J
Jeff Strickland
Guest
"Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Don't forget that this study, which shows that mountain biking has greater
> impacts than hiking and horseback riding, actually GREATLY UNDERESTIMATES
the
> impacts of mountain biking, because it ignores the relative distance
travelled!
> When mountain biking's already-significant impacts are multiplied by the
> distance travelled, the differences become even greater.
This is patently false. If there are three encounters in a mile and no more
miles, then that is 3 per mile. But if there are three in a mile, and then 8
more miles go by with no encounters, then we have travelled 9 miles with 3
encounters. This gives us an encounter rate that is 1/9th of the rate of the
shorter distance traveller.
Your blatant lie assumes that whatever the encounter rate in a given area
is, that rate persists over all areas and this is simply untrue.
It also assumes the flight response is detremental in all cases, and this is
a blatant lie as well. Let's explore the flight response of your cat. If
your cat goes outside and lurks around in the bushes, and a dog comes
along - or a person - then the cat will change its immediate behavior as a
result. It might react with a flight response, and for the sake of this
discussion, I'll assume that this is the response each and every time it
perceives a threat -- encounters a human. Once the cat decides the threat is
no longer present, it will return to the site of the encounter and do
whatever it was doing before. It will repeatedly return to the site, even if
the threat returns on a random schedule. The cat is not harmed by its threat
response, and it doesn't alter its behavior as a result.
If the threat is a bulldozer, and the bulldozer is clearing ground for a new
minimall, then the cat will alter its behavior, but your blatant lie is that
the cat will leave an area just because a bike rider passes through.
<snip tired old research that was posted here long ago>
You are what the comic strip, Non-Sequitor is poking fun at these days, the
pre-conceptual theorist. A pre-conceptual theorist is one that ignores any
data that does not support their premise, and buys only into data that
supports the preconception.
news:[email protected]...
> Don't forget that this study, which shows that mountain biking has greater
> impacts than hiking and horseback riding, actually GREATLY UNDERESTIMATES
the
> impacts of mountain biking, because it ignores the relative distance
travelled!
> When mountain biking's already-significant impacts are multiplied by the
> distance travelled, the differences become even greater.
This is patently false. If there are three encounters in a mile and no more
miles, then that is 3 per mile. But if there are three in a mile, and then 8
more miles go by with no encounters, then we have travelled 9 miles with 3
encounters. This gives us an encounter rate that is 1/9th of the rate of the
shorter distance traveller.
Your blatant lie assumes that whatever the encounter rate in a given area
is, that rate persists over all areas and this is simply untrue.
It also assumes the flight response is detremental in all cases, and this is
a blatant lie as well. Let's explore the flight response of your cat. If
your cat goes outside and lurks around in the bushes, and a dog comes
along - or a person - then the cat will change its immediate behavior as a
result. It might react with a flight response, and for the sake of this
discussion, I'll assume that this is the response each and every time it
perceives a threat -- encounters a human. Once the cat decides the threat is
no longer present, it will return to the site of the encounter and do
whatever it was doing before. It will repeatedly return to the site, even if
the threat returns on a random schedule. The cat is not harmed by its threat
response, and it doesn't alter its behavior as a result.
If the threat is a bulldozer, and the bulldozer is clearing ground for a new
minimall, then the cat will alter its behavior, but your blatant lie is that
the cat will leave an area just because a bike rider passes through.
<snip tired old research that was posted here long ago>
You are what the comic strip, Non-Sequitor is poking fun at these days, the
pre-conceptual theorist. A pre-conceptual theorist is one that ignores any
data that does not support their premise, and buys only into data that
supports the preconception.