Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#151
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
spindrift wrote:
On 5 Feb, 14:00, Nick wrote: In the real world, where people , um, DO walk, the evidence shows that increased numbers reduces accidents. Again. It does not reduce the number of accidents it reduces the rate of accident per cyclist per mile cycled. As you know the raw accident figures in London have gone up with more cyclists. It's thought that the mindset of drivers changes since: 1/ they are more used to encountering cyclists and 2/ the drivers cycle themselves The "them and us" attitude displayed by your probably subconscious decision to cast motorists as lions and vulnerable road users as antelopes is telling. In reality cyclists own cars at the rate of 85%- higher than the general population- and so they are well acquainted with responsible driving. I tried to chose an example that would allow you to step outside of your prejudice. FWIW. I am a cyclist. I commute 25 miles round trip into London each day. I support much tougher controls on cars, speed limits, presumption of liability in an accident etc. I'm quite happy to see cyclists riding on the pavements in a responsible manner or going through red lights when it is safe to do so. All in all I'm more towards the militant end of the cycling spectrum even if I'm too lazy to attend critical mass or such like. However I also work with statistics and I particularly dislike people like yourself who distort the meaning of statistics to try and prove their own particular theory. |
#152
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 4 Feb, 18:59, "Brimstone" wrote:
Also, they will start to dominate the ASL areas, which are often extensions of the bus and cycle lanes. In fact they'd have to use the ASL area, otherwise they would block cyclists from entering it. So the thousands of ASL areas nationwide would be rendered potentially worthless. So only potentially, not reality No 'potentially' about it in Glasgow. ASLs are routinely blocked by motorvehicles, and not always legitimately (by which I mean drivers finding themselves already in that area when the lights go back to red and they cannot proceed). On my way home last night I was stopped at a light controlled junction. During the green man phase I watched a motorcyclist filter up between the lanes of cars on the other street and plonk himself at the front of the cyclists' ASL area. He was a police motorcyclist. At least now I know why the police ignore abuse of ASLs. Calum |
#153
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 5 Feb, 15:50, Adrian wrote:
spindrift (spindrift ) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: This is a statistical fudge similar to helmet compunction in australia saving lives cos fewer cyclists were hurt cos there were much fewer cyclists! Hmmm. Either that was indeed seriously flawed, or you don't understand the concept of "per million (or whatever) vehicle kilometres" I know where my money lies. Wanna Prove it? £50 to a charity of your choice that vehicle km didn't come into it? Cyclist numbers vs cyclist injuries in Western Australia The introduction of mandatory helmet legislation in 1992 heralded a major downturn in cyclist numbers (approximately 30%) on West Australian roads by 1996. Despite this, the number of cyclist hospital admissions per annum increased after 1992 helmet law enforcement to consecutive record levels, the increase in hospital admissions in line with the recovery in cyclist numbers to pre-law levels by 1998/99. http://www.cycle-helmets.com/ My charity of choice is the spindrift Kronenbourg Trust, providing beer to the needy for twenty years. Get ready for some hasty withdrawal of that oh-so-confident pledge of money.... |
#154
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 5 Feb, 15:54, Nick wrote:
spindrift wrote: On 5 Feb, 14:00, Nick wrote: In the real world, where people , um, DO walk, the evidence shows that increased numbers reduces accidents. Again. It does not reduce the number of accidents it reduces the rate of accident per cyclist per mile cycled. As you know the raw accident figures in London have gone up with more cyclists. It's thought that the mindset of drivers changes since: 1/ they are more used to encountering cyclists and 2/ the drivers cycle themselves The "them and us" attitude displayed by your probably subconscious decision to cast motorists as lions and vulnerable road users as antelopes is telling. In reality cyclists own cars at the rate of 85%- higher than the general population- and so they are well acquainted with responsible driving. I tried to chose an example that would allow you to step outside of your prejudice. FWIW. I am a cyclist. I commute 25 miles round trip into London each day. I support much tougher controls on cars, speed limits, presumption of liability in an accident etc. I'm quite happy to see cyclists riding on the pavements in a responsible manner or going through red lights when it is safe to do so. All in all I'm more towards the militant end of the cycling spectrum even if I'm too lazy to attend critical mass or such like. However I also work with statistics and I particularly dislike people like yourself who distort the meaning of statistics to try and prove their own particular theory.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Where did I display any prejudice please? Maybe i should have said the data supports the tenet that you are less likely to be in an accident the more cyclists there are, sorry about that, not sure it constitutes the presence of prejudice though. |
#155
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "calum" wrote in message ... On 4 Feb, 18:59, "Brimstone" wrote: Also, they will start to dominate the ASL areas, which are often extensions of the bus and cycle lanes. In fact they'd have to use the ASL area, otherwise they would block cyclists from entering it. So the thousands of ASL areas nationwide would be rendered potentially worthless. So only potentially, not reality No 'potentially' about it in Glasgow. ASLs are routinely blocked by motorvehicles, and not always legitimately (by which I mean drivers finding themselves already in that area when the lights go back to red and they cannot proceed). On my way home last night I was stopped at a light controlled junction. During the green man phase I watched a motorcyclist filter up between the lanes of cars on the other street and plonk himself at the front of the cyclists' ASL area. He was a police motorcyclist. At least now I know why the police ignore abuse of ASLs. Did he stop anyone else using the ASL? |
#156
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
spindrift (spindrift ) gurgled happily, sounding
much like they were saying: Hmmm. Either that was indeed seriously flawed, or you don't understand the concept of "per million (or whatever) vehicle kilometres" I know where my money lies. Wanna Prove it? No, not really. Cyclist numbers vs cyclist injuries in Western Australia The introduction of mandatory helmet legislation in 1992 heralded a major downturn in cyclist numbers (approximately 30%) on West Australian roads by 1996. Despite this, the number of cyclist hospital admissions per annum increased after 1992 helmet law enforcement to consecutive record levels, the increase in hospital admissions in line with the recovery in cyclist numbers to pre-law levels by 1998/99. http://www.cycle-helmets.com/ Some very flaky statistics, including the subtle detail that - considering they're claiming a huge drop in cyclist figures since 1977, made worse by the introduction of a helmet law in 1991, there are no reliable stats from before 1990. Also no consideration of other factors - that same period coincided with all the major skin cancer and ozone layer health scares in Australia - which will have played a major part in discouraging cycling. Yes, it's a very flawed report. So much so that you really can't give it any credence whatsoever. (Oh, and fwiw, I'm not exactly pro-cycle helmet) Get ready for some hasty withdrawal of that oh-so-confident pledge of money.... You show me this "pledge"... |
#157
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 5 Feb, 16:08, "Brimstone" wrote:
.. Did he stop anyone else using the ASL?- Hide quoted text - Yes. The cop positioned himself at the front of lane two for travelling straight ahead. A cyclist, also intent on travelling straight ahead, had to position himself to the left of the cop and at the front of lane one (left turning traffic). He had to wait for the cop to scoot off before making his way across to lane two where he should have been in the first place but for the policeman. Calum |
#158
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
spindrift wrote:
"I think it's pathetic that the most vocally and notoriously anti- motorist/anti-motorcyclist poster on the whole Internet denies being anything of the sort. " You'll have to take his word for the fact that he finds you pathetic. I dare say he's not the only one. In fact, I know he's not. |
#159
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 5 Feb, 16:43, JNugent
wrote: spindrift wrote: "I think it's pathetic that the most vocally and notoriously anti- motorist/anti-motorcyclist poster on the whole Internet denies being anything of the sort. " You'll have to take his word for the fact that he finds you pathetic. I dare say he's not the only one. In fact, I know he's not. I can take being called pathetic for no reason, not much I can do about that, but if I'm accused of having an irrational hatred of anyone it's reasonable to ask for some evidence. Anything, actually. They're building a maximum security segregated cycle lane on Southwark Bridge, one of the quietest bridges in London (bridges in London are particularly dangerous for cyclist, one killed by a moped rider on London Bridge a couple of years ago). This lane has probablt eaten up an entire year's cycling budget, and it's pointless and counter- productive, I think. The limit of 30 on the bridges has never been enforced bar Tower. Stopping and punishing idiot drivers would make more difference and that, by the way, is anti idiot motorist, NOT anti-motorist. |
#160
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Feb 5, 2:48 pm, spindrift wrote:
"I think it's pathetic that the most vocally and notoriously anti- motorist/anti-motorcyclist poster on the whole Internet denies being anything of the sort. " I am asking for evidence for this. I've asked seven times now. And I've already said that you have declared support for many, many anti-motorist measures over the years (at least two of which have been mentioned in this thread), but I've never seen you oppose any. That is evidence enough, although there is plenty more, not least your ridiculous hatred of Paul Smith. No-one who genuinely advocated safe and pleasant cycling, and wasn't anti-motorist, would have such a pathological obsession with the man. If my views were as "anti-motorist" as you claim it strikes me a strange that you can't actually find any examples.... As above. The Internet is littered with your posts supporting anti- motorist measures, and none (that I've seen) opposing them. Have you got it yet? "Can you name any anti-motorist or anti-motorcyclist measures (which are not also intended to be anti- cyclist) which you oppose? " I'm asking you what these mythical "anti-motorist" measures are. So that'll be a "no" then. Anyone who thinks that this government isn't even slightly anti-car, and therefore hasn't implemented or expanded any anti-car measures, is potty. I don't think even you're that deluded. I've already given examples of anti-motorist measures, and there are plenty more which are well known. You know perfectly well what they all are, as you frequently scour and quote from sites which discuss them, and you automatically support them exactly because they're anti-motorist. Presumably you're reluctant to admit that anti-motorist measures exist because then you'd also be forced to admit that you happen to support every single one of them. But you see you might as well, because everyone knows it anyway. Go on, have some backbone. Perhaps you missed my question, what on earth made you think any of the Telegraph quotes are mine please? I don't remember saying that, certainly not in this thread, but you are renowned for posting your invective pretty much everywhere that you possibly can, and that includes the comments sections of relevant articles. You must have used literally hundreds of different aliases over the years. Why did you use "yggems" to post on YouTube, by the way? |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Addison Lee tells drivers to drive in bus lanes | London Transport | |||
All the bike lanes lead nowhere | London Transport | |||
Motorbikes get to use bus lanes | London Transport | |||
Epping and ongar history website anyone to proof read it and link me! | London Transport | |||
What are bus lanes worth? | London Transport |