Earl Aelfheah

Rockets Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I am glad we have finally established > that Rachel Alfred's research is neither impartial > or unbiased nor particularly scientific. Have we established that? I thought heartblock had said he didn?t dismiss her research. She is an award winning and established academic with a record of publications in peer reviewed journals and an h-index of 29.

@ Rockets. Cycling has increased ever year since 2014 except one: 2019. TFL state that this was ?mainly driven by trends in outer London, and reflecting unusually poor weather during the counting periods?. We saw record increases in 2020. It?s not a declining picture is it? But the academic research is all biased and TFL are deliberately misleading people. Which makes sense, because common sense would suggest that mixing with heavy traffic as a pedestrian or cyclist is relaxing.

Rockets Wrote: > TFL were cutting the data differently to show a win. It's > what organisations do when the data isn't showing > what they want it to show.. It's interesting. TFL are misrepresenting the data. Academics are biased in their research. All the evidence suggesting better cycling infrastructure and quieter streets encourage active travel is dubious.

And can you explain your comment about cycling in London having gone down. In how many of the years between 2014 to 2020 has it dropped? Just to be clear.

So no more cycle infrastructure?

And I looked back. I didn?t say professor Aldred had 25 peer reviewed papers on the subject of LTNs. I said ?Rachel Aldred is a Professor in Transport at the University of Westminster with over 25 peer reviewed papers. I was pointing out that she is a serious academic. But the point was not about one academic. It was that virtually all the evidence points towards the fact that if you create dedicated space for cycling and walking, you encourage cycling and walking. We can play games, argue about credentials, pick apart data points and try and score rhetorical ?goals? but do you genuinely disagree with this central point @Rockets? Do you believe a kid is as likely to drive on a busy road as one with less traffic or a segregated lane?

People can look at the data themselves. The upwards trend in cycling has been sustained over time. You?ve taken a single data point, but you?re ignoring the clear trend.

welcome back

I?ll drink to that Heartblock

I didn?t say she had 25 peer reviewed papers on LTNs.

🥳

😃👏

Heartblock, I agree you shouldn't leave the forum. It's good to debate (as I am sure you'll agree as an academic) and no one is attacking you personally. Perhaps I'm mistaken about the peer reviewed journal articles. I defer to your expertise here, but her Google scholar page suggests publications in a number of academic journals and an H-index of 29. She is a Professor at Westminster University. So does on the face of it seem to be a reliable source. I am happy for you to explain why I'm mistaken and happy to concede if I am wrong. https://scholar.google.co.uk/citations?user=jycgGvsAAAAJ&hl=en

I do get frustrated the Southwark haven't done better with collecting data on the impact of LTNs. But then I have to remind myself that even if they did - whatever it concluded would likely be dismissed by many if it didn't support their view. Whichever side of the debate.

Rockets Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > No, increased every year until 2017, then plateau' > d, declined in 2019 and then up again in 2020 due > to the pandemic (driven mainly by outer London > cycling - i.e. people being at home and taking to > their bikes for exercise). It's actually increased every single year since surveys began in 2013 / 14. there was a levelling off in 2017, but this was followed by record increase in 2018. The trend over time has been consistently up. TFL, in the report you've quoted as evidence apparently that cycling isn't growing in London, say: "In central London, the average quarterly growth in cycled kilometres in 2018 with respect to 2017 was 6.2 per cent, also the highest recorded since surveys began in Q4 2013/14, but this should be seen in the context of just 0.1 per cent growth the previous year. The most recent data from January-March and April-June 2019 continue to show signs of sustained long-term growth." In 2020 there was again record growth, with a 22% increase in outer London. Whichever way you cut it, it's impossible to seriously argue that cycling in London hasn't consistently trended upwards over many years and continues to do so.

Peer reviewed research dismissed. Data showing a consistent upward trend in cycling with London from 2015 dismissed. It's pointless isn't it?

So increased every year since 2015 except a small dip during the lockdown. After which it increased again this in 2020?

She has over 25 peer reviewed papers. They're not 'awaiting peer review'. Almost every published academic in this area gets accused of 'bias' in this debate and it's nonsense.

I mean, it doesn't seem that crazy that a cycling charity looking to develop a transport policy, might want to engage an award winning public policy expert.

I'm not sure her working with transport charities invalidates her published, peer reviewed research. She is an expert on transport policy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rachel_Aldred The problem is, most people who are experts in transport planning, management and policy tend not to advocate for more car use in cities. So there are two conclusions you can reach, either: 1) They're all biased and research cannot be trusted, or 2) Their expertise has informed their view in a way that we should probably pay attention to But then we have all had enough of experts.

alice Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > doesnt her mum live on calton? > > when the review comes we need people involved with > a fresh objective eye. Rachel Aldred? I didn't know that. The problem is as shown above - most of those who publish proper research in this area are dismissed as 'activists', because it all tends to point in the same direction when it comes to the best ways to encourage walking and cycling and reduce our reliance on cars. It's not making car use as convenient and comfortable as possible.

alice Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The long and expensive redesign of that junction > increased the problems there. Which suited some > who always wanted a more 'villagey' suburb. > Unfortunately because of the local geography, > parks, golf course, sports grounds, private > playing fields The effects of that small closure > had knock on effects that spread like ripples on a > stormy lake, affecting many many more people than > benefited. Simple solutions say calton using > gilkes to exit onto Dulwich village thus > simplifying the village junction, Allowing P4 to > use court lane for faster transit nearer more > people, Coaches and parents having drop off points > with freshair walk to school, having actual bike > lanes, banning on road parking etc etc You're suggesting opening Gilkes Road from Calton Avenue an directing buses down Court Lane, so that it doesn't serve the village? Would Court lane only be open to buses, or are you saying that we should roll back the filters and open a previously closed road additionally? Where would the coach and private school drop off points be and where would these freshair walks be? Would they be on no through roads? I'm in favour of actual, segregated bike lanes, and removing on street parking, but if you think LTNs are controversial, wait until you tell people they can no longer park outside their houses. That would also have a knock on on surrounding streets - I guarantee that many of the same arguments deployed against LTNS would be used to resist the removal of on street parking and segregated bike lanes that also remove parking. I think you're suggestions are in many ways more radical than the LTNS. I suspect they'd be politically more sensitive as well.

@Rockets - TFL data shows a sustained long term trend in the growth of cycling, linked to improvements in infrastructure... details towards the bottom of page 15: http://content.tfl.gov.uk/travel-in-london-report-12.pdf

Hi Rockets, I am not sure you're right about this. According to TFL Quarter 4 of the 2018/19 financial year saw an increase in the average daily cycle-km in central London of 4 per cent with respect to the same quarter in 2017/18. Across the whole of London, 2018 saw the highest growth observed in cycling volume since monitoring began (in 2015), increasing almost 5 per cent from the previous year and exceeding for the first time on record an average daily volume of more than 4 million cycle-km. Also, Rachel Aldred is a Professor in Transport at the University of Westminster with over 25 peer reviewed papers.

There is already a thread on this. Just search 'Rye Lane closure - express your views'. It's in the Lounge. [EDITED to add link: /forum/read.php?20,2205881,page=1 ]