|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Protecting the head ...
On 12/25/2006 13:21:40 "LSMike" wrote: On Dec 24, 6:30 pm, John wrote: I for one was lucky enough to have been very well protected when I suffered my most serious head injury. Given the severity of that accident I am in little doubt that I probably wouldn't be here today without this protection. So what are your views on compulsion? How do you know that your helmet didn't worsen your injury? This is such a stupid comment, I once stated on here that a motorcycle helmet had once saved my life in an accident and was shouted down by the naysayers telling me I could not say that unless I redid the accident without the helmet, what a purile response, of course if I am dead I cannot post things that they disagree with. I think Mike should re-enact John's incident without a helmet to prove how wrong John is. We all know that this board is anti-helmet but the prime idiots who shout people down with foolish responses based on ignorance are not good representatives of cycling, by all means debate but give stupidity a rest. -- Buck I would rather be out on my Catrike http://www.catrike.co.uk |
Ads |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Protecting the head ...
On Dec 28, 11:30 am, Buck wrote: On 12/25/2006 13:21:40 "LSMike" wrote: On Dec 24, 6:30 pm, John wrote: I for one was lucky enough to have been very well protected when I suffered my most serious head injury. Given the severity of that accident I am in little doubt that I probably wouldn't be here today without this protection. So what are your views on compulsion? How do you know that your helmet didn't worsen your injury?This is such a stupid comment, I once stated on here that a motorcycle helmet had once saved my life in an accident and was shouted down by the naysayers telling me I could not say that unless I redid the accident without the helmet, what a purile response, of course if I am dead I cannot post things that they disagree with. I think Mike should re-enact John's incident without a helmet to prove how wrong John is. We all know that this board is anti-helmet but the prime idiots who shout people down with foolish responses based on ignorance are not good representatives of cycling, by all means debate but give stupidity a rest. -- Buck I would rather be out on my Catrike http://www.catrike.co.uk LOLLOLLOL! |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Protecting the head ...
On Thu, 28 Dec 2006 11:30:21 GMT, Buck wrote:
On 12/25/2006 13:21:40 "LSMike" wrote: On Dec 24, 6:30 pm, John wrote: So what are your views on compulsion? How do you know that your helmet didn't worsen your injury? This is such a stupid comment, Why? How _do_ you know that the helmet did not worsen the injury? I once stated on here that a motorcycle helmet had once saved my life in an accident and was shouted down by the naysayers telling me I could not say that unless I redid the accident without the helmet, Which is, of course, a 100% true statement. You don't like people making true statements? people down with foolish responses based on ignorance Aha. So your assertions are not based on ignorance. We await, with baited breath, the evidence that supports your claims. regards, Ian SMith -- |\ /| no .sig |o o| |/ \| |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Protecting the head ...
Quoting Buck :
This is such a stupid comment, I once stated on here that a motorcycle helmet had once saved my life in an accident and was shouted down by the naysayers telling me I could not say that unless I redid the accident without the helmet, Which is true. Just because the control experiment isn't feasible doesn't mean it isn't necessary to reach the conclusion. -- OPTIONS=name:Kirsty,menustyle:C,female,lit_corrido r,standout,time,showexp,hilit e_pet,catname:Akane,dogname:Ryoga,fruitkonomiyak i,pickup_types:"!$?=/,scores: 5 top/2 around,color,boulder:0,autoquiver,autodig,disclose :yiyayvygyc,pickup_bu rden:burdened,!cmdassist,msg_window:reversed,!spar kle,horsename:Rumiko,showrace |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Protecting the head ...
Quoting Ian Smith :
On Thu, 28 Dec 2006 11:30:21 GMT, Buck wrote: On 12/25/2006 13:21:40 "LSMike" wrote: On Dec 24, 6:30 pm, John wrote: So what are your views on compulsion? How do you know that your helmet didn't worsen your injury? This is such a stupid comment, Why? How _do_ you know that the helmet did not worsen the injury? Well, although it has passed well over "Buck"'s head, because John wasn't wearing one; John was responding to the "alcohol can mitigate head injuries" story. -- OPTIONS=name:Kirsty,menustyle:C,female,lit_corrido r,standout,time,showexp,hilit e_pet,catname:Akane,dogname:Ryoga,fruitkonomiyak i,pickup_types:"!$?=/,scores: 5 top/2 around,color,boulder:0,autoquiver,autodig,disclose :yiyayvygyc,pickup_bu rden:burdened,!cmdassist,msg_window:reversed,!spar kle,horsename:Rumiko,showrace |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Protecting the head ...
On 12/28/2006 13:46:19 Ian Smith wrote: On Thu, 28 Dec 2006 11:30:21 GMT, Buck wrote: On 12/25/2006 13:21:40 "LSMike" wrote: On Dec 24, 6:30 pm, John wrote: So what are your views on compulsion? How do you know that your helmet didn't worsen your injury? This is such a stupid comment, Why? How _do_ you know that the helmet did not worsen the injury? I once stated on here that a motorcycle helmet had once saved my life in an accident and was shouted down by the naysayers telling me I could not say that unless I redid the accident without the helmet, Which is, of course, a 100% true statement. You don't like people making true statements? people down with foolish responses based on ignorance Aha. So your assertions are not based on ignorance. We await, with baited breath, the evidence that supports your claims. regards, Ian SMith You go and prove it wrong as it is so important to you, go and headbut a transit van at 40mph with no helmet on, easy, you will be no less stupid for the experience. -- Buck I would rather be out on my Catrike http://www.catrike.co.uk |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Protecting the head ...
On 12/28/2006 14:29:05 David Damerell wrote: Quoting Ian Smith : On Thu, 28 Dec 2006 11:30:21 GMT, Buck wrote: On 12/25/2006 13:21:40 "LSMike" wrote: On Dec 24, 6:30 pm, John wrote: So what are your views on compulsion? How do you know that your helmet didn't worsen your injury? This is such a stupid comment, Why? How _do_ you know that the helmet did not worsen the injury? Well, although it has passed well over "Buck"'s head, because John wasn't wearing one; John was responding to the "alcohol can mitigate head injuries" story. I was not responding to John, but that seems to be way over your head my old chummy. -- Buck I would rather be out on my Catrike http://www.catrike.co.uk |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Protecting the head ...
Buck wrote:
On 12/28/2006 13:46:19 Ian Smith wrote: On Thu, 28 Dec 2006 11:30:21 GMT, Buck wrote: On 12/25/2006 13:21:40 "LSMike" wrote: On Dec 24, 6:30 pm, John wrote: So what are your views on compulsion? How do you know that your helmet didn't worsen your injury? This is such a stupid comment, Why? How _do_ you know that the helmet did not worsen the injury? I once stated on here that a motorcycle helmet had once saved my life in an accident and was shouted down by the naysayers telling me I could not say that unless I redid the accident without the helmet, Which is, of course, a 100% true statement. You don't like people making true statements? people down with foolish responses based on ignorance Aha. So your assertions are not based on ignorance. We await, with baited breath, the evidence that supports your claims. You go and prove it wrong as it is so important to you, go and headbut a transit van at 40mph with no helmet on, easy, you will be no less stupid for the experience. What happens when the transit van headbutts you? Does that make a difference? Before you go jumping to conclusions that is a general you not a personal one. Bicycle helmets (also known as plastic hats) are only designed to protect against certain low-speed accidents. In other situations their usefullness is debatable at best. Collisions with motor vehicles are /not/ what they are designed to protect against. I'm off to indulge in some more head (or is it brain?) protection, hic! -- Phil Cook looking north over the park to the "Westminster Gasworks" |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Protecting the head ...
On Thu, 28 Dec 2006 15:21:15 GMT, Buck
wrote: You go and prove it wrong as it is so important to you, go and headbut a transit van at 40mph with no helmet on, easy, you will be no less stupid for the experience. a) in such a situation a cycle helmet will be no help at all; b) cycle helmets in general have a negative impact on public health; and as for stupidity, c) people who fail to understand the implications of a) and b) would not benefit from a cycle helmet even if a) and b) were false. |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Protecting the head ...
In article
Buck wrote: snip You go and prove it wrong as it is so important to you, go and headbut a transit van at 40mph with no helmet on, easy, you will be no less stupid for the experience. You're the one claiming that a flimsy piece of plastic provides protection in a situation that would otherwise cause significant brain injury - it seems only fair that you should be the one to provide conclusive proof. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Protecting my shins | pkplonker | Unicycling | 8 | November 19th 06 10:02 AM |
Protecting your saddle? | firisfirefly | Unicycling | 20 | August 8th 06 03:18 PM |
Protecting your saddle? | mornish | Unicycling | 0 | August 3rd 06 06:40 AM |
Protecting your saddle? | Jerrick | Unicycling | 0 | August 3rd 06 06:39 AM |
AOL is protecting Lance | tom tank | Racing | 4 | July 20th 04 10:39 PM |