Cyclist at war!

Tom Keats wrote:
In article ,
Tom Sherman writes:
aka Jobst Brandt wrote:
Tom Keats wrote:

Then why do I keep meeting smarter people riding bicycles than
riding motorcycles?
Because we bicyclists have to read the minds of the motor vehicle
operators around us. We often have to do their thinking for them.
We know what they're gonna do before they know what they're gonna
do. Because what they're gonna do is gonna be the most detrimental
thing to us if we aren't heads-up about their brainless movements.
And besides, bicycles are often a more intelligent choice of
vehicle.
I think these two postings are examples of what causes trouble on many
roads. It is an elitist attitude of bicyclists who let car drivers
know how much smarter they are and how much more environmentally their
bicycle (recreation) is than driving a car. As I have often mentioned
here, I ride on many narrow, heavily traveled roads in the Santa Cruz
mountains and rarely have differences with car traffic, except when
with a rider who has the elitist bicyclist mentality.

I typically see less than a dozen cyclists per week while driving, and
typically pass less than 10 per month, so motorists being held up by
cyclists is hardly a common occurrence. Yet, the same anti-cyclist
attitude can be encountered. It has nothing to do with the behavior of
cyclists, and everything to do with people who grew up as privileged
spoiled brats who have to have their way (literally in this case).

"How dare you take your rightful share of the road!"

These are the same people who run red lights, jump their turn at 4-way
stops, pass on the shoulder in congested urban freeway traffic, tailgate
people in the right lane with their "brights" on instead of passing to
the left.

What may not be apparent to many self righteous bicyclists is that
their body language reveals their disdain for motorized traffic,
eliciting rude and often dangerous behavior in response. As for mind
reading, it doesn't take a seer to understand what the bicyclist out
in the traffic lane is trying to say about his motorized fellow human.

Relying on motorists to pass at a close distance is foolish,
^^^^^
ITYM "safe" distance?

No, Jobst has previously posted that he is fine with motorists (e.g.
London buses) passing cyclists at close distances. I do not agree with
leaving such a small margin for error.

--
Tom Sherman - 42.435731,-83.985007
If you are not a part of the solution, you are a part of the precipitate.

I'm off to tow a trailerload of laundry a mere 15 city blocks
to the laundromat, using my humble trailer and my humble
bike. Maybe do some grocery shopping on the return leg ....

If I'm elitist for not needing a pickup truck to do all that,
so be it.

=v= Clearly you live in one of the parts of [North] America that
Sarah Palin characterizes as anti-American. Danged eeleetist.*
_Jym_

__________________________________________________ ______________
* Note that True Blue Red Scare Americans pronounce that word
the same way as Dan Quayle. None of that unpatriotic accent
agile stuff for us!

and = Tom Sherman

Dude, real bicycles do NOT want bicycle ghetto lanes.
"BananaApe Boy" does NOT speak for cyclists.

=v= Neither does Tom Sherman.

"Bicycle lane" promoters are either misguided or
anti-cyclist.

=v= That statement represents an ideology, not a consensus.
Many "real" bicyclists quite reasonable hold other opinions.

Judging all bicyclists by Critical Mass is like judging
all motorcyclists by the handful of anti-social criminal
gang members.

=v= Absolute bull****. Tom Sherman's declaration of "criminal
gang member" status is contradicted very directly by a number
of court rulings. In the U.S., in fact, a Federal judge has in
fact ruled that "Participation in the Critical Mass bike ride
constitutes expressive association entitled to First Amendment
protection."
_Jym_

--
"There should be 1,000 of you out there, like in San Francisco."
-- Oakland Mayor (and now Attorney General) Jerry Brown

In article ,
Tom Sherman writes:

Relying on motorists to pass at a close distance is foolish,
^^^^^
ITYM "safe" distance?

No, Jobst has previously posted that he is fine with motorists (e.g.
London buses) passing cyclists at close distances. I do not agree with
leaving such a small margin for error.

At any rate, Jobst seems to have mistaken me as
one of the riders described in:
http://www.bicyclepaper.com/articles..._problem__dude

I suppose his misguided opinion of me and my riding
is ultimately mildly amusing.


cheers,
Tom

--
Nothing is safe from me.
I'm really at:
tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca

Jym Dyer wrote:
and = Tom Sherman

Dude, real bicycles do NOT want bicycle ghetto lanes.
"BananaApe Boy" does NOT speak for cyclists.

=v= Neither does Tom Sherman.

"Bicycle lane" promoters are either misguided or
anti-cyclist.

=v= That statement represents an ideology, not a consensus.
Many "real" bicyclists quite reasonable hold other opinions.

Judging all bicyclists by Critical Mass is like judging
all motorcyclists by the handful of anti-social criminal
gang members.

=v= Absolute bull****. Tom Sherman's declaration of "criminal
gang member" status is contradicted very directly by a number
of court rulings. In the U.S., in fact, a Federal judge has in
fact ruled that "Participation in the Critical Mass bike ride
constitutes expressive association entitled to First Amendment
protection."
_Jym_

In article ,
KingOfTheApes writes:
On Oct 17, 9:29*pm, (Tom Keats) wrote:
In article ,
* * * * Tim McNamara writes:

Then why do I keep meeting smarter people riding bicycles than riding
motorcycles?

Because we bicyclists have to read the minds of the
motor vehicle operators around us. *We often
have to do their thinking for them. *We know what
they're gonna do before they know what they're
gonna do. *Because what they're gonna do is gonna
be the most detrimental thing to us if we aren't
heads-up about their brainless movements.

And besides, bicycles are often a more intelligent
choice of vehicle.

You contradict your claim to being smart when you refuse to bring here
the bike facilities that work elsewhere.

Streets & roads /are/ bike facilities.


But it ain't so much that you
are stupid, it's simply that you are elitist and are selfish as
such...

And yet I'm not out to plant fear into the minds of people,
while you /are/!

I quote here from someone who have figured out that your kind should
shut up and mind your own business..
"First thing I would do would be to purge snobbish/elitist advocates
from leadership or policy making positions at any publicly funded
bicycling advocacy/educational organization; i.e. the clubby
enthusiast type who believes cycling skill (or advocacy goals) is
defined by being a racer (like himself) or a cyclist (like himself)
who moves consistently at speeds greater than 12mph."
http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread...=1#post7688868

My "kind," eh?

Strike one.

Snobbish/elitist advocate, eh?

Strike two.

Shall we go on to your strike 85?

You're evilly anti-human, and I'm
calling you on it. You hate bicycling
because it gets in your way as a driver,
and it sticks in your throat like a fishbone.
You're not out to promote bicycling; you're
out to restrict it.

"By their fruits shall ye know them."

Your fruits are distasteful and highly,
bitterly spit-out-able.

And you are despicable for it.

It is /you/ who is not only the elitist snob,
but the greedy pig doing everything you can to
force everybody else out of your way as you
muscle into what you perceive as the free-for-all
traffic trough in which you believe non-drivers
don't belong.

I don't hate you. I don't pity you. It's not mine
to harbour either of those sentiments. I just work
around you, you odious obstacle.

Just as you work against people.


--
Nothing is safe from me.
I'm really at:
tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca

Tom Keats wrote:
[...]
Streets & roads /are/ bike facilities.[...]

HOT DOG, WE HAVE A WEINER!

--
Tom Sherman - 42.435731,-83.985007
If you are not a part of the solution, you are a part of the precipitate.

In article ,
Tom Sherman writes:
Tom Keats wrote:
[...]
Streets & roads /are/ bike facilities.[...]

HOT DOG, WE HAVE A WEINER!

Actually, that's "wiener," with the 'i" before the 'e'.
Because a true wiener is a Viennese sausage, and the word
wiener is etymologically, culturally and geographically
associated with "Vienna."

A "wiener" is a Vienner sausage.

I'm not sure what a weiner is, but it sounds like somebody
with a shaved head, who lies in a street gutter, clinging
onto a bottle of cheap, rotgut sherry in a paper bag, while
wearing lederhosen and singing tunes from Pink Floyd's The
Wall, or a Teutonic version of O Canada.


cheers,
Tom


--
Nothing is safe from me.
I'm really at:
tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca

On Oct 18, 10:55 pm, Tom Sherman
wrote:
aka Jobst Brandt wrote:



Tom Keats wrote:

Then why do I keep meeting smarter people riding bicycles than
riding motorcycles?

Because we bicyclists have to read the minds of the motor vehicle
operators around us. We often have to do their thinking for them.
We know what they're gonna do before they know what they're gonna
do. Because what they're gonna do is gonna be the most detrimental
thing to us if we aren't heads-up about their brainless movements.

And besides, bicycles are often a more intelligent choice of
vehicle.

I think these two postings are examples of what causes trouble on many
roads. It is an elitist attitude of bicyclists who let car drivers
know how much smarter they are and how much more environmentally their
bicycle (recreation) is than driving a car. As I have often mentioned
here, I ride on many narrow, heavily traveled roads in the Santa Cruz
mountains and rarely have differences with car traffic, except when
with a rider who has the elitist bicyclist mentality.

I typically see less than a dozen cyclists per week while driving, and
typically pass less than 10 per month, so motorists being held up by
cyclists is hardly a common occurrence. Yet, the same anti-cyclist
attitude can be encountered. It has nothing to do with the behavior of
cyclists, and everything to do with people who grew up as privileged
spoiled brats who have to have their way (literally in this case).

"How dare you take your rightful share of the road!"

These are the same people who run red lights, jump their turn at 4-way
stops, pass on the shoulder in congested urban freeway traffic, tailgate
people in the right lane with their "brights" on instead of passing to
the left.

Don't tell me anymore. If the roads were to be a jungle (and I have
every reason to believe it), these would be THE PREDATORS of the
jungle. Their philosophy is "me, myself and I" typical of the
predator.

However DRIVING SHOULD BE A COOPERATIVE EFFORT, something the monkeys
are so good at.

But I guess the vultures benefit from the status quo.


What may not be apparent to many self righteous bicyclists is that
their body language reveals their disdain for motorized traffic,
eliciting rude and often dangerous behavior in response. As for mind
reading, it doesn't take a seer to understand what the bicyclist out
in the traffic lane is trying to say about his motorized fellow human.

Relying on motorists to pass at a close distance is foolish,
particularly drivers of wide SUV's, truck and vans that are
multi-tasking (eating, talking on the phone, etcetera). Unless the lane
is extra wide (e.g. right lanes on certain urban arterials), or there is
a vacant parking lane or paved shoulder, taking the lane is the only
sensible choice.

"God forbid that I get delayed a few seconds on my way to the mall, and
have to moved my foot from the throttle to the brake and back!"

Nothing is safe from me.

Don't ride near me.

Is Vancouver near Palo Alto?


Vancouver is near America, and that may be a problem if you get the
influence get to you. But then again the whole world watches American
movies and shows, so eventually SUVs and stupidity will trickle down. :
(

On Oct 18, 11:07 pm, Tom Sherman
wrote:
KingOfTheApes aka anti-cycling troll wrote:



On Oct 17, 9:29 pm, (Tom Keats) wrote:
In article ,
Tim McNamara writes:

Then why do I keep meeting smarter people riding bicycles than riding
motorcycles?
Because we bicyclists have to read the minds of the
motor vehicle operators around us. We often
have to do their thinking for them. We know what
they're gonna do before they know what they're
gonna do. Because what they're gonna do is gonna
be the most detrimental thing to us if we aren't
heads-up about their brainless movements.

And besides, bicycles are often a more intelligent
choice of vehicle.

cheers,
Tom

You contradict your claim to being smart when you refuse to bring here
the bike facilities that work elsewhere. But it ain't so much that you
are stupid, it's simply that you are elitist and are selfish as
such...

If you actually rode a bicycle, you would understand why "bicycle lanes"
are separate and unequal facilities.

I quote here from someone who have figured out that your kind should
shut up and mind your own business..

"First thing I would do would be to purge snobbish/elitist advocates
from leadership or policy making positions at any publicly funded
bicycling advocacy/educational organization; i.e. the clubby
enthusiast type who believes cycling skill (or advocacy goals) is
defined by being a racer (like himself) or a cyclist (like himself)
who moves consistently at speeds greater than 12mph."

http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread...=1#post7688868

Yes, let us put the cyclists in a ghetto bike lane to keep them out of
the way of the superior motorists!

--
Tom Sherman - 42.435731,-83.985007
If you are not a part of the solution, you are a part of the precipitate.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I've said BIKE LANES, TAME TRAFFIC, OR GO TO HOLLAND, but you are just
picking up on the first one.

Do you think they ever will tame traffic in America? Not without a
revolution, right? Then what are left with if you don't want to give
up on the country and leave it to the SUVs? Make bike facilities
including bike lanes, right? Well, that won't happen either without a
revolution...

So let's seek political assylum in Holland, I guess.

Are you retarded, by any chance?