Nuxx:D26eae84-f894-44b3-a650-dc260d983f73@p3g2000vbv.googlegroups.com

Path: num2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!num1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!number.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border3.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!postnews.google.com!p3g2000vbv.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Message-ID:  From: Nuxx Bar  Newsgroups: uk.rec.cycling Subject: Re: Helmets: Chapman Should Put His Money Where His Mouth Is Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2011 10:39:02 -0800 (PST) References:   Lines: 48 Organization: http://groups.google.com NNTP-Posting-Host: 82.71.49.124 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: posting.google.com 1299177542 9354 127.0.0.1 (3 Mar 2011 18:39:02 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2011 18:39:02 +0000 (UTC) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: p3g2000vbv.googlegroups.com; posting-host=82.71.49.124; posting-account=7_6kYAkAAABD6HrjM0VxehwvZOKMxm4g User-Agent: G2/1.0 X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.5; en-US; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101203 Firefox/3.6.13,gzip(gfe) Bytes: 3545 Xref: perfectly-safe.chapmancentral.co.uk uk.rec.cycling:801022

On Mar 3, 5:28=A0pm, bugbear  wrote: > Nuxx Bar wrote: > > Chapman (aka "Just zis Guy, you know?") has recently had the following > > post to URCM rejected for abuse (I've snipped all the useless PGP > > rubbish): > > >> On 02/03/2011 21:47, Steve Walker wrote: > >>> Are you saying that Angela Lee knowingly propagates false information= in > >>> order to obtain funding which she should not properly be entitled to? > >>> That would be a very serious allegation to publicly make against the = founder > >>> of a children's safety charity. > > >> I'm sure Marc would not have made such a suggestion about the founder = of > >> a children's safety charity. The leader of a bunch of lying bike-hater= s, > >> on the other hand... > > > If he thinks that Angela Lee (of BHIT) is indeed the "leader of a > > bunch of lying bike-haters", and so obviously and deliberately > > misusing statistics, then he should be able to pulverise her in a > > public debate. > > No, that doesn't follow at all.

Oh really? Please explain.

I could pulverise you in a public debate about speed cameras. How about it? Thought not. Just like Mary Williams and countless other irrational scamera supporters mysteriously shied away from debate challenges from Paul Smith, who they were quite happy to call "barking", so why were they so reluctant to attempt to prove it? Maybe, just maybe, they know that their "cameras save lives" nonsense doesn't stack up, and their camera support is due to vested interests?

FWIW I think Chapman *may* be right about helmets (note that I'm not pretending to think helmets help just to persecute cyclists, in the same way that he pretends to think cameras help just to persecute motorists...I figured it was best to be the bigger person and not be dog-in-the-manger like Chapman). I would like the truth, whatever it is, to be arrived at beyond reasonable doubt, and I think a public debate would be a great way to do it. If Chapman is confident enough that Ms Lee is being dishonest and has the wrong motives then how could he think he would fail at outdebating her? Why would he not want to challenge her? Is it just because I've suggested it or is he secretly afraid that he'd lose?