Could UA be related to cellphones?
in [Toyota]
|
From: Hachiroku ハチロク on 12 Mar 2010 23:27 On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 23:15:38 +0000, Clive wrote: > In message <hnedu8$mo4$1(a)news.eternal-september.org>, > =?iso-2022-jp?q?Hachiroku_=1B$B%O%A%m%=2F=1B=28B?= <Trueno(a)e86.GTS> writes >> have white >>knuckles from grasping the wheel > Then you're simply driving too fast. Well, that too... I don't know about over there, but I have seen some INCREDIBLY stupid things just this week alone!
From: Hachiroku ハチロク on 12 Mar 2010 23:28 On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 17:52:34 -0500, JoeSpareBedroom wrote: >>> Actually, the first story I heard about the inarguably valid research >>> was on TV about 5 years ago. It was on Fox News. >> >> My observations of drivers who shouldn't even be let anywhere near a car >> are valid, too. > > > OK, but we're talking about the effects of cell phones on driving ability, > not the overall incompetence of most drivers. You cannot measure the > effects of cell phones by looking out your window. You'll spot the worst, > most obvious cases, but you will not spot the ticking time bombs. Who was talking about cell phones? I'm talking about people who shouldn't even be let near a car in the first place. God help us all if they decide to start using a cell phone, too!
From: JoeSpareBedroom on 12 Mar 2010 23:31 "Hachiroku ????" <Trueno(a)e86.GTS> wrote in message news:hnf49n$ek8$4(a)news.eternal-september.org... > On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 17:52:34 -0500, JoeSpareBedroom wrote: > >>>> Actually, the first story I heard about the inarguably valid research >>>> was on TV about 5 years ago. It was on Fox News. >>> >>> My observations of drivers who shouldn't even be let anywhere near a car >>> are valid, too. >> >> >> OK, but we're talking about the effects of cell phones on driving >> ability, >> not the overall incompetence of most drivers. You cannot measure the >> effects of cell phones by looking out your window. You'll spot the worst, >> most obvious cases, but you will not spot the ticking time bombs. > > Who was talking about cell phones? I was. I still am. Your attempt to redirect the discussion was a lame ploy because you lost.
From: dr_jeff on 13 Mar 2010 07:13 JoeSpareBedroom wrote: > "Hachiroku ????" <Trueno(a)e86.GTS> wrote in message > news:hnf49n$ek8$4(a)news.eternal-september.org... >> On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 17:52:34 -0500, JoeSpareBedroom wrote: >> >>>>> Actually, the first story I heard about the inarguably valid research >>>>> was on TV about 5 years ago. It was on Fox News. >>>> My observations of drivers who shouldn't even be let anywhere near a car >>>> are valid, too. >>> >>> OK, but we're talking about the effects of cell phones on driving >>> ability, >>> not the overall incompetence of most drivers. You cannot measure the >>> effects of cell phones by looking out your window. You'll spot the worst, >>> most obvious cases, but you will not spot the ticking time bombs. >> Who was talking about cell phones? > > > I was. I still am. Your attempt to redirect the discussion was a lame ploy > because you lost. This should not be about winning or losing. When it is, no one really wins. This should a free and *friendly* exchange of ideas. If Joe wants to walk about cell phones, let him. If Hachiroku wants to talk about something else, fine. No one says anyone has to read someone else's posts. Jeff
From: Hachiroku ハチロク on 13 Mar 2010 10:46
On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 23:31:30 -0500, JoeSpareBedroom wrote: > "Hachiroku ????" <Trueno(a)e86.GTS> wrote in message > news:hnf49n$ek8$4(a)news.eternal-september.org... >> On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 17:52:34 -0500, JoeSpareBedroom wrote: >> >>>>> Actually, the first story I heard about the inarguably valid research >>>>> was on TV about 5 years ago. It was on Fox News. >>>> >>>> My observations of drivers who shouldn't even be let anywhere near a >>>> car are valid, too. >>> >>> >>> OK, but we're talking about the effects of cell phones on driving >>> ability, >>> not the overall incompetence of most drivers. You cannot measure the >>> effects of cell phones by looking out your window. You'll spot the >>> worst, most obvious cases, but you will not spot the ticking time >>> bombs. >> >> Who was talking about cell phones? > > > I was. I still am. Your attempt to redirect the discussion was a lame ploy > because you lost. Not really. You are lost. I should have known better than to discuss abstracts with you. I'll get it printed in the NYT for you. |