[throwaway290]

The bicycle and riding style used in the video do not provide a good illustration, I have no idea what he was trying to do as he crashed repeatedly, and he did not seem (or the frame prevented him) to use the ability of his body to lean the bike into the turn, riding naively (which didn't prevent them from talking down as if there is a clear consensus in the field of bicycle dynamics).

At low speeds on e.g. a light MTB stop pedaling, lift your butt off the saddle, lean bike far into desired side balancing your body and handlebars to keep going straight. You have most of what's needed to turn. You may countersteer but your line does not veer into the direction of countersteer, counter to illustrations.

Riding edge of a cliff is not a great idea anyway because balancing a bicycle tends to require countless small adjustments even due to pedaling alone.

[kazinator]

> The bicycle and riding style used in the video do not provide a good illustration

It's good enough if you already understand it and know what to look for; just not the best for convincing someone who doesn't believe the physics.

[throwaway290]

You don't just believe the physics. If there is consensus in physics that says you cannot turn a bicycle without measurably turning the opposite way first, feel free to link. It's a ridiculous claim that assumes certain speeds, bicycle type and riding style. I've seen a guy ride a narrow rocky ridge, even jumping from stone to stone where needed (without stepping off the bicycle), was he violating laws of physics or is the world more complex than simplified models of it? Either way, it is just bikeshedding.