I don't wear a helmet, but I'm not that kind of cyclist.
#51
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Posts: 403
Bikes: Bullitt Milk Plus with Alfine 11s; Dahon Smooth Hound
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
No, I did not just learn them. It's a catch-all term for all-sorts of, yes, intellectual dishonesty, I see in your posts: Strawmanning, moving the goal-posts, redefining words as you see fit, invalid premises, and so forth. All sorts of fallacies and general dishonesty when debating all fit under the umbrella of "intellectual dishonesty". But then again, since you didn't use the word "premise", but rather "building up to", I am not surprised one bit.
#52
Senior Member
No, I did not just learn them. It's a catch-all term for all-sorts of, yes, intellectual dishonesty, I see in your posts: Strawmanning, moving the goal-posts, redefining words as you see fit, invalid premises, and so forth. All sorts of fallacies and general dishonesty when debating all fit under the umbrella of "intellectual dishonesty". But then again, since you didn't use the word "premise", but rather "building up to", I am not surprised one bit.
#53
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: D'uh... I am a Cutter
Posts: 6,139
Bikes: '17 Access Old Turnpike Gravel bike, '14 Trek 1.1, '13 Cannondale CAAD 10, '98 CAD 2, R300
Mentioned: 62 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1571 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 12 Times
in
9 Posts
My wife insists that I wear a helmet. So I do.
Statistically.... the risks involved in cycling aren't really such a big deal. I am not implying that cycling itself doesn't have intrinsic dangers/risks. I accept that my chosen sport is a blood sport. So there will be injuries... and there might be a marginally greater risk of more serious injuries if a helmet isn't worn. But I'd like to see the actuary that can actually put numbers to those stats. I doubt it can be done.
Of course.... the safest and easiest solution is just to wear a helmet on the day(s) you have accidents. That's my plan. And it makes the wife happy too.
Statistically.... the risks involved in cycling aren't really such a big deal. I am not implying that cycling itself doesn't have intrinsic dangers/risks. I accept that my chosen sport is a blood sport. So there will be injuries... and there might be a marginally greater risk of more serious injuries if a helmet isn't worn. But I'd like to see the actuary that can actually put numbers to those stats. I doubt it can be done.
Of course.... the safest and easiest solution is just to wear a helmet on the day(s) you have accidents. That's my plan. And it makes the wife happy too.
#54
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Posts: 403
Bikes: Bullitt Milk Plus with Alfine 11s; Dahon Smooth Hound
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I am not parroting anything. I am repeating points I have already explained and already shown where you were dishonest in one way or another. But no, repeating doesn't make it true, but I did repeatedly show where you were dishonest and explained why it was dishonest. Now you want me to repost those things? You don't even know what a premise is, apparently, and you outright lie about my position, and when not, you misrepresent what I say, and when explained to you, you just pretend you said something else, as I have shown repeatedly in this very thread. I am not going to repost everything I said before, nor disseminate every word of your longer posts again, nor am I going to post full-length posts in their entirety, just so your invalid premises and whatnot can be ignored by you.
I also find it funny, that I caught you in an outright lie, yet, that is completely ignored by you, apparently you want me to repost everything I said in this thread to prove you wrong, even if that is less than practical. If you didn't lie, and what you said was true, it would be a matter of seconds to show exactly where I said what you claim I said. But no, better to pretend I haven't provided anything to back up my arguments (there's that intellectual dishonesty on your part again).
#55
Senior Member
You must have realised that I am not bothering quoting every instance at this point, just because you move the goal posts or demand that I repost what you have said and not said. You can reread the posts if you are in doubt.
I am not parroting anything. I am repeating points I have already explained and already shown where you were dishonest in one way or another. But no, repeating doesn't make it true, but I did repeatedly show where you were dishonest and explained why it was dishonest. Now you want me to repost those things? You don't even know what a premise is, apparently, and you outright lie about my position, and when not, you misrepresent what I say, and when explained to you, you just pretend you said something else, as I have shown repeatedly in this very thread. I am not going to repost everything I said before, nor disseminate every word of your longer posts again, nor am I going to post full-length posts in their entirety, just so your invalid premises and whatnot can be ignored by you.
I also find it funny, that I caught you in an outright lie, yet, that is completely ignored by you, apparently you want me to repost everything I said in this thread to prove you wrong, even if that is less than practical. If you didn't lie, and what you said was true, it would be a matter of seconds to show exactly where I said what you claim I said. But no, better to pretend I haven't provided anything to back up my arguments (there's that intellectual dishonesty on your part again).
I am not parroting anything. I am repeating points I have already explained and already shown where you were dishonest in one way or another. But no, repeating doesn't make it true, but I did repeatedly show where you were dishonest and explained why it was dishonest. Now you want me to repost those things? You don't even know what a premise is, apparently, and you outright lie about my position, and when not, you misrepresent what I say, and when explained to you, you just pretend you said something else, as I have shown repeatedly in this very thread. I am not going to repost everything I said before, nor disseminate every word of your longer posts again, nor am I going to post full-length posts in their entirety, just so your invalid premises and whatnot can be ignored by you.
I also find it funny, that I caught you in an outright lie, yet, that is completely ignored by you, apparently you want me to repost everything I said in this thread to prove you wrong, even if that is less than practical. If you didn't lie, and what you said was true, it would be a matter of seconds to show exactly where I said what you claim I said. But no, better to pretend I haven't provided anything to back up my arguments (there's that intellectual dishonesty on your part again).
I'm really interested on that supposed lie. I really have no idea what you are talking about.
But just to level the playground with exact same argumentative force:
You do the same thing.
#56
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Posts: 403
Bikes: Bullitt Milk Plus with Alfine 11s; Dahon Smooth Hound
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Hmm, apparently, that word means something else to you than to the rest of us. I can gather, that you think that premises and explanations are "parroting".
See the post you quoted here (and didn't respond to the context one bit which is a fine strategy when you want something to go away):
https://www.bikeforums.net/advocacy-s...l#post16853116
And my post that was quoted, including the thing I consider an outright lie:
https://www.bikeforums.net/advocacy-s...l#post16853097
Or, will you refuse to go back and read, and then claim victory because I haven't provided the text (and the complete text) again?
I have time and time again provided you with the reasoning, and why yours are invalid, and quoted you to show you where you moved the goalposts and shown you other fallacies too. Excuse me for not wanting to continue that, all while you just move the goalposts, pretend you didn't say something, or pretend I said something I didn't. But I guess the rules of logic doesn't apply to you, and as a result, this is just "parroting".
I'm really interested on that supposed lie. I really have no idea what you are talking about.
https://www.bikeforums.net/advocacy-s...l#post16853116
And my post that was quoted, including the thing I consider an outright lie:
https://www.bikeforums.net/advocacy-s...l#post16853097
Or, will you refuse to go back and read, and then claim victory because I haven't provided the text (and the complete text) again?
But just to level the playground with exact same argumentative force:
You do the same thing.
You do the same thing.
#57
Senior Member
Hmm, apparently, that word means something else to you than to the rest of us. I can gather, that you think that premises and explanations are "parroting".
See the post you quoted here (and didn't respond to the context one bit which is a fine strategy when you want something to go away):
https://www.bikeforums.net/advocacy-s...l#post16853116
And my post that was quoted, including the thing I consider an outright lie:
https://www.bikeforums.net/advocacy-s...l#post16853097
Or, will you refuse to go back and read, and then claim victory because I haven't provided the text (and the complete text) again?
I have time and time again provided you with the reasoning, and why yours are invalid, and quoted you to show you where you moved the goalposts and shown you other fallacies too. Excuse me for not wanting to continue that, all while you just move the goalposts, pretend you didn't say something, or pretend I said something I didn't. But I guess the rules of logic doesn't apply to you, and as a result, this is just "parroting".
See the post you quoted here (and didn't respond to the context one bit which is a fine strategy when you want something to go away):
https://www.bikeforums.net/advocacy-s...l#post16853116
And my post that was quoted, including the thing I consider an outright lie:
https://www.bikeforums.net/advocacy-s...l#post16853097
Or, will you refuse to go back and read, and then claim victory because I haven't provided the text (and the complete text) again?
I have time and time again provided you with the reasoning, and why yours are invalid, and quoted you to show you where you moved the goalposts and shown you other fallacies too. Excuse me for not wanting to continue that, all while you just move the goalposts, pretend you didn't say something, or pretend I said something I didn't. But I guess the rules of logic doesn't apply to you, and as a result, this is just "parroting".
And I will point this out again.
Lets assume driving a car is safe.
One can quite reasonably then state that driving a car is safe even though some driving disciplines are not safe (such as nascar or drifting). This is due to the fact that the majority of driving falls within the constraints of "safe" normal driving. When someone then says driving is safe that argument cannot be weakened by stating that it is not since not all driving is safe. It's majority against minority and majority wins.
Same thing with cycling and this time we need no fake assumptions. Cycling is safe. That works because the majority of cycling is safe. Majority of cycling is on par with walking in safety actually. But even though minority niches of cycling are dangerous it does not in fact affect the cycling as safe in general. It can skew the statistics towards unsafe which is of course a shame but it does not affect the safety on majority cycling (which is day to day or utility)
#58
Cycle Year Round
None of these mandatory laws or FRAP should exist.
__________________
Land of the Free, Because of the Brave.
Land of the Free, Because of the Brave.
#59
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Posts: 403
Bikes: Bullitt Milk Plus with Alfine 11s; Dahon Smooth Hound
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I had beforehand already differentiated between types of cycling which made all the difference in following posts and which you so graciously chose to disregard. But I guess you couldn't be bothered to take earlier posts into consideration.
I can't get anywhere with you. On the one hand, you demand that I quote your own post constantly, that I have to repost what have already been said by both of you. On the other hand, if I do that, I have to quote the post in it's entirety or close to it, otherwise it's out of context, and I shouldn't attach any value to your premises ("the building-up", as you put it), when you have moved on. Also, I shouldn't dare compare what you say now to what you said before, even in the same paragraph. And if I do, I "invent the order" of your quotes and whatnot.
What a waste of time this has been.
Last edited by SmallFront; 06-15-14 at 02:41 PM.
#60
Senior Member
Thread Starter
I'm not against the wearing of helmets. It's sensible, but I choose not to do it because the only person it affects is me. I'm surprised that this has concentrated on the wearing, or not, of helmets. I think everyone would agree that for your own personal safety it's best to wear a helmet. Why hasn't there been more discussion of the number of cyclists that routinely put other road users (and themselves) at risk by breaking simple road rules that they would follow when driving a car.
#61
Senior Member
Thread Starter
If you're concerned with being perceived as the subject line implies, it may have nothing to do with headgear.
I always wonder when I see these uber defensive "I don't wear a helmet" posts if the purported bias against riders without helmets is as real as is suggested. I wear a helmet, as do most of the riders I know. But I don't know a single rider who cares what anyone else wears. As with motorcycles, there are surely pros and cons. I make my choice, you make yours, and I can't see any reason why either of us would be concerned about any choice but our own.
I always wonder when I see these uber defensive "I don't wear a helmet" posts if the purported bias against riders without helmets is as real as is suggested. I wear a helmet, as do most of the riders I know. But I don't know a single rider who cares what anyone else wears. As with motorcycles, there are surely pros and cons. I make my choice, you make yours, and I can't see any reason why either of us would be concerned about any choice but our own.
#62
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Posts: 403
Bikes: Bullitt Milk Plus with Alfine 11s; Dahon Smooth Hound
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I'm not against the wearing of helmets. It's sensible, but I choose not to do it because the only person it affects is me. I'm surprised that this has concentrated on the wearing, or not, of helmets. I think everyone would agree that for your own personal safety it's best to wear a helmet. Why hasn't there been more discussion of the number of cyclists that routinely put other road users (and themselves) at risk by breaking simple road rules that they would follow when driving a car.
But you're right. I don't wear a helmet all the time. I had a really old one, and because it was so scruffy, I got into the habit of only wearing it when I deemed it a real necessity. Now, with my new helmet, I have a hard time getting into the habit of donning it "because that's what I always do". I'd like to get into that habit again.
One of my pet peeves are those miniscule watch-battery leds that does next to nothing, and on the other end; people wearing superbright headtorches, blinding everyone, including motorists in the same streets as I am travelling. That, and people riding all over the place, as if they own the place (and is closed to the public) - often without any lights whatsover. But the thread was someone posting about not wearing a helmet, a sort of statement to that end, so of course people respond to that (both sides of the aisle).
#63
Cycle Year Round
The cyclist is not endangering anyone else, unless you think the cyclist may tip the bus over if he gets right hooked.
The cyclist also likely knows when the light will turn green and knows if he has time to pass the bus. I know the timing of the lights in the areas I regularly ride. On others, I often can see if the light on the cross street is green or if it has already turned yellow.
The cyclist also likely knows when the light will turn green and knows if he has time to pass the bus. I know the timing of the lights in the areas I regularly ride. On others, I often can see if the light on the cross street is green or if it has already turned yellow.
__________________
Land of the Free, Because of the Brave.
Land of the Free, Because of the Brave.
#64
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: New Rochelle, NY
Posts: 38,665
Bikes: too many bikes from 1967 10s (5x2)Frejus to a Sumitomo Ti/Chorus aluminum 10s (10x2), plus one non-susp mtn bike I use as my commuter
Mentioned: 140 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5766 Post(s)
Liked 2,538 Times
in
1,404 Posts
In fact the MVA death rate for bicyclists is currently lower than it was 5-10 years ago - before texting.
__________________
FB
Chain-L site
An ounce of diagnosis is worth a pound of cure.
Just because I'm tired of arguing, doesn't mean you're right.
“One accurate measurement is worth a thousand expert opinions” - Adm Grace Murray Hopper - USN
WARNING, I'm from New York. Thin skinned people should maintain safe distance.
FB
Chain-L site
An ounce of diagnosis is worth a pound of cure.
Just because I'm tired of arguing, doesn't mean you're right.
“One accurate measurement is worth a thousand expert opinions” - Adm Grace Murray Hopper - USN
WARNING, I'm from New York. Thin skinned people should maintain safe distance.
#65
Just a person on bike
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 2,140
Bikes: 2015 Trek 1.1, 2021 Specialized Roubaix, 2022 Tern HSD S+
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 132 Post(s)
Liked 86 Times
in
56 Posts
It would be the best if none of those laws existed. WA doesn't have a mandatory bike-lane law (thank goodness), but it has the FRAP and helmet laws.
__________________
The value of your life doesn't change based on the way you travel. - Dawn Schellenberg (SDOT)
The value of your life doesn't change based on the way you travel. - Dawn Schellenberg (SDOT)
#66
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 228
Bikes: Trek Verve 3
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
I don't wear a helmet...it's a personal choice...but I do have front and rear lights and follow the rules of the road, stopping at red lights, signaling and taking the lane firmly etc.
It annoys me that I see so many other cyclists on my urban commute that faithfully wear their helmets and then proceed to ride so dangerously, going through red lights
and cycling up on the inside of trucks and buses. People seem to equate helmets with personal safety rather than how they ride or whether they have lights at night.
It annoys me that I see so many other cyclists on my urban commute that faithfully wear their helmets and then proceed to ride so dangerously, going through red lights
and cycling up on the inside of trucks and buses. People seem to equate helmets with personal safety rather than how they ride or whether they have lights at night.
#67
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Posts: 403
Bikes: Bullitt Milk Plus with Alfine 11s; Dahon Smooth Hound
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
#69
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 228
Bikes: Trek Verve 3
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
When in the Navy on a submarine, I learned the accidents can be avoided or minimized when they happen. Having said that, I still hate wearing helmets and only wear them to minimize social pressure. It is a cost versus reward premises. The cost is potential brain damage, the reward is a comfortable bike ride. I guess I am just the the type of person who is willing to take some chances.
Last edited by mrtuttle04; 06-15-14 at 07:09 PM. Reason: Corrected spelling
#70
Just a person on bike
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 2,140
Bikes: 2015 Trek 1.1, 2021 Specialized Roubaix, 2022 Tern HSD S+
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 132 Post(s)
Liked 86 Times
in
56 Posts
When in the Navy on a submarine, I learned the accidents can be avoided or minimized when they happen. Having said that, I still hate wearing helmets and only wear them to minimize social pressure. It is a cost versus reward premises. The cost is potential brain damage, the reward is a comfortable bike ride. I guess I am just the the type of person who is willing to take some chances.
__________________
The value of your life doesn't change based on the way you travel. - Dawn Schellenberg (SDOT)
The value of your life doesn't change based on the way you travel. - Dawn Schellenberg (SDOT)
#71
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Eugene, Oregon
Posts: 7,048
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 509 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 9 Times
in
8 Posts
It appears to me that much of the unlawful cycling are simply the way inexperienced people on bikes compensate for the behavior of scofflaw motorists. They fear illegal/unsafe close passes, so they salmon. They fear being hit by either opening doors on parked cars or overtaking motorists on congested urban streets, so they ride on the sidewalk. They fear being run over while waiting at intersections, so they run the lights (Even Joey Bike has given this as a partial rationale for his style).
While none of these compensations are safer than riding lawfully, these people's fears are difficult to overcome when they can see with their own eyes that nearly all motorists run every stop sign, turn right on red without stopping or looking to the right, speed on every road and seem to have an incredible amount of difficulty keeping a seven foot wide vehicle in an eleven foot wide lane.
By the way, I'm an ass whole and a cyclist, but not an ass whole cyclist, if you know what I mean.
Last edited by B. Carfree; 06-15-14 at 08:14 PM.
#72
Senior Member
Thread Starter
While none of these compensations are safer than riding lawfully, these people's fears are difficult to overcome when they can see with their own eyes that nearly all motorists run every stop sign, turn right on red without stopping or looking to the right, speed on every road and seem to have an incredible amount of difficulty keeping a seven foot wide vehicle in an eleven foot wide lane.
#73
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 3,138
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 67 Post(s)
Liked 83 Times
in
44 Posts
If I had to wear a bike helmet by law, I would prob give up cycling. That is how much I hate mandatory helmet and seat-belt laws. You can TRY to justify helmets a million different ways but the bottom line is that it is MY choice. Period. I don't need someone else "looking out for me". I do just fine on my own. That's why I won't ride in events that require helmets.
#74
20+mph Commuter
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Greenville. SC USA
Posts: 7,512
Bikes: Surly LHT, Surly Lowside, a folding bike, and a beater.
Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1430 Post(s)
Liked 330 Times
in
218 Posts
I ride exclusively to preserve my life. Sometimes it is safer to obey the law, sometimes obeying the law puts me in harm's way (and motorist's way) for no good reason. If I were the only @-hole on the planet I MIGHT agree to ride lawfully. Until that day comes, you are wasting your breath.
#75
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Gig Harbor, WA
Posts: 2,470
Bikes: Surly Long Haul Trucker, Gary Fisher Hoo Koo E Koo, Dahon Mu P 24 , Ritchey Breakaway Cross, Rodriguez Tandem, Wheeler MTB
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 32 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts