dumbass LCC bike lane on Stratford High Street

[knocksofbeggarmen]

you've read the entire thread? Including the bit where I telephone the DfT for the numbers?

Perfect! Only by telephone is the truth divulged. No numbers are actually published otherwise.

You can link to the VERY NUMBERS THEMSELVES -if they exist.

 

[mjr]

Blimey. You really have bitten the bullet. Black is not only white, but the sparkliest most reflective sort of white. I'm sure you wouldn't resent linking to this, er, "evidence" right here.

What about https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3064866 ? ;-)

 

[knocksofbeggarmen]

What about https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3064866 ? ;-)

Yes, you can do that kind of study- or you can just compare injury rates in the Netherlands with those in the UK. Since bigger sample, more robust. Turns out it shows the same effect, but a hell of a lot more of it.

 

[dellzeqq]

It is extraordinary that you have CS7 confused with mass cycling- and I'm sure you have the figures to back up that "no contribution" claim. Surely.

yes I do. I sometimes take the bus, and it's not at all difficult to count the buses, estimate the passengers and count the cyclists between each bus. And there are always many more people on the buses than on bikes. Not that I'm complaining - fortyfive years ago it would have been just me riding up the Clapham Road and now it's a swirling crocodile of bikes of all sorts and sizes. That makes my heart sing, but it doesn't blind me to the facts.

 

[dellzeqq]

What about https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3064866 ? ;-)

read the thread. The calculation is subtle (and tendencious) but the result is the result

 

[mjr]

http://lcc.org.uk/articles/bow-to-s...-adopt-dutch-principles-for-cycling-provision

That seems to be a link saying they liked the look of the consultation. I don't know whether things changed, but anyway it's hardly LCC designing or taking ownership.

 

[knocksofbeggarmen]

Wow. Now 'no contribution' means

there are always many more people on the buses than on bikes

Insane.

 

[knocksofbeggarmen]

That seems to be a link saying they liked the look of the consultation. I don't know whether things changed, but anyway it's hardly LCC designing or taking ownership.

Quite. Some of the logic on this tread is hilarious.

 

[knocksofbeggarmen]

read the thread. The calculation is subtle (and tendencious) but the result is the result

Ha haha ha ha ha ha haha ha ha ha ha haha ha ha ha ha haha ha ha ha ha haha ha ha ha ha

 

[knocksofbeggarmen]

Oh dear, I fear I need to get subtle and tenacious about my dinner. So long folks.

 

[dellzeqq]

Wow. Now 'no contribution' means.

show me where I wrote 'no contribution'....

 

[dellzeqq]

I'm halfway to Sort...............

 

[mjr]

read the thread. The calculation is subtle (and tendencious) but the result is the result

I've read the first few pages (of 52!) and it's already contained the same sorry mistakes about MK as this thread, so why is its calculation going to be more accurate? Now this thread seems to suggest its using unpublished numbers. Can't we use published studies instead? I'll even cede that their conclusions are mixed and it's not conclusive.

 

[dellzeqq]

I've read the first few pages (of 52!) and it's already contained the same sorry mistakes about MK as this thread, so why is its calculation going to be more accurate? Now this thread seems to suggest its using unpublished numbers. Can't we use published studies instead? I'll even cede that their conclusions are mixed and it's not conclusive.

the reason I had to call the DfT is that they didn't then (and may still not) publish numbers for miles cycled in London.............

 

[mjr]

the reason I had to call the DfT is that they didn't then (and may still not) publish numbers for miles cycled in London.............

Is that for the same reason that the number of cycling trips isn't published for local authority wards, that it's regarded as unsound by the Office for National Statistics?