Mountain Bikers Destroy Rainforest Area as Large as a Football Field!



"Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Sat, 30 Sep 2006 08:09:56 -0400, "S Curtiss" <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>news:[email protected]...
>>> On Tue, 26 Sep 2006 14:06:05 -0400, "S Curtiss" <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Since when is Canada forestland considered "rainforest"? What are the
>>>>coordinates of this alleged destruction? Google sat maps are very
>>>>detailed
>>>>for that region. Where is this? Perhaps the exaggeration is tainted by
>>>>emotion as the DNV did not act in such a manner as this absolutist
>>>>considered to be called for.

>>
>>Interesting... You didn't call me out on "rainforest" designation in
>>Canada. I was curious and looked it up. Pacific rim watershed areas along
>>North America are actually classified as "rainforests". Yet you ignore my
>>my
>>mistake to focus on your alleged destruction by "mountain bikers".
>>>>
>>>>You (and those like you) give only as much information as you feel
>>>>necessary
>>>>to make your point and exclude real information that counters it. The
>>>>exclusion of actual locations to verify this "third party" account is
>>>>suspect. The fact that it references residential proximity also makes
>>>>the
>>>>entire account suspect.
>>>>
>>>>Wow! Some kids are riding bikes in a vacant lot adjacent to their
>>>>neighborhood...? Rainforest destruction...? Only MV math can arrive at
>>>>that answer.
>>>
>>> It was virgin rainforest in BC, destroyed by mountain bikers purely
>>> for cheap thrills.

>>
>>"Virgin"...? This close to major population and residential...? To quote
>>the
>>piece you posted: "as it is considered more neighbourhood forested
>>areas at end of streets, cul-de-sacs, etc."
>>You ignore the FACT the area was already compromised by houses, roads,
>>proximity to population and construction.
>>Mountain bikers did not destroy anything.

>
> BS. They destroyed living rainforest for cheap thrills -- nothing new
> for mountain bikers.


You continue to offer nothing of substance to support your statement. The
piece YOU posted is, first of all, heresay. Second of all, you IGNORE the
quote "as it is considered more neighbourhood forested areas at end of
streets, cul-de-sacs, etc." Third, you insist on forming your conclusion
based on your OPINION.
Neighborhood...? Cul-de sacs...? Virgin...?
Where were the "mountain bikers" when the bulldozers and chainsaws were
clearing the area for these homes?

The only thing "virgin" is your OPINION as it has yet to be penetrated by
reality.

>
> They are utilizing an area that is
>>adjacent to their living area. You ignore my mistake of rainforest
>>designation to continue your microscopic focus on your OPINION that
>>anything
>>concerning bicycles off-road is suspect.
>>> ===
>>> 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.)
>>>
>>> Please don't put a cell phone next to any part of your body that you are
>>> fond of!

Awwww... Poor little man afraid of more technology...? You always latch
onto the conspiracy in spite of the odds. If you are so scared, get a Razr
with the antenna in the lower section... Or get a Bluetooth... Or hide
under your blanket so the gremlins don't get you...

Pathetic.
 
Mike Vandeman wrote:


>If it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck.... This was done by
>mountain bikers, which you would know, if you weren't 10,000 miles
>
>

Funny how you discount what those like Roberto Baggio have to say when
they live in the area in question...I'd say Roberto has a better idea of
what is going on there than you do. Adding to that, you seem distraught
that someone living away from the site has an opinion...but Mike...you
don't live right there, so you don't know either! I don't see a
difference: if you can claim something from 2000 miles away why can't
Demos at 10,000 miles away? Besides, you're using heresay / aren't
actually naming a source...you could fabricating this "friend" for your
own purposes.

>As to not doing "any particular damage", ALL mountain biking
>accelerates erosion, creates V-shaped ruts, kills small animals and
>plants on and next to the trail, and drives wildlife and other trail
>users out of the parks: http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande/scb7.
>
>


Once again, Mike, referencing your own webpage (where you have your
"literature reviews" and no scientifically valid,peer reviewed,
independent research of your own) holds no credibility. The joy of the
internet is that anyone can post whatever they wish in
cyberspace....having it posted on the net and pointing at it on usenet
doesn't make it true.

Michael Halliwell
 
On Mon, 02 Oct 2006 16:44:40 GMT, "Andy H" <[email protected]>
wrote:

>
>"Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> On Sun, 01 Oct 2006 21:37:47 GMT, "Andy H" <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>news:[email protected]...
>>>> On Sun, 01 Oct 2006 03:34:21 GMT, "Roberto Baggio"
>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>I live very, very, very close to the area and have seen it. But I guess
>>>>>you
>>>>>know the truth, as you've only seen a picture on the Internet and live
>>>>>in
>>>>>a
>>>>>land far, far away.
>>>>>
>>>>>You should really stop getting your cheap thrills by constantly
>>>>>spreading
>>>>>lies.
>>>>
>>>> Photographs don't lie. Neither do I.
>>>
>>>I beg to differ, on both counts.
>>>
>>>You are guilty as charged. LIAR

>>
>> As usual, you conveniently decline to give any specifics, proving that
>> you are LYING.
>>

>I don't need to provide specifics to the audience, most of them have seen
>your prolific hate filled rantings on countless occassions. You've omitted
>to include any proof of my dishonesty as well.


Only a mountain biker could look at a photograph of environmental
destruction and not see it.

>TOOL!
>
>>>>>"Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>>>news:[email protected]...
>>>>>> On Sat, 30 Sep 2006 05:26:45 GMT, "Roberto Baggio"
>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Mein Lieben! I've been to that area - have you?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>That is not virgin rainforest - those trees are mere 2nd growth
>>>>>>>sapplings.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Right. Virgin rainforest, illegally destroyed by mountain bikers for
>>>>>> cheap thrills.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> ===
>>>> 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.)
>>>>
>>>> Please don't put a cell phone next to any part of your body that you are
>>>> fond of!
>>>>
>>>> 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.)
>>
>> Please don't put a cell phone next to any part of your body that you are
>> fond of!
>>
>> 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.)

Please don't put a cell phone next to any part of your body that you are fond of!

http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande
 
Mike Vandeman wrote:
> Only a mountain biker could look at a photograph of environmental
> destruction and not see it.



Mike, could you please enlighten us with the human activity that does
not involve environmental destruction? Sitting at your desk with your
head up your **** will also cause environmental destruction at some
level.

Laters,

Marz
 
On Tue, 03 Oct 2006 04:31:43 GMT, Michael Halliwell
<[email protected]> wrote:

>Mike Vandeman wrote:
>
>
>>If it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck.... This was done by
>>mountain bikers, which you would know, if you weren't 10,000 miles
>>
>>

>Funny how you discount what those like Roberto Baggio have to say when
>they live in the area in question...I'd say Roberto has a better idea of
>what is going on there than you do.


Only if he tells the truth. But there's nothing he can say that will
deny what that photograph shows: pristine rainforest habitat destroyed
by mountain bikers for some cheap thrills.

Adding to that, you seem distraught
>that someone living away from the site has an opinion...but Mike...you
>don't live right there, so you don't know either! I don't see a
>difference: if you can claim something from 2000 miles away why can't
>Demos at 10,000 miles away?


Because I have been there (within 100 miles).

Besides, you're using heresay / aren't
>actually naming a source...you could fabricating this "friend" for your
>own purposes.


The evidence is the photograph, taken by the mountain bikers
themselves.

>>As to not doing "any particular damage", ALL mountain biking
>>accelerates erosion, creates V-shaped ruts, kills small animals and
>>plants on and next to the trail, and drives wildlife and other trail
>>users out of the parks: http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande/scb7.
>>
>>

>
>Once again, Mike, referencing your own webpage (where you have your
>"literature reviews" and no scientifically valid,peer reviewed,
>independent research of your own) holds no credibility. The joy of the
>internet is that anyone can post whatever they wish in
>cyberspace....having it posted on the net and pointing at it on usenet
>doesn't make it true.


I never said it does. But its true nonetheless. I presented it again
9/21, with IMBA in the audience, and even THEY couldn't come up with a
single complaint or refutation.

>Michael Halliwell

===
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.)

Please don't put a cell phone next to any part of your body that you are fond of!

http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande
 
"Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Tue, 03 Oct 2006 04:31:43 GMT, Michael Halliwell
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>Mike Vandeman wrote:
>>
>>
>>>If it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck.... This was done by
>>>mountain bikers, which you would know, if you weren't 10,000 miles
>>>
>>>

>>Funny how you discount what those like Roberto Baggio have to say when
>>they live in the area in question...I'd say Roberto has a better idea of
>>what is going on there than you do.

>
> Only if he tells the truth. But there's nothing he can say that will
> deny what that photograph shows: pristine rainforest habitat destroyed
> by mountain bikers for some cheap thrills.
>
> Adding to that, you seem distraught
>>that someone living away from the site has an opinion...but Mike...you
>>don't live right there, so you don't know either! I don't see a
>>difference: if you can claim something from 2000 miles away why can't
>>Demos at 10,000 miles away?

>
> Because I have been there (within 100 miles).
>
> Besides, you're using heresay / aren't
>>actually naming a source...you could fabricating this "friend" for your
>>own purposes.

>
> The evidence is the photograph, taken by the mountain bikers
> themselves.
>
>>>As to not doing "any particular damage", ALL mountain biking
>>>accelerates erosion, creates V-shaped ruts, kills small animals and
>>>plants on and next to the trail, and drives wildlife and other trail
>>>users out of the parks: http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande/scb7.
>>>
>>>

>>
>>Once again, Mike, referencing your own webpage (where you have your
>>"literature reviews" and no scientifically valid,peer reviewed,
>>independent research of your own) holds no credibility. The joy of the
>>internet is that anyone can post whatever they wish in
>>cyberspace....having it posted on the net and pointing at it on usenet
>>doesn't make it true.

>
> I never said it does. But its true nonetheless. I presented it again
> 9/21, with IMBA in the audience, and even THEY couldn't come up with a
> single complaint or refutation.


Where they awake or had your inane hatefilled rambling bored them to sleep?

******!
>
>>Michael Halliwell

> ===
> 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.)
>
> Please don't put a cell phone next to any part of your body that you are
> fond of!
>
> http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande
 
Mike Vandeman wrote:

> 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.)


As our numbers increase, there will be more conflicts at all levels --
local, regional, national, international and global -- that wouldn't
happen if population were stabilized.
It would be much more equitable having each individual fight the
flu on his own, rather than waste resources having armies fight each
other over resources. By stopping the suppression of influenza,
everyone could be on the front lines, instead of just a few good men.
..
..
--
 
On 3 Oct 2006 09:26:47 -0700, "Marz" <[email protected]> wrote:

>
>Mike Vandeman wrote:
>> Only a mountain biker could look at a photograph of environmental
>> destruction and not see it.

>
>
>Mike, could you please enlighten us with the human activity that does
>not involve environmental destruction? Sitting at your desk with your
>head up your **** will also cause environmental destruction at some
>level.


Your unwillingness to admit the OBVIOUS is duly noted.

>Laters,
>
>Marz

===
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.)

Please don't put a cell phone next to any part of your body that you are fond of!

http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande
 
On 3 Oct 2006 23:32:41 -0700, [email protected] wrote:

>
>Mike Vandeman wrote:
>
>> 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.)

>
> As our numbers increase, there will be more conflicts at all levels --
>local, regional, national, international and global -- that wouldn't
>happen if population were stabilized.


NONSENSE! Even ONE person can cause environmental destruction.

> It would be much more equitable having each individual fight the
>flu on his own, rather than waste resources having armies fight each
>other over resources. By stopping the suppression of influenza,
>everyone could be on the front lines, instead of just a few good men.
>.
>.

===
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.)

Please don't put a cell phone next to any part of your body that you are fond of!

http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande
 
< If it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck

Mr Vandaman obviously suffers from double blindness, one, he cannot see
the wood from the trees and two, he cannot see beyond his own
phobia/s...it is true in the picture reproduced by the North Shore
Mountain Bike Magazine one sees a specialized form of the mountain bike
being used for 'freestyle' and would recommend to said blind person
that such hysterical response to a zone which has clearly been marked
out for this limited activity, which it is, has totally nothing to do
with the term"Mountain Bikers Destroy Rauinforest" irrespective of the
football pitch size, because it is clear that it is a legal or approved
zone for such activity and will have zero impact on the wildlife...as
far as

>>>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.)

presumeably the incumbent Mr V does equally not intend to trespass on
this special area and thus not contaminate it with his human
presence...a splendid project for which I will support him for his
third blindness...you are clearly someone who cannot face truths and
realities in the sense that they are lived out every day.

Mountain bikers are above all environment friendly , that do not
pollute the air nor pollute the natural world...cattle cause land
erosion on a vast scale and pollute the air...ramblers cause land
erosion on a vast scale, road diggers and bulldozers do vast damages to
the land...plants get destroyed by cattle and other charming little
creatures such as your cuddly bunny...when do you want to see properly
Mr V?

The answer to your overall problem might begin with some
counselling....as far as, if it walks like a duck and quacks like a
duck is concerned, maybe thats you quacking and waddling your life like
a duck and in your blindness cannot see the reality...yours is clearly
something different. Try politics. Demos

Mike Vandeman wrote:
> On 2 Oct 2006 05:43:34 -0700, "demos" <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> >As a mountain biker for many years and guide across many european
> >venues including alpscross of over 450kms I can certainly say that the
> >term "mountain-biker" is entirely incorrect and that it should be
> >"freestylers" aligned to bmx type bikes. Mountain bikers are a breed
> >that journey distances off-road or carry out races/enduros/marathons
> >under properly controlled conditions.
> >
> >In europe there are great numbers of environmentally educated riders
> >that do not do any particular damage nor unlike great groups of walkers
> >leave great ruts along preffered trails...having said that there are
> >always exceptions to the rule but such a venue as described is not a
> >mountain biker venue, even tho' it may be frecuented by some. The
> >correct term is "freestylists". Perhaps you should not blow-off at the
> >drop of a twig...I am also a marine ecologist and work in the middle of
> >perpetual damages done by **** sapiens...try being a little more
> >directed and less dramatic....Demos

>
> If it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck.... This was done by
> mountain bikers, which you would know, if you weren't 10,000 miles
> away. People who bike off-road are mountain bikers, period. They may
> ALSO be freestylists, but that's irrelevant. The general term is
> "mountain biker". They ride mountain bikes and ride off-road.
>
> As to not doing "any particular damage", ALL mountain biking
> accelerates erosion, creates V-shaped ruts, kills small animals and
> plants on and next to the trail, and drives wildlife and other trail
> users out of the parks: http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande/scb7.
>
> >Mike Vandeman wrote:
> >> http://photos.nsmb.com/showimage.php?i=5156&c=36:
> >>
> >> From a friend:
> >>
> >> I went on a tour of our parks and forests with PNEAC in areas I
> >> normally would not go, as it is considered more neighbourhood forested
> >> areas at end of streets, cul-de-sacs, etc. and places I do not know
> >> about. We looked at the most devastating thing in our forest. A
> >> mountain bike bmx dirt jum area that was a large as a football field
> >> built around trees, etc. in that part of the forest in the Mt. Seymour
> >> area, next door to Fromme. It had ramps and walls to jump off -- all
> >> dirt dug from the forest floor, etc. The DNV Parks people said they
> >> could not charge anyone because they did not know who did it (so lame,
> >> as anyone using it is breaking the law). Meanwhile during the fire
> >> hazard warning not to smoke cigarettes in the forest we noted one of
> >> the mtb bmx'ers (bmx'ing with mountain bikes) smoking a cigarette, and
> >> the head guy of parks did not do anything about it. I cannot explain
> >> how bad it is but picture what they have done to the Appalachian
> >> mountains for strip mining coal, plus the odd tree in between the
> >> jumps and ramps, etc. You have got a pretty good picture. It is
> >> devastating, and not a finger has been lifted by the Parks people or
> >> the apathetic neighbourhood living right next to this monstrousity! I
> >> will be going back in with my camera with the Mayor, if possible, and
> >> will send you it. I have never seen such devastation in my life to a
> >> forest land. It rivals the structures in Mt. Fromme.
> >>
> >> What I do not understand is how the DNV Parks people let this one
> >> continue to the extent it did. I had not heard of it until last
> >> night. I feel pretty sick about it. Why are people so apathetic about
> >> this kind of thing? I wonder what else is out there I do not know
> >> about. At this rate, the forest in DNV might as well become one large
> >> adventure and amusement park. I am also pretty angry right now at the
> >> Parks people who let this kind of thing happen without lifting a
> >> finger to stop it, telling me that the local kids want to have
> >> something close to their neighbourhoods. So lame! Sometimes I wish I
> >> didn't know about this.
> >> ===
> >> 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.)
> >>
> >> Please don't put a cell phone next to any part of your body that you are fond of!
> >>
> >> 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.)
>
> Please don't put a cell phone next to any part of your body that you are fond of!
>
> http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande
 
Mike Vandeman wrote:
> On 3 Oct 2006 23:32:41 -0700, [email protected] wrote:
>
> >
> >Mike Vandeman wrote:
> >
> >> 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.)

> >
> > As our numbers increase, there will be more conflicts at all levels --
> >local, regional, national, international and global -- that wouldn't
> >happen if population were stabilized.

>
> NONSENSE! Even ONE person can cause environmental destruction.
>


You almost got it right, so close. Everyone causes environmental
destruction to greater or lesser degree through almost every action
they make.

Please try and understand this.

Laters,

Marz
 
Mike Vandeman wrote:
> On 3 Oct 2006 09:26:47 -0700, "Marz" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >
> >Mike Vandeman wrote:
> >> Only a mountain biker could look at a photograph of environmental
> >> destruction and not see it.

> >
> >
> >Mike, could you please enlighten us with the human activity that does
> >not involve environmental destruction? Sitting at your desk with your
> >head up your **** will also cause environmental destruction at some
> >level.

>
> Your unwillingness to admit the OBVIOUS is duly noted.
>


No, I think I do admit the obvious by saying that all human activity
can cause environmental destruction and that sitting at a desk and
mountain biking are just examples of an activity.

But I also understand that I can control my personal impact upon
environmental destruction by being aware of the level of impact my
activities may have.

Do you believe that you have a lesser impact on the environment while
spending an hour on your computer than I would spending an hour mtbing?
Careful this may require you to think, so find somewhere comfy to rest
your head.

Laters,

Marz
 
Mike Vandeman wrote:
> [email protected] wrote:
> >
> > As our numbers increase, there will be more conflicts at all levels --
> >local, regional, national, international and global -- that wouldn't
> >happen if population were stabilized.

>
> NONSENSE! Even ONE person can cause environmental destruction.


I didn't say there would be no conflicts. I said the additional ones,
caused by increased population, would be averted.


> > It would be much more equitable having each individual fight the
> >flu on his own, rather than waste resources having armies fight each
> >other over resources. By stopping the suppression of influenza,
> >everyone could be on the front lines, instead of just a few good men.

..
..
--
 
On 4 Oct 2006 09:48:11 -0700, "Marz" <[email protected]> wrote:

>
>Mike Vandeman wrote:
>> On 3 Oct 2006 23:32:41 -0700, [email protected] wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >Mike Vandeman wrote:
>> >
>> >> 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.)
>> >
>> > As our numbers increase, there will be more conflicts at all levels --
>> >local, regional, national, international and global -- that wouldn't
>> >happen if population were stabilized.

>>
>> NONSENSE! Even ONE person can cause environmental destruction.
>>

>
>You almost got it right, so close. Everyone causes environmental
>destruction to greater or lesser degree through almost every action
>they make.
>
>Please try and understand this.


I do, better than you do. Not try to understand this: mountain biking
is the most destructive activity allowed in any park, and has no
business in any natural area.

>Laters,
>
>Marz

===
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.)

Please don't put a cell phone next to any part of your body that you are fond of!

http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande
 
On 4 Oct 2006 17:26:41 -0700, [email protected] wrote:

>
>Mike Vandeman wrote:
>> [email protected] wrote:
>> >
>> > As our numbers increase, there will be more conflicts at all levels --
>> >local, regional, national, international and global -- that wouldn't
>> >happen if population were stabilized.

>>
>> NONSENSE! Even ONE person can cause environmental destruction.

>
>I didn't say there would be no conflicts. I said the additional ones,
>caused by increased population, would be averted.


Population can't be changes rapidly, but stopping mountain biking can
happen overnight, and thus is much easier.

>> > It would be much more equitable having each individual fight the
>> >flu on his own, rather than waste resources having armies fight each
>> >other over resources. By stopping the suppression of influenza,
>> >everyone could be on the front lines, instead of just a few good men.

>.
>.

===
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.)

Please don't put a cell phone next to any part of your body that you are fond of!

http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande
 
On 4 Oct 2006 08:07:50 -0700, "demos" <[email protected]>
wrote:

>< If it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck
>
>Mr Vandaman obviously suffers from double blindness, one, he cannot see
>the wood from the trees and two, he cannot see beyond his own
>phobia/s...it is true in the picture reproduced by the North Shore
>Mountain Bike Magazine one sees a specialized form of the mountain bike
>being used for 'freestyle' and would recommend to said blind person
>that such hysterical response to a zone which has clearly been marked
>out for this limited activity,


Nope, it was taken and used illegally.

which it is, has totally nothing to do
>with the term"Mountain Bikers Destroy Rauinforest" irrespective of the
>football pitch size, because it is clear that it is a legal or approved
>zone for such activity


Where did you get THAT nonsense? There was never any approval for
destruction like that -- the same as ALL North Shore mountain biking.

and will have zero impact on the wildlife...as
>far as
>
>>>>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.)
>
>presumeably the incumbent Mr V does equally not intend to trespass on
>this special area and thus not contaminate it with his human
>presence...a splendid project for which I will support him for his
>third blindness...you are clearly someone who cannot face truths and
>realities in the sense that they are lived out every day.
>
>Mountain bikers are above all environment friendly


You are living in Fantasyland, like all mountain bikers. The harm that
mountain biking does is OBVIOUS to everyone else. And to science:
http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande/scb7.

, that do not
>pollute the air


Yes, it does, since it requires motor vehicles to transport the bikes
to the trailhead.

> nor pollute the natural world


Yes, it does: erosion pollutes waterways.

....cattle cause land
>erosion on a vast scale and pollute the air...ramblers cause land
>erosion on a vast scale, road diggers and bulldozers do vast damages to
>the land...plants get destroyed by cattle and other charming little
>creatures such as your cuddly bunny


And mountain bikers.

....when do you want to see properly
>Mr V?
>
>The answer to your overall problem might begin with some
>counselling....as far as, if it walks like a duck and quacks like a
>duck is concerned, maybe thats you quacking and waddling your life like
>a duck and in your blindness cannot see the reality...yours is clearly
>something different. Try politics. Demos
>
>Mike Vandeman wrote:
>> On 2 Oct 2006 05:43:34 -0700, "demos" <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >As a mountain biker for many years and guide across many european
>> >venues including alpscross of over 450kms I can certainly say that the
>> >term "mountain-biker" is entirely incorrect and that it should be
>> >"freestylers" aligned to bmx type bikes. Mountain bikers are a breed
>> >that journey distances off-road or carry out races/enduros/marathons
>> >under properly controlled conditions.
>> >
>> >In europe there are great numbers of environmentally educated riders
>> >that do not do any particular damage nor unlike great groups of walkers
>> >leave great ruts along preffered trails...having said that there are
>> >always exceptions to the rule but such a venue as described is not a
>> >mountain biker venue, even tho' it may be frecuented by some. The
>> >correct term is "freestylists". Perhaps you should not blow-off at the
>> >drop of a twig...I am also a marine ecologist and work in the middle of
>> >perpetual damages done by **** sapiens...try being a little more
>> >directed and less dramatic....Demos

>>
>> If it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck.... This was done by
>> mountain bikers, which you would know, if you weren't 10,000 miles
>> away. People who bike off-road are mountain bikers, period. They may
>> ALSO be freestylists, but that's irrelevant. The general term is
>> "mountain biker". They ride mountain bikes and ride off-road.
>>
>> As to not doing "any particular damage", ALL mountain biking
>> accelerates erosion, creates V-shaped ruts, kills small animals and
>> plants on and next to the trail, and drives wildlife and other trail
>> users out of the parks: http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande/scb7.
>>
>> >Mike Vandeman wrote:
>> >> http://photos.nsmb.com/showimage.php?i=5156&c=36:
>> >>
>> >> From a friend:
>> >>
>> >> I went on a tour of our parks and forests with PNEAC in areas I
>> >> normally would not go, as it is considered more neighbourhood forested
>> >> areas at end of streets, cul-de-sacs, etc. and places I do not know
>> >> about. We looked at the most devastating thing in our forest. A
>> >> mountain bike bmx dirt jum area that was a large as a football field
>> >> built around trees, etc. in that part of the forest in the Mt. Seymour
>> >> area, next door to Fromme. It had ramps and walls to jump off -- all
>> >> dirt dug from the forest floor, etc. The DNV Parks people said they
>> >> could not charge anyone because they did not know who did it (so lame,
>> >> as anyone using it is breaking the law). Meanwhile during the fire
>> >> hazard warning not to smoke cigarettes in the forest we noted one of
>> >> the mtb bmx'ers (bmx'ing with mountain bikes) smoking a cigarette, and
>> >> the head guy of parks did not do anything about it. I cannot explain
>> >> how bad it is but picture what they have done to the Appalachian
>> >> mountains for strip mining coal, plus the odd tree in between the
>> >> jumps and ramps, etc. You have got a pretty good picture. It is
>> >> devastating, and not a finger has been lifted by the Parks people or
>> >> the apathetic neighbourhood living right next to this monstrousity! I
>> >> will be going back in with my camera with the Mayor, if possible, and
>> >> will send you it. I have never seen such devastation in my life to a
>> >> forest land. It rivals the structures in Mt. Fromme.
>> >>
>> >> What I do not understand is how the DNV Parks people let this one
>> >> continue to the extent it did. I had not heard of it until last
>> >> night. I feel pretty sick about it. Why are people so apathetic about
>> >> this kind of thing? I wonder what else is out there I do not know
>> >> about. At this rate, the forest in DNV might as well become one large
>> >> adventure and amusement park. I am also pretty angry right now at the
>> >> Parks people who let this kind of thing happen without lifting a
>> >> finger to stop it, telling me that the local kids want to have
>> >> something close to their neighbourhoods. So lame! Sometimes I wish I
>> >> didn't know about this.
>> >> ===
>> >> 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.)
>> >>
>> >> Please don't put a cell phone next to any part of your body that you are fond of!
>> >>
>> >> 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.)
>>
>> Please don't put a cell phone next to any part of your body that you are fond of!
>>
>> 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.)

Please don't put a cell phone next to any part of your body that you are fond of!

http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande
 
On 4 Oct 2006 09:59:13 -0700, "Marz" <[email protected]> wrote:

>
>Mike Vandeman wrote:
>> On 3 Oct 2006 09:26:47 -0700, "Marz" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >Mike Vandeman wrote:
>> >> Only a mountain biker could look at a photograph of environmental
>> >> destruction and not see it.
>> >
>> >
>> >Mike, could you please enlighten us with the human activity that does
>> >not involve environmental destruction? Sitting at your desk with your
>> >head up your **** will also cause environmental destruction at some
>> >level.

>>
>> Your unwillingness to admit the OBVIOUS is duly noted.
>>

>
>No, I think I do admit the obvious by saying that all human activity
>can cause environmental destruction and that sitting at a desk and
>mountain biking are just examples of an activity.
>
>But I also understand that I can control my personal impact upon
>environmental destruction by being aware of the level of impact my
>activities may have.
>
>Do you believe that you have a lesser impact on the environment while
>spending an hour on your computer than I would spending an hour mtbing?


Yes, of course.

>Careful this may require you to think, so find somewhere comfy to rest
>your head.
>
>Laters,
>
>Marz

===
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.)

Please don't put a cell phone next to any part of your body that you are fond of!

http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande
 
Mike Vandeman wrote:
> >Do you believe that you have a lesser impact on the environment while
> >spending an hour on your computer than I would spending an hour mtbing?

>
> Yes, of course.
>



Of course that is your opinion, biased to your activity; my opinion
will differ biased by my activity. You see me leaving a semi-permanent
impression on a dirt trail and I see you in a permanent structure
burning electricity. Can you prove which of our activities has the
greater impact, no! Just becuase my activity produces a visual direct
effect does not make it worse than your activity which causes an
indirect displaced effect.


When I see a bunch of kids riding in the forest, I understand they're
not at home watching TV, not playing computer games, not requiring more
electricity for entertainment, maintaining a higher level of fitness
and well being AND starting to appreciate nature.


Laters,

Marz
 
On 5 Oct 2006 05:04:12 -0700, "Marz" <[email protected]> wrote:

>
>Mike Vandeman wrote:
>> >Do you believe that you have a lesser impact on the environment while
>> >spending an hour on your computer than I would spending an hour mtbing?

>>
>> Yes, of course.
>>

>
>
>Of course that is your opinion, biased to your activity; my opinion
>will differ biased by my activity. You see me leaving a semi-permanent
>impression on a dirt trail and I see you in a permanent structure
>burning electricity. Can you prove which of our activities has the
>greater impact, no!


It's obvious. A few seconds of a small amount of electricity doesn't
compare with several hours of ripping up nature (after being driven to
the trailhead).

Just becuase my activity produces a visual direct
>effect does not make it worse than your activity which causes an
>indirect displaced effect.
>
>
>When I see a bunch of kids riding in the forest, I understand they're
>not at home watching TV, not playing computer games, not requiring more
>electricity for entertainment, maintaining a higher level of fitness
>and well being AND starting to appreciate nature.


And I understand that they are learning that the rough treatment of
nature is acceptable -- just the OPPOSITE of "appreciation" of nature.
One look at any mountain biking video wil show you that there is ZERO
"nature appreciation" going on.

>Laters,
>
>Marz

===
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.)

Please don't put a cell phone next to any part of your body that you are fond of!

http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande
 
Your thousands of hours of on line time equates to many tons of pollution.


Mike Vandeman wrote:
> On 5 Oct 2006 05:04:12 -0700, "Marz" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Mike Vandeman wrote:

>
> It's obvious. A few seconds of a small amount of electricity doesn't
> compare with several hours of ripping up nature (after being driven to
> the trailhead).
>


> ===
> 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.)
>
> Please don't put a cell phone next to any part of your body that you are fond of!
>
> http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande
 

Similar threads