|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#51
|
|||
|
|||
Saw an intelligent bicyclist today
On Feb 27, 7:21*pm, Zoot Katz wrote:
On Wed, 27 Feb 2008 18:32:04 -0800 (PST), Ed Pirrero wrote: On Feb 27, 6:04*pm, Zoot Katz wrote: On Wed, 27 Feb 2008 20:23:24 -0500, Nate Nagel wrote: Please, PLEASE let us not resurrect that thread. *I remember it well, and it was definitely a case of an irresistable force of reason meeting an immovable object of stubbornness and irrationality. nate So you still don't understand how those things work. Perhaps if they were renamed "slow humps" you might get it. If you're claiming that they do anything more than slow people down right at their location, then you are mistaken. *Average speeds on roads with speed humps INCREASES when they are installed. Explain that, if you please. Drivers are petulant brats. Nice cause and effect you have going there. Logic, much? E.P. |
Ads |
#52
|
|||
|
|||
Saw an intelligent bicyclist today
On Feb 27, 7:14*pm, Zoot Katz wrote:
On Wed, 27 Feb 2008 18:30:06 -0800 (PST), Ed Pirrero wrote: Come ride with me someday. *You'll see I'm right. Sorry, but according to the rules of logic, it takes only one counterexample to prove you wrong. Yes. *Now prove that he has ever seen one bicyclist stop. *Go ahead, it's *your* proposal, after all. From some of the biking behavior I've seen, it's not outside the realm of possiblity that he has never actually seen a bicyclist stop at a light or a sign. *Unlikely, but not impossible. If some cyclists' behaviour gets your attention it should make you more cautious around other cyclists and that's okay with me. As a former vehicular cyclist, I am always careful. And not just around bicyclists. The most likely explanation is that normal drivers (not you clowns in r.a.d) don't notice cyclists obeying the rules to the letter of the law. What about we clown who used to ride bikes, and now pay very close attention to all traffic, just out of habit? They're processed as regular traffic and forgotten. It's the same as I quickly forget the attentive attuned motorists playing by the rules. Except that seeing bicycles riding correctly on the roads is a rare, noteworthy event. It's the stunned or belligerent scud jockeys who get my attention though few of them are memorable except by their sheer numbers. Which is it - there are so many you can't keep track, or they are rare? You are being contradictory. The typical scud slave exhibiting their typically less than lawful conduct is usually predictable, rarely disappoints me, and quickly forgotten so I'm ready for the inevitable next one. * And the lawful one, in their rarity, is not noticed at all. Uh -huh - you're making a whole lot of sense now. (not) Mostly they're all regarded as potentially dangerous, self-absorbed idiots who may well be asleep, zonked on drugs, talking on phones, putting on make-up, shaving or diverted by their electronic toys. Just like fools on bikes who can't be bothered to make themselves even partially visible at night, or who ignore traffic control devices. Got it. E.P. |
#53
|
|||
|
|||
Saw an intelligent bicyclist today
On Wed, 27 Feb 2008 22:17:12 -0500, Nate Nagel
wrote: Zoot Katz wrote: On Wed, 27 Feb 2008 18:30:06 -0800 (PST), Ed Pirrero wrote: Come ride with me someday. You'll see I'm right. Sorry, but according to the rules of logic, it takes only one counterexample to prove you wrong. Yes. Now prove that he has ever seen one bicyclist stop. Go ahead, it's *your* proposal, after all. From some of the biking behavior I've seen, it's not outside the realm of possiblity that he has never actually seen a bicyclist stop at a light or a sign. Unlikely, but not impossible. If some cyclists' behaviour gets your attention it should make you more cautious around other cyclists and that's okay with me. The most likely explanation is that normal drivers (not you clowns in r.a.d) don't notice cyclists obeying the rules to the letter of the law. They're processed as regular traffic and forgotten. It's the same as I quickly forget the attentive attuned motorists playing by the rules. Nope. I just don't see them because cyclists obeying the letter of the law don't exist in my area. Amazingly they manage to survive to **** you off again another day. Given current trends, their numbers are growing and it's not because you've learned to compensate for their behaviour. Likely they've learned to avoid your predictable stupidity. It's the stunned or belligerent scud jockeys who get my attention though few of them are memorable except by their sheer numbers. The typical scud slave exhibiting their typically less than lawful conduct is usually predictable, rarely disappoints me, and quickly forgotten so I'm ready for the inevitable next one. Mostly they're all regarded as potentially dangerous, self-absorbed idiots who may well be asleep, zonked on drugs, talking on phones, putting on make-up, shaving or diverted by their electronic toys. I'd like to cordially invite you to take your attitude and shove it up your ass. It's not like I needed yet *another* reason to think the average cyclist was a self-important asshole. Get out your bike, pump up the tires and go for a ride. If that doesn't rekindle your soul then you've buried it in that coffin you love. Get well soon. -- zk |
#54
|
|||
|
|||
Saw an intelligent bicyclist today
necromancer wrote:
It would help if the cyclists would obey the laws and stop running red lights and stop driving on the left side of the road. Cyclists are riding, you idiot, *not* driving. What I don't understand is how sfb can judge what intelligence is, considering that it doesn't possess the attributes necessary to make such a judgement. -- People don't confuse me with someone who cares. |
#55
|
|||
|
|||
Saw an intelligent bicyclist today
Nate Nagel wrote:
Larry Farrell wrote: N8N wrote: On Feb 27, 3:40 pm, Larry Farrell wrote: N8N wrote: On Feb 27, 3:25 pm, Larry Farrell wrote: N8N wrote: [snip] Why? If I hit another car because the driver did something illegal, or hit a cyclist because he did something illegal, I still hit something. I'm still inconvenienced, and I still have to deal with a lot of BS. Since my observations are that 100% of cyclists flagrantly violate the rules of the road, that seems like a real problem to me. [snip] 100% of cyclists blatantly ignore stop signs. Both of your 100%s are 100% BS. Feel free to ride with me someday and prove me wrong. You won't. You'll be shocked at what you see. I stand by my statement. 100% of cyclists that I encounter flagrantly violate the rules of the road. Most common infraction is blowing through stop signs at speed. It sounds incredible, but it is true - ALL cyclists that I encounter ride like they want to be hit. There's a fair number of cyclists around where I live, too - my commute to/from work takes me across a bike trail, so there's a lot of cyclists that I assume are getting on/off the bike trail and riding on the same roads on which I'm driving. nate Your original statements were that 100% of bicyclists were doing illegal things, not that 100% of the bicyclists you observed were doing so. Therefore, your original statements were blatantly wrong. I stand by *my* statement. So the ones I don't see are perfectly law-abiding? Somehow I doubt that. nate No one said that. But you *did* say that 100% of bicyclists do illegal things, and that is clearly false. I said "my observations are 100%." That is a 100% true statement. nate This has dragged on long enough so I will concede that I overstated the situation a *bit.* Your initial statements are reproduced above exactly as they appeared in your original message. Granted, you did state initially that, "Since my observations are that 100% of cyclists flagrantly violate the rules of the road," and my calling that 100% BS was out of line (although I really doubt that *every* bicyclist you have ever seen has done as you suggest). However, you followed that later with the statement that, "100% of cyclists blatantly ignore stop signs." Clearly, you are not in a position to judge what 100% of bicyclists do, even in your local area, and you did not limit that comment to apply only to your observations. One for you, one for me. -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com |
#56
|
|||
|
|||
Saw an intelligent bicyclist today
On Wed, 27 Feb 2008 19:36:56 -0800 (PST), Ed Pirrero
wrote: On Feb 27, 7:14*pm, Zoot Katz wrote: On Wed, 27 Feb 2008 18:30:06 -0800 (PST), Ed Pirrero wrote: Come ride with me someday. *You'll see I'm right. Sorry, but according to the rules of logic, it takes only one counterexample to prove you wrong. Yes. *Now prove that he has ever seen one bicyclist stop. *Go ahead, it's *your* proposal, after all. From some of the biking behavior I've seen, it's not outside the realm of possiblity that he has never actually seen a bicyclist stop at a light or a sign. *Unlikely, but not impossible. If some cyclists' behaviour gets your attention it should make you more cautious around other cyclists and that's okay with me. As a former vehicular cyclist, I am always careful. And not just around bicyclists. The most likely explanation is that normal drivers (not you clowns in r.a.d) don't notice cyclists obeying the rules to the letter of the law. What about we clown who used to ride bikes, and now pay very close attention to all traffic, just out of habit? I didn't really learn to drive until after taking a motorcycle safety course. I'd already had a license for ten years, owned two cars, three motorcycles and three road bikes. An evasive driving course later in life was rehashing most of what I already knew and threw in a few twists suited to 4 wheels and more mass. Rarely am I required to drive these days but the survival habits are ingrained. As a passenger I'm usually uncomfortable as the driver's skill and attention level is comparably lower than mine. Face it; any idiot can drive. . . and they usually do.* They're processed as regular traffic and forgotten. It's the same as I quickly forget the attentive attuned motorists playing by the rules. Except that seeing bicycles riding correctly on the roads is a rare, noteworthy event. You're kidding. As a cyclist riding daily throughout the city the rarest observation is riders riding counterflow. Completely unlit cyclists averages less than 10%. Most of them have tail lights. Rolling stop signs is commonly observed by both cars and bicyclists. Whether or not they have the prescribed bell, most bikes are not in compliance with that law. Helmet use, mandatory here, is about 60%. I probably only stop and dab for fewer than ten percent of the stop signs along my usual routes. I and most cyclists I know approach intersections with restricted vision prepared to stop not trusting the stop sign to stop the cross-traffic. I've done my usual momentary semi-stop in front of cops without hassle. They don't hassle drivers for that move either. If the traffic is backed up, I'll filter forward and cross with a car at a four way stop or red light and I guess that's what really ****es off the caged stooges. They're envious. It's the stunned or belligerent scud jockeys who get my attention though few of them are memorable except by their sheer numbers. Which is it - there are so many you can't keep track, or they are rare? You are being contradictory. I mean that individually they're entirely forgettable because there are too many idiots pulling the same stunned stunts or selfishly applying the laws of gross tonnage instead of normal ROW rules. You can't keep track of them all and they're best forgotten though always anticipated. The typical scud slave exhibiting their typically less than lawful conduct is usually predictable, rarely disappoints me, and quickly forgotten so I'm ready for the inevitable next one. * And the lawful one, in their rarity, is not noticed at all. Uh -huh - you're making a whole lot of sense now. (not) The attentive attuned driver causes no conflict, is quickly processed and forgotten. The next driver is still an unknown quantity but initially regarded as a potential threat. Mostly they're all regarded as potentially dangerous, self-absorbed idiots who may well be asleep, zonked on drugs, talking on phones, putting on make-up, shaving or diverted by their electronic toys. Just like fools on bikes who can't be bothered to make themselves even partially visible at night, or who ignore traffic control devices. Got it. Traffic control devices? You're making me gag now. If the cops could write 100 citations per hour they'd write 350 between 3pm and six thirty, five days per week for drivers making prohibited turns at just one intersection I cross daily. What part of "except bicycles" appended to signs restricting automobile entry you clowns not understand? Surely driving over the diverter curbs and swerving around the signs must have gotten your attention. Quit touching yourself. E.P. * meaning they're too stupid or lazy to figure out how to get around without their motorised carapace. The genuinely handicapped are a minority compared to those who have handicapped themselves by their devoted dependance on their plastic lined cages. -- zk |
#57
|
|||
|
|||
Saw an intelligent bicyclist today
On Wed, 27 Feb 2008 19:32:21 -0800 (PST), Ed Pirrero
wrote: On Feb 27, 7:21*pm, Zoot Katz wrote: On Wed, 27 Feb 2008 18:32:04 -0800 (PST), Ed Pirrero wrote: On Feb 27, 6:04*pm, Zoot Katz wrote: On Wed, 27 Feb 2008 20:23:24 -0500, Nate Nagel wrote: Please, PLEASE let us not resurrect that thread. *I remember it well, and it was definitely a case of an irresistable force of reason meeting an immovable object of stubbornness and irrationality. nate So you still don't understand how those things work. Perhaps if they were renamed "slow humps" you might get it. If you're claiming that they do anything more than slow people down right at their location, then you are mistaken. *Average speeds on roads with speed humps INCREASES when they are installed. Explain that, if you please. Drivers are petulant brats. Nice cause and effect you have going there. Logic, much? Speed humps aren't well tolerated by petulant brats so they speed up to express their disproportionate annoyance over a trifling matter. Thus: the average speed on the road goes up. -- zk |
#58
|
|||
|
|||
Saw an intelligent bicyclist today
|
#59
|
|||
|
|||
Saw an intelligent bicyclist today
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
DANGER and Intelligent Unicyclists | ivan | Unicycling | 14 | November 11th 07 10:23 PM |
What - Intelligent Thought? | Joe Cipale | Racing | 291 | February 28th 07 04:16 AM |
What - Intelligent Thought? | ST | Racing | 0 | February 20th 07 12:28 AM |
Intelligent comment | Mikefule | Unicycling | 25 | July 21st 05 03:05 AM |
more intelligent computers | Miles | General | 7 | December 8th 04 12:52 AM |