Why don't mountain bikers get it?



Status
Not open for further replies.
M

Mike Vandeman

Guest
At 11:44 AM 6/8/03 -0300, "Randal R. Gray" <[email protected]> wrote:
>I don't own a motorized vehicle, am I allowed to ride my bike in the woods
now?

No, of course not. You can walk, like everyone else. If you don't own a motor vehicle, I would
expect that you'd have more sympathy for the natural world.
===
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
 
D

Dante Catoni

Guest
Bikes and cars are part of the natural world. Humans are animals and are part of nature. Birds build
nests and beavers build dams. Just about all creatures build things, some more sophisticated than
others. I personally built up an '87 Cutlass with a 461 cubic inch big block Olds. It's so fast and
loud sometimes it even scares me. If I drive it really easy on the highway it might get 10 mpg. That
doesn't mean I don't have sympathy for others in the natural world. After all if the track is really
far away instead of driving it there I'll just tow it with my SUV.

Dante

> No, of course not. You can walk, like everyone else. If you don't own a
motor
> vehicle, I would expect that you'd have more sympathy for the natural
world.
 
R

Randal R. Gray

Guest
What about, when I'm walking, people go past me on ATV's(who towed them to the trail with their
SUV's)? Are they ok?

On Sun, 8 Jun 2003, Mike Vandeman wrote:

> At 11:44 AM 6/8/03 -0300, "Randal R. Gray" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >I don't own a motorized vehicle, am I allowed to ride my bike in the woods
> now?
>
> No, of course not. You can walk, like everyone else. If you don't own a motor vehicle, I would
> expect that you'd have more sympathy for the natural world.
> ===
> 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
 
R

Rich

Guest
Then what give humans the right to build structures on the planet? If you have a dwelling you are
destroying the planet as much as mountain bikers are. "Dante Catoni" <[email protected]> wrote in
message news:[email protected]...
> Bikes and cars are part of the natural world. Humans are animals and are part of nature. Birds
> build nests and beavers build dams. Just about all creatures build things, some more sophisticated
> than others. I personally built up an '87 Cutlass with a 461 cubic inch big block Olds. It's so
> fast and loud sometimes it even scares me. If I drive it really easy on the highway it might get
> 10 mpg. That doesn't mean I don't have sympathy for others in the natural world. After all if the
> track is really far away instead of driving it there I'll just tow it with my SUV.
>
> Dante
>
> > No, of course not. You can walk, like everyone else. If you don't own a
> motor
> > vehicle, I would expect that you'd have more sympathy for the natural
> world.
>
>
 
G

"Grieg Pedersen

Guest
Mike Vandeman wrote:
> At 11:44 AM 6/8/03 -0300, "Randal R. Gray" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>I don't own a motorized vehicle, am I allowed to ride my bike in the woods
>
> now?
>
> No, of course not. You can walk, like everyone else. If you don't own a motor vehicle, I would
> expect that you'd have more sympathy for the natural world.

Wrong again. Most of the ppl I know who don't drive make that choice because driving in their big,
loud cities is a pain. They would no more go out in the backcountry than I would go to Queens.
 
J

Jeff Strickland

Guest
"Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:p[email protected]...
> At 11:44 AM 6/8/03 -0300, "Randal R. Gray" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >I don't own a motorized vehicle, am I allowed to ride my bike in the
woods
> now?
>
> No, of course not. You can walk, like everyone else. If you don't own a
motor
> vehicle, I would expect that you'd have more sympathy for the natural
world.
> ===

Yes, you can ride your bike in the woods, but please observe trail restrictions. Mike has an
unreasonable view of the world, he would like to see all human life exterminated, as thought
exterminating humans would be environmentally sound.
 
M

Motorpsycho

Guest
Passing laws to save the wilderness/environment/wetland/habitat (plug in your favorite cause here)
misses the real issue.

When one cave man urinates in a stream, there is no problem. When X billion humans dump their waste
in the rivers, it's a problem.

China has figured out the real problem. We may dislike their solution, but at least they are
addressing the issue. We've still got our heads burried in the sand. Everywhere you look there are
warning signs, so no one looks anymore.

It's not the fact that there are bikes in the woods, it's the fact that there are a lot of bikes in
the woods and more every day.
 
J

Jeff Strickland

Guest
> It's not the fact that there are bikes in the woods, it's the fact that there are a lot of bikes
> in the woods and more every day.

It's not the bikes in the woods, it's the people. It matters not if the people are on foot or on a
bike, they are in the woods. It doesn't even matter, usually, if the people are in motor vehicle, it
only matters that they are there. (I agree that there are places where motor vehicles ought not be
due to damage that has been done, but most of the places I go are under threat of closure with no
apparent damage at all, other than the existance of the road itself.)

As more and more public lands are closed to public access, the public is crammed into smaller and
smaller areas, increasing the impact upon those areas.
 
M

Mike Vandeman

Guest
On Sun, 8 Jun 2003 18:29:04 -0300, "Randal R. Gray" <[email protected]> wrote:

.What about, when I'm walking, people go past me on ATV's(who towed them to .the trail with their
SUV's)? Are they ok?

Stupid question.

.On Sun, 8 Jun 2003, Mike Vandeman wrote: . .> At 11:44 AM 6/8/03 -0300, "Randal R. Gray"
<[email protected]> wrote: .> >I don't own a motorized vehicle, am I allowed to ride my bike in
the woods .> now? .> .> No, of course not. You can walk, like everyone else. If you don't own a
motor .> vehicle, I would expect that you'd have more sympathy for the natural world. .> === .> 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
 
M

Mike Vandeman

Guest
On 10 Jun 2003 11:07:16 -0700, [email protected] (MotorPsycho) wrote:

.Passing laws to save the wilderness/environment/wetland/habitat (plug .in your favorite cause here)
misses the real issue. . .When one cave man urinates in a stream, there is no problem. When X
.billion humans dump their waste in the rivers, it's a problem. . .China has figured out the real
problem. We may dislike their .solution, but at least they are addressing the issue. We've still got
.our heads burried in the sand. Everywhere you look there are warning .signs, so no one looks
anymore. . .It's not the fact that there are bikes in the woods, it's the fact .that there are a lot
of bikes in the woods and more every day.

BS. Even ONE mountain bike kills animals and plants and drives wildlife out of its habitat.
===
I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to humans ("pure habitat"). Want to
help? (I spent the previous 8 years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)

http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande
 
M

Mike Vandeman

Guest
On Tue, 10 Jun 2003 11:23:12 -0700, "Jeff Strickland" <[email protected]> wrote:

.> .> It's not the fact that there are bikes in the woods, it's the fact .> that there are a lot of
bikes in the woods and more every day. . .It's not the bikes in the woods, it's the people. It
matters not if the .people are on foot or on a bike, they are in the woods. It doesn't even .matter,
usually, if the people are in motor vehicle, it only matters that .they are there.

BS. Bikes allow people to travel several times as far, thus doing several times as much damage.

(I agree that there are places where motor vehicles ought .not be due to damage that has been
done, but most of the places I go are .under threat of closure with no apparent damage at all,
other than the .existance of the road itself.) . .As more and more public lands are closed to
public access, the public is .crammed into smaller and smaller areas, increasing the impact upon
those .areas. . . . .

===
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
 

SilverTongue

New Member
Jun 15, 2003
6
0
0
I relate a lot with Mike. I myself am all for animal rights, and support Greenpeace and the like. Humans are destroying this world. I mean, 10mpg??? Fuel consumption like that should be illegal. I detest the American 'gas guzzler' culture. I myself have a car, so I can't say I'm no polluter either, but it is kinder at least with 45mpg. I ain't a millionaire either, or I'd buy electric or gas cars, or deaisel and convert it to run off vegetable oil. But most people in the world with 1million would probably buy A Dodge Viper, with like 5mpg.

But I don't really agree with banning mountain bikes. Sure, I'd say at least half the world must be undisturbed, but you've got to have some cycle paths. I don't think the impact of cycle paths is that bad on the environment, I mean where I live, my cycle path is constantly being overgrown (can't think how many times thorns growing across the path have acted like stingers to my tyres!). Cycle paths mean some people will use bikes rather than cars, and gives people something to do, limiting yob culture at least. But the amount of cycle paths must not get out of hand.
 
M

Mike Vandeman

Guest
On 16 Jun 2003 05:30:35 +0950, SilverTongue <[email protected]> wrote:

.I relate a lot with Mike. I myself am all for animal rights, and support .Greenpeace and the like.
Humans are destroying this world. I mean, .10mpg??? Fuel consumption like that should be illegal. I
detest the .American 'gas guzzler' culture. I myself have a car, so I can't say I'm .no polluter
either, but it is kinder at least with 45mpg. I ain't a .millionaire either, or I'd buy electric or
gas cars, or deaisel and .convert it to run off vegetable oil. But most people in the world with
.1million would probably buy A Dodge Viper, with like 5mpg. . .But I don't really agree with banning
mountain bikes. Sure, I'd say at .least half the world must be undisturbed, but you've got to have
some .cycle paths.

We DO: they are called "roads". I am quite familiar with transportation activists like you who don't
have a clue about wildlife issues.

I don't think the impact of cycle paths is that bad on the .environment, I mean where I live, my
cycle path is constantly being .overgrown (can't think how many times thorns growing across the
path .have acted like stingers to my tyres!). Cycle paths mean some people .will use bikes rather
than cars, and gives people something to do, .limiting yob culture at least. But the amount of
cycle paths must not .get out of hand.

You don't give any facts or reasons, just your opinion. Learn something about conservation biology,
before you put your foot in your mouth again.
===
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
 
D

Dashi Toshii

Guest
"Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On 16 Jun 2003 05:30:35 +0950, SilverTongue
<[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> .I relate a lot with Mike. I myself am all for animal rights, and support .Greenpeace and the
> like. Humans are destroying this world. I mean, .10mpg??? Fuel consumption like that should be
> illegal. I detest the .American 'gas guzzler' culture. I myself have a car, so I can't say I'm .no
> polluter either, but it is kinder at least with 45mpg. I ain't a .millionaire either, or I'd buy
> electric or gas cars, or deaisel and .convert it to run off vegetable oil. But most people in the
> world with .1million would probably buy A Dodge Viper, with like 5mpg. . .But I don't really agree
> with banning mountain bikes. Sure, I'd say at .least half the world must be undisturbed, but
> you've got to have some .cycle paths.
>
> We DO: they are called "roads". I am quite familiar with transportation activists like you who
> don't have a clue about wildlife issues.

Don't try to talk common sense with Micky boy, he is quite mad you know!

Dashii
 

SilverTongue

New Member
Jun 15, 2003
6
0
0
Hey Mike, you have to be the most arrogant person I've ever seen on the net! Anyone who isn't exactly the same as you, you regard as wrong or stupid. Even me, who seems to be the person closest to agreeing with you on this website, you still **** me off.

I know about environmental and wildlife issues, why do you accuse me of being ignorant when you don't know what I know? I've taken environmental science in college, and am going to do environmental earth science in Uni, so I'll know even more then. For my career, I wanna be like a conservationist, glaciologist, or anything to do with environmental issues. Think before judging others as ignorant and lesser than you. I hate humans generally as it is, but don't you show even the slightest slack for them?
 
S

Stephen Baker

Guest
SilverTongue says:

>Hey Mike, you have to be the most arrogant person I've ever seen on the net!

<snip oratory>

>I hate humans generally as it is, but don't you show even the slightest slack for them?

Easy to see how he got _his_ handle. ;-P

Steve
 
A

Adam

Guest
Mike Vandeman <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>... -8<- snip ->8-
> You don't give any facts or reasons, just your opinion. Learn something about conservation
> biology, before you put your foot in your mouth again.
-8<- snip ->8-

Classic! Mike, I hearby award you the order of the black pot...

Adam...
 
J

Jeff Strickland

Guest
> BS. Even ONE mountain bike kills animals and plants and drives wildlife
out of
> its habitat.
> ===

You are full of ****.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads