tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3317748811909502538.post7853425161343417693..comments2008-09-05T15:33:44.645+01:00DaveoftheNewCitynoreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3317748811909502538.post-49044781496333437662008-09-05T15:33:44.645+01:002008-09-05T15:33:44.645+01:00Thanks for the comment. Yes, similarly, in a comment to the New Scientist article on their website, someone else made the point that by far the most dangerous time in a flight is take-off and landing. I think the message is just that numbers/statistics are very difficult to interpret but are meaningless without interpretation (without a supporting storyline). This is not to deny the message of the article, that you should look at the numbers and be careful of emotion, but it is a long way from the whole story.David Chapmanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04140446220455064332noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3317748811909502538.post-60048806505148977402008-09-05T15:00:00.000+01:002008-09-05T15:00:00.000+01:00Another factor to consider: most road accidents happen in built-up areas, during short journeys, near home, so modes of transport that are used more for shorter journeys are disproportionately represented in the statistics. I first came across this in connection with motor cycling but it obviously applies also to bicycling and walking. I believe journey length/accident figures might be available but I'll leave it to you to hunt them down!Robin Faichneyhttp://www.dalbrack.org/noreply@blogger.com