On Monday, June 3, 2019 at 2:15:09 PM UTC-4, sms wrote:
On 6/3/2019 10:16 AM, jbeattie wrote:

snip

Without getting into the question of whether bicycle is safe or safer than gardening, one can argue about the completeness of the data -- at least in non-fatalities. And then one can argue about what the data means.

What?! You want to base decisions on actual data. That's so lawyer-like!
Don't you know that using actual data is not acceptable when it
conflicts with an agenda?

It's so interesting when someone proclaims something that isn't true,
without any supporting data, then gets upset when others provide the
actual data. No one would think any worse of Frank if he simply admitted
his mistake.
Snipped

Talk about the kettle calling the pot black. You consistently ignore data whenever it does not support your stance or agenda.

Cheers