|
Mike Vandeman
I will probably get into trouble for "feeding the troll" but I find him
quite a nice little hobby to while away the lonly hours. This is a challenge to Mike Provide us with (any of the following) 1. Statistics 2. Written confirmation or 3. photographic evidence To prove that Mountain biking is "Bad" for nature Heres the tricky part Anything you supply must be free from speculation Rumors or anything unproven. and sources you quote must come from real people who would be in the position to scientifically confirm there results and they must be traceable not just a email adress, proof of the position they hold that would allow the to confirm results. anything you supply or quote must be linked to the person who is claiming it in a way we can prove once again not just a email address. Any thing you supply/quote will HAVE to be scientifically reported!! I cannot stress this enough. If Mike can supply this evidence which proves that mountain bikeing is dramatically "BAD" for nature then I for one will listen and possibly do my bit. but if he cant supply this then I will have to stay Innocent until somebody proves me guilty. DARE/ CAN YOU MEET THE CHALLENGE MIKE ???? |
Fish wrote:
I will probably get into trouble for "feeding the troll" but I find him quite a nice little hobby to while away the lonly hours. This is a challenge to Mike *yawn* And what exactly is this going to accomplish? You're going to have to be more clever than that. -- Westie |
Sorry Fish but yes *yawn*
It won't happen and will surely end up with Mike screaming BS and Liar at people :) http://www.geocities.com/mike_vandeman_the_extremist/ |
Do a GOOGLE for his post for the last 8 years and the info you seek
will be there. MTBMAN |
QUOTE=Fish I will probably get into trouble for "feeding the troll" but I find him quite a nice little hobby to while away the lonly hours. If you are that bored you should just pile up some real evidence supporting MTB, you will get the same result... ...Vandeman will disagree! Suprise! You will have more fun that way, and you will actually be counterproductive to his cause. -- Mr_Kingkillaha |
"Mr_Kingkillaha" wrote in message ... QUOTE=Fish I will probably get into trouble for "feeding the troll" but I find him quite a nice little hobby to while away the lonly hours. If you are that bored you should just pile up some real evidence supporting MTB, you will get the same result... ..Vandeman will disagree! Suprise! You will have more fun that way, and you will actually be counterproductive to his cause. Fish likely live in an area like me, snow covered for several months. I beat the winter by xc skiing, and snowmobiling..... i love breaking a trail where no trail is.... More fuel for th troll, but true. Micheal |
"Mr_Kingkillaha" wrote in message ... QUOTE=Fish I will probably get into trouble for "feeding the troll" but I find him quite a nice little hobby to while away the lonly hours. If you are that bored you should just pile up some real evidence supporting MTB, you will get the same result... ..Vandeman will disagree! Suprise! You will have more fun that way, and you will actually be counterproductive to his cause. Its a good idea but I feel it would be agaist the rules that I set out ...... Mike has clearly read all the existing documentation out there and chosent o ignore it so simply re-cycling other peoples reasearch into my own paper would be pointless, annoying and it would be exactly what mike is doing and I have absolutly no scientific bacground except at GCSE level although I did do well this does not qualify me to perform scientific reaserch. TAKE NOTE OF THIS MIKEY BOY!!!! Although It would be fun to read all the argument's counter arguments and counter counter arguments put forward by professionals and try to come to my own unbiased decision although Unbiased would be difficult as I am already biased!! Im sticking with the argument INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY. The best I could hope to do is go out and take some photo's of well known and well used mountain biker haunts and show the lack of soil damage. but mike would argue some way anyway so its kinda pointless. In fact a good plan would be to take a trail that has been off limits to bikes for the last 5 years at least and compare it to a trail which is still fully acessable to bikes. Man your right I am bored .....Mayby I should appoint myself as a full time Mike fighter. At least until I find a job. Save the rest of you the bother |
Although It would be fun to read all the argument's counter arguments and counter counter arguments put forward by professionals and try to come to my own unbiased decision although Unbiased would be difficult as I am already biased!! Im sticking with the argument INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY. The best I could hope to do is go out and take some photo's of well known and well used mountain biker haunts and show the lack of soil damage. but mike would argue some way anyway so its kinda pointless. That is more of what I was hinting at, Mike doesn't care about texts by MTB'ers. It would have to be hard even for him to argue with photo evidence. It is definately pointless unless you are having fun knowing he is actually at home squirming, behind his "Internet tough guy" thing he's always doing. -- Mr_Kingkillaha |
On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 17:14:31 -0000, "Fish"
wrote: "demonmaster" wrote in message . yvirf... mountain bikers are never innocent!! by the way -- are trek bikes still pretty good at the under 500 dollar range? I have an old trek I just rebuilt and its been working really well but being it's pretty old I was thinking of replacing it. Don't really know whetehr I want another off-the-shelf bike like a trek. really want a custom frame. I'd just swap all the components off the trek since they are in great shape. however having a hard time finding custom under 500. I have no idea you will probably be best to start a new post for this . It might also make sense to check which group this is posted to, if you are getting into such specifics for a bicycle purchase. Just because Mikie has no control over which groups he posts to, does not mean that you need to follow suit. With custom frames, there is no way they are going to cost below a certain price for a frame; it is not cost effective to do custom one-off work at a mass-produced price point. Happy trails, Gary (net.yogi.bear) -- At the 51st percentile of ursine intelligence Gary D. Schwartz, Needham, MA, USA Please reply to: garyDOTschwartzATpoboxDOTcom |
none On Tue, 15 Mar 2005, Gary S. wrote: On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 17:14:31 -0000, "Fish" wrote: "demonmaster" wrote in message virf... mountain bikers are never innocent!! by the way -- are trek bikes still snip t a custom frame. I'd just swap all the components off the trek since they are in great shape. however having a hard time finding custom under 500. snip With custom frames, there is no way they are going to cost below a certain price for a frame; it is not cost effective to do custom one-off work at a mass-produced price point. why's that? even if it takes a day to cut and weld the tubes that is still over 100 an hour being charged for labor. why would it not be cost effective to charge less for labor? |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:19 PM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
CycleBanter.com