Yes, ok - great, but you suspect wrong.
Arch said:
Alright, that was slightly sloppy language on my part. But if you think such people are 'rare' and they are in fact much more common than you think, what about the disparity? Do you think those are all made up?
if they're a lot more common than I think - but I don't think they are more common than I think...
And what do you mean 'what about the disparity' - what about what disparity? disparity between what...?
I don't think anything's 'made up' - you're the only one that's brought made up into the conversation.
Arch said:
bonj said:
Arch said:
there are more and more recumbents about - they are, despite bonj, growing in popularity.
Have you got any evidence, such as statistics published accurately reporting the number of recumbents used nationwide year on year?
I know that I know more people with them each year.
Yes well that's probably because you know more
people each year!
That's a good logic, isn't it - let's estimate the population like that. Have I met any
new people this year that I didn't know last year? Yes I have, so the population must have gone up!
Arch said:
I suspect the figures you want don't exist because as you know full well, no-one surveys how many of what type of bikes are on the road. Even figures for the total number of 'normal' cyclists out there are usually based on the sales figures you will refuse to accept.
Sales figures will be able to estimate the number of normal cyclists, because research has probably been done into the ratio of the number of people that buy bikes to the number of people that actually use them. To get a half-decent estimation of whether the popularity is rising, you would not only have to measure that ratio, but also measure the change in that ratio.
For instance it may be the case that someone hears about recumbents and thinks "oh yes I've got one of those in my shed I'll have a go on, i'll dust it off" and the ratio goes down, conversely, someone might think "I can't be arsed riding my recumbent any more, I keep falling off it" and the ratio goes up.
Arch said:
I assume you mean "don't think the "well they keep getting produced and sold so somebody must be riding them" argument will do", or that's a double negative, and therefore means the opposite....
Yes I do mean that don't be so pedantic