UK Karting - Notice Board (Chat) : Re: er Tangler no

Notice Board (Chat)

Re: er Tangler no
Posted by 'JohnClucas' on 03 Apr 2009 @ 12:08

| View Message Thread | Reply to this message |

JohnClucasJoined: August 2001
Total Posts: 1
[ View User Profile ]

Like I said if at any one time (say) 10% of drivers drive red cars, you would expect 10% of accidents to involve red cars. If there was significantly less than 10% involving red cars you would conclude that red cars were safer, for some reason. If more than 10% involved red cars you would conclude that red cars were less safe for some reason. ie you would say there was a causal link between the colour red and accident rates.

Exactly the same argument applies to speeding. If 10% of drivers are speeding at a given instant were speeding you would expect speeding drivers to be involved in accidents if speeding had NO effect on safety.

Now we come to the figures only 5% of drivers involved in accidents are judged to be speeding.

Do you really believe that only 5% of drivers are speeding at a given time? No you don't - and neither does itpro. You are forced to the conclusion that speeding drivers are LESS likely to have an accident than law abiding ones.

Even when we come to fatal accidents. Do you actually think that only 13% of drivers are actually speeding at any one instant - itpro certainly doesn't, I'm not sure one way or the other.

But you are forced the conclusion that the figures strongly suggests that speeding motorists are at least as safe as those that obey the limit.

Perverse though you may find that, it's what the figures clearly show.

Which is why itpro, who claims to have some statistical knowledge won't answer the question.

If the government figures are right itpro's and your case is completely destroyed - and itpro knows it.

And before you suggest these are just one set of figures these figures have been produced annually, are part of (by far) the most comprehensive road safety report the DFT produces and have consistently produced similar figures.

Message Thread:

Re: Continued from SAFE SPEED thread. by 'DanTheK1RaceGearMan' (01 Apr 2009 @ 9:04)

Re: Continued from SAFE SPEED thread. by 'davidmc' (01 Apr 2009 @ 10:14)

David by 'itpro' (01 Apr 2009 @ 11:37)

Re: David by 'DanTheK1RaceGearMan' (01 Apr 2009 @ 12:56)

Re: Continued from SAFE SPEED thread. by 'itpro' (01 Apr 2009 @ 11:32)

Re: Continued from SAFE SPEED thread. by 'DanTheK1RaceGearMan' (01 Apr 2009 @ 13:06)

This stuff is NOT complex! by 'itpro' (01 Apr 2009 @ 15:54)

Re: Still avoiding the simple question itpro/tangl by 'JohnClucas' (01 Apr 2009 @ 17:11)

Re: Still avoiding the simple question itpro/tangl by 'PaulMRotax' (01 Apr 2009 @ 17:31)

Paul by 'itpro' (01 Apr 2009 @ 19:52)

Re: Paul by 'PaulMRotax' (02 Apr 2009 @ 8:19)

Re: Paul by 'itpro' (02 Apr 2009 @ 10:15)

Re: Paul by 'PaulMRotax' (02 Apr 2009 @ 10:22)

Re: Paul by 'itpro' (02 Apr 2009 @ 11:23)

Re: Paul by 'PaulMRotax' (02 Apr 2009 @ 12:33)

Re: Still avoiding the simple question itpro/tangl by 'JohnClucas' (01 Apr 2009 @ 17:41)

-John: still avoid the simple question itpro/tangl by 'TanglerTKM' (01 Apr 2009 @ 17:47)

Re: -John: still avoid the simple question itpro/t by 'JohnClucas' (01 Apr 2009 @ 19:35)

Re: -John: still avoid the simple question itpro/t by 'itpro' (01 Apr 2009 @ 19:54)

Re: -John: still avoid the simple question itpro/t by 'JohnClucas' (01 Apr 2009 @ 19:59)

Re: -John: still avoid the simple question itpro/t by 'TanglerTKM' (01 Apr 2009 @ 22:45)

Re: That just sums it up Tangler!!!! by 'DanTheK1RaceGearMan' (02 Apr 2009 @ 7:56)

Re: That just sums it up Tangler!!!! by 'DanTheK1RaceGearMan' (02 Apr 2009 @ 8:24)

Dan....... by 'itpro' (02 Apr 2009 @ 11:17)

Re: Dan....... by 'DanTheK1RaceGearMan' (02 Apr 2009 @ 11:36)

Re: Dan....... by 'itpro' (02 Apr 2009 @ 15:07)

Try thinking about it Dan by 'TanglerTKM' (02 Apr 2009 @ 18:58)

Re: ARE YOU thinking about it Tangler? by 'DanTheK1RaceGearMan' (02 Apr 2009 @ 19:24)

Re: ARE YOU thinking about it Tangler? by 'DanTheK1RaceGearMan' (02 Apr 2009 @ 19:26)

Re: ARE YOU thinking about it Tangler? by 'itpro' (02 Apr 2009 @ 19:39)

Re: ARE YOU thinking about it Tangler? by 'DanTheK1RaceGearMan' (02 Apr 2009 @ 19:51)

Re: ARE YOU thinking about it Tangler? by 'itpro' (02 Apr 2009 @ 20:07)

*sigh* by 'TanglerTKM' (02 Apr 2009 @ 20:08)

Re: Excuse me Tangler by 'JohnClucas' (02 Apr 2009 @ 19:26)

Re: Excuse me Tangler by 'itpro' (02 Apr 2009 @ 20:16)

Re: Typical ipro - no interest in facts or context by 'JohnClucas' (02 Apr 2009 @ 22:29)

Re: Dan....... by 'DanTheK1RaceGearMan' (02 Apr 2009 @ 19:38)

Re: Dan....... by 'PaulMRotax' (02 Apr 2009 @ 12:38)

Re: Dan....... by 'itpro' (02 Apr 2009 @ 15:09)

Re: Dan....... by 'PaulMRotax' (02 Apr 2009 @ 19:53)

Re: Dan....... by 'itpro' (02 Apr 2009 @ 20:09)

Re: Dan....... by 'PaulMRotax' (02 Apr 2009 @ 23:35)

I'll answer YOUR question the first time YOU.... by 'itpro' (01 Apr 2009 @ 19:50)

Re: I'll answer YOUR question the first time YOU.. by 'JohnClucas' (01 Apr 2009 @ 20:06)

Re: I'll answer YOUR question the first time YOU.. by 'DanTheK1RaceGearMan' (01 Apr 2009 @ 20:35)

where are we with this? by 'TanglerTKM' (01 Apr 2009 @ 23:08)

Re: where are we with this? by 'Booney' (01 Apr 2009 @ 23:29)

Re: where are we with this? by 'DanTheK1RaceGearMan' (02 Apr 2009 @ 7:40)

Ok...getting somewhere! Booney & Dan by 'TanglerTKM' (02 Apr 2009 @ 19:17)

Re: Now that is real progress Tangler!!!! by 'DanTheK1RaceGearMan' (02 Apr 2009 @ 19:47)

Re: Now that is real progress Tangler!!!! by 'TanglerTKM' (02 Apr 2009 @ 20:13)

Re: Now that is real progress Tangler!!!! by 'DanTheK1RaceGearMan' (02 Apr 2009 @ 20:36)

Re: Now that is real progress Tangler!!!! by 'TanglerTKM' (02 Apr 2009 @ 20:57)

Re: Tangler by 'JohnClucas' (02 Apr 2009 @ 8:15)

Re: Tangler by 'itpro' (02 Apr 2009 @ 11:26)

John by 'TanglerTKM' (02 Apr 2009 @ 18:44)

Re: Tangler - well actually YES someone did die by 'JohnClucas' (02 Apr 2009 @ 19:41)

Re: Tangler - well actually YES someone did die by 'TanglerTKM' (02 Apr 2009 @ 20:21)

For goodness sake Tangler by 'JohnClucas' (02 Apr 2009 @ 22:33)

John by 'TanglerTKM' (02 Apr 2009 @ 23:38)

Re: I'll answer YOUR question the first time YOU.. by 'itpro' (02 Apr 2009 @ 11:10)

Re: I'll answer YOUR question the first time YOU.. by 'JohnClucas' (02 Apr 2009 @ 11:50)

Re: I'll answer YOUR question the first time YOU.. by 'itpro' (02 Apr 2009 @ 15:08)

Re: I'll answer YOUR question the first time YOU.. by 'JohnClucas' (02 Apr 2009 @ 19:12)

Re: I'll answer YOUR question the first time YOU.. by 'itpro' (02 Apr 2009 @ 20:30)

Re: Sorry I should have said.. by 'JohnClucas' (02 Apr 2009 @ 19:15)

Re: Sorry I should have said.. by 'itpro' (02 Apr 2009 @ 19:53)

Re: So answer the question by 'JohnClucas' (02 Apr 2009 @ 19:59)

Re: So answer the question by 'itpro' (02 Apr 2009 @ 20:13)

Gentlemen....I suggest you look here...... by 'QuickOldTimer' (02 Apr 2009 @ 21:08)

Re: Gentlemen....I suggest you look here...... by 'TanglerTKM' (02 Apr 2009 @ 21:37)

Re: Do be scientific by 'JohnClucas' (02 Apr 2009 @ 21:59)

Re: Do be scientific...get it right... by 'QuickOldTimer' (02 Apr 2009 @ 22:04)

Re: Do be scientific...get it right... by 'JohnClucas' (02 Apr 2009 @ 22:15)

john.....ahem by 'TanglerTKM' (02 Apr 2009 @ 23:47)

Re: er Tangler no by 'JohnClucas' << You are here!

John....you're arguing against yourself now! by 'TanglerTKM' (03 Apr 2009 @ 12:27)

Re: no I'm not!!! by 'JohnClucas' (03 Apr 2009 @ 12:51)

Re: no I'm not!!! by 'TanglerTKM' (03 Apr 2009 @ 16:00)

Re: Try logic tangler by 'JohnClucas' (03 Apr 2009 @ 17:32)

and i thought it was blue..... by 'Avago' (03 Apr 2009 @ 12:43)

Re: This stuff is NOT complex! by 'DanTheK1RaceGearMan' (01 Apr 2009 @ 20:49)

Re: This stuff is NOT complex! by 'itpro' (02 Apr 2009 @ 11:00)

Re: This stuff is NOT complex! by 'PaulMRotax' (02 Apr 2009 @ 12:39)

I really can't understand..... by 'vic' (02 Apr 2009 @ 13:01)

Re: Unfortunately vic by 'JohnClucas' (02 Apr 2009 @ 17:01)

John will do his BEST to avoid this BUT..... by 'itpro' (02 Apr 2009 @ 19:28)

Re: No he won't, put up or shut up by 'JohnClucas' (02 Apr 2009 @ 19:47)

Re: No he won't, put up or shut up by 'itpro' (02 Apr 2009 @ 20:10)

One for the mix by 'Booney' (02 Apr 2009 @ 23:24)

Re: One for the mix by 'TanglerTKM' (02 Apr 2009 @ 23:55)

Re: One for the mix by 'PaulMRotax' (03 Apr 2009 @ 7:59)

Re: One for the mix by 'TanglerTKM' (03 Apr 2009 @ 8:59)

Re: One for the mix by 'PaulMRotax' (03 Apr 2009 @ 11:17)

Re: One for the mix by 'TanglerTKM' (03 Apr 2009 @ 16:10)

Re: One for the mix by 'DanTheK1RaceGearMan' (03 Apr 2009 @ 20:00)

Accidents are NOT accidents because.... by 'Avago' (03 Apr 2009 @ 12:56)

Re: Accidents are NOT accidents because.... by 'Booney' (03 Apr 2009 @ 17:33)

Re: Accidents are NOT accidents because.... by 'PaulMRotax' (04 Apr 2009 @ 14:02)

Re: Unfortunately vic.... by 'vic' (03 Apr 2009 @ 12:51)

Re: Unfortunately vic.... by 'JohnClucas' (03 Apr 2009 @ 14:36)

Re: Unfortunately vic.... by 'vic' (03 Apr 2009 @ 19:37)

Re: Unfortunately vic.... by 'JohnClucas' (03 Apr 2009 @ 20:12)

Re: Telepathy or what! by 'DanTheK1RaceGearMan' (03 Apr 2009 @ 20:26)

Re: Unfortunately vic.... by 'DanTheK1RaceGearMan' (03 Apr 2009 @ 20:21)

Dan & John by 'TanglerTKM' (03 Apr 2009 @ 20:56)

Re: And the conclusion... by 'DanTheK1RaceGearMan' (03 Apr 2009 @ 21:29)

The reason speed is made an issue by 'TanglerTKM' (03 Apr 2009 @ 21:58)

Re: The reason speed is made an issue by 'DanTheK1RaceGearMan' (03 Apr 2009 @ 22:10)

Re: The reason speed is made an issue by 'DanTheK1RaceGearMan' (03 Apr 2009 @ 22:20)

Re: The reason speed is made an issue by 'TanglerTKM' (03 Apr 2009 @ 22:26)

Re: The reason speed is made an issue by 'DanTheK1RaceGearMan' (03 Apr 2009 @ 22:44)

Re: The reason speed is made an issue by 'TanglerTKM' (03 Apr 2009 @ 22:22)

Re: The reason speed is made an issue by 'DanTheK1RaceGearMan' (03 Apr 2009 @ 22:47)

Re: The reason speed is made an issue by 'JohnClucas' (04 Apr 2009 @ 19:38)

Re: Tangler by 'JohnClucas' (03 Apr 2009 @ 21:37)

Re: Tangler by 'TanglerTKM' (03 Apr 2009 @ 22:05)

Re: Tangler by 'JohnClucas' (04 Apr 2009 @ 12:42)

Re:Enforce the things that matter by 'QuickOldTimer' (04 Apr 2009 @ 14:19)

Re:Enforce the things that matter by 'DanTheK1RaceGearMan' (05 Apr 2009 @ 0:01)

Re:Enforce the things that matter by 'TanglerTKM' (05 Apr 2009 @ 8:57)

Re:Enforce the things that matter by 'DanTheK1RaceGearMan' (05 Apr 2009 @ 13:21)

Re:Enforce the things that matter by 'QuickOldTimer' (05 Apr 2009 @ 17:47)

Re:Enforce the things that matter by 'TanglerTKM' (05 Apr 2009 @ 18:38)

Re:Enforce the things that matter by 'DanTheK1RaceGearMan' (05 Apr 2009 @ 20:05)

Re:Enforce the things that matter by 'JohnClucas' (05 Apr 2009 @ 21:28)

Re:Enforce the things that matter by 'DanTheK1RaceGearMan' (06 Apr 2009 @ 7:24)

Re: and what about consistency in punishment by 'JohnClucas' (03 Apr 2009 @ 20:47)

Re: This stuff is NOT complex! by 'DanTheK1RaceGearMan' (03 Apr 2009 @ 20:37)

Re: This stuff is NOT complex! by 'DevonHawker' (03 Apr 2009 @ 20:48)

Post a Reply:

You may post a direct reply to this message which will appear in this thread.
To post a new or unrelated message use This Form. Top of Page
Notice Board Index

[ UK Karting Main Index ]


News	Karts & Karting	Notice Board	Market Place	Companies Directory	Tracks Directory	Events Calendar	Race Results	Photo Gallery	Links