View Single Post
  #9  
Old July 30th 13, 07:14 AM posted to rec.bicycles.soc
EdwardDolan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 538
Default Is Mike Andaman finally dead?

"Blackblade" wrote in message ...

Edward Dolan wrote:

Everyone in the world knows what a hiking trail is, except you
apparently.


Oh do they ? So, please enlighten me, how am I to determine a 'hiking trail' to which only the Sainted Ed and his compatriots are permitted access and a 'regular trail' which is to be shared ? I can, tracker like, look at some kind of spoor to determine which is which ?


Hiking trails exist in natural areas and are easily negotiable by humans on foot. Bike paths exist in developed areas and are designed for wheels mainly. Always glad to help out the mentally impaired.

Bicycles go much faster than anyone can walk, whether on a
street or on a trail. Many hikers have been struck by cyclists while hiking on
trails.


How many ? It's easy to assert this but, bereft facts, it's anecdote and hearsay. There have been NO reported hiker/biker accidents in, for example, Swinley Forest in the last two years and most trails are shared there.


It is becoming more and more a daily experience of hikers having just one close call after another. Come to Aspen and find out for yourself. A mountain biker just killed himself the other day on a trail at Vail. That indeed was good news! You should be reading Mr. Vandeman’s emails/newsletters instead of mountain biker **** magazines.

What matters is the speed of the walker, not anything else.
Glad we finally agree on something! Now we just need to get bicycles off trails
the same as we got motorcycles off trails – and for the same reason - speed
differentials.


We didn't agree Ed ... provided that cyclists go past hikers at a slow speed and permit them space what does it matter what speed they do elsewhere ?


It is also a matter of aesthetics .... which I know is beyond you!
[...]

What works “just fine” for you does not work so fine for most
others. Come to Aspen, Colorado sometime to get a clue!


I already agreed with you that a case by case basis for deciding what works is required. You have to take into account numbers of people, type of the trail and many other factors. I have never been messianic that all trails should be shared.


An enlightened public will come to see this sooner than you
think, most especially when hikers and equestrians start suffering

injuries
and deaths from the activities of mountain bikers. We both agree that

it will
be a political process that decides the issue.


Well, for this to happen, there would have to be significant numbers of hiker/biker and biker/equestrian incidents. Your pal Vandeman trawls the net feverishly to find such encounters and highlight them but he comes up with barely any relative to the numbers of bikers and hikers.


Mr. Vandeman finds dozens of such incidents on a monthly basis – more than enough to give everyone pause. What he finds equally significant are the high numbers of mountain bikers who injure and kill themselves riding on trails without any help from hikers. I will admit it makes for boring reading because the accidents are always the same. At least hikers when they have accidents make for more interesting reading.

Better to have a futile hobby than a reprehensible pastime of
ruining trails for hikers by desecrating wilderness and natural areas with the
loathsome presence of a bicycle.


Oh for goodness sake. How is the presence of a bicycle loathsome ? This is emotive rubbish. A bicycle no more 'desecrates' the wilderness than hiking boots, a backpack or a tent.


Bicycles can be on their own trails totally separated from hikers. Then indeed who cares!

Nonsense! Everyone in the world now knows where you stand
although, like all liberal cowards, you choose to remain anonymous, never using
your real name. Only Mr. Vandeman and I have the courage of our
convictions.


I am happy to stand behind what I've said and it's pretty easy to find out my identity if you want to. However, it's totally immaterial to the argument.


It’s easy to stand behind what you say when you are anonymous. It is what all cowards and knaves do on the Internet.

However, I am not 'aligned' to anyone. I'm simply stating my opinions.


What I don’t like is that you did not focus on what matters
- the speed differential ... and the engine which makes noise. In other
words, it is a contraption just like a bicycle is a contraption. Motorcycles in
essence are motorized bicycles plus a bit of noise. Sorry you do not have the
brains to see what is so obvious to the rest of the world.


Now you're just getting silly and undermining your own argument. If what matters is speed and noise then motorcycles are, as I've stated and proven, a completely different category to mountainbikes which are much slower and largely silent. If that distinction is what matters to you then you've just argued to treat motorcycles and mountainbikes differently.


What motorcycles and bicycles have in common is that they are both mechanical contrivances. That right there is enough to disqualify them from my sacred trails. What they also have in common is the ‘fun and games’ mentality of their operators. What I would like to see is the sharing of trails between bicycles and motorcycles. Let the slaughter begin. The rats vs. the cockroaches!

Unlit you can justify motorized vehicles using the trails the
same as bicycles, you are and remain a hypocrite.


No, if I were to do so then I would be a hypocrite since I DON'T believe that they should be permitted to do so. The key distinction is one of power source; I don't believe any non-human power source has the same rights to access.


It is NOT the power source that matters. What matters is the mechanical contrivance. It is this mechanical contrivance which results in disparate views of wilderness and natural areas and therefore the attitudes we bring to the experience. The one and only reason for trails in this day and age is for an appreciation of nature. There are no other purposes for trails that are suited for hikers. Get your own trails and use them for whatever other purposes you want.

Mr. Vandeman is a Saint almost
on my level. The only person here wearing a black hat is you –
Blackblade!


Very funny. I would note that saints are usually beatified by the church, not themselves, since humility is usually a key characteristic.


A Great Saint like Myself is beyond the reach of a mere church. We exist on an equal level with God Almighty.

Like all liberal know nothings you would like to think it is
just a matter of different views, never once stooping to considerations of right
and wrong, good and evil, the sacred and the profane.


Why would you assume that I'm a liberal or supporter of relativism ? I'm not. That I can accept that others, such as you, hold differing views doesn't mean that I think your viewpoint has equal merit. I don't.


I can spot and smell a liberal from a mile away. It is one of the hallmarks of a Genius like Me!

I endeavour to be polite and courteous in argument but don't mistake that for weakness. Your right and wrong and good and evil are not mine and I don't accept them.


You bring up the same old rot over and over. What is polite about that?

I think your arguments are largely circular and, essentially, come down to personal preference. As such, you're the one reverting to views, not me.


The only arguments that are circular are your own self-serving ones for doing what you want to do regardless of how it affects anyone else. But like all liberals, you know only your own justifications in your limited skewed view of the world.

It is why I am a Great
Saint and you are a mere sinner. My view will prevail in the end. All that
needs to happen is for a few cyclists to kill a few hikers while “doing their
thing” on a trail.


So, the Great Saint would like some fatalities to support his position. Not very saintly.


It is just a matter of time human nature being what it is.

Ed Dolan the Great
aka
Saint Edward the Great


Ads
 

Home - Home - Home - Home - Home