4bbeb4a2   
   XPost: misc.phone.mobile.iphone, comp.mobile.android   
   From: pmcook@gte.net   
      
   On Mon, 14 Dec 2015 08:09:28 +1100, Rod Speed wrote:   
      
   >> 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.   
      
   That's correct.   
      
   I'm saying the accident rate has nothing to do with cellphones   
   just like it has nothing to do with how many people wear   
   red socks.   
      
   And, the data shows that.   
      
   The people who need to produce the data you're looking for   
   are those who claim that cellphones have *any* effect on the   
   accident rate.   
      
   Not me. I already said, it's clear that they have no effect   
   whatsoever on the accident rate (that's as obvious as me saying   
   that the color of your hair has nothing to do with the accident   
   rate).   
      
   You don't expect me to produce data showing that the color of   
   your hair has no effect on the accident rate, do you?   
      
   It's the people who claim *otherwise* who need to show their   
   data (which they can't!).   
      
   So, just like the onus to provide proof that anyone claiming   
   that the color of your hair has something to do with the accident   
   rate, those who claim that cellphones have something to do   
   with the accident rate are the ones you need to ask for   
   this data from.   
      
   Not me. There is *no* data that will prove that cellphones   
   have *any* effect on the accident rate. So, you can't ask me   
   to supply proof since there is no proof that cellphones have   
   *any* effect on the accident rate.   
      
   Those who say otherwise are the ones who need to supply proof   
   (and they can't, simply because that proof does not exist).   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)