"Have you recently taken up cycling to avoid the frustrations and
expense of travelling by car, or do you simply cycle for pleasure?

The BBC is asking for readers to send in their experiences of cycling
in their area. We would like to hear about why you choose to cycle and
the problems you face on your daily journey.

The number of cyclists on the road is steadily increasing. Government
body Cycling England will be announcing funding for cycling
initiatives to a selection of towns in England. We want to know how
you think your area could be made bike-friendly.

Are you a cyclist? What provisions are there for cyclists in your
area? We want to hear about the highs and lows of your daily journey
and to see pictures from your bike rides. Send us your comments and
pictures using the form below.

Send your pictures to yourpics@bbc.co.uk or text them to 61124. If you
have a large file you can upload here. Read the terms and conditions
At no time should you endanger yourself or others, take any
unnecessary risks or infringe any laws..."

More:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/talking_point/7460074.stm


--
Carfree Cities
http://www.carfree.com/
Promoting practical alternatives to car dependence - walking, cycling
and public transport.

Doug  typed:

'The usual' cut ' paste job.

Why would I want to cycle to work?

It's a far more [1] polluting manner of transport than the one I already 
use.  Anyone cycling to work is creating far more pollution than I do.

[1] Especially when taking into account the manufacturing processes and 
materials involved.

-- 
Dogpoop
http://www.glass-uk.org/
"You would probably do better not to bother with renewable
energy"  Doug, UK.Transport 29/04/2008 08:53.

On Jun 19, 6:12 am, Doug  wrote:
> "Have you recently taken up cycling to avoid the frustrations and
> expense of travelling by car, or do you simply cycle for pleasure?
>
> The BBC is asking for readers to send in their experiences of cycling
> in their area.

The BBC were running a feature on an urban cyclist.  She was talking
about the good and bad points and giving a nice balanced picture of it
all.

What caused me to snort coffee was when she was being interviewed
there was a pedestrian crossing behind her.  Just as she made a
comment about red light jumping cyclists giving all cyclists a bad
name two cyclists zoomed past the red light.  It was such perfect
timing that I had to rewind it to check I hadn't imagined it.

Fod

On Jun 19, 9:16 am, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
> Doug  typed:
>
> 'The usual' cut ' paste job.
>
> Why would I want to cycle to work?
>
> It's a far more [1] polluting manner of transport than the one I already
> use.  Anyone cycling to work is creating far more pollution than I do.
>
> [1] Especially when taking into account the manufacturing processes and
> materials involved.
>

I miss the old days when i walked to work.  Though I remember a
cyclist giving me a hard time as cycling would have been more
environmentally friendly...

His argument was I was using more calories.  He wouldn't accept the
point that the bike needed to be created and maintained which used
resources...

Fod

On 19 Jun, 12:03, Fod  wrote:
> On Jun 19, 6:12 am, Doug  wrote:
>
> > "Have you recently taken up cycling to avoid the frustrations and
> > expense of travelling by car, or do you simply cycle for pleasure?
>
> > The BBC is asking for readers to send in their experiences of cycling
> > in their area.
>
> The BBC were running a feature on an urban cyclist.  She was talking
> about the good and bad points and giving a nice balanced picture of it
> all.
>
> What caused me to snort coffee was when she was being interviewed
> there was a pedestrian crossing behind her.  Just as she made a
> comment about red light jumping cyclists giving all cyclists a bad
> name two cyclists zoomed past the red light.  It was such perfect
> timing that I had to rewind it to check I hadn't imagined it.
>
> Fod

She then went on about a 'mad' motorist whose journey was so important
that he jumped the red light and caused her to do a forward roll
across his bonnet, that was on Breakfast program this morning. Of
course we all understand that it's only motorists are hypocrites.

Fod  wrote:

> The BBC were running a feature on an urban cyclist.  She was talking
> about the good and bad points and giving a nice balanced picture of it
> all.

As balanced a picture as one can give with a face that appeared to have
been put on sideways with a pound or two of ironmmongery hanging from
one's nose.

> What caused me to snort coffee was when she was being interviewed
> there was a pedestrian crossing behind her.  Just as she made a
> comment about red light jumping cyclists giving all cyclists a bad
> name two cyclists zoomed past the red light.  It was such perfect
> timing that I had to rewind it to check I hadn't imagined it.

<AOL>

I was PMSL at that. It was one of those moments where you wonder if the
BBC decided to show it in the spirit of irony. She was at the same time
whining about a motorist who had passed a red light as she herself
appeared to cycle past a red light (the pedestrians had not cleared the
crossing, the cars did not move, she did).

Also, did the weirdness of turning Bristol into a city sponsoring
bicycle use strike anyone else? Cambridge, Oxford, Chester I can
understand, but Bristol? Are hordes of unfit businessmen really going to
start to pedal up the hills in the City of Bristol?

Doug wrote:
> "Have you recently taken up cycling to avoid the frustrations and
> expense of travelling by car, or do you simply cycle for pleasure?

My wife would have a fit if I rode a bike down the stairs in our 
house... And cycling to the office I've been to today isn't going to 
happen (266 mile round trip).

-- 
Abo

On 19 Jun, 09:16, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
> Doug  typed:
>
> 'The usual' cut ' paste job.
>
> Why would I want to cycle to work?
>
> It's a far more [1] polluting manner of transport than the one I already
> use.  Anyone cycling to work is creating far more pollution than I do.
>
> [1] Especially when taking into account the manufacturing processes and
> materials involved.
>
What transport do you already use and why is it less polluting than
cycling?

--
Carfree Cities
http://www.carfree.com/
Promoting practical alternatives to car dependence - walking, cycling
and public transport.

On 19 Jun, 12:05, Fod  wrote:
> On Jun 19, 9:16 am, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
>
> > Doug  typed:
>
> > 'The usual' cut ' paste job.
>
> > Why would I want to cycle to work?
>
> > It's a far more [1] polluting manner of transport than the one I already
> > use.  Anyone cycling to work is creating far more pollution than I do.
>
> > [1] Especially when taking into account the manufacturing processes and
> > materials involved.
>
> I miss the old days when i walked to work.  Though I remember a
> cyclist giving me a hard time as cycling would have been more
> environmentally friendly...
>
> His argument was I was using more calories.  He wouldn't accept the
> point that the bike needed to be created and maintained which used
> resources...
>
I tend to agree with you that walking is better environmentally but
has a more limited range so cycling is second best and maybe more
practical in our fast-paced modern world.

--
Carfree Cities
http://www.carfree.com/
Promoting practical alternatives to car dependence - walking, cycling
and public transport.

Doug  typed:
> On 19 Jun, 09:16, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
>> Doug  typed:
>>
>> 'The usual' cut ' paste job.
>>
>> Why would I want to cycle to work?
>>
>> It's a far more [1] polluting manner of transport than the one I
>> already use.  Anyone cycling to work is creating far more pollution
>> than I do.
>>
>> [1] Especially when taking into account the manufacturing processes
>> and materials involved.
>>
> What transport do you already use and why is it less polluting than
> cycling?

I walk.


-- 
Dogpoop
http://www.glass-uk.org/
"You would probably do better not to bother with renewable
energy"  Doug, UK.Transport 29/04/2008 08:53.

On 20 Jun, 08:25, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
> Doug  typed:
>
>
>
> > On 19 Jun, 09:16, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
> >> Doug  typed:
>
> >> 'The usual' cut ' paste job.
>
> >> Why would I want to cycle to work?
>
> >> It's a far more [1] polluting manner of transport than the one I
> >> already use.  Anyone cycling to work is creating far more pollution
> >> than I do.
>
> >> [1] Especially when taking into account the manufacturing processes
> >> and materials involved.
>
> > What transport do you already use and why is it less polluting than
> > cycling?
>
> I walk.
>
Excellent, and an example to us all, except those who work from/at
home.

--
Carfree Cities
http://www.carfree.com/
Promoting practical alternatives to car dependence - walking, cycling
and public transport.

Doug wrote:
> On 20 Jun, 08:25, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
>> Doug  typed:
>>
>>
>>
>>> On 19 Jun, 09:16, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
>>>> Doug  typed:
>>
>>>> 'The usual' cut ' paste job.
>>
>>>> Why would I want to cycle to work?
>>
>>>> It's a far more [1] polluting manner of transport than the one I
>>>> already use.  Anyone cycling to work is creating far more pollution
>>>> than I do.
>>
>>>> [1] Especially when taking into account the manufacturing processes
>>>> and materials involved.
>>
>>> What transport do you already use and why is it less polluting than
>>> cycling?
>>
>> I walk.
>>
> Excellent, and an example to us all,

So when are you going to follow suite?

Doug wrote:
> On 20 Jun, 08:25, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
>> Doug  typed:
>>
>>
>>
>>> On 19 Jun, 09:16, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
>>>> Doug  typed:
>>>> 'The usual' cut ' paste job.
>>>> Why would I want to cycle to work?
>>>> It's a far more [1] polluting manner of transport than the one I
>>>> already use.  Anyone cycling to work is creating far more pollution
>>>> than I do.
>>>> [1] Especially when taking into account the manufacturing processes
>>>> and materials involved.
>>> What transport do you already use and why is it less polluting than
>>> cycling?
>> I walk.
>>
> Excellent, and an example to us all, except those who work from/at
> home.
> 
> --
> Carfree Cities
> http://www.carfree.com/
> Promoting practical alternatives to car dependence - walking, cycling
> and public transport.
> 

Tell me Doug, is it good to work from home?

-- 
Tony the Dragon

On Jun 20, 9:05 am, Doug  wrote:
> On 20 Jun, 08:25, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
>
> > Doug  typed:
>
> > > On 19 Jun, 09:16, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
> > >> Doug  typed:
>
> > >> 'The usual' cut ' paste job.
>
> > >> Why would I want to cycle to work?
>
> > >> It's a far more [1] polluting manner of transport than the one I
> > >> already use.  Anyone cycling to work is creating far more pollution
> > >> than I do.
>
> > >> [1] Especially when taking into account the manufacturing processes
> > >> and materials involved.
>
> > > What transport do you already use and why is it less polluting than
> > > cycling?
>
> > I walk.
>
> Excellent, and an example to us all, except those who work from/at
> home.

I don't know, its probably cheaper to heat a building that holds 100
than 100 homes.
Plus you have the extra load on the internet so more equipment is
needed.

Its probably not as good as it sounds if the person would be walking
or cycling to work.  If you are stopping someone using a car or PT
then I agree.

Fod

On Jun 20, 9:28 am, Tony Dragon  wrote:
> Doug wrote:
> > On 20 Jun, 08:25, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
> >> Doug  typed:
>
> >>> On 19 Jun, 09:16, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
> >>>> Doug  typed:
> >>>> 'The usual' cut ' paste job.
> >>>> Why would I want to cycle to work?
> >>>> It's a far more [1] polluting manner of transport than the one I
> >>>> already use.  Anyone cycling to work is creating far more pollution
> >>>> than I do.
> >>>> [1] Especially when taking into account the manufacturing processes
> >>>> and materials involved.
> >>> What transport do you already use and why is it less polluting than
> >>> cycling?
> >> I walk.
>
> > Excellent, and an example to us all, except those who work from/at
> > home.
>
> > --
> > Carfree Cities
> >http://www.carfree.com/
> > Promoting practical alternatives to car dependence - walking, cycling
> > and public transport.
>
> Tell me Doug, is it good to work from home?

I've a mate that does it.  Both of the jobs that were setup that way
he excelled in.  All the others he got fired from.

The only downside is that its lead to him having a very inactive
lifestyle and thats lead to a lot of health problems.  He's not got a
lot of self discipline so that possibly wouldn't happen to others.

I find working at home is ok from time to time but I prefer a home and
work difference so you know when you finish.

Fod

Doug  wrote:

> > His argument was I was using more calories.  He wouldn't accept the
> > point that the bike needed to be created and maintained which used
> > resources...
> >
> I tend to agree with you that walking is better environmentally but
> has a more limited range so cycling is second best and maybe more
> practical in our fast-paced modern world.

Oh, so it's OK for you to be frivolously hypermobile?

I tend to agree with you that cycling is better environmentally but
has a more limited range so driving is second best and maybe more
practical in our fast-paced modern world.

Fod wrote:
> On Jun 20, 9:28 am, Tony Dragon  wrote:
>> Doug wrote:
>>> On 20 Jun, 08:25, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
>>>> Doug  typed:
>>>>> On 19 Jun, 09:16, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
>>>>>> Doug  typed:
>>>>>> 'The usual' cut ' paste job.
>>>>>> Why would I want to cycle to work?
>>>>>> It's a far more [1] polluting manner of transport than the one I
>>>>>> already use.  Anyone cycling to work is creating far more pollution
>>>>>> than I do.
>>>>>> [1] Especially when taking into account the manufacturing processes
>>>>>> and materials involved.
>>>>> What transport do you already use and why is it less polluting than
>>>>> cycling?
>>>> I walk.
>>> Excellent, and an example to us all, except those who work from/at
>>> home.
>>> --
>>> Carfree Cities
>>> http://www.carfree.com/
>>> Promoting practical alternatives to car dependence - walking, cycling
>>> and public transport.
>> Tell me Doug, is it good to work from home?
> 
> I've a mate that does it.  Both of the jobs that were setup that way
> he excelled in.  All the others he got fired from.
> 
> The only downside is that its lead to him having a very inactive
> lifestyle and thats lead to a lot of health problems.  He's not got a
> lot of self discipline so that possibly wouldn't happen to others.
> 
> I find working at home is ok from time to time but I prefer a home and
> work difference so you know when you finish.
> 
> Fod
> 

I said working from home, it is different from working at home.

-- 
Tony the Dragon

Tony Dragon  wrote:

> 
> Tell me Doug, is it good to work from home?

Doug thinks it's bad to work. Unless it's for barter at the local
workers wholegrain cooperative.

On 20 Jun, 09:28, Tony Dragon  wrote:
> Doug wrote:
> > On 20 Jun, 08:25, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
> >> Doug  typed:
>
> >>> On 19 Jun, 09:16, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
> >>>> Doug  typed:
> >>>> 'The usual' cut ' paste job.
> >>>> Why would I want to cycle to work?
> >>>> It's a far more [1] polluting manner of transport than the one I
> >>>> already use.  Anyone cycling to work is creating far more pollution
> >>>> than I do.
> >>>> [1] Especially when taking into account the manufacturing processes
> >>>> and materials involved.
> >>> What transport do you already use and why is it less polluting than
> >>> cycling?
> >> I walk.
>
> > Excellent, and an example to us all, except those who work from/at
> > home.
>
> > --
> > Carfree Cities
> >http://www.carfree.com/
> > Promoting practical alternatives to car dependence - walking, cycling
> > and public transport.
>
> Tell me Doug, is it good to work from home?

I'm afraid you will have lost Doug with that one.  The eighth word in
your sentence is an alien concept to Gollum, and will have to be
explained to him.

On 2008-06-20, Fod  wrote:
> On Jun 20, 9:28 am, Tony Dragon  wrote:
>> Doug wrote:


>> > Excellent, and an example to us all, except those who work from/at
>> > home.
>>
>> > --

BTW, Doug, could you fix your sig seperator so it's standards compliant, please?

>> Tell me Doug, is it good to work from home?
>
> I've a mate that does it. 

I do it. It's marvellous. No way would I go back to commuting.


-- 
          "Be thankful that you have a life, and forsake your vain
                 and presumptuous desire for a second one."
               [email me at huge {at} huge (dot) org <dot> uk]

On 2008-06-20, Doug  wrote:
> On 20 Jun, 08:25, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
>> Doug  typed:
>>
>>
>>
>> > On 19 Jun, 09:16, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
>> >> Doug  typed:
>>
>> >> 'The usual' cut ' paste job.
>>
>> >> Why would I want to cycle to work?
>>
>> >> It's a far more [1] polluting manner of transport than the one I
>> >> already use.  Anyone cycling to work is creating far more pollution
>> >> than I do.
>>
>> >> [1] Especially when taking into account the manufacturing processes
>> >> and materials involved.
>>
>> > What transport do you already use and why is it less polluting than
>> > cycling?
>>
>> I walk.
>>
> Excellent, and an example to us all, except those who work from/at
> home.

Why "except"? Surely those who work at home are doing their bit by not
commuting?


-- 
          "Be thankful that you have a life, and forsake your vain
                 and presumptuous desire for a second one."
               [email me at huge {at} huge (dot) org <dot> uk]

"Steve Firth" <%steve%@malloc.co.uk> wrote in message 
news:1iisceu.c9tdysur7cq4N%%steve%@malloc.co.uk...
> Fod  wrote:
>
>> The BBC were running a feature on an urban cyclist.  She was talking
>> about the good and bad points and giving a nice balanced picture of it
>> all.
>
> As balanced a picture as one can give with a face that appeared to have
> been put on sideways with a pound or two of ironmmongery hanging from
> one's nose.
>
>> What caused me to snort coffee was when she was being interviewed
>> there was a pedestrian crossing behind her.  Just as she made a
>> comment about red light jumping cyclists giving all cyclists a bad
>> name two cyclists zoomed past the red light.  It was such perfect
>> timing that I had to rewind it to check I hadn't imagined it.
>
> <AOL>
>
> I was PMSL at that. It was one of those moments where you wonder if the
> BBC decided to show it in the spirit of irony. She was at the same time
> whining about a motorist who had passed a red light as she herself
> appeared to cycle past a red light (the pedestrians had not cleared the
> crossing, the cars did not move, she did).
>
> Also, did the weirdness of turning Bristol into a city sponsoring
> bicycle use strike anyone else? Cambridge, Oxford, Chester I can
> understand, but Bristol? Are hordes of unfit businessmen really going to
> start to pedal up the hills in the City of Bristol?

I heard this about Bristol and thought it was something Krusty on the other 
group made up!

Mike P

Doug  writes:

> On 20 Jun, 08:25, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
>>
>> I walk.
>>
> Excellent, and an example to us all, except those who work from/at
> home.

Why?  Isn't it better to get some exercise by walking to work than
just shambling into the spare bedroom in your jammies and sitting
there all day?

Chris
-- 
Chris Eilbeck

Doug  typed:
> On 20 Jun, 08:25, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
>> Doug  typed:
>>
>>
>>
>>> On 19 Jun, 09:16, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
>>>> Doug  typed:
>>
>>>> 'The usual' cut ' paste job.
>>
>>>> Why would I want to cycle to work?
>>
>>>> It's a far more [1] polluting manner of transport than the one I
>>>> already use.  Anyone cycling to work is creating far more pollution
>>>> than I do.
>>
>>>> [1] Especially when taking into account the manufacturing processes
>>>> and materials involved.
>>
>>> What transport do you already use and why is it less polluting than
>>> cycling?
>>
>> I walk.
>>
> Excellent, and an example to us all, except those who work from/at
> home.

So you agree you are far more polluting than me, in this respect?

Mind, I don't suppose you work, do you?

-- 
Dogpoop
http://www.glass-uk.org/
"You would probably do better not to bother with renewable
energy"  Doug, UK.Transport 29/04/2008 08:53.

In message <1iisceu.c9tdysur7cq4N%%steve%@malloc.co.uk>, Steve Firth 
<%steve%@malloc.co.uk> writes
>Fod  wrote:
>
>> The BBC were running a feature on an urban cyclist.  She was talking
>> about the good and bad points and giving a nice balanced picture of it
>> all.
>
>As balanced a picture as one can give with a face that appeared to have
>been put on sideways with a pound or two of ironmmongery hanging from
>one's nose.
>
>> What caused me to snort coffee was when she was being interviewed
>> there was a pedestrian crossing behind her.  Just as she made a
>> comment about red light jumping cyclists giving all cyclists a bad
>> name two cyclists zoomed past the red light.  It was such perfect
>> timing that I had to rewind it to check I hadn't imagined it.
>
><AOL>
>
>I was PMSL at that. It was one of those moments where you wonder if the
>BBC decided to show it in the spirit of irony.

I haven't seen this specific item but it sounds almost certainly like 
the sort of detail that would have been spotted and left in, TV people 
love that sort of thing.


-- 
Ed Banger

Ed Banger  wrote:

> I haven't seen this specific item but it sounds almost certainly like
> the sort of detail that would have been spotted and left in, TV people
> love that sort of thing.

I was left wondering if they were unable to find anyone normal riding a
bicycle in Bristol. Certainly the lop-sided face with a load of nasal
ironmongery seemed chosen to put people off riding a bike.

Some twerp with a faceful of metal jumped out in front of my car this
morning. He seemed to be taking the Bollenical approach to roads that
they are there for the pedestrian first and for drivers second. Or he
was attemptign suicide, not sure which. I managed to stop without
hitting him, but he seemed to suffer from an attitude problems, cursing
at any and all motorists. He wasn't phased by his near death eperience
since he did it again to a car coming the other way, couple with more
aggro.

He was trying to look 'hard' scowling furiously at drivers. Ended up
looking a complete tit IMO.

Ah well, another reason why I avoid cities. Nutters like Bolltard are
all too common.

On 20 Jun, 18:39, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
> Doug  typed:
>
>
>
> > On 20 Jun, 08:25, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
> >> Doug  typed:
>
> >>> On 19 Jun, 09:16, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
> >>>> Doug  typed:
>
> >>>> 'The usual' cut ' paste job.
>
> >>>> Why would I want to cycle to work?
>
> >>>> It's a far more [1] polluting manner of transport than the one I
> >>>> already use.  Anyone cycling to work is creating far more pollution
> >>>> than I do.
>
> >>>> [1] Especially when taking into account the manufacturing processes
> >>>> and materials involved.
>
> >>> What transport do you already use and why is it less polluting than
> >>> cycling?
>
> >> I walk.
>
> > Excellent, and an example to us all, except those who work from/at
> > home.
>
> So you agree you are far more polluting than me, in this respect?
>
Only if you claim never to use a car and are extremely economical in
your home energy use.
>
> Mind, I don't suppose you work, do you?
>
Why would you suppose that?

--
World Carfree Network
http://www.worldcarfree.net/
Help for your car-addicted friends in the U.K.

On 20 Jun, 10:37, Huge <H...@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:
> On 2008-06-20, Doug  wrote:
>
>
>
> > On 20 Jun, 08:25, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
> >> Doug  typed:
>
> >> > On 19 Jun, 09:16, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
> >> >> Doug  typed:
>
> >> >> 'The usual' cut ' paste job.
>
> >> >> Why would I want to cycle to work?
>
> >> >> It's a far more [1] polluting manner of transport than the one I
> >> >> already use.  Anyone cycling to work is creating far more pollution
> >> >> than I do.
>
> >> >> [1] Especially when taking into account the manufacturing processes
> >> >> and materials involved.
>
> >> > What transport do you already use and why is it less polluting than
> >> > cycling?
>
> >> I walk.
>
> > Excellent, and an example to us all, except those who work from/at
> > home.
>
> Why "except"? Surely those who work at home are doing their bit by not
> commuting?
>
You misunderstand. Those who work at home do not need an example
because they are an example in themselves to those who commute using
machines.

Of course cycling and walking does provide healthy exercise but this
doesn't necessarily have to happen just during a rush hour. Those who
work from home can exercise in their free time.

--
World Carfree Network
http://www.worldcarfree.net/
Help for your car-addicted friends in the U.K.

On 20 Jun, 18:39, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
> Doug  typed:
>
>
>
> > On 20 Jun, 08:25, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
> >> Doug  typed:
>
> >>> On 19 Jun, 09:16, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
> >>>> Doug  typed:
>
> >>>> 'The usual' cut ' paste job.
>
> >>>> Why would I want to cycle to work?
>
> >>>> It's a far more [1] polluting manner of transport than the one I
> >>>> already use.  Anyone cycling to work is creating far more pollution
> >>>> than I do.
>
> >>>> [1] Especially when taking into account the manufacturing processes
> >>>> and materials involved.
>
> >>> What transport do you already use and why is it less polluting than
> >>> cycling?
>
> >> I walk.
>
> > Excellent, and an example to us all, except those who work from/at
> > home.
>
> So you agree you are far more polluting than me, in this respect?
>
> Mind, I don't suppose you work, do you?
>
Be fair to both Dhgh's,  at their age you wouldn't expect them to
work.

On 21 Jun, 01:40, %ste...@malloc.co.uk (Steve Firth) wrote:
> Ed Banger  wrote:
> > I haven't seen this specific item but it sounds almost certainly like
> > the sort of detail that would have been spotted and left in, TV people
> > love that sort of thing.
>
> I was left wondering if they were unable to find anyone normal riding a
> bicycle in Bristol. Certainly the lop-sided face with a load of nasal
> ironmongery seemed chosen to put people off riding a bike.
>
> Some twerp with a faceful of metal jumped out in front of my car this
> morning. He seemed to be taking the Bollenical approach to roads that
> they are there for the pedestrian first and for drivers second. Or he
> was attemptign suicide, not sure which. I managed to stop without
> hitting him, but he seemed to suffer from an attitude problems, cursing
> at any and all motorists. He wasn't phased by his near death eperience
> since he did it again to a car coming the other way, couple with more
> aggro.
>
> He was trying to look 'hard' scowling furiously at drivers. Ended up
> looking a complete tit IMO.
>
> Ah well, another reason why I avoid cities. Nutters like Bolltard are
> all too common.

Yesterday I had to go to a farm near Lands End, the road from Newlyn
past the merry maidens stone circle has a couple of steep valleys that
are narrow, one very narrow. In the discovery I'm just starting up the
other side at the narrowest point, single track road about 1 in 4 at a
guess when a lycra clad loon on a bike with dropped handlebars came
hurtling down the hill from around the blind bend, both his brakes
jammed on and with his teeth set in a frozen grin, how the fuck he got
through the gap between my car and the hedge I don't know but he
managed to get past me without scratching the car, he was seen in the
mirror wobbling all over the road having scraped along the hedgerow,
he was going far faster than any of the cars using the road. It wasn't
either of the Dougs because he was only about 25.
I suppose had I hit him it would have been my fault.

Doug wrote:
> On 20 Jun, 18:39, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
>> Doug  typed:
>>
>>
>>
>>> On 20 Jun, 08:25, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
>>>> Doug  typed:
>>>>> On 19 Jun, 09:16, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
>>>>>> Doug  typed:
>>>>>> 'The usual' cut ' paste job.
>>>>>> Why would I want to cycle to work?
>>>>>> It's a far more [1] polluting manner of transport than the one I
>>>>>> already use.  Anyone cycling to work is creating far more pollution
>>>>>> than I do.
>>>>>> [1] Especially when taking into account the manufacturing processes
>>>>>> and materials involved.
>>>>> What transport do you already use and why is it less polluting than
>>>>> cycling?
>>>> I walk.
>>> Excellent, and an example to us all, except those who work from/at
>>> home.
>> So you agree you are far more polluting than me, in this respect?
>>
> Only if you claim never to use a car and are extremely economical in
> your home energy use.
>> Mind, I don't suppose you work, do you?
>>
> Why would you suppose that?
> 
> --
> World Carfree Network
> http://www.worldcarfree.net/
> Help for your car-addicted friends in the U.K.
> 

What part of *in this respect* did you not understand?

-- 
Tony the Dragon

Doug  wrote:

> You misunderstand. Those who work at home do not need an example
> because they are an example in themselves to those who commute using
> machines.

Thank you for hero-worshipping me.

On 2008-06-21, Doug  wrote:
> On 20 Jun, 10:37, Huge <H...@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:
>> On 2008-06-20, Doug  wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> > On 20 Jun, 08:25, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
>> >> Doug  typed:
>>
>> >> > On 19 Jun, 09:16, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
>> >> >> Doug  typed:
>>
>> >> >> 'The usual' cut ' paste job.
>>
>> >> >> Why would I want to cycle to work?
>>
>> >> >> It's a far more [1] polluting manner of transport than the one I
>> >> >> already use.  Anyone cycling to work is creating far more pollution
>> >> >> than I do.
>>
>> >> >> [1] Especially when taking into account the manufacturing processes
>> >> >> and materials involved.
>>
>> >> > What transport do you already use and why is it less polluting than
>> >> > cycling?
>>
>> >> I walk.
>>
>> > Excellent, and an example to us all, except those who work from/at
>> > home.
>>
>> Why "except"? Surely those who work at home are doing their bit by not
>> commuting?
>>
> You misunderstand. Those who work at home do not need an example
> because they are an example in themselves to those who commute using
> machines.

Ah, OK. Thank you.


-- 
          "Be thankful that you have a life, and forsake your vain
                 and presumptuous desire for a second one."
               [email me at huge {at} huge (dot) org <dot> uk]

On 21 Jun, 10:42, %ste...@malloc.co.uk (Steve Firth) wrote:
> Doug  wrote:
> > You misunderstand. Those who work at home do not need an example
> > because they are an example in themselves to those who commute using
> > machines.
>
> Thank you for hero-worshipping me.

I'm sure Bollum will soon think up a reason why you working from home
is a bad thing, and label it "greenwash".  Just give him time.

Doug  typed:
> On 20 Jun, 18:39, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
>> Doug  typed:
>>
>>
>>
>>> On 20 Jun, 08:25, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
>>>> Doug  typed:
>>
>>>>> On 19 Jun, 09:16, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
>>>>>> Doug  typed:
>>
>>>>>> 'The usual' cut ' paste job.
>>
>>>>>> Why would I want to cycle to work?
>>
>>>>>> It's a far more [1] polluting manner of transport than the one I
>>>>>> already use.  Anyone cycling to work is creating far more
>>>>>> pollution than I do.
>>
>>>>>> [1] Especially when taking into account the manufacturing
>>>>>> processes and materials involved.
>>
>>>>> What transport do you already use and why is it less polluting
>>>>> than cycling?
>>
>>>> I walk.
>>
>>> Excellent, and an example to us all, except those who work from/at
>>> home.
>>
>> So you agree you are far more polluting than me, in this respect?
>>
> Only if you claim never to use a car and are extremely economical in
> your home energy use.

'in this respect' means nothing, I suppose.  So, again, you agree you are 
far more polluting than me in this respect?

>> Mind, I don't suppose you work, do you?
>>
> Why would you suppose that?

Well, you didn't answer my question above, you appear too old, your pictures 
make you look too ill to work and you give the general impression that you 
aren't gainfully employed.

-- 
Dogpoop
http://www.glass-uk.org/
"You would probably do better not to bother with renewable
energy"  Doug, UK.Transport 29/04/2008 08:53.

On 21 Jun, 10:42, %ste...@malloc.co.uk (Steve Firth) wrote:
> Doug  wrote:
> > You misunderstand. Those who work at home do not need an example
> > because they are an example in themselves to those who commute using
> > machines.
>
> Thank you for hero-worshipping me.

So now you are pretending you only work from home, or did they cancel
your contract? I seem to remember that in the past you have used your
masive 4x4 for work, or are you going to lie about that too?

--
UK Radical Campaigns
www.zing.icom43.net
"The 4x4, more of a sewer than a convenience".

On 21 Jun, 15:44, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
> Doug  typed:
>
>
>
> > On 20 Jun, 18:39, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
> >> Doug  typed:
>
> >>> On 20 Jun, 08:25, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
> >>>> Doug  typed:
>
> >>>>> On 19 Jun, 09:16, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
> >>>>>> Doug  typed:
>
> >>>>>> 'The usual' cut ' paste job.
>
> >>>>>> Why would I want to cycle to work?
>
> >>>>>> It's a far more [1] polluting manner of transport than the one I
> >>>>>> already use.  Anyone cycling to work is creating far more
> >>>>>> pollution than I do.
>
> >>>>>> [1] Especially when taking into account the manufacturing
> >>>>>> processes and materials involved.
>
> >>>>> What transport do you already use and why is it less polluting
> >>>>> than cycling?
>
> >>>> I walk.
>
> >>> Excellent, and an example to us all, except those who work from/at
> >>> home.
>
> >> So you agree you are far more polluting than me, in this respect?
>
> > Only if you claim never to use a car and are extremely economical in
> > your home energy use.
>
> 'in this respect' means nothing, I suppose.  So, again, you agree you are
> far more polluting than me in this respect?
>
> >> Mind, I don't suppose you work, do you?
>
> > Why would you suppose that?
>
> Well, you didn't answer my question above, you appear too old, your pictures
> make you look too ill to work and you give the general impression that you
> aren't gainfully employed.
>
Which pictures are you referring to and what impression? BTW, do you
have any pictures of you on the internet?

--
World Carfree Network
http://www.worldcarfree.net/
Help for your car-addicted friends in the U.K.

On 22 Jun, 06:26, Doug  wrote:
> On 21 Jun, 15:44, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
>
>
>
> > Doug �typed:
>
> > > On 20 Jun, 18:39, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
> > >> Doug �typed:
>
> > >>> On 20 Jun, 08:25, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
> > >>>> Doug �typed:
>
> > >>>>> On 19 Jun, 09:16, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
> > >>>>>> Doug �typed:
>
> > >>>>>> 'The usual' cut ' paste job.
>
> > >>>>>> Why would I want to cycle to work?
>
> > >>>>>> It's a far more [1] polluting manner of transport than the one I
> > >>>>>> already use. �Anyone cycling to work is creating far more
> > >>>>>> pollution than I do.
>
> > >>>>>> [1] Especially when taking into account the manufacturing
> > >>>>>> processes and materials involved.
>
> > >>>>> What transport do you already use and why is it less polluting
> > >>>>> than cycling?
>
> > >>>> I walk.
>
> > >>> Excellent, and an example to us all, except those who work from/at
> > >>> home.
>
> > >> So you agree you are far more polluting than me, in this respect?
>
> > > Only if you claim never to use a car and are extremely economical in
> > > your home energy use.
>
> > 'in this respect' means nothing, I suppose. �So, again, you agree you are
> > far more polluting than me in this respect?
>
> > >> Mind, I don't suppose you work, do you?
>
> > > Why would you suppose that?
>
> > Well, you didn't answer my question above, you appear too old, your pictures
> > make you look too ill to work and you give the general impression that you
> > aren't gainfully employed.
>
> Which pictures are you referring to

I imagine he's referring to the ones of you which appear on the
Lewisham cycling group website.  The ones which have been posted to
this group on numerous occasions.

> and what impression?

That of a painfully thin, deathly white old turd who looks as though
he's just been dug up, perhaps?

BrianW wrote:
> On 22 Jun, 06:26, Doug  wrote:
>> On 21 Jun, 15:44, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> Doug �typed:
>>>> On 20 Jun, 18:39, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
>>>>> Doug �typed:
>>>>>> On 20 Jun, 08:25, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
>>>>>>> Doug �typed:
>>>>>>>> On 19 Jun, 09:16, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Doug �typed:
>>>>>>>>> 'The usual' cut ' paste job.
>>>>>>>>> Why would I want to cycle to work?
>>>>>>>>> It's a far more [1] polluting manner of transport than the one I
>>>>>>>>> already use. �Anyone cycling to work is creating far more
>>>>>>>>> pollution than I do.
>>>>>>>>> [1] Especially when taking into account the manufacturing
>>>>>>>>> processes and materials involved.
>>>>>>>> What transport do you already use and why is it less polluting
>>>>>>>> than cycling?
>>>>>>> I walk.
>>>>>> Excellent, and an example to us all, except those who work from/at
>>>>>> home.
>>>>> So you agree you are far more polluting than me, in this respect?
>>>> Only if you claim never to use a car and are extremely economical in
>>>> your home energy use.
>>> 'in this respect' means nothing, I suppose. �So, again, you agree you are
>>> far more polluting than me in this respect?
>>>>> Mind, I don't suppose you work, do you?
>>>> Why would you suppose that?
>>> Well, you didn't answer my question above, you appear too old, your pictures
>>> make you look too ill to work and you give the general impression that you
>>> aren't gainfully employed.
>> Which pictures are you referring to
> 
> I imagine he's referring to the ones of you which appear on the
> Lewisham cycling group website.  The ones which have been posted to
> this group on numerous occasions.
> 
>> and what impression?
> 
> That of a painfully thin, deathly white old turd who looks as though
> he's just been dug up, perhaps?

Do you mean "Doug up"?

-- 
Moving things in still pictures!

Doug  typed:

Evasive tactics again, so I'll leave the questions in .......

>> 'in this respect' means nothing, I suppose.  So, again, you agree
>> you are far more polluting than me in this respect?

>>>> Mind, I don't suppose you work, do you?

-- 
Dogpoop
http://www.glass-uk.org/
"You would probably do better not to bother with renewable
energy"  Doug, UK.Transport 29/04/2008 08:53.

On 22 Jun, 09:43, ®i©ardo  wrote:
> BrianW wrote:
> > On 22 Jun, 06:26, Doug  wrote:
> >> On 21 Jun, 15:44, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
>
> >>> Doug �typed:
> >>>> On 20 Jun, 18:39, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
> >>>>> Doug �typed:
> >>>>>> On 20 Jun, 08:25, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
> >>>>>>> Doug �typed:
> >>>>>>>> On 19 Jun, 09:16, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> Doug �typed:
> >>>>>>>>> 'The usual' cut ' paste job.
> >>>>>>>>> Why would I want to cycle to work?
> >>>>>>>>> It's a far more [1] polluting manner of transport than the one I> >>>>>>>>> already use. �Anyone cycling to work is creating far more
> >>>>>>>>> pollution than I do.
> >>>>>>>>> [1] Especially when taking into account the manufacturing
> >>>>>>>>> processes and materials involved.
> >>>>>>>> What transport do you already use and why is it less polluting
> >>>>>>>> than cycling?
> >>>>>>> I walk.
> >>>>>> Excellent, and an example to us all, except those who work from/at
> >>>>>> home.
> >>>>> So you agree you are far more polluting than me, in this respect?
> >>>> Only if you claim never to use a car and are extremely economical in
> >>>> your home energy use.
> >>> 'in this respect' means nothing, I suppose. �So, again, you agree you are
> >>> far more polluting than me in this respect?
> >>>>> Mind, I don't suppose you work, do you?
> >>>> Why would you suppose that?
> >>> Well, you didn't answer my question above, you appear too old, your pictures
> >>> make you look too ill to work and you give the general impression that you
> >>> aren't gainfully employed.
> >> Which pictures are you referring to
>
> > I imagine he's referring to the ones of you which appear on the
> > Lewisham cycling group website.  The ones which have been posted to> > this group on numerous occasions.
>
> >> and what impression?
>
> > That of a painfully thin, deathly white old turd who looks as though
> > he's just been dug up, perhaps?
>
> Do you mean "Doug up"?

LOL.  Yes!

Doug  wrote:

> On 21 Jun, 10:42, %ste...@malloc.co.uk (Steve Firth) wrote:
> > Doug  wrote:
> > > You misunderstand. Those who work at home do not need an example
> > > because they are an example in themselves to those who commute using
> > > machines.
> >
> > Thank you for hero-worshipping me.
> 
> So now you are pretending you only work from home, or did they cancel
> your contract? I seem to remember that in the past you have used your
> masive 4x4 for work, or are you going to lie about that too?

You need to learn the difference between working from home and working
at home. You also need to learn the difference between a liar (you) and
someone who tells the truth.

On 22 Jun, 10:15, %ste...@malloc.co.uk (Steve Firth) wrote:
> Doug  wrote:
> > On 21 Jun, 10:42, %ste...@malloc.co.uk (Steve Firth) wrote:
> > > Doug  wrote:
> > > > You misunderstand. Those who work at home do not need an example
> > > > because they are an example in themselves to those who commute using
> > > > machines.
>
> > > Thank you for hero-worshipping me.
>
> > So now you are pretending you only work from home, or did they cancel
> > your contract? I seem to remember that in the past you have used your
> > masive 4x4 for work, or are you going to lie about that too?
>
> You need to learn the difference between working from home and working
> at home. You also need to learn the difference between a liar (you) and
> someone who tells the truth.

More of your evasiveness? You have boasted about and defended your
wanton 4x4 use in the past and now you are trying to wriggle out of it
and lie about it with a greenwash smokescreen.

--
UK Radical Campaigns
www.zing.icom43.net
"The 4x4, more of a sewer than a convenience".

On 22 Jun, 09:43, ®i©ardo  wrote:
> BrianW wrote:
> > On 22 Jun, 06:26, Doug  wrote:
> >> On 21 Jun, 15:44, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
>
> >>> Doug �typed:
> >>>> On 20 Jun, 18:39, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
> >>>>> Doug �typed:
> >>>>>> On 20 Jun, 08:25, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
> >>>>>>> Doug �typed:
> >>>>>>>> On 19 Jun, 09:16, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> Doug �typed:
> >>>>>>>>> 'The usual' cut ' paste job.
> >>>>>>>>> Why would I want to cycle to work?
> >>>>>>>>> It's a far more [1] polluting manner of transport than the one I
> >>>>>>>>> already use. �Anyone cycling to work is creating far more
> >>>>>>>>> pollution than I do.
> >>>>>>>>> [1] Especially when taking into account the manufacturing
> >>>>>>>>> processes and materials involved.
> >>>>>>>> What transport do you already use and why is it less polluting
> >>>>>>>> than cycling?
> >>>>>>> I walk.
> >>>>>> Excellent, and an example to us all, except those who work from/at
> >>>>>> home.
> >>>>> So you agree you are far more polluting than me, in this respect?
> >>>> Only if you claim never to use a car and are extremely economical in
> >>>> your home energy use.
> >>> 'in this respect' means nothing, I suppose. �So, again, you agree you are
> >>> far more polluting than me in this respect?
> >>>>> Mind, I don't suppose you work, do you?
> >>>> Why would you suppose that?
> >>> Well, you didn't answer my question above, you appear too old, your pictures
> >>> make you look too ill to work and you give the general impression that you
> >>> aren't gainfully employed.
> >> Which pictures are you referring to
>
> > I imagine he's referring to the ones of you which appear on the
> > Lewisham cycling group website.  The ones which have been posted to
> > this group on numerous occasions.
>
> >> and what impression?
>
> > That of a painfully thin, deathly white old turd who looks as though
> > he's just been dug up, perhaps?
>
> Do you mean "Doug up"?
>
Wrong again, as usual. Unfortunately for you they are not pictures of
me and you cannot produce any pictures of me. Typical!

--
World Carfree Network
http://www.worldcarfree.net/
Help for your car-addicted friends in the U.K.

Doug wrote:
> On 22 Jun, 09:43, ®i©ardo  wrote:
>> BrianW wrote:
>>> On 22 Jun, 06:26, Doug  wrote:
>>>> On 21 Jun, 15:44, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
>>>>> Doug �typed:
>>>>>> On 20 Jun, 18:39, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
>>>>>>> Doug �typed:
>>>>>>>> On 20 Jun, 08:25, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Doug �typed:
>>>>>>>>>> On 19 Jun, 09:16, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Doug �typed:
>>>>>>>>>>> 'The usual' cut ' paste job.
>>>>>>>>>>> Why would I want to cycle to work?
>>>>>>>>>>> It's a far more [1] polluting manner of transport than the one I
>>>>>>>>>>> already use. �Anyone cycling to work is creating far more
>>>>>>>>>>> pollution than I do.
>>>>>>>>>>> [1] Especially when taking into account the manufacturing
>>>>>>>>>>> processes and materials involved.
>>>>>>>>>> What transport do you already use and why is it less polluting
>>>>>>>>>> than cycling?
>>>>>>>>> I walk.
>>>>>>>> Excellent, and an example to us all, except those who work from/at
>>>>>>>> home.
>>>>>>> So you agree you are far more polluting than me, in this respect?
>>>>>> Only if you claim never to use a car and are extremely economical in
>>>>>> your home energy use.
>>>>> 'in this respect' means nothing, I suppose. �So, again, you agree you are
>>>>> far more polluting than me in this respect?
>>>>>>> Mind, I don't suppose you work, do you?
>>>>>> Why would you suppose that?
>>>>> Well, you didn't answer my question above, you appear too old, your pictures
>>>>> make you look too ill to work and you give the general impression that you
>>>>> aren't gainfully employed.
>>>> Which pictures are you referring to
>>> I imagine he's referring to the ones of you which appear on the
>>> Lewisham cycling group website.  The ones which have been posted to
>>> this group on numerous occasions.
>>>> and what impression?
>>> That of a painfully thin, deathly white old turd who looks as though
>>> he's just been dug up, perhaps?
>> Do you mean "Doug up"?
>>
> Wrong again, as usual. Unfortunately for you they are not pictures of
> me and you cannot produce any pictures of me. Typical!
> 
> --
> World Carfree Network
> http://www.worldcarfree.net/
> Help for your car-addicted friends in the U.K.
> 

Either everybody else & the evidence is wrong or paranoia has set in.

-- 
Tony the Dragon

Doug wrote:
> On 22 Jun, 09:43, ®i©ardo  wrote:
>> BrianW wrote:
>>> On 22 Jun, 06:26, Doug  wrote:
>>>> On 21 Jun, 15:44, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
>>>>> Doug �typed:
>>>>>> On 20 Jun, 18:39, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
>>>>>>> Doug �typed:
>>>>>>>> On 20 Jun, 08:25, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Doug �typed:
>>>>>>>>>> On 19 Jun, 09:16, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Doug �typed:
>>>>>>>>>>> 'The usual' cut ' paste job.
>>>>>>>>>>> Why would I want to cycle to work?
>>>>>>>>>>> It's a far more [1] polluting manner of transport than the one I
>>>>>>>>>>> already use. �Anyone cycling to work is creating far more
>>>>>>>>>>> pollution than I do.
>>>>>>>>>>> [1] Especially when taking into account the manufacturing
>>>>>>>>>>> processes and materials involved.
>>>>>>>>>> What transport do you already use and why is it less polluting
>>>>>>>>>> than cycling?
>>>>>>>>> I walk.
>>>>>>>> Excellent, and an example to us all, except those who work from/at
>>>>>>>> home.
>>>>>>> So you agree you are far more polluting than me, in this respect?
>>>>>> Only if you claim never to use a car and are extremely economical in
>>>>>> your home energy use.
>>>>> 'in this respect' means nothing, I suppose. �So, again, you agree you are
>>>>> far more polluting than me in this respect?
>>>>>>> Mind, I don't suppose you work, do you?
>>>>>> Why would you suppose that?
>>>>> Well, you didn't answer my question above, you appear too old, your pictures
>>>>> make you look too ill to work and you give the general impression that you
>>>>> aren't gainfully employed.
>>>> Which pictures are you referring to
>>> I imagine he's referring to the ones of you which appear on the
>>> Lewisham cycling group website.  The ones which have been posted to
>>> this group on numerous occasions.
>>>> and what impression?
>>> That of a painfully thin, deathly white old turd who looks as though
>>> he's just been dug up, perhaps?
>> Do you mean "Doug up"?
>>
> Wrong again, as usual. Unfortunately for you they are not pictures of
> me and you cannot produce any pictures of me. Typical!
> 
> --
> World Carfree Network
> http://www.worldcarfree.net/
> Help for your car-addicted friends in the U.K.
> 

I suppose that publishing a "real" picture of you could result in a 
prosecution under the Obscene Publications Act!

Cor, look at that c*nt!

-- 
Moving things in still pictures!

In message 
, Doug 
 writes
>On 22 Jun, 09:43, ®i©ardo  wrote:
>> BrianW wrote:
>> > On 22 Jun, 06:26, Doug  wrote:
>> >> On 21 Jun, 15:44, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
>>
>> >>> Doug 0 >> >>>> On 20 Jun, 18:39, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
>> >>>>> Doug 0 >> >>>>>> On 20 Jun, 08:25, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
>> >>>>>>> Doug 0 >> >>>>>>>> On 19 Jun, 09:16, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>> Doug 0 >> >>>>>>>>> 'The usual' cut ' paste job.
>> >>>>>>>>> Why would I want to cycle to work?
>> >>>>>>>>> It's a far more [1] polluting manner of transport than the one I
>> >>>>>>>>> already use. 0 >> >>>>>>>>> pollution than I do.
>> >>>>>>>>> [1] Especially when taking into account the manufacturing
>> >>>>>>>>> processes and materials involved.
>> >>>>>>>> What transport do you already use and why is it less polluting
>> >>>>>>>> than cycling?
>> >>>>>>> I walk.
>> >>>>>> Excellent, and an example to us all, except those who work from/at
>> >>>>>> home.
>> >>>>> So you agree you are far more polluting than me, in this respect?
>> >>>> Only if you claim never to use a car and are extremely economical in
>> >>>> your home energy use.
>> >>> 'in this respect' means nothing, I suppose. 0 >> >>>you are
>> >>> far more polluting than me in this respect?
>> >>>>> Mind, I don't suppose you work, do you?
>> >>>> Why would you suppose that?
>> >>> Well, you didn't answer my question above, you appear too old, 
>> >>>your pictures
>> >>> make you look too ill to work and you give the general impression 
>> >>>that you
>> >>> aren't gainfully employed.
>> >> Which pictures are you referring to
>>
>> > I imagine he's referring to the ones of you which appear on the
>> > Lewisham cycling group website.  The ones which have been posted to
>> > this group on numerous occasions.
>>
>> >> and what impression?
>>
>> > That of a painfully thin, deathly white old turd who looks as though
>> > he's just been dug up, perhaps?
>>
>> Do you mean "Doug up"?
>>
>Wrong again, as usual.

Ding ding!

*salivate*

>Unfortunately for you they are not pictures of
>me and you cannot produce any pictures of me. Typical!

Ugly cunt, isn't he?


-- 
Ed Banger

On 23 Jun, 06:45, Doug  wrote:
> On 22 Jun, 09:43, ®i©ardo  wrote:
>
>
>
> > BrianW wrote:
> > > On 22 Jun, 06:26, Doug  wrote:
> > >> On 21 Jun, 15:44, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
>
> > >>> Doug �typed:
> > >>>> On 20 Jun, 18:39, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
> > >>>>> Doug �typed:
> > >>>>>> On 20 Jun, 08:25, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
> > >>>>>>> Doug �typed:
> > >>>>>>>> On 19 Jun, 09:16, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>> Doug �typed:
> > >>>>>>>>> 'The usual' cut ' paste job.
> > >>>>>>>>> Why would I want to cycle to work?
> > >>>>>>>>> It's a far more [1] polluting manner of transport than the one I
> > >>>>>>>>> already use. �Anyone cycling to work is creating far more
> > >>>>>>>>> pollution than I do.
> > >>>>>>>>> [1] Especially when taking into account the manufacturing
> > >>>>>>>>> processes and materials involved.
> > >>>>>>>> What transport do you already use and why is it less polluting
> > >>>>>>>> than cycling?
> > >>>>>>> I walk.
> > >>>>>> Excellent, and an example to us all, except those who work from/at
> > >>>>>> home.
> > >>>>> So you agree you are far more polluting than me, in this respect?
> > >>>> Only if you claim never to use a car and are extremely economical in
> > >>>> your home energy use.
> > >>> 'in this respect' means nothing, I suppose. �So, again, you agree you are
> > >>> far more polluting than me in this respect?
> > >>>>> Mind, I don't suppose you work, do you?
> > >>>> Why would you suppose that?
> > >>> Well, you didn't answer my question above, you appear too old, your pictures
> > >>> make you look too ill to work and you give the general impression that you
> > >>> aren't gainfully employed.
> > >> Which pictures are you referring to
>
> > > I imagine he's referring to the ones of you which appear on the
> > > Lewisham cycling group website.  The ones which have been posted to
> > > this group on numerous occasions.
>
> > >> and what impression?
>
> > > That of a painfully thin, deathly white old turd who looks as though
> > > he's just been dug up, perhaps?
>
> > Do you mean "Doug up"?
>
> Wrong again, as usual. Unfortunately for you they are not pictures of
> me and you cannot produce any pictures of me. Typical!

Lying again, Gollum?  You have in the past admitted that these pics
are you:

http://www.pnony.org.uk/thenandnow.html

And the skinny old turd shown in the Lewisham Cycling club pics looks
suspiciously like the pics on pnony.  Or are you saying that Doug
Bollen is also a skinny old pale white turd who looks just like you?
Are you twins, perhaps?

In message 
, Doug 
 writes
>On 22 Jun, 09:43, ®i©ardo  wrote:
>> BrianW wrote:
>> > On 22 Jun, 06:26, Doug  wrote:
>> >> On 21 Jun, 15:44, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
>>
>> >>> Doug 0 >> >>>> On 20 Jun, 18:39, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
>> >>>>> Doug 0 >> >>>>>> On 20 Jun, 08:25, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
>> >>>>>>> Doug 0 >> >>>>>>>> On 19 Jun, 09:16, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>> Doug 0 >> >>>>>>>>> 'The usual' cut ' paste job.
>> >>>>>>>>> Why would I want to cycle to work?
>> >>>>>>>>> It's a far more [1] polluting manner of transport than the one I
>> >>>>>>>>> already use. 0 >> >>>>>>>>> pollution than I do.
>> >>>>>>>>> [1] Especially when taking into account the manufacturing
>> >>>>>>>>> processes and materials involved.
>> >>>>>>>> What transport do you already use and why is it less polluting
>> >>>>>>>> than cycling?
>> >>>>>>> I walk.
>> >>>>>> Excellent, and an example to us all, except those who work from/at
>> >>>>>> home.
>> >>>>> So you agree you are far more polluting than me, in this respect?
>> >>>> Only if you claim never to use a car and are extremely economical in
>> >>>> your home energy use.
>> >>> 'in this respect' means nothing, I suppose. 0 >> >>>you are
>> >>> far more polluting than me in this respect?
>> >>>>> Mind, I don't suppose you work, do you?
>> >>>> Why would you suppose that?
>> >>> Well, you didn't answer my question above, you appear too old, 
>> >>>your pictures
>> >>> make you look too ill to work and you give the general impression 
>> >>>that you
>> >>> aren't gainfully employed.
>> >> Which pictures are you referring to
>>
>> > I imagine he's referring to the ones of you which appear on the
>> > Lewisham cycling group website.  The ones which have been posted to
>> > this group on numerous occasions.
>>
>> >> and what impression?
>>
>> > That of a painfully thin, deathly white old turd who looks as though
>> > he's just been dug up, perhaps?
>>
>> Do you mean "Doug up"?
>>
>Wrong again, as usual.

Ding ding!

*salivate*

>Unfortunately for you they are not pictures of
>me and you cannot produce any pictures of me. Typical!

Ugly cunt, isn't he? I'd deny they were me if I looked like that too.


-- 
Ed Banger

Doug  wrote:

> On 22 Jun, 10:15, %ste...@malloc.co.uk (Steve Firth) wrote:
> > Doug  wrote:
> > > On 21 Jun, 10:42, %ste...@malloc.co.uk (Steve Firth) wrote:
> > > > Doug  wrote:
> > > > > You misunderstand. Those who work at home do not need an example
> > > > > because they are an example in themselves to those who commute using
> > > > > machines.
> >
> > > > Thank you for hero-worshipping me.
> >
> > > So now you are pretending you only work from home, or did they cancel
> > > your contract? I seem to remember that in the past you have used your
> > > masive 4x4 for work, or are you going to lie about that too?
> >
> > You need to learn the difference between working from home and working
> > at home. You also need to learn the difference between a liar (you) and
> > someone who tells the truth.
> 
> More of your evasiveness? You have boasted about and defended your
> wanton 4x4 use in the past and now you are trying to wriggle out of it
> and lie about it with a greenwash smokescreen.

No such thing, I'm pointing out the facts and you are, as usual,
indulging in abuse and hand waving.

On 19 Jun, 06:12, Dzhugashvili  wrote:

> Are you a cyclist?

Yes Dzhugashvili, I cycle to work.
Yes Dzhugashvili I WORK for a living, unlike yourself.

Dogpoop  typed:
> Doug  typed:
>
> Evasive tactics again, so I'll leave the questions in .......
>
>>> 'in this respect' means nothing, I suppose.  So, again, you agree
>>> you are far more polluting than me in this respect?
>
>>>>> Mind, I don't suppose you work, do you?

Not answering Doug?

I'll ask again, just in case you didn't see the questions.

"You agree you are far more polluting than me in this respect?"

"I don't suppose you work, do you?"

You've answered other posts in this thread, but won't answer two basic 
questions which are immediately derivative of your OP.

I wonder why ........

-- 
Dogpoop
http://www.glass-uk.org/
"You would probably do better not to bother with renewable
energy"  Doug, UK.Transport 29/04/2008 08:53.

In message 
, 
Doug  writes
>Why would you suppose that?
Without turning off your heating and lighting, how else do you reckon to 
be lower in energy consumption than anyone else?   Oh, and walking to 
the shops and back, public transport is a big user of carbon fuel.
-- 
Clive

On 23 Jun, 07:50, Tony Dragon  wrote:
> Doug wrote:
> > On 22 Jun, 09:43, ®i©ardo  wrote:
> >> BrianW wrote:
> >>> On 22 Jun, 06:26, Doug  wrote:
> >>>> On 21 Jun, 15:44, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
> >>>>> Doug �typed:
> >>>>>> On 20 Jun, 18:39, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
> >>>>>>> Doug �typed:
> >>>>>>>> On 20 Jun, 08:25, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> Doug �typed:
> >>>>>>>>>> On 19 Jun, 09:16, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>> Doug �typed:
> >>>>>>>>>>> 'The usual' cut ' paste job.
> >>>>>>>>>>> Why would I want to cycle to work?
> >>>>>>>>>>> It's a far more [1] polluting manner of transport than the one I
> >>>>>>>>>>> already use. �Anyone cycling to work is creating far more
> >>>>>>>>>>> pollution than I do.
> >>>>>>>>>>> [1] Especially when taking into account the manufacturing
> >>>>>>>>>>> processes and materials involved.
> >>>>>>>>>> What transport do you already use and why is it less polluting
> >>>>>>>>>> than cycling?
> >>>>>>>>> I walk.
> >>>>>>>> Excellent, and an example to us all, except those who work from/at
> >>>>>>>> home.
> >>>>>>> So you agree you are far more polluting than me, in this respect?
> >>>>>> Only if you claim never to use a car and are extremely economical in
> >>>>>> your home energy use.
> >>>>> 'in this respect' means nothing, I suppose. �So, again, you agree you are
> >>>>> far more polluting than me in this respect?
> >>>>>>> Mind, I don't suppose you work, do you?
> >>>>>> Why would you suppose that?
> >>>>> Well, you didn't answer my question above, you appear too old, your pictures
> >>>>> make you look too ill to work and you give the general impression that you
> >>>>> aren't gainfully employed.
> >>>> Which pictures are you referring to
> >>> I imagine he's referring to the ones of you which appear on the
> >>> Lewisham cycling group website.  The ones which have been posted to
> >>> this group on numerous occasions.
> >>>> and what impression?
> >>> That of a painfully thin, deathly white old turd who looks as though
> >>> he's just been dug up, perhaps?
> >> Do you mean "Doug up"?
>
> > Wrong again, as usual. Unfortunately for you they are not pictures of
> > me and you cannot produce any pictures of me. Typical!
>
> > --
> > World Carfree Network
> >http://www.worldcarfree.net/
> > Help for your car-addicted friends in the U.K.
>
> Either everybody else & the evidence is wrong or paranoia has set in.
>
Fortunately, the motorists who dominate this transport newsgroup are
not 'everyone else', far from it, and you still cannot produce any
pictures of me.

--
Carfree Cities
http://www.carfree.com/
Promoting practical alternatives to car dependence - walking, cycling
and public transport.

On 24 Jun, 14:52, Doug  wrote:
> On 23 Jun, 07:50, Tony Dragon  wrote:
>
>
>
> > Doug wrote:
> > > On 22 Jun, 09:43, ®i©ardo  wrote:
> > >> BrianW wrote:
> > >>> On 22 Jun, 06:26, Doug  wrote:
> > >>>> On 21 Jun, 15:44, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
> > >>>>> Doug �typed:
> > >>>>>> On 20 Jun, 18:39, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
> > >>>>>>> Doug �typed:
> > >>>>>>>> On 20 Jun, 08:25, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>> Doug �typed:
> > >>>>>>>>>> On 19 Jun, 09:16, "Dogpoop"  wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>>>> Doug �typed:
> > >>>>>>>>>>> 'The usual' cut ' paste job.
> > >>>>>>>>>>> Why would I want to cycle to work?
> > >>>>>>>>>>> It's a far more [1] polluting manner of transport than the one I
> > >>>>>>>>>>> already use. �Anyone cycling to work is creating far more
> > >>>>>>>>>>> pollution than I do.
> > >>>>>>>>>>> [1] Especially when taking into account the manufacturing
> > >>>>>>>>>>> processes and materials involved.
> > >>>>>>>>>> What transport do you already use and why is it less polluting
> > >>>>>>>>>> than cycling?
> > >>>>>>>>> I walk.
> > >>>>>>>> Excellent, and an example to us all, except those who work from/at
> > >>>>>>>> home.
> > >>>>>>> So you agree you are far more polluting than me, in this respect?
> > >>>>>> Only if you claim never to use a car and are extremely economical in
> > >>>>>> your home energy use.
> > >>>>> 'in this respect' means nothing, I suppose. �So, again, you agree you are
> > >>>>> far more polluting than me in this respect?
> > >>>>>>> Mind, I don't suppose you work, do you?
> > >>>>>> Why would you suppose that?
> > >>>>> Well, you didn't answer my question above, you appear too old, your pictures
> > >>>>> make you look too ill to work and you give the general impression that you
> > >>>>> aren't gainfully employed.
> > >>>> Which pictures are you referring to
> > >>> I imagine he's referring to the ones of you which appear on the
> > >>> Lewisham cycling group website.  The ones which have been posted to
> > >>> this group on numerous occasions.
> > >>>> and what impression?
> > >>> That of a painfully thin, deathly white old turd who looks as though
> > >>> he's just been dug up, perhaps?
> > >> Do you mean "Doug up"?
>
> > > Wrong again, as usual. Unfortunately for you they are not pictures of
> > > me and you cannot produce any pictures of me. Typical!
>
> > > --
> > > World Carfree Network
> > >http://www.worldcarfree.net/
> > > Help for your car-addicted friends in the U.K.
>
> > Either everybody else & the evidence is wrong or paranoia has set in.
>
> Fortunately, the motorists who dominate this transport newsgroup are
> not 'everyone else', far from it, and you still cannot produce any
> pictures of me.

Liar!

http://www.pnony.org.uk/thenandnow.html

Dogpoop  typed:
> Dogpoop  typed:
>> Doug  typed:
>>
>> Evasive tactics again, so I'll leave the questions in .......
>>
>>>> 'in this respect' means nothing, I suppose.  So, again, you agree
>>>> you are far more polluting than me in this respect?
>>
>>>>>> Mind, I don't suppose you work, do you?
>
> Not answering Doug?
>
> I'll ask again, just in case you didn't see the questions.
>
> "You agree you are far more polluting than me in this respect?"
>
> "I don't suppose you work, do you?"
>
> You've answered other posts in this thread, but won't answer two basic
> questions which are immediately derivative of your OP.
>
> I wonder why ........

Still not answering Doug?

...... they're pretty easy questions.

-- 
Dogpoop
http://www.glass-uk.org/
"You would probably do better not to bother with renewable
energy"  Doug, UK.Transport 29/04/2008 08:53.

On 2008-06-24, Doug  wrote:


> Fortunately, the motorists who dominate this transport newsgroup are
> not 'everyone else', far from it, and you still cannot produce any
> pictures of me.

Duhg, no-one believes you.


-- 
          "Be thankful that you have a life, and forsake your vain
                 and presumptuous desire for a second one."
               [email me at huge {at} huge (dot) org <dot> uk]

Dogpoop  typed:
> Dogpoop  typed:
>> Dogpoop  typed:
>>> Doug  typed:
>>>
>>> Evasive tactics again, so I'll leave the questions in .......
>>>
>>>>> 'in this respect' means nothing, I suppose.  So, again, you agree
>>>>> you are far more polluting than me in this respect?
>>>
>>>>>>> Mind, I don't suppose you work, do you?
>>
>> Not answering Doug?
>>
>> I'll ask again, just in case you didn't see the questions.
>>
>> "You agree you are far more polluting than me in this respect?"
>>
>> "I don't suppose you work, do you?"
>>
>> You've answered other posts in this thread, but won't answer two
>> basic questions which are immediately derivative of your OP.
>>
>> I wonder why ........
>
> Still not answering Doug?
>
> ...... they're pretty easy questions.

This is getting tedious .....

-- 
Dogpoop
http://www.glass-uk.org/
"You would probably do better not to bother with renewable
energy"  Doug, UK.Transport 29/04/2008 08:53.