Nuxx:RF65l.63435$Zz2.29086@newsfe30.ams2

Path: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!postnews.google.com!news3.google.com!feeder.news-service.com!eweka.nl!hq-usenetpeers.eweka.nl!cyclone03.ams.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!npeersf02.ams.highwinds-media.com!newsfe30.ams2.POSTED!7564ea0f!not-for-mail Message-ID:  From: _  Newsgroups: uk.rec.cycling Subject: Re: "Research" (was Re: Wait like the rest of us) Date: Fri, 26 Dec 2008 15:22:38 +0000 References: <3qv1l45b5tinu86rqnlsd0etrldm7hbk6j@4ax.com> 	  	<55a4l.25545$i_6.5797@newsfe11.ams2>  	  	      Lines: 39 User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.18 (Windows/20081105) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To:  Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit NNTP-Posting-Host: 82.21.204.127 X-Complaints-To: http://netreport.virginmedia.com X-Trace: newsfe30.ams2 1230304983 82.21.204.127 (Fri, 26 Dec 2008 15:23:03 UTC) NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 26 Dec 2008 15:23:03 UTC Organization: virginmedia.com Bytes: 3252 Xref: perfectly-safe.chapmancentral.co.uk uk.rec.cycling:681982

MatSav wrote: >  wrote in message > news:chk9l4p2dc5ovhmatlujj3adrj7g4khvl4@4ax.com... >> On Thu, 25 Dec 2008 23:39:46 +0000, Phil W Lee >>  wrote: >> >> >> >> >> Did you know that research has shown that the further a >> bicyclist >> rides away from the curb - then the less room overtaking >> motorists >> will allow - ride nearer the curb and motorists give you more >> room. >> > > Please provide the citation for said research - author(s), date > and details of the peer-reviewed journal, if any, and allow me to > make my own evidence-based decision. > > To be technically sound research, it should be a statistically > significant sample, repeatable, and have at least one control > group against which the hypothesis. I suspect the middle of these > three conditions can't be achieved. > > Additionally, the method of measurement of both the distance from > the kerb (not "curb" - go look it up on Google, or any english > dictionary, on-line or otherwise) and the clearance distance, > should be given. Otherwise, it's just anecdotes - not research. > No problem. That data will be forthcoming just as soon as you apply the same rigour to the data which supports Lee's opposing theory. Oh no, hang on, that's not necessary, is it? Data which *supports* cycling falls squarely into the 's'obvious, innit' school, where anything negative of cycling requires robust evidence which is inevitably dismissed anyway! You guys really should observe Duhg more, its a mirror into your own position in another handful of years :)