused by a severe
enough impact that a helmet might migitate the damage but would not
prevent an injury completely, hence the use of the word "prevent".
Tom Sherman is simply trolling - he wants to restart a helmet war,
having gotten bored with ranting about bike lanes.
--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 05 Aug 2007 23:10:38
From: Tom \Johnny Sunset\ Sherman
Subject: Re: Can you make it to the market on a bike?
|
Bill Zaumen wrote:
> "Tom \"Johnny Sunset\" Sherman" <sunsetss0003@invailid.com> writes:
>
>> Bill Sornson wrote:
>>>> As for personal experience, show me two accidents that are IDENTICAL
>>>> except for h*lm*t use and outcome. Anything else is meaningless, since
>>>> the outcome if a h*lm*t had or had not been used is unknown.
>>> Absurd. If I feel a seatbelt restrain me in a panic stop, then I
>>> /know/ it worked as intended. Similarly, if I do an endo in a rock
>>> garden and bang my lidded melon off a sharp, jagged surface (or even
>>> a smooth, rounded one), then I /know/ the helmet worked as intended
>>> (that is, took and absorbed the blow so my skull didn't have to).
>>> It's really not that complicated.
>>> Bill "OUT!" S.
>> That is not proof that the h*lm*t prevented serious head injury or death.
>
> For Bill Sornson's edification (base on participating in some of the
> former dicussions on this topic), the de facto definition of a
> "serious head injury" that the AHZs use is one caused by a severe
> enough impact that a helmet might migitate the damage but would not
> prevent an injury completely, hence the use of the word "prevent".
>
> Tom Sherman is simply trolling - he wants to restart a helmet war,
> having gotten bored with ranting about bike lanes.
I did not bring up the h*lm*t subject in this thread - that was Bill
Zaumen who did so. ;)
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 06 Aug 2007 00:17:43
From: Bill Z.
Subject: Re: Can you make it to the market on a bike?
|
"Tom \"Johnny Sunset\" Sherman" <sunsetss0003@invailid.com > writes:
> Bill Zaumen wrote:
> > "Tom \"Johnny Sunset\" Sherman" <sunsetss0003@invailid.com> writes:
> >
> >> Bill Sornson wrote:
> >>>> As for personal experience, show me two accidents that are IDENTICAL
> >>>> except for h*lm*t use and outcome. Anything else is meaningless, since
> >>>> the outcome if a h*lm*t had or had not been used is unknown.
> >>> Absurd. If I feel a seatbelt restrain me in a panic stop, then I
> >>> /know/ it worked as intended. Similarly, if I do an endo in a rock
> >>> garden and bang my lidded melon off a sharp, jagged surface (or even
> >>> a smooth, rounded one), then I /know/ the helmet worked as intended
> >>> (that is, took and absorbed the blow so my skull didn't have to).
> >>> It's really not that complicated.
> >>> Bill "OUT!" S.
> >> That is not proof that the h*lm*t prevented serious head injury or death.
> > For Bill Sornson's edification (base on participating in some of the
> > former dicussions on this topic), the de facto definition of a
> > "serious head injury" that the AHZs use is one caused by a severe
> > enough impact that a helmet might migitate the damage but would not
> > prevent an injury completely, hence the use of the word "prevent".
> > Tom Sherman is simply trolling - he wants to restart a helmet war,
> > having gotten bored with ranting about bike lanes.
>
> I did not bring up the h*lm*t subject in this thread - that was Bill
> Zaumen who did so. ;)
Another lie - I did not bring up the "helmet subject" but rather
pointed out an overlap between the anti-bikelane fanatics and the
anti-helmet fanatics, which suggests that the term "fanatics" is
quite apropos - they obviously need something to rant about.
--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 06 Aug 2007 06:03:42
From: Tom \Johnny Sunset\ Sherman
Subject: Re: Can you make it to the market on a bike?
|
Bill Zaumen wrote:
> "Tom \"Johnny Sunset\" Sherman" <sunsetss0003@invailid.com> writes:
>
>> Bill Zaumen wrote:
>>> "Tom \"Johnny Sunset\" Sherman" <sunsetss0003@invailid.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> Bill Sornson wrote:
>>>>>> As for personal experience, show me two accidents that are IDENTICAL
>>>>>> except for h*lm*t use and outcome. Anything else is meaningless, since
>>>>>> the outcome if a h*lm*t had or had not been used is unknown.
>>>>> Absurd. If I feel a seatbelt restrain me in a panic stop, then I
>>>>> /know/ it worked as intended. Similarly, if I do an endo in a rock
>>>>> garden and bang my lidded melon off a sharp, jagged surface (or even
>>>>> a smooth, rounded one), then I /know/ the helmet worked as intended
>>>>> (that is, took and absorbed the blow so my skull didn't have to).
>>>>> It's really not that complicated.
>>>>> Bill "OUT!" S.
>>>> That is not proof that the h*lm*t prevented serious head injury or death.
>>> For Bill Sornson's edification (base on participating in some of the
>>> former dicussions on this topic), the de facto definition of a
>>> "serious head injury" that the AHZs use is one caused by a severe
>>> enough impact that a helmet might migitate the damage but would not
>>> prevent an injury completely, hence the use of the word "prevent".
>>> Tom Sherman is simply trolling - he wants to restart a helmet war,
>>> having gotten bored with ranting about bike lanes.
>> I did not bring up the h*lm*t subject in this thread - that was Bill
>> Zaumen who did so. ;)
>
> Another lie - I did not bring up the "helmet subject" but rather
> pointed out an overlap between the anti-bikelane fanatics and the
> anti-helmet fanatics, which suggests that the term "fanatics" is
> quite apropos - they obviously need something to rant about.
OK, now I understand how thing work on Planet Zaumen.
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 06 Aug 2007 16:23:51
From: Bill Z.
Subject: Re: Can you make it to the market on a bike?
|
"Tom \"Johnny Sunset\" Sherman" <sunsetss0003@invailid.com > writes:
> Bill Zaumen wrote:
> > "Tom \"Johnny Sunset\" Sherman" <sunsetss0003@invailid.com> writes:
> >
> >> Bill Zaumen wrote:
> >>> "Tom \"Johnny Sunset\" Sherman" <sunsetss0003@invailid.com> writes:
> >>>
> >>>> Bill Sornson wrote:
> >>>>>> As for personal experience, show me two accidents that are IDENTICAL
> >>>>>> except for h*lm*t use and outcome. Anything else is meaningless, since
> >>>>>> the outcome if a h*lm*t had or had not been used is unknown.
> >>>>> Absurd. If I feel a seatbelt restrain me in a panic stop, then I
> >>>>> /know/ it worked as intended. Similarly, if I do an endo in a rock
> >>>>> garden and bang my lidded melon off a sharp, jagged surface (or even
> >>>>> a smooth, rounded one), then I /know/ the helmet worked as intended
> >>>>> (that is, took and absorbed the blow so my skull didn't have to).
> >>>>> It's really not that complicated.
> >>>>> Bill "OUT!" S.
> >>>> That is not proof that the h*lm*t prevented serious head injury or death.
> >>> For Bill Sornson's edification (base on participating in some of the
> >>> former dicussions on this topic), the de facto definition of a
> >>> "serious head injury" that the AHZs use is one caused by a severe
> >>> enough impact that a helmet might migitate the damage but would not
> >>> prevent an injury completely, hence the use of the word "prevent".
> >>> Tom Sherman is simply trolling - he wants to restart a helmet war,
> >>> having gotten bored with ranting about bike lanes.
> >> I did not bring up the h*lm*t subject in this thread - that was Bill
> >> Zaumen who did so. ;)
> > Another lie - I did not bring up the "helmet subject" but rather
> > pointed out an overlap between the anti-bikelane fanatics and the
> > anti-helmet fanatics, which suggests that the term "fanatics" is
> > quite apropos - they obviously need something to rant about.
>
> OK, now I understand how thing work on Planet Zaumen.
I'm not the only one who pointed your lie out to you.
--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 05 Aug 2007 22:08:57
From: Bill Sornson
Subject: Re: Can you make it to the market on a bike?
|
Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
> I did not bring up the h*lm*t subject in this thread - that was Bill
> Zaumen who did so. ;)
IIRC, he merely pointed out that the same people who have an irrational
dislike (fear?) of bike lanes seem to also disparage helmets. (No pointy
things needed, BTW. It's just a /word/.)
Bill "now if anyone would learn to TRIM..." S.
|
| | | | | | | | | |
Date: 05 Aug 2007 14:23:18
From: Bill Sornson
Subject: Re: Can you make it to the market on a bike?
|
Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
> Since when has Guy Chapman been a troll?
ROTFL Good one! ROTFL
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 04 Aug 2007 19:11:24
From: Tom \Johnny Sunset\ Sherman
Subject: Re: Can you make it to the market on a bike?
|
Bill Zaumen wrote:
> "Tom \"Johnny Sunset\" Sherman" <sunsetss0003@iinvalid.com> writes:
>
>> Bill Zaumen wrote:
>>> "Tom \"Johnny_Sunset\" Sherman" <sunsetss0003@invalida.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> Bill Zaumen wrote:
>>>>> ...
>>>>> And that's the trouble with the lot of you. Your thing about
>>>>> bike lanes, helmets, or whatever is so consuming that you will do
>>>>> anything, no matter how low, to further it. It is really pathetic.
>>>> butbutbut, we are right about these issues, so why not be passionate
>>>> when someone insists on posting misinformation?
>>> No, you are wrong about them.
>> Not in the world outside Silicon/Silly Cone Valley we are not, but
>> Zaumen has his mind made up and is not about to let it be changed by
>> real world experience.
>
> Silicon Valley *is* part of the real world, your silly name calling
> notwithstanding. We get plenty of "real world" experience in a region
> with some of the worst congestion in the U.S.
>
>> My experience has been that I can ride on most streets/roads like a
>> vehicular cyclist without problems. When in the ignorance of early
>> adulthood I tried using bike lanes and bike paths, I was frustrated by
>> the restrictions imposed by motorist behavior and severely scared at
>> how the bike lanes and paths put me in the path of the motor vehicles
>> when they were not expecting it.
>
> Oh, so you were a young, inexerpienced cyclist at one point and had
> problems that cleared up when you had more experience, but for some
> reason you attributed your former problems to bike lanes rather than
> to your lack of experience.
Nope. I did some bike lane riding no too long ago [1] and hated it.
BTW, it is spelled "inexperienced". [2]
[1] To avoid social conflict since riding the bicycle farcilities (sic)
was the other person's preference.
[2] Since Zaumen wants to play the spelling/grammar game.
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 04 Aug 2007 17:47:20
From: Bill Z.
Subject: Re: Can you make it to the market on a bike?
|
"Tom \"Johnny Sunset\" Sherman" <sunsetss0003@iinvalid.com > writes:
> Bill Zaumen wrote:
> > "Tom \"Johnny Sunset\" Sherman" <sunsetss0003@iinvalid.com> writes:
> >
> >> Bill Zaumen wrote:
> >>> "Tom \"Johnny_Sunset\" Sherman" <sunsetss0003@invalida.com> writes:
> >>>
> >>>> Bill Zaumen wrote:
> >>>>> ...
> >>>>> And that's the trouble with the lot of you. Your thing about
> >>>>> bike lanes, helmets, or whatever is so consuming that you will do
> >>>>> anything, no matter how low, to further it. It is really pathetic.
> >>>> butbutbut, we are right about these issues, so why not be passionate
> >>>> when someone insists on posting misinformation?
> >>> No, you are wrong about them.
> >> Not in the world outside Silicon/Silly Cone Valley we are not, but
> >> Zaumen has his mind made up and is not about to let it be changed by
> >> real world experience.
> > Silicon Valley *is* part of the real world, your silly name calling
> > notwithstanding. We get plenty of "real world" experience in a region
> > with some of the worst congestion in the U.S.
> >
> >> My experience has been that I can ride on most streets/roads like a
> >> vehicular cyclist without problems. When in the ignorance of early
> >> adulthood I tried using bike lanes and bike paths, I was frustrated by
> >> the restrictions imposed by motorist behavior and severely scared at
> >> how the bike lanes and paths put me in the path of the motor vehicles
> >> when they were not expecting it.
> > Oh, so you were a young, inexerpienced cyclist at one point and had
> > problems that cleared up when you had more experience, but for some
> > reason you attributed your former problems to bike lanes rather than
> > to your lack of experience.
>
> Nope. I did some bike lane riding no too long ago [1] and hated it.
Given your preconceptions, why am I not surprised?
> BTW, it is spelled "inexperienced". [2]
Oooh. You found a typo and it was clear enough for you to figure out
what was obviously meant.
--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB
|
| |
Date: 04 Aug 2007 08:05:39
From: Bill Z.
Subject: Re: Can you make it to the market on a bike?
|
tkeats2005@hotmail.com (Tom Keats) writes:
> > Krygowski has been on my case for decades for not agreeing with
> > his idiotic position on bicycle helmets (he objects to my opinion
> > that wearing one is a reaonable choice one might make). He's been
> > on a vendetta ever since.
> >
> > Keats, of course, is another one of these nuts: see
> > message ID <lv1qtc.s4b.ln@bud.garden.local> where he says:
> >
> > I'm more inclined to the opinion that the more vehement
> > proponents of MHLs are car drivers who feel uncomfortable
> > sharing the streets and roads with bicyclists, because they
> > simply don't understand cycling, and nothing will un-convince
> > them that riding bicycles in traffic is daredevilry. If they
> > see us 'daredevil cyclists' (I say that with tongue in cheek)
> > wearing helmets, those drivers' comfort levels are somewhat
> > increased. So they want /all/ cyclists to wear helmets.
> >
>
> Thank you. I still maintain that position.
Your position is idiotic for the reasons I gave. It is simply
not why MHL were passed.
> Anyways, back to La Brea for you.
> And fuck off with your cowardly trying to futz the headers
> in your half-assedly vain attempt to prevent replies.
Keats, that is simply a bald-faced lie. I did absolutely nothing to
the headers. For some reason, I can't currently fetch the post you
replied to, but when I tried to get the last 200 posts on this
newsgroup, it came back with only 12. If anything got "futzed",
you can blame my ISP, but there is no way for me to diagnose the
problem when I can't get the post. There might have been some
transient problem with the server, but there is no way for me to tell.
--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB
|
|
