VocalNeal Posted June 21, 2022 Share Posted June 21, 2022 2 minutes ago, Thunglom said: Expert - a reverse fallacious appeal to authority, often used by people to attack the messenger rather than the message. Oh and you didn't attack Kwasaki? How about hypocrite instead of expert? Ad hominem maybe the term you are searching for? Which doesn't help any discussion. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VocalNeal Posted June 21, 2022 Share Posted June 21, 2022 22 minutes ago, Thunglom said: You haven't comprehended a single word I posted This is the only true thing you may have said. You could also add disinterest in your opinion. Some people use statistics as a drunk would a lamppost. More for support than illumination? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swimfan Posted June 21, 2022 Share Posted June 21, 2022 On 6/19/2022 at 7:38 PM, Thunglom said: Rubbish! You have no evidence to support the first assumption secondly "It is only a 'road death' if the person dies at the road side." - is simply not true. I suspect you have no idea who gathers statistics or or how it is done. "Many groups in Thailand believe that the real number is up to 50% higher." - really - which "groups" are these. This is typical of the ignorance and nonsense talked about road safety in Thailand. both the public and those in charge simply have o idea, yet there are several organisations, both national and international, that are taking abscientiic approach to road safety yet they are completely ignored. Actually what he said is completely true. Only those dead at the scene are counted as official road death statistics. you should do some research before attacking someone’s post. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yellowtail Posted June 21, 2022 Share Posted June 21, 2022 5 minutes ago, Swimfan said: Actually what he said is completely true. Only those dead at the scene are counted as official road death statistics. you should do some research before attacking someone’s post. They take doctors to the crash-sites do declare people dead? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thunglom Posted June 21, 2022 Share Posted June 21, 2022 20 minutes ago, Swimfan said: Actually what he said is completely true. Only those dead at the scene are counted as official road death statistics. you should do some research before attacking someone’s post. 100% untrue - what do you think "official" road stats are??? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thunglom Posted June 21, 2022 Share Posted June 21, 2022 14 minutes ago, Yellowtail said: They take doctors to the crash-sites do declare people dead? they don't even get ambulances there on time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thunglom Posted June 21, 2022 Share Posted June 21, 2022 50 minutes ago, VocalNeal said: This is the only true thing you may have said. You could also add disinterest in your opinion. Some people use statistics as a drunk would a lamppost. More for support than illumination? why bother replying, then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kwasaki Posted June 21, 2022 Share Posted June 21, 2022 1 hour ago, Thunglom said: What is “human error”? Human error is not “bad driving”, it is a normal occurrence. It has been shown that human error falls largely into one of three principle categories[1]. First is a perceptual error. Critical information that is below the threshold for seeing - the light was too dim, the driver was blinded by the glare, or the pedestrian's clothes had low contrast. In other cases, the driver made a perceptual misjudgement (a curve's radius or another car's speed or distance). Or in Thailand, just tinted windows! Second and far more common cause is that the critical information was detectable but that the driver failed to attend/notice because his mental resources were focussed elsewhere. Often times, a driver will claim that s/he did not "see" a plainly visible pedestrian or car. This is entirely possible because much of our information processing occurs outside of awareness. - (Mack and Rock, 1998)[2] Third, the driver may correctly process the information but fail to choose the correct response ("I'm skidding, so I'll turn away from the skid") or make the correct decision yet fail to carry it out ("I meant to hit the brake, but I hit the gas"). Thailand has had a lot of advice from road safety organisations both home and abroad, but somehow this advice does not get taken and is overruled by the archaic “we know best” prejudices of successive ill-informed governments who fail to understand the basic concept of “human error” as opposed to “blame”. [1] https://www.visualexpert.com/Resources/roadaccidents.html [2] (Mack and Rock (1998) have shown that we can be less likely to perceive an object if we are looking directly at it than if it falls outside the centre of the visual field. This "inattentional blindness" phenomenon is certainly the cause of many RTIs) What are your qualifications on motobike riding abilities. ???? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thunglom Posted June 21, 2022 Share Posted June 21, 2022 54 minutes ago, VocalNeal said: Oh and you didn't attack Kwasaki? How about hypocrite instead of expert? Ad hominem maybe the term you are searching for? Which doesn't help any discussion. 55 minutes ago, VocalNeal said: Oh and you didn't attack Kwasaki? How about hypocrite instead of expert? Ad hominem maybe the term you are searching for? Which doesn't help any discussion. Duh - used as ad how - but you don't seem to see the point is I'm making. It's based on the fallacious argument made by Kwasaki Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now