Poll: Why don't Americans ride bikes?

[ComandanteBanana]

(No don't go the easy way and assume they are stupid. There may be
other rational explanations for them not doing the obvious thing)

Some argue that people should be riding bikes on the road, period. Not
very clever. Well, since nearly 99% of people don't ride bikes to
work, there must be some good reason for it. Perhaps PEOPLE ARE AFRAID
to share the roads with our reckless, sometime criminal drivers,
perhaps they are plain stupid, or perhaps they are lazy couch potatoes
who won't even go the supermarket on bikes...

Thus we put this poll so that a solution is found once the revolution
is in place. ;)

Of course, the revolution will not be motorized.

The Poll is being taken here...

http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=462492

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Velorution: The movement for the cyclists who want bike facilities
now."

http://webspawner.com/users/donquijote91

[Jack May]

Post by ComandanteBanana
(No don't go the easy way and assume they are stupid. There may be
other rational explanations for them not doing the obvious thing)
Some argue that people should be riding bikes on the road, period. Not
very clever. Well, since nearly 99% of people don't ride bikes to
work, there must be some good reason for it. Perhaps PEOPLE ARE AFRAID
to share the roads with our reckless, sometime criminal drivers,
perhaps they are plain stupid, or perhaps they are lazy couch potatoes
who won't even go the supermarket on bikes...
Thus we put this poll so that a solution is found once the revolution
is in place. ;)
Of course, the revolution will not be motorized.
The Poll is being taken here...
http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=462492

Hey retard it was explained to you that we know for an absolute fact that
people don't ride bikes because they highly value their time and the price
of their time to use a bike is far too expensive for them to afford.

You are way too retarded to remember, but I told you that a Nobel Prize was
won by an economist at UC Berkeley that determined why people make decision
such as driving vs bikes vs transit vs walking. But Noooooooooooooooooooo
you want to ignore everything we know and pretend that it is a big unknown
since you have the comprehension of a two year old.

For people that did not read the post, the gut level cost people use to
decide which mode to use for a trip has been found to be:

Trip cost = trip dollar cost + pay rate time * waiting,etc + half pay rate
* travel time

People typically choose the transportation mode with the lowest cost.
Extremely rational except for the born losers in society like
ComandanteBanana

[Tom Sherman]

Post by Jack May

Post by ComandanteBanana
(No don't go the easy way and assume they are stupid. There may be
other rational explanations for them not doing the obvious thing)
Some argue that people should be riding bikes on the road, period. Not
very clever. Well, since nearly 99% of people don't ride bikes to
work, there must be some good reason for it. Perhaps PEOPLE ARE AFRAID
to share the roads with our reckless, sometime criminal drivers,
perhaps they are plain stupid, or perhaps they are lazy couch potatoes
who won't even go the supermarket on bikes...
[...]

Hey retard it was explained to you that we know for an absolute fact that
people don't ride bikes because they highly value their time and the price
of their time to use a bike is far too expensive for them to afford.

But superior people prefer to spend the time riding a bicycle.

[Jack May]

Post by Tom Sherman

Post by Jack May

Post by ComandanteBanana
(No don't go the easy way and assume they are stupid. There may be
other rational explanations for them not doing the obvious thing)
Some argue that people should be riding bikes on the road, period. Not
very clever. Well, since nearly 99% of people don't ride bikes to
work, there must be some good reason for it. Perhaps PEOPLE ARE AFRAID
to share the roads with our reckless, sometime criminal drivers,
perhaps they are plain stupid, or perhaps they are lazy couch potatoes
who won't even go the supermarket on bikes...
[...]

Hey retard it was explained to you that we know for an absolute fact that
people don't ride bikes because they highly value their time and the
price of their time to use a bike is far too expensive for them to
afford.

But superior people prefer to spend the time riding a bicycle.

Dream on. Absolutely no evidence that is true.

Certainly a bike is one form of exercise that works well for some. For
transportation, its usage is very limited because of it very high cost of
travel for most people to most of their destinations.

[DennisTheBald]

Post by Jack May

Post by Tom Sherman

Post by Jack May

Post by ComandanteBanana
(No don't go the easy way and assume they are stupid. There may be
other rational explanations for them not doing the obvious thing)
Some argue that people should be riding bikes on the road, period. Not
very clever. Well, since nearly 99% of people don't ride bikes to
work, there must be some good reason for it. Perhaps PEOPLE ARE AFRAID
to share the roads with our reckless, sometime criminal drivers,
perhaps they are plain stupid, or perhaps they are lazy couch potatoes
who won't even go the supermarket on bikes...
[...]

Hey retard it was explained to you that we know for an absolute fact that
people don't ride bikes because they highly value their time and the
price of their time to use a bike is far too expensive for them to
afford.

But superior people prefer to spend the time riding a bicycle.

Dream on. Absolutely no evidence that is true.
Certainly a bike is one form of exercise that works well for some. For
transportation, its usage is very limited because of it very high cost of
travel for most people to most of their destinations.

Jack May adds to the growing amount of evidence that it's true with
his every post.

[Johnny Borborigmi]

Post by Tom Sherman

Post by Jack May

Post by ComandanteBanana
(No don't go the easy way and assume they are stupid. There may be
other rational explanations for them not doing the obvious thing)
Some argue that people should be riding bikes on the road, period. Not
very clever. Well, since nearly 99% of people don't ride bikes to
work, there must be some good reason for it. Perhaps PEOPLE ARE AFRAID
to share the roads with our reckless, sometime criminal drivers,
perhaps they are plain stupid, or perhaps they are lazy couch potatoes
who won't even go the supermarket on bikes...
[...]

Hey retard it was explained to you that we know for an absolute fact that
people don't ride bikes because they highly value their time and the
price of their time to use a bike is far too expensive for them to
afford.

But superior people prefer to spend the time riding a bicycle.

Dream on.  Absolutely no evidence that is true.
Certainly a bike is one form of exercise that works well for some.   For
transportation, its usage is very limited because of it very high cost of
travel for most people to most of their destinations.

You're an ass. Repeating your crap over and over does NOT make it a
fact. Most trips people take are less than 4 miles. VERY doable on a
bike. You're pathetic. YOU dream on. Bicycling is gaining in
popularity. It won't over take cars here do to the apathy and lazy
factor but it IS gaining in popularity. Google it.

[Will]

Post by Jack May
People typically choose the transportation mode with the lowest cost.

Which perfectly explains why they buy cheap Audis and BMW's and get
Sat Nav options.

[ComandanteBanana]

Post by Will

Post by Jack May
People typically choose the transportation mode with the lowest cost.

Which perfectly explains why they buy cheap Audis and BMW's and get
Sat Nav options.

I think people rather buy what they see on TV.

Have you seen any ads for bikes?

[Pat]

Post by Will

Post by Jack May
People typically choose the transportation mode with the lowest cost.

Which perfectly explains why they buy cheap Audis and BMW's and get
Sat Nav options.

It's not really a "cost" factor as a "utility" factor. Although it's
similar, people don't seek the lowest cost, they seek the highest
utility (benefit).

Say you have a $50,000 a year job. You might scrape together enough
money to buy a $20,000 car. You might even set aside enough money to
put a little away in savings. For you, it works and you're happy with
the savings. But for someone else with the same salary, they might
find a higher benefit to having no savings and a $25,000 car. People
do what pleases them the most, but it isn't always the lowest cost.

If you make $1,000,000 a year, the difference between the cost of a
$25,000 car and a $75,000 car is negligible but the benefits are
substantial -- so you get the more expensive car. In this case, the
difference between 15 mpg and 40 mpg as also inconsequential so it
really isn't a factor unless your name is Ed Beagley.

[DennisTheBald]

Post by Pat

Post by Will

Post by Jack May
People typically choose the transportation mode with the lowest cost.

Which perfectly explains why they buy cheap Audis and BMW's and get
Sat Nav options.

It's not really a "cost" factor as a "utility" factor. Although it's
similar, people don't seek the lowest cost, they seek the highest
utility (benefit).
Say you have a $50,000 a year job. You might scrape together enough
money to buy a $20,000 car. You might even set aside enough money to
put a little away in savings. For you, it works and you're happy with
the savings. But for someone else with the same salary, they might
find a higher benefit to having no savings and a $25,000 car. People
do what pleases them the most, but it isn't always the lowest cost.
If you make $1,000,000 a year, the difference between the cost of a
$25,000 car and a $75,000 car is negligible but the benefits are
substantial -- so you get the more expensive car. In this case, the
difference between 15 mpg and 40 mpg as also inconsequential so it
really isn't a factor unless your name is Ed Beagley.

What are you smoking? The difference between a $75k auto and a $25k
auto is $50k no mater what your annual income. The difference in
performance that the additional $50k would buy is pretty
insignificant. There must be some other perceived value in the more
expensive auto, I wonder what that could be?

[Bill Z.]

Post by DennisTheBald
What are you smoking? The difference between a $75k auto and a $25k
auto is $50k no mater what your annual income. The difference in
performance that the additional $50k would buy is pretty
insignificant. There must be some other perceived value in the more
expensive auto, I wonder what that could be?

Status (and, in a particular age group, an aid for attracting trophy
wives).

[Tom Sherman]

Post by DennisTheBald

Post by Pat

Post by Will

Post by Jack May
People typically choose the transportation mode with the lowest cost.

Which perfectly explains why they buy cheap Audis and BMW's and get
Sat Nav options.

It's not really a "cost" factor as a "utility" factor. Although it's
similar, people don't seek the lowest cost, they seek the highest
utility (benefit).
Say you have a $50,000 a year job. You might scrape together enough
money to buy a $20,000 car. You might even set aside enough money to
put a little away in savings. For you, it works and you're happy with
the savings. But for someone else with the same salary, they might
find a higher benefit to having no savings and a $25,000 car. People
do what pleases them the most, but it isn't always the lowest cost.
If you make $1,000,000 a year, the difference between the cost of a
$25,000 car and a $75,000 car is negligible but the benefits are
substantial -- so you get the more expensive car. In this case, the
difference between 15 mpg and 40 mpg as also inconsequential so it
really isn't a factor unless your name is Ed Beagley.

What are you smoking? The difference between a $75k auto and a $25k
auto is $50k no mater what your annual income. The difference in
performance that the additional $50k would buy is pretty
insignificant. There must be some other perceived value in the more
expensive auto, I wonder what that could be?

I understand the more expensive car compensates for small genitalia.

[Pat]

Post by Tom Sherman

Post by Will

Post by Jack May
People typically choose the transportation mode with the lowest cost.

Which perfectly explains why they buy cheap Audis and BMW's and get
Sat Nav options.

It's not really a "cost" factor as a "utility" factor.  Although it's
similar, people don't seek the lowest cost, they seek the highest
utility (benefit).
Say you have a $50,000 a year job.  You might scrape together enough
money to buy a $20,000 car.  You might even set aside enough money to
put a little away in savings.  For you, it works and you're happy with
the savings.  But for someone else with the same salary, they might
find a higher benefit to having no savings and a $25,000 car.  People
do what pleases them the most, but it isn't always the lowest cost.
If you make $1,000,000 a year, the difference between the cost of a
$25,000 car and a $75,000 car is negligible but the benefits are
substantial -- so you get the more expensive car.  In this case, the
difference between 15 mpg and 40 mpg as also inconsequential so it
really isn't a factor unless your name is Ed Beagley.

What are you smoking?  The difference between a $75k auto and a $25k
auto is $50k no mater what your annual income.  The difference in
performance that the additional $50k would buy is pretty
insignificant.  There must be some other perceived value in the more
expensive auto, I wonder what that could be?

I understand the more expensive car compensates for small genitalia.
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
“Mary had a little lamb / And when she saw it sicken /
She shipped it off to Packingtown / And now it’s labeled chicken.”

Then what does it mean that I own a cheap car? :-o

[Tom Sherman]

Post by Pat

Post by Tom Sherman

Post by DennisTheBald
[...]
What are you smoking? The difference between a $75k auto and a $25k
auto is $50k no mater what your annual income. The difference in
performance that the additional $50k would buy is pretty
insignificant. There must be some other perceived value in the more
expensive auto, I wonder what that could be?

I understand the more expensive car compensates for small genitalia.

PLEASE HONOR THE SIGNATURE SEPARATOR.

Post by Pat
Then what does it mean that I own a cheap car? :-o

Ask your significant other.

[Jym Dyer]

Post by Pat

Post by Tom Sherman
I understand the more expensive car compensates for small
genitalia.

Then what does it mean that I own a cheap car? :-o

=v= Actually, there are two car-ownership equations:

(1) Car status is inversely proportional to sexual adequacy.
(2) Excess car size is inversely proportional to intelligence.

Status and price are often correlated, but not always. If your
cheap car attains higher status, your penis shrinks accordingly.

=v= As SUVs got bigger and bigger, there was joking about how
this was Freudian compensation for smaller and smaller penises.
Actually, what the size increase meant was a reduction in IQ.
(Though of course, those with reduced IQs held bigger SUVs in
more esteem, increasing their status, thus creating an epidemic
of shrinking penises and other sexual inadequacies. It's no
surprise that Viagra was rushed to market during the SUV era.)

=v= All in all, it's best to go carfree and avoid all of this.
Plus, it makes you brilliant and fantastic in the sack.
<_Jym_>

[Jym Dyer]

Post by Pat

Post by Tom Sherman
I understand the more expensive car compensates for small
genitalia.

Then what does it mean that I own a cheap car? :-o

=v= Actually, there are two car-ownership equations:

(1) Car status is inversely proportional to sexual adequacy.
(2) Excess car size is inversely proportional to intelligence.

Status and price are often correlated, but not always. If your
cheap car attains higher status, your penis shrinks accordingly.

=v= As SUVs got bigger and bigger, there was joking about how
this was Freudian compensation for smaller and smaller penises.
Actually, what the size increase meant was a reduction in IQ.
(Though of course, those with reduced IQs held bigger SUVs in
more esteem, increasing their status, thus creating an epidemic
of shrinking penises and other sexual inadequacies. It's no
surprise that Viagra was rushed to market during the SUV era.)

=v= All in all, it's best to go carfree and avoid all of this.
Plus, it makes you brilliant and fantastic in the sack.
<_Jym_>

[ComandanteBanana]

Post by Tom Sherman

Post by Will

Post by Jack May
People typically choose the transportation mode with the lowest cost.

Which perfectly explains why they buy cheap Audis and BMW's and get
Sat Nav options.

It's not really a "cost" factor as a "utility" factor.  Although it's
similar, people don't seek the lowest cost, they seek the highest
utility (benefit).
Say you have a $50,000 a year job.  You might scrape together enough
money to buy a $20,000 car.  You might even set aside enough money to
put a little away in savings.  For you, it works and you're happy with
the savings.  But for someone else with the same salary, they might
find a higher benefit to having no savings and a $25,000 car.  People
do what pleases them the most, but it isn't always the lowest cost.
If you make $1,000,000 a year, the difference between the cost of a
$25,000 car and a $75,000 car is negligible but the benefits are
substantial -- so you get the more expensive car.  In this case, the
difference between 15 mpg and 40 mpg as also inconsequential so it
really isn't a factor unless your name is Ed Beagley.

What are you smoking?  The difference between a $75k auto and a $25k
auto is $50k no mater what your annual income.  The difference in
performance that the additional $50k would buy is pretty
insignificant.  There must be some other perceived value in the more
expensive auto, I wonder what that could be?

I understand the more expensive car compensates for small genitalia.

And even smaller brain.

[Pat]

Post by Will

Post by Jack May
People typically choose the transportation mode with the lowest cost.

Which perfectly explains why they buy cheap Audis and BMW's and get
Sat Nav options.

It's not really a "cost" factor as a "utility" factor.  Although it's
similar, people don't seek the lowest cost, they seek the highest
utility (benefit).
Say you have a $50,000 a year job.  You might scrape together enough
money to buy a $20,000 car.  You might even set aside enough money to
put a little away in savings.  For you, it works and you're happy with
the savings.  But for someone else with the same salary, they might
find a higher benefit to having no savings and a $25,000 car.  People
do what pleases them the most, but it isn't always the lowest cost.
If you make $1,000,000 a year, the difference between the cost of a
$25,000 car and a $75,000 car is negligible but the benefits are
substantial -- so you get the more expensive car.  In this case, the
difference between 15 mpg and 40 mpg as also inconsequential so it
really isn't a factor unless your name is Ed Beagley.

What are you smoking?  The difference between a $75k auto and a $25k
auto is $50k no mater what your annual income.  The difference in
performance that the additional $50k would buy is pretty
insignificant.  There must be some other perceived value in the more
expensive auto, I wonder what that could be?

But to some people, $50m is negligible. For some, the status, ride,
sound system or whatever is obviously worth more to them than putting
the money in their 401(k).

[r***@gmail.com]

"The difference in performance that the additional $50k would buy is
pretty insignificant."

Dennis The Bald, you may be right. It is really a shame that you
can't buy a quality car anymore. As recently as the late '80s to
early '90s, you could buy, for example, a top-of-the-line Mercedes
(420SEL) for $55,000 (not sure how much that would be today, but
probably about $85K?) and it was built to last forever, given proper
maintenance. I am not aware of any cars of comparable quality being
sold today for anywhere near that price. In the case of Mercedes,
later in the '90s the marketing department took over control of the
product line from the engineers, and the cars began being built to a
more popular price. Quality went out the window. The good news is
that you can pick one of these cars up fairly cheaply these days and
you can maintain it yourself.

[ComandanteBanana]

Post by Jym Dyer

Post by ComandanteBanana
Originally Posted by sojourn

Post by ComandanteBanana
I think a lot of guys think it's a "Gay" sport.........

I thought a lot of gays thought it was a guy sport. Nothing
effeminate about riding something until you drop exhausted. ;)

=x= How can you even think this idiocy is worthy of discussion?
Are you mentally deficient or are you 8 years old?
<_Jym_>

I don't want to discuss my age here, just the issues.

But even kids know is deadly to ride bikes in America.

"Question
Why do so many people who ride bicycles ride in the streets when there
is a sidewalk nearby?

Now I ride my bike all the time and definitely stay on the
sidewalks... so why do so many people ride in the streets and slow
traffic and risk getting hit? It's sooo annoying and stupid (in my
opinion)

Answerer 4
By law, a bicycle is a vehicle and belongs in the street.

Of course, common sense says that a bicycle is too frail for being in
motor vehicle traffic.

Conclusion: THERE IS NO PROPER PLACE FOR BICYCLES."

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080610182657AArONFj

[ComandanteBanana]

Originally Posted by StrangeWill

"I've watched coworkers drive ~200 feet as opposed to walk.

Nuff said."


Oh, those must be really stupid...

You know, they say when the car is cold it burns so much more gas...
Anyone knows about it?

99% of people use the car to the supermarket, and that's mighty stupid
too when it's under, say, 1 mile.

[troppo]

Post by ComandanteBanana
Originally Posted by StrangeWill
"I've watched coworkers drive ~200 feet as opposed to walk.
Nuff said."
Oh, those must be really stupid...
You know, they say when the car is cold it burns so much more gas...
Anyone knows about it?

Generally, until the engine reaches optimum operating temperature, more
fuel passes through the system without being burned. 'Modern' engines are
set up to reach o.o.t. rapidly, but it still takes several miles/km to
reach this. Mechanisms that control emissions and limit unburnt fuel also
loose efficiency over time unless scrupulously maintained.

Post by ComandanteBanana
99% of people use the car to the supermarket, and that's mighty stupid
too when it's under, say, 1 mile.

OTOH how else do you get the stuff if you are old, pressed for time, have
to stock up for a family?

[ComandanteBanana]

Post by troppo

Post by ComandanteBanana
Originally Posted by StrangeWill
"I've watched coworkers drive ~200 feet as opposed to walk.
Nuff said."
Oh, those must be really stupid...
You know, they say when the car is cold it burns so much more gas...
Anyone knows about it?

Generally, until the engine reaches optimum operating temperature, more
fuel passes through the system without being burned. 'Modern' engines are
set up to reach o.o.t. rapidly, but it still takes several miles/km to
reach this. Mechanisms that control emissions and limit unburnt fuel also
loose efficiency over time unless scrupulously maintained.

But is it a significant difference or not? Say is it half optimum
temperature?

Post by troppo

Post by ComandanteBanana
99% of people use the car to the supermarket, and that's mighty stupid
too when it's under, say, 1 mile.

OTOH how else do you get the stuff if you are old, pressed for time, have
to stock up for a family?

They couldn't make up, say, more than 50% of the population. It could
serve as a "getaway" for the whole family.

In my case, that mile is fun-tastic, but not everybody can enjoy the
same safety. I couldn't where l lived before.

So should I see the glass half empty or half full?

[Martin Clark]

Post by ComandanteBanana

news:ce402479-eb07-

Post by ComandanteBanana
Originally Posted by StrangeWill
"I've watched coworkers drive ~200 feet as opposed to walk.
Nuff said."
Oh, those must be really stupid...
You know, they say when the car is cold it burns so much more
gas... Anyone knows about it?

Generally, until the engine reaches optimum operating temperature,
more fuel passes through the system without being burned. 'Modern'
engines are set up to reach o.o.t. rapidly, but it still takes
several miles/km to reach this. Mechanisms that control emissions and
limit unburnt fuel also loose efficiency over time unless
scrupulously maintained.

But is it a significant difference or not? Say is it half optimum
temperature?

How long is a piece of string ...
Depends on the vehicle, climate, driving technique.
People tend to 'step on the gas' when response is sluggish. Not wise -
results in drop in vacuum, more fuel wasted. An old but useful tool is a
vacuum guage hooked into the fuel inlet manifold somehow. Teaches you to
drive conservatively.

Fast warm-up mechanisms prevent the radiator fan turning on until o.o.t.
is reached. Bit risky in hot climates. If the radiator thermostat is
faulty and the fan doesn't turn on, then it isn't long before the engine
is damaged or blown by overheating. So around here (19deg south) you
often find that the thermostat has been shorted out.

Post by ComandanteBanana

Post by ComandanteBanana
99% of people use the car to the supermarket, and that's mighty
stupid too when it's under, say, 1 mile.

OTOH how else do you get the stuff if you are old, pressed for time,
have to stock up for a family?

They couldn't make up, say, more than 50% of the population. It could
serve as a "getaway" for the whole family.
In my case, that mile is fun-tastic, but not everybody can enjoy the
same safety. I couldn't where l lived before.
So should I see the glass half empty or half full?

"Consider the glass as already broken" :-)

[ComandanteBanana]

Post by Jack May

Post by ComandanteBanana
(No don't go the easy way and assume they are stupid. There may be
other rational explanations for them not doing the obvious thing)
Some argue that people should be riding bikes on the road, period. Not
very clever. Well, since nearly 99% of people don't ride bikes to
work, there must be some good reason for it. Perhaps PEOPLE ARE AFRAID
to share the roads with our reckless, sometime criminal drivers,
perhaps they are plain stupid, or perhaps they are lazy couch potatoes
who won't even go the supermarket on bikes...
Thus we put this poll so that a solution is found once the revolution
is in place. ;)
Of course, the revolution will not be motorized.
The Poll is being taken here...
http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=462492

Hey retard it was explained to you that we know for an absolute fact that
people don't ride bikes because they highly value their time and the price
of their time to use a bike is far too expensive for them to afford.
You are way too retarded to remember, but I told you that a Nobel Prize was
won by an economist at UC Berkeley that determined why people make decision
such as driving vs bikes vs transit vs walking.   But Noooooooooooooooooooo
you want to ignore everything we know and pretend that it is a big unknown
since you have the comprehension of a two year old.
For people that did not read the post, the gut level cost people use to
Trip cost = trip dollar cost  + pay rate time * waiting,etc  + half pay rate
* travel time
People typically choose the transportation mode with the lowest cost.
Extremely rational except for the born losers in society like
ComandanteBanana- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

Still it doesn't explain why people don't go to the supermarket by
bike. Or why they don't use it for other trips under 2 miles --40% of
all trips.

So you say cyclists are born losers. Is that the opinion of 99% of
Americans, or just your own?

[ComandanteBanana]

Originally Posted by sojourn
I think a lot of guys think it's a "Gay" sport.........

***

I thought a lot of gays thought it was a guy sport. Nothing effeminate
about riding something until you drop exhausted. ;)

[Jym Dyer]

Post by ComandanteBanana
Originally Posted by sojourn

Post by ComandanteBanana
I think a lot of guys think it's a "Gay" sport.........

I thought a lot of gays thought it was a guy sport. Nothing
effeminate about riding something until you drop exhausted. ;)

=x= How can you even think this idiocy is worthy of discussion?
Are you mentally deficient or are you 8 years old?
<_Jym_>

[Just zis Guy, you know?]

Post by Jack May
Hey retard it was explained to you that we know for an absolute fact that
people don't ride bikes because they highly value their time and the price
of their time to use a bike is far too expensive for them to afford.

So glad I live in the UK and work in London where the reverse is
true and cycling is far and away the quickest way to get form A to
B.

So, uk froup to which this debate is wholly irrelevant now removed
from followups.

Guy

[Pat]

Post by Jack May

Post by ComandanteBanana
(No don't go the easy way and assume they are stupid. There may be
other rational explanations for them not doing the obvious thing)
Some argue that people should be riding bikes on the road, period. Not
very clever. Well, since nearly 99% of people don't ride bikes to
work, there must be some good reason for it. Perhaps PEOPLE ARE AFRAID
to share the roads with our reckless, sometime criminal drivers,
perhaps they are plain stupid, or perhaps they are lazy couch potatoes
who won't even go the supermarket on bikes...
Thus we put this poll so that a solution is found once the revolution
is in place. ;)
Of course, the revolution will not be motorized.
The Poll is being taken here...
http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=462492

Hey retard it was explained to you that we know for an absolute fact that
people don't ride bikes because they highly value their time and the price
of their time to use a bike is far too expensive for them to afford.
You are way too retarded to remember, but I told you that a Nobel Prize was
won by an economist at UC Berkeley that determined why people make decision
such as driving vs bikes vs transit vs walking.   But Noooooooooooooooooooo
you want to ignore everything we know and pretend that it is a big unknown
since you have the comprehension of a two year old.
For people that did not read the post, the gut level cost people use to
Trip cost = trip dollar cost  + pay rate time * waiting,etc  + half pay rate
* travel time
People typically choose the transportation mode with the lowest cost.
Extremely rational except for the born losers in society like
ComandanteBanana

Remember, he's on Exxon or Mobil's payroll to encourage driving and
discourage biking through internet news groups and blogging. It's the
next, new thing. He's probably paid by a combination of # of posts, #
of workds, and # of responses. So if everyone just ignores him he
won't make as much money and he'll move on. That's why he keeps
arguments going and why he'll respond to himself if he has to. It's
also why he's been know to use different names to respond to himself.
It's all about the money.

[Jym Dyer]

Post by Jack May
Hey retard it was explained to you that we know for an
absolute fact that people don't ride bikes because they
highly value their time and the price of their time to
use a bike is far too expensive for them to afford.

=x= As usual, Jack May's "absolute fact" is totally unproven
and was refuted before his eyes. But at least he got the
first two words right.
<_Jym_>

[TheBagbournes]

Post by Jack May
Hey retard it was explained to you that we know for an absolute fact that
people don't ride bikes because they highly value their time and the price
of their time to use a bike is far too expensive for them to afford.

Arf!

It takes only 10 minutes longer for me to ride my bike to work. And then I don't have to go to the gym or worry about my weight or my cardiovascular health. All in all it's a time and money saver and a win-win situation all round....

"reetard"

Pff! yanks. Cretins.

[Tadej Brezina]

Post by Jack May

Post by ComandanteBanana
(No don't go the easy way and assume they are stupid. There may be
other rational explanations for them not doing the obvious thing)
Some argue that people should be riding bikes on the road, period. Not
very clever. Well, since nearly 99% of people don't ride bikes to
work, there must be some good reason for it. Perhaps PEOPLE ARE AFRAID
to share the roads with our reckless, sometime criminal drivers,
perhaps they are plain stupid, or perhaps they are lazy couch potatoes
who won't even go the supermarket on bikes...
Thus we put this poll so that a solution is found once the revolution
is in place. ;)
Of course, the revolution will not be motorized.
The Poll is being taken here...
http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=462492

Hey retard it was explained to you that we know for an absolute fact

Haha, what are absolute facts in science anyway?
Just a theory that hasn't been proven wrong yet.

There have been hundreds of theories, that have been claimed to be "an
absolute fact", e.g. "the geocentric system", in their time until better
explanations came along.
Should be know to you Jack, eh?
Relax!

Tadej

[ComandanteBanana]

Post by Tadej Brezina

Post by Jack May

Post by ComandanteBanana
(No don't go the easy way and assume they are stupid. There may be
other rational explanations for them not doing the obvious thing)
Some argue that people should be riding bikes on the road, period. Not
very clever. Well, since nearly 99% of people don't ride bikes to
work, there must be some good reason for it. Perhaps PEOPLE ARE AFRAID
to share the roads with our reckless, sometime criminal drivers,
perhaps they are plain stupid, or perhaps they are lazy couch potatoes
who won't even go the supermarket on bikes...
Thus we put this poll so that a solution is found once the revolution
is in place. ;)
Of course, the revolution will not be motorized.
The Poll is being taken here...
http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=462492

Hey retard it was explained to you that we know for an absolute fact

Haha, what are absolute facts in science anyway?
Just a theory that hasn't been proven wrong yet.
There have been hundreds of theories, that have been claimed to be "an
absolute fact", e.g. "the geocentric system", in their time until better
explanations came along.
Should be know to you Jack, eh?
Relax!
Tadej

Sorry to disagree. ;)

There's one and only one absolute fact in America: THERE'S NO PLACE TO
RIDE A BIKE! (unless you go the "green areas")

[Tom Keats]

Post by ComandanteBanana
Some argue that people should be riding bikes on the road, period. Not
very clever. Well, since nearly 99% of people don't ride bikes to
work, there must be some good reason for it.

You're still trying to scare would-be riders off the
streets & roads, eh? Your FUDmongering disinformation
campaign is destined to fail. The Truth shall out,
as it inevitably does.

Not even bike-hating propagandists such as yourself
are safe from The Truth.

Go climb a banana tree. And stay up there.

[Tom Sherman]

Post by Tom Keats

Post by ComandanteBanana
Some argue that people should be riding bikes on the road, period. Not
very clever. Well, since nearly 99% of people don't ride bikes to
work, there must be some good reason for it.

You're still trying to scare would-be riders off the
streets & roads, eh? Your FUDmongering disinformation
campaign is destined to fail. The Truth shall out,
as it inevitably does.
Not even bike-hating propagandists such as yourself
are safe from The Truth.
Go climb a banana tree. And stay up there.

Banana plants are actually pseudostems, not trees.

[Tadej Brezina]

Post by Tom Keats

Post by ComandanteBanana
Some argue that people should be riding bikes on the road, period. Not
very clever. Well, since nearly 99% of people don't ride bikes to
work, there must be some good reason for it.

You're still trying to scare would-be riders off the
streets & roads, eh? Your FUDmongering disinformation
campaign is destined to fail. The Truth shall out,
as it inevitably does.

I don't think he's concern really is to scare existing roadway cyclers
off the and onto the sidewalk.
In some/many/most(?) US cities it may genuinely be a problem to ride a
bike in vehicular traffic, meaning, that there might be agressiv e
drivers honking horns and the likes. Especially for those, not used to
move with the stream.
But proposing sidewalk-cycling ist not at all a solution, that's
d'accord! So he may be a little "confused" about the best way to survive
in the jungle for real.
Tadej

[ComandanteBanana]

Post by Tadej Brezina

Post by Tom Keats

Post by ComandanteBanana
Some argue that people should be riding bikes on the road, period. Not
very clever. Well, since nearly 99% of people don't ride bikes to
work, there must be some good reason for it.

You're still trying to scare would-be riders off the
streets & roads, eh?  Your FUDmongering disinformation
campaign is destined to fail.  The Truth shall out,
as it inevitably does.

I don't think he's concern really is to scare existing roadway cyclers
off the and onto the sidewalk.
In some/many/most(?) US cities it may genuinely be a problem to ride a
bike in vehicular traffic, meaning, that there might be agressiv e
drivers honking horns and the likes. Especially for those, not used to
move with the stream.
But proposing sidewalk-cycling ist not at all a solution, that's
d'accord! So he may be a little "confused" about the best way to survive
in the jungle for real.
Tadej
--

Thank you for your defense, but I must clarify that I'm NOT proposing
that people should ride on the sidewalks. I'm just "reporting from the
jungle," so to speak. People often ride on the sidewalk because THEY
ARE TERRORIZED by drivers.

My personal decision at this time is (the way I'm chipping in to fight
Global Warming, and yet not put my life at risk in the process): 2
miles round trip to the market through quite streets and 4 miles of
trails that I have at my disposal. These lead me to some other shops,
and so much for practical biking. The main roads (north, south and
west) are no-man's land. To go east I need a kayak, where I find
another type of jungle with motorboats. You know, the big fish eats
the little fish.

[Eric Vey]

Post by ComandanteBanana
My personal decision at this time is (the way I'm chipping in to fight
Global Warming, and yet not put my life at risk in the process): 2
miles round trip to the market through quite streets and 4 miles of
trails that I have at my disposal.

Are you NUTZ!? You go go OUTSIDE the house in Miami-Dade?! Are you aware
how DANGEROUS that is?! According to the FBI, Metro reported 98 murders
in Miami-Dade in 2006 alone!!!
http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2006/data/table_10_fl.html

Yet, you are TERRORIZED by drivers who, also in 2006, bumped off 9
cyclists in Miami-Dade.
http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/departments/nrd-30/ncsa/STSI/12_FL/2007/Counties/Florida_Miami-Dade%20County_2007.HTM

Sounds to me like you have your priorities all out of whack.

Post by ComandanteBanana
These lead me to some other shops

You go SHOPPING? You carry CASH or a CREDIT Card? Aren't you afraid
someone will kill you for them?

There are delivery services, you know. You really ought to use them.
Then you can be nice and safe where you belong, in front of a tube, like
the old ladies who are afraid to go outside after watching the local
news for years and years.

[Pat]

Post by Eric Vey

Post by ComandanteBanana
My personal decision at this time is (the way I'm chipping in to fight
Global Warming, and yet not put my life at risk in the process): 2
miles round trip to the market through quite streets and 4 miles of
trails that I have at my disposal.

Are you NUTZ!? You go go OUTSIDE the house in Miami-Dade?! Are you aware
how DANGEROUS that is?! According to the FBI, Metro reported 98 murders
in Miami-Dade in 2006 alone!!!http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2006/data/table_10_fl.html
Yet, you are TERRORIZED by drivers who, also in 2006, bumped off 9
cyclists in Miami-Dade.http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/departments/nrd-30/ncsa/STSI/12_FL/2007/...
Sounds to me like you have your priorities all out of whack.
 >These lead me to some other shops
You go SHOPPING? You carry CASH or a CREDIT Card? Aren't you afraid
someone will kill you for them?
There are delivery services, you know. You really ought to use them.
Then you can be nice and safe where you belong, in front of a tube, like
the old ladies who are afraid to go outside after watching the local
news for years and years.

Gee. In my city we had a murder 8 or 10 years ago. We also had a cop
killed something like 25 years ago. "Big crime" here is a DWI.

But our county is a lot worse because it's a lot bigger -- just over
80,000 -- and we get a murder ever few years. I can think of 3 in the
last 15 years.

Oh, and I know think anyone was killed while on a bicycle. In fact,
statistically, you're probably safer when you're sitting on one around
here.

[ComandanteBanana]

Post by Eric Vey

Post by ComandanteBanana
My personal decision at this time is (the way I'm chipping in to fight
Global Warming, and yet not put my life at risk in the process): 2
miles round trip to the market through quite streets and 4 miles of
trails that I have at my disposal.

Are you NUTZ!? You go go OUTSIDE the house in Miami-Dade?! Are you aware
how DANGEROUS that is?! According to the FBI, Metro reported 98 murders
in Miami-Dade in 2006 alone!!!http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2006/data/table_10_fl.html

I thought stupid cyclists didn't get to live that long. You must be
very young, right?

Actually, I wouldn't even drive in Miami because that would be far
more dangerous than crime. Go for a spin on a car (just to play it
safe) and notice the wild activities going on out there: wild change
of lanes, speeding on residential areas, bullying, chatting on the
phone, etc, etc.

Hey, and it's perfectly legal! ;)

Post by Eric Vey
Yet, you are TERRORIZED by drivers who, also in 2006, bumped off 9
cyclists in Miami-Dade.http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/departments/nrd-30/ncsa/STSI/12_FL/2007/...
Sounds to me like you have your priorities all out of whack.

Oh, I should be terrorized by terrorists instead, right? Or so says
the Republican Party.

Post by Eric Vey

Post by ComandanteBanana
These lead me to some other shops

You go SHOPPING? You carry CASH or a CREDIT Card? Aren't you afraid
someone will kill you for them?
There are delivery services, you know. You really ought to use them.
Then you can be nice and safe where you belong, in front of a tube, like
the old ladies who are afraid to go outside after watching the local
news for years and years.

Hey, I don't live close to "the jungle" by any means. I've got very
"lionized" neighbors. ;)

You don't know what's going on in the jungle, right?


(HealthNewsDigest.com)-It's important to put the brakes on your
emotions whenever you get behind the wheel. That's the advice from
experts who say that road rage-when drivers act irrationally because
of anger or impatience-leads to danger.

"When drivers let their emotions get the best of them, they take it
out on other drivers, putting everyone on the road at risk," says
Captain Mark Welch, chief of public affairs for the Florida Highway
Patrol.

So which city's drivers suffer from the worst road rage? The third
annual In The Driver's Seat Road Rage Survey, commissioned by
AutoVantage, a leading national auto club, found that the least
courteous city in the country is Miami... It's the third consecutive
year that Miami takes the crown as road rage capital of America.

http://www.healthnewsdigest.com/news/Health_Tips_620/Steering_Clear_Of_Road_Rage.shtml

[SMS]

Post by ComandanteBanana
Actually, I wouldn't even drive in Miami because that would be far
more dangerous than crime. Go for a spin on a car (just to play it
safe) and notice the wild activities going on out there: wild change
of lanes, speeding on residential areas, bullying, chatting on the
phone, etc, etc.

I remember going to South Florida to visit (I was born there but left
after college) and there was TV news segment about a woman grocery
shopping at Publix (the major supermarket chain there) who dropped her
purse, and her handgun fell out, and went off. No one was hurt. Other
shoppers being interviewed about the incident were berating the woman
for having carried the wrong type of gun. They proceeded to show the
news reporter their own guns that they used when grocery shopping.

As an aside, my mother has a friend in south Florida that, despite being
a hard core Democrat, has said that she will not vote for Obama because
she was once mugged by a black guy. My mother pointed out that she
herself had been mugged by a white guy, right in front of her own house.

[ComandanteBanana]

Post by SMS

Post by ComandanteBanana
Actually, I wouldn't even drive in Miami because that would be far
more dangerous than crime. Go for a spin on a car (just to play it
safe) and notice the wild activities going on out there: wild change
of lanes, speeding on residential areas, bullying, chatting on the
phone, etc, etc.

I remember going to South Florida to visit (I was born there but left
after college)

I can see you are smart. ;)

and there was TV news segment about a woman grocery

Post by SMS
shopping at Publix (the major supermarket chain there) who dropped her
purse, and her handgun fell out, and went off. No one was hurt. Other
shoppers being interviewed about the incident were berating the woman
for having carried the wrong type of gun. They proceeded to show the
news reporter their own guns that they used when grocery shopping.

You should carry one too when cycling according to a recent poll I
conducted "bike forums."

Post by SMS
As an aside, my mother has a friend in south Florida that, despite being
a hard core Democrat, has said that she will not vote for Obama because
she was once mugged by a black guy. My mother pointed out that she
herself had been mugged by a white guy, right in front of her own house.

Those kind of NON-ISSUES dominate the political landscape,
particularly affecting those who could have any connections with
communists. :(

But you have heard about Banana Republic, right?

[D***@gmail.com]

<snip>

Post by ComandanteBanana

Post by SMS
and there was TV news segment about a woman grocery
shopping at Publix (the major supermarket chain there) who dropped her
purse, and her handgun fell out, and went off. No one was hurt. Other
shoppers being interviewed about the incident were berating the woman
for having carried the wrong type of gun. They proceeded to show the
news reporter their own guns that they used when grocery shopping.

You should carry one too when cycling according to a recent poll I
conducted "bike forums."

<snip>

You don't mean to say you're taken seriously over there, and people
took interest in your "poll"? I'd like a link to that.

As far as carrying a weapon, there's a case to be made some people
should carry one anywway, bike or otherwise. Of course, those "some
people" would need to have proper knowledge at the least, and ideally
training as well. A gun is a tool that like many others requires
proper use, storage, and operation to be safe. Handled incorrectly
they can be extremely dangerous, and handled properly they can be
quite safe, and actually increase safety in some circumstances.

[ComandanteBanana]

Post by D***@gmail.com
<snip>

Post by ComandanteBanana

Post by SMS
and there was TV news segment about a woman grocery
shopping at Publix (the major supermarket chain there) who dropped her
purse, and her handgun fell out, and went off. No one was hurt. Other
shoppers being interviewed about the incident were berating the woman
for having carried the wrong type of gun. They proceeded to show the
news reporter their own guns that they used when grocery shopping.

You should carry one too when cycling according to a recent poll I
conducted "bike forums."

<snip>
You don't mean to say you're taken seriously over there, and people
took interest in your "poll"?  I'd like a link to that.
As far as carrying a weapon, there's a case to be made some people
should carry one anywway, bike or otherwise.  Of course, those "some
people" would need to have proper knowledge at the least, and ideally
training as well.  A gun is a tool that like many others requires
proper use, storage, and operation to be safe.  Handled incorrectly
they can be extremely dangerous, and handled properly they can be
quite safe, and actually increase safety in some circumstances.

Oh yeah, people do take me serious. Even half the population here take
the elections as such. ;)

http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=430730&highlight=

How would you have voted. And since most offenses against you are
noticed when the drivers is well ahead of you, are you for shooting
them in the back?

[D***@gmail.com]

Post by ComandanteBanana

Post by D***@gmail.com
<snip>

Post by ComandanteBanana

Post by SMS
and there was TV news segment about a woman grocery
shopping at Publix (the major supermarket chain there) who dropped her
purse, and her handgun fell out, and went off. No one was hurt. Other
shoppers being interviewed about the incident were berating the woman
for having carried the wrong type of gun. They proceeded to show the
news reporter their own guns that they used when grocery shopping.

You should carry one too when cycling according to a recent poll I
conducted "bike forums."

<snip>
You don't mean to say you're taken seriously over there, and people
took interest in your "poll"? I'd like a link to that.
As far as carrying a weapon, there's a case to be made some people
should carry one anywway, bike or otherwise. Of course, those "some
people" would need to have proper knowledge at the least, and ideally
training as well. A gun is a tool that like many others requires
proper use, storage, and operation to be safe. Handled incorrectly
they can be extremely dangerous, and handled properly they can be
quite safe, and actually increase safety in some circumstances.

Oh yeah, people do take me serious. Even half the population here take
the elections as such. ;)
http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=430730&highlight=
How would you have voted.

I usually carry. That includes cycling. In no way does that suggest
I carry to shoot at cars or drivers that intimidate me, nor that I'd
shoot anyone in the back. I carry on my bike for the same reasons I
carry on foot, just in case I find myself in a life-or-death self-
defense situation. I wouldn't shoot at a car that brush-passed me, or
even hit me. I wouldn't even shoot at the big guy who took offense to
my riding and threatened me with physical violence, even if he’s
bigger than me, has stopped the vehicle and is coming at me. Odds are
I can ride away from him, and if not there’s always unarmed self-
defense, assuming the assailant is unarmed (or poorly armed) as well.
Only if someone threatening to kill me me drew a gun, or if I were to
get “jumped” in a bad neighborhood (such as the one I live in, and
some I’ve lived in in the past), or in other circumstances where there
is an extremely good chance of me getting killed if I don't defend
myself would I consider using a firearm. Even then, if there are
better options available I'll take them every time. On my bike in the
city I can get away from a bad situation almost every time. I can go
places cars can’t, and go faster than people on foot. A self-defense
shooting is an absolute last resort. That said, you're rather
unlikely to ever "need" a gun. If you do find yourself in that
unfortunate situation where you need it, however, you probably
_really_ need it.

Post by ComandanteBanana
And since most offenses against you are
noticed when the drivers is well ahead of you, are you for shooting
them in the back?

Of course not. I'm not for shooting them in anywhere in retaliation
for an offense against me that's already over with. You seem confused
about the meaning of self-defense.

If people carrying guns used them in the situations you seem to be
suggesting, they would be shooting people left and right, at least
until they lost their CCW permits and ended up in jail. IME this is
not the case among responsible and licensed gun owners.

[ComandanteBanana]

Post by ComandanteBanana

Post by D***@gmail.com
<snip>

Post by ComandanteBanana

Post by SMS
and there was TV news segment about a woman grocery
shopping at Publix (the major supermarket chain there) who dropped her
purse, and her handgun fell out, and went off. No one was hurt. Other
shoppers being interviewed about the incident were berating the woman
for having carried the wrong type of gun. They proceeded to show the
news reporter their own guns that they used when grocery shopping.

You should carry one too when cycling according to a recent poll I
conducted "bike forums."

<snip>
You don't mean to say you're taken seriously over there, and people
took interest in your "poll"?  I'd like a link to that.
As far as carrying a weapon, there's a case to be made some people
should carry one anywway, bike or otherwise.  Of course, those "some
people" would need to have proper knowledge at the least, and ideally
training as well.  A gun is a tool that like many others requires
proper use, storage, and operation to be safe.  Handled incorrectly
they can be extremely dangerous, and handled properly they can be
quite safe, and actually increase safety in some circumstances.

Oh yeah, people do take me serious. Even half the population here take
the elections as such. ;)
http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=430730&highlight=
How would you have voted.

I usually carry.  That includes cycling.  In no way does that suggest
I carry to shoot at cars or drivers that intimidate me, nor that I'd
shoot anyone in the back.  I carry on my bike for the same reasons I
carry on foot, just in case I find myself in a life-or-death self-
defense situation.  I wouldn't shoot at a car that brush-passed me, or
even hit me.  I wouldn't even shoot at the big guy who took offense to
my riding and threatened me with physical violence, even if he’s
bigger than me, has stopped the vehicle and is coming at me.  Odds are
I can ride away from him, and if not there’s always unarmed self-
defense, assuming the assailant is unarmed (or poorly armed) as well.
Only if someone threatening to kill me me drew a gun, or if I were to
get “jumped” in a bad neighborhood (such as the one I live in, and
some I’ve lived in in the past), or in other circumstances where there
is an extremely good chance of me getting killed if I don't defend
myself would I consider using a firearm.  Even then, if there are
better options available I'll take them every time.  On my bike in the
city I can get away from a bad situation almost every time.  I can go
places cars can’t, and go faster than people on foot.  A self-defense
shooting is an absolute last resort.  That said, you're rather
unlikely to ever "need" a gun.  If you do find yourself in that
unfortunate situation where you need it, however, you probably
_really_ need it.

Post by ComandanteBanana
And since most offenses against you are
noticed when the drivers is well ahead of you, are you for shooting
them in the back?

Of course not.  I'm not for shooting them in anywhere in retaliation
for an offense against me that's already over with.  You seem confused
about the meaning of self-defense.
If people carrying guns used them in the situations you seem to be
suggesting, they would be shooting people left and right, at least
until they lost their CCW permits and ended up in jail.  IME this is
not the case among responsible and licensed gun owners.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

I don't deny you the right to bear arms in "the jungle." Well,
somewhere where it may be necessary, not where biking is common place
and driving follows civilized behavior like Holland.

But do you judge whether you shoot or not when you are potentially
threatened and then spit in the face? Sorry, I'd probably shoot the
MF.

Some incidents you'd accept while carrying a weapon calls for the
patience of Buddha. But hey, we already debated this! :)

causeway incident

Post by ComandanteBanana
Carrying a concealed weapon is not easy to do for a cyclist, and then
drawing first would be even more difficult. Cagers already have a
weapon in their hand: their vehicle.

1) Carrying concealed on a bicycle is easy, unless you're insistent on
skin-tight clothing. A baggy shirt and a good holster accomplishes
wonders.
2) The situation in question here involved the cyclist stopped,
arguing with a man on foot and getting shot & robbed. Not really
relative to car vs. gun combat.

I've thought we didn't know that. Anyway *I* had an incident that
would have called for a gun if I had one, or for law and order on our
roads...

I was riding the 96th st causeway with my girlfriend, taking the lane,
two lanes in each direction, nearly no traffic, signs say bikes must
be walked along bridges' sidewalks, 3 bridges ranging from 200 to 900
feet... First incident: Policeman waves me off the road
(indifference)... Second incident, down the road, no bridge: Guy in
SUV blasts the horn (road rage), I have second thoughts about taking
the lane... Third incident, riding against the curb, back on the
bridge: Yet another guy in SUV insistently blows the horn (without me
knowing what it means), I give him the finger, and he stops (road rage
escalation). He threatens to get off the car (he's much stronger than
me, plus he's in a 3 ton vehicle), and I try to get out of the
situation. He says he was trying to help me (he's playing vigilante)
by having me safely walk the bike on the sidewalk. We argue, he spits
at my face and takes off. Luckily no guns on either side. I don't
react to get his license plate, and wouldn't have made a difference
anyway. I never go for the puppet, but for the puppeteer...

Now suppose I had a gun: What should I have done? Isn't it better that
they built more bike facilities, and taught drivers to respect
cyclists? There was a policeman with the speed gun nearby (collection
time). I bet if they sent undercover policemen on bikes, the way
policewomen do hookers, none of that would have happened, or at least
it would be a step in the right direction, right? But they argue
there's no funds for that...

I went back to this bridge a few days ago and the sidewalk is so
narrow that is completely unrideable, and perhaps even unwalkable with
a bike. IT'S ONLY 2 1/2 FEET WIDE! One step wrong and you fall into
traffic. The police set up these signs for no good reason, and any
vigilante out there can feel the need to fill the void. Never again
back on that causeway which is one major way to get to stores as well
as parks with my bike. Now I just drive or avoid the area altogether.
And other major roads are closed for me as well due to heavy (and
chaotic) traffic.

Only law out there is the Law of the Jungle. Take meditation or take a
gun. Or go on the Internet and make a lot of noise about it. That's
the best weapon the monkey's got --besides the banana. ;)

[DanKMTB]

Post by ComandanteBanana

Post by D***@gmail.com

Post by ComandanteBanana

Post by D***@gmail.com
<snip>

Post by ComandanteBanana

Post by SMS
and there was TV news segment about a woman grocery
shopping at Publix (the major supermarket chain there) who dropped her
purse, and her handgun fell out, and went off. No one was hurt. Other
shoppers being interviewed about the incident were berating the woman
for having carried the wrong type of gun. They proceeded to show the
news reporter their own guns that they used when grocery shopping.

You should carry one too when cycling according to a recent poll I
conducted "bike forums."

<snip>
You don't mean to say you're taken seriously over there, and people
took interest in your "poll"? I'd like a link to that.
As far as carrying a weapon, there's a case to be made some people
should carry one anywway, bike or otherwise. Of course, those "some
people" would need to have proper knowledge at the least, and ideally
training as well. A gun is a tool that like many others requires
proper use, storage, and operation to be safe. Handled incorrectly
they can be extremely dangerous, and handled properly they can be
quite safe, and actually increase safety in some circumstances.

Oh yeah, people do take me serious. Even half the population here take
the elections as such. ;)
http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=430730&highlight=
How would you have voted.

I usually carry. That includes cycling. In no way does that suggest
I carry to shoot at cars or drivers that intimidate me, nor that I'd
shoot anyone in the back. I carry on my bike for the same reasons I
carry on foot, just in case I find myself in a life-or-death self-
defense situation. I wouldn't shoot at a car that brush-passed me, or
even hit me. I wouldn't even shoot at the big guy who took offense to
my riding and threatened me with physical violence, even if he’s
bigger than me, has stopped the vehicle and is coming at me. Odds are
I can ride away from him, and if not there’s always unarmed self-
defense, assuming the assailant is unarmed (or poorly armed) as well.
Only if someone threatening to kill me me drew a gun, or if I were to
get “jumped” in a bad neighborhood (such as the one I live in, and
some I’ve lived in in the past), or in other circumstances where there
is an extremely good chance of me getting killed if I don't defend
myself would I consider using a firearm. Even then, if there are
better options available I'll take them every time. On my bike in the
city I can get away from a bad situation almost every time. I can go
places cars can’t, and go faster than people on foot. A self-defense
shooting is an absolute last resort. That said, you're rather
unlikely to ever "need" a gun. If you do find yourself in that
unfortunate situation where you need it, however, you probably
_really_ need it.

Post by ComandanteBanana
And since most offenses against you are
noticed when the drivers is well ahead of you, are you for shooting
them in the back?

Of course not. I'm not for shooting them in anywhere in retaliation
for an offense against me that's already over with. You seem confused
about the meaning of self-defense.
If people carrying guns used them in the situations you seem to be
suggesting, they would be shooting people left and right, at least
until they lost their CCW permits and ended up in jail. IME this is
not the case among responsible and licensed gun owners.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

I don't deny you the right to bear arms in "the jungle." Well,
somewhere where it may be necessary, not where biking is common place
and driving follows civilized behavior like Holland.
But do you judge whether you shoot or not when you are potentially
threatened and then spit in the face? Sorry, I'd probably shoot the
MF.

Then you should not carry or posess a firearm. Ever. It's a serious
responsibility that needs to be treated as such. Gunshot wounds don't
wash off nearly as either as spittle. Neither does death. Further,
you must weigh the value of life as you know it. So someone spits and
your face, and you shoot him. Then you go to jail, for many, many
years. Showed him, huh?

Post by ComandanteBanana
Some incidents you'd accept while carrying a weapon calls for the
patience of Buddha. But hey, we already debated this! :)

Or the patience and rationality of a reasonable person. Perhaps
that's not a perspective you're familiar with.

Anyway, you’re right, we have already debated this. I forgot about
that thread. Too bad, I probably dropped out right as it started
getting fun.

[ComandanteBanana]

(This guy questions the forum's owner where I'm coming from, meaning
if I threaten the status quo. But, like him, there are many of us
caught up in "the limbo," the place where you use the car to survive
and the bike for fun and the environment.)

flyingman wrote:
Gus,

"No idea where he’s coming from. Hurricanes have been coming at us
for millions of years. There are just much more of us living on the
shore lines, i.e. more to damage.

That said, I like to ride my bike when I’m not in my SUV. Sometime
I’ll take my bikes on the back of my SUV, haven’t tried it the other
away around yet.

I like to ride on the side walks vs the bike paths on the roads, as a
general rule. But bikes need to follow the rules of the road if they
expect to have any respect from the vehicles.

I try my best to avoid heavy road traffic when I’m on my bike, law of
physics applies here.

Speaking of which, check out the video of that poor guy that got run
over by a van in Chicago at a gas station. Talk about deliberate hit
and run! They got it all on video, but haven’t yet ID’d the driver or
his car. They even got his girlfriend going in and out of the store
to pay.

Show a little respect and courtesy once in a while folks."

***

Where I’m coming from is a fair assessment of “the jungle,” the system
where you are what you drive and the bigger the better.

I too occasionally drive my girlfriend’s car, an older Lexus, which
I’d never buy. And yet it’s totally relaxing in the sense that people
“don’t mess with you” all the time. Now my vehicle of choice on the
causeways out of Miami Beach. (Survival is priority in the jungle)

So it is we all feeding Global Warming, sometime involuntarily (just
to play it safe), which we know causes, among other things, more
hurricanes. Just like smoking and lung cancer.

[ComandanteBanana]

Post by Eric Vey

Post by ComandanteBanana
I'm ready to face that jungle... But I'd need something like an SUV.
Like this...

So you can drive it off the road like the locals do and kill yourself?
344 auto fatalities in Miami-Dade in 2006!
186 single vehicle crashes (almost HALF!)
9 cyclists.
Seems like most people doing to dying down there are driving too fast
and either running off the road and over-correcting (mysterious loss of
control) or are missing the turn and piling into something.
Do you want to die like that?
Stay HOME. Let them find your 90 year-old corpse in front of a TV
playing re-runs of "I Love Lucy." No need to be out on the street
becoming a statistic.

Have you been to Miami? You don't see people at all in the streets.
Are they all watching Lucy, or are they just afraid to come out and
enjoy life...

I do enjoy life though. Particularly since I'm ready to die, and have
ridden motorcycles and bikes all over Miami. Maybe I've been lucky
though, and I shouldn't tempt the devil anymore. You know, my neighbor
has the same problem. Maybe it comes with age, or maybe you realize
it's not worth it to fight all the predators out there.

After a while you get tired of fighting, you know. And then you carry
the fight to the Internet. Someone has do it anyway, no?

[Eric Vey]

ComandanteBanana wrote:
And then you carry

Post by ComandanteBanana
the fight to the Internet. Someone has do it anyway, no?

No.

Based on the facts that I have cited. The number of murders alone should
be getting you upset. Nine people killed on bicycles is not enough to
get excited about, but 90 is.

Then there is the number of felonious assaults. Over 6,000. You want to
stir the pot over Road Rage, when rage in general seems to be a much
bigger problem.

And "taking the fight to the internet" is wrong as well. What do you
expect to do by doing that? Do you think that any of the drivers or
murders or robbers read anything you have to say? Do you think they
would care if they did?

I have had much better success talking face-to-face to people. If you
want to DO something rather than just complain about it, that is what
you have to do. This is what being a "community activist" is all about.
You can accomplish much more at the local level rather than honking your
horn in the UK.

If you want to be a community activist, the BE one. It isn't that hard.
You can effect changes right there in your local neighborhood. Other
people have done it. I've done it, so why can't you? NO EXCUSES!

You are wasting your time here. Get OUT there and DO something.

Or don't. We don't care one way or the other, but this incessant posting
about HOW DANGEROUS the streets are where you live and constant
nattering becomes quite silly when you refuse to do anything about it
except complain.

[ComandanteBanana]

Post by ComandanteBanana
And then you carry

Post by ComandanteBanana
the fight to the Internet. Someone has do it anyway, no?

No.
Based on the facts that I have cited. The number of murders alone should
be getting you upset. Nine people killed on bicycles is not enough to
get excited about, but 90 is.

Some of the people like to lie with statistics...

How can there be a lot of people killed on bikes if only a few
daredevils dare to do it?

But the level of violence of roadrage will soon catch up with you even
if you are the most careful rider.

Post by ComandanteBanana
Then there is the number of felonious assaults. Over 6,000. You want to
stir the pot over Road Rage, when rage in general seems to be a much
bigger problem.
And "taking the fight to the internet" is wrong as well. What do you
expect to do by doing that? Do you think that any of the drivers or
murders or robbers read anything you have to say? Do you think they
would care if they did?

This is a "model" (the suburban sprawl) that gets exported (via TV
series) throughout the world (particularly the Third World) and as
such it deserves denunciation. It's good only of the lions, those
lucky enough to own SUV and live behind gated communities.

Post by ComandanteBanana
I have had much better success talking face-to-face to people. If you
want to DO something rather than just complain about it, that is what
you have to do. This is what being a "community activist" is all about.
You can accomplish much more at the local level rather than honking your
horn in the UK.
If you want to be a community activist, the BE one. It isn't that hard.
You can effect changes right there in your local neighborhood. Other
people have done it. I've done it, so why can't you? NO EXCUSES!
You are wasting your time here. Get OUT there and DO something.
Or don't. We don't care one way or the other, but this incessant posting
about HOW DANGEROUS the streets are where you live and constant
nattering becomes quite silly when you refuse to do anything about it
except complain.

This is World Revolution, my friend, because nothing can be
accomplished locally when other issues of the Global Jungle are not
addressed...

GLOBAL JUNGLE

It's a Global Jungle: Can It Become a Global Village?

'The world is a Global Jungle and not the integrated and harmonious
community implied by the designation, "global village"? The truth is
that we are a fragmented species whose history is dominated by
violence and conflict among the components.'

http://www.buy.com/prod/it-s-a-global-jungle-can-it-become-a-global-village/q/loc/106/30841659.html

“If national governments are basically unilateral in their attitudes
towards global problems, anarchy will prevail over international
governance and what should be our global village may turn into a
global jungle.”

- Gro Harlem Brundtland,
addressing the “Earth Summit”,
Rio de Janeiro, 13 June 1992

http://www.un.org/Pubs/chronicle/2001/issue4/0104p48.html

"People often use the expression 'global village' to refer to the
process of globalisation. Unfortunately, as far as workers are
concerned, the term 'global jungle' would be more apt."

http://www.itglwf.org/congress/en/pr01.htm

In the current economic system, individuals and nations have to more
rigorously identify and pursue opportunities. But like any jungle, the
global market can marginalize and destroy. Contained in its wonders is
what Professor Manuel Castells calls a fourth world: "black holes in
informational capitalism: regions where [there is] no escape from
suffering and deprivation".

http://www.gcis.gov.za/media/ceo/000630.htm

[ComandanteBanana]

Hey, many of you think I'm exaggerating but a good defense and a sense
of humor are helpful around here. This is written in a Miami forum
about Miami...

(I slightly disagree with her: When you use your finger you may really
need your gun)


"It’s just because we have a melting pot of drivers from countries
with different driving habits.

Here’s what you’ll need to drive successfully throughout Miami:

- Impact resistant/bullet proof glass
- Body Armor
- PIP Insurance
- Gun
- Prozac

Also, it may be wise to exercise your middle finger at least twice a
week.

Oh, and a REALLY GOOD SENSE OF HUMOR.

Just be patient guys. A) you don’t look like the idiot and b) your
chances of arriving alive will be better."

http://forums.miamibeach411.com/index.php?/forums/viewthread/3079/

[ComandanteBanana]

Sometimes the simplest answers let you see where the problem lies...

(from bike forums)

'IMHO, it is really simple, and has nothing to do with any cycling
elite. The rest of the world gets it, and America doesn't because we
are controlled by oil companies, automobiles companies, subsidized gas
prices and a completely ****ed-up government. As a country, we have an
"go-fast six lane interstate" mentality and view cyclist as a
nuisance.

There is absolutely no incentive to build any kind of biking
infrastructure until that changes.'

http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=459661&page=16

[ComandanteBanana]

Some of these answers are really candid. This guy is even trying to
ban the cell phone, and yet he drives an SUV for the following
reasons...

(from the Miami Forum)

"Why do I drive an SUV instead of a cute Mini? Because I hope to be
able to walk away from the scene of the accident!"

But in the jungle no precaution is too much. ;)

...

"Aha, but then you are paying higher auto insurance as a smoker.
Why?

Because statistics show that smokers have a higher incident rate of
accidents.

So, because of the increased accidents caused by cel phone user’s, the
rest of us are paying higher rates. Until such time they figure out
how to disable hand held cel phones in your car. They already have
those in Churches by the way. Just a matter of time folks.

Big brother is looking over all of us!

Hey, I love freedom just as much as anyone, but when it starts to
affect my freedom to have a safe drive to/from work, time to do
something.

Why do I drive an SUV instead of a cute Mini? Because I hope to be
able to walk away from the scene of the accident!"

[Pat]

It must be hard to be the only person who's ever right.

It must be hard to know all of the answers.

It must be hard to know what each and every person should be doing,
whether or not they want to be doing it.

It must be hard to be so obsessive that you cannot stop yourself when
in a NG.

It must be hard to do nothing all day except read other blogs and NG
to try to shore up your arguments.

It must be hard to be lonely that you have nothing better to do than
to sit all day and post to NGs.

It must be hard to be so lonely that when no one responds to your
pitiful posts, you respond yourself to keep the thread alive.

It must be hard to be so obsessive about bikes that nothing else in
the world matters -- not family, not friends, not a job, not other
hobbies.

It must be hard to go through the pain of a thread that ends, which to
you must be like losing a child.

It must be hard to love bikes and ride in constant fear that something
untoward will happen to you.

It must be hard to live with all of the hatred in your heart --
towards SUVs, toward government, toward transportation planners,
towards other bikers who don't live up to your standards, etc.

It must be hard to be you. I'm glad that I'm not you and I'm glad
that everyone else who isn't you, isn't you. Otherwise the world
would be a terrible, lonely, fearful, empty, fearful place.

[ComandanteBanana]

Post by Pat
It must be hard to be the only person who's ever right.
It must be hard to know all of the answers.
It must be hard to know what each and every person should be doing,
whether or not they want to be doing it.
It must be hard to be so obsessive that you cannot stop yourself when
in a NG.
It must be hard to do nothing all day except read other blogs and NG
to try to shore up your arguments.
It must be hard to be lonely that you have nothing better to do than
to sit all day and post to NGs.
It must be hard to be so lonely that when no one responds to your
pitiful posts, you respond yourself to keep the thread alive.
It must be hard to be so obsessive about bikes that nothing else in
the world matters -- not family, not friends, not a job, not other
hobbies.
It must be hard to go through the pain of a thread that ends, which to
you must be like losing a child.
It must be hard to love bikes and ride in constant fear that something
untoward will happen to you.
It must be hard to live with all of the hatred in your heart --
towards SUVs, toward government, toward transportation planners,
towards other bikers who don't live up to your standards, etc.
It must be hard to be you.  I'm glad that I'm not you and I'm glad
that everyone else who isn't you, isn't you.  Otherwise the world
would be a terrible, lonely, fearful, empty, fearful place.

It must have been hard to put all that stuff together, but don't worry
about me... My sense of humor saves me.

However it must be very hard for you too...

It must be hard TO LIVE WITHOUT A SENSE OF HUMOR (the monkey giving a
banana to the hungry lion).

It must be hard to lie to yourself that you are a sheep and not a
monkey.

It must be hard to wait for God to solve the problem and then find out
that the people of Eastern Island had the same hope too (they ended up
eating each other).

It must be hard to hear there's no money for bike facilities or even
for fighting Global Warming and then waste a fortune in wars.

It must be hard to hear a lonely kayaker to the North Pole and find
very little ice left and few polar bears. And then tell you that
there's no future because the nations of the world are indifferent.

It must be hard to have AGAIN the same political party of the past 8
years.

It must be hard that one country unilaterally retired from the Kyoto
Protocol and then unleashed the Law of the Jungle attacking others who
have oil.

It must be hard to witness the sheep to be accomplices to this so they
can have their SUVs' gas tanks full.

It must be hard to want to do something and yet feel that's there's no
place for you to ride a bike because you don't have money to burn.

It must be hard for people of other nations to know their nations have
managed to escape the Law of the Jungle, and the people of another
nation feel superior enough to do what they please in internal and
international affairs, etc, etc.

In short, nothing is easy, because THE ONLY EASY WAY IS TO DRIVE AN
SUV AND PRETEND YOU'LL BE SAVED BY ARMAGEDDON.

God bless America. ;)

Loading Image...

[Pat]

Post by ComandanteBanana

Post by Pat
It must be hard to be the only person who's ever right.
It must be hard to know all of the answers.
It must be hard to know what each and every person should be doing,
whether or not they want to be doing it.
It must be hard to be so obsessive that you cannot stop yourself when
in a NG.
It must be hard to do nothing all day except read other blogs and NG
to try to shore up your arguments.
It must be hard to be lonely that you have nothing better to do than
to sit all day and post to NGs.
It must be hard to be so lonely that when no one responds to your
pitiful posts, you respond yourself to keep the thread alive.
It must be hard to be so obsessive about bikes that nothing else in
the world matters -- not family, not friends, not a job, not other
hobbies.
It must be hard to go through the pain of a thread that ends, which to
you must be like losing a child.
It must be hard to love bikes and ride in constant fear that something
untoward will happen to you.
It must be hard to live with all of the hatred in your heart --
towards SUVs, toward government, toward transportation planners,
towards other bikers who don't live up to your standards, etc.
It must be hard to be you.  I'm glad that I'm not you and I'm glad
that everyone else who isn't you, isn't you.  Otherwise the world
would be a terrible, lonely, fearful, empty, fearful place.

It must have been hard to put all that stuff together, but don't worry
about me... My sense of humor saves me.
However it must be very hard for you too...

No, not really. Live and let live is a good philosophy, with reason.

Post by ComandanteBanana
It must be hard TO LIVE WITHOUT A SENSE OF HUMOR (the monkey giving a
banana to the hungry lion).

I continue to have no idea what you are talking about with your
metaphors, for the most part. I am neither a sheep nor a lion nor
monkey, whatever they are. I am hard to categorize.

Post by ComandanteBanana
It must be hard to lie to yourself that you are a sheep and not a
monkey.

No, not really. But then again I don't know what you're talking
about. It must be a biker thing.

Post by ComandanteBanana
It must be hard to wait for God to solve the problem and then find out
that the people of Eastern Island had the same hope too (they ended up
eating each other).

Waiting for God is not hard. It just requires faith: faith in God.
Faith in man.

Post by ComandanteBanana
It must be hard to hear there's no money for bike facilities

No, not at all. If they're for people like you, who needs them. It'd
be good not to have them around.

or even

Post by ComandanteBanana
for fighting Global Warming and then waste a fortune in wars.
It must be hard to hear a lonely kayaker to the North Pole and find
very little ice left and few polar bears. And then tell you that
there's no future because the nations of the world are indifferent.
It must be hard to have AGAIN the same political party of the past 8
years.

If you think there's much of a difference between the parties, then I
pity you even more. The only difference is one lies and the other
doesn't tell the truth. They're sort of like you.

Post by ComandanteBanana
It must be hard that one country unilaterally retired from the Kyoto
Protocol and then unleashed the Law of the Jungle attacking others who
have oil.
It must be hard to witness the sheep to be accomplices to this so they
can have their SUVs' gas tanks full.

As things go, gas remains relatively inexpensive.

Post by ComandanteBanana
It must be hard to want to do something and yet feel that's there's no
place for you to ride a bike because you don't have money to burn.

I can ride anywhere. My bike has a 1300 CC engine.

Post by ComandanteBanana
It must be hard for people of other nations to know their nations have
managed to escape the Law of the Jungle, and the people of another
nation feel superior enough to do what they please in internal and
international affairs, etc, etc.

I have no idea. Who are you talking about? Even with the worst of
times, the US is doing a better job of managing its affairs than a lot
of countries. Been to Haiti lately?

Post by ComandanteBanana
In short, nothing is easy, because THE ONLY EASY WAY IS TO DRIVE AN
SUV AND PRETEND YOU'LL BE SAVED BY ARMAGEDDON.

If leaps of logic was an Olympic sport, you'd get a gold metal.

Post by ComandanteBanana
God bless America. ;)
http://www.cabaloosa.com/images/Main%20Site%20Images/Moai%20of%20East...

[ComandanteBanana]

Post by ComandanteBanana
However it must be very hard for you too...

No, not really.  Live and let live is a good philosophy, with reason.

If that were the case, people could drive or ride a bike in safety.
When the latter is not accomplished (in safety), you intimidate the
people into driving.

Post by ComandanteBanana
It must be hard TO LIVE WITHOUT A SENSE OF HUMOR (the monkey giving a
banana to the hungry lion).

I continue to have no idea what you are talking about with your
metaphors, for the most part.  I am neither a sheep nor a lion nor
monkey, whatever they are.  I am hard to categorize.

Trust me, you are more related to the monkey than to the lion. But the
lion is also the symbol of power and wealth.

So I think you are a sheep who follows the lion.

Post by ComandanteBanana
It must be hard to lie to yourself that you are a sheep and not a
monkey.

No, not really.  But then again I don't know what you're talking
about.  It must be a biker thing.

No biker thing. EVOLUTION, DARWIN, SURVIVAL OF THE FITTEST, the
foundation of the economic system we've got. Which is why cyclists are
simply dismissed as "monkeys."

Post by ComandanteBanana
It must be hard to wait for God to solve the problem and then find out
that the people of Eastern Island had the same hope too (they ended up
eating each other).

Waiting for God is not hard.  It just requires faith: faith in God.
Faith in man.

Faith in God is not faith in man. Faith in man is called HUMANISM. And
that requires taking action (riding bikes for example) to prevent a
catastrophe, not wait for God to save us.

Post by ComandanteBanana
It must be hard to hear there's no money for bike facilities

No, not at all.  If they're for people like you, who needs them.  It'd
be good not to have them around.

Ok, people like me and people who care about saving the environment,
like this kayaker going to the North Pole to make the poing of ice
melting. Probably there's a good chunk of people out there willing to
take responsibility in their hands.

or even

Post by ComandanteBanana
for fighting Global Warming and then waste a fortune in wars.
It must be hard to hear a lonely kayaker to the North Pole and find
very little ice left and few polar bears. And then tell you that
there's no future because the nations of the world are indifferent.
It must be hard to have AGAIN the same political party of the past 8
years.

If you think there's much of a difference between the parties, then I
pity you even more.  The only difference is one lies and the other
doesn't tell the truth.  They're sort of like you.

I have called them "Republicrats," and yet remain hopeful that someone
will break the cycle.

Post by ComandanteBanana
It must be hard that one country unilaterally retired from the Kyoto
Protocol and then unleashed the Law of the Jungle attacking others who
have oil.
It must be hard to witness the sheep to be accomplices to this so they
can have their SUVs' gas tanks full.

As things go, gas remains relatively inexpensive.

Bad for the environment. But they are plannig to drill anyway, no
matter what.

Post by ComandanteBanana
It must be hard to want to do something and yet feel that's there's no
place for you to ride a bike because you don't have money to burn.

I can ride anywhere.  My bike has a 1300 CC engine.

Good for you. At least you will only kill yourself in case of an
accidents. You know, the hungry lions drive SUVs. ;)

Post by ComandanteBanana
It must be hard for people of other nations to know their nations have
managed to escape the Law of the Jungle, and the people of another
nation feel superior enough to do what they please in internal and
international affairs, etc, etc.

I have no idea.  Who are you talking about?  Even with the worst of
times, the US is doing a better job of managing its affairs than a lot
of countries.  Been to Haiti lately?

Good to know that America is doing better than Haiti. Probably even
better than Cuba.

But it remains a country of extreme contrasts and disparities among
the civilized nations.

Post by ComandanteBanana
In short, nothing is easy, because THE ONLY EASY WAY IS TO DRIVE AN
SUV AND PRETEND YOU'LL BE SAVED BY ARMAGEDDON.

If leaps of logic was an Olympic sport, you'd get a gold metal.

It's also easy to drive a big bike, if only you could stay away from a
bicycle forum. ;)

Post by ComandanteBanana
God bless America. ;)
http://www.cabaloosa.com/images/Main%20Site%20Images/Moai%20of%20East...- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

[Pat]

Post by ComandanteBanana

Post by ComandanteBanana
However it must be very hard for you too...

No, not really.  Live and let live is a good philosophy, with reason.

If that were the case, people could drive or ride a bike in safety.
When the latter is not accomplished (in safety), you intimidate the
people into driving.

Post by ComandanteBanana
It must be hard TO LIVE WITHOUT A SENSE OF HUMOR (the monkey giving a
banana to the hungry lion).

I continue to have no idea what you are talking about with your
metaphors, for the most part.  I am neither a sheep nor a lion nor
monkey, whatever they are.  I am hard to categorize.

Trust me, you are more related to the monkey than to the lion. But the
lion is also the symbol of power and wealth.
So I think you are a sheep who follows the lion.

Post by ComandanteBanana
It must be hard to lie to yourself that you are a sheep and not a
monkey.

No, not really.  But then again I don't know what you're talking
about.  It must be a biker thing.

No biker thing. EVOLUTION, DARWIN, SURVIVAL OF THE FITTEST, the
foundation of the economic system we've got. Which is why cyclists are
simply dismissed as "monkeys."

Post by ComandanteBanana
It must be hard to wait for God to solve the problem and then find out
that the people of Eastern Island had the same hope too (they ended up
eating each other).

Waiting for God is not hard.  It just requires faith: faith in God.
Faith in man.

Faith in God is not faith in man. Faith in man is called HUMANISM. And
that requires taking action (riding bikes for example) to prevent a
catastrophe, not wait for God to save us.

Post by ComandanteBanana
It must be hard to hear there's no money for bike facilities

No, not at all.  If they're for people like you, who needs them.  It'd
be good not to have them around.

Ok, people like me and people who care about saving the environment,
like this kayaker going to the North Pole to make the poing of ice
melting. Probably there's a good chunk of people out there willing to
take responsibility in their hands.

or even

Post by ComandanteBanana
for fighting Global Warming and then waste a fortune in wars.
It must be hard to hear a lonely kayaker to the North Pole and find
very little ice left and few polar bears. And then tell you that
there's no future because the nations of the world are indifferent.
It must be hard to have AGAIN the same political party of the past 8
years.

If you think there's much of a difference between the parties, then I
pity you even more.  The only difference is one lies and the other
doesn't tell the truth.  They're sort of like you.

I have called them "Republicrats," and yet remain hopeful that someone
will break the cycle.

Post by ComandanteBanana
It must be hard that one country unilaterally retired from the Kyoto
Protocol and then unleashed the Law of the Jungle attacking others who
have oil.
It must be hard to witness the sheep to be accomplices to this so they
can have their SUVs' gas tanks full.

As things go, gas remains relatively inexpensive.

Bad for the environment. But they are plannig to drill anyway, no
matter what.

Post by ComandanteBanana
It must be hard to want to do something and yet feel that's there's no
place for you to ride a bike because you don't have money to burn.

I can ride anywhere.  My bike has a 1300 CC engine.

Good for you. At least you will only kill yourself in case of an
accidents. You know, the hungry lions drive SUVs. ;)

Post by ComandanteBanana
It must be hard for people of other nations to know their nations have
managed to escape the Law of the Jungle, and the people of another
nation feel superior enough to do what they please in internal and
international affairs, etc, etc.

I have no idea.  Who are you talking about?  Even with the worst of
times, the US is doing a better job of managing its affairs than a lot
of countries.  Been to Haiti lately?

Good to know that America is doing better than Haiti. Probably even
better than Cuba.
But it remains a country of extreme contrasts and disparities among
the civilized nations.

Post by ComandanteBanana
In short, nothing is easy, because THE ONLY EASY WAY IS TO DRIVE AN
SUV AND PRETEND YOU'LL BE SAVED BY ARMAGEDDON.

If leaps of logic was an Olympic sport, you'd get a gold metal.

It's also easy to drive a big bike, if only you could stay away from a
bicycle forum. ;)

Hey moron, I'm not in a bike forum. I'm in an urban planning one. If
you don't want people like me in the threads, then stop your moronic
cross-posting and the problem will be solved.

Post by ComandanteBanana

Post by ComandanteBanana
God bless America. ;)
http://www.cabaloosa.com/images/Main%20Site%20Images/Moai%20of%20East...Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

[ComandanteBanana]

Post by ComandanteBanana

Post by ComandanteBanana
However it must be very hard for you too...

No, not really.  Live and let live is a good philosophy, with reason.

If that were the case, people could drive or ride a bike in safety.
When the latter is not accomplished (in safety), you intimidate the
people into driving.

Post by ComandanteBanana
It must be hard TO LIVE WITHOUT A SENSE OF HUMOR (the monkey giving a
banana to the hungry lion).

I continue to have no idea what you are talking about with your
metaphors, for the most part.  I am neither a sheep nor a lion nor
monkey, whatever they are.  I am hard to categorize.

Trust me, you are more related to the monkey than to the lion. But the
lion is also the symbol of power and wealth.
So I think you are a sheep who follows the lion.

Post by ComandanteBanana
It must be hard to lie to yourself that you are a sheep and not a
monkey.

No, not really.  But then again I don't know what you're talking
about.  It must be a biker thing.

No biker thing. EVOLUTION, DARWIN, SURVIVAL OF THE FITTEST, the
foundation of the economic system we've got. Which is why cyclists are
simply dismissed as "monkeys."

Post by ComandanteBanana
It must be hard to wait for God to solve the problem and then find out
that the people of Eastern Island had the same hope too (they ended up
eating each other).

Waiting for God is not hard.  It just requires faith: faith in God.
Faith in man.

Faith in God is not faith in man. Faith in man is called HUMANISM. And
that requires taking action (riding bikes for example) to prevent a
catastrophe, not wait for God to save us.

Post by ComandanteBanana
It must be hard to hear there's no money for bike facilities

No, not at all.  If they're for people like you, who needs them.  It'd
be good not to have them around.

Ok, people like me and people who care about saving the environment,
like this kayaker going to the North Pole to make the poing of ice
melting. Probably there's a good chunk of people out there willing to
take responsibility in their hands.

or even

Post by ComandanteBanana
for fighting Global Warming and then waste a fortune in wars.
It must be hard to hear a lonely kayaker to the North Pole and find
very little ice left and few polar bears. And then tell you that
there's no future because the nations of the world are indifferent.
It must be hard to have AGAIN the same political party of the past 8
years.

If you think there's much of a difference between the parties, then I
pity you even more.  The only difference is one lies and the other
doesn't tell the truth.  They're sort of like you.

I have called them "Republicrats," and yet remain hopeful that someone
will break the cycle.

Post by ComandanteBanana
It must be hard that one country unilaterally retired from the Kyoto
Protocol and then unleashed the Law of the Jungle attacking others who
have oil.
It must be hard to witness the sheep to be accomplices to this so they
can have their SUVs' gas tanks full.

As things go, gas remains relatively inexpensive.

Bad for the environment. But they are plannig to drill anyway, no
matter what.

Post by ComandanteBanana
It must be hard to want to do something and yet feel that's there's no
place for you to ride a bike because you don't have money to burn.

I can ride anywhere.  My bike has a 1300 CC engine.

Good for you. At least you will only kill yourself in case of an
accidents. You know, the hungry lions drive SUVs. ;)

Post by ComandanteBanana
It must be hard for people of other nations to know their nations have
managed to escape the Law of the Jungle, and the people of another
nation feel superior enough to do what they please in internal and
international affairs, etc, etc.

I have no idea.  Who are you talking about?  Even with the worst of
times, the US is doing a better job of managing its affairs than a lot
of countries.  Been to Haiti lately?

Good to know that America is doing better than Haiti. Probably even
better than Cuba.
But it remains a country of extreme contrasts and disparities among
the civilized nations.

Post by ComandanteBanana
In short, nothing is easy, because THE ONLY EASY WAY IS TO DRIVE AN
SUV AND PRETEND YOU'LL BE SAVED BY ARMAGEDDON.

If leaps of logic was an Olympic sport, you'd get a gold metal.

It's also easy to drive a big bike, if only you could stay away from a
bicycle forum. ;)

Hey moron, I'm not in a bike forum.  I'm in an urban planning one.  If
you don't want people like me in the threads, then stop your moronic
cross-posting and the problem will be solved.

Post by ComandanteBanana

Post by ComandanteBanana
God bless America. ;)
http://www.cabaloosa.com/images/Main%20Site%20Images/Moai%20of%20East...quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

And what you doing there if you live in the boondocks and hate
civilization?

[Pat]

Post by ComandanteBanana

Post by ComandanteBanana

Post by ComandanteBanana
However it must be very hard for you too...

No, not really.  Live and let live is a good philosophy, with reason.

If that were the case, people could drive or ride a bike in safety.
When the latter is not accomplished (in safety), you intimidate the
people into driving.

Post by ComandanteBanana
It must be hard TO LIVE WITHOUT A SENSE OF HUMOR (the monkey giving a
banana to the hungry lion).

I continue to have no idea what you are talking about with your
metaphors, for the most part.  I am neither a sheep nor a lion nor
monkey, whatever they are.  I am hard to categorize.

Trust me, you are more related to the monkey than to the lion. But the
lion is also the symbol of power and wealth.
So I think you are a sheep who follows the lion.

Post by ComandanteBanana
It must be hard to lie to yourself that you are a sheep and not a
monkey.

No, not really.  But then again I don't know what you're talking
about.  It must be a biker thing.

No biker thing. EVOLUTION, DARWIN, SURVIVAL OF THE FITTEST, the
foundation of the economic system we've got. Which is why cyclists are
simply dismissed as "monkeys."

Post by ComandanteBanana
It must be hard to wait for God to solve the problem and then find out
that the people of Eastern Island had the same hope too (they ended up
eating each other).

Waiting for God is not hard.  It just requires faith: faith in God.
Faith in man.

Faith in God is not faith in man. Faith in man is called HUMANISM. And
that requires taking action (riding bikes for example) to prevent a
catastrophe, not wait for God to save us.

Post by ComandanteBanana
It must be hard to hear there's no money for bike facilities

No, not at all.  If they're for people like you, who needs them.  It'd
be good not to have them around.

Ok, people like me and people who care about saving the environment,
like this kayaker going to the North Pole to make the poing of ice
melting. Probably there's a good chunk of people out there willing to
take responsibility in their hands.

or even

Post by ComandanteBanana
for fighting Global Warming and then waste a fortune in wars.
It must be hard to hear a lonely kayaker to the North Pole and find
very little ice left and few polar bears. And then tell you that
there's no future because the nations of the world are indifferent.
It must be hard to have AGAIN the same political party of the past 8
years.

If you think there's much of a difference between the parties, then I
pity you even more.  The only difference is one lies and the other
doesn't tell the truth.  They're sort of like you.

I have called them "Republicrats," and yet remain hopeful that someone
will break the cycle.

Post by ComandanteBanana
It must be hard that one country unilaterally retired from the Kyoto
Protocol and then unleashed the Law of the Jungle attacking others who
have oil.
It must be hard to witness the sheep to be accomplices to this so they
can have their SUVs' gas tanks full.

As things go, gas remains relatively inexpensive.

Bad for the environment. But they are plannig to drill anyway, no
matter what.

Post by ComandanteBanana
It must be hard to want to do something and yet feel that's there's no
place for you to ride a bike because you don't have money to burn.

I can ride anywhere.  My bike has a 1300 CC engine.

Good for you. At least you will only kill yourself in case of an
accidents. You know, the hungry lions drive SUVs. ;)

Post by ComandanteBanana
It must be hard for people of other nations to know their nations have
managed to escape the Law of the Jungle, and the people of another
nation feel superior enough to do what they please in internal and
international affairs, etc, etc.

I have no idea.  Who are you talking about?  Even with the worst of
times, the US is doing a better job of managing its affairs than a lot
of countries.  Been to Haiti lately?

Good to know that America is doing better than Haiti. Probably even
better than Cuba.
But it remains a country of extreme contrasts and disparities among
the civilized nations.

Post by ComandanteBanana
In short, nothing is easy, because THE ONLY EASY WAY IS TO DRIVE AN
SUV AND PRETEND YOU'LL BE SAVED BY ARMAGEDDON.

If leaps of logic was an Olympic sport, you'd get a gold metal.

It's also easy to drive a big bike, if only you could stay away from a
bicycle forum. ;)

Hey moron, I'm not in a bike forum.  I'm in an urban planning one.  If
you don't want people like me in the threads, then stop your moronic
cross-posting and the problem will be solved.

Post by ComandanteBanana

Post by ComandanteBanana
God bless America. ;)
http://www.cabaloosa.com/images/Main%20Site%20Images/Moai%20of%20East...text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

And what you doing there if you live in the boondocks and hate
civilization?

I've involved with urban planning all across the state. So why are
you here if you want nothing except biker stuff. When planners read
your stuff they say "yet another reason to discount bikers", which is,
I suppose, your real intention.

Why do you say I live in a hate civilization? Obviously, you have a
reading comprehension problem to go with your obsessive behavior. I'm
the one who says it's a big world with lots of folks liking lots of
different stuff. You're the one trying to force everyone into your
bizarre little preconceived set of narrow minded ideas. Live and let
live.

[ComandanteBanana]

Post by ComandanteBanana

Post by ComandanteBanana

Post by ComandanteBanana
However it must be very hard for you too...

No, not really.  Live and let live is a good philosophy, with reason.

If that were the case, people could drive or ride a bike in safety.
When the latter is not accomplished (in safety), you intimidate the
people into driving.

Post by ComandanteBanana
It must be hard TO LIVE WITHOUT A SENSE OF HUMOR (the monkey giving a
banana to the hungry lion).

I continue to have no idea what you are talking about with your
metaphors, for the most part.  I am neither a sheep nor a lion nor
monkey, whatever they are.  I am hard to categorize.

Trust me, you are more related to the monkey than to the lion. But the
lion is also the symbol of power and wealth.
So I think you are a sheep who follows the lion.

Post by ComandanteBanana
It must be hard to lie to yourself that you are a sheep and not a
monkey.

No, not really.  But then again I don't know what you're talking
about.  It must be a biker thing.

No biker thing. EVOLUTION, DARWIN, SURVIVAL OF THE FITTEST, the
foundation of the economic system we've got. Which is why cyclists are
simply dismissed as "monkeys."

Post by ComandanteBanana
It must be hard to wait for God to solve the problem and then find out
that the people of Eastern Island had the same hope too (they ended up
eating each other).

Waiting for God is not hard.  It just requires faith: faith in God.
Faith in man.

Faith in God is not faith in man. Faith in man is called HUMANISM. And
that requires taking action (riding bikes for example) to prevent a
catastrophe, not wait for God to save us.

Post by ComandanteBanana
It must be hard to hear there's no money for bike facilities

No, not at all.  If they're for people like you, who needs them.  It'd
be good not to have them around.

Ok, people like me and people who care about saving the environment,
like this kayaker going to the North Pole to make the poing of ice
melting. Probably there's a good chunk of people out there willing to
take responsibility in their hands.

or even

Post by ComandanteBanana
for fighting Global Warming and then waste a fortune in wars.
It must be hard to hear a lonely kayaker to the North Pole and find
very little ice left and few polar bears. And then tell you that
there's no future because the nations of the world are indifferent.
It must be hard to have AGAIN the same political party of the past 8
years.

If you think there's much of a difference between the parties, then I
pity you even more.  The only difference is one lies and the other
doesn't tell the truth.  They're sort of like you.

I have called them "Republicrats," and yet remain hopeful that someone
will break the cycle.

Post by ComandanteBanana
It must be hard that one country unilaterally retired from the Kyoto
Protocol and then unleashed the Law of the Jungle attacking others who
have oil.
It must be hard to witness the sheep to be accomplices to this so they
can have their SUVs' gas tanks full.

As things go, gas remains relatively inexpensive.

Bad for the environment. But they are plannig to drill anyway, no
matter what.

Post by ComandanteBanana
It must be hard to want to do something and yet feel that's there's no
place for you to ride a bike because you don't have money to burn.

I can ride anywhere.  My bike has a 1300 CC engine.

Good for you. At least you will only kill yourself in case of an
accidents. You know, the hungry lions drive SUVs. ;)

Post by ComandanteBanana
It must be hard for people of other nations to know their nations have
managed to escape the Law of the Jungle, and the people of another
nation feel superior enough to do what they please in internal and
international affairs, etc, etc.

I have no idea.  Who are you talking about?  Even with the worst of
times, the US is doing a better job of managing its affairs than a lot
of countries.  Been to Haiti lately?

Good to know that America is doing better than Haiti. Probably even
better than Cuba.
But it remains a country of extreme contrasts and disparities among
the civilized nations.

Post by ComandanteBanana
In short, nothing is easy, because THE ONLY EASY WAY IS TO DRIVE AN
SUV AND PRETEND YOU'LL BE SAVED BY ARMAGEDDON.

If leaps of logic was an Olympic sport, you'd get a gold metal.

It's also easy to drive a big bike, if only you could stay away from a
bicycle forum. ;)

Hey moron, I'm not in a bike forum.  I'm in an urban planning one.  If
you don't want people like me in the threads, then stop your moronic
cross-posting and the problem will be solved.

Post by ComandanteBanana

Post by ComandanteBanana
God bless America. ;)
http://www.cabaloosa.com/images/Main%20Site%20Images/Moai%20of%20East...-

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

And what you doing there if you live in the boondocks and hate
civilization?

I've involved with urban planning all across the state.  So why are
you here if you want nothing except biker stuff.  When planners read
your stuff they say "yet another reason to discount bikers", which is,
I suppose, your real intention.

Sure, that's why city planners ignore bike facilities. They even
ignore pedestrian facilities in much of the American sprawl. Not even
sidewalks!

Why do you say I live in a hate civilization?  Obviously, you have a
reading comprehension problem to go with your obsessive behavior.  I'm
the one who says it's a big world with lots of folks liking lots of
different stuff.  You're the one trying to force everyone into your
bizarre little preconceived set of narrow minded ideas.  Live and let
live.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

You've saying that all along. People thought that you were stupid
(what could be more stupid than to be city a planner and live in the
boondocks) but never a liar.

[Little Meow]

Post by ComandanteBanana

Post by Pat
It must be hard to be the only person who's ever right.
It must be hard to know all of the answers.
It must be hard to know what each and every person should be doing,
whether or not they want to be doing it.
It must be hard to be so obsessive that you cannot stop yourself when
in a NG.
It must be hard to do nothing all day except read other blogs and NG
to try to shore up your arguments.
It must be hard to be lonely that you have nothing better to do than
to sit all day and post to NGs.
It must be hard to be so lonely that when no one responds to your
pitiful posts, you respond yourself to keep the thread alive.
It must be hard to be so obsessive about bikes that nothing else in
the world matters -- not family, not friends, not a job, not other
hobbies.
It must be hard to go through the pain of a thread that ends, which
to you must be like losing a child.
It must be hard to love bikes and ride in constant fear that
something untoward will happen to you.
It must be hard to live with all of the hatred in your heart --
towards SUVs, toward government, toward transportation planners,
towards other bikers who don't live up to your standards, etc.
It must be hard to be you.  I'm glad that I'm not you and I'm glad
that everyone else who isn't you, isn't you.  Otherwise the world
would be a terrible, lonely, fearful, empty, fearful place.

It must have been hard to put all that stuff together, but don't worry
about me... My sense of humor saves me.
However it must be very hard for you too...
It must be hard TO LIVE WITHOUT A SENSE OF HUMOR (the monkey giving a
banana to the hungry lion).
It must be hard to lie to yourself that you are a sheep and not a
monkey.
It must be hard to wait for God to solve the problem and then find out
that the people of Eastern Island had the same hope too (they ended up
eating each other).
It must be hard to hear there's no money for bike facilities or even
for fighting Global Warming and then waste a fortune in wars.
It must be hard to hear a lonely kayaker to the North Pole and find
very little ice left and few polar bears. And then tell you that
there's no future because the nations of the world are indifferent.
It must be hard to have AGAIN the same political party of the past 8
years.
It must be hard that one country unilaterally retired from the Kyoto
Protocol and then unleashed the Law of the Jungle attacking others who
have oil.
It must be hard to witness the sheep to be accomplices to this so they
can have their SUVs' gas tanks full.
It must be hard to want to do something and yet feel that's there's no
place for you to ride a bike because you don't have money to burn.
It must be hard for people of other nations to know their nations have
managed to escape the Law of the Jungle, and the people of another
nation feel superior enough to do what they please in internal and
international affairs, etc, etc.
In short, nothing is easy, because THE ONLY EASY WAY IS TO DRIVE AN
SUV AND PRETEND YOU'LL BE SAVED BY ARMAGEDDON.
God bless America. ;)
http://www.cabaloosa.com/images/Main%20Site%20Images/Moai%20of%20Easter
%20Island.JPG

Do you think that post was directed at you?
I thought it was directed at me!
Finally, I thought someone was able to appreciate my personal
struggle, but now not so much.

[ComandanteBanana]

Post by Little Meow

Post by ComandanteBanana
http://www.cabaloosa.com/images/Main%20Site%20Images/Moai%20of%20Easter
%20Island.JPG

Do you think that post was directed at you?
I thought it was directed at me!
Finally, I thought someone was able to appreciate my personal
struggle, but now not so much.-

I think he was hunting for the big game, not the little one.

Funny name. You must be new in this jungle, right? ;)

Welcome to the struggle anyway!

[Tom Sherman]

Post by Pat
It must be hard to be the only person who's ever right.

Ask Ed Dolan. ;)

Post by Pat
It must be hard to know all of the answers.

Not really. ;)

Post by Pat
[...]
It must be hard to be so obsessive about bikes that nothing else in
the world matters -- not family, not friends, not a job, not other
hobbies.

butbutbut, NOTHING is more important than cycling!

Post by Pat
[...]
It must be hard to love bikes and ride in constant fear that something
untoward will happen to you.

Only CommendanteBananaNutJob has that problem.

Post by Pat
It must be hard to live with all of the hatred in your heart --
towards SUVs, toward government, toward transportation planners,
towards other bikers who don't live up to your standards, etc.

Other bikers? The proper term is cyclist for road riding. "Biker" should
never be used in the context of human powered single-track vehicles
unless preceded by "mountain".

Post by Pat
It must be hard to be you. I'm glad that I'm not you and I'm glad
that everyone else who isn't you, isn't you. Otherwise the world
would be a terrible, lonely, fearful, empty, fearful place.

INDEFINITE PRONOUN ALERT!

Who is "you"?

[Pat]

Post by Tom Sherman

Post by Pat
It must be hard to be the only person who's ever right.

Ask Ed Dolan. ;)

Post by Pat
It must be hard to know all of the answers.

Not really. ;)

Post by Pat
[...]
It must be hard to be so obsessive about bikes that nothing else in
the world matters -- not family, not friends, not a job, not other
hobbies.

butbutbut, NOTHING is more important than cycling!

Post by Pat
[...]
It must be hard to love bikes and ride in constant fear that something
untoward will happen to you.

Only CommendanteBananaNutJob has that problem.

Post by Pat
It must be hard to live with all of the hatred in your heart --
towards SUVs, toward government, toward transportation planners,
towards other bikers who don't live up to your standards, etc.

Other bikers? The proper term is cyclist for road riding. "Biker" should
never be used in the context of human powered single-track vehicles
unless preceded by "mountain".

Post by Pat
It must be hard to be you.  I'm glad that I'm not you and I'm glad
that everyone else who isn't you, isn't you.  Otherwise the world
would be a terrible, lonely, fearful, empty, fearful place.

INDEFINITE PRONOUN ALERT!
Who is "you"?

You is him, not you. If it were you, I'd say it was you, not him.

Post by Tom Sherman
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
“Mary had a little lamb / And when she saw it sicken /
She shipped it off to Packingtown / And now it’s labeled chicken.”

[SMS]

Post by ComandanteBanana
Those kind of NON-ISSUES dominate the political landscape,
particularly affecting those who could have any connections with
communists. :(

Not funny. It's pretty clear that only communists will be voting for McCain.

[D***@gmail.com]

Post by SMS

Post by ComandanteBanana
Those kind of NON-ISSUES dominate the political landscape,
particularly affecting those who could have any connections with
communists. :(

Not funny. It's pretty clear that only communists will be voting for McCain.

Excellent argument. I think that with statements like that you'll
change the opinions of many. I can hear people now screeching "oh no,
I didn't realize that vote would make me a commie! Obama it is!"

[ComandanteBanana]

Post by SMS

Post by ComandanteBanana
Those kind of NON-ISSUES dominate the political landscape,
particularly affecting those who could have any connections with
communists. :(

Not funny. It's pretty clear that only communists will be voting for McCain.

Excellent argument.  I think that with statements like that you'll
change the opinions of many.  I can hear people now screeching "oh no,
I didn't realize that vote would make me a commie!  Obama it is!"

I don't think presidents are either communists or not. They are more
like survivors of the political jungle. Whatever the sheep wants to
hear... ;)

[ComandanteBanana]

Post by Tom Sherman

Post by ComandanteBanana

Post by Pat

Post by ComandanteBanana
http://news.iafrica.com/sa/1140241.htm

Are you still blogging for bucks or whatever they call that program
Big Oil has for people to make anti-biking internet comments? Can't
you find another way of earning a living; or are you stuck in your
chair, eating Bon Bons.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

Hey, stupidity is an asset in Texas, right? Or are you the Pat from
NY?
At least NYC has some good old fashioned public transportation. Never
mind. ;)

"Artisticphotography" Pat is from Upstate New York.
If people would use a last name (real or invented) we would not have
this problem.

I see. I call him "Pat from the Boondocks" because he lives in the
boondocks (the middle of nowhere, trashing the last wilderness). And
yet he claims he's "city planner"...

No wonder our cities look like a jungle. ;)

[ComandanteBanana]

Post by SMS

Post by ComandanteBanana
Those kind of NON-ISSUES dominate the political landscape,
particularly affecting those who could have any connections with
communists. :(

Not funny. It's pretty clear that only communists will be voting for McCain.

Yeah, it's clear, but they control the "truth." Orwell said that "the
party" controls the truth. That's the way it is, locally.

[ComandanteBanana]

(If you want to know many of the reasons why Americans don't ride
bikes, here's a good summary. I respond at bottom)

Originally Posted by andrelam
There are a few key items that I've noticed that seem to keep people
from cycling:

1. This country greatly suffers from the "A Bike is a Toy" mentality.
Unless you are living in places like Portland OR, Bolder CO, or some
other "heavy" cycling city, the concept of utility cycling is just so
foreign. This is ofcourse further propegated by Trek, Giant, and all
the other bike companies.

The big bike companies' products are clearly sold as toys. If you
spend about $60 (retail) you can add fenders and a rack. With such
simple additions you can actually USE your bike to carry something.
Without a simple rack how can you even ride to the neighborhood store
to get a few items.

One more pet peeve is the complete lack of lighting. I don't care if
they add a low end simple bottle generator and a battery operated rear
LED light for about $20. Unless I am mistaken, every state required
active lighting after dark, yet virtualy no bikes are sold with any
form of lighting. In Europe, low end bikes come with low end light,
but even a super cheap $15 set of generator hub and front light will
be a HUGHE improvement over no lighting at all.

If every bike in the USA case with a rack, fenders, and some very
basic lighting, at least you'd give everyone the ability to use their
bikes from something other than just recreation.

2. Distances are much greater in the USA than most European countries.
This is a simple fact that can not be ignored completely. That being
said however, there is still a vast portion of the population that
could get to at least a convenience store within 2 to 3 miles. Even if
a large percentage of the population commutes more than 15 Miles round
trip... that doesn't excuse those that live closer from using an
alternative form of transportation.

3. Weather. Certainly the USA gets much more extreme weather than most
of Europe. The Summers here are Much hotter than anywhere in
Scandanavia or other parts of Northern Europe where cycling is very
popular. The Winters too can be more extreme in their cold and
precipitation. The mild (but wet) year round weather in place like
Holland and Denmark do help make cycling easier without changing
clothing. This past Summer for instance I was in Holland (outside of
Alkmaar) for the last week in June through the 1st week in July. The
warmest weather was about 78F and on average it was aright around 72F.
Once I got back the Buffalo (NY) it was pretty much in the high 70's
to low 80's from July through end of September. That 10 degree
difference means I sweat a whole lot more, and therefore wear a T
shirt and shorts to work while riding and then change into clean
clothing. During the past Winter temps are are consistantly below
freezing and we had our usual weeks of weather in the Teens and
Twenties, and even a few days of low single digit weather. I could
wear my work pants, but with the fresh snow fall a few days a week it
was just more comfortable to wear a pair of tights under my rain pants
and leave the nice cloths at work.

4. Government policies that have historically been very pro-car and
not much more. I remember during the 1st few years of the Bush
Administration that one of the higher-ups said sothing to the effect
that "Driving Big Cars was a Right" that every American deserved and
that worying about effciency was unamerican. With the cost of fuel now
seriously hurting our economy even with clearly Pro-Energy
administration has seen the need to make things more efficient, and
look at alternative forms of transportation. However most of the
"progress" appears to be put into Ethanol and not working out how to
get people to drive less. Cycling infrastructure, public
transportation, and Amtrack (national rail) are all seen as a grain on
our government, yet we conveniently forget how expensive it is to
support all the cars on the road (road maintenance, new contruction,
securing oil).

These are ofcourse by no means the only reasons people don't consider
riding a bike as a serious option to saving fuel, and improving once
health. By leading by example, I've convinced a few people at work
that cycling isn't so crazy after all. Once they see my coworker and I
riding into work virtually every day during the Winter we inspired a
few folks to start riding for fun and excercise. Some of teh folks
that started riding admittedly live to far away for a novice to
commute, but at least they are starting to use their bikes. Better to
ride a bike around the neighborhood, then to get in a car to drive
some distance to a health club just so you can Spin, etc.

Happy riding,
André

***

Thanks, great feeback. I totally agree with 1, often overlooked. They
could meet a criteria similar to a motorcycle to make it street legal
--or not. Number 3 is relative and I can handle Florida weather most
of the time.

Number 4 deserves proper attention. It's the policies of both
Republicans and Democrats (Republicrats) to incentivate the Big Three
and ignore the bike. It's all about money, of course, and not that
they hate the bicycle that much. Actually you often see SUVs with
bikes hanging from the back.

Now the only hope is the Obama, but maybe he'll be become part of the
machine, if he ever has a chance. So just keep riding, and pray for
the revolution.

[ComandanteBanana]

Post by Eric Vey

Post by ComandanteBanana
So which city's drivers suffer from the worst road rage? The third
annual In The Driver's Seat Road Rage Survey, commissioned by
AutoVantage, a leading national auto club, found that the least
courteous city in the country is Miami... It's the third consecutive
year that Miami takes the crown as road rage capital of America.
http://www.healthnewsdigest.com/news/Health_Tips_620/Steering_Clear_O...

6,180 Aggravated assaults in 2006. (That's a felony where somebody gets
whomped up on or shot.)
How many of those were road rage?

I just stay from assaults, but can't get away from road rage.
Actually, one could have killed recently while on a bike.

Post by Eric Vey
Seems like you may have your priorities out of whack.
I'm telling you STAY HOME and don't go out! Better to be fat and lazy
than dead.

I'm ready to face that jungle... But I'd need something like an SUV.
Like this...

http://www.cadillac.com/cadillacjsp/model/gallery.jsp?model=escalade

I'd get it black with tinted windows like a real maffia boss or a
president.

That's what the locals do anyway. ;)

[Eric Vey]

Post by ComandanteBanana
I'm ready to face that jungle... But I'd need something like an SUV.
Like this...

So you can drive it off the road like the locals do and kill yourself?

344 auto fatalities in Miami-Dade in 2006!
186 single vehicle crashes (almost HALF!)
9 cyclists.

Seems like most people doing to dying down there are driving too fast
and either running off the road and over-correcting (mysterious loss of
control) or are missing the turn and piling into something.
Do you want to die like that?

Stay HOME. Let them find your 90 year-old corpse in front of a TV
playing re-runs of "I Love Lucy." No need to be out on the street
becoming a statistic.

[Eric Vey]

Post by ComandanteBanana
So which city's drivers suffer from the worst road rage? The third
annual In The Driver's Seat Road Rage Survey, commissioned by
AutoVantage, a leading national auto club, found that the least
courteous city in the country is Miami... It's the third consecutive
year that Miami takes the crown as road rage capital of America.
http://www.healthnewsdigest.com/news/Health_Tips_620/Steering_Clear_Of_Road_Rage.shtml

6,180 Aggravated assaults in 2006. (That's a felony where somebody gets
whomped up on or shot.)
How many of those were road rage?

Seems like you may have your priorities out of whack.

I'm telling you STAY HOME and don't go out! Better to be fat and lazy
than dead.

[ComandanteBanana]

(Perhaps we will never know why America isn't like Europe, or why
Europe isn't like America, but we'll keep theorizing in search of the
truth. Hey, if Globalization wins Europe will be like America and
China too, right?)

Originally Posted by ritepath
"Well said....Many people can't accept America isn't Europe, for
whatever reason."

I know we had a revolution so we didn't have to have a king. But
France doesn't have a king and it's making Paris bicycle friendly.

To be honest, I don't see the advantages of not having a king.

Or maybe it has to do with people's education, and the amount of time
they are exposed to commercials. Commercials are much more limited in
Europe. How much advertising we get on an hour, perhaps half the time?
Often I change all the 10 pre-programmed channels and they all selling
stuff --but never a bike.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Velorution: The movement for the cyclists who want bike facilities
now."

http://webspawner.com/users/donquijote91

[ComandanteBanana]

Originally Posted by H23Nutcase

"because it's a very un-american thing to do. In fact, you will be
branded as a commie if you ride everyday."


And if you carry a backpack they'll think you carry a bomb in there.
Try to look like the elite riders with the lycra suit not to be
confused with a terrorist.

I think the only patriotic thing to do is to drill. ;)

[Tom Keats]

Post by Tadej Brezina

Post by Tom Keats

Post by ComandanteBanana
Some argue that people should be riding bikes on the road, period. Not
very clever. Well, since nearly 99% of people don't ride bikes to
work, there must be some good reason for it.

You're still trying to scare would-be riders off the
streets & roads, eh? Your FUDmongering disinformation
campaign is destined to fail. The Truth shall out,
as it inevitably does.

I don't think he's concern really is to scare existing roadway cyclers

^^^^^^^^

Post by Tadej Brezina
off the and onto the sidewalk.

His concern is to scare /would-be/ roadway cyclers
^^^^^^^^
off the streets and onto the sidewalks.

He has a history here in r.b.m. and other ngs.

Don't be fooled.

He is against you and me.

Again, I implore you to not be fooled.
Unless you want to be fooled by a lard-assed,
bike-hating idjit who sits in a Laz-E-boy in FLA
doing his Web TV thing (he might have grown out
of that lately) all day, making posts about how]
dangerous cycling is, between chompfuls of sweet
potato pie, and occasionally leaning over in his
Laz-E-boy to let one off, and telling cyclists to
get off the road.

The content of his messages indicates his
evil intentions & desires.

All it takes is to hear what he's saying.
It's often right there in his (mutated)
subject lines.

We're dealing with an anti-cycling propagandist.

Plain 'n simple.

CommandanteBanana/DonQuijote/Orlando has relatively
long been an anti-cycling propagandist on Usenet.

Fortunately, most people recognize him for the
windbag he is.

He sure doesn't do much to instill confidence in
new riders.

And that's his ploy.


cheers,
Tom

[ComandanteBanana]

Post by Tadej Brezina

Post by Tom Keats

Post by ComandanteBanana
Some argue that people should be riding bikes on the road, period. Not
very clever. Well, since nearly 99% of people don't ride bikes to
work, there must be some good reason for it.

You're still trying to scare would-be riders off the
streets & roads, eh?  Your FUDmongering disinformation
campaign is destined to fail.  The Truth shall out,
as it inevitably does.

I don't think he's concern really is to scare existing roadway cyclers

                                                ^^^^^^^^

Post by Tadej Brezina
off the and onto the sidewalk.

His concern is to scare /would-be/ roadway cyclers
                         ^^^^^^^^
off the streets and onto the sidewalks.
He has a history here in r.b.m. and other ngs.
Don't be fooled.
He is against you and me.
Again, I implore you to not be fooled.
Unless you want to be fooled by a lard-assed,
bike-hating idjit who sits in a Laz-E-boy in FLA
doing his Web TV thing (he might have grown out
of that lately) all day, making posts about how]
dangerous cycling is, between chompfuls of sweet
potato pie, and occasionally leaning over in his
Laz-E-boy to let one off, and telling cyclists to
get off the road.
The content of his messages indicates his
evil intentions & desires.
All it takes is to hear what he's saying.
It's often right there in his (mutated)
subject lines.
We're dealing with an anti-cycling propagandist.
Plain 'n simple.
CommandanteBanana/DonQuijote/Orlando has relatively
long been an anti-cycling propagandist on Usenet.
Fortunately, most people recognize him for the
windbag he is.
He sure doesn't do much to instill confidence in
new riders.
And that's his ploy.
cheers,
        Tom

And you are just making Canada look stupid. Actually I think it's
pretty smart place for being in North America, not great with bike
facilities like Scandinavia, but at least not a jungle, say, in
healthcare like the republic south of the border (USA).

Anyway, you probably want your frozen paradise to melt and become
another Florida. Your hopes are coming through fast...

(the kayaker reaching the pole by kayak says)

"I am deeply concerned that the policy makers are using the wrong
information to inform the policy decisions. Unless world leaders
appreciate the speed of change, any measures that they take will be
wholly inadequate."

This year saw the Arctic with the thinnest sea ice and the lowest
volume on record. The US National Snow and Ice Data Centre have
announced that for the first time on record, the North West Passage in
the Canadian Arctic and the North East Passage in the Russian Arctic
have melted.

Polar bears are endangered by this situation because their existence
depends on ice. "This story is not just about the destruction of
another local habit, and its effect on wild life. Though the Arctic is
thousand of miles away from most people, the loss of sea ice will have
profound consequences for everyone."

http://news.iafrica.com/sa/1140241.htm

[Pat]

Post by ComandanteBanana

Post by Tadej Brezina

Post by Tom Keats

Post by ComandanteBanana
Some argue that people should be riding bikes on the road, period. Not
very clever. Well, since nearly 99% of people don't ride bikes to
work, there must be some good reason for it.

You're still trying to scare would-be riders off the
streets & roads, eh?  Your FUDmongering disinformation
campaign is destined to fail.  The Truth shall out,
as it inevitably does.

I don't think he's concern really is to scare existing roadway cyclers

                                                ^^^^^^^^

Post by Tadej Brezina
off the and onto the sidewalk.

His concern is to scare /would-be/ roadway cyclers
                         ^^^^^^^^
off the streets and onto the sidewalks.
He has a history here in r.b.m. and other ngs.
Don't be fooled.
He is against you and me.
Again, I implore you to not be fooled.
Unless you want to be fooled by a lard-assed,
bike-hating idjit who sits in a Laz-E-boy in FLA
doing his Web TV thing (he might have grown out
of that lately) all day, making posts about how]
dangerous cycling is, between chompfuls of sweet
potato pie, and occasionally leaning over in his
Laz-E-boy to let one off, and telling cyclists to
get off the road.
The content of his messages indicates his
evil intentions & desires.
All it takes is to hear what he's saying.
It's often right there in his (mutated)
subject lines.
We're dealing with an anti-cycling propagandist.
Plain 'n simple.
CommandanteBanana/DonQuijote/Orlando has relatively
long been an anti-cycling propagandist on Usenet.
Fortunately, most people recognize him for the
windbag he is.
He sure doesn't do much to instill confidence in
new riders.
And that's his ploy.
cheers,
        Tom

And you are just making Canada look stupid. Actually I think it's
pretty smart place for being in North America, not great with bike
facilities like Scandinavia, but at least not a jungle, say, in
healthcare like the republic south of the border (USA).
Anyway, you probably want your frozen paradise to melt and become
another Florida. Your hopes are coming through fast...
(the kayaker reaching the pole by kayak says)
"I am deeply concerned that the policy makers are using the wrong
information to inform the policy decisions. Unless world leaders
appreciate the speed of change, any measures that they take will be
wholly inadequate."
This year saw the Arctic with the thinnest sea ice and the lowest
volume on record. The US National Snow and Ice Data Centre have
announced that for the first time on record, the North West Passage in
the Canadian Arctic and the North East Passage in the Russian Arctic
have melted.
Polar bears are endangered by this situation because their existence
depends on ice. "This story is not just about the destruction of
another local habit, and its effect on wild life. Though the Arctic is
thousand of miles away from most people, the loss of sea ice will have
profound consequences for everyone."
http://news.iafrica.com/sa/1140241.htm

Are you still blogging for bucks or whatever they call that program
Big Oil has for people to make anti-biking internet comments? Can't
you find another way of earning a living; or are you stuck in your
chair, eating Bon Bons.

[ComandanteBanana]

Post by Pat

Post by ComandanteBanana
http://news.iafrica.com/sa/1140241.htm

Are you still blogging for bucks or whatever they call that program
Big Oil has for people to make anti-biking internet comments?  Can't
you find another way of earning a living; or are you stuck in your
chair, eating Bon Bons.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

Hey, stupidity is an asset in Texas, right? Or are you the Pat from
NY?

At least NYC has some good old fashioned public transportation. Never
mind. ;)

[Tom Sherman]

Post by ComandanteBanana

Post by Pat

Post by ComandanteBanana
http://news.iafrica.com/sa/1140241.htm

Are you still blogging for bucks or whatever they call that program
Big Oil has for people to make anti-biking internet comments? Can't
you find another way of earning a living; or are you stuck in your
chair, eating Bon Bons.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

Hey, stupidity is an asset in Texas, right? Or are you the Pat from
NY?
At least NYC has some good old fashioned public transportation. Never
mind. ;)

"Artisticphotography" Pat is from Upstate New York.

If people would use a last name (real or invented) we would not have
this problem.

[Pat]

Post by ComandanteBanana

Post by Pat

Post by ComandanteBanana
http://news.iafrica.com/sa/1140241.htm

Are you still blogging for bucks or whatever they call that program
Big Oil has for people to make anti-biking internet comments?  Can't
you find another way of earning a living; or are you stuck in your
chair, eating Bon Bons.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

Hey, stupidity is an asset in Texas, right? Or are you the Pat from
NY?
At least NYC has some good old fashioned public transportation. Never
mind. ;)

Where I live there is no public transportation -- but there is very
little public either.

[ComandanteBanana]

Post by Pat

Post by ComandanteBanana

Post by Pat

Post by ComandanteBanana
http://news.iafrica.com/sa/1140241.htm

Are you still blogging for bucks or whatever they call that program
Big Oil has for people to make anti-biking internet comments?  Can't
you find another way of earning a living; or are you stuck in your
chair, eating Bon Bons.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

Hey, stupidity is an asset in Texas, right? Or are you the Pat from
NY?
At least NYC has some good old fashioned public transportation. Never
mind. ;)

Where I live there is no public transportation -- but there is very
little public either.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

In other words, there's nothing to talk about but you.

[Tom Keats]

Post by ComandanteBanana

Post by Tadej Brezina

Post by Tom Keats

Post by ComandanteBanana
Some argue that people should be riding bikes on the road, period. Not
very clever. Well, since nearly 99% of people don't ride bikes to
work, there must be some good reason for it.

You're still trying to scare would-be riders off the
streets & roads, eh?  Your FUDmongering disinformation
campaign is destined to fail.  The Truth shall out,
as it inevitably does.

I don't think he's concern really is to scare existing roadway cyclers

                                                ^^^^^^^^

Post by Tadej Brezina
off the and onto the sidewalk.

His concern is to scare /would-be/ roadway cyclers
                         ^^^^^^^^
off the streets and onto the sidewalks.
He has a history here in r.b.m. and other ngs.
Don't be fooled.
He is against you and me.
Again, I implore you to not be fooled.
Unless you want to be fooled by a lard-assed,
bike-hating idjit who sits in a Laz-E-boy in FLA
doing his Web TV thing (he might have grown out
of that lately) all day, making posts about how]
dangerous cycling is, between chompfuls of sweet
potato pie, and occasionally leaning over in his
Laz-E-boy to let one off, and telling cyclists to
get off the road.
The content of his messages indicates his
evil intentions & desires.
All it takes is to hear what he's saying.
It's often right there in his (mutated)
subject lines.
We're dealing with an anti-cycling propagandist.
Plain 'n simple.
CommandanteBanana/DonQuijote/Orlando has relatively
long been an anti-cycling propagandist on Usenet.
Fortunately, most people recognize him for the
windbag he is.
He sure doesn't do much to instill confidence in
new riders.
And that's his ploy.

And you are just making Canada look stupid.

I'm just shining the Light of Truth on your
anti-cycling FUDmongering, PosterBoy.

So now you've gone from admonishing riders to
get off the road, to bemoaning the shrinkage
of the polar icecaps. It's a clumsy and artless
distractionary tactic on your part, as you grasp
at straws to salvage credibility. You squirm
like a worm.

You're still the guy who wants cyclists to get
off the streets & roads, and take to the sidewalks
where they'll (we'll) be "safer." In a pig's eye!

You've also stated how you don't like Critical Mass.
Too many bikes on the street.

The USA has Effective Cycling courses, and I
wholeheartedly endorse it for USA dwellers
who are new to riding as street/road traffic.
It's a base-point, anyways, and some pretty
good smarts can be gleaned from it. The
Canadian version is called CAN-BIKE. And for
my fellow Vancouverites, the Vancouver Area
Cycling Coalition pitches a commuter cycling
training course based on CAN-BIKE/EC. Then
peruse Robert Haston's: "The Art of Urban
Cycling," take the best/safest of both
approaches, and combine 'em. Then just keep
your eyes open and don't do stupid stuff like
"threading the needle" in tight places, and
you'll be okay.

[ComandanteBanana]

Post by Tom Keats

Post by ComandanteBanana
And you are just making Canada look stupid.

I'm just shining the Light of Truth on your
anti-cycling FUDmongering, PosterBoy.
So now you've gone from admonishing riders to
get off the road, to bemoaning the shrinkage
of the polar icecaps.  It's a clumsy and artless
distractionary tactic on your part, as you grasp
at straws to salvage credibility.  You squirm
like a worm.
You're still the guy who wants cyclists to get
off the streets & roads, and take to the sidewalks
where they'll (we'll) be "safer."  In a pig's eye!

You must have heard about bike ridership in Holland or Denmark, right?

That's what I have in mind, not your melting tundra. OK?

[Pat]

Post by ComandanteBanana

Post by Tom Keats

Post by ComandanteBanana
And you are just making Canada look stupid.

I'm just shining the Light of Truth on your
anti-cycling FUDmongering, PosterBoy.
So now you've gone from admonishing riders to
get off the road, to bemoaning the shrinkage
of the polar icecaps.  It's a clumsy and artless
distractionary tactic on your part, as you grasp
at straws to salvage credibility.  You squirm
like a worm.
You're still the guy who wants cyclists to get
off the streets & roads, and take to the sidewalks
where they'll (we'll) be "safer."  In a pig's eye!

You must have heard about bike ridership in Holland or Denmark, right?
That's what I have in mind, not your melting tundra. OK?

The thing is, no one gives a cr*p what you think because of your
bizarre thoughts and behavior. Even if anyone cared, there's not much
anyone could/would do in a NG. If you think you have solutions to
world problems, go run for office.

[ComandanteBanana]

Post by Pat

Post by ComandanteBanana

Post by Tom Keats

Post by ComandanteBanana
And you are just making Canada look stupid.

I'm just shining the Light of Truth on your
anti-cycling FUDmongering, PosterBoy.
So now you've gone from admonishing riders to
get off the road, to bemoaning the shrinkage
of the polar icecaps.  It's a clumsy and artless
distractionary tactic on your part, as you grasp
at straws to salvage credibility.  You squirm
like a worm.
You're still the guy who wants cyclists to get
off the streets & roads, and take to the sidewalks
where they'll (we'll) be "safer."  In a pig's eye!

You must have heard about bike ridership in Holland or Denmark, right?
That's what I have in mind, not your melting tundra. OK?

The thing is, no one gives a cr*p what you think because of your
bizarre thoughts and behavior.  Even if anyone cared, there's not much
anyone could/would do in a NG.  If you think you have solutions to
world problems, go run for office.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

What party, Republican or Democrat? You told me they are the same
thing. How many sponsors I need to have a chance?

The only thing the monkey can do is MAKE NOISE, and there's no place
for it like the Internet.

But you should get into the jungle metaphors because they explain why
people like you can't understand...

"It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his job
depends on not understanding it."
-Upton Sinclair (author of "The Jungle")

[ComandanteBanana]

Post by Tom Keats

Post by ComandanteBanana
Some argue that people should be riding bikes on the road, period. Not
very clever. Well, since nearly 99% of people don't ride bikes to
work, there must be some good reason for it.

You're still trying to scare would-be riders off the
streets & roads, eh?  Your FUDmongering disinformation
campaign is destined to fail.  The Truth shall out,
as it inevitably does.
Not even bike-hating propagandists such as yourself
are safe from The Truth.
Go climb a banana tree.  And stay up there.

The monkeys should stay on the treetops for fear of the lion (SUVs)
feeding on them.

And the stupid sheep should keep grazing and feeding the beast (Big
Oil). ;)