Sorry guys but despite the ton of verbage that preceded this statement I see it not as a conclusion based on facts but on preconceived notions and biases.


Since this statement was made in response to my posts I will respond since I have obviously been included in what is being referred to as the "public way of thought".

#1- While I support bikeways as a part of a system of cyclist and vehicular transportation I by no means see it as the whole solution. To suggest that I, and others, that support bikeways under some circumstances " have placed their (our) hopes on bikeway systems" is a way of inaccurately reframing the argument. Most of us are adaptive in our solutions and even see riding vehicularly as part of the overall solution when that solution is most effective. My argument against one size fits all solutions is just as strong against bike lanes, bike paths, MUP's when they are poorly designed, constructed, maintained or installed when not needed as it is against seeing VC as the panacea to solve all ills.

#2 We disagree about what it means to be realistic and what is an ideologue. To me being realistic is adapting our approaches to various environments knowing that compromises are sometimes necessary or no forward momentum will be made. Ideologues, in my view, paint their opposition as ignorant, emotionally charged, phobic, stupid, childish idealists usually as a preemptive defense against such labels being applied to themselves and see no room for compromise.