Adam Hansen, the president of CPA, the union that represents the pro riders to the UCI, seems to be in a bit of a pickle.
After climate activists This is Rigged brought the entire peloton to a standstill for more than an hour eighty kilometres into the elite men's road race at Glasgow yesterday, with some protestors "cementing their hands" to the tarmac, Hansen felt compelled to say something.
First he issued this statement: "A message to the protesters. What you did in today's race did the opposite to help the environment. While a bike race might not be the best thing for the environment, the impact of exposing people the thought of taking up cycling is key for the environment. Getting more people to ride bikes and means cars drive less.
"Also, those orange safety vest you all wear.... made from petroleum.... your glasses, shoe soles, plastic on the tips of shoe laces, buttons, debit/credit cards... yeah, made from Oil... just saying."
Now I don't know if you'll agree with me, but not a great look. Strawman arguments may seem clever in your head, but they never look good on paper, especially if the paper is called Twitter (sorry not sorry, Elon).
And expectedly, most fans pointed this out to him.
Hansen's response? Accusing trolls for attacking him. He also added: "It's ironic that those who complain about 'some sponsors' in cycling didn't support the protest themselves by turning off the TV......"
Maybe I'm being too harsh on him, he's got a tough job protecting the riders. And Hansen, to his credit, tried to explain his position by saying: "I'm not saying don't protest. Protest! I'm not denying I am perfect or that there are no climate problems. I know the science very well. I do my part. I'm also a vegan. I don't believe in killing or abusing animals."
Good response, right? Erm, he finished with the tweet with this: "But I don't throat it down people's throat. I don't stop an event where 100s of athlete's have worked years to do their best while following their dreams. You disrupt my athletes, and of course, I am going to defend them. My tweet is not about a climate issue, but the way you handled it and stopped a group of guys on bikes who trained years of their lives on bikes.. how about you protest somewhere else where it's a real issue."
Funnily enough, This is Rigged have recently targeted the Scottish Parliament and the Grangemouth oil and gas petrochemical plant, the largest manufacturing site of cycling team sponsor Ineos. And to be fair, it's not like a cycling event is the cleanest, greenest sporting competition in the world.
> "Greenwashing, pure and simple" - fury as Shell UK sponsors British Cycling
Hmm. Protest, for thee, but not for me?
As I said, Hansen is probably just focused on doing his job, and has landed in a bit of a pickle.
On the lighter side, British rider Owain Doull seemed to be glad about the protest helping him out to attend a nature's call.
"I was busting for a pee, so I was quite happy to stop. They did me a favour!" the 30-year-old, who finished 18th after his stint in the break, joked to reporters, including road.cc, at the finish.
> “I was busting for a pee – they did me a favour!” Mixed response from riders after climate protesters stop world road race championships for an hour
Add new comment
30 comments
This is the Virtue Signalling World Championships, right?
But how will we ever get to Net Zero?
It doesn't hurt to look up the meaning of "virtue signalling". Essentially, its the saying or writing in favour of a "good thing" without actually acting to perform that good thing.
So, to accuse those who act in attempts to bring about a good thing of mere virtue signalling is unjust. Many tight righties (or daft lefties) will accuse those trying to act virtuously of merely signalling. But there is a difference.
Not to say that all acts intended to be virtuous (or claimed to be) actually are. Many rabid businessmen & women will claim that their provision of, say, gambling "services" or some hugely polluting plastic gew-gaw is a virtuous act. They often demand that their "virtue" should be rewarded by not just vast profits but government subsidies and gongs!
But I digress.
The path to net zero is for everyone to follow, from individual humans to vast corporations and governments - to act virtuously in bringing it about. Personally I do solar panels (put more into the grid than I take out) don't fly, don't eat meat, don't consume so much crap (trying to get to zero crap consumption) etc*..
Individual acts will make just a teeny-weeny, very-small-indeed, fraction of one percent difference. But if everyone tried to act virtuously in this respect, it might add up to quite a lot.
Of course, business and its government servants seem less inclined to act virtuously on this matter. In fact they like to not just eschew virtuous actions but even the signalling, prefering to signal then commit evil intents with gay and open abandon.
What of yourself? Do you try to do your bit for net zero or are you dismissive of the concept; or dismissive of the notion that even you might make a contribution by acting rather than signalling?
* Such acts are not really enough and I still have many personal behaviours that should be curtailed in the name of net-zero. The full monty would probably require a suicidal act followed by a composting of my remains to improve the soil.
wouldn't composting produce methane, which is a worse greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide?
Soylent green is the answer.
https://www.channel4.com/programmes/gregg-wallace-the-british-miracle-meat
One feels that one's methane emissions when alive would far exceed them when a dedder. I can match any large cow, any time of day. Oh yes I can! I blame the spring greens and snadgy I love so much. Also, I think the ladywife puts fart-powder in me dinner for a joke.
A surprising number of dickheads (of varying political hues) have picked up on the term "policing by consent", but think it means "the police must let me do what I want".
Doesn't the 'modern' intrepretation of policing by consent come in during the height of the pandemic, with all those freemen on the land type people misquoting and misinterpreting the Magna Carta to try and get out of being fined?
As opposed to the references to Robert Peel and the establishment of a genuine police service - https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/policing-by-consent/definitio...
This kind of highlights the issue that cyclists face with drivers. They have a really weird false equivolance for cyclists and cars.
On one hand they accept that bikes are completely different to cars and then then in the same sentence equate the two exactly. They think that bikes breaking the rules is just as dangerous as a car doing it. They ignore the constant rule breaking of cars and instead fixate on the small number of cyclists who do it despite it being massively on sided towards cars and completely ignore the vulnerability of cyclists.
As I keep banging on about, drivers should be forced to cycle on our roads periodically. Any speed or safety awareness course should have a mandatory cycling part where you have to go out on the road with an instructor and feel what its like to be close passed by dickheads like themselves.
I'd say it's "most people in the UK". Even some UK cyclists don't seem to get "neither pedestrian nor 'vehicle' like cars" (And vehicular cyclists will want to die on the "vehicle" hill).
Is this is due to unfamiliarity with cycling in general? Perhaps because we don't have good examples of other ways of doing things? Maybe also the law / how we've enacted "what goes where" is also responsible? Legally a cycle is a "vehicle" so goes on the road with the motor vehicles. So that signifies fast and dangerous for pedestrians! Also "I have to take a test / pay 'road tax' / have insurance - why don't they?"
OTOH councils also stick up blue signs to "make" cycle facilities from existing footways. They also assume (if they think about it at all...) that cyclists are happy to proceed not much faster than walking pace and dismount for obstacles every few hundred yards ("less confident cyclists").
Ultimately this is only "resolved" when cyclists are not an "other". Not a small minority we can point to and single out from people in cars, people on trains, people walking. And (chicken and egg) that is only likely to happen when we have sufficient spaces suited for the specific requirements of cycling, rather than walking or driving.
No, that's completely wrong. If you want to overtake, go in the next lane. Many of us run video cameras and if you squeeze past in the same lane we'll report you for prosecution
Well we can try, but the really bad forces like Lancashire have never conducted a 'close pass operation', have no intention of doing so and determinedly ignore any reports of close passing. Mikey is doing a great job, but he's lucky in not living in an area where the 'Sod the Cyclists' Dark Side of the Force remains in control
https://upride.cc/incident/md72dfu_alanhowardtrafic_closepass/
https://upride.cc/incident/pk15pcy_seatibiza_closepass/
https://upride.cc/incident/fh16fhz_golf_closepass/
https://upride.cc/incident/yn67mvj_sainsburys44tonner_closepass/
Because shoplifting causes 1700+ deaths and 25,000 injuries a year, obviously...
Cyclists aren't people, they are simply collateral damage.
Torygraph lead on a story about fining businesses that hire illegal* migrants. That's not a woke policy and therefore qualifies as real crime!
*not my choice of wording.
Although, businesses hiring migrants who haven't (yet) been granted permission to live here are unlikely to be paying minimum wage, pension contributions and employers' NI and might not have H&S compliance high on their agendas. Plus in some (not all) situations they'll be driving down other workers' wages.
It's a real crime with real victims, and is worth pursuing. The noise and climate of persecution coming from government around migration in general is abhorrent and dishonest, of course.
That's a helluva big battery for a B- Series
BMC invented the hybrid?
It is a huge battery but are you sure its not an A series mounted longitudinally , as in the Austin A30 ?
That is brilliant!
Anyone who uses the word "woke" apart from the describe the postion of having just finished a sleep really doesn't understand what "woke" actually means. It's just another lazy insult from people with tiny little minds and zero imagination.
Just watch out for the mind virus
That list reads like the complete opposite of what most woke people actually are.
If your comments count towards your diploma from the Online Troll Academy I think you've probably failed the course. Is it too late to get your money back? Is there anything else you can do? Macrame? Knitting? You must be good at something - everyone has a hidden talent, you've just not found yours yet.
Stopping drivers who drive poorly has an additional benefit, as it often uncovers other criminal activity. It is a fact that criminals tend on average to commit more traffic offences than is average for the general population.
Stopping drivers who drive poorly has an additional benefit, as it often uncovers other criminal activity
My own version of this profiling has shown that Audis and pickups are the ones to go for if you want to find MOT, insurance, VED evaders. 6 years bureaucracy-free motoring here!
Drivers: please stop close passing, injuring, and killing cyclists so that police can solve shoplifting and maybe rape which are currently only happening because police are having to do Operation Close Pass.
Theft of an object is a cost of doing business aka an insurance matter.
Intimidation, Injury or Death are offences against the Person so real crimes.
Yes, cyclists are People not objects.
PS:If this is news to you, put the object 'driving licence' in the post to DVLA since you don't meet the requirements...
Theft of an object is theft, which is a real crime.
Offences against the person are also real crimes.
Unfortunately, a lot of people do seem to consider crimes against property to be more important than crimes against a person, maybe because it is more easily measurable...
Your reply to Rendel does not follow from what he wrote.
Not sure you've quite followed my point there, chap. "Has the police considered actually solving real crimes ... including shoplifting..." was the quote from Twitter mentioned in the article, then I was pointing out shoplifting didn't do the damage dangerous driving does. You seem to be addressing me as if I'd said the opposite?
Hopefully, and to the extent they engage with them, the comments "backlash" help confirm the need for this type of operation to be a regular feature. As always, drivers' sense of victim-hood knows no bounds. Why you would make a political priority out of trying to appease such a bunch of whingers is beyond me.
...because they are quickly running out of both time and voters. If life gives you lemons, and all that!