Originally Posted by joejack951
I would agree that it's silly to argue about debris building in bike lanes and then tout shoulders as if they are debris free. Touting a shoulder as more vehicular than a bike lane is a different story though. Not all bike lanes/shoulder accumulate debris and where they don't, they make convenient places to move over to allow faster traffic to pass. No more convenient than a wide lane though, which in my experience, tend to have the debris build up start further right than a marked off bike lane/shoulder.
If bike lanes weren't touted as having such magical powers like making people no longer care that it's 95 degrees outside and jump on a bike to head to the store, then I wouldn't argue about them so much.
Who's citing "magical powers"? Are you saying that making roads more attractive for cycling has
no effect on the total number of cyclists on the streets? Who here has claimed that they are the
only factor in increasing cyclists?
I kind of thought that you were on a warpath here. Why not back down a bit if you are just arguing for amusement?
__________________
Cat 2 Track, Cat 3 Road.
"If you’re new enough [to racing] that you would ask such question, then i would hazard a guess that if you just made up a workout that sounded hard to do, and did it, you’d probably get faster." --
the tiniest sprinter