Christian McArdle
correct.
correct. here's where you get desperate:
incorrect. you posted a reference of a body of work by Simpson, H. M., and Mayhew, D. R. regarding "The Hard Core Drinking Driver" which has no relevance to the data I posted. you posted that above report to prop up your buttertion that the test results gained from a study (human factors Vol 38 P 381) was flawed. you have still to detail how *exactly* you are so sure that the data is flawed.
Fw: ideaaday.com day 2192 529I don't catalogue arguments. Of course not, your "Won Arguments Folder is empty". Overtaking is safer in powerful cars. Agreed. I have stopped driving to work on the motorway, I have found a...
there's where you trip yourself up again. I didn't have any intended purpose for the data other than the intended purpose of the new scientist: it was a snippet, cunningly designed to elicit conversation from of normal people and to set off the fraggles amongst us (that's you) who claim to be able to divine the accuracy and efficacy of studies and the integrity of the authors simply by not reading them or knowing anything about them. AMAZING !
no, it shows a three line numerical reference to a study done on braking times in relation to the consumption of alcohol whilst remaining under the legal limit. that is all yet you are able to extrapolate a whole load of baloney out of it. as a conversation starter and fraggle detector, it's served it's purpose well.
you don't have to accept my qualifications, christine, you are quite amusingly rejecting the very real qualifications of people who's name you don't know, who've written a report you haven't read in a journal you've never seen.
