Nuxx:3f8733a5-237a-4d43-bc98-b69dc84b85da@b1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com

Path: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!postnews.google.com!b1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Message-ID: <3f8733a5-237a-4d43-bc98-b69dc84b85da@b1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com> From: Nuxx Bar  Newsgroups: uk.rec.cycling Subject: Re: an interesting experience Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2008 12:19:47 -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> <6jsdsfF4ict7U1@mid.individual.net> <1a9l7n01q9d88.1y1sbcyn542ou.dlg@40tude.net> Lines: 79 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 1222197588 18233 127.0.0.1 (23 Sep 2008 19:19:48 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2008 19:19:48 +0000 (UTC) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: b1g2000hsg.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: 4193 Xref: perfectly-safe.chapmancentral.co.uk uk.rec.cycling:668896

On Sep 23, 4:41=A0pm, _  wrote: > On Tue, 23 Sep 2008 15:47:57 +0100, Peter Clinch wrote: > > _ wrote: > > >> 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. > > > "you, apart from forward motion, just fell over, right?" > > > So how does looking at the helmet resolve that? =A0 > > Don't play silly buggers, of course it is not a question that looking at > the helmet can resolve. =A0 > > > How does memory well > > before the event resolve that? > > He's remembered well enough that he knew he was going to come off, and th= at > it was a sliding fall. =A0I was asking in case there was any possibility = it > was anythiong OTHER than a just-falling-over event; perhaps there was > someone else on the track that he ran into, or that he had a fork collaps= e, > etcetera. > > > "Is the other side of the helmet unmarked?" > > > Sure, you can find out by looking at the helmet, but all that tells you > > is there was only an impact on one side. =A0Not actually enough to draw > > anything useful from. > > *Nothing* useful? =A0Such confidence before you even see the data - > remarkable. > > > "Were the straps on good and tight?" > > > So how does looking at the helmet resolve that? =A0 > > Don't play silly buggers, of course it is not a question that looking at > the helmet can resolve. =A0 > > > How does memory well > > before the event resolve that in any way conclusively? > > It is possible that the time when he put his helmet on, and his usual > method and degree of tightness are something that he can remember. =A0If = he > can't, so be it; I see no harm in asking. > > > 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 issu= e with > >> gathering such evidence. > > > because as illustrated above, it isn't actually much use. =A0 > > You "illustration" seems in part to be based on deliberate mis-reading > and/or mis-understanding the questions. =A0I find it questionable at best= . > > > What you can > > conclude is that his helmet struck something on one side, and /that's > > about it/. =A0So I'm taking issue partly because it's a waste of time, > > Whose time - yours? =A0 > > > and > > more to the point I suspect (not 101% sure, but strongly suspect with > > your opening gambit of rotational injuries) you're building up to a bit > > of a witch-hunting side show against helmets. > > Well, there's no pejorative pre-judgement there, is there.

You're a cunt.