Originally Posted by
Severian
The more intelligent response is:
Yes, you raised a question about the appropriateness of hand brakes in certain situations. And you were unhappy with the response as it did not conform to the conventions of conversation English language. I'm sorry you're still unhappy.
Fixed.
Responding to specific questions about the drawbacks presented by hand brakes with nonsense such as suggesting I have my handlebars on backwards is offtopic blather that has absolutely nothing to do with my hypothesis. When having a conversation one is supposed to respond by addressing the specifics of the topic, not drifting off into la la land.
Originally Posted by
CommuterRun
This is BS. If it were true, then a bike wouldn't be steerable, nor even controllable, when riding with no hands.
Except at very slow speeds, a bike steers by leaning into the turn. You don't need to grip the 'bars at all to do that. In fact it's easier to do with a relaxed grip, or even open hands, rather than gripping the bar tightly. Not trying to muscle a bike through a turn produces smoother and tighter turns.
Absolutely not. When riding with no hands your hands are no longer bearing any weight. This is completely different from the typical riding position where your hands bear a significant portion of the weight. You're comparing apples and oranges. One has nothing to do with the other. Furthermore, I think it goes without saying that riding with no hands is not the safest way to ride in traffic. So your post completely irrelevant.
The strangest thing though, is that people like you keep bring up whether or not a cyclist "needs" to grip the bars. Is it not painfully obvious that need has almost nothing to do with safety? Have not the old pennyfartherings demonstrated quite convincingly that you don't even need any brakes at all and has not the unicycling community demonstrated that you don't even need handlebars or more than one wheel? Need is obviously a completely separate issue from safety. Do you need a helmet to ride a bicycle? Do you need reflective gear or lights? Do you need to ride in the same direction as other traffic? No, no, and no. All answers which have absolutely nothing to do with safety.
Originally Posted by
ItsJustMe
Better make the best of it while you can. Once you have tons of experience, by your own theory you'll be posting mostly wrong info there. If I were you I'd try my hardest to not ever learn anything, so you won't get stupid.
Obviously, it's not the experience that signals their stupidity. It's the fact that they authoritatively trumpet that experience to others.
I'm not worried about learning and, trust me, if you think that's the conclusion of what I've said then the problem isn't me: "ItsJust[You]".
Originally Posted by
BikEthan
Not this part of planet earth.
I can only imagine what you're like at work. Your boss asks you to analyze a case study and, instead of doing so, you decide to tell him about wolves in the himalayas and psychological tendencies.
Get real.
Originally Posted by
cyccommute
Huh? There's a difference between 'real science' and 'some of the things scientists do'? Science is studying the natural world, applying the scientific method and trying to discover new ways of looking at the world. It isn't reinventing the wheel each time you go into the lab. Do you start each day trying to figure out atomic theory based on the models of the ancient Greece? If you do, tell me how much progress you make by the end of the day.
Everyone that does real science (not your variety) builds on the work of others. It's just not cricket to redo other people's work even if you discovered it independently...unless you happen to be doing it at the same time. If you were to say that you had discovered a new way of doing something that is obviously more difficult, more elaborate and gave a worse result, you'd be laughed off any podium in the world.
Here's a tip from a real scientist, you might want to look up what the term "peer review" means.
Get a clue.
Originally Posted by
cyccommute
Millions of bicycles have been made with hand brakes and millions of people use them everyday. They seem to be able to steer, brake and still manage not to run into cars, building, people, busses and other objects hundreds of times per day. And, since you seemed to have missed the boat, take a look at my thoughts on braking
here. You could say that I've thought about it a whole lot.
To be completely honest I'm getting quite tired of putting this same argument to rest over and over and over and over again.
Yes, plenty of people are able to steer, brake, and manage with hand brakes. I'm one of them. Plenty of people also manage riding without helmets, riding on brakeless fixies, unicycles, etc, etc. So what? What does it have to do with danger and safety? Absolutely nothing.
Originally Posted by
cyccommute
As for chains and working on bikes, I've tried your method (yes, I've seen your silliness before) long ago. There are better, easier, quicker, less elaborate ways of doing it. If someone comes up with a better method then the current chain tools, I have an open enough mind to adopt those methods. Here's a hint: your method ain't it!
Really, you've tried my method? You must be a psychic because I didn't even tell you the materials I'm working with, much less the goal of my endeavor.
Stop making a fool of yourself and assuming you know things which you don't have a clue about.
Originally Posted by
cccorlew
Let's step back. The problem is hand brakes. We've all focused on the brakes. Maybe the issue is hands. Perhaps we should be using our brakes, but not using our hands.
Hello? Despite the army of buffoons too daft to see it, that has been the topic of this thread from the very beginning.
Originally Posted by
cccorlew
There is general agreement about the inadequacy of coaster brakes, so lets reject that as a non-viable solution.
Shimano has introduced electronic shifting. Can electronic braking be far behind? Once that hits the market it's only a matter of time until thought controlled braking makes a .... should I say break through?
This advance will free us to use our hands as the gods intended: To throw rocks at each other.
Until then, I will use my three fold system: Drag sneaker on road, put other sneaker heal on back wheel while I back pedal the coaster brake and use my "quad brake lever" that activates both front and rear calipers and disc brakes.
This leaves me one hand still free to flip off the crazy people who won't see things exactly the same way I do.
Thank you for bringing some sanity to this thread.
Originally Posted by
Paul L.
Hmmm, and you are assuming that I never question (I'm questioning you right now actually)? I didn't say that experts weren't wrong sometimes. When someone has done a proper study with the proper sample size, or proper amount of observations then I am willing to accept what they have to offer.
Don't get me wrong. I'm also willing to accept what they have to offer. The problem is that what they have to offer is often misunderstood, misapplied, and misrepresented.
Originally Posted by
Paul L.
I also find that personal experience and common sense account for quite a bit. I am smart enough to know that a bicycle chain and a motorcycle chain are two different animals and require seperate tools. I also know that taking good advice makes life a lot easier more often than not.
In my experience it takes a rare individual to take the same amount of care with something that I personally take....especially when it's something that affects me in ways that it doesn't affect them.
Best piece of advice I've ever read: "If you want something done right, you have to do it yourself."
Originally Posted by
Paul L.
The trick is being wise enough to acknowledge and take good advice. If one truly questioned everything they would be growing everything they ate or eating pre WWII army rations (don't ya know the government didn't start trying to control us until post WWII), living in a bunker detached from the grid with solar energy with their own private cache of firearms suspicious of everyone and everything that came into contact with them. I believe the scientific term for this is paranoia, but perhaps since you question science and 90% of what it has found to be "fact" perhaps you call it being careful or something else like that.
I don't question science nor do I question good advice. What I question is the authenticity of claims of science and good advice.
Originally Posted by
Paul L.
Incidentally, breaking a chain the wrong way and saying it worked for you is a sample size of 1. Just because it worked once doesn't mean it will do that again. I suggest you perform a scientific study getting a numerous amount of people to try your nail and hammer method of chain repair and document your findings.
I'm confident in that my method was the best solution to my specific problem and I am 100% confident that given the circumstances it would work again. If I were trying to convince you of some kind of general method then I'd do exactly what you've suggested, but I have no intention of trying to convince you of anything, so I'm quite content telling you to bugger off because you have no idea about the specific requirements I had that made my method the best for the job at hand.