Groups > misc.phone.mobile.iphone > #202760

Re: Why do people claim cellphone use increased the USA accident rate?

From	Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com>
Newsgroups	misc.phone.mobile.iphone, rec.autos.driving, comp.mobile.android, rec.autos.tech, alt.home.repair
Subject	Re: Why do people claim cellphone use increased the USA accident rate?
Date	2026-09-21 21:00 +0000
Organization	A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID	<118s5t2$b0bs$1@dont-email.me> (permalink)
References	(4 earlier) <118l1hi$2slo$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com> <118lkke$22r2v$1@dont-email.me> <118pdt0$30cb$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com> <118ql71$3p71b$1@dont-email.me> <118qssi$201j$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com>

Cross-posted to 5 groups.

Show all headers | View raw

Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> wrote:
> Chris wrote:
>>> I certainly know the answer to the question that I posed in this thread.
>>> I knew it a decade ago. 
>> 
>> If you know it so well it would be very easy for you to evidence it
>> irrefutably. Which you've yet to do this time and also every other time you
>> bring this up.
>> 
>> Why? Because it doesn't exist.
> 
> Jesus Christ, Chris. Seriously. Have you no decency? I gave you the facts!
> 
> I get it you're from the iOS group so you think denying all facts makes
> them go away, but I posted the evidence in this group, Read the thread.
> 
> Yes. It's boring. Not a single emoji. No 'bold new colors' either. 
> But I provided the statistics and the links to where they came from.
>  1. Cellphone ownership rates
>  2. Miles driven
>  3. Accidents
> 
> Accidents divided by miles driven over the period of cellphone
> skyrocketing, and there are no changes whatsoever in the rate.
> 
> I explained my hypothesis and the data supports it.
> You invented accident rates which don't exist. Now support that.
> 
> Don't support it by NOT looking at the data and saying it doesn't exist.
> That's what Apple posters do all the time on the Apple newsgroups, Chris.
> 
>>> Why? 
>>> Because I can think. I can do research. I can look up the data.
>> 
>> Your attempts to make yourself sound like an authority just come across as
>> the boasts of a weak man. 
>> 
>> I invite you to respond to my experimental design questions and also
>> Carlos's very pertinent ChatGPT clear answers to your intentionally false
>> claims.
> 
> Oh my God, Chris. I get it you are from an iOS group 

Why are you hiding behind ad hominems?

What does "being from an iOS group" even mean? If you don't want a response
from people who subscribe to ios (Ed. iphone actually) ngs you shouldn't
post in them. 

>  
>  Q: Here is the statistics posted to Usenet. Are they correct? 

It's got nothing to do with whether the "statistics" (sic) are correct or
not, it's what you're trying to infer from them that matters. 

State explicitly what the question at hand is. The CharGPT response is
correct in that you're trying to conflate two different things. Pick one.
Then, Explain clearly in terms of scientific methodology why the data
you've chosen is appropriate to the question and why you think a
correlation (or otherwise) is the best way to answer the question.

Thread

csiph-web