Do Mountain Bikers Have Any Balls?

[Muddy]

> >You are LYING. It is IMPOSSIBLE to avoid skidding, on steep slopes.

Its actually rare for a bike to skid, as long as the rider knows what he's doing. Imagine a muddy
slope, if I were to lock up, I run the risk of loosing balance and direction. If I were to lightly
brake I keep balance and direction, but increasing speed and maneuverability. It works just like
A.B.S. Also walkers / hikers slip to in the mud. Now they have more weight distributed in the area,
and leave a bigger tread mark. No one does it on purpose, only the stupid ones.

I think the majority of this community wouldn't skid. Its the stupid ones. Your talking to the wrong
people on this one.

I've very seen any evidence to confirm that mountain bikes create destruction. I look at the
evidence myself and decide.

> Ahh, poor Muddy.
>
> Attacked and accused of lying by the very person you've been defending you have. The Dark Side is
> strong. Fight it, you must. Loyalty Darth Vaderman has not. Fight him, you must. Only then, a Jedi
> you will become.

Don't worry about me Im starting to get used to this whole, pick on Muddy game.

But remember, the young Jedi wins in the end! : )

 

[Muddy]

> But to me, Mountain biking is a rebelious sport. Its more than just XC, its an extreme sport.

> Aha - that magic word "extreme" - the hallmark of the clueless *******.

And might I add, whats wrong with Extreme? Extreme can mean jumping, drops, and FUN!!!! And all can
be done on concreate.

So unless you've got a problem with that I suggest YOU put a sock in
it. Now either your jumping to conclusions, or just can't read... I have already stated I do
street riding.

SO BUTTON IT!!!

> You want to be nannyed for the rest of your life? If you've got ethical problems with mountain
> biking, don't do it. Otherwise, put a sock in it.

Scared I'm right? Scared that your not the only one that thinks it destructive? Its ok now, it takes
people awhile to come out !! : )

> Andy Chequer

Muddy - Tells it like it is - and a bit more!

 

[Muddy]

Everyone makes spelling mistakes!

Just maybe I make more than others!!!

Muddy - But thats spelt right, right?

 

[Just Zis Guy]

On Sat, 30 Nov 2002 15:58:52 GMT, Mike Vandeman <[email protected]> wrote:

>.I think it's likely that those people who experience the natural .environment by biking and
>walking are likely to gain an appreciation .of natural diversity and become more sympathetic to
>moves aimed at .restricting the destruction of the world's habitats,

>BS. The only think mountan bikers ever protest is the closure of trails to bikes.

I am a mountain biker, I never protest the colsure of bike trails (because it's never happened to a
trail I know about), I do protest about plenty of other stuff.

Or, to put it in language you might understand, Mike, DUH! you LIED! AGAIN!

Guy
===
** WARNING ** This posting may contain traces of irony. http://www.chapmancentral.com (BT ADSL and
dynamic DNS permitting)
NOTE: BT Openworld have now blocked port 25 (without notice), so old mail addresses may no longer
work. Apologies.

 

[Pete Hickey]

In article <[email protected]>, Mike Vandeman <[email protected]> wrote:

>Mountain bikers' favorite tactic: CENSORSHIP.

Wait... I thought it was LIEING!

-Pete

--
--
LITTLE KNOWN FACT: Did you know that 90% of North Americans cannot taste the difference between
fried dog and fried cat?

 

[Surgius]

"Pete Hickey" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>, Mike Vandeman
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >Mountain bikers' favorite tactic: CENSORSHIP.
>
> Wait... I thought it was LIEING!

That is Vandemans favorite tactic, that and the ample use of 'Junk Science' to attempt to prove
his point.

>
> -Pete
>
> --
> --
> LITTLE KNOWN FACT: Did you know that 90% of North Americans cannot taste the difference between
> fried dog and fried cat?

 

[Mike Vandeman]

On Tue, 03 Dec 2002 03:44:37 GMT, "Surgius" <[email protected]> wrote:

. ."Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
.news:[email protected]... . .> .> Do I have to explain EVERYTHING to you
idiots? Hiking reduces impacts. .> . .> .Hiking frightens wildlife. Hiking INCREASES impact over
non-use. .Therefore .> .hiking is bad for the environment. .> .> I agree, of course, but mountain
biking is much MORE destructive, .obviously. . .I contradicted your statement and you agree with
me.. So you admit you are a .liar and a hypocrite.

BS. I agree that hiking is harmful, but it is much LESS harmful than mountain biking.
Learn to think.

.> === .> 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

 

[Mike Vandeman]

On Tue, 03 Dec 2002 03:46:30 GMT, "Surgius" <[email protected]> wrote:

. ."Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
.news:[email protected]... .> On Sat, 30 Nov 2002 03:53:49 GMT, "Surgius"
<[email protected]> wrote: .> .> . .> ."Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message .>
.news:[email protected]... .> .> On Fri, 29 Nov 2002 21:44:27 -0500, Ken B
.> .<[email protected]> .> .> wrote: .> .> .> .> . .> .> .I'd like to see one shred
of proof that mountain biking is destroing .> .> .the environment. .> .> .> .> That's easy. Just
look at any mountain biking trail. .> . .> .The creation of said trail does more damage to the
environment that does .> .damage to the trail. .> .> .> .> Ha! I've seen no evidence WHAT SO EVER
here,or .> .> .anywhere else for that matter, proving that statement. None. .> .> .> .> Your nose is
growing. .> .> .> .> .The latest attempt at proof of environmental destruction is: .> .>
.http://www.santabarbarahikes.com/ComparisonTrails/damage.shtml. Nice .> .> .try, but no luck there.
All I see are perfectly normal mountiain .> .> .biking trails. .> .> .> .> Yeah, with huge ruts and
other erosion. .> . .> .Which a trail crew can repair. .> .> BS. Lost and destroyed soil cannot be
replaced. It's GONE. . .So, if I took a bucket full of soil and filled in a rut on a trail, your
.saying that would NOT be replacing soil? Do youknow what the definition of .'replace' is?

So you stole soil from one place, and MOVED it. You didn't replace the original soil. That's gone
for good. Besides, you shouldn't be moving species around.
===
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]

On Sun, 1 Dec 2002 18:50:56 -0800, "penny s" <[email protected]> wrote:

.yes, and you've gotten reamed for it too. One can ride and not be .destructive.

BS. Just look at your tires, and you can see that you can't ride without doing damage.
===
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]

On Sun, 01 Dec 2002 22:37:42 -0500, Ken B <[email protected]> wrote:

.On 1 Dec 2002 12:31:00 -0800, [email protected] (Muddy) .wrote: . .>> "penny s"
<[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>... .>> >
since you are new here. and you've already wasted tons of bandwidth .>> > replying to you know
who...here's a hint. Don't bother. You'd be much better .>> > off either killfiling or ignoring MV
threads. Read Jonathan Harris' AMB FAQ. .> .>Yes, MV does talk some bollock! But I only defend him
cause there .>really are some thick as sh*t people here that honestly think biking .>doesn't cause
destruction. . .It's not that people are thickheaded. It's called let's see some hard .data. Let's
see unbiased work done by qualified scientists that are .experts in the field. This means research
performed by scientists not .having some agenda or pet cause be it hugging trees or riding trails.
.This does NOT mean subjective pseudo-research performed by unqualified .non-scientists (such as MV)
that is made up of partially plagiarized .targeted (meaning agenda driven) research. Nor does it
mean someone's .opinion. . .So far, MV has NOT provided this to the group and, therefore, has no
.credibility. Why does he need to provide this? Because he is the one .making the accusations that
mountain biking is destructive. The burden .of proof lies with him.

BS. By law (NEPA), the burden of proof is on the developer: the person who wants to add bikes
to trails. Where is the scientific research proving that mountain bikiing is harmless? It
doesn't exist!

.So far all I have seen here are OPINIONS. It is opinion that biking is .destructive to the
environment until it is PROVEN otherwise. Hell, no .one here has even been able to tell me what
'destruction' is.

Is killing plants and animals good enough for you?

My .definition would be something along the lines of '...completely unable .to support life...'
That's my opinion, however. Like I said, there is .no hard data to go on.

Because it is too obvious to be worth researching. Research is only needed when the facts
aren't obvious.

===
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

 

[Gary S.]

On Sun, 08 Dec 2002 15:18:59 GMT, Mike Vandeman <[email protected]> wrote:

>.> BS. Lost and destroyed soil cannot be replaced. It's GONE. . .So, if I took a bucket full of
>soil and filled in a rut on a trail, your .saying that would NOT be replacing soil? Do youknow what
>the definition of .'replace' is?
>
>So you stole soil from one place, and MOVED it. You didn't replace the original soil. That's gone
>for good. Besides, you shouldn't be moving species around.
>
When mountain bike tires move soil, it is gone instead of being somewhere different? Transmuted into
some other form of matter, or dissipated as energy?

What happens to the soil, given the Law of Conservation of Matter?

How is that different than moving it around with a bucket and shovel?

Is moving soil several feet going to be that disruptive to any species?

I wonder what name you are going to call me for asking questions.

Happy trails, Gary (net.yogi.bear)
------------------------------------------------
at the 51st percentile of ursine intelligence

Gary D. Schwartz, Needham, MA, USA Please reply to: garyDOTschwartzATpoboxDOTcom

 

[Just Zis Guy]

On Sun, 01 Dec 2002 00:49:00 GMT, Mike Vandeman <[email protected]> wrote:

>.Just as well the New Forest fauna don't know that - and I'm not about .to tell them either. The
>thing which drives them away is motor .traffic. They don't like the noise, and they don't like the
>smell. .Fair enough, neither do I. They seem not to care too much about .walkers and cyclists -
>follow the trails far enough from the roads and .you start to see all the butterflies, mammals,
>birds, occasional .snakes - all the things you claim we've driven off.

>BS. You are seeing only the ones that hold their noses and tolerate human presence.

Strange - this thousand-year-old forest doesn't seem to be suffering any reduction in species
diversity due to cyclists, walkers and equestrians using it. Maybe the vast logging machines are
more significant - but no, the wildlife doesn't seem to care too much about them either. Whaddya
know. It's a managed forest, man made and used for the enjoyment of all kinds of people, and it's
full of wildlife, including some rare species.

Guy
===
** WARNING ** This posting may contain traces of irony. http://www.chapmancentral.com (BT ADSL and
dynamic DNS permitting)
NOTE: BT Openworld have now blocked port 25 (without notice), so old mail addresses may no longer
work. Apologies.

 

[Surgius]

"Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Sun, 1 Dec 2002 18:50:56 -0800, "penny s" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> .yes, and you've gotten reamed for it too. One can ride and not be .destructive.
>
> BS. Just look at your tires, and you can see that you can't ride without
doing
> damage.

We could say the same thing aboput your shoes, at least we do trail maintenance.

> ===
> 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

 

[Surgius]

"Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Sun, 01 Dec 2002 22:37:42 -0500, Ken B
<[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> .On 1 Dec 2002 12:31:00 -0800, [email protected] (Muddy) .wrote: . .>> "penny s"
> <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> .>> > since you are new here. and you've already wasted tons of bandwidth .>> > replying to you
> know who...here's a hint. Don't bother. You'd be
much better
> .>> > off either killfiling or ignoring MV threads. Read Jonathan Harris'
AMB FAQ.
> .> .>Yes, MV does talk some bollock! But I only defend him cause there .>really are some thick as
> sh*t people here that honestly think biking .>doesn't cause destruction. . .It's not that people
> are thickheaded. It's called let's see some hard .data. Let's see unbiased work done by qualified
> scientists that are .experts in the field. This means research performed by scientists not .having
> some agenda or pet cause be it hugging trees or riding trails. .This does NOT mean subjective
> pseudo-research performed by unqualified .non-scientists (such as MV) that is made up of partially
> plagiarized .targeted (meaning agenda driven) research. Nor does it mean someone's .opinion. . .So
> far, MV has NOT provided this to the group and, therefore, has no .credibility. Why does he need
> to provide this? Because he is the one .making the accusations that mountain biking is
> destructive. The burden .of proof lies with him.
>
> BS. By law (NEPA), the burden of proof is on the developer: the person who
wants
> to add bikes to trails. Where is the scientific research proving that
mountain
> bikiing is harmless? It doesn't exist!
>
> .So far all I have seen here are OPINIONS. It is opinion that biking is .destructive to the
> environment until it is PROVEN otherwise. Hell, no .one here has even been able to tell me what
> 'destruction' is.
>
> Is killing plants and animals good enough for you?

I suppose you don't eat animals or vegetables?

>
> My .definition would be something along the lines of '...completely unable .to support life...'
> That's my opinion, however. Like I said, there is .no hard data to go on.
>
> Because it is too obvious to be worth researching. Research is only needed
when
> the facts aren't obvious.

Or in your case opinions, and having your head up your ass.

>
> ===
> 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

 

[Jones]

"penny s" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> "Muddy" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > You sad, sad *******!!
> >
> > Now thats what Im about!!! You think I can really be bothered writing an essay for YOU!
> >
> > ****ing hell, is only your pig ignorance that compels me to reply to you, let alone think how I
> > could structurally hold a good paragraph.
> >
>
> hey muddy... lighten up, go for a ride man. You are new here, get the lay of the land before you
> start blasting people. Oh and quit replying to HWSNBN, it's really pointless.
>
> 1¢

You know Its has been 2 weeks since I sat my my saddle. Maybe its affecting me. I feel a fever
coming on. Should be back to normal next week.

Mind you, I don't suppose thats any better.

Oh, and whats HWSNBN and ng?

Muddy

 

[Muddy]

> > Rimmer thats all you ever do!!!
>
> Oh behave Muddy, before you make me look bad......errmmm, well, I suppose you're too late anyway -
> I prolly beat you to it a long time ago.......
>

Damn. And I've been showing my self up on purpose.

Muddy

 

[Muddy]

> > You sad, sad *******!!
>
> I'm actually a very happy *******, thankyouverymuch!
>
> > Now thats what Im about!!!
>
> 'About' a zero on a nought to ten? ',;~}
>
> > You think I can really be bothered writing an essay for YOU!
>
> I'd rather you didn't....
>
> > ****ing hell, is only your pig ignorance
>
> PKB Muddy.
>
> > that compels me to reply to you, let alone think how I could structurally hold a good paragraph.
> >
>
> See, you're doing better already ',;~}

Cheers, just for you I've started using a spellcheck. Doesn't mean I'll make any more sense though.

> >
> > > Do not over use, under use, or miss use either of these - it makes
> reading
> > > what you are trying to say rather difficult at best. At worst, down
> right
> > > infuriating
> >
> > Don't read my post then!!
>
> You might be one of the people that inspired me to put this together, but I didn't write it
> especially _for_ you, ya bloody eejit. Don't be so damned egocentric.
>

Wow, I'd have backed off your case if I'd have know I was inspiring you abuse.

> > > Now that you have read, digested, and implemented all of this in your postings, any other
> > > stupidities in the content of your ramblings are
> less
> > > likely to be picked on as severely, and hey, they may even go unnoticed altogether! (Well,
> > > except by *JD, but he'll call you stupid anyhow - it 'comes with the territory').
> >
> > Actually, I got bored after the first description. But I read the start and the end, and you
> > normally talk bollocks in the middle anyway. Its good to see that you use good punctuation. But
> > could you just make your posts interesting now! : )
>
> Yessir, right away sir!
>
> > > Shaun aRe (probably loads of spelling mistakes in that, but WGAF eh? Heheheheh
> >
> > Sorry didn't read it.
>
> You are LYING! You are a MOUNTAIN BIKER and they ALWAYS tell lies!

Has MV just intervened with your post?

>
> > Muddy - So lit.'s not may strong point. No need the make fun of me!!
>
> _Of course_ there is! I mean, why should I give you special treatment? I make fun of everyone, not
> least of all myself, just in case you didn't notice. Hell fire...........
>
> Shaun aRe - Me smart like monkey.

P.s. And I've stopped using exclamation marks just for you!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Muddy

Please let me just get it out of my system
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Thanks.

 

[Mike Vandeman]

On Mon, 02 Dec 2002 02:36:19 GMT, "Joshua E. Rodd" <[email protected]> wrote:

.Mike Vandeman wrote: .> You are LYING. It is IMPOSSIBLE to avoid skidding, on steep slopes. .
.Since you never mountain bike, how do you know this?

Observation. And 50+ years of bicycling. And I did ride a mountain bike once.

===
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]

On Mon, 2 Dec 2002 08:59:00 -0800, "Jeff Strickland" <[email protected]> wrote: .It is still two
animals per mile, so it is the same.

So if you travel farther, you disturb more animals. DUH!

===
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]

On Mon, 02 Dec 2002 03:58:59 GMT, "Chris McMartin" <[email protected]> wrote:

."Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
.news:[email protected]... .> .> See _Wildlife and Recreationists_. .> . .>
.Author? Spouting a cryptic reference isn't proof. YOU didn't do .anything .> .except cop out. .> .>
Richard Knight & Kevin Gutzwiller. You could have looked it up, if you .were .> willing to lift a
finger, other than the middle one. . .That's cute, and a LIE, but the burden of proof is on YOU as
per my original .request.

The brden of proof, by law, is on the developer: the one who wants to add mountain biking to trails.

===
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