Green belt M11 travel hub progresses to next stage

Register or log in via Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, Google+ or your Iliffe Media account to post comments.

• Sir Gary Twate wrote:

  25/08/2023 21:25

  > So I was right all along. There is no proof that man made co2 is the cause of climate change.
  
  Because there is no proof in science, but tehre is overwhelming evidence from many different sources. There is virtually none for your viewpoint.

  Reply Report Abuse

  +2
• Sir Gary Twate wrote:

  25/08/2023 14:01

  @Still Still Still Can't Get Rid
  
  You're just digging yourself a deeper and deeper hole.
  
  "You've heard of our greatest scientific theories: the theory of evolution, the Big Bang theory, the theory of gravity. You've also heard of the concept of a proof, and the claims that certain pieces of evidence prove the validities of these theories. Fossils, genetic inheritance, and DNA prove the theory of evolution. The Hubble expansion of the Universe, the evolution of stars, galaxies, and heavy elements, and the existence of the cosmic microwave background prove the Big Bang theory. And falling objects, GPS clocks, planetary motion, and the deflection of starlight prove the theory of gravity.
  
  Except that's a complete lie. While they provide very strong evidence for those theories, they aren't proof. In fact, when it comes to science, proving anything is an impossibility."
  
  https://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2017/11/22/scientific-proof-is-a-myth/?sh=1316e1f42fb1

  Reply Report Abuse

  +2
• Sir Gary Twate wrote:

  24/08/2023 16:00

  @Still Still Still Can't Get Rid
  
  Again you prove you have no clue what science is:
  
  Read: https://thelogicofscience.com/2016/04/19/science-doesnt-prove-anything-and-thats-a-good-thing/

  Reply Report Abuse

  +1
• All Rights Reserved wrote:

  24/08/2023 13:03

  Sir Gary Twate wrote:
  22/08/2023 21:22
  > official data is not hijacked and interfered with by heavily funded so called scientific media
  
  PROVE IT!
  
  
  PROVE IT ISN'T ... Duck's.

  Reply Report Abuse

  +1
• Sir Gary Twate wrote:

  24/08/2023 13:01

  @All Rights Reserved - probably because you resorted to personal insults (i.e. you lost the argument, again).
  
  It's amusing seeing how seriously you take everything.

  Reply Report Abuse

  -3
• All Rights Reserved wrote:

  24/08/2023 12:56

  Where have all of Can't Get Rid's posts gone? I love reading them and his daily posts beasting and belittling Belchism.
  
  Looks like someone flounced and lost the argument and got him 'banned' again. What futile behaviour.

  Reply Report Abuse

  +2
• Caligula wrote:

  24/08/2023 12:43

  ITS ABOUT THE MONEY, IT ALWAYS IS.

  Reply Report Abuse

  1 Reply

  +6
• Sir Gary Twate wrote:

  24/08/2023 07:54

  @You Still Can't Get Rid
  
  You cannot say that they died from it with 100% certainty. Occasionally a cause of death has been updated when new evidence is found e.g. if police later thought they might have been a murder victim they might perform additional tests which would disprove an earlier diagnosis.
  
  Time to go back to school, this is real basic stuff. Did you skip science class?

  Reply Report Abuse

  -3
• Uncommon Sense wrote:

  23/08/2023 19:13

  The usual lies from the GCP.
  
  "The scheme aims to encourage more people to get out of their cars and cycle, walk, or use public transport."
  
  Buses, maybe. But walk where? It's in the middle of nowhere. And cycle on what bikes? Will there be some to hire? Are people expected to bring their own in their cars?
  
  And tarmacking over acres of countryside is supposed to "enhance the habitat of the area"? What utter nonsense. The GCP are sounding like developers. Still, a good opportunity to throw in the buzzword 'biodiversity', in case a few gullible fools might believe this project is somehow beneficial to the environment.

  Reply Report Abuse

  +16
• View from Milton Fen wrote:

  23/08/2023 12:21

  Just spending time in Amsterdam this week and what is noticeable is that trams, not buses, along with a metro providing public transportation and that cyclists pay no heed to pedestrians. The latter would seriously have to be addressed by some sort of licensing and insurance but, so far as public transportation is concerned, I could see trams working extremely well in Cambridge and GCP could gain a lot of support if they provided trams from St Ives into Cambridge along the GBW, the proposed GBW from Cambourne and from Cambridge Central Station along the GBW to Addenbrookes. Try it, it will work and have greater capacity and, if run frequently with minimal numbers of cars, would encourage to people to leave cars at p&r sites around Cambridge where trams would also be run. People don't want buses, GCP need to understand that.

  Reply Report Abuse

  +20
• Caligula wrote:

  23/08/2023 11:41

  Local council funding was cut by the government because of the cost of covid. Councils are trying to make the difference up by targeting cars, its not about health or climate.
  
  Criminal deception, manipulation, gangsterism, thats Cambridge City council.
  
  And you cant vote them out, any replacement will be the same.

  Reply Report Abuse

  1 Reply

  +13
• John Fortnam wrote:

  23/08/2023 09:35

  Seems like a short-term solution, and I doubt it will make much difference to to congestion, much of which is cutting across to Addenbrokes/Biomed or entering the city (until the tax comes in perhaps). Will likely just just moderate the queue a little for a few years until growth consumes it. Cluster points 2-3 miles outside the city, and travel hubs like the one emerging at Foxton station seem more logical.
  
  No doubt this will facilitate the conversion of the exsiting P&R site into more housing.
  
  Fact of the day, the ponds alongside the bike path are old coprolite mines (fertiliser).

  Reply Report Abuse

  +9
• Willywonker wrote:

  23/08/2023 03:39

  The M 11 and A 14 should never have been built . The City council , at the time of planning , called them the " Northern and Western by-pass " and wanted traffic to travel through Cambridge using East Road as the inner relief road and Elizabeth Way bridge . The same as it ever was, the same as it ever was ,,,

  Reply Report Abuse

  1 Reply

  -19
• HMMurdoch wrote:

  22/08/2023 22:00

  For those concerned about 'local pollution',
  The council's own latest Air Quality Status Report states that 95% of the harmful PM 2.5 emissions found IN Cambridge City, come from OUTSIDE Cambridge City.
  
  Modelling (by Atkins(!!!)/WSP ) for the GCP Making Connections consultation projects that congestion (and thus, emissions) will actually INCREASE around park and ride sites when the Sustainable Transport Zone / road user charge is introduced.
  
  The effect, therefore, will be an INCREASE in harmful emissions within Cambridge.
  
  Go on, shoot yourself in the foot, why don't you? !?

  Reply Report Abuse

  +23
• Sir Gary Twate wrote:

  22/08/2023 21:22

  > official data is not hijacked and interfered with by heavily funded so called scientific media
  
  PROVE IT!

  Reply Report Abuse

  1 Reply

  -12
• Sir Gary Twate wrote:

  22/08/2023 21:21

  > imaginary pollution
  
  That's right guys, you heard it here first, all that **** spewing out the back of vehicles is just imaginary! It doesn't exist! Lol!

  Reply Report Abuse

  2 Replies

  -12
• View from Milton Fen wrote:

  22/08/2023 18:59

  These proposals are undemocratic , there is no mandate for any GCP proposals. If you really want to stop emissions and care about clean air, you also have to ban bonfires, all wood burning, smoking, barbecues so let's not hold back, ban the lot and ban the sale of cigarettes etc, barbecue coals, disposable barbecues, kindling, lighters, bottled gas, the list goes on. If you want clean air, ban everything like these items

  Reply Report Abuse

  1 Reply

  +22
• Sir Gary Twate wrote:

  22/08/2023 18:36

  @You Still Can't Get Rid
  
  The absence of specific wording on death certificates doesn't negate the wealth of scientific evidence indicating the significant health risks posed by traffic pollution.

  Reply Report Abuse

  -15
• Sir Gary Twate wrote:

  22/08/2023 13:02

  @Caligula
  
  So poisoning kids is OK because you might have a little niggle in your knee? Got more shopping to carry? Get a cargo bike or have it delivered - no need to even go into town, just order it online! Not that hard is it?

  Reply Report Abuse

  2 Replies

  -25
• Caligula wrote:

  22/08/2023 11:48

  Walk? youve got to be kidding, cycling, how do i drive there and then get a bike?, what if its raining, i have bad knees, im old, what then? The exact location is not mentioned, camoflaged.
  
  The average citizen wont walk or cycle, its all nonsense, i used to live in Gwydir street, walking into town took too long, how do i get my shopping back?
  
  Its all camoflage, gaslighting, a sop, the real agenda is a war on cars, what will be the consequence of that?, let the GCP know. TORIES OUT, LABOUR OUT... madness is everywhere. The political classes are ill, serious like, the medicine, getting voted out wont work, the medicine is like the illness, it is the illness.
  
  Dads army, the scot..." We are all DOOMED."

  Reply Report Abuse

  3 Replies

  +18
• parker21 wrote:

  22/08/2023 11:25

  Some forward thinking needs to come into play with this travel hub. A monorail would be the best thing to have ; connecting to Addenbrookes. Obviously these are the most people who are going to use this sight as there is already a Park and Ride at Trumpington well used by shoppers.

  Reply Report Abuse

  +22