Quote:
Originally Posted by daker13
I read that article. The first thing that struck me was the statement that the guy who died was riding "about 25 mph" when he ran into a bear... I thought that seemed awful fast for a mtb'er who wasn't blasting down a descent. But then there was another reference to that speed later in the article. I wonder if it was lifted from his computer or something? A little disturbing that the NYT is giving its readers the impression that mountain bikers typically ride at 25 mph .
There always has to be a 'trend' for the NYT to write about it, and sometimes the trends the writers find are pretty thin. Personally, I thought that was yet another article singling out mountain bikers (which I rarely do anymore, btw) for their effects on wildlife/the backcountry without much to back it up.
|
If you haven't noticed by now the NYT is basically crap, let me help.
The whole paper is like that. ALL of it.
“Briefly stated, the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect is as follows. You open the newspaper to an article on some subject you know well. In Murray's case, physics. In mine, show business. You read the article and see the journalist has absolutely no understanding of either the facts or the issues. Often, the article is so wrong it actually presents the story backward—reversing cause and effect. I call these the "wet streets cause rain" stories. Paper's full of them.
In any case, you read with exasperation or amusement the multiple errors in a story, and then turn the page to national or international affairs, and read as if the rest of the newspaper was somehow more accurate about Palestine than the baloney you just read. You turn the page, and forget what you know.”
― Michael Crichton