3681d4ec   
   XPost: misc.phone.mobile.iphone, comp.mobile.android   
   From: rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com   
      
   Paul M. Cook  wrote   
   > Rod Speed wrote   
      
   >>> I'm saying the accident rate has nothing to do with cellphones   
      
   >> And you have no basis for that claim.   
      
   > Ok. You're just arguing for the sake of arguing.   
      
   Another bare faced lie.   
      
   > I looked at the data first,   
      
   There is fuck all data on the number of people who use a cellphone while   
   driving.   
      
   Even those who are fined for doing that can only   
   ever be a tiny subset of those who actually do that.   
      
   > and the data shows   
      
   There is fuck all data on the number of people who use a cellphone while   
   driving.   
      
   Even those who are fined for doing that can only   
   ever be a tiny subset of those who actually do that.   
      
   > there is no effect whatsoever that can correspond   
   > to the explosion in cellphone ownership.   
      
   Cellphone ownership is completely irrelevant data.   
      
   > That there is no increase in accident rates is obvious.   
   > That's a fact.   
      
   Another bare faced pig ignorant lie.   
      
   > Now you just blindly assume that the data is wrong.   
      
   I know that there is no relevant data.   
      
   > Worse, you assume the *opposite* of what the data actually shows.   
      
   There is no relevant data that shows anything at all.   
      
   > Yet, you provide no proof.   
      
   I made no claim except to rub your stupid   
   nose in the fact that there is no relevant data.   
      
   > a. I start with good data,   
      
   Another bare face lie, there is no relevant data.   
      
   >   and simply state what the data actually shows   
   >   which is the accident rate is not rising at all.   
      
   Another bare face lie, there is no relevant data.   
      
   > b. You start with zero data,   
      
   Another bare faced lie.   
      
   >   and simply *assume* that the accident rate   
   >   is rising due to cellphones being used.   
      
   I assume nothing of the sort and have in fact   
   repeatedly rubbed your stupid nose in the   
   FACT that accident rates keep dropping for   
   the reasons I have repeatedly told you.   
      
   > I can point to a lack of increased accidents.   
      
   But are too stupid to realise that that is due to   
   the FACT that the accident rate keeps dropping   
   due to other factors that swamp the cellphone   
   use while driving.   
      
   > You can't point to increased accidents.   
      
   Because they are in fact happening less.   
      
   > Yet, you persist with the baseless claim.   
      
   I made no claim except to rub your stupid   
   nose in the facts that there there is no   
   relevant data on the number who use   
   their cellphones while driving and the   
   accident rate keeps dropping.   
      
   > Worse, you say "I" need to prove the lack of accidents   
      
   I have never ever said anything of the sort.   
      
   > (which is inherent in the data in the first place!).   
      
   Another bare faced lie.   
      
   > You're funny.   
      
   You're pathetic, bone headed and a terminal fuckwit.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)