Critical Mass - Fundamentalist Plonkers?

Theo Bekkers wrote:

Because police turn a blind eye doesn't make it legal.

If you took part, or did better research, then

A motorist 'crashing'
through a cork is breaking the law how?

It desn't matter whether it is a cork or not, legal or illegal, a
motorist cannot drive over or into anything. Think about it.

Sheesh, the closet fat arses are really coming out of the woodwork now.

Resound wrote:
"Terryc" wrote in message
...

Zebee Johnstone wrote:


(I note that working with the RTA on motorcycle awareness over the
last 5 years has cut car into motorcycle accidents by well over 30%...

Cheese & chalk.

Motorcycle riders =/= bicycle riders.

I do not follow the two wheels good, four wheels bad dictum. Rather, the
presence of a internal combustion engine mounted in a vehicle has
nothing in common with anyone on a human powered bicycle.

G-S wrote:

I was referring to the chip on *your* shoulder (that's not intended as
an insult, just an observation about your debating style).

Lol, tough. Sadly, you have no style. Just a clumsy shuffle. Come back
when you actually know what a bicycle is and can stick to the point..


There are many examples where education campaigns have had positive
effects upon the behavior of large groups of people, there are very few
examples where protests or street gatherings have had any effect (other
than to make the people feel like they are doing something).

There are? The word "positive" is a value judgement and many so called
"postive education campaigns" were nothing of the sort.


I'm not so much anti street protest as pro ideas that work [1]

Then you will see nothing wrong with CM. At least people are getting off
their arse and making a statement and actually getting more bums onto
bicycle seats.

Rather than all those tutt tutters who think people sholdn't "rock the
boat" and should "work through the system".

Whether I do or do not agree with CM in all its points, I'll gladly
target arsesitters who join the tutt tutt brigade.

No one is saying you have to be involved, but if you want to impede the
traffic,then take the consequences. It is part of working together.
Forget being a control freak where everyone has to do what you think is
the right way to do it.

Theo Bekkers wrote:
Tomasso wrote:


There used to be zero cars on Oz and quite a lot of bikes,


Actually, you're fantasising about that too. The penny-farthing was never
much more than a toy for the indolent and rich young. Working people never
got onto bikes for transport in a big way until 'safeties' were invented,
and cars predate the safety bicycle by nearly ten years.

Yawn, there are no so silly as those that do not open their eyes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Safety_bicycle
"The safety bicycle is a type of bicycle that became very popular
beginning in the late 1880s. The first safety, using a diamond frame,
was invented by John Kemp Starley in 1885. "Safeties" are characterized
by having two wheels of identical - or nearly identical - size, and a
chain-driven rear wheel."

So when were cars "invented"?
Considering the early cars used bicycle technology.

The problem is Theo is that you do not know what you are talking about
for this newsgroup. UK.bicycles maybe.

If google was any good, then I could show you plenty of photographs of
working people who used the bicycle as transport throughout Australia.

An excellent book is The Bicycle and the Bush by Jim Fitzpatrick. Man &
Machine in Rural Australia. ISBN 0 19 554 231 2.first published in 1980.

it is an excellent investigation of the rural use of bicycle in
Australia. Also makes the highly telling point that there is very little
research into the use of bicycle by working people anywhere in the world
concening the early part of the 20th Century.

G-S wrote:

It's natural that people would get frustrated with the slow rate of
change, but the truth is "you catch more flies with honey than vinegar".

Actually, vegemite works better.

Zebee Johnstone wrote:

The info I have from people who are working with the RTA on motorcycle
issues is that the confrontational attitudes from some of the bicycle
advocates (and I don't know what org they are from)

They do not exist. It is just a story they are feeding you. if these
agro bicycle advocates existed, then CM would not exist.

On Dec 3, 8:22 am, TimC -
astro.swin.edu.au wrote:

Oh come on Theo. I'm pretty sure Zebee is actually forming her
opinion on something a little more concrete than that.

Is this the channel 9 news, or their current affair program? Who's
the John Laws equivalent in WA who you listen to?

An letters to the editor? ****ed off people writing letters to the
editor -- ****ed off because of something they read from another
letter to the editor, what they saw on the TV news, or heard some
shock jock talk about?

I have never been on a CM ride. I have never seen it on TV. I have
never
heard a radio commentator's opinion on the subject and I have never
read about it in a newspaper. If it were not for previous postings in
this
newsgroup I wouldn't have the faintest idea what you guys are talking
about.
My opinion coincides with Zebee, on the basis that she is making
sense.
Most of the pro-CM folks sound like they are foaming at the mouth.
In fact they sound like fundamentalist plonkers.

Zebee Johnstone wrote:

besides - if the point is "effect on opinions" then all effects have
to be counted.

lol, crawl back into your hole of ignorance. It will be safer.

If CM holds a ride and gets more participants, then it doesn't give a
damm about the ignorant cagers who blame CM for their lack of
satifaction in the cagers life.

Theo Bekkers wrote:

The questions were, "What have they achieved"? and "What pro-cycling laws
have been passed as a direct result of CM"?

Lol, for one who claims to be older than many here, you really are
ignorant. Haven't you learn't anything from the years you have been alive?

You are looking under the wrong rock. Of course, I expect that your
reply is going to be WHOOSH, but that is your loss.

Sigh, all those years wasted, when you could have learnt so much.

brucef wrote:
TimC wrote

I have never been on a CM ride. I have never seen it on TV. I have
never
heard a radio commentator's opinion on the subject and I have never
read about it in a newspaper. If it were not for previous postings in
this
newsgroup I wouldn't have the faintest idea what you guys are talking
about.
My opinion coincides with Zebee, on the basis that she is making
sense.

She does that all the time. Bloody annoying.

Most of the pro-CM folks sound like they are foaming at the mouth.
In fact they sound like fundamentalist plonkers.

But the anti-CM numbers seem to be growing. Soon they'll have critical mass.

Theo