Re: Science Proves Mountain Biking Is More Harmful Than Hiking

[Just zis Guy, you know?]

Mike Vandeman <[email protected]> sd / msg
<[email protected]> dtd Wed, 19 Oct 2005
05:23:23 GMT:

>.A paper which explicitly recommends against your preferred solution,
>.and which found no effect in at least one species, and which showed
>.evidence of habituation in another, and which showed an effect from
>.your preferred recreation - yes, agreement like that is precisely what
>.we mean by no recognised experts agreeing with you

>You forgot that not only was mountain biking found to be more harmful than
>hiking, but the effect was GROSSLY UNDERESTIMATED, due to ignoring total
>distance travelled. You are nothing but a liar.

You forgot that the supposed detriment is largely speculative, since
there was no evidence whatsoever that the deer did not find perfectly
acceptable forage where they moved to (a point which the paper alludes
to). And you forgot that it specifically recommends against your
preferred solution. And you forgot that only one of the species
showed any significant effect at all. And you forgot that hikers also
caused the same kind of "damage" to this and other species. And you
forgot that none of the wilderness protection agencies seem to back
your idea of mountain biking as uniquely harmful. And you forgot that
every single time you post the same ********, it is disproven in the
same way: by the simple expedient of reading the primary source rather
than the mad ravings of Mike Vandeman the lazy lying hypocritical
habitat-destroying crapflooding bigot.

Fortunately your opinion carries no weight anywhere that matters, a
fact which clearly causes you some pain (and us great amusement).

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

85% of helmet statistics are made up, 69% of them at CHS, Puget Sound

 

[Just zis Guy, you know?]

"Mark" <[email protected]> sd / msg
<[email protected]> dtd Wed, 19 Oct 2005
15:42:23 GMT:

>Its also intersting Wilson et al still recommend a holistic approach to the
>environmental conservation, and suggest taking one group without counting
>the effects of the whole is both unscientific and likely to give inacurate
>assesments.

And the best bit is, Mike is so blinded by hate and prejudice that he
can't actually understand that point, so every time he cites the same
research (which, it seems, is the sole credible paper he can cite in
his "support"), he gets shot down in flames instantly - and then
spends days arguing the toss and looking even *more* stupid!

I guess if he were an effective campaigner he'd not need to resort to
crapflooding Usenet

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

85% of helmet statistics are made up, 69% of them at CHS, Puget Sound

 

[Charlie Maxwell]

"Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Tue, 18 Oct 2005 18:07:52 GMT, "Mark" <[email protected]>
> wrote:
<SNIP>
> Whoops, you are wrong:
>
> Finally, in 2004, Wisdom et al did a very well controlled study
> comparing the impacts of ATV riders, mountain bikers, and hikers on elk
> and mule
> deer. They say we have an "urgent need for timely management information
> to

yo mike,
your comments about the impact of mountain bikes on Mule Deer are pretty
insignificant in contrast to the impact of the HUNTING COMMUNITY. Even
http://www.muledeer.org which is working to protect habitats for wildlife
(unlike yourself who just spouts off) are doing so to enable hunters to
SHOOT and KILL the animals.

mr phd, answer this one simple question. Which is worse?
A) causing an animal to run away.
B) KILLING THE ANIMALS

Have a nice day mike.
Cheers!
Charlie Maxwell

PS: MMMMM.... Mule deer are Yummy!!!



<ADDTIONAL BS SNIPPED> ===
> 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

 

[Chris Foster]

"Charlie Maxwell" <[email protected]> wrote in
news[email protected]:

>
> "Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> On Tue, 18 Oct 2005 18:07:52 GMT, "Mark" <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
> <SNIP>
>> Whoops, you are wrong:
>>
>> Finally, in 2004, Wisdom et al did a very well controlled study
>> comparing the impacts of ATV riders, mountain bikers, and hikers on
>> elk and mule
>> deer. They say we have an "urgent need for timely management
>> information to
>
> yo mike,
> your comments about the impact of mountain bikes on Mule Deer are
> pretty insignificant in contrast to the impact of the HUNTING
> COMMUNITY. Even http://www.muledeer.org which is working to protect
> habitats for wildlife (unlike yourself who just spouts off) are doing
> so to enable hunters to SHOOT and KILL the animals.
>
> mr phd, answer this one simple question. Which is worse?
> A) causing an animal to run away.
> B) KILLING THE ANIMALS
>
> Have a nice day mike.
> Cheers!
> Charlie Maxwell
>
> PS: MMMMM.... Mule deer are Yummy!!!



I grow several rows of corn, oats and barley on my propery just to keep
the Mule Deer nice and fat. They taste Sooooo much better.


>
>
>
> <ADDTIONAL BS SNIPPED> ===
>> 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 Wed, 19 Oct 2005 15:30:10 GMT, "Mark" <[email protected]> wrote:

..
.."Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
..news:[email protected]...
..> On Tue, 18 Oct 2005 18:07:52 GMT, "Mark" <[email protected]>
..> wrote:
..>
..> .
..> ."Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
..> .news:[email protected]...
..> .> On Mon, 17 Oct 2005 11:50:53 GMT, SMS <[email protected]>
..> wrote:
..> .>
..> .> .Mark wrote:
..> .> .
..> .> .> lame attemtps at personal insult when called on soemthing you cannot
..> .> answer.
..> .> .> It ISNT in your 'thesis'. You actually make very little comment
..> onthe
..> .> fact
..> .> .> you change the conclusions of the authors to suit your agenda. if
..> you
..> .> are
..> .> .> still referring to distance being the factor, I will again point you
..> to
..> .> the
..> .> .> 10 to 12 times magnitude of hikers to bikers, and subsequerntly
..> where
..> .> .> distance is concerned, Hiking , per arbitary time period, globally
..> .> covers
..> .> .> many more miles than biking.
..> .> .
..> .> .This is one of the reasons that all the scientific papers on the
..> subject
..> .> .point out. It is not just the impact on wildlife causes by noise and
..> .> .litter, which hikers cause and leave more of, it's both the time they
..> .> .spend in a small area, and the raw numbers of hikers that causes the
..> .> .greater impact.
..> .> .
..> .> .There are no scientific papers, that have been peer reviewed, that
..> show
..> .> .that Mountain Biking are more harmful than hiking.
..> .>
..> .> OOPS, wrong; you forgot:
..> .>
..> .> Wisdom, M. J. ([email protected]), Alan A. Ager ([email protected] ), H.
..> K.
..> .> Preisler ([email protected]), N. J. Cimon ([email protected]), and B.
..> K.
..> .> Johnson ([email protected]), "Effects of off-road recreation on mule
..> deer
..> .> and
..> .> elk". Transactions of the North American Wildlife and Natural Resources
..> .> Conference 69, 2004.
..> .>
..> .
..> .
..> .Only when you change the conclusion.
..> .The authors own conclusion says nothing of the sort.
..>
..> Whoops, you are wrong:
..>
..Now post the conclusion.
..You know, the one where the author specifically states that a holistic
..viewpoint should be adopted, and that taking one activity without the others
..is unscientific and not a true reflection of the in field situation, and
..that much more data is needed to come to any serious conclusion above mere
..hypothesis.

That's opinion, not science. His data indicate otherwise. DUH!

..Oops, is that a lie by ommission?
..I believe so.
..

===
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 Wed, 19 Oct 2005 22:42:28 GMT, "Charlie Maxwell" <[email protected]>
wrote:

..
.."Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
..news:[email protected]...
..> On Tue, 18 Oct 2005 18:07:52 GMT, "Mark" <[email protected]>
..> wrote:
..<SNIP>
..> Whoops, you are wrong:
..>
..> Finally, in 2004, Wisdom et al did a very well controlled study
..> comparing the impacts of ATV riders, mountain bikers, and hikers on elk
..> and mule
..> deer. They say we have an "urgent need for timely management information
..> to
..
..yo mike,
..your comments about the impact of mountain bikes on Mule Deer are pretty
..insignificant in contrast to the impact of the HUNTING COMMUNITY. Even
..http://www.muledeer.org which is working to protect habitats for wildlife
..(unlike yourself who just spouts off) are doing so to enable hunters to
..SHOOT and KILL the animals.
..
..mr phd, answer this one simple question. Which is worse?
.. A) causing an animal to run away.
.. B) KILLING THE ANIMALS
..
..Have a nice day mike.
..Cheers!
..Charlie Maxwell
..
..PS: MMMMM.... Mule deer are Yummy!!!

Thanks for demonstrating exactly what mountain bikers are like.

..<ADDTIONAL BS SNIPPED> ===
..> 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 Wed, 19 Oct 2005 15:42:23 GMT, "Mark" <[email protected]> wrote:

..
.."Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
..news:[email protected]...
..> On Tue, 18 Oct 2005 18:08:28 +0100, "Just zis Guy, you know?"
..> <[email protected]>
..> wrote:
..>
..> .Mike Vandeman <[email protected]> sd / msg
..> .<[email protected]> dtd Sat, 01 Oct 2005
..> .16:09:42 GMT:
..> .
..> .>Wisdom, M. J. ([email protected]), Alan A. Ager ([email protected] ), H.
..> K.
..> .>Preisler ([email protected]), N. J. Cimon ([email protected]), and B.
..> K.
..> .>Johnson ([email protected]), "Effects of off-road recreation on mule deer
..> and
..> .>elk". Transactions of the North American Wildlife and Natural Resources
..> .>Conference 69, 2004.
..> .
..> .A paper which explicitly recommends against your preferred solution,
..> .and which found no effect in at least one species, and which showed
..> .evidence of habituation in another, and which showed an effect from
..> .your preferred recreation - yes, agreement like that is precisely what
..> .we mean by no recognised experts agreeing with you
..>
..> You forgot that not only was mountain biking found to be more harmful than
..> hiking, but the effect was GROSSLY UNDERESTIMATED, due to ignoring total
..> distance travelled. You are nothing but a liar.
..>
..yes lets bring distance in again, as you state, 3 miles per hike on average,
..10 miles on a bike on average. (your figures).
..Then factor in the 10 -12 times more hikers around(8-12 million bikers
..against 120 to 140 million hikers), which means 30 - 36 miles hiked for
..every 10 miles biked.
..Why is it you factor in a milage excess on biking, when it is quite clear
..per arbitary worldwide timeperiod, there is many more hiking miles covered,
..by a factor of 3, or a 200% increase.

Mountain bikers, per person, are more harmful, so bikes should be banned. If you
weren't a hypocrite, you'd be trying to ban hiking, as I am.

..BUT, as you say this study shows flight speed greater from biking, 17 feet
..per sec as opposed to 15 feet per sec, an increase of 13%.
..
..So, take that into consideration, and hiking does 187% more damage than
..biking per arbitary time period.. Working on your distance figures, the
..damage assesment figures from this study you put forward as proof, and the
..numbers of worldwide participants of the 2 sports.
..
..Its also intersting Wilson et al still recommend a holistic approach to the
..environmental conservation, and suggest taking one group without counting
..the effects of the whole is both unscientific and likely to give inacurate
..assesments.

That's just an opinion, not science. DUH!

..Of course, you go ahead and do that anyway, as its the only way to 'prove'
..your little theory.
..

===
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 Wed, 19 Oct 2005 19:02:56 +0100, "Just zis Guy, you know?" <[email protected]>
wrote:

.."Mark" <[email protected]> sd / msg
..<[email protected]> dtd Wed, 19 Oct 2005
..15:42:23 GMT:
..
..>Its also intersting Wilson et al still recommend a holistic approach to the
..>environmental conservation, and suggest taking one group without counting
..>the effects of the whole is both unscientific and likely to give inacurate
..>assesments.
..
..And the best bit is, Mike is so blinded by hate and prejudice that he
..can't actually understand that point, so every time he cites the same
..research (which, it seems, is the sole credible paper he can cite in
..his "support"), he gets shot down in flames instantly - and then
..spends days arguing the toss and looking even *more* stupid!
..
..I guess if he were an effective campaigner he'd not need to resort to
..crapflooding Usenet
..
..Guy

Did you say something?
===
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 Wed, 19 Oct 2005 18:59:46 +0100, "Just zis Guy, you know?" <[email protected]>
wrote:

..Mike Vandeman <[email protected]> sd / msg
..<[email protected]> dtd Wed, 19 Oct 2005
..05:23:23 GMT:
..
..>.A paper which explicitly recommends against your preferred solution,
..>.and which found no effect in at least one species, and which showed
..>.evidence of habituation in another, and which showed an effect from
..>.your preferred recreation - yes, agreement like that is precisely what
..>.we mean by no recognised experts agreeing with you
..
..>You forgot that not only was mountain biking found to be more harmful than
..>hiking, but the effect was GROSSLY UNDERESTIMATED, due to ignoring total
..>distance travelled. You are nothing but a liar.
..
..You forgot that the supposed detriment is largely speculative, since
..there was no evidence whatsoever that the deer did not find perfectly
..acceptable forage where they moved to (a point which the paper alludes
..to). And you forgot that it specifically recommends against your
..preferred solution. And you forgot that only one of the species
..showed any significant effect at all. And you forgot that hikers also
..caused the same kind of "damage" to this and other species. And you
..forgot that none of the wilderness protection agencies seem to back
..your idea of mountain biking as uniquely harmful. And you forgot that
..every single time you post the same ********, it is disproven in the
..same way: by the simple expedient of reading the primary source rather
..than the mad ravings of Mike Vandeman the lazy lying hypocritical
..habitat-destroying crapflooding bigot.
..
..Fortunately your opinion carries no weight anywhere that matters, a
..fact which clearly causes you some pain (and us great amusement).
..
..Guy

Did you say something?
===
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

 

[Charlie Maxwell]

"Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Wed, 19 Oct 2005 22:42:28 GMT, "Charlie Maxwell"
> <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> .
> ."Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> .news:[email protected]...
> .> On Tue, 18 Oct 2005 18:07:52 GMT, "Mark" <[email protected]>
> .> wrote:
> .<SNIP>
> .> Whoops, you are wrong:
> .>
> .> Finally, in 2004, Wisdom et al did a very well controlled study
> .> comparing the impacts of ATV riders, mountain bikers, and hikers on elk
> .> and mule
> .> deer. They say we have an "urgent need for timely management
> information
> .> to
> .
> .yo mike,
> .your comments about the impact of mountain bikes on Mule Deer are pretty
> .insignificant in contrast to the impact of the HUNTING COMMUNITY. Even
> .http://www.muledeer.org which is working to protect habitats for wildlife
> .(unlike yourself who just spouts off) are doing so to enable hunters to
> .SHOOT and KILL the animals.
> .
> .mr phd, answer this one simple question. Which is worse?
> . A) causing an animal to run away.
> . B) KILLING THE ANIMALS
> .
> .Have a nice day mike.
> .Cheers!
> .Charlie Maxwell
> .
> .PS: MMMMM.... Mule deer are Yummy!!!
>
> Thanks for demonstrating exactly what mountain bikers are like.

Sorry mike, but once again you seem to be mis-informed or reading something
in to the message that is not there. That was Charlie Maxwell the
HUNTER/ATV RIDER talking. I am not a mountain biker right now. Also, you
cannot hunt while riding a bike. You cannot carry your kill home with you
on a bike either. You cannot hunt from an ATV either. You must be a HIKER
to hunt. When I hike I wear HIKING BOOTS. You know, the ones with LUGS on
the soles.

Your avoidence of the question is duly noted. Your ignorance on the laws of
hunting is duly noted as well.

Save some wilderness. Contribute to http://www.muledeer.org

Where is the habitat that you have saved?

Have a nice weekend mike.
Cheers!
Charlie Maxwell


PS: hunting season is here. Got deer?

>
> .<ADDTIONAL BS SNIPPED> ===
> .> 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

 

[Just zis Guy, you know?]

I submit that on or about Fri, 21 Oct 2005 15:48:48 GMT, the person
known to the court as Mike Vandeman <[email protected]> made a
statement (<[email protected]> in Your
Honour's bundle) to the following effect:

>Did you say something?

Yep, but you didn't. Or at least, nothing worth hearing.
Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

85% of helmet statistics are made up, 69% of them at CHS, Puget Sound

 

[Just zis Guy, you know?]

I submit that on or about Fri, 21 Oct 2005 15:49:32 GMT, the person
known to the court as Mike Vandeman <[email protected]> made a
statement (<[email protected]> in Your
Honour's bundle) to the following effect:

>Did you say something?

Yup, and your inability to address the points raised is duly noted.
Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

85% of helmet statistics are made up, 69% of them at CHS, Puget Sound