Richard & Judy *5pm tonight*

On at 5.25 ...

NOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Whinges about lack of seperated facilities

"Cycling and traffic don't mix"

"I say don't do it, it's far too dangerous"

Aaaaarghgrhgrhgrhgrhrghrgrhgrhgrhrgrhrgh.

Well it was indeed the usual whinge-fest with nothing approaching
intelligent debate. One expected this rock-bottom level from Richard Madeley
and Quentin Wilson, but Jon Snow should be ashmaed of himself. He admitted
to telling people not to take up cycling as it's "too dangerous out there"
and for wanting cycling facilities to keep cyclists totally separate from
vehicles. Twunt!

Cheers, helen s

"Mark Thompson"
<pleasegivegenerously@warmmail*_turn_up_the_heat_to_reply*.com> wrote in
message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

NOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Whinges about lack of seperated facilities

"Cycling and traffic don't mix"

"I say don't do it, it's far too dangerous"

Aaaaarghgrhgrhgrhgrhrghrgrhgrhgrhrgrhrgh.

The man is a twunt in this respect.

Cheers, helen s

Outcome was inevitable as you said. 99 percent of viewers of this tosh
will be happy that their prejudices have been confirmed. Jon Snow
agreeing that cycling is dangerous in cities is just what their viewers
woud want to hear. 'he knows what he's talking about... etc'
The thing is that the average speed of traffic in cities is now very
low and will continue to fall until total car saturation is reached.
Biggest danger is probably getting hit by a door as passengers leave
their cars to continue ahead on foot.

David

Quoted message said:

Well it was indeed the usual whinge-fest with nothing approaching
intelligent debate. One expected this rock-bottom level from Richard
Madeley and Quentin Wilson, but Jon Snow should be ashmaed of himself.
He admitted to telling people not to take up cycling as it's "too
dangerous out there" and for wanting cycling facilities to keep
cyclists totally separate from vehicles. Twunt!

And did you see his tie and socks? So bad I kind of admire him.

There was some good there, but spoilt by a bizarre 'oooh, it's too
dangerous' mentality. Strangely, no mention of training that's available
or anything useful like that.

Email if you want a copy of the video <brainwave> or just the audio
</brainwave> (it's almost worth the extra download of video just for his
tie + socks thobut).

[1] Well, in theory anyway.[2]

[2] No, I don't know what this footnote refers to either.

"Mark Thompson"
<pleasegivegenerously@warmmail*_turn_up_the_heat_to_reply*.com> wrote in
message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

NOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Whinges about lack of seperated facilities

"Cycling and traffic don't mix"

"I say don't do it, it's far too dangerous"

John Snow did less for cycling than Quentin Wilson.

JS: "Cars shouldn't be allowed into London". Who are you trying to please
with that one John?

QW: "I recorded a program where I rode around London for two days, I really
enjoyed it." That's great, pro-active and positive.

All in all, not much came out of this, except I'll be looking out for this
program with QW. No mention of possibly re-phasing the lights to be in the
favour of cyclists? Well, that's something I'd like to see. The London
Bikeathon is a prime example of bad phasing of lights. *Everybody* jumps the
lights en-masse which proves there is something fundamentally wrong.

elyob said:

No mention of possibly re-phasing the lights
to be in the favour of cyclists?

Care to elaborate on that? how rephased?

pk

"p.k." <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

elyob said:

No mention of possibly re-phasing the lights
to be in the favour of cyclists?

Care to elaborate on that? how rephased?

Well, as I say, I feel the lights should be timed so that after leaving one
set of traffic lights, if travelling at average cycling speed (or preferred
london traffic speed), then the lights should already be on green. On the
London bikeathon all the lights were so badly timed in the city. It was
pretty much a complete stop every 200 yards. Pretty much all the cyclists
gave up on the lights.

wafflycat came up with the following;:

Quoted message said:

Well it was indeed the usual whinge-fest with nothing approaching
intelligent debate. One expected this rock-bottom level from Richard
Madeley and Quentin Wilson, but Jon Snow should be ashmaed of himself. He
admitted to telling people not to take up cycling as it's "too dangerous
out there" and for wanting cycling facilities to keep cyclists totally
separate from vehicles. Twunt!

Why should he be ashamed of himself?

He's a cyclist, they are his beliefs about what will make cycling safer for
him, so what's wrong with airing his views?

Just 'cos they're different to what you want doesn't mean they're wrong.

--
Paul ...
(8(|) Homer Rules ..... Doh !!!

Cyclists are [censored]. Motorists are [censored] too. They have something in common and that is that they're both groups of people. Do motorists think that if they rode a bike to work they'd be angels and have nothing but respect for the Highway Code? I think if you asked one that question they would be staggerred at the suggestion that they should stoop so low as to ride a child's toy to work.

"Paul - [censored]" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Why should he be ashamed of himself?

He's a cyclist, they are his beliefs about what will make cycling safer
for him, so what's wrong with airing his views?

Just 'cos they're different to what you want doesn't mean they're wrong.

He should be ashamed of himself for giving the erronous view that cycling is
such a dangerous activity that people should be dissuaded from taking it up.
Cycling is *not* like that! He *is* wrong.

Cheers, helen s

elyob said:

"p.k." <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

elyob said:

No mention of possibly re-phasing the lights
to be in the favour of cyclists?

Care to elaborate on that? how rephased?

Well, as I say, I feel the lights should be timed so that after
leaving one set of traffic lights, if travelling at average cycling
speed (or preferred london traffic speed), then the lights should
already be on green. On the London bikeathon all the lights were so
badly timed in the city. It was pretty much a complete stop every 200
yards. Pretty much all the cyclists gave up on the lights.

any reports from where that has been done (apart from the rolling green ligh
show posted a wile ago)

pk

wafflycat said:

He should be ashamed of himself for giving the erronous view that cycling is
such a dangerous activity that people should be dissuaded from taking it up.
Cycling is *not* like that! He *is* wrong.

Cheers, helen s

Maybe cycling in London in rush hour is?

I drive racing cars and have done for years and if you were to ask me how many times I have nearly been killed (I dont just mean had near misses which would have hurt a bit) I would say one serious maybe two. Both were on my bike! Not to mention that the only time I have been in hospital as an adult was when I had a cycling accident. Although there was a time a few years ago when a Formula Ford wheel flew past my head by a couple of foot in a complete blur because the car in front had smashed into a wall and the wheel came off! That was pretty close too!

"p.k." <[email hidden]> wrote in message >

Quoted message said:

any reports from where that has been done (apart from the rolling green
ligh show posted a wile ago)

No, it's just something I thought about that day. The speed of cyclists is
about the average speed of traffic in London. If drivers know that cyclists
are travelling at an optimum speed, they won't get the red rag syndrome and
zip for the lights, and overly fast cyclists will slow down a bit. It's just
London City that I thought this would work (or other very built up places
e.g. Birmingham etc). Of course, it was just a daydream thesis, and
absolutely no science involved.

"wafflycat" <w*a*ff£y£cat*@£btco*nn£ect.com> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Paul - [censored]" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Why should he be ashamed of himself?

He's a cyclist, they are his beliefs about what will make cycling safer
for him, so what's wrong with airing his views?

Just 'cos they're different to what you want doesn't mean they're wrong.

He should be ashamed of himself for giving the erronous view that cycling
is such a dangerous activity that people should be dissuaded from taking
it up. Cycling is *not* like that! He *is* wrong.

London City cycling is dangerous if you don't know what you're doing. If
someone said to me "I want to take up cycling, I want to cycle into the City
every day", I would recommend that they take some time getting used to the
bike away from the traffic, I'd consider recommending that they take some
tutoring. The most important advice I'd give is to know your route before
you start the regular ride.

So, in a way he is correct, but didn't put it across in a great way. I gave
one person the advice to use the off-road path in Richmond Park as it is
traffic free. She thought it was a great idea, as she was too worried about
traffic. Turns out she was too worried about exercise.

wafflycat came up with the following;:

Quoted message said:

"Paul - [censored]" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Why should he be ashamed of himself?

He's a cyclist, they are his beliefs about what will make cycling safer
for him, so what's wrong with airing his views?

Just 'cos they're different to what you want doesn't mean they're wrong.

He should be ashamed of himself for giving the erronous view that cycling
is such a dangerous activity that people should be dissuaded from taking
it up. Cycling is *not* like that! He *is* wrong.

Maybe he thinks you should be ashamed of yourself for not thinking that
cycling is dangerous. His frame of reference, London during rush hour, is
completely different to yours, so for him and probably many others like him,
it may well be very dangerous.

I agree that cycling where I, and probably you, live isn't inherently
dangerous, indeed I believe cycling anywhere to be extremely beneficial to
health, but I suggest that if I had to commute in London I'd maybe think
differently.

None of this means he is wrong or that he should be ashamed for having a
belief, no matter what you can prove or think to the contrary.

ISTM that in this programme the 'petrol head' was more clued up on cycling
than the cyclist ... 😉

--
Paul ...
(8(|) Homer Rules ..... Doh !!!

p.k. said:

elyob said:

"p.k." <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

elyob wrote:

>No mention of possibly re-phasing the lights
>to be in the favour of cyclists?

Care to elaborate on that? how rephased?

Well, as I say, I feel the lights should be timed so that after
leaving one set of traffic lights, if travelling at average cycling
speed (or preferred london traffic speed), then the lights should
already be on green. On the London bikeathon all the lights were so
badly timed in the city. It was pretty much a complete stop every 200
yards. Pretty much all the cyclists gave up on the lights.

any reports from where that has been done (apart from the rolling green ligh
show posted a wile ago)

pk

In beach road melbourne (a well know training venue that you will see in
the ITT at the Commonwealth Games they made a big fuss out of setting
the lights to suit cyclists.

Alas they seem to have set them to suit Lance on a particulary good day,
if you can average well over 40 kph they are mostly green

Dave

elyob said:

"wafflycat" <w*a*ff£y£cat*@£btco*nn£ect.com> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Paul - [censored]" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Why should he be ashamed of himself?

He's a cyclist, they are his beliefs about what will make cycling safer
for him, so what's wrong with airing his views?

Just 'cos they're different to what you want doesn't mean they're wrong.

He should be ashamed of himself for giving the erronous view that cycling
is such a dangerous activity that people should be dissuaded from taking
it up. Cycling is *not* like that! He *is* wrong.

London City cycling is dangerous if you don't know what you're doing. If
someone said to me "I want to take up cycling, I want to cycle into the City
every day", I would recommend that they take some time getting used to the
bike away from the traffic, I'd consider recommending that they take some
tutoring. The most important advice I'd give is to know your route before
you start the regular ride.

And here's another thing not to do:-
http://www.channel4.com/news/content/news-storypage.jsp?id=1174251

Lawyer killed as she 'couldn't hear lorry'

This follows on a couple of discussions in this group over the last 6
months. Personally, after listening to the "News Quiz", or, maybe, "I'm
sorry I haven't a clue", for a couple of rides home, I decided that it
was not a good idea, even if I were to die laughing.