T
Theo Bekkers
Guest
>>> Tomasso wrote:
>>>> There used to be zero cars on Oz and quite a lot of bikes,
Actually, you're fantasising about that too. The penny-farthing was never
much more than a toy for the indolent and rich young. Working people never
got onto bikes for transport in a big way until 'safeties' were invented,
and cars predate the safety bicycle by nearly ten years.
Theo
>>>> There used to be zero cars on Oz and quite a lot of bikes,
Actually, you're fantasising about that too. The penny-farthing was never
much more than a toy for the indolent and rich young. Working people never
got onto bikes for transport in a big way until 'safeties' were invented,
and cars predate the safety bicycle by nearly ten years.
Theo
T
Theo Bekkers
Guest
scotty72 wrote:
> Theo Bekkers Wrote:
>> God, that was funny Scotty. For a second there I thought you were
>> being
>> serious, but now I see you were giving us an excellent example of
>> what a fundamentalist would say.
> And once again, the troll chooses to not see the point.
I see sarcasm is totally lost on you.
> A protest group should be somewhat fundamentalist - otherwise, why are
> they there?
The questions were, "What have they achieved"? and "What pro-cycling laws
have been passed as a direct result of CM"?
Theo
> Theo Bekkers Wrote:
>> God, that was funny Scotty. For a second there I thought you were
>> being
>> serious, but now I see you were giving us an excellent example of
>> what a fundamentalist would say.
> And once again, the troll chooses to not see the point.
I see sarcasm is totally lost on you.
> A protest group should be somewhat fundamentalist - otherwise, why are
> they there?
The questions were, "What have they achieved"? and "What pro-cycling laws
have been passed as a direct result of CM"?
Theo
T
Theo Bekkers
Guest
scotty72 wrote:
> Theo Bekkers Wrote:
>> Because police turn a blind eye doesn't make it legal. A motorist
>> 'crashing' through a cork is breaking the law how?
> Troll question.
>
> Even Theo isn't that dumb that he really needs this answered.
You think? Or, You think?
OK, I'll play. I understand a 'cork' to be where cyclists block cross
traffic who have a green light. Tell me what law a motorist breaks when
ignoring such a block. If a police officer does the same thing, I understand
that to be directing traffic, not a 'cork'.
Your move Scotty. Please quote traffic code for reference to my
misunderstanding.
Theo
> Theo Bekkers Wrote:
>> Because police turn a blind eye doesn't make it legal. A motorist
>> 'crashing' through a cork is breaking the law how?
> Troll question.
>
> Even Theo isn't that dumb that he really needs this answered.
You think? Or, You think?
OK, I'll play. I understand a 'cork' to be where cyclists block cross
traffic who have a green light. Tell me what law a motorist breaks when
ignoring such a block. If a police officer does the same thing, I understand
that to be directing traffic, not a 'cork'.
Your move Scotty. Please quote traffic code for reference to my
misunderstanding.
Theo
Z
Zebee Johnstone
Guest
In aus.bicycle on Mon, 3 Dec 2007 10:31:53 +0900
Theo Bekkers <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> That's the trouble with you Zeb, you want outcomes when most people just
> want a protest ride.
Heh. THe MCC has been a bad influence on me.
>
> How did you find the foot?
In a padded bag! Just picked it up from the courier office today.
Zebee
Theo Bekkers <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> That's the trouble with you Zeb, you want outcomes when most people just
> want a protest ride.
Heh. THe MCC has been a bad influence on me.
>
> How did you find the foot?
In a padded bag! Just picked it up from the courier office today.
Zebee
Z
Zebee Johnstone
Guest
In aus.bicycle on Mon, 3 Dec 2007 11:17:15 +0900
Theo Bekkers <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> Tomasso wrote:
>
>>>>> There used to be zero cars on Oz and quite a lot of bikes,
>
> Actually, you're fantasising about that too. The penny-farthing was never
> much more than a toy for the indolent and rich young. Working people never
> got onto bikes for transport in a big way until 'safeties' were invented,
> and cars predate the safety bicycle by nearly ten years.
I suspect it depends a lot on location.
Cars were pretty dodgy until at least late Edwardian, and judging by
pics horses were still majorly used until the 30s in Oz.
In Oz they were used, eg they were popular with itinerant workers, but
so were early motorcycles. I think it really was a money thing - as
soon as you were able to afford a motor, you got one. They had
advantages over horses except for delivery work.
Pictures are what tells the story, you don't see many cyclists or
unattended bicycles in Edwardian photos and paintings, but you do see
horses and some cars. (There is going to be some bias - cars were
things you took pictures of - but there are enough streetscapes...)
I'll have to dig up the stuff on the City of Sydney site about the
roads. They changed how the roads were built mostly for horse traffic
I think, but I can't recall if bicycles get a mention.
Given the explosion in motorcycles between the wars, and the cheap
cars after, any bicycle boom would have to have been short in
duration.
Zebee
Theo Bekkers <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> Tomasso wrote:
>
>>>>> There used to be zero cars on Oz and quite a lot of bikes,
>
> Actually, you're fantasising about that too. The penny-farthing was never
> much more than a toy for the indolent and rich young. Working people never
> got onto bikes for transport in a big way until 'safeties' were invented,
> and cars predate the safety bicycle by nearly ten years.
I suspect it depends a lot on location.
Cars were pretty dodgy until at least late Edwardian, and judging by
pics horses were still majorly used until the 30s in Oz.
In Oz they were used, eg they were popular with itinerant workers, but
so were early motorcycles. I think it really was a money thing - as
soon as you were able to afford a motor, you got one. They had
advantages over horses except for delivery work.
Pictures are what tells the story, you don't see many cyclists or
unattended bicycles in Edwardian photos and paintings, but you do see
horses and some cars. (There is going to be some bias - cars were
things you took pictures of - but there are enough streetscapes...)
I'll have to dig up the stuff on the City of Sydney site about the
roads. They changed how the roads were built mostly for horse traffic
I think, but I can't recall if bicycles get a mention.
Given the explosion in motorcycles between the wars, and the cheap
cars after, any bicycle boom would have to have been short in
duration.
Zebee
T
Terryc
Guest
Zebee Johnstone wrote:
> In aus.bicycle on Sun, 02 Dec 2007 22:35:42 GMT
> Of the 4WD drive owners I know, most bought it either for towing or
> for "safety" in traffic.
Yep, "safety" says it all.
Bet they heard that line in the sales add.
> In aus.bicycle on Sun, 02 Dec 2007 22:35:42 GMT
> Of the 4WD drive owners I know, most bought it either for towing or
> for "safety" in traffic.
Yep, "safety" says it all.
Bet they heard that line in the sales add.
T
Terryc
Guest
Zebee Johnstone wrote:
> Which is the same reason why whenever there's talk about motorcycle
> activism there's a huge cry for "protest ride" and no one willign to
> do real work.
don't know, but perhaps if you asked in aus.motorcycle you might get an
answer.
> Which is the same reason why whenever there's talk about motorcycle
> activism there's a huge cry for "protest ride" and no one willign to
> do real work.
don't know, but perhaps if you asked in aus.motorcycle you might get an
answer.
T
Terryc
Guest
Zebee Johnstone wrote:
> Well the ones who saw "corking" knew that was illegal.
Nope, you really do need to learn about abot how constable Plod wants
things done.
> The ones who saw people riding more than 2 abreast did too.
Not applicable. They are following police instructions. You would know
this if you had actually performed a bit of research instead of curryig
favour with Aln Jones and ilk.
>>You might also like to educate yourself as to what Critical Mass is and
>>does.
>
> I've tried. But the only *consistent* information is assertions about
> "everyone hates us but we are really good" "we make change happen".
What part of "an anarchy" do you not understand?
> As soon as I ask for details it degenerates into name calling and more
> assertions.
lol, are you sure you actually asked the right people or was this
another "have you stopped beating your wife yet?" type question.
> And so there has been no change at all in cycling over that decade?
> None?
well, the government has contributed a few tiddly concrete paths and
classified a lot of road markings as bicycle related expenditure, but
sadly, very little, in comparison.
Meanwhile, the usual rat bags have merrily contined on their way
subverting as many bums onto bicycle seats as they can.
> So far I have seen a lot of assertions, I have seen no proof.
>
> YOu make the claim, you provide the evidence.
You have read your first posts haven't you?
> After all, I'd think that would be something CM would have at their
> collective fingertips no?
Dunno, i'm not CM {.
which url did you find that?
> Well the ones who saw "corking" knew that was illegal.
Nope, you really do need to learn about abot how constable Plod wants
things done.
> The ones who saw people riding more than 2 abreast did too.
Not applicable. They are following police instructions. You would know
this if you had actually performed a bit of research instead of curryig
favour with Aln Jones and ilk.
>>You might also like to educate yourself as to what Critical Mass is and
>>does.
>
> I've tried. But the only *consistent* information is assertions about
> "everyone hates us but we are really good" "we make change happen".
What part of "an anarchy" do you not understand?
> As soon as I ask for details it degenerates into name calling and more
> assertions.
lol, are you sure you actually asked the right people or was this
another "have you stopped beating your wife yet?" type question.
> And so there has been no change at all in cycling over that decade?
> None?
well, the government has contributed a few tiddly concrete paths and
classified a lot of road markings as bicycle related expenditure, but
sadly, very little, in comparison.
Meanwhile, the usual rat bags have merrily contined on their way
subverting as many bums onto bicycle seats as they can.
> So far I have seen a lot of assertions, I have seen no proof.
>
> YOu make the claim, you provide the evidence.
You have read your first posts haven't you?
> After all, I'd think that would be something CM would have at their
> collective fingertips no?
Dunno, i'm not CM {
.which url did you find that?
T
Terryc
Guest
Theo Bekkers wrote:
> Because police turn a blind eye doesn't make it legal.
If you took part, or did better research, then
> A motorist 'crashing'
> through a cork is breaking the law how?
It desn't matter whether it is a cork or not, legal or illegal, a
motorist cannot drive over or into anything. Think about it.
Sheesh, the closet fat arses are really coming out of the woodwork now.
> Because police turn a blind eye doesn't make it legal.
If you took part, or did better research, then
> A motorist 'crashing'
> through a cork is breaking the law how?
It desn't matter whether it is a cork or not, legal or illegal, a
motorist cannot drive over or into anything. Think about it.
Sheesh, the closet fat arses are really coming out of the woodwork now.
T
Terryc
Guest
Resound wrote:
> "Terryc" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
>>Zebee Johnstone wrote:
>>
>>
>>>(I note that working with the RTA on motorcycle awareness over the
>>>last 5 years has cut car into motorcycle accidents by well over 30%...
>>
>>Cheese & chalk.
Motorcycle riders =/= bicycle riders.
I do not follow the two wheels good, four wheels bad dictum. Rather, the
presence of a internal combustion engine mounted in a vehicle has
nothing in common with anyone on a human powered bicycle.
> "Terryc" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
>>Zebee Johnstone wrote:
>>
>>
>>>(I note that working with the RTA on motorcycle awareness over the
>>>last 5 years has cut car into motorcycle accidents by well over 30%...
>>
>>Cheese & chalk.
Motorcycle riders =/= bicycle riders.
I do not follow the two wheels good, four wheels bad dictum. Rather, the
presence of a internal combustion engine mounted in a vehicle has
nothing in common with anyone on a human powered bicycle.
T
Terryc
Guest
G-S wrote:
> I was referring to the chip on *your* shoulder (that's not intended as
> an insult, just an observation about your debating style).
Lol, tough. Sadly, you have no style. Just a clumsy shuffle. Come back
when you actually know what a bicycle is and can stick to the point..
> There are many examples where education campaigns have had positive
> effects upon the behavior of large groups of people, there are very few
> examples where protests or street gatherings have had any effect (other
> than to make the people feel like they are doing something).
There are? The word "positive" is a value judgement and many so called
"postive education campaigns" were nothing of the sort.
> I'm not so much anti street protest as pro ideas that work [1]
Then you will see nothing wrong with CM. At least people are getting off
their **** and making a statement and actually getting more bums onto
bicycle seats.
Rather than all those tutt tutters who think people sholdn't "rock the
boat" and should "work through the system".
Whether I do or do not agree with CM in all its points, I'll gladly
target arsesitters who join the tutt tutt brigade.
No one is saying you have to be involved, but if you want to impede the
traffic,then take the consequences. It is part of working together.
Forget being a control freak where everyone has to do what you think is
the right way to do it.
> I was referring to the chip on *your* shoulder (that's not intended as
> an insult, just an observation about your debating style).
Lol, tough. Sadly, you have no style. Just a clumsy shuffle. Come back
when you actually know what a bicycle is and can stick to the point..
> There are many examples where education campaigns have had positive
> effects upon the behavior of large groups of people, there are very few
> examples where protests or street gatherings have had any effect (other
> than to make the people feel like they are doing something).
There are? The word "positive" is a value judgement and many so called
"postive education campaigns" were nothing of the sort.
> I'm not so much anti street protest as pro ideas that work
[1]Then you will see nothing wrong with CM. At least people are getting off
their **** and making a statement and actually getting more bums onto
bicycle seats.
Rather than all those tutt tutters who think people sholdn't "rock the
boat" and should "work through the system".
Whether I do or do not agree with CM in all its points, I'll gladly
target arsesitters who join the tutt tutt brigade.
No one is saying you have to be involved, but if you want to impede the
traffic,then take the consequences. It is part of working together.
Forget being a control freak where everyone has to do what you think is
the right way to do it.
T
Terryc
Guest
Theo Bekkers wrote:
>>>>Tomasso wrote:
>
>
>>>>>There used to be zero cars on Oz and quite a lot of bikes,
>
>
> Actually, you're fantasising about that too. The penny-farthing was never
> much more than a toy for the indolent and rich young. Working people never
> got onto bikes for transport in a big way until 'safeties' were invented,
> and cars predate the safety bicycle by nearly ten years.
Yawn, there are no so silly as those that do not open their eyes.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Safety_bicycle
"The safety bicycle is a type of bicycle that became very popular
beginning in the late 1880s. The first safety, using a diamond frame,
was invented by John Kemp Starley in 1885. "Safeties" are characterized
by having two wheels of identical - or nearly identical - size, and a
chain-driven rear wheel."
So when were cars "invented"?
Considering the early cars used bicycle technology.
The problem is Theo is that you do not know what you are talking about
for this newsgroup. UK.bicycles maybe.
If google was any good, then I could show you plenty of photographs of
working people who used the bicycle as transport throughout Australia.
An excellent book is The Bicycle and the Bush by Jim Fitzpatrick. Man &
Machine in Rural Australia. ISBN 0 19 554 231 2.first published in 1980.
it is an excellent investigation of the rural use of bicycle in
Australia. Also makes the highly telling point that there is very little
research into the use of bicycle by working people anywhere in the world
concening the early part of the 20th Century.
>>>>Tomasso wrote:
>
>
>>>>>There used to be zero cars on Oz and quite a lot of bikes,
>
>
> Actually, you're fantasising about that too. The penny-farthing was never
> much more than a toy for the indolent and rich young. Working people never
> got onto bikes for transport in a big way until 'safeties' were invented,
> and cars predate the safety bicycle by nearly ten years.
Yawn, there are no so silly as those that do not open their eyes.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Safety_bicycle
"The safety bicycle is a type of bicycle that became very popular
beginning in the late 1880s. The first safety, using a diamond frame,
was invented by John Kemp Starley in 1885. "Safeties" are characterized
by having two wheels of identical - or nearly identical - size, and a
chain-driven rear wheel."
So when were cars "invented"?
Considering the early cars used bicycle technology.
The problem is Theo is that you do not know what you are talking about
for this newsgroup. UK.bicycles maybe.
If google was any good, then I could show you plenty of photographs of
working people who used the bicycle as transport throughout Australia.
An excellent book is The Bicycle and the Bush by Jim Fitzpatrick. Man &
Machine in Rural Australia. ISBN 0 19 554 231 2.first published in 1980.
it is an excellent investigation of the rural use of bicycle in
Australia. Also makes the highly telling point that there is very little
research into the use of bicycle by working people anywhere in the world
concening the early part of the 20th Century.
T
Terryc
Guest
G-S wrote:
> It's natural that people would get frustrated with the slow rate of
> change, but the truth is "you catch more flies with honey than vinegar".
Actually, vegemite works better.
> It's natural that people would get frustrated with the slow rate of
> change, but the truth is "you catch more flies with honey than vinegar".
Actually, vegemite works better.
T
Terryc
Guest
Zebee Johnstone wrote:
> The info I have from people who are working with the RTA on motorcycle
> issues is that the confrontational attitudes from some of the bicycle
> advocates (and I don't know what org they are from)
They do not exist. It is just a story they are feeding you. if these
agro bicycle advocates existed, then CM would not exist.
> The info I have from people who are working with the RTA on motorcycle
> issues is that the confrontational attitudes from some of the bicycle
> advocates (and I don't know what org they are from)
They do not exist. It is just a story they are feeding you. if these
agro bicycle advocates existed, then CM would not exist.
B
brucef
Guest
On Dec 3, 8:22 am, TimC <[email protected]
astro.swin.edu.au> wrote:
> Oh come on Theo. I'm pretty sure Zebee is actually forming her
> opinion on something a little more concrete than that.
>
> Is this the channel 9 news, or their current affair program? Who's
> the John Laws equivalent in WA who you listen to?
>
> An letters to the editor? ****** off people writing letters to the
> editor -- ****** off because of something they read from another
> letter to the editor, what they saw on the TV news, or heard some
> shock jock talk about?
I have never been on a CM ride. I have never seen it on TV. I have
never
heard a radio commentator's opinion on the subject and I have never
read about it in a newspaper. If it were not for previous postings in
this
newsgroup I wouldn't have the faintest idea what you guys are talking
about.
My opinion coincides with Zebee, on the basis that she is making
sense.
Most of the pro-CM folks sound like they are foaming at the mouth.
In fact they sound like fundamentalist plonkers.
astro.swin.edu.au> wrote:
> Oh come on Theo. I'm pretty sure Zebee is actually forming her
> opinion on something a little more concrete than that.
>
> Is this the channel 9 news, or their current affair program? Who's
> the John Laws equivalent in WA who you listen to?
>
> An letters to the editor? ****** off people writing letters to the
> editor -- ****** off because of something they read from another
> letter to the editor, what they saw on the TV news, or heard some
> shock jock talk about?
I have never been on a CM ride. I have never seen it on TV. I have
never
heard a radio commentator's opinion on the subject and I have never
read about it in a newspaper. If it were not for previous postings in
this
newsgroup I wouldn't have the faintest idea what you guys are talking
about.
My opinion coincides with Zebee, on the basis that she is making
sense.
Most of the pro-CM folks sound like they are foaming at the mouth.
In fact they sound like fundamentalist plonkers.
T
Terryc
Guest
Zebee Johnstone wrote:
> besides - if the point is "effect on opinions" then all effects have
> to be counted.
lol, crawl back into your hole of ignorance. It will be safer.
If CM holds a ride and gets more participants, then it doesn't give a
damm about the ignorant cagers who blame CM for their lack of
satifaction in the cagers life.
> besides - if the point is "effect on opinions" then all effects have
> to be counted.
lol, crawl back into your hole of ignorance. It will be safer.
If CM holds a ride and gets more participants, then it doesn't give a
damm about the ignorant cagers who blame CM for their lack of
satifaction in the cagers life.
T
Terryc
Guest
Theo Bekkers wrote:
> The questions were, "What have they achieved"? and "What pro-cycling laws
> have been passed as a direct result of CM"?
Lol, for one who claims to be older than many here, you really are
ignorant. Haven't you learn't anything from the years you have been alive?
You are looking under the wrong rock. Of course, I expect that your
reply is going to be WHOOSH, but that is your loss.
Sigh, all those years wasted, when you could have learnt so much.
> The questions were, "What have they achieved"? and "What pro-cycling laws
> have been passed as a direct result of CM"?
Lol, for one who claims to be older than many here, you really are
ignorant. Haven't you learn't anything from the years you have been alive?
You are looking under the wrong rock. Of course, I expect that your
reply is going to be WHOOSH, but that is your loss.
Sigh, all those years wasted, when you could have learnt so much.
T
Theo Bekkers
Guest
brucef wrote:
> TimC wrote
> I have never been on a CM ride. I have never seen it on TV. I have
> never
> heard a radio commentator's opinion on the subject and I have never
> read about it in a newspaper. If it were not for previous postings in
> this
> newsgroup I wouldn't have the faintest idea what you guys are talking
> about.
> My opinion coincides with Zebee, on the basis that she is making
> sense.
She does that all the time. Bloody annoying.
> Most of the pro-CM folks sound like they are foaming at the mouth.
> In fact they sound like fundamentalist plonkers.
But the anti-CM numbers seem to be growing. Soon they'll have critical mass.
Theo
> TimC wrote
> I have never been on a CM ride. I have never seen it on TV. I have
> never
> heard a radio commentator's opinion on the subject and I have never
> read about it in a newspaper. If it were not for previous postings in
> this
> newsgroup I wouldn't have the faintest idea what you guys are talking
> about.
> My opinion coincides with Zebee, on the basis that she is making
> sense.
She does that all the time. Bloody annoying.
> Most of the pro-CM folks sound like they are foaming at the mouth.
> In fact they sound like fundamentalist plonkers.
But the anti-CM numbers seem to be growing. Soon they'll have critical mass.
Theo
T
Theo Bekkers
Guest
Terryc wrote:
> Zebee Johnstone wrote:
>
>> besides - if the point is "effect on opinions" then all effects have
>> to be counted.
>
> lol, crawl back into your hole of ignorance. It will be safer.
>
> If CM holds a ride and gets more participants, then it doesn't give a
> damm about the ignorant cagers who blame CM for their lack of
> satifaction in the cagers life.
How to make friends and influence people?
So what happened to the sharing caring CM people?
Theo
Motorist, motorcyclist, cyclist, pedestrian.
> Zebee Johnstone wrote:
>
>> besides - if the point is "effect on opinions" then all effects have
>> to be counted.
>
> lol, crawl back into your hole of ignorance. It will be safer.
>
> If CM holds a ride and gets more participants, then it doesn't give a
> damm about the ignorant cagers who blame CM for their lack of
> satifaction in the cagers life.
How to make friends and influence people?
So what happened to the sharing caring CM people?
Theo
Motorist, motorcyclist, cyclist, pedestrian.
Similar threads
- Graeme Dods
- Australia and New Zealand
- Zebee Johnstone
- Australia and New Zealand
- Zebee Johnstone
- Australia and New Zealand