December 1965, before mini roundabouts were invented..When was that?
Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
December 1965, before mini roundabouts were invented..When was that?
December 1965, before mini roundabouts were invented..
Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk
Rubbish. Back in 1934, just prior to the introduction of the 30mph speed limit in the UK, there were only around one-tenth of the cars on the road today, but four times as many associated deaths.Statistics show there were less pedestrian deaths when no speed limits were in force, therefore should we simply do away with speed limits altogether?
Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk
I must be missing the point.December 1965, before mini roundabouts were invented..
Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk
About 12 million in the UK. Compared to about 38 million now.How many vehicles were on the road in 1965?
The point is "Statistics" that people seem to take seriously and rely on are nonsensical as they can be manipulated to suit whoever is presenting them as my point shows...I must be missing the point.
Statistics are indeed manipulated to make a point, but it’s essential that those statistics are correct or the manipulator risks making a fool of himself.The point is "Statistics" that people seem to take seriously and rely on are nonsensical as they can be manipulated to suit whoever is presenting them as my point shows...
Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk
Anyone who relies on or believes in Statistics is making a fool of themselves..Statistics are indeed manipulated to make a point, but it’s essential that those statistics are correct or the manipulator risks making a fool of himself.
You’re right to infer that we need to defend ourselves against fraudulent claims wrapped up as statistics. But just as important as detecting the deceptive use of statistics is the appreciation of the proper use of statistics. With intelligence we can recognise statistical evidence that justifiably supports a stated conclusion. Statistics are all around us, sometimes used well, sometimes not. We all really need to learn how to distinguish the two cases. Intelligent consumers of statistical claims can do this.Anyone who relies on or believes in Statistics is making a fool of themselves..
Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk
After all, someone will survive a collision with a car at 20mph, but they'd survive even more if they bother to look and NOT step into the path of an oncoming vehicle.
Anyone who relies on or believes in Statistics is making a fool of themselves..
Statistics are fairly fundamental to all our lives one way or another.
So the seatbelt, ABS, and airbags in your car - are there because of statistics. There has been a push to get ESP (or its non-MB equivalent) standardised in cars - again a push based on statistics.
The problem is really mis-presentation or subjective and selective interpretion - particularly where there is strong personal or political advocacy involved.
So in the USA we hear - "guns don't kill, people do". Well you could argue that from the statistics. On the other hand it does seem that the *combination* of a person and a gun is the primary problem - not one or other in isolation. So ban people or guns and you get an improvement - given the choice people are going to be more vocal about being banned than guns.
The Telegraph is carrying an article showing that pedestrians are becoming blasé when wandering about in some 20MPH zones and the figures are showing that there are more accidents.
Here
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.