Street furniture, footpath furniture

[Tony Raven]

Clive Coleman wrote:
> that doesn't mean we all or even 1% of us are prepared to
> contemplate a heart attack where next to no public transport exists.

Large numbers do as they sit in their cars. Cyclists are healthier and
live longer on average than the general population. Drivers on the
other hand treble their chance of a heart attack as they sit in another
traffic jam.

Tony

 

[Clive Coleman]

In message <[email protected]>, Tony Raven
<[email protected]> writes
>I thought it was the Troll Wall in Norway ;-)
I have been in the Troll fjord, is there a connection?
--
Clive.

 

[Adrian]

Clive Coleman ([email protected]) gurgled happily, sounding much
like they were saying :

>>> I'm glad you've chosen Wycombe and it's mole hills. Luckily for me
>>> I have relatives that I visit there and the land is flat compared to
>>> where I live.

>>Where the hell do you live? Kathmandu? Machu Pichu?

> No. Hint. Try Everest.

Y'see - bloody cyclists. No idea of distances...

How far IS Kathmandu from Everest, Clive?

 

[Adrian]

Clive Coleman ([email protected]) gurgled happily, sounding much
like they were saying :

>>It's about the only place hillier than Wycombe?

> You don't get out a lot apart from Wycombe do you.

Yes.

Christ, if I had to live *in* Wycombe, I think I'd top meself.

I don't think I've EVER come across a town that's quite so soddin' steep in
damn near every direction(1). The easiest way to put a bypass from Penn to
the M40 would be to just put a bridge straight over - it'd rival the Viaduc
du Millau (except for scenery)

My brother was at Uni in Edinburgh - that's flatter.
I grew up in/near Sheffield - that's flatter.

(1) The A40 follows the bottom of the valley, so if you've only done
Beaconsfield-Wycombe-West Wycombe I can see how you'd think it was
flattish. And ****. You'd be right on the second point...

 

[James Annan]

Tony Raven wrote:
> James Annan wrote:
>
>>
>> The point being that anyone who questions the existence of
>> anthropogenically-forced climate change is utterly clueless.
>
>
> That's what I like: a good open scientific mind of the type Galileo and
> Bruno faced for their Copernican view that the sun might not revolve
> around the earth.

So presumably the jury is still out on that issue according to you.
Along with whether the Earth is round and the Moon is made of cheese.

> A good scientist should always question the accepted
> paradigm. Theories are never proved, only disproved. You should read
> Kuhn's The Structure of Scientific Revolutions.

I'd take your protestations more seriously if you showed signs of having
any interest in the truth. But all I see are paper-thin rationalisations
of your existing prejudices. Why haven't you jumped out of a tall
building to challenge the patriarchal construct of gravity?

>
> Tony the Clueless

You said it.

James

 

[James Annan]

Phil Bradshaw wrote:
> James Annan wrote:
>

>>
>> The point being that anyone who questions the existence of
>> anthropogenically-forced climate change is utterly clueless.
>
>
> Until such time that the (any) accepted theory (mindset) is shown to be
> wanting.

Well if CO2 levels were shown to not be rising, or its absorption
spectra were shown to be an atefact of a faulty method, then I would
probably reconsider. Similarly, if apples started floating around, I
would rethink my views on gravity.

James

 

[Mark Thompson]

>> It's only a bicycle - four year olds can ride the things.
>
> And a four year old can drive a car.

Alright then, they're both so easy to drive/ride that I'd fall over
laughing if a grown adult said they couldn't drive/ride one, although I'm
getting horrible visions of Maureen from driving school.

 

[Tony Raven]

Clive Coleman wrote:
> In message <[email protected]>, Tony Raven
> <[email protected]> writes
>
>> I thought it was the Troll Wall in Norway ;-)
>
> I have been in the Troll fjord, is there a connection?

The fjord is flat, the Wall is vertical.

Tony

 

[Adrian]

Mark Thompson ([email protected]) gurgled happily,
sounding much like they were saying :

>>> It's only a bicycle - four year olds can ride the things.

>> And a four year old can drive a car.

> Alright then, they're both so easy to drive/ride that I'd fall over
> laughing if a grown adult said they couldn't drive/ride one, although
> I'm getting horrible visions of Maureen from driving school.

The difference is that it's perfectly possible for somebody to be
physically able to "drive" a car, but be nowhere near the standard required
by law. Maureen's a fine case, and we've all got stories of
friends/relatives who we'd avoid going in a car with in favour of an hour
locked in a cage with John Prescott...

But a bike, well, a four-year-old can ride one...

 

[Adrian]

Clive Coleman ([email protected]) gurgled happily, sounding much
like they were saying :

>>>>Where the hell do you live? Kathmandu? Machu Pichu?

>>> No. Hint. Try Everest.

>> Y'see - bloody cyclists. No idea of distances...
>>
>> How far IS Kathmandu from Everest, Clive?

> Next door.

Right...

So, unless the Everest you were referring to was actually the call centre
for a double-glazing firm... *Ding* - You live in Basingstoke...?

 

[Mark Thompson]

> Exercise is an unpleasant
> necessity

Aye, avoid stuff you don't like, and swap it for something you do. Ditch
the gym and take up something that gives you some sort of enjoyment along
with the exercise?

 

[Clive Coleman]

In message <[email protected]>,
Adrian <[email protected]> writes
>So, unless the Everest you were referring to was actually the call
>centre for a double-glazing firm... *Ding* - You live in
>Basingstoke...?
Not quite, try again.
--
Clive.

 

[Ambrose Nankivell]

James Annan wrote:
> Phil Bradshaw wrote:
>> James Annan wrote:
>>> The point being that anyone who questions the existence of
>>> anthropogenically-forced climate change is utterly clueless.
>>
>> Until such time that the (any) accepted theory (mindset) is shown to
>> be wanting.
>
> Well if CO2 levels were shown to not be rising, or its absorption
> spectra were shown to be an atefact of a faulty method, then I would
> probably reconsider. Similarly, if apples started floating around, I
> would rethink my views on gravity.

If apples do start bobbing around, I'd suggest you had a look and checked if
it's halloween before rethinking your views on gravity.

I have to thank you for upholding this side of the argument, though. The
less the assertions against greenhouse emissions are challenged, the less
likely change is to happen, IMHO.

A

 

[Mark Thompson]

> But a bike, well, a four-year-old can ride one...

Right, so the only limiting thing for riding a bike is being unable to
physically control it, or not knowing the rules of the road. As Clive can
do both he is indeed just giving up before he's started!

 

[Jon Senior]

Adrian wrote:
> I don't think I've EVER come across a town that's quite so soddin' steep in
> damn near every direction(1). The easiest way to put a bypass from Penn to
> the M40 would be to just put a bridge straight over - it'd rival the Viaduc
> du Millau (except for scenery)

The couple who lived in Wycombe have now moved to Cornwall... something
about hills I think.

> My brother was at Uni in Edinburgh - that's flatter.
> I grew up in/near Sheffield - that's flatter.

Two good examples. I live in the former, and went to uni in the latter.
I cycle(d) round both. Hills are mostly in the mind and slightly in the
legs.

Jon

 

[Jon Senior]

Tony Raven wrote:
> The fjord is flat, the Wall is vertical.

Is there a bridge near there?

 

[Jon Senior]

Clive Coleman wrote:
> I visited the web site kindly put here for me to see. As a Bristolian
> I have visited Cornwall and can vouch that it isn't flat, but I can also
> vouch that as you get older hills get steeper regardless of what you
> believe. Just because some OAP fitness freaks want to ride up hill and
> down dale, that doesn't mean we all or even 1% of us are prepared to
> contemplate a heart attack where next to no public transport exists.

As Tony mentioned, being an active cyclist reduces your chance of a
heart attack. And the point of the veterans club anecdote was that just
because you've retired, doesn't mean that you can't cycle anymore. You
may not be able to just jump on a bike and ride with them, but that's
not because you've got old... it's because you're not fit enough. The
price we seem to pay for intelligence is the ability to think up limits
for ourselves that simply don't exist. You've given up before you've
even started.

And as for PT failings. I'm well aware that there are places where the
PT is **** (My parent's village being one), but this is not a universal
truth for Britain. Much as it galls me to admit it, GNER have (IME)
improved their standing this year WRT to arriving on time (Although
their rates are still pretty steep). Using only a bike and PT I managed
to travel from Edinburgh to St Malo in just under 24hours. Not only
that, but I was able to read and relax all the way. So you see, I match
your "Wouldn't work for me" and raise you by "Hasn't failed me yet". ;-)

Jon

 

[Jon Senior]

Steve Walker wrote:
> Err, no, sorry, I'm an atheist, I don't want a copy of The Watchtower,
> and if I felt God was trying to tell me something, I'd see a psychiatrist.
>
> What? Not religion?

No. I direct contrast to most (all) religions, I can offer facts and
figures, real experience and the ability to try before you buy. Heaven
may not exist, but it's definitely faster to cycle Edinburgh than to
drive it. ;-)

Jon

 

[James Annan]

Ambrose Nankivell wrote:

> If apples do start bobbing around, I'd suggest you had a look and
checked if
> it's halloween before rethinking your views on gravity.



>
> I have to thank you for upholding this side of the argument, though.

There are many others who do a more eloquent and patient job, but when
such risible nonsense gets propagated in a generally useful ng, it
needs to be shown for what it is.


> The
> less the assertions against greenhouse emissions are challenged, the
less
> likely change is to happen, IMHO.

Well, there is certainly room for debate about the overall scale of the
effects, and what action we should take. But those who deny the
underlying reality demonstrate only that they are not acting in good
faith.

James

 

[Phil Bradshaw]

James Annan wrote:
> Phil Bradshaw wrote:
> > James Annan wrote:
> >
>
> >>
> >> The point being that anyone who questions the existence of
> >> anthropogenically-forced climate change is utterly clueless.
> >
> >
> > Until such time that the (any) accepted theory (mindset) is shown to be
> > wanting.
>
> Well if CO2 levels were shown to not be rising, or its absorption
> spectra were shown to be an atefact of a faulty method, then I would
> probably reconsider. Similarly, if apples started floating around, I
> would rethink my views on gravity.
>

Can you define the causes of either, or for that matter friction (what
causes the forces opposing motion)?