A Mr John Bratley recently published the results of his 'investigation' into "the rash of cycle lanes narrowing our already-congested main roads" on this very letters page.

His investigation was compromised from the start by extreme ignorance, prejudice and incompetence and is without doubt the single most flawed piece of research that I have ever encountered.

It is clear from his description of the lanes as a ‘rash’ whose purpose is to increase congestion what his investigation will conclude.

The data collection is woeful and fails to reach the standard required for a ‘fair test’ in GCSE science, with the cyclist count taking place just once at morning rush hour and once again at evening rush hour, when all but the most suicidal cyclists will dismount.

The most staggering flaw comes at the end when one would usually interpret the data collected to draw a conclusion as to the validity of a hypothesis.

Mr Bratley bases his conclusion on his suspicion that the coming winter will drive cyclists back to using public transport.

I think he should use some of the time he claims to have on his hands learning how to conduct an investigation to test a hypothesis fairly before he starts ranking traffic light layouts in order of ‘pencil-pushing incompetency’.

Chris Noble, by email