have you ever been to ny. ny is one of the safest cities in the world. its just like any other city. if you go looking for trouble you will get whats coming to you. i walk around the city drunk off my ass all the time and have never been once mugged or knifed.
Actually, no I haven't, but I think you are missing the point. I'm sure you realize that people do get murdered, raped, and beaten every day in all the major u.s. cities. The point is, living amongst a ton of humans is exponentially more dangerous than backpacking amongt the most viscious predators our country has to offer. It isn't even close.
i totally disagree with that. you can ignore them but can you ignore a pack of wolves that have you surrounded. so you can outrun a grizzly bear or a lion or a pack of wolves. you must have usain bolt speed then. :roll:
Bullets are much faster than any animal. You have to be denser than a dinosaur's mattress to not understand what I am saying. Go do a google search on murder rates in new york and then go compare that to the number of people killed by animals, or for any reason, in all of our national parks combined.
Idaho's Premier Outdoor Writer
Please Support My Writing Habit By Purchasing A Book:
Bullets are much faster than any animal. You have to be denser than a dinosaur's mattress to not understand what I am saying. Go do a google search on murder rates in new york and then go compare that to the number of people killed by animals in all of our national parks combined.
You have to factor in also that there aren't 8 million people living in our national parks, day to day.
Walking through the city is perfectly safe.. there's actually more crime in the suburbs.
Bullets are much faster than any animal. You have to be denser than a dinosaur's mattress to not understand what I am saying. Go do a google search on murder rates in new york and then go compare that to the number of people killed by animals in all of our national parks combined.
You have to factor in also that there aren't 8 million people living in our national parks, day to day.
No shit. Also the point.
Idaho's Premier Outdoor Writer
Please Support My Writing Habit By Purchasing A Book:
Bullets are much faster than any animal. You have to be denser than a dinosaur's mattress to not understand what I am saying. Go do a google search on murder rates in new york and then go compare that to the number of people killed by animals, or for any reason, in all of our national parks combined.
i just think you have this fear ny is some big bad city where tourist get mugged. you can deny that all you want but that's what i take from you.
Ron: I just don't feel like going out tonight
Sammi: Wanna just break up?
Bullets are much faster than any animal. You have to be denser than a dinosaur's mattress to not understand what I am saying. Go do a google search on murder rates in new york and then go compare that to the number of people killed by animals, or for any reason, in all of our national parks combined.
i just think you have this fear ny is some big bad city where tourist get mugged. you can deny that all you want but that's what i take from you.
Is there someone paying attention that can explain this to metsfan? I never said that at all. I don't worry about anyone mugging me ever. I would worry for the mugger even trying it. I'm saying, where there are tons of people there is a hell of a lot more potential for violence than anything I need to worry about in a national park. This isn't exactly rocket surgery.
Idaho's Premier Outdoor Writer
Please Support My Writing Habit By Purchasing A Book:
Bullets are much faster than any animal. You have to be denser than a dinosaur's mattress to not understand what I am saying. Go do a google search on murder rates in new york and then go compare that to the number of people killed by animals, or for any reason, in all of our national parks combined.
i just think you have this fear ny is some big bad city where tourist get mugged. you can deny that all you want but that's what i take from you.
Is there someone paying attention that can explain this to metsfan? I never said that at all. I don't worry about anyone mugging me ever. I would worry for the mugger even trying it. I'm saying, where there are tons of people there is a hell of a lot more potential for violence than anything I need to worry about in a national park. This isn't exactly rocket surgery.
There's also, food, water, shelter every few feet in the city. Don't forget that!
I'm sure you're right about nature and statistics. It depends on the specific scenario one puts themself in though. Go into anything unprepared and you're bound to find trouble.
Bullets are much faster than any animal. You have to be denser than a dinosaur's mattress to not understand what I am saying. Go do a google search on murder rates in new york and then go compare that to the number of people killed by animals, or for any reason, in all of our national parks combined.
i just think you have this fear ny is some big bad city where tourist get mugged. you can deny that all you want but that's what i take from you.
Is there someone paying attention that can explain this to metsfan? I never said that at all. I don't worry about anyone mugging me ever. I would worry for the mugger even trying it. I'm saying, where there are tons of people there is a hell of a lot more potential for violence than anything I need to worry about in a national park. This isn't exactly rocket surgery.
nyc was the safest biggest city in 2009. wow that must be shocking to you huh.
so you've called me dense and now you've assumed i'm stupid. wow great job with the name calling :thumbup: :thumbup:
Ron: I just don't feel like going out tonight
Sammi: Wanna just break up?
nyc was the safest biggest city in 2009. wow that must be shocking to you huh.
That statistic doesn't really help your battle here metsfan.. doesn't mean other cities aren't warzones. You have to compare it to nature, not other cities.
nyc was the safest biggest city in 2009. wow that must be shocking to you huh.
That statistic doesn't really help your battle here metsfan.. doesn't mean other cities aren't warzones. You have to compare it to nature, not other cities.
oh it does cause this nature lover thinks nyc is some kinda dangerous place. i'd much rather live around 8 million people then live with animals who can kill you at a minutes notice.
Ron: I just don't feel like going out tonight
Sammi: Wanna just break up?
nyc was the safest biggest city in 2009. wow that must be shocking to you huh.
That statistic doesn't really help your battle here metsfan.. doesn't mean other cities aren't warzones. You have to compare it to nature, not other cities.
oh it does cause this nature lover thinks nyc is some kinda dangerous place. i'd much rather live around 8 million people then live with animals who can kill you at a minutes notice.
My grandma lived in a city her whole life.. visited Yellowstone once and was eaten by a bear. True story.
Statistically people are probably more likely to get killed by a person than a bear, but yes, cities are much safer than people make them out to be..
nyc was the safest biggest city in 2009. wow that must be shocking to you huh.
so you've called me dense and now you've assumed i'm stupid. wow great job with the name calling :thumbup: :thumbup:
No that isn't shocking to me at all. AND, I clearly didn't go anywhere near far enough on the name calling because you prove yourself to be even dumber than I could possibly imagine with every continuing post. Seriously, I have to leave now, but could someone else take a shot at explaining this concept that even my cats understand...
Idaho's Premier Outdoor Writer
Please Support My Writing Habit By Purchasing A Book:
Statistically people are probably more likely to get killed by a person than a bear, but yes, cities are much safer than people make them out to be..
So, you do get it. Maybe you can help metsfan. Good luck.
dude i've been saying the whole time a city is safer then the wild. your the one that made it out to be like the wild is some kinda safe place. hey thanks for the name calling. im sure that's not allowed on here or something.
Ron: I just don't feel like going out tonight
Sammi: Wanna just break up?
Statistically people are probably more likely to get killed by a person than a bear, but yes, cities are much safer than people make them out to be..
So, you do get it. Maybe you can help metsfan. Good luck.
I think the point Metsfan might be trying to prove is that its safer to cross paths with a person than a bear. He's immagining walking into a forest overrun with 8 million bears and thinking, "fuck that!"
I think the point Metsfan might be trying to prove is that its safer to cross paths with a person than a bear. He's immagining walking into a forest overrun with 8 million bears and thinking, "fuck that!"
wow see you get what i'm saying. i swear its like talking to a brick wall sometimes.
hey eyed i hear brownsville brooklyn is nice. you should visit it if you ever come to nyc.
Ron: I just don't feel like going out tonight
Sammi: Wanna just break up?
nyc was the safest biggest city in 2009. wow that must be shocking to you huh.
so you've called me dense and now you've assumed i'm stupid. wow great job with the name calling :thumbup: :thumbup:
No that isn't shocking to me at all. AND, I clearly didn't go anywhere near far enough on the name calling because you prove yourself to be even dumber than I could possibly imagine with every continuing post. Seriously, I have to leave now, but could someone else take a shot at explaining this concept that even my cats understand...
What the hell, I'll give it a shot....
metsfan, eyed is not afraid of NYC or other cities. He is not saying that NYC is a dangerous place, nor is he saying that an encounter with a person in NYC is more dangerous than an encounter with a bear in the wilderness.
He was simply trying to explain the relative risk of hanging out in the wilderness, so as to put the danger of the wilderness into perspective. Statistically speaking, a person is more likely to die in the city than in the wilderness, therefore the wilderness should not be feared more than the city.
Another example of relative risk is that more people die in car accidents when they drive than in terrorist attacks when they fly. Therefore, the likelihood of being killed while driving is much greater than the likelihood of being killed while flying, so it does not make logical sense to be more afraid of flying than of driving.
You seem to be thinking more of case fatality rates, which is the likelihood of dying in the event that you are attacked by a bear or the victim of a terrorist attack. Certainly, your average bear attack more likely results in death than an average encounter with a New Yorker, just as being the victim of a terrorist attack is more deadly than being in a car accident.
But relative risk counts everyone who is at risk of an event occurring, not just the people to whom it actually occurs. E.g., it counts everyone who enters the wilderness, not just those who are attacked by bears, and everyone who flies on a plane, not just those who are the victims of terrorist attacks. Therefore, because terrorist attacks happen with much less frequency than car accidents, the risk to people who fly is much less than the risk to people who drive. So people shouldn't be more afraid of flying than of driving; they should only be more afraid of dying if they are actually attacked by terrorists.
So what eyed is saying is just that violence occurs in the wilderness much less frequently than violence occurs in the city, and therefore he shouldn't be more afraid of the wilderness than of the city. So if we think the city is safe enough to be in, we should think the wilderness is safe enough to be in too.
nyc was the safest biggest city in 2009. wow that must be shocking to you huh.
so you've called me dense and now you've assumed i'm stupid. wow great job with the name calling :thumbup: :thumbup:
No that isn't shocking to me at all. AND, I clearly didn't go anywhere near far enough on the name calling because you prove yourself to be even dumber than I could possibly imagine with every continuing post. Seriously, I have to leave now, but could someone else take a shot at explaining this concept that even my cats understand...
What the hell, I'll give it a shot....
metsfan, eyed is not afraid of NYC or other cities. He is not saying that NYC is a dangerous place, nor is he saying that an encounter with a person in NYC is more dangerous than an encounter with a bear in the wilderness.
He was simply trying to explain the relative risk of hanging out in the wilderness, so as to put the danger of the wilderness into perspective. Statistically speaking, a person is more likely to die in the city than in the wilderness, therefore the wilderness should not be feared more than the city.
Another example of relative risk is that more people die in car accidents when they drive than in terrorist attacks when they fly. Therefore, the likelihood of being killed while driving is much greater than the likelihood of being killed while flying, so it does not make logical sense to be more afraid of flying than of driving.
You seem to be thinking more of case fatality rates, which is the likelihood of dying in the event that you are attacked by a bear or the victim of a terrorist attack. Certainly, your average bear attack more likely results in death than an average encounter with a New Yorker, just as being the victim of a terrorist attack is more deadly than being in a car accident.
But relative risk counts everyone who is at risk of an event occurring, not just the people to whom it actually occurs. E.g., it counts everyone who enters the wilderness, not just those who are attacked by bears, and everyone who flies on a plane, not just those who are the victims of terrorist attacks. Therefore, because terrorist attacks happen with much less frequency than car accidents, the risk to people who fly is much less than the risk to people who drive. So people shouldn't be more afraid of flying than of driving; they should only be more afraid of dying if they are actually attacked by terrorists.
So what eyed is saying is just that violence occurs in the wilderness much less frequently than violence occurs in the city, and therefore he shouldn't be more afraid of the wilderness than of the city. So if we think the city is safe enough to be in, we should think the wilderness is safe enough to be in too.
Clear as mud now?
it was a clear as mud as the first time. i was just having a go wit him cause he thinks nyc is some big bad city when he hasnt even be here.
Ron: I just don't feel like going out tonight
Sammi: Wanna just break up?
No that isn't shocking to me at all. AND, I clearly didn't go anywhere near far enough on the name calling because you prove yourself to be even dumber than I could possibly imagine with every continuing post. Seriously, I have to leave now, but could someone else take a shot at explaining this concept that even my cats understand...
What the hell, I'll give it a shot....
metsfan, eyed is not afraid of NYC or other cities. He is not saying that NYC is a dangerous place, nor is he saying that an encounter with a person in NYC is more dangerous than an encounter with a bear in the wilderness.
He was simply trying to explain the relative risk of hanging out in the wilderness, so as to put the danger of the wilderness into perspective. Statistically speaking, a person is more likely to die in the city than in the wilderness, therefore the wilderness should not be feared more than the city.
Another example of relative risk is that more people die in car accidents when they drive than in terrorist attacks when they fly. Therefore, the likelihood of being killed while driving is much greater than the likelihood of being killed while flying, so it does not make logical sense to be more afraid of flying than of driving.
You seem to be thinking more of case fatality rates, which is the likelihood of dying in the event that you are attacked by a bear or the victim of a terrorist attack. Certainly, your average bear attack more likely results in death than an average encounter with a New Yorker, just as being the victim of a terrorist attack is more deadly than being in a car accident.
But relative risk counts everyone who is at risk of an event occurring, not just the people to whom it actually occurs. E.g., it counts everyone who enters the wilderness, not just those who are attacked by bears, and everyone who flies on a plane, not just those who are the victims of terrorist attacks. Therefore, because terrorist attacks happen with much less frequency than car accidents, the risk to people who fly is much less than the risk to people who drive. So people shouldn't be more afraid of flying than of driving; they should only be more afraid of dying if they are actually attacked by terrorists.
So what eyed is saying is just that violence occurs in the wilderness much less frequently than violence occurs in the city, and therefore he shouldn't be more afraid of the wilderness than of the city. So if we think the city is safe enough to be in, we should think the wilderness is safe enough to be in too.
Clear as mud now?
it was a clear as mud as the first time. i was just having a go wit him cause he thinks nyc is some big bad city when he hasnt even be here.
I think the whole point is that he doesn't think NYC is some big bad city; you have just misinterpreted his comments. Seems clear to me. Just sayin'....
again i was just having a go with him cause he mentioned nyc. seem clear enough now to you. it's cute you feel the need to stick up for your friend :roll: . it's people like you and many others that made me not have the desire to post in the what is called the MT. i''m sure others feel the same way seeing as how the MT is just a big pissing match between board members.
Ron: I just don't feel like going out tonight
Sammi: Wanna just break up?
again i was just having a go with him cause he mentioned nyc. seem clear enough now to you. it's cute you feel the need to stick up for your friend :roll: . it's people like you and many others that made me not have the desire to post in the what is called the MT. i''m sure others feel the same way seeing as how the MT is just a big pissing match between board members.
Whatever. :roll: You don't have to act like an ass about it. I don't even know eyed, by the way. But he asked if someone else would try to explain to you what he was saying and I felt his frustration due to how ridiculous it is that you couldn't understand his point. As for the MT, please, by all means, stay away. It's a place for people who actually possess powers of comprehension.
again i was just having a go with him cause he mentioned nyc. seem clear enough now to you. it's cute you feel the need to stick up for your friend :roll: . it's people like you and many others that made me not have the desire to post in the what is called the MT. i''m sure others feel the same way seeing as how the MT is just a big pissing match between board members.
Whatever. :roll: You don't have to act like an ass about it. I don't even know eyed, by the way. But he asked if someone else would try to explain to you what he was saying and I felt his frustration due to how ridiculous it is that you couldn't understand his point. As for the MT, please, by all means, stay away. It's a place for people who actually possess powers of comprehension.
hey look another name caller and insulting me, wow how original. oh sweetheart I had bout 12,000 posts in the mt long before you ever came onto this board. Names like my2hands,jlew, currpente, abookamongsthemany, el kabong and hippiemom(r.I.p) were a hell of a lot friendlier to me then you will ever be. But hey thanks for proving my point that the MT has gone to shit, good job :thumbup:.
Btw- I took the SAT'S my senior year for fun and got a 1140
Ron: I just don't feel like going out tonight
Sammi: Wanna just break up?
again i was just having a go with him cause he mentioned nyc. seem clear enough now to you. it's cute you feel the need to stick up for your friend :roll: . it's people like you and many others that made me not have the desire to post in the what is called the MT. i''m sure others feel the same way seeing as how the MT is just a big pissing match between board members.
Whatever. :roll: You don't have to act like an ass about it. I don't even know eyed, by the way. But he asked if someone else would try to explain to you what he was saying and I felt his frustration due to how ridiculous it is that you couldn't understand his point. As for the MT, please, by all means, stay away. It's a place for people who actually possess powers of comprehension.
hey look another name caller and insulting me, wow how original. oh sweetheart I had bout 12,000 posts in the mt long before you ever came onto this board. Names like my2hands,jlew, currpente, abookamongsthemany, el kabong and hippiemom(r.I.p) were a hell of a lot friendlier to me then you will ever be. But hey thanks for proving my point that the MT has gone to shit, good job :thumbup:.
Btw- I took the SAT'S my senior year for fun and got a 1140
Comments
Bullets are much faster than any animal. You have to be denser than a dinosaur's mattress to not understand what I am saying. Go do a google search on murder rates in new york and then go compare that to the number of people killed by animals, or for any reason, in all of our national parks combined.
Please Support My Writing Habit By Purchasing A Book:
https://www.createspace.com/3437020
http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000663025696
http://earthtremors.blogspot.com/
Walking through the city is perfectly safe.. there's actually more crime in the suburbs.
No shit. Also the point.
Please Support My Writing Habit By Purchasing A Book:
https://www.createspace.com/3437020
http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000663025696
http://earthtremors.blogspot.com/
Sammi: Wanna just break up?
Is there someone paying attention that can explain this to metsfan? I never said that at all. I don't worry about anyone mugging me ever. I would worry for the mugger even trying it. I'm saying, where there are tons of people there is a hell of a lot more potential for violence than anything I need to worry about in a national park. This isn't exactly rocket surgery.
Please Support My Writing Habit By Purchasing A Book:
https://www.createspace.com/3437020
http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000663025696
http://earthtremors.blogspot.com/
I'm sure you're right about nature and statistics. It depends on the specific scenario one puts themself in though. Go into anything unprepared and you're bound to find trouble.
nyc was the safest biggest city in 2009. wow that must be shocking to you huh.
so you've called me dense and now you've assumed i'm stupid. wow great job with the name calling :thumbup: :thumbup:
Sammi: Wanna just break up?
Sammi: Wanna just break up?
Statistically people are probably more likely to get killed by a person than a bear, but yes, cities are much safer than people make them out to be..
excellent point LAO. sorry what happened to your grandma. does she have nasty scars.
Sammi: Wanna just break up?
No that isn't shocking to me at all. AND, I clearly didn't go anywhere near far enough on the name calling because you prove yourself to be even dumber than I could possibly imagine with every continuing post. Seriously, I have to leave now, but could someone else take a shot at explaining this concept that even my cats understand...
Please Support My Writing Habit By Purchasing A Book:
https://www.createspace.com/3437020
http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000663025696
http://earthtremors.blogspot.com/
So, you do get it. Maybe you can help metsfan. Good luck.
Please Support My Writing Habit By Purchasing A Book:
https://www.createspace.com/3437020
http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000663025696
http://earthtremors.blogspot.com/
Sammi: Wanna just break up?
My grandma was NOT eaten by a bear.. I was just poking fun at a point.
hey eyed i hear brownsville brooklyn is nice. you should visit it if you ever come to nyc.
Sammi: Wanna just break up?
What the hell, I'll give it a shot....
metsfan, eyed is not afraid of NYC or other cities. He is not saying that NYC is a dangerous place, nor is he saying that an encounter with a person in NYC is more dangerous than an encounter with a bear in the wilderness.
He was simply trying to explain the relative risk of hanging out in the wilderness, so as to put the danger of the wilderness into perspective. Statistically speaking, a person is more likely to die in the city than in the wilderness, therefore the wilderness should not be feared more than the city.
Another example of relative risk is that more people die in car accidents when they drive than in terrorist attacks when they fly. Therefore, the likelihood of being killed while driving is much greater than the likelihood of being killed while flying, so it does not make logical sense to be more afraid of flying than of driving.
You seem to be thinking more of case fatality rates, which is the likelihood of dying in the event that you are attacked by a bear or the victim of a terrorist attack. Certainly, your average bear attack more likely results in death than an average encounter with a New Yorker, just as being the victim of a terrorist attack is more deadly than being in a car accident.
But relative risk counts everyone who is at risk of an event occurring, not just the people to whom it actually occurs. E.g., it counts everyone who enters the wilderness, not just those who are attacked by bears, and everyone who flies on a plane, not just those who are the victims of terrorist attacks. Therefore, because terrorist attacks happen with much less frequency than car accidents, the risk to people who fly is much less than the risk to people who drive. So people shouldn't be more afraid of flying than of driving; they should only be more afraid of dying if they are actually attacked by terrorists.
So what eyed is saying is just that violence occurs in the wilderness much less frequently than violence occurs in the city, and therefore he shouldn't be more afraid of the wilderness than of the city. So if we think the city is safe enough to be in, we should think the wilderness is safe enough to be in too.
Clear as mud now?
Sammi: Wanna just break up?
I think the whole point is that he doesn't think NYC is some big bad city; you have just misinterpreted his comments. Seems clear to me. Just sayin'....
Sammi: Wanna just break up?
Anyone??... ah, drunk Sat night on AET
:thumbup:
Sammi: Wanna just break up?
well of course she was... its what we do.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
Whatever. :roll: You don't have to act like an ass about it. I don't even know eyed, by the way. But he asked if someone else would try to explain to you what he was saying and I felt his frustration due to how ridiculous it is that you couldn't understand his point. As for the MT, please, by all means, stay away. It's a place for people who actually possess powers of comprehension.
Btw- I took the SAT'S my senior year for fun and got a 1140
Sammi: Wanna just break up?