|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Mountain Biking Carnage
On Sunday, January 13, 2013 1:55:50 PM UTC-8, Blackblade wrote:
If you had any sense, which you obviously don't, you would admit that I'm right. If you think you are right tell me again about my masters in statistics! IDIOT. You really are getting desperate aren't you ? Either that, or you have forgotten what you have previously written. I suppose that much ordure must affect the brain ! From your own website "I have an M.A. in Mathematics (including study in Statistics) from Harvard University." So where do you see "Masters in Statistics"? Can't you even READ????? So, stop equivocating and address the fundamental issue; you, who claim to know statistics, are observing a very rare occurrence of death for an activity which is daily engaged in by tens of millions. Another lie. You can try and obfuscate all you like but you know that this means that the likelihood of such an events is incredibly low. Of course, it's not zero so there will be some deaths ... but, critically, far less than die from many many other factors. That's not the point. The point is that moubntain biking is far more dangerous than anything you mentioned. Danger isn't measured by total deaths, but by deaths per hour of the relevant activity. You are only demonstrating your utter ignorance of statistics. And, PS, Harvard is only ranked fourth in the world ...http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datab...ties-2012#data So what degree did you get, and where? I know you are bluffing, or you would have told us already! |
Ads |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Mountain Biking Carnage
That's not the point. The point is that moubntain biking is far more dangerous than anything you mentioned. Danger isn't measured by total deaths, but by deaths per hour of the relevant activity. You are only demonstrating your utter ignorance of statistics.
Mike, you don't get to suddenly decide how statistics are applied. I simply took the published figures. Also, just to put you straight, the usual measure when applied to transport is Death per Mile Travelled (or x miles travelled) ... no need to thank me by the way ! I already invited you, if you want to come up with something more, to provide data. I don't have deaths per hour ... I highly doubt you do either. However, to play the game, let's do a strawman ... Let's say that the US's 50 million mountainbikers ride, on average, once every two weeks for 15 miles. You postulate that the distance is higher on your website but, hey, let's give you a chance on this. That means that the total distance covered in a year is 19.5 billion miles. You have about 12-15 deaths on your list ... but that's for the whole world ... not just the US. However, let's give you an even bigger chance and say that it's 24 fatalities per annum in the US alone. That means that there are 0.00123 fatalities per million MTB miles travelled. However, the figure for driving in the US is 1.5 per million miles travelled. So, they are not even close ... as I said ... even if you make the MTB figures ridiculous (say 2,400 deaths per annum in the US ... which is certainly not the case) you still only come up with 0.123 deaths per million miles. Quad Erat Demonstrandum ... So what degree did you get, and where? I know you are bluffing, or you would have told us already! Appeal to authority = Logical Fallacy. I am not playing your stupid games. However, given that I am British (as you know) and that there is only one British university on the list above Harvard I thought you might have figured it out. Ho hum ! |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Mountain Biking Carnage
On Monday, January 14, 2013 6:59:35 AM UTC-8, Blackblade wrote:
Mike, you don't get to suddenly decide how statistics are applied. I simply took the published figures. They aren't relevant, as I already explained. I guess you are too dumb to understand statistics. Also, just to put you straight, the usual measure when applied to transport is Death per Mile Travelled (or x miles travelled) ... no need to thank me by the way ! That would be fine, but you don't provide that. I already invited you, if you want to come up with something more, to provide data. I don't have deaths per hour ... I highly doubt you do either. It's obvious. However, to play the game, let's do a strawman ... Let's say that the US's 50 million mountainbikers There aren't 50 million mountain bikers in the U.S., liar. ride, on average, once every two weeks for 15 miles. You postulate that the distance is higher on your website but, hey, let's give you a chance on this. That means that the total distance covered in a year is 19.5 billion miles. You have about 12-15 deaths on your list ... but that's for the whole world ... not just the US. However, let's give you an even bigger chance and say that it's 24 fatalities per annum in the US alone. That means that there are 0.00123 fatalities per million MTB miles travelled. However, the figure for driving in the US is 1.5 per million miles travelled. So, they are not even close ... as I said ... even if you make the MTB figures ridiculous (say 2,400 deaths per annum in the US ... which is certainly not the case) you still only come up with 0.123 deaths per million miles. Quad Erat Demonstrandum ... So what degree did you get, and where? I know you are bluffing, or you would have told us already! Appeal to authority = Logical Fallacy. I am not playing your stupid games. However, given that I am British (as you know) No, I don't. and that there is only one British university on the list above Harvard I thought you might have figured it out. Ho hum ! That only indicates your stupidity. You have to look at how they were rated when I graduated from Berkeley & Harvard, when your university probably wasn't on the map. I can't believe you ever went to a university, to make such a simple blunder. So tell me again about my "masters in statistics"! LIAR! |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Mountain Biking Carnage
On Tuesday, January 15, 2013 2:40:30 AM UTC, Mike Vandeman wrote:
On Monday, January 14, 2013 6:59:35 AM UTC-8, Blackblade wrote: Mike, you don't get to suddenly decide how statistics are applied. I simply took the published figures. They aren't relevant, as I already explained. I guess you are too dumb to understand statistics. Also, just to put you straight, the usual measure when applied to transport is Death per Mile Travelled (or x miles travelled) ... no need to thank me by the way ! That would be fine, but you don't provide that. I think you will find, if you can be bothered to read the entire post, that I estimate exactly that ! I already invited you, if you want to come up with something more, to provide data. I don't have deaths per hour ... I highly doubt you do either.. It's obvious. No, it's not. And as some sort of, albeit very poor, scientist you should know that. The data suggests that the death rate from MTB is orders of magnitude lower than driving ... so your 'obvious' is complete crap. There aren't 50 million mountain bikers in the U.S., liar. The Journal of Park and Recreation Administration estimated that there were 45.2 million back in 2006. IMBA states that there are 50 million. Where do you get your data ? Oh, sorry, I forgot ... you magically make numbers up and they are axiomatically true ! No other comments on the logic/proof ????? Instead, you go back to my university education which, like yours, is completely irrelevant to the point. Neither of us have degrees in Mountain Biking ! So, no refutation that driving is orders of magnitude more dangerous than mountainbiking ? Thought not ... That only indicates your stupidity. You have to look at how they were rated when I graduated from Berkeley & Harvard, when your university probably wasn't on the map. I can't believe you ever went to a university, to make such a simple blunder. "As the oldest university in the English-speaking world, Oxford is a unique and historic institution." Ha ha. I think you'll find that my university existed long before even the USA :-) You really are lazy aren't you ? Can't be bothered to do a five second check to determine the veracity of anything ? That's why no-one believes you anymore ... you spout opinion as if it were fact and then change the subject when you're called on it. |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Mountain Biking Carnage
On Tuesday, January 15, 2013 5:04:04 AM UTC-8, Blackblade wrote:
On Tuesday, January 15, 2013 2:40:30 AM UTC, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Monday, January 14, 2013 6:59:35 AM UTC-8, Blackblade wrote: Mike, you don't get to suddenly decide how statistics are applied. I simply took the published figures. They aren't relevant, as I already explained. I guess you are too dumb to understand statistics. Also, just to put you straight, the usual measure when applied to transport is Death per Mile Travelled (or x miles travelled) ... no need to thank me by the way ! That would be fine, but you don't provide that. I think you will find, if you can be bothered to read the entire post, that I estimate exactly that ! I already invited you, if you want to come up with something more, to provide data. I don't have deaths per hour ... I highly doubt you do either. It's obvious. No, it's not. And as some sort of, albeit very poor, scientist you should know that. The data suggests that the death rate from MTB is orders of magnitude lower than driving ... so your 'obvious' is complete crap. There aren't 50 million mountain bikers in the U.S., liar. The Journal of Park and Recreation Administration estimated that there were 45.2 million back in 2006. IMBA states that there are 50 million. Where do you get your data ? Oh, sorry, I forgot ... you magically make numbers up and they are axiomatically true ! No other comments on the logic/proof ????? Instead, you go back to my university education which, like yours, is completely irrelevant to the point. Neither of us have degrees in Mountain Biking ! So, no refutation that driving is orders of magnitude more dangerous than mountainbiking ? Thought not ... That only indicates your stupidity. You have to look at how they were rated when I graduated from Berkeley & Harvard, when your university probably wasn't on the map. I can't believe you ever went to a university, to make such a simple blunder. "As the oldest university in the English-speaking world, Oxford is a unique and historic institution." Ha ha. I think you'll find that my university existed long before even the USA :-) You really are lazy aren't you ? Can't be bothered to do a five second check to determine the veracity of anything ? That's why no-one believes you anymore ... you spout opinion as if it were fact and then change the subject when you're called on it. Tell me again about my "masters in statistics", Oh Great Oxford Scholar. What WAS your major? Football? Ping Pong? Please enlighten us, Oh Great One. |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Mountain Biking Carnage
Tell me again about my "masters in statistics", Oh Great Oxford Scholar. What WAS your major? Football? Ping Pong? Please enlighten us, Oh Great One.. So you concede the major point then I assume. Mountain Biking is far less dangerous than driving a car. I assume this because, as usual when you lose, you then flail around on ancillary points as here. I hereby rescind any comment about any ability of yours in statistics ... you clearly have none. If "I have an M.A. in Mathematics (including study in Statistics) from Harvard University." as quoted on your website means you have no mastery of statistics then the great institution of Harvard must be very disappointed in you. And, as I said, my undergraduate and postgraduate qualifications have zero to do with the argument. I am not claiming any authority by dint of my educational background ... simply letting the facts speak for themselves. I just thought it very funny that, yet again, your presumptions were provably wrong. |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Mountain Biking Carnage
On Wednesday, January 16, 2013 4:53:02 AM UTC-8, Blackblade wrote:
Tell me again about my "masters in statistics", Oh Great Oxford Scholar.. What WAS your major? Football? Ping Pong? Please enlighten us, Oh Great One. So you concede the major point then I assume. Mountain Biking is far less dangerous than driving a car. I assume this because, as usual when you lose, you then flail around on ancillary points as here. I hereby rescind any comment about any ability of yours in statistics ... you clearly have none. If "I have an M.A. in Mathematics (including study in Statistics) from Harvard University." as quoted on your website means you have no mastery of statistics then the great institution of Harvard must be very disappointed in you. And, as I said, my undergraduate and postgraduate qualifications have zero to do with the argument. But the fact that you refuse to answer a simple question proves that you are ashamed of your education and have something to hide, and are thoroughly dishonest. I am not claiming any authority by dint of my educational background ... simply letting the facts speak for themselves. I just thought it very funny that, yet again, your presumptions were provably wrong. I'm not going to waste any more time responding to dishonest mountain bikers. You don't answer questions, proving that you have something to hide and aren't being honest, you lie frequently, you can't reason logically. and you keep repeating assertions that I have already refuted. |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Mountain Biking Carnage
On 1/15/2013 7:04 AM, Blackblade wrote:
No other comments on the logic/proof ????? Instead, you go back to my university education which, like yours, is completely irrelevant to the point. Neither of us have degrees in Mountain Biking ! Mikey V. has honorary doctorates in "Usenet Trolling", "Tree-Fort Building" and "HANDSAW Combat". -- Tom $herman |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Mountain Biking Carnage
I'm not going to waste any more time responding to dishonest mountain bikers. You don't answer questions, proving that you have something to hide and aren't being honest, you lie frequently, you can't reason logically. and you keep repeating assertions that I have already refuted. Good, then go away ! This is alt.mountain-bike ... Aside from anything else, I don't know why you bother when you keep getting bettered by mountainbikers using logic and facts instead of the ad-hominem, circular logic, false dichotomies and baseless assertions you employ. You don't refute anything ... you state that it's the case and then call everyone liars when they point out the lack of backup in facts and logic. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Mountain Bikers Actually Think a PICNIC Wil Make People Want to Permit Mountain Biking!!!!! | Mike Vandeman | Mountain Biking | 0 | May 28th 09 06:06 AM |
IMBA Fundraiser Advocates Illegal Mountain Biking; Mountain Bikers Say NOTHING about It | Mike Vandeman | Mountain Biking | 2 | February 3rd 09 01:58 PM |
Mountain Bikers Rat Pack & Threaten Woman for Telling the Truth about Mountain Biking! | Mike Vandeman | Mountain Biking | 2 | April 2nd 08 05:12 PM |
Mountain Bikers Rat Pack & Threaten Woman for Telling the Truth about Mountain Biking! | Mike Vandeman | Social Issues | 2 | April 2nd 08 05:12 PM |
Mountain Biking Video -- See What Mountain Biking Is Really Like! | Peter | Mountain Biking | 0 | March 25th 05 10:56 PM |