Rudy, ok.. let's try this again.
The article proves NOTHING. The article is about raising the speed limit up 10mph and the highway death rate after that. It has nothing to do with what you were doing. You were driving 100mph, that's not even close to the raised speed limit on the article. Why the hell are you using the article to back yourself up? The only conclusion you can draw from the article is - There isn't a direct correlation between raising the speed limit from 55mph to 65mph and the highway death rate. Besides, maybe we can't even draw that conclusion, since there are too many variable that needs to be taken into account, for instance, the cars have improved over the years(DSC, AST, better stopping distance, maneuverbility, lighting). The road's are getting safer, too. More signs are installed at dangerous corners. How do you do an accurate compensation for all these effects over the years? You can't.
Ok, so let's do a simple test that's not subject any of these uncertainties.
You, Rudy, a self-proclaimed "cautious driver", drive at 100mph.
You, again, Rudy, a self-proclaimed "cautious driver", drive at 50 mph.
Suddenly, two cow run in front of you, a 747 falls out of the sky, and the 18 wheeler in the opposite lane crosses the central divider coming right at you.
Which one of the Rudy above has a better chance to:
1) stop the car to avoid the accident. Or
2) maneuver the car around to avoid the accident. Or
3) do any other maneuver to avoid the accident.
I hope your answer is the 50mph Rudy. Speed does matter. A safe driver driving at a safe speed can only make him a even safer driver (a safe driver drving 100mph can still be safe, but not as safe as when he's driving 50mph). Think about it Rudy.
P.S - If your answer to the above question is not the 50mph Rudy. I am not going to say anything anymore, please just continue to drive cautiously at 100mph.