Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr

Forum Post: July Four

Posted 12 months ago on July 25, 2013, 7:05 p.m. EST by ZenDog (13676) from South Burlington, VT
This content is user submitted and not an official statement



and each of these accidents has at least one thing in common -

human error.



EDIT: The train crash in Canada may have been a criminal act, and that cannot be considered human error, rather it is human deliberation.

woops - It's worse than I thought . . .

  • Train travel in Europe generally safe despite deadly crashes in Spain, France this month

    • THE HAGUE, Netherlands - Two deadly railroad accidents inside two weeks that claimed 80 lives in Spain and six in France have raised questions about train safety across Europe. But experts say rail travel remains one of the safest forms of transport on the continent.

    • From Communist-era trains in parts of eastern Europe to modern high-speed TGVs hurtling through the French countryside, Europe has a vast array of trains but among the highest safety rates in the world, experts say.

    • "Accidents like this are incredibly rare," Sim Harris, managing editor of Rail News in Britain, said Thursday.



Air and Rail Safety - Fatalities per 100 million person-kilometers: 0.035

And the train accident in France - apparently July 12 . . .

Two on the sixth.

One on the twelfth, the twenty second, and twenty-fourth . . .

  • 6
  • 6 * 2 = 12
  • 12 * 2 = 24
  • 2
  • 2 2
  • 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2



Read the Rules


[-] 1 points by JPB950 (2254) 12 months ago

What "accident" isn't the result of an error? There are over 100,000 deaths every year listed as "accidental" that we could say are most likely due to human error. Unfortunate, but as humans we commit errors that take our life or the lives of others.

[-] 2 points by ZenDog (13676) from South Burlington, VT 12 months ago

of course we do. In fact, it is a fact, one that may be counted on.

But let us examine . . . .


As we can see from this information alone, which must not be considered the final but rather the first word on the subject, that incidents such as this occur rarely. Four of them occurring on three days in an single 18 day period must be considered

statistically significant.


Human Engineering

Isn't just for elections anymore


[-] 0 points by JPB950 (2254) 12 months ago

I wouldn't call it statistically significant, looking at the most deadly train accidents of the last 25 years in Europe, this one seems to blend in to the group. Over 100 people died in three train accidents in 2006, 155 people died in a single crash in 2000. This one in Spain seems statistically unremarkable. I could almost say Europe was due for a large train accident (but I do know accidents are random events).

Looking at commercial airline accidents, there have been 8 so far in 2013. There were 13 in 2012, 25 in 2011, 26 in 2010, you can look at all of them back to 1919 here, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_accidents_and_incidents_involving_commercial_aircraft . So far the only thing I can see about 2013 is that it's number of accidents is less then one might expect if they were looking for some kind of pattern.

I'm not sure I see what point are you trying to make. Accidents would be expected to occur at random there would be no pattern and occasionally they can and do occur close together.

[-] 2 points by ZenDog (13676) from South Burlington, VT 12 months ago

I'm not a statistician but I am aware that there is a statistical probability of random overlap.

What do they say about plane accidents? That several systems are usually required to fail before an accident can occur?

And yet here we have two different sectors of the transportation industry, who have a similar and very low rate of death per person-kilometers, each of them apparently the result of human error . . .

Isn't that kinda like . . .

  • . . . rolling snake eyes twice . . .
[-] 0 points by JPB950 (2254) 12 months ago

May be but it happens. Each event is independent of the others the probability doesn't actually accumulate and grow larger. The probability of rolling snake eyes once is 1 in 36. The next roll is independent of the first the probability of rolling snake eyes again is still 1 in 36. Same with the accidents, each is independent of the others. The media can often make things look unusual based on how many stories they run on an event.

This reminds me of 2001, the so called Summer of the shark. A couple of shark attacks resulted in media broadcasting so many stories that people got the feeling something unusual was happening. In fact 2001 was unremarkably ordinary in the number of attacks by sharks. More people are killed by getting hit on the head by a falling coconut then by a shark.

[-] 1 points by ZenDog (13676) from South Burlington, VT 12 months ago

so roll some dice - ten thousand times. Calculate how often snake eyes occurs twice in a row.

then do it again.

And then consider carefully - we aren't actually talking about dice.

These are not six sided playing cubes, these are incidents involving mass transit wherein death or injury has resulted. One of them is in fact a criminal investigation.

There is nothing to indicate that any one or even all of these others are not the result of some form of human engineering - after all, it appears that in the latest incident, the operator's behavior was well known, and even documented - on facebook.

[-] 0 points by forourfutures (393) 12 months ago

Uh, maybe there is something to this wacky numerology I found after all. Apparently 22 is special.


[-] -1 points by MarriageEquality (-1) 12 months ago

Wtf ZenDog? The 'F" word? Seriously?

ZenDog (16285) from South Burlington, VT 2 hours ago

that goddamned shit throwing goopgoblin trashy macaque faggot just won't leave me alone . . .

[-] 2 points by ZenDog (13676) from South Burlington, VT 12 months ago

well I guess if you're not gonna bomb my mail box then I'll just have ta take it back.

I really do wish you hadn't fuked this place up so goddamned bad. But in all fairness, sexual orientation has nothing to do with it.

None of which has a damn thing to do with the topic at hand - 127 people dead as a result of 4 accidents . . .

Can you say

  • statistically significant