Originally Posted by I-Like-To-Bike
"Practice what you preach bubba. I'm calling you on this, prove to us you're right" My My! Diatribe? Freaking novel? You really are on a quest for knowledge aren't you Jack.
First brush up on the fallacy of demanding negative proof.
http://wiki.cotch.net/index.php/Proving_a_Negative
This will start you on the answer to your (and other logically deprived fellas) assumption that quantitative claims about risk reduction/changed cycling behavior as a result of formal training/VC indoctrination are true until proven otherwise. The VC proselytizers and promoters cry "we need education (read: VC) classes implemented as some sort of mandatory program in schools" yet are unable to provide any reason why. What problem will their program fix, solve or mitigate and what makes them think so?
Then reread:
http://www.bikeforums.net/showpost.p...4&postcount=51
http://www.bikeforums.net/showpost.p...1&postcount=53
http://www.bikeforums.net/showpost.p...1&postcount=75
Then learn that any risk analysis of bicycle accidents (or any other accidents) that ignores considering severity of the accidents is no better than worthless, and is more likely agenda driven drivel. All of Forester's "studies" of bicycling risk to include bike facilities risk and insignificance of traffic to rear risk fit that category due to that fatal flaw.
In addition to the above, the notorious claim of 80% accident reduction for both Vehicular Cyclists and VC trained cyclists ( made by Forester, Allen, Schubert, the LAB-reform gang, et al.) is based on fabrication of data for a mystery population of unidentified vehicular cyclists. This mystery population uses undefined vehicular cycling characteristics, and there is zero accident data for this Forester fabricated population of cyclists. This is the so-called safety record of VC training promoted by the Foresterite LCI's. and LCI wannabes.
Bottom line: There is no evidence of any safety record, good or bad, associated with defined vehicular cycling/cyclists, and there is no record of accomplishment, improved safety, or changed behavior for students of formal VC based training.
So you're calling Forester a creationist. Has it ever occured to you that the statements made by Forester & his group are theories? What is wrong with that? Has Forester claimed they are facts backed up by statistical evidence? Has it also occured to you there is not yet enough statistical evidence to put together a factual statement about how effective these classes are?
I am not sure but I do not think there is any follow up or follow through to collect the needed facts to document the effectiveness of the LAB courses or if what is taught is effective in making people better cyclists. One way to collect the needed facts is if there are survey's done in certain intervals after the participants complete the courses that can be filled out & turned into the LAB so they can put together some kind of documented facts & statistical evidence to back up the claims of the effectivness of the courses.
I understand if you have issues with Forester & what his group stands for Stanley. But instead of fighting against them & spouting off about your disagreement about them why don't you offer some suggestions to them to improve things. Then maybe things will get done they way they should. In other words step down off of your damn soap box & take action to help improve things rather then spout of about them. If it is one thing I can not stand it is someone who *****es & moans & spouts off about their disagreement about **** but don't do anything to help change things for the better. Basically what I'm trying to say is **** or get off the toilet bud, there are others who need to use it. Put up or shut up. You get the idea?
I was the same way about the trail system & bike route system for the longest time in my community. I would ***** & preach about it. One day someone suggested I stop *****ing about it & start taking action. Well I did. I helped creat the Siouxland Trails Foundation. Now we are making change for the better. It hasn't been easy but it is working.
What I'm telling you is if you're sick & tired of not having the statistical proof you so desire from Forester & the LAB about the courses or anything they stand for & if you don't like their theories then do something to help create & change it. I'm calling you out to do this. So what do you say? You gonna step off of the soap box & take action or are you going to continue to bith, moan & whine about it? What's it gonna be?
Does anyone else agree with me? Or does anyone else have any other suggestions about this & how ILTB should handle it?