Originally Posted by Helmet Head
I hadn't seen that post. I'll address it there.
Your response has been read, and responded to. Thanks.
Originally Posted by Helmet Head
Don't be silly. Surely you aren't arguing that signs are of equal importance to what is ahead in the driver's path? Surely you know drivers who rarely look at signs. Why? Because they are deemed by all drivers to be of secondary importance, relative to the primary importance of what's ahead, and by some drivers to be of very little importance. Next time you are with someone else, after passing a sign, ask them if they noticed it and what it said. Obviously, they'll probably know about a stop sign. The kinds of signs that are usually missed are: speed limit signs, "deer xing/rock falling", etc., especially on regular routes. There are exceptions - drivers who pay attention to all signs, but they are exceptions. But there are no exceptions to the fact that all drivers give what's ahead in their lane primary importance.
I don't disagree that drivers give what is ahead and in their lane more priority than things off to the side or in other lanes. Of course that holds true. But if the object off to the side or in another lane is a human being or any item that can cause them great harm then they
do give it the consideration it deserves. This is one of the causes of rubber-necking incidents. And I have also noticed that when I am riding on a wide shoulder that motorists tend to be half way into their left lane as they pass me, even though there is 4 or 5 feet between my left side and the fog line to their right. People aren't cattle, they do perceive things around them.
Originally Posted by Helmet Head
Because they are relevant to us. Have you read much about inattentional blindness? Perceived relevance plays a key role with respect to whether the subject notices something or not.
That inattentional blindness crap is just that, crap. There are no peer reviewd studies on this. Only mishmush from people who are trying to use it to make a buck by testifying in court cases. I have said it before, just because something is on the internet, does not make it true.
Maybe it does have some truth in it... maybe. But remember my post to you about a multi-billion dollar industry that would like to rebute it? They are called
advertisers and have a few hundred thousand bilboards up here and there that would like you to take them into consideration.
Originally Posted by Helmet Head
Note that if all bike lanes are gone, only the stripe would be gone, the space would still be there. You don't seem to realize that.
I realized what you were saying. But the stripe serves a purpose! People tend to keep their cars
between the lines. If they are all willynilly drifting back and forth can you explain why the shoulder of the roads are so filled with crap while the lanes are clean?
Originally Posted by Helmet Head
Why would you be "directly in the line of fire" any more or less simply because of a stripe being there or not?
Read what I said about
keeping it between the lines
Originally Posted by Helmet Head
As far as the mayo goes, say you were that jar and you wanted to be noticed by the person who goes in the fridge to get the milk. Where would you choose to be, in front of the milk carton, or off to the side of it? (please don't ignore this question - it gets to the heart of the matter).
I would chose to be where the person would expect me to be! And that is in the door next to the other condiments.
I'm getting hungry now.
Originally Posted by Helmet Head
To improve the analogy. Consider a refrigerator with only a few items on it. On the top left rack is a milk carton. The top right is empty. The bottom rock has a few items on it. You are the mayo that wants to be noticed by the person going for the milk. Would you just to be next to the milk on the top left, or on the empty rack to the right?
It all depends on where the person would expect me to be.
I'm really getting hungry now.
Ever misplace your car keys? If you were on your way out the door would you go to grab your keys off the key rack where you expect them to be or would you go looking thru your porn collection?
No need to answer that, it only proves to serve my point. I do see yours (point that is, not porn collection) but I think mine holds more merrit otherwise I'd just shut up about it.
Originally Posted by Helmet Head
Removing bike lane stripes does not remove space that cyclists can use to allow faster traffic to pass, and removing those stripes increases their chance of being noticed by making the presence of the cyclist in the motorists lane more relevant to the motorists.
But with the stripe there it's a constant reminder to motorists that cyclists
so use this road so please be on the look out for them.
Originally Posted by Helmet Head
Yes, I still drive over 10,000 miles per year. I am a motorist and I think like a motorist. But I realize I'm also a cyclist, and that skews my views from that of a typical motorist who is not also a cyclist. So when I say "they" I am mostly talking about motorists who are not also cyclists.
Cool, now I know you have motoring experience. Now come to the east coast and see how things go here. Not everywhere is sunny California. I'm sure that on the roads you have there your ideas are likely the better of many options. But not everywhere is like that, you need to understand and consider. I have. I do make a point of considering that metro Detroit is ont indicitive of the entire US. That is why I always (almost) use phrases like "around here" and "in these parts".