More Abusive Email from a Typical Mountain Biker

[Just zis Guy, you know?]

On Fri, 06 May 2005 14:57:19 -0400, pmhilton <[email protected]> wrote
in message <[email protected]>:

>I share your appreciation of THHGG, but step cautiously. Whereas Zaphod,
>"Just ziz guy..." has an ego as large as the known universe, it seems
>Mikey places a close second - witness his claim further down in this
>thread where he claims to be the world's foremost expert in mountain
>biking damage. Which brings to mind the definition of an expert: an "ex"
>is a has-been and a pert is a drip under pressure.

The curious thing is, when I looked in some detail at the websites of
the major wilderness protection agencies in the US and elsewhere, not
one of them identified mountain biking as a particular threat over and
above hiking and camping. They have quite a problem with camping
because of fires and the footprint of some campsites. None of the
human-powered recreational activities come anywhere close to offroad
driving as a cause of damage, though.

So I guess that Mike is the world expert on the damage mountain biking
causes in the same way that Don Black is the world expert on the
Zionist conspiracy on the USA.

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

85% of helmet statistics are made up, 69% of them at CHS, Puget Sound

 

[Just zis Guy, you know?]

On Fri, 6 May 2005 10:03:44 -0700, "GaryG" <[email protected]>
wrote in message <[email protected]>:

>Yet another "La-la-la-la...I'm not listening!" post. Is that the style of
>scientific reasoning they taught when you were studying for your PhD?

BSc=********, MSc=More ****, PhD=Piled Higher and Deeper ;-)

I have a B.Eng :-D

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

85% of helmet statistics are made up, 69% of them at CHS, Puget Sound

 

[BarryNL]

Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:
> On Fri, 06 May 2005 16:20:37 GMT, Mike Vandeman <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> My nickname is, of course, a cultural reference to one of my favourite
> radio programmes, a nod in the direction of the late Douglas Adams - a
> man who, unlike Mike Vandeman, managed to campaign for the wilderness
> and endangered species without descending to bigotry.

Yes, I thought "Last Chance To See" was an excellent book - especially
the section on Komodo Dragons... a shame it took his time away from
writing another Dirk Gently book though - I always thought Dirk was a
far better creation than anything in the Hitchhikers... The description
of how Dirk achieves consciousness in the mornings is one of the
funniest pieces of literature I have ever read.

>
> Guy

 

[BarryNL]

Mike Vandeman wrote:
> On Thu, 05 May 2005 12:28:30 +0100, "Just zis Guy, you know?"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> .On Thu, 05 May 2005 04:36:58 GMT, Mike Vandeman <[email protected]>
> .wrote:
> .
>
> Did you say something?

I did! I asked why, if you hold a real Ph.D in psychology, as opposed to
one from Hollywood Upstairs University, do you violate even the most
basic principals of psychology - those that a first year psychology
undergraduate would be completely familiar with - in all your assertions
on this thread? Do you have the slightest understanding of the
principals of psychological research? Either reconcile your position
with your supposed qualifications or admit that your Ph.D. is as fake as
a moon landing conspiracist's 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

 

[Mike Vandeman]

On Fri, 06 May 2005 17:47:57 +0100, "Just zis Guy, you know?"
<[email protected]> wrote:

..On Fri, 06 May 2005 16:19:11 GMT, Mike Vandeman <[email protected]>
..wrote:
..
..>Did you say something?
..
..I note that you found the case unanswerable.

Liar. You BORED us all to death.

Duly noted.
..
..Guy

===
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 Fri, 06 May 2005 17:44:56 GMT, Gary S. <Idontwantspam@net> wrote:

..On Thu, 05 May 2005 04:36:58 GMT, Mike Vandeman <[email protected]>
..wrote:
..
..>I'm the world's foremost expert on the environmental impacts of montain biking.
..>
..So it IS all about your ego. You are not just knowledgable, not just
..AN expert, but you want to be perceived as the "world's foremost
..expert".

It's just a FACT.

===
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 Sat, 7 May 2005 06:26:29 -0700, "GaryG" <[email protected]> wrote:

.."Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
..news:[email protected]...
..> On Fri, 6 May 2005 10:03:44 -0700, "GaryG" <[email protected]>
..wrote:
..>
..> .>
..> .> Did you say something?
..> .
..> .Yet another "La-la-la-la...I'm not listening!" post. Is that the style
..of
..> .scientific reasoning they taught when you were studying for your PhD?
..> .
..> .BTW - did you ever show Grizak's email to your friends and/or family and
..ask
..> .if they found it to be as "abusive" as you seem to see it? You may be
..> .surprised that those closest to you fail to see the "abuse" that you see.
..> .Is there anyone close to you that you can share your feelings of "abuse"
..> .with?
..>
..> Yawn.
..
..Mike,
..
..The only conclusion I can draw from your repeated refusals to answer this
..simple question is that you have nobody close to you in the real world whom
..you can share your feelings of persecution with (or, that your friends and
..family have tried, but failed, to get you to see that you have a problem).
..
..That's pretty sad, but it's entirely consistent with how you present
..yourself here on Usenet - that is, as an angry, lonely, obsessed troll.
..
..You're wasting your life on this Mike. Do you really want your epitath to
..be nothing more than these archived electronic bits of your obsessions, and
..the archives of hundreds of people calling you an idiot? Is that a life
..worth living?

Yawn.

..GG
..
..>
..> .GG
..> .
..

===
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 Sat, 07 May 2005 10:09:24 +0100, "Just zis Guy, you know?" <[email protected]>
wrote:

..On Sat, 07 May 2005 06:22:25 GMT, Mike Vandeman <[email protected]>
..wrote in message <[email protected]>:
..
..>.>Did you say something?
..>.I note that you found the case unanswerable.
..>Liar. You BORED us all to death.
..
..In a way that years of relentless and repetitive spamming have not? I
..don't think so. I think you and Zaumen are likely one and the same.
..See how you have completely excised any substantive content and moved
..entirely into the realm of ad-hominem?

Look up "projection" in a dictionary of psychology.

..Guy

===
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 Sat, 07 May 2005 13:49:00 GMT, Mike Vandeman <[email protected]>
wrote:

>Look up "projection" in a dictionary of psychology.
>
Wouldn't that apply to you accusing others of using tactics which you
yourself have been documented to have used?

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, you know?]

On Sat, 07 May 2005 16:37:56 +0200, BarryNL <[email protected]>
wrote in message <[email protected]>:

>> Look up "projection" in a dictionary of psychology.
>Again, you demonstrate your ignorance of basic psychological concepts.

No, no, I think Mike's countering my accusation of bigotry by offering
an alternative explanation for his behaviour. And the idea that he is
projecting has some merit, but it is too narrowly focused to be really
believable. I can't see how he could have taken up with the horse
riders if his motivation genuinely was to offload his guilt at taking
part in hiking.
Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

85% of helmet statistics are made up, 69% of them at CHS, Puget Sound

 

[BarryNL]

Mike Vandeman wrote:
> On Sat, 07 May 2005 16:37:56 +0200, BarryNL <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> .Mike Vandeman wrote:
> .> On Sat, 07 May 2005 10:09:24 +0100, "Just zis Guy, you know?" <[email protected]>
> .> wrote:
> .>
> .> .On Sat, 07 May 2005 06:22:25 GMT, Mike Vandeman <[email protected]>
> .> .wrote in message <[email protected]>:
> .> .
> .> .>.>Did you say something?
> .> .>.I note that you found the case unanswerable.
> .> .>Liar. You BORED us all to death.
> .> .
> .> .In a way that years of relentless and repetitive spamming have not? I
> .> .don't think so. I think you and Zaumen are likely one and the same.
> .> .See how you have completely excised any substantive content and moved
> .> .entirely into the realm of ad-hominem?
> .>
> .> Look up "projection" in a dictionary of psychology.
> .
> .Again, you demonstrate your ignorance of basic psychological concepts.
> .This diagnosis of projection is what I'd expect from someone who once
> .read a pop psychology book - certainly not someone who'd studied
> .psychology seriously.
> .
> .Perhaps you should buy a psychology dictionary yourself to make yourself
> .sound a little more credible in future.
>
> I notice that you didn't correct me, so you must admit that I am RIGHT.

Well, for a start, simply dismissing any criticism as "projection" with
no other evidence is ridiculous. To take an example, someone critical of
homosexuality may be projecting a fear of their own latent tendancies
but they may also simply be expressing a prejudice. Without a lot more
carefully controlled study of the individual there is no way to tell.
So, no qualified psychologist would make a "diagnosis" of projection on
the basis of such minimal evidence. But then, I see nothing in your
posts to suggest you are a qualified psychologist.

Further, projection would be more likely if the criticism was simply
stated with no reasoning - ie. there was no real identifiable logic, but
Guy's critique of your behaviour was reasoned which is hardly suggestive
of projection.

> ===
> 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 Sat, 07 May 2005 21:14:43 +0200, BarryNL <[email protected]> wrote:

..Mike Vandeman wrote:
..> On Sat, 07 May 2005 16:37:56 +0200, BarryNL <[email protected]> wrote:
..>
..> .Mike Vandeman wrote:
..> .> On Sat, 07 May 2005 10:09:24 +0100, "Just zis Guy, you know?" <[email protected]>
..> .> wrote:
..> .>
..> .> .On Sat, 07 May 2005 06:22:25 GMT, Mike Vandeman <[email protected]>
..> .> .wrote in message <[email protected]>:
..> .> .
..> .> .>.>Did you say something?
..> .> .>.I note that you found the case unanswerable.
..> .> .>Liar. You BORED us all to death.
..> .> .
..> .> .In a way that years of relentless and repetitive spamming have not? I
..> .> .don't think so. I think you and Zaumen are likely one and the same.
..> .> .See how you have completely excised any substantive content and moved
..> .> .entirely into the realm of ad-hominem?
..> .>
..> .> Look up "projection" in a dictionary of psychology.
..> .
..> .Again, you demonstrate your ignorance of basic psychological concepts.
..> .This diagnosis of projection is what I'd expect from someone who once
..> .read a pop psychology book - certainly not someone who'd studied
..> .psychology seriously.
..> .
..> .Perhaps you should buy a psychology dictionary yourself to make yourself
..> .sound a little more credible in future.
..>
..> I notice that you didn't correct me, so you must admit that I am RIGHT.
..
..Well, for a start, simply dismissing any criticism as "projection" with
..no other evidence is ridiculous. To take an example, someone critical of
..homosexuality may be projecting a fear of their own latent tendancies
..but they may also simply be expressing a prejudice. Without a lot more
..carefully controlled study of the individual there is no way to tell.
..So, no qualified psychologist would make a "diagnosis" of projection on
..the basis of such minimal evidence. But then, I see nothing in your
..posts to suggest you are a qualified psychologist.
..
..Further, projection would be more likely if the criticism was simply
..stated with no reasoning - ie. there was no real identifiable logic, but
..Guy's critique of your behaviour was reasoned which is hardly suggestive
..of projection.

BS. Faulty reasoning and lies. Nothing else.
===
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

 

[BarryNL]

Mike Vandeman wrote:
> On Sat, 07 May 2005 21:14:43 +0200, BarryNL <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> .Mike Vandeman wrote:
> .> On Sat, 07 May 2005 16:37:56 +0200, BarryNL <[email protected]> wrote:
> .>
> .> .Mike Vandeman wrote:
> .> .> On Sat, 07 May 2005 10:09:24 +0100, "Just zis Guy, you know?" <[email protected]>
> .> .> wrote:
> .> .>
> .> .> .On Sat, 07 May 2005 06:22:25 GMT, Mike Vandeman <[email protected]>
> .> .> .wrote in message <[email protected]>:
> .> .> .
> .> .> .>.>Did you say something?
> .> .> .>.I note that you found the case unanswerable.
> .> .> .>Liar. You BORED us all to death.
> .> .> .
> .> .> .In a way that years of relentless and repetitive spamming have not? I
> .> .> .don't think so. I think you and Zaumen are likely one and the same.
> .> .> .See how you have completely excised any substantive content and moved
> .> .> .entirely into the realm of ad-hominem?
> .> .>
> .> .> Look up "projection" in a dictionary of psychology.
> .> .
> .> .Again, you demonstrate your ignorance of basic psychological concepts.
> .> .This diagnosis of projection is what I'd expect from someone who once
> .> .read a pop psychology book - certainly not someone who'd studied
> .> .psychology seriously.
> .> .
> .> .Perhaps you should buy a psychology dictionary yourself to make yourself
> .> .sound a little more credible in future.
> .>
> .> I notice that you didn't correct me, so you must admit that I am RIGHT.
> .
> .Well, for a start, simply dismissing any criticism as "projection" with
> .no other evidence is ridiculous. To take an example, someone critical of
> .homosexuality may be projecting a fear of their own latent tendancies
> .but they may also simply be expressing a prejudice. Without a lot more
> .carefully controlled study of the individual there is no way to tell.
> .So, no qualified psychologist would make a "diagnosis" of projection on
> .the basis of such minimal evidence. But then, I see nothing in your
> .posts to suggest you are a qualified psychologist.
> .
> .Further, projection would be more likely if the criticism was simply
> .stated with no reasoning - ie. there was no real identifiable logic, but
> .Guy's critique of your behaviour was reasoned which is hardly suggestive
> .of projection.
>
> BS. Faulty reasoning and lies. Nothing else.

"I notice that you didn't correct me, so you must admit that I am RIGHT."

 

[JP]

"Gary S." <Idontwantspam@net> wrote in answer MV's......

> >Yawn.


> Everyone should note that this is a "yawn" from a PhD who is the
> world's foremost expert in many subject areas.
>
> If this is the sort of debating techniques and scientific discourse
> that PhDs learn at Berkeley, I am glad there are not more like Mikey.


Someone here must have seen proof of MV's degree that it has been
accepted as a given.

Where is it?

I've googled MV and found nothing except his own web pages and references
to his postings. That's rare. Most people I know show up somewhere in a
search. I googled his citations with the same result. It is unusual in
that the
references lead only to his website.

I know personally of one PHD in Psych who always refers to himself as
"Doctor," with similar mental limitations as MV, he was put in charge of
the
University's Counseling Center for ten years but was fired for his habit of
groping the undergraduate women who showed up for help. So it is
possible for the unprincipled and incompetent to acquire a degree.
He was never accredited to practice in the state but was allowed to as an
employee of the University. Ten years later he still calls himself
"Doctor."

But it's also possible to claim a degree and get away with it for years
and years. As a New Yorker born and bred I trust no one and double
check all claims. Right now the only assumption I can make is that his
degree is as specious (means a big fat lie) as his scientific evidence.
My little (50+, little is relative) sister's recent PhD even shows up in
unrelated places on a search. But MV's always leads me back to his website.
I believe Mr. Chapman of the UK may have made an accurate assumption,
that MV and Zaumen are the same person, the corallary assumption would
be that there may be other aliases as well.

I'm not a typical MTB'er of course, just an old guy whose legs are shot
from running too many miles on the trails and for whom the MTB is the only
way
to move through the woods. As a longtime runner I saw the damage caused
by hikers, runners, bikers, horses and campers. Though bikers are the most
annoying for a runner to share trails with the damage is on a par with
runners,
which is minimal. Campers and horses do the most damage of course,
horses can turn a trail into a sand pit real fast making it virtually
unusable by
anyone else.

Adolph ****** taught us that a lie repeated often enough will eventually
become
accepted as truth by enough people to affect the world. MV is enough of a
psychologist to have learned that lesson. So he periodically posts his
drivel
and despite it's fallacious evidence and logic it is answered, many times
by
the weak-minded who reproduce it in it's entirety with a header such as;
"On Sat, 07 May 2005 13:46:36 GMT, Mike Vandeman <mjvande*pacbell.nut>
wrote:" with a line or two of comment. The one's who take the time and
trouble
to review and read and rebut are called liars, otherwise insulted, or
treated
to "Yawn" or "Did you say something?"

That I can't find proof of a graduate degree doesn't mean it doesn't exist,
yet with data in all areas being made made more electronically accessible
such probability continues to decrease. On apparent merit the degree is
totally ficticious since he doesn't show the reasoning skills or familiarity
with the scientific method necessary to write an acceptable thesis.

May I humbly suggest rewording the header and/or trimming his posts
to minimize the amount of bandwidth his drivel monopolizes on the world's
servers. Deleting the crossposting to other groups would be considerate as
well.

Cloudy and 60, time for a ride.