HH: I am honestly not sure what you want. If you want my total capitulation about my analysis, you won't get it this way.

Yes! Forester makes claims which are unsupported by his experiment. He comes up with his "danger ratio" using an experiment which cannot be used to evaluate relative danger because he is operating outside the operational parameters of the sidepath intentionally. His experiment proves that one cannot ride a sidepath the same way as the road. His experiment does not make any conclusions about relative safety of the sidepath vs. the road.

The best you can say is that he showed that it is dangerous to ride a sidepath at full speed and without yielding at intersections, i.e. recklessly. This result is of minor importance as it is self evident for most people. Again, there is nothing here to evaluate a "danger ratio."

(That make three times explaining this to you HH. I've made my point. Unless you have anything else to add, I'm done here.)