Bike Forums

Bike Forums (http://www.bikeforums.net/forum.php)
-   General Cycling Discussion (http://www.bikeforums.net/general-cycling-discussion/)
-   -   Cycling is Dangerous??? (http://www.bikeforums.net/general-cycling-discussion/43030-cycling-dangerous.html)

cwodave 12-30-03 05:31 PM

Cycling is Dangerous???
 
I was doing some web surfing and came across this article.

Road Cycling is Dangerous, Unhealthy and not Environmentally Friendly

The author's name is Arek Zawada and I suppose everybody is entitled to their opinion, but I think several of the statements that he claims are facts are a little off.

Worth reading if you have a few minutes.

Dave

Triker 12-30-03 05:49 PM

I am not sure it is worth reading :) To say some of his facts are a bit off is being very gracious. There are a few germs of truth, but not worth sorting put from all the other stuff. The guy is from the UK and most of what is says has no meaning in North Dakota, for example.

Aloner 12-30-03 06:05 PM

Don't click on the poll there, either.

iamlucky13 12-30-03 11:05 PM

I had to click because I knew someone was bound to say it sooner or later. He's making some pretty big stretches. Sounds like he took the best numbers from one side (and accounted for everything) and the worst numbers from the other (and only counted the bad stuff), then made up a few numbers to show that riding a bike a whopping 1/3 as damaging as driving a Geo Metro.

That should sum up the highlights of the article

Michel Gagnon 12-31-03 02:41 AM

Read the remaining parts of his site. British humour at its best, I think.

Don Cook 12-31-03 08:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cwodave
I was doing some web surfing and came across this article.

Road Cycling is Dangerous, Unhealthy and not Environmentally Friendly

The author's name is Arek Zawada and I suppose everybody is entitled to their opinion, but I think several of the statements that he claims are facts are a little off.

Worth reading if you have a few minutes.

Dave

It impressed me as a rant that was designed to bait cyclists into vehement responses. I would think that if this not-too-bright brit spent a little more time polishing his writing and thinking skills, his post might have been slightly interesting. As it is, I've read fourth grade arguments for dropping the legal driving age to twelve that made more sense and were better researched.

Pat 12-31-03 11:29 AM

I read the article and the guy is not accurate. I found the following glaring errors and there are many others in the article.

Glaring Error #1
He says riding is 14 times more dangerous then driving. Actually cycling is twice as safe as driving per hour in the USA. That includes all cyclists. If you look at experienced cyclists, they are probably 10-20 times as safe as motorists. I doubt the figures in Great Britain are that much different then the USA.

Glaring Error #2
He claims the average car produces only 3 times the emissions of a cyclist. Well my compact car gets about 3 miles per lb of gas. Gas is a fat. I get about 70 miles per lb of fat. So as a cyclist, I am about 23 times as efficient on my bike. Also my fuel is renewable and a car's is not.

Glaring Error #3
He claims the average car is cheaper to run then a bike. Nonsense. Even using pretty top of the line stuff, you can operate a bike for about 5 cents per mile. Auto insurance alone costs more then that. Autos cost well in excess of 30 cents per mile. Now, if you want to get involved in skin flint cycling, I think you can easily get your cost to about 2 cents per mile.

ParamountScapin 12-31-03 11:36 AM

If it takes 130 kg of emissions to produce a bike it must take ~(3000/25=120)x130=15,600 kg of emissions to make a car. Or, using his 1/3 that still equals 5,200 kg of emissions. It might actually be pounds rather than kg. But his article is so full of BS it is not worth going back to look.

skiahh 12-31-03 11:43 AM

What a good laugh! If the guy actually believes this, he's probably sharing a flat with Elvis and has it lined with tin foil to keep the government and/or aliens from reading his thoughts.

Oh, by the way, if you vote in his poll, you go to a porn site, so unless you'd like to surf the dark side for a bit, don't bother expressing your opinion to him that way.

Robert Gardner 12-31-03 01:10 PM

This artical is a joke. It must be British humor. I don't understand why anyone takes it seriously. I think the only thing in it that might be true is that bike lanes are useless and don't improve the safety of bikers.

Chi 12-31-03 01:19 PM

Yes its dangerous. Dont bike. Just sit on your ass and drive your way to the American dream: to be overweight.

Chi 12-31-03 01:19 PM

Oh and did I mention that driving is dangerous too?

atbman 12-31-03 05:58 PM

Sadly, he means it. Not British humour I'm afraid

iamlucky13 01-01-04 12:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by atbman
Sadly, he means it. Not British humour I'm afraid

Doesn't change the fact that it's humourous.

I'm thinking it's more a case of a person who deals with hardcore advocates a lot, and was scraping for some sort of response. I just can't buy any other reason to write that stuff. Spending a couple hours at his computer with a calculator and a World Book encyclopedia was probably a good workout for him.
:D


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:22 PM.