More Fascinating Abusive Email from a Typical Mountain Biker

[Mike Vandeman]

On Mon, 22 Mar 2004 08:04:11 -0500, Steve Curtiss <[email protected]>
wrote:

.Like your "editorial comments" that all mt bikers are
liars.

It's simply FACT that every one I know has lied.

That only hikers enjoy .the outdoors. That anyone who
disagrees with your philosophy (make no mistake, it .is a
philosophy) is either stupid or ignorant. Your posts are
nothing but ."editorial comments". How is your posting of
an opinion in a free speech .environment any better than
anyone else? You have always had a double standard. .Your
posts are gospel, while disagreeing posts are sacrilege.
You are myopic to any .other view and the nly person who is
being fooled is you.

You fabricated that nonsense. I never said any of it. Thanks
for demonstrating that all mountain bikers ARE liars.

.Mike Vandeman wrote: . .> On Sat, 20 Mar 2004 17:07:42 -
0500, "S Curtiss" <[email protected]> wrote: .> .>
.MV:"Quite different. I just posted verbatim. He posted
lies." .> . .> .RE: The now gone MV FAQ .> . .> .He posted
lies? They were copies of your posts! .> .> As well as
"editorial comments". .> .> .How can showing ng threads of
your arguments and "facts" be lies... unless, .> .of course,
they were lies to begin with? .> . .> . .> . .> ."Mike
Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message .>
.news[email protected]... .> .> On
Tue, 16 Mar 2004 09:44:23 -0500, Steve Curtiss
<[email protected]> .> .> wrote: .> .> .> .> ."post it
for the world to see"... I seem to recall the "Mike Vandeman
.> .FAQ" which .> .> .did just that. Posted your nonsense in
a central location for the world .> .to see. .> .> .Your name-
calling, your finger-pointing and hacked up "scientific"
data. .> .The FAQ .> .> .was an actual representation of
your trolling, baiting and ng tactics. It .> .showed .> .>
.your typical posts, reposts and shallow arguments from this
forum. .> .> .Then you threatened to sue the man for doing
exactly what you just did. .> .Posting .> .> .for the world
to see. And all he had was actual, unaltered posts from a .>
.public .> .> .forum displayed and categorized so people
would be able to see which .> .arguments .> .> .have already
been posted and reposted. .> .> .> .> Quite different. I
just posted verbatim. He posted lies. .> .> .> .> .So Mr.
Doublestandard rises to the occasion again... What a
surprise! .> .> . .> .> . .> .> .Mike Vandeman wrote: .> .>
. .> .> .> On Mon, 15 Mar 2004 23:32:18 GMT, "Scott"
<[email protected]> wrote: .> .> .> .> .> .> .posting this
just makes you look bad Mike. .> .> .> .> .> .> The best way
to deal with abusive email is to post it for the whold .>
.world to .> .> .> see. If they have no shame, at least it
will sucker someone like you. .> .One is .> .> .> born every
minute.... .> .> .> .> .> .> ."Mike Vandeman"
<[email protected]> wrote in message .> .> .>
.news:[email protected]... .> .> .>
.> I wonder what he thought he would accomplish, by sending
hate mail? .> .> .> .> .> .(clipped) .> . .> .> === .> 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 Mon, 22 Mar 2004 16:42:54 -0500, "S Curtiss" <[email protected]> wrote:

.
. "Jeff Strickland" <[email protected]> .> wrote: .> .>
.Dear Mr. Vandeman, .> .Why in Hell can't you trim the
excess ******** from your posts? First of .> .all, your
posts are inane at best, and second, there are several
inches .of .> .header data that has nothing at all to do
with anything. .> .> So, naturally, being the hypocrite
that you are, you REPOSTED all the same .stuff .> you just
complained about ME posting! Idiot. .> .Wow.. hateful
and abusive. That double standard again...

Are you speaking of the illustrious Jeff Strickland?
===
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, 22 Mar 2004 16:54:48 -0500, "S Curtiss" <[email protected]> wrote:

."Eric Gisin" <[email protected]> wrote: .> .> .There
is nothing hateful in the message, just a dose of reality.
.> .> Oh, yeah?: "You sir, and your organization are at the
very least .overeducated .> ignoramuses." .> .(clipped) .
.Sounds like the same kind of language you (MV) use to
describe anyone who .disagrees with you. That double
standard hangs around your neck like a .disemboweled
whipsnake... .Examples of terms used to describe Mt Bikers
by MVidiot, liar, illiterate, .criminal, duh, stupid,
crazy) .But it's not hate-speach when MV does it, is it?

No, it's just factual.
===
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

 

[Eric Gisin]

Take your meds Mikey. The only adults I know who call their
opponents liars were psychotic.

"Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news[email protected]...
> On Mon, 22 Mar 2004 08:04:11 -0500, Steve Curtiss
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> .Like your "editorial comments" that all mt bikers
> are liars.
>
> It's simply FACT that every one I know has lied.
>
> That only hikers enjoy .the outdoors. That anyone who
> disagrees with your philosophy (make no
mistake, it
> .is a philosophy) is either stupid or ignorant. Your posts
> are nothing but ."editorial comments". How is your posting
> of an opinion in a free speech .environment any better
> than anyone else? You have always had a double
standard.
> .Your posts are gospel, while disagreeing posts are
> sacrilege. You are
myopic to any
> .other view and the nly person who is being fooled is you.
>
> You fabricated that nonsense. I never said any of it.
> Thanks for
demonstrating
> that all mountain bikers ARE liars.

 

[Mike Vandeman]

On Mon, 22 Mar 2004 18:49:35 -0800, "Eric Gisin" <[email protected]> wrote:

.Take your meds Mikey. The only adults I know who call their
opponents liars .were psychotic.

You are lying. See how easy it is? I just tell the truth.
What's wrong with THAT?

."Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
.news[email protected]... .> On
Mon, 22 Mar 2004 08:04:11 -0500, Steve Curtiss
<[email protected]> .> wrote: .> .> .Like your
"editorial comments" that all mt bikers are liars. .> .>
It's simply FACT that every one I know has lied. .> .> That
only hikers enjoy .> .the outdoors. That anyone who
disagrees with your philosophy (make no .mistake, it .> .is
a philosophy) is either stupid or ignorant. Your posts are
nothing but .> ."editorial comments". How is your posting of
an opinion in a free speech .> .environment any better than
anyone else? You have always had a double .standard. .>
.Your posts are gospel, while disagreeing posts are
sacrilege. You are .myopic to any .> .other view and the nly
person who is being fooled is you. .> .> You fabricated that
nonsense. I never said any of it. Thanks for .demonstrating
.> that all mountain bikers ARE liars. .>

===
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

 

[Brett Jaffee]

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

>
> That only hikers enjoy .the outdoors. That anyone who
> disagrees with your philosophy (make no mistake, it .is a
> philosophy) is either stupid or ignorant. Your posts are
> nothing but ."editorial comments". How is your posting of
> an opinion in a free speech .environment any better than
> anyone else? You have always had a double standard. .Your
> posts are gospel, while disagreeing posts are sacrilege.
> You are myopic to any .other view and the nly person who
> is being fooled is you.
>
> You fabricated that nonsense. I never said any of
> it. Thanks for demonstrating that all mountain
> bikers ARE liars.

Actually, you just proved his point.

 

[Gary S .]

On Tue, 23 Mar 2004 01:45:41 GMT, Mike Vandeman <[email protected]>
wrote:

>On Mon, 22 Mar 2004 16:54:48 -0500, "S Curtiss"
><[email protected]> wrote:
>
>.Sounds like the same kind of language you (MV) use to
>describe anyone who .disagrees with you. That double
>standard hangs around your neck like a .disemboweled
>whipsnake... .Examples of terms used to describe Mt Bikers
>by MVidiot, liar, illiterate, .criminal, duh, stupid,
>crazy) .But it's not hate-speach when MV does it, is it?
>
>No, it's just factual.
>===

Main Entry: fact Pronunciation: 'fakt Function: noun
Etymology: Latin factum, from neuter of factus, past
participle of facere
1 : a thing done: as a obsolete : FEAT b : CRIME
<accessory after the
fact> c archaic : ACTION
2 archaic : PERFORMANCE, DOING
2 : the quality of being actual : ACTUALITY <a question of
fact hinges on evidence> 4 a : something that has actual
existence <space exploration is now a
fact> b : an actual occurrence <prove the fact of damage>
3 : a piece of information presented as having
objective reality
- in fact : in truth

Main Entry: truth Pronunciation: 'trüth Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural truths /'trü[th]z, 'trüths/
Etymology: Middle English trewthe, from Old English trEowth
fidelity; akin to Old English trEowe faithful -- more at
TRUE 1 a archaic : FIDELITY, CONSTANCY b : sincerity in
action, character, and utterance 2 a (1) : the state of
being the case : FACT (2) : the body of real things, events,
and facts : ACTUALITY (3) often capitalized : a transcendent
fundamental or spiritual reality b : a judgment,
proposition, or idea that is true or accepted as true
<truths of
thermodynamics> c : the body of true statements and
thermodynamics> propositions
3 a : the property (as of a statement) of being in accord
with fact or reality b chiefly British : TRUE 2 c : fidelity
to an original or to a standard 4 capitalized, Christian
Science : GOD
- in truth : in accordance with fact : ACTUALLY

Main Entry: re·al·i·ty Pronunciation: rE-'a-l&-tE Function:
noun Inflected Form(s): plural -ties
1 : the quality or state of being real 2 a (1) : a real
event, entity, or state of affairs <his dream became a
reality> (2) : the totality of real things and events
<trying to escape from reality> b : something that is
neither derivative nor dependent but exists necessarily
- in reality : in actual fact

Mikey:

Note that all three words and concepts above, "fact",
"truth", and "reality", cannot be created by one person and
imposed on everyone else. They are based on underlying
shared acceptance of basic principles.

Just because you think a certain way does not make it true.
Unless of course, you are more than a regular human being.

You offer no proof, other than your beliefs. Quoting
yourself on your personal website does not help. Rather than
trying to convince people with information and facts, you
call names and make absurd generalizations, and repeat
yourself. Repeating the same thing over and over is a
pathetic attempt at brainwashing others.

The people who believe they have the sole "truth" have
caused much grief in the world, all throughout history.

But it's not really about the environment for you, is it?

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

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

 

[Mike Vandeman]

On Tue, 23 Mar 2004 14:58:11 GMT, Gary S. <Idontwantspam@net> wrote:

.On Tue, 23 Mar 2004 01:45:41 GMT, Mike Vandeman
<[email protected]> .wrote: . .>On Mon, 22 Mar 2004
16:54:48 -0500, "S Curtiss" <[email protected]> wrote:
.> .>.Sounds like the same kind of language you (MV) use to
describe anyone who .>.disagrees with you. That double
standard hangs around your neck like a .>.disemboweled
whipsnake... .>.Examples of terms used to describe Mt Bikers
by MVidiot, liar, illiterate, .>.criminal, duh, stupid,
crazy) .>.But it's not hate-speach when MV does it, is it?
.> .>No, it's just factual. .>=== . .Main Entry: fact
.Pronunciation: 'fakt .Function: noun .Etymology: Latin
factum, from neuter of factus, past participle of .facere .1
: a thing done: as a obsolete : FEAT b : CRIME <accessory
after the .fact> c archaic : ACTION .2 archaic :
PERFORMANCE, DOING .3 : the quality of being actual :
ACTUALITY <a question of fact hinges .on evidence> .4 a :
something that has actual existence <space exploration is
now a .fact> b : an actual occurrence <prove the fact of
damage> .5 : a piece of information presented as having
objective reality .- in fact : in truth . .Main Entry: truth
.Pronunciation: 'trüth .Function: noun .Inflected Form(s):
plural truths /'trü[th]z, 'trüths/ .Etymology: Middle
English trewthe, from Old English trEowth fidelity; .akin to
Old English trEowe faithful -- more at TRUE .1 a archaic :
FIDELITY, CONSTANCY b : sincerity in action, character, .and
utterance .2 a (1) : the state of being the case : FACT (2)
: the body of real .things, events, and facts : ACTUALITY
(3) often capitalized : a .transcendent fundamental or
spiritual reality b : a judgment, .proposition, or idea that
is true or accepted as true <truths of .thermodynamics> c :
the body of true statements and propositions .3 a : the
property (as of a statement) of being in accord with fact or
.reality b chiefly British : TRUE 2 c : fidelity to an
original or to a .standard .4 capitalized, Christian Science
: GOD .- in truth : in accordance with fact : ACTUALLY .
.Main Entry: re·al·i·ty .Pronunciation: rE-'a-l&-tE
.Function: noun .Inflected Form(s): plural -ties .1 : the
quality or state of being real .2 a (1) : a real event,
entity, or state of affairs <his dream became .a reality>
(2) : the totality of real things and events <trying to
.escape from reality> b : something that is neither
derivative nor .dependent but exists necessarily .- in
reality : in actual fact . .Mikey: . .Note that all three
words and concepts above, "fact", "truth", and ."reality",
cannot be created by one person and imposed on everyone
.else. They are based on underlying shared acceptance of
basic .principles.

You just fabricated that. Nowhere is that written in what
you quoted.

.Just because you think a certain way does not make it true.
Unless of .course, you are more than a regular human being.
. .You offer no proof, other than your beliefs. Quoting
yourself on your .personal website does not help. Rather
than trying to convince people .with information and facts,
you call names and make absurd .generalizations, and repeat
yourself. Repeating the same thing over .and over is a
pathetic attempt at brainwashing others. . .The people who
believe they have the sole "truth" have caused much .grief
in the world, all throughout history. . .But it's not really
about the environment for you, is it?

Don't expect others to be as dishonest as you and your
fellow mountain bikers. You have very poor role models.

.Happy trails, .Gary (net.yogi.bear) .------------------------------------------------
.at the 51st percentile of ursine intelligence . .Gary D.
Schwartz, Needham, MA, USA .Please reply to:
garyDOTschwartzATpoboxDOTcom

===
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, 23 Mar 2004 08:44:23 GMT, Brett Jaffee <[email protected]>
wrote:

.Mike Vandeman <[email protected]> wrote in
.news[email protected]: . .> .>
That only hikers enjoy .> .the outdoors. That anyone who
disagrees with your philosophy (make no .> mistake, it .is
a philosophy) is either stupid or ignorant. Your posts .>
are nothing but ."editorial comments". How is your posting
of an .> opinion in a free speech .environment any better
than anyone else? You .> have always had a double standard.
.Your posts are gospel, while .> disagreeing posts are
sacrilege. You are myopic to any .other view and .> the nly
person who is being fooled is you. .> .> You fabricated
that nonsense. I never said any of it. Thanks for .>
demonstrating that all mountain bikers ARE liars. .
.Actually, you just proved his point.

No, he lied, making himself a liar. I only pointed it out.
===
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

 

[S Curtiss]

MV: > .> You fabricated that nonsense. I never said any of
it. Thanks for demonstrating that all mountain bikers
ARE liars.

Your truth... that does not make THE truth. Anyone can read
the posts by you in this ng to find all the necessary proof
of your double standards. Read your posts in this ng from
the past week, year or 5 years. Yes... you have said it. It
was in the FAQ. It is in the ng record. It is on this very
page of posts. Calling me a liar doesn't change history, Mr.
Vandeman. http://www.dejanews.com/ Anyone can find it.
Search "vandeman". Your screen will be full of "truth".
Unfortunately, Norton hasn't developed a filter yet...

"Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Mon, 22 Mar 2004 18:49:35 -0800, "Eric Gisin"
> <[email protected]>
wrote:
>
> .Take your meds Mikey. The only adults I know who call
> their opponents
liars
> .were psychotic.
>
> You are lying. See how easy it is? I just tell the truth.
> What's wrong
with
> THAT?
>
> ."Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> .news[email protected]... .> On
> Mon, 22 Mar 2004 08:04:11 -0500, Steve Curtiss
<[email protected]>
> .> wrote: .> .> .Like your "editorial comments" that all
> mt bikers are liars. .> .> It's simply FACT that every one
> I know has lied. .> .> That only hikers enjoy .> .the
> outdoors. That anyone who disagrees with your philosophy
> (make no .mistake, it .> .is a philosophy) is either
> stupid or ignorant. Your posts are nothing
but
> .> ."editorial comments". How is your posting of an
> opinion in a free
speech
> .> .environment any better than anyone else? You have
> always had a double .standard. .> .Your posts are gospel,
> while disagreeing posts are sacrilege. You are .myopic to
> any .> .other view and the nly person who is being fooled
> is you. .> .> You fabricated that nonsense. I never said
> any of it. Thanks for .demonstrating .> that all mountain
> bikers ARE liars. .>
>
> ===
> 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 Tue, 23 Mar 2004 16:30:58 GMT, Mike Vandeman <[email protected]>
wrote:

>On Tue, 23 Mar 2004 14:58:11 GMT, Gary S.
><Idontwantspam@net> wrote:
>
>.On Tue, 23 Mar 2004 01:45:41 GMT, Mike Vandeman
><[email protected]> .wrote: . .>No, it's just factual.
>.>=== . .Main Entry: fact .Pronunciation: 'fakt .Function:
>noun .Etymology: Latin factum, from neuter of factus, past
>participle of .facere .1 : a thing done: as a obsolete :
>FEAT b : CRIME <accessory after the .fact> c archaic :
>ACTION .2 archaic : PERFORMANCE, DOING .3 : the quality of
>being actual : ACTUALITY <a question of fact hinges .on
>evidence> .4 a : something that has actual existence <space
>exploration is now a .fact> b : an actual occurrence <prove
>the fact of damage> .5 : a piece of information presented
>as having objective reality .- in fact : in truth . .Main
>Entry: truth .Pronunciation: 'trüth .Function: noun
>.Inflected Form(s): plural truths /'trü[th]z, 'trüths/
>.Etymology: Middle English trewthe, from Old English
>trEowth fidelity; .akin to Old English trEowe faithful --
>more at TRUE .1 a archaic : FIDELITY, CONSTANCY b :
>sincerity in action, character, .and utterance .2 a (1) :
>the state of being the case : FACT (2) : the body of real
>.things, events, and facts : ACTUALITY (3) often
>capitalized : a .transcendent fundamental or spiritual
>reality b : a judgment, .proposition, or idea that is true
>or accepted as true <truths of .thermodynamics> c : the
>body of true statements and propositions .3 a : the
>property (as of a statement) of being in accord with fact
>or .reality b chiefly British : TRUE 2 c : fidelity to an
>original or to a .standard .4 capitalized, Christian
>Science : GOD .- in truth : in accordance with fact :
>ACTUALLY . .Main Entry: re·al·i·ty .Pronunciation: rE-'a-l&-
>tE .Function: noun .Inflected Form(s): plural -ties .1 :
>the quality or state of being real .2 a (1) : a real event,
>entity, or state of affairs <his dream became .a reality>
>(2) : the totality of real things and events <trying to
>.escape from reality> b : something that is neither
>derivative nor .dependent but exists necessarily .- in
>reality : in actual fact . .Mikey: . .Note that all three
>words and concepts above, "fact", "truth", and ."reality",
>cannot be created by one person and imposed on everyone
>.else. They are based on underlying shared acceptance of
>basic .principles.
>
>You just fabricated that. Nowhere is that written in what
>you quoted.
>
Under "fact", meanings 3,4 and 5 Under "truth" meanings 2
and 3 Under "reality" meanings 1 and 2

You do not have a monopoly on deductive reasoning, if in
fact you have any grasp of it at all.

Unless you believe that one person can create "fact",
"truth", and "reality" and impose it on everyone else. That
seems like a symptom of deeper issues with reality, and
utter comtept for every other person.

>.Just because you think a certain way does not make it
>true. Unless of .course, you are more than a regular human
>being. . .You offer no proof, other than your beliefs.
>Quoting yourself on your .personal website does not help.
>Rather than trying to convince people .with information and
>facts, you call names and make absurd .generalizations, and
>repeat yourself. Repeating the same thing over .and over is
>a pathetic attempt at brainwashing others. . .The people
>who believe they have the sole "truth" have caused much
>.grief in the world, all throughout history. . .But it's
>not really about the environment for you, is it?
>
>Don't expect others to be as dishonest as you and your
>fellow mountain bikers. You have very poor role models.
>
Disagreeing with you does not make me dishonest. Learn to
discern the difference between reality and your opinions.

Exactly what makes you think I am a mountain biker? Are your
responses that automated that you have no control? Or must I
now go out and buy a mountain bike, and ride off road, to
make you happy?

You expect others to recall details about you. I expect the
same from you about my previous postings.

How does the idea of role models enter into this? Do you
think you are a role model for anything?

Typical that you avoid the real issues, and focus on minutia
and name calling.

I guess any sort of attention makes you happy.

Too bad you will never accomplish anything, and only drive
people away from your supposed position.

You do more to stifle discussions about the impact of
recreation on the environment, and create counter-reactions
against the environment, ending up hurting your alleged
cause more than anything positive you could ever accomplish.

With a rational approach, and even a minimal level of people
skills, you might actually have accomplished something.

Too bad you are incapable of objectively assessing
your efforts.

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

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

 

[Mll]

"Gary S." <Idontwantspam@net> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Tue, 23 Mar 2004 16:30:58 GMT, Mike Vandeman
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >On Tue, 23 Mar 2004 14:58:11 GMT, Gary S.
> ><Idontwantspam@net> wrote:
> >
> >.On Tue, 23 Mar 2004 01:45:41 GMT, Mike Vandeman
> ><[email protected]> .wrote: . .>No, it's just factual.
> >.>=== . .Main Entry: fact .Pronunciation: 'fakt
> >.Function: noun .Etymology: Latin factum, from neuter of
> >factus, past participle of .facere .1 : a thing done: as
> >a obsolete : FEAT b : CRIME <accessory after the .fact> c
> >archaic : ACTION .2 archaic : PERFORMANCE, DOING .3 : the
> >quality of being actual : ACTUALITY <a question of fact
> >hinges .on evidence> .4 a : something that has actual
> >existence <space exploration is now a .fact> b : an
> >actual occurrence <prove the fact of damage> .5 : a piece
> >of information presented as having objective reality .-
> >in fact : in truth . .Main Entry: truth .Pronunciation:
> >'trüth .Function: noun .Inflected Form(s): plural truths
> >/'trü[th]z, 'trüths/ .Etymology: Middle English trewthe,
> >from Old English trEowth fidelity; .akin to Old English
> >trEowe faithful -- more at TRUE .1 a archaic : FIDELITY,
> >CONSTANCY b : sincerity in action, character, .and
> >utterance .2 a (1) : the state of being the case : FACT
> >(2) : the body of real .things, events, and facts :
> >ACTUALITY (3) often capitalized : a .transcendent
> >fundamental or spiritual reality b : a judgment,
> >.proposition, or idea that is true or accepted as true
> ><truths of .thermodynamics> c : the body of true
> >statements and propositions .3 a : the property (as of a
> >statement) of being in accord with fact or .reality b
> >chiefly British : TRUE 2 c : fidelity to an original or
> >to a .standard .4 capitalized, Christian Science : GOD .-
> >in truth : in accordance with fact : ACTUALLY . .Main
> >Entry: re·al·i·ty .Pronunciation: rE-'a-l&-tE .Function:
> >noun .Inflected Form(s): plural -ties .1 : the quality or
> >state of being real .2 a (1) : a real event, entity, or
> >state of affairs <his dream became .a reality> (2) : the
> >totality of real things and events <trying to .escape
> >from reality> b : something that is neither derivative
> >nor .dependent but exists necessarily .- in reality : in
> >actual fact . .Mikey: . .Note that all three words and
> >concepts above, "fact", "truth", and ."reality", cannot
> >be created by one person and imposed on everyone .else.
> >They are based on underlying shared acceptance of basic
> >.principles.
> >
> >You just fabricated that. Nowhere is that written in what
> >you quoted.
> >
> Under "fact", meanings 3,4 and 5 Under "truth" meanings 2
> and 3 Under "reality" meanings 1 and 2
>
> You do not have a monopoly on deductive reasoning, if in
> fact you have any grasp of it at all.
>
> Unless you believe that one person can create "fact",
> "truth", and "reality" and impose it on everyone else.
> That seems like a symptom of deeper issues with reality,
> and utter comtept for every other person.
>
> >.Just because you think a certain way does not make it
> >true. Unless of .course, you are more than a regular
> >human being. . .You offer no proof, other than your
> >beliefs. Quoting yourself on your .personal website does
> >not help. Rather than trying to convince people .with
> >information and facts, you call names and make absurd
> >.generalizations, and repeat yourself. Repeating the same
> >thing over .and over is a pathetic attempt at
> >brainwashing others. . .The people who believe they have
> >the sole "truth" have caused much .grief in the world,
> >all throughout history. . .But it's not really about the
> >environment for you, is it?
> >
> >Don't expect others to be as dishonest as you and your
> >fellow mountain
bikers.
> >You have very poor role models.
> >
> Disagreeing with you does not make me dishonest. Learn to
> discern the difference between reality and your opinions.
>
> Exactly what makes you think I am a mountain biker? Are
> your responses that automated that you have no control? Or
> must I now go out and buy a mountain bike, and ride off
> road, to make you happy?
>
> You expect others to recall details about you. I expect
> the same from you about my previous postings.
>
> How does the idea of role models enter into this? Do you
> think you are a role model for anything?
>
> Typical that you avoid the real issues, and focus on
> minutia and name calling.
>
> I guess any sort of attention makes you happy.
>
> Too bad you will never accomplish anything, and only drive
> people away from your supposed position.
>
> You do more to stifle discussions about the impact of
> recreation on the environment, and create counter-
> reactions against the environment, ending up hurting your
> alleged cause more than anything positive you could ever
> accomplish.
>
> With a rational approach, and even a minimal level of
> people skills, you might actually have accomplished
> something.
>
> Too bad you are incapable of objectively assessing your
> efforts.
>
> Happy trails, Gary (net.yogi.bear)
> ------------------------------------------------
> at the 51st percentile of ursine intelligence
>
> Gary D. Schwartz, Needham, MA, USA Please reply to:
> garyDOTschwartzATpoboxDOTcom

The pot calling the kettle black. Damnation you people are a
boring bunch of egomaniacs.

 

[S O R N I]

MLL wrote:
> "Gary S." <Idontwantspam@net> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...

> The pot calling the kettle black. Damnation you people are
> a boring bunch of egomaniacs.

And yet you re-posted a jillion lines' worth of stuff just
to add your biting commentary.

Bill "talk about black kettles" S.

 

[Mike Vandeman]

On Tue, 23 Mar 2004 19:20:39 GMT, Gary S. <Idontwantspam@net> wrote:

.On Tue, 23 Mar 2004 16:30:58 GMT, Mike Vandeman
<[email protected]> .wrote: . .>On Tue, 23 Mar 2004
14:58:11 GMT, Gary S. <Idontwantspam@net> wrote: .> .>.On
Tue, 23 Mar 2004 01:45:41 GMT, Mike Vandeman
<[email protected]> .>.wrote: .>. .>.>No, it's just
factual. .>.>=== .>. .>.Main Entry: fact .>.Pronunciation:
'fakt .>.Function: noun .>.Etymology: Latin factum, from
neuter of factus, past participle of .>.facere .>.1 : a
thing done: as a obsolete : FEAT b : CRIME <accessory after
the .>.fact> c archaic : ACTION .>.2 archaic : PERFORMANCE,
DOING .>.3 : the quality of being actual : ACTUALITY <a
question of fact hinges .>.on evidence> .>.4 a : something
that has actual existence <space exploration is now a
.>.fact> b : an actual occurrence <prove the fact of damage>
.>.5 : a piece of information presented as having objective
reality .>.- in fact : in truth .>. .>.Main Entry: truth
.>.Pronunciation: 'trüth .>.Function: noun .>.Inflected
Form(s): plural truths /'trü[th]z, 'trüths/ .>.Etymology:
Middle English trewthe, from Old English trEowth fidelity;
.>.akin to Old English trEowe faithful -- more at TRUE .>.1
a archaic : FIDELITY, CONSTANCY b : sincerity in action,
character, .>.and utterance .>.2 a (1) : the state of being
the case : FACT (2) : the body of real .>.things, events,
and facts : ACTUALITY (3) often capitalized : a
.>.transcendent fundamental or spiritual reality b : a
judgment, .>.proposition, or idea that is true or accepted
as true <truths of .>.thermodynamics> c : the body of true
statements and propositions .>.3 a : the property (as of a
statement) of being in accord with fact or .>.reality b
chiefly British : TRUE 2 c : fidelity to an original or to a
.>.standard .>.4 capitalized, Christian Science : GOD .>.-
in truth : in accordance with fact : ACTUALLY .>. .>.Main
Entry: re·al·i·ty .>.Pronunciation: rE-'a-l&-tE .>.Function:
noun .>.Inflected Form(s): plural -ties .>.1 : the quality
or state of being real .>.2 a (1) : a real event, entity, or
state of affairs <his dream became .>.a reality> (2) : the
totality of real things and events <trying to .>.escape from
reality> b : something that is neither derivative nor
.>.dependent but exists necessarily .>.- in reality : in
actual fact .>. .>.Mikey: .>. .>.Note that all three words
and concepts above, "fact", "truth", and .>."reality",
cannot be created by one person and imposed on everyone
.>.else. They are based on underlying shared acceptance of
basic .>.principles. .> .>You just fabricated that. Nowhere
is that written in what you quoted. .> .Under "fact",
meanings 3,4 and 5 .Under "truth" meanings 2 and 3 .Under
"reality" meanings 1 and 2

BS. Nowhere does it say anything about other people. I can
say "1 + 1 = 2" and it is true regardless of what other
people think.

.You do not have a monopoly on deductive reasoning, if in
fact you have .any grasp of it at all.

Anyone can reason. The difference is HONESTY in reporting
the results. You continue to lie.

.Unless you believe that one person can create "fact",
"truth", and ."reality" and impose it on everyone else. That
seems like a symptom of .deeper issues with reality, and
utter comtept for every other person.

It has NOTHING to do with other people. It has to do with
conformance to REALITY. In REALITY, you are a liar.

.>.Just because you think a certain way does not make it
true. Unless of .>.course, you are more than a regular human
being. .>. .>.You offer no proof, other than your beliefs.
Quoting yourself on your .>.personal website does not help.
Rather than trying to convince people .>.with information
and facts, you call names and make absurd
.>.generalizations, and repeat yourself. Repeating the same
thing over .>.and over is a pathetic attempt at brainwashing
others. .>. .>.The people who believe they have the sole
"truth" have caused much .>.grief in the world, all
throughout history. .>. .>.But it's not really about the
environment for you, is it? .> .>Don't expect others to be
as dishonest as you and your fellow mountain bikers. .>You
have very poor role models. .> .Disagreeing with you does
not make me dishonest. Learn to discern the .difference
between reality and your opinions. . .Exactly what makes you
think I am a mountain biker?

You act like one. You defend mountain biking. You lie
constantly. You hang out and post in a mountain biking
newsgroup. But I never said you are a mountain biker, liar.

Are your responses .that automated that you have no control?
Or must I now go out and buy .a mountain bike, and ride off
road, to make you happy? . .You expect others to recall
details about you. I expect the same from .you about my
previous postings. . .How does the idea of role models enter
into this? Do you think you are .a role model for anything?
. .Typical that you avoid the real issues, and focus on
minutia and name .calling. . .I guess any sort of attention
makes you happy.

And you sure love to give it to me!

.Too bad you will never accomplish anything, and only drive
people away .from your supposed position. . .You do more to
stifle discussions about the impact of recreation on .the
environment, and create counter-reactions against the
environment, .ending up hurting your alleged cause more than
anything positive you .could ever accomplish.

I have yet to hear you offer a single bit of useful
information. What ARE you trying to accomplish????

.With a rational approach, and even a minimal level of
people skills, .you might actually have accomplished
something. . .Too bad you are incapable of objectively
assessing your efforts.

I know I tell the truth, which is more than you can say.

.Happy trails, .Gary (net.yogi.bear) .------------------------------------------------
.at the 51st percentile of ursine intelligence . .Gary D.
Schwartz, Needham, MA, USA .Please reply to:
garyDOTschwartzATpoboxDOTcom

===
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 Romain]

Mike Vandeman wrote:
>
> On Tue, 23 Mar 2004 19:20:39 GMT, Gary S.
> <Idontwantspam@net> wrote:
>
<snip>
> . .Exactly what makes you think I am a mountain biker?
>
> You act like one. You defend mountain biking. You lie
> constantly. You hang out and post in a mountain
> biking newsgroup. But I never said you are a mountain
> biker, liar.

Are you really that stupid Mike?

I though you might at least have a little clue however
deranged you are.

I am not posting this on a mountain bike newsgroup,
neither is Gary.

You should try and remember where 'you' post your ********
there Mikey.

Mike
86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in
'00 88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's

 

[Gary S .]

On Thu, 25 Mar 2004 04:07:56 GMT, Mike Vandeman <[email protected]>
wrote:

>On Tue, 23 Mar 2004 19:20:39 GMT, Gary S.
><Idontwantspam@net> wrote:
>
>BS. Nowhere does it say anything about other people. I can
>say "1 + 1 = 2" and it is true regardless of what other
>people think.
>
But it is not true because you said it.

It is also true that 1+1 = 10

>.You do not have a monopoly on deductive reasoning, if in
>fact you have .any grasp of it at all.
>
>Anyone can reason. The difference is HONESTY in reporting
>the results. You continue to lie.
>
If I accurately report my opinion, then what I say is true
and is honest. You might disagree, but my opinions are as
valid as yours.

>.Unless you believe that one person can create "fact",
>"truth", and ."reality" and impose it on everyone else.
>That seems like a symptom of .deeper issues with reality,
>and utter comtept for every other person.
>
>It has NOTHING to do with other people. It has to do with
>conformance to REALITY. In REALITY, you are a liar.
>
You are trying to impose your version of reality, and
make other people conform to your thinking. Your poor
people skills make it unlikely you will ever convince
anyone of anything.

>.>.Just because you think a certain way does not make it
>true. Unless of .>.course, you are more than a regular
>human being. .>. .>.You offer no proof, other than your
>beliefs. Quoting yourself on your .>.personal website does
>not help. Rather than trying to convince people .>.with
>information and facts, you call names and make absurd
>.>.generalizations, and repeat yourself. Repeating the same
>thing over .>.and over is a pathetic attempt at
>brainwashing others. .>. .>.The people who believe they
>have the sole "truth" have caused much .>.grief in the
>world, all throughout history. .>. .>.But it's not really
>about the environment for you, is it? .> .>Don't expect
>others to be as dishonest as you and your fellow mountain
>bikers. .>You have very poor role models. .> .Disagreeing
>with you does not make me dishonest. Learn to discern the
>.difference between reality and your opinions. . .Exactly
>what makes you think I am a mountain biker?
>
>You act like one. You defend mountain biking. You lie
>constantly. You hang out and post in a mountain biking
>newsgroup. But I never said you are a mountain biker, liar.
>
You just contradicted yourself, or in your terms you LIED.
Just above you refer to me and "fellow mountain bikers", and
you say you "never said you are a mountain biker".

You can't even be consistent in two consecutive paragraphs.

>.Typical that you avoid the real issues, and focus on
>minutia and name .calling. . .I guess any sort of attention
>makes you happy.
>
>And you sure love to give it to me!

You must be rather starved for attention if your treatment
here is the best you can do. People are laughing AT you, and
you seem to enjoy it.

Exchanges like this serve to show exactly how disconnected
from reality you are, and create a permanent record of how
low your credibility with sane people is.
>
>.Too bad you will never accomplish anything, and only drive
>people away .from your supposed position. . .You do more to
>stifle discussions about the impact of recreation on .the
>environment, and create counter-reactions against the
>environment, .ending up hurting your alleged cause more
>than anything positive you .could ever accomplish.
>
>I have yet to hear you offer a single bit of useful
>information. What ARE you trying to accomplish????
>
I am trying to have a rational discussion with you.
OBVIOUSLY a waste of time, a little of mine and a lot of
yours. You sure put a lot of time posting and arguing with a
large number of people who are amused by you.

You are not capable of understanding or assessing anything
outside your little worldview. Waste of time trying to
explain anything to you.

>.With a rational approach, and even a minimal level of
>people skills, .you might actually have accomplished
>something. . .Too bad you are incapable of objectively
>assessing your efforts.
>
>I know I tell the truth, which is more than you can say.
>
A real scientist would have proofs outside his own opinions.

When you regain rationality, you may understand the
difference between the truth and your opinions.

You may also understand the difference between ranting and
accomplishing something.

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

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

 

[Curtis L . Russ]

On Fri, 26 Mar 2004 14:27:26 GMT, Gary S. <Idontwantspam@net> wrote:

>It is also true that 1+1 = 10

Isn't that 01 + 01 = 10?

Curtis L. Russell Odenton, MD (USA) Just someone on
two wheels...

 

[Gary S .]

On Fri, 26 Mar 2004 10:29:41 -0500, Curtis L. Russell
<[email protected]> wrote:

>On Fri, 26 Mar 2004 14:27:26 GMT, Gary S.
><Idontwantspam@net> wrote:
>
>>It is also true that 1+1 = 10
>
>Isn't that 01 + 01 = 10?
>
That gives it away.

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

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

 

[Mike Vandeman]

On Thu, 25 Mar 2004 10:15:32 -0500, Mike Romain <[email protected]> wrote:

.Mike Vandeman wrote: .> .> On Tue, 23 Mar 2004 19:20:39
GMT, Gary S. <Idontwantspam@net> wrote: .> .<snip> .> . .>
.Exactly what makes you think I am a mountain biker? .> .>
You act like one. You defend mountain biking. You lie
constantly. You hang out .> and post in a mountain biking
newsgroup. But I never said you are a mountain .> biker,
liar. . . .Are you really that stupid Mike? . .I though you
might at least have a little clue however deranged you are.
. .I am not posting this on a mountain bike newsgroup,
neither is Gary.

Yes, you are, or I wouldn't see it. DUH!

.You should try and remember where 'you' post your ********
there Mikey. . .Mike .86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds,
'glass nose to tail in '00 .88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT'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]

On Fri, 26 Mar 2004 14:27:26 GMT, Gary S. <Idontwantspam@net> wrote:

.On Thu, 25 Mar 2004 04:07:56 GMT, Mike Vandeman
<[email protected]> .wrote: . .>On Tue, 23 Mar 2004
19:20:39 GMT, Gary S. <Idontwantspam@net> wrote: .> .>BS.
Nowhere does it say anything about other people. I can say
"1 + 1 = 2" and .>it is true regardless of what other
people think. .> .But it is not true because you said it. .
.It is also true that 1+1 = 10 . .>.You do not have a
monopoly on deductive reasoning, if in fact you have .>.any
grasp of it at all. .> .>Anyone can reason. The difference
is HONESTY in reporting the results. You .>continue to lie.
.> .If I accurately report my opinion, then what I say is
true and is .honest. You might disagree, but my opinions
are as valid as yours.

Only if you say "I think that". An assertion of fact is NOT
an expression of an opinion.

.>.Unless you believe that one person can create "fact",
"truth", and .>."reality" and impose it on everyone else.
That seems like a symptom of .>.deeper issues with
reality, and utter comtept for every other person. .> .>It
has NOTHING to do with other people. It has to do with
conformance to .>REALITY. In REALITY, you are a liar. .>
.You are trying to impose your version of reality, and
make other .people conform to your thinking. Your poor
people skills make it .unlikely you will ever convince
anyone of anything.

It's MY fault that you are ignorant? That's a good one.

.>.>.Just because you think a certain way does not make it
true. Unless of .>.>.course, you are more than a regular
human being. .>.>. .>.>.You offer no proof, other than your
beliefs. Quoting yourself on your .>.>.personal website
does not help. Rather than trying to convince people
.>.>.with information and facts, you call names and make
absurd .>.>.generalizations, and repeat yourself. Repeating
the same thing over .>.>.and over is a pathetic attempt at
brainwashing others. .>.>. .>.>.The people who believe they
have the sole "truth" have caused much .>.>.grief in the
world, all throughout history. .>.>. .>.>.But it's not
really about the environment for you, is it? .>.> .>.>Don't
expect others to be as dishonest as you and your fellow
mountain bikers. .>.>You have very poor role models. .>.>
.>.Disagreeing with you does not make me dishonest. Learn
to discern the .>.difference between reality and your
opinions. .>. .>.Exactly what makes you think I am a
mountain biker? .> .>You act like one. You defend mountain
biking. You lie constantly. You hang out .>and post in a
mountain biking newsgroup. But I never said you are a
mountain .>biker, liar. .> .You just contradicted yourself,
or in your terms you LIED. Just above .you refer to me and
"fellow mountain bikers", and you say you "never .said you
are a mountain biker".

"Fellow mountain bikers" doesn't imply that you are one.

.You can't even be consistent in two consecutive paragraphs.
. .>.Typical that you avoid the real issues, and focus on
minutia and name .>.calling. .>. .>.I guess any sort of
attention makes you happy. .> .>And you sure love to give it
to me! . .You must be rather starved for attention if your
treatment here is the .best you can do. People are laughing
AT you, and you seem to enjoy it.

I enjoy seeing you guys make fools of yourselves.

.Exchanges like this serve to show exactly how disconnected
from .reality you are, and create a permanent record of how
low your .credibility with sane people is. .> .>.Too bad
you will never accomplish anything, and only drive people
away .>.from your supposed position. .>. .>.You do more to
stifle discussions about the impact of recreation on .>.the
environment, and create counter-reactions against the
environment, .>.ending up hurting your alleged cause more
than anything positive you .>.could ever accomplish. .> .>I
have yet to hear you offer a single bit of useful
information. What ARE you .>trying to accomplish???? .> .I
am trying to have a rational discussion with you. OBVIOUSLY
a waste .of time, a little of mine and a lot of yours. You
sure put a lot of .time posting and arguing with a large
number of people who are amused .by you. . .You are not
capable of understanding or assessing anything outside
.your little worldview. Waste of time trying to explain
anything to .you.

You haven't explained anything.

.>.With a rational approach, and even a minimal level of
people skills, .>.you might actually have accomplished
something. .>. .>.Too bad you are incapable of objectively
assessing your efforts. .> .>I know I tell the truth, which
is more than you can say. .> .A real scientist would have
proofs outside his own opinions.

I do. See the references on my web site.

.When you regain rationality, you may understand the
difference between .the truth and your opinions. . .You may
also understand the difference between ranting and
.accomplishing something. . .Happy trails, .Gary
(net.yogi.bear) .------------------------------------------------
.at the 51st percentile of ursine intelligence . .Gary D.
Schwartz, Needham, MA, USA .Please reply to:
garyDOTschwartzATpoboxDOTcom

===
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