🚀 go-pugleaf

JoJo Jo wrote:

>I'm sorry but I just have to comment.
>
>If you look at page 46 and page 93 of the study you will see that the
>tests have a statistical modeling algorithm that clearly justifies the
>correlation between speed and accidents causing deaths. The graphs
>have been verified by independent agencies including the automotive
>companies and semiconductor companies.

The algorithm is based upon meaningless data.  If, and that is a big
if, the VMT has not increased by a similar 9% to the increase in
fatalities, then you may have a point.  But if the VMT has increased
by more than 9%, the trend is in the opposite direction.  But
regardless, one year isn't enough to provide meaningful proof either
way.

>I know that each of you will stop writing replies with various
>opinions after you read pages 46 and 93.

Err, anyone who places their faith in a report that clearly warns you
it is inconclusive is just plain foolish and perhaps desperate to
confirm a long held and emotionally appealing but unproven belief.

>Thank You.
>
>Signed,
>
>Drive Safe (and slow if you want to live longer...perhaps, unless fate
>gets you first)

Hmm, do you have anything more than a gut feeling that "slow is safe"?
Some states had fatalities rise, some had them go down.  Yet sometimes
fatalities went up and down despite no change in the speed limit.
-- 
Brandon

"Spooooooooooonnnnn!"