Well, then there is our fundamental difference. You think, "for the most part", that proper lateral positioning for cyclists is largely determined independent of current conditions (including but not limited to: weather, surface conditions, cyclist speed, cyclist's intended destination, speed, volume and location of other traffic, presence of parked cars and other potential hazards, lighting conditions, etc.). No wonder you like and support bike lanes. There is no way you can appreciate what's wrong with them if you think this.

Talk about strawman. I've never argued that there is a wall stopping anyone from leaving the bike lane, or anything like that. Anyway, this is now beside the point, because our fundamental difference is noted above.

I never said bike lanes prevented that or anything else. Are you having a discussion with me or just playing with yourself?

I said that bike lanes reinforce the notion that where cyclists belong on the road is largely a static proposition independent of current conditions, which brings us back to our fundamental disagreement.

Given my assumption about dynamics, relative to every-changing conditions, being the norm with respect to proper cyclist lateral positioning, the only proper training for bike lanes is to ignore them - position yourself as if the stripe is not there. But in that case, what is the bike lane for? But again, if you don't accept the assumption then this point is moot. Which brings us back to our fundamental disagreement, which I'm sure we can't resolve here.

I should clarify that while each time one may ride in a significantly different lateral position from the next or previous time, the cyclist's position should remain relatively static, once adjusted for the current conditions, on any particular trip through a given section.