Cyclists above the law
in [UK Drivers]
|
Prev: Cunting lorry drivers.
Next: Britain's scariest roads
From: MasonS on 6 Dec 2009 12:46 On 6 Dec, 17:29, "The Medway Handyman" <davidl...(a)nospamblueyonder.co.uk> wrote: > Mas...(a)BP.com wrote: > > On 6 Dec, 16:32, "The Medway Handyman" > > <davidl...(a)nospamblueyonder.co.uk> wrote: > >> Mas...(a)BP.com wrote: > >>> On 6 Dec, 13:22, Conor <co...(a)gmx.co.uk> wrote: > >>>> In article <9794ca9a-552a-4520-a03e-618921e70364 > >>>> @x16g2000vbk.googlegroups.com>, Mas...(a)BP.com says... > > >>>>> Don't car drivers have to eat as well? > > >>>> Not to replace energy used to transport themselves. > > >>>>> Stop clutching at straws. > > >>>> You should. > > >>>> -- > >>>> Conorwww.notebooks-r-us.co.uk > > >>>> I'm not prejudiced. I hate everybody equally. > > >>> I eat about 2500 calories a day and am around 12 stone. A lot of my > >>> fat car driving workmates eat *far* more than I do to maintain their > >>> 18 stone plus weight. This bulk, plus their 1.5 tonne cars needs a > >>> lot of fossil fuel energy to shift on top of their carbon footprint > >>> caused by all of the lorries shifting their pies and sausage rolls > >>> up and down the land. > > >> So your pro biotic yoghurt & muesli transport themselves do they? > > >> -- > >> Dave - The Medway Handymanwww.medwayhandyman.co.uk-Hide quoted text > >> - > > >> - Show quoted text - > > > Sadly for your blinkered stereotype, I'm more likely to eat fillet > > steak than muesli. > > So how is that delivered then? In the same lorry as the pies and sausage > rolls? > > -- > Dave - The Tax Paying Motorist- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - Yes, but then I'm not the one trying to justify my driving a big engined car by stupidly arguing that a cyclist is breathing out more CO2 than a 1.5 tonne car gives out. Say if I drive to work in my 2.2 litre car, then over a year I will have burned nearly 1000 litres of petrol, yet would eat the same amount of food as usual and thus put on weight as my exercise has gone. So by leaving the car at home, I have saved nearly a tonne of petrol a year and consequently all of the CO2 that would release. You can understand that surely? -- Simon Mason
From: Adrian on 6 Dec 2009 13:11 "MasonS(a)BP.com" <MasonS(a)BP.com> gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: > Yes, but then I'm not the one trying to justify my driving a big engined > car by stupidly arguing that a cyclist is breathing out more CO2 than a > 1.5 tonne car gives out. Say if I drive to work in my 2.2 litre car, > then over a year I will have burned nearly 1000 litres of petrol, yet > would eat the same amount of food as usual and thus put on weight as my > exercise has gone. Ah, I think I see where your logic is failing.
From: MasonS on 6 Dec 2009 13:27 On 6 Dec, 18:11, Adrian <toomany2...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > "Mas...(a)BP.com" <Mas...(a)BP.com> gurgled happily, sounding much like they > were saying: > > > Yes, but then I'm not the one trying to justify my driving a big engined > > car by stupidly arguing that a cyclist is breathing out more CO2 than a > > 1.5 tonne car gives out. Say if I drive to work in my 2.2 litre car, > > then over a year I will have burned nearly 1000 litres of petrol, yet > > would eat the same amount of food as usual and thus put on weight as my > > exercise has gone. > > Ah, I think I see where your logic is failing. I would eat the same amount of food cycling to work and back whether I was in the car or not. I know this as when I go on holiday I eat as I normally do and gain weight, so you can take the food out of the equation as I eat the same when I am driving or cycling. That means that I prevent 1 tonne of fuel a year (OK the density of fuel is not 1000 kg/m3 so it is a bit less) being burned. All that would change is that I would end up converting the extra calories in the food into fat so my "food miles" would not change. In fact, my carbon footprint would go up even more as my car would have to shift 13, 14 , 15 and so on stones in weight. -- Simon Masom
From: Steve Firth on 6 Dec 2009 13:28 MasonS(a)BP.com <MasonS(a)BP.com> wrote: > but then I'm not the one trying to justify my driving a big > engined car by stupidly arguing that a cyclist is breathing out more > CO2 than a 1.5 tonne car gives out. Nobody has argued such a thing. I have however pointed out that when "mileburner" claimed that riding a bicycle produces no emissions that he was incorrect. I cited a booklet producing by a cycling pressure group as evidence. Please feel free to continue tilting at windmills. Mention of a car is like a red rag with a bull to you lycra tossers isn't it? You can't see past the word "car" and go into your automatic anti-motorist rant.
From: Adrian on 6 Dec 2009 13:30
"MasonS(a)BP.com" <MasonS(a)BP.com> gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: >> > Yes, but then I'm not the one trying to justify my driving a big >> > engined car by stupidly arguing that a cyclist is breathing out more >> > CO2 than a 1.5 tonne car gives out. Say if I drive to work in my 2.2 >> > litre car, then over a year I will have burned nearly 1000 litres of >> > petrol, yet would eat the same amount of food as usual and thus put >> > on weight as my exercise has gone. >> Ah, I think I see where your logic is failing. > I would eat the same amount of food cycling to work and back whether I > was in the car or not. I know this as when I go on holiday I eat as I > normally do and gain weight, so you can take the food out of the > equation as I eat the same when I am driving or cycling. ....and that's exactly where your logic is failing. Maybe they should tax fat bastards more, and bill it as a green tax? Income tax %age = BMI? |