View Single Post
Old 12-24-07, 11:14 AM
  #59  
John Forester
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 4,071
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by The Human Car
May I ask where and when exactly did you pull up this new degree in urban planning or urban transportation? When was the last time you attended school? What degrees do you hold besides a bachelor’s in English? There does come a time if one doesn’t keep up with things their experience turns into old school rubbish.

That’s your best argument “you are largely ignorant of the subject, and, furthermore, are subject to your anti-motoring ideology.”???

You are just full of insults and non-logic. We can’t mention anything around you without being accused of being anti-motoring. This is a bike forum for crying out loud and you’re da^^n straight we support something else besides car only travel. It is just fact that cars alone are not the best mode of transportation in a dense urban environment. Dense development is best served by dense forms of transportation. You seem to be limited to only being able to relate to things as suburbanite. Some of us do live in a city and enjoy it as much if not more then suburbanites in their isolated communities with not much to do without a long drive. Mass transit may or may not be applicable where you live but there are a lot of places where it is applicable and viable and not to mention at least, if not more economically viable then supporting the single occupancy vehicle.

I have never ever heard such an inane argument that boils down to since mass transit is not as viable in the suburbs it should not be considered in the urban environment as well. And all viable transportation enhancements in an urban setting are limited to increasing capacity of the roads or reducing the places to drive to or from the city. Talk about believing in the induced traffic superstition so belief that non-congested highways cause economic development that in turn causes more traffic is a false superstition but reducing economic development causes non-congested highways. Absolutely brilliant logic. I would love to see you present that argument before some Regional Transit Board. “You can reduce congestion by reducing economic development.”
Despite what Human Car writes, my best argument is not that he is ignorant of transportation. That's not an argument for my position, merely a statement of fact as to why Human Car doesn't understand my position. If he had significant knowledge of transportation, he could make his arguments in terms that would be understood by members of the profession.

And Human Car attacks me, on his assumption that I do not know the subject that I discuss, on the basis that I have an AB in English Literature. I also have an MS, and I am a registered professional engineer in California. Furthermore, I have studied urban transportation for more than sixty years, and I keep up with a considerable portion of the current literature on the subject.

As as example of being ill-informed about transportation, consider Human Car's prime statement in the above: "[T]hat non-congested highways cause economic development that in turn causes more traffic is a false superstition but reducing economic development causes non-congested highways."

Highways operating below capacity do not "cause economic development". Economic development occurs in those locations and in those times where and when there is an economic need and the means of satisfying that need. Shall we postulate that there is a need for more pure silicon crystal? Various organizations with money to invest believe so, at any rate. Highways have practically no causative effect concerning the market for pure silicon crystal. Is that not obvious? Highways are simply one of many factors that determine where that production will occur.

Neither will "reducing economic development cause non-congested highways". Quite clearly, the existing level of economic activity produces the highway congestion that is present. Reducing the level of economic development will merely decrease the rate at which congestion increases.

Human Car's own words demonstrate that he doesn't know the subject of transportation. No more should need to be written, but I doubt that such evidence is persuasive in this forum.
John Forester is offline