Victory nearly complete!

A reader has submitted a YouTube video which we are delighted to embed below. The auteur has made and exhibited his film in order to demonstrate his fear and hatred of people getting about on bicycles. This is commendable, and we look forward to seeing many more films from him exploring this theme.


However, even the greatest works of art have a flaw, and we hope that the film-maker won't mind that we point out what has been missed. It's quite obvious, really. And it's actually really good news!

In his precis on the YouTube hosting page, the auteur expounds at length about how much he fears and hates people using bicycles on the pavement.We feel for him - no-one likes feeling frightened of stuff. But we also think that the video gives us reasons to be happy.

In the film, the priority given to motor traffic in the very centre of Aberdeen is demonstrated to have forced people on bicycles into conflict with people on foot. Can't our filmmaker see that this is exactly what is required?

For if conditions for people on foot and on bike have been made so very unattractive on the streets of Aberdeen "city and shire" that these people are squeezed into an ever-decreasing share of the urban realm, herded behind barriers and forced to use two-stage crossings with those enclosures in the middle which traffic engineers unblushingly call "sheep pens", then the logical conclusion will be that more and more of these people will abandon their attempts to use "active travel" and just get in the car for their city-centre shopping trips. Then our Victory will be complete! So we thank the film-maker for submitting this video which documents that every day we force more people on bikes off of our roads; and by doing so, we make it more and more likely that they will just take the car the next time they're thinking about going to Union Square for some Handmade Burgers. In this way Aberdeen City and Shire can help to pull the UK economy out of recession.

Check it out:


(aaargh! Royalty-free music soundtrack warning! Turn down your speakers!)

We Really Hate It When Cyclists Jump Red Lights

Yeah, we hate it cos that's OUR job!

More Fabulous Anti-Cycling Stuff from the Cycle Touring Club

In the past, we've lauded the quisling work of our entryist agents in deep cover at CTC Grampian and the Aberdeen Cycle Forum. Unlike the results brought by foreign cycle advocacy groups like the so-called "-izes", (see Copenhagenize, Amsterdamize, Hamburgize, Portlandize and on and on) our fifth columnists at CTC Grampian and Aberdeen Cycle Forum manage to keep cycling down, keep it in it's place. They do this by means of a variety of wheezes involving:

Making cycling irresistible. Ha! Yeah right.
So you are.

1. Divide and rule (CTC and the Forum are always at each other's throats); 
2. Deep satire (the members of these clubs are very often photographed looking bloody ridiculous); 
3. Pusillanimity (invariably compromising on cycling issues, rights and facilities in favour of the needs of the more important family motorist on the streets of Aberdeen "City and Shire); 
4. and, best of all dangerism.

Dangerism is a term which refers to the practice of maximising the perception of risk and the cultivation of fear and the accommodation of those fears by a "hardening" of safety measures, which then, in turn feed back into a greater yet perception of risk in an increasingly strident feedback howl, until an activity comes to be regarded (however irrationally) as being almost unthinkably dangerous.

So we congratulate the entryist factions of UK cycle 'advocacy' groups for their excellent dangerism praxis. We were particularly impressed by the CTC's "Children and Young Person's Participation Policy" which we spotted online recently. It sets out rules and policy, guidance and advice for young people taking part in cycling activities. Here it is. Frankly, it was too long, so we couldn't be bothered to read it:

Now, if before you saw that, you were in any doubt about our assertions that cycling is a dangerous activity requiring serious consideration; requiring special permission, planning, equipment and supervision, you shouldn't be now, eh? What with all those rules, and responsibilities and forms to fill in and stuff. Just so a kid can go on a bike, according to the Cycle Touring Club. We particularly enjoy the fact that, when the authorities (local or national government) are consulting on transport issues, it is to these people - the CTC - to whom the authorities turn for the cyclist's view. This fact makes us laugh out loud. Yes, we laugh all the way to the petrol station.

We thank Ford that our undercover agents at CTC have managed to insert this kind of thinking into the corporate body of the organisation, for without them, we might have to tolerate sights like this on the streets of Aberdeen "City and Shire":

Copenhagen

Amsterdam

Paris

Can you imagine anything worse than Aberdeen being though of as being like Copanhagen, Amsterdam or Paris?

Aberdeen Council Cancel Mary Portas Free Parking Plan

We got all excited about the forthcoming suspension of parking charges in Aberdeen "City and Shire". You'll all remember, just before Xmas, that Mary Portas off the telly saying that the only way to save 'the High Street' is for councils to offer free parking in town centres. The BBC covered it:

Free parking
Having affordable town centre parking is another key recommendation.
In a recent survey, the Federation of Small Businesses (FSB) found that 50% of their members said the lack of affordable town centre parking had a detrimental effect on their business.
John Walker, chairman of the FSB, said: "Putting in place free controlled parking schemes and introducing a parking league table could go some way in [addressing] this."

And yes, we agree with this, it must be put on any sensible planning horizon. The common sense policy of free parking in city centres is long overdue and much needed and would definitely go a long way to easing traffic woes. We already pay enough for the privilege of driving our nice cars into town. We are already taxed to the eyeballs with road taxes and council parking charges are just another tax on motoring from our anti-car, anti-business, anti-growth council. That Mary Portas off the telly is right to announce that parking should be free for important wealth creators like us, bringing in our extensive buying power at high speed from our hinterland dormitories to the US-style covered-mall shopping pleasuredomes of Aberdeen. Being off the telly, she is sure to be perfectly correct in all her opinions and recommendations. We should take note.

But did our council listen to this important and correct TV personality in her call for free parking for the important wealth creating drivers of Aberdeen Cars? Did they listen? Oh no, they think they know better... As everyone knows, in recent years our council has done everything they can to discourage people coming into the city by car, cloaking their anti-car, anti-growth, anti-Aberdeen measures in a green mantle of environmentalism.

And so it continues... we noticed this in council-subsidised local freesheet: The Aberdeen Citizen (BEST [sic] free newspaper in Scotland) :

But Aberdeen City Council's planning and infrastructure convenor Kate Dean said the [parking] controls were there for a reason. "If you do not want to get fined, then park in the correct place," she said. "We would also hope that people use public transport which would reduce congestion as well." She said she did not support the scrapping of parking charges...

Typical. Just typical. But we can take a crumb of comfort... nowhere in her anti-car rant does Kate Dean mention that anything should be done to support or promote active transport modes like walking or cycling. Thank goodness, for these treehugger activities have no place in the city of the future (which is unlikely to have any trees for them to hug anyway). Aberdeen's latest multi-million pound indoor shopping mall - ultramodern Union Square with its extensive outdoor and covered parking accessible by thrillingly spiral ramp - that's what the city of the future will look like.

One of the reasons for the success of Union Square is that – once you have battled your way through the traffic – at least the parking is adequate and reasonably priced. 

We suppose that we have to agree to an extent, though, with Kate Dean; we agree with her that some people should be expected always to need public transport to get them to the shops - shame. Some people in the underclass will always just be too poor to afford a really nice car to get them to Union Square with its welcoming, vibrant car parking.

So, to sum up, our council needs to take note and make things right and ease transport with lots of free or very cheap car parking space and extra road capacity for cars, so that our city centre can yes become a welcoming place again, regardless of how people choose to travel, whether by car, or public transport. Either option is open. See - we're not monsters. (As long as they don't come on foot or by bike - haha, for goodness sake! Be reasonable!)

We call on the quislings to consolidate progress.

On your behalf; on behalf of the hard-pressed tax-farmed motorists of the car-driven economic powerhouse that is Aberdeen "City and Shire"; on behalf of progress towards more cars on more roads; and on behalf of the quest to deliver ever more wealth and riches into the hands of we Tycoons of Aberdeen, as you probably know we undertake sometimes distasteful work researching the output of the outer lunatic fringe of the so-called "active and sustainable transport" lobby in Scotland. Their newsletters, handouts, nasty little blogs and poorly-designed and coded web-pages are where we must practice our filthy duplicity.

Undertaking this distasteful work, once or twice, we have had to report back from our trips to those outer limits with bad news for the drivers of Aberdeen Cars. So, you can imagine our exultant delight when we notice that vegetarian tree-hugging tax-dogers at Spokes (the Edinburgh and Lothian Cycling Campaign) have got their lycra bib-tight thingiess in a twist at the forthcoming slashing of the budget for "Cycling, Walking and Safer Streets".

 They say:

CYCLING AND WALKING : a Scottish Government 2012-13 disaster

The Scottish Government draft 2012-13 budget, now being consulted on, is a disaster for walking and cycling. Total transport spending rises from £1804m in 11-12 to £1884m in 12-13, thanks to a near £100m boost for trunk roads and motorways from £558m to £655m. In contrast to that huge and growing total, the meagre sums devoted to active travel are being slashed.

Naturally, we are delighted that this is what is coming to pass, what with that big boost in the budget for the trunk roads and motorways which we love.  So far, so good.

But then, Citizen Contributer "Ali" emailed aberdeencars@gmail.com and wrote to us to tell of a potential threat to this enlightented policy of getting shot of this useless contribution of our hard-earned road-and-fuel-tax contributions to freeloading cyclists and pestestrains. "Ali" says:

Dear Mr Skidmark,


It seems budgets are all the rage this week - King Alex and his Merry Men have recently issued the draft one for the Scottish Executive (err sorry I mean Government). Excellent news for the motorist with vastly increased spending on roads and a significant reduction in cycling on "active travel". Yes thats right, less and less for those freeloading walkers and cyclists, AMAZING!


Unfortunately that well known subversive group the "Aberdeen Cycle Forum" seems to be plotting against the government:
http://www.aberdeencycleforum.org.uk/index.php?pf=news.php&nid=136
If we are not carefull this could lead to an overthrow of the car owning democracy that we are, and indeed of King Alex himself. Please publicise this risk through your most excellent publication.


Yours
Ali

Firstly, thanks "Ali" for your contribution, we appreciate it. But please don't worry! The subversive group you mention: the self-styled "Aberdeen Cycle Forum" (ACF) are a nest of quisling pro-motorcar activists and are actually on our side!  

You just have to think about it...

Firstly, their website abounds with the word "challenge": Aberdeen Cycle Forum Challenge, Chief Executive Cycle Challenge, Annual Commuter Challenge. Brilliant! The message is clear - cycling is a challenge, something hard, something difficult and unusual - like mountaineering or world-record attempts.

Secondly, we notice a little bit of friction between ACF and CTC Grampian (another "cycling advocacy" group) over the issue of bike lanes at pedestrian refuge pinch points. We do not propose to examine the esoterica of this arcane dispute, it is enough for us to note that the two groups are at each other's throats over this inconsequential piece of nothing. Divide and conquer; as long as these two groups are busy knocking lumps out of each other over this and other issues, they will not impinge upon the activities of the drivers of Aberdeen Cars. Good.

Sling up a sign. That's all that's needed to keep
the cyclists quiet, and more importantly -
out of our goddam way!

Thirdly, and probably the most clever piece of tradecraft exhibited by the ACF double agents, is that they do everything they can to promote the 'shared use' pedestrian and cyclist infrastructure which we see popping up all over the place in Aberdeen "City and Shire" these days. Everywhere we look there are "Dual Use" paths and "Toucan" crossings. Brilliant. These serve our aims in four ways.

• One - they encourage cyclists to get off our road and out of our way. 
• Two - they make the authorities appear to be doing something green, something for the cyclists, all the while spending the very minimum and not actually doing very much at all in the way of creating suitable new infrastructure for cycling. 
• Three - these dual-use facilities do not reduce the amount of roadspace allocated to cars, while in effect reducing the amount of space available for walking (by forcing cyclists onto the pavement) and marginalising cycling (by treating cyclists as equivalent to pedestrians). 
• And four - they put pedestrians and cyclists into direct conflict, making the cycling experience difficult and making the walking experience unpleasant and dangerous. 

All of this couldn't suit us better! The more the disincentives to walking and cycling which groups like ACF manage to put into place,  the lower the uptake of cycling and walking as transport modes around Aberdeen "City and Shire" and the higher the modal share for cars = good.

Finally, in their newsletter material, ACF are usually keen to picture themselves. In contrast to the trendy aspirational look promoted by successful cycle advocacy groups worldwide (like the infamous Copenhagen Cycle Chic), ACF rock a quite different look.

But which...

...is which?

As everyone in Aberdeen "City and Shire" knows, more cars on more roads is the one and only way to ensure that the necessary economic growth is created to enable Aberdeen to pull the rest of UK plc out of recession. We therefore applaud and thank Aberdeen Cycle Forum for working so hard to put barriers in the way of the uptake of cycling as a mass transportation mode, for their craven kowtowing on behalf of all Aberdeen cyclists to the needs of motor-transport, and for their enviable success in making cyclists look like total out-group arseholes. Thank you very much. The predominance of nice cars on our roads is down to people like you. The abject failure of cycling as a mode of mass transport in Britain is down to people like you. That cycling is marginalised and regarded as, at best, a pastime for children is down to you. That cycling is perceived as a dangerous, difficult, special activity requiring special permission, equipment, planning and a reckless disregard for one's personal safety is down to you. The removal of funds for Cycling, Walking and Safer Streets is down to you. We think you're amazing...

Keep up the good work!

Subtle Linguistic Conditioning from First Bus

A little while ago, we wrote about the risible and disturbing idea of a bicycle-sharing scheme for Aberdeen "City and Shire" as subtly (un)promoted by local anti-cycling pro-car greenwash outfit GetAbout.

On the subject of this proposal for "Boris's Bikes" in Aberdeen, GetAbout partners FirstBus were quick to issue a statement to local freesheet "Aberdeen Citizen" in which they said:

"We welcome any move which will reduce the amount of traffic within the city centre and which will allow our services to move more freely and speed up journey times for our customers."

At first glance, as one might expect from the world's largest public transport operators, FirstBus appear to be issuing an anti-car rant with this statement. They seem to be saying that cyclists and buses are all in it together to reduce the amount of cars in Aberdeen.

But then, if you look closely, you'll see the true meaning of the statement. The spokesman says "reduce the amount of traffic"; where he means "cars" he says "traffic". The message is clear: bicycles are not traffic, they are something else (what that might be is not specified). Only cars are considered to be "traffic", and therefore only cars can provide the sort of transport which delivers economically active consumers and important business people into the city centre. Anything else is just something we don't, can't and won't understand because its outwith our conceptual framework.

Of course, for every motorist who might (Ford only knows why!) be tempted out of his or her lovely car and onto one of Boris's Bikes, that would be one less car on the city centre streets of Aberdeen. But it wouldn't be a reduction in the amount of traffic, it would be a shift in the kind of traffic - a qualitative shift, not a quantitative reduction. We thank FirstBus for concealing this fact and raising the spectre that the introduction of a bike sharing scheme in Aberdeen would reduce the total number of people entering the city centre, thus impacting the vibrancy and economic viability of our city.

Yes, by their subtle and disingenuous misapplication of the word "traffic" FirstBus have, thankfully, managed to endorse the status quo. They are confirming that cycling is not a form of traffic, and therefore they are confirming that traffic planners should make no provision for cycling. Why should they - when cycling is not a form of traffic?

In Town - Without My Car!

In Town Without My Car

But with my car and/or White Van

Useful local Aberdeen "City and Shire" greenwash outfit "GetAbout" staged an amazing display of plausible-deniabilty anti-cycling fummery at the weekend on the city's Belmont Street. As part of "Alternative Mobility: European Mobility Week" they put on an "In Town - Without My Car!" event. Elsewhere, the event is know as "European Car-Free Day", which is why our city chose to hold the event on a street which is already part of a pedestrianised area. In other places which value economic growth less than we do, they close normal roads for the day! Imagine! Aren't they funny?!

In order to stage the event, many motor vehicles (which are normally banned from Belmont Street and its feeder lanes) filled the streets and the roadspace was hemmed in by crowd-control barriers to create a couple of circuits for novelty-cycling demonstrations involving pre-teen children on recumbants, a clown bike, tricycles, a hand powered bike and other such useless non-transport stuff. There was even a climbing wall. Officials were on hand to ensure that anyone who wanted to participate on a novelty bike was suitably attired with high-vis tabards and crash helmets, which are of course necessary when riding a bike. So great was the emphasis on safety danger that there was an entire stall set up to hand out high-vis tabards.

All in all, we thought that GetAbout's handling of the event was a great success because:

• It greatly reduced the amount of space available to pedestrians in the Belmont Street pedestrianised areas, inconveniencing them and making them blame cyclists.
• It reinforced the impression that cycling is a funny novelty which is mostly just for children. Or clowns on comedy bikes.
• It reinforced the feeling that cycling is a special activity requiring special planning and permission, and necessitating the use of special safety apparel.
• It confirmed the fact that cycling is dangerous - like the rock-climbing demonstration which was run in parallel. Indeed, it seems that, according to GetAbout, cycling and rock-climbing require almost identical safety equipment. Cycling is therefore as dangerous and frightening as rock-climbing.
• Because (as has already been established) cycling is as dangerous and frightening as rock-climbing, it has no place in the city centre. Don't be silly.
• By refusing to close any roads which were not already pedestrianised, the event confirmed that motor traffic will never, never give way to cycling or make space for it as a useful mode of transport in Aberdeen City and Shire, and nor should it be asked to. Don't be silly.
• It insulted people who actually do use bikes in Aberdeen City and Shire, reinforcing their status as an out-group to be regarded with suspicion and contempt.

So, all in all, a great day's greenwash from GetAbout, paying lipservice to cycling while actually pointing out that cycling is at best a laughably comedic novelty pastime for children, but is at worst a dangerous inconvenient menace. Yes, GetAbout achieved all this, with great fanfare and hulabaloo, and all the while did nothing, in fact - less than nothing, to reduce the number of cars in the centre of Aberdeen. Genius. We salute their kung-fu skills!

These vehicles are expected to replace cars by 2020. Hahahaha.

Just right for the commute!

Off to the shops - all she needs is a pannier.

On the way to a business meeting.

All future entrepreneurs will be driving one of these.

A Clown

Children only!

At first we were worried...

... but then we realised what was really going on.

We're talking about the local "joint project" - GetAbout - their stated aim is to create a "better transport system... in Aberdeen City and Shire."

News reaches us that GetAbout are floating the idea of a bike-sharing scheme for Aberdeen, similar to London's so-called 'Boris Bikes', or "Boris's Bikes" as GetAbout would have it. Well, of course we were worried. But then, on closer reading, we realised the subtlety of what was really going on here. From the GetAbout web-page:

Is Aberdeen ready for a scheme like Boris's?

What do you think? ... Perhaps you think it's just not safe to cycle, or as a driver you are worried by cyclists. Maybe Boris's Bikes sound great for use on old railway lines and in the parks, or may be they sound an ideal way to get around town. Would your staff use them for business trips or to get to work from the Union Square Transport interchange?

(Our emphasis)

It's subtle and very clever. What appears on the surface to be a pro-cycling bit of quango-work is actually framed very carefully in an anti-cycling context with anti-cycling language and imagery. We therefore congratulate GetAbout, for spending their greenwash budget on an intitiative which drives home the usual messages:

• that cycling is not safe;


• that cyclists worry drivers. Indeed, for the menace cyclists might scratch our nice cars as we roar past them, or - when we run into them after they've "just come out of no-where" - they jeopardise our no-claims bonuses. And we already pay quite enough for car insurance, thank-you very much;


• and that cycling is not really a mode of transport at all, it's fine for the old railway line or in the park and that's about it.

Then, and only then, do GetAbout ask whether we should consider cycling for getting around town or business trips or commuting? GetAbout mention this only after first framing the question with the three previous anti-cycling points, thus ensuring that - when we consider getting about town by bike, or commuting by bike or doing a business trip by bike - we first consider that it is not safe, that it worries drivers, and that it is in fact, just a childish leisure activity for weekends or summer evenings. So GetAbout have ensured that the answer will be: "No, cycling does not sound like an ideal way to get around town, to commute, or to use for a business trip - are you mad?"

Just look at the  picture which GetAbout have chosen to illustrate their press-release.
She is not a high-powered business-person, unlike the people in Aberdeen who mostly are.
And she is wearing a  full-head crash helmet, thus demonstrating danger.
And the bikes, look at the bikes. They are not in use. Good. Let's keep it that way.

We think its brilliant that GetAbout have managed to propagate this pro-motorcar message while spending their budget appearing to promote cycling and maintaining plausible deniability.

In their press release they asked:

Is Aberdeen ready for a scheme like Boris's?

By framing their question the way they have, they have helped ensure that, in Aberdeen "City and Shire" the answer to that question will remain for the forseeable futue a resounding "NO!" and have helped to keep the dangerous menace of cycling off our roads. We congratulate GetAbout for their kung-fu skills. Brilliant!

Oxford, Cambridge - Failures.

We have become aware that, in Aberdeen's aspiration to 'ideopolis' status, some urban intellectuals have pointed to Oxford and Cambridge as having examples of urban space policies which we might want to follow. Sounds fair enough, we thought.

But then we started learning about things we don't much like.

From Cyclingmobility.com

Across the whole city [Oxford], more than 10% of journeys made are by bicycle. About 16% of commuters in the city cycle to work. Most cyclists ride in ordinary clothes ...

Oxford certainly doesn’t have lots of European-style segregated cycle tracks. There is a network of quiet routes on backstreets and paths, but they are generally indirect and not really good enough for people trying to get from A to B. They are mostly used by children going to school, and for leisure.

Instead, the majority of Oxford’s cyclists use the ordinary main roads. More than half of these main roads have painted cycle lanes (or bus lanes), but there’s no real separation from the traffic.

What is it that persuades cyclists to mix with the traffic in Oxford?

Partly, it’s the lack of car parking, especially in the city centre. Since the 1970s, businesses have not had permission to provide new car parking for their staff or customers; instead, they have to contribute to park and ride car parks on the edge of the city. Charges at public car parks are high, and they’re almost never full. More than 40% of journeys into central Oxford are by bus. This shortage of car parking makes many people try cycling who, elsewhere, wouldn’t even consider it.

Another reason is that no-one drives very fast in Oxford. It’s rare that anyone does more than 30mph. The side streets and shopping areas on main roads all have 20mph limits. If the residents had their way, there’d be 20mph limits on all of the main roads too.

So much space has been dedicated to bus lanes and cycle lanes that there’s not enough room for the traffic to go fast, even if the speed limits were increased. In 2000, the last two gyratory junctions were removed – they were clogged solid with traffic anyway. All the inner ring road junctions have 20mph limits, and they are much less scary than the norm.

So what is it that gets people cycling? It’s not perfect facilities – Oxford is far from perfect. But by removing car parking, making good public transport easily available and by slowing down motor traffic, other cities could follow the example set by Oxford in removing would-be cyclists’ concerns and turning interest into action.

(Our emphasis)


And just look at the result!

Who'd have thought there were so many poor people in Oxford?

This poor lost soul continues to wear his suit, despite obviously
having fallen so far that he can no longer afford a car.
Sad.

No caption required.

Much more pictures of Oxford's unemployed, layabout hobbyists here.

And what about Cambridge? We're afraid that it's much the same story.

Cambridge has a large number of cyclists. Many residents also prefer cycling to driving in the narrow, busy streets, giving the city the highest level of cycle use in the UK. According to the 2001 census, 25% of residents travelled to work by bicycle. A few roads within the city are adapted for cycling, including separate traffic lights for cycle lanes and cycle contraflows on streets which are otherwise one-way.

(Again, our emphasis)

Those unsettling pictures were from here and here.

St Andrews, too! That's getting a bit close to home!

So, all this is very disheartening. If the photos of all those cyclists in Oxford or Cambridge are anything to go by, it seems that this urban ideopolis thing doesn't work, having the effect only of forcing so many people to walk, cycle or use the bus. This means they must be unemployed, either that or very poorly paid, because otherwise they'd have nice cars, wouldn't they? Oxford and Cambridge are setting very poor examples. If this is what happens in an ideopolis, we'll just leave it, thanks. Who needs clever people anyway? And what about all the carbon emissions from all the books that these people read? Eh? What about that, then? Hadn't thought about that, had you?

Thank goodness we urban realists in Aberdeen have more enlightened policies towards future economic growth and sustainability than those urban intellectuals elsewhere, what with our forthcoming radial urban expressway which will deliver high volumes of high-speed traffic into the city centre on the currently underused Denburn Dual Carriageway and our extremely exciting orbital motorway project, "The AWPR" (Aberdeen Western Peripheral Route) which will greatly increase the number, distance and velocity of car journeys undertaken throughout Aberdeen "City and Shire", thus ensuring our future prosperity without question, because more cars on more roads is what everyone wants, isn't it?

"Aha got you there!" we can hear the nimby naysayer greenies - "what about all the carbon emissions that this increase in traffic will cause?" Well, we have it on good authority that by the time the AWPR is open to traffic in 2012 2015 2025 tailpipe emissions will be water only, hydrogen powered cars having been made compulsory cars will be zero emission because of some as-yet un-proven battery technology we'll all be driving fusion powered hovercars. Yes we will. We saw it on the Jetsons.

And, in any case, what about all the greenhouse gas emissions which come from the manufacture of too many cycle helmets and high-visibility tabards? Again, we'll bet you hadn't thought about that.

Now, which is best?

Aberdeen:

Or an ideopolis?

We're sure that, when you examine the evidence, you'll probably agree with us.

Cycle Lane Use on Queens Road

As we're sure you already know, one of the very worst things about cyclists is the fact that they get in the way of your view when you're trying to get out of a T-junction.

That's why we're very pleased that the cycle lanes advance stop boxes for motorists have been provided on Aberdeen's Queens Road. They call them cycle lanes; we think that's to denote their function as lanes that you can enter when you want to see past the oncoming cyclists.



Perfect!

Dangerous Cyclist Forces Innocent Motorist SC59NHG to Risk Wing Mirror Bump

Deep within the so-called "cycling activist movement" in Aberdeen, our double-dealing double-agent lurks behind his deep-cover legend: "Codename JannieJumbo" - providing us with timely dispatches from the front-line of the ongoing war on motorists.

As part of his duties, "Codename JannieJumbo" left us this video in the dead-letter dropbox in the dress circle of the HM Theatre.



Oh for goodness sake! Did you see that? The reckless cyclist's behaviour on Aberdeen's Abergeldie Road was so poor that it not only did it cause the driver of that lovely Lexus IS reg. SC59NHG to break the speed limit, attempt an overtaking maneuver at an inappropriate location, execute that maneuver recklessly, ignoring the poor road conditions and the other motorist getting out of his parked car ahead, but it also forced the driver to risk getting a scratch on his nice 'obsidian' paintwork as he squeezes past. How awful! We notice that the Lexus driver was forced to actually 'flip the wingmirrors' using the power-assist option on this premium upscale vehicle in order to facilitate his vital overtaking maneuver.

"But - hold on!" we hear you exclaim. "What was it that was so reckless about this cyclist's behaviour? - I've looked at the video, and the cyclist seems to have done nothing wrong..." And that's true up to a point, but then, what you'd be forgetting is that cyclists do not pay Road Tax. This means they have no right to be on the road.

London School of Economics Embarasses Itself. Again

We have been passed a superficially horrifying report from the London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE) which supposedly details all the "benefits" of cycling - both economically and socially.

The report is full of hollow boasts like:

Increasing participation:

• Net addition of 1.3 million cyclists in 2010 take total UK cyclists to 13 million representing 27 per cent of the population, of these new cyclists 500,000 are frequent or regular Of total cyclists in the UK:


• • 3.5 million (41%) are Frequent Cyclists (those who cycle once a week or more)
  
  
  • 4.3 million (33%) are Regular Cyclists (those who cycled 12 or more times in the past year)
  
  
  • 3.5 million (27%) are Occasional Cyclists
  
  


• 208 million cycle journeys made in 2010


• Over 200,000 people took part in Sky Ride events across the UK in 2010


• 22,000 people daily share 5,000 bikes through the Mayor of London’s Barclays Cycle Hire scheme

Britain’s Cycling Economy - retail, manufacturing and services:

• £2.9 billion gross value of cycling to the UK economy, equalling a gross cycling product of £230 per cyclist per year


• 3.7 million bikes were sold in the UK in 2010 representing a 28 per cent increase over 2009 figures.


• Bike sales in the UK in 2010 had a retail value of £1.62 billion


• £51 million of UK retail sales was accounted for bikes manufactured in the UK


• The average price per bike in 2010 was £439, lower than an average bike price of £493 in 2009


• Around 2,000 retail stores currently operate across a spectrum of activities including sales, servicing, workshops, and other speciality areas


• There are around 1,000 additional independent specialist cycling shops

Britain’s Cycling Economy - value of individual cyclists:

Major segments	Bike sales	Total Accessories	Total Market
Occasional Cyclist	£664m	£116m	£780m
Regular Cyclist	£529m	£106m	£635m
Frequent Cyclist	£430m	£530m	£960m
Total	£1.62bn	£752m	£2.9bn

Britain’s Cycling Economy - employment contribution:

• The cycling economy generated an employment contribution of £500 million in 2010, including over £100 million in income tax and NI contributions, from an employment base of around 23,000


• A total of 1,700 Cycle Network jobs are estimated to be supported. These jobs generated £41 million in salaries in 2010 and £9 million in income tax and national insurance contributions

Britain’s Cycling Economy - absenteeism and health factors:

• Cycling to work is associated with less all-cause sickness absence. Mean absenteeism in cyclists is significantly lower than in non-cyclists with a significant relationship between frequent cycling and absenteeism, with regular cyclists taking 7.4 sick days per annum, compared to 8.7 sick days for non-cyclists


• Frequent cyclists save the economy £128 million in absenteeism per year, projected to save a further £1.6 billion in absenteeism over the next 10 years


• Compared with the rest of Europe, the UK has the highest number of sick days taken each year, with 225 million days estimated to have been taken in 2010 at a cost of £17 billion. This equates to around £600 per employee per annum, and an average of 7.7 days per person

Projected socio-economic benefits of wider participation in cycling:

• A 7 per cent rise in Frequent and Regular cyclists by 2013 could contribute £2 billion to the UK economy over the next two yearS


• Frequent and Regular cyclists could further save the economy £2 billion over a 10 year period in terms of reduced absenteeism


• A 20 per cent increase in current cycling levels by 2015 could save the economy £207 million in terms of reduced traffic congestion and £71 million in terms of lower pollution levels


• Latent demand for cycling could amount to around £516 million of untapped economic potential for the UK


• A 20 per cent increase in cycling levels by 2015 can save £107 million in reducing premature deaths and £52 million in NHS costs, and deliver £207 million and £71 million benefits in congestion and pollution

Well, we say all that's just a lot of rubbish and scaremongering.

And then, thinking about it, we can place this report in context... Do you remember? The LSE's links with Libya's Col. Gaddafi are a matter of record, and that the LSE's anti-car (and therefore anti-Aberdeen and by extension anti-UK economy) rant should have been published on the day that rebel fighters besiege Gaddafi's compound in Tripoli (at the time of writing) is simply too big a coincidence to discount. We remember the Colonel's warning that Europe faces "catastrophe" for backing the rebels. This LSE report is just the sort of half-cocked nonsense we were expecting. It's quite pathetic really and the LSE have embarrassed themselves again over this.

Thank goodness that we, like all the other drivers of Aberdeen Cars, have the intelligence and perspicacity to see this report for what it really is.

Report Author

Oh Doctor Beeching.... Thankyou!

A little while ago we wrote of Aberdeen and Grampian Chambers of Commerce (AGCC) and their exciting aspiration to run a thrilling futuristic monorail on the route of the old Deeside Railway instead of the useless Sustrans National Cycle Route 195 which currently occupies that transport corridor like some sort of freeloading dog-in-a-manger.



While the AGCC monorail proposal for the Old Deeside Line is brilliant and forward looking, we couldn't help but think that there was something not quite right - that the proposal was missing something obvious. We said that one of the benefits of the monorail would be the fact that it would likely put the bus-route along North Deeside Road out of business, thus freeing up precious road-space for the drivers of Aberdeen Cars. But perhaps we would be best to take a leaf out of the book developed by our English cousins in the South West, where plans are afoot to turn the disused Bath to Bristol railway (currently only used by arrogant horsey people, walkers, cyclists, joggers, dog walkers, children, old people and all sorts of other petrol-tax-dodging people who are either unemployed or underemployed - in short, people who don't count and about whom we don't like to think) into a rapid-transit bus corridor. We understand that these plans are currently on hold. While not as exciting, futuristic, thrilling and forward-thinking as our own railway path monorail, there is much to recommend the Bristol/Bath bus plan. Primarily the fact that it will immediately get the hated buses off the road, freeing up precious roadspace between Bristol and Bath for more and nicer cars and vans, like those driven by the nice people at Bristol Traffic.

Bristol/Bath Railway Path

(Photo by Steinsky via Wikimedia commons)

But, of course, all this is just stupid. What a lot of nonsense, to think of converting these paths for public transport, when much more obvious and pragmatic use is clear to see. Via a citizen contributer known only as "Edinburgh Tags", we hear of a better solution yet, and one pioneered here in Bonnie Scotland! A part of the former Edinburgh Suburban and Southside Junction Railway (as closed by the Sainted Beeching) has been turned by Network Rail into a road, for cars and vans. No mamby-pambying around with compromise public transport options (however thrilling or futuristic), they have cut straight to the chase and pragmatically decided that what the market economy really calls for, what's really needed in order for economic activity to flourish, is more roadspace for more cars and vans. The trackbeds of the railways closed by Doctor Beeching in our Nation's Capital are seen as an ideal solution to increase the stock of available roadspace in Edinburgh.

Enter here.

Passing space - thoughtful!

That sign's not there for cyclists, pedestrians or arrogant horsey people.

No, its there for the drivers of Edinburgh Cars to ignore!

So yes, the capital leads the way. We must follow their example and get rid of the walkers, cyclists and equestrians from these former railway line routes. Never mind thinking of a monorail. Discard thoughts of dedicated bus lanes. We should take a leaf out of Edinburgh's book and convert the Old Deeside Line Sustrans Route 195 into a road for cars immediately. Economic growth for Aberdeen "City and Shire" (and so, by extension the rest of UK "plc") would then be assured!



The only weird thing is that it's taken this long since Beeching closed the railways in the 1960's for this obvious and inevitable solution to be identified for all that dead space!

Coincidence?

Here at Aberdeen Cars we love America and All Things American. Yes we do. We've been to Houston and we just love it!



So we're disturbed, very disturbed, by some of the anti-car news which seems to be coming out of America recently.



First, the pedestrianisation sorry 'pedestrianization' of Times Square and other bits of Broadway.



Then we hear of the burgeoning cycle movement in places like Minneapolis and Portland with their high number of segregated bike lanes, municipal bike racks, bike 'boulevards' (huh?) and other stuff we either don't understand or don't want to understand.



But now, and this is the worst, we noticed this on the TV:





Yes, that's Wall Street - the very name synonymous with buccaneering capital - has had one of New Yorks 'pedestrian plazas' imposed upon it over the last few weeks.



And just look what happened!!!!!







Coincidence? We don't think so...

Careless Cyclist Forces Innocent Drivers to Risk License Endorsement Points

Checking the dead letter drop-box behind the "This Roundabout is Sponsored by Talisman Energy" sign on the roundabout at the junction between Aberdeen's Great Southern Road and Holburn Street, we found this video had been left for us by our filthy duplicitous double agent "Codename JannieJumbo", operating, as he does, from behind his deep cover legend as a so-called "activist" within what is laughably called the Aberdeen cycling "community".




Bloody hell! Did you see that? This careless cyclist's behaviour on Aberdeen's Broomhill Road was so awful that it not only did it cause the driver of the Renault Clio reg CF53DNH to choose an inappropriate spot for an overtaking maneuver, break the speed limit, swerve alarmingly and risk crashing into oncoming vehicles, but it also forced the driver of the second, blue VW Passat to risk penalty points and a fine by making him (as you've seen, forcing him to) execute a pointless close-pass overtaking maneuver in the vicinity of a T-junction.

"But - hold on!" we hear you exclaim. "What was it that was so reckless about this cyclist's behaviour? - I've looked at the video, and the cyclist seems to have done nothing wrong..." And that's true up to a point, because what the video cannot show is the privileged information we have access to through our contact with "Codename JannieJumbo".

That information is the fact that this cyclist was not wearing a high-visibility tabard at the time. (Thus absolving the blameless motorists of any and all liability for their actions.)

Foreign Cycling "Culture"

Pedal-cycle use in foreign cities is a cultural thing. Not the sort of thing that could possibly catch on here, because it has never been embraced by our sort of people.

And as if to demonstrate exactly what we mean by that, just take a look at this barbaric display by the so-called "Mayor" of Vilnius. Which used to be in the Soviet Union. Say no more.



Barbaric. Imagine if someone were to do that to an Aberdeen Car!

Dangerous Cyclist Forces Innocent Drivers to Risk No-Claims Bonus

Once again, our slimy slug of a double agent has left us video-footage in the dead-letter drop box beneath the Ruthrieston Pack Horse Bridge. What 'Codename JannieJumbo' caught on camera this time, operating in deep cover from behind his legend in the so-called "active travel activist" movement in Aberdeen, really shocked us.



Oh my God! Did you see that? This irresponsible cyclist's dangerous behaviour caused not only the driver of Aberdeen Car reg P896TGE to ignore a hand signal and pass too close for safety, but also the reckless cyclist made the taxi driver of Aberdeen Taxi reg KY55CCD overtake dangerously, ignoring the cyclist's hand signal and into the path of oncoming traffic - and all for nothing, being held up at the roundabout which was only 50 yards away anyway.

"But - hold on!" we hear you exclaim. "What was it that was so reckless about this cyclist's behaviour? - I've looked at the video, and the cyclist seems to have done nothing wrong..." And that's true up to a point, because what the video cannot show is the privileged information we have access to through our contact with "Codename JannieJumbo".

That information is the fact that this cyclist pedal-cycle was not equipped with a bell at the time. (Thus absolving the blameless motorists of any liability for their actions.)

Negligent Cyclist Forces Innocent Motorist YP59DFO to Risk Fixed Penalty

Deep within the so-called "sustainable transport movement" in Aberdeen, our double-dealing double-agent lurks behind his deep-cover legend: "Codename JannieJumbo" - providing us with timely dispatches from the front-line of the ongoing war on motorists.

As part of his duties, "Codename JannieJumbo" left us this video in the dead-letter dropbox underneath the most racist part of the King Edward VII statue at the corner of Union Terrace and Union Bridge.



Oh for goodness sake! Did you see that? The reckless cyclist's behaviour on Aberdeen's Forest Avenue was so poor that it not only did it cause the driver of the Ford C-Max Estate "Style" (ooooh!) reg. YP59DFO to break the speed limit, attempt an overtaking maneuver at an inappropriate location, execute that maneuver recklessly, ignoring the poor road contitions and roadworks ahead, but it also forced the driver to risk getting a scratch on his nice paintwork as he squeezes past. Nasty.

"But - hold on!" we hear you exclaim. "What was it that was so reckless about this cyclist's behaviour? - I've looked at the video, and the cyclist seems to have done nothing wrong..." And that's true up to a point, because what the video cannot show is the privileged information we have access to through our contact with "Codename JannieJumbo".

That information is the fact that this cyclist was not wearing a cycle-helmet at the time. (Thus absolving the blameless motorists of all liability for their actions.)

Reckless Cyclist Forces Innocent Drivers to Break Law

Yet more footage from our sneaking snitchy double agent "Codename JanniJumbo". Reporting back from his mission in deep cover within Aberdeen's so-called "cycling advocacy community", he left us this video in the secret dead-letterbox buried deep in the peat at Moss of Rotten.



Gosh, did you see that? The reckless cyclist's behaviour on Bucksburn's Bankhead Road was so poor that it not only did it cause the driver of the Gold VW Golf reg SA02XPY to break the speed limit, swerve alarmingly and risk crashing into the pedestrian refuge island, but it also forced the driver of the second, high-revving blue car to risk penalty points and a fine by making him (as you've seen, forcing him to) ignore the keep left sign.

"But - hold on!" we hear you exclaim. "What was it that was so reckless about this cyclist's behaviour? - I've looked at the video, and the cyclist seems to have done nothing wrong..." And that's true up to a point, because what the video cannot show is the privileged information we have access to through our contact with "Codename JannieJumbo".

That information is the fact that this cyclist was not wearing a helmet at the time. (Thus absolving the blameless motorists of all liability for their actions.)

Proof Positive That Foreigners Do Not Love Their Children

We all know that in abroad, and in some parts of Britain which are not concerned with the supply of oil and gas, they believe that 'global warming' is causing going to cause a 'bottleneck' which many species will be lucky to get through.

These arrogant people believe that they know best, and advocate birth control, voluntary euthanasia and all sorts of things like that to try to keep the 'damaging' human population down. All very sad and misguided, but not new. We were aware of these people and their activities. We knew all that.

But what we didn't know was this. These people are prepared to sacrifice their children in order to control the population. We have evidence - here, look:

Horrendous, isn't it? This is from the 'cyclestreets.net' website, and the photo is captioned: "Virtually all Dutch children cycle to school every day." Oh The Horror. The carnage must be unbelievable. The number of brain-damaged children in the Netherlands must be beyond count! The Dutch barbarians are prepared to soak their country in the blood of children's head injuries in order to 'save the planet'.

Of course, cycling is far too dangerous to just let children do it independently and in casual clothing. And here in Britain, we love our children, which is why we have every intention of making them safe at all times. If they were to cycle, we would make sure they were supervised and wearing high visibility yellow coats and big bright plastic helmets. This is in stark contrast to the Dutch monsters who let their children cycle about independently without any special equipment whatsoever. Unbelievable!

We believe that special safety equipment is very important and very good for safety at all times which is why we have no hesitation in endorsing these products which are for children to wear ALL THE TIME.

THE 'THUDGUARD'

THE 'OOPSIE'