bro. no… 1- I did it per trip not per person.
Again for the 10th time Im repeating this is per TRIP, not person, not miles, not passenger miles, not even hours… You do the math yourself after you understand what you’re trying to calculate.
Yes. I know. And I’ve been trying to tell you repeatedly now. That’s the problem. That’s the fault in your methodology. You can’t count it per trip, and then count the deaths per person.
Your methodology is incorrect to begin with, it doesn’t matter what numbers you use if the method is wrong. You’ve been basing everything on that hundreds of people are all condensed into 1 plane trip, rather than viewing it as hundreds of people making 1 plane trip, per person. yet, when counting the deaths, you don’t count it per plane trip, you count it per person.
Your methodology is skewing your results by the hundreds. And that is independent of whatever numbers you’re coming up with.
The scientific community in collaboration with statisticians have over the past 20 years, all come to the same conclusion, that you are significantly less probable of dying while traveling in an airplane or train, than you are in a car, and especially a motorcycle.
If you genuinely believe, that you’ve made a breakthrough that goes against the result of every single published and peer reviewed report on the topic, I implore you to publish your results and have it peer reviewed by the various institutions that also collect data on the topic.
But I’m not going to argue with you about this. You are free to believe whatever you want. Personally, I’m going to believe that the data and methodology from a professor, with 39 years of experience and several published papers on the economics, and safety in the transit sector, is correct.
my assumed numbers
The fact you don’t see the problem with that statement speaks volume.
You assumed a bunch of numbers pulled from thin air, and applied some other numbers without considering the context or methodology of how they were obtained.
And you think that will provide you with informational data? Good job. You clearly know what you’re doing. Keep it up.
The statistics in the post has a source. It is cited as Ian Savage. And it doesn’t take much to find the report these statistics are based upon.
https://faculty.wcas.northwestern.edu/ipsavage/436-manuscript.pdf
I didn’t need you to tell me your numbers were bullshit, it was pretty obvious. So if you want to mald in your chair and be angry over a report you don’t understand. That is your choice.
Though I’d recommend you read the report since that would be the best way of growing your understanding of the topic you are so intent on sharing your opinion on.
What are you even talking about? Which mode of transportation has the most deaths based on distance covered.
Meaning, if you want to drive from California to New York, you are more likely to die as a result of that trip, versus, if you took a train or plane.
If you want to judge this based on “per trip” or even “per hour”. The data would be even more skewed, making airplanes seem even safer, and motorcycles and cars even more dangerous. Also. How would you even measure “per trip” or “per hour”. At least with “per mile” you can measure it. Because vehicles have odometers that keeps track of distance covered. Meaning, you know how far the vehicle traveled before it turned into scrap metal.
Stop calling it a genocide, it’s just a simple case of systematically eradicating a specific group of people. - Hillary Clinton (probably)