Comments
A Transportation Enthusiast on January 12th, 2008 at 3:54 pm #
Wow, Elwyn Tinklenberg actually believes Ken Avidor’s anti-PRT propaganda! I wonder if he, like Avidor, is associated with rail construction interests? Has he received donations from any of Ken’s buddies at Light Rail Now? Perhaps Tinklenberg should explain to us the basis for his assertion that PRT would not work, given that many respected transit professionals around the world have a completely different view, and that the only people who say it won’t work are those directly a$$ociated with a competing technology…
A Transportation Enthusiast on January 12th, 2008 at 4:21 pm #
Well what do you know - I’m not the first to question Tinklenberg’s motives! Tinklenberg heads “The Tinklenberg Group” which has made hundreds of thousands of dollars as a rail transit consultant! Is it any shock that he’s promoting the anti-PRT propaganda of Ken Avidor? If PRT wins, he loses money! I was a little shocked when I first heard Tinklenberg’s remarks here, but now knowing his financial conflict of interest, it makes perfect sense. FOLLOW THE MONEY…
A Transportation Enthusiast on January 13th, 2008 at 11:47 am #
More developments on this… Mr. Grant has written an excellent post analyzing Ken Avidor’s interview with Tinklenberg: http://innovative-transit.blogspot.com/2008/01/just-perfect-mock-journalist-part-iv.html The crux of it is this: Ken Avidor has publicly questioned Tinklenberg’s association with SEH, a transportation engineering firm which Avidor has criticized for years: http://dumpbachmann.blogspot.com/2006/05/elwyn-tinklenbergs-troubling-ties-to.html So why didn’t SEH come up in Avidor’s interview? One would think it would be Avidor’s first question to Tinklenberg given that Avidor himself wrote that blog post two years ago. Most likely answer: two years ago Tinklenberg was not publicly against PRT; today he is. For Ken Avidor, PRT is the litmus test. If you come out against PRT, all past sins will be forgiven. Another irony here: Ken Avidor has tried to link SEH to PRT for years now: http://innovative-transit.blogspot.com/2008/01/just-perfect-mock-journalist-part-iv.html His thesis was that SEH was an evil highway construction firm; SEH was associated with PRT; therefore PRT is a scheme to promote highways. But the ties to PRT were always tenuous - yet here we have a RAIL CHAMPION with DIRECT TIES to SEH, and Ken Avidor doesn’t mention a word of it. I have followed Ken Avidor’s writings for two years now, and I even have a blog dedicated to analyzing his tactics. I can tell you this with certainty: PRT is his litmus test. If you support PRT, Avidor will vilify you; if you come out against PRT, Avidor will support you. Tinklenberg knew this, told Avidor what he wanted to hear, and thereby guaranteed a friendly interview. Now I’d like to know from Ken: is SEH “not so bad” now that it is associated closely with a rail proponent?
Avidor on January 13th, 2008 at 3:15 pm #
Old news. 1) SEH gave money to Taxi 2000 before the lawsuit in 2005. A documents in the lawsuit says SEH tore up its memo of understanding with Taxi 2000. The SEH logo was removed from the Taxi 2000 website. As far as I know, SEH no longer supports PRT. It recently worked on a report for the city of Mpls about streetcars. 2) SEH’s lobbyist is Ed Cain and Bachmann has a picture of Ed Cain on her congressional website. If you search for Ed Cain on the DB blog, you’ll learn that Ed Cain is also the lobbyist for Taxi 2000. I hope that answers your question. If it doesn’t you’ll have to ask someone else.
A Transportation Enthusiast on January 13th, 2008 at 7:08 pm #
Just to clarify: Avidor has claimed for years that PRT was a scam perpetrated by the highway industry, and as evidence of that, all he provided was the Taxi2000 link to SEH. So, in other words, according to Avidor, PRT was a scam BECAUSE OF its association with SEH, not the other way around. Now that SEH is DIRECTLY involved with a huge light rail proponent, SEH is apparently no longer evil in Avidor’s eyes. Can anyone spot the circular argument here? For years, Avidor said PRT was evil because of its association with SEH; but really, deep down, he believed the opposite: SEH was evil because of its association with PRT, and now that they’ve broken ties with PRT and are in bed with light rail proponents, SEH is no longer evil! So I now have two questions for Avidor: - What evidence do you now have that PRT is a scam? Your sole piece of “evidence” (flimsy as it was) was the link to highways through SEH, but now that SEH has been redeemed in your eyes, you have absolutely NOTHING to support your 4-year-old “scam” claims.
Post a comment
|
|
|
|
|
||