Re: Proof that MOST Mountain Bikers Break the Law

[Edward Dolan]

"Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Fri, 5 May 2006 18:36:53 -0500, "Edward Dolan" <[email protected]>
> wrote:
[...]
>>>>Cyclists simply do not belong on footpaths.
>>>
>>> I think you mean "bicycles". Cyclists are indistinguishable from
>>> everyone else (well, aside from their day-glo clothing).
>>
>>I am talking about off-road cyclists and their confounded mentality, not
>>bikes which are inanimate objects.
>
> Bikes should be banned, off of pavement. There's nothing we can do
> about mountain BIKERS, since without their bikes, they are
> indistinguishable from everyone else. You can't discriminate on the
> basis of personality.

Well, I do not so much object to a stray BIKE lying around on a trail as I
do to it being ridden by a BIKER on a trail.
[...]

>>Yes, and specially constructed bike trails are just fine too. Rail-trails
>>are ideal. The main thing is not to have them on our footpaths.
>
> You forgot about the wildlife. Constructing trails destroys habitat.
> It should be kept to a minimum. Trails also give access to humans,
> further driving out the wildlife. Bikes multiply human access by an
> order of magnitude, which is their worst characteristic, as far as
> habitat impacts go.

Bike trails will always be at a minimum because of the expense of
constructing them. Here in the Upper Midwest, there is not much wildlife
habitat left for anyone to enjoy. Read the history of Minnesota some time if
you would like to know what man has wrought here.
[...]

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

 

[Edward Dolan]

"S Curtiss" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:gnl7g.50902$k%3.6799@dukeread12...

ALL TOP POSTERS ARE IDIOTS!

> Hey! Look! I'm posting on TOP of E Dolan! Woo-Hoo!
> "Edward Dolan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>>
>> "S Curtiss" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:ApT6g.50833$k%3.21331@dukeread12...
>>
>> ALL TOP POSTERS ARE IDIOTS!
>>
>>> Hey Dolan.... Give it a rest! Show me a badge. Show me some authority.
>>> I'll post where I chose and don't need some nut with a self-written
>>> proclamation to quote netiquette.
>>>> The only nutjob I have encountered so far here is Curtiss. Why does he
>>>> have two s' in his last name. Surely Curtiss should be Curtis. Or is he
>>>> just in love with the letter s since I note he also has an S for his
>>>> first name.
>>>
>>> Wow - character assasination...? Just like your pal Vandeman...
>>
>> I have noticed most of the name calling coming from you, not him.
> Apparently, you have not taken the time to research Vandeman or his
> posting methods. I suggest Google group search "vandeman".

I never look up anything - ever. It comes from my training as a professional
librarian.

>> But a
>>> quick search of Google groups "dolan" comes up with a lot of the same in
>>> the recumbents ng. Seems anybody who takes the time to challenge Dolan
>>> and his claims of greatness gets some mud thrown at them. Since I ride a
>>> bicycle on trails, a little mud should be no problem. WTF...? What has
>>> my name have to do with the price of suspension forks in West Virginia?
>>
>> I don't much like folks who fool around with their real names. They seem
>> like fools to me. However, if your name is really spelled with two s',
>> then you need to explain how that came to be. However, let me tell you
>> what I really don't like at all and that is folks who only have a user
>> name, never ever revealing their real name. You don't seem to fall into
>> that category, so you have passed a very critical test with the Great
>> One.
>
> I have to explain nothing. My name is what it is.

But Curtiss seems like a stupid name with two s'. Why wouldn't just one s be
enough?

>>>>> I asked you directly what makes your 6 year old study so relevant. I
>>>>> challenged you on context and substance and you side-step it to play
>>>>> tag with another opinionated half-wit.
>>>>
>>>> The only half-wit I have encountered so far here is Curtiss.
>>> Wow... Your opinion is sharp as a condom.... Perhaps you should start
>>> wearing them on your head... After all, you might as well dress like
>>> you act.
>>
>> Careful! You are now getting into the arena of sexual allusions and this
>> is likely to arouse Saint Edward the Great. Trust me on this, you do not
>> want to make HIS acquaintance. Ed Dolan the Great is a mouse compared to
>> HIM!
>
> Wow... a schizophrenic threat! That's a new one!

Even so, watch out for Saint Edward the Great. You have been warned! Making
sexual allusions is a very dangerous thing to do around Saint Edward the
Great as HE delights getting into an uproar about such shenanigans.

>>>>> So... again.
>>>>
>>>> Please, not again!
>>>>
>>>>> Please, by all means, explain the increase in cooperation, popularity,
>>>>> access and recognition of off-road cycling if the numbers and opinions
>>>>> you report are true and valid. If your numbers were consistent over
>>>>> time and universally represented the cycling community, the growth and
>>>>> recognition of off-road cycling could not be happening. Simple
>>>>> economic effects on the losses from other trail users would have been
>>>>> enough for the agencies involved to close the gates. Since these
>>>>> agencies are recognizing the cooperation and benefits of off-road
>>>>> cycling, the information, definitions and opinions you cling to and
>>>>> insist upon have either been proven false or no longer valid. Whatever
>>>>> the case, you and your opinions have been left behind.
>>>>
>>>> The agencies are catering to whomever wants to use their resources. The
>>>> only economics they care about is the number of users, because that
>>>> brings money to the local communities. Case solved! Next inquiry,
>>>> please?
>>>
>>> Right... and if the other users were not coming because of the cyclists
>>> then these agencies would have put more restrictions on cycling access.
>>> Since the cooperation and access continues, the claim of other users
>>> being driven away is unfounded. Since the only economics they care about
>>> is the number of users, and the users of all types continue to come,
>>> then off-road cyclists have not had the detrimental effects Vandeman has
>>> claimed. Case proven. The end.
>>
>> There are all kinds of conflicts going on between users under the
>> surface. The agencies are only concerned with the bottom line. As long as
>> they are not being deserted by one and all, they will continue to do
>> business as usual.
>
> Perhaps that explains why it is more important for the user groups to keep
> communication open and cooperation a priority.
>>
>> Bikers do not mind hikers, but hikers do mind bikers. So what? Exactly
>> so!
>
> Generalizations and opinions.

Nope, you will never get anything from Ed Dolan the Great except the
unvarnished truth!

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

 

[Michael Halliwell]

Edward Dolan wrote:

>>
>>I have to explain nothing. My name is what it is.
>
>
> But Curtiss seems like a stupid name with two s'. Why wouldn't just one s be
> enough?
>
>
That's like saying Lloyd should only have one "l"...the spelling is the
spelling, get over it.

Michael Halliwell

 

[Mike Vandeman]

On Sun, 7 May 2006 17:57:51 -0400, "S Curtiss"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>
>"Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news[email protected]...
>>>>>And you place importance on anecdotal and unproven "evidence" too.
>>>>
>>>> All science derives from observation. Observations are the FACTS upon
>>>> which it rests. You would know that, if you knew anything about
>>>> science.
>>>Actually - You have it backwards. Observation leads to facts. A fact is
>>>determined by repeated process and observation. An observation is not a
>>>FACT.
>>
>> So if I observe a mountain biker speeding, running over an animal,
>> creating a rut, skidding, or running into a hiker, it didn't really
>> happen? You are digging yourself in deeper and deeper in your morass
>> of lies. I've observed you lie so often, it must be a FACT, right?
>
>I have observed hikers leave garbage, go off trail, remove plants, and
>create deep footprints in soft terrain....
>Are these observations factual? Of course. Can I extrapolate that all
>persons engaging in the activity of hiking will behave this way? No.

You could if you had enough observations & statistics. For example, I
have a HUGE number of observations of mountain bikers lying. In fact,
I have never met one who doesn't lie. From that it is valid and
necessary to generalize.

>You make assumptions based on your "observations" which are already tainted
>because you expect to find adverse evidence and you expect it to be caused
>by cyclists. Your witness of poor behavior is not an indicator of behavior
>by everyone. In your eyes, every mountain biker is doing harm. Therefore,
>the mere presence represents poor behavior. Your observation is tainted to
>begin with.
>
>>
>> It is merely part of the process of determining a fact.
>>>But someone who insists on their own definitions and opinions as the only
>>>ones applicable can hardly claim scientific support.
>>>>
>>>> .. What
>>>>>is your criteria? What are the controls and statistics to maintain data
>>>>>across several user groups? What is the time frame? How many
>>>>>participants
>>>>>in
>>>>>each user group? Just because you see a rut and squeel "mountain bike"
>>>>>like
>>>>>a girl finding a spider means nothing.
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Explain how a guitarist can sing and maintain the rhythm and
>>>>>chord structure? How can you begin to assume, as a non-cyclist, the
>>>>>degree
>>>>>of attention required to control the bike? It is like anything else...
>>>>>Practice creates reflex and muscle memory. Riding and observing the
>>>>>natural
>>>>>surroundings is as easy, (and emotionally fulfilling) as walking. The
>>>>>mere
>>>>>fact you can't do it is no reason to detract from my abillitiy.
>>>>
>>>> Your primary skill is LYING.
>>>Opinion. Expressing it may be your primary skill.
>>
>> BS. When I OBSERVE you lying, that's all the evidence I need. Like the
>> lie above: "An observation is not a FACT". You are a LIAR. And when
>> it's repeated, you are an incorrigible liar.
>You have yet to prove a lie on my part. Go for it. Google Group search and
>find an instance of a lie on my part.
>I disagree with your opinion. (disagreement is not a lie) I challenge your
>status as an authority (challenge is not a lie) I make statements based on
>my point of view and assimilated information (my expression of an opinion is
>not a lie).
>So... please.... Find a lie on my part.

I have pointed out many in this newsgroup.

An actual, real presentation of
>false information. Not merely a statement that goes against your opinion.
>> ===
>> 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 Sun, 7 May 2006 18:45:20 -0500, "Edward Dolan" <[email protected]>
wrote:

>
>"Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> On Fri, 5 May 2006 18:36:53 -0500, "Edward Dolan" <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>[...]
>>>>>Cyclists simply do not belong on footpaths.
>>>>
>>>> I think you mean "bicycles". Cyclists are indistinguishable from
>>>> everyone else (well, aside from their day-glo clothing).
>>>
>>>I am talking about off-road cyclists and their confounded mentality, not
>>>bikes which are inanimate objects.
>>
>> Bikes should be banned, off of pavement. There's nothing we can do
>> about mountain BIKERS, since without their bikes, they are
>> indistinguishable from everyone else. You can't discriminate on the
>> basis of personality.
>
>Well, I do not so much object to a stray BIKE lying around on a trail as I
>do to it being ridden by a BIKER on a trail.
>[...]
>
>>>Yes, and specially constructed bike trails are just fine too. Rail-trails
>>>are ideal. The main thing is not to have them on our footpaths.
>>
>> You forgot about the wildlife. Constructing trails destroys habitat.
>> It should be kept to a minimum. Trails also give access to humans,
>> further driving out the wildlife. Bikes multiply human access by an
>> order of magnitude, which is their worst characteristic, as far as
>> habitat impacts go.
>
>Bike trails will always be at a minimum because of the expense of
>constructing them.

I don't think so. Mountain bikers are willing to construct them for
free.

Here in the Upper Midwest, there is not much wildlife
>habitat left for anyone to enjoy. Read the history of Minnesota some time if
>you would like to know what man has wrought here.

I have been at biology conferences in Duluth and Madison, and gone on
the field trips. Wildlife quality is relative, not black and white..

>[...]
>
>Regards,
>
>Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
>aka
>Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
>
>
===
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 Sun, 7 May 2006 19:00:02 -0500, "Edward Dolan" <[email protected]>
wrote:

>
>"S Curtiss" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:gnl7g.50902$k%3.6799@dukeread12...
>
>ALL TOP POSTERS ARE IDIOTS!
>
>> Hey! Look! I'm posting on TOP of E Dolan! Woo-Hoo!
>> "Edward Dolan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>>>
>>> "S Curtiss" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>> news:ApT6g.50833$k%3.21331@dukeread12...
>>>
>>> ALL TOP POSTERS ARE IDIOTS!
>>>
>>>> Hey Dolan.... Give it a rest! Show me a badge. Show me some authority.
>>>> I'll post where I chose and don't need some nut with a self-written
>>>> proclamation to quote netiquette.
>>>>> The only nutjob I have encountered so far here is Curtiss. Why does he
>>>>> have two s' in his last name. Surely Curtiss should be Curtis. Or is he
>>>>> just in love with the letter s since I note he also has an S for his
>>>>> first name.
>>>>
>>>> Wow - character assasination...? Just like your pal Vandeman...
>>>
>>> I have noticed most of the name calling coming from you, not him.
>> Apparently, you have not taken the time to research Vandeman or his
>> posting methods. I suggest Google group search "vandeman".
>
>I never look up anything - ever. It comes from my training as a professional
>librarian.
>
>>> But a
>>>> quick search of Google groups "dolan" comes up with a lot of the same in
>>>> the recumbents ng. Seems anybody who takes the time to challenge Dolan
>>>> and his claims of greatness gets some mud thrown at them. Since I ride a
>>>> bicycle on trails, a little mud should be no problem. WTF...? What has
>>>> my name have to do with the price of suspension forks in West Virginia?
>>>
>>> I don't much like folks who fool around with their real names. They seem
>>> like fools to me. However, if your name is really spelled with two s',
>>> then you need to explain how that came to be. However, let me tell you
>>> what I really don't like at all and that is folks who only have a user
>>> name, never ever revealing their real name. You don't seem to fall into
>>> that category, so you have passed a very critical test with the Great
>>> One.
>>
>> I have to explain nothing. My name is what it is.
>
>But Curtiss seems like a stupid name with two s'. Why wouldn't just one s be
>enough?

Yes, wasteful. But isn't "Ed Dolan the Great" redundant?

>>>>>> I asked you directly what makes your 6 year old study so relevant. I
>>>>>> challenged you on context and substance and you side-step it to play
>>>>>> tag with another opinionated half-wit.
>>>>>
>>>>> The only half-wit I have encountered so far here is Curtiss.
>>>> Wow... Your opinion is sharp as a condom.... Perhaps you should start
>>>> wearing them on your head... After all, you might as well dress like
>>>> you act.
>>>
>>> Careful! You are now getting into the arena of sexual allusions and this
>>> is likely to arouse Saint Edward the Great. Trust me on this, you do not
>>> want to make HIS acquaintance. Ed Dolan the Great is a mouse compared to
>>> HIM!
>>
>> Wow... a schizophrenic threat! That's a new one!
>
>Even so, watch out for Saint Edward the Great. You have been warned! Making
>sexual allusions is a very dangerous thing to do around Saint Edward the
>Great as HE delights getting into an uproar about such shenanigans.
>
>>>>>> So... again.
>>>>>
>>>>> Please, not again!
>>>>>
>>>>>> Please, by all means, explain the increase in cooperation, popularity,
>>>>>> access and recognition of off-road cycling if the numbers and opinions
>>>>>> you report are true and valid. If your numbers were consistent over
>>>>>> time and universally represented the cycling community, the growth and
>>>>>> recognition of off-road cycling could not be happening. Simple
>>>>>> economic effects on the losses from other trail users would have been
>>>>>> enough for the agencies involved to close the gates. Since these
>>>>>> agencies are recognizing the cooperation and benefits of off-road
>>>>>> cycling, the information, definitions and opinions you cling to and
>>>>>> insist upon have either been proven false or no longer valid. Whatever
>>>>>> the case, you and your opinions have been left behind.
>>>>>
>>>>> The agencies are catering to whomever wants to use their resources. The
>>>>> only economics they care about is the number of users, because that
>>>>> brings money to the local communities. Case solved! Next inquiry,
>>>>> please?
>>>>
>>>> Right... and if the other users were not coming because of the cyclists
>>>> then these agencies would have put more restrictions on cycling access.
>>>> Since the cooperation and access continues, the claim of other users
>>>> being driven away is unfounded. Since the only economics they care about
>>>> is the number of users, and the users of all types continue to come,
>>>> then off-road cyclists have not had the detrimental effects Vandeman has
>>>> claimed. Case proven. The end.
>>>
>>> There are all kinds of conflicts going on between users under the
>>> surface. The agencies are only concerned with the bottom line. As long as
>>> they are not being deserted by one and all, they will continue to do
>>> business as usual.
>>
>> Perhaps that explains why it is more important for the user groups to keep
>> communication open and cooperation a priority.
>>>
>>> Bikers do not mind hikers, but hikers do mind bikers. So what? Exactly
>>> so!
>>
>> Generalizations and opinions.
>
>Nope, you will never get anything from Ed Dolan the Great except the
>unvarnished truth!
>
>Regards,
>
>Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
>aka
>Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
>
===
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

 

[Edward Dolan]

"Michael Halliwell" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:grx7g.136286$7a.74341@pd7tw1no...
> Edward Dolan wrote:
>
>>>
>>>I have to explain nothing. My name is what it is.
>>
>>
>> But Curtiss seems like a stupid name with two s'. Why wouldn't just one s
>> be enough?
>>
>>
> That's like saying Lloyd should only have one "l"...the spelling is the
> spelling, get over it.
>
> Michael Halliwell

Yes, it is a given that some of us come into the world with a sensible name
and others of us come into the world with a stupid name. I blame it all on
the parents. So be it!

But most folks are glad to explain their names, no matter how stupid. That
apparently is not the case with Steve Curtiss (he of the double s).

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

 

[S Curtiss]

"Edward Dolan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> But most folks are glad to explain their names, no matter how stupid. That
> apparently is not the case with Steve Curtiss (he of the double s).
>
It is what is. What's the fuss? It could be worse... It could be spelled
"D-o-l-a-n".

 

[S Curtiss]

"Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Sun, 7 May 2006 17:57:51 -0400, "S Curtiss"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>news[email protected]...
>>>>>>And you place importance on anecdotal and unproven "evidence" too.
>>>>>
>>>>> All science derives from observation. Observations are the FACTS upon
>>>>> which it rests. You would know that, if you knew anything about
>>>>> science.
>>>>Actually - You have it backwards. Observation leads to facts. A fact is
>>>>determined by repeated process and observation. An observation is not a
>>>>FACT.
>>>
>>> So if I observe a mountain biker speeding, running over an animal,
>>> creating a rut, skidding, or running into a hiker, it didn't really
>>> happen? You are digging yourself in deeper and deeper in your morass
>>> of lies. I've observed you lie so often, it must be a FACT, right?
>>
>>I have observed hikers leave garbage, go off trail, remove plants, and
>>create deep footprints in soft terrain....
>>Are these observations factual? Of course. Can I extrapolate that all
>>persons engaging in the activity of hiking will behave this way? No.
>
> You could if you had enough observations & statistics. For example, I
> have a HUGE number of observations of mountain bikers lying. In fact,
> I have never met one who doesn't lie. From that it is valid and
> necessary to generalize.
You stating "you have not met one who does not lie" is meaningless. Where is
the corraboration? Your claims of having enough observation to create a
valid statistical model are meaningless. How many mountain bikers are there?
Ten, twenty, two thousand, twenty million...? What percentage have you
observed in person? How much have you a observed as trace evidence and
attributed to cyclists while disregarding any other possible factors? Your
claim of what is HUGE is suspect because all of your information is filtered
first through your bias agains off-road cycling.
>
>>You make assumptions based on your "observations" which are already
>>tainted
>>because you expect to find adverse evidence and you expect it to be caused
>>by cyclists. Your witness of poor behavior is not an indicator of behavior
>>by everyone. In your eyes, every mountain biker is doing harm. Therefore,
>>the mere presence represents poor behavior. Your observation is tainted to
>>begin with.
>>
>>>
>>> It is merely part of the process of determining a fact.
>>>>But someone who insists on their own definitions and opinions as the
>>>>only
>>>>ones applicable can hardly claim scientific support.
>>>>>
>>>>> .. What
>>>>>>is your criteria? What are the controls and statistics to maintain
>>>>>>data
>>>>>>across several user groups? What is the time frame? How many
>>>>>>participants
>>>>>>in
>>>>>>each user group? Just because you see a rut and squeel "mountain bike"
>>>>>>like
>>>>>>a girl finding a spider means nothing.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Explain how a guitarist can sing and maintain the rhythm and
>>>>>>chord structure? How can you begin to assume, as a non-cyclist, the
>>>>>>degree
>>>>>>of attention required to control the bike? It is like anything else...
>>>>>>Practice creates reflex and muscle memory. Riding and observing the
>>>>>>natural
>>>>>>surroundings is as easy, (and emotionally fulfilling) as walking. The
>>>>>>mere
>>>>>>fact you can't do it is no reason to detract from my abillitiy.
>>>>>
>>>>> Your primary skill is LYING.
>>>>Opinion. Expressing it may be your primary skill.
>>>
>>> BS. When I OBSERVE you lying, that's all the evidence I need. Like the
>>> lie above: "An observation is not a FACT". You are a LIAR. And when
>>> it's repeated, you are an incorrigible liar.
>>You have yet to prove a lie on my part. Go for it. Google Group search and
>>find an instance of a lie on my part.
>>I disagree with your opinion. (disagreement is not a lie) I challenge
>>your
>>status as an authority (challenge is not a lie) I make statements based
>>on
>>my point of view and assimilated information (my expression of an opinion
>>is
>>not a lie).
>>So... please.... Find a lie on my part.
>
> I have pointed out many in this newsgroup.
And they are....?
>
> An actual, real presentation of
>>false information. Not merely a statement that goes against your opinion.
>>> ===

 

[Edward Dolan]

"Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Sun, 7 May 2006 18:45:20 -0500, "Edward Dolan" <[email protected]>
> wrote:
[...]
> Here in the Upper Midwest, there is not much wildlife
>>habitat left for anyone to enjoy. Read the history of Minnesota some time
>>if
>>you would like to know what man has wrought here.
>
> I have been at biology conferences in Duluth and Madison, and gone on
> the field trips. Wildlife quality is relative, not black and white..

If you would know the future of the US, you need to visit the East Coast
from Boston to Richmond. It is becoming a totally urbanized landscape. The
only wildlife left is that of rats and cockroaches, ever the constant
companions of man on earth.

But southern Minnesota is not central and northern Minnesota. It is exactly
like Iowa. I know Iowa a hundred times better than I know the rest of
Minnesota because I have driven across it dozens of times.

So what is left in Iowa, the true Heartland of America? Just about nothing
is left. The entire state was given over to agriculture in the space of a
single generation. It is truly a black desert as far as wildlife is
concerned. Even the state parks are little more than postage-sized set
asides. The entire country east of the Mississippi is pretty much like Iowa.
The tall grass prairie, one of the wonders of the world, has been completely
destroyed and is gone forever.

The country west of the Mississippi is going to go the same way as the
country east of the Mississippi. After all, you can water the deserts and
humans can live there in great numbers. The state of our technology is such
that people can live anywhere they want to live, even on mountain tops. I am
in total despair of there ever being anything left of the natural world. It
is all going to go very rapidly.

Population is the key to everything and it is why you are fighting a forlorn
battle. The best you can do are some stop gap measures, but in the end
everything you and I would like to see is not going to happen. Cutiss and
his ilk are going to win every battle even though they know not what they
do. The world of the future will not be one you and I would want to live in,
but the generations to come will not know any better and they will accept
whatever is. Curtiss and his ilk will have prevailed.

Earth - Abandon all hope ye who enter here!

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

 

[Mike Vandeman]

On Mon, 8 May 2006 13:56:42 -0400, "S Curtiss" <[email protected]>
wrote:

>
>"Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> On Sun, 7 May 2006 17:57:51 -0400, "S Curtiss"
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>news[email protected]...
>>>>>>>And you place importance on anecdotal and unproven "evidence" too.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> All science derives from observation. Observations are the FACTS upon
>>>>>> which it rests. You would know that, if you knew anything about
>>>>>> science.
>>>>>Actually - You have it backwards. Observation leads to facts. A fact is
>>>>>determined by repeated process and observation. An observation is not a
>>>>>FACT.
>>>>
>>>> So if I observe a mountain biker speeding, running over an animal,
>>>> creating a rut, skidding, or running into a hiker, it didn't really
>>>> happen? You are digging yourself in deeper and deeper in your morass
>>>> of lies. I've observed you lie so often, it must be a FACT, right?
>>>
>>>I have observed hikers leave garbage, go off trail, remove plants, and
>>>create deep footprints in soft terrain....
>>>Are these observations factual? Of course. Can I extrapolate that all
>>>persons engaging in the activity of hiking will behave this way? No.
>>
>> You could if you had enough observations & statistics. For example, I
>> have a HUGE number of observations of mountain bikers lying. In fact,
>> I have never met one who doesn't lie. From that it is valid and
>> necessary to generalize.
>You stating "you have not met one who does not lie" is meaningless. Where is
>the corraboration?

Right here. Google it. You can verify it

Your claims of having enough observation to create a
>valid statistical model are meaningless. How many mountain bikers are there?
>Ten, twenty, two thousand, twenty million...? What percentage have you
>observed in person?

Dozens. I have yet to meet even ONE mountain biker who doesn't lie,
including YOU.

How much have you a observed as trace evidence and
>attributed to cyclists while disregarding any other possible factors? Your
>claim of what is HUGE is suspect because all of your information is filtered
>first through your bias agains off-road cycling.

I'm not biased. I just tell the truth. Mountain bikers hate that.

>>>You make assumptions based on your "observations" which are already
>>>tainted
>>>because you expect to find adverse evidence and you expect it to be caused
>>>by cyclists. Your witness of poor behavior is not an indicator of behavior
>>>by everyone. In your eyes, every mountain biker is doing harm. Therefore,
>>>the mere presence represents poor behavior. Your observation is tainted to
>>>begin with.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> It is merely part of the process of determining a fact.
>>>>>But someone who insists on their own definitions and opinions as the
>>>>>only
>>>>>ones applicable can hardly claim scientific support.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> .. What
>>>>>>>is your criteria? What are the controls and statistics to maintain
>>>>>>>data
>>>>>>>across several user groups? What is the time frame? How many
>>>>>>>participants
>>>>>>>in
>>>>>>>each user group? Just because you see a rut and squeel "mountain bike"
>>>>>>>like
>>>>>>>a girl finding a spider means nothing.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Explain how a guitarist can sing and maintain the rhythm and
>>>>>>>chord structure? How can you begin to assume, as a non-cyclist, the
>>>>>>>degree
>>>>>>>of attention required to control the bike? It is like anything else...
>>>>>>>Practice creates reflex and muscle memory. Riding and observing the
>>>>>>>natural
>>>>>>>surroundings is as easy, (and emotionally fulfilling) as walking. The
>>>>>>>mere
>>>>>>>fact you can't do it is no reason to detract from my abillitiy.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Your primary skill is LYING.
>>>>>Opinion. Expressing it may be your primary skill.
>>>>
>>>> BS. When I OBSERVE you lying, that's all the evidence I need. Like the
>>>> lie above: "An observation is not a FACT". You are a LIAR. And when
>>>> it's repeated, you are an incorrigible liar.
>>>You have yet to prove a lie on my part. Go for it. Google Group search and
>>>find an instance of a lie on my part.
>>>I disagree with your opinion. (disagreement is not a lie) I challenge
>>>your
>>>status as an authority (challenge is not a lie) I make statements based
>>>on
>>>my point of view and assimilated information (my expression of an opinion
>>>is
>>>not a lie).
>>>So... please.... Find a lie on my part.
>>
>> I have pointed out many in this newsgroup.
>And they are....?
>>
>> An actual, real presentation of
>>>false information. Not merely a statement that goes against your opinion.

Try Google.
===
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, 8 May 2006 19:44:50 -0500, "Edward Dolan" <[email protected]>
wrote:

>
>"Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> On Sun, 7 May 2006 18:45:20 -0500, "Edward Dolan" <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>[...]
>> Here in the Upper Midwest, there is not much wildlife
>>>habitat left for anyone to enjoy. Read the history of Minnesota some time
>>>if
>>>you would like to know what man has wrought here.
>>
>> I have been at biology conferences in Duluth and Madison, and gone on
>> the field trips. Wildlife quality is relative, not black and white..
>
>If you would know the future of the US, you need to visit the East Coast
>from Boston to Richmond. It is becoming a totally urbanized landscape.

I know. Just to look at a road map is scary.

The
>only wildlife left is that of rats and cockroaches, ever the constant
>companions of man on earth.
>
>But southern Minnesota is not central and northern Minnesota. It is exactly
>like Iowa. I know Iowa a hundred times better than I know the rest of
>Minnesota because I have driven across it dozens of times.
>
>So what is left in Iowa, the true Heartland of America? Just about nothing
>is left.

Not quite. I went to a conference in Lincoln. Sand County was
mentioned often. Still, it's relative.

The entire state was given over to agriculture in the space of a
>single generation. It is truly a black desert as far as wildlife is
>concerned. Even the state parks are little more than postage-sized set
>asides. The entire country east of the Mississippi is pretty much like Iowa.
>The tall grass prairie, one of the wonders of the world, has been completely
>destroyed and is gone forever.

There are pockets of prairie that are mentioned at the conferences.
Many people are working on restoration, even of elephants (to replace
the mammoths & mastodons).

>The country west of the Mississippi is going to go the same way as the
>country east of the Mississippi. After all, you can water the deserts and
>humans can live there in great numbers. The state of our technology is such
>that people can live anywhere they want to live, even on mountain tops. I am
>in total despair of there ever being anything left of the natural world. It
>is all going to go very rapidly.

There are reasons for hope, e.g. running out of oil. That will cut our
footprint down considerably.

>Population is the key to everything and it is why you are fighting a forlorn
>battle. The best you can do are some stop gap measures, but in the end
>everything you and I would like to see is not going to happen. Cutiss and
>his ilk are going to win every battle even though they know not what they
>do. The world of the future will not be one you and I would want to live in,
>but the generations to come will not know any better and they will accept
>whatever is. Curtiss and his ilk will have prevailed.

Despair only helps them. I think it's like a disease.

>Earth - Abandon all hope ye who enter here!
>
>Regards,
>
>Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
>aka
>Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
>
===
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]

"Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Mon, 8 May 2006 13:56:42 -0400, "S Curtiss" <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>>>>I have observed hikers leave garbage, go off trail, remove plants, and
>>>>create deep footprints in soft terrain....
>>>>Are these observations factual? Of course. Can I extrapolate that all
>>>>persons engaging in the activity of hiking will behave this way? No.
>>>
>>> You could if you had enough observations & statistics. For example, I
>>> have a HUGE number of observations of mountain bikers lying. In fact,
>>> I have never met one who doesn't lie. From that it is valid and
>>> necessary to generalize.
>>You stating "you have not met one who does not lie" is meaningless. Where
>>is
>>the corraboration?
>
> Right here. Google it. You can verify it

And what am I to "Google"? Your name...? "mountain biking"? The history of
the "lie"...? Who am I looking up to corraborate your claim of mountain
bikers being liars simply because you meet them?
>
> Your claims of having enough observation to create a
>>valid statistical model are meaningless. How many mountain bikers are
>>there?
>>Ten, twenty, two thousand, twenty million...? What percentage have you
>>observed in person?
>
> Dozens. I have yet to meet even ONE mountain biker who doesn't lie,
> including YOU.

Opinion. Projection. A conclusion based on your opinion as a qualifier.
Meaningless.
>
> How much have you a observed as trace evidence and
>>attributed to cyclists while disregarding any other possible factors? Your
>>claim of what is HUGE is suspect because all of your information is
>>filtered
>>first through your bias agains off-road cycling.
>
> I'm not biased. I just tell the truth. Mountain bikers hate that.
If you were truly "not biased", you would include all types of recreation in
your posts as a comparison and a basis of observing real information. It is
only when challenged, repeatedly, that you mention possible effects of other
activities. Mountain bikers do not hate "truth". They hate you for
misrepresenting the "truth".
>
>>>>You make assumptions based on your "observations" which are already
>>>>tainted
>>>>because you expect to find adverse evidence and you expect it to be
>>>>caused
>>>>by cyclists. Your witness of poor behavior is not an indicator of
>>>>behavior
>>>>by everyone. In your eyes, every mountain biker is doing harm.
>>>>Therefore,
>>>>the mere presence represents poor behavior. Your observation is tainted
>>>>to
>>>>begin with.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>So... please.... Find a lie on my part.
>>>
>>> I have pointed out many in this newsgroup.
>>And they are....?
>>>
>>> An actual, real presentation of
>>>>false information. Not merely a statement that goes against your
>>>>opinion.
>
> Try Google.
Nope... You say I lie... You find it.

 

[Edward Dolan]

"S Curtiss" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:E4p8g.51115$k%3.33760@dukeread12...
>
> "Edward Dolan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
[....]
>> I am only telling you what true walkers like myself think of you when
>> they you see on a bike on their sacred footpaths.
>
> Fine. These opinions and the actual true relationship to impact are two
> different things. One is perception (opinion), the other is reality (real
> effects).

Nope, you are slob and a cretin when you are on my scared footpaths on your
confounded bike. Stay on the roads where you belong.

>>> You have no authority or recognized position to speak for anyone or any
>>> group. You have not been elected, appointed or chosen by any of the
>>> groups you mention to speak on their behalf.
>>
>> We solitary walkers in the wilderness are not organized types. Like
>> Somerset Maugham, I am not a club-able man.
>
> Fine. So what. Big Deal. Who cares?

I have just told you above that I do not belong to freaking clubs like you
do. I speak of, by and for MYSELF. I am like GOD that way.

>>> You have nothing but an opinion.
>>
>> But my opinions are better than your opinions. Surely you can see that!
>
> If I accepted that, I would not be having this conversation. Your opinions
> are no more important to the grand scheme than than the guy in 47th row at
> the last NASCAR race.

Anyone attending a NASCAR race is subhuman, but it sure does tell all of us
where you are coming from.

>> Welcome to the real world, Edward Dolan
>>> "the just like any other person".
>>
>> I have chosen to hardly ever reside in "the real world." That is
>> something I have always wanted to escape from whenever possible.
>
> By all means... have at it.

Yes, you continue to live in your freaking world and I will continue to live
in mine. God, it must be awful to be a slob like Curtiss! He should put a
bullet though his brain and end his misery - and ours too!

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

 

[S Curtiss]

"Edward Dolan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>>
>> Fine. These opinions and the actual true relationship to impact are two
>> different things. One is perception (opinion), the other is reality (real
>> effects).
>
> Nope, you are slob and a cretin when you are on my scared footpaths on
> your confounded bike. Stay on the roads where you belong.
Your name-calling, opinion of who owns what and where I "belong" are a
non-issue. Your comments merely have no authority.
>
>>>> You have no authority or recognized position to speak for anyone or any
>>>> group. You have not been elected, appointed or chosen by any of the
>>>> groups you mention to speak on their behalf.
>>>
>>> We solitary walkers in the wilderness are not organized types. Like
>>> Somerset Maugham, I am not a club-able man.
>>
>> Fine. So what. Big Deal. Who cares?
>
> I have just told you above that I do not belong to freaking clubs like you
> do. I speak of, by and for MYSELF. I am like GOD that way.
Fine. So what. Big Deal. Who cares? You want to speak for yourself... OK.
You have my permission. As far as a comparison to GOD goes... You'll have
to take that up with him.
>
>>>> You have nothing but an opinion.
>>>
>>> But my opinions are better than your opinions. Surely you can see that!
>>
>> If I accepted that, I would not be having this conversation. Your
>> opinions are no more important to the grand scheme than than the guy in
>> 47th row at the last NASCAR race.
>
> Anyone attending a NASCAR race is subhuman, but it sure does tell all of
> us where you are coming from.
wow... let me step sideways and avoid the thrust of yet another sharp
witticism. I wouldn't want to get bruised...
>
>>> Welcome to the real world, Edward Dolan
>>>> "the just like any other person".
>>>
>>> I have chosen to hardly ever reside in "the real world." That is
>>> something I have always wanted to escape from whenever possible.
>>
>> By all means... have at it.
>
> Yes, you continue to live in your freaking world and I will continue to
> live in mine. God, it must be awful to be a slob like Curtiss! He should
> put a bullet though his brain and end his misery - and ours too!
>
At least my first attempt would be my last, unlike you who apparently missed
the first time. Was the caliber too small or was it the target?

 

[Edward Dolan]

"S Curtiss" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:u5L8g.9612$B42.6232@dukeread05...
>
> "Edward Dolan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>>>
>>> Fine. These opinions and the actual true relationship to impact are two
>>> different things. One is perception (opinion), the other is reality
>>> (real effects).
>>
>> Nope, you are slob and a cretin when you are on my scared footpaths on
>> your confounded bike. Stay on the roads where you belong.
>
> Your name-calling, opinion of who owns what and where I "belong" are a
> non-issue. Your comments merely have no authority.

But my opinions are superior to your opinions. Sure you can see that!

>>>>> You have no authority or recognized position to speak for anyone or
>>>>> any group. You have not been elected, appointed or chosen by any of
>>>>> the groups you mention to speak on their behalf.
>>>>
>>>> We solitary walkers in the wilderness are not organized types. Like
>>>> Somerset Maugham, I am not a club-able man.
>>>
>>> Fine. So what. Big Deal. Who cares?
>>
>> I have just told you above that I do not belong to freaking clubs like
>> you do. I speak of, by and for MYSELF. I am like GOD that way.
>
> Fine. So what. Big Deal. Who cares? You want to speak for yourself...
> OK. You have my permission. As far as a comparison to GOD goes... You'll
> have to take that up with him.

GOD does not belong to organizations and clubs like you do! Nor do I.

>>>>> You have nothing but an opinion.
>>>>
>>>> But my opinions are better than your opinions. Surely you can see that!
>>>
>>> If I accepted that, I would not be having this conversation. Your
>>> opinions are no more important to the grand scheme than than the guy in
>>> 47th row at the last NASCAR race.
>>
>> Anyone attending a NASCAR race is subhuman, but it sure does tell all of
>> us where you are coming from.
>
> wow... let me step sideways and avoid the thrust of yet another sharp
> witticism. I wouldn't want to get bruised...

NASCAR people and mountain bike people go together. What they have in common
is their barbarity and lack of genuine culture that would result in an
appreciation for wilderness and natural scenes. You probably drink beer
instead of wine. Everyone knows that beer is strictly for barbarians.

>>>> Welcome to the real world, Edward Dolan
>>>>> "the just like any other person".
>>>>
>>>> I have chosen to hardly ever reside in "the real world." That is
>>>> something I have always wanted to escape from whenever possible.
>>>
>>> By all means... have at it.
>>
>> Yes, you continue to live in your freaking world and I will continue to
>> live in mine. God, it must be awful to be a slob like Curtiss! He should
>> put a bullet though his brain and end his misery - and ours too!
>>
> At least my first attempt would be my last, unlike you who apparently
> missed the first time. Was the caliber too small or was it the target?

I do not believe in that much violence. I am more the take poison type.
After all, why should I disturb my cats with a shotgun blast just because I
want to get out of a world that is mostly composed of slobs and barbarians
like Steve Curtiss.

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

 

[S Curtiss]

"Edward Dolan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
>>>>
>>>> Fine. These opinions and the actual true relationship to impact are two
>>>> different things. One is perception (opinion), the other is reality
>>>> (real effects).
>>>
>>> Nope, you are slob and a cretin when you are on my scared footpaths on
>>> your confounded bike. Stay on the roads where you belong.
>>
>> Your name-calling, opinion of who owns what and where I "belong" are a
>> non-issue. Your comments merely have no authority.
>
> But my opinions are superior to your opinions. Sure you can see that!

Not even with a microscope...
>
>>>>>> You have no authority or recognized position to speak for anyone or
>>>>>> any group. You have not been elected, appointed or chosen by any of
>>>>>> the groups you mention to speak on their behalf.
>>>>>
>>>>> We solitary walkers in the wilderness are not organized types. Like
>>>>> Somerset Maugham, I am not a club-able man.
>>>>
>>>> Fine. So what. Big Deal. Who cares?
>>>
>>> I have just told you above that I do not belong to freaking clubs like
>>> you do. I speak of, by and for MYSELF. I am like GOD that way.
>>
>> Fine. So what. Big Deal. Who cares? You want to speak for yourself... OK.
>> You have my permission. As far as a comparison to GOD goes... You'll
>> have to take that up with him.
>
> GOD does not belong to organizations and clubs like you do! Nor do I.

The oranges are blue.
>
>>>>>> You have nothing but an opinion.
>>>>>
>>>>> But my opinions are better than your opinions. Surely you can see
>>>>> that!
>>>>
>>>> If I accepted that, I would not be having this conversation. Your
>>>> opinions are no more important to the grand scheme than than the guy in
>>>> 47th row at the last NASCAR race.
>>>
>>> Anyone attending a NASCAR race is subhuman, but it sure does tell all of
>>> us where you are coming from.
>>
>> wow... let me step sideways and avoid the thrust of yet another sharp
>> witticism. I wouldn't want to get bruised...
>
> NASCAR people and mountain bike people go together. What they have in
> common is their barbarity and lack of genuine culture that would result in
> an appreciation for wilderness and natural scenes. You probably drink beer
> instead of wine. Everyone knows that beer is strictly for barbarians.
>
Single malt Scotch, usually.
>>>>> Welcome to the real world, Edward Dolan
>>>>>> "the just like any other person".
>>>>>
>>>>> I have chosen to hardly ever reside in "the real world." That is
>>>>> something I have always wanted to escape from whenever possible.
>>>>
>>>> By all means... have at it.
>>>
>>> Yes, you continue to live in your freaking world and I will continue to
>>> live in mine. God, it must be awful to be a slob like Curtiss! He should
>>> put a bullet though his brain and end his misery - and ours too!
>>>
>> At least my first attempt would be my last, unlike you who apparently
>> missed the first time. Was the caliber too small or was it the target?
>
> I do not believe in that much violence. I am more the take poison type.
> After all, why should I disturb my cats with a shotgun blast just because
> I want to get out of a world that is mostly composed of slobs and
> barbarians like Steve Curtiss.
>
You say I should "put a bullet " through my brain...? Then acuse me of
being a "slob" and "barbarian"...?
If I wanted to get out of a world that is mostly composed of lost and
confused egos, I would simply leave the psychiatric ward.

 

[Edward Dolan]

"S Curtiss" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:4X39g.9684$B42.1779@dukeread05...
>
> "Edward Dolan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Fine. These opinions and the actual true relationship to impact are
>>>>> two different things. One is perception (opinion), the other is
>>>>> reality (real effects).
>>>>
>>>> Nope, you are slob and a cretin when you are on my scared footpaths on
>>>> your confounded bike. Stay on the roads where you belong.
>>>
>>> Your name-calling, opinion of who owns what and where I "belong" are a
>>> non-issue. Your comments merely have no authority.
>>
>> But my opinions are superior to your opinions. Surely you can see that!
>
> Not even with a microscope...

When you do not like what I say, you charge me with having nothing but an
opinion, but that applies to you as well as everyone else who posts to these
newsgroups. Do you not know that the world turns on opinions. What do you
think the War on Terror is all about?

>>>>>>> You have no authority or recognized position to speak for anyone or
>>>>>>> any group. You have not been elected, appointed or chosen by any of
>>>>>>> the groups you mention to speak on their behalf.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We solitary walkers in the wilderness are not organized types. Like
>>>>>> Somerset Maugham, I am not a club-able man.
>>>>>
>>>>> Fine. So what. Big Deal. Who cares?
>>>>
>>>> I have just told you above that I do not belong to freaking clubs like
>>>> you do. I speak of, by and for MYSELF. I am like GOD that way.
>>>
>>> Fine. So what. Big Deal. Who cares? You want to speak for yourself...
>>> OK. You have my permission. As far as a comparison to GOD goes...
>>> You'll have to take that up with him.
>>
>> GOD does not belong to organizations and clubs like you do! Nor do I.
>
> The oranges are blue.
>>
>>>>>>> You have nothing but an opinion.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But my opinions are better than your opinions. Surely you can see
>>>>>> that!
>>>>>
>>>>> If I accepted that, I would not be having this conversation. Your
>>>>> opinions are no more important to the grand scheme than than the guy
>>>>> in 47th row at the last NASCAR race.
>>>>
>>>> Anyone attending a NASCAR race is subhuman, but it sure does tell all
>>>> of us where you are coming from.
>>>
>>> wow... let me step sideways and avoid the thrust of yet another sharp
>>> witticism. I wouldn't want to get bruised...
>>
>> NASCAR people and mountain bike people go together. What they have in
>> common is their barbarity and lack of genuine culture that would result
>> in an appreciation for wilderness and natural scenes. You probably drink
>> beer instead of wine. Everyone knows that beer is strictly for
>> barbarians.
>>
> Single malt Scotch, usually.

Yes, Scotch is the only way to go for a real drinker.

>>>>>> Welcome to the real world, Edward Dolan
>>>>>>> "the just like any other person".
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have chosen to hardly ever reside in "the real world." That is
>>>>>> something I have always wanted to escape from whenever possible.
>>>>>
>>>>> By all means... have at it.
>>>>
>>>> Yes, you continue to live in your freaking world and I will continue to
>>>> live in mine. God, it must be awful to be a slob like Curtiss! He
>>>> should put a bullet though his brain and end his misery - and ours too!
>>>>
>>> At least my first attempt would be my last, unlike you who apparently
>>> missed the first time. Was the caliber too small or was it the target?
>>
>> I do not believe in that much violence. I am more the take poison type.
>> After all, why should I disturb my cats with a shotgun blast just because
>> I want to get out of a world that is mostly composed of slobs and
>> barbarians like Steve Curtiss.
>>
> You say I should "put a bullet " through my brain...? Then acuse me of
> being a "slob" and "barbarian"...?

You are a slob and a barbarian because you advocate that mountain bikes
belong on hiking trails.

> If I wanted to get out of a world that is mostly composed of lost and
> confused egos, I would simply leave the psychiatric ward.

Did you know that one in ten people are actually crazy at any given time?

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota