Paul Smith now on the CyclingPlus forum..

On 19 Aug 2004 01:08:35 -0700 someone who may be
[email hidden] (Howard) wrote this:-

Quoted message said:

This got a little
personal and someone suggested that a certain person might gain
pleasure from watching Channel 5 weather girls whilst having his hands
down his trousers.

I must give this a try sometime:-) I don't watch Channel 5 often,
when are the "weather girls" on and what do they do?

Note - the above post may not be entirely serious.

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

Howard said:

http://www.cyclingplus.co.uk/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=35592

Jeez, is he still peddling that [censored]? It was pointed out to him over a
year ago that his absurd claim only works if:
- you ignore pre-existing trends,
- you only look at fatalities, not KSI (which are reducing still),
- you assume that cameras only affect motorcyclists (the only road user
group with a worsening fatality trend),
- you assume that the worse fatality figures on motorways and rural minor
roads are due to cameras, almost all of which are sited on other road types,
- you assume that the improvements on other road tyes are not due to
cameras,
- you exclude the possiblity of any other cause (e.g. mobile phone use)
- you assume that "speed kills" started in the mid 90s and that the "speed
kills" TV fillers and posters of my youth were all hallucinations.

I now know three or four statisticians and at least one journalist who have
investigated Smith's claims in detail, and they all come to exactly the same
concluusion: the man is a crank. It's almost as if he lost his job because
of being banned for speeding or something.

I can't be arsed to go over there and argue with him.

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington
University

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

Quoted message said:

Hi folks,

There been quite a bit of fun on the 'Cycling Plus' forum. First a
thread went up having a go at Paul' blame it on a dead person if you
are caught speeding' Smith's crazier 'arguments'. This got a little
personal and someone suggested that a certain person might gain
pleasure from watching Channel 5 weather girls whilst having his hands
down his trousers. Some of Smith's cronies on the forum reported this
to Smith and the moderator. Smith threatened legal action for libel
(What libel?) and the thread was pulled. A thread was posted to
explain what the thread was pulled, but this ws then pulled as well!
next thing PS himself sets up his own thread to 'clear up some
misunderstandings' about what he says. Cue a barrage of solid
criticism of the stuff posted on 'Safespeed' whilst PS dodges and
weaves and fails to give any proper answers.

Quoted message said:

Great fun! join in at:

Jezz NO. The prat Smith polluted this NG for long enough. Just ignore him
and he will go away.

He is a crank pushing snakeoil theories.

T

In message <[email hidden]>, David Hansen
<[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

On 19 Aug 2004 01:08:35 -0700 someone who may be
[email hidden] (Howard) wrote this:-

Quoted message said:

This got a little
personal and someone suggested that a certain person might gain
pleasure from watching Channel 5 weather girls whilst having his hands
down his trousers.

I must give this a try sometime:-) I don't watch Channel 5 often,
when are the "weather girls" on and what do they do?

You want to put your hand down PS's trousers......?
--
Chris French, Leeds

chris French said:

You want to put your hand down PS's trousers......?

You might if you're going to carry out the official urc punishment.

On Thu, 19 Aug 2004 11:21:03 +0100 someone who may be Mike K Smith
<[email hidden]> wrote this:-

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

You want to put your hand down PS's trousers......?

You might if you're going to carry out the official urc punishment.

There are other ways of doing that, such as a shotgun.

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

David Hansen said:

On Thu, 19 Aug 2004 11:21:03 +0100 someone who may be Mike K Smith
<[email hidden]> wrote this:-

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

You want to put your hand down PS's trousers......?

You might if you're going to carry out the official urc punishment.

There are other ways of doing that, such as a shotgun.

Followed by burning the body, natch... ;-)

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email hidden] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

Tony W said:

He is a crank pushing snakeoil theories.

I think he comes into this catagory:

A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.
Sir Winston Churchill (1874 - 1965)

BugBear

bugbear said:

Tony W said:

He is a crank pushing snakeoil theories.

I think he comes into this catagory:

A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the
subject. Sir Winston Churchill (1874 - 1965)

BugBear

Now there's a rather a large dollop of irony.

quote='dwb'bugbear said:

Tony W said:

He is a crank pushing snakeoil theories.

I think he comes into this catagory:

A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the
subject. Sir Winston Churchill (1874 - 1965)

BugBear

Now there's a rather a large dollop of irony.[/QUOTE]

Insightful
Delightful!

Roger

Just zis Guy said:

I now know three or four statisticians and at least one journalist who have
investigated Smith's claims in detail, and they all come to exactly the same
concluusion: the man is a crank. It's almost as if he lost his job because
of being banned for speeding or something.

I can't be arsed to go over there and argue with him.

Guy, can you clarify...are you Toomey?

John B

On Sat, 21 Aug 2004 22:24:52 GMT, JohnB <[email hidden]> wrote in
message <[email hidden]>:

Quoted message said:

Guy, can you clarify...are you Toomey?

No, I am not active on the C+ forum at all. It's bad enough keeping
up with Usenet and email :-)

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University

Just zis Guy said:

On Sat, 21 Aug 2004 22:24:52 GMT, JohnB <[email hidden]> wrote in
message <[email hidden]>:

Quoted message said:

Guy, can you clarify...are you Toomey?

No, I am not active on the C+ forum at all. It's bad enough keeping
up with Usenet and email :-)

PM sent.

John B

Quoted message said:

PM sent.

Thanks, John.