'safe and fun' traffic cycling- delusional, misguided?

[Bekologist]

In many of the A&S threads I see a recurring theme in someone's tagline-

"safe and fun traffic cycling."

Now, I ride in big city traffic daily, metropolitian gridlock, and also rural highways, and enjoy myself while doing so.

However, riding in traffic is neither 'safe' nor 'fun' and anyone who would mischaracterize it as such is misleading themselves and the bicycling public fool enough to listen.

Any comments about 'safe and fun' traffic cycling?

[Keith99]

Safe and fun for riding in traffic is the same as for most other 'dangerous' things. Just listen to Dirty Harry.

A man's got to know his limitations.

As long as you don;t get in over your head it is both fun and safe. But what your limitations are can change over time. A few years ago when I was riding a lot I rode to Dodger stadium for opening day. Traffic was a zoo. But I was fit and sober, wearing bright clothes and faster than most of the cars. Perfectly safe.

I knew my limitations and hitched a ride back home. By the end of the game I was fit but hardly sober. I'm not sure how fit many of the drivers were, but I know there were plenty who were also hardlly sober.

[genec]

Well I find traffic cycling a bit of a chore... I can't go full bore, I have to spend part of my energy looking for the motorists that don't look for me, and I have to make a lot more judgements that I don't have to make when I drive. (do they see me... have they seen me... are they looking at me or through me... )

Now that said, do I enjoy my commute... yes and no. I do not enjoy the areas where there are lots of potential problems... many lanes coming from different directions with traffic moving at various speeds and for the most part, rather introspective (IE drivers only concerned about what they need to do in the next several seconds... vice being good drivers).

I do on the other hand just enjoy cycling. And there are some areas on my commute that are quite predictable and therefore enjoyable.

Would I ride in rush hour traffic if I had a choice. NO! I would not, but then I would avoid rush hour traffic at all times, if I had a choice.

Safe and fun. Nah... that is just ridiculous. It cannot be as safe as riding with no traffic... So the safety aspect is wrong. Fun... well some folks do enjoy pain... so whatever trips your trigger. Other folks seem to enjoy antagonizing dangerous creatures (jabbing sticks into the tiger's cage) again, whatever trips your trigger. So for some it could be fun.

My idea of biking fun doesn't involve second guessing stressed motoring commuters... so for me, the "fun" is vastly overated.

Now give me a quiet road with some dappled light, little to no MV traffic and some rolling hills... Now that is fun. And the fewer the MV traffic, the safer.

[Helmet Head]

I used to find cycling in traffic something of chore, like Gene describes. Not any more. I honestly look forward to engaging with folks in traffic. I enjoy the opportunity to exercise my negotiating techniques. It feels good to be treated respectfully, like a vehicle driver, because I'm acting like a vehicle driver, respectfully. It puts a smile on my face, and a wave in my hand.

Cycling in traffic IS fun and safe, for me. And it can be for you too.

[sbhikes]

Traffic is noisy and the fumes are toxic. Especially diesel fumes. I will ride on the sidewalk to get away from waiting in line behind a diesel at a traffic signal.

It is not safe and fun to ride in traffic. It is safe and fun to ride downhill on an empty bike path. :)

[caloso]

I have a lot of fun cruising past the backed up motor traffic on my way home. And by riding quickly, assertively, and legally, I feel very safe.

I don't think it's either delusional or misguided.

[pmseattle]

I enjoy riding in heavy traffic in downtown Seattle, but I don't think it's particularly safe. It's the same kind of "fun" you get from skiing or rock climbing.

[Helmet Head]

Traffic is noisy and the fumes are toxic.
I prefer a quiet ride out in the country, of course, but I don't mind the noise. I certainly don't allow it to get to me. Frankly, I must not notice it, because I never think about it.

I don't like being stuck behind a diesel vehicle, especially a truck, but that happens very rarely. Overall, cars today are spewing out a lot fewer fumes than they did 30 years ago, and about the only time I'm ever bothered by fumes (except the occasional diesel) is on long climbs with lots of traffic (San Diegans, e.g., , up Torrey Pines hill going south from Torrey Pines beach).

[Helmet Head]

I enjoy riding in heavy traffic in downtown Seattle, but I don't think it's particularly safe. It's the same kind of "fun" you get from skiing or rock climbing.
Exactly, and why would you put that type of fun in quotes, implying it's not real fun? If that's not real fun, what is?

[genec]

Exactly, and why would you put that type of fun in quotes, implying it's not real fun? If that's not real fun, what is?

Because he is an adrenalin junky, and perhaps also enjoys jumping out of planes.

But fun is a relative thing. Some folks idea of fun is sitting in a quiet place reading books.

Others find hours of alcohol consumption along with driving the interstate to be fun...

Still others enjoy riding a bike without the noise, smell and aggrevation of traffic.

Some people like racing unlimited class motorboats. I race sailboats. See the contrast?

[Bekologist]

I don't like being stuck behind a diesel vehicle, especially a truck, but that happens very rarely.

It's comments like this that make me think once again that the proponent of SFTC (safe and fun traffic cycling) doesn't ride his bike much! I get stuck behind, or have to split lanes at stops or generally ride in 'no-ride zones' to avoid diesel trucks pretty much daily. Any biker that pretends it doesn't happen to them often, obviously (to me) doesn't ride much OR practice what they preach.

I strongly dislike self-pontificating blowhards that have no idea what they're talking about.

[sbhikes]

HH doesn't live where there's a lot of construction, any fire trucks, any truck traffic of any kind, or any old Mercedes or VW diesels. I think he drives his bike down the luxurious lanes of La Jolla, and apparently, there's no construction going on among the wealthy elite La Jolla-ites or else he'd know what diesel trucks are like. I ride through Montecito, home of billionaires, and believe me those people are having a huge orgy of construction while the rest of us are losing our jobs to china...Sorry. Off topic.

Here's the deal. You take the words "riding a bike" and you get "fun". Add the words to "in traffic" to anything, and you get "not fun." Add the words "in traffic" to riding a bike, and you get "more fun than driving, but it is less fun than it could be". It's also a lot of work sometimes to ride a bike in traffic and work is not fun by definition!

[Bekologist]

I strongly doubt any theories of traffic cycling promoted by a cyclist that proudly proclaims he doesn't get caught up in truck traffic much.

It must be some amazing, smoke-and-mirrors cycling technique I'm not privy to.

[genec]

Guys, I hate to defend him, but we only work a couple miles apart and live about 5 miles apart. I know the roads he travels... although I cannot tell you when.

Believe me, these are not nice, pristine, "friendly" roads. One area he rides is a real PITA bottleneck full of motorists that often have no idea what lane they want to be in... at the other end of his route, is a rather fast 6 lane road full of stressed broker types. I ride right through that area too, but perpendicular to HH's route.

Now it could be that his commute is timed to miss most of the space cases out there... but take it from me, his route is no piece of cake. Really.

But since I have not actually commuted with him... I don't know if he uses some "magic" on the route or not.

The only times I have ridden with him were group rides and he pulled a pretty good pace... and there was nothing magic about what he did.

Same thing when we took the Road II class. I did not see any special techniques.

Now the area I ride... phsssh. I followed 4 double dump trucks to the office today at about 1:00. I know diesel stinks. BTW my riding partner chose to go between these things... so there were 3 trucks, then her (tiny woman, but she is a triathlete) and then one more truck. I hung back and rode behind them. (actually she kicked my ass going up the hill... :o and happened to get there first).

Just trying to keep it real.

[BearsPaw]

Maybe I'm doing something wrong, but cycling in traffic doesn't seem that dangerous to me. I've been riding in the street, in Philly, for seven years. I've been honked at twice. Once it was some drunk yahoos from Jersey, and another time it was some UPenn brats in an SUV who didn't realize that bikes were allowed in the roads too. (No offense intended towards anyone that goes to Penn.) I don't think either of them intended any physical harm. I was also "tapped" by a car once, but it was nothing serious.

Other than this, I've not had any trouble. Some of the posters on this site make it sound like they are nearly killed on a daily basis. What's going on?

[el twe]

While it isn't always safe, it is generally quite a lot of fun.

[Bekologist]

Gene, you may ride near the same roads the safe and friendly traffic cyclist lives near, but its debatable to me how much actual fun-n-friendly road time he gets in with all the traffic.

somehow, not encountering truck traffic while riding in traffic is a method I'm not even able to duplicate, much less advocate

[Helmet Head]

Bek, there are 9 traffic signals on my 6 mile commute, unless I missed one or two. Most of the time when I'm stopped at these signals I'm not behind a truck, and, when I am behind a truck, I'm usually able to avoid the exhaust. But, once in a while, I do happen to be behind a truck that's diesel and I'm in the fumes. But, that happens very rarely. When I'm not stopped at a light, if there is a truck around, it passes me and it's gone. No big deal.

Diane, there is always a lot of construction going on in La Jolla, but I'm usually traveling in the opposite direction from them.

[Bekologist]

that's interesting, and i'll take your approach that diesel exhaust isn't a big deal to you.

I find that strange and unrealistic, compared to actually riding a bike in traffic. Diesel exhaust, and getting caught up behind trucks spewing exhaust, are some of the biggest mundane, everyday hassles of a being a bicyclist in traffic.

If you don't think these are much of an issue, your 'safe and fun' traffic cycling 'theory' is based on something other than actual biking.

It's an unrealistic, might i say, delusional and misguided look at biking by someone who doesn't ride in traffic much. Far as I can tell.

but so goes another turn of the wheels....

[ceridwen]

Maybe I'm doing something wrong, but cycling in traffic doesn't seem that dangerous to me. I've been riding in the street, in Philly, for seven years. I've been honked at twice. Once it was some drunk yahoos from Jersey, and another time it was some UPenn brats in an SUV who didn't realize that bikes were allowed in the roads too. (No offense intended towards anyone that goes to Penn.) I don't think either of them intended any physical harm. I was also "tapped" by a car once, but it was nothing serious.

Other than this, I've not had any trouble. Some of the posters on this site make it sound like they are nearly killed on a daily basis. What's going on?

More and more I think this has a LOT to do with where you are. Florida is absolutely awful for this. People will yell all kinds of things at you (same if you are a pedestrian, +1000 if you are female). They buzz you, they will throw things at you. It's incredible. And it does NOT all go away when you behave like a vehicle. I wish it did, it would make my life a lot easier.

I'm sure this is related to our ridiculously high rates of pedestrian and cyclist injuries and fatalities.

Edit: I might add that I recently stopped and had a conversation with one of the crossing guards who works the corner outside my apt complex (there is an elementary school down the street, they are there twice a day to help the kids cross). He says he is laughed at and abused verbally on a daily basis. People will even try to go through the intersection while he's holding up things for the kids to cross, and give him the finger when he makes them stop.

[noriel]

I have fun in gridlock. I have the choice of going on two roads that are parallel to each other (Main and Fannin in the Med Center for those of you familiar with Houston). One (Fannin) has a lot of stop lights, two lanes, a light rail, and is always backed up when work lets out. The other street, Main, has two more lanes, fewer stops, and traffic zips along at least 35-50 mph. I rode on Main for a year but got fed up with cars trying to cut me off so they could make the exit just in front of me. For me, gridlocked cars are safer than moving ones.

Ceridwen, that is really sad what you write about the crossing guard. I remember here a few years ago, an elderly lady crossing guard got killed. She was assertive and would ding cars with her stop sign. I don't know if her death was related to her assertiveness.

[UmneyDurak]

I'm not sure if I describe it as "fun", but it's certainly less stressfull then driving. I freaken hate people who can't even go the damn speed limit in left most lane, and that take 2 miles just to hit something that approaches moving forward. :mad:
Woosa, Woosa back to my happy place.

[LittleBigMan]

In many of the A&S threads I see a recurring theme in someone's tagline-

"safe and fun traffic cycling."

Now, I ride in big city traffic daily, metropolitian gridlock, and also rural highways, and enjoy myself while doing so.

However, riding in traffic is neither 'safe' nor 'fun' and anyone who would mischaracterize it as such is misleading themselves and the bicycling public fool enough to listen.

Any comments about 'safe and fun' traffic cycling?
It would be impossible to argue whether or not cycling in traffic is "fun," since what's fun for you might not be fun for someone else. The only thing left to argue is whether or not it is "safe," and you can't do that unless you can measure it, and since we don't all agree whether or not safety can actually be measured scientifically, this thread is destined to become another verbal tennis match with the usual players and no winner.

[genec]

It would be impossible to argue whether or not cycling in traffic is "fun," since what's fun for you might not be fun for someone else. The only thing left to argue is whether or not it is "safe," and you can't do that unless you can measure it, and since we don't all agree whether or not safety can actually be measured scientifically, this thread is destined to become another verbal tennis match with the usual players and no winner.

Exactly! "Fun" is very personal and relative.

However... as far as the safety factor goes... quite obviously the more traffic, the greater the chance of a bad encounter.

[Bekologist]

i'd speculate for most riders, the ratios of perceived 'fun' and perceived or actual 'safety':to cars decreases in relation to the increase of traffic density.

Don't get me wrong, i twaddle along and also ride like a banshee in traffic (depending entirely on traffic density and all those darn exhaust spewing vehicles), assertively using my 'negotiating' skills to command full lanes of traffic with nothing more than a fingle waggle and a shoulder check, I'm no traffic shrinking violet,

but to pretend that 'fun and safe' traffic cycling methodology is worthy of an advocacy platform is delusional and misguiding.

[mr_tom]

In London, at least, injury rates for cyclists are on a par with those for other methods of transportation per person per mile. So it's as safe as anything else.

And it's /definitely/ a sh*tload of fun. Certainly lots more fun than riding the tube, or the bus. Or driving.

[Helmet Head]

I find it interesting that at least some of the folks here are equating "fun in traffic" with "fun in gridlock". That's certainly not what I am referring to in my signature.

By "traffic" I mean others out there on the road. Would I prefer a quiet country road? Sure, some of the time. But I also enjoy the social interaction, however brief, that occurs when sharing the road with others. I find it to be fun.



Because he is an adrenalin junky, and perhaps also enjoys jumping out of planes.

Okay, I agree downhill skiing can certainly provide adrenalin rushes, but rock climbing? Except for a total beginner, the potential of falling is a non-issue (the rope stops you right away, then you swing back to the rock and try again). What rock climbing is about, for me, is puzzle-solving using your whole body. It provides about as much of an adrenalin rush as playing chess. Well, getting to the top can certainly be exciting, but so can finishing a NY Times crossword puzzle.

But yeah, I would liken the "fun" in traffic cycling with the "fun" in rock climbing. But it's not the adrenalin rush kind of "fun" that I get when I go 40+ down a hill. It's hard to describe. Perhaps part of the "fun" comes from a satisfaction in feeling comfortable/centered in an environment where I used to believe that would not be possible.


But fun is a relative thing. Some folks idea of fun is sitting in a quiet place reading books.
Yes, fun is a relative thing. But it's not necessarily individual. Sure, whether riding a roller-coaster is fun is probably pretty individual, but lots of activities are fun or not based on how well one is prepared for those activities. As someone who has been able to learn to enjoy cycling in traffic, it's hard for me to understand why most others could not learn to enjoy it as well (except perhaps their own self-fulfilling conviction that it's not possible).

[noisebeam]

In London, at least, injury rates for cyclists are on a par with those for other methods of transportation per person per mile. So it's as safe as anything else.

And it's /definitely/ a sh*tload of fun. Certainly lots more fun than riding the tube, or the bus. Or driving.
I recently spent a week in London visiting relatives and of course observed cyclists riding everywhere. It did indeed seem like great fun as cyclist/motorist speeds were well matched. I kept telling my wife about my desires to join in the fun, which I would have except for the left/right transition and lack of a good bike.

Al

[joejack951]

I'm not sure if I describe it as "fun", but it's certainly less stressfull then driving. I freaken hate people who can't even go the damn speed limit in left most lane, and that take 2 miles just to hit something that approaches moving forward. :mad:
Woosa, Woosa back to my happy place.

Northern California must have very different drivers than the east coast. When traffic isn't stopped on I95, it's moving anywhere from 15-25mph OVER the speed limit (that's anywhere from 70-90mph depending on the location). You might find some people doing only 10 over in the right lane. When driving on that road, I feel like I'm back on my bike given the speed differential and the impatience of those behind me trying to pass. I enjoy the same satisfaction of slowing them down in my car as I do on my bike :) (This is not to say I impede traffic on my bike. I only "block" traffic when I'm doing near the speed limit and passing would be unsafe.)

[Bekologist]

Okay, I agree downhill skiing can certainly provide adrenalin rushes, but rock climbing? Except for a total beginner, the potential of falling is a non-issue

You prove again you have no clue what you're talking about, Helmet Head.

Your ability to masquerade ignorance as expertise extends into other sports as well, I see. Just put a sock in it buddy, your 'fun' and 'safe' traffic advice is dreamt up in the same, Mittyesque fantasy world as your rock climbing.


Take it from someone that's been climbing for several decades, served on a mountain rescue squad and been out on more than a few SARs and body recoveries,

avoiding falling is THE dominant climbing paradigm.

[Keith99]

Not all traffic is equal.

I got in the first reply. I refered to opening day Dodger Stadium. That was traffic, fast, thick and hoonestly fun.

BUT:

Thgey were all out for opening day. I had a choice. If it got nasty I would have bailed and walked with the people who had been drivers and were now peds. But the huge thing as I see it was that the drivers were out for a good time and in a good mood.

Rush hour is a different monster. If you ask about rush hour traffic being 'fun' either in my car on on my bike the answer is no. (well except for the last mile on the way home on Friday).

[LittleBigMan]

You have no clue what you're talking about, Helmet Head.

Your ability to masquerade ignorance as expertise extends into other sports as well, I see. You should just put a sock in it buddy, your 'fun' and 'safe' traffic advice is dreamt up in the same fantasy world as your rock climbing expertise.


Take it from someone that's been climbing for several decades, served on a Mountain rescue squad and been out on more than a few SARs and body recoveries,

avoiding falling is THE dominant climbing paragidm.


I'm embarrased by helmet head's ignorance, and appalled by his masquerade.

ignorance masked as expertise by a self deluded blowhard. Sheesh.
Here, finally, the motive of this thread is exposed.

Good job, Bek. You baited Helmet Head and caught him in a trap. You are the superior one.

Can we play this again? This is so much fun.

[Bekologist]

If you thought this thread had an agenda, you are correct, little big man.

[LittleBigMan]

If you thought this thread had an agenda, you are correct, little big man. Like Kreskin, or Houdini in his later years, debunking the mediums misleading the public.
"Helmet Head, what do you see?"

"I see dead people..."

[Bekologist]

that's pretty funny, little big man.... :)

[LittleBigMan]

Ok, well, I accept that you are sincere, Bek. I just don't think Advocacy boils down to "debunking" people. You debunk ideas, not people.

[flipped4bikes]

I lived in NYC for two years, and I have always considered riding in the city FUN! I have always been cognizant of the dangers, but most often, I rarely put myself intentionally on really bad traffic areas. If you look at it as an adventure, it'll be more fun than not... :)

[Helmet Head]

Jeez, Bek, I was talking about rock climbing in a gym and top roping, not lead climbing on the face of half dome for crying out loud. I didn't think I would have to spell that out in the context of comparing activities to cycling in traffic.

But if you're not sure what someone means, you might try asking instead of assuming next time.

Speaking of climbing on half dome, every time I've been up there I think about this story a guy once told me. He was up there, leaning over the edge watching a couple of guys slowly make their way up. When they were within hearing distance, he called to one of them, in his east indian accent, "pardon me sir, do you have you any Grey Poupon?"

[Bekologist]

HH, none of that changes my low opinion of you or your message. I think you're full of it.

Are you going to get all the schoolchildren into 'safe and fun' traffic cycling as a way to accomodate kids along traffic laden streets?

Stating in another thread about how the amount of traffic never makes you consider your route choice, even while pulling your child in a trailer, makes me realize how flippant your attitude in this forum is about safety.

You should be ashamed of your dishonest, misguided advocacy.

[genec]

Yes, fun is a relative thing. But it's not necessarily individual.

I very much disagree with you there. Fun is not a universal thing... period. A roller coaster ride could be quite terrifying to some, and a "walk in the park" to others.

My wife very much enjoys driving. Will fill the car and take off and do 8 hours without a beat. I find it very very boring. She does all the long distance driving when we travel.

I on the other hand very much enjoy sailing. My wife finds it very boring, or even terrifying... perhaps the noise and crowds are just not their thing.

Again, we have different tastes and therefore find "fun" in different things.

Now lest one think that sailing is nothing more than very lazy bobbing along... I race, which means close quarter drills and rapid decision making in amongst many other boats, while also adhering to a rigid set of rules.

It all comes down to different tastes. Fun is not universal. I bet there are even folks that find Disneyland boring.

[Helmet Head]

I think you're full of it.
Well, I think you're full of it, so there! :rolleyes:


Stating in another thread about how no amount of traffic never makes you consider your route choice, even while pulling your child in a trailer, makes me realize how flippant your attitude in this forum is about safety.
You don't know anything about the routes I have to choose from, and why I would choose one route over another, yet you reach a conclusion like this, and have the gall to claim that I'm the one who is full of it. Time for a mirror check, my friend.


And while claiming riding in traffic is not fun for you, you are able to write all this:


Don't get me wrong, i twaddle [twaddle???] along and also ride like a banshee in traffic (depending entirely on traffic density and all those darn exhaust spewing vehicles), assertively using my 'negotiating' skills to command full lanes of traffic with nothing more than a fingle waggle and a shoulder check, I'm no traffic shrinking violet, ...
Sounds like someone is having fun to me...


but to pretend that 'fun and safe' traffic cycling methodology is worthy of an advocacy platform is delusional and misguiding.
Why are you so opposed to encouraging folks to learn how to make cycling in traffic be a fun and safe activity? If that's not the essence of cycling advocacy, what is?

[genec]

Certainly part of the misperception is due to varying degrees of "fun" and varying degrees of "traffic."

[Helmet Head]

There are varying degree, yes.

But what I'm trying to address is how one's individual assessment of fun and safety regarding a given activity - in this case cycling in traffic - can vary too. In particular, I'm trying to bring attention to how one can change his own assessment of cycling in traffic to go from not fun and not safe to both fun and safe, given the attainment of the right skills, experience and appropriate adjustments in attitude, beliefs and behavior.

[Helmet Head]

Perhaps it's really about building context-specific self-esteem, which ultimately is derived from feeling competent and comfortable in the given context.

[genec]

There are varying degree, yes.

But what I'm trying to address is how one's individual assessment of fun and safety regarding a given activity - in this case cycling in traffic - can vary too. In particular, I'm trying to bring attention to how one can change his own assessment of cycling in traffic to go from not fun and not safe to both fun and safe, given the attainment of the right skills, experience and appropriate adjustments in attitude, beliefs and behavior.

Yes, you are addressing basic skills... therefore the "degree" is one of transition from not riding in traffic or at least avoiding it, to riding in traffic and finding it satisfying.

Where as others may interpret "fun, riding in traffic" as "facing rush hour with an overzelous glee...." something a messenger might look upon as simply "a challenge." Vastly different circumstances. And obviously some messengers do quite enjoy that bit... so even that extreme can be enjoyed by some.

[Bekologist]

a 'fun' and 'safe' traffic cycling method developed by a bicyclist that makes claims of virtual complete avoidance of trucks, traffic and exhaust is dubious, at best. Delusional and misguided, as the assertion in original post.

In a recent thread, HH, you were making 'claims' how a high speed differential or traffic volumes never affected you, even when pulling your child in a trailer- I doubt you could even find 1% of avid cycling parents, much less parents in general, that would agree with you on that one, fella. Your flippant approach to safety is disgusting.....

The rest of Helmet Head's bicycling (or rock climbing, for that matter!) advice is similarily suspect.

[Helmet Head]

The rest of Helmet Head's bicycling (or rock climbing, for that matter!) advice is similarily suspect.
I judge all advice independent of its source. If I was to evaluate a moral dictum, I wouldn't care if the source was Mother Theresa or OJ Simpson, my evaluation would be based on the dictum itself.

Either advice makes sense or it doesn't. I don't understand why you're so hung up on who is giving the advice. What is the relevance of the source of the advice to how you evaluate it? It's not like we're talking about rocket science, medicine or structural engineering here, areas where one might rely heavily on expert advice. The topic here is riding a bike in traffic. Now, some folks might know more than others, but surely you don't need to identify someone as a bonafide expert in bicycling before you'll consider what they have to say?

It's good that you find my advice suspect. Hopefully, you treat all advice with such scrutiny.

[Bekologist]

what does your kid think about that when you pull her in high volume, high speed traffic?

Your false dogma is reprehensible. That's why I take such offense. No offense intended, but I'm not the one with the false, misleading traffic 'methodogy' that GETS SHOVED DOWN THIS FORUM'S THROAT all the time. You do that.

I take offense at your methodology and 'advice', like all mentioned examples above, and comments like a couple of weeks ago when you stated to 'ride to the LEFT of a bike lane stripe, unless you have good reason for doing otherwise...'

If I caught you talking to a group of schoolkids or a group beginners ride like that, I'd likely have to physically vomit from the repulsion.

[I-Like-To-Bike]

What is the relevance of the source of the advice to how you evaluate it?
Credibility! Even a habitual liar tells the truth occasionally; only a fool would pay attention to anything from such an unreliable source. Same applies to a source unable to distinguish between his own premises (based on his own conjuring, and wishful thinking) and actual measured real life data. No one who is sensible will waste the time trying to find a needle of truth in a haystack of guesswork.

[Helmet Head]

What is the relevance of the source of the advice to how you evaluate it?

Credibility! Even a habitual liar tells the truth occasionally; only a fool would pay attention to anything from such an unreliable source.
Credibility? In an internet forum? You've got to be kidding! No wonder we have such a disconnect! Why rely on credibility of the source at all? No wonder you have such a hard time reading what, for example, Forester has to say. You've written him off, so you automatically write off anything he has to say. Frankly, that is so stupid!

Why not evaluate the substance of whatever is being said independent of its source or whatever credibility you may or may not ascribe to him or her? What does credibility matter anyway? Say you decide (how??) that John Doe is a "credible" source. Now you're going to believe everything John Doe says? What stupidity! How absurd! Or do you believe a "credible" source is always right? :rolleyes: Say Jane Doe is a habitual liar. Now you're going to disbelieve everything Jane Does says? What stupidity! How absurd! Afer all, like you said, even a habitual liar tells the truth occasionally.

Say John Does says X, and Jane Doe says not-X. How do you decide who is right? Do you blindly go with X simply because the "credible" guy said it? Or do you evaluate the reasons for John contending X and Jane contending Not-X? After all, maybe she's right this time. I sure as heck would do the latter. No wonder we have such a difficult time. Credibility?? I'm incredulous!

Jeez. Even you and I agree once in a while. What does that mean with respect to the truth of what we may be contending? About as much as when we disagree... nothing. Nada. Zilch. What determines the truth of what either of us contends, or what anyone one of us contends, should be the truth (or falsehood) of what we're contending, and nothing else. Credibility? LOL! Incredible!

I finally get it. I'm sorry, but this is hilarious. Credibility? I am literally laughing out loud.

:roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao: