On Sat, 30 Apr 2005 01:31:33 GMT, (Bill Z.)
wrote in message :

I was revering to the reporter (the author of the newspaper article),
not the author of the paper the reporter mentioned.

No you were not, you were referring to the person who merely alerted
the author of the article to the existence of the paper. As you would
know, if you had bothered to read the article before rubbishing it.

Oh come off it. He mentioned Burdett prominently enough that Burdett
was obviously a significant source. If you had bothered to read the
post you first responded to, you'd know that - it was clearly stated.

Avery was *not* the author of the article - and this is obvious if you
read it. You rubbished the article without reading it.

Any reasonably intelligent reader would not have made the mistake of
rubbishing a document without reading it.

Looking in a mirror, Guy?

Oh, good question. Better review the available facts:

Have you read the article under discussion?
Chapman: Yes.
Zaumen: No.

Have you read the paper it is discussing?
Chapman: Yes.
Zaumen: Refuses to say, but no evidence of having done so.

Have you been rubbishing the article based on personal prejudice about
someone you mistakenly identified as the author?
Chapman: No
Zaumen: Yes.

So, that'll be a "no" on the mirror question, then.

Do feel free to come back when you have read enough to make some
worthwhile contribution. The article is available online from
Accident Analysis and Prevention's website, at cost, or if you email
the author he might send you a copy. As long as he thinks you have a
genuine interest.

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