Originally Posted by I-Like-To-Bike
Critics should stick to what he writes about bicycling and bicyclists, and his unique "Scientific process"for reaching those conclusions. There is enough to find fault with there, no need to delve into his personal life or personal beliefs. That is an irrelevant non-issue for me.
I guess I respectfully disagree to a point and feel that his comments referencing the ADC, on his own website, conflict with his scholarly approach.
I have no knowledge of being on such a Speakers Bureau, or even whether one exists.
He is showcased here, on a speakers page.
They have his picture posted, a link to his email, and stipulations for paying him for speaking.
If he claims that he doesnt know about it, and he is half as scholarly as he pretends to be, and if he doesn't explicitly agree with the website that is using his image, and his work, he should ask that it be removed. I was asking these questions to get a broader sense of who JF is.
You will also note that the ADC links to a paper he wrote for the preserving the American Dream Conference 2005. Seems he would know about the organization if he presented a paper with their name in the title.
While I do not think this is relevant to the specific deconstruction of JFs work, it has for me filled in some information on who JF is and what he believes.
Like most of his answers he sidestepped some of the trickier issues until I pressed, when he answered them, the last of which seemed to actually be written by a human being sitting at a keyboard. I was thankful for this. I wish he'd answer to some of the other questions on this thread in the same way.
I guess the direction of my question was to press the issue of climate change and the data that we see from it - and does JF, who continually stands by his interpretation of the data in his studies, think this will change how he relates to cycling and advocacy.
Seems the two can be related, if one wants to maintain individual mobility (expanding the distance one can travel beyond a walk) and move away from the private auto. The private auto is in many cases the reason why we are having much of this debate at all - if there were fewer of them on the road cycling would be a safer, saner way to negotiate our environment.
Pick apart the data all you want and use the "straw-man" defense over and over - but the reality I see is that without cars we wouldn't be arguing over where JF pulled the data about bike lanes and collisions and what is safer. Working towards fewer cars and less sprawl would be a noble pursuit for a bicycle advocate - the world would get a little smaller - perhaps designed with people instead of plastic and metal in mind - and the roads that we do have might be a bit nicer to traverse.
Getting a sense of where JF stands politically and personally on these issues, and reading a website that has listed him as a speaker, has informed my understanding of him. One can't ask a question without influencing the answer. (I'm guilty of that!) JF's questions seem to stem from an autocentric base - and its no wonder his data supports it.
I thanked him for his response and do not think I chastised, only asked several pointed questions.