Nope.

of course in such hot weather it could just mean blowing hot air .

but in the article they mention that Egypt is the 7th "fattest" country in the world. so this is part of the reason they are doing this also.

Of course I went slow and it was only a few miles from the base to the bookstore.

...really, when you're covering ground and getting airflow its just fine. Drink water of course, but cycling in the heat is much nicer than standing still in the heat. Stopping is the issue, if you are cycling to go somewhere - suddenly there's no airflow, your sweat glands are still pumping and you're drenched.

The record high is 47.8°C (118°F). Month-by-month, the highest average high is in July, at 34.7°C (94.5°F).

(Climate data from the "Climate" section of the Wikipedia article about Cairo)

Within that average high, there would be fluctuations, so that I wouldn't be surprised to see a fair number of days when the temperature broke 100°F.

Cyclists might be even worse off in the spring, when the khamsin winds can fill the air with sand and dust from the desert.

for Egyptians and the planet - way to go Sisi!

would have sent a much better example.

That is my impression, and that is the first of many increases in many items he is planning. When the Moslem Brotherhood was ruling Egypt they were also looking at those same price increases. Those price increases was one of the reasons the Moslem Brotherhood had such problems ruling, and Murabeck was overthrown.

where else could this same thing be happening... in the #1 Oil producing country in the world... nooooooo. Except here it's not as simple as overthrowing the government, here we have to overthrow... EXXON/MOBIL, BRITISH PETROLEUM, CHEVRON.

They'd literally will have his head on a platter.

Now, Dubya could do it, but he intended to bike just for fun, not for commuting.

That said, most cities now are planned for automotive transportation rather than walking or cycling. There are very few cities that are cycle and walk Friendly. San Francisco, Seattle, New York, Philadelphia, parts of Miami Beach, Portland OR. That's about it. Even neighboring San Jose 40 miles south of San Francisco is a bear for walkers and cyclists. Dallas? Not a chance! Boston? I don't know.

but they're all white.

Listed #4, #6, #8, #27 in your "That's about it". Missed a lot of bicycle friendly cities, I'm guessing because of a bias towards coastal cities only in what you considered.

Here a "very few" 50 cities for you: http://www.bicycling.com/news/advocacy/america%E2%80%99s-top-50-bike-friendly-cities

Walking is much more popular in the East Coast and Mid West then biking. Thus in 2012, 3,969,000 walked to work, while only 865,000 rode a bike to work:

http://www.rita.dot.gov/bts/node/490916

Given that in 1980 5.6% of all commuters walked to work and it is only (2012) only 2.8%, that is still a large number compared to the .6% that commute by bike:

http://www.census.gov/prod/2014pubs/acs-25.pdf

I suspect most of the change has been increased movement from the inner city to the Suburbs. Most post WWII suburbs are NOT friendly to pedestrians and thus when a company moves to the suburbs its employees has to switch to automobiles.

Egypt is about 26% destitute. That is its poverty level, which is the percentage of Egyptians who earn less then $569 PER YEAR. These are the base for the Moslem Brotherhood, for they look to the Brotherhood for assistance, assistance they are NOT getting from the Government.

http://english.ahram.org.eg/NewsContent/3/12/87776/Business/Economy/Egypts-poverty-rate-rises-to--in--CAPMAS.aspx

Average income in Egypt is only $3,798 per year.

Now 5.6% of FAMILIES live on less then $1,452 per year. This includes income from father, mothers AND their children living at home. Extended families are the NORM in Egypt i.e. Families can include 3-4 generations. Thus such families may have three people earning $569 per year.

On the other side only 6.2% of Families earn more then $7,259 per year. That means 95.8% of families earn less then $7259 per year. Most bicycles are made in China and costs a couple of hundred dollars even in Egypt. How many people are willing to spend a 1/3 of their YEARLY wage on a bicycle?

This is aimed at European and American voters and his own top 5%, not the other 95% of Egyptians. If he wanted to show an example to his own people, he be walking, but that may be dangerous given his lack of support among the lower 90% of the population.

Go ahead and swat away at tangents.

And changing T-shirts. When I go for a long bike ride, I often change my t-shirts half way through such a trip. The change does cool you down.

Other ways to keep cool:

1. Wear a hat that is soaked in water, as the water dissipates it takes the heat from your body.

2. Do NOT go on routes without shade. Some time this is hard to do, but try.

3. Go out in the evening and morning. The Spanish Siesta developed as a method to deal with the heat of the day, but just taking a break and saving work for those times where the heat is less. Studies have shown that people who take Siestas tend to be as productive as people who do not. When the temperature is over 100 degrees Fahrenheit, look for some shade and take a nap.

4. Wear white clothes. When I was in the National Guard in the 1980s, we were issued the then new BDU uniforms. These had a lot of black in them and heated you up. In the 1990s I found a place that were selling BDUs in solid colors, I went with Khaki and I found it was a lot cooler then the standard color BDU I wore in the National Guard. The US Army dropped Black from its Desert BDUs after the invasion into Iraq, for the simple reason Black absorbs all sunlight and thus tends to be hotter then the tans and other light colors of the Desert Uniforms. My point is avoid black and stay with as light as color clothing you can in hot weather.

5. If you can find them, get some Army "Hot Temperature" in 100% rip spot cotton. These were the best hot temperature uniform for the thin cotton would absorb your sweat but it was so thin that it could not absorb that much. If in a light color a lot better then the Regular BDUs, in standard Colors, noticeable cooler then the Standard BDUs. Hard to find now, the Army replaced them with a light weight hot temperature uniform made of the same 50% Cotton 50% Polyester material of the standard BDU Uniform (and the Army is switching to a new uniform, Called "ACU" in a digital color but the material is staying the same). The Army Complaints about 100% Rip Stop Cotton was that the uniform wore out to quickly. The 50% Cotton 50% Polyester (called 50/50 by the Army) tended to last 18 months of hard use, the 100% Rip Stop Cotton would only last three months of hard use. This was do to it being much thinner then the regular BDU material and being 100% Cotton a lot weaker material. Polyester lasts a lot longer then cotton thus the 50/50 material lasts up to 18 months of hard usage.

Now the Army replaced the 100% Rip Stop Cotton uniform with a hot weather uniform made of thinner material then the regular uniform but the material was still 50/50 Material. The reports I have read is that it is cooler then the regular uniform, and "cooler" the the old 100% Rip Stop Cotton Uniform. Please note the new hot weather 50/50 uniform had all black removed from them, while the 100% Rip Stop Cotton uniform till they were replaced by the new 50/50 hot weather uniform still had black in the uniform. Thus how much of this new "Coolest" in the uniform is related to the removal of Black? I suspect the new uniform was "Cooler" for the removal of black, for when I went to Khaki in my Civilian BDUs I notice the difference in heat absorption just by the switch to Khaki from the Standard BDU uniform colors.

My comment is I just do not see the 100% Rip Stop Cotton pants anymore. US Cavalry does carry them:

http://www.uscav.com/productinfo.aspx?productid=5397&TabID=548

I would avoid them in any color but Khaki, you are defeating the whole purpose of 100% Cotton by going with a color that absorbs sunlight.

Now, I am light skin and on medication that makes me burn easy, thus shorts are not an option. Thus I like 100% rip stop cotton, but I also understand they are NOT as durable as the 50/50 option.

Side note: Avoid any material with more then 50% Polyester. My experiences with such clothing is they end up feeling like you are wearing plastic. I suspect it was the cheap polyester used in those pants, but I just refuse to wear anything that is more then 50% Polyester except as a dress pair of pants. On the other hand more then 50% Cotton pants I have had no problems with. I can not notice any decline in how long they last (I do not do combat drills anymore so I do NOT need pants that will last 18 months of hard usage). I have had 100% rip stop Cotton pants that lasted for years, but again I kept them for use in hot weather and I also did not used them in anything near combat usage. I do NOT expect them to last as long as the 50/50 pants I have purchased, but they are a lot cooler.

But I wouldn't know Rip Stop if it bit me on my butt. I wear duck shorts, pastel polo shirts, short socks, and NO gloves (I tolerate the sun better then enduring weird tan lines) - all 100% cotton. I've been wearing the same basic garb for over forty-five years (well, in the sixties I wore cut-offs) without all the associated discomforts my cycling buddies experience with their slick high tech clothing: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1018&pid=620172

I don't have the luxury of riding in shade, but I do well for twenty miles in triple digit weather if I stay hydrated, and part of my hydration plan is to drink tons of water the night before, and top off before I begin. I only carry one bottle of water; why drink hot water when you can stop and get ice cold water somewhere.

Rip Stop was developed during the Vietnam war. It is a very thin cotton material, much thinner then Cotton duck. In addition to the thin cotton weave, Rip Stop Cotton has a thread of Nylon every 1/4 inch. If you look closely at it, you see the small little squares made by the nylon threads.

This combination permitted much thinner cotton material (and thus cooler) for if the material caught on anything, any tear would stop at one of the Nylon Threads.

http://www.crookedbrook.com/Fabric/Ripstop/Ripstop-Natural-(2).JPG

http://www.crookedbrook.com/Fabric/Ripstop/Ripstop-Natural-(2).JPG

http://www.crookedbrook.com/riptstop-cotton.htm


http://www.hiwtc.com/products/100-cotton-ripstop-fabric-olive-green-and-black-803-29190.htm



Please note, the key advantage of Rip stop Cotton is its very low thread count and thus low weight, even when soaking wet (Cotton can hold four times its weight in water). 50/50 Poly Cotton tended to be be 3-4 times as thick as Rip stop Cotton for the 50/50 was designed to take a beating and wear like Iron (and 50/50 Cotton Polyester does wear like Iron, I had some that lasted 10 years of almost weekly use, through I did not submit them to anything close to what people in Combat do) .

The light weight of Rip Stop is also its main disadvantage, it does rip easily and wears out much quicker then any other material, including thicker cotton materials in addition to Nylon and Polyester (and mixes of Nylon and Polyester with Cotton such as the 50/50 Cotton Polyester material popular with the army today).

Last edited Mon Jun 16, 2014, 06:03 PM - Edit history (1)

Hitler forced Germany to switch from Gothic print to the Latin Print the rest of the Western World used and started the Autobahn.

Stalin had built several of the Canals and other waterways of Russia, pushed aircraft development, started Soviet Rocket research. Built the Moscow Subway. etc

Just because someone does something good, does not make him not evil. Evil people know they need popular support, so projects that help people are as favored by them as any "Good" leader. Evil people have also supported "Good Causes", Hitler for example was a Vegetarian and reported to like Dogs. That does NOT make him a "good man" given what he did during WWII.

Just a comment, a person doing something good, by itself, does not mean the person doing it is good. You have to look over his entire career and right now, that is NOT good. You have to take a person as a whole, the Story of Lot is about doing so. Lot did a lot of bad things in his life, lived in a sinful city, had sex with his own daughters, etc, but as a whole he was a good man, he refused to reveal that Sarah was Abraham's wife not his sister while all three were in Egypt and the Pharaoh wanted to "known" Sarah. Lot refused to turn over the Angels that came to get him out of Sodom to the mob that wanted to rape them, he always treated with others fairly. He took care of his daughters even after they trick him into having sex with them, so they could have sons to take care of them in their old age. As a whole Lot's life was good, he had his faults but as a whole he was good.

Hitler had his good points, the Autobahn, the adoption of Latin Printing etc were good things he did. He was a large builder, when Germany became reunified they had a problem, many of the buildings the Government ended up using had been built by Hitler but they did not want to give him any credit. Thus Hitler did some good, but as a whole, given WWII, the Death Camps, and even the decline in Wages in Germany in the 1930s were all bad. In many ways, Hitler's adoption of inflation and pushing down wages lead to growing internal German opposition in the late 1930s, thus Hitler did all he could to prevent Pope Pius XI's letter he wrote to all Catholic Germans in 1938 from getting to those Churches. It was getting so bad, with growing Labor and Catholic opposition that he had to go to war in 1939 (in that Letter Pius XI not only complained of Hitler breaking his word, but also of Hitler's treatment of the Jews). If Hitler had NOT gone to war, they was a good chance he would have been overthrown by 1941 (One of the reason for the Munich Pact of 1938 was to permit this opposition to build up, but the mere fact Hitler "won" in Munich strengthen his hold on Germany, which was further Strengthened with the Victories over Poland in 1939 and France in 1940). Thus as a whole Hitler was bad, even through he did some good things for Germany.

More on Lot:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lot_(biblical_person)

Great job asshole. Now try doing that as woman when you're expected to be "modestly dressed" while still being sexually harassed, and knowing that if anything happens the police are as likely to sexually abuse you as to defend you.

Or did he just have police beat their heads into a bloody pulp in the street to save time?