Miccaela Baird Badger sent this missive:<\/p>\n
What about “near miss<\/strong>?” Many journalists tend to
\nuse this phrase to describe how two planes or trains nearly hit each
\nother, or some other sort of narrowly avoided accident. However, wouldn’t
\na “near miss” actually occur when two objects nearly miss
\neach other, but still collide?<\/p><\/blockquote>\n(Editor’s note: “near” in this instance implies distance,
\nnot approximation — that is, a miss that was near vs. one that was
\nfar, rather than things that nearly missed, but didn’t. Even so, I’d
\nban “near miss” on the grounds that it isn’t a particularly
\nuseful description. How near is<\/em> near? When an asteroid comes
\nwithin a million miles of the earth, scientists call it a near miss.
\nTwo aircraft 500 yards apart is another near miss. “Near”
\nis one of those weasel words like “almost,” “approximately,”
\n“several” and its ilk that we use when we’re too lazy to figure
\nout the precise measurements.<\/li>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"Miccaela Baird Badger sent this missive: What about “near miss?” Many journalists tend to use this phrase to describe how two planes or trains nearly hit each other, or some other sort of narrowly avoided accident. However, wouldn’t a “near … Continue reading