|
|
| Re: Dictatorship not Democracyn (314458) | |||
 |
|||
| Home > BusChat | |||
|
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
||
|
Re: Dictatorship not Democracyn |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Wed Jun 8 23:40:12 2016, in response to Re: Dictatorship not Democracyn, posted by BrooklynBus on Wed Jun 8 18:24:26 2016. "You have the real numbers of how many safe street crossings occur every day or year? Please share them with us."No. I never said I did. "Or are you saying the number of safe crossings do not matter and only the ones where pedestrians are injured or killed count?" Correct. They are wholly irrelevant if you are comparing incidence rate of automobile-pedestrian incidents to lightning strikes. "Wrong." No. Such is not wrong. "They are both important to ascertain how dangerous the streets really are." Correct! But you were not talking about how likely it is to hit when one crosses the street. You were comparing it to getting struck by lightning! For which such is absolutely useless in a comparison! "I was not using any I imaginary numbers." You were not using square roots of negative numbers, correct. You were using made up numbers. "I was actually being very conservative by assuming the average pedestrian crosses only four intersections a day. In reality the number is far higher." YES YOU WERE! In general crossing the street is MUCH safer than your estimate showed on a per exposure basis. BUT YOU WERE COMPARING IT TO LIGHTNING STRIKES WHICH AREN'T BEING CONSIDERED ON A PER EXPOSURE BASIS. Say one spends 50 hours of the year crossing the streets and potentially being hit by cars. They are spending 8766 hours of the year being potentially hit by lightning! "And how do real numbers prove me wrong? You made a statement so back it up." I already did. To quote Merrick's better numbers than mine: Number of people treated for vehicle-pedestrian collisions: 150,000 Number of people treated for lightning strikes: 297. Getting hit by a car crossing the street is not less likely. Not even just more likely. Not even just a lot more likely. FIVE HUNDRED TIMES MORE FUCKING LIKELY. And that is without considering the exposure difference that you were trying to bring in, which would shift it substantially against your argument, as you were only considering exposure for automobile accidents and not lightning. |
|
|
|