Survey - Lorry Drivers vs Cyclists

"Marc" wrote in message
...
On 18/01/2010 19:39, Brimstone wrote:


"Marc" wrote in message
...
On 18/01/2010 09:38, Brimstone wrote:


"Marc" wrote in message
...
On 17/01/2010 20:10, Peter Grange wrote:
On Sun, 17 Jan 2010 17:02:28 -0000, "Brimstone"
wrote:



wrote in message
...
NM wrote:
On 17 Jan, 15:29, wrote:
Vicko Zoomba wrote:
On 16 Jan, 22:14, wrote:

There isn't one, there aren't enough literate lorry drivers
for it
to be worth the effort.

ho ho ho....well as a lorry driver I'm probably educated far
higher
than you will ever be.

Err, no you are wrong. Marc would win on the education
comparison.

Wanna bet?

I don't gamble, but if you are suggesting that they education
required to
be a lorry driver exceeds the education of the poster known as Marc
then you are wrong.
The education needed to do a job has nothing to do with the
education some
of the people doing the job have received.


Agreed, but he did say "as a lorry driver".

It doesn't make any difference, you can't trust anything a lorry
driver says. Don't forget this is the "profession" that is so
untrustworthy that the Government had to set up weighbridges because
lorry drivers can't be trusted to drive at a legal weight limit;
Tachographs because they couldn't be trusted to stay within their
hours, even their hours are restricted because they can't be trusted
to drive when they aren't tired; speed limiters because they can't be
trusted to keep to speed limits. Lorry drivers have shown over and
over again that they can't be trusted, so why would lieing about
education bother them?

And no scientist ever manipulates results to his employers advantage in
order to keep his job?

No, of course not.


Irrelevant, unless you can find examples of "scientists" having to be
forced by legislation to stop their actions then there is no
comparison between the trustworthiness of scientists and lorry
drivers. Over decades and repeatedly, lorry drivers have been shown to
be untrustworthy over loads, hours, speeds etc...

And why did lorry drivers behave in that manner?

Because they can't be trusted.....

******.

"Phil W Lee" phil(at)lee-family(dot)me(dot)uk wrote in message
...
"Mr Pounder" considered Sun, 17 Jan
2010 17:54:53 GMT the perfect time to write:


"Marc" wrote in message
.. .
On 17/01/2010 00:02, Road_Hog wrote:
wrote in message
...
There is a running thread in uk.rec.cycling.moderated about a survey
being done for the CTC regarding cyclists and lorry drivers.

Some have said that the design of the survey is totally biased in
favour of cyclists

The site says : "If you are a regular cyclist, please answer the 10
questions that follow."


http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?s...DNa0bc2A_3d_3d

I do like the balanced and fair nature of the questions in this survey
and
the way lorry drivers are treated with respect by those lycra urban
warriors.

Question1) Are lorry drivers ****s.
A) Yes, they're ****s.
B) Yes, mostly they are ****s.
C)Yes, quite often they are ****s.
D)Yes, they're all ****s all of the time.
E) I've never met a lorry driver who isn't a ****.
In this text box section you can add in further thoughts (on why lorry
drivers are ****s and should be banned from the roads.)


E! Every time! Thanks for giving me the chance to point this out.
A pity that your questions missed out on how bad lorry drivers smell.

Ever been caught short at 4AM on the road to nowhere?
I have, it is not very nice.

Shouldn't have had that last pint.

It was the ****ty southern water that did it.

Mr Pounder

On 18/01/2010 18:45, Marc wrote:

Irrelevant, unless you can find examples of "scientists" having to be
forced by legislation to stop their actions then there is no comparison
between the trustworthiness of scientists and lorry drivers.

I think you'll find there are many occasions where the law has to be
used to prevent scientists getting ahead of themselves and risking the
lives of everyone on the planet.

On Mon, 18 Jan 2010 19:27:36 -0000, "OG"
wrote:


"JMS" wrote in message
.. .
On Sun, 17 Jan 2010 23:25:40 +0000, Phil W Lee
phil(at)lee-family(dot)me(dot)uk wrote:

"OG" considered Sun, 17 Jan 2010 16:58:02
-0000 the perfect time to write:



snip


That was how you responded to the survey?

If so, we'd better warn CTC that it's now doubly invalid, since they
were looking for responses from cyclists to this survey, and truckers
in the other (so far undiscovered) one.


I am an occasional cyclist - are you saying that my views do not
count?


Of course they count, I just wonder whether those were your actual responses
that you submitted to the survey.



I was asking Lee as he was suggesting "warning" the CTC for some
reason, if that was I had responded; perhaps he could explain.

"JMS" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 18 Jan 2010 19:27:36 -0000, "OG"
wrote:


"JMS" wrote in message
. ..
On Sun, 17 Jan 2010 23:25:40 +0000, Phil W Lee
phil(at)lee-family(dot)me(dot)uk wrote:

"OG" considered Sun, 17 Jan 2010 16:58:02
-0000 the perfect time to write:



snip


That was how you responded to the survey?

If so, we'd better warn CTC that it's now doubly invalid, since they
were looking for responses from cyclists to this survey, and truckers
in the other (so far undiscovered) one.


I am an occasional cyclist - are you saying that my views do not
count?


Of course they count, I just wonder whether those were your actual
responses
that you submitted to the survey.



I was asking Lee as he was suggesting "warning" the CTC for some
reason, if that was I had responded; perhaps he could explain.


Clearly you didn't actually respond to the survey in the way you claimed.

I don't know why you didnt just say "No I didn't respond in that way".

On Mon, 18 Jan 2010 23:34:21 -0000, "OG"
wrote:


"JMS" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 18 Jan 2010 19:27:36 -0000, "OG"
wrote:


"JMS" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 17 Jan 2010 23:25:40 +0000, Phil W Lee
phil(at)lee-family(dot)me(dot)uk wrote:

"OG" considered Sun, 17 Jan 2010 16:58:02
-0000 the perfect time to write:



snip


That was how you responded to the survey?

If so, we'd better warn CTC that it's now doubly invalid, since they
were looking for responses from cyclists to this survey, and truckers
in the other (so far undiscovered) one.


I am an occasional cyclist - are you saying that my views do not
count?


Of course they count, I just wonder whether those were your actual
responses
that you submitted to the survey.



I was asking Lee as he was suggesting "warning" the CTC for some
reason, if that was I had responded; perhaps he could explain.


Clearly you didn't actually respond to the survey in the way you claimed.

I don't know why you didnt just say "No I didn't respond in that way".


Why are the answers I gave here , "clearly" not my actual response?

In article , Marc says...

Irrelevant, unless you can find examples of "scientists" having to be
forced by legislation to stop their actions then there is no comparison
between the trustworthiness of scientists and lorry drivers.

How about the legislation on cloning? They were prevented from
attempting to clone a human, even to the embryonic stage, after "Dolly
the sheep" came to being.

--
Conor

I'm not prejudiced. I hate everybody equally.

In article , Marc says...

And why did lorry drivers behave in that manner?

Because they can't be trusted.....

Is the wrong answer.


--
Conor

I'm not prejudiced. I hate everybody equally.

On 19/01/2010 01:29, Conor wrote:
In , Marc says...

Irrelevant, unless you can find examples of "scientists" having to be
forced by legislation to stop their actions then there is no comparison
between the trustworthiness of scientists and lorry drivers.

How about the legislation on cloning? They were prevented from
attempting to clone a human, even to the embryonic stage, after "Dolly
the sheep" came to being.


Show me the X,000s of cloned humans that were made before the
legislation was finally brought in to stop this? Now compare this with
the number of times that lorry drivers wee shown to be untrustworthy and
had to have their behaviour curbed.

"Marc" wrote in message
...
On 19/01/2010 01:29, Conor wrote:
In , Marc says...

Irrelevant, unless you can find examples of "scientists" having to be
forced by legislation to stop their actions then there is no comparison
between the trustworthiness of scientists and lorry drivers.

How about the legislation on cloning? They were prevented from
attempting to clone a human, even to the embryonic stage, after "Dolly
the sheep" came to being.


Show me the X,000s of cloned humans that were made before the legislation
was finally brought in to stop this? Now compare this with the number of
times that lorry drivers wee shown to be untrustworthy and had to have
their behaviour curbed.

Do you do everything your boss tells you, or wants you to do, or even what
you think he wants you to do, or are your actions constrained by law?