Re: Thanks for demonstrating the character of the typical mountain biker! (was Re: Novice Dies from

[Just zis Guy, you know?]

On Tue, 24 May 2005 10:59:08 GMT, Mike Vandeman <[email protected]>
wrote in message <[email protected]>:

>Thanks for demonstrating the character of the typical mountain biker!

Your statement lacks an evidential basis. Prove, with citations and
examples, how the reaction of mountain bikers to sustained trolling
and gleeful death reports differs in any significant manner from any
other group subjected to such bigotry.

A controlled experiment would be best, I have suggested a methodology
in the past.

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

 

[Mike Vandeman]

On Tue, 24 May 2005 22:04:18 +0100, "Just zis Guy, you know?" <[email protected]>
wrote:

..On Tue, 24 May 2005 10:59:08 GMT, Mike Vandeman <[email protected]>
..wrote in message <[email protected]>:
..
..>Thanks for demonstrating the character of the typical mountain biker!
..
..Your statement lacks an evidential basis. Prove, with citations and
..examples, how the reaction of mountain bikers to sustained trolling
..and gleeful death reports differs in any significant manner from any
..other group subjected to such bigotry.
..
..A controlled experiment would be best, I have suggested a methodology
..in the past.
..
..Guy

Thanks for demonstrating the character of the typical mountain biker!
===
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?]

On Thu, 26 May 2005 17:23:34 GMT, Mike Vandeman <[email protected]>
wrote:

>.Your statement lacks an evidential basis. Prove, with citations and
>.examples, how the reaction of mountain bikers to sustained trolling
>.and gleeful death reports differs in any significant manner from any
>.other group subjected to such bigotry.
>.A controlled experiment would be best, I have suggested a methodology
>.in the past.

>Thanks for demonstrating the character of the typical mountain biker!

You're welcome. I note that you now consider that an evidence-based
approach is typical of mountain bikers. Well done! Progress at last.

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

 

[sremmus]

Mike Vandeman wrote:
> .>Thanks for demonstrating the character of the typical mountain biker!
> .
> Thanks for demonstrating the character of the typical mountain biker!

Thanks for demonstrating the character of a degenerate atypical freak!

> ===
> 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

 

[Mark]

"Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Tue, 24 May 2005 22:04:18 +0100, "Just zis Guy, you know?"
<[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> .On Tue, 24 May 2005 10:59:08 GMT, Mike Vandeman <[email protected]>
> .wrote in message <[email protected]>:
> .
> .>Thanks for demonstrating the character of the typical mountain biker!
> .
> .Your statement lacks an evidential basis. Prove, with citations and
> .examples, how the reaction of mountain bikers to sustained trolling
> .and gleeful death reports differs in any significant manner from any
> .other group subjected to such bigotry.
> .
> .A controlled experiment would be best, I have suggested a methodology
> .in the past.
> .
> .Guy
>
> Thanks for demonstrating the character of the typical mountain biker

You mean intelligent, well informed and literate, all shown by Mr Chapman.

You on the other hand, show a complete lack of any substance to anything you
post. You prefer to argue scemantics than the environmental issues you
purport to represent.
When confronted by an unarguable truth, such as posted here, that you cannot
prove mountain bikers react any differently to other groups when confronted
by someone posting continually with insults and glorifying the deaths of
othe human beings, you resort to name calling.

That is because, as has become more and more obvious recently, you have no
substance, no reason other than bigotry, and a lack of intelligence that
sees you resort to the lowest common denominator of personal insults when
confronted with indisputable facts.

 

[Gary S.]

On Thu, 26 May 2005 18:09:04 GMT, "Mark" <[email protected]>
wrote:

>That is because, as has become more and more obvious recently, you have no
>substance, no reason other than bigotry, and a lack of intelligence that
>sees you resort to the lowest common denominator of personal insults when
>confronted with indisputable facts.
>
And every bit of it is permanently recorded in a searchable database,
for anyone to see Mikey's character traits in his own words.

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

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

 

[Mike Vandeman]

On Thu, 26 May 2005 18:09:04 GMT, "Mark" <[email protected]> wrote:

..
.."Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
..news:[email protected]...
..> On Tue, 24 May 2005 22:04:18 +0100, "Just zis Guy, you know?"
..<[email protected]>
..> wrote:
..>
..> .On Tue, 24 May 2005 10:59:08 GMT, Mike Vandeman <[email protected]>
..> .wrote in message <[email protected]>:
..> .
..> .>Thanks for demonstrating the character of the typical mountain biker!
..> .
..> .Your statement lacks an evidential basis. Prove, with citations and
..> .examples, how the reaction of mountain bikers to sustained trolling
..> .and gleeful death reports differs in any significant manner from any
..> .other group subjected to such bigotry.
..> .
..> .A controlled experiment would be best, I have suggested a methodology
..> .in the past.
..> .
..> .Guy
..>
..> Thanks for demonstrating the character of the typical mountain biker
..
..You mean intelligent, well informed and literate, all shown by Mr Chapman.

No. Dishonest to the core.

..You on the other hand, show a complete lack of any substance to anything you
..post. You prefer to argue scemantics than the environmental issues you
..purport to represent.
..When confronted by an unarguable truth, such as posted here, that you cannot
..prove mountain bikers react any differently to other groups when confronted
..by someone posting continually with insults and glorifying the deaths of
..othe human beings, you resort to name calling.
..
..That is because, as has become more and more obvious recently, you have no
..substance, no reason other than bigotry, and a lack of intelligence that
..sees you resort to the lowest common denominator of personal insults when
..confronted with indisputable facts.

Sounds like mountain bikers. Hmmm.
===
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 Thu, 26 May 2005 19:48:38 GMT, Gary S. <Idontwantspam@net> wrote:

..On Thu, 26 May 2005 18:09:04 GMT, "Mark" <[email protected]>
..wrote:
..
..>That is because, as has become more and more obvious recently, you have no
..>substance, no reason other than bigotry, and a lack of intelligence that
..>sees you resort to the lowest common denominator of personal insults when
..>confronted with indisputable facts.
..>
..And every bit of it is permanently recorded in a searchable database,
..for anyone to see Mikey's character traits in his own words.

Yep. Honest to a fault.

..Happy trails,
..Gary (net.yogi.bear)

===
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

 

[Mark]

biker
> .
> .You mean intelligent, well informed and literate, all shown by Mr
Chapman.
>
> No. Dishonest to the core.

I see, dishonest now means telling the truth, and putting forward arguments
that you either completely fail to understand or just simply havent the
intelligence to refute, given the most frequent reply to his posts from you
is 'did you say something'

Emphasises your lack of substance, and your inability to argue
enviropnmental points, you prefer to argue scemantics and trry to belittle
people.

You are a sham, environmentalism means nothing to you, its just
justification for irrational hatred.

For you, ill exporess that in a simple word, bigotry.

> .You on the other hand, show a complete lack of any substance to anything
you
> .post. You prefer to argue scemantics than the environmental issues you
> .purport to represent.
> .When confronted by an unarguable truth, such as posted here, that you
cannot
> .prove mountain bikers react any differently to other groups when
confronted
> .by someone posting continually with insults and glorifying the deaths of
> .othe human beings, you resort to name calling.
> .
> .That is because, as has become more and more obvious recently, you have
no
> .substance, no reason other than bigotry, and a lack of intelligence that
> .sees you resort to the lowest common denominator of personal insults when
> .confronted with indisputable facts.
>
> Sounds like mountain bikers. Hmmm.
What does?

Again, you have nothing meaningful to say, you try to turn this into
personal arguments because your agenda has no substance, you are here out of
hate for mountain bikers, and nothing else.

 

[Mike Vandeman]

On Sun, 29 May 2005 09:03:46 GMT, "Mark" <[email protected]> wrote:

..biker
..> .
..> .You mean intelligent, well informed and literate, all shown by Mr
..Chapman.
..>
..> No. Dishonest to the core.
..
..I see, dishonest now means telling the truth, and putting forward arguments
..that you either completely fail to understand or just simply havent the
..intelligence to refute, given the most frequent reply to his posts from you
..is 'did you say something'
..
..Emphasises your lack of substance, and your inability to argue
..enviropnmental points, you prefer to argue scemantics and trry to belittle
..people.
..
..You are a sham, environmentalism means nothing to you, its just
..justification for irrational hatred.
..
..For you, ill exporess that in a simple word, bigotry.
..
..> .You on the other hand, show a complete lack of any substance to anything
..you
..> .post. You prefer to argue scemantics than the environmental issues you
..> .purport to represent.
..> .When confronted by an unarguable truth, such as posted here, that you
..cannot
..> .prove mountain bikers react any differently to other groups when
..confronted
..> .by someone posting continually with insults and glorifying the deaths of
..> .othe human beings, you resort to name calling.
..> .
..> .That is because, as has become more and more obvious recently, you have
..no
..> .substance, no reason other than bigotry, and a lack of intelligence that
..> .sees you resort to the lowest common denominator of personal insults when
..> .confronted with indisputable facts.
..>
..> Sounds like mountain bikers. Hmmm.
..What does?
..
..Again, you have nothing meaningful to say, you try to turn this into
..personal arguments because your agenda has no substance, you are here out of
..hate for mountain bikers, and nothing else.

I don't hate mountain bikers. I pity them. It must be hard to get along on half
a brain.
===
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

 

[Mark]

"Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Sun, 29 May 2005 09:03:46 GMT, "Mark" <[email protected]>
wrote:
>
> .biker
> .> .
> .> .You mean intelligent, well informed and literate, all shown by Mr
> .Chapman.
> .>
> .> No. Dishonest to the core.
> .
> .I see, dishonest now means telling the truth, and putting forward
arguments
> .that you either completely fail to understand or just simply havent the
> .intelligence to refute, given the most frequent reply to his posts from
you
> .is 'did you say something'
> .
> .Emphasises your lack of substance, and your inability to argue
> .enviropnmental points, you prefer to argue scemantics and trry to
belittle
> .people.
> .
> .You are a sham, environmentalism means nothing to you, its just
> .justification for irrational hatred.
> .
> .For you, ill exporess that in a simple word, bigotry.
> .
> .> .You on the other hand, show a complete lack of any substance to
anything
> .you
> .> .post. You prefer to argue scemantics than the environmental issues you
> .> .purport to represent.
> .> .When confronted by an unarguable truth, such as posted here, that you
> .cannot
> .> .prove mountain bikers react any differently to other groups when
> .confronted
> .> .by someone posting continually with insults and glorifying the deaths
of
> .> .othe human beings, you resort to name calling.
> .> .
> .> .That is because, as has become more and more obvious recently, you
have
> .no
> .> .substance, no reason other than bigotry, and a lack of intelligence
that
> .> .sees you resort to the lowest common denominator of personal insults
when
> .> .confronted with indisputable facts.
> .>
> .> Sounds like mountain bikers. Hmmm.
> .What does?
> .
> .Again, you have nothing meaningful to say, you try to turn this into
> .personal arguments because your agenda has no substance, you are here out
of
> .hate for mountain bikers, and nothing else.
>
> I don't hate mountain bikers. I pity them. It must be hard to get along on
half
> a brain.
And back to childish insults, nothing to say, no intelligent argument, just
a craving for attention.

If you expect anyone to beleive you are seen as a credible scientist with
the hateful , childish drivel you continually spout here in this group, you
truly do have a genuine mental illness.You have discredited yourself enough
in the last couple of weeks to make your campaign worthless in the eyes of
genuine ecologists, let alone the people whos attitude you wish to change.

Of course, without any peer reviewed papers or relevant qualifications , the
opinion you were ever a credible scientist was only shared by two people,
and both reside within your head.

 

[Mike Vandeman]

On Sun, 29 May 2005 16:26:10 GMT, "Mark" <[email protected]> wrote:

..
.."Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
..news:[email protected]...
..> On Sun, 29 May 2005 09:03:46 GMT, "Mark" <[email protected]>
..wrote:
..>
..> .biker
..> .> .
..> .> .You mean intelligent, well informed and literate, all shown by Mr
..> .Chapman.
..> .>
..> .> No. Dishonest to the core.
..> .
..> .I see, dishonest now means telling the truth, and putting forward
..arguments
..> .that you either completely fail to understand or just simply havent the
..> .intelligence to refute, given the most frequent reply to his posts from
..you
..> .is 'did you say something'
..> .
..> .Emphasises your lack of substance, and your inability to argue
..> .enviropnmental points, you prefer to argue scemantics and trry to
..belittle
..> .people.
..> .
..> .You are a sham, environmentalism means nothing to you, its just
..> .justification for irrational hatred.
..> .
..> .For you, ill exporess that in a simple word, bigotry.
..> .
..> .> .You on the other hand, show a complete lack of any substance to
..anything
..> .you
..> .> .post. You prefer to argue scemantics than the environmental issues you
..> .> .purport to represent.
..> .> .When confronted by an unarguable truth, such as posted here, that you
..> .cannot
..> .> .prove mountain bikers react any differently to other groups when
..> .confronted
..> .> .by someone posting continually with insults and glorifying the deaths
..of
..> .> .othe human beings, you resort to name calling.
..> .> .
..> .> .That is because, as has become more and more obvious recently, you
..have
..> .no
..> .> .substance, no reason other than bigotry, and a lack of intelligence
..that
..> .> .sees you resort to the lowest common denominator of personal insults
..when
..> .> .confronted with indisputable facts.
..> .>
..> .> Sounds like mountain bikers. Hmmm.
..> .What does?
..> .
..> .Again, you have nothing meaningful to say, you try to turn this into
..> .personal arguments because your agenda has no substance, you are here out
..of
..> .hate for mountain bikers, and nothing else.
..>
..> I don't hate mountain bikers. I pity them. It must be hard to get along on
..half
..> a brain.
..And back to childish insults, nothing to say, no intelligent argument, just
..a craving for attention.
..
..If you expect anyone to beleive you are seen as a credible scientist with
..the hateful , childish drivel you continually spout here in this group, you
..truly do have a genuine mental illness.You have discredited yourself enough
..in the last couple of weeks to make your campaign worthless in the eyes of
..genuine ecologists, let alone the people whos attitude you wish to change.
..
..Of course, without any peer reviewed papers or relevant qualifications , the
..opinion you were ever a credible scientist was only shared by two people,
..and both reside within your head.
..

Yawn.
===
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

 

[Mark]

> .> On Sun, 29 May 2005 09:03:46 GMT, "Mark" <[email protected]>
> .wrote:
> .>
> .> .biker
> .> .> .
> .> .> .You mean intelligent, well informed and literate, all shown by Mr
> .> .Chapman.
> .> .>
> .> .> No. Dishonest to the core.
> .> .
> .> .I see, dishonest now means telling the truth, and putting forward
> .arguments
> .> .that you either completely fail to understand or just simply havent
the
> .> .intelligence to refute, given the most frequent reply to his posts
from
> .you
> .> .is 'did you say something'
> .> .
> .> .Emphasises your lack of substance, and your inability to argue
> .> .enviropnmental points, you prefer to argue scemantics and trry to
> .belittle
> .> .people.
> .> .
> .> .You are a sham, environmentalism means nothing to you, its just
> .> .justification for irrational hatred.
> .> .
> .> .For you, ill exporess that in a simple word, bigotry.
> .> .
> .> .> .You on the other hand, show a complete lack of any substance to
> .anything
> .> .you
> .> .> .post. You prefer to argue scemantics than the environmental issues
you
> .> .> .purport to represent.
> .> .> .When confronted by an unarguable truth, such as posted here, that
you
> .> .cannot
> .> .> .prove mountain bikers react any differently to other groups when
> .> .confronted
> .> .> .by someone posting continually with insults and glorifying the
deaths
> .of
> .> .> .othe human beings, you resort to name calling.
> .> .> .
> .> .> .That is because, as has become more and more obvious recently, you
> .have
> .> .no
> .> .> .substance, no reason other than bigotry, and a lack of intelligence
> .that
> .> .> .sees you resort to the lowest common denominator of personal
insults
> .when
> .> .> .confronted with indisputable facts.
> .> .>
> .> .> Sounds like mountain bikers. Hmmm.
> .> .What does?
> .> .
> .> .Again, you have nothing meaningful to say, you try to turn this into
> .> .personal arguments because your agenda has no substance, you are here
out
> .of
> .> .hate for mountain bikers, and nothing else.
> .>
> .> I don't hate mountain bikers. I pity them. It must be hard to get along
on
> .half
> .> a brain.
> .And back to childish insults, nothing to say, no intelligent argument,
just
> .a craving for attention.
> .
> .If you expect anyone to beleive you are seen as a credible scientist with
> .the hateful , childish drivel you continually spout here in this group,
you
> .truly do have a genuine mental illness.You have discredited yourself
enough
> .in the last couple of weeks to make your campaign worthless in the eyes
of
> .genuine ecologists, let alone the people whos attitude you wish to
change.
> .
> .Of course, without any peer reviewed papers or relevant qualifications ,
the
> .opinion you were ever a credible scientist was only shared by two people,
> .and both reside within your head.
> .
>
> Yawn.

Carry on, every such post proves me right, every such post more people see
you for the bigoted , ignorant and unintelligent fool you are.

Mr M J Vandeman is a sham, a charlaton, a bigot, unable to counter even the
simplest argument against his 'theories'

This post, along with the similar replies in other threads when faced with
facts completely refuting his viewpoint , and people he cant derail into
silly scemantic arguments, show it.

Unless he wishes to post something of actual and provable substance of
course.