Re: [GPGT] Travel on bicycle; For your own health sake, please correct..

For your own health sake, please correct your food calorie related misconceptions.

---

ponpokku (28-03-2011, 09:58 AM) wrote:

cherry6 (28-03-2011, 06:36 AM) wrote:

Re: [GPGT] Travel on bicycle is good for the environment.
snip

u missed the point totally. why is it more expensive to ride a trishaw than taking a bus?

List of logical fallacies (that may help you in formulating your posts in CAL): 33. Bad Analogy: claiming that two situations are highly similar, when they aren't. For example, "The solar system reminds me of an atom, with planets orbiting the sun like electrons orbiting the nucleus. We know that electrons can jump from orbit to orbit; so we must look to ancient records for sightings of planets jumping from orbit to orbit also."
Or, "Minds, like rivers, can be broad. The broader the river, the shallower it is. Therefore, the broader the mind, the shallower it is."
Or, "We have pure food and drug laws; why can't we have laws to keep movie-makers from giving us filth?"

ponpokku (28-03-2011, 09:58 AM) wrote:

lets look at ur calculations... since i see that u took the calculations off a weightloss site, it probably didnt tell u what it takes to produce that 840kcal.

Why nit pick the cyclist 840kCal/ 30km when the average car U use combust 26.065X more energy per unit dist compared to cycling?: i.e. 840kCal X 26.065.

ponpokku (28-03-2011, 09:58 AM) wrote:

ok human body can only transform, at best, 25% of food calorie to work. so in order to make up that 840kcal for 30km, or 14 kcal/km, u need 4x or more food consumption. thats what weightloss thru burning calories is all about. u burn every 1 kcal = 4 kcal of food, thus u lose weight. normal man consumes abt 2700 kcal per day, angmoh standard. asians probably lower. say a 560 kcal for 20km, regular distance to and back from work, would burn all the food u eat in one day, ur body gets nothing, u need another 3 meals, get it? now how much does food cost? how much does petrol cost?

Rubbish U r talking! Really hope that your knowledge of food calorie values exceeds that of Ms Donna Simpson fr New Jersey [link] cos by your logic, you r certainly overeating. If U claim that only 1/4 of food calories is absorbed, then by your logic, the 'angmoh' man of RDI 2700kCal/day would need to eat food containing 10800kCal i.e. 17.8 plates of Chicken rice (each 607kCal) [HPB nutrition] everyday (and twice that should he go cycling).
Ms Simpson might fit your example (consumes 12,000kCal/day) [link] but I believe she's really just one big perverse American slut (people pay to see her nude).- liberty gone awry.
- U must have mixed up grams to calorie conversions: 1g of Carbohydrate = 4kCalories if U would please.

ponpokku (28-03-2011, 09:58 AM) wrote:

now u know why is it more expensive to take a trishaw than a bus? energy wise cycling could be efficient, but our body is not an efficient energy converter.

33. Bad Anology ['Logical Falacies'] again.

ponpokku (28-03-2011, 09:58 AM) wrote:

and ur assumption 1 person per car is total moot point cos in sg, 12 out of 100 owns a car, and most ppl took public transport. u should try selling ur idea to the americans or OECD countries really, since they avg have 70 cars every 100 persons.

Nothing against Americans, they have to invest in green tech simple bc oil is running low and as oil price peaks, green tech is the only viable technology.

ponpokku (28-03-2011, 09:58 AM) wrote:

besides,going at a speed a cyclist cannot ever achieve and carry more things a cyclist cannot carry, there is no comparison. plus u havent factor in the other costs... the foot print of a bike, say 0.8x1.5m. 80 guys, 96 sq m. 80 guys on a bus, 30 sq m at most. so u build 3x more roads to house cyclists moving at 1/2 the speed? good job.

dun want to argue about footprint though I must also comment that cyclist can cycle quite close to each other dep on speed, no need for land for petrol stn, workshops, car parks etc. Some bikes are fold able but this is a diversion.

ponpokku (28-03-2011, 09:58 AM) wrote:

ps, and plz dun tell me how easy it is to cycle. i've tried cycling regularly from holland area to bukit batok 20yrs back, or even my resident in beijing to tiananmen square. if i take it easy it would be nearly an hour, and i'm on a racer not mountain bike. if i try to be fast, i probably cant do anything else after the session. and i bet no boss would like to see their employees dozing away after cycling to work, probably what happened in china with the afternoon naps and such. so does the industrial revolution make sense to u now? u travel to work without effort so that u can concentrate on ur work, instead of wasting energy on ur travel.
i've done it and dropped the idea, unlike armchair generals like greenies who used only lip service. greenies makes sense in their own countries becos of the angmohs' lifestyle. but it doesnt make sense here.

I have access to both modes of transport and neither am I proposing the banning of private transport. This thread was started only as a means of discussion about the exact energy intensity expended per unit distance for cycling compared with various other modes of transport. I never said that all persons MUST cycle nor insisted that firemen must arrive on bicycles. For your own health sake, please correct your food calorie related misconceptions and against the proponents of green living, they are doing their part to stem global warming and reduce land flooding, so how wrong could such civic consciousness be?

~ "The King will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me.'"-- Matthew 25:40 (NIV)

Rgds
B.C.

Caloric Content Of Commonly-Eaten Dishes (HPB)

Recommended Calorie Intake (Average activity by age, sex etc)

CALORIE EXPENDITURE CHART PER HOUR FOR VAROIUS ACTIVITIES

====================

At/ related:

31Mar2011: [GPGT] Travel on bicycle is good for the environment.