• givesomefucks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    19
    ·
    3 months ago

    Wait…

    So you think the effort into that peer reviewed research paper took more effort than just looking at two PDFs and finding the rate between two sets of numbers?!

    Crazy man.

    • ltxrtquq
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      What are you talking about? When did I ever say publishing a paper was easy? You asked for someone to provide updated studies compared to the 20 year old one you linked. It’s certainly not perfect, but now you have some more up to date numbers to look at.

      • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        16
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        No, you took two numbers you didn’t understand and declared that as in depth as the study…

        The only numbers I’d trust you to calculate is the number of motorcycles you own, but I wouldn’t trust you to report that accurately here.

        Have fun tho, that’s apparently what matters, not dead children

        • ltxrtquq
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          I was pretty transparent with what I was doing and never claimed to be as thorough as a proper study would be. But 20 years is a very long time, you can’t assume the numbers from back then are still accurate to today’s world.

          I don’t own a motorcycle.

          If you care about dead children, maybe you should care a little more about the 6,000 killed by cars, trucks and SUVs rather than the 42 killed by motorcycles. Why are you on this crusade against motorcycles in the first place? It seems weird and unnecessarily hostile. (Edit: the 6,000 and 42 are all pedestrians killed, I don’t know how many of those are children)