That statistic is bunk in the analogy that you use. There are far less folks trying to circumnavigate the globe in a sailboat than there are 16 year-olds trying to drive.
No, it isn't bunk. It's per mile traveled. That's the fairest metric when comparing different modes of travel.
You can also travel much further in a vehicle in a given amount of time.
You can also travel much further in an airplane in a given amount of time. Yet, air travel is not less safe than car travel. In fact, it's much safer.
Are your statistics for 16 year-olds in both categories?
No, I couldn't go through trouble finding all the data for 16 years old, so its for all ages combined. But it still gives relatively valid safety comparison for two modes of travel.
In addition, out of the 100's of millions of attempts at circumnavigation by sailing used for this statistic, how many were 16?
So you (with no data to support your claim) are saying that 16 old sailors are less prone to fatal accidents than adult sailors?
Gotta do a little better than throw raw data at me to make it stick
Hah, don't you think that 'raw data' is a little better than no data at all? At least I use some data, you're just pulling it out of nothing.
All I'm saying is, all-you-pro-16-solo-sailing-around-the-globe-people-saying-it-isn't-any-less-dangerous-than-driving-a-car are wrong. Better argument is needed to support your claim (ie data).
Where did you find those values bighorn?
National Highway Safety Administration, World Sailing Speed Record Council, Adventure Stats, various articles found on the web.
Data for solo sailing globe circumnavigation isn't foolproof, but error margin isn't that big either that would considerably change the ratios.