curious event

[bugbear]

Since the members of this group seem keen
to extrapolate universal truths from
random events...

I enjoyed cycling to work today, and
arrived without injury. I was not wearing a helmet.

BugBear

[Simon Mason]

"bugbear" > wrote in message
...
> Since the members of this group seem keen
> to extrapolate universal truths from
> random events...
>
> I enjoyed cycling to work today, and
> arrived without injury. I was not wearing a helmet.
>
> BugBear

I didn't cycle to work yesterday or today, but did cycle 4 miles to get my
hair cut. I was in the chair at 0830, paid my £6-20 plus a £2 tip and cycled
5 miles home. I did not wear a helmet and arrived home safely.

--
Simon Mason
http://www.simonmason.karoo.net/

[Peter Keller]

On Tue, 02 Nov 2010 09:37:55 +0000, Simon Mason wrote:


> I didn't cycle to work yesterday or today, but did cycle 4 miles to get
> my hair cut. I was in the chair at 0830, paid my £6-20 plus a £2 tip and
> cycled 5 miles home. I did not wear a helmet and arrived home safely.


And I bet your hairdresser loved you for it; not having to deal with
disgusting sweaty hair.
Some years ago (while I was still obeying our vile Head-Rotting law), I
had a hairdresser threaten to refuse to serve me because of the hot
sweaty state of my head.

Peter

--
67.4% of statistics are made up.

[Simon Mason]

"Peter Keller" > wrote in message
...
> On Tue, 02 Nov 2010 09:37:55 +0000, Simon Mason wrote:
>
>
>> I didn't cycle to work yesterday or today, but did cycle 4 miles to get
>> my hair cut. I was in the chair at 0830, paid my £6-20 plus a £2 tip and
>> cycled 5 miles home. I did not wear a helmet and arrived home safely.
>
>
> And I bet your hairdresser loved you for it; not having to deal with
> disgusting sweaty hair.
> Some years ago (while I was still obeying our vile Head-Rotting law), I
> had a hairdresser threaten to refuse to serve me because of the hot
> sweaty state of my head.

The barber himself cycles 7 miles from his home to his shop and he does wear
a helmet, but doesn't suffer from sweaty hair syndrome as he doesn't have
any.

--
Simon Mason
http://www.simonmason.karoo.net/

[Tony Raven[_3_]]

Simon Mason wrote:
>
> I didn't cycle to work yesterday or today, but did cycle 4 miles to get
> my hair cut. I was in the chair at 0830, paid my £6-20 plus a £2 tip and
> cycled 5 miles home. I did not wear a helmet and arrived home safely.
>


<JMS>

Pretentious tosser

</JMS>

Tony ;-)

[JMS]

On Tue, 02 Nov 2010 10:25:32 +0000, Tony Raven >
wrote:

>Simon Mason wrote:
>>
>> I didn't cycle to work yesterday or today, but did cycle 4 miles to get
>> my hair cut. I was in the chair at 0830, paid my £6-20 plus a £2 tip and
>> cycled 5 miles home. I did not wear a helmet and arrived home safely.
>>
>
>
><JMS>
>
>Pretentious tosser
>
></JMS>
>
>Tony ;-)



Sorry - I cannot see anything pretentious there at all.

Perhaps you don't know what the word means:

"Attempting to impress by affecting greater importance or merit than
is actually possessed"


Now who is that? I don't think that it is Simon - but it does rather
look to fit the Ravin and Porky bill doesn't it?

[bugbear]

bugbear wrote:
> Since the members of this group seem keen
> to extrapolate universal truths from
> random events...
>
> I enjoyed cycling to work today, and
> arrived without injury. I was not wearing a helmet.

I enjoyed cycling to work today, and
arrived without injury. I was not wearing a helmet.

BugBear

[bod]

On 03/11/2010 10:22, bugbear wrote:
> bugbear wrote:
>> Since the members of this group seem keen
>> to extrapolate universal truths from
>> random events...
>>
>> I enjoyed cycling to work today, and
>> arrived without injury. I was not wearing a helmet.
>
> I enjoyed cycling to work today, and
> arrived without injury. I was not wearing a helmet.
>
> BugBear
>
>

How dangerous!!! Don't you realise that a conker could have fallen from
a tree and smashed your head in and caused a massive multi car pile up
causing hundreds of deaths!!!!!! :)

Bod

[Mrcheerful[_2_]]

bugbear wrote:
> bugbear wrote:
>> Since the members of this group seem keen
>> to extrapolate universal truths from
>> random events...
>>
>> I enjoyed cycling to work today, and
>> arrived without injury. I was not wearing a helmet.
>
> I enjoyed cycling to work today, and
> arrived without injury. I was not wearing a helmet.
>
> BugBear

Have you tried cycling to work with a helmet on to get a comparison?

[bod]

On 03/11/2010 11:33, Mrcheerful wrote:
> bugbear wrote:
>> bugbear wrote:
>>> Since the members of this group seem keen
>>> to extrapolate universal truths from
>>> random events...
>>>
>>> I enjoyed cycling to work today, and
>>> arrived without injury. I was not wearing a helmet.
>>
>> I enjoyed cycling to work today, and
>> arrived without injury. I was not wearing a helmet.
>>
>> BugBear
>
> Have you tried cycling to work with a helmet on to get a comparison?
>
>

Good point! :)

Bod

[bugbear]

bugbear wrote:
> bugbear wrote:
>> Since the members of this group seem keen
>> to extrapolate universal truths from
>> random events...
>>
>> I enjoyed cycling to work today, and
>> arrived without injury. I was not wearing a helmet.
>
> I enjoyed cycling to work today, and
> arrived without injury. I was not wearing a helmet.

I enjoyed cycling to work today, and
arrived without injury. I was not wearing a helmet.

I'm starting to see a pattern here.

BugBear

[Mrcheerful[_2_]]

bugbear wrote:
> bugbear wrote:
>> bugbear wrote:
>>> Since the members of this group seem keen
>>> to extrapolate universal truths from
>>> random events...
>>>
>>> I enjoyed cycling to work today, and
>>> arrived without injury. I was not wearing a helmet.
>>
>> I enjoyed cycling to work today, and
>> arrived without injury. I was not wearing a helmet.
>
> I enjoyed cycling to work today, and
> arrived without injury. I was not wearing a helmet.
>
> I'm starting to see a pattern here.
>
> BugBear

which is that while you do not collide with anything or fall off during your
ride to work you are uninjured and happy.

[JNugent[_7_]]

On 04/11/2010 09:32, bugbear wrote:
> bugbear wrote:
>> bugbear wrote:
>>> Since the members of this group seem keen
>>> to extrapolate universal truths from
>>> random events...
>>>
>>> I enjoyed cycling to work today, and
>>> arrived without injury. I was not wearing a helmet.
>>
>> I enjoyed cycling to work today, and
>> arrived without injury. I was not wearing a helmet.
>
> I enjoyed cycling to work today, and
> arrived without injury. I was not wearing a helmet.
>
> I'm starting to see a pattern here.

With more data, you would probably see a different but parallel pattern.
Several thousand UK drivers will have arrived home safely last night, without
incident, despite having a blood alcohol level higher than the law permits.
Would you draw any conclusions from it?

[Mrcheerful[_2_]]

JNugent wrote:
> On 04/11/2010 09:32, bugbear wrote:
>> bugbear wrote:
>>> bugbear wrote:
>>>> Since the members of this group seem keen
>>>> to extrapolate universal truths from
>>>> random events...
>>>>
>>>> I enjoyed cycling to work today, and
>>>> arrived without injury. I was not wearing a helmet.
>>>
>>> I enjoyed cycling to work today, and
>>> arrived without injury. I was not wearing a helmet.
>>
>> I enjoyed cycling to work today, and
>> arrived without injury. I was not wearing a helmet.
>>
>> I'm starting to see a pattern here.
>
> With more data, you would probably see a different but parallel
> pattern. Several thousand UK drivers will have arrived home safely
> last night, without incident, despite having a blood alcohol level
> higher than the law permits. Would you draw any conclusions from it?

driving while ****ed makes you drive very carefully and therefore more
safely?

[JNugent[_7_]]

On 04/11/2010 10:23, Mrcheerful wrote:

> JNugent wrote:
>> On 04/11/2010 09:32, bugbear wrote:
>>> bugbear wrote:
>>>> bugbear wrote:

>>>>> Since the members of this group seem keen
>>>>> to extrapolate universal truths from
>>>>> random events...

>>>>> I enjoyed cycling to work today, and
>>>>> arrived without injury. I was not wearing a helmet.

>>>> I enjoyed cycling to work today, and
>>>> arrived without injury. I was not wearing a helmet.

>>> I enjoyed cycling to work today, and
>>> arrived without injury. I was not wearing a helmet.

>>> I'm starting to see a pattern here.

>> With more data, you would probably see a different but parallel
>> pattern. Several thousand UK drivers will have arrived home safely
>> last night, without incident, despite having a blood alcohol level
>> higher than the law permits. Would you draw any conclusions from it?

> driving while ****ed makes you drive very carefully and therefore more
> safely?

<splutter>

....possibly...

[bod]

On 04/11/2010 09:56, Mrcheerful wrote:
> bugbear wrote:
>> bugbear wrote:
>>> bugbear wrote:
>>>> Since the members of this group seem keen
>>>> to extrapolate universal truths from
>>>> random events...
>>>>
>>>> I enjoyed cycling to work today, and
>>>> arrived without injury. I was not wearing a helmet.
>>>
>>> I enjoyed cycling to work today, and
>>> arrived without injury. I was not wearing a helmet.
>>
>> I enjoyed cycling to work today, and
>> arrived without injury. I was not wearing a helmet.
>>
>> I'm starting to see a pattern here.
>>
>> BugBear
>
> which is that while you do not collide with anything or fall off during your
> ride to work you are uninjured and happy.
>
>

Aah, I love happy endings.

Bod

[bugbear]

JNugent wrote:
>
> Several thousand UK drivers will have arrived home safely last night,
> without incident, despite having a blood alcohol level higher than the
> law permits. Would you draw any conclusions from it?

Yeah. Drivers regularly break the law.

BugBear

[JNugent[_7_]]

On 04/11/2010 11:43, bugbear wrote:

> JNugent wrote:
>>
>> Several thousand UK drivers will have arrived home safely last night,
>> without incident, despite having a blood alcohol level higher than the law
>> permits. Would you draw any conclusions from it?
>
> Yeah. Drivers regularly break the law.

Anything else?

[bugbear]

JNugent wrote:
> On 04/11/2010 11:43, bugbear wrote:
>
>> JNugent wrote:
>>>
>>> Several thousand UK drivers will have arrived home safely last night,
>>> without incident, despite having a blood alcohol level higher than
>>> the law
>>> permits. Would you draw any conclusions from it?
>>
>> Yeah. Drivers regularly break the law.
>
> Anything else?

Oh - do you suspect me of giving a conclusion
that wasn't the one you had in mind, possibly
for comic effect?

BugBear

[JNugent[_7_]]

On 04/11/2010 15:23, bugbear wrote:
> JNugent wrote:
>> On 04/11/2010 11:43, bugbear wrote:
>>
>>> JNugent wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Several thousand UK drivers will have arrived home safely last night,
>>>> without incident, despite having a blood alcohol level higher than the law
>>>> permits. Would you draw any conclusions from it?
>>>
>>> Yeah. Drivers regularly break the law.
>>
>> Anything else?
>
> Oh - do you suspect me of giving a conclusion
> that wasn't the one you had in mind, possibly
> for comic effect?

Your thought processes are a closed book to me.

[bugbear]

JNugent wrote:
> On 04/11/2010 15:23, bugbear wrote:
>> JNugent wrote:
>>> On 04/11/2010 11:43, bugbear wrote:
>>>
>>>> JNugent wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Several thousand UK drivers will have arrived home safely last night,
>>>>> without incident, despite having a blood alcohol level higher than
>>>>> the law
>>>>> permits. Would you draw any conclusions from it?
>>>>
>>>> Yeah. Drivers regularly break the law.
>>>
>>> Anything else?
>>
>> Oh - do you suspect me of giving a conclusion
>> that wasn't the one you had in mind, possibly
>> for comic effect?
>
> Your thought processes are a closed book to me.

Motorist in "doesn't understand cyclist" shock!

BugBear

[JNugent[_7_]]

On 04/11/2010 16:03, bugbear wrote:
> JNugent wrote:
>> On 04/11/2010 15:23, bugbear wrote:
>>> JNugent wrote:
>>>> On 04/11/2010 11:43, bugbear wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> JNugent wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Several thousand UK drivers will have arrived home safely last night,
>>>>>> without incident, despite having a blood alcohol level higher than the law
>>>>>> permits. Would you draw any conclusions from it?
>>>>>
>>>>> Yeah. Drivers regularly break the law.
>>>>
>>>> Anything else?
>>>
>>> Oh - do you suspect me of giving a conclusion
>>> that wasn't the one you had in mind, possibly
>>> for comic effect?
>>
>> Your thought processes are a closed book to me.
>
> Motorist in "doesn't understand cyclist" shock!


No.

Me in "doesn't understand how bugbear can hop from topic to topic without
recognising analogies, patterns and precedents" shock.

If "shock" is the right word (it isn't, as you know).

[Simon Mason[_4_]]

On Nov 2, 9:27*am, bugbear > wrote:
> Since the members of this group seem keen
> to extrapolate universal truths from
> random events...
>
> I enjoyed cycling to work today, and
> arrived without injury. I was not wearing a helmet.
>
> * * BugBear

I cycled to work this morning starting at 0545.
I arrived at work safely at 0630 despite a 25 mph headwind from the
North Sea.
I did not wear a helmet, but *did* wear a beanie as it was cold, but I
took it off halfway after I had warmed up.

--
Simon Mason

[bugbear]

bugbear wrote:
> bugbear wrote:
>> bugbear wrote:
>>> Since the members of this group seem keen
>>> to extrapolate universal truths from
>>> random events...
>>>
>>> I enjoyed cycling to work today, and
>>> arrived without injury. I was not wearing a helmet.
>>
>> I enjoyed cycling to work today, and
>> arrived without injury. I was not wearing a helmet.
>
> I enjoyed cycling to work today, and
> arrived without injury. I was not wearing a helmet.

I enjoyed cycling to work today, and
arrived without injury. I was not wearing a helmet.

BugBear

[bugbear]

bugbear wrote:
>
> I enjoyed cycling to work today, and
> arrived without injury. I was not wearing a helmet.


I enjoyed cycling to work today, and
arrived without injury. I was not wearing a helmet.

BugBear

[al Mossah[_2_]]

On Nov 15, 9:59*am, bugbear > wrote:
> bugbear wrote:
>
> > I enjoyed cycling to work today, and
> > arrived without injury. I was not wearing a helmet.
>
> I enjoyed cycling to work today, and
> arrived without injury. I was not wearing a helmet.
>
> * * BugBear

This morning it was -3 and freezing fog. I rode to the station, and
from station to work. Some patches of ice on the roads, but no
mishaps. I was wearing a helmet. I enjoyed the (eventual) bright
sunlight and cold air on the journey.

[Tom Crispin[_4_]]

On Mon, 15 Nov 2010 09:59:20 +0000, bugbear
> wrote:

>bugbear wrote:
>>
>> I enjoyed cycling to work today, and
>> arrived without injury. I was not wearing a helmet.
>
>
>I enjoyed cycling to work today, and
>arrived without injury. I was not wearing a helmet.

I think that you miss the point.

No one, as far as I can tell, denies the fact that the vast majority
of cycle trips are without someone falling and landing on their head.
Helmets are designed to reduce the risk of injury or severity of
injury in the unlikely event of someone falling and landing on their
head.

If you want to argue over the effectiveness of helmets at an
individual or population level, then by all means have areasoned
conversation. But don't show your ignorance by arguing against them by
discussing individual trips.

[Rob Morley]

On Mon, 15 Nov 2010 16:48:54 +0000
Tom Crispin > wrote:

> On Mon, 15 Nov 2010 09:59:20 +0000, bugbear
> > wrote:
>
> >bugbear wrote:
> >>
> >> I enjoyed cycling to work today, and
> >> arrived without injury. I was not wearing a helmet.
> >
> >
> >I enjoyed cycling to work today, and
> >arrived without injury. I was not wearing a helmet.
>
> I think that you miss the point.
>
I think that /you/ miss the point.

[bugbear]

bugbear wrote:
> bugbear wrote:
>>
>> I enjoyed cycling to work today, and
>> arrived without injury. I was not wearing a helmet.
>
>
> I enjoyed cycling to work today, and
> arrived without injury. I was not wearing a helmet.

I enjoyed cycling to work today, and
arrived without injury. I was not wearing a helmet.

BugBear