130MPH+ on a public road!!!

[lynw]

Gnan, I note you've ignored my comments on my filtering.

I think you're too rigidly set in the higher speed automatically = higher risk thinking. When I played with the Porsche, all be it at silly speed and something I probably wont do again, I still maintain my overall risk was lower than when Im doing 15 mph in rush hour traffic on the A2.

It was a case of empty road, nothing ahead, nothing behind. Only me and the Porsche, a mechanically sound bike and no hazzards on the road hence me doing what I did. The moment we saw traffic was when I went back down to under 100.

I still consider that to have less risk than when Im filtering. There you have so many potential risks in cars moving lanes, other bikes, passengers getting out of their cars etc that overall the risk must be higher.

Yet you are still going on about the speed without acknowledging that with most statistics you can prove anything you want.

Youre trying to prove something that most of us who've done it know isn't entirely the case or a foregone conclusion of you speed, you die.

You can seriously injure yourself or die from a low speed spill as much as a high speed one. I think there are enough examples to prove speed isnt necessarily the determining factor - what happens is. Youre probably more likely to die on a 30mph head on with an HGV than a lowside and slide down an empty road at 130mph. :D

Is that sufficiently stirred now?? :lol: :lol: :lol:

[Viney]

is this thread still going...? :shock:

At over 130mph by the looks of it.

Anyway, Joe is gay and should know better, his bike does much more than 130mph, and probably didnt even do the speed and is on a wind up.l

[Peter Henry]

Lyn...I do not think that your high speed shenanigans in themselves are the main issue here. Nor in fact your swift "suck in" type filtering method.

My main concern would be if you had applied mascara prior to your little jaunt as with a hint of draught inside your helmet you know how that Maybeline stuff runs! :P

[Anonymous]

is this thread still going...? :shock:

At over 130mph by the looks of it.

Anyway, Joe is gay and should know better, his bike does much more than 130mph, and probably didnt even do the speed and is on a wind up.l

Woah there... which Joe is gay? :shock: :P

I didnt start this thread... and unless ive missed something, i dont think Ichin is gay... crossed wires me thinks... :wink: :lol: :lol: :lol:

[Gnan]

highly likely usually is 90% < x < 100% probability (at least it used to be)

Er, yes. But this isn't:

"so, it is inappropriate to travel at 130mph on a public road, as you are almost 100% likely to kill yourself and/or whoever else you take with you as a result of any accident. "

And you've still failed to back up even your softened "highly likely" premise in the slightest, let alone your original claim. You obviously know and understand statistics, probably better than me, so I doubt you're unaware of just how badly you're using them...

what do you want me to back it up with? look at the Joksch research on collisions, which is what speed limit setting is based on when judging hazard density.. it's also where they get the 80% of people survive at 20mph facts from which they use in their campaigns.

[_Stretchie_]

http://upload3.postimage.org/126463/sleeping.jpg (http://upload3.postimage.org/126463/photo_hosting.html)


Mm, zzzzzz, what?! Get a life. zzzzzz I don't wanna go to school zzzzzz

Sorry, you woke me up

[Viney]

If you promise to be careful. It bites :shock: :lol:
Only those that are scared of it.

[Viney]

is this thread still going...? :shock:

At over 130mph by the looks of it.

Anyway, Joe is gay and should know better, his bike does much more than 130mph, and probably didnt even do the speed and is on a wind up.l

Woah there... which Joe is gay? :shock: :P

I didnt start this thread... and unless ive missed something, i dont think Ichin is gay... crossed wires me thinks... :wink: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Itching, as in a gay biking overlord....He couldnt go above 30 let alone 130 ;)

[Filipe M.]

*loads of sensible yabber*

Hey Northy, cut it out... you're making sense again! :roll:

:D

[Peter Henry]

The expression..."Flogging a dead horse" springs to mind here! :P

EDTED...JUst for Keith! :P

[keithd]

The expression..."Flogging a dead horse to death" springs to mind here! :P

never heard of that one

[Flamin_Squirrel]

If you promise to be careful. It bites :shock: :lol:
Only those that are scared of it.

If it wasnt scaring you, or at least getting your heart rate going, then it's not being ridden properly 8)

[Peter Henry]

Keith....seriously? It's a bit of a northern one tbh. :wink:

Mind you I did write it wrong! :? :P Just edited! :P

[lynw]

Lyn...I do not think that your high speed shenanigans in themselves are the main issue here. Nor in fact your swift "suck in" type filtering method.

My main concern would be if you had applied mascara prior to your little jaunt as with a hint of draught inside your helmet you know how that Maybeline stuff runs! :P

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Ive yet to encounter any make up that is bike glove proof. All this non-run Mascara does when you go to wipe a bit of grit out of your eye. :( .

Ive ended up looking like a panda because of it before, so now I take make up with me and put it on when Ive arrived. :D

[keithd]

ah! NOW it makes sense!!

yours,

a pedant. :D

[Peter Henry]

Keith...Mind you the way I wrote it,the indicated message was almost as futile as most of this thread! :P :P

[Viney]

If you promise to be careful. It bites :shock: :lol:
Only those that are scared of it.

If it wasnt scaring you, or at least getting your heart rate going, then it's not being ridden properly 8)

Hmmmmm, ok

[mattSV]

Exceeding the legal speed limit is not in itself dangerous or reckless.

The research by Joksch et al suggests the following:-

'the greater the speed that you are travelling when you have a collsion/accident, the more likely a fatality will be'

It may (or may not!) also be true that the faster you go, the more likely that a collision/accident will actually be.

Therefore, generally speaking IF you have an accident at a higher speed it is considered more likely to result in a fatality - I don't think I can disagree with that.

I guess however that his research will not have allowed for low speed/high risk situations such as filtering, if it was primarily based upon car drivers.

If you choose to ride at speed, the trick is to not actually have/cause the bloody accident in the first place - then surely there is no danger!

You can reduce the chances of that accident/collision in the first place by gaining riding experience, undertaking additional training, having a well maintained bike, reading the road ahead etc etc etc. These factors will not have been taken into account with the statistics.

I 'have a friend' who saw an indicated 150mph for a very short period on a dead straight stretch of dual carriageway one summers evening (dry roads, good light, no other vehicles in site, no other entrances/exits to the road, well maintained bike, 6 years riding experience, advanced riding tuition obtained).

Was it dangerous - no more so than filtering at 20 mph IMHO
Was it reckless - I don't think so
Was it exhilerating - hell yeah :twisted: (or so 'they' told me :wink: )

[Gnan]

Gnan, I note you've ignored my comments on my filtering.

I think you're too rigidly set in the higher speed automatically = higher risk thinking. When I played with the Porsche, all be it at silly speed and something I probably wont do again, I still maintain my overall risk was lower than when Im doing 15 mph in rush hour traffic on the A2.

It was a case of empty road, nothing ahead, nothing behind. Only me and the Porsche, a mechanically sound bike and no hazzards on the road hence me doing what I did. The moment we saw traffic was when I went back down to under 100.

I still consider that to have less risk than when Im filtering. There you have so many potential risks in cars moving lanes, other bikes, passengers getting out of their cars etc that overall the risk must be higher.

Yet you are still going on about the speed without acknowledging that with most statistics you can prove anything you want.

Youre trying to prove something that most of us who've done it know isn't entirely the case or a foregone conclusion of you speed, you die.

You can seriously injure yourself or die from a low speed spill as much as a high speed one. I think there are enough examples to prove speed isnt necessarily the determining factor - what happens is. Youre probably more likely to die on a 30mph head on with an HGV than a lowside and slide down an empty road at 130mph. :D

Is that sufficiently stirred now?? :lol: :lol: :lol:

all you have stated there is the risk of crashing is greater in a higher hazard environment, i'm not disputing that. the risk of a fatality at 15mph is significantly less than it is at 100+ (in fact it is several orders of magnitude less)

1. higher speeds = higher braking times, sometimes incredibly so (over a ton)

2. reading the road and making decisions based on your observations becomes much harder and stressful.. most people haven't had the training required to make these decisions (police advanced level which is practised constantly)

3. again you assume that the 130mph spill will result in you sliding down an empty road.. go and find an empty road where you would consider that speed, and then count the number of things that will kill you if you hit them

4. the justifiers who say "i'm not putting anyone else at risk" are sorely misguided. if someone pulls out of a side road and fails to judge your speed correctly, pulls out, and you slam into them at 50-60-70mph (assuming you started your braking from 500 feet away), then i hope you can live with yourselves, assuming you survive, which has a probability of P(x) -> 0.

[Nutkins]

If you go too slow, you lose balance and fall over anyway.

So, going too fast can't be all bad.

Here endith the lesson.

[Viney]

I take it that you are aginst speeding then?? ;)

[keithd]

the faster you go the better the chance of avoiding getting hit.

FACT.

[Carsick]

4. the justifiers who say "i'm not putting anyone else at risk" are sorely misguided. if someone pulls out of a side road and fails to judge your speed correctly, pulls out, and you slam into them at 50-60-70mph (assuming you started your braking from 500 feet away), then i hope you can live with yourselves, assuming you survive, which has a probability of P(x) -> 0.
Sorry, side road? When I'm doing 100mph+ on a non-dual-carriageway or motorway? I don't think so.

[diamond]

I went pillion once and we did an indicated 170, it was brilliant. :twisted: :lol:






I'm not helping am i?

[Carsick]

I went pillion once and we did an indicated 170, it was brilliant. :twisted: :lol:
and here's me thinking you were impressed with my tiny 120mph on the M3.
The fact that you fell asleep should have been a hint, really. :wink:

[Person]

Just read all of this. :lol: :lol: :lol:

It's quite funny how some people will just not back down.

Many factors make up a crash, not just speed and people are either forgetting this or are just refusing to accept it.


:rant:

[Nutkins]

I take it that you are aginst speeding then?? :wink:

Is my mum reading this? ... Yes?


"Eh .... Yes, I am totally against speeding"

[Carsick]

Many factors make up a crash, not just speed and people are either forgetting this or are just refusing to accept it.
Fair point, but one that has been made a few times.

[Flamin_Squirrel]

2. reading the road and making decisions based on your observations becomes much harder and stressful.. most people haven't had the training required to make these decisions (police advanced level which is practised constantly)

3. again you assume that the 130mph spill will result in you sliding down an empty road.. go and find an empty road where you would consider that speed, and then count the number of things that will kill you if you hit them

4. the justifiers who say "i'm not putting anyone else at risk" are sorely misguided. if someone pulls out of a side road behind a tree and you slam into them at 50-60-70mph (after starting your braking from 800 feet away), then i hope you can live with yourselves, assuming you survive, which has a probability of P(x) -> 0.

You're still not listening are you. If you're getting stressed because of the speed you're going, you're riding beyond your ability and you should slow down accordingly. If theres a great big long road with no turn offs or bends, there are less critical observations to be made and high speed is safe. That should be obvious to anyone. Well, except you for some reason.

As for putting others coming from side roads at risk, again ********. Firstly beause if you are going to do high speeds it shouldn't be done on roads with conceiled exits, secondly you're assuming to avoid the accident you have to come to a complete stop.

You can quote as much probability rubbish as you like, you've still done nothing other than come up with half truths and spout irrelivent anti-speed rhetoric.

[diamond]

I went pillion once and we did an indicated 170, it was brilliant. :twisted: :lol:
and here's me thinking you were impressed with my tiny 120mph on the M3.
The fact that you fell asleep should have been a hint, really. :wink:

Sorry fella, 120 just doesn't cut the mustard for me. :lol:

[_Stretchie_]

I went pillion once and we did an indicated 170, it was brilliant. :twisted: :lol:



I'm not helping am i?

Ha haaa, :winner:

Here you go mate, here's a spoon to help you stir it a bit more ha haaa :lol: :lol: :lol:

http://upload3.postimage.org/126737/spoon.jpg (http://upload3.postimage.org/126737/photo_hosting.html)

[Nutkins]

I once travelled at speeds in excess of 150mph and had the wheels leave the ground!


To slow down would've proved fatal, the plane would surely have hit the trees at the end of the runway.

[diamond]

I once travelled at speeds in excess of 150mph and had the wheels leave the ground!


To slow down would've proved fatal, the plane would surely have hit the trees at the end of the runway.

PMSL :lol: :lol:

[lynw]

then i hope you can live with yourselves, assuming you survive, which has a probability of P(x) -> 0.

Sorry which post did you say you weren't lecturing us how to ride? Because what else is the above comment?

I hate to break this to you but real life isnt as clear cut as your little probability equations. If thats how you live it, I feel sorry for you tbh. But quit with the morality lectures and take your probability equations and shove them where the sun doesnt shine.

Joe did a 130 and lived. Ive done 155 and lived. E.Ds been on the back at 170 and lived. A lot of others have been over the ton and lived. Yet STILL you feel the need to insult our judgement making and try and impose unrealistic mathmatical models on us.

155 mph on an empty M25 is no more dangerous than doing it on a track. There is no way in hell I would do it when traffic was about - your presumption that we are all selfish again is one reason youre getting peoples backs up.

Filtering at slow speed is far more dangerous than high speed on motorways and dual carriageways. If your riding is geared around every conceivable problem you really shouldnt be on a bike. Im surprised you are tbh. Slow speed spills KILL bikers too and youre more likely to have an accident filtering than otherwise.

[Viney]

the faster you go the better the chance of avoiding getting hit.

FACT.
But you cant travel more than 88mph can you?

For the record

I have ridden a bike on a public highway (A24) at an indicated 174mph (not my SV i would add)

I have driven a car on a public highway (M23) at an indicated 160 (Again not my volvo)

I have flown in an aircraft at an indcated Mach 2.

I regularly commute into london and filter at more than 20mph

I have also had 11 points on my licence for speeding and currently have 3

I have been knocked off 3 times all at below 30mph FACT(To use a KeithD term)

Speed doesnt kill, its the sudden stop at the end. Look at that bloke in Moto GP last year(or the year before) coming off at over 180mph and walked away.

Its nopt big, its not clever, but people will keep doing it and there is no sense in trying to stop it or get annoyed about it.

[Nutkins]

Oh, Viney .... you irresponsible fool. :lol:

[Gnan]

4. the justifiers who say "i'm not putting anyone else at risk" are sorely misguided. if someone pulls out of a side road and fails to judge your speed correctly, pulls out, and you slam into them at 50-60-70mph (assuming you started your braking from 500 feet away), then i hope you can live with yourselves, assuming you survive, which has a probability of P(x) -> 0.
Sorry, side road? When I'm doing 100mph+ on a non-dual-carriageway or motorway? I don't think so.

you don't have side roads on dual carriageways? there's a wonderful one near here that have farmers crossings, two normal junctions on which you can only see from up close.. the A1 is particularly notorious for this sort of design!

[Person]

A friend of mine died at under 60.

I've been in motorbike crashes at a lot higher than that speed, just lucky that i slid until standstill. It's not lucky that there were no cars about though, as i wouldn't have been going so fast if there was.

Has anyone on here come off at anything over 100?

[Viney]

Oh, Viney .... you irresponsible fool. :lol:

Oi...i resemble that remark

[Nutkins]

I have been knocked off 3 times all at below 30mph

Now, I hope you've learnt your lesson.

If you'd been watching the road and not your speedo, you may avoided the accidents. Just my two pennith.

[rubberduckofdeath]

I love you Joe ;-)

[lynw]

Has anyone on here come off at anything over 100?

I think THAT is the real point here. For all of us that have gone over those speeds, NONE appear [with one exception iirc from earlier] to have come off. We're all still here, aptly demonstrating how stupid it is to live your life by inaccurate probability models. :roll:

[Nutkins]

Has anyone on here come off at anything over 100?

Oh no .... I don't do porno.

[Nutkins]

Sorry .... meant to say perverse porno.

[Viney]

I have been knocked off 3 times all at below 30mph

Now, I hope you've learnt your lesson.

If you'd been watching the road and not your speedo, you may avoided the accidents. Just my two pennith.

Trying to second guss cars is the hardest :?

[diamond]

The people on here with there holier than thou attitudes make me laugh, and i wonder when the fun and excitment left there world.

Now i ride fast, pretty much all the time, i'm not talking 60 in a 30 but it increases at a rapid rate as you go up through the posted limits. I also have an older brother who is a traffic sergant and the fatal accident investigator for his area. He spends every working day dealing with the aftermath of accidents, and regularily they involve bikers. He has never once lectured me on the way i ride, he has said if he ever see's me whilst he's on duty he will pull me over cos thats his job and he can't ignore it, but he never lectured or tried to tell me i'm wrong for what i do, he consideres what i do my decision and me that will have to face the concequences of anything should it ever happen or should i get caught. Why do some people on here feel the need to lecture?

And BTW he is not a biker and drives like an old woman when he's off duty.

[_Stretchie_]

I filter with my eyes closed and my hands over my visor

Cos I'm well 8)

[Gnan]

Joe did a 130 and lived. Ive done 155 and lived. E.Ds been on the back at 170 and lived. A lot of others have been over the ton and lived. Yet STILL you feel the need to insult our judgement making and try and impose unrealistic mathmatical models on us.


again - "i've done it and got away with it, so it's ok" - what about the hundreds/thousands of people who thought they were safe and didn't get away with it (and possibly killed others in the process?)

they're not unrealistic, they are highly realistic.. most speed limits are based on 85th percentiles, and most countries take the joksch work as gospel when determining speed limits versus hazard density.


155 mph on an empty M25 is no more dangerous than doing it on a track. There is no way in hell I would do it when traffic was about - your presumption that we are all selfish again is one reason youre getting peoples backs up.


again, wrong. race tracks don't have armco barriers or metal signposts to crash into.


Filtering at slow speed is far more dangerous than high speed on motorways and dual carriageways.


more dangerous in terms of the probability that an incident may occur is higher in high-hazard environments, but not in terms of incident severity, and that's what we are trying to minimise. it'd be better to have for example 2000 people with broken arms, bruises, whatever than 6 deaths.


If your riding is geared around every conceivable problem you really shouldnt be on a bike. Im surprised you are tbh. Slow speed spills KILL bikers too and youre
more likely to have an accident filtering than otherwise.

see above.

[Carsick]

4. the justifiers who say "i'm not putting anyone else at risk" are sorely misguided. if someone pulls out of a side road and fails to judge your speed correctly, pulls out, and you slam into them at 50-60-70mph (assuming you started your braking from 500 feet away), then i hope you can live with yourselves, assuming you survive, which has a probability of P(x) -> 0.
Sorry, side road? When I'm doing 100mph+ on a non-dual-carriageway or motorway? I don't think so.

you don't have side roads on dual carriageways? there's a wonderful one near here that have farmers crossings, two normal junctions on which you can only see from up close.. the A1 is particularly notorious for this sort of design!
Not many, most of the dual carriageways near where I live now and where my parents live use slip roads and not sideroads. On the ones that do use sideroads, I travel at lower speeds.

[northwind]

what do you want me to back it up with? look at the Joksch research on collisions, which is what speed limit setting is based on when judging hazard density.. it's also where they get the 80% of people survive at 20mph facts from which they use in their campaigns.

The Joksch research doesn't make categorical statements on survivability from speed alone specific to motorcyclists or to other road users ttruck by motorcyclists, as I'm sure you're aware.

[Anonymous]

A friend of mine died at under 60.

I've been in motorbike crashes at a lot higher than that speed, just lucky that i slid until standstill. It's not lucky that there were no cars about though, as i wouldn't have been going so fast if there was.

Has anyone on here come off at anything over 100?

Yup.. the crash i referred to earlier on when i was forced off the road by a drunk driver.. i was doing an indicated 120mph.. wearing Sidi boots, Leather jacket, helmet and gloves.. i was also wearing just jeans. Denim jeans.

My legs were a mess.. but i could walk, just - until the lactic acid build up hit me the next day and they seized up... i could walk again in a week though.

Thankfully i went to the left after leaving the bike. I slid across the remainder of the road, onto the pavement, and into the undergrowth.

The last thing i remember was looking at the speedo, seeing 120 on it and thinking "oh ****!! This is gonna hurt!"

Then i woke up in the bushes. Police investigated, and regardless of my high speed, they were satisfied that even at a lower speed, there was nothing i could have done to have avoided the incident due to the nature of the driving from the cage.

Edit: Did it slow me down? Did it ****! Why? Cos i accept that accidents happen, and i ride bikes for that reason.. my signature sums it all up really.

[Viney]

Joe did a 130 and lived. Ive done 155 and lived. E.Ds been on the back at 170 and lived. A lot of others have been over the ton and lived. Yet STILL you feel the need to insult our judgement making and try and impose unrealistic mathmatical models on us.


again - "i've done it and got away with it, so it's ok" - what about the hundreds/thousands of people who thought they were safe and didn't get away with it (and possibly killed others in the process?)

they're not unrealistic, they are highly realistic.. most speed limits are based on 85th percentiles, and most countries take the joksch work as gospel when determining speed limits versus hazard density.


155 mph on an empty M25 is no more dangerous than doing it on a track. There is no way in hell I would do it when traffic was about - your presumption that we are all selfish again is one reason youre getting peoples backs up.


again, wrong. race tracks don't have armco barriers or metal signposts to crash into.


Filtering at slow speed is far more dangerous than high speed on motorways and dual carriageways.


more dangerous in terms of the probability that an incident may occur is higher in high-hazard environments, but not in terms of incident severity, and that's what we are trying to minimise. it'd be better to have for example 2000 people with broken arms, bruises, whatever than 6 deaths.


If your riding is geared around every conceivable problem you really shouldnt be on a bike. Im surprised you are tbh. Slow speed spills KILL bikers too and youre
more likely to have an accident filtering than otherwise.

see above.

Do you smoke? Drink? Do anything remotly dangerous?

My mate never drank, smoke, even drove, yet he died at the young age of 24. How? Cancer. Perspective is what is needed her ok!

[Gnan]

one can reasonably assume that the fatality curve for motorcyclists would approach 1.0 a lot quicker than it would do for car drivers.

[lynw]

Gnan, which part of take your probability models and shove them where the sun doesnt shine did you misunderstand?

Are you really that stupid that in one post you claim you're not trying to tell us how to ride, then you continue to ignore everyone and proceed to do EXACTLY that?

Like I said, reality isnt based on probability models. Sell your bike now, really. Its far far too dangerous when you work out the probabilities of accidents at low speeds as well. All my offs have been at low speed as have most other peoples. But dont let that get in the way of being insulting and taking the moral high ground with no basis in reality to do so.

Calling people selfish and stupid has not won you any awards here. In fact youve come across as an opinionated, insulting tw@ who wont listen to anyone else. Just because you have a bit of paper that says you know about probabilities doesn't mean to say youre right.

So how about just stfu now? :D

[_Stretchie_]

It'll end in tears...

Can't wait for the annual meet.. I'm bringing popcorn

[Nutkins]

Perspective is what is needed her ok!

Yeah .... a blurrey one, cos your riding so hard to try and catch the vanishing point.

[Carsick]

I love you Joe ;-)
Has he beaten your record for biggest argument started with one post?

[fizzwheel]

It'll end in tears...

Can't wait for the annual meet.. I'm bringing popcorn

What sort of popcorn ? :wink:

[_Stretchie_]

Who was that bloke who started off the whole 'Wheeling through town to impress birds' lark..???

:lol: :lol: :lol: Come back, all is forgiven

[lynw]

It'll end in tears...

Can't wait for the annual meet.. I'm bringing popcorn

Take it if Gnan makes it [well 40 mph must be the safest speed he rides at :roll: ] I take it he'll be the tail end Charlie too. Any plans to make this a two day event?? :P :lol: :lol: :lol:

[Gnan]

Gnan, which part of take your probability models and shove them where the sun doesnt shine did you misunderstand?

Are you really that stupid that in one post you claim you're not trying to tell us how to ride, then you continue to ignore everyone and proceed to do EXACTLY that?

Like I said, reality isnt based on probability models. Sell your bike now, really. Its far far too dangerous when you work out the probabilities of accidents at low speeds as well. All my offs have been at low speed as have most other peoples. But dont let that get in the way of being insulting and taking the moral high ground with no basis in reality to do so.

Calling people selfish and stupid has not won you any awards here. In fact youve come across as an opinionated, insulting tw@ who wont listen to anyone else. Just because you have a bit of paper that says you know about probabilities doesn't mean to say youre right.

So how about just stfu now? :D

be quiet, you are just rude. i am trying to have a sensible debate. if you have to resort to abuse then you should consider going back to school to learn some respect.

[Flamin_Squirrel]

Gnan, which part of take your probability models and shove them where the sun doesnt shine did you misunderstand?

Are you really that stupid that in one post you claim you're not trying to tell us how to ride, then you continue to ignore everyone and proceed to do EXACTLY that?

Like I said, reality isnt based on probability models. Sell your bike now, really. Its far far too dangerous when you work out the probabilities of accidents at low speeds as well. All my offs have been at low speed as have most other peoples. But dont let that get in the way of being insulting and taking the moral high ground with no basis in reality to do so.

Calling people selfish and stupid has not won you any awards here. In fact youve come across as an opinionated, insulting tw@ who wont listen to anyone else. Just because you have a bit of paper that says you know about probabilities doesn't mean to say youre right.

So how about just stfu now? :D

be quiet, you are just rude. i am trying to have a sensible debate. if you have to resort to abuse then you should consider going back to school to learn some respect.

No Lyns right. And you've not contributed anything sensible to the debate yet, you just keep repeating your personal prejudices.

[Carsick]

I'm confused as to what's even being argued over.

[keithd]

and away we go again..... :roll:

[_Stretchie_]

What sort of popcorn ? :wink:

I was thinking toffee popcorn..

Tell you what mate. If I bring all the food and BBQ stuff and beer, will you pay for the ringside seats???

Fair trade I'd say...

[Anonymous]

Ladies... keep it mature please or the thread will no doubt be locked by our very on Fizzwheel. :wink:


Probabilties can "prove" lots of things, but in reality they prove sod all.

In the real world there are way to many factors to take into consideration.. roll your dice, take your chance, and live life. Or sit in your house all day long and do nothing. Venture out of the house only when coated head to toe in bubble wrap.....

I know which existance i'd rather have.

[Person]

Yup.. the crash i referred to earlier on when i was forced off the road by a drunk driver.. i was doing an indicated 120mph.. wearing Sidi boots, Leather jacket, helmet and gloves.. i was also wearing just jeans. Denim jeans.

My legs were a mess.. but i could walk, just - until the lactic acid build up hit me the next day and they seized up... i could walk again in a week though.

Thankfully i went to the left after leaving the bike. I slid across the remainder of the road, onto the pavement, and into the undergrowth.

The last thing i remember was looking at the speedo, seeing 120 on it and thinking "oh sh*t!! This is gonna hurt!"

Then i woke up in the bushes. Police investigated, and regardless of my high speed, they were satisfied that even at a lower speed, there was nothing i could have done to have avoided the incident due to the nature of the driving from the cage.

Edit: Did it slow me down? Did it f**k! Why? Cos i accept that accidents happen, and i ride bikes for that reason.. my signature sums it all up really.

So out of the two people that came off doing over 120, both pretty much walked away.

Think that settles it then, speeding saves lifes... :lol:

[_Stretchie_]

I'm confused as to what's even being argued over.

Well mate it started like this.

If L & R on socks and shoes means Left and Right

What does C and A on ladies underwear stand for??

[lynw]

be quiet, you are just rude. i am trying to have a sensible debate. if you have to resort to abuse then you should consider going back to school to learn some respect.

No you arent trying to have a debate. That implies you are listening to others.

What you ARE trying to do is impose your morality on others and have come across as a judgemental, opinionated, and insulting idiot. Do you really consider it a constructive debate to call people selfish and stupid for their behaviour? Then you complain when people do the same to you? Bit rich that.

Oh and go back, do I need to quote the post where you said you weren't trying to tell people how to ride? then post all your others next to it where that is CLEARLY what you are doing? Stop being a hypocrite, stop telling people what to do.

You wont get any respect from me while you're doing what you're doing. It has to be earnt, I don't need to go back to school to learn it - you need to be more constructive, stop lecturing and imposing your opinions on others in order to earn it. :roll:

Go back to your probabilities, Ill stay living in the real world.

[Ceri JC]

Speeding is black or white - either you have done it, or you haven't. I doubt that there isn't a single person on this planet who hasn't gone over the speed limit at least once in their life! Since we have the legal limit as our line in the sand, then it doesn't matter whether you are 2mph over or 60mph over - you are still breaking the law.


Yes. There's that statistic isn't there;

94% of car drivers admit they have, at one time or another, broken the speed limit. 100% of bikers do.

From this, you could infer that bikers are all hoodlums whereas at least some car driver are good little law abiding drones. However, I prefer to look at it this way; Motorcyclist are without exception honest and aware of their speed. 4% of car drivers are either liars or just incredibly inattentive to their speed.

I can believe that, hypothetically, there could be someone who drives who has never sped in their life in the UK. However, there is absolutely f-all chance that it's 4%. Before people cite the chronically slow (you know the sort; Daewoo or Hyundai crawling along at 20 under the limit in ideal conditions), I'd argue that even they speed. The sort of people who do 40 on open NSL roads tend to be the ones who maintain that 40mph through the 30 limit village and carry on at 40 when they leave it on the other side. :D

As to what GYKD says about age/experience. I'd largely agree.

[fizzwheel]

I think at the end of the day. I dont want some nannying Tony Blairite government nitwit to tell me how fast is safe for me to go. The way this country is going we'll all end up with speedlimiters and then TBH whats the point of having a bike.

I dont tend to stick to the speedlimits on open A & B roads and the motorway.

I do stick to them in town, near a school or anywhere where there might be pedestrians, lots of traffic that kind of thing. Also I keep my speed down in roadworks on the motorway.

As for motorways IIRC statistic's prove these to be the safetest type of road of all.

Werent the speed limits set years ago when the majority of cars had cr*p tyres and brakes. Most modern vehicles IIRC can stop in less than the braking distances in the highway code.

[Gnan]

ah i can't be bothered anymore, dealing with rude people (lynw) and their lickspittle (flamin_squrrel) who should be one of the "yes men" like smithers in the simpsons.

[fizzwheel]

What sort of popcorn ? :wink:

I was thinking toffee popcorn..

Tell you what mate. If I bring all the food and BBQ stuff and beer, will you pay for the ringside seats???

Fair trade I'd say...

Sounds like a plan 8) :lol: :thumbsup:

[Nutkins]

ah i can't be bothered anymore, dealing with rude people (lynw) and their lickspittle (flamin_squrrel) who should be one of the "yes men" like smithers in the simpsons.

So much so, you had to tell us. :wink:

[lynw]

ah i can't be bothered anymore, dealing with rude people (lynw) and their lickspittle (flamin_squrrel) who should be one of the "yes men" like smithers in the simpsons.

Oh so calling people selfish and stupid wasn't rude of you in the first place then? :roll:

What do you really expect when you come across as insulting [not just me, if you read Kates post too] and not prepared to listen or actually debate anything?

If you cant stop and just consider how you're coming across you're going to find a lot more of this next time you start taking the moral high ground and lecturing people on how wonderful you are and how bad and selfish we are.

:roll:

[21QUEST]

It's been emotional but.... :lol:

Road Closed :? :P


Cheers
Ben

[Anonymous]

ah i can't be bothered anymore, dealing with rude people (lynw) and their lickspittle (flamin_squrrel) who should be one of the "yes men" like smithers in the simpsons.

http://www.advrider.com/forums/images/smilies/eek2.gif

http://www.advrider.com/forums/images/smilies/roflol.gif


........http://www.advrider.com/forums/images/smilies/lurker.gif

[Anonymous]

Cant we just get back on subject children??

:nomore:

[Nutkins]

ah i can't be bothered anymore, dealing with rude people (lynw) and their lickspittle (flamin_squrrel) who should be one of the "yes men" like smithers in the simpsons.


Oh so calling people selfish and stupid wasn't rude of you in the first place then?

What do you really expect when you come across as insulting [not just me, if you read Kates post too] and not prepared to listen or actually debate anything?

If you cant stop and just consider how you're coming across you're going to find a lot more of this next time you start taking the moral high ground and lecturing people on how wonderful you are and how bad and selfish we are.

It's no good, we can't get her off him ..... she's killing him. Bucket of cold water? :wink:

[_Stretchie_]

Cant we just get back on subject children??

:nomore:


WHOA there sonny.....

Don't bloody set them off again

P.S. I see Dr Rich has already started on my popcorn

[Flamin_Squirrel]

ah i can't be bothered anymore, dealing with rude people (lynw) and their lickspittle (flamin_squrrel) who should be one of the "yes men" like smithers in the simpsons.

I'm not a yes man, I've been telling you you're an idiot long before Lyn joined in thanks very much. Dont blame us for having a complete lack of reasoning ability.

[Filipe M.]

ah i can't be bothered anymore, dealing with rude people (lynw) and their lickspittle (flamin_squrrel) who should be one of the "yes men" like smithers in the simpsons.

I'm not a yes man, I've been telling you you're an idiot long before Lyn joined in thanks very much. Dont blame us for having a complete lack of reasoning ability.

Does that mean Lynw is the "yes man"? :shock: or the fact that she's a girl makes her be a "yes woman"? :shock: me confoosed :shock:

[rubberduckofdeath]

I love you Joe ;-)
Has he beaten your record for biggest argument started with one post?

Looks like it :lol:

I love you Joe.

[_Stretchie_]

Does that mean Lynw is the "yes man"? :shock: or the fact that she's a girl makes her be a "yes woman"? :shock: me confoosed :shock:

I think 'Yes LADY' is more PC.. We don't want to start a debate over that aswel now do we :wink:

[Flamin_Squirrel]

ah i can't be bothered anymore, dealing with rude people (lynw) and their lickspittle (flamin_squrrel) who should be one of the "yes men" like smithers in the simpsons.

I'm not a yes man, I've been telling you you're an idiot long before Lyn joined in thanks very much. Dont blame us for having a complete lack of reasoning ability.

Does that mean Lynw is the "yes man"? :shock: or the fact that she's a girl makes her be a "yes woman"? :shock: me confoosed :shock:

No I think shes perfectly capable of forming her own opinions, and certainly not one to look to me for them :lol:

[Anonymous]

I love you Joe ;-)
Has he beaten your record for biggest argument started with one post?

Looks like it :lol:

I love you Joe.

:shock:







:love: Why thank you!!

















:wink: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

[Scoobs]

Is this thread STILL going?

[anna]

ah i can't be bothered anymore, dealing with rude people (lynw) and their lickspittle (flamin_squrrel) who should be one of the "yes men" like smithers in the simpsons.

http://www.advrider.com/forums/images/smilies/eek2.gif

http://www.advrider.com/forums/images/smilies/roflol.gif


........http://www.advrider.com/forums/images/smilies/lurker.gif

Dont hog all the popcorn some of us here in the back row would like some ;)

[Anonymous]

Dont hog all the popcorn some of us here in the back row would like some ;)

Back row eh? :wink:

[Filipe M.]

ah i can't be bothered anymore, dealing with rude people (lynw) and their lickspittle (flamin_squrrel) who should be one of the "yes men" like smithers in the simpsons.

http://www.advrider.com/forums/images/smilies/eek2.gif

http://www.advrider.com/forums/images/smilies/roflol.gif


........http://www.advrider.com/forums/images/smilies/lurker.gif

Dont hog all the popcorn some of us here in the back row would like some ;)

I'll take a medium Coke, please. No ice.

[_Stretchie_]

I'll take a medium Coke, please. No ice.


Dont hog all the popcorn some of us here in the back row would like some ;)


And just who else is in this back row????

[keithd]

Is this thread STILL going?

get over it

[anna]

I'll take a medium Coke, please. No ice.


Dont hog all the popcorn some of us here in the back row would like some ;)


And just who else is in this back row????

;) that would be telling

[Anonymous]

Massive................

http://nat.org/2004/october/derail.jpg

:lol:

[Filipe M.]

I'll take a medium Coke, please. No ice.


Dont hog all the popcorn some of us here in the back row would like some ;)


And just who else is in this back row????

There's room for you, mate! We'll just have to get keithd out :wink:

[mattSV]

Anyone fancy a pint?

[diamond]

Anyone fancy a pint?

No thanks i don't wanna die of liver disease, cos thats what'll happen to you. :wink: :D

I think i'll go out on my bike instead and ride within the speed limits then i'll never die :lol:

[Anonymous]

Anyone fancy a pint?

Ohh wouldnt say no buddy!?

Any nice beer gardens where you are?? Temperature up here is about 17degrees C.. sun is shining, clear blue skies out the window.. definately an afternoon for the beer garden!

:drink:

[Tara]

:shock: not in Lancashire it aint

but i'll have a beer cheers

[Tara]

How soon til Fizz locks this thread