I am skeptical that researchers and reviewers of Science wouldn't have accounted for that. I made some research about rebuttal to this study, so far the only ones I have found are from farmer related or anti-vegan communities, which are likely more biased than a scientific journal. I will need at least a contradictory peer reviewed article to convince me this meta analysis is incorrect.
oce
I don't have the current knowledge nor the time to reach the level of researchers in the domain to make my own meta analysis. Where can I read a reputable rebuttal to this meta analysis?
More like using them as toothpicks.
The shit-eating grin is prefect.
Do you have a source more reputable than the Science journal and the Oxford university?
He's supporting this change, he's part of the local government developing it. So he's saying that to illustrate the change of mindset.
Yes, I think you're not getting the point, it's about making the default for bikes and pedestrians now, and treating cars as secondary users, that have their smaller delimited special lane.
Le Monde Group is mainly owned by various rich people, but 25% is owned by employees, and they have specific rights that are not common for billionaire-owned journals, like voting for their own newspaper managing editor and approving changes of shareholders.
Yes, I said it is paywalled a couple of worlds before the link. I was just giving a source for the quote, it's not really the point of the article.
No, Le Monde (The World) is center left, which in France means close to Socialist party, which is close to Bernie Sanders in the USA. It's probably the most well respected newspaper from France.
Not really, for now it is mostly "here's the bike lane", because the street is attributed to cars by default. So this quote is about reversing this mind set.
What makes you think the reasons you think this is cool is different from the reasons why other people find SUV cool? This article mentions the similarities.
When you are not an expert of the domain, it is easy to get mislead by arguments such as the one you gave, maybe you're correct, maybe you're misleading, I don't have the knowledge to verify by myself. That's why I need to rely on reputable source, and it's hard to do more reputable than a meta-analysis in Science. If you are correct, the rebuttal will eventually be published in a peer reviewed journal, I'll will be happy to read the conclusions then.