I'm sorry that you found the one source I posted was a content farm, because I found numerous others saying the same thing. The link you posted is an absolute

I'm sorry that you found the one source I posted was a content farm, because I found numerous others saying the same thing. The link you posted is an absolute joke that you're cherry picking, because the only reason to put "Bicycling, Stationary: vigorous" above "normal sustained speeds" is because you made the utterly inaccurate editorial decision to do so. You're flat out wrong if you believe a 12 minute mile (which is barely walking speed) is equivalent to "vigorous stationary cycling". If you consulted your own chart you'd see it lists, under "training and sports activities", "Bicycling >20mph" as 693cal for a 185lb person and "Running: 10mph (6min/mile)" as 671cal which at least is close to accurate. Unfortunately, you don't seem to be remotely familiar with the physiological demands here, so I don't know what to say. Your argument was that running couldn't possibly burn more calories because it only involved the lower body.