facetious accusation

This sub-forum all discussions about this "lively" subject. All topics that are substantially about helmets will be moved here, if not placed here correctly in the first place.
User avatar
[XAP]Bob
Posts: 17178
Joined: 26 Sep 2008, 4:12pm

facetious accusation

Postby [XAP]Bob » 20 Aug 2014, 10:52am

About 6 pages back in another thread I was accused of being facetious when I suggested that assertions of injuries saved required a control experiment.

I'd just like to state that I wasn't being facetious at all.
I was doing the normal thing and equating hospital treatment with more than just a couple of stitches (which don't require a hospital), but I wasn't being facetious.

To know what injuries, minor or otherwise, you may have avoided you need to redo the accident, or present other evidence. e.g. torn gloves probably imply scratches and scrapes.

Of course you might not go as fast, or take your hands off the bars, or any of a myriad of other contributory behaviours (where applicable) and therefore might avoid all injuries...
A shortcut has to be a challenge, otherwise it would just be the way. No situation is so dire that panic cannot make it worse.
There are two kinds of people in this world: those can extrapolate from incomplete data.

Phil Fouracre
Posts: 817
Joined: 12 Jan 2013, 12:16pm
Location: Deepest Somerset

Re: facetious accusation

Postby Phil Fouracre » 20 Aug 2014, 11:46am

Read the thread, yup, didn't think you were being facetious! Always think reading David Speiglehalter should be compulsory reading, a genius on risk.
Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity

User avatar
pjclinch
Posts: 3872
Joined: 29 Oct 2007, 2:32pm
Location: Dundee, Scotland
Contact:

Re: facetious accusation

Postby pjclinch » 20 Aug 2014, 12:58pm

As we see here...

Image

... it's typically the case that your typical punter doesn't understand what you actually need to do science properly.

So not entirely surprising that when you point out flaws in "received wisdom" from a scientific standpoint you are often perceived as 'avin' a laff at someone else's expense.

Pete.
Often seen riding a bike around Dundee...

User avatar
horizon
Posts: 10076
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 11:24am
Location: Cornwall

Re: facetious accusation

Postby horizon » 20 Aug 2014, 10:50pm

I didn't take it as facetious, I took it as ironic: we cannot replicate the accident and that's the problem (you said). You're right, though I would have thought that they would by now have devised even some computer modelling, if nothing else.
When the pestilence strikes from the East, go far and breathe the cold air deeply. Ignore the sage, stay not indoors. Ho Ri Zon 12th Century Chinese philosopher

fast but dim
Posts: 288
Joined: 15 Sep 2013, 8:48pm
Location: Just far enough from Chorley, lancs

Re: facetious accusation

Postby fast but dim » 20 Aug 2014, 11:59pm

[XAP]Bob wrote:About 6 pages back in another thread I was accused of being facetious when I suggested that assertions of injuries saved required a control experiment.

I'd just like to state that I wasn't being facetious at all.
I was doing the normal thing and equating hospital treatment with more than just a couple of stitches (which don't require a hospital), but I wasn't being facetious.

To know what injuries, minor or otherwise, you may have avoided you need to redo the accident, or present other evidence. e.g. torn gloves probably imply scratches and scrapes.

Of course you might not go as fast, or take your hands off the bars, or any of a myriad of other contributory behaviours (where applicable) and therefore might avoid all injuries...



You aren't the one still on crutches, can't work, can't walk and will miss the rest of the summer on his bike. I'll be looking at a financial loss of around a grand, and a ruined holiday. To suggest I repeat it is not even close to being appropriate.

Your smart ( insert word ) comment was purely flippant and facetious. I sent you a pm regarding this, and and yet you chose not to reply, but wait and start another thread.

fast but dim
Posts: 288
Joined: 15 Sep 2013, 8:48pm
Location: Just far enough from Chorley, lancs

Re: facetious accusation

Postby fast but dim » 21 Aug 2014, 12:05am

oh, and another pm sent.

User avatar
horizon
Posts: 10076
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 11:24am
Location: Cornwall

Re: facetious accusation

Postby horizon » 21 Aug 2014, 12:16am

fast but dim wrote:
You aren't the one still on crutches, can't work, can't walk and will miss the rest of the summer on his bike. I'll be looking at a financial loss of around a grand, and a ruined holiday. To suggest I repeat it is not even close to being appropriate.



fast but dim: I do sympathise with you BTW (I'm pretty sure we all do). But we have a problem: we cannot verify your assertion that your helmet saved you because we cannot re-run the accident (and for your sake wouldn't want to anyway). Hence the debate - we haven't got a lot to go on. Just to say that you may have read more into XAPbob's comment than was intended.

And get well soon, helmet or no helmet.
When the pestilence strikes from the East, go far and breathe the cold air deeply. Ignore the sage, stay not indoors. Ho Ri Zon 12th Century Chinese philosopher

fast but dim
Posts: 288
Joined: 15 Sep 2013, 8:48pm
Location: Just far enough from Chorley, lancs

Re: facetious accusation

Postby fast but dim » 21 Aug 2014, 12:31am

the helmet issue is irrelevent. Xap bob made an inapropriate remark to someone who has had a serious accident. I let him know this by pm, but got no response.... then this thread appears.

I would have though an explaination by pm prior to posting this would have been more acceptable.

fast but dim
Posts: 288
Joined: 15 Sep 2013, 8:48pm
Location: Just far enough from Chorley, lancs

Re: facetious accusation

Postby fast but dim » 21 Aug 2014, 12:40am

[XAP]Bob wrote:About 6 pages back in another thread I was accused of being facetious when I suggested that assertions of injuries saved required a control experiment.

I'd just like to state that I wasn't being facetious at all.
I was doing the normal thing and equating hospital treatment with more than just a couple of stitches (which don't require a hospital), but I wasn't being facetious.

To know what injuries, minor or otherwise, you may have avoided you need to redo the accident, or present other evidence. e.g. torn gloves probably imply scratches and scrapes.

Of course you might not go as fast, or take your hands off the bars, or any of a myriad of other contributory behaviours (where applicable) and therefore might avoid all injuries...



Oh, and what you actually put was not quite so reasoned or eloquent.
[XAP]Bob wrote:surely to cinfirm thatit saved you from head you've repeated the incident without a lid?

Don't dress it up like it's not mate

User avatar
Cunobelin
Posts: 10140
Joined: 6 Feb 2007, 7:22pm

Re: facetious accusation

Postby Cunobelin » 21 Aug 2014, 5:59am

fast but dim wrote:
[XAP]Bob wrote:About 6 pages back in another thread I was accused of being facetious when I suggested that assertions of injuries saved required a control experiment.

I'd just like to state that I wasn't being facetious at all.
I was doing the normal thing and equating hospital treatment with more than just a couple of stitches (which don't require a hospital), but I wasn't being facetious.

To know what injuries, minor or otherwise, you may have avoided you need to redo the accident, or present other evidence. e.g. torn gloves probably imply scratches and scrapes.

Of course you might not go as fast, or take your hands off the bars, or any of a myriad of other contributory behaviours (where applicable) and therefore might avoid all injuries...



You aren't the one still on crutches, can't work, can't walk and will miss the rest of the summer on his bike. I'll be looking at a financial loss of around a grand, and a ruined holiday. To suggest I repeat it is not even close to being appropriate.

Your smart ( insert word ) comment was purely flippant and facetious. I sent you a pm regarding this, and and yet you chose not to reply, but wait and start another thread.


What is still apparent is that the grasp of figures isn't there.

If you slipped and fell, or had an accident in your car, would the consequent head injury have resulted in less financial loss, or less of a ruined holiday?

The point is that if I claimed that I slipped over whilst walking, and my helmet had definitely saved me form injury / death..... would you accept that as unequivocal evidence and start wearing one whilst walking?

User avatar
[XAP]Bob
Posts: 17178
Joined: 26 Sep 2008, 4:12pm

Re: facetious accusation

Postby [XAP]Bob » 21 Aug 2014, 7:59am

The wait is because I'm on an irregular conection at the moment, the spelling was poor due to the fact that I'm on a touchscreen, with my right hand in a double splint.

From your PM I can only assume that you wore your helmet on your hip?
fast but dim wrote:on face book, look me up. some pictures of my hip there.
You know exactly what you meant in your flippant comment.


Without replication of the accident you can't know what the injuries would have been. Frankly I've forgotten your original description of your incident, but I'll stand by that assertion
A shortcut has to be a challenge, otherwise it would just be the way. No situation is so dire that panic cannot make it worse.
There are two kinds of people in this world: those can extrapolate from incomplete data.

fast but dim
Posts: 288
Joined: 15 Sep 2013, 8:48pm
Location: Just far enough from Chorley, lancs

Re: facetious accusation

Postby fast but dim » 21 Aug 2014, 8:47am

I really have no interest in This part of the forum,just a personal problem with your post I've sent a couple pm s, with no reply, so shan't return to this thread.

MartinC
Posts: 1840
Joined: 10 May 2007, 6:31pm
Location: Bredon

Re: facetious accusation

Postby MartinC » 21 Aug 2014, 9:01am

Fast but dim. I'm sure everyone here including me has sympathy for your accident. I'm also sure that you're reading far more into Bob's post than is either there or intended. Please also remember that you're the poster who called everyone who didn't agree with you about hi vis pillocks.

User avatar
horizon
Posts: 10076
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 11:24am
Location: Cornwall

Re: facetious accusation

Postby horizon » 21 Aug 2014, 10:38am

MartinC wrote:Fast but dim. I'm sure everyone here including me has sympathy for your accident. I'm also sure that you're reading far more into Bob's post than is either there or intended.


+1
When the pestilence strikes from the East, go far and breathe the cold air deeply. Ignore the sage, stay not indoors. Ho Ri Zon 12th Century Chinese philosopher

irc
Posts: 4673
Joined: 3 Dec 2008, 2:22pm
Location: glasgow

Re: facetious accusation

Postby irc » 21 Aug 2014, 11:34am

Cunobelin wrote:The point is that if I claimed that I slipped over whilst walking, and my helmet had definitely saved me form injury / death..... would you accept that as unequivocal evidence and start wearing one whilst walking?


As it happens this week my son had to go to hospital for a CT scan (all clear) following a head injury. Climbing down from a wall a large piece of it came off and landed on his head .. The skin was broken for 4" though not deeply enough to be stitched. He cycles every day un-helmeted without any head injuries so far. A walking helmet would have prevented a hospital visit. I told him he should have been wearing a helmet and he laughed at me.