Nuxx:E71a2c48-96f0-4946-ac3c-8e936a96272e@m73g2000hsh.googlegroups.com

Path: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!postnews.google.com!m73g2000hsh.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Message-ID:  From: Nuxx Bar  Newsgroups: uk.rec.cycling Subject: Re: an interesting experience Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2008 12:19:32 -0700 (PDT) References:  <1q2xofrb9lzmd.saipunkd0br5.dlg@40tude.net> <6js6ejF4rovrU1@mid.individual.net> <2o4bsexa7g3z$.zdnljsorcw1s.dlg@40tude.net> <6jsb6aF4rangU1@mid.individual.net> <1x6cc52hthjl$.1x7lhff0nn21n$.dlg@40tude.net> Lines: 30 Organization: http://groups.google.com NNTP-Posting-Host: 88.105.206.99 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: posting.google.com 1222197572 18173 127.0.0.1 (23 Sep 2008 19:19:32 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2008 19:19:32 +0000 (UTC) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: m73g2000hsh.googlegroups.com; posting-host=88.105.206.99; posting-account=7_6kYAkAAABD6HrjM0VxehwvZOKMxm4g User-Agent: G2/1.0 X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-GB; rv:1.9.0.1) Gecko/2008070208 Firefox/3.0.1,gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe) Bytes: 2379 Xref: perfectly-safe.chapmancentral.co.uk uk.rec.cycling:668895

On Sep 23, 3:08=A0pm, _  wrote: > On Tue, 23 Sep 2008 15:02:00 +0100, Peter Clinch wrote: > > _ wrote: > > >> He was asked to supply more which would tend to confirm or deny - do y= ou > >> wish to forestall this inquiry? > > > Given the information supplied abut the specifics being /remarkably/ > > woolly, what are you going to learn that's actually *hard* data? > > > Even if Trevor could remember it well you'd be in the realms of > > arm-waving speculation. =A0 > > Well, the questions asked were of the sort that can either > > a) be answered by looking at the helmet now; or > > b) be answered by memory from well before the event. > > So the issue of memory being obscured by the incident probably a red > herring. > > As for the conclusion, well, that would rather depend on the evidence - > some of which we haven't got. =A0I fail to see why you are taking issue w= ith > gathering such evidence.

You're a cunt.