Los Altos Hills bicyclist killed in big-rig crash was a mother,nurse and a 'go-getter'

On 12/24/2010 7:11 PM, DirtRoadie who? wrote:
On Dec 24, 12:23 pm, Tºm Shermªn™ °_°""twshermanREMOVE\"@THI
$southslope.net" wrote:


So we should celebrate contributing to the ecosystem's destruction by
overpopulation?

A good cause is worth sacrificing for. Tom, can we count on you to do
your part?

No children [1] and no plans to have any.

[1] Much better to go to a shelter and adopt a cat or two.

--
Tºm Shermªn - 42.435731,-83.985007
I am a vehicular cyclist.

"Phil W Lee" wrote in message
...
Frank Krygowski considered Fri, 24 Dec 2010
17:04:39 -0800 (PST) the perfect time to write:

On Dec 24, 7:39 pm, Tºm Shermªn™ °_° ""twshermanREMOVE\"@THI
$southslope.net" wrote:
On 12/24/2010 6:10 PM, Jay Beattie wrote:



On Dec 24, 11:24 am, T m Sherm n _ ""twshermanREMOVE\"@THI
$southslope.net" wrote:
On 12/24/2010 10:04 AM, Duane H bert wrote:

On 12/23/2010 8:24 PM, Phil W Lee wrote:

How do you reserve five feet of the road for bikes alone, if it is
barely wide enough for cars?

And if it is wide enough to have 5 feet reserved for bikes, why
would
you want to?
Unless your aim is to promote the idea that bicycles don't belong
on
roads, of course.

Maybe to increase cycling.

From today's Montreal Gazette:

http://www.montrealgazette.com/trave...ide/4022475/st...

If so, only because too many people spend their time shouting

D A N G E R !

D A N G E R !

Hey, who needs shoring and trench jacks! I'll just dig a f****** hole
and jump in it! -- Jay Beattie.

I got into it once with a job site superintendent, because my tech
refused to go down into a excavation, and I backed him up on it. The
excavation caved in just a couple of minutes after we got off the phone.
The tech would almost certainly have been killed if he had been in the
excavation.

Seriously, Jay, danger can be realistically evaluated. Nobody is
saying to ignore significant dangers, nor to abandon safety
precautions that demonstrably work. But in the bicycling world, there
is much exaggeration of minuscule dangers, and over-promotion of
measures with minuscule protective benefits.

Instead of saying "We need bike lanes and bike tracks and helmets to
be safe," why can't we admit that ordinary, correct cycling IS safe,
by any rational measure? Why is that idea being attacked here?

- Frank Krygowski

It certainly seems to me as if the increases in cycling are down to
the Bixi hire bikes and provision of more secure parking.

Bixi arrived last year. This may impact this latest increase but
cycling levels have been increasing here for several years. I've
posted these links before. Also, Bixi and parking facilities are
only in town. For example, I'm on the west island and there are
neither.

"Phil W Lee" wrote in message
...
Duane Hébert considered Fri, 24 Dec 2010
11:04:45 -0500 the perfect time to write:

On 12/23/2010 8:24 PM, Phil W Lee wrote:

How do you reserve five feet of the road for bikes alone, if it is
barely wide enough for cars?

And if it is wide enough to have 5 feet reserved for bikes, why would
you want to?
Unless your aim is to promote the idea that bicycles don't belong on
roads, of course.

Maybe to increase cycling.

From today's Montreal Gazette:

http://www.montrealgazette.com/trave...475/story.html


There's no attempt there to differentiate between a general increase
in cycling and any caused by lanes.
I notice they've been actively promoting cycling, and also made much
more secure bike parking available, and of course, the Bixi hire bikes
have come in over the same period (which probably account for that
amount of increase on their own).

Looks a lot like one increase, with several things all claiming the
credit for all of it.

I wonder how much greater the increase would have been if they hadn't
tried to pretend that bikes don't belong on roads.

Probably similar to what it has been in places where that is the
case. Which is to say probably not much. I don't want to live
in a town where a motorist will see one bike a day.

I don't think that there is a single thing that works. That's the whole
point.

Regarding which is actually working here, the only thing close to empirical
evidence here is that it's not taking the lane as that is prohibited.

song

she's a mother
yeahyeahyeah
she's a mother
yeahyeahyeah
she crept up on the truck
yeahyeahyeah
now she'spread out in the muck
yeahyeahyeah

coda......

On 12/25/2010 10:52 AM, Duane Hébert wrote:
Probably similar to what it has been in places where that is the
case. Which is to say probably not much. I don't want to live
in a town where a motorist will see one bike a day.

Cyclists are rare here in Iowa, but so are problems with motorists.

--
Tºm Shermªn - 42.435731,-83.985007
I am a vehicular cyclist.

On 12/25/2010 11:27 AM, kolldata aka AVOGADRO IV wrote:
song

she's a mother
yeahyeahyeah
she's a mother
yeahyeahyeah
she crept up on the truck
yeahyeahyeah
now she'spread out in the muck
yeahyeahyeah

coda......

GENE IS A GENIUS!

--
Tºm Shermªn - 42.435731,-83.985007
I am a vehicular cyclist.

Duane Hébert wrote:
Probably similar to what it has been in places where that is the
case. Which is to say probably not much. I don't want to live
in a town where a motorist will see one bike a day.

Tºm Shermªn™ °_° wrote:
Cyclists are rare here in Iowa, but so are problems with motorists.


Rare is about 140 degrees F:
http://www.ikea.com/us/en/catalog/products/80100406

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

"Tºm Shermªn™ °_°" " wrote in
message ...
On 12/25/2010 10:52 AM, Duane Hébert wrote:
Probably similar to what it has been in places where that is the
case. Which is to say probably not much. I don't want to live
in a town where a motorist will see one bike a day.

Cyclists are rare here in Iowa, but so are problems with motorists.

There is that.

On 12/25/2010 1:37 PM, A. Muzi wrote:
Duane Hébert wrote:
Probably similar to what it has been in places where that is the
case. Which is to say probably not much. I don't want to live
in a town where a motorist will see one bike a day.

Tºm Shermªn™ °_° wrote:
Cyclists are rare here in Iowa, but so are problems with motorists.


Rare is about 140 degrees F:
http://www.ikea.com/us/en/catalog/products/80100406

They are not that picky:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/5c/Turkey_Vulture_%28Cathartes_aura%29_-in_flight.jpg.

--
Tºm Shermªn - 42.435731,-83.985007
I am a vehicular cyclist.

On Dec 25, 2:05 pm, "Edward Dolan" wrote:

snip


Nope, Opus is quite right. Mothers are much more valuable than males just as
the survival of the species is much more valuable than any individual. Mr.
Sherman's liberal sentiments lead him astray as always.

I would have designed life so that sex was not necessary at all. New life
would simply split off from old life like it does with some simple cell
organisms. Imagine life without the bother of sex!

The mechanics of reproduction aside, that latter consideration is
still an oxymoron.

snip