Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.mobile.android > #141425 > unrolled thread

It's a myth that cellphone use caused the accident rate to rise in the USA

Back to article view | Back to comp.mobile.android

Contents

  It's a myth that cellphone use caused the accident rate to rise in the USA Andrew <andrew@spam.net> - 2024-05-25 14:29 +0000
    Re: It's a myth that cellphone use caused the accident rate to rise in the USA Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2024-05-25 08:10 -0700
      Re: It's a myth that cellphone use caused the accident rate to rise in the USA Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> - 2024-05-25 18:28 +0200
        Re: It's a myth that cellphone use caused the accident rate to rise in the USA Andrew <andrew@spam.net> - 2024-05-26 06:22 +0000
    Re: It's a myth that cellphone use caused the accident rate to rise in the USA micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> - 2024-05-25 13:34 -0400
      Re: It's a myth that cellphone use caused the accident rate to rise in the USA Andrew <andrew@spam.net> - 2024-05-26 00:40 +0000
        Re: It's a myth that cellphone use caused the accident rate to rise in the USA micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> - 2024-05-25 21:48 -0400
          Re: It's a myth that cellphone use caused the accident rate to rise in the USA Andrew <andrew@spam.net> - 2024-05-26 05:58 +0000
            Re: It's a myth that cellphone use caused the accident rate to rise in the USA micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> - 2024-05-26 18:41 -0400
              Re: It's a myth that cellphone use caused the accident rate to rise in the USA Andrew <andrew@spam.net> - 2024-05-27 00:45 +0000
        Re: It's a myth that cellphone use caused the accident rate to rise in the USA "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2024-05-29 11:51 +0200
          Re: It's a myth that cellphone use caused the accident rate to rise in the USA Andrew <andrew@spam.net> - 2024-05-30 05:16 +0000
            Re: It's a myth that cellphone use caused the accident rate to rise in the USA Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2024-05-30 10:17 -0700
    Re: It's a myth that cellphone use caused the accident rate to rise in the USA badgolferman <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> - 2024-05-26 11:38 +0000
      Re: It's a myth that cellphone use caused the accident rate to rise in the USA Newyana2 <newyana@invalid.nospam> - 2024-05-26 09:32 -0400
      Re: It's a myth that cellphone use caused the accident rate to rise in the USA Andrew <andrew@spam.net> - 2024-05-26 14:01 +0000
        Re: It's a myth that cellphone use caused the accident rate to rise in the USA Andrew <andrew@spam.net> - 2024-05-26 14:05 +0000
        Re: It's a myth that cellphone use caused the accident rate to rise in the USA "badgolferman" <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> - 2024-05-26 15:15 +0000
          Re: It's a myth that cellphone use caused the accident rate to rise in the USA Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2024-05-26 14:41 -0700
          Re: It's a myth that cellphone use caused the accident rate to rise in the USA micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> - 2024-05-26 19:36 -0400
          Re: It's a myth that cellphone use caused the accident rate to rise in the USA Andrew <andrew@spam.net> - 2024-05-28 04:59 +0000
            Re: It's a myth that cellphone use caused the accident rate to rise in the USA Newyana2 <newyana@invalid.nospam> - 2024-05-28 09:23 -0400
              Re: It's a myth that cellphone use caused the accident rate to rise in the USA danmin@danminart-dot-com.no-spam.invalid (Danart) - 2024-05-29 00:30 +0000
                Re: It's a myth that cellphone use caused the accident rate to rise in the USA Andrew <andrew@spam.net> - 2024-05-29 05:05 +0000
                  Re: It's a myth that cellphone use caused the accident rate to rise in the USA Newyana2 <newyana@invalid.nospam> - 2024-05-29 08:38 -0400
                    Re: It's a myth that cellphone use caused the accident rate to rise in the USA Andrew <andrew@spam.net> - 2024-05-29 20:43 +0000
                Re: It's a myth that cellphone use caused the accident rate to rise in the USA Andrew <andrew@spam.net> - 2024-05-29 05:07 +0000
              Re: It's a myth that cellphone use caused the accident rate to rise in the USA Andrew <andrew@spam.net> - 2024-05-29 04:34 +0000
                Re: It's a myth that cellphone use caused the accident rate to rise in the USA micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> - 2024-05-29 02:57 -0400
                  Re: It's a myth that cellphone use caused the accident rate to rise in the USA Andrew <andrew@spam.net> - 2024-05-29 21:10 +0000
                  Re: It's a myth that cellphone use caused the accident rate to rise in the USA micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> - 2024-05-29 17:40 -0400
                    Re: It's a myth that cellphone use caused the accident rate to rise in the USA Andrew <andrew@spam.net> - 2024-05-29 21:57 +0000
                      Re: It's a myth that cellphone use caused the accident rate to rise in the USA bad sector <forgetski@_INVALID.net> - 2024-05-29 19:30 -0400
                        Re: It's a myth that cellphone use caused the accident rate to rise in the USA Andrew <andrew@spam.net> - 2024-05-30 03:36 +0000
                      Re: It's a myth that cellphone use caused the accident rate to rise in the USA Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2024-05-30 06:34 +0000
                        Re: It's a myth that cellphone use caused the accident rate to rise in the USA Andrew <andrew@spam.net> - 2024-05-30 07:36 +0000
                          Re: It's a myth that cellphone use caused the accident rate to rise in the USA Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2024-05-30 19:14 +0100
                            Re: It's a myth that cellphone use caused the accident rate to rise in the USA Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2024-06-01 11:38 +0000
                              Re: It's a myth that cellphone use caused the accident rate to rise in the USA Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2024-06-01 23:02 +0000
                Re: It's a myth that cellphone use caused the accident rate to rise in the USA Newyana2 <newyana@invalid.nospam> - 2024-05-29 08:25 -0400
                  Re: It's a myth that cellphone use caused the accident rate to rise in the USA Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2024-05-29 15:22 +0000
                    Re: It's a myth that cellphone use caused the accident rate to rise in the USA Newyana2 <newyana@invalid.nospam> - 2024-05-29 11:44 -0400
                      Re: It's a myth that cellphone use caused the accident rate to rise in the USA Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2024-05-29 09:05 -0700
                        Re: It's a myth that cellphone use caused the accident rate to rise in the USA Newyana2 <newyana@invalid.nospam> - 2024-05-29 13:21 -0400
                          Re: It's a myth that cellphone use caused the accident rate to rise in the USA Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2024-05-29 10:34 -0700
                          Re: It's a myth that cellphone use caused the accident rate to rise in the USA micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> - 2024-05-29 14:53 -0400
                            Re: It's a myth that cellphone use caused the accident rate to rise in the USA Newyana2 <newyana@invalid.nospam> - 2024-05-29 22:39 -0400
                              Re: It's a myth that cellphone use caused the accident rate to rise in the USA Andrew <andrew@spam.net> - 2024-05-30 05:14 +0000
                      Re: It's a myth that cellphone use caused the accident rate to rise in the USA "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2024-05-29 18:31 +0200
                        Re: It's a myth that cellphone use caused the accident rate to rise in the USA Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2024-05-29 21:31 +0000
                          Re: It's a myth that cellphone use caused the accident rate to rise in the USA Andrew <andrew@spam.net> - 2024-05-29 22:05 +0000
                            Re: It's a myth that cellphone use caused the accident rate to rise in the USA Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2024-05-30 00:49 +0000
                              Re: It's a myth that cellphone use caused the accident rate to rise in the USA Andrew <andrew@spam.net> - 2024-05-30 05:09 +0000
                                Re: It's a myth that cellphone use caused the accident rate to rise in the USA Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2024-05-30 10:18 -0700
                      Re: It's a myth that cellphone use caused the accident rate to rise in the USA Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2024-05-29 16:44 +0000
                    Re: It's a myth that cellphone use caused the accident rate to rise in the USA micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> - 2024-05-29 12:48 -0400
                      Re: It's a myth that cellphone use caused the accident rate to rise in the USA Newyana2 <newyana@invalid.nospam> - 2024-05-29 13:25 -0400
                        Re: It's a myth that cellphone use caused the accident rate to rise in the USA micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> - 2024-05-29 14:55 -0400
                          Re: It's a myth that cellphone use caused the accident rate to rise in the USA danmin@danminart-dot-com.no-spam.invalid (Danart) - 2024-05-29 19:17 +0000
                            Re: It's a myth that cellphone use caused the accident rate to rise in the USA Andrew <andrew@spam.net> - 2024-05-30 04:58 +0000
                          Re: It's a myth that cellphone use caused the accident rate to rise in the USA ollie <ollie@privacy.me> - 2024-06-18 11:17 +0200
                      Re: It's a myth that cellphone use caused the accident rate to rise in the USA sticks <wolverine01@charter.net> - 2024-05-29 20:31 -0500
                        Re: It's a myth that cellphone use caused the accident rate to rise in the USA Andrew <andrew@spam.net> - 2024-05-30 05:06 +0000
                          Re: It's a myth that cellphone use caused the accident rate to rise in the USA sticks <wolverine01@charter.net> - 2024-05-30 09:22 -0500
                            Re: It's a myth that cellphone use caused the accident rate to rise in the USA Andrew <andrew@spam.net> - 2024-05-30 14:57 +0000
                              Re: It's a myth that cellphone use caused the accident rate to rise in the USA sticks <wolverine01@charter.net> - 2024-05-30 11:43 -0500
                                Re: It's a myth that cellphone use caused the accident rate to rise in the USA Andrew <andrew@spam.net> - 2024-05-30 17:43 +0000
                                  Re: It's a myth that cellphone use caused the accident rate to rise in the USA sticks <wolverine01@charter.net> - 2024-05-30 15:37 -0500
                                    Re: It's a myth that cellphone use caused the accident rate to rise in the USA Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2024-05-30 21:29 +0000
                                      Re: It's a myth that cellphone use caused the accident rate to rise in the USA Nick Charles - 2024-05-30 18:21 -0400
                                        Re: It's a myth that cellphone use caused the accident rate to rise in the USA Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2024-05-31 16:27 +0000
                                  Re: It's a myth that cellphone use caused the accident rate to rise in the USA Norm <norm@slbglobal.net> - 2024-06-18 08:26 +0000
                          Re: It's a myth that cellphone use caused the accident rate to rise bad sector <forgetski@_INVALID.net> - 2024-06-18 06:48 -0400
                            Re: It's a myth that cellphone use caused the accident rate to rise Andrew <andrew@spam.net> - 2024-06-18 17:15 +0000
                        Re: It's a myth that cellphone use caused the accident rate to rise in the USA micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> - 2024-05-30 13:53 -0400
                  Re: It's a myth that cellphone use caused the accident rate to rise in the USA Andrew <andrew@spam.net> - 2024-05-29 21:15 +0000
      Re: It's a myth that cellphone use caused the accident rate to rise in the USA Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2024-05-26 14:39 -0700
      Re: It's a myth that cellphone use caused the accident rate to rise in the USA bad💽sector <forgetski@_INVALID.net> - 2024-05-26 19:21 -0400
        Re: It's a myth that cellphone use caused the accident rate to rise in the USA Andrew <andrew@spam.net> - 2024-05-30 04:53 +0000
          Re: It's a myth that cellphone use caused the accident rate to rise in the USA Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2024-05-30 10:22 -0700
          Re: It's a myth that cellphone use caused the accident rate to rise in the USA bad💽sector <forgetski@_INVALID.net> - 2024-05-30 21:42 -0400
            Re: It's a myth that cellphone use caused the accident rate to rise in the USA Andrew <andrew@spam.net> - 2024-06-02 03:01 +0000
              Re: It's a myth that cellphone use caused the accident rate to rise in the USA bad💽sector <forgetski@_INVALID.net> - 2024-06-01 23:42 -0400
              Re: It's a myth that cellphone use caused the accident rate to rise in the USA Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2024-06-02 14:29 +0000

Page 3 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5  Next page →

#141556

Newyana2 <newyana@invalid.nospam> wrote:
> On 5/29/2024 12:34 AM, Andrew wrote:
>> 
>> Notice that the common myth isn't only unsupported in the United States.
>> But you won't click on any of these reference links, now will you.
>> 
> 
>   I clicked, read and responded to the first links you posted.
> You never answered. At any rate, this is getting silly. You've
> said your piece. It's nonsense. You only attack rather than
> discuss with people. I'm beginning to think that you're a bot
> created by a consortium of car and cellphone makers.
> 
>   If you want to discuss ANYTHING you have to start by trying
> to be intellectually honest. You can't do that if you hold onto a
> vested interest in the outcome.

You realise this is "arlen", right? This is his MO. Fire off dozens of
posts and threads on the same topic with no interest in having a
discussion. Unless, of course, with sycophants. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#141557

On 5/29/2024 11:22 AM, Chris wrote:

> 
> You realise this is "arlen", right? This is his MO. Fire off dozens of
> posts and threads on the same topic with no interest in having a
> discussion. Unless, of course, with sycophants.
> 

  Arlen, really? How do people identify him?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#141558

On 2024-05-29 08:44, Newyana2 wrote:
> On 5/29/2024 11:22 AM, Chris wrote:
> 
>>
>> You realise this is "arlen", right? This is his MO. Fire off dozens of
>> posts and threads on the same topic with no interest in having a
>> discussion. Unless, of course, with sycophants.
>>
> 
>   Arlen, really? How do people identify him?
> 
> 

 From his manner of "speaking".

Honestly, I'm shocked that anyone COULDN'T recognize him.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#141569

On 5/29/2024 12:05 PM, Alan wrote:
> On 2024-05-29 08:44, Newyana2 wrote:

>>   Arlen, really? How do people identify him?
>>
>  From his manner of "speaking".
> 
> Honestly, I'm shocked that anyone COULDN'T recognize him.

   Interesting. I just figure that the majority of people are
motivated by emotion, can't stand to be wrong, and don't
think very clearly. So I'm not surprised to see a new person
hold forth as an irrational hothead. I suppose that on the
bright side these discussions provide a chance to clarify
topics.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#141571

On 2024-05-29 10:21, Newyana2 wrote:
> On 5/29/2024 12:05 PM, Alan wrote:
>> On 2024-05-29 08:44, Newyana2 wrote:
> 
>>>   Arlen, really? How do people identify him?
>>>
>>  From his manner of "speaking".
>>
>> Honestly, I'm shocked that anyone COULDN'T recognize him.
> 
>    Interesting. I just figure that the majority of people are
> motivated by emotion, can't stand to be wrong, and don't
> think very clearly. So I'm not surprised to see a new person
> hold forth as an irrational hothead. I suppose that on the
> bright side these discussions provide a chance to clarify
> topics.
> 
> 

Just take a look at the language; the phrasing.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#141574

In comp.mobile.android, on Wed, 29 May 2024 13:21:29 -0400, Newyana2
<newyana@invalid.nospam> wrote:

>On 5/29/2024 12:05 PM, Alan wrote:
>> On 2024-05-29 08:44, Newyana2 wrote:
>
>>>   Arlen, really? How do people identify him?
>>>
>>  From his manner of "speaking".
>> 
>> Honestly, I'm shocked that anyone COULDN'T recognize him.
>
>   Interesting. I just figure that the majority of people are
>motivated by emotion, can't stand to be wrong, and don't
>think very clearly. So I'm not surprised to see a new person
>hold forth as an irrational hothead. I suppose that on the
>bright side these discussions provide a chance to clarify
>topics.

That's sort of, almost, sort of the basis on which I rationalized my
posts, that it was an academic challenge to go to the core of the false
logic. 

So I usad to practice my own arguments.  It will help me in my run for
Congress this fall. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#141607

On 5/29/2024 2:53 PM, micky wrote:

> That's sort of, almost, sort of the basis on which I rationalized my
> posts, that it was an academic challenge to go to the core of the false
> logic.
> 
> So I usad to practice my own arguments.  It will help me in my run for
> Congress this fall.
> 

   Your time may be better spent buying a machinegun and opposing
abortion. No one debates the issues anymore.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#141613

Newyana2 wrote on Wed, 29 May 2024 22:39:54 -0400 :

>    Your time may be better spent buying a machinegun and opposing
> abortion. No one debates the issues anymore.

Without taking sides on the issue... I will note the inconsistencies... 

What's interesting is in the United States, the party platforms are not
self consistent on the taking of a life (whether almost born or later).

Democrat platform (paraphrased)...
a. It's fine to kill an unborn child with an abortion
b. It's not fine to kill a living person with a gun

Republican platform (paraphrased)...
a. It's not fine to kill an unborn child with an abortion
b. It's fine to kill a living person with a gun

Obviously those are paraphrased, but the point I'm making is neither
platform is self consistent, as a consistent platform might be instead...

A. It's not fine to kill an unborn child with an abortion
B. It's not fine to kill a living person with a gun

Or...

B. It's fine to kill a living person with a gun
A. It's fine to kill an unborn child with an abortion

The inconsistencies show, at least to me, they don't even believe in their
own words because if they cared about life, their platform would be
consistent. 

It's not.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#141560

On 2024-05-29 17:44, Newyana2 wrote:
> On 5/29/2024 11:22 AM, Chris wrote:
> 
>>
>> You realise this is "arlen", right? This is his MO. Fire off dozens of
>> posts and threads on the same topic with no interest in having a
>> discussion. Unless, of course, with sycophants.
>>
> 
>   Arlen, really? How do people identify him?

We have correlated the identity Andrew with him months ago. He is made 
many posts with it, the identification is easy.

He has several quirks of language. One is saying he speak facts, when 
there are none in evidence. Another is insulting. If I see some new name 
that insults me out of the blue, there are high chances that it is him.

He changes names often. He may refer to posts he made under another name.

-- 
Cheers, Carlos.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#141597

On 2024-05-29, Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
> On 2024-05-29 17:44, Newyana2 wrote:
>> On 5/29/2024 11:22 AM, Chris wrote:
>> 
>>> You realise this is "arlen", right? This is his MO. Fire off dozens
>>> of posts and threads on the same topic with no interest in having a
>>> discussion. Unless, of course, with sycophants.
>> 
>>   Arlen, really? How do people identify him?
>
> We have correlated the identity Andrew with him months ago. He is made
> many posts with it, the identification is easy.
>
> He has several quirks of language. One is saying he speak facts, when
> there are none in evidence. Another is insulting. If I see some new
> name that insults me out of the blue, there are high chances that it
> is him.
>
> He changes names often. He may refer to posts he made under another
> name.

He also replies to his own posts with different names in order to give
the appearance his positions are more popular than they are. 

-- 
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#141601

Jolly Roger wrote on 29 May 2024 21:31:40 GMT :

> He also replies to his own posts with different names in order to give
> the appearance his positions are more popular than they are.

I know that most people are morons, Jolly Roger. 

So I know the facts will be unpopular with most people, Jolly Roger.
a. Most people believe in the myth
b. Yet most people never check the facts

Which is ironic, actually.
A. Most people dispute the facts.
B. And yet, most people never question the myth.

The myth is that you'll see any evidence whatsoever of the supposed direct
first-order effect of cellphone saturation on the USA accident rate.

All the morons dispute that fact.
Yet none of the morons can find a single cite backing up their dispute.

You think I didn't know this would happen?
I'm trying to _teach_ you something, Jolly Roger.

You can't say all facts are not facts simply because you don't like them.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#141604

On 2024-05-29, Andrew <andrew@spam.net> wrote:
> Jolly Roger wrote on 29 May 2024 21:31:40 GMT :
>
>> He also replies to his own posts with different names in order to
>> give the appearance his positions are more popular than they are.
>
> I know that most people are moronsi

Straight to the insults...

-- 
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#141612

Jolly Roger wrote on 30 May 2024 00:49:26 GMT :

> Straight to the insults

You're the ones denying all facts simply because you don't like them.

The adult question to ponder, once you understand it, is if cellphone use
while driving is so dangerous, why does the accident rate not show that?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#141632

On 2024-05-29 22:09, Andrew wrote:
> Jolly Roger wrote on 30 May 2024 00:49:26 GMT :
> 
>> Straight to the insults
> 
> You're the ones denying all facts simply because you don't like them.
> 
> The adult question to ponder, once you understand it, is if cellphone use
> while driving is so dangerous, why does the accident rate not show that?

Because there are other factors at play, you moron.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#141562

Newyana2 <newyana@invalid.nospam> wrote:
> On 5/29/2024 11:22 AM, Chris wrote:
> 
>> 
>> You realise this is "arlen", right? This is his MO. Fire off dozens of
>> posts and threads on the same topic with no interest in having a
>> discussion. Unless, of course, with sycophants.
>> 
> 
>  Arlen, really? How do people identify him?

If an OP includes a diatribe or a grandiose statement plus belittling of
apple users, that'll be him. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#141563

In comp.mobile.android, on Wed, 29 May 2024 15:22:54 -0000 (UTC), Chris
<ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote:

>Newyana2 <newyana@invalid.nospam> wrote:
>> On 5/29/2024 12:34 AM, Andrew wrote:
>>> 
>>> Notice that the common myth isn't only unsupported in the United States.
>>> But you won't click on any of these reference links, now will you.
>>> 
>> 
>>   I clicked, read and responded to the first links you posted.
>> You never answered. At any rate, this is getting silly. You've
>> said your piece. It's nonsense. You only attack rather than
>> discuss with people. I'm beginning to think that you're a bot
>> created by a consortium of car and cellphone makers.

LOL.  Could be.  Next generation of advertising!
>> 
>>   If you want to discuss ANYTHING you have to start by trying
>> to be intellectually honest. You can't do that if you hold onto a
>> vested interest in the outcome.
>
>You realise this is "arlen", right? This is his MO. Fire off dozens of
>posts and threads on the same topic with no interest in having a
>discussion. Unless, of course, with sycophants. 
>
Could be.  I usually don't get caught up in his stuff.  

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#141570

On 5/29/2024 12:48 PM, micky wrote:

>> You realise this is "arlen", right? This is his MO. Fire off dozens of
>> posts and threads on the same topic with no interest in having a
>> discussion. Unless, of course, with sycophants.
>>
> Could be.  I usually don't get caught up in his stuff.
> 

  I've seen bot posts on Reddit. Usually I don't think of it until
someone points it out, then I realize that it probably is a bot
post. Then again, is there a difference between bots, marketing,
Chinese propagandists and Russian hackers? They're mostly only
identifiable by their viewpoint.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#141575

In comp.mobile.android, on Wed, 29 May 2024 13:25:00 -0400, Newyana2
<newyana@invalid.nospam> wrote:

>On 5/29/2024 12:48 PM, micky wrote:
>
>>> You realise this is "arlen", right? This is his MO. Fire off dozens of
>>> posts and threads on the same topic with no interest in having a
>>> discussion. Unless, of course, with sycophants.
>>>
>> Could be.  I usually don't get caught up in his stuff.
>> 
>
>  I've seen bot posts on Reddit. Usually I don't think of it until
>someone points it out, then I realize that it probably is a bot
>post. Then again, is there a difference between bots, marketing,
>Chinese propagandists and Russian hackers? They're mostly only
>identifiable by their viewpoint.

Come to think of it, bots could be valuable for Chinese and Russians.
You only have to teach English to one computer instead of a bunch of
people. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#141576

 > Andrew wrote:
 > How many of you are scientists; how many of you are morons?
 > 
 > It's a myth that cellphone use caused the accident rate to rise in
the USA
 > 
 > The only place that myth exists is in stupid people's minds, 
 > since the main proponents of the myth are those with money to gain,

 > namely (a) injury lawyers, (b) insurance companies & (c)
ticketing police.
 > 
 > In the accurate US Census Bureau records, what do you see happening
to the
 > accident rate before, during and after the meteoric rise in
cellphone
 > ownership in the United States?
 >  
https://www.google.com/search?q=us+census+accident+rate+statistics+by+year

 > 
 > What do you see?
 >  
https://www2.census.gov/library/publications/2010/compendia/statab/130ed/tables/11s1102.pdf

 > 
 > Look at first-order effects, i.e., the accident rate per year.
 >  
https://www.iihs.org/topics/fatality-statistics/detail/yearly-snapshot

 > 
 > What do you see happening to the rate during skyrocketing cellphone
days?
 >  
https://injuryfacts.nsc.org/motor-vehicle/historical-fatality-trends/deaths-and-rates/

 > 
 > HINT: US Accident rates trending down were wholly unaffected by
cellphones.

It is not a myth it is a fact. You get in the car
in no way you should answer that phone, unless your at a light and it
is 
on speaker or your in park. Point being you could be distracted. You
might as well have a tablet-computer with a SIM-card
slot just for your car. Rather then you blasted phone. It is
distracting and not everybody have the ability to focus on the road
and some moron on the phone.
 

This is a response to the post seen at:
http://www.jlaforums.com/viewtopic.php?p=665966706#665966706

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#141610

Danart wrote on Wed, 29 May 2024 19:17:02 +0000 :

> It is not a myth it is a fact. You get in the car
> in no way you should answer that phone, unless your at a light and it
> is on speaker or your in park. Point being you could be distracted. You
> might as well have a tablet-computer with a SIM-card
> slot just for your car. Rather then you blasted phone. It is
> distracting and not everybody have the ability to focus on the road
> and some moron on the phone.

The main message I wanted to communicate is that people believe in myths
that have no basis in fact when you bother to double check the facts.

The myth is that cellphones are so dangerous to use in a vehicle that the
accident rate must have skyrocketed (and then leveled off) during the
period that ownership rates went meteorically from 0% to almost 100%.

And yet... the fact is... nothing happened to the accident rate.
My goal is to merely state the facts. 

And the fact is there is no effect visible in the reliable accident rate
statistics of the skyrocketing rise in cellphone ownership rates.

No adult can discuss that topic until they understand & agree with the
facts, and only then a healthy debate can ensue as to why that's a fact.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 3 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.mobile.android

csiph-web