You guys still aren't up to speed on the magic hats, are you?

Helmet touched ground = helmet saved life. Duh.

Are you being deliberately obtuse?

There is absolutely no reason to suppose that the rider would have suffered a head injury had he not been wearing a helmet, given that other parts of his body had already hit the ground harder and sustained no particular damage. The fact that the helmet touched the ground does not mean it saved his life, or even his scalp.

Is that any clearer?

I'm pretty sure it's not deliberate.

Oh my god these posts are the funniest I've ever seen. Keep up the comedy routine guys, this is great!!

I don't believe in helmets either because of natural selection, it's an evolutionary process, only the smartest will survive, those wearing helmets, the rest will go extinct. So keep on not wearing helmets, we need the less intelligent to become extinct.

I am pretty sure this cyclist is smarter than YOU.
http://bikeforums.net/attachment.php...hmentid=248843

He lived a long life without a helmet.

So original. We haven't head that one before, really.


However, your comment does provide an example of a phenomenon which this thread illustrates better than anything else I have ever seen. Namely, the extent to which many people are threatened when reality appears to conflict with their assumptions and beliefs. They cannot countenance the fact that they may have been mistaken, or misled. That would diminish them in their own eyes, they feel it would make them look foolish, their own rightness is enormously important to them. So even those with the intelligence to do so, refuse to engage with the data. Instead they protect themselves by rejecting any sort of rational debate, and fall back inn playground insults. "it's obvious" "You're stupid" "you have nothing in there worth protecting".

There are exceptions. A pity you're not one of them.

Well if the anti helmet cult is willing to let their bare head hit concrete, fine by me. Personally I would rather have a helmet between me and that very hard surface. Or maybe they have had that hit, and thats why their muddled thots on the subject.

If you say so

Performance pulled through and gave me a new helmet no cost to me

cool
http://www.easyfreesmileys.com/smile...mileys-523.gif

As though we really want to be populated by people too useless to survive a bare-headed bicycle ride. Helmeteers = natural selection thwarted.

Apparently your "thots" define you and your hard skull.

http://www.myspace.com/drekeytheghet...-rino-68764965

And that was my point, let the thick skulled primates hit their heads and get them off this planet so the rest of mankind can go on. I can't believe with all the studies and proof to back up the FACT that helmets do work...granted, not 100 percent of the time, but then neither do seat belts, shoulder straps and air bags. So with their logic that helmets don't work then they shouldn't wear seat belts, shoulder straps and air bags...after all a whole lot of people survived driving without any of that "junk" ever being used and died as old people and died not in car accidents.

So you do think you are smarter than this guy!

http://bikeforums.net/attachment.php...hmentid=248843

They didn't have helmets back then for bikers, and Einstein didn't wear seat belts, shoulder straps or air bags...why? Because they weren't in cars yet, they were optional in some cars in the mid 50's but he died in 55. So your argument based on Einstein is baseless.

Seatbelts etc are proven to work effectively and save lives. Bicycle helmets are not, nor are they even designed to.

Fantastic, then don't wear a helmet and go against all studies that prove they are effective.

Perhaps you'd like to cite a particular study that you believe proves their effectiveness? Then it would be possible to have an actual debate, as opposed to dismissing you as a troll.

Another day without falling down, going boom and hoiting my widdle head. Darwin was right, survival of the fittest, helmets for the rest. :D

have to agree, if you need styrofoam on your head in order to evolve maybe you shouldn't be allowed to anyway.
but then if a slo-mo fall can kill w/out a helmet what kind of genes are we allowing to dominate? isn't that de-evolving?
no wonder apes took over the planet, we were too busy looking for safety equipment instead of just fighting back.

It's going to be a sad day when you Helmet Haters wreck and hurt yourselves bad enough. You'll wish you had won one then.

:rolleyes:

Do you smoke (like he did)?

If you think this is a good argument for not wearing a helmet, you've lost the argument.

I've got nearly 50 years of happiness riding without a helmet under my belt...how many years do I have to wait for your doom and gloom predictions to come true?

It can't be much of a life to live in fear of hurting yourself all the time. I feel sorry for you.

The chances of my having that accident are small. But if it happens, I'll know that it is very unlikely that a helmet would have made any difference.

Conversing with you would be far more interesting if you actually attempted to engage in some sort of analysis of the facts, rather than just making unsupported assertions that are supported by nothing other than your own assumptions. Go back and read the posts by Skye and Meanwhile on page 85. Then come back and explain why, in your view, they are mistaken. Alternatively,don't waste our time further.

whilst not wearing a helmet: separated ribs, bruised ribs, bruised hip socket, broken fingers, road rash on knees, elbows, arms, back, chin.
head still okay, 'cept for that head lac I got while wearing a helmet.