Another Idiot Mountain Biker Demonstrates Their Stupidity

Discussion in 'Mountain Bikes' started by Mike Vandeman, Jun 25, 2003.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. "Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > On Mon, 14 Jul 2003 15:17:31 -0700, "Jeff Strickland" <[email protected]>
    wrote:
    >
    > . ."Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > .news:[email protected]... .> On Thu, 26 Jun 2003 10:31:00 -0700, "Jeff
    > Strickland" <[email protected]> .wrote: .> .> .Dear Mike, .> .You poor, pathetic little man. You
    > repeatedly call for closure of all .trails .> .to mountain bikers, .> .> No, only to BIKES, LIAR.
    > .> .> but in the same breath you say that the bikers are .> .welcome, just not the bikes. If you
    > take the bikes away, the bikers
    cease
    > .to .> .be bikers, they become hikers at that point. .> .> BS. .> .BS? Really? If a biker is not
    > riding a bike but is walking instead, then
    he
    > .is not a biker at that point, he is a hiker.
    >
    > It would help if you learned to read English. If you aren't a mountain
    biker,
    > then what are you doing in this newsgroup? And owning and riding a
    mountain
    > bike. Obviously, you didn't read your dictionary. Idiot!
    >

    I have never presented myself as owning or riding a bike of any type, in fact I have repeatedly
    stated that I am not a bike rider. My sole interest in this topic is to keep routes open to
    everybody, and certainly not close routes due to the random activities of a few scofflaws that might
    go outside from time to time. I read just fine, you, on the other hand ...

    > If a driver is not driving, but .is walking instead, he is not a driver at that point, he is a
    > hiker. If a .glofer is not playing golf at the moment bu tis bolwing instead, he is
    not a
    > .glofer at that point, he is a bowler. In each and every case where we
    label
    > .a person as belonging to a group because of the activity the group
    engages
    > .in, but we change that activity for a member of that group, then that
    member
    > .will then belong to a different group for the purposes of describing him .because of the activity
    > he is engaged in. Hikers can be bikers on a .different day, and bikers can be hikers on a
    > different day. Bikers can
    leave
    > .the bike on the back of the car and become hikers for a few hours. But,
    the
    > .moment the biker gets off his bike and travels by foot, he is a hiker
    until
    > .he gets back on the bike again. A biker retains his biker status while .walking his bike -- thank
    > you Captain Obvious for pointing this out. . .It would be much easier to hold a conversation with
    > you if you would use
    the
    > .same dictionary as everybody else. Your penchant for making up
    definitions
    > .to words makes it quite difficult to talk to you. .
    >
    > ===
    > 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
     


  2. On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 15:04:07 -0700, "Jeff Strickland" <[email protected]> wrote:

    . ."Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    .news:[email protected]... .> On Mon, 14 Jul 2003 15:17:31 -0700, "Jeff
    Strickland" <[email protected]> .wrote: .> .> . .> ."Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in
    message .> .news:[email protected]... .> .> On Thu, 26 Jun 2003 10:31:00
    -0700, "Jeff Strickland" <[email protected]> .> .wrote: .> .> .> .> .Dear Mike, .> .> .You poor,
    pathetic little man. You repeatedly call for closure of all .> .trails .> .> .to mountain bikers, .>
    .> .> .> No, only to BIKES, LIAR. .> .> .> .> but in the same breath you say that the bikers are .>
    .> .welcome, just not the bikes. If you take the bikes away, the bikers .cease .> .to .> .> .be
    bikers, they become hikers at that point. .> .> .> .> BS. .> .> .> .BS? Really? If a biker is not
    riding a bike but is walking instead, then .he .> .is not a biker at that point, he is a hiker. .>
    .> It would help if you learned to read English. If you aren't a mountain .biker, .> then what are
    you doing in this newsgroup? And owning and riding a .mountain .> bike. Obviously, you didn't read
    your dictionary. Idiot! .> . .I have never presented myself as owning or riding a bike of any type,
    in .fact I have repeatedly stated that I am not a bike rider. My sole interest .in this topic is to
    keep routes open to everybody, and certainly not close .routes due to the random activities of a few
    scofflaws that might go outside .from time to time.

    In other words, you don't care a whit about the environment.

    .I read just fine, you, on the other hand ...

    Then why don't you read some biology -- a field where your ignorance is colossal?

    .> If a driver is not driving, but .> .is walking instead, he is not a driver at that point, he is a
    hiker. If a .> .glofer is not playing golf at the moment bu tis bolwing instead, he is .not a .>
    .glofer at that point, he is a bowler. In each and every case where we .label .> .a person as
    belonging to a group because of the activity the group .engages .> .in, but we change that activity
    for a member of that group, then that .member .> .will then belong to a different group for the
    purposes of describing him .> .because of the activity he is engaged in. Hikers can be bikers on a
    .> .different day, and bikers can be hikers on a different day. Bikers can .leave .> .the bike on
    the back of the car and become hikers for a few hours. But, .the .> .moment the biker gets off his
    bike and travels by foot, he is a hiker .until .> .he gets back on the bike again. A biker retains
    his biker status while .> .walking his bike -- thank you Captain Obvious for pointing this out. .> .
    .> .It would be much easier to hold a conversation with you if you would use .the .> .same
    dictionary as everybody else. Your penchant for making up .definitions .> .to words makes it quite
    difficult to talk to you. .> . .> .> === .> 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 .

    ===
    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
     
  3. > .I have never presented myself as owning or riding a bike of any type, in .fact I have repeatedly
    > stated that I am not a bike rider. My sole
    interest
    > .in this topic is to keep routes open to everybody, and certainly not
    close
    > .routes due to the random activities of a few scofflaws that might go
    outside
    > .from time to time.
    >
    > In other words, you don't care a whit about the environment.
    >
    Those are your words, not mine.

    I care plenty about the environment, I just think that bikes are not the environmental calamity that
    you presxent them to be. Indeed, I find that recreational travel does not present anywhere near the
    hazards that you claim.

    > .I read just fine, you, on the other hand ...
    >
    > Then why don't you read some biology -- a field where your ignorance is colossal?
    >
    I wonder the same of you.
     
  4. On Mon, 21 Jul 2003 12:01:45 -0700, "Jeff Strickland" <[email protected]> wrote:

    . .> .I have never presented myself as owning or riding a bike of any type, in .> .fact I have
    repeatedly stated that I am not a bike rider. My sole .interest .> .in this topic is to keep routes
    open to everybody, and certainly not .close .> .routes due to the random activities of a few
    scofflaws that might go .outside .> .from time to time. .> .> In other words, you don't care a whit
    about the environment. .> .Those are your words, not mine. . .I care plenty about the environment, I
    just think that bikes are not the .environmental calamity that you presxent them to be. Indeed, I
    find that .recreational travel does not present anywhere near the hazards that you .claim.

    ALL environmental rapists say that.

    .> .I read just fine, you, on the other hand ... .> .> Then why don't you read some biology -- a
    field where your ignorance is .> colossal? .> .I wonder the same of you.

    I do. I just finished E.O. Wilson's _The Future of Life_. Do you even know who he is?
    ===
    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
     
  5. Sorni

    Sorni Guest

    "Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > On Mon, 21 Jul 2003 12:01:45 -0700, "Jeff Strickland" <[email protected]>
    wrote:

    > .> Then why don't you read some biology -- a field where your ignorance is .> colossal? .> .I
    > wonder the same of you.
    >
    > I do. I just finished E.O. Wilson's _The Future of Life_. Do you even know
    who
    > he is?

    Didn't he work on Old McDonald's Farm?

    (I'll wait for it.)

    Still Filterless Bill
     
  6. "Sorni" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > "Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > news:[email protected]...
    > > On Mon, 21 Jul 2003 12:01:45 -0700, "Jeff Strickland" <[email protected]>
    > wrote:
    >
    > > .> Then why don't you read some biology -- a field where your ignorance
    is
    > > .> colossal? .> .I wonder the same of you.
    > >
    > > I do. I just finished E.O. Wilson's _The Future of Life_. Do you even
    know
    > who
    > > he is?
    >
    > Didn't he work on Old McDonald's Farm?
    >

    No, that was EIEIO Willson ...
     
  7. "Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > On Mon, 21 Jul 2003 12:01:45 -0700, "Jeff Strickland" <[email protected]>
    wrote:
    >
    > . .> .I have never presented myself as owning or riding a bike of any type,
    in
    > .> .fact I have repeatedly stated that I am not a bike rider. My sole .interest .> .in this topic
    > is to keep routes open to everybody, and certainly not .close .> .routes due to the random
    > activities of a few scofflaws that might go .outside .> .from time to time. .> .> In other words,
    > you don't care a whit about the environment. .> .Those are your words, not mine. . .I care plenty
    > about the environment, I just think that bikes are not the .environmental calamity that you
    > presxent them to be. Indeed, I find that .recreational travel does not present anywhere near the
    > hazards that you .claim.
    >
    > ALL environmental rapists say that.
    >
    Environemntal Rapist is such a subjective term, I never understand why such an intelligent guy would
    use such a term. (The assumption of intelligence is based on the title of PhD that you insist on
    using.) Another term htat you frequently use, which is well below your claim of being a PhD is LIAR.

    Perhaps it is time to explain the meaning of "subjective". A subjective term is one that could mean
    one thing to one person, and something different to another. Maybe rapist is not subjective in
    itself, but actions that can be used to label one as an environemtnal rapist can be used by another
    group to describe an environmental hero.

    Let's talk about a hiker that carries in 20 pounds of groceries, and throws food wrappers along the
    side of the trail. Maybe he camps in three different locations, and pees and craps behind a tree
    every morning. He travels, let's say 10 miles per day, so he is out 4 days and 3 nights, he travels
    about 40 miles, and leaves trash and sewage all along the route. The hiker has impacted the
    environment at a rate of (at a minimum) 20 times in 40 miles, or once every two miles. (The
    assumption is that the hiker will need to pee three times a day after breaking camp, and will stop
    for lunch along the trail, then camp overnight.)

    A biker that takes off on a trip of the same period of time, 4 days and 3 nights, will have the same
    need to pee, eat, and camp, but he will travel 30 miles per day, instead of 10. His impact on the
    environment will be 20 times in 120 miles, or once every six miles.

    > .> .I read just fine, you, on the other hand ... .> .> Then why don't you read some biology -- a
    > field where your ignorance is .> colossal? .> .I wonder the same of you.
    >
    > I do. I just finished E.O. Wilson's _The Future of Life_. Do you even know
    who
    > he is?

    You wonder about my reading, I wonder about your ignorance.
     
  8. Mike Vandeman <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:<[email protected]>...
    > At 08:37 AM 6/25/03 -0700, Ilana Levin wrote:
    > >Mike:
    >
    > >read your notes forwarded by Elizabeth Tenney at ESAN
    > and i want to share that although I don't think mountain bikers should be allowed in areas that
    > are off limits to all humans (I like that idea),
    >
    > I need your help. So far, I know of no such areas confirmed anywhere in the world.
    >
    > > we live
    > in a world with many people. get over your inability to share the trails.
    >
    > You misunderstood. I am perfectly happy to share the trails with mountain bikers, who are human
    > beings, but not with bicycles, which aren't human, have no rights, and don't belong there.
    >
    > > i don't like the flies and soil
    > effects from horses/riders on trails, and I either avoid those trails or I get over it and
    > use them.
    >
    > Why? There are good reasons why exotic species shouldn't be allowed in natural areas.
    >
    > >THere are many trails to travel that don't allow
    > mountain bikers, and you can use those.
    >
    > I do, but mountain bikers ride there anyway! What should I do about THAT? Ignore it?
    >
    > >Multi-purpose/user trails compose some of our public
    > land trail system and although that may suck to you, we have a lot of people on this planet. I
    > wish we didn't have so many, but that's the way it is.
    >
    > I have never complained about the people. It's the BIKES I object to. And so far, I have yet to
    > hear a single good reason why we should permit them. You don't offer one, either.
    >
    >
    >
    > >Ilana
    >
    >
    > __________________________________
    > Do you Yahoo!? SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month! http://sbc.yahoo.com
    >
    > ===
    > 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

    There already is a place that is "off-limits" to humans and is beyond the scope and breadth of your
    phonetic(s) (symbols),opinions and/or imagination; (i.e., it existed long before such (of) any
    application, and will continue long after.) It seems incidently an oxymoron that you espouse your
    habitat,but use as a resource a medium that disintegrates wildlife habitat.In fact it is one of the
    utmost,consummate resource (re energy) consumers requiring methods of extraction that come at
    habitats expense which is extraneous to nature.

    "Do the evolution" Pearl Jam "Redundant tautology enveloped in diffidence."
     
  9. Mr. E. Mann

    Mr. E. Mann Guest

    Mike Vandeman <[email protected]> wrote in news:[email protected]:

    Mike, Do the world a favor. Pull your bottom lip over your head and swallow!

    Have a nice day!

    > On 28 Jun 2003 21:00:04 +0950, Twisties <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    > .Mike i have read the other threads you have started, now u are annoing .the hell out of me! . .U
    > stupid #@%$ head! . .u suffer from ATTENTION DEFICITE DISORDER!!!! . .U NEED TO FIND A FRIEND! .
    > .GO AWAY AND STOP ANNOING US!!! GO TO ONE OF THE OTHER CYCLING SITES THAT .ARE ALL ABOUT MTB!!!
    > WHY ARE YOU ANNOING ONE SITE THAT HAS A SMALL .PERCENTAGE DEVOTED TO MTBIKING??? . . .GO AWAY!
    >
    > Did you say something?
    >===
    > 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
     
  10. On 25 Jul 2003 01:49:02 -0700, [email protected] (Jason MacMillan) wrote:

    .Mike Vandeman <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:<[email protected]>... .> At 08:37 AM 6/25/03 -0700, Ilana Levin
    wrote: .> >Mike: .> .> >read your notes forwarded by Elizabeth Tenney at ESAN .> and i want to share
    that although I don't think .> mountain bikers should be allowed in areas that are .> off limits to
    all humans (I like that idea), .> .> I need your help. So far, I know of no such areas confirmed
    anywhere in the .> world. .> .> > we live .> in a world with many people. get over your inability .>
    to share the trails. .> .> You misunderstood. I am perfectly happy to share the trails with mountain
    .> bikers, who are human beings, but not with bicycles, which aren't human, have no .> rights, and
    don't belong there. .> .> > i don't like the flies and soil .> effects from horses/riders on trails,
    and I either .> avoid those trails or I get over it and use them. .> .> Why? There are good reasons
    why exotic species shouldn't be allowed in natural .> areas. .> .> >THere are many trails to travel
    that don't allow .> mountain bikers, and you can use those. .> .> I do, but mountain bikers ride
    there anyway! What should I do about THAT? Ignore .> it? .> .> >Multi-purpose/user trails compose
    some of our public .> land trail system and although that may suck to you, .> we have a lot of
    people on this planet. I wish we .> didn't have so many, but that's the way it is. .> .> I have
    never complained about the people. It's the BIKES I object to. And so .> far, I have yet to hear a
    single good reason why we should permit them. You .> don't offer one, either. .> .> .> .> >Ilana .>
    .> .> __________________________________ .> Do you Yahoo!? .> SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per
    month! .> http://sbc.yahoo.com .> .> === .> 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 . .There already is a
    place that is "off-limits" to humans and is beyond .the scope and breadth of your phonetic(s)
    (symbols),opinions and/or .imagination; (i.e., it existed long before such (of) any application,
    .and will continue long after.) .It seems incidently an oxymoron that you espouse your habitat,but
    use .as a resource a medium that disintegrates wildlife habitat.In fact it .is one of the
    utmost,consummate resource (re energy) consumers .requiring methods of extraction that come at
    habitats expense which is .extraneous to nature. . ."Do the evolution" Pearl Jam "Redundant
    tautology enveloped in .diffidence."

    Okay, now please translate that into English.
    ===
    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
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Loading...