Mountain Bikers as "Environmentalists"?

I hate to feed the troll, but it's my first day of mini-vacation, so I'm having some fun....

On Fri, 16 Jan 2004 05:22:18 +0000, Mike Vandeman wrote:

> I have NEVER seen any mountain bikers doing that. In fact, for the 8 years I worked on stopping
> road construction, NOT ONE mountain biker ever showed up at any of the hearings nor wrote a
> letter. You aren't allies AT ALL.

How would you know? By your own (il)logic, once they get off their moutnain bikes, they're just like
normal people (except, presumably they still lie all the time about everything, including the fact
that they ride mountain bikes.) So, you could be in a room full of people, and they could all ride
mountain bikes, but none would admit it, and you'd have no way of telling which ones ride and which
ones don't.....

> People who oppose mountain biking are actually a majority of the public. Mountain bikers are a
> tiny minority.

Really? The majority of the public couldn't give a rat's ass about biking, mountain or otherwise.

>>you
> can't possibly believe they represent the "same" form of damage that loggers represent, or that
> housing developers represent..?
>
> Different form, same result.

I guess you've never seen a root rake in action, then. Come by, I'll show you just how much damage a
D9 pushing a root rake can do.

-Kamus

--
o__ | If you're old, eat right and ride a decent bike. ,>/'_ | Q. (_)\(_) | Usenet posting`

Mike, I sent the letter below to you by private e-mail, since it was pretty clear you were trolling.
If you had even the tiniest bit of ethics, and cared about the causes you claim to, you "could" have
e-mailed me back with a "considered" response. Not that I care much about you posting my e-mail to
the NG, but it shows you care "only" about yourself. It would also seem you care more about yourself
than the environment you give "lip service" to, so often---wearing it like some badge of courage and
decency, when it so obviously does not fit you. If you had ever cared enough about the environment
you pretend to champion so much, you would have checked more in to mountain bike advocacy groups,
and found that in fact, there are some huge groups that have been extremely effective in protecting
wilderness areas from paved roads, from logging, and from developers( housing and other). Instead,
you ignore the fact that mountain bikers consider loggers their enemies, that mountain bikers hate
encroaching housing developers, and in fact, that mountain bikers hold most of the same "enemies"
that you do. The old saying, " the enemy of your enemy is your friend..." could apply here, except
that in our case, the enemy ( you) of our enemies ( loggers/Real Estate Developers) , is an asshole
who enjoys being an enemy to all groups, and could care less about actually trying to fight a battle
"successfully" against the loggers/Real Estate Developers etc. Mike, its pretty sad when a person
has to go to the lengths you have to create a "pretend identity" for himself--as an advocate for the
wilderness, and even worse as your self indulgent attempts, will actually damage the potential
coalitions already formed to protect the wilderness. No Regards, Dan V

"Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> At 04:31 PM 1/15/04 -0500, Dan Volker wrote:
> >Mike,
> If you and the 20 or 30 "like minded people" you might hope to get helping you with your war, were
> the "only" people who "cared" about protecting the wilderness areas and forest trails---all your
> efforts would be completely
in
> vain---even if you represented 30 people...This would be sad for you but true, because this is a
> population size that would be absolutely ignored
by
> any government official or lawmaker.
>
> > You Need allies to protect the forests from logging, from being turned
into
> "housing developments", from being dissected by paved roads and automobile traffic, and a long
> list of threats which can be grouped under things that the average developer would desire.
>
> I have NEVER seen any mountain bikers doing that. In fact, for the 8 years
I
> worked on stopping road construction, NOT ONE mountain biker ever showed
up at
> any of the hearings nor wrote a letter. You aren't allies AT ALL.
>
> >Typical Americans care ( at a level which could allow activism) only
about
> things that they are immediately involved with--that they have nearly "direct contact" with.
>
> >To protect the forests and wilderness, you have hikers, mountain bikers,
and
> equestrians who represent "relatively" low threat levels to the
wilderness,
> and who would be inclined to feel equally indignant about the threats
posed
> by developers and loggers, etc. The general public has little concern for these areas they see
> only in pictures and TV.
>
> There's nothing to keep you out of the parks except your own laziness (to
walk).
>
> >You can have a few million people who could "campaign" with you, against
the
> developers and loggers, and have a reasonble chance of shaking up a few politicians and lawmakers
> with real voting and boycotting significance...
or
> you could choose to remain impotent in this quest for wilderness purity,
as
> a group so small you are effectively non-existent.
>
> People who oppose mountain biking are actually a majority of the public. Mountain bikers are a
> tiny minority.
>
> >So why do you continue to ******** one of the largest potential allies
you
> could have ( mountain bikers on usenet could mean an activist group of hundreds of thousands).
>
> I don't **** people off. I just tell the truth. Mountain bikers just don't
like
> to hear it. Or to have other people hear it.
>
> > No matter how much you may hate mountain bikers,
>
> I don't hate mountain bikers. How can you hate someone so pathetic?
>
> >you
> can't possibly believe they represent the "same" form of damage that
loggers
> represent, or that housing developers represent..?
>
> Different form, same result.
>
> >In a real war, something that is life or death important, you find allies
> unless you are so large or powerful that you don't need any. So either you need to think about
> mountain bikers and hikers as 2 big potential sources
of
> allies, or you might think about looking for some windmills you can go charge after.
>
> You guys have had about 10 years to prove that you are potential allies.
You
> haven't proven ****, except that you care about nothing but your own
selfish,
> destructive sport.
>
>
> >Regards,
> Dan V
>
>
> "Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:<[email protected]>...
> > On 14 Jan 2004 13:19:01 -0800, [email protected] (J. Muir) wrote:
> >
> > .Mike Vandeman wrote:
> > . <<Just looking for places to ride that are in the area and
> > . <<would be challenging. Any suggestions would be helpful. . .<Anywhere, as long as you stay
> > on the pavement. . .Mike, I've seen some badly damaged trails due to mountain bikes, so I
> > .can understand why you want to keep them on roads. But why just paved .roads? There are lots
> > of dirt roads in rural areas that would seem .fine for bikes.
> >
> > Do I have to explain EVERYTHING to you idiots? The laws of physics and
> biology
> > are the same on dirt roads & dirt trails.
> >
> > Besides, car traffic is almost always less on these .roads, so it's safer for the cyclists.
> > You're not against bikes on .dirt roads (that are open to cars), are you?
> >
> > Yes, I want them closed to all vehicles.
> >
> > .jm

MV blathers:

>I have NEVER seen any mountain bikers doing that. In fact, for the 8 years I worked on stopping
>road construction, NOT ONE mountain biker ever showed up at any of the hearings nor wrote a letter.

But if they drove there, then you wouldn't have KNOWN they were mountain bikers, woddya? DUH!

Steve "God, I hate feeding the troll - but someone has to "

I think to stereotype anyone is inherintly wrong.

I don't mind mountain biking. Looks fun. My only complaint is when I am huffing my backpack up a
narrow mountain trail and some biker comes zooming past me going 15 miles an hour, so I have to dive
off the trail before getting run over. Then trying to get back up and make sure my 40 lb, multi-day
pack is still snug. Its a pain in the butt.

Kamus of Kadizhar commented:

> I hate to feed the troll, but it's my first day of mini-vacation, so I'm having some fun....
>
> On Fri, 16 Jan 2004 05:22:18 +0000, Mike Vandeman wrote:
>
>> I have NEVER seen any mountain bikers doing that. In fact, for the 8 years I worked on stopping
>> road construction, NOT ONE mountain biker ever showed up at any of the hearings nor wrote a
>> letter. You aren't allies AT ALL.
>
> How would you know? By your own (il)logic, once they get off their moutnain bikes, they're just
> like normal people (except, presumably they still lie all the time about everything, including the
> fact that they ride mountain bikes.) So, you could be in a room full of people, and they could all
> ride mountain bikes, but none would admit it, and you'd have no way of telling which ones ride and
> which ones don't.....
>
>> People who oppose mountain biking are actually a majority of the public. Mountain bikers are a
>> tiny minority.
>
> Really? The majority of the public couldn't give a rat's ass about biking, mountain or otherwise.
>
>>>you
>> can't possibly believe they represent the "same" form of damage that loggers represent, or that
>> housing developers represent..?
>>
>> Different form, same result.
>
> I guess you've never seen a root rake in action, then. Come by, I'll show you just how much damage
> a D9 pushing a root rake can do.
>
> -Kamus
>

--
Dark Forest Mud http://www.darkforestmud.net

Top-posters suck.

Jason Crowder wrote:
> I think to stereotype anyone is inherintly wrong.

Bill "but they sure spell well" S.

On Fri, 16 Jan 2004 05:48:20 -0500, "Kamus of Kadizhar" <[email protected]>
wrote:

.I hate to feed the troll, but it's my first day of mini-vacation, so I'm .having some fun.... . .On
Fri, 16 Jan 2004 05:22:18 +0000, Mike Vandeman wrote: . .> I have NEVER seen any mountain bikers
doing that. In fact, for the 8 years I .> worked on stopping road construction, NOT ONE mountain
biker ever showed up at .> any of the hearings nor wrote a letter. You aren't allies AT ALL. . .How
would you know?

EASY! Most of the time, I was the ONLY person objecting to the freeway widening.

===
I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to humans ("pure habitat"). Want to
help? (I spent the previous 8 years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)

http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande

On Fri, 16 Jan 2004 07:55:54 -0500, "Dan Volker" <[email protected]> wrote:

.Mike, I sent the letter below to you by private e-mail, since it was pretty .clear you were
trolling. If you had even the tiniest bit of ethics, and .cared about the causes you claim to, you
"could" have e-mailed me back with .a "considered" response.

I did.

Not that I care much about you posting my e-mail to
.the NG, but it shows you care "only" about yourself.

BS. I care about getting the truth out.

It would also seem you .care more about yourself than the environment you give "lip service" to, so
.often---wearing it like some badge of courage and decency, when it so .obviously does not fit you.

I have no idea what you are talking about. Nor do you.

.If you had ever cared enough about the environment you pretend to champion .so much, you would have
checked more in to mountain bike advocacy groups, .and found that in fact, there are some huge
groups that have been extremely .effective in protecting wilderness areas from paved roads, from
logging, and .from developers( housing and other).

Nonsense. They have been hard at work trying to keep new Wildernesses from being designated, and
trying to remove their favorite trails from them.

Instead, you ignore the fact that .mountain bikers consider loggers their enemies, that mountain
bikers hate .encroaching housing developers, and in fact, that mountain bikers hold most .of the
same "enemies" that you do.

Maybe, but they do NOTHING about it. In every battle I know of, mountain bikers have ONLY advocated
for more mountain biking.

. The old saying, " the enemy of your enemy is your friend..." could apply .here, except that in our
case, the enemy ( you) of our enemies ( .loggers/Real Estate Developers) , is an asshole who
enjoys being an enemy to .all groups, and could care less about actually trying to fight a battle
."successfully" against the loggers/Real Estate Developers etc. .Mike, its pretty sad when a
person has to go to the lengths you have to .create a "pretend identity" for himself--as an
advocate for the wilderness, .and even worse as your self indulgent attempts, will actually damage
the .potential coalitions already formed to protect the wilderness.

I am only one person. How could I do that, all over the world. You make no sense. All you care about
is trying to get me to shut up and stop telling the truth about mountain biking.

.No Regards, .Dan V . . ."Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
.news:[email protected]... .> At 04:31 PM 1/15/04 -0500, Dan Volker wrote:
.> >Mike, .> If you and the 20 or 30 "like minded people" you might hope to get helping .> you with
your war, were the "only" people who "cared" about protecting the .> wilderness areas and forest trails---
all your efforts would be completely .in .> vain---even if you represented 30 people...This would be
sad for you but .> true, because this is a population size that would be absolutely ignored .by .>
any government official or lawmaker. .> .> > You Need allies to protect the forests from logging,
from being turned .into .> "housing developments", from being dissected by paved roads and
automobile .> traffic, and a long list of threats which can be grouped under things that .> the
average developer would desire. .> .> I have NEVER seen any mountain bikers doing that. In fact, for
the 8 years .I .> worked on stopping road construction, NOT ONE mountain biker ever showed .up at .>
any of the hearings nor wrote a letter. You aren't allies AT ALL. .> .> >Typical Americans care ( at
a level which could allow activism) only .about .> things that they are immediately involved with--
that they have nearly .> "direct contact" with. .> .> >To protect the forests and wilderness, you
have hikers, mountain bikers, .and .> equestrians who represent "relatively" low threat levels to
the .wilderness, .> and who would be inclined to feel equally indignant about the threats .posed .>
by developers and loggers, etc. The general public has little concern for .> these areas they see
only in pictures and TV. .> .> There's nothing to keep you out of the parks except your own laziness
(to .walk). .> .> >You can have a few million people who could "campaign" with you, against .the .>
developers and loggers, and have a reasonble chance of shaking up a few .> politicians and lawmakers
with real voting and boycotting significance... .or .> you could choose to remain impotent in this
quest for wilderness purity, .as .> a group so small you are effectively non-existent. .> .> People
who oppose mountain biking are actually a majority of the public. .> Mountain bikers are a tiny
minority. .> .> >So why do you continue to ******** one of the largest potential allies .you .>
could have ( mountain bikers on usenet could mean an activist group of .> hundreds of thousands). .>
.> I don't **** people off. I just tell the truth. Mountain bikers just don't .like .> to hear it.
Or to have other people hear it. .> .> > No matter how much you may hate mountain bikers, .> .> I
don't hate mountain bikers. How can you hate someone so pathetic? .> .> >you .> can't possibly
believe they represent the "same" form of damage that .loggers .> represent, or that housing
developers represent..? .> .> Different form, same result. .> .> >In a real war, something that is
life or death important, you find allies .> unless you are so large or powerful that you don't need
any. So either you .> need to think about mountain bikers and hikers as 2 big potential sources .of
.> allies, or you might think about looking for some windmills you can go .> charge after. .> .> You
guys have had about 10 years to prove that you are potential allies. .You .> haven't proven ****,
except that you care about nothing but your own .selfish, .> destructive sport. .> .> .> >Regards,
.> Dan V .> .> .> "Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message .>
news:<[email protected]>... .> > On 14 Jan 2004 13:19:01 -0800,
[email protected] (J. Muir) wrote: .> > .> > .Mike Vandeman wrote: .> > . <<Just looking for
places to ride that are in the area and .> > . <<would be challenging. Any suggestions would be
helpful. .> > . .> > .<Anywhere, as long as you stay on the pavement. .> > . .> > .Mike, I've seen
some badly damaged trails due to mountain bikes, so I .> > .can understand why you want to keep them
on roads. But why just paved .> > .roads? There are lots of dirt roads in rural areas that would
seem .> > .fine for bikes. .> > .> > Do I have to explain EVERYTHING to you idiots? The laws of
physics and .> biology .> > are the same on dirt roads & dirt trails. .> > .> > Besides, car traffic
is almost always less on these .> > .roads, so it's safer for the cyclists. You're not against bikes
on .> > .dirt roads (that are open to cars), are you? .> > .> > Yes, I want them closed to all
vehicles. .> > .> > .jm .> .> .

===
I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to humans ("pure habitat"). Want to
help? (I spent the previous 8 years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)

http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande

On 16 Jan 2004 22:54:21 GMT, [email protected] (Stephen Baker) wrote:

.MV blathers: . .>I have NEVER seen any mountain bikers doing that. In fact, for the 8 years I
.>worked on stopping road construction, NOT ONE mountain biker ever showed up .>at .>any of the
hearings nor wrote a letter. . .But if they drove there, then you wouldn't have KNOWN they were
mountain .bikers, woddya?

Yes, I would, because they always identify themselves as mountain bikers, and pretend that they
represent a significant body or people. After all, they are trying to protect mountain biking, as
their TOP priority.

.DUH! . .Steve "God, I hate feeding the troll - but someone has to "

===
I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to humans ("pure habitat"). Want to
help? (I spent the previous 8 years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)

http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande

Mike Vandeman <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Jan 2004 05:48:20 -0500, "Kamus of Kadizhar"
>
> EASY! Most of the time, I was the ONLY person objecting to the freeway widening.
>
So its not just mountain bikers who find your "causes" utterly without merit. That you were the only
one objecting to freeway widening suggests that the rest of society finds your delusional fantasies
of environmental nirvana just as bizarre and irrational as those of us in the newsgroups you
continually spam.

Tom.

Mike Vandeman wrote:
> On 16 Jan 2004 22:54:21 GMT, [email protected] (Stephen Baker) wrote:
>
> .MV blathers: . .>I have NEVER seen any mountain bikers doing that. In fact, for the 8 years I
> .>worked on stopping road construction, NOT ONE mountain biker ever showed up .>at .>any of the
> hearings nor wrote a letter. . .But if they drove there, then you wouldn't have KNOWN they were
> mountain .bikers, woddya?
>
> Yes, I would, because they always identify themselves as mountain bikers, and pretend that they
> represent a significant body or people.

But...but...you said they never come!!!

Bill "aaaarrrrrggggghhhhhhhh" S.

On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 03:46:44 GMT, Jason Crowder <[email protected]> wrote:

.I think to stereotype anyone is inherintly wrong. . .I don't mind mountain biking. Looks fun. My
only complaint is when I am .huffing my backpack up a narrow mountain trail and some biker comes
zooming .past me going 15 miles an hour, so I have to dive off the trail before .getting run
over. Then trying to get back up and make sure my 40 lb, .multi-day pack is still snug. Its a
pain in the butt.

So is getting run over and crushed to death. Like the Alameda whipsnake killed in Black Diamond
Mines Regional Preserve, CA.

.Kamus of Kadizhar commented: . .> I hate to feed the troll, but it's my first day of mini-vacation,
so I'm .> having some fun.... .> .> On Fri, 16 Jan 2004 05:22:18 +0000, Mike Vandeman wrote: .> .>>
I have NEVER seen any mountain bikers doing that. In fact, for the 8 .>> years I worked on stopping
road construction, NOT ONE mountain biker ever .>> showed up at any of the hearings nor wrote a
letter. You aren't allies AT .>> ALL. .> .> How would you know? By your own (il)logic, once they get
off their .> moutnain bikes, they're just like normal people (except, presumably they .> still lie
all the time about everything, including the fact that they ride .> mountain bikes.) So, you could
be in a room full of people, and they .> could all ride mountain bikes, but none would admit it, and
you'd have no .> way of telling which ones ride and which ones don't..... .> .>> People who oppose
mountain biking are actually a majority of the public. .>> Mountain bikers are a tiny minority. .>
.> Really? The majority of the public couldn't give a rat's ass about .> biking, mountain or
otherwise. .> .>>>you .>> can't possibly believe they represent the "same" form of damage that .>>
loggers represent, or that housing developers represent..? .>> .>> Different form, same result. .>
.> I guess you've never seen a root rake in action, then. Come by, I'll show .> you just how much
damage a D9 pushing a root rake can do. .> .> -Kamus .>

===
I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to humans ("pure habitat"). Want to
help? (I spent the previous 8 years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)

http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande

On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 00:54:08 -0500, "tcmedara" <[email protected]>
wrote:

.Mike Vandeman <[email protected]> wrote: .> On Fri, 16 Jan 2004 05:48:20 -0500, "Kamus of
Kadizhar" .> .> EASY! Most of the time, I was the ONLY person objecting to the .> freeway widening.
.> .So its not just mountain bikers who find your "causes" utterly without .merit.

So you admit that mountain bikers DON'T oppose road construction.

That you were the only one objecting to freeway widening suggests .that the rest of society finds
your delusional fantasies of environmental .nirvana just as bizarre and irrational as those of us in
the newsgroups you .continually spam.

No, Mountain bikers claim to oppose road construction also. It's YOU who are out of step. Thanks for
proving my point for me!

.Tom.

===
I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to humans ("pure habitat"). Want to
help? (I spent the previous 8 years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)

http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande

On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 06:13:21 GMT, "S o r n i" <[email protected]> wrote:

.Mike Vandeman wrote: .> On 16 Jan 2004 22:54:21 GMT, [email protected] (Stephen Baker) .>
wrote: .> .> .MV blathers: .> . .> .>I have NEVER seen any mountain bikers doing that. In fact, for
the .> 8 years I .>worked on stopping road construction, NOT ONE mountain .> biker ever showed up
.>at .> .>any of the hearings nor wrote a letter. .> . .> .But if they drove there, then you
wouldn't have KNOWN they were .> mountain .bikers, woddya? .> .> Yes, I would, because they always
identify themselves as mountain .> bikers, and pretend that they represent a significant body or
people. . .But...but...you said they never come!!!

Right. I was talking about the other meetings, where they ask for more mountain biking
opportunities. DUH!

.Bill "aaaarrrrrggggghhhhhhhh" S. .

===
I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to humans ("pure habitat"). Want to
help? (I spent the previous 8 years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)

http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande

Mike Vandeman <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 00:54:08 -0500, "tcmedara" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> .Mike Vandeman <[email protected]> wrote: .> On Fri, 16 Jan 2004 05:48:20 -0500, "Kamus of
> Kadizhar" .> .> EASY! Most of the time, I was the ONLY person objecting to the .> freeway
> widening. .> .So its not just mountain bikers who find your "causes" utterly without .merit.
>
> So you admit that mountain bikers DON'T oppose road construction.

I don't know what other mountain biker think of road construction. It normally doesn't come up when
we're riding. We're too busy scouring the trail for useless animals to crush beneath our tires.

BTW: Anyone know a good way to clean whipsnake entrails off a rim? Obviously disk brakes are the
long term solution, but there's nothing more annoying than rim brake fade due to the lubrication
effects of reptilian innards.

Tom (may have actually killed a few plants in my day as well)

On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 10:29:02 -0500, "tcmedara" <[email protected]>
wrote:

.Mike Vandeman <[email protected]> wrote: .> On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 00:54:08 -0500, "tcmedara" .>
<[email protected]> wrote: .> .> .Mike Vandeman <[email protected]> wrote: .> .> On Fri,
16 Jan 2004 05:48:20 -0500, "Kamus of Kadizhar" .> .> .> .> EASY! Most of the time, I was the ONLY
person objecting to the .> .> freeway widening. .> .> .> .So its not just mountain bikers who find
your "causes" utterly .> without .merit. .> .> So you admit that mountain bikers DON'T oppose road
construction. . .I don't know what other mountain biker think of road construction. It .normally
doesn't come up when we're riding. We're too busy scouring the .trail for useless animals to crush
beneath our tires. . .BTW: Anyone know a good way to clean whipsnake entrails off a rim? .Obviously
disk brakes are the long term solution, but there's nothing more .annoying than rim brake fade due
to the lubrication effects of reptilian .innards. . .Tom (may have actually killed a few plants in
my day as well)

Thanks for letting us see into your inner child.
===
I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to humans ("pure habitat"). Want to
help? (I spent the previous 8 years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)

http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande