[dylanmo]

Re: Physics for dummies

SBP never said shiat about parallax. Go back and read the thread if you don't believe me. And stop being such a farking drip about the physicists. I can't believe what a world-class numbnuts you are.

You got nothing, as usual.

 

[kpaul]

Liar

Yes he did.... I'll find it for you idiot. ...

 

[IceWorm]

There is no question that riding a motorcycle puts you at greater risk of bodily harm than other common forms of transportation, including riding in a car. Many of us accept that risk because we perceive motorcycling to be a pleasurable experience. Risk exposure can be divided into two areas, things we can control and things we can't control. It is my opinion the list of controllable risk factors is long and the latter is short. Riders can mitigate their risk exposure by paying close attention to the "things I can control list". Here is a quick example ranked in order of importance.



1. Wear a full face helmet

2. Wear full protective motorcycle specific riding gear with armor.

3. Take the motorcycle safety foundation beginner and advanced courses.

4. When possible choose routs with less traffic.

5. Comply with state inspection laws and stay up to date with your motorcycle maintenance schedule.

6. Choose a light, maneuverable, motorcycle with good brakes, to ride.

7. Don't ride at night.

8. Don't ride when you are tired.

9. Don't ride under the influence.

10. Obey traffic laws.



You get the idea, obviously the list could go on and on. There is no doubt that at times we all fudge on these safety issues, but with the understanding that we do so at a price. The list of things we can't control goes like this.



1. Behavior of other motorcycle riders and car drivers.



That's about it. If I were to think long and hard I might come up with a couple of others. The good news is paying attention to number 4 on the first list reduces problems connected to number 1 on the second list. Paying close attention to the first list 10 won't insure you don't get run over by the second list big number one, but it sure will improve you odds a bunch.



One more thing. Everyone has different safety priorities and I am sure others would add to my safety list and rearrange it as well. I have a friend who would put number 7 "Don't ride at night" at the top.

 

[4940]

Re: Physics for dummies

I have come to the conclusion that pointing out to idiot boy that he is a mindless troll is indeed pointless. He is like one of those bad sci-fi creatures that gains sustanance from evil. Maybe in the future it would be best if we all just ignored him, and let him babble to himself. Perhaps if he gains no succor here he will drift off to some other site, and torment the unsuspecting there. VWW

 

[dylanmo]

Re: Liar

Looking forward to it.

 

[stoney8888]

Yea I totally would put 9 way above most. Anything that slows down the old motor skills is a bad idea. because we all know that nobody can see us out there for some reason.

 

[jungkvist]

I've got a screw looses

I could sit here all night, listing all the things I know I should be doing while riding on the street but. The truth is, once I get in the saddle, all bets are off. I don’t know how many times I’ve started out for a ride saying…No matter what, I’m not gonna go over 100mph; only to find myself doing 100+ down the first decent straightaway I come to.

I absolutely love riding a sportbike. However, the more I think about it, the more I’m considering something like a Kawasaki W-650 for the street, then using my "Rat" VFR for track days.

I don't know about you guys, but I know I've got a screw loose...

 

[dylanmo]

Re: Liar

Oh, here is what SBP said about parallax:

The parallax error is embedded in a much greater measuring error...

Meaning, to native English speakers, the parallax error was insignificant. You say above:

About the parallelex affect I was being sarcastic the mentioned professor er instructor rather of physics supported a dubious argument (parallex) put forth by the MO editor in an earlier agrument.

So you're an idiot, liar, or both, as if more proof were needed. Unhhh!

 

[MikeM132]

Long ago when I had a real job I was "safety director" of a trucking company. I went to a couple of accident investigation courses at Penn State and Michigan State. It is actually pretty simple and common to determine whether or not a light was on when impact occurred. Other reconstruction can be somewhat speculative, but there are methods of reconstruction there, too. Typcially insurance companies do this to some degree to limit their exposure. I agree that the "facts" of this case are improbable, at best. With a fatality like this caused by a rear-end collision, the insurance company would probably have information they gathered from police or on their own to limit damage to themselves. I'm not buying this story at all as written here.