Keenan & Julie wrote:


I live in Canada. As such, I am not well versed in the rules governing
police boats in New York. Since you actually use those waters, it would make
sense for you to find out what the rules are for that jurisdiction.

Wow, funny that after all the other advice you have for me, you're so
shy and humble over the one point which matters, that I'd originally
asked about!

I'm not everyone on this NG. I didn't have a meeting or talk to anyone else
here before responding to you. Try to focus, you are sounding paranoid.

I didn't say you were "everyone." Get rid of the water in your ears.

My statement is not an example of circular reasoning.

And here we have yet another example of your fine reasoning processes:
conclusion by fiat.

You have no evidence whatsoever that the police made a deliberate attempt to
hit you.

This was never an issue. Why do you insist on making it one?

Nor have you suggested any plausible reason why they would attempt
to do so.

Never an issue. Are you going to go on about WMDs next?

Thus, all logic points to the probability that they simply did not
see you.

Never an issue, said issue remaining being whether it makes any sense
to leave the middle of the river open for motorized traffic if said
motorized traffic will still just race up the shoreline anyway.

It is decidely not the same. This is illogical. Very illogical.

Sigh...like I said, go talk to your insurance company.

Just as knowing that the odds are against you at the casino does not help
you come out a winner,

No ****, Sherlock -- knowing the odds are against you "helps" you come
out a loser! Knowing the odds are with you helps you come out a
winner. You're mixing up odds for and against with what
predicatability/probability means vis-a-vis safety.

knowing that the roads are dangerous does not make
them safer to travel.

Knowing something's safer means knowing the odds FOR; knowing
something's more dangerous means knowing the odds AGAINST. But knowing
the odds for OR against is better -- because it makes for more informed
decision-making -- and thus safer, than not knowing. Hence the
relationship between safety and predicatability.

Hell's bells, but you really do have a screw loose up there.

And I say that not with malice, only exhaustion.

yawn

Sorry to have woken you up.

yawn

But don't forget your pills!

Take a look at what you have written here and give some thought as to
whether or not you are in a position to hand out advice of this nature.

OMG!!!

It's just like straight out of the Bible: guy walks up to Jesus and
asks, Teacher, why doesn't God just show Himself? And Christ looks him
straight in the eye and says that even if He did, folks still wouldn't
believe in Him.