livedarklions

You're mixing up 'word salad guy" with "made up methodology claims guy." Word salad guy is a self-proclaimed "certified genius" btw, so be careful messing with him!

Koyote

Thanks to both of you for the correction. I got two nonsensical posters mixed up.

Leisesturm

You enjoy making a fool of yourself. Black people are NOT represented in any significant way in Classical Music. Please don't argue the point. And most black adults don't ride bikes because it simply isn't culturally acceptable. But if, when they do, they ride everywhere. Black people are not fish in a bowl that are confined only to "poor areas". Black pedestrians, maybe. Black cyclists NO. You should remember in the heyday of the bike messenger that black cyclists sliced and diced Manhattan traffic to a fare thee well. If infrastructure is the reason black cyclists are dying at 4.5x white ones, then why aren't more of the crashes single vehicle? Are black drivers hitting black cyclists? Are white drivers hitting black cyclists in black areas? I am certain that black people have no idea just how much greater their risk of being killed is when riding a bike. I didn't until yesterday. Neither did you! It has absolutely no bearing on their decision to ride or not. You are the one arguing a strawman. I notice a lot more ad hominem attacks in this thread. Not just at me. The antagonism level is truly comical. But when you need to pick on grammar issues it's a sure sign that you are on the ropes argument wise. Yep. Self educated product of an underperforming ghetto public school here. I do the best I can. What is your excuse?

Zara Sp00k

Black people are more likely to be shot there as well, are you saying it is the lack of spending on infrastructure that is the cause for this as well?

see, that's where the problem is, you are attributing a cause to a problem without proof that it is the real cause.
In college the popular saying is: correlation does not prove cause

the example they like to give is:
ice cream sales go up in summer
crime goes up in summer
so does ice cream consumption cause crime?

my observation is that higher bicycle deaths in minority neighborhoods has the same cause as the higher number of gunshot deaths

Koyote

We've gone from this...

...to this:

Aside from your shifting claims, do you realize that Black people pretty much invented jazz, blues, and gospel? Oh, and don't forget rock and roll, since Elvis (and other early rock stars) were aping Black artists. Think about Little Richard, Ike Turner, Chuck Berry, etc. (The first two were pianists, btw!)

And in the realm of "just making up stuff," this one is classic:
​​​​​​

Leisesturm

Interesting. We shouldn't have to guess at this. Are you saying this is just more black on black violence? I did make the point earlier though ... the last year I recall the exact number of cyclists killed in the US was around 2019. The number was around 818. Total. The entire US. All races. I'm not saying that's good, but .... come on ... pedestrian deaths were surely in the multiple ten thousands. Motorist on Motorist were 40K or more. Black people have way bigger fish to fry. Until I know the exact number of black cyclists killed in any calendar year, the findings of this article y'all are so wrought up about will not affect how I ride, or where.

Leisesturm

Talk about shifting ... what does reeling off a list of Jazz, Blues and Gospel musicians do to refute my assertion that Black people are underrepresented in Classical Music? WTH. It's not like cycling is all that popular with American White adults. Why is it incredulous that cycling is not popular with Black ones? It is not. I am the only cyclist in my family, and it is a huge one. They all think I am crazy. I am the only cyclist in my church. I play Piano and Organ for that church by the way. I am the only Black cyclist in my club. It too is huge. Why are we arguing the obvious lack of participation in adult cycling by black people? Next you will be proving that I am wrong to say black culture is insulated. It is always possible to take apart someones argument if you want to badly enough. You and LDL know I am not a cretin, but you certainly succeed in making me look like one. Good on ya's. Twist words. Throw in the hyperbole and faux outrage. Character assassination is what you have to resort to because your arguments are weak and biased. Look at my 'join date'. The reason we've never tangled like this is because I avoid it. The usual pointless debates you and others dragged from A&S over to General are often doomed from the start. I limit my exposure. See you again in five years.

livedarklions

So wait, what percentage of any racial or ethnic group are classical musicians? Where in your post is there a limitation to classical music? Moving the goalposts much? Are you under the impression that classical music represents the main preference of the "dominant culture" at this point? That black musicians don't interact with musicians of other races? What century is your zip code in?

You want to deny that urban neighborhoods carved up by high-traffic roads are disproportionately black, you go right ahead. Citation needed.

"Are black drivers hitting black cyclists? Are white drivers hitting black cyclists in black areas?" Yes. Are you familiar with how roads work? Many of them go through neighborhoods to get to other neighborhoods, especially the busy roads.

"If infrastructure is the reason black cyclists are dying at 4.5x white ones, then why aren't more of the crashes single vehicle?" If horses aren't dogs, why are there cats? I can post nonsense questions too. Your argument about infrastructure is with the study referenced in the OP. They've studied it, and it's what they've suggested as the primary cause. You have stated no intelligible reason to refute that, just armchair sociological nonsense.

" I am certain that black people have no idea just how much greater their risk of being killed is when riding a bike. I didn't until yesterday.Neither did you! It has absolutely no bearing on their decision to ride or not. You are the one arguing a strawman." Missing my main point, you don't need to know the statistics to know you're riding in an area where you'll be dodging a lot of cars under unfavorable circumstances. If you live in such a neighborhood, that's likely the starting and/or ending point of most if not all of your rides, especially if you don't have a car. Guess where car ownership tends to be lowest? So yeah, the person is less likely to start riding if they have to overcome that barrier to entry--the start and end of their ride is going to be scary, especially for a beginner. BTW, I can't help but notice that you don't actually know what a straw man argument is. Whatever it is you're accusing me of, it isn't "arguing a straw man", you just think I'm assuming something that I'm not.

"And most black adults don't ride bikes because it simply isn't culturally acceptable." Sez who? Citation needed. Pretty sure you pulled this nonsense from your butt. Most white adults don't ride bikes, either, btw, just that the adults who do are disproportionately likely to be white. "They don't because it's not culturally acceptable" is a completely circular argument. The proof of the statement is going to be the phenomenon it's supposedly explaining, i.e., "black adults don't ride because it's culturally unacceptable and we know it's culturally unacceptable, because black adults don't ride." BTW, somebody better tell the large numbers of adult black cyclists I see in the Boston area that they don't exist or are committing a cultural sin or something.

I think you crossed yourself with the bike messenger thing. The main reason that adult cyclists are disproportionately white is because whites are more likely to have the opportunity for leisurely riding, which is usually performed on low-risk routes. Bicycle messengering and delivery is definitely not that, and is actually comparatively high-risk. The people doing that job are likely to be urban and at the lower end of the income scale. You can finish the math on that yourself.

Pretty sure the ropes ain't anywhere near me, but thank you for your concern.










.

livedarklions

Wait a second--do you actually not see the irony in dragging out the old saw about correlation and causation in the same post that you're asserting that there's got to be some causal connection between high bicycle fatalities and shootings in black neighborhoods because of their correlation? Your "observation" is a completely unsupported and very non-specific assertion.

livedarklions

I would say that it is absolutely rational that the existence of such a statistic should have absolutely no effect on your riding habits. As I recall, you live in Portland where the riding infrastructure happens to be pretty good comparatively.. No one's saying that population averages override individual characteristics in predicting risk. Bicyclist deaths and pedestrian deaths tend to be in urban settings while motor vehicle driver occupant deaths are more evenly divided. I'd have to be a damn idiot to think I can safely engage in risky riding practices because being white makes me safe.

I do think there's an uptick in urban pedestrian and cyclist deaths in the past few years (since 2019, especially), and I think that's an issue for trying to get people out of cars in cities. We're obviously talking past each other as nowhere have I suggested whether or not anyone needs to get wrought up, only that this is useful data if it actually suggests some things that might make people actually safer and perhaps more willing to ride. This is supposed to be a forum about cycling advocacy and safety, I don't think it's required that every aspect of that be anyone's biggest fish for frying.

Most motor vehicle fatalities (about 55%) are single vehicle by the way, so that "motorist on motorist" figure is about half that unless you call a driver killing.himself or an occupant of his vehicle "motorist on motorist,"

Pratt

The first thing one notices about the statistics is that there are no p values associated with the differences.
The raw numbers she something like 7.5 deaths of whites and about 34 deaths of Blacks, per 100,000,000 miles. Another way of looking at that is that the chance of a Black person having a fatal accident on a bike is 0.000000034 vs 0.0000000075 for a white person.
Those are like lottery numbers. I'm not sure that either number is statistically different from zero.

Leisesturm

Thank you. This has been my argument even without seeing the data. But about that. One thing that I haven't seen discussed whenever racial disparities comes up. Blacks yada yada more than White. There are 8x more White people than Black people. So if 34 Black people are killed per Million miles vs 7.5 White people. It's actually a jaw dropping disparity. Much more than the 34/7.5 on its face would indicate.

livedarklions

Your math is way off. Those numbers are correct only if the person only rides 1 mile. And if you read the study, they do give p values for the differences.

Koyote

The reliability on the stats is in the article's appendix; in case you don't feel like opening it, here is the takeaway, which addresses your concern. (I'm presuming you know the meaning of a 95% CI.) As for whether those numbers are (statistically) significantly different from zero, I didn't find that info in my cursory glance...But the small numbers don't surprise me, and do not, ipso facto, suggest (to me, anyway) statistical insignificance.

Results: Exposure to traffic fatality differs by race/ethnicity group and by mode, indicating that adjustment for differential exposure is needed when estimating disparities. The authors find that fatality rates per 100 million miles traveled are systematically higher for Black and Hispanic Americans for all modes and notably higher for vulnerable modes (e.g., Black Americans died at more than 4 times the rate for White Americans while cycling, 33.71 [95% CI: 21.84, 73.83] compared with 7.53 [95% CI: 6.64, 8.69], and more than 2 times the rate while walking, 40.92 [95% CI: 36.58, 46.44] compared with 18.77 [95% CI: 17.30, 20.51]). Previous estimates that do not adjust for differential exposure may underestimate disparities by race/ethnicity. Observed disparities remained when considering only urban areas and appear to be exacerbated during darkness.

Umm...what is your point? The whole purpose of converting to a fatality rate (e.g., per million miles traveled) is to wash out the difference in population sizes.

retswerb

Nope nope nope. Nice try but you're not even close.

"Public school pupils enrolled in urban districts receive on average around $2,100 less per pupil than their suburban counterparts, and $4,000 less than students who attend rural remote schools, according to a recent study by EdBuild. And within cities, kids in predominantly nonwhite districts receive less than kids in predominantly white districts—about $1,321 less." ( Why City Kids Get Less Money for Their Education - Bloomberg - just one source among many available.)

Pratt

Thanks to the Lions and Koyotes!
What ever version I opened, either didn't have, or I overlooked, the direction to, the confidence interval data. They do indeed demonstrate a statistically significant difference.
Two dozen lashes with sweaty bar tape.

livedarklions

So you think the problem is that black people are shooting each other with bicycles? Strain that logic a little harder and you'll need surgery. As to where the investment in bicycle infrastructure is going, I'll just quote the Omar Bradley line in Patton: " I can read a map, George! "

jon c. 

Your factually suspect response certainly belongs somewhere else. It has nothing whatsoever to do with the topic at hand.

We are presented with an interesting study that relates to advocacy and safety for urban riders. And a segment of the audience feels the need to question the veracity of the study and the competence of the scientists involved while introducing all manner of extraneous BS simply because the study notes racial demographics.

The study is about a cohort of fellow cyclists and the danger of riding in urban settings. It has nothing to do with the public education system or whether or not blacks play the piano. It's hard to imagine why anyone would think those topics to be relevant.

Cyclists face more danger riding is some areas than in others. Considering that reality and contemplating potential solutions is not inherently controversial or political. There's no good reason to make it so.

Koyote

It's the Gish gallop approach that has become popular among the anti-truth, anti-science crowd. They just throw out a huge number of 'counter-arguments' that are irrelevant, poorly-reasoned, factually incorrect. But as long as they throw out LOTS of such arguments, it becomes impossible to refute all of them, and the discussion is irretrievably dragged off-topic. I think most such people do it without consciously realizing it - they've learned the behavior and just mimic it.

mschwett 

thank you both for coherently and fairly summarizing the issue and discussion.

we are cyclists. we should all be concerned about the safety of other cyclists, black, white, urban, rural. the kind of “logic” being used here by a few posters is exactly what leads to this kind of inequity. nobody in this day and age will say outright “we don’t care about ____ people, let’s not build safe infrastructure where they live,” but they will invoke all kinds of ******** misdirection and appeal to mistrust of government to prevent progress or change. the results are pretty clear.

CrimsonEclipse

Black folks are being killed 400% more often and you're worried about capitalization.

(*yikes*)

indyfabz

What in the wild, wild world of sports?

FBinNY 

Yes and no.

I've always had problems with data presented this way. If, for example the problems were related to things like urban vs suburban, or factors like income or social status, etc. then the honest thing to do is present the conclusions. However, as has become common, the conclusions are presented on a secondary basis, ---- ie. data says dense eastern cities have higher bicycle fatality rates, and since they also have higher minority populations, the disparity can also be stated in a racial context.

It's a logical two step and is one of the reasons publications like the New York Times are losing credibility.

I won't digress farther into politics, but if the intent is to discuss road safety, there's no need to mask it as a racial disparity issue.

Leisesturm

I don't know why my state would spend hundreds of thousands of dollars in an effort to get black people on bikes if they were already riding them at similar per capita rates to other demographics. Do you? Can you prove that cycling in the black community is at similar levels to other demographic groups? That's what you need to do instead of sidetracking the discussion.
https://andscape.com/features/ahead-...-in-the-sport/

FBinNY 

Yes and no.

I've always had problems with data presented this way. If, for example, the problems were related to things like urban vs suburban, or factors like income or social status, etc. then the honest thing to do is present the conclusions as such. However, as has become common, the conclusions are presented on a secondary basis, ---- ie. data says dense eastern cities have higher bicycle fatality rates, and since they also have higher minority populations, the disparity can also be stated in a racial context.

It's a logical two step and is one of the reasons publications like the New York Times are losing credibility.

I won't digress farther into politics, but if the intent is to discuss road safety, there's no need to mask it as a racial disparity issue.