Do Mountain Bikers Have Any Balls?

[Mike Vandeman]

On Tue, 03 Dec 2002 19:28:57 +0000, "Just zis Guy, you know?" <[email protected]> wrote:

.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.

So you ADMIT that it is reducing wildlife populations. QED
===
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

 

[Muddy]

"Shaun Rimmer" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> Muddy <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > > > ****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.
>
> Aye - highly unlikely.

Urmm, yeah, my spellchecks **** to.

> >
> > Wow, I'd have backed off your case if I'd have know I was inspiring you abuse.
>
> You're on my case? Hell, someone coulda told me, then I coulda braced myself.....
>
> Anyhow, what abuse?

Just kindin'. Its a good job I come along to this site in time. It was a shambles when I got here,
you all picked on me. Fortunately I managed to calm everyone down. Now what would you do without me?

>
> > > > > 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?
>
> It was a sideways dig at several people.

One person does come to mind.

> Heheheheh, now, you're appearing slightly more well adjusted already, so, in that case, you'll
> likely stand out like a sore thumb in this place......
>
> Shaun aRe

DO YOU WANT ME TO ARGUE? i will you know. : )

Muddy

 

[Muddy]

"Shaun Rimmer" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> Muddy <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > "Shaun Rimmer" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:<[email protected]>...
> > > Muddy <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > > news:[email protected]...
>
> > > Aye - highly unlikely.
> >
> > Urmm, yeah, my spellchecks **** to.
>
> Yes, and a spell checker doesn't help you make sense....
>
F*ck off
> > > > Wow, I'd have backed off your case if I'd have know I was inspiring you abuse.
> > >
> > > You're on my case? Hell, someone coulda told me, then I coulda braced myself.....
> > >
> > > Anyhow, what abuse?
> >
> > Just kindin'.
>
> Try 'kidding'.

F*ck off
>
> > Its a good job I come along to this site in time.
>
> 'Came along', oh, and this is a 'news group'.

F*ck off - F*ck off
>
> > It was a shambles when I got here, you all picked on me. Fortunately I managed to calm everyone
> > down. Now what would you do without me?
>
> Throw a ****ing great party........
>
F*ck off

> > > Heheheheh, now, you're appearing slightly more well adjusted already,
> so, in
> > > that case, you'll likely stand out like a sore thumb in this place......
> > >
> > > Shaun aRe
> >
> > DO YOU WANT ME TO ARGUE? i will you know. : )
>
> OK. I take it you like losing then?

F*ck off

>
> Shaun aRe...........

Muddy - F*cked off with losing

 

[Mike Vandeman]

On Sun, 01 Dec 2002 23:09:39 -0500, Ken B <[email protected]> wrote:

.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? . .The fact is that he DOESN'T know. He probably tried it once
and not .only skidded all down the trail but all over his underpants too. . . .Have you seen this
guy's picture??? He got beat up by the kids the .bullies beat up. He couldn't handle a tricycle on
an empty tennis .court let alone navigate a technical downhill. Christ, we'd have to .scrape him off
the rocks and roots before we could ride again. And the .smell of ****.... ick. Well, I guess that's
ONE way for him to keep us .off the trails. Ew. . .> .>(I don't mountain bike either, so I don't
really know; I do know that .>on my road bike, I *never* skid unless I'm doing something really
.>wrong, regardless of the condition of the pavement.) . .

===
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 2 Dec 2002 16:08:36 -0800, [email protected] (Muddy) wrote:

.> 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!!!

Mountain bikers' favorite tactic: CENSORSHIP.

===
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 2 Dec 2002 15:56:05 -0800, [email protected] (Muddy) wrote:

.> >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.

And if you don't brake, you crash for sure. DUH!

.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 never said it was on purpose.

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

BS. On a steep slope, it's impossible not to skid. Bikes don't have enough traction to
prevent skidding.
===
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 05:14:10 GMT, "G.T." <[email protected]> wrote:

.Chris McMartin 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. .> .> .>>."It's obvious..." Another weak
argument and a cop out. I asked for .>>.objective proof and once again you fail to deliver. .>>
.>>It's not something that requires proof. DUH! .> .> .> I'LL be the judge of that. My challenge
still stands unanswered. .> .> . .You know, playing with the troll once or twice on each of his
binges can be .good fun. But more than that is a ****ING WASTE OF TIME!

So what are YOU doing? If "playing with the troll" is a waste of time, TALKING about it is even more
a waste of time. DUH!

.Greg

===
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 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.

He has observed a small minority and then makes up assumptions and/or lies about the majority. He
rode a mt bike once on a fire road, according to his website.

>
> ===
> 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

 

[Chris McMartin]

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

That's not what we were talking about. Nice try.

 

[Just Zis Guy]

On Sat, 07 Dec 2002 01:43:01 GMT, Mike Vandeman <[email protected]> wrote:

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

Surely you didn't mountain bike? Then you are the SPAWN OF SATAN!

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.

 

[Just Zis Guy]

On Sat, 07 Dec 2002 01:43:04 GMT, Mike Vandeman <[email protected]> wrote:

>On a steep slope, it's impossible not to skid. Bikes don't have enough traction to prevent
>skidding.

Ah, like you said further up - you mountain biked once. I see now that you mean exactly that: once.
Clearly you never developed the skill necessary to ride without skidding; maybe that explains the
evidently addled state of your "mind."

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.

 

[Jeff Strickland]

Yes, but if a hiker goes a mile and disturbs three animals, then he has disturbed three animals per
mile, if a bike goes five miles and disturbs ten animals, he has disturbed 2 animals per mile. The
rate of disturbance is lower for the biker than for the hiker.

Why do I have to keep repeating myself. Are you stupid, or just lying ...

"Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> 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!

 

[Elvis]

Mike Vandeman <[email protected]> wrote in message >
> ===
> 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.)
>

Hmmm... Mikey seems that you have had this little tag on your messages for a number of years....
since you have spent "8" years on this, what success have you had?

SL

 

[Surgius]

"Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On 2 Dec 2002 15:56:05 -0800, [email protected] (Muddy) wrote:
>
> .> >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.
>
> And if you don't brake, you crash for sure. DUH!
>
> .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 never said it was on purpose.
>
> .I think the majority of this community wouldn't skid. Its the stupid .ones. Your talking to the
> wrong people on this one.
>
> BS. On a steep slope, it's impossible not to skid. Bikes don't have enough traction to prevent
> skidding.

In your opinion, I do just fine on slopes without skidding.

> ===
> 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

 

[Michael Dart]

"Rosco" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > 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.
> >
> Riding a mountain bike is no more mountain biking then driving a race car
is
> racing.
>
>

Not to James Lane. To whom driving a race car is just like riding a bike.

Mike - at least that's what I got out of the "G.T. on his knees" thread. ;^)

 

[Jeff Strickland]

"Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Sun, 01 Dec 2002 23:09:39 -0500, Ken B
<[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> .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? . .The fact is that he DOESN'T know. He probably tried
> it once and not .only skidded all down the trail but all over his underpants too. . . .Have you
> seen this guy's picture??? He got beat up by the kids the .bullies beat up. He couldn't handle a
> tricycle on an empty tennis .court let alone navigate a technical downhill. Christ, we'd have to
> .scrape him off the rocks and roots before we could ride again. And the .smell of ****.... ick.
> Well, I guess that's ONE way for him to keep us .off the trails. Ew. . .> .>(I don't mountain bike
> either, so I don't really know; I do know that .>on my road bike, I *never* skid unless I'm doing
> something really .>wrong, regardless of the condition of the pavement.) . .
>

That one left you speechless, huh Mike?

 

[Jeff Strickland]

"Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On 2 Dec 2002 15:56:05 -0800, [email protected] (Muddy) wrote:
>
> .> >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.
>
> And if you don't brake, you crash for sure. DUH!
>

There is no requirement to skid simply because the brakes have been applied.

> .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 never said it was on purpose.
>
> .I think the majority of this community wouldn't skid. Its the stupid .ones. Your talking to the
> wrong people on this one.
>
> BS. On a steep slope, it's impossible not to skid. Bikes don't have enough traction to prevent
> skidding.

BS. The only way to maintain control is to avoid skidding. It is easy to avoid skidding, and the
statement that "Bikes don't have enough traction to prevent skidding." is a lie.

 

[eugene]

In article <[email protected]>, Gary S. <Idontwantspam@net> wrote:
>Mikey's plan skips the voluntary part.

There was a book published in the 60s about radiological population control. That idea has been
around a long time.

What's this got to do with bikes?

 

[Pete Hickey]

In article <[email protected]>, Cameron <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>"Lou W" <[email protected]> wrote in message

>> If that's the case he should lead by example and be the 1st to "off" himself.
>>
>
>I agree. But their excuse for not doing so is, "We need to educate the rest of the world".

Lets hope that's all it is. Lets hope it isn't that he wants to bring as many with him when he goes.

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

 

[News.Verizon.Ne]

Bike are human powered. but up here we have noisey obnoctuous snow moblies that are loud and tear up
the earth far worse than a bicycle. Then yoy have motorized dirt bikes?

"Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Fri, 29 Nov 2002 12:41:45 -0800, "Jeff Strickland"
<[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> . ."Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> .news:[email protected]... .> On Fri, 29 Nov 2002 17:49:57 GMT, Mike
> Vandeman <[email protected]> .wrote: .> .> .At 06:37 PM 11/28/02 -0700, Gunther, Jeff wrote: .>
> . .> .> Mike, .> . .> .> Just so you know, I am a mountain biker and a mountaineer who cares .>
> .deeply about the environment. .> . .> .Caring is as caring DOES. People who truly care reflect
> that in their .ACTIONS. .> . .> .> I think it is wrong to say that mountain .> .bikers are out to
> harm the environment. .> . .> .I never said it is INTENTIONAL! But it is still destructive. .> . .
> .You have repeatedly stated that it is intentional. You have said that all .mountain bikers are
> thugs, and the definition of a thug is one that .intentionally does destructive things.
>
> To PEOPLE. Their destruction of the environment MAY not be intentional (I
am
> being generous).
>
> . .> .>Everyone that I ride with is very .> .conscious of leaving no trace when we are out and we
> frequently pick
up
> .> .after hikers that have left wrappers, tissues, etc. on the trail. .> . .> .Good. So keep your
> bikes on pavement, and HIKE in nature. .> . . .How can concerned bikers pick up trash left on the
> trail by hikers if
they
> .are forced to keep the bikes on the pavement?
>
> By WALKING. DUH!
>
> Your own position makes no .sense.
>
> BS. YOU make no sense.
>
> .> .> As you know, getting outside and into the mountains is a very .> .fulfilling and uplifting
> experience that should not be off limits to .someone .> .just because they are on a bike. .> . .>
> .You are LYING. There isn't a single trail in the world closed to
mountain
> .> .bikers. It is only BIKES that are banned. You CAN walk, can't you? .> . . .There is no point
> in walking when we can ride.
>
> Thanks for demonstrating just how stupid you are. People walk so they can actually SEE something,
> rather than just go from point A to point B
faster.
>
> The statement made was that .the "uplifting experience that should not be off limits to someone
> just .because they are on a bike." And your response is that the off limits is
not
> .imposed if a person is walking. That makes no sense, because if the .uplifting experience is
> denied because someone is riding, then walking
will
> .not provide the same experience, and your solution is unrealistic. It is .selfish too, but that
> is another topic.
>
> BS. Walking gives a much BETTER experience of nature. It's selfish to
bike,
> because bikes drive away wildlife and other trail users. Tell the truth,
for
> once. (I know, you CAN'T.)
> ===
> 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