The Oil Drum

All we need is another idiot spouting crap. Let me put it in caps so you don't miss it: THE SAFEST PLACE FOR A CYCLIST IS IN THE STREET CYCLING WITH THE FLOW OF TRAFFIC. I'm not making that up. The statistics backing up that statement may be found on the late Sheldon Brown's website (RIP). Sorry, but I've long since lost the link. But put "Sheldon Brown" into google and that will take you to his website. Ferret out the stats for yourself. Compared to cycling in the street with the flow of traffic, cycling on a bicycle path leaves you between 1.4 and 1.8 times more likely (depending on the study) to have an accident. Cycling on the sidewalk with the traffic raises your accident probability to around 2. On the sidewalk against the traffic, you're around 4 times more likely to have an accident.

You might ask yourself "why this counterintuitive statistic?" Well, first you have to understand that "strike from behind" accidents almost never happen. The stats. show that only 8% of car-bicycle accidents are the "strike from behind" variety. However, 80+% of car-bicycle accidents happen at intersections. (BTW, I'm quoting police-reported accident stats here.) Obviously you don't ride a bicycle regularly because every serious bicycle commuter knows this intuitively: The more visible you are, the less likely you are going to be struck by a car. Hence the safest place is IN THE ROAD in the traffic. Cycling on the sidewalk, or on a bicycle path that is not officially part of the road, simply removes you physically from the road and psychologically from the motorists' awareness. As I mentioned, most accidents happen at intersections. If the motorist hasn't seen you, you are more likely to be struck.

So please stop spreading unsubstantiated lies which will result in more bicycle accidents and cyclist deaths. The best sort of bike lane is in fact, a painted lane in the street with NO CURB OR BARRIER separating you from the cars. It forces motorists to be aware of your presence, which in turn, lowers the chance that you are going to get into an accident. If you haven't heard the cognitive mechanism that underpins this, search for "inattention blindness," or type '"Daniel Simons" gorilla video' into google and check it out.

Even if we had cold fusion, the idea of continuing a growth based BAU type economy/society is a complete waste. There will ALWAYS be limits to growth and the continuation of this type of thing. cold fusion or whatever you have, your still putting off bigger problems for later, there is only so much land area and arable food. The problem with the world is we are relentlessly pursuing growth and are encountering diminishing marginal returns, this is a problem only we, not technology, will solve.

Back in this universe, there is no way that a 30 year old physicist is going to get something usable from the Cold Fusion effect. Firstly, because the youngest guy in the field that I know of is 48 - all the potential young people have got scared off by the severe career damage that results - and secondly because all the research that can be done on a shoestring has already been done. Cold fusion is a quantum nanotechnology / surface physics phenomenon, and only a really well-funded lab or corporation could do meaningful work in this area. Thirdly, the CF / LENR community represents a much smaller fraction of the science community (i.e. no more than about 40 active research groups worldwide) than does Peak Oil in its corner.

TOD-ers, you have no idea what it is to struggle against a really dominant cultural paradigm, believe me.

Yes how Sad...that you would need to heap guilt on. Here is an interesting video for you:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1484635787266506285

A rush to judgement stems from an inability to express empathy...