|Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter. (322546)|
|Home > BusChat|
Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter.
Posted by R30A on Wed Feb 1 16:23:47 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by BrooklynBus on Wed Feb 1 15:48:01 2017.Thanks for putting words in my mouth once again to give the misleading impression you are correct when it is plain obvious that you are incorrect.
Where did I do that? I see where you did that to me, in nearly every statement you claim I have made here...
I made the point that the lowering the speed limit lowers the average speed if people abide by the new lower limit.
Yes, You made an incorrect blanket statement.
You countered that saying it wasn't the case.
Correct, it is not.
When I asked you to explain, you gave the example of synchronized signals.
Correct! That is an example that I used.
The assumption I made which you later stated was incorrect was that most signals are synchronized.
Correct! That is an incorrect assumption to make based on anything I stated.
So I responded that if synchronization is the exception rather than the rule, it really does not matter if signals are synchronized or not when concluding that lowering the speed limit lowers the average speed or not.
That is not exactly what you said, nor is it entirely true.
So therefore you bringing up synchronized signals was just a diversion as are most of the points you bring up so as to avoid discussing the topic at hand.
No. It is a counterexample proving your universal statement false.
So in conclusion you have offered zero proof to counter my argument that lowering the speed limit lowers average speed.
False. I offered a counterexample. Synchronized lights. Prevalence is irrelevant.
Instead you make up a lie and state that I realized a major fallacy in my thinking so as to end the discussion proving you are correct.
I made no lie. Whether or not you realize that there are fallacies in your thinking has no bearing on my correctness.
The only thing you have proved is that you are not willing or capable of having a fair discussion without diverting the subject,
I have had a fair discussion here. You are the one who repeatedly makes statements which are incorrect, and continuously asserts facts which are not based in any form of reality.
bringing up irrelevant points so as to confuse the reader what the subject was.
You brought it up. You made a factually incorrect statement. I demonstrated why it was false. That the point being made is irrelevant is not on me...
You claim the other person said things he never did and draw erroneous conclusions from that.
Amazing self projection you have going for you here...
And if all else fails, you then resort to insults and buzzwords like "conspiracy" in order to discredit the other party.
If you don't want to be called a conspiracy theorist, don't act like one. Claiming the MTA is trying to cover things up makes you look about as sane as a JFK conspiracist