98baad7e
XPost: misc.phone.mobile.iphone, comp.mobile.android
From: rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com
Paul M. Cook wrote
> Rod Speed wrote
>> Doesn’t stop you proclaiming that cellphone use while
>> driving isn't dangerous because you can't see any effect
>> on the accident rate.
> The onus isn't on "me" to determine if it's dangerous.
You were the one who originally proclaimed that cellphone
use while driving can not be seen in the accident rate.
> The onus is on those who proclaim it's dangerous.
Its obviously more dangerous than
not using the cellphone while driving.
> If a fool is going to state that the use of cellphones
> while driving is dangerous, don't you think they
> should supply a single ounce of *reliable* data
> that backs that (erroneous) claim up?
Nope, for the same reason that a sensible person who
says that driving around with your eyes closed is more
dangerous than driving around with your eyes open
doesn’t have to provide proof of that obvious fact.
Particularly when as even you admit there just isn't
any good data on cellphone use WHILE DRIVING.
> I'm not the one saying cellphone use is dangerous.
You are the one who originally proclaimed that cellphone
use while driving can not be seen in the accident rate.
> In fact, since there is absolutely no reliable evidence
> that it is dangerous, I wouldn't expect to see *anything*
> different in the reliable data.
More fool you.
> Which is *exactly* what I see.
You 'see' nothing of the sort, because there is
no reliable data on cellphone use WHILE DRIVING.
> So, why do you ask "me" to prove what is already proved?
I have done nothing of the sort. And nothing has already proved either.
> You need to ask the cellphone-is-dangerous crowd to
> prove what *they* say. Mine is already proved by the data.
Like hell it is when we have no data on cellphone use WHILE DRIVING.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
