🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <33A5CCD8.3D01@direct.ca>, Ken Bognar  <kbognar@direct.ca> wrote:

>Obviously I'm just stating that you put too much faith in statistics
>when the results are just too hard to gather accurately.  

In fact I don't, and I've examined this issue very carefully. I
started out in favour of mandatory helmet laws until I did some
research.

>My statistics the other way? Well, I personally know 6 people that have
>wrecked helmets and have proof that they would have been hurt pretty
>badly without them.  Those are hard facts but not recorded anywhere
>unlike the stats that you speak of that just don't reflect facts like
>that.

Of course they don't; that's anecdoctal evidence, not statistics.
Given this sort of argument, it's quite obvious that you don't have
a clue about statistics, and are thus entirely incompetent to judge
what is statistically good and bad.

I think, based on that, we can terminate this argument.

>I'm not ignoring any evidence at all. I just disregard evidence that
>doesn't tell the whole story.

No, you disregard evidence that you don't like.

cjs
-- 
Curt Sampson    cjs@portal.ca	   Info at http://www.portal.ca/
Internet Portal Services, Inc.	   Through infinite myst, software reverberates
Vancouver, BC  (604) 257-9400	   In code possess'd of invisible folly.