> Perhaps cyclists had tried, but they had all been run over. I'm an American cyclist, and I'm trying to do my part commuting to work by bike. But I got whack

> Perhaps cyclists had tried, but they had all been run over. I'm an American cyclist, and I'm trying to do my part commuting to work by bike. But I got whacked in the elbow a few weeks ago by the mirror of a car who was offended by having to slow down briefly and go around me... I'd say that 75% of drivers are conscientious, crossing over when there's a gap in the opposite lane to give me more than the 5 feet of space required by local laws (3 feet required by state law). Another 20% don't have a clue what to do around a cyclist and either white-knuckle past me close by, with a shouted "sorry" with their wheel just on the centerline (and no one in the opposite lane) follow a car's length behind my wheel for a mile (at 15-20 mph on 35, 45, or 55mph roads, building a traffic jam of frustrated other motorists who are far more likely to drive aggressively). Some 5% are actively hostile. I've been whacked in the butt and shoulder by mirrors of people trying to run me off the road, had half-empty beer cans thrown at me, been enveloped many times in the black smoke off of one of many diesel mall-crawlers with the tuner kit that allows them to "roll coal" when they step on the throttle. Some shout "get off the road" as if my road bike would work in the ditch. I think it's what needs to be done, so I'm doing my part because I'm an able, healthy adult, but it's definitely an activist/enthusiast thing, not a reasonable solution for the vast majority of my state who use 5,000 lbs of steel to move 200 lbs of human to work and back. I will say that I'm happy to see more e-bikes on the handful of trails in the area (yes, even when driven by people who don't know proper etiquette and who are using throttle-only on trails that are supposed to be non-motorized), because it means you don't have to have a VO2 max of 50+ mL/kg/min or an FTP of 3 W/kg to get out of the car. I've been reading "The Ministry for the Future" by Kim Stanley Robinson. It's inspiring, but what strikes me the most is how unreasonable it is. Floridians and Americans and Europeans alike simply do not respond rationally to the reality of climate change. PS: > Moving to Mars is a pipedream for 99.9999% of the population. I think you're missing a few nines there, multiplying by 8 billion suggests that 8,000 humans could reasonably live on Mars. I'd love to see a manned mission of 2-5 astronauts (supported by a nation-state or international effort) get some science done on Mars within my lifetime, but the idea of an elites-only glass dome city being erected on Mars for billionaires to run away to while Earth wastes away is not even close to reasonable.