Spectator killed by out of control racing cyclist

Should be a big compo claim there, I am certain British Cycling have
fridge-freezer insurance.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news...killed-4210824

Mrcheerful wrote:
snip
You appear to spend much of your time scouring the internet for stories like
this, including off-topic and non-uk stories. No doubt you will defend your
actions by saying that putting 'OT' before the subject is acceptable. It is
in many cases, but your morbid fixation with this sort of story really seems
to be becoming a situation for clinical intervention. Perhaps you have
already sought help. With your frequent and continued postings of this sort
of story you risk going beyond saturation point (if you haven't done so
already) where you will find that many people may kill-file you; in which
case all of your posts will cease to have any effect.

--
Iain

On 20/09/2014 12:20, Iain wrote:
Mrcheerful wrote:
snip
You appear to spend much of your time scouring the internet for stories like
this, including off-topic and non-uk stories. No doubt you will defend your
actions by saying that putting 'OT' before the subject is acceptable. It is
in many cases, but your morbid fixation with this sort of story really seems
to be becoming a situation for clinical intervention. Perhaps you have
already sought help. With your frequent and continued postings of this sort
of story you risk going beyond saturation point (if you haven't done so
already) where you will find that many people may kill-file you; in which
case all of your posts will cease to have any effect.


Thank you for your concern.
I cite cases like this to counter the: 'bicycles have so little energy
they never hurt anyone or kill anyone' brigade.

On Sat, 20 Sep 2014 16:52:21 +0100
Mrcheerful wrote:

Thank you for your concern.
I cite cases like this to counter the: 'bicycles have so little
energy they never hurt anyone or kill anyone' brigade.

Except I think you'll find that's "bicycles don't kill a statistically
significant number of people in the UK". Obviously each death is a
tragedy, but you're more likely to be struck by lightning than killed
by a bicycle. It does seem that there may be more of a problem in the
USA, but that reflects their totally different culture of road users.
Something which those who are in favour of compulsory segregation of
cyclists might do well to reflect on.

"Rob Morley" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 20 Sep 2014 16:52:21 +0100
Mrcheerful wrote:

Thank you for your concern.
I cite cases like this to counter the: 'bicycles have so little
energy they never hurt anyone or kill anyone' brigade.

Except I think you'll find that's "bicycles don't kill a statistically
significant number of people in the UK". Obviously each death is a
tragedy, but you're more likely to be struck by lightning than killed
by a bicycle. It does seem that there may be more of a problem in the
USA, but that reflects their totally different culture of road users.
Something which those who are in favour of compulsory segregation of
cyclists might do well to reflect on.


"statistically significant number"
So, the people killed by bicycles must be insignificant in the world of
cycling.

On 20/09/2014 19:44, Mr Pounder wrote:
"Rob Morley" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 20 Sep 2014 16:52:21 +0100
Mrcheerful wrote:

Thank you for your concern.
I cite cases like this to counter the: 'bicycles have so little
energy they never hurt anyone or kill anyone' brigade.

Except I think you'll find that's "bicycles don't kill a statistically
significant number of people in the UK". Obviously each death is a
tragedy, but you're more likely to be struck by lightning than killed
by a bicycle. It does seem that there may be more of a problem in the
USA, but that reflects their totally different culture of road users.
Something which those who are in favour of compulsory segregation of
cyclists might do well to reflect on.


"statistically significant number"
So, the people killed by bicycles must be insignificant in the world of
cycling.

People get confused about what statistically significant actually means.

I think a more valid point is that whilst there is a very small
probability of being killed by a cyclist there is a reasonably high
probability that a cyclist may shout at you if you drive like a dick.
How people want to respond to this very real threat is up to them.
Personally I quite enjoy reading your postings in much the same way as I
enjoy watching F1 crashes.

"Nick" wrote in message
eb.com...
On 20/09/2014 19:44, Mr Pounder wrote:
"Rob Morley" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 20 Sep 2014 16:52:21 +0100
Mrcheerful wrote:

Thank you for your concern.
I cite cases like this to counter the: 'bicycles have so little
energy they never hurt anyone or kill anyone' brigade.

Except I think you'll find that's "bicycles don't kill a statistically
significant number of people in the UK". Obviously each death is a
tragedy, but you're more likely to be struck by lightning than killed
by a bicycle. It does seem that there may be more of a problem in the
USA, but that reflects their totally different culture of road users.
Something which those who are in favour of compulsory segregation of
cyclists might do well to reflect on.


"statistically significant number"
So, the people killed by bicycles must be insignificant in the world of
cycling.

People get confused about what statistically significant actually means.

Can you please clarify that?

I think a more valid point is that whilst there is a very small
probability of being killed by a cyclist there is a reasonably high
probability that a cyclist may shout at you if you drive like a dick.
How people want to respond to this very real threat is up to them.
Personally I quite enjoy reading your postings in much the same way as I
enjoy watching F1 crashes.

The first cyclist that shouts at me will meet my fist. It is I that shout
"FOOTPATH" at the cyclist riding on it. They all jump back into the gutter
and look at me with the usual gormless open mouths. I'm sure that you will
be not be an exception.
I have always confused you with Frank Spencer, you and him have very similar
characteristics.

On 20/09/2014 21:47, Mr Pounder wrote:
"Nick" wrote in message
eb.com...
On 20/09/2014 19:44, Mr Pounder wrote:
"Rob Morley" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 20 Sep 2014 16:52:21 +0100
Mrcheerful wrote:

Thank you for your concern.
I cite cases like this to counter the: 'bicycles have so little
energy they never hurt anyone or kill anyone' brigade.

Except I think you'll find that's "bicycles don't kill a statistically
significant number of people in the UK". Obviously each death is a
tragedy, but you're more likely to be struck by lightning than killed
by a bicycle. It does seem that there may be more of a problem in the
USA, but that reflects their totally different culture of road users.
Something which those who are in favour of compulsory segregation of
cyclists might do well to reflect on.


"statistically significant number"
So, the people killed by bicycles must be insignificant in the world of
cycling.

People get confused about what statistically significant actually means.

Can you please clarify that?

People confuse statistically significant to mean something is big or
pronounced. It is actually a measure that the claimed result of a test
is not just down to luck. If you are interested look up null hypothesis
test.

I think a more valid point is that whilst there is a very small
probability of being killed by a cyclist there is a reasonably high
probability that a cyclist may shout at you if you drive like a dick.
How people want to respond to this very real threat is up to them.
Personally I quite enjoy reading your postings in much the same way as I
enjoy watching F1 crashes.

The first cyclist that shouts at me will meet my fist. It is I that shout
"FOOTPATH" at the cyclist riding on it. They all jump back into the gutter
and look at me with the usual gormless open mouths. I'm sure that you will
be not be an exception.
I have always confused you with Frank Spencer, you and him have very similar
characteristics.


Don't forget to keep usenet informed as and when these encounters happen.

"Nick" wrote in message
...
On 20/09/2014 21:47, Mr Pounder wrote:
"Nick" wrote in message
eb.com...
On 20/09/2014 19:44, Mr Pounder wrote:
"Rob Morley" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 20 Sep 2014 16:52:21 +0100
Mrcheerful wrote:

Thank you for your concern.
I cite cases like this to counter the: 'bicycles have so little
energy they never hurt anyone or kill anyone' brigade.

Except I think you'll find that's "bicycles don't kill a statistically
significant number of people in the UK". Obviously each death is a
tragedy, but you're more likely to be struck by lightning than killed
by a bicycle. It does seem that there may be more of a problem in the
USA, but that reflects their totally different culture of road users.
Something which those who are in favour of compulsory segregation of
cyclists might do well to reflect on.


"statistically significant number"
So, the people killed by bicycles must be insignificant in the world of
cycling.

People get confused about what statistically significant actually means.

Can you please clarify that?

People confuse statistically significant to mean something is big or
pronounced. It is actually a measure that the claimed result of a test
is not just down to luck. If you are interested look up null hypothesis
test.

I myself do not confuse this. Thanks anyway.

I think a more valid point is that whilst there is a very small
probability of being killed by a cyclist there is a reasonably high
probability that a cyclist may shout at you if you drive like a dick.
How people want to respond to this very real threat is up to them.
Personally I quite enjoy reading your postings in much the same way as I
enjoy watching F1 crashes.

The first cyclist that shouts at me will meet my fist. It is I that shout
"FOOTPATH" at the cyclist riding on it. They all jump back into the
gutter
and look at me with the usual gormless open mouths. I'm sure that you
will
be not be an exception.
I have always confused you with Frank Spencer, you and him have very
similar
characteristics.


Don't forget to keep usenet informed as and when these encounters happen.

For what porpoise?

On 20/09/2014 22:40, Mr Pounder wrote:


Don't forget to keep usenet informed as and when these encounters happen.

For what porpoise?

For fun, that's the point isn't it?