Seems the British public have voted Top Gear the programme of the decade.
CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Cycling News
And now we know why...
(17 posts)-
Posted 15 years ago #
-
chris this is very depressing news, any more comedy snowpersons? I saw one yesterday at the Balerno end of the Water of Leith path, reclining on a bench, is someone going round making them or is it a new trend?
Posted 15 years ago # -
Both May and Hammond are known cyclists.
Hammond raced through London on a bike in a traffic challenge which I didn't expect him to win because it started quite far out from the centre of town.
May is even better since he rides a Brompton.
Posted 15 years ago # -
There are photos of JC on a Raleigh Pioneer too, but the fact remains - a large section of the BP are obsessed with people obsessed with motor vehicles.
Where TG 'leads' newspapers follow and many politicians are 'persuaded' that there is some sort of pro-car consensus, which is then read as 'anti anything else' - which is (perhaps) less true.
Posted 15 years ago # -
From that JM article;
Unfortunately, the cyclists' statement seemed less compelling than the fathers'. It seemed to be either a) I am an eco-warrior of greater moral rectitude than you, or b) I'm stupid enough to spend £75 on an item of headwear that, anywhere else, would be regarded as a disposable medium for the shock-free transportation of television sets.
or perhaps he's missed one;
c) I want to get there faster through the rush hour traffic than you in your £250,000 car...
or another;
d) I wan't to have a modicum of fitness so that I don't sweat at work when the lift is broken and I have to take the stairs
Just a thought
Posted 15 years ago # -
I don't think May was having a go at cycling just the protestors.
And he's right on the magic hats.
Posted 15 years ago # -
I have been known to enjoy a bit of top gear, I find dropping pianos on Morris Marinas rather funny and am amused in the turning of a Reliant Robin into a space shuttle. However ultimately it's just some expertly filmed hardcore automobile pornography and it puts commentators such as JM on shaky ground when it comes to criticising people who want to buy an expensive "designer" bike and show it off. After all, he and his show represent ludicrously expensive, designer cars that are totally impractical for any other purpose than saying to everyone else how empty the conrents of your trousers are... I just don't think he should get to have it both ways - he may not be Clarkson, but if you hang around the latter enough, some of his shit sticks
Posted 15 years ago # -
James May usually drives a Panda. He does have other things too of course.
Clarkson has made some very good shows on other topics. His program about the VC was wonderful as were the documentary on Brunel and the one about the attack on the French harbour.
Hammond's science show for kids on the BBC is good as was Brainiacs when he was the front man. Vic Reeves seems to blow things up for fun all the time although I did like his demo of the speed of sound from England to France.
I had to push a BMW 5 series out of the snow yesterday and a Nissan 4WD jeep like thing which turned out to only have front wheel drive. My Swedish RWD is working fine so far.
Longstaff 2WD trike is unpleasant to ride on the now hard and bumpy snow but it does work. it's sitting in the sun in the garden. Tyres are blown up, headset has been fixed.
Posted 15 years ago # -
Only one I've ever watched was the one where the dogsleds and skiers almost made it to the North Pole before the cars. All very silly and artificial, but it did show up the limitations of the cars (until the last few minutes).
Posted 15 years ago # -
That was still a Top Gear show. Clarkson outwith Top Gear has done some very good documentaries and James May might be implicated in a shortage of Lego kits over Christmas. Santa seemed to manage here and got the Police motorcycle kit.I've shown May's moon program in school and pupils seem to like it. He met real moon men and went through some of the training like the vomit comet.
Posted 15 years ago # -
Scary amount of support for Top Gear. tho of course even people you don't like might share some of your prejudices. To me Top Gear is moronic. I note that I am in a minority on that one. I guess I am elitist with a brain I will do anything to protect (even wearing some toughened polystyrene just in case).
Wee Foldy - did you know the writer and one time heroin user Will Self is very keen on Brompton's? He made a Radio 4 programme about them, went to the factory on the Thames etc.
Posted 15 years ago # -
gembo,
If you want to protect it then don't double the radius of the naturally evolved protection. Helmets have been shown to reduce minor scrapes but increase the risk of serious injuries.
Do you wear a magic hat while walking or riding in a car? Have you checked the rate of head injuries in both of those activities?
I knew about Will Self's fondness for the Brompton, he has a black superlight now but has added a few things to it which increase the mass. My matt black superlight is a little minimal.
Clarkson's VC show was great the whole way through. He talked about the the guys who won it. Right at the end he gave one last story about Robert Henry Cain and then said that he had been Clarkson's father in law and he had never mentioned that he won a VC. His own daughter only found out the day he died.
Posted 15 years ago # -
Quite agree, top gear is moronic aand clarkson repulses me. that's why i liked the north pole show - he looked a total idiot all the way through.
Posted 15 years ago # -
I really don't get the helmet hate round here.
When driving one uses appropriate safety gear, Seatbelts being the number one, airbags, abs, side impact bars the list is virtually endless.
While walking, the way one falls is vastly different (and much slower) your more likely to fall on the very large large muscle at the top of your legs than you are to land on your head yes if you fall with sufficient momentum you can hit the back of your skull but that part is pretty well protected and most of the energy is dissipated in your arse and your back, well before your head hits the ground. While cycling your likely to be travelling more quickly thus have much more kinetic energy (e=0.5M*v^2) to dissipate and since your more likely to fall side ways than backwards you have much less body surface to dissipate the energy and more likely to hit the side of your head which has very thin protection thus where the bulk of the helmet is.
Your naturally evolved protection was never designed to protect you from falling from a metal frame balance on two tiny cross sections of rubber and as such is pretty rubbish at it, there is no selective advantage in having a thick cranium just ask the Neanderthals.
On topic I like Top Gear its about the only good thing on TV its a shame the public take JC's (funny) ranting as some kind of gospel.
Posted 15 years ago # -
Foldy - I don't want to fall out, it is Christmas. Top Gear rubbish, Clarkson maybe he makes better other programmes? (I am being generous due to Xmas)
Turning to the dreaded helmet debate - many of the other strings on this forum have turned into a helmetVnon-helmet debate [where i admit to wearing my helmet when walking, wearing a magic light up hat when the government banned mornings in the early 1970s etc]. What I note is that people are biased and therefore look for evidence which suits them [when I say people I mean me and you and everyone else]. The debate takes the same shape as the anti-seat belt campaigns and the anti-motorbike helmet campaigns. Of course a bike helmet is about as much use as a chocolate fireguard unlike seatbelts and maybe motorbike helmets. However, I will stick my neck out as it were and say that a helmet will provide some protection [as medics said in case of my friend who is now partially paralysed but recovering in a way he wouldn't be if he didn't have helmet on, again according to medics at the scene of the accident]] and I am struggling to see how a helmet in and of itself will increase the risk of serious accident [might encourage people to take more risks? but that is people not helmets??]. Oh no, iI've started another helmetVnon-helmet debate...........
Posted 15 years ago # -
steveo,
Have you looked into the requirements for helmets? They are based on the speed your head hits the ground if you fall over. That's where the 12 mph limit comes from. Forward velocity is not considered and neither is the impact of a Volvo FH12 Intercooler tractor unit.
Since you know the formula for for kinetic energy try a quick sum to see how much the design limit is exceeded in a 15 mph impact.
Have you also looked at the number of people who get head injuries in cars? It seems the seat belts, air bags and so on are not sufficient and there should be a campaign to sell, nay enforce, helmet waring in cars.
Cycling is not dangerous. Helmets make it less safe and make people less likely to cycle. Not cycling is much more dangerous than cycling.
Posted 15 years ago # -
Apologies if you have been trying to post here in last few minutes.
I thought it might be a good idea to start a new forum/topic for helmets!
Posted 15 years ago #
Reply
You must log in to post.
posts
