Mountain Bikers STILL Don't Get It!



M

Mike Vandeman

Guest
On 25 Jun 2005 18:21:37 -0700, "Coyoteboy" <[email protected]> wrote:

..> Average car in the US uses approx 5 gallons of gas a week, or approx 250
..> gallons/yr. Which is about 1 ton of gasoline/yr.
..>
..> Once combustion occures, about 3 tons of CO/CO2 is released.
..>
..> Hardly seems insignificant.
..>
..>
..> I ride my road bike to/from work everyday
..
..
..I burn 16US gallons per week just getting to work. I couldnt get to
..work without my car,

What's wrong with using public transit?

===
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
 
M

Mike Vandeman

Guest
On 24 Jun 2005 05:30:12 -0700, "Coyoteboy" <[email protected]> wrote:

..
..> BS. As I said, MOST mountain bikers drive to the trailhead. But it's typical for
..> you to try to change the subject.
..
..
..Actually MOST mountainbikers do drive to remote trails, but only very
..occasionally - MOST of the time they train on local trails and so dont
..use cars. Especially in the UK where you are never far from some
..offroad fun where-ever you live.

BS. And why not leave the bike at the trailhead? There's no good reason to take
a bike on a trail.

..HOWEVER, ive yet to see a hiker who didnt drive to the start of their
..walks on 90% of occasions, as its usually too much to add on a few
..miles to a hike when you are on foot.

Irrelevant. That has NOTHING to do with the damage YOU are doing.

..J

===
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
 
M

Mike Vandeman

Guest
On Fri, 24 Jun 2005 12:10:07 -0400, "lowkey" <[email protected]> wrote:

..
.."Coyoteboy" <[email protected]> wrote in message
..news:[email protected]
..>
..>> BS. As I said, MOST mountain bikers drive to the trailhead. But it's
..>> typical for
..>> you to try to change the subject.
..>
..>
..> Actually MOST mountainbikers do drive to remote trails, but only very
..> occasionally - MOST of the time they train on local trails and so dont
..> use cars. Especially in the UK where you are never far from some
..> offroad fun where-ever you live.
..
.. I certainly ride my bike to the local trails

Why not leave the bike at the trailhead? I can't think of a good reason to take
a bike on a trail.

and use public transit and at
..most carpooling to go to more distant trails. I choose not to own nor
..operate an automobile.
..
.. But I do know some people in my town who do transport themselves and their
..bikes to the trails by SUV in a trip that would take at the very most 30
..minutes if the lived at the oppsite end of town. Not just mb'er but joggers,
..dog walkers and what-not.

===
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
 
M

Mike Vandeman

Guest
On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 20:03:04 -0700, "Jeff Strickland" <[email protected]>
wrote:

..
.."Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
..news:[email protected]
..> On Mon, 13 Jun 2005 08:10:52 GMT, "Mark" <[email protected]>
..wrote:
..>
..> Juts as YOU are ignoring mountain bikers' contribution to global warming.
..>
..
..
..
..Am I reading this right? Mike is saying that mountain bikes contribute to
..global warming! How? Do bike riders fart more than everybody else?

By driving 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.)

http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande
 
M

Mike Vandeman

Guest
On Wed, 22 Jun 2005 16:16:52 +0100, "Just zis Guy, you know?"
<[email protected]> wrote:

..On Wed, 22 Jun 2005 15:52:08 +0100, "Shaun aRe"
..<[email protected]> wrote:
..
..>>>> Am I reading this right? Mike is saying that mountain bikes contribute
..>>>> to global warming! How? Do bike riders fart more than everybody else?
..
..>>> Manufacture of plastics, rubber, refined oils and greases, the smelting
..>>> of steel and aluminium, etc. etc. etc. Sorry Jeff, but ya gotta accept
..>>> that much.
..
..>> Yes, it's another example of Mike employing the "insignificant cause"
..>> logical fallacy.
..
..>I wouldn't deny it, but too many people make the mistake of dismissing the
..>actual fact itself, rather than its relevance to the argument at hand, and
..>of course, MV just loves that, makes him feel 'right' LMFAO!
..
..I think one reason Mikey's taken such a beating recently

You are dreaming. Beating with a wet noodle can hardly be called "beating".

is that a lot
..of people have taken on board the kinds of comments in the "Vandeman
..FAQ" and now tend not to fall into his silly logical traps.
..
..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
 
M

Mike Vandeman

Guest
On Wed, 22 Jun 2005 16:42:13 GMT, "Mark" <[email protected]> wrote:

..
.."Shaun aRe" <[email protected]> wrote in message
..news:[email protected]
..>
..> "Just zis Guy, you know?" <[email protected]> wrote in message
..> news:[email protected]
..> > On Wed, 22 Jun 2005 10:41:08 +0100, "Shaun aRe"
..> > <[email protected]> wrote:
..> >
..> > >> Am I reading this right? Mike is saying that mountain bikes
..contribute
..> to
..> > >> global warming! How? Do bike riders fart more than everybody else?
..> >
..> > >Manufacture of plastics, rubber, refined oils and greases, the smelting
..> of
..> > >steel and aluminium, etc. etc. etc. Sorry Jeff, but ya gotta accept
..that
..> > >much.
..> >
..> > Yes, it's another example of Mike employing the "insignificant cause"
..> > logical fallacy.
..>
..> I wouldn't deny it, but too many people make the mistake of dismissing the
..> actual fact itself, rather than its relevance to the argument at hand, and
..> of course, MV just loves that, makes him feel 'right' LMFAO!
..>
..>
..> Cheers JZG!
..>
..>
..>
..> Shaun aRe
..>
..The whole principal of his argument relies more or less completely that
..people will just deny any harm comes from biking, bike manufacture or
..transport to trails instead of actually reading through his hypothesis and
..commenting on that.
..When people deny, they are wrong, no doubts, and as you say, he is very
..vocal about the fact.
..
..However, anyone with a modicum of education and understanding of language
..who bother to dig a little into the reasoning behind Mr Vandermans theories
..can easily pick huge holes in the argument,

It hasn't happened YET. It must not be so easy....

sadly all he seems to be able to
..respond with is juvenile attempts to steer the discussion away from those
..holes and towards the personal attacks he seems to enjoy so much.
..
..Its quite sad really as the base cause he tries to represent is a worthwhile
..one, but his object of aggression is entirely the wrong target.
..While industry is pumping out pollution at the rate it is, and deforestation
..and urban expansion also continue unabated, the damage caused by Bikes, or
..indeed hikers or horses or other leisure acitivities is largely irrelevant,

BS. ALL damage is significant. You are just rationalizing. One thing has NOTHING
to do with the other.

..mainly because those trails and surrounding environment will be destroyed
..regardless of anything done by the leisure activities we enjoy.
..With China proposing 800 new (and not environmentally efficient) power
..stations to be brought online within the next 10 years, the failure by the
..US and others to ratify the kyoto protocol and the continued deforestation
..within the rain forest regions of the world, things are not going to improve
..any time soon.
..
..But what do I know, Im a mountain biker, the ecological devil apparently.
..

===
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
 
M

Mike Vandeman

Guest
On Wed, 22 Jun 2005 15:42:50 GMT, "Bill Sornson"
<[email protected]> wrote:

..Shaun aRe wrote:
..> "Jeff Strickland" <[email protected]> wrote in message
..
..>> Am I reading this right? Mike is saying that mountain bikes
..>> contribute to global warming! How? Do bike riders fart more than
..>> everybody else?
..
..> Manufacture of plastics, rubber, refined oils and greases, the
..> smelting of steel and aluminium, etc. etc. etc. Sorry Jeff, but ya
..> gotta accept that much.
..
..CMIIW, but I /think/ Mikie's point is that mtb-ers supposedly DRIVE to their
..rides -- unlike, say...hikers? Trail runners? Horseback riders? ATV-ers?
..Comic ecological conference attendees?!?
..
..I wonder how pointy-headed Mikie got down here to San Diego to "hike"
..Mission Trails Park (along with all those hard-core dog-walkers and nature
..lovers). Cellular transport?!?

Public transit.

===
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
 
M

Mike Vandeman

Guest
On Wed, 22 Jun 2005 10:44:56 -0700, "Jeff Strickland" <[email protected]>
wrote:

..
.."Shaun aRe" <[email protected]> wrote in message
..news:[email protected]
..>
..> "Jeff Strickland" <[email protected]> wrote in message
..> news:[email protected]
..> >
..> > "Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
..> > news:[email protected]
..> > > On Mon, 13 Jun 2005 08:10:52 GMT, "Mark" <[email protected]>
..> > wrote:
..> > >
..> > > Juts as YOU are ignoring mountain bikers' contribution to global
..> warming.
..> > >
..> >
..> >
..> >
..> > Am I reading this right? Mike is saying that mountain bikes contribute
..to
..> > global warming! How? Do bike riders fart more than everybody else?
..>
..> Manufacture of plastics, rubber, refined oils and greases, the smelting of
..> steel and aluminium, etc. etc. etc. Sorry Jeff, but ya gotta accept that
..> much.
..>
..
..But, if they - mountain bikers - bought other kinds of bikes, they would
..have the same contribution to global warming, and this is much less than the
..contribution of a car or a house or any of the other **** that we buy and
..use everyday.
..
..I don't know what's more absurd, Mike's suggestion that mountain bikes
..contribute to global warming, or my not getting it.
..
..And, Mike has repeatedly said in the past that it isn't mountain bikes that
..he doesn't like, it's bikes on the trail. Now, he is railing against the
..bikes in particular,

Nope, it's the driving 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.)

http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande
 
M

Mike Vandeman

Guest
On Thu, 23 Jun 2005 00:01:01 -0700, [email protected] wrote:

..The real problem with Mikey's arguement is that the answer is yes, but
..pretty much everyone contributes to global warming. So what's Mike to
..do now, say he contributes less?

Yes, of course!

That arguement doesn't work either to
..my thinking.

But it's true.

===
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
 
J

Just zis Guy, you know?

Guest
On Sat, 02 Jul 2005 01:02:30 GMT, Mike Vandeman <[email protected]>
wrote:


>. I certainly ride my bike to the local trails


>Why not leave the bike at the trailhead? I can't think of a good reason to take
>a bike on a trail.


But we can.

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

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at CHS, Puget Sound
 
J

Just zis Guy, you know?

Guest
On Sat, 02 Jul 2005 01:01:06 GMT, Mike Vandeman <[email protected]>
wrote:

>BS. And why not leave the bike at the trailhead? There's no good reason to take
>a bike on a trail.


False. You can't think of one (or rather: you refuse to admit of the
possibility of one), that doesn't mean there is none.

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

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at CHS, Puget Sound
 
J

Just zis Guy, you know?

Guest
On Sat, 02 Jul 2005 01:34:21 GMT, Mike Vandeman <[email protected]>
wrote:


>.I think one reason Mikey's taken such a beating recently
>You are dreaming. Beating with a wet noodle can hardly be called "beating".


You think? Amazing that the set of people who agree includes only
you.

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

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at CHS, Puget Sound
 
J

Just zis Guy, you know?

Guest
On Sat, 02 Jul 2005 01:32:51 GMT, Mike Vandeman <[email protected]>
wrote:

>.Am I reading this right? Mike is saying that mountain bikes contribute to
>.global warming! How? Do bike riders fart more than everybody else?


>By driving to the trailhead.


In a way that hikers don't? No. Once again you attack your chosen
hate group on the basis of a behaviour which is manifestly not
restricted to them. You are a bigot, so this is no surprise.

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

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at CHS, Puget Sound
 
S

SuperG

Guest
Mike Vandeman wrote:
a car or a house or any of the other **** that we buy and
> .use everyday.
> .
> .I don't know what's more absurd, Mike's suggestion that mountain bikes
> .contribute to global warming, or my not getting it.
> .
> .And, Mike has repeatedly said in the past that it isn't mountain bikes that
> .he doesn't like, it's bikes on the trail. Now, he is railing against the
> .bikes in particular,
>
> Nope, it's the driving 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.)
>
> http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande


I ride to the trailhead on my mountain bike, thus you Lie...
 
L

lowkey

Guest
"Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> On Fri, 24 Jun 2005 12:10:07 -0400, "lowkey" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> . I certainly ride my bike to the local trails
>
> Why not leave the bike at the trailhead? I can't think of a good reason to
> take
> a bike on a trail.


The trails in question were approved for use by the Conservation Authority
as and created expressly for mountain biking. As well they are maintained by
the local offroad biking association.

Although this primary use designation is for mountain biking other
non-motorized users are welcome to use the trails with the understanding
that cycling is the primary designation.

You see Mikey, that is an example of rational people compromising, sharing
and getting along with each other.

I love your site, BTW. Do you have any more photo's of yourself?

http://www.geocities.com/crazeemikey/index.html

I'll take a ride in your honour today an snap a trail photo to upload.
..
Keep it real, Bro.

--
I am working on creating an internet that is off-limits to
Mike Vandeman ("pure habitat"). Want to help? (I spent the previous 8
minutes fighting trolls and spammers)

http://www.geocities.com/crazeemikey/index.html
 
J

Jason

Guest
* Mike Vandeman <[email protected]>:
> On 25 Jun 2005 18:21:37 -0700, "Coyoteboy" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> .> Average car in the US uses approx 5 gallons of gas a week, or approx 250
> .> gallons/yr. Which is about 1 ton of gasoline/yr.
> .>
> .> Once combustion occures, about 3 tons of CO/CO2 is released.
> .>
> .> Hardly seems insignificant.
> .>
> .>
> .> I ride my road bike to/from work everyday
> .
> .
> .I burn 16US gallons per week just getting to work. I couldnt get to
> .work without my car,
>
> What's wrong with using public transit?
>


May not be any there little one, I know you'll ignore that like you do
any fact that doesn't agree with your warped sense of the world but hey
whatever.

Jason
 
M

Mark

Guest
"Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> On Wed, 22 Jun 2005 10:44:56 -0700, "Jeff Strickland"

<[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> .
> ."Shaun aRe" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> .news:[email protected]
> .>
> .> "Jeff Strickland" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> .> news:[email protected]
> .> >
> .> > "Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> .> > news:[email protected]
> .> > > On Mon, 13 Jun 2005 08:10:52 GMT, "Mark"

<[email protected]>
> .> > wrote:
> .> > >
> .> > > Juts as YOU are ignoring mountain bikers' contribution to global
> .> warming.
> .> > >
> .> >
> .> >
> .> >
> .> > Am I reading this right? Mike is saying that mountain bikes

contribute
> .to
> .> > global warming! How? Do bike riders fart more than everybody else?
> .>
> .> Manufacture of plastics, rubber, refined oils and greases, the smelting

of
> .> steel and aluminium, etc. etc. etc. Sorry Jeff, but ya gotta accept

that
> .> much.
> .>
> .
> .But, if they - mountain bikers - bought other kinds of bikes, they would
> .have the same contribution to global warming, and this is much less than

the
> .contribution of a car or a house or any of the other **** that we buy and
> .use everyday.
> .
> .I don't know what's more absurd, Mike's suggestion that mountain bikes
> .contribute to global warming, or my not getting it.
> .
> .And, Mike has repeatedly said in the past that it isn't mountain bikes

that
> .he doesn't like, it's bikes on the trail. Now, he is railing against the
> .bikes in particular,
>
> Nope, it's the driving to the trailhead.


Please cite, with validated data, your proof that mountain bikers , as a
subset of the leisure activities group, drive further distances than any
other subset of the leeisure activities group, especially those that you do
not persue in this matter.

If you cannot, and I know you cant, then the statement is pure bigotry.
 
G

Gary S.

Guest
On Sat, 02 Jul 2005 01:36:38 GMT, Mike Vandeman <[email protected]>
wrote:

>BS. ALL damage is significant. You are just rationalizing. One thing has NOTHING
>to do with the other.
>

Does this include the environmental damages caused by an individual
travelling hundreds of miles to give a 15 minute paper at a
conference, a paper which he has presented to that conference
previously?

After all, ALL damage is significant.

You live near San Francisco, and the conference was in Oregon.
Did you fly there? Did you drive there? Did you you ride your bicycle
there, wobbling all the way to scare drivers?

Is what you presented so important that it justifies such major
evironmental destruction of traveling that far, when a mountain biker
driving a couple of towns over to go riding is an ecological disaster?

Also, are mountain bikers the only ones who drive to non-local
trailheads?


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

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

Mike Vandeman

Guest
On Sat, 02 Jul 2005 09:02:36 +0100, "Just zis Guy, you know?"
<[email protected]> wrote:

..On Sat, 02 Jul 2005 01:01:06 GMT, Mike Vandeman <[email protected]>
..wrote:
..
..>BS. And why not leave the bike at the trailhead? There's no good reason to take
..>a bike on a trail.
..
..False. You can't think of one (or rather: you refuse to admit of the
..possibility of one), that doesn't mean there is none.

Liar. If you could think of one, you would have posted it. The fact is, you
CAN'T!

..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
 
M

Mike Vandeman

Guest
On Sat, 02 Jul 2005 07:10:50 -0400, SuperG <[email protected]> wrote:

..Mike Vandeman wrote:
..a car or a house or any of the other **** that we buy and
..> .use everyday.
..> .
..> .I don't know what's more absurd, Mike's suggestion that mountain bikes
..> .contribute to global warming, or my not getting it.
..> .
..> .And, Mike has repeatedly said in the past that it isn't mountain bikes that
..> .he doesn't like, it's bikes on the trail. Now, he is railing against the
..> .bikes in particular,
..>
..> Nope, it's the driving 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.)
..>
..> http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande
..
..I ride to the trailhead on my mountain bike, thus you Lie...

Then leave it at 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.)

http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande