Nuxx:9b17efdf-f6c1-4426-8bf9-86c318fae8c9@u69g2000hse.googlegroups.com

Path: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!postnews.google.com!u69g2000hse.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Message-ID: <9b17efdf-f6c1-4426-8bf9-86c318fae8c9@u69g2000hse.googlegroups.com> From: Nuxx Bar  Newsgroups: uk.rec.cycling Subject: Re: Well Done! Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2008 01:57:27 -0700 (PDT) References: <0d98876c-e050-4e91-bfda-139cb3270812@p39g2000prm.googlegroups.com>  <985aaddb-5e7a-49ec-bd70-65968171dfb2@a9g2000prl.googlegroups.com> <7g5604p5rfj9eb75us60r7pvdqbg42rfnn@4ax.com>   <4473a86a-eabf-45e9-8c77-f7a8b3d3bc08@59g2000hsb.googlegroups.com> Lines: 44 Organization: http://groups.google.com NNTP-Posting-Host: 88.105.150.187 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: posting.google.com 1208336247 16285 127.0.0.1 (16 Apr 2008 08:57:27 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2008 08:57:27 +0000 (UTC) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: u69g2000hse.googlegroups.com; posting-host=88.105.150.187; posting-account=7_6kYAkAAABD6HrjM0VxehwvZOKMxm4g User-Agent: G2/1.0 X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-US; rv:1.9b5) Gecko/2008032620 Firefox/3.0b5,gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe) Bytes: 3457 Xref: perfectly-safe.chapmancentral.co.uk uk.rec.cycling:647438

On Apr 15, 1:15=A0pm, Sir Jeremy  wrote: > On 14 Apr, 21:23, "Just zis Guy, you know?"  wrote: > > > > > On Mon, 14 Apr 2008 09:43:30 -0700 (PDT), Sir Jeremy > >  said in > > : > > > >Why did Which interview you about Safespeed? > > > They searched the web and usenet and noted that I had long exchanges > > with Smith, and had a detailed rebuttal of his one in three > > fatalities bullshit on my website. =A0They submitted it to their own > > statisticians for review, I believe, and they also looked at the > > 12mph comedy web page. =A0If any professional road safety researcher > > had ever dignified Smith with a published rebuttal, I am sure they > > would have called them instead, but the professional road safety > > community did not, as far as I can tell, ever take any notice of his > > argument, because it was not published in any peer-reviewed > > journals, and of course because it was complete bollocks. > > > Guy > > -- > > May contain traces of irony. =A0Contents liable to settle after posting.= http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk > > > 85% of helmet statistics are made up, 69% of them at CHS, Puget Sound > > So they were looking to do a hatchet job and you provided some ready > made ammunition. > > For all the whining from such as yourself and Spindrift about > Safespeeds work not being peer reviewed (not that Brakes anal > dribblings are peer reviewed) it turns out that Which use the non-peer > reviewed anti-car and anti-driver bollocks from someone with personal > antipathy towards Paul Smith. > > I've had my doubts abouts the alleged research that Which do for a > while, but this shows their stuff is about as convincing as Alistair > Campbell's evidence for weapons of mass destruction which was also > ripped off the net

Nail on the head.