Originally Posted by
John Forester 
Bek's claim is quantitative, referring to numbers of conflicts. OK Bek. Prove your claim by reference to traffic statistics.
Originally Posted by
Bekologist
meh.
2012 NIH journal - New York City bikelanes do not lead to greater conflicts
-that study wasn't even adjusted for the increasing ridership in NYC that has tripled in the last decade as well)
and this one, a much larger assay,
a 2009 meta analysis of 23 bicycle infrastructure studies
both provide compelling suggestions, if not cut and dried, double blind polar-bonded correlation
that
"Evidence is beginning to accumulate that purpose-built bicycle-specific facilities reduce crashes and injuries among cyclists."
I'm sure the flat-earth society of bicycling drivers won't be able to accept facilities drive bicyclist safety, but their loss. If a person wants to look like a rube at a bicycling conference, all they have to do is ask if separated class bike facilities or painted pavement enhancements improve rider safety.
Bek, you have not answered the challenge to your claim that "Physical separation with barriers and colored paint countermeasures reduce traffic conflicts." Neither of the sources which you provide contains any data on such conflicts, let alone comparing them with other facilities. You made this claim. Therefore you should provide the supporting evidence.