Actually HH, there are instances of looking at Mr. Forester's presentation style, but the bulk of the comments are regarding what he writes about. Like the issue of describing a general concern a "phobia" and his use of medical terminology which is not recognized by the medical field. Or the issue of his lack of enthusiasm for increasing the number of people who bicycle and his focus on the "skilled, high mileage cyclists" to the excusion and, in fact, to the dis-benefit of lesser skilled cyclists who could benefit from transportational cycling.

These are all fair topics to pursue. JF has written about these topics and others publicly, so they are fair game for critical analysis. In fact, I doubt very much, given what I know about his personality, that he appreciates your dilution of his ideas. He will want one to take his words at face value and he will fight the hard fight. As much as people disagree with him, the world needs people like him. Not to be leaders (there's not a snowball's chance in hell that he could lead a bicycle or bicyclist advocacy group - in fact, he's tried before and failed), but to define the boundaries of the problem.