On Dec 15, 10:16 am, Frank Krygowski wrote:


Robert, you just said "... I am certain..." with no citations, no
mention of data, no corroboration but your own belief system. Get
some data and cite it, or don't talk to be about belief systems,
ideology, fantasy or whatever.

Again: What would be needed is good data on hits from directly behind
either in daylight, or at night with properly lit and reflectorized
cyclists. Also needed would be data that accurately counts fatalities
from people passing too closely who do not hit directly from behind.
If you have those numbers, why not give them?

I said I was certain because it is a mathematical certainty based on
available data, not because of my precious beliefs. I'll explain it to
you:

I already mentioned Cross-Fisher, which broke down car-bike collision
types into 37 different types. Car smashes into rear of bicyclist was
Type 13, and accounted for about 24.6% of all cyclist fatalities, _by
far_ the most common of any fatal accident type. Dangerous passes were
Type 16 and accounted for 1.8% of all cyclist fatalities.

Are you getting this so far? 24.6%. 1.8%

According to Cross-Fisher 71% of Type 13 fatal crashes occurred at
night. A whoppping huge number!

Let us assume that ALL of the deceased cyclists smashed into from
behind at night by motorists who didn't see them were improperly lit.
(Of course this is not true, but let's assume that it is.) In that
case, there would still be 29% of Type 13 crashes remaining which
occurred in broad daylight.

Assuming 100 total cyclist fatalities then, ~25 would be Type 13 and
~2 would be Type 16. And there would still be at least 7 well-lit Type
13 fatalities versus maybe 2 from dangerous passes.

IOW, it's not even close, no matter how you slice it.

Ralph Wessels studied police reports in Washington State from
1988-1993 and broke down car-bike collision types with a system
roughly equivalent to Cross-Fisher's.

Wessels counted 405 Type 13-style collisions in the records, versus 70
Type 16 dangerous pass-caused collisions. He found 10 fatal Type 13
wrecks and 1 fatal dangerous pass. 10-1.

http://www.industrializedcyclist.com...ton_88to93.pdf

You said before that you thought dangerous passes accounted for more
fatalities than drivers' completely failing to notice the bicyclist in
front of them. Clearly, you were very, very wrong about that.

Again I'll ask -- in the face of these contrary facts, how will you
change your strongly-held beliefs?