On Tuesday, August 18, 2015 at 3:10:50 PM UTC-4, ceg wrote:
On Tue, 18 Aug 2015 05:16:33 -0700, trader_4 wrote:

I also pointed out several times now that the census data that CEG posted
clearly says that it's "estimated and should be used with caution for
year to year comparison".

No amount of *estimation* error is going to cancel out the huge
rates predicted by the reports.

Did you see the poster who showed a report of 25% greater accident rates?


Did you see it? You're the one claiming that accident rates haven't
gone up. Good grief.



Do you really believe that the "estimation errors" are exactly 1/4 of
the huge numbers, and then, that these estimation errors only occur
during the exact time frame when cellphone ownership rates skyrocketed?

And then, these very same "estimation errors" tailed off suddenly, and
precipitously, exactly when cellphone ownership rates tailed off?

You continue to lie and claim that the issue is only estimation errors.
The census bureau, who's numbers you used, said to use the numbers for
year to year comparison with caution. We don't know all the reasons why.
But here you are, using them, while squawking PARADOX, PARADOX