On Wed, 22 Dec 2004 07:03:39 GMT, wrote:
On 21 Dec 2004 21:11:56 GMT, Dave Hinz wrote:

A whole lot of stuff -- which is well beyond the point of diminishing
returns. Since he won't look at the evidence

You gave me a many-page report as your 'evidence', and will not say what
in there you are talking about.

and doesn't even
understand such elementary concepts as statistical insignificance,

The statistical error -you- are talking about is in a sample which is
a subset of all the data. However, the report which you cite seems to
_be_ all of the data, not just a sampling. Therefore the 7 and 9 percent
are real percents of the total population of data.

and
since he can't provide any documented support for his position this
whole conversation is pretty much useless.

You're the one making the statement that airbags do more harm than good,
while citing a study showing they reduce deaths by 9% and serious
injuries by 7% (or is it the other way around? Whatever). And you say
that _I_ don't understand the topic? Sheesh.

He's had his say and I've had mine. Anyone who's interested in the
truth can follow the references I've posted or do their own research.

I notice you completely evade my questions. One last one. Let's say there
is a device which may give you a mild injury where you wouldn't have had
any, in a mild crash, but gives you a double-digit better chance of a better
outcome in a severe crash. Would you trade a bit of bag-rash for a saved
life?

Somehow, I think I know you won't be able to answer that in a meaningful
way.