Rant on, Professor - your blustering rants and acreage of script don’t disguise the fact that you’re indulging in Whataboutery because you know you can’t ‘win’ with regard to the thread topic, and ‘winning’ is what matters most to you.

You’ve claimed, on more than one occasion, to be a ‘scientist’, yet you have no evidence whatsoever to support the claims which you always make that good dog owners are ‘in a minority’, or that owners only pick up after their dogs ‘when someone is watching’ - those are nothing more than inventions - the only evidence you do have is that **some** dog owners don’t clear up after their dogs, and you have no evidence at all of what proportion of dog owners that **some** represents. Some ‘scientist’!

You take every opportunity to post your spittle-flecked, hate-filled rants about dogs and their owners, and you started this spat with your standard anti-dog/dog owner rants, for no other reason than to draw attention away from the, in many cases, well-deserved criticism that cyclists receive. You’ll note that I don’t say ‘all’ or even ‘most’ cyclists - I’ll leave that kind of unjustifiable, broad-brush exaggeration to you.

And, if you don’t like my reaction to your attacks on dogs and their owners, don’t make those attacks. And don’t be surprised, when you do make deliberately provocative posts, that the target of your provocation reacts. When I encounter someone who’s behaved like a bell-end, I tell them to their face that they’ve behaved like a bell-end. You’ve behaved like a bell-end, so suck it up, or STFU.

Any further occurrences of you posting your know-it-all horse-shit will be treated with the contempt they deserve.

Now back to the thread topic, and people’s experiences of cyclists’ bad behaviour.