View Single Post
  #17  
Old August 7th 13, 12:12 PM posted to rec.bicycles.soc
Miguel
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5
Default Is Mike Andaman finally dead?

On Wed, 7 Aug 2013 02:34:09 -0700 (PDT), Blackblade
wrote:

A good place to start would be Mr. Vandeman’s emails provided
you are fortunate enough to get on his list. Another good way would be to do a
Google search on the Internet under an appropriate subject heading. Hikers are
constantly being harassed and injured by thug mountain bikers.


Vandeman's list, which he gleans from internet feeds across the globe, shows a tiny number of incidents proportional to the overall number of rides happening every day.

You've gone from stating that there are incidents every day at a specific location then, when called to provide facts to back that assertion, you have reverted to generalities. You will forgive me if I therefore consider your assertion, at least for the moment, disproved (or unproven).

In the local vernacular it is referred to as "bull****".

When an attack borders on being terminally stupid, then you
are going to get what you deserve. It is part of My Greatness!


So, you simply want to justify ad-hominem. Fine, interesting definition of "My Greatness". Looks to me like "My inability to argue points convincingly which means I will attack the messenger instead".


It is a term used in attempt to define oneself as more important then
one actually is/are.


You must be an idiot almost on Tom Sherman's level. Facts
could be shoved up your dumb ass and it wouldn't make any difference. Why not
try some common sense for a change.


Why don't you try and provide some facts to backup your position and see where that gets you ? So far, all I'm getting is baseless assertions and circular logic.


He has given you all he has.

“It is mainly older people who are dying of heart disease.” – Ed
Dolan


Great example of circular logic Ed. You simply restate your assertion. Did you bother to go to the World Health Organisation website to actually check the data ? I guess not. Risk of death from heart disease has risen, in the developed world, in the last ten years in the 25-44 and 45-54 age sectors. Your assertion is REFUTED.


To research the WHO will likely destroy his assertion and then where
would he be?

The mark of Cain is upon you. “Hey, I want to do what I want
to do.” You are a childish boob who only knows the language of force. Mr.
Vandeman and I are working on that. We will get all you kiddies banned from our
sacred hiking trails sooner or later. It is just a matter of time.


Childish Ed. For a stated atheist you employ quite a lot of religious absolutism to your rhetoric.


You must be wrong Sir. How can an atheist become a saint as he loudly
proclaims himself to be.

Have I ever advocated the use of force ? No, I leave that to you and Vandeman with your language of conflict and sick satisfaction in the death and injury of others.

Apparently Vandeman is soft pedaling the use of force since his
conviction.

Not millions – only jerks like you who think you have a right
to something you have no right to. What's the matter? Can’t walk?


I have no right to a PUBLIC resource ? Your sense of entitlement is rather overwhelming.


Well no! At least in the view of some.

And I have stated previously again and again that a public
resource must must be managed intelligently, not stupidly for the likes of you
and your ilk. What you are doing is nothing short of vandalism, physical and
mental, to a scarce and precious resource. There is no requirement that
everything must be shared. Are you just pretending to be stupid or is it for
real?


You have stated it, and I've refuted it, again and again. Your argument comes down to "I don't like it" and you seem to believe that this justifies your position. You've thrown loads of assertions but, when challenged, you can't back them up which might, if you think about it, cause you to rethink the assertions;

I think he has a very valid point there. Howsoever to be fair it would
appear that those who profess to be the overlords of the trails and
deny their use to the public should be too proud to accept public
money for their "private property" and be prepared to provide any and
all financial support for the maintenance and construction of said
trails.

There are loads of hiker/biker accidents so it's too dangerous : REFUTED
It's more environmentally damaging than hiking : REFUTED
It's aesthetically unappealing to you : INVALID REASONS TO ALLOCATE PUBLIC RESOURCE
It's an 'incorrect' use of a public resource : NO FACTS TO BACKUP ASSERTION

Right now I feel as if I'm arguing with a religious fanatic. You know the type; you beat them logically but, when it comes down to it, they simply tell you that this is just because you don't really understand and that their belief system allows them to know that they're right.

I'm sorry, but that's what I'm getting here and I'm starting to think it's a waste of time arguing. A fanatic can't be swayed by logic ... it's a belief system.

I can throw facts and logic at you all day and, at the end, you'll still think you're right even if I demolish every assertion.

Of course not. You are a selfish spoiled child who wants to do
what you want to do* We adults will have to take you in hand and teach you
the ways of the world.


We Adults? Rather we criminals, isn't it? I seem to have this
recollection of your lord and master being convicted some time ago.

Oh, I'm being selfish am I ? I'm the one who readily conceded that some trails shouldn't be shared. You're the one who's asserting that all hiking trails are for your exclusive use. Your greatness is definitely slipping Ed ... go get some facts to backup your assertions and I might listen again ... but, right now, I'm about done with you.

--
Cheers,

Miguel
Ads
 

Home - Home - Home - Home - Home