Helmets - again!

Alan Braggins said:

IFYPFY. HTH, HAND.

ROFL.

d.

Dave Larrington said:

Clive George said:

Anybody interested in finding out why, google groups for
uk.rec.cycling, author Peter Taylor, and read the threads resulting
from his posts.

I'll save you the bother.

It's because he's a troll.

Auf wiedersehn, forever, "Peter": <plonk>

Peter Taylor said:

I am still confused by the apparent hostilty to, and ridiculing of, cyclists
who choose to wear helmets by various members of this newsgroup.

You haven't been reading properly. Write out 100 times, "I must not
jump to conclusions".

dkahn400 said:

Every so often you pop up here with what appears to be a helmet troll.
I'm not aware of any of the regular posters here ever having ridiculed
anyone for choosing to wear a helmet. Indeed the usual anti-compulsion
position is that it should be a matter of personal choice.

To be completely fair to the OP, a few of us don't especially like to
see other people wearing helmets because the DfT have made it clear that
one of the barriers to compulsion is low wearing rates. Therefore lots
of cyclists wearing h*lmets makes compulsion more likely. This is an
unarguable fact; see http://www.peeble.com/bikes/letter1.gif and
http://www.peeble.com/bikes/letter2.gif

That's a very specialised argument and we're NOT "ridiculing" those who
choose to wear the things - if they won't ride without one, better that
they're still cycling.

Personally I wish, as with nuclear weapons, that helmets had never been
invented, then life would be so much simpler.

Peter Taylor said:

I am still confused by the apparent hostilty to, and ridiculing of, cyclists
who choose to wear helmets by various members of this newsgroup.

The arguments seem to revolve around (a) helmets will do nothing to protect
you in the event of an accident and (b) I am so damn skilled I will never
have an accident (c) helmets cause cyclists to have accidents.

[snip]

You could read the previous threads on this subject to disabuse you of
the egregious misconceptions. It would have been considerate and polite
to do so before posting.

Use of a helmet is usually seen by people who post here as a matter of
personal choice.

The arguments arise when claims are made for helmets that are
unsupported by any credible evidence, or else when it is argued that
helmets should be mandatory.

I hope that helps.

--
Joe * If I cannot be free I'll be cheap

Clive George said:

"Peter Taylor" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I am still confused by the apparent hostilty to, and ridiculing of,
cyclists
who choose to wear helmets by various members of this newsgroup.

<Yawn>

You said this on 3 Dec 2004, 8 Sep 2004, 7 Sep 2004, 17 May 2004, 13 Apr
2004 and 4 Feb 2004.

Guess what? You're still wrong.

Anybody interested in finding out why, google groups for uk.rec.cycling,
author Peter Taylor, and read the threads resulting from his posts.

clive

Bugger. If I'd noticed the [censored] had previous, I'd have ignored him. Oh
well, other things to do...

--
Joe * If I cannot be free I'll be cheap

JLB said:

Bugger. If I'd noticed the [censored] had previous, I'd have ignored him. Oh
well, other things to do...

And guys (and gals) please note that in each of the helmet threads he
started he posted only the once. So if you are trying to persuade him,
he's not there, he's vamoosed, he's gone to wherever trolls go when they
are not trolling.

--
Tony

"Don't argue the matter, the difficulties will argue for themselves"
-W.S. Churchill

"Peter Taylor" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I am still confused

Obviously.

And you are still a troll.

On Tue, 07 Jun 2005 16:43:43 GMT someone who may be Buck
<[email hidden]> wrote this:-

Quoted message said:

a lot of folk are here just so they can ram their opinions down the throats of others.

Another mind reader.

--
David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E
I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government
prevents me by using the RIP Act 2000.

At Tue, 07 Jun 2005 16:55:53 GMT, message
<[email hidden]> was posted by Buck
<[email hidden]>, including some, all or none of the following:

Quoted message said:

And so it starts again.

Clueless newbie[1] starts helmet war: pictures at eleven.

[1] with apologies to whoever it was created the Zen levels of helmets
categories.

Guy
--
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

"To every complex problem there is a solution which is
simple, neat and wrong" - HL Mencken

At Tue, 7 Jun 2005 16:38:16 +0100, message
<[email hidden]> was posted by
"Clive George" <[email hidden]>, including some, all or none
of the following:

Quoted message said:

You said this on 3 Dec 2004, 8 Sep 2004, 7 Sep 2004, 17 May 2004, 13 Apr
2004 and 4 Feb 2004.

I see you are right. Thanks for the heads-up; in the troll box with
it.

Guy
--
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

"To every complex problem there is a solution which is
simple, neat and wrong" - HL Mencken

Peter Taylor said:

So please, I have no objection to non helmet wearing between consenting
adults in private, but don't try to encourage others to your way of
thinking.

What? Like you're doing you mean?

Quoted message said:

I belive in freedom of expression and speech, but this is a bit
like shouting "fire" in a crowded cinema. Irresponsible and stupid.

Again a similar comparison could be made to your own statements. I can
only conclude that

a) Your tongue is embedded in your cheek. or
b) You're a raging buffoon of the highest order.

Come on people, given how nice the weather is (Here at least) at the
minute, what's with all the cross-posted angst and trolling? ;-)

Jon

JLB <[email hidden]>typed

Quoted message said:

Bugger. If I'd noticed the [censored] had previous, I'd have ignored him. Oh
well, other things to do...

So would I...

--
Helen D. Vecht: [email hidden]
Edgware.

In message <[email hidden]>, Pete Bentley <[email hidden]>
writes

Quoted message said:

Personally I have the opposite experience, I have managed a number
of unplanned falls over the years (some of which hurt considerably),
never whilst wearing a helmet and have never hit my head.

I've only had three unplanned falls in 28 years of adult cycling and
in none of them one did my cranium hit the ground.. The worst one was
when I was 17 and cycling back home 10 miles after a night out in
Loughborough. I fell asleep at the wheel so to speak and woke up with
my chin scraping along the tarmac. It was around midnight and there was
no traffic, thank god. I had to walk about with a very large scab on my
chin for a couple of weeks afterwards.

I wear a helmet now as my wife insists, but I did take it off on Sunday
afternoon as it was too damn hot cycling with it on. I tell you, there
is probably more risk of injury from accidents caused
overheating due to wearing a helmet in hot weather than there is in not
wearing a helmet in hot weather. With hyperthermia symptoms of
giddiness would make you more likely to have an accident and considering
you loose a substantial amount of heat through your head I would think
the risk of that the risk of hyperthermia in hot weather is real.
--
David Bentley (no relation)

David Bentley said:

I've only had three unplanned falls in 28 years of adult cycling and
in none of them one did my cranium hit the ground.. The worst one was
when I was 17 and cycling back home 10 miles after a night out in
Loughborough. I fell asleep at the wheel so to speak and woke up with
my chin scraping along the tarmac.

Oh, that *really* fills me with confidence for the Dunwich Dynamo ;-)

On 06/07/2005 20:33:08 David Hansen said:

On Tue, 07 Jun 2005 16:43:43 GMT someone who may be Buck
<[email hidden]> wrote this:-

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

a lot of folk are here just so they can ram their opinions down the
throats of others.

Quoted message said:

Another mind reader.

I can sense the anger in you, give in to the dark side.

--
Buck

I would rather be out on my Catrike

www.catrike.co.uk

in message <[email hidden]>, Tony Raven

(') said:

JLB said:

Bugger. If I'd noticed the [censored] had previous, I'd have ignored him.
Oh well, other things to do...

And guys (and gals) please note that in each of the helmet threads he
started he posted only the once. So if you are trying to persuade
him, he's not there, he's vamoosed, he's gone to wherever trolls go
when they are not trolling.

Yup. Sorry, he got me. Successful troll.

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/
;; If Python is executable pseudocode,
;; then Perl is executable line noise
-- seen on Slashdot.

At Tue, 07 Jun 2005 16:43:43 GMT, message
<[email hidden]> was posted by Buck
<[email hidden]>, including some, all or none of the following:

Quoted message said:

Peter, there are those on here who actually argue against anything
pro cycling on the grounds that anything that makes cyclists different
will discourage cycling,

Really? Can you think of anything pro cycling which people here have
argued against?

Quoted message said:

also on newsgroups very few people have
"personal" opinions, a lot of folk are here just so they can ram their
opinions down the throats of others.

LOL! Have you ever heard of Eric Martlew, MP? Now *there* is a man
who wants to ram his opinion down your throat!

Quoted message said:

As far as the helmet debacle is concerned there are people who spend
so much time arguing against them that they have lost sight of the
good things that exist about helmets, did someone say crusade?

Crusade, eh? Is that where people force others to convert to their
faith? Let me introduce you to Angela Lee, another non-cyclist whose
faith-based approach to helmets inspired the MP named above...

You have the situations reversed. Most of us who argue against
zealotry are sceptics. We have looked at the evidence and seen the
faults in it; we have found that there is conflicting evidence which
the pro-helmet lobby will not acknowledge; and we have documented
proof that helmet promoters have lied to MPs and others in order to
try to get them to change the law to enforce their judgment on
everybody else..

It's a high stakes game, and where the Liddites have won the cost has
been high for cycling.

Incidentally, some of the most authoritative sceptical material I have
read has come from John Franklin, author of Cyclecraft, and from Brian
Walker, who runs the largest helmet testing laboratory in the UK.

I'll say again: Angela Lee, Britain's foremost helmet promoter, is
*not* a cyclist. Neither is Eric Martlew, who tabled a private
member's bill to compel helmet use.

Quoted message said:

Just ignore the ranters or read the facts and ignore the fiction,

Absolutely. Start here: http://www.cyclehelmets.org

Incidentally, have you any figures on the risk of helmet-preventable
head injury while riding a recumbent trike? I'd say that "zero" was a
pretty good first approximation ;-)

Guy
--
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

"To every complex problem there is a solution which is
simple, neat and wrong" - HL Mencken

In message <[email hidden]>

Andy Leighton said:

On Tue, 7 Jun 2005 14:50:18 +0000 (UTC),

Peter Taylor said:

I am still confused by the apparent hostilty to, and ridiculing of, cyclists
who choose to wear helmets by various members of this newsgroup.

The arguments seem to revolve around (a) helmets will do nothing to protect
you in the event of an accident and (b) I am so damn skilled I will never
have an accident (c) helmets cause cyclists to have accidents.

I don't think anyone has claimed b) or c).

I know of a case of c) where a skilled cyclist on a route that he
regularly rides, normally without a helmet, chose to wear a helmet. When
he ducked to go under a tree branch the additional size of his helmeted
head caused this to hit the branch. A clear case of the helmet causing
an accident

G.

[snip]

--

in message <[email hidden]>, David Bentley

(') said:

In message <[email hidden]>, Pete Bentley
<[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

Personally I have the opposite experience, I have managed a number
of unplanned falls over the years (some of which hurt considerably),
never whilst wearing a helmet and have never hit my head.

I've only had three unplanned falls in 28 years of adult cycling
and
in none of them one did my cranium hit the ground..

Huh. I've had three unplanned falls /tonight/. And, although under the
circumstances (time trialling on seriously technical singletrack) I was
wearing a helmet and was glad to be wearing a helmet), in none of them
did my helmet hit the ground.

In fact, in probably thousands of falls (all unplanned) in my thirty
years of adult cycling, my head, helmetted or otherwise, has /never/
hit the ground. Elbows, knees, hips, hands or as in tonight's case
shins, are what pick up the injuries. And as when you're time trialling
the adrenaline masks more sensible consideration of things, I can't
tell you on /which/ of tonight's three falls I gashed my shin.

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

'there are no solutions, only precipitates'