We've been fooling ourselves...

[Crescentius Vespasianus]

I think all cyclists, that have done
some serious cycling, delude themselves
to think that there will be a day when
people get out of their cars, and
discover the magic of cycling. The
problem with this is that cycling is in
direct conflict with the most seductive
drug that mankind has ever invented and
that is the automobile. Anyone who has
done a lot cycling, has seen the faces
of hundreds of thousands of drivers.
The trance like, almost drugged
appearance in their faces. Then there
are the ones that can't keep their foot
off the gas, almost like that
accelerator gives them a freebase like
high. Ground zero, is of course the
USA, but it is now spreading to all
corners of the planet. People who have
cycled off and on in France for years,
have seen the French moving in the
American direction, and are garaging
their bikes, and now driving cars.
India, with the new Nano car, is about
to put a hundred million bicycles into
retirement, as driving cars is now the
thing to do. China, is now banning
bicycles from roads, because Chinese
drivers prefer the wide bodied SUV's,
that they are now buying by the
millions. Everywhere you look, bikes
are being junked, as being a primitive
form of transportation, as they jump
into their new shiny cars. Meanwhile,
we waste time having arcane arguments
about helmets, while cycling itself is
headed to extinction. We are not the
vanguards, we are simply the last ones
to get the message.

[thefronny@gmail.com]

On Feb 10, 11:19 am, Crescentius Vespasianus <jazzyb...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
> I think all cyclists, that have done
> some serious cycling, delude themselves
> to think that there will be a day when
> people get out of their cars, and
> discover the magic of cycling. The
> problem with this is that cycling is in
> direct conflict with the most seductive
> drug that mankind has ever invented and
> that is the automobile. Anyone who has
> done a lot cycling, has seen the faces
> of hundreds of thousands of drivers.
> The trance like, almost drugged
> appearance in their faces. Then there
> are the ones that can't keep their foot
> off the gas, almost like that
> accelerator gives them a freebase like
> high. Ground zero, is of course the
> USA, but it is now spreading to all
> corners of the planet. People who have
> cycled off and on in France for years,
> have seen the French moving in the
> American direction, and are garaging
> their bikes, and now driving cars.
> India, with the new Nano car, is about
> to put a hundred million bicycles into
> retirement, as driving cars is now the
> thing to do. China, is now banning
> bicycles from roads, because Chinese
> drivers prefer the wide bodied SUV's,
> that they are now buying by the
> millions. Everywhere you look, bikes
> are being junked, as being a primitive
> form of transportation, as they jump
> into their new shiny cars. Meanwhile,
> we waste time having arcane arguments
> about helmets, while cycling itself is
> headed to extinction. We are not the
> vanguards, we are simply the last ones
> to get the message.

Man, you're even more cynical than I am. I don't know whether to give
you a toast or throw myself off a bridge.

tf

[joseph.santaniello@gmail.com]

On Feb 10, 7:19*pm, Crescentius Vespasianus <jazzyb...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
> I think all cyclists, that have done
> some serious cycling, delude themselves
> to think that there will be a day when
> people get out of their cars, and
> discover the magic of cycling. *The
> problem with this is that cycling is in
> direct conflict with the most seductive
> drug *that mankind has ever invented and
> that is the automobile. *Anyone who has
> done a lot cycling, has seen the faces
> of hundreds of thousands of drivers.
> The trance like, almost drugged
> appearance in their faces. *Then there
> are the ones that can't keep their foot
> off the gas, almost like that
> accelerator gives them a freebase like
> high. *Ground zero, is of course the
> USA, but it is now spreading to all
> corners of the planet. *People who have
> cycled off and on in France for years,
> have seen the French moving in the
> American direction, and are garaging
> their bikes, and now driving cars.
> India, with the new Nano car, is about
> to put a hundred million bicycles into
> retirement, as driving cars is now the
> thing to do. *China, is now banning
> bicycles from roads, because Chinese
> drivers prefer the wide bodied SUV's,
> that they are now buying by the
> millions. *Everywhere you look, bikes
> are being junked, as being a primitive
> form of transportation, as they jump
> into their new shiny cars. *Meanwhile,
> we waste time having arcane arguments
> about helmets, while cycling itself is
> headed to extinction. *We are not the
> vanguards, we are simply the last ones
> to get the message.

Humans are lazy. Most people in the world who ride bikes I'm sure see
it as a task they wish were easier. They are trying to get someplace
and perhaps carry stuff too. The only reason they ride is because they
can't afford anything else.

Joseph

[A Muzi]

Crescentius Vespasianus wrote:
> I think all cyclists, that have done some serious cycling, delude
> themselves to think that there will be a day when people get out of
> their cars, and discover the magic of cycling. The problem with this is
> that cycling is in direct conflict with the most seductive drug that
> mankind has ever invented and that is the automobile. Anyone who has
> done a lot cycling, has seen the faces of hundreds of thousands of
> drivers. The trance like, almost drugged appearance in their faces.
> Then there are the ones that can't keep their foot off the gas, almost
> like that accelerator gives them a freebase like high. Ground zero, is
> of course the USA, but it is now spreading to all corners of the
> planet. People who have cycled off and on in France for years, have
> seen the French moving in the American direction, and are garaging their
> bikes, and now driving cars. India, with the new Nano car, is about to
> put a hundred million bicycles into retirement, as driving cars is now
> the thing to do. China, is now banning bicycles from roads, because
> Chinese drivers prefer the wide bodied SUV's, that they are now buying
> by the millions. Everywhere you look, bikes are being junked, as being
> a primitive form of transportation, as they jump into their new shiny
> cars. Meanwhile, we waste time having arcane arguments about helmets,
> while cycling itself is headed to extinction. We are not the vanguards,
> we are simply the last ones to get the message.

At least since Cicero ('O tempora! O mores!') and probably long before,
we've been warned of the imminent demise of our culture.

As I frequently tell my staff, on many topics, perfection is beyond our
reach. If _you_ make it better, it will be better.
--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

[Michael Press]

In article <13qugkciu5d6bba@corp.supernews.com>,
Crescentius Vespasianus <jazzyboss@hotmail.com> wrote:

> I think all cyclists, that have done
> some serious cycling, delude themselves
> to think that there will be a day when
> people get out of their cars, and
> discover the magic of cycling. The
> problem with this is that cycling is in
> direct conflict with the most seductive
> drug that mankind has ever invented and
> that is the automobile. Anyone who has
> done a lot cycling, has seen the faces
> of hundreds of thousands of drivers.
> The trance like, almost drugged
> appearance in their faces. Then there
> are the ones that can't keep their foot
> off the gas, almost like that
> accelerator gives them a freebase like
> high. Ground zero, is of course the
> USA, but it is now spreading to all
> corners of the planet. People who have
> cycled off and on in France for years,
> have seen the French moving in the
> American direction, and are garaging
> their bikes, and now driving cars.
> India, with the new Nano car, is about
> to put a hundred million bicycles into
> retirement, as driving cars is now the
> thing to do. China, is now banning
> bicycles from roads, because Chinese
> drivers prefer the wide bodied SUV's,
> that they are now buying by the
> millions. Everywhere you look, bikes
> are being junked, as being a primitive
> form of transportation, as they jump
> into their new shiny cars. Meanwhile,
> we waste time having arcane arguments
> about helmets, while cycling itself is
> headed to extinction. We are not the
> vanguards, we are simply the last ones
> to get the message.

All true. I do all the errands possible
with an ordinary bicycle, rack, and grocery panniers.
Can tie down a medium carton as well. After that
it is into the car. A huge reason I prefer
the bicycle is parking. I prefer negotiating
traffic on the bicycle to the car. Other
drivers are more aggravating when I am
driving a car than when I am on the bicycle.

--
Michael Press

[Luke]

In article <13qugkciu5d6bba@corp.supernews.com>, Crescentius
Vespasianus <jazzyboss@hotmail.com> wrote:

> I think all cyclists, that have done
> some serious cycling, delude themselves
> to think that there will be a day when
> people get out of their cars, and
> discover the magic of cycling.

<snip>

<Yawn> Is this a troll? Well, I'll bite.

You're right, the advantages and pleasures of cycling certainly won't
prompt motorists to abandon their ways. It will be skyrocketing gas
prices, gridlock, and the onerous expense of owning and operating a
car.

Less cars may not translate into more bicycles but to benefit us it's
not necessary that it does.

[Zoot Katz]

On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 11:19:26 -0700, Crescentius Vespasianus
<jazzyboss@hotmail.com> wrote:

>Everywhere you look, bikes
>are being junked, as being a primitive
>form of transportation, as they jump
>into their new shiny cars.

I guess I'm looking in the wrong places.

http://www.earth-policy.org/Indicators/indicator11_data1.htm

Since the mid twentieth century, annual world production of bicycles
has more than doubled the number of cars produced.
--
zk

[Ed Pirrero]

On Feb 10, 10:19 am, Crescentius Vespasianus <jazzyb...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
> I think all cyclists, that have done
> some serious cycling, delude themselves
> to think that there will be a day when
> people get out of their cars, and
> discover the magic of cycling. The
> problem with this is that cycling is in
> direct conflict with the most seductive
> drug that mankind has ever invented and
> that is the automobile. Anyone who has
> done a lot cycling, has seen the faces
> of hundreds of thousands of drivers.
> The trance like, almost drugged
> appearance in their faces. Then there
> are the ones that can't keep their foot
> off the gas, almost like that
> accelerator gives them a freebase like
> high. Ground zero, is of course the
> USA, but it is now spreading to all
> corners of the planet. People who have
> cycled off and on in France for years,
> have seen the French moving in the
> American direction, and are garaging
> their bikes, and now driving cars.
> India, with the new Nano car, is about
> to put a hundred million bicycles into
> retirement, as driving cars is now the
> thing to do. China, is now banning
> bicycles from roads, because Chinese
> drivers prefer the wide bodied SUV's,
> that they are now buying by the
> millions. Everywhere you look, bikes
> are being junked, as being a primitive
> form of transportation, as they jump
> into their new shiny cars. Meanwhile,
> we waste time having arcane arguments
> about helmets, while cycling itself is
> headed to extinction. We are not the
> vanguards, we are simply the last ones
> to get the message.

*snork*

I used to ride my bike everywhere. To work, to school, to work after
school, then to work again after I completed school.

I rode for fun, and I rode just to ride - no purpose at all except to
turn the cranks.

Then a funny thing happened. I began to notice that people don't pay
attention to anything but themselves. It was bad before, but in the
last 5 years has gotten exponentially worse.

All this time, I have owned cars. Performance-oriented cars. I love
to drive almost as much as I love to bike. It is a different
communion of man and machine, but of the same type as man and
bicycle. One might be termed mastery of large muscle groups and other
mastery of small muscle groups. Driving a car to it's limits requires
a special set of skills, just as riding a MTB well has a special set
of (different) skills.

But back to the decision - when one day, I was nearly run over thrice
by cell-phone holding, slack-jawed soccer moms in minivans, I put up
my bike as a commuter. No more do I ride on the road with the folks
who can't be bothered to look even three feet outside their cars.

The pleasure of bike commuting might still be there for some people.
I don't see it any more. I ride my bike on singletrack and avoid
automobiles all I can.

To get back to your thesis...

Your characterization of drivers may be correct in some cases, but
more often than not, there is a perceived hassle with riding bike to
work, and a real hassle if you have children you must fetch from
daycare, then pick up food for a meal - there are just not enough
hours in a day to make all that happen, and ride bike, too. When you
are responsible for transporting two kids and 4 bags of groceries 10
miles in one-half hour, then you can quickly see that a bike is not a
viable option.

The lifestyle changes required to make it work are too difficult for
most folks to contemplate. If ever they even did entertain a glimmer
of a notion to do so.

As primary transportation, the bike is dead in the U.S. And will go
that way elsewhere.

But we'll be dead by then. Weep for your children's children. They
will be the ones who bear the burden.

E.P.

[Scott Gordo]

On Feb 10, 1:19 pm, Crescentius Vespasianus <jazzyb...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
> I think all cyclists, that have done
> some serious cycling, delude themselves
> to think that there will be a day when
> people get out of their cars, and
> discover the magic of cycling. The
> problem with this is that cycling is in
> direct conflict with the most seductive
> drug that mankind has ever invented and
> that is the automobile. Anyone who has
> done a lot cycling, has seen the faces
> of hundreds of thousands of drivers.
> The trance like, almost drugged
> appearance in their faces. Then there
> are the ones that can't keep their foot
> off the gas, almost like that
> accelerator gives them a freebase like
> high. Ground zero, is of course the
> USA, but it is now spreading to all
> corners of the planet. People who have
> cycled off and on in France for years,
> have seen the French moving in the
> American direction, and are garaging
> their bikes, and now driving cars.
> India, with the new Nano car, is about
> to put a hundred million bicycles into
> retirement, as driving cars is now the
> thing to do. China, is now banning
> bicycles from roads, because Chinese
> drivers prefer the wide bodied SUV's,
> that they are now buying by the
> millions. Everywhere you look, bikes
> are being junked, as being a primitive
> form of transportation, as they jump
> into their new shiny cars. Meanwhile,
> we waste time having arcane arguments
> about helmets, while cycling itself is
> headed to extinction. We are not the
> vanguards, we are simply the last ones
> to get the message.

Pffft. You're still here?

As for being "the last ones to get the message', what message? Like
the wise man says, I ride my bike to ride my bike.

Seriously, go find a hobby that makes you happy.

Also: I'd say that the vast majority of people in this newsgroup own a
car. I would if I didn't live in a place

/s

[Werehatrack]

The greater and faster the expansion of IC-based transportation, the
sooner it will outstrip the ability of the petro companies to supply
fuel. All that is being achieved is a last gasp of cancerous bloat of
the auto-based transport paradigm; the shape of its replacement isn't
even being imagined yet, and will be shaped in part by the chaos of
the collapse of oil production in about 15 years. Hint: The last
Depression will look like an ungraded practice session. Beware of
zealots when it hits.

--
My email address is antispammed; pull WEEDS if replying via e-mail.
Typoes are not a bug, they're a feature.
Words processed in a facility that contains nuts.

[Tosspot]

joseph.santaniello@gmail.com wrote:
> On Feb 10, 7:19 pm, Crescentius Vespasianus <jazzyb...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>> I think all cyclists, that have done
>> some serious cycling, delude themselves
>> to think that there will be a day when
>> people get out of their cars, and
>> discover the magic of cycling. The
>> problem with this is that cycling is in
>> direct conflict with the most seductive
>> drug that mankind has ever invented and
>> that is the automobile. Anyone who has
>> done a lot cycling, has seen the faces
>> of hundreds of thousands of drivers.
>> The trance like, almost drugged
>> appearance in their faces. Then there
>> are the ones that can't keep their foot
>> off the gas, almost like that
>> accelerator gives them a freebase like
>> high. Ground zero, is of course the
>> USA, but it is now spreading to all
>> corners of the planet. People who have
>> cycled off and on in France for years,
>> have seen the French moving in the
>> American direction, and are garaging
>> their bikes, and now driving cars.
>> India, with the new Nano car, is about
>> to put a hundred million bicycles into
>> retirement, as driving cars is now the
>> thing to do. China, is now banning
>> bicycles from roads, because Chinese
>> drivers prefer the wide bodied SUV's,
>> that they are now buying by the
>> millions. Everywhere you look, bikes
>> are being junked, as being a primitive
>> form of transportation, as they jump
>> into their new shiny cars. Meanwhile,
>> we waste time having arcane arguments
>> about helmets, while cycling itself is
>> headed to extinction. We are not the
>> vanguards, we are simply the last ones
>> to get the message.
>
> Humans are lazy. Most people in the world who ride bikes I'm sure see
> it as a task they wish were easier. They are trying to get someplace
> and perhaps carry stuff too. The only reason they ride is because they
> can't afford anything else.

In leftpondia maybe, but over here a cheap runabout is around 500 UKP,
or about the same as a bike. Insurance on such a beast is neglible, buy
it with road tax and safety certificate still to run and its bloody
cheap mileage.

For me, I do it because I like a bit of fresh air, for a lot of my
journeys it's better (i.e. quicker/easier) and I have a 180mph motorbike
for when I need to get from A to B *quick*.

Otoh, I do have a driving license, and every so often I have to hire a
car because of either the distance is arkward (around 300 miles is the
worst), or I need to carry something large.

However, I'm sure that people who drive their cars the 2 miles to work
are indeed too lazy to cycle.

[Ben C]

On 2008-02-10, joseph.santaniello@gmail.com <joseph.santaniello@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Feb 10, 7:19*pm, Crescentius Vespasianus <jazzyb...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>> I think all cyclists, that have done
>> some serious cycling, delude themselves
>> to think that there will be a day when
>> people get out of their cars, and
>> discover the magic of cycling. *The
>> problem with this is that cycling is in
>> direct conflict with the most seductive
>> drug *that mankind has ever invented and
>> that is the automobile.
[...]
> Humans are lazy. Most people in the world who ride bikes I'm sure see
> it as a task they wish were easier. They are trying to get someplace
> and perhaps carry stuff too. The only reason they ride is because they
> can't afford anything else.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/main.jhtml?xml=/motoring/2005/04/09/mrmay09.xml

"I would like to suggest that every time a bicycle is minted, the desire
for a car is born."

[(PeteCresswell)]

Per joseph.santaniello@gmail.com:
>They are trying to get someplace
>and perhaps carry stuff too. The only reason they ride is because they
>can't afford anything else.

Somebody very close used tb a civil engineer in Shanghai.

He found himself at a meeting where they were discussing the
future of the city's transportation needs.

Some guy was pitching bicycles - which were the dominant mode of
transportation at that time.

He was going on and on about how China already had all the pieces
in place, and how wonderful it was and so-on and so-forth.

Somewhere along the line, one of the Australian team noticed this
middle-aged guy across the table muttering in Mandarin.

This went on for awhile - the Oz guy going on and on and the
middle-aged guy muttering.

Finally one of the Australians asked the guy I know what the
person across the table was saying.

The answer - translated/summarized from Mandarin - was "You guys
are soooooo full of ****! Have you *ever* actually had to go
everywhere on a bicycle?"
--
PeteCresswell

[joseph.santaniello@gmail.com]

On Feb 10, 9:19*pm, Tosspot <Frank.Le...@esa.int> wrote:
> joseph.santanie...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Feb 10, 7:19 pm, Crescentius Vespasianus <jazzyb...@hotmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >> I think all cyclists, that have done
> >> some serious cycling, delude themselves
> >> to think that there will be a day when
> >> people get out of their cars, and
> >> discover the magic of cycling. *The
> >> problem with this is that cycling is in
> >> direct conflict with the most seductive
> >> drug *that mankind has ever invented and
> >> that is the automobile. *Anyone who has
> >> done a lot cycling, has seen the faces
> >> of hundreds of thousands of drivers.
> >> The trance like, almost drugged
> >> appearance in their faces. *Then there
> >> are the ones that can't keep their foot
> >> off the gas, almost like that
> >> accelerator gives them a freebase like
> >> high. *Ground zero, is of course the
> >> USA, but it is now spreading to all
> >> corners of the planet. *People who have
> >> cycled off and on in France for years,
> >> have seen the French moving in the
> >> American direction, and are garaging
> >> their bikes, and now driving cars.
> >> India, with the new Nano car, is about
> >> to put a hundred million bicycles into
> >> retirement, as driving cars is now the
> >> thing to do. *China, is now banning
> >> bicycles from roads, because Chinese
> >> drivers prefer the wide bodied SUV's,
> >> that they are now buying by the
> >> millions. *Everywhere you look, bikes
> >> are being junked, as being a primitive
> >> form of transportation, as they jump
> >> into their new shiny cars. *Meanwhile,
> >> we waste time having arcane arguments
> >> about helmets, while cycling itself is
> >> headed to extinction. *We are not the
> >> vanguards, we are simply the last ones
> >> to get the message.
>
> > Humans are lazy. Most people in the world who ride bikes I'm sure see
> > it as a task they wish were easier. They are trying to get someplace
> > and perhaps carry stuff too. The only reason they ride is because they
> > can't afford anything else.
>
> In leftpondia maybe, but over here a cheap runabout is around 500 UKP,
> or about the same as a bike. *Insurance on such a beast is neglible, buy
> it with road tax and safety certificate still to run and its bloody
> cheap mileage.
>
> For me, I do it because I like a bit of fresh air, for a lot of my
> journeys it's better (i.e. quicker/easier) and I have a 180mph motorbike
> for when I need to get from A to B *quick*.
>
> Otoh, I do have a driving license, and every so often I have to hire a
> car because of either the distance is arkward (around 300 miles is the
> worst), or I need to carry something large.
>
> However, I'm sure that people who drive their cars the 2 miles to work
> are indeed too lazy to cycle.

I'm talking about poor people in India, Africa, China, etc.

Joseph

[Michael Baldwin]

Andrew says

>As I frequently tell my staff, on many topics, perfection
>is beyond our reach. If _you_ make it better, it
>will be better.

Exactly!

Best Regards - Mike Baldwin

[datakoll]

On Feb 10, 3:57*pm, Michael Press <rub...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> In article <13qugkciu5d6...@corp.supernews.com>,
> *Crescentius Vespasianus <jazzyb...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > I think all cyclists, that have done
> > some serious cycling, delude themselves
> > to think that there will be a day when
> > people get out of their cars, and
> > discover the magic of cycling. *The
> > problem with this is that cycling is in
> > direct conflict with the most seductive
> > drug *that mankind has ever invented and
> > that is the automobile. *Anyone who has
> > done a lot cycling, has seen the faces
> > of hundreds of thousands of drivers.
> > The trance like, almost drugged
> > appearance in their faces. *Then there
> > are the ones that can't keep their foot
> > off the gas, almost like that
> > accelerator gives them a freebase like
> > high. *Ground zero, is of course the
> > USA, but it is now spreading to all
> > corners of the planet. *People who have
> > cycled off and on in France for years,
> > have seen the French moving in the
> > American direction, and are garaging
> > their bikes, and now driving cars.
> > India, with the new Nano car, is about
> > to put a hundred million bicycles into
> > retirement, as driving cars is now the
> > thing to do. *China, is now banning
> > bicycles from roads, because Chinese
> > drivers prefer the wide bodied SUV's,
> > that they are now buying by the
> > millions. *Everywhere you look, bikes
> > are being junked, as being a primitive
> > form of transportation, as they jump
> > into their new shiny cars. *Meanwhile,
> > we waste time having arcane arguments
> > about helmets, while cycling itself is
> > headed to extinction. *We are not the
> > vanguards, we are simply the last ones
> > to get the message.
>
> All true. I do all the errands possible
> with an ordinary bicycle, rack, and grocery panniers.
> Can tie down a medium carton as well. After that
> it is into the car. A huge reason I prefer
> the bicycle is parking. I prefer negotiating
> traffic on the bicycle to the car. Other
> drivers are more aggravating when I am
> driving a car than when I am on the bicycle.
>
> --
> Michael Press- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

on the bicycle, you live more effectively, you are there now if you
think of being there now or here now. Butbutbut the conveyance are
complimentary. I gotta new van with stereo. cruising up Hutchinson
Island at 1AM in the moonlight listening to ...once in a while is
surely equal to riding up Hutchinson's on the bicycle all the time.
The cycle appreciates the van.

[Crescentius Vespasianus]

>
> You're right, the advantages and pleasures of cycling certainly won't
> prompt motorists to abandon their ways. It will be skyrocketing gas
> prices, gridlock, and the onerous expense of owning and operating a
> car.
>
> Less cars may not translate into more bicycles but to benefit us it's
> not necessary that it does.
---------
Logic has nothing to do with it. Is it
logical to smoke a cigarette, but
millions still do. I predict after we
are all long gone, the automobile will
eventually kill the planet. Alien
anthropologists someday will visit the
dead earth, and see all these machines
(cars), everywhere they look. They will
conclude that these were the machines
that killed the planet. They will
scratch their heads, and wonder how a
species could obsess so much about these
machines, that they would continue to
produce them, by the billions until the
planet was turned inside out. What were
they thinking?

[Rob Lindauer]

Crescentius Vespasianus wrote:

> Logic has nothing to do with it. Is it logical to smoke a cigarette,
> but millions still do. I predict after we are all long gone, the
> automobile will eventually kill the planet. Alien anthropologists
> someday will visit the dead earth, and see all these machines (cars),
> everywhere they look. They will conclude that these were the machines
> that killed the planet. They will scratch their heads, and wonder how a
> species could obsess so much about these machines, that they would
> continue to produce them, by the billions until the planet was turned
> inside out. What were they thinking?

An excellent (and scary and disheartening) read: Jared Diamond's
"Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed." He asks (among
many other things) what the person who cut down the last tree on Easter
Island was thinking. I don't think we've become any smarter.

--
Rob Lindauer - Please change "att" to "sbc" for my real email address

[A Muzi]

>> You're right, the advantages and pleasures of cycling certainly won't
>> prompt motorists to abandon their ways. It will be skyrocketing gas
>> prices, gridlock, and the onerous expense of owning and operating a
>> car.
>> Less cars may not translate into more bicycles but to benefit us it's
>> not necessary that it does.

Crescentius Vespasianus wrote:
> Logic has nothing to do with it. Is it logical to smoke a cigarette,
> but millions still do. I predict after we are all long gone, the
> automobile will eventually kill the planet. Alien anthropologists
> someday will visit the dead earth, and see all these machines (cars),
> everywhere they look. They will conclude that these were the machines
> that killed the planet. They will scratch their heads, and wonder how a
> species could obsess so much about these machines, that they would
> continue to produce them, by the billions until the planet was turned
> inside out. What were they thinking?

Wood and coal fired steam engines changed.
Personal transport of all types has and will again.
--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

[Ben C]

On 2008-02-11, Crescentius Vespasianus <jazzyboss@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> You're right, the advantages and pleasures of cycling certainly won't
>> prompt motorists to abandon their ways. It will be skyrocketing gas
>> prices, gridlock, and the onerous expense of owning and operating a
>> car.
>>
>> Less cars may not translate into more bicycles but to benefit us it's
>> not necessary that it does.
> ---------
> Logic has nothing to do with it.
> logical to smoke a cigarette, but
> millions still do. I predict after we
> are all long gone, the automobile will
> eventually kill the planet. Alien
> anthropologists someday will visit the
> dead earth, and see all these machines
> (cars), everywhere they look. They will
> conclude that these were the machines
> that killed the planet.

How exactly will automobiles kill all life on earth? Oh I forgot, logic
has nothing to do with it.

> They will
> scratch their heads, and wonder how a
> species could obsess so much about these
> machines, that they would continue to
> produce them, by the billions until the
> planet was turned inside out. What were
> they thinking?

Then they will step back into their flying saucers and go home again,
thinking why did we invest all that cash into Death Star research when
all we needed was a few billion automobiles.

[Luke]

In article <13qv56ja55t2ec6@corp.supernews.com>, Crescentius
Vespasianus <jazzyboss@hotmail.com> wrote:

> >
> > You're right, the advantages and pleasures of cycling certainly won't
> > prompt motorists to abandon their ways. It will be skyrocketing gas
> > prices, gridlock, and the onerous expense of owning and operating a
> > car.
> >
> > Less cars may not translate into more bicycles but to benefit us it's
> > not necessary that it does.
> ---------
> Logic has nothing to do with it. Is it
> logical to smoke a cigarette, but
> millions still do. I predict after we
> are all long gone, the automobile will
> eventually kill the planet. Alien
> anthropologists someday will visit the
> dead earth, and see all these machines
> (cars), everywhere they look. They will
> conclude that these were the machines
> that killed the planet. They will
> scratch their heads, and wonder how a
> species could obsess so much about these
> machines, that they would continue to
> produce them, by the billions until the
> planet was turned inside out. What were
> they thinking?

LOL! Logic deserting the cause? Say it aint so. But if you're reasoning
is an indication I can't argue.

You have the human race extinct, the whole Earth dead as well. What
conceit: to imply that because we destroy ourselves it's fait accompli
that life itself ceases regenerating; the biosphere is more resilient
than a single species! And aliens are landing. Anthropological aliens
at that! With heads to scratch! Why not complete the parallels to our
species and have them all driving SUVs back in Alpha Centauri? If we're
two sides of the same coin, let's call the glass half full instead of
half empty, have our speculations kill off their race and land on their
planet a million years hence.

The analogy to smoking is awkward at best. Smoking comprises a physical
(nicotine) addiction; our embrace of the automobile is a cultural
imperative. Cultures change and their host civilizations wax and wane.

There is nothing inevitable about our present course. History has
demonstrated that predicating the future is a fraught pastime.

[jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org]

Someone writes:

>> Everywhere you look, bikes are being junked, as being a primitive
>> form of transportation, as they jump into their new shiny cars.

> I guess I'm looking in the wrong places.

http://www.earth-policy.org/Indicators/indicator11_data1.htm

> Since the mid twentieth century, annual world production of bicycles
> has more than doubled the number of cars produced.

That appears to me to be a meaningless comparison, considering the
population of the earth and its mechanization. You might as well
compare it to the use of lead pencils and again against ball pens, or
for that matter the number of Oldsmobiles being produced by GM.

Bicycling, especially at night and in inclement weather, is not
something people over 40 years of age do gladly, especially if they
aren't doing so for recreation. Although I probably ride greater
annual distances than most bicycle advocates, I have always driven a
car for errands that involve loads that do not fit in my back-pack,
especially in poor weather and at night and on days of bad weather.

I also use my car to the starting point of major weekend rides (over
the Sierra Nevada for instance) and fly with commercial air to my
rides in Europe. Bicycle advocacy is best directed at routine rides
to work and the like, ones that are easily accomplished by bicycle.

Riding to work, has been my method, mainly because I live where that
is practical, here in the Santa Clara valley and when I lived in
Europe. Both of these areas were considered by others to be unsafe
for bicycle commuting. That may have just been and excuse for those
commenting, to explain their not doing so, but that's the perception.

Jobst Brandt

[mark@drumbent.com]

On Feb 10, 8:38 pm, jobst.bra...@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
> Someone writes:
> >> Everywhere you look, bikes are being junked, as being a primitive
> >> form of transportation, as they jump into their new shiny cars.
> > I guess I'm looking in the wrong places.
>
> http://www.earth-policy.org/Indicators/indicator11_data1.htm
>
> > Since the mid twentieth century, annual world production of bicycles
> > has more than doubled the number of cars produced.
>
> That appears to me to be a meaningless comparison, considering the
> population of the earth and its mechanization. You might as well
> compare it to the use of lead pencils and again against ball pens, or
> for that matter the number of Oldsmobiles being produced by GM.
>
> Bicycling, especially at night and in inclement weather, is not
> something people over 40 years of age do gladly, especially if they
> aren't doing so for recreation. Although I probably ride greater
> annual distances than most bicycle advocates, I have always driven a
> car for errands that involve loads that do not fit in my back-pack,
> especially in poor weather and at night and on days of bad weather.

(snip)

You might want to say "not something *most* people..." And I think
much of that would depend on one's environment. If I lived in the
burbs and had to deal with 80kph traffic just to get to the nearest
store I might wish I had a car. But I'm glad I'm not in that situation
(by choice).

I'm 48 and live in Ottawa, the second-coldest capital city in the
world. And I ride my bike, day or night, year-round, save for bad
snowstorms or freezing rain. Sometimes I tow a trailer for groceries
and other errands, other times for getting to music gigs (though I use
my cargo trike in the non-winter months for that). I get a lift every
now and then from one of my fellow musicians to certain gigs, or
otherwise borrow a friend's car, which I had to do all of four times
in 2007 (and if I did not have access to that I'd simply join our very
successful local car-share). Otherwise it's bike bike bike. Why?
Because it's good for my health and good for my local environment, and
yes, even just fun.

But in being a musician and also willing to endure the prototyping of
the cargo trike I'm perhaps a bit outside of any usual
demographic. ;)

Mark

[Luke]

In article <47afa6fc$0$36357$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>,
<jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org> wrote:

<snip>

> Bicycling, especially at night and in inclement weather, is not
> something people over 40 years of age do gladly, especially if they
> aren't doing so for recreation.

<snip>

The same can be said of motoring. Your point is valid nonetheless, but
it rests upon the assumption that driving is a practical option. I
envision a scenario where that option will become increasingly
constrained (economics, etc...), where the necessity of foregoing the
auto will supersede one's preferences in the matter.

Living in the city core, where owning a car is just not worthwhile,
this scenario describes my reality. Forced to, I'm in the habit of
riding everywhere; and some habits, especially if you like 'em, are
very hard to break.

[Tom Sherman]

Ed Pirrero wrote:
> On Feb 10, 10:19 am, Crescentius Vespasianus <jazzyb...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>> I think all cyclists, that have done
>> some serious cycling, delude themselves
>> to think that there will be a day when
>> people get out of their cars, and
>> discover the magic of cycling. The
>> problem with this is that cycling is in
>> direct conflict with the most seductive
>> drug that mankind has ever invented and
>> that is the automobile. Anyone who has
>> done a lot cycling, has seen the faces
>> of hundreds of thousands of drivers.
>> The trance like, almost drugged
>> appearance in their faces. Then there
>> are the ones that can't keep their foot
>> off the gas, almost like that
>> accelerator gives them a freebase like
>> high. Ground zero, is of course the
>> USA, but it is now spreading to all
>> corners of the planet. People who have
>> cycled off and on in France for years,
>> have seen the French moving in the
>> American direction, and are garaging
>> their bikes, and now driving cars.
>> India, with the new Nano car, is about
>> to put a hundred million bicycles into
>> retirement, as driving cars is now the
>> thing to do. China, is now banning
>> bicycles from roads, because Chinese
>> drivers prefer the wide bodied SUV's,
>> that they are now buying by the
>> millions. Everywhere you look, bikes
>> are being junked, as being a primitive
>> form of transportation, as they jump
>> into their new shiny cars. Meanwhile,
>> we waste time having arcane arguments
>> about helmets, while cycling itself is
>> headed to extinction. We are not the
>> vanguards, we are simply the last ones
>> to get the message.
>
> *snork*
>
> I used to ride my bike everywhere. To work, to school, to work after
> school, then to work again after I completed school.
>
> I rode for fun, and I rode just to ride - no purpose at all except to
> turn the cranks.
>
> Then a funny thing happened. I began to notice that people don't pay
> attention to anything but themselves. It was bad before, but in the
> last 5 years has gotten exponentially worse.
>
Part of the increase in selfishness that is breaking down society.

> All this time, I have owned cars. Performance-oriented cars. I love
> to drive almost as much as I love to bike. It is a different
> communion of man and machine, but of the same type as man and
> bicycle. One might be termed mastery of large muscle groups and other
> mastery of small muscle groups. Driving a car to it's limits requires
> a special set of skills, just as riding a MTB well has a special set
> of (different) skills.
>
> But back to the decision - when one day, I was nearly run over thrice
> by cell-phone holding, slack-jawed soccer moms in minivans, I put up
> my bike as a commuter. No more do I ride on the road with the folks
> who can't be bothered to look even three feet outside their cars.
>
To bad cars do not have interlocks that prohibit simultaneous driving
and mobile phone use.

> The pleasure of bike commuting might still be there for some people.
> I don't see it any more. I ride my bike on singletrack and avoid
> automobiles all I can.
>
Another part of the problem is people irresponsibly over-breeding.
Traffic was much less of a problem 30 years ago when the population was
much smaller.

> To get back to your thesis...
>
> Your characterization of drivers may be correct in some cases, but
> more often than not, there is a perceived hassle with riding bike to
> work, and a real hassle if you have children you must fetch from
> daycare, then pick up food for a meal - there are just not enough
> hours in a day to make all that happen, and ride bike, too. When you
> are responsible for transporting two kids and 4 bags of groceries 10
> miles in one-half hour, then you can quickly see that a bike is not a
> viable option.
>
Of course, if the increases in worker productivity had resulted in
higher wages (in the US), people would only have to work 30 hours per
week instead of 50 to 70, which would greatly increase the amount of
available time. Urban sprawl has also resulted in distances that are too
far to walk and ride for most people.

> The lifestyle changes required to make it work are too difficult for
> most folks to contemplate. If ever they even did entertain a glimmer
> of a notion to do so.
>
> As primary transportation, the bike is dead in the U.S. And will go
> that way elsewhere.
>
> But we'll be dead by then. Weep for your children's children. They
> will be the ones who bear the burden.
>
If the hominids survive that long, which is not a given.

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful

[still just me]

On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 18:17:57 -0800 (PST), Ed Pirrero
<gcmschemist@gmail.com> wrote:

>Then a funny thing happened. I began to notice that people don't pay
>attention to anything but themselves. It was bad before, but in the
>last 5 years has gotten exponentially worse.

You've met my ex-wife then?

[Crescentius Vespasianus]

>
> But back to the decision - when one day, I was nearly run over thrice
> by cell-phone holding, slack-jawed soccer moms in minivans, I put up
> my bike as a commuter. No more do I ride on the road with the folks
> who can't be bothered to look even three feet outside their cars.
>
> The pleasure of bike commuting might still be there for some people.
> I don't see it any more. I ride my bike on singletrack and avoid
> automobiles all I can.
>

> E.P.
------------
A very insightful response, but another
thing that you might consider, is that
driving is also getting extremely
dangerous. Just for the record, I drive
6000 miles /year, and ride 6000 miles
/year. And I use to drive a lot more,
but that's getting more hairy also,
because of the things you said in your
comment. So I only drive, if I have to,
and it's not fun anymore. The other
day, a kid here, slammed into 10 cars,
and his SUV went airborne, before
slamming into a car, killing a teacher
driving to work. The kid said, he had a
medical problem, but the full details
have not been released yet. I commute
twice a week (hedging my bets), and I
ride through the carnage, of yesterdays
wrecks, parts of bumpers, glass broken,
parts of tail-lights. Many are fender
benders, my brother got rear-ended, and
his kid got rear-ended, all within a
year. Eventually, there has to be an
end game to all of this. But the common
thread, is people don't give a rats ass,
and they are too distracted, by all the
gadgets, that have nothing to do with
driving. They said technology, would
free mankind, but I think it's putting
people who value their safety in a
prison. Safe at home, until someone
drives through the wall, which also
happens time to time.

[Clive George]

"Ed Pirrero" <gcmschemist@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:13db758e-1ebd-4e42-b316-707633b5c35f@e23g2000prf.googlegroups.com...

> As primary transportation, the bike is dead in the U.S. And will go
> that way elsewhere.

Actually, in places this side of the pond, utility bike use is on the way
up, not down. Life on two wheels is good!

(isn't it happening in some places in leftpondia too?)

cheers,
clive

[frkrygow@gmail.com]

On Feb 10, 9:17 pm, Ed Pirrero <gcmschem...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Your characterization of drivers may be correct in some cases, but
> more often than not, there is a perceived hassle with riding bike to
> work, and a real hassle if you have children you must fetch from
> daycare, then pick up food for a meal - there are just not enough
> hours in a day to make all that happen, and ride bike, too. When you
> are responsible for transporting two kids and 4 bags of groceries 10
> miles in one-half hour, then you can quickly see that a bike is not a
> viable option.
>
> The lifestyle changes required to make it work are too difficult for
> most folks to contemplate. If ever they even did entertain a glimmer
> of a notion to do so.

What you say in that paragraph is true. Still, what you said in the
previous paragraph can be corrected, or prevented, by the application
of a little uncommon sense.

It's been decades since we moved to this town from a different state.
But both this house, and the one we bought in that different state,
were chosen largely to reject the problem of transporting kids and
groceries ten miles in half an hour. I wanted a house in a nice
neighborhood that allowed my kids to walk to school, allowed me to use
a bike to get to work, and to stores, doctors, banks, etc.

To get this, I ended up with a house most Americans would say is too
small. And to keep it, I resisted pressures to move to a larger,
ritzier place. I've recently expanded the house a bit, rather than
move.

Most people would say the expansion made no economic sense. But I
base my decisions on more than simplistic economics. Quality of life
makes a difference to me - and part of that quality is not being quite
so enslaved to a car.

Perhaps this attitude will be fashionable some day. Stranger things
have happened.

> As primary transportation, the bike is dead in the U.S. And will go
> that way elsewhere.

Not necessarily. See above. Predicting the future always seems to be
done by extrapolating present trends. But the future tends to throw
weirdness in from time to time, just to prove it can't be reliably
predicted.

Meanwhile, I'll keep doing what I think is right. Maybe others will
follow. Stranger things have happened.

- Frank Krygowski

[Matt O'Toole]

On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 18:17:57 -0800, Ed Pirrero wrote:

> But back to the decision - when one day, I was nearly run over thrice by
> cell-phone holding, slack-jawed soccer moms in minivans, I put up my
> bike as a commuter. No more do I ride on the road with the folks who
> can't be bothered to look even three feet outside their cars.

I bet that like most of us, you've had many more close calls while driving
a motor vehicle than while bicycling -- from people running red lights,
etc. And yet you drive because you feel "safer."

Matt O.

[(PeteCresswell)]

Per Clive George:
>Actually, in places this side of the pond, utility bike use is on the way
>up, not down. Life on two wheels is good!
>
>(isn't it happening in some places in leftpondia too?)

It's dangerous enough to ride a bike around where I live (if one
blindly follows the official rules...) that I would never advise
anybody to give up their car for a bike on local trips. Wouldn't
want the feeling of responsibility if they bit the big one.

Having said that...

I'm about 20 minutes by bike from the gym (actually a huge YMCA)
that I work out in 5-7 days a week. In a car, I might make it
in 12-15 minutes.... maybe... but maybe 30 also. By bike it's 20
minutes: period.... no matter what.

It's actually quite a pleasant ride as long as I cut down the
right sidewalk and through the right parking lots - Yet
potentially suicidal if I were to pretend to be a car.

But this facility serves *thousands* of people - and the most
bikes I've ever seen in the rack outside are two besides mine.
Usually the number is zero.

All those people going somewhere to get some exercise... and
driving a car to get there.

I think I know why.. And I agree with it for the average
law-abiding person... but it's still a crying shame....
--
PeteCresswell

[Scott Gordo]

On Feb 10, 10:54 pm, Scott Gordo <blubberp...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Feb 10, 1:19 pm, Crescentius Vespasianus <jazzyb...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> > I think all cyclists, that have done
> > some serious cycling, delude themselves
> > to think that there will be a day when
> > people get out of their cars, and
> > discover the magic of cycling. The
> > problem with this is that cycling is in
> > direct conflict with the most seductive
> > drug that mankind has ever invented and
> > that is the automobile. Anyone who has
> > done a lot cycling, has seen the faces
> > of hundreds of thousands of drivers.
> > The trance like, almost drugged
> > appearance in their faces. Then there
> > are the ones that can't keep their foot
> > off the gas, almost like that
> > accelerator gives them a freebase like
> > high. Ground zero, is of course the
> > USA, but it is now spreading to all
> > corners of the planet. People who have
> > cycled off and on in France for years,
> > have seen the French moving in the
> > American direction, and are garaging
> > their bikes, and now driving cars.
> > India, with the new Nano car, is about
> > to put a hundred million bicycles into
> > retirement, as driving cars is now the
> > thing to do. China, is now banning
> > bicycles from roads, because Chinese
> > drivers prefer the wide bodied SUV's,
> > that they are now buying by the
> > millions. Everywhere you look, bikes
> > are being junked, as being a primitive
> > form of transportation, as they jump
> > into their new shiny cars. Meanwhile,
> > we waste time having arcane arguments
> > about helmets, while cycling itself is
> > headed to extinction. We are not the
> > vanguards, we are simply the last ones
> > to get the message.
>
> Pffft. You're still here?
>
> As for being "the last ones to get the message', what message? Like
> the wise man says, I ride my bike to ride my bike.
>
> Seriously, go find a hobby that makes you happy.
>
> Also: I'd say that the vast majority of people in this newsgroup own a
> car. I would if I didn't live in a place
>
> /s

....that made it more difficult and expensive than it's worth. And, you
know, we're all using computers, made of plastic, powered by
electricity. And our bikes are welded with fossil fuel flames, and the
food we eat is likely transported to the supermarkets using fossil
fuel, and etc. ad nauseam.

Enjoy!

Done!

[datakoll]

I'll bet a ten that 80% of the riders here past and present do not
ride short trips in loo of using an IC vehicle.

[Tom Sherman]

datakoll aka gene daniels wrote:
>
> I'll bet a ten that 80% of the riders here past and present do not
> ride short trips in loo of using an IC vehicle.

I suspect that most RBT posters do NOT use a loo to travel.

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful

[Clive George]

"datakoll" <datakoll@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:4ae1a543-9fc5-46c3-8b4a-6b758e210c37@p69g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
>
>
> I'll bet a ten that 80% of the riders here past and present do not
> ride short trips in loo of using an IC vehicle.

You're probably right. Which is sad.

I'm happily in that 20% though :-)

cheers,
clive

[A Muzi]

datakoll wrote:
> I'll bet a ten that 80% of the riders here past and present do not
> ride short trips in loo of using an IC vehicle.

I walk to the loo. Bike won't fit in there.
--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

[DanKMTB@gmail.com]

On Feb 10, 11:01*pm, datakoll <datak...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> I'll bet a ten that 80% of the riders here past and present do not
> ride short trips in loo of using an IC vehicle.

By here, do you mean RBT, your country or this planet? I use my bike
for short trips all the time, cruising (this time of year carrying the
bike through the unshoveled snow) right past my truck with my
"practical" bike - SS/fixie w/ fenders. If by "here" you mean RBT,
I'd be tempted to take your bet. I did it Saturday to go get more
mayo so the womanfolk of the house could finish the potato and egg
salad. I can't imagine that at least two thirds of the RBT population
would have taken the truck.

It was bitter cold, windy and the roads were slushy. I just stayed
slow and easy - due to the straight shot and lack of parking it was
probably still just as fast as taking the truck would have been (and
longer if you factor in warming up the truck).

[Brian Huntley]

On Feb 10, 11:37*pm, A Muzi <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
> datakoll wrote:
> > I'll bet a ten that 80% of the riders here past and present do not
> > ride short trips in loo of using an IC vehicle.
>
> I walk to the loo. Bike won't fit in there.

That beats skipping there.

[DanKMTB@gmail.com]

On Feb 10, 11:37*pm, A Muzi <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
> datakoll wrote:
> > I'll bet a ten that 80% of the riders here past and present do not
> > ride short trips in loo of using an IC vehicle.
>
> I walk to the loo. Bike won't fit in there.
> --
> Andrew Muziwww.yellowjersey.org
> Open every day since 1 April, 1971

One of my bikes lives in the loo at work. Not someplace I'd want to
live, but it's accessible right by the time clock for lunchtime runs,
and it's out of site for people walking by from the train.

[Tom Sherman]

Andrew Muzi wrote:
> datakoll wrote:
>> I'll bet a ten that 80% of the riders here past and present do not
>> ride short trips in loo of using an IC vehicle.
>
> I walk to the loo. Bike won't fit in there.

I have cleaned off my ATB in the bathtub.

While in graduate school, I stored a B.o.B. in the water closet, since
there was no place for it elsewhere (efficiency apartment).

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful

[Ed Pirrero]

On Feb 10, 9:12 pm, frkry...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Feb 10, 9:17 pm, Ed Pirrero <gcmschem...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Your characterization of drivers may be correct in some cases, but
> > more often than not, there is a perceived hassle with riding bike to
> > work, and a real hassle if you have children you must fetch from
> > daycare, then pick up food for a meal - there are just not enough
> > hours in a day to make all that happen, and ride bike, too. When you
> > are responsible for transporting two kids and 4 bags of groceries 10
> > miles in one-half hour, then you can quickly see that a bike is not a
> > viable option.
>
> > The lifestyle changes required to make it work are too difficult for
> > most folks to contemplate. If ever they even did entertain a glimmer
> > of a notion to do so.
>
> What you say in that paragraph is true. Still, what you said in the
> previous paragraph can be corrected, or prevented, by the application
> of a little uncommon sense.
>
> It's been decades since we moved to this town from a different state.
> But both this house, and the one we bought in that different state,
> were chosen largely to reject the problem of transporting kids and
> groceries ten miles in half an hour. I wanted a house in a nice
> neighborhood that allowed my kids to walk to school, allowed me to use
> a bike to get to work, and to stores, doctors, banks, etc.
>
> To get this, I ended up with a house most Americans would say is too
> small. And to keep it, I resisted pressures to move to a larger,
> ritzier place. I've recently expanded the house a bit, rather than
> move.
>
> Most people would say the expansion made no economic sense. But I
> base my decisions on more than simplistic economics. Quality of life
> makes a difference to me - and part of that quality is not being quite
> so enslaved to a car.
>
> Perhaps this attitude will be fashionable some day. Stranger things
> have happened.
>
> > As primary transportation, the bike is dead in the U.S. And will go
> > that way elsewhere.
>
> Not necessarily. See above. Predicting the future always seems to be
> done by extrapolating present trends.

In essence, America invented the mass-produced automobile, making it
available to the everyman. In the U.S., distances are too large to
not have some form of IC transportation, and since public transport is
not very good even in the best of places, this leads in one direction.

Your path, which most people can't see, is fortuitous. For you. But
most folks can't live near where they work and where their kids go to
school. I'm glad my work is only 12 miles away. I'm glad that the
kids can walk to school. I used to commute the 12 miles each way, but
won't, because of the personal danger. And I sure as hell wouldn't
expose my kids to it.

We, too, chose a house that was smaller in order to live closer in.
But it still isn't close enough to everything to obviate a car.

Bike sales may be up, but it might be due to increased population.
What is the yearly bike commuting per capita, as compared to years
past?

E.P.

[Luke]

In article
<70ca3fb3-9986-451f-b6d7-ca5b9232b389@s13g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, Ed
Pirrero <gcmschemist@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> In essence, America invented the mass-produced automobile, making it
> available to the everyman.

And embraced the mass produced "community", i.e., suburban
developments, like no other society. Accordingly it's not surprising
that (North) Americans are adept at mass producing problems as well;
let's see if solutions can be engineered on a similar scale.

> In the U.S., distances are too large to
> not have some form of IC transportation, and since public transport is
> not very good even in the best of places, this leads in one direction.

It generally points in one direction but, as Frank has demonstrated,
one is free to head off in another. Thankfully the prominence of mass
production doesn't inculcate everyone with an ethic of mass
consumption. There are those who develop a sense of themselves and live
by their own convictions rather than blindly buying into the dominant
cultural assumptions.

>
> Your path, which most people can't see, is fortuitous. For you. But
> most folks can't live near where they work and where their kids go to
> school.

I wonder if the more accurate term should be "won't" instead of
"can't". As in, won't if it requires a smaller house, or if the
property value won't increase as quickly, or the lawn isn't as large,
or the quality of the neighbourhood or neighbors is below par, etc...

I appreciate your point, however I find there can be many factors
blurring the boundaries between those two terms.


> I'm glad my work is only 12 miles away. I'm glad that the
> kids can walk to school. I used to commute the 12 miles each way, but
> won't, because of the personal danger. And I sure as hell wouldn't
> expose my kids to it.

Understandable. But a shame nonetheless.
>
> We, too, chose a house that was smaller in order to live closer in.
> But it still isn't close enough to everything to obviate a car.
>
> Bike sales may be up, but it might be due to increased population.
> What is the yearly bike commuting per capita, as compared to years
> past?
>
> E.P.

[Michael Press]

In article
<80edf348-25e3-4baa-980b-7beeffae1491@j20g2000hsi.googlegroups.com>,
mark@drumbent.com wrote:

> I'm 48 and live in Ottawa, the second-coldest capital city in the
> world.

Moscow?

--
Michael Press

[datakoll]

On Feb 11, 3:07*am, Ben C <spams...@spam.eggs> wrote:
> On 2008-02-11, Crescentius Vespasianus <jazzyb...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >> You're right, the advantages and pleasures of cycling certainly won't
> >> prompt motorists to abandon their ways. It will be skyrocketing gas
> >> prices, gridlock, and the onerous expense of owning and operating a
> >> car.
>
> >> Less cars may not translate into more bicycles but to benefit us it's
> >> not necessary that it does.
> > ---------
> > Logic has nothing to do with it.
> > logical to smoke a cigarette, but
> > millions still do. *I predict after we
> > are all long gone, the automobile will
> > eventually kill the planet. *Alien
> > anthropologists someday will visit the
> > dead earth, and see all these machines
> > (cars), everywhere they look. *They will
> > conclude that these were the machines
> > that killed the planet.
>
> How exactly will automobiles kill all life on earth? Oh I forgot, logic
> has nothing to do with it.
>
> > They will
> > scratch their heads, and wonder how a
> > species could obsess so much about these
> > machines, that they would continue to
> > produce them, by the billions until the
> > planet was turned inside out. *What were
> > they thinking?
>
> Then they will step back into their flying saucers and go home again,
> thinking why did we invest all that cash into Death Star research when
> all we needed was a few billion automobiles.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

oh that's an easy one.
the auto is a continuation of man's ego trip: an extension of War is
fun.
I drive an expensive car. I am an Alpha male.
You who proph...walk, ride a bicycle or drive a 999cc mini car are a
Beta male.
people are stupid, egocentric, narrowminded so they buy that Alpha
male consumerism benefitting the KIng
and wind up as cannon fodder.

[Eric Vey]

datakoll wrote:
> On Feb 11, 3:07 am, Ben C <spams...@spam.eggs> wrote:
>> On 2008-02-11, Crescentius Vespasianus <jazzyb...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>> You're right, the advantages and pleasures of cycling certainly won't
>>>> prompt motorists to abandon their ways. It will be skyrocketing gas
>>>> prices, gridlock, and the onerous expense of owning and operating a
>>>> car.
>>>> Less cars may not translate into more bicycles but to benefit us it's
>>>> not necessary that it does.
>>> ---------
>>> Logic has nothing to do with it.
>>> logical to smoke a cigarette, but
>>> millions still do. I predict after we
>>> are all long gone, the automobile will
>>> eventually kill the planet. Alien
>>> anthropologists someday will visit the
>>> dead earth, and see all these machines
>>> (cars), everywhere they look. They will
>>> conclude that these were the machines
>>> that killed the planet.
>> How exactly will automobiles kill all life on earth? Oh I forgot, logic
>> has nothing to do with it.
>>
>>> They will
>>> scratch their heads, and wonder how a
>>> species could obsess so much about these
>>> machines, that they would continue to
>>> produce them, by the billions until the
>>> planet was turned inside out. What were
>>> they thinking?
>> Then they will step back into their flying saucers and go home again,
>> thinking why did we invest all that cash into Death Star research when
>> all we needed was a few billion automobiles.- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> oh that's an easy one.
> the auto is a continuation of man's ego trip: an extension of War is
> fun.
> I drive an expensive car. I am an Alpha male.
> You who proph...walk, ride a bicycle or drive a 999cc mini car are a
> Beta male.
> people are stupid, egocentric, narrowminded so they buy that Alpha
> male consumerism benefitting the KIng
> and wind up as cannon fodder.

Not quite. If they are truly an Alpha male, then neither they, nor their
children end up as cannon fodder. Ask the Alphas who paid for their
kids to get Ph D's in Astronomy.

Older folks will pick that crack up on the first take, but for people
too young or too naive, it was common practice for wealthy parents to
keep their kids in college studying "essential work" back in the '60's
if they didn't have the pull to get them into the Air National Guard.

[Tom Sherman]

datakoll aka gene daniels wrote:
> On Feb 11, 3:07 am, Ben C <spams...@spam.eggs> wrote:
>> On 2008-02-11, Crescentius Vespasianus <jazzyb...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> You're right, the advantages and pleasures of cycling certainly won't
>>>> prompt motorists to abandon their ways. It will be skyrocketing gas
>>>> prices, gridlock, and the onerous expense of owning and operating a
>>>> car.
>>>> Less cars may not translate into more bicycles but to benefit us it's
>>>> not necessary that it does.
>>> ---------
>>> Logic has nothing to do with it.
>>> logical to smoke a cigarette, but
>>> millions still do. I predict after we
>>> are all long gone, the automobile will
>>> eventually kill the planet. Alien
>>> anthropologists someday will visit the
>>> dead earth, and see all these machines
>>> (cars), everywhere they look. They will
>>> conclude that these were the machines
>>> that killed the planet.
>> How exactly will automobiles kill all life on earth? Oh I forgot, logic
>> has nothing to do with it.
>>
>>> They will
>>> scratch their heads, and wonder how a
>>> species could obsess so much about these
>>> machines, that they would continue to
>>> produce them, by the billions until the
>>> planet was turned inside out. What were
>>> they thinking?
>> Then they will step back into their flying saucers and go home again,
>> thinking why did we invest all that cash into Death Star research when
>> all we needed was a few billion automobiles.- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> oh that's an easy one.
> the auto is a continuation of man's ego trip: an extension of War is
> fun.
> I drive an expensive car. I am an Alpha male.

I drive an expensive car, therefore I have been suckered by Madison Avenue.

> You who proph...walk, ride a bicycle or drive a 999cc mini car are a
> Beta male.

I ride a bicycle and drive a small car, therefore I am morally superior
to the luxury car/SUV driver.

> people are stupid, egocentric, narrowminded so they buy that Alpha
> male consumerism benefitting the KIng
> and wind up as cannon fodder.

gene for President 2008!

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful

[still just me]

On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 09:24:50 -0500, Eric Vey <junker@ericvey.com>
wrote:

>
>Older folks will pick that crack up on the first take, but for people
>too young or too naive, it was common practice for wealthy parents to
>keep their kids in college studying "essential work" back in the '60's
>if they didn't have the pull to get them into the Air National Guard.

How dare you insinuate that GWB used his parents pull get into the ANG
to avoid military service and then didn't even properly complete that
service (using further influence to first avoid, and later obfuscate,
that issue).

[jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org]

Matt O'Toole writes:

>> But back to the decision - when one day, I was nearly run over
>> thrice by cell-phone holding, slack-jawed soccer moms in minivans,
>> I put up my bike as a commuter. No more do I ride on the road with
>> the folks who can't be bothered to look even three feet outside
>> their cars.

> I bet that like most of us, you've had many more close calls while
> driving a motor vehicle than while bicycling -- from people running
> red lights, etc. And yet you drive because you feel "safer."

That is for good reason. Surrounded by a steel frame and body, with
seat belts and air bags most collisions where cars are destroyed,
driver and passengers are often relatively unscathed. That is not the
situation when hit by a 30mph red light running car when bicycling.

Here in the Santa Cruz mountains, cars go over the side and lodge
between trees 50 to 100 yards below the road with minimal injuries in
many cases. Those would not be so benign on a bicycle going over the
edge at 30-40mph.

Jobst Brandt

[(PeteCresswell)]

Per Matt O'Toole:
> And yet you drive because you feel "safer."

On a bike I'm naked.

In a car I'm protected by seatbelts, multiple airbags, and a
steel cage.

They don't call 'em "Cagers" for nothing.... -)
--
PeteCresswell

[Ed Pirrero]

On Feb 11, 1:12*pm, Matt O'Toole <mattoto...@letterboxes.org> wrote:
> On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 18:17:57 -0800, Ed Pirrero wrote:
> > But back to the decision - when one day, I was nearly run over thrice by
> > cell-phone holding, slack-jawed soccer moms in minivans, I put up my
> > bike as a commuter. *No more do I ride on the road with the folks who
> > can't be bothered to look even three feet outside their cars.
>
> I bet that like most of us, you've had many more close calls while driving
> a motor vehicle than while bicycling -- from people running red lights,
> etc. *And yet you drive because you feel "safer."
>
> Matt O.

Matt, I AM safer. With two tons of German steel surrounding me,
airbags, and direct control of nearly 400HP, I can out-brake, out-
corner and out-accelerate most every other car on the road, AND, if
all that fails, have the cage and other safety systems that help
protect me.

One of the reasons I am a better driver is due to my bike commuting.
The intuition I developed about car actions before they would actually
happen has served me very well while commuting in my car. But that
having been said, minivan-driving soccer moms rarely ignore a big
German sport sedan directly out their windows.

E.P.

[(PeteCresswell)]

Per DanKMTB@gmail.com:
> I use my bike
>for short trips all the time, cruising (this time of year carrying the
>bike through the unshoveled snow) right past my truck with my
>"practical" bike - SS/fixie w/ fenders. If by "here" you mean RBT,
>I'd be tempted to take your bet. I did it Saturday to go get more
>mayo so the womanfolk of the house could finish the potato and egg
>salad. I can't imagine that at least two thirds of the RBT population
>would have taken the truck.

Funny thing with me: my "real" bike cost enough to feed an entire
Indian village for at least three months, yet for at least the
past six months 90% of my mileage has been on my POS
"who'd-want-to-steal-it" bike... just getting places I need to go
that are more conveniently gotten to by bike.
--
PeteCresswell

[Rob Lindauer]

Michael Press wrote:
> In article
> <80edf348-25e3-4baa-980b-7beeffae1491@j20g2000hsi.googlegroups.com>,
> mark@drumbent.com wrote:
>
>> I'm 48 and live in Ottawa, the second-coldest capital city in the
>> world.
>
> Moscow?
>

Nuuk?

--
Rob Lindauer - Please change "att" to "sbc" for my real email address

[mark@drumbent.com]

On Feb 11, 6:28 pm, Rob Lindauer <rli...@attglobal.net> wrote:
> Michael Press wrote:
> > In article
> > <80edf348-25e3-4baa-980b-7beeffae1...@j20g2000hsi.googlegroups.com>,
> > m...@drumbent.com wrote:
>
> >> I'm 48 and live in Ottawa, the second-coldest capital city in the
> >> world.
>
> > Moscow?
>
> Nuuk?
>
> --
> Rob Lindauer - Please change "att" to "sbc" for my real email address


Actually, it's Ulaan-baatar, Mongolia.

http://geography.about.com/od/physicalgeography/a/coldcapital.htm

Though this website says that Ottawa is not even in the top 5! Darn,
I bought the propaganda that said we were #2, as that's why I moved
here. ;)

Mark (who just cycled home at -17C)

[DanKMTB@gmail.com]

On Feb 11, 7:15 pm, "(PeteCresswell)" <x...@y.Invalid> wrote:
> Per DanK...@gmail.com:
>
> > I use my bike
> >for short trips all the time, cruising (this time of year carrying the
> >bike through the unshoveled snow) right past my truck with my
> >"practical" bike - SS/fixie w/ fenders. If by "here" you mean RBT,
> >I'd be tempted to take your bet. I did it Saturday to go get more
> >mayo so the womanfolk of the house could finish the potato and egg
> >salad. I can't imagine that at least two thirds of the RBT population
> >would have taken the truck.
>
> Funny thing with me: my "real" bike cost enough to feed an entire
> Indian village for at least three months, yet for at least the
> past six months 90% of my mileage has been on my POS
> "who'd-want-to-steal-it" bike... just getting places I need to go
> that are more conveniently gotten to by bike.
> --
> PeteCresswell

Change "six months" to "three months" and the same (I assume, without
being sure the details of the village) could be said for me. Truth be
told, however, my "real" bike is a mountain bike, and the only skinny
tire ride I have is the aforementioned SS/fixie, an old 60's Rudge
salvage. Last summer I'd have taken the MTB and done some "urban
assault" toying on the way there. This time of year I'd rather keep
the salt away from it.

Funny thing about that bike, I bought it and then planned on buying a
"real" road bike down the road, but it never managed to take priority
when funds were available. I've since considered putting a 9 speed
setup on the trusty Rudge (which I love, oh-so-comfy), but I'm afraid
to lose that no-worries, no-fuss simplicity of the SS/fixie. I'd also
probably have to add to and improve on the brake situation. Hm...

[datakoll]

looks like I WALK TO THE LOO is ahmoooovin' up on the C & W charts
eeyayyahahaha

yeah. THE BET. let's look at the other side of the loo errr coin?
what's all this BS about Colnago this and Colnago that?
those folk claiming Colnago status are riding to the superduper or
Truerippoff?
anyway, I wuz talkin' summertime. I live in Fla so no cheating right?
in the north, if possible, I would walk not ride caws of the ice.
No, I believe what I see: most of this I ride to save the planet thru
conserving is ONLINE BS, theoretic or hypothetic.

[Zoot Katz]

On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 16:32:36 -0800 (PST), "DanKMTB@gmail.com"
<DanKMTB@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Feb 11, 7:15 pm, "(PeteCresswell)" <x...@y.Invalid> wrote:
>> Per DanK...@gmail.com:
>>
>> > I use my bike
>> >for short trips all the time, cruising (this time of year carrying the
>> >bike through the unshoveled snow) right past my truck with my
>> >"practical" bike - SS/fixie w/ fenders. If by "here" you mean RBT,
>> >I'd be tempted to take your bet. I did it Saturday to go get more
>> >mayo so the womanfolk of the house could finish the potato and egg
>> >salad. I can't imagine that at least two thirds of the RBT population
>> >would have taken the truck.
>>
>> Funny thing with me: my "real" bike cost enough to feed an entire
>> Indian village for at least three months, yet for at least the
>> past six months 90% of my mileage has been on my POS
>> "who'd-want-to-steal-it" bike... just getting places I need to go
>> that are more conveniently gotten to by bike.
>> --
>> PeteCresswell
>
>Change "six months" to "three months" and the same (I assume, without
>being sure the details of the village) could be said for me. Truth be
>told, however, my "real" bike is a mountain bike, and the only skinny
>tire ride I have is the aforementioned SS/fixie, an old 60's Rudge
>salvage. Last summer I'd have taken the MTB and done some "urban
>assault" toying on the way there. This time of year I'd rather keep
>the salt away from it.
>
>Funny thing about that bike, I bought it and then planned on buying a
>"real" road bike down the road, but it never managed to take priority
>when funds were available. I've since considered putting a 9 speed
>setup on the trusty Rudge (which I love, oh-so-comfy), but I'm afraid
>to lose that no-worries, no-fuss simplicity of the SS/fixie. I'd also
>probably have to add to and improve on the brake situation. Hm...

That's what picking my grits on the whole "urban bike" scene hitting
North America. We're importing the bicycle equivalent of Volvo,
SAAB, Benz and BMW to do the jobs our trusty dumped beaters have been
doing for years. The hype is made to sell the sexiness of cycling to
the urban chic. Freds are suddenly studs as long as they've got a
couple gee!-notes to drop on a bike with a name people mispronounce.
I'm happy they're trying. Even the cheap buzz-bikes are okay with me.
I believe that the more cyclists rattling cagers, the better it gets
for all of us.

For a twenty kilometer bus trip, that makes its three connections on
time, it takes me one hour from my door. The bike trip out takes
seventy minutes, or about 90 minutes hauling ~40 lbs. of tools you
wouldn't get on a bus. The same bus trip can take ninety minutes if
you miss one of the connections. Riding home is faster because of the
overall elevation drrop. On Fridays you kill cars through downtown.

I ride daily even if it's just the mile to the grocery store. Seven
of my eleven bikes have fenders because the winters in Vancouver, BC
are wet but rideable.

Just looking around at the five bikes I've ridden in the past week,
two of them were gifted by friends, two were dumpster freebies and
one was partial payment on a dumped but working complete road bike I
traded. That only needed toe clips, tires and cables to restore.

Two of them are SS, three have racks and they all have fenders.
They've all had between sixty and $450 invested in their present
configurations. That price doesn't include locks nor does the chosen
lock bear any relation to the bike's value. That is decided by
anticipated or unknown parking situations. I'd hate having to walk or
take a bus if my bike's been stolen. They're all "urban bikes" and do
utility service depending on destination and load carrying needs.
Only one of them bears any resemblence to its initial specifications.
My "good" bikes I don't lock, except at home, because I won't leave
them when I'm riding one.
--
zk

[Scott Gordo]

On Feb 11, 7:32*pm, "DanK...@gmail.com" <DanK...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Feb 11, 7:15 pm, "(PeteCresswell)" <x...@y.Invalid> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Per DanK...@gmail.com:
>
> > > I use my bike
> > >for short trips all the time, cruising (this time of year carrying the
> > >bike through the unshoveled snow) right past my truck with my
> > >"practical" bike - SS/fixie w/ fenders. *If by "here" you mean RBT,
> > >I'd be tempted to take your bet. *I did it Saturday to go get more
> > >mayo so the womanfolk of the house could finish the potato and egg
> > >salad. *I can't imagine that at least two thirds of the RBT population
> > >would have taken the truck.
>
> > Funny thing with me: my "real" bike cost enough to feed an entire
> > Indian village for at least three months, yet for at least the
> > past six months 90% of my mileage has been on my POS
> > "who'd-want-to-steal-it" bike... just getting places I need to go
> > that are more conveniently gotten to by bike.
> > --
> > PeteCresswell
>
> Change "six months" to "three months" and the same (I assume, without
> being sure the details of the village) could be said for me. *Truth be
> told, however, my "real" bike is a mountain bike, and the only skinny
> tire ride I have is the aforementioned SS/fixie, an old 60's Rudge
> salvage. *Last summer I'd have taken the MTB and done some "urban
> assault" toying on the way there. *This time of year I'd rather keep
> the salt away from it.
>
> Funny thing about that bike, I bought it and then planned on buying a
> "real" road bike down the road, but it never managed to take priority
> when funds were available. *I've since considered putting a 9 speed
> setup on the trusty Rudge (which I love, oh-so-comfy), but I'm afraid
> to lose that no-worries, no-fuss simplicity of the SS/fixie. *I'd also
> probably have to add to and improve on the brake situation. *Hm...- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

9sp on a 3sp Rudge frame? I dunno. Sounds expensive (new hub, gears,
shifters, longer bb, 9sp rings... and, like you said,
counterproductive to the spirit of the bike in ways.

Oh, wait, are there 9sp internal hubs that'll fit?

[Zoot Katz]

On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 18:50:49 -0600, Tom Sherman
<sunsetss0003@REMOVETHISyahoo.com> wrote:

>Andrew Muzi wrote:
>> datakoll wrote:
>>> I'll bet a ten that 80% of the riders here past and present do not
>>> ride short trips in loo of using an IC vehicle.
>>
>> I walk to the loo. Bike won't fit in there.
>
>I have cleaned off my ATB in the bathtub.
>
>While in graduate school, I stored a B.o.B. in the water closet, since
>there was no place for it elsewhere (efficiency apartment).

I've hung two bikes nestled in a step-up steel shower stall.
Locked together there was no way to get them out. Draw the curtain
and you'd never even know they were there. There was usually only one
bike in there when I wanted to shower so it wasn't much of a hassle.
--
zk

[(PeteCresswell)]

Per Ed Pirrero:
>. But that
>having been said, minivan-driving soccer moms rarely ignore a big
>German sport sedan directly out their windows.

Best vehicle in that vein I ever had was a rusted out,
well-dented '98 Olds two-door with roof racks on top.

Put that baby's turn signal on... and watch the Beamers scatter
like barnyard chickens.
--
PeteCresswell

[DanKMTB@gmail.com]

On Feb 11, 8:07 pm, "(PeteCresswell)" <x...@y.Invalid> wrote:
> Per Ed Pirrero:
>
> >. But that
> >having been said, minivan-driving soccer moms rarely ignore a big
> >German sport sedan directly out their windows.
>
> Best vehicle in that vein I ever had was a rusted out,
> well-dented '98 Olds two-door with roof racks on top.
>
> Put that baby's turn signal on... and watch the Beamers scatter
> like barnyard chickens.
> --
> PeteCresswell

I drove a previously totaled GMS Yukon, 1992, creased up bumpers and
all for a while. Same effect - nobody wants to get in the way of
something that big & heavy, especially when it already shows battle
scars. The Ranger I now drive, complete with branch & gate bodywork,
doesn't have the same effect. I think it's just too small.

[Tom Sherman]

(PeteCresswell) wrote:
> Per Ed Pirrero:
>> . But that
>> having been said, minivan-driving soccer moms rarely ignore a big
>> German sport sedan directly out their windows.
>
> Best vehicle in that vein I ever had was a rusted out,
> well-dented '98 Olds two-door with roof racks on top.
>
> Put that baby's turn signal on... and watch the Beamers scatter
> like barnyard chickens.
>
Yep, that is fun. A really ratty full size pickup works well.

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful

[Ed Pirrero]

On Feb 11, 5:07*pm, "(PeteCresswell)" <x...@y.Invalid> wrote:
> Per Ed Pirrero:
>
> >. *But that
> >having been said, minivan-driving soccer moms rarely ignore a big
> >German sport sedan directly out their windows.
>
> Best vehicle in that vein I ever had was a rusted out,
> well-dented '98 Olds two-door with roof racks on top.
>
> Put that baby's turn signal on... and watch the Beamers scatter
> like barnyard chickens.
> --
> PeteCresswell

NEVER, EVER argue with a beater. :)

E.P.

[frkrygow@gmail.com]

On Feb 11, 8:12 pm, "DanK...@gmail.com" <DanK...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Feb 11, 8:07 pm, "(PeteCresswell)" <x...@y.Invalid> wrote:
>
> > Per Ed Pirrero:
>
> > >. But that
> > >having been said, minivan-driving soccer moms rarely ignore a big
> > >German sport sedan directly out their windows.
>
> > Best vehicle in that vein I ever had was a rusted out,
> > well-dented '98 Olds two-door with roof racks on top.
>
> > Put that baby's turn signal on... and watch the Beamers scatter
> > like barnyard chickens.
> > --
>
> I drove a previously totaled GMS Yukon, 1992, creased up bumpers and
> all for a while. Same effect - nobody wants to get in the way of
> something that big & heavy, especially when it already shows battle
> scars. The Ranger I now drive, complete with branch & gate bodywork,
> doesn't have the same effect. I think it's just too small.

Hmm. Just what we need - every American driving a Sherman tank for
"protection" from all the other Americans driving Sherman tanks for
protection. What could possibly be wrong with that? What could
possibly be wrong with a society that accepts that?

- Frank Krygowski

[Matt O'Toole]

On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 17:12:08 -0800, DanKMTB@gmail.com wrote:

> On Feb 11, 8:07 pm, "(PeteCresswell)" <x...@y.Invalid> wrote:
>> Per Ed Pirrero:
>>
>> >. But that
>> >having been said, minivan-driving soccer moms rarely ignore a big
>> >German sport sedan directly out their windows.
>>
>> Best vehicle in that vein I ever had was a rusted out, well-dented '98
>> Olds two-door with roof racks on top.
>>
>> Put that baby's turn signal on... and watch the Beamers scatter like
>> barnyard chickens.
>> --
>> PeteCresswell
>
> I drove a previously totaled GMS Yukon, 1992, creased up bumpers and all
> for a while. Same effect - nobody wants to get in the way of something
> that big & heavy, especially when it already shows battle scars.

It's not the "brawn" they're afraid of, it's the driver who's been
bumping into things without enough insurance (or money) to get his vehicle
fixed. I'd probably give you a wide berth too.

Matt O.

[Ed Pirrero]

On Feb 11, 5:51 pm, Luke <lucasirag...@rogers.com> wrote:
> In article
> <70ca3fb3-9986-451f-b6d7-ca5b9232b...@s13g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, Ed
>
> Pirrero <gcmschem...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > In essence, America invented the mass-produced automobile, making it
> > available to the everyman.
>
> And embraced the mass produced "community", i.e., suburban
> developments, like no other society. Accordingly it's not surprising
> that (North) Americans are adept at mass producing problems as well;
> let's see if solutions can be engineered on a similar scale.
>
> > In the U.S., distances are too large to
> > not have some form of IC transportation, and since public transport is
> > not very good even in the best of places, this leads in one direction.
>
> It generally points in one direction but, as Frank has demonstrated,
> one is free to head off in another.

Only in urbanized areas.

The U.S. is urbanized in a very small proportion to its area. Even
the most urbanized areas are not conducive to obviation of IC
transport.

I do not live in an urbanized area, really. It's a small town. With
rudimentary public transport, and almost no bike-friendly facilities.


>
> > Your path, which most people can't see, is fortuitous. For you. But
> > most folks can't live near where they work and where their kids go to
> > school.
>
> I wonder if the more accurate term should be "won't" instead of
> "can't".

As a person who has tried, the answer is "can't". As in "not
physically possible".

There is a group of folks for whom "won't" is the better answer.

> As in, won't if it requires a smaller house, or if the
> property value won't increase as quickly, or the lawn isn't as large,
> or the quality of the neighbourhood or neighbors is below par, etc...

:roll eyes:

Yes, those shallow "values" exist everywhere, even among bike riders.

A small house? No problem. Yard work solves many perceived lawn
issues. Sometimes hard work is required to make your landscaping look
good. Living in a neighborhood infested with gangs and drug dealers?
When I was single, OK. I have bigger responsibilities now. I do what
I can to make sure my impact on the planet is light, but I *won't*
sacrifice the safety of my family in the process.

> I appreciate your point, however I find there can be many factors
> blurring the boundaries between those two terms.

Indeed. I grew up on a farm. My schools were 7 and 10 miles away.
In high school, I rode my bike, unless it was raining. But the
nearest grocery store was about 6 miles away, and not really on the
way home from school. Not owning some sort of IC vehicle for personal
transport was essentially impossible.

> > I'm glad my work is only 12 miles away. I'm glad that the
> > kids can walk to school. I used to commute the 12 miles each way, but
> > won't, because of the personal danger. And I sure as hell wouldn't
> > expose my kids to it.
>
> Understandable. But a shame nonetheless.


I agree. I prefer to ride my bike. But in a choice between being
roadkill and assisting in the planet's death, well, I make the only
reasonable choice.

E.P.

[Zoot Katz]

On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 19:09:51 -0800 (PST), mark@drumbent.com wrote:

>On Feb 11, 6:28 pm, Rob Lindauer <rli...@attglobal.net> wrote:
>> Michael Press wrote:
>> > In article
>> > <80edf348-25e3-4baa-980b-7beeffae1...@j20g2000hsi.googlegroups.com>,
>> > m...@drumbent.com wrote:
>>
>> >> I'm 48 and live in Ottawa, the second-coldest capital city in the
>> >> world.
>>
>> > Moscow?
>>
>> Nuuk?
>>
>> --
>> Rob Lindauer - Please change "att" to "sbc" for my real email address
>
>
>Actually, it's Ulaan-baatar, Mongolia.
>
>http://geography.about.com/od/physicalgeography/a/coldcapital.htm
>
>Though this website says that Ottawa is not even in the top 5! Darn,
>I bought the propaganda that said we were #2, as that's why I moved
>here. ;)
>
>Mark (who just cycled home at -17C)

I figured it might be one of the coldest capitals in Canada.
Only, Iqaluit, Yellowknife, Edmonton, Whitehorse, Quebec City,
Winnipeg and maybe St. John's could be in possible contention.
--
zk

[Rob Lindauer]

mark@drumbent.com wrote:

>
>
> Actually, it's Ulaan-baatar, Mongolia.
>
> http://geography.about.com/od/physicalgeography/a/coldcapital.htm
>
> Though this website says that Ottawa is not even in the top 5! Darn,
> I bought the propaganda that said we were #2, as that's why I moved
> here. ;)
>
> Mark (who just cycled home at -17C)

Hmmm.

That site gives the fullyear avg temp in Ulaan-Baatar (Mongolia) as
29.7°F/-1.3°C.

http://siempre.arcus.org/4DACTION/wi_alias_fsDrawPage/1/102 gives the
fullyear avg temp for Nuuk as

Annual average temperature (*F): 29.48
Annual average temperature (*C): -1.4

Wikipedia says Nuuk is 30F / -1C. Either way, pretty much a draw....


--
Rob Lindauer - Please change "att" to "sbc" for my real email address

[datakoll]

NOW, the reasonable choice is placing yourself in the position to walk

[frkrygow@gmail.com]

On Feb 11, 11:17 pm, Ed Pirrero <gcmschem...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Feb 11, 5:51 pm, Luke <lucasirag...@rogers.com> wrote:
>
> > It generally points in one direction but, as Frank has demonstrated,
> > one is free to head off in another.
>
> Only in urbanized areas.
>
> The U.S. is urbanized in a very small proportion to its area. Even
> the most urbanized areas are not conducive to obviation of IC
> transport.

I'm not trying for completely eliminating IC transport. But I'd like
to eliminate the idea that it's the _only_ choice. If you really have
to go 90 miles, take the car. If you really have to haul 500 pounds
of building materials, take the car and a trailer. But if you have to
buy three days groceries, or get to the bank, or go rent a movie, you
should not have to take a car. So don't set your life up to make the
car always necessary.

> I do not live in an urbanized area, really. It's a small town. With
> rudimentary public transport, and almost no bike-friendly facilities.

I don't buy the idea that you need to live in a large city in order to
reduce your dependence on a car, if that's what you mean. When I
began adult bicycling, I lived in a town of 10,000. That's where I
began using a bike to get to work, to do shopping, banking, etc.

Then I changed jobs to one that was 23 miles away in a larger town,
about 30,000. I car pooled for a few years, then moved to that town
so I wouldn't have that drive. I (or we) found a nice neighborhood
2.4 miles from my work, and about 1.5 miles from my son's school. He
and I both used bikes for transportation. I used the bike even more
for utility work.

Next move was to a metro area of about 200,000. Longer ride to work,
more traffic, lousier work schedule, but I still did a lot of riding
to work, and continued riding for utility.

It can be done in any size town. One key is to think about this
before you select a neighborhood to live in. Make it part of your
list of criteria.

> > I wonder if the more accurate term should be "won't" instead of
> > "can't".
>
> As a person who has tried, the answer is "can't". As in "not
> physically possible".

Until you give further information, it takes only one counterexample
to disprove that assertion.

If I didn't live in this neighborhood, I'm sure most of these
neighbors would say "It's not possible to use a bike for
transportation." Since I'm here, they can't say that. They have to
choose between "You rode your bike? Good for you!!!"* and "Well,
_I'm_ not going to do that."

(*Quote last night, from an unidentified woman at the pharmacy. It
was the 13 deg. F. that drew the remark.)


> > As in, won't if it requires a smaller house, or if the
> > property value won't increase as quickly, or the lawn isn't as large,
> > or the quality of the neighbourhood or neighbors is below par, etc...
>
>
> A small house? No problem. Yard work solves many perceived lawn
> issues. Sometimes hard work is required to make your landscaping look
> good. Living in a neighborhood infested with gangs and drug dealers?
> When I was single, OK. I have bigger responsibilities now. I do what
> I can to make sure my impact on the planet is light, but I *won't*
> sacrifice the safety of my family in the process.
> [...]
>
> I agree. I prefer to ride my bike. But in a choice between being
> roadkill and assisting in the planet's death, well, I make the only
> reasonable choice.

I don't know, Ed. It sounds like you're setting up false dichotomies
to defend your choices.

It's not like all utility cyclists live in gang-infested
neighborhoods. It's not like a significant percentage of them are
turned into "roadkill." In fact, the data's pretty strong showing
that utility cyclists live longer than average, and that cycling is at
least roughly as safe as driving. (And safer than walking.)

If a person really lives in a place where biking would lead to death,
or where less-than-conspicuous-consumption would endanger their
family, they must have missed an opportunity somewhere along the
line.

Granted, sometimes these situations are unavoidable. But I think that
most often, the situations arise because people's value systems have
large holes in them.

"Of _course_ I'll buy a house 40 miles from my new job, because the
taxes are lower over there, so I can afford an extra 500 square feet
and big pillars on the front, to show I've really made it.

"And of _course_ I'll drive the car every time I need a pack of
cigarettes, because the convenience store is too far from our nice,
homogenized Deforest Acres.

"And of _course_ I'll buy a huge, fast, luxurious car, because I want
to be as comfortable as possible on that long drive to work. And
safe! I gotta be safe!

"And of _course_ I'll vote down the school levy, because I can't
afford any more taxes - I can barely meet my payments!

"And of _course_ I'll drop my kid off at school, and wait for him
after school with the big engine idling, because the school's five
miles from Deforest Acres, and the damned school board claims they
can't afford buses...

"And ... hey, who's that guy riding bicycles with his kid, getting his
kid to school? Whatta freak. He must be homeless or something."

- Frank Krygowski

[Tom Sherman]

Zoot Katz wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 16:32:36 -0800 (PST), "DanKMTB@gmail.com"
> <DanKMTB@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Feb 11, 7:15 pm, "(PeteCresswell)" <x...@y.Invalid> wrote:
>>> Per DanK...@gmail.com:
>>>
>>>> I use my bike
>>>> for short trips all the time, cruising (this time of year carrying the
>>>> bike through the unshoveled snow) right past my truck with my
>>>> "practical" bike - SS/fixie w/ fenders. If by "here" you mean RBT,
>>>> I'd be tempted to take your bet. I did it Saturday to go get more
>>>> mayo so the womanfolk of the house could finish the potato and egg
>>>> salad. I can't imagine that at least two thirds of the RBT popu