FLU

On 2017-11-27 11:55, jbeattie wrote:
On Monday, November 27, 2017 at 9:38:12 AM UTC-8, Joerg wrote:
On 2017-11-26 16:08, John B. wrote:
On Sun, 26 Nov 2017 08:07:27 -0800, Joerg
wrote:

On 2017-11-26 07:18, AMuzi wrote:
On 11/25/2017 3:05 PM, Joerg wrote:
On 2017-11-25 12:51, wrote:
On Saturday, November 25, 2017 at 1:48:06 PM UTC-7,
wrote:
the foil joke may prevent you from arranging with/into
your environment

try this ... if foil was a component then why not ....
?

J this is an older German architectural/psych concept:
terracotta buildings are healthier than steel reinforced
concrete ...a much larger off the ground scale

I cannot locate current info on the net


Steel re-enforced in most cases means some big residential
highrise in a congested area. No wonder that those people
are or feel less healthy. I have never understood the
desire of city folk to cram together like sardines in a
can.


Try an intro Anthropology book some time. Before The Inter
Webs, close proximity promoted exchange of ideas and
specialization of effort. Still does to some extent.


It does, though specialization is not always a good thing. It
results, for example, in people who can't even fix a flat.
Their tool of fixing just about anything is the yellow pages.

As for health, dense living results in lot of civilization
diseases, higher stress levels and nowadays lung diseases
because of pollution. Probably also more cancer. Just about
every time I reach the top of the last hill to ride into the
Sacramento Valley I see that brownish smog line and I am
thankful not to have to live down there. Other times I can
literally smell it.

I'm not so sure about the higher stress levels. I grew in a
rural village in New England and have lived in cities like Miami
Fl, Tokyo, Japan, Jakarta Indonesia and Bangkok Thailand and to
be frank I have never felt any stress from living in cities.


Such stress is often subconscious and not openly felt but it's
there. Honking, screeching tires, hustle and bustle, police sirens,
general traffic noise in the city ... versus tranquility, bird
chirping, gentle leaf rustling, rooster crowing in the country. It
has been studied scientifically many times.

http://www.nature.com/news/2011/1106...l/474429a.html

Population pressures can cause stress, but remote, sparsely populated
areas can be stressful, too, and some places are simply alienating --
socially and visually.


Why visually? While other people look at the bland outer walls of the
next high-rises I look at vistas like this:

http://www.analogconsultants.com/ng/bike/SouthFork1.JPG

Socially, yes, if someone has problems in that domain they should not
live out in the country. I am quite happy with the number of friends I
have here and also consider friendship with animals to be very
rewarding. On my last ride I spent around 1/2h with horses. When they
see my helmet bobbing in the distance they start coming. Even some wild
animals are quite social. Deer, foxes, birds. After a while they
recognize people they see a lot and behave quite friendly. Especially if
one makes the time for them.

In the city people honk if you stop "needlessly". Even cyclists have
hollered "Don't block the path!" when I dared to pet a dog. They
obviously felt inconvenienced to move the handlebar a few milli-degrees
to ride around us. I once inadvertently blocked a singletrack because a
horse wanted a nose rub. Another rider came up from behind, hopped off
and gave the next horse a nose rub. Then we talked about trails and
stuff for 15 minutes. That's what I call country living.


And there are dangers of living in a truly remote area. It is like
skiing out of bounds. If you get hurt, you better have a beacon and
an evacuation strategy.


Very aware of that. This is why there are rocky downhill stretches that
I walk down when I ride alone. So far I mostly have to because people
consider MTB rides longer than 20mi or road bike ride of more than 35mi
"crazy". I'll also have to get a portable 2m radio because cell phones
don't work well out there.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

On Monday, November 27, 2017 at 1:32:12 PM UTC-8, Joerg wrote:
On 2017-11-27 11:55, jbeattie wrote:
On Monday, November 27, 2017 at 9:38:12 AM UTC-8, Joerg wrote:
On 2017-11-26 16:08, John B. wrote:
On Sun, 26 Nov 2017 08:07:27 -0800, Joerg
wrote:

On 2017-11-26 07:18, AMuzi wrote:
On 11/25/2017 3:05 PM, Joerg wrote:
On 2017-11-25 12:51, wrote:
On Saturday, November 25, 2017 at 1:48:06 PM UTC-7,
wrote:
the foil joke may prevent you from arranging with/into
your environment

try this ... if foil was a component then why not ....
?

J this is an older German architectural/psych concept:
terracotta buildings are healthier than steel reinforced
concrete ...a much larger off the ground scale

I cannot locate current info on the net


Steel re-enforced in most cases means some big residential
highrise in a congested area. No wonder that those people
are or feel less healthy. I have never understood the
desire of city folk to cram together like sardines in a
can.


Try an intro Anthropology book some time. Before The Inter
Webs, close proximity promoted exchange of ideas and
specialization of effort. Still does to some extent.


It does, though specialization is not always a good thing. It
results, for example, in people who can't even fix a flat.
Their tool of fixing just about anything is the yellow pages.

As for health, dense living results in lot of civilization
diseases, higher stress levels and nowadays lung diseases
because of pollution. Probably also more cancer. Just about
every time I reach the top of the last hill to ride into the
Sacramento Valley I see that brownish smog line and I am
thankful not to have to live down there. Other times I can
literally smell it.

I'm not so sure about the higher stress levels. I grew in a
rural village in New England and have lived in cities like Miami
Fl, Tokyo, Japan, Jakarta Indonesia and Bangkok Thailand and to
be frank I have never felt any stress from living in cities.


Such stress is often subconscious and not openly felt but it's
there. Honking, screeching tires, hustle and bustle, police sirens,
general traffic noise in the city ... versus tranquility, bird
chirping, gentle leaf rustling, rooster crowing in the country. It
has been studied scientifically many times.

http://www.nature.com/news/2011/1106...l/474429a.html

Population pressures can cause stress, but remote, sparsely populated
areas can be stressful, too, and some places are simply alienating --
socially and visually.


Why visually? While other people look at the bland outer walls of the
next high-rises I look at vistas like this:

http://www.analogconsultants.com/ng/bike/SouthFork1.JPG


Boring brown foothills. I was raised in an area like that. The action is up the road in the Sierra -- which are stunning.

I look at vistas like this, which is shot from my commute route: https://multco.us/sites/default/file...?itok=iYuM17n-

I work in the tall white building and have an unobstructed view of Mt. Hood.. I can jump on my bike and go he http://images.fineartamerica.com/ima...t-jon-ares.jpg 70 miles out and back. Longer gravel ride: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-4Zj5JTj6uk

In fact, I can go snow skiing, bike riding, hiking, windsurfing, brew-pubbing, distillery hopping, etc., etc. all in one summer day (theoretically, if I had the energy). http://www.spokesman.com/stories/201...d-access-t/#/3

Timberline is about an hour and a half by car from my loathsome urban home.

Socially, yes, if someone has problems in that domain they should not
live out in the country. I am quite happy with the number of friends I
have here and also consider friendship with animals to be very
rewarding. On my last ride I spent around 1/2h with horses. When they
see my helmet bobbing in the distance they start coming. Even some wild
animals are quite social. Deer, foxes, birds. After a while they
recognize people they see a lot and behave quite friendly. Especially if
one makes the time for them.

Dear St. Francis, I'm not talking about being lonely and communing with the animals. I'm talking about living in a cow-town east of the Cascades where being from Portland makes me a presumptive tree-hugging, faggot communist.. I've been to tiny towns in Idaho and Montana where the locals were downright hostile to cyclists. If you moved to Hurricane, you would never quite fit into the dominant culture -- unless you convert.


In the city people honk if you stop "needlessly". Even cyclists have
hollered "Don't block the path!" when I dared to pet a dog. They
obviously felt inconvenienced to move the handlebar a few milli-degrees
to ride around us. I once inadvertently blocked a singletrack because a
horse wanted a nose rub. Another rider came up from behind, hopped off
and gave the next horse a nose rub. Then we talked about trails and
stuff for 15 minutes. That's what I call country living.

I get a flat tire, and I have fifty people ask me if I need help -- which does get tiring. And yes, there is nasty city traffic and honking motor vehicles. It's a big city, and that is why I am moving back to Portland in 1978 -- or Los Gatos in 1968. I see no other options than time travel.

BTW, I walk on a horse trail and don't find it particularly enjoyable. He https://tinyurl.com/y7sqb7j5 That is about a mile from my godless, urban wasteland of a home. My wife and I do a lot of walking around Tryon Creek. I bet you don't have a little suspension bridge in your back yard! http://www.oregonhikers.org/w/images...leyBridge1.jpg



And there are dangers of living in a truly remote area. It is like
skiing out of bounds. If you get hurt, you better have a beacon and
an evacuation strategy.


Very aware of that. This is why there are rocky downhill stretches that
I walk down when I ride alone. So far I mostly have to because people
consider MTB rides longer than 20mi or road bike ride of more than 35mi
"crazy". I'll also have to get a portable 2m radio because cell phones
don't work well out there.

You must hang with a dopey cohort. Around here, nobody marvels at a 35 mile road ride. Half the city rides CX. https://farm7.staticflickr.com/6171/...538f04fd1d.jpg
http://www.cxmagazine.com/racers-num...endance-record

-- Jay Beattie.

On Monday, November 27, 2017 at 4:16:23 PM UTC-5, Joerg wrote:
On 2017-11-27 12:15, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On Monday, November 27, 2017 at 10:25:02 AM UTC-5, Joerg wrote:
On 2017-11-26 18:57, Frank Krygowski wrote:

Another false dichotomy. Riding on the road does not mean
ingesting significant pollution. Several studies have shown that
even in city traffic, cyclists ingest less pollution than motor
vehicle operators. Other studies have shown that bicycle
commuters live far longer than those commuting by other means.


Ah yes, you have a magic energy shield around you so the fumes
part right in front of your face. Phhht. I can literally smell just
about any Diesel that comes by.

Cars have HEPA filters and a cocoon-like innard in whcih the
operator resideth, bicycles ... don't.


IOW, "Don't bother me with scientific studies. My own imagination is
infallible."


That goes for you. When have you last seen a bicycle with a HEPA filter?
Do you know what a HEPA filter is?


Yes I do, Joerg. I worked as a plant engineer, then I was in charge of several labs at the university. What you don't seem to understand is that smelling a diesel is not equivalent to ingesting a significant amount of pollution. They are identical only in your imagination.

One of your biggest logical problems is equating your imagination with actual fact. You stumble over that time and again.


Besides, almost all of my riding involves relatively little
traffic even though I rarely use bike paths. I enjoy riding quiet
roads, where I may be passed by fewer than 20 cars per hour. But
even on utility trips in the city or its suburbs, I can usually
choose quieter streets. On our runs to the grocery store, we
choose a route that gives us six miles round trip. We'll
typically be passed by only a dozen cars.


Good luck trying that where a metropolis is 30mi or closer. I
sometimes have to ride during rush our and then it's almost bumper
to bumper.

Oh dear, you poor baby! Imagine! Sometimes having to ride in rush
hour!

But I'm sure you've convinced those in power to add a completely
separate bike facility along all of your routes, right? After all,
you seem to think that's the only solution to your problem.


It is the only environmentally friendly one. The other solution is to
use the car.

Bull****. You completely ignore or discount the idea of riding a bike on a normal street or road, something that most of us here probably do almost every day. That is more environmentally friendly than wasting resources to pave more of the earth. It has the added benefit of allowing you to ride to almost any practical destination, not just those along a kiddie path.

Oh - and I'm sure your completely separate bike paths will be
hermetically sealed, and given their own supply of filtered and
purified air, right? It wouldn't do to have them downwind from some
cars. One can't be too careful!


The one I took on Friday does come close to roads and even ... gasp
... Highway 50 at one spot where you can hear faint vroom vroom sounds.
Smells? Pine needle scent, foliage, earth, and oo, the occasionally
horse poop. I rather smell horse poop than the soot from a big Diesel.
You might be so city-addicted that you don't notice the difference but I
sure do.

Ah, so you don't demand a bike path sealed against pollution? If some separation is sufficient, is that because the amount of pollution is diluted by distance and is below some limit?

Shall we pursue this? What is the limit, and how should we determine it?

My contention is that riding fairly quiet streets (like today's ten miles to the credit union, plus my ride to the post office) puts one way below any reasonable limit of pollution exposure.

And as evidence, I'll link to easily available articles showing that bike commuting increases longevity. That's true even in places where there are few bike facilities, and in places where those on the bike facilities can smell the nearby diesel fumes. The Netherlands really doesn't seal off its bike paths, you know.

https://www.bicycling.com/training/f...ride-your-life

http://time.com/4748377/commute-biki...ing-longevity/

http://mentalfloss.com/article/79211...cy-study-finds

Those articles refer to three separate studies in three different locations, all with the same general result - a result that disagrees with your fearful imagination. They indicate that riding a bike in very normal city environments
is not detrimental to your health. Instead, it's highly beneficial.

Sorry, Joerg. I chose instead to learn to ride on the roads, and
I do so in perfect comfort and safety. You should try that.
https://abea.bike/ Even you can learn to do it.


I know how to ride.

And there's one of bicycling's biggest problems. Everyone over 12
thinks "I know how to ride." They can't imagine there's anything they
don't already know, so they absolutely refuse to consider learning
anything. It's Dunning-Kruger in full force.


Of course, you will never accept anyone who has even a slightly
different opinion than you do. Doesn't matter to me.


I have accepted reasonable input and changed my views on many issues, including on issues discussed in this forum. When I'm presented with evidence, I evaluate it and compare it with other evidence. Occasionally I've found that I was wrong.

What I don't accept are opinions whose source are just a paranoid's imagination.

- Frank Krygowski

On Mon, 27 Nov 2017 13:16:19 -0800, Joerg
wrote:

On 2017-11-27 12:15, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On Monday, November 27, 2017 at 10:25:02 AM UTC-5, Joerg wrote:
On 2017-11-26 18:57, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 11/26/2017 12:29 PM, Joerg wrote:
On 2017-11-26 09:16, AMuzi wrote:


This is a false dichotomy in that all of it can be true and
likely is. Choice is good, neither city nor rural life being
perfect and humans being by their nature a diverse lot.


Though as humans we need to recognize when we are damaging our
bodies and the denser the area the more that will happen. This
is also why I'll never understand people who say "Away with
cycle paths, bicycles belong on the road". I find that, sorry
to say, stupid. Why would anyone in their right mind want to
travel alongside noisy and polluting combustion engines buzzing
by?

Another false dichotomy. Riding on the road does not mean
ingesting significant pollution. Several studies have shown that
even in city traffic, cyclists ingest less pollution than motor
vehicle operators. Other studies have shown that bicycle
commuters live far longer than those commuting by other means.


Ah yes, you have a magic energy shield around you so the fumes
part right in front of your face. Phhht. I can literally smell just
about any Diesel that comes by.

Cars have HEPA filters and a cocoon-like innard in whcih the
operator resideth, bicycles ... don't.


IOW, "Don't bother me with scientific studies. My own imagination is
infallible."


That goes for you. When have you last seen a bicycle with a HEPA filter?
Do you know what a HEPA filter is?


Besides, almost all of my riding involves relatively little
traffic even though I rarely use bike paths. I enjoy riding quiet
roads, where I may be passed by fewer than 20 cars per hour. But
even on utility trips in the city or its suburbs, I can usually
choose quieter streets. On our runs to the grocery store, we
choose a route that gives us six miles round trip. We'll
typically be passed by only a dozen cars.


Good luck trying that where a metropolis is 30mi or closer. I
sometimes have to ride during rush our and then it's almost bumper
to bumper.

Oh dear, you poor baby! Imagine! Sometimes having to ride in rush
hour!

But I'm sure you've convinced those in power to add a completely
separate bike facility along all of your routes, right? After all,
you seem to think that's the only solution to your problem.


It is the only environmentally friendly one. The other solution is to
use the car.


Oh - and I'm sure your completely separate bike paths will be
hermetically sealed, and given their own supply of filtered and
purified air, right? It wouldn't do to have them downwind from some
cars. One can't be too careful!


The one I took on Friday does come close to roads and even ... gasp
... Highway 50 at one spot where you can hear faint vroom vroom sounds.
Smells? Pine needle scent, foliage, earth, and oo, the occasionally
horse poop. I rather smell horse poop than the soot from a big Diesel.
You might be so city-addicted that you don't notice the difference but I
sure do.


Quite the opposite I would say. and, yes, I grew up in a rural
environment so I am familiar with all the smells that exist "out in
the country". But to those who actually reside in that environment
don't even notice them, they are part of the normal atmosphere.

It is only the city slickers who comment on "Oh... Smell the pine
trees. Of course there is an odor of pine trees, there ought to be as
all you can see is pine trees for miles around.

Your comment about smelling "horse poop" is a dead giveaway. The
correct term is "horse manure" and it is a normal part of the rural
atmosphere, or at least the normal rural atmosphere in areas where
horses are kept. In other areas it might be cow manure or chicken
manure and is a perfectly normal part of the environment where those
critters are raised.

You remind me of the city folk that pay extra to buy the "organic"
vegetables that are grown in a chemical free environment... so you can
be sure that none of those nasty nitrogen rich chemicals are never,
never used.

What you do to maintain the chemicals necessary to support plant life
is spread "natural" fertilizers... i.e. manure on the farm land.

So (to be a bit vulgar) first you grow the veggies in **** and then
you charge the city folks extra for doing so :-)
--
Cheers,

John B.

On Monday, November 27, 2017 at 5:42:37 PM UTC-5, jbeattie wrote:
Snipped
Boring brown foothills. I was raised in an area like that. The action is up the road in the Sierra -- which are stunning.

I look at vistas like this, which is shot from my commute route: https://multco.us/sites/default/file...?itok=iYuM17n-

I work in the tall white building and have an unobstructed view of Mt. Hood. I can jump on my bike and go he http://images.fineartamerica.com/ima...t-jon-ares.jpg 70 miles out and back. Longer gravel ride: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-4Zj5JTj6uk

In fact, I can go snow skiing, bike riding, hiking, windsurfing, brew-pubbing, distillery hopping, etc., etc. all in one summer day (theoretically, if I had the energy). http://www.spokesman.com/stories/201...d-access-t/#/3

Timberline is about an hour and a half by car from my loathsome urban home.

Snipped

But you must rememberthat Joerg demands/needs access to bre-pubs, pubs or other places he can get booze.

Joerg's BS is so high you can probably fertilize the entire wheat belt with it.

Cheers

On Mon, 27 Nov 2017 09:38:07 -0800, Joerg
wrote:

On 2017-11-26 16:08, John B. wrote:
On Sun, 26 Nov 2017 08:07:27 -0800, Joerg
wrote:

On 2017-11-26 07:18, AMuzi wrote:
On 11/25/2017 3:05 PM, Joerg wrote:
On 2017-11-25 12:51, wrote:
On Saturday, November 25, 2017 at 1:48:06 PM UTC-7,

wrote:
the foil joke may prevent you from arranging with/into your
environment

try this ... if foil was a component then why not .... ?

J this is an older German architectural/psych concept:
terracotta
buildings are healthier than steel reinforced concrete
...a much
larger off the ground scale

I cannot locate current info on the net


Steel re-enforced in most cases means some big residential
highrise in a congested area. No wonder that those people
are or feel less healthy. I have never understood the desire
of city folk to cram together like sardines in a can.


Try an intro Anthropology book some time.
Before The Inter Webs, close proximity promoted exchange of ideas and
specialization of effort. Still does to some extent.


It does, though specialization is not always a good thing. It results,
for example, in people who can't even fix a flat. Their tool of fixing
just about anything is the yellow pages.

As for health, dense living results in lot of civilization diseases,
higher stress levels and nowadays lung diseases because of pollution.
Probably also more cancer. Just about every time I reach the top of the
last hill to ride into the Sacramento Valley I see that brownish smog
line and I am thankful not to have to live down there. Other times I can
literally smell it.

I'm not so sure about the higher stress levels. I grew in a rural
village in New England and have lived in cities like Miami Fl, Tokyo,
Japan, Jakarta Indonesia and Bangkok Thailand and to be frank I have
never felt any stress from living in cities.


Such stress is often subconscious and not openly felt but it's there.
Honking, screeching tires, hustle and bustle, police sirens, general
traffic noise in the city ... versus tranquility, bird chirping, gentle
leaf rustling, rooster crowing in the country. It has been studied
scientifically many times.


Quite obviously you have never really lived in the country. Honking,
screeching, indeed.

What you have in the country is roosters that get up before daylight
to proclaim their rights to the big manure pile that they claim as
their fief. The cows bellowing to be milked... Good Lord, the
pressures! If you do go to town you have the be careful to be back for
milking time. No sleeping in on weekends the cows got to be milked and
the chickens fed and the eggs gathered. No two weeks vacation either,
you got to get the plowing done and the garden in or there won't be
anything to eat next winter.

And sure studies are made of the pressures of city life... All you
need to do is write up a good proposal and get the grant and away you
go. A government funded study. We get them over here. Every few years
you see an article in the Bangkok newspaper about someone that got yet
another grant to study "Prostitution in Thailand". So ignoring the
fact that prostitution have been studied innumerable times in the past
some bloke gets a grant to study them once again.
--
Cheers,

John B.

On 11/27/2017 6:43 PM, John B. wrote:
On Mon, 27 Nov 2017 09:38:07 -0800, Joerg
wrote:

On 2017-11-26 16:08, John B. wrote:
On Sun, 26 Nov 2017 08:07:27 -0800, Joerg
wrote:

On 2017-11-26 07:18, AMuzi wrote:
On 11/25/2017 3:05 PM, Joerg wrote:
On 2017-11-25 12:51, wrote:
On Saturday, November 25, 2017 at 1:48:06 PM UTC-7,

wrote:
the foil joke may prevent you from arranging with/into your
environment

try this ... if foil was a component then why not .... ?

J this is an older German architectural/psych concept:
terracotta
buildings are healthier than steel reinforced concrete
...a much
larger off the ground scale

I cannot locate current info on the net


Steel re-enforced in most cases means some big residential
highrise in a congested area. No wonder that those people
are or feel less healthy. I have never understood the desire
of city folk to cram together like sardines in a can.


Try an intro Anthropology book some time.
Before The Inter Webs, close proximity promoted exchange of ideas and
specialization of effort. Still does to some extent.


It does, though specialization is not always a good thing. It results,
for example, in people who can't even fix a flat. Their tool of fixing
just about anything is the yellow pages.

As for health, dense living results in lot of civilization diseases,
higher stress levels and nowadays lung diseases because of pollution.
Probably also more cancer. Just about every time I reach the top of the
last hill to ride into the Sacramento Valley I see that brownish smog
line and I am thankful not to have to live down there. Other times I can
literally smell it.

I'm not so sure about the higher stress levels. I grew in a rural
village in New England and have lived in cities like Miami Fl, Tokyo,
Japan, Jakarta Indonesia and Bangkok Thailand and to be frank I have
never felt any stress from living in cities.


Such stress is often subconscious and not openly felt but it's there.
Honking, screeching tires, hustle and bustle, police sirens, general
traffic noise in the city ... versus tranquility, bird chirping, gentle
leaf rustling, rooster crowing in the country. It has been studied
scientifically many times.


Quite obviously you have never really lived in the country. Honking,
screeching, indeed.

What you have in the country is roosters that get up before daylight
to proclaim their rights to the big manure pile that they claim as
their fief. The cows bellowing to be milked... Good Lord, the
pressures! If you do go to town you have the be careful to be back for
milking time. No sleeping in on weekends the cows got to be milked and
the chickens fed and the eggs gathered. No two weeks vacation either,
you got to get the plowing done and the garden in or there won't be
anything to eat next winter.

And sure studies are made of the pressures of city life... All you
need to do is write up a good proposal and get the grant and away you
go. A government funded study. We get them over here. Every few years
you see an article in the Bangkok newspaper about someone that got yet
another grant to study "Prostitution in Thailand". So ignoring the
fact that prostitution have been studied innumerable times in the past
some bloke gets a grant to study them once again.
--
Cheers,

John B.


Grant? I always just paid up and left.

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On 11/27/2017 6:24 PM, Joerg wrote:
On 2017-11-27 14:42, jbeattie wrote:
On November 27, 2017, Joerg wrote:
On 2017-11-27 11:55, jbeattie wrote:
On November 27, 2017, Joerg wrote:
On 2017-11-26 16:08, John B. wrote:
On 26 Nov 2017, Joerg wrote:
On 2017-11-26 07:18, AMuzi wrote:
On 11/25/2017 3:05 PM, Joerg wrote:
On 2017-11-25 12:51, wrote:
On November 25, 2017, wrote:

-snip the whole damned lot of it-

What a lot of people do not realize is that amassing wealth
will not protect them much from old-age ailments. Some day
they retire and then find out soon after that they can't
ride anymore. Better to have a not so nice bike and ... ride.


+1
Finally a point with which I heartily agree.

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On Mon, 27 Nov 2017 13:32:08 -0800, Joerg
wrote:

On 2017-11-27 11:55, jbeattie wrote:
On Monday, November 27, 2017 at 9:38:12 AM UTC-8, Joerg wrote:
On 2017-11-26 16:08, John B. wrote:
On Sun, 26 Nov 2017 08:07:27 -0800, Joerg
wrote:

On 2017-11-26 07:18, AMuzi wrote:
On 11/25/2017 3:05 PM, Joerg wrote:
On 2017-11-25 12:51, wrote:
On Saturday, November 25, 2017 at 1:48:06 PM UTC-7,
wrote:
the foil joke may prevent you from arranging with/into
your environment

try this ... if foil was a component then why not ....
?

J this is an older German architectural/psych concept:
terracotta buildings are healthier than steel reinforced
concrete ...a much larger off the ground scale

I cannot locate current info on the net


Steel re-enforced in most cases means some big residential
highrise in a congested area. No wonder that those people
are or feel less healthy. I have never understood the
desire of city folk to cram together like sardines in a
can.


Try an intro Anthropology book some time. Before The Inter
Webs, close proximity promoted exchange of ideas and
specialization of effort. Still does to some extent.


It does, though specialization is not always a good thing. It
results, for example, in people who can't even fix a flat.
Their tool of fixing just about anything is the yellow pages.

As for health, dense living results in lot of civilization
diseases, higher stress levels and nowadays lung diseases
because of pollution. Probably also more cancer. Just about
every time I reach the top of the last hill to ride into the
Sacramento Valley I see that brownish smog line and I am
thankful not to have to live down there. Other times I can
literally smell it.

I'm not so sure about the higher stress levels. I grew in a
rural village in New England and have lived in cities like Miami
Fl, Tokyo, Japan, Jakarta Indonesia and Bangkok Thailand and to
be frank I have never felt any stress from living in cities.


Such stress is often subconscious and not openly felt but it's
there. Honking, screeching tires, hustle and bustle, police sirens,
general traffic noise in the city ... versus tranquility, bird
chirping, gentle leaf rustling, rooster crowing in the country. It
has been studied scientifically many times.

http://www.nature.com/news/2011/1106...l/474429a.html

Population pressures can cause stress, but remote, sparsely populated
areas can be stressful, too, and some places are simply alienating --
socially and visually.


Why visually? While other people look at the bland outer walls of the
next high-rises I look at vistas like this:

http://www.analogconsultants.com/ng/bike/SouthFork1.JPG

Socially, yes, if someone has problems in that domain they should not
live out in the country. I am quite happy with the number of friends I
have here and also consider friendship with animals to be very
rewarding. On my last ride I spent around 1/2h with horses. When they
see my helmet bobbing in the distance they start coming. Even some wild
animals are quite social. Deer, foxes, birds. After a while they
recognize people they see a lot and behave quite friendly. Especially if
one makes the time for them.

In the city people honk if you stop "needlessly". Even cyclists have
hollered "Don't block the path!" when I dared to pet a dog. They
obviously felt inconvenienced to move the handlebar a few milli-degrees
to ride around us. I once inadvertently blocked a singletrack because a
horse wanted a nose rub. Another rider came up from behind, hopped off
and gave the next horse a nose rub. Then we talked about trails and
stuff for 15 minutes. That's what I call country living.

But that isn't "country living" it is just another example of city
folk" talking about something they don't understand.

You stopped to rub a horse's nose when real country life is shoveling
the horse manure out of the horse's stall. Your socially inclined
foxes kill the chickens that are laying the eggs that you eat for
breakfast. Those friendly birds are arriving in flocks... to eat your
newly sown seeds.
--
Cheers,

John B.

On Mon, 27 Nov 2017 12:11:11 -0800 (PST), Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On Monday, November 27, 2017 at 10:15:34 AM UTC-5, Joerg wrote:
On 2017-11-26 18:46, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 11/26/2017 12:49 PM, Joerg wrote:
On 2017-11-26 09:48, wrote:
On Sunday, November 26, 2017 at 9:03:32 AM UTC-7, Joerg wrote:
On 2017-11-25 16:30, wrote:

goo.gl/CshRPR

assuming your superior healthy is an error ...


It isn't an error.


... around you people are not...

the 'satellite city' boom grew more high towers

I assume one n 2 stories are cheaper

nice photo couldn't find a view north of NYC

http://mossien.com/wp-content/upload...chester_NY.jpg



No ten horses would get me to live there.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

no no no the local pop's health. who gives a damn abt your health.


I do. If someone choses to smoke which rural folks often do that isn't
my problem, it's theirs.

If rural life is so wonderful, what drives those people to ruin their
lives by getting into their "long term substance abuse problems" that
you mentioned?


Faulty government rules (tell'em pot is "harmless", let's grab those
extra taxes!), peer pressure, sometimes boredom. None of this applies to
us or any of our neighbors.


FWIW: When I was about 30 years old I thought it would be wonderful to
live a rural life. I'm extremely glad that I chose otherwise.


100% opposite here. Same for my wife who grew up in a huge metropolis
and never ever wants to go back to that sort of living.

Well, you're certainly into dichotomies.

In reality, there's quite a spectrum of living or housing densities; and there are people who choose every condition on that spectrum, from hermits living in caves to city denizens living in 500 square foot efficiency apartments packed into skyscrapers. Each choice has its own benefits and detriments.

One problem with the most fashionable choice (which is a new development in some cornfield, within driving distance of city amenities) is that the choice is extremely dependent on transportation by car, and consumes resources very inefficiently. Yes, there is one hero in Cameron Park who does epic bike rides to avoid using his car. But for every bike hero who moves to such a place, there are hundreds of motorists who say "It's another half hour to my job and the grocery store, but I don't mind."

Then, once the community is established, developers spot the opportunity for a convenience store and gas station out at the highway. They'll run power lines and sewer out to that. The new sewer will trigger another housing development, which sprouts an entire plaza by the highway, which attracts more housing. And so it goes, an endless cycle of paving the rural landscape.

All this demands money to extend the infrastructure. It paves more ground to generate flash runoff from storms, increases the area the police must patrol, lengthens the routes of the school bus and trash pickup, etc. On a global scale, it's far less "green" than dense city living.

And it's all done so people can satisfy their atavistic pioneer urges - but ruin the atmosphere for the few that have always lived there.

Years ago, I came across a poster by Robert Crumb that summarized all this. It had about a dozen panels showing one intersection of roads as time marched on decade by decade. It started with a pretty rural scene with two dirt roads and a large shade tree. It progressed through "development" step by step, ending with a dingy scene with clotted car traffic in front of crumbling buildings with trash blowing. The caption, IIRC, was "What are we doing?"

And when you finally get the kids through collage they scamper off for
the city where the good jobs are :-)
--
Cheers,

John B.