Quote:
Originally Posted by Corndogger
I've read the academic, social engineering inspired literature. If you read deeper into what these guys have written they even agree with me. Someone (I wish I could find the study) did an analysis of this using a whack of US transportation data and discovered there is no (0.01) correlation between new roads and increased traffic if you control for other factors. That's simple common sense. New roads do not cause vehicles to pop out of thin air and there's no real evidence they account for increased trips/person either. If there is I'd love to see some scientific-based evidence that isn't written by someone with an agenda.
|
When a
proper scientific study is done, researchers do not start the study with preconceived notions on the truth of their hypotheses, as evidence should be what supports the hypothesis. I'm not suggesting all scientific studies are done properly, because the researchers are human and do make mistakes in experimental setup or their analysis or their hypothesis may be wrong.
However, a scientific study is still better than appealing to common sense because scientific studies can be discussed based on the merits of the evidence collected and the analysis performed. Appealing to common sense means justifying without evidence, and what can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. Common sense notions are not necessarily correct.
I repeat, however, independent of the significance or truth of induced traffic, a good argument can be made that the new ring roads are needed because population and employment growth at the city's perimeter.