Mother dies from bike crash moments after taking this smiling selfie on her way home

[meic]

Darwinistic selection isnt exact, it is a statistical distribution. Sometimes people die because they were unlucky and luck doesnt travel through genes (or does it)?

My survival is due to a combination of sense and luck. You do need the latter on an individual level.

[Vorpal]

I hope the family don't read this. I think it's sad that someone can read about a tragic accident like this and make Darwin comments.

She wasn't stupid. She wasn't even doing anything wrong. She *may* have made a mistake, or hit a pothole or a rough bit of road when she had only one hand on the handlebars. We don't even know what actually happened; we only have the limited details reported by her family.

Her family have tragically lost a daughter, mother, wife, and people have also lost a friend. How would you feel if it was someone close to you?


RIP Carmen Greenway.

[pwa]

I hope the family don't read this. I think it's sad that someone can read about a tragic accident like this and make Darwin comments.

She wasn't stupid. She wasn't even doing anything wrong. She *may* have made a mistake, or hit a pothole or a rough bit of road when she had only one hand on the handlebars. We don't even know what actually happened; we only have the limited details reported by her family.

Her family have tragically lost a daughter, mother, wife, and people have also lost a friend. How would you feel if it was someone close to you?


RIP Carmen Greenway.

I agree wholeheartedly with most of that. Primarily this is a story about a family tragedy and we should remember that. Where I disagree with you is on the probable cause of the accident, which seems to me to be simple carelessness of the sort that we all exhibit at some point. I think we can all take away from this the message that having a phone or camera in your hand whilst cycling is a risk.

[Vorpal]

I agree wholeheartedly with most of that. Primarily this is a story about a family tragedy and we should remember that. Where I disagree with you is on the probable cause of the accident, which seems to me to be simple carelessness of the sort that we all exhibit at some point. I think we can all take away from this the message that having a phone or camera in your hand whilst cycling is a risk.

We don't know that she had a phone or a camera in her hand at the time of the accident. All we know is that her family said she had one hand on the handlebars. That's all we know.

[Bonefishblues]

I agree wholeheartedly with most of that. Primarily this is a story about a family tragedy and we should remember that. Where I disagree with you is on the probable cause of the accident, which seems to me to be simple carelessness of the sort that we all exhibit at some point. I think we can all take away from this the message that having a phone or camera in your hand whilst cycling is a risk.

We don't know that she had a phone or a camera in her hand at the time of the accident. All we know is that her family said she had one hand on the handlebars. That's all we know.

Indeed.

[pwa]

I agree wholeheartedly with most of that. Primarily this is a story about a family tragedy and we should remember that. Where I disagree with you is on the probable cause of the accident, which seems to me to be simple carelessness of the sort that we all exhibit at some point. I think we can all take away from this the message that having a phone or camera in your hand whilst cycling is a risk.

We don't know that she had a phone or a camera in her hand at the time of the accident. All we know is that her family said she had one hand on the handlebars. That's all we know.

I hesitate to reply because, like you, I don't want to use this sad event as an excuse for a debate. So just to clarify, you are technically correct to say that we don't know the lady had a phone in her hand at the moment of the crash. But we do know that she had a phone in her hand a few moments earlier and that she only had one hand on the bars when she crashed. If we knew the same about a car driver who had crashed we would infer that he/she probably still had the phone in one hand.

(I should add that my view is influenced by the fact that I nearly crashed with a camera in one hand whilst cycling, many years ago)

[Bonefishblues]

Vorpal is simply correct, not technically so.

The inference is yours and yours alone, not "ours" as denoted by your us of "we", so "I would infer" would be a better way to express your views.

Otherwise we're all good.

[pwa]

Vorpal is simply correct, not technically so.

The inference is yours and yours alone, not "ours" as denoted by your us of "we", so "I would infer" would be a better way to express your views.

Otherwise we're all good.

I'm happy to accept the corrections.

[Vorpal]

I hesitate to reply because, like you, I don't want to use this sad event as an excuse for a debate. So just to clarify, you are technically correct to say that we don't know the lady had a phone in her hand at the moment of the crash. But we do know that she had a phone in her hand a few moments earlier and that she only had one hand on the bars when she crashed. If we knew the same about a car driver who had crashed we would infer that he/she probably still had the phone in one hand.

But firstly, that inference is meaningless in determining a cause, or even a lesson, even if it is accurate. We have no *evidence*. Secondly, if said car driver had injured or killed someone, unless there was clear evidence that the driver still held the phone at the time of the crash, it would be considered inconclusive, and might even be determined to have no relevance (I'm sure you've read news reports about things like that, too).

Frankly, I don't think it even probable that she still held the phone in her hand. My reasoning is that if she was in the process of putting it away, or had just done so, this is more likely to have created the scenario where she was both distracted, and riding with only one hand on the handlebars; combine that with a rough patch of road and poor lighting, and that could cause an accident. I will, however readily admit that this is pure speculation, and not suggest that anyone should take any lessons from it. 'Be careful' is a bit too general to be helpful, even though I tell my kids that with considerable frequency.

[bovlomov]

(I should add that my view is influenced by the fact that I nearly crashed with a camera in one hand whilst cycling, many years ago)

Like most of us whose behaviour is sub-optimal, you survived. Thus, according to proponents of the 'Darwin' theory (note: nothing to do with Darwin), you aren't an idiot and your genes continued to be available to humanity.

[landsurfer]

bovlomov;
In life there are victims and volunteers.
Terrible things happen to victims without their input.
Volunteers do stupid things and pay the price.
Which do you think applies in this tragic case ?

[pwa]

I hesitate to reply because, like you, I don't want to use this sad event as an excuse for a debate. So just to clarify, you are technically correct to say that we don't know the lady had a phone in her hand at the moment of the crash. But we do know that she had a phone in her hand a few moments earlier and that she only had one hand on the bars when she crashed. If we knew the same about a car driver who had crashed we would infer that he/she probably still had the phone in one hand.

But firstly, that inference is meaningless in determining a cause, or even a lesson, even if it is accurate. We have no *evidence*. Secondly, if said car driver had injured or killed someone, unless there was clear evidence that the driver still held the phone at the time of the crash, it would be considered inconclusive, and might even be determined to have no relevance (I'm sure you've read news reports about things like that, too).

Frankly, I don't think it even probable that she still held the phone in her hand. My reasoning is that if she was in the process of putting it away, or had just done so, this is more likely to have created the scenario where she was both distracted, and riding with only one hand on the handlebars; combine that with a rough patch of road and poor lighting, and that could cause an accident. I will, however readily admit that this is pure speculation, and not suggest that anyone should take any lessons from it. 'Be careful' is a bit too general to be helpful, even though I tell my kids that with considerable frequency.

With regard to the first paragraph, this is not a court of law and we have often come to the conclusion that a driver was probably using a phone at the moment of a crash even though the evidence only shows the phone was used shortly before the crash.

Looking at your second paragraph, I think maybe you and I have read the report of what her husband said and imagined two different timescales. I read it as the photo being taken one moment and the crash happening within, say, a minute. Perhaps you imagine the crash happening several minutes later with the phone already back in the pocket.

(Whether or not it is relevant to this case, I know from experience that having a camera (or phone) in your hand whilst cycling is dodgy and I advise my kids not to do it. I nearly came a cropper doing it.)

[Vorpal]

With regard to the first paragraph, this is not a court of law and we have often come to the conclusion that a driver was probably using a phone at the moment of a crash even though the evidence only shows the phone was used shortly before the crash.

I am not part of that we. I come to no conculsion without evidence.

[bovlomov]

bovlomov;
In life there are victims and volunteers.
Terrible things happen to victims without their input.
Volunteers do stupid things and pay the price.
Which do you think applies in this tragic case ?

I think meic's post applies.

Darwinistic selection isnt exact, it is a statistical distribution. Sometimes people die because they were unlucky and luck doesnt travel through genes (or does it)?

My survival is due to a combination of sense and luck. You do need the latter on an individual level.

I agree that some people are authors of their own misfortune. In fact, I think we all are to some degree, often in subtle, indirect ways. Some of the recipients of the 'Darwin' accolade have behaved in a near suicidal manner. Most, though, have done something no more foolish than millions of others do during the course of a day. They become 'idiots' because the cause and effect are adjacent, and thus seem obvious - and because they were exceedingly unlucky.

On a personal note: I don't intentionally go through red lights. If one day I am distracted and inadvertently go across a junction at red and get killed, I think my family would be rather upset to read that I was stupid and that their loss was a gain for the gene pool.

[reohn2]

I hope the family don't read this. I think it's sad that someone can read about a tragic accident like this and make Darwin comments.

She wasn't stupid. She wasn't even doing anything wrong. She *may* have made a mistake, or hit a pothole or a rough bit of road when she had only one hand on the handlebars. We don't even know what actually happened; we only have the limited details reported by her family.

Her family have tragically lost a daughter, mother, wife, and people have also lost a friend. How would you feel if it was someone close to you?


RIP Carmen Greenway.

+1
There's enough crass and hurtful comments on this tragedy for moderators to remove them or event the whole thread IMHO.