Education of Psycholists

It looks like progress is being made on use of their acquired
language.

Please see Ian Jackson's post:

Message-ID:


(Good to see that Porky Chapman couldn't even understand the
question)

--

"I have never said that I encourage my children to wear helmets. I would challenge judith
to find the place where I said I encourage my children to wear helmets." Guy Chapman
Judith then produced the web page where he said "I encourage my children to wear helmets."
Later that day Chapman immediately added the following to the web page:
"This page is out of date and preserved only for convenience" but he left the date last updated as 31/08/2004.

On Jul 26, 3:29*pm, JMS wrote:
It looks like progress is being made

No, you're still posting.

On Mon, 26 Jul 2010 15:20:02 -0700 (PDT), PhilO
wrote:

On Jul 26, 3:29*pm, JMS wrote:
It looks like progress is being made

No, you're still posting.

On the other hand, CTC has been doing some work:
http://www.ctc.org.uk/DesktopDefault.aspx?TabID=5242

I wonder how many the usual suspects would get right?

Guy
--
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk/
The usenet price promise: all opinions offered in newsgroups are guaranteed
to be worth the price paid.

On Jul 27, 10:26*am, "Just zis Guy, you know?"
wrote:
On Mon, 26 Jul 2010 15:20:02 -0700 (PDT), PhilO
wrote:

On Jul 26, 3:29*pm, JMS wrote:
It looks like progress is being made

No, you're still posting.

On the other hand, CTC has been doing some work:
http://www.ctc.org.uk/DesktopDefault.aspx?TabID=5242

I wonder how many the usual suspects would get right?

Guy

Not many, because most of the 'correct' answers are stupid or
ambiguous!

On Tue, 27 Jul 2010 02:40:31 -0700 (PDT), Derek C
wrote:

On Jul 27, 10:26*am, "Just zis Guy, you know?"
wrote:
On Mon, 26 Jul 2010 15:20:02 -0700 (PDT), PhilO
wrote:

On Jul 26, 3:29*pm, JMS wrote:
It looks like progress is being made

No, you're still posting.

On the other hand, CTC has been doing some work:
http://www.ctc.org.uk/DesktopDefault.aspx?TabID=5242

I wonder how many the usual suspects would get right?

Guy

Not many, because most of the 'correct' answers are stupid or
ambiguous!

You are wrong. See "The effect of me being right on you being wrong",
International Journal of Because I Said So, vol. 7, 2007.

End of.

Guy
--
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk/
The usenet price promise: all opinions offered in newsgroups are guaranteed
to be worth the price paid.

On 27/07/2010 10:26, Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:
On Mon, 26 Jul 2010 15:20:02 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

On Jul 26, 3:29 pm, wrote:
It looks like progress is being made

No, you're still posting.

On the other hand, CTC has been doing some work:
http://www.ctc.org.uk/DesktopDefault.aspx?TabID=5242

I wonder how many the usual suspects would get right?

CTC obviously couldn't get it right:

- Their "correct" answer to the 3rd question implies that law-breaking
is not anti-social.
- Their "correct" answer to the 4th question is factually incorrect on
at least 2 counts and misleading on others.
- Their "correct" answer to the 5th question uses the trick of absolute
numbers rather than rates as a measure of "danger".
- Their "correct" answer to the 6th question asserts opinions as facts.
- Their "correct" answer to the 8th question is factually incorrect.
- Their "correct" answer to the 10th question actually evades the question.

IMHO, The suggested answers are a disgrace. They look like they are
designed to deceive and mislead cyclists and to deliberately antagonise
motorists.

--
Matt B

On 27/07/2010 10:26, Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:
On Mon, 26 Jul 2010 15:20:02 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

On Jul 26, 3:29 pm, wrote:
It looks like progress is being made

No, you're still posting.

On the other hand, CTC has been doing some work:
http://www.ctc.org.uk/DesktopDefault.aspx?TabID=5242

I wonder how many the usual suspects would get right?

What I found interesting about the quiz was that many of the answers are
actually, in my opinion, wrong or ambiguous at best.

One even suggesting that red-light jumping is safe .. implying the laws
that govern traffic shouldn't apply to cycles! For a 'respected'
National organisation to condone rule/law breaking because they say it's
safer is simply wrong and gives both the wrong impression and is
downright misleading. There really should be no ambiguity in what they
say regarding conduct on the roads.

I found them wrong, or ambiguous, from a cyclists and a drivers point of
view and figure they must be extremely misleading to a newcomer to
cycling.

Not a good quiz.

--
Paul - xxx

'96/'97 Landrover Discovery 300 Tdi
Dyna Tech Cro-Mo comp

On 27 July, 11:47, Paul - xxx wrote:
On 27/07/2010 10:26, Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:

On Mon, 26 Jul 2010 15:20:02 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

On Jul 26, 3:29 pm, *wrote:
It looks like progress is being made

No, you're still posting.

On the other hand, CTC has been doing some work:
http://www.ctc.org.uk/DesktopDefault.aspx?TabID=5242

I wonder how many the usual suspects would get right?

What I found interesting about the quiz was that many of the answers are
actually, in my opinion, wrong or ambiguous at best.

One even suggesting that red-light jumping is safe .. implying the laws
that govern traffic shouldn't apply to cycles! *For a 'respected'
National organisation to condone rule/law breaking because they say it's
safer is simply wrong and gives both the wrong impression and is
downright misleading. *There really should be no ambiguity in what they
say regarding conduct on the roads.

I found them wrong, or ambiguous, from a cyclists and a drivers point of
view and figure they must be extremely misleading to a newcomer to
cycling.

Not a good quiz.

--
Paul - xxx

'96/'97 Landrover Discovery 300 Tdi
Dyna Tech Cro-Mo comp

Blimey:
"the vast majority of pedestrians are killed by motor vehicles ".
I had no idea walking was so dangerous. :-)

Matt B wrote:
On 27/07/2010 10:26, Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:
On Mon, 26 Jul 2010 15:20:02 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

On Jul 26, 3:29 pm, wrote:
It looks like progress is being made

No, you're still posting.

On the other hand, CTC has been doing some work:
http://www.ctc.org.uk/DesktopDefault.aspx?TabID=5242

I wonder how many the usual suspects would get right?

CTC obviously couldn't get it right:

- Their "correct" answer to the 3rd question implies that law-breaking
is not anti-social.
- Their "correct" answer to the 4th question is factually incorrect on
at least 2 counts and misleading on others.
- Their "correct" answer to the 5th question uses the trick of absolute
numbers rather than rates as a measure of "danger".
- Their "correct" answer to the 6th question asserts opinions as facts.
- Their "correct" answer to the 8th question is factually incorrect.

QUOTE:
Vehicle Excise Duty is a fee paid to license vehicles. It must be paid on
all vehicles used on the public roads, and it is sometimes incorrectly
referred to as 'road tax'.
ENDQUOTE

So cyclists pay road tax on their bikes.

It must be true. Bikes are vehicles, and the CTC (fronted by that honourable
man, Jon Snow) say that road tax must be paid on all vehicles used on the
public roads.

- Their "correct" answer to the 10th question actually evades the question.

IMHO, The suggested answers are a disgrace. They look like they are
designed to deceive and mislead cyclists and to deliberately antagonise
motorists.

I agree.

But it's cheering to read that cyclists pay road tax at last.

JNugent wrote:

QUOTE:
Vehicle Excise Duty is a fee paid to license vehicles. It must be paid
on all vehicles used on the public roads, and it is sometimes
incorrectly referred to as 'road tax'.
ENDQUOTE

So cyclists pay road tax on their bikes.

Which part of "incorrectly" is confusing you?

BugBear