Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers

Gravity is an established fact. Relativity is an established fact. Atoms are
established fact. Evolution is an established fact. Global warming from (at
least the largest source) human activities is an established fact.

Tell me, do YOU keep up with the scientific literature?

 

(5) Destroyed by the UN inspectors between 1991-2003, as was their job.

And now the world demands Bush prove they exist, since he claimed they did.

 

No, thinking you need 2 and a half tons to get room does.

 

Then why do many smaller cars -- Volvos, Mercedes, etc. -- have better safety
records and better safety reputations?

And ask the hundreds of police officers killed by their CVs exploding and
burning them to death about the car keeping you alive. No, wait, you can't,
they're DEAD!

 

I had a 1972 Corolla that was an excellent entry-level car. Opel was also
selling Kadetts and 1900s that were good cars.

 

dirve with steel frame. Big fan, and heavy enough to keep you alive.

 

I can't speak to Vegas and Gremlins, but I did own a shiny new 1972 Pinto. The
only import car in the same price range that was better in my opinion was the
Datsun 510 (and it was more expensive). The low cost Toyotas available in the
Eastern US in 1972 were low grade junk and too small inside besides. The VWs
sold at that time were laugable. The 510 was a great little car. I probably
would have bought one if there had been a dealer in my home town. The biggest
problem the US companies had was their desire to not build low price cars that
would take sales away from their other models.

Ed

 

istr that the story is when they are hit from the rear the fuel tank is
prone to rupture and ignite the spillage. Kind of like a big Pinto.

 

The Crown Vic is extremely safe for the money. If cars that cost
signficantly more and we are talking probably *THREE* times as much
with the MB, it better have superior performance.

Over the years, every time it was tested, the crown vic well exceeded
crash standards. I'd rather be in a crown vic than many of these SUVs
that's for sure.

Hundreds? Hardly lloyd. But that sort of BS is typical of you. You've
picked up alot of bad habbits from the sci.environment liberals.

The number of *incidents* doesn't even crack 30. The number of *deaths*
even lower. Then, keep in mind these cars were smacked at speeds in the
neighborhood of 70 *seventy* miles per hour.

So Parker, find a police vehicle with a significantly *BETTER* record
with regards to incident rate than the crown vic. 29 incidents in over
20 years and probably untold millions of miles is *NOTHING* statistically
speaking.

If you want to pay taxes to put all cops in MBs to give them a slight
edge with regards to this low rate event, you can pay it. I have no
desire to.

 

More like 50-70. The ones thar have exploded have been hit at very high
speeds. Also when you hit cars that tend to have ammunition in the trunk you
might just get a fire.

 

Maybe to people like you who want the government controlling their lives
or see themselves as the ones making the decisions for others.

 

Only that it exists. There are alot of questions about gravity that
remain unanswered. The fundamental one is why is it so much weaker
than other basic forces.

No it isn't, it's just the best we have at the momement to describe
behaviors.

Yet new shocking details of smaller and smaller particles are discovered
rutinely that cause other ideas to re-evaluated. What exactly do you
think they do with those accelerators if the facts are established?

It is not a "fact". It's the best explaination we have at the moment.

Gobal warming is nebulus term that is used to describe everything that
occurs with climate. Thusly it can't be wrong. One part of the world is
getting warmer? It's global warming. Another part of the world is getting
colder? It's global warming. One critter flurishes, it's global warming.
another critter is dying off, it's global warming. so on and so on. No
matter what happens, it supports "global warming".

"Global warming" isn't even well defined with regards to what it is and
what it entails, let alone being an established fact. Of course it's hard
to disprove something that isn't fixed in definition.

I can tell you don't, even on a cursory level.

Dr. Parker, you are the kind of "scienist" that stifles thought, new
ideas, new ways of looking at things, and advancement. You are rigid
in your thinking and believe if it wasn't what the establishment tought
you it cannot be correct. 4 centuries ago you would have been one of
those who went after galieo and others. Your idea of science is whatever
is politically acceptable.

 

Name one that is a good value for the money. (I don't really expect a reply
here) -Dave

 

Subaru (any model).

 

"Lies, all a pack of lies."
Lloyd, these are all BILL CLINTON statements... Are you saying that BILL
CLINTON lied? I guess it depends on your definition of LIE...

 

Why the reputations are better is likely due to advertising strategy,
but the facts tell a different story. Comparing actual death rates per
million registered vehicle years shows the following data (IIHS.ORG):

Mercedes C class = 52
Volvo 850 - 39
Ford Expedition 4WD = 39

=Vic=
Bear Gap, PA

 

I'd say "all" liberals are guilty of treason...

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=treason

"Violation of allegiance toward one's country or sovereign, especially the
betrayal of one's country by waging war against it or by consciously and
purposely acting to aid its enemies. "

Here's treason defined in Teddy Kennedy's (you know, the murdering liberal
from MA) state:
http://www.state.ma.us/legis/laws/mgl/264-1.htm
"Treason against the commonwealth shall consist only in levying war against
it, or in adhering to the enemies thereof, giving them aid and comfort; it
shall not be bailable."
Note the giving the enemy aid part...
Punishable by LIFE in prison:
http://www.state.ma.us/legis/laws/mgl/264-2.htm

 

No, I WON'T do it because it's a rat hole... you beleive what you want.

"there are facts supporting creationism."
No to use the friends argument here but the greatest minds in the world all
thought that the world was flat.