Originally Posted by
John Forester
You state: "[I]f more people are cyclingcycling, to run errands, as identified in the video ... then naturally they will be motoring less.". Joseph Goebbels, great liar that he was, would have been utterly ashamed of the technical absurdity of this effort that you all appear to praise so much. The whole object of the video is to oppose motoring, with cycling mentioned as a minor sideline. Your words here indicate that not only are you bicycle advocates unable to understand the meaning of the words that you read, as mentioned before, you also cannot understand even a simple video. You make cycling into a dreary duty to be performed as part of the anti-motoring war, and regardless of the danger to those whom you affect.
I don't see anyone here that's any more anti-motoring than you are apparently anti 'bicycle advocate'.
I also don't see anything wrong with being 'anti-motoring' as you define it. Anyone with half a brain can see that motoring's day's are numbered. It's ridiculous to think that this perpetual growth in motor traffic can be sustained. Any efforts to reduce our dependance on it can only be a good thing.
No-one's advocating an immediate removal of all private motor vehicles from the road overnight, but a gradual process of reduced dependance. Maybe you should update your thinking to this century - pro-motoring advocates such as yourself are going to find yourselves increasingly marginalised as time passes.