I know you weren't trying to pick a fight, but I try to avoid "controversial" subjects in this thread (other than to point out the controversy and move on). "Invisible cycling" is advocated strongly by some, and denounced equally strongly by others. Put "invisible" in the "Search the Forums" section and you will get some of the debates.
That said, you have an excellent point. The skill of riding through traffic is more important than equipment. That's why I suggested John Hurst's "Art of Urban Cycling." I recommended Hurst's book because it discusses the various approaches. Go to the library or bookstore, and look for other books nearby on the shelf. You will also find "Effective Cycling" by John Forrester. He advocates vehicular cycling ("VC"), which, in many ways, is the opposite of "invisible cycling." Hopefully, you will also find books that advocate the invisible cycling approach.
Edit: Below, you explain why you think cycling as if you were invisible makes you safer. Others say it makes you less safe. They say that you should cycle to be more visible by, for example, being in the center or left of the lane when cars can turn right. As I said, this is not the thread to debate the subject. Pointing out the controversy and letting people who want more informationto look it up should be the limit of this thread.
If you want to start another thread to debate vehicular cycling versus invisible cycling, I'm game. But I ask that you NOT use this thread for that argument.