Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Catrike Ryder <Soloman@old.bikers.org>
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.tech
Subject: Re: New Bike Path
Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2024 11:20:16 -0400
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 38
Message-ID: <se3aajlmle187mr1h2otic3bfoef9043v9@4ax.com>
References: <v6tqe7$3ih7q$4@dont-email.me> <v6u41v$3kevu$2@dont-email.me> <7v559j1bs0ia511gls5thk96njrfearrl7@4ax.com> <v72uq3$k5kl$5@dont-email.me> <Y6clO.63379$J6gc.24141@fx09.ams4> <v73mr7$pqin$1@dont-email.me> <N0xlO.126461$Liga.8066@fx15.ams4> <v76lc1$1dnmj$2@dont-email.me> <cNMoO.560137$Liga.341869@fx15.ams4> <v80qpa$2v4bh$1@dont-email.me> <cSSoO.422844$mMba.84001@fx06.ams4> <v81dn4$31pcq$4@dont-email.me> <f1b9ajlemhud9nh671k82io40n50e4cjjg@4ax.com> <v831nt$3dseh$5@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2024 17:20:20 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="9cfc7acb1aa96a2eefaf389d6caf2547";
	logging-data="3623344"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19xw78uzdya+tKJ7Aro4NxVGk9yWqFXKX8="
User-Agent: ForteAgent/8.00.32.1272
Cancel-Lock: sha1:cZ6+n/8EtLZ1dj96UaRKS3khUSM=
Bytes: 2914

On Sat, 27 Jul 2024 10:54:51 -0400, Frank Krygowski
<frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

>On 7/27/2024 4:16 AM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
>> On Fri, 26 Jul 2024 20:06:59 -0400, Frank Krygowski
>> <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>> 
>>> In the years prior to the installation, they had six car bike
>>> crashes in 37 months. Immediately afterward they had eleven car-bike
>>> crashes in 8 months. There is no chance of that NOT being statistically
>>> significant! To pretend otherwise is laughable.
>> 
>> I suspect more people rode that route after they installed the bike
>> path.  More riders = more accidents.
>
>I've already addressed that. "They claim a 75% increase in bike traffic, 
>but that's nowhere near the appoximately 1000% increase in car-bike 
>crashes."


LOL> Six and elleven are insignificant numbers. Using a percent
increase for small numbers is inherently dishonest. For instance, an
increase from 1 to 2 is a 100% increase...

So what were the other factors that weren 't reported. Was there in
increase in vehicle traffic? Was there a blockage on some other road?
Was there a new shopping center opining up somewhere that changed the
traffic pattern?

Never mind, you don't care. You only want it to support your opinion.

As always, your simple facts only work for simple minds like yours.

Much like your previous ignorant assesment that correlation implies
causation.

>Granted, that response used (gasp!) mathematics. Sorry if it was too 
>confusing for you.