"Bob Noel" wrote in message
...
Your approach of trying to make a claim/proof/whatever about pilots as
drivers based on aircraft accident rates without any basis for a
relationship
between the two.

If the fact that a person is a pilot is relevant to whether they are a good
driver or not, surely the question of whether they are a *good* pilot is
also relevant.

Conversely, if it's your claim that their abilities as a pilot are
irrelevant to their abilities as a driver, then the only logical conclusion
is that the question of whether they are a pilot at all is also irrelevant.

Which is what I originally said in the first place.

[...]
You attack my statements on that basis

No. I disagreed with your argument based on its flaws. Not on you
or your intent.

When you say that my proof is invalid, you necessarily make the assumption
(ie the basis for your comments) that I am trying to prove something. Given
that I'm not trying to prove anything, your claim that my proof is faulty is
irrelevant.

Pete