Regional and School Buses!

"DennisTheBald" wrote in message
...
In general I would say the Ed Dolan is on crack, but this is the day
that the sun shines on that dog's ass...

Cycling in NOT particularly dangerous.

Motor vehicles are inherently dangerous. In the US there are about
44,000 fatalities caused by motor vehicle collisions every year, very
few of these involve bikes, or peds, or horses or whatever else you
might imagine other than motor vehicles. A pretty good segment of
these fatal collisions involve only the one vehicle colliding with
something immobile like a bridge support or a tree or even just the
ground in an unusual direction. That's why we the people don't allow
kids and drunks to drive and require licensed operators to be
financially liable for the potential damage they are about to cause.

This number, 44,000 per annum, does NOT include deaths related to
automobile manufacture or operation other than collisions, however a
good many people have put forth that motor vehicles do indeed cause
death in manners not related to collisions. I understand that
operating one in an enclosed space can be quite fatal. In this regard
and in so much as the big ball we live on doesn't seem to share an
atmospheric current with any other celestial body it in and of itself
would seem to constitute one rather large enclosed space. It only
stands to reason that the outcome of operating these motor vehicles in
our atmosphere is essentially the same as operating them in a large
enclosed space, it's only a matter of time before it produces the same
results. I mean to say that if you fired up your Buick in a three car
garage it would take longer to kill you than it would in a one car
garage, but if the tank is full sooner or later your gonna get the
same results. Wouldn't it be nice if we could hold the people that
profit from the manufacture and sale of these things liable for the
damage their product does? I guess if we're going down that road we
ought to go after the booze vendors first as that would be more bang
for our buck.

People that think bicycles are dangerous can wear helmets and/or cups.
Personally I won't ride without a night-light, 'cause I'm scared of
the dark - YMMV.

DennisTheBald
For years now the levels of carbon monoxide emitted by new automobiles in
the US (sorry, don't know about other countries) has been so low that if you
fire up your (1980 or newer) Buick in a three car or a one car garage, it
will never kill you. See:
http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/art...?artid=1273253
This result may or may not be able to be extrapolated to the big ball we
live on.
Kerry

DennisTheBald
For years now the levels of carbon monoxide emitted by new automobiles in
the US (sorry, don't know about other countries) has been so low that if you
fire up your (1980 or newer) Buick in a three car or a one car garage, it
will never kill you. See:http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/art...?artid=1273253
This result may or may not be able to be extrapolated to the big ball we
live on.
Kerry

I notice that you don't go so far as to say that car exhaust is
actually good for a body, good for you (doing so would have blown your
cover, you auto-industrial complex shill you;-). I'm still somewhat
incredulous, despite your citation. But, I am willing to acquiesce
that there has been some movement in a positive direction regarding
auto emissions in the US during the past couple decades... I wouldn't
want to get all political but there are certainly those that feel
these gains come at too high of a price and we need to operate more
like the Chinese do with fewer governmental regulations and more
conscripted labor. I am looking forward to all y'all burning less
sulfur in the diesel motor fuel when you deliver my goods.

And, even though governmental regulation is driving improvements in
the level of this one poisonous gas emitted by the motor vehicles I
don't think that you can conclude that a few failed suicide attempts
here and there make it safe to run your car in the garage. As a
matter of fact the reference you cite indicates that the subject of
this story was pulled unconscious from the garage after three hours,
most vehicles will operate for considerably longer than that on a full
tank. Also your cited report was created in 1981 testing 1980 model
chevys - I suspect that the same 1980 models would produce much more
CO if tested today. The late 70's were a period of peak
environmentalist activity, but with the 80s came Reaganomics and that
whole "greed is good" thing. Today the CDC recommends that you not/
operate a motor vehicle in your garage: http://www.cdc.gov/co/faqs.htm
- I believe this page to have been updated since 1981.

And I would encourage any and all motorists to test your theory by
going into the garage and fire it up.

"Jon" wrote in message
...
"Wilson" wrote in message
. ..

"Jon" wrote
"Wilson" wrote

a bicycle/motor vehicle accident on the road is
inherently unsafe for the cyclist.

Ok, but by the same reasoning, a small car/big truck accident on
the road is "inherently unsafe" for the small car occupants. In
actuality, however, it does *not necessarily* follow from this that
the biggest vehicles are the safest.
[....]

Ok so it might even be true that nothing in this life necessarily follows
anything else. Throw a coke bottle up in the air and I suppose it may
*not necessary* follow that it will return to earth, but I'm willing to
bet it will.

I do know that I don't want to be in a Mini Cooper that collides
with a semi truck and trailer.

Me neither, but again, that's not the point I am addressing. The
problem with accessing risk in this case, as is common, is one
of selective observation and flawed generalization.

Imagine you are in a minor car collision, wearing your seat belt.
You are not injured, but a gasoline leak has started a fire. You
have time to escape if you move quickly, but your seat belt is
jammed. You die in the fire. OK, so you carry a knife to cut
the seat belt. What if that slight delay makes the difference?

Clearly in this case, wearing the seat belt was as undesirable
as being in the Mini Cooper crushed by the semi. But it does
not necessarily follow that *not* wearing seat belts is the safest
behavior.

Throw a coke bottle up in the air and I suppose it may *not necessary*
follow that it will return to earth, but I'm willing to
bet it will.

Depends on whether the bottle obtains escape velocity. %^)
That you are willing to wager on the likely outcome suggests an
understanding of the laws of physics or at least a sound
generalization from observation of a fairly simple circumstance
with few variables.

But when assessing relative risk of various human activities, the
laws of physics are only part of the picture. Hmmm, this
reminds me of the falling Coke bottle in the movie, _The Gods
Must be Crazy_.

graphic photo of car plowing into a peloton [...]
According to your statistics all these cyclists were statistically less
safe driving to the start of the race with their bikes in tow than they
were on the road racing their bikes.

The cyclists were exposed to greater risk while driving.

Shall I send you links to news photos of the mangled
remains of the SUV where four children of friends of
mine died?

Then the unthinkable happened.

Not unthinkable. An unlikely thing happened.
A tragic incident.

Do you propose that the cyclists involved failed to
properly prepare for and take evasive action?

Do you propose that they failed to make eye contact
with the driver, -- drunk, asleep at the wheel,-- before
proceeding?

The inherently unsafe aspect here is the drunk driver.
Sadly, that's not a very rare occurrence. This was
not about the physics of smaller or larger bodies in
motion colliding. If the reports are true, this was
not a accident, it was man slaughter.

Your statistics are no respecter of persons.

Correct. One-in-a-million events happen.
Strangely, in about one in a million times over
the long run. %^)

Statistics to the contrary don't matter when it's your
body flying though the air.

Correct.

No more than statistics matter if the drunk driver had
swerved onto the sidewalk and into a crowd of
pedestrians. Or had crossed into oncoming traffic
and struck head-on a van full of kids going to church
camp. Both have happened here.

Doesn't change the point that cycling is not particularly
dangerous.

Jon


My argument doesn't concern the relative dangers of cycling compared to
other activities, such as roller derby, per hour risk of exposure, or
whatever. They are what they are.

My argument, which is backed up by my common sense, is that a cyclist
getting run over by a car, train, bus, or semi trailer is involved in an
event that is inherently dangerous, and often fatal, to the cyclist. It is
far and away more dangerous for the cyclist than for the train engineer,
car, or
the bus or simi truck drivers. My point is that it is critically important
for the cyclist to act accordingly and use their own judgment and wits to
avoid this eventuality.

Thass all I'm sayin'.

"DennisTheBald" wrote in message
...
In general I would say the Ed Dolan is on crack, but this is the day
that the sun shines on that dog's ass...

Ed Dolan the Great is the mightiest genius ever to walk the earth! He is
also a Great Saint, but what would some slob known as Dennis the Bald ever
know about that. After all, he is not Great like I am.

Cycling in NOT particularly dangerous.

Motor vehicles are inherently dangerous. In the US there are about
44,000 fatalities caused by motor vehicle collisions every year, very
few of these involve bikes, or peds, or horses or whatever else you
might imagine other than motor vehicles. ...
[...]

If there were hundreds of millions of bicycles on the road with motor
vehicles we would soon see a slaughter would make the mind reel. The fact is
there are relatively few cyclists on the road with motor vehicles, and so
there are not so many deaths.

Now you know why I am a Great Genius and why Dennis the Bald is ... well,
bald!

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

In article ,
"Edward Dolan" writes:

"DennisTheBald" wrote in message
...
In general I would say the Ed Dolan is on crack, but this is the day
that the sun shines on that dog's ass...

Ed Dolan the Great is the mightiest genius ever to walk the earth! He is
also a Great Saint, but what would some slob known as Dennis the Bald ever
know about that. After all, he is not Great like I am.

sigh Nobody understands your Erse schtick, except me.

I suppose going over the heads of people can be fun for a
while, but that would get old pretty quickly. Getting
/into/ their heads and being a positive influence is so
horribly, disgustingly, unforgivably nice. It's delightfully
Machiavellian.


cheers, & Erin go bra-less,
Tom

--
Nothing is safe from me.
I'm really at:
tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca

"Kerry Montgomery" wrote in message
m...

"DennisTheBald" wrote in message
...
DennisTheBald
For years now the levels of carbon monoxide emitted by new automobiles in
the US (sorry, don't know about other countries) has been so low that if
you fire up your (1980 or newer) Buick in a three car or a one car garage,
it will never kill you. See:
http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/art...?artid=1273253
This result may or may not be able to be extrapolated to the big ball we
live on.
Kerry

You have too much faith in the assertions of the report.

Yes, fewer people die of carbon monoxide poisoning when attempting to kill
themselves by using car exhausts but it's still possible to to be killed by
asphyxiation if the confined space is not ventilated. Catalytic converters
removed the carbon monoxide but the carbon dioxide levels are unaffected.

In a confined unventilated space with an engine running, the oxygen levels
will drop, the carbon dioxide levels rise and any hapless mammals including
humans sharing that space will eventually suffocate due to the lack of
oxygen. It just takes longer to die but gives more opportunities for the
suicide wannabees to change their minds and do something about it. It also
increases the chances of being discovered by a third party before the
attempt succeeds.

You are all welcome to try to prove me wrong but I would recommend you try
to do it using a hands on approach....

"vernon" wrote in message
...

"Kerry Montgomery" wrote in message
m...

"DennisTheBald" wrote in message
...
DennisTheBald
For years now the levels of carbon monoxide emitted by new automobiles in
the US (sorry, don't know about other countries) has been so low that if
you fire up your (1980 or newer) Buick in a three car or a one car
garage, it will never kill you. See:
http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/art...?artid=1273253
This result may or may not be able to be extrapolated to the big ball we
live on.
Kerry

You have too much faith in the assertions of the report.

Yes, fewer people die of carbon monoxide poisoning when attempting to kill
themselves by using car exhausts but it's still possible to to be killed
by asphyxiation if the confined space is not ventilated. Catalytic
converters removed the carbon monoxide but the carbon dioxide levels are
unaffected.

In a confined unventilated space with an engine running, the oxygen levels
will drop, the carbon dioxide levels rise and any hapless mammals
including humans sharing that space will eventually suffocate due to the
lack of oxygen. It just takes longer to die but gives more opportunities
for the suicide wannabees to change their minds and do something about it.
It also increases the chances of being discovered by a third party before
the attempt succeeds.

You are all welcome to try to prove me wrong but I would recommend you try
to do it using a hands on approach....

For heaven's sakes, the only way to kill yourself is to go down to your dirt
floor basement and hang yourself from the rafters. No one has any sense of
style anymore. Either do it right, or don't do it at all!

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

"Tom Keats" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Edward Dolan" writes:

"DennisTheBald" wrote in message
...
In general I would say the Ed Dolan is on crack, but this is the day
that the sun shines on that dog's ass...

Ed Dolan the Great is the mightiest genius ever to walk the earth! He is
also a Great Saint, but what would some slob known as Dennis the Bald
ever
know about that. After all, he is not Great like I am.

sigh Nobody understands your Erse schtick, except me.

I suppose going over the heads of people can be fun for a
while, but that would get old pretty quickly. Getting
/into/ their heads and being a positive influence is so
horribly, disgustingly, unforgivably nice. It's delightfully
Machiavellian.

It IS fun to put down anyone who takes these confounded newsgroups the least
bit serious. Tom Keats is one of the few who gets it. Like me, he is a
philosopher at heart. He has gotten that way from hard work on the docks of
old Vancouver. I have gotten that way from contemplating my navel all of my
life and never doing one lick of work. He is not as Great as I am, but he is
not altogether negligible either.

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

"Wilson" wrote

My argument, which is backed up by my common sense, is that a cyclist
getting run over by a car, train, bus, or semi trailer is involved in an
event that is inherently dangerous, and often fatal, to the cyclist.

So based on this do you believe cycling is "particularly dangerous"?

Jon

"Jon" wrote in message
...
"Wilson" wrote

My argument, which is backed up by my common sense, is that a cyclist
getting run over by a car, train, bus, or semi trailer is involved in an
event that is inherently dangerous, and often fatal, to the cyclist.

So based on this do you believe cycling is "particularly dangerous"?

Jon

YES, if you are doing it on a road with high speed traffic without paved
shoulders. It is not particularly dangerous if you are doing it on a quiet
residential street in a small town without much traffic. Even here however
you should NOT be cycling in the traffic lane. You need to be out of the
lane of traffic no matter where you are. Bike paths are the only totally
safe way to cycle. Just ask Jeff Grippe!

By the way, any recumbent cyclist who is not wearing a rear view mirror is a
fool. You need to see what is coming from behind at all times.

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota