A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » rec.bicycles » Social Issues
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Another idiot mountain biker!



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old June 1st 14, 04:33 AM posted to rec.bicycles.soc
EdwardDolan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 538
Default Another idiot mountain biker!

"Blackblade" wrote in message ...
[...]
Edward Dolan wrote:

Reports from the media are more than sufficient for this
purpose.


No, they're not because media reports come from all over. You need data for the same place and over the same period to be in any way comparable.


A random sampling of a universe of phenomena is even better than a sampling from a specific time and place. All I am doing is comparing different universes.
[...]

Nobody knows what is meant by "exposures" Your reliance on
this kind of "data" is hilarious.


Yes, Ed, people know exactly what is meant by exposures. If you could care to do some study instead of simply spouting you can read about it here ... http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1472638/


However, I fully expect that you won't bother and will remain secure in your ignorance.


All “exposures” are never the same. Too generalized to be of any use.
[...]

Hiker errors resulting in accidents are interesting because
they are unique. Mountain biker errors resulting in accidents are dull because
they are all the same. The biker hits an irregularity in the trail and goes
flying over the handlebars and lands on his head or back. Dull, dull, dull!


Oh dear Ed. So, the fact that the number one category requiring Mountain Rescue was "Slip, Trip or Stumble" with 111 of the 433 injuries in the Lake District in 2013 is indicative of a wonderful range of innovative and 'interesting' new injuries suffered by hikers ?


That number one category is trivial and not worth mentioning, certainly not to be compared with the kind of common accidents that mountain bikers suffer. Hiker accidents that result in serious injury or death are interesting. Similar degree mountain biker accidents are never interesting because they are all the same.

Rider hits irregularity and falls off (OTB is relatively rare), hiker slips, trips or stumbles over irregularity. What a fascinating degree of similarity don't you think ?


Being thrown over the handle bars and having to be picked up by the rescue and emergency services is a quite common mountain biker accident. However, even falling off a bike for any reason at all is far more serious than a hiker falling (unless from a great height).

Mountain bikers are barbarians and have no right to be on any trail used by hikers – unless they want to get off their god damn ****ing bikes and walk like everyone else. When they crash and injure themselves, I rejoice! If and when they manage to kill themselves, I say good riddance to bad rubbish! Death to mountain biking!

“Tread softly! All the earth is holy ground.”
~ Christina Rossetti (Psalm 24),
from "A Later Life: A Double Sonnet of Sonnets"

Mountain bikes have wheels. Wheels are for roads.

Trails are for walking. What’s the matter? Can’t walk?

Ed Dolan the Great
aka
Saint Edward the Great


Ads
  #22  
Old June 2nd 14, 11:47 AM posted to rec.bicycles.soc
Blackblade[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 214
Default Another idiot mountain biker!

No, they're not because media reports come from all over.
You need data for the same place and over the same period to be in any way
comparable.

A random sampling of a universe of phenomena is even better
than a sampling from a specific time and place. All I am doing is comparing
different universes.


And thereby rendering the data totally meaningless. You can't compare a cross country trail with a downhill bike park.

You can't compare a city street with a trail.

And, you're not sampling either ... you're collecting every instance you can of one outcome (death or injury) without collecting the rest of the dataset. So, you are committing so many statistical errors that you wouldn't even pass a school-level stats course .. let alone anything more advanced.

Nobody knows what is meant by "exposures" Your reliance on


this kind of "data" is hilarious.


Yes, Ed, people know exactly what is meant by exposures. If

you could care to do some study instead of simply spouting you can read about it
here ... http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1472638/

However, I fully expect that you won't bother and will remain

secure in your ignorance.

All "exposures" are never the same. Too generalized to be of
any use.


So, thank you, you confirmed my expectations ...

Oh dear Ed. So, the fact that the number one category

requiring Mountain Rescue was "Slip, Trip or Stumble" with 111 of the 433
injuries in the Lake District in 2013 is indicative of a wonderful range of
innovative and 'interesting' new injuries suffered by hikers ?

That number one category is trivial and not worth mentioning,


Why Ed ? It's the most common category of injuries and therefore hardly 'trivial'. Particularly when you remember that these were incidents that were sufficient serious that they required people to call our Mountain Rescue.

certainly not to be compared with the kind of common accidents that mountain
bikers suffer. Hiker accidents that result in serious injury or death are
interesting. Similar degree mountain biker accidents are never interesting
because they are all the same.


Well then Ed, from the report that I provided, show me the 'interesting' hiker deaths or injuries. The vast majority are from the same causes, every year .. a fact decried by the chairman in his opening remarks.

  #23  
Old June 2nd 14, 11:08 PM posted to rec.bicycles.soc
EdwardDolan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 538
Default Another idiot mountain biker!

"Blackblade" wrote in message ...

No, they're not because media reports come from all over.

You need data for the same place and over the same period to be in any way
comparable.


Edward Dolan wrote:

A random sampling of a universe of phenomena is even better
than a sampling from a specific time and place. All I am doing is comparing
different universes.


And thereby rendering the data totally meaningless. You can't compare a cross country trail with a downhill bike park.


You can't compare a city street with a trail.


And, you're not sampling either ... you're collecting every instance you can of one outcome (death or injury) without collecting the rest of the dataset. So, you are committing so many statistical errors that you wouldn't even pass a school-level stats course .. let alone anything more advanced.


The randomness corrects for all of that. That is the beauty of it. It is also why polls must be sufficiently large to have any value. Statistics 101.
[...]

Oh dear Ed. So, the fact that the number one category

requiring Mountain Rescue was "Slip, Trip or Stumble" with 111 of the 433
injuries in the Lake District in 2013 is indicative of a wonderful range of
innovative and 'interesting' new injuries suffered by hikers ?

That number one category is trivial and not worth mentioning,


Why Ed ? It's the most common category of injuries and therefore hardly 'trivial'. Particularly when you remember that these were incidents that were sufficient serious that they required people to call our Mountain Rescue.


You might not be able to walk because of a foot or ankle injury and so need a way out, but these are not serious injuries.

certainly not to be compared with the kind of common accidents that mountain
bikers suffer. Hiker accidents that result in serious injury or death are
interesting. Similar degree mountain biker accidents are never interesting
because they are all the same.


Well then Ed, from the report that I provided, show me the 'interesting' hiker deaths or injuries. The vast majority are from the same causes, every year .. a fact decried by the chairman in his opening remarks.

Trivial injures don’t interest me. Maybe you could make it your mission to bring us reports of the deaths of hikers with all the details at which point I will then tell you wherein the interest lies. Mountain biker injuries and deaths are all the same and therefore uninteresting.

Mountain bikers are barbarians and have no right to be on any trail used by hikers – unless they want to get off their god damn ****ing bikes and walk like everyone else. When they crash and injure themselves, I rejoice! If and when they manage to kill themselves, I say good riddance to bad rubbish! Death to mountain biking!

“Tread softly! All the earth is holy ground.”
~ Christina Rossetti (Psalm 24),
from "A Later Life: A Double Sonnet of Sonnets"

Mountain bikes have wheels. Wheels are for roads.

Trails are for walking. What’s the matter? Can’t walk?

Ed Dolan the Great
aka
Saint Edward the Great


  #24  
Old June 3rd 14, 05:06 PM posted to rec.bicycles.soc
Blackblade[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 214
Default Another idiot mountain biker!

No, they're not because media reports come from all
over.

You need data for the same place and over the same period to be in any

way

comparable.


A random sampling of a universe of phenomena is even better


than a sampling from a specific time and place. All I am doing is

comparing

different universes.




And thereby rendering the data totally meaningless. You

can't compare a cross country trail with a downhill bike park.



You can't compare a city street with a trail.




And, you're not sampling either ... you're collecting every

instance you can of one outcome (death or injury) without collecting the rest of
the dataset. So, you are committing so many statistical errors that you
wouldn't even pass a school-level stats course .. let alone anything more
advanced.



The randomness corrects for all of that. That is the beauty of
it. It is also why polls must be sufficiently large to have any value.
Statistics 101.


You've shown that you haven't the faintest idea about statistics. And, no, you AREN'T random sampling. You are looking for one occurrence, death or injury, across the globe. You aren't randomly sampling a number of rides and seeing what occurs. That's why you think mountain biking is very dangerous ... because you only ever read about when it goes wrong. You completely miss the vast majority of rides where everything is fine.

But, you know that anyway I think and are just dancing around as usual ...

Oh dear Ed. So, the fact that the number one category



requiring Mountain Rescue was "Slip, Trip or Stumble" with 111 of the

433

injuries in the Lake District in 2013 is indicative of a wonderful

range of

innovative and 'interesting' new injuries suffered by hikers ?




That number one category is trivial and not worth mentioning,


Why Ed ? It's the most common category of injuries and

therefore hardly 'trivial'. Particularly when you remember that these were
incidents that were sufficient serious that they required people to call our
Mountain Rescue.

You might not be able to walk because of a foot or ankle
injury and so need a way out, but these are not serious injuries.


Ed, one of them resulted in a fatality from exposure !

certainly not to be compared with the kind of common accidents that

mountain

bikers suffer. Hiker accidents that result in serious injury or death

are

interesting. Similar degree mountain biker accidents are never

interesting

because they are all the same.




Well then Ed, from the report that I provided, show me the 'interesting'
hiker deaths or injuries. The vast majority are from the same causes,
every year .. a fact decried by the chairman in his opening remarks.



Trivial injures don't interest me. Maybe you could make it
your mission to bring us reports of the deaths of hikers with all the details at
which point I will then tell you wherein the interest lies. Mountain biker
injuries and deaths are all the same and therefore uninteresting.


No, Ed, I am not making it my mission to bring you anything. Go out there, do some real research, and you might be enlightened. However, as ever, I think that you won't ... you're not in the slightest bit interested in reality ... you have your own perspective on the world and, despite not the slightest objective backup, you're going to stick with that. Your mind is closed.

I belong to a mountain biking club. We have over 500 members and have now been in existence for twenty years. In all that time we have had two serious injuries ... significantly less than the 1.54 injuries per exposure figure from the BMJ.
  #25  
Old June 3rd 14, 11:07 PM posted to rec.bicycles.soc
EdwardDolan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 538
Default Another idiot mountain biker!

"Blackblade" wrote in message ...
[...]

Edward Dolan wrote:

The randomness corrects for all of that. That is the beauty of
it. It is also why polls must be sufficiently large to have any value.
Statistics 101.


You've shown that you haven't the faintest idea about statistics. And, no, you AREN'T random sampling. You are looking for one occurrence, death or injury, across the globe. You aren't randomly sampling a number of rides and seeing what occurs. That's why you think mountain biking is very dangerous ... because you only ever read about when it goes wrong. You completely miss the vast majority of rides where everything is fine.


Reviewing what is out there by what is reported in the media is as good a method as any. If biking on trails were not dangoeurs there would be no reports of serious accidents and deaths. Of course, most everything everybody does is relatively safe and so does not get reported. So what else is new? But the fact remains that biking on trails is dangerous compared to walking on trails.
[...]

Trivial injures don't interest me. Maybe you could make it
your mission to bring us reports of the deaths of hikers with all the details at
which point I will then tell you wherein the interest lies. Mountain biker
injuries and deaths are all the same and therefore uninteresting.


No, Ed, I am not making it my mission to bring you anything. Go out there, do some real research, and you might be enlightened. However, as ever, I think that you won't ... you're not in the slightest bit interested in reality ... you have your own perspective on the world and, despite not the slightest objective backup, you're going to stick with that. Your mind is closed.


It is a question of who is lazier, you or me? I take a back seat to no one when it comes to that. I am far lazier than you – and proud of it!

I do not need an open mind once I have made it up. Some pathetic souls go to their grave still with an open mind. Apparently they are incapable of learning anything with finality. Therein lies MY Greatness ... and everyone else’s fecklessness.

I belong to a mountain biking club. We have over 500 members and have now been in existence for twenty years. In all that time we have had two serious injuries ... significantly less than the 1.54 injuries per exposure figure from the BMJ.


Why not tell us about those 2 serious injuries? Will they have anything in common with the mountain biker injuries being reported from all over the world? Or will they be interesting because unique?

Frankly, all this blather about injuries and deaths and damage to the trails is not my primary interest. Biking on trails needs to banned everywhere because it is a conflict of both means and purpose. It is why motorcycles are also banned from all trails everywhere, or at least from trails where you have hikers and equestrians present. Bikes and motorcycles are not that different. And neither of those conveyances have anything to do with walking, whether it be a human walking or a horse walking. Take your ****ing biking club with its 500 members and ride on the roads and streets of dowdy old England – or is there a shortage of roads there?

Mountain bikers are barbarians and have no right to be on any trail used by hikers – unless they want to get off their god damn ****ing bikes and walk like everyone else. When they crash and injure themselves, I rejoice! If and when they manage to kill themselves, I say good riddance to bad rubbish! Death to mountain biking!

“Tread softly! All the earth is holy ground.”
~ Christina Rossetti (Psalm 24),
from "A Later Life: A Double Sonnet of Sonnets"

Mountain bikes have wheels. Wheels are for roads.

Trails are for walking. What’s the matter? Can’t walk?

Ed Dolan the Great
aka
Saint Edward the Great


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Runner Injured by Idiot Mountain Biker Mike Vandeman Mountain Biking 5 June 29th 07 11:41 PM
Runner Injured by Idiot Mountain Biker Mike Vandeman Social Issues 5 June 29th 07 11:41 PM
Death Threat from a Typical Mountain Biker (was Hate Mail from a Typical Mountain Biker) averal Social Issues 0 April 11th 05 04:47 AM
Mountain Biker Gives Driver the Finger, Then Wonders Why People Hate Mountain Bikers! Mr_Kingkillaha Mountain Biking 3 January 27th 05 05:20 AM
Another Idiot Mountain Biker Demonstrates Their Stupidity Mike Vandeman Mountain Biking 1 July 26th 03 09:28 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:37 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2024 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.