Would bike lanes have stopped Edmonton's most recent fatal traffic accident?

The lie:

Hey #yegcc, another cyclist has died riding on dangerous road with no good alternative #yegbike route. Invest in cyclist safety already!
— Conrad Nobert (@GreenYEG) May 6, 2013

The truth:

Hey, here's the exact intersection that this fatal crash occurred on. Hey, what's this? Why, it's a bike lane!


Well, whoops, I guess there aren't four bike lanes all meeting at this intersection. Which would have done what, exactly?

The cyclist was going through a green light when he was hit by an eastbound GMC half-ton that was turning left onto 127th Street, which is one-way northbound but has a southbound bike lane.

Nowlan said there’s no indication either man had been distracted. The cyclist was not wearing a helmet.

Well, eventually any bike lane that goes somewhere will be in a situation where its intersecting with a roadway where vehicles will cross it. What would a bike lane have done, exactly? Shifted the impact site by a couple of feet?

The basic warning in the article is pretty clear: even vehicles that are driving slowly are dangerous for a cyclist. Irrational claims that this accident "is the fault of no bike lanes" belies the entire circumstances of the collision in the first place.