THE first thing I must do is apologise for my absence over the last twelve months.

The reason is simple; I have just been rushed off my feet. I won't bore you with all the details; suffice to say things have quietened a bit so I am now able to resume blogging.

Some of you may have noticed two lengthy comments left by someone who prefers to hide his identity behind initials 'AJ of Harrow'.

I find this rather telling as one thing he accuses me of is "but given that the lying black propagandist who concocted it all didn't have the guts to put their name to it."

This tells us three things about AJ. One he didn't identify himself. Secondly it must really call into question his ability to actually research information since my blog is not only headed Bob Hinton, but also displays my photograph! Thirdly it just shows you the type of people we are up against.

I did warn you at the beginning that these people will try everything to con you. They will brainwash you by repeating nonsense over and over, they will attempt to demonise you and then they will threaten and abuse you. Well done AJ of Harrow for being the perfect example of the type of person I am talking about. I urge everyone to read his comments so they will see exactly what I am talking about.

Let me lead you through some of the rubbish this person is throwing at you. First of all he talks about KSI figures and kind of shoots his own argument down in his first pass. He states that the KSI figure for "The KSI for last year were 29,000-plus, and they were double that twenty years ago, and treble that forty years ago."

So using his statistics we can extrapolate his figures backwards. This means that in 1969 there were 90,000 casualties (give or take) 1929 -270,000 and in 1909 540,000. So in Edwardian times when traffic was largely horse drawn and motorised vehicles had a top speed of about 12 mph according to AJ there were about 540,000 casualties on the roads. Why? All the anti car brigade keep telling us that speed is the only cause of accidents, so surely when vehicles are travelling at much less than the Holy Grail of ACF (Anti Car Fanatics) the 20mph limit not only should there be no casualties on the roads but the population should actually be increasing every time they use the road!

He is however correct when he questions the figure I gave of KSI of being about 3,800. That is not the correct figure it should have been the figure for Killed not Seriously Injured. I made a mistake mea culpa. However when he goes on to question my figures for other deaths he is on less steady ground.

Let us take hypothermia which I stated was about 40,000 a year. Let me explain. Hypothermia is when the body cools down to such a low state that the organs shut down and the person dies. However the cause of death is hardly ever given as 'Hypothermia' instead it is classified as heart failure, liver failure or such like. In Japan for instance heart failure is seldom recorded as a cause of death because in the Japanese culture it is a disgrace, that is why many Japanese who die of heart failure are actually recorded as dying of stroke. This a problem for people collecting statistics as it shows that the Japanese are rarely effected by heart failure but seem to be dropping like flies from strokes.

In Britain we have the same problem with hypothermia. The reason for the death is people getting so cold that their organs fail and they die, but if it rarely shows up on the cause of death as being hypothermia and organ failure is inserted instead the figures are skewed. So what they do is take account of deaths 'above the mean'. What this means is that the number of deaths are averaged out over the whole year. This gives you a base line. Then those deaths that occurred during the colder winter months are looked at. They always give a much bigger figure, showing that although the cause of death is rarely noted as hypothermia, the actual reason for the death is because people got too cold. Ironically on the news yesterday (24 November 2009) there was an item that said the level of deaths above the mean, actually fell last winter. It now stood at 36,000. So my figure of 40,000 is entirely accurate. The point is that 40,000 more people die during the winter months in this country than they do at any other time.

The same situation is present in Hospital Infections. Deaths are recorded under many labels, heart failure, pneumonia, toxic shock etc. The way this figure is arrived at is the amount of people who die of an illness, disease or infection they did not have on being admitted to hospital. Now cut that any way you want 80,000 people dying of something they didn't have before entering hospital is a disgrace.

Let us now go on to AJ's assertion that Speed Kills and speed camera's and lower speed limits are the answer.

For a start AJ has completely ignored the fact that when vehicle speeds were much, much lower than they are today, casualty figures were much, much, higher. But all ACF's have this in common – they will always ignore facts in favour of their mantras.

The fact is that since roads became better and vehicles became safer there had been a steady annual decline in the rate of deaths on the road. In the 30 years preceding 2000 the rate of deaths per km mile was declining at a steady rate of 5.3 per cent. However since the powers that be became infatuated with speed being the Great Satan in around 2000, that rate of decline collapsed to 3.4 per cent. To put that another way, if the pre Speed Con decline had been allowed to continue the figures for killed in 2007 would have been 2544 instead of the 2946 actually experienced. The scrapping of all realistic safety policies actually caused 402 additional deaths.

The horrifying thing was that there was no need for this to happen. The Transport Research Laboratory's report LP 323 published in 1998 (available online) showed that far from being a major factor in road accidents, speed was a very minor one. By the way don't expect any ACF's to have actually read this report, as I said they don't like facts. I once had a long debate with the Road Safety Officer for Dyfed Powys police who admitted that far from reading it they had never actually heard of it. That's akin to a priest saying he hadn't read the bible because he had never heard of it!

323 showed that in all accidents 'Excessive Speed' was the cause of only 7.3 per cent of accidents. Now this is very important because what is being talked about here is excessive speed NOT breaking the speed limit. They are of course two entirely different things. However bearing in mind that cameras can only record the breaking of the speed limit it is interesting to note that in all cases only 3.8 per cent of accidents were caused by vehicles actually breaking the speed limit. But it doesn't stop there; you see that figure also includes accidents caused by emergency vehicles on call and vehicles driven by criminals – criminals who are hardly likely to slow down while escaping from a bank robbery just because of a speed limit.

So when you take all those factors into consideration you are left with the startling fact that that the amount of accidents caused by normal drivers exceeding the speed limit is actually closer to 1.8 per cent!

So that means 98.2 per cent of all accidents have causes other than exceeding the speed limit – yet 100 per cent of our road safety policy is focussed on this minute proportion. How idiotic is that? It's like having the entire National Health Service fully concentrating on those people struck by lightning and ignoring everyone else.

If this wasn't bad enough the authorities went even further to con the public. Take the Killed and Serious Injured (KSI) figure. A serious injury used to be classified as one requiring an overnight stay in hospital. Now since most people involved in a road accident are kept in overnight this drastically inflated the KSI figure. So with a KSI figure of 29,000 only approximately 10 per cent were killed. So the figure now is Killed 3000, seriously injured 26,000.

After a couple of years of Speed Kills the government released the new KSI figures which showed a marked decrease, this they said was solely due to Speed Cameras. However what they didn't make clear was the fact that the definition of what constituted Serious Injury has been changed. To be so classified you now had to spend at least a week in hospital. This of course sent the figures plummeting. Amongst all the braying and cheering in the Commons over this supposed miracle one lone voice could be heard. A solitary Conservative MP asked if the figures for Killed and Seriously Injured could be given separately. The transport minister mumbled he didn't have those figures. Luckily the MP did and produced them showing that far from the number of deaths going down they had actually risen. Rumbled.

After that they tried all sorts of tricks to convince the public they were on the right track. This came to an abrupt halt in June 2006 when the figures were released that showed that far from falling road casualties had actually increased. Of course AJ would no doubt attribute this information to the whiskey drinking/cocaine snorting petrolheads, however I think he would really need to explain how many drug addicted alcoholics work for The British Medical Journal. They had discovered that new methods of reporting accidents conveniently left out a large number of casualties admitted to hospital after a road accident. Of course the ACF's will no doubt condemn The world renowned British Medical Journal as just another group of what was it he said "boy-racers and speedfreaks and the ABD and SS and Pistonheads and the Jeremy Clarksons etc, etc,"

The fact is that speed doesn't kill – never has never will. It is the meeting of metal and matter that does that and I am proud to belong to a group who wants' to eradicate all accidents – at whatever speed they occur at.

Finally AJ finishes with this comment:

"In Part four we will see how the government actually treats motorists worse than murderers", so says the person who compiled all this claptrap, and that final comment about sums it all up!

Unfortunately this is just another example of how ignorant AJ is on this subject. I didn't say that at all. It was a comment made by Judge Pavlovschi of the European Court of Human Rights giving his dissenting views on the cases (15809/02 and 25624/02) 29 June 2007. He made written comment on the following:

"the presumption of innocence is granted under Article 6 for terrorism, banditry, murder, organised crime and other truly dangerous forms of criminal behaviour, but is denied to motorists who commit a minor offence. In my view it is illogical for persons who have committed minor offences to find themselves in a less favourable situation than those who have committed acts which are truly dangerous to society"

He was not the only dissenting voice. I urge you to read the full judgement which can be found online.

I hope you notice that I have managed to write this article without once abusing, calling names or making silly comments about AJ – it's a pity he is not adult enough to do the same!

Next I shall be investigating the biggest con of them all, the Global Warming Scam and how it will affect everyone for hundreds of years to come.