or Connect
Cycling Forums › Forums › Bikes › Road Cycling › Can you make it to the market on a bike?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Can you make it to the market on a bike? - Page 7

post #91 of 521

Re: Do Cars REALLY Save Time??

On Wed, 25 Jul 2007 18:33:28 -0700, Zoot Katz wrote:

> They get invitations to coffee klatch, wine & cheese parties, buffets
> and barbecues from the local automobile dealerships where they're
> customers.


Really? People used to go to church halls and pubs for social
intercourse and a sense of community. How times have changed.
post #92 of 521

Re: Can you make it to the market on a bike?

Amy Blankenship wrote:

>
> Wouldn't that methane be produced anyway, though, by the natural breakdown
> of the vegetable matter that they eat?
>
>


Not methane, CO2 which is approx 30 times less potent as a greenhouse gas.

Tony
post #93 of 521

Re: Do Cars REALLY Save Time??

Jack May wrote:
> "Zoot Katz" <zootkatz@operamail.com> wrote in message
> news:iqtca3pkrnssqctmv3mc9m00lt6rukpao1@4ax.com...
>>On Tue, 24 Jul 2007 13:39:44 -0700, breeze "Jack May"
>><jack.may@comcast.net> missed it when he wrote:
>>Car addicts don't like to figure in the externalities connected with
>>their transportation choice. Those externalities end up costing
>>non-drivers $2.70 for every dollar the driver spends on their car.

> Oh here we go again with somebody throwing everything they can think of into
> a cost number to pump it up as high as possible. Useless approach.


Similarly useless as all those approaches externalising many of those
costs produced by cars.

>>Your census figures only demonstrate that the average commuter's
>>destination is well within bicycling range.

>
> So what. If people consider a bike an inferior way to commute, then all
> your arguments are worthless. All technology survives or fails in an
> evolutionary process. Bikes have lost the evolution game.


Hey Jack, if you would have a clue about evolution, not just using it as
a fancy pseudo argument, then two basic evolutionary principles would
come to your mind, that directly contradict your repeating claims:

1. Evolution aint over, till it's over. Mamals once were also only a
rather small portion of life, and the dinosaurs, if they were able to
with their tiny brains, probably also thought "Mamals have lost the
evolution game, he he he".

2. Evolution always goes the maximum efficiency / minimum energy
expenditure per purpose way in the long run.
That modern/western world's fossile fuel consumming and polluting
transport system does not fit nature's principles is figured out by
every elementary school pupil.
So go figure it out for yourself.

Tadej
--
"Vergleich es mit einer Pflanze - die wächst auch nur dann gut, wenn du
sie nicht jeden zweiten Tag aus der Erde reißt, um nachzusehen, ob sie
schon Wurzeln geschlagen hat."
<Martina Diel in d.t.r>
post #94 of 521

Re: Can you make it to the market on a bike?

Amy Blankenship wrote:

> "Joe the Aroma" <bdjr76@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:uuidnaw8Zr4WkTrbnZ2dnUVZ_h6vnZ2d@comcast.com...
> ...
>>Your idiotic platitudes aside, the reason why bike lanes won't happen is
>>because of democracy, the vast majority of people do not bike and therefor
>>do not demand bike lanes. Democracy in action.

>
> However, is the reason that the vast majority of people do not bike because
> they have grown up in a situation where it is inconceivable to do so? In
> other words, has the fact that our infrastructure is so car-centric


If it where only the infrastructure ... it's all life, resulting from
the infrastructure: advertising, laws, social behaviour and social
status, education, lottery prizes, building codes, ...

> become
> self-perpetuating because people have on some level given up any expectation
> that they could ever take any other form of transportation to their
> destination?


Definitely there is a huge amount of self perpetuation: the way you
teach your children, that way they are going to act for themselves as
adults.

T.
--
"Vergleich es mit einer Pflanze - die wächst auch nur dann gut, wenn du
sie nicht jeden zweiten Tag aus der Erde reißt, um nachzusehen, ob sie
schon Wurzeln geschlagen hat."
<Martina Diel in d.t.r>
post #95 of 521

Re: Can you make it to the market on a bike?

Bill Z. wrote:

> "Edward Dolan" <edolan@iw.net> writes:
>
>
>>"Bill Z." <nobody@nospam.pacbell.net> wrote in message
>>news:878x94kk6p.fsf@nospam.pacbell.net...
>>
>>>"Edward Dolan" <edolan@iw.net> writes:

>
>
>>Anyone but me notice how others (scoundrels) are quick to call those with
>>whom they disagree liars. Hellls Bells, I just assume that Bill Z is an
>>ignorant cuss like all his tribe of so-called fact finders. It would never
>>even occur to me to call him a liar since he is essentially such a numskull.

>
>
> Dolan, you proved yourself to be a liar by posting false accusations
> that suggested dangerous cycling on my part, and that was simply a lie
> that you repeated over and over. If you don't like being called a liar
> in public, then stop posting lies - the lie was obvious as we've never
> met so there is no way for you to have a clue about safe I am when
> riding a bicycle.
>
> Then you go around calling people "numskulls" after they back up what
> they say with citations to peer reviewed journals. That behavior really
> makes you look like a fool.
>
>
>>By the way, I will never go to any links (citations). Either say it yourself
>>or forget about it.

>
>
> I'm not going to cut and paste a 10 page article with various figures
> just for your benefit. If you are too ignorant to read a peer
> reviewed article, one 'click' away, then maybe you should stick to
> safe subjects: your health and the weather. At least that would spare
> us from listening to you croon like a bilious pidgeon.


Hey guys, having fun flaming away? :-)
T.
--
"Vergleich es mit einer Pflanze - die wächst auch nur dann gut, wenn du
sie nicht jeden zweiten Tag aus der Erde reißt, um nachzusehen, ob sie
schon Wurzeln geschlagen hat."
<Martina Diel in d.t.r>
post #96 of 521
Thread Starter 

Re: Do Cars REALLY Save Time??

On Jul 25, 8:01 pm, Zoot Katz <zootk...@operamail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 26 Jul 2007 08:46:49 +0930, Michael Warner
>
> <m...@westnet.com.au> wrote:
> >On Tue, 24 Jul 2007 11:50:23 -0700, Zoot Katz wrote:

>
> >> garages: time spent watching automobile commercials or attending
> >> consumer education meetings to improve quality of the next buy.

>
> >Americans go to meetings to learn how to buy cars? Wow.

>
> They attend automobile trade shows in droves.


And the "free" automobile drawing sure has to do with it. Bicycles
used to be that important in the late 1800's, before "bigger is
better" was the slogan.

People go to see all kinds of shows though.
post #97 of 521
Thread Starter 

Re: Can you make it to the market on a bike?

On Jul 25, 6:57 pm, "Joe the Aroma" <bdj...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Oh yes. Democratic societies would build BIKE LANES and have HEALTH
> > INSURANCE, though I don't know how the last one applies here.

>
> Errr, no they wouldn't. The last might be true if most people didn't have
> health insurance.


You think the only democratic activity is voting a president every
four year, who's really no different from the opposition?

Democratic endeavors would make people participate --demand--
healthcare and bike lanes by those who most need it. That's a wrong
concept of "democracy" you have.


> > OK, and where are they coexisting? Perhaps in small places like Key
> > West? No wonder people feel so free down there.

>
> Well... not in a lot of places. We need to change some policies changed in
> this country, along with some fundamental assumptions. I won't get into
> them, other than to say that the one that comes to mind is that driving is a
> "right" and not a "priveledge".-


That's a good one, but also need to change what we look in a candidate
--not soundbites but ISSUES.

Just look at OUR MAN TO THE WHITE HOUSE...

"History has tried hard to teach us that we can't have good government
under politicians. Now, to go and stick one at the very head of the
government couldn't be wise." -Mark Twain

Yes, we, the Banana Revolution, has decided to join the race to the
White House with a unique specimen that will not lie, launch
territorial wars, or oppose environmental commitments. Well, he's not
given to many words, but he's a real doer. A "man of action" so to
speak. And he doesn't even eat large salaries and kickbacks, just
peanuts. Oh, and he's all for EVOLUTION (revolution where it is
denied), since he realizes the need for change. He will indeed
challenge laws long established in the jungle like THE LION'S SHARE (a
few keep the best part of the pie), MONOPOLY (like that held by the
automobile), THE BIG FISH EATS THE LITTLE FISH (try riding a bike out
there), EVERYONE TO HIMSELF (too bad you don't have medical
insurance), etc. Without further ado...

http://www.teddybearfriends.co.uk/im...mbo-monkey.jpg

Isn't he loveable?* Well, we won't send him up there without proper
tools because we plan to arm him with something his predecessors
lacked: A POLITICAL PLATFORM, in writing, so anyone --WE THE PEOPLE--
can follow it, and there's no forgetting of electoral promises. Anyway
here's our Platform:

COMING OUT OF THE JUNGLE
http://webspawner.com/users/donquijote1

There are additional advantages to having a puppet up there:

1- No need for expensive campaigns which are financed by the
corporations

2- Some say presidents are puppets to the same corporations, so having
a real puppet is a very attractive proposition

3- They are cute, unlike some of our presidents who scare people.
Well, just kidding...

And, if you think it would be selfish for us to submit our own
Platform exclusively, we may as well consider similar proposals going
for meaningful necessary change. Case in point is this outside
platform...

"When you hold views which are radical from the perspective of the
status quo, it's hard to write a political platform, because it's hard
to know exactly where to stop. If I were going to write a platform
giving full voice to my values, it would include measures such as
putting a cap of $10 million on the total of tangible and liquid
assents which any individual is permitted to own, above which there is
a 100% tax, and a substantial penalty for attempted evasion, with the
proceeds going to assorted social programs. What I've written below is
much more modest; it is a move in a particular direction, but not
nearly so fundamental a departure from the status quo."

http://www.ling.upenn.edu/~kurisuto/platform.html


* As you may have noticed, the "UK" on the stuffed monkey seems to
indicate he's got a British pedigree. And we don't want that since we
fought a King George so we could have our own President George. Anyway
as soon as we find an American puppet we'll put it up there. Not easy
though when most products are "Made in China." Or perhaps it just
doesn't matter in the era of globalization.
post #98 of 521
Thread Starter 

Re: The Revolution Will Not be Motorized

On Jul 25, 7:03 pm, "Joe the Aroma" <bdj...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I saw Cheney mentioned (what he has to do with any of this is beyond me) and
> I saw that it said it was better in the 70's. No wonder you anti-car people
> are a bunch of marginalized freaks. You're LOONY, and if you weren't you
> could actually convince people to create bike lanes or trails or whatever,
> and it would be a good thing. Posting loony article does you no good.


America joining the select group of democratic nations could do no
harm --actually it can do a lot of good. Nations the chose that path --
Holland, Germany, Scandinavia-- have both Healthcare for all and bike
lanes.
post #99 of 521

Re: The Revolution Will Not be Motorized

Joe the Aroma wrote:
>
> No wonder you anti-car people
> are a bunch of marginalized freaks. You're LOONY, and if you weren't you
> could actually convince people to create bike lanes or trails or whatever,
> and it would be a good thing. Posting loony article does you no good.
>


Oh I don't know. If it keeps them from building more cycle farcilities
many cyclists would see that as a good thing.



Tony
post #100 of 521
Thread Starter 

Re: what's f*** solution?

On Jul 26, 3:53 am, Peter Clinch <p.j.cli...@dundee.ac.uk> wrote:
> Bill Z. wrote:
> > We have plenty of bike lanes around here. Many are along routes
> > children use to ride their bicycles to school. It may surprise you,
> > but a "majority of people" have children and will support anything
> > that they think will reduce the chances of their children being
> > injured.

>
> It doesn't surprise me at all, but all the same it would be much, much,
> much better if they supported things that *actually* reduce the chances,
> rather than things that they assume reduce them, but have no clear track
> record of actually doing so.
>
> > Bike lanes are also popular with commuters, who feel more
> > comfortable when there is one.

>
> For some values of "comfortable". I doubt that the several documented
> cases of commuters being crushed (fatally, in several cases) against
> roadside railings by left turning trucks (that'll be equivalent to right
> turn if you drive on the right where you're reading this) as they
> "comfortably" made their way up the inside on cycle lanes just as the
> lights turned green were too comfortable as they had the life squeezed
> out of them.
>
> > And our traffic engineers like them as
> > well - on expressways or similar heavily used road, the bike lanes
> > double as breakdown lanes

>
> So when I'm cycling along there's asuddenly a broken down vehicle in my
> way, and now I have to go out into the main traffic flow /where nobody
> expects me because there is a bike lane/. That's not a Good Thing.
> They are liked by traffic engineers because they involved no effort and
> they get to think they're doing something useful.
>
> The most common effect of these lanes is to force cyclists closer to the
> kerb than it's often wise to cycle, and allows drivers to think it's
> fine to overtake with minimal clearance just as long as there's a white
> line between them and the cyclist. Compare and contrast to how you
> should overtake on a road with no such lane:http://www.highwaycode.gov.uk/15.htm#139
>
> > In case there is any confusion, a bike lane is part of a road
> > and should not be confused with a bike path, which is a completely
> > separate facility. The paths are popular too, as they are really
> > bicycle/pedestrian paths.

>
> They are popular amongst people who /assume/ they are a safety benefit.
> They are less popular among cyclists who've read the record of what
> they actually achieve.
> Seehttp://www.cyclecraft.co.uk/infrastructure.html


I'm still waiting for YOUR solution. Bike Lanes don't work, the Status
Quo is even worse, so what's f*** solution? I got one: LET THE RIGHT
LANE BE A BIKE LANE. Any objections?
post #101 of 521
Thread Starter 

Re: SPEED DIFFERENTIAL

On Jul 26, 4:19 am, Peter Clinch <p.j.cli...@dundee.ac.uk> wrote:

> Would you have given up driving amongst cars and trucks if you'd had a
> similarly nasty accident while driving? Would you have given up being a
> pedestrian along streets if a similarly nasty accident had happened to
> you while being a pedestrian? If you don't want to cycle with traffic
> any more then it's your life and I'm not trying to force you, but I
> don't see it pays you to treat cycling differently to walking or
> driving, which can get you killed similarly easily.
>


Your lack of common sense shows that America doesn't have a monopoly
on stupidity. Actually your are the only civilized country that went
along in this predatory war over oil.

Have you been reading this thread? Did you hear about SPEED
DIFFERENTIAL? Do you know why scooters are not allowed on highways?
Right, SPEED DIFFERENTIAL. If you ride a bike on a major road, you'll
be a sitting duck because the driver behind you --who otherwise is
engaged on the phone-- won't expect a vehicle to be travelling 10MPH.
And you only got one life, you know. Just like many that went into
that predatory war well know.
post #102 of 521
Thread Starter 

Re: Do Cars REALLY Save Time??

On Jul 26, 7:21 am, Tadej Brezina <tadej_use...@gmx.at> wrote:
> Jack May wrote:
> > "Zoot Katz" <zootk...@operamail.com> wrote in message
> >news:iqtca3pkrnssqctmv3mc9m00lt6rukpao1@4ax.com...
> >>On Tue, 24 Jul 2007 13:39:44 -0700, breeze "Jack May"
> >><jack....@comcast.net> missed it when he wrote:
> >>Car addicts don't like to figure in the externalities connected with
> >>their transportation choice. Those externalities end up costing
> >>non-drivers $2.70 for every dollar the driver spends on their car.

> > Oh here we go again with somebody throwing everything they can think of into
> > a cost number to pump it up as high as possible. Useless approach.

>
> Similarly useless as all those approaches externalising many of those
> costs produced by cars.
>
> >>Your census figures only demonstrate that the average commuter's
> >>destination is well within bicycling range.

>
> > So what. If people consider a bike an inferior way to commute, then all
> > your arguments are worthless. All technology survives or fails in an
> > evolutionary process. Bikes have lost the evolution game.

>
> Hey Jack, if you would have a clue about evolution, not just using it as
> a fancy pseudo argument, then two basic evolutionary principles would
> come to your mind, that directly contradict your repeating claims:
>
> 1. Evolution aint over, till it's over. Mamals once were also only a
> rather small portion of life, and the dinosaurs, if they were able to
> with their tiny brains, probably also thought "Mamals have lost the
> evolution game, he he he".
>
> 2. Evolution always goes the maximum efficiency / minimum energy
> expenditure per purpose way in the long run.
> That modern/western world's fossile fuel consumming and polluting
> transport system does not fit nature's principles is figured out by
> every elementary school pupil.
> So go figure it out for yourself.


We may as well use this quotation: "It is not the strongest of the
species that survive, nor the most intelligent, but the one most
responsive to change." -Charles Darwin
post #103 of 521

Re: Do Cars REALLY Save Time??

"donquijote1954" <nolionnoproblem@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1185449934.670523.31680@d55g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
> On Jul 25, 8:01 pm, Zoot Katz <zootk...@operamail.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, 26 Jul 2007 08:46:49 +0930, Michael Warner
>>
>> <m...@westnet.com.au> wrote:
>> >On Tue, 24 Jul 2007 11:50:23 -0700, Zoot Katz wrote:

>>
>> >> garages: time spent watching automobile commercials or attending
>> >> consumer education meetings to improve quality of the next buy.

>>
>> >Americans go to meetings to learn how to buy cars? Wow.

>>
>> They attend automobile trade shows in droves.

>
> And the "free" automobile drawing sure has to do with it. Bicycles
> used to be that important in the late 1800's, before "bigger is
> better" was the slogan.
>
> People go to see all kinds of shows though.


Clearly we need to ban "automobile drawings".
post #104 of 521

Re: SPEED DIFFERENTIAL

donquijote1954 wrote:

>
> Have you been reading this thread? Did you hear about SPEED
> DIFFERENTIAL? Do you know why scooters are not allowed on highways?
> Right, SPEED DIFFERENTIAL. If you ride a bike on a major road, you'll
> be a sitting duck because the driver behind you --who otherwise is
> engaged on the phone-- won't expect a vehicle to be travelling 10MPH.
> And you only got one life, you know. Just like many that went into
> that predatory war well know.
>


Have you been reading the data. Being hit from behind is a very rare
accident on the roads. The vast majority of accidents are conflicts at
junctions. In the UK riding on the road is safer than walking on the
sidewalk as far as being killed by a motor vehicle is concerned. In
fact it is estimated that if you cycled at 15mph for 8 hours a day 365
days a year the mean time to a fatal accident would be 8,600 years. I
think I have more important threats to my life to worry about. The risk
for experienced cyclists is 5-8 times lower still while the health
benefits give regular cyclists a two year increased life expectancy.

But hey, don't let the facts get in the way of a good scare story.

Tony
post #105 of 521

Re: Can you make it to the market on a bike?

"donquijote1954" <nolionnoproblem@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1185450786.718151.52440@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
> On Jul 25, 6:57 pm, "Joe the Aroma" <bdj...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Oh yes. Democratic societies would build BIKE LANES and have HEALTH
>> > INSURANCE, though I don't know how the last one applies here.

>>
>> Errr, no they wouldn't. The last might be true if most people didn't have
>> health insurance.

>
> You think the only democratic activity is voting a president every
> four year, who's really no different from the opposition?
>
> Democratic endeavors would make people participate --demand--
> healthcare and bike lanes by those who most need it. That's a wrong
> concept of "democracy" you have.


The fact that you threw health care in there is pretty kooky. People may not
like the health care system as a whole, but they are generally happy with
their own care. Hence polls as well as the referendums on single payer care.

>> > OK, and where are they coexisting? Perhaps in small places like Key
>> > West? No wonder people feel so free down there.

>>
>> Well... not in a lot of places. We need to change some policies changed
>> in
>> this country, along with some fundamental assumptions. I won't get into
>> them, other than to say that the one that comes to mind is that driving
>> is a
>> "right" and not a "priveledge".-

>
> That's a good one, but also need to change what we look in a candidate
> --not soundbites but ISSUES.
>
> Just look at OUR MAN TO THE WHITE HOUSE...


You're a kook. This has nothing to do with Bush, these policies were in
place before Bush, kook.

<snip looniness>
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Road Cycling
Cycling Forums › Forums › Bikes › Road Cycling › Can you make it to the market on a bike?