Reducing an image to become an Avatar here

[ACyclingRooster]

Perhaps I misunderstood you meaning or import here - please explain in more depth and without spouting figures from some research. When I used the term 'Fact' I was speaking from my own visual and actual experience of seeing cyclists with Walkman systems and in more recent times - mobile phones connected to their heads/ears by earplugs/miniature loudspeakers.

So when you used the term "fact", you really meant "opinion" and ignore the posting of evidence of facts. There's some non-research explanation on the recent thread viewtopic.php?f=7&t=110955

Not wanting to persist with this 'Off Topic' point BUT what do you not understand or accept about :--

When I used the term 'Fact' I was speaking from my own visual and actual experience of seeing cyclists with Walkman systems and in more recent times - mobile phones connected to their heads/ears by earplugs/miniature loudspeakers.

[mjr]

Not wanting to persist with this 'Off Topic' point BUT what do you not understand or accept about :--

When I used the term 'Fact' I was speaking from my own visual and actual experience of seeing cyclists with Walkman systems and in more recent times - mobile phones connected to their heads/ears by earplugs/miniature loudspeakers.

I understand but don't accept that an anonymous person's vague and unsubstantiated experience defines something as "fact" when it is contrary to better evidence from attributed, published research.

[ACyclingRooster]

Not wanting to persist with this 'Off Topic' point BUT what do you not understand or accept about :--

When I used the term 'Fact' I was speaking from my own visual and actual experience of seeing cyclists with Walkman systems and in more recent times - mobile phones connected to their heads/ears by earplugs/miniature loudspeakers.

I understand but don't accept that an anonymous person's vague and unsubstantiated experience defines something as "fact" when it is contrary to better evidence from attributed, published research.

I was not talking about " an anonymous person's vague and unsubstantiated experience" I was relating to me and only me having seen with both of my perfectly good eyes - now if that was/is not fact - then what the hell is ?

[mjr]

I was not talking about " an anonymous person's vague and unsubstantiated experience" I was relating to me and only me having seen with both of my perfectly good eyes - now if that was/is not fact - then what the hell is ?

Stuff you can measure or describe and reliably reproduce, like aggregation of recorded factors contributing to collisions and the rarity of cyclist headphones in that. Here, you are anonymous (or more accurately pseudonymous) and while you may know what you think you saw and that your expression of them is unambiguous, it wouldn't be the first time that such things misled people.

[Paulatic]

Perhaps I misunderstood you meaning or import here - please explain in more depth and without spouting figures from some research. When I used the term 'Fact' I was speaking from my own visual and actual experience of seeing cyclists with Walkman systems and in more recent times - mobile phones connected to their heads/ears by earplugs/miniature loudspeakers.

So when you used the term "fact", you really meant "opinion" and ignore the posting of evidence of facts. There's some non-research explanation on the recent thread viewtopic.php?f=7&t=110955

Not wanting to persist with this 'Off Topic' point BUT what do you not understand or accept about :--

When I used the term 'Fact' I was speaking from my own visual and actual experience of seeing cyclists with Walkman systems and in more recent times - mobile phones connected to their heads/ears by earplugs/miniature loudspeakers.

If you carry on with that 'fact' you also stated 'they passed you' presumably without incident or accident?

[Vorpal]

As the OP seems to have sorted the avatar thing, this thread is being locked.