If you don't believe in Evolution, then why do you drive an SUV?

Tadej Brezina wrote:
...
3. If one needs 1.5 hours by bike for the distance you commute by car in
0.25 hours, one should get his/her ass on a bike as quick as possible!
(An estimated - high! - avg. commuting speed of 50km/h makes 12.5km,
makes slightly above 8km/h avg. bike speed if traveled by bike in 1.5h)

Well, I used to have a 25 km commute, with an average speed of over 90
kph, but that is unusual.

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
"And never forget, life ultimately makes failures of all people."
- A. Derleth

Tom Sherman wrote:

Tadej Brezina wrote:

...
3. If one needs 1.5 hours by bike for the distance you commute by car
in 0.25 hours, one should get his/her ass on a bike as quick as possible!
(An estimated - high! - avg. commuting speed of 50km/h makes 12.5km,
makes slightly above 8km/h avg. bike speed if traveled by bike in 1.5h)


Well, I used to have a 25 km commute, with an average speed of over 90
kph, but that is unusual.

Door to door?
In a city or agglomeration?
At usual commuting times?

That is really fairly unusal!
Tadej
--
"Vergleich es mit einer Pflanze - die wächst auch nur dann gut, wenn du
sie nicht jeden zweiten Tag aus der Erde reißt, um nachzusehen, ob sie
schon Wurzeln geschlagen hat."
Martina Diel in d.t.r

Tadej Brezina wrote:
Tom Sherman wrote:

Tadej Brezina wrote:

...
3. If one needs 1.5 hours by bike for the distance you commute by car
in 0.25 hours, one should get his/her ass on a bike as quick as
possible!
(An estimated - high! - avg. commuting speed of 50km/h makes 12.5km,
makes slightly above 8km/h avg. bike speed if traveled by bike in 1.5h)


Well, I used to have a 25 km commute, with an average speed of over 90
kph, but that is unusual.

Door to door?
In a city or agglomeration?
At usual commuting times?

That is really fairly unusal!

I lived very near an interchange to a controlled access highway, and
work was also very near an interchange. For most of the trip my speed
was in the 105 to 115 kph range.

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
"And never forget, life ultimately makes failures of all people."
- A. Derleth

"Amy Blankenship" wrote in message
. ..

"George Conklin" wrote in message
...

"Tom Sherman" wrote in message

Oh please. In the US, people do NOT pay directly for the true cost, but
it is hidden in other expenses.

The true cost of riding a bicycle is huge, and hidden by nonsense posted
here.

True. If more people biked more, the medical industry could potentially
lose millions.



Broken legs would make up the difference quickly. Bicycles are dangerous on
a per-mile basis.

"Tom Sherman" wrote in message
...
George Conklin wrote:
"Tom Sherman" wrote in message
...
Jack May wrote:
"Tom Sherman" wrote in message
...
George Conklin wrote:
"Tom Keats" wrote in message
...
Showers and lockers could be provided for less than the cost of
"free"
parking, when the externalities are accounted for.
A company needs "free" parking to be able to attract the people they
want to
hire. Very few people ride a bike to work. Showers and lockers are
still
installed these days for people that exercise at work.

Pretty poor excuse for a society then, eh?

If people had to pay the true cost of motor vehicles, we would see a
lot
more commuter cyclists.

You have that totally backwards. Turning a 15 minute commute into a
one
and half hour commute at standard wage rates means that you are wasting
several hours per day of productive work time, and you arrive at work
exhausted to boot.

Nonsense. Riding a bicycle is fun! Regular exercise makes a person LESS
tired.

Get out of your cage!

Exercise is supposed to make you tired.

"Tadej Brezina" wrote in message
...
George Conklin wrote:

"Tom Sherman" wrote in message
If people had to pay the true cost of motor vehicles, we would see a lot
more commuter cyclists.

You have that totally backwards. Turning a 15 minute commute into a
one
and half hour commute at standard wage rates means that you are wasting
several hours per day of productive work time, and you arrive at work
exhausted to boot.

1. Since when does the alleged loss of "time" is being changed by the
billing rate? Time is time. That's not even backwards, that's totally
confused reasoning!

If you bill by the hour, then loss of time is loss of income. Otherwise,
you lose time you could spend fixing the house, mowing the lawn, and so
forth. It is a very important issue.

"Tom Sherman" wrote in message
...
George Conklin wrote:
"Tom Sherman" wrote in message
...
George Conklin wrote:
"Tom Keats" wrote in message
...
...
And on the other hand, there seems to be a perception among
a lot of people that cycling is just too inconvenient -- that
one must dress funny, "brave" the elements, and risk their
neck among motorized traffic. They don't realize it doesn't
have to be such a big deal.

In this climate, I would need a shower and chaning room in the
buildings
at
work, since I would arrive totally 100% soaked through 8 months of the
year.
Also, a change of clothes and a place to wash them. So you would need
locker rooms too.
Showers and lockers could be provided for less than the cost of "free"
parking, when the externalities are accounted for.

So who gets free parking? And those externalities are infinite if
you
are one of those bicycle militants.

Every place I have ever worked at has had an employee parking lot.

Many such lots are NOT free. They charge employees to come to work, thus
taking back their wage.

"Tom Keats" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"George Conklin" writes:

"Tom Keats" wrote in message
...
In article t%Ngj.4940$O97.2830@trndny01,
Stephen Harding writes:
donquijote1954 wrote:
On Jan 7, 5:09 pm, Stephen Harding wrote:

George Conklin wrote:

If you are concerned with your health, you won't be riding a
bicycle. Too
many accidents per mile.

Like how many?

Cite please.


It's just a fear the system plants on you. It doesn't have to be
real
though. Just enough so people give up bicycles and buy SUVs.

That's a fair point.

However I've come to believe people eschew bicycle commuting
not so much because it's seen as a death wish, but more that
such a view makes a convenient excuse.

Let's face it, hopping in the dino-juice buggy can be awfully
convenient!

And on the other hand, there seems to be a perception among
a lot of people that cycling is just too inconvenient -- that
one must dress funny, "brave" the elements, and risk their
neck among motorized traffic. They don't realize it doesn't
have to be such a big deal.


cheers,
Tom

In this climate, I would need a shower and chaning room in the buildings
at
work, since I would arrive totally 100% soaked through 8 months of the
year.

I bet I live in a wetter climate than you.

With my riding raingear on, I stay much drier
than if I'd walked.


If you used raingear around here, you would arrive at work even more
soaked through and you would need to wash the raingrear to get the sweat
out.


I don't need a shower. I'm a warehouse worker.
I'm gonna get sweaty anyways, unloading shipments
in marine containers from China to provide people
like you with your cheap crap.

Also, a change of clothes and a place to wash them. So you would need
locker rooms too.

People who ride to jobs where they need to be fresh
simply keep their fresh clothes at their worksites.
And they don't need a full-on shower. A quick refresher
at the washroom sink does the trick, perhaps along with
an application of their pit-stick of choice.

It's really easy and do-able.

Ride past the gas station you usualy stop at, and
thumb your nose at 'em. Maybe even give 'em a
Flatbush cheer, while sticking your thumbs in your
ears and waving all your fingers at 'em.

If you can ride no-handed.


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

"George Conklin" wrote in message
...

"Tadej Brezina" wrote in message
...
George Conklin wrote:

"Tom Sherman" wrote in message
If people had to pay the true cost of motor vehicles, we would see a
lot
more commuter cyclists.

You have that totally backwards. Turning a 15 minute commute into a
one
and half hour commute at standard wage rates means that you are wasting
several hours per day of productive work time, and you arrive at work
exhausted to boot.

1. Since when does the alleged loss of "time" is being changed by the
billing rate? Time is time. That's not even backwards, that's totally
confused reasoning!

If you bill by the hour, then loss of time is loss of income.
Otherwise,
you lose time you could spend fixing the house, mowing the lawn, and so
forth. It is a very important issue.

If you die early because you're a big fat blob, not only do you lose any
time you could have spent fixing the house, etc., but your family loses your
future earnings and has to pay to bury you (assuming that death is instant
and you don't spend 6 months in the hospital---if that is the case then it
will be even more expensive).

"George Conklin" wrote in message
...

"Tom Keats" wrote in message
...

In this climate, I would need a shower and chaning room in the
buildings
at
work, since I would arrive totally 100% soaked through 8 months of the
year.

I bet I live in a wetter climate than you.

With my riding raingear on, I stay much drier
than if I'd walked.


If you used raingear around here, you would arrive at work even more
soaked through and you would need to wash the raingrear to get the sweat
out.

When I was a student at Mississippi State University, the only
transportation I had the first year I lived off campus was a bike. I had
the same concerns, but I found after a few months that I was fit enough for
my normal commute and I didn't get sweaty anymore, even when it was hot.
Mississippi, even North Mississippi, tends to be warmer than North Carolina.

-Amy