|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
Econut's avoidance of the truth
On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 16:59:04 -0700, "Brian"
wrote: snip Hikers are more likely to spend the night in wildlife habitat, cook meals in wildlife habitat, go off-trail in wildlife habitat, litter in wildlife habitat, defecate in wildlife habitat, light fires in wildlife habitat. An animal may be bothered for a few seconds by a mountain-biker passing through, but it will be disrupted for hours, even days when someone sets up camp, starts cooking meals, urinates/defecates, builds a fire, sleeps and more in an animals living space. Sounds like he's got ya there, Mikey. BS. Where mountain biking is allowed, camping is usually not allowed. If it is allowed. mountain bikers are also camping. B. -- 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.) Please don't put a cell phone next to any part of your body that you are fond of! http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande |
Ads |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
The Impacts of Mountain Biking on Wildlife and People -- The Only Review of Mike's really old Literature
"Mike Vandeman" wrote in message ... On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 08:37:07 -0700, "Jeff Strickland" wrote: "Mike Vandeman" wrote in message . .. On Sun, 10 Aug 2008 21:14:31 -0700, "Jeff Strickland" wrote: "Mike Vandeman" wrote in message m... On Sun, 10 Aug 2008 11:40:28 -0700, "Jeff Strickland" wrote: Mike picks and chooses the literature that fits his selfish agenda and posts it. Liar. I reviewed EVERY experimental study, 7 of 8 of which CLAIMED (dishonestly) that mountain biking is no more harmful than hiking. There is ample evidence that you are dishonest. We all agree that you are devoted to your cause, and that relative to your cause you mean well. But, you lie and cheat and misstate irrelevent facts so often that you are seen as utterly dishonest. You haven't found a single lie yet, LIAR. Misstatement of fact is a lie. No, it isn't. There must be an intent to deceive. Exactly. You decieve. It is part of your agenda. What bothers me is that you are deceptive about the goal of preserving less than 0.0004% of the environment. If you set about to lie about saving 4%, I could understand the effort. Applying a fact of one locale to a completely different locale and asserting the same result, is a lie. Sometimes you create the lie, other times you merely repeat it. But, no matter the source, it's still a lie. You do this almost daily, and sometimes more than once in the same day. You make no sense whatsoever. As usual. You need to be specific (yes, I know, you can't). I can't be sepecific. You lie about everything. |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
Econut's avoidance of the truth
On Aug 12, 11:26*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote:
On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 16:59:04 -0700, "Brian" wrote: snip Hikers are more likely to spend the night in wildlife habitat, cook meals in wildlife habitat, go off-trail in wildlife habitat, litter in wildlife habitat, defecate in wildlife habitat, light fires in wildlife habitat. An animal may be bothered for a few seconds by a mountain-biker passing through, but it will be disrupted for hours, even days when someone sets up camp, starts cooking meals, urinates/defecates, builds a fire, sleeps and more in an animals living space. Sounds like he's got ya there, Mikey. BS. Where mountain biking is allowed, camping is usually not allowed. If it is allowed. mountain bikers are also camping. Please provide proof of this ridiculous statement, otherwise you are LYING. |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
Econut's avoidance of the truth
On Aug 12, 11:23*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote:
On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 07:25:01 -0700 (PDT), Siskuwihane wrote: On Aug 12, 9:23*am, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 04:34:40 GMT, "M. Halliwell" templetagteam@shawdotca wrote: Mike Vandeman wrote: (Snip of Mike going off on a tangent again) Nonsense. What I left out was IRRELEVANT to the basic question of which form of recreation causes more erosion.. Irrelevant? Hmmm... So let me get this right. If you take a quote out of context No, I didn't. I quoted the relevant part. And it wasn't my major point, anyway, which was that they didn't measure erosion. *and use it to formulate an argument against a report, yet you still consider it a good argument? Your "lit review" claims the Wilson and Seney quote you gave as a reason to question the results...but if you include the full quote, your argument isn't justified. ("E" for effort in trying to redirect the discussion away from your deception.) Yes, it is. The fact that you refuse to include any details is proof that you are LYING. Geee...sounds like your quote from Wisdom about flight speeds...you know the one. It's where you conveniently snip out the fact that the evening mean movement rate of elk for mountain bike events was the same as hiking events. The dot-dot-dot thing is a convenient way of glossing over that text you don't want others to see, ain't it? You are cherry-picking irrelevancies. Oh...and don't forget that Wisdom et al suggest things contrary to you...like the fact that participant populations needs to be included and addressed (Does recreationist equivalent ring a bell?). Irrelevant. And one more thing....have you figured out the difference between speed and distance yet? You keep posting your "lit review" where you talk about speed as proof about relative distances traveled. (You know...number of teams to cover a set distance over a set time...it's in you comments about Wisdom et al). I know certain vehicles with 100 mph average speeds (dragsters), but a hiker will go a lot further in typical distance covered. You are just trying to avoid admitting that I'm right: a mountain biker has a much greater impact on wildlife & the environment than a hiker. Wrong. More opinion, not fact from Michael J. Vandeman. Hikers are more likely to spend the night in wildlife habitat, cook meals in wildlife habitat, go off-trail in wildlife habitat, litter in wildlife habitat, defecate in wildlife habitat, light fires in wildlife habitat. You fabricated all of that misinformation. E.g. most mountain biking is in parks near cities, where camping isn't allowed. Wrong. Michael J. Vandeman is once again defeated by the FACTS. An animal may be bothered for a few seconds by a mountain-biker passing through, but it will be disrupted for hours, even days when someone sets up camp, starts cooking meals, urinates/defecates, builds a fire, sleeps and more in an animals living space. Ditto. Liar. Accept your defeat like the neutered man that you are, Michael J. Vandeman |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
Econut's avoidance of the truth
On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 20:51:42 -0700 (PDT), Siskuwihane
wrote: On Aug 12, 11:26*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 16:59:04 -0700, "Brian" wrote: snip Hikers are more likely to spend the night in wildlife habitat, cook meals in wildlife habitat, go off-trail in wildlife habitat, litter in wildlife habitat, defecate in wildlife habitat, light fires in wildlife habitat. An animal may be bothered for a few seconds by a mountain-biker passing through, but it will be disrupted for hours, even days when someone sets up camp, starts cooking meals, urinates/defecates, builds a fire, sleeps and more in an animals living space. Sounds like he's got ya there, Mikey. BS. Where mountain biking is allowed, camping is usually not allowed. If it is allowed. mountain bikers are also camping. Please provide proof of this ridiculous statement, otherwise you are LYING. It's obvious. QED -- 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.) Please don't put a cell phone next to any part of your body that you are fond of! http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
Econut's avoidance of the truth
On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 20:54:19 -0700 (PDT), Siskuwihane
wrote: On Aug 12, 11:23*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 07:25:01 -0700 (PDT), Siskuwihane wrote: On Aug 12, 9:23*am, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 04:34:40 GMT, "M. Halliwell" templetagteam@shawdotca wrote: Mike Vandeman wrote: (Snip of Mike going off on a tangent again) Nonsense. What I left out was IRRELEVANT to the basic question of which form of recreation causes more erosion.. Irrelevant? Hmmm... So let me get this right. If you take a quote out of context No, I didn't. I quoted the relevant part. And it wasn't my major point, anyway, which was that they didn't measure erosion. *and use it to formulate an argument against a report, yet you still consider it a good argument? Your "lit review" claims the Wilson and Seney quote you gave as a reason to question the results...but if you include the full quote, your argument isn't justified. ("E" for effort in trying to redirect the discussion away from your deception.) Yes, it is. The fact that you refuse to include any details is proof that you are LYING. Geee...sounds like your quote from Wisdom about flight speeds...you know the one. It's where you conveniently snip out the fact that the evening mean movement rate of elk for mountain bike events was the same as hiking events. The dot-dot-dot thing is a convenient way of glossing over that text you don't want others to see, ain't it? You are cherry-picking irrelevancies. Oh...and don't forget that Wisdom et al suggest things contrary to you...like the fact that participant populations needs to be included and addressed (Does recreationist equivalent ring a bell?). Irrelevant. And one more thing....have you figured out the difference between speed and distance yet? You keep posting your "lit review" where you talk about speed as proof about relative distances traveled. (You know...number of teams to cover a set distance over a set time...it's in you comments about Wisdom et al). I know certain vehicles with 100 mph average speeds (dragsters), but a hiker will go a lot further in typical distance covered. You are just trying to avoid admitting that I'm right: a mountain biker has a much greater impact on wildlife & the environment than a hiker. Wrong. More opinion, not fact from Michael J. Vandeman. Hikers are more likely to spend the night in wildlife habitat, cook meals in wildlife habitat, go off-trail in wildlife habitat, litter in wildlife habitat, defecate in wildlife habitat, light fires in wildlife habitat. You fabricated all of that misinformation. E.g. most mountain biking is in parks near cities, where camping isn't allowed. Wrong. Michael J. Vandeman is once again defeated by the FACTS. An animal may be bothered for a few seconds by a mountain-biker passing through, but it will be disrupted for hours, even days when someone sets up camp, starts cooking meals, urinates/defecates, builds a fire, sleeps and more in an animals living space. Ditto. Liar. Accept your defeat like the neutered man that you are, Michael J. Vandeman Liar. -- 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.) Please don't put a cell phone next to any part of your body that you are fond of! http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
Econut's avoidance of the truth
On Aug 13, 11:54*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote:
On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 20:51:42 -0700 (PDT), Siskuwihane wrote: On Aug 12, 11:26*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 16:59:04 -0700, "Brian" wrote: snip Hikers are more likely to spend the night in wildlife habitat, cook meals in wildlife habitat, go off-trail in wildlife habitat, litter in wildlife habitat, defecate in wildlife habitat, light fires in wildlife habitat. An animal may be bothered for a few seconds by a mountain-biker passing through, but it will be disrupted for hours, even days when someone sets up camp, starts cooking meals, urinates/defecates, builds a fire, sleeps and more in an animals living space. Sounds like he's got ya there, Mikey. BS. Where mountain biking is allowed, camping is usually not allowed. If it is allowed. mountain bikers are also camping. Please provide proof of this ridiculous statement, otherwise you are LYING. It's obvious. QED Yes, it's obvious that you were lying. Thanks for clearing that up. |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
Econut's avoidance of the truth
On Aug 13, 11:54*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote:
On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 20:54:19 -0700 (PDT), Siskuwihane wrote: On Aug 12, 11:23*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 07:25:01 -0700 (PDT), Siskuwihane wrote: On Aug 12, 9:23*am, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 04:34:40 GMT, "M. Halliwell" templetagteam@shawdotca wrote: Mike Vandeman wrote: (Snip of Mike going off on a tangent again) Nonsense. What I left out was IRRELEVANT to the basic question of which form of recreation causes more erosion.. Irrelevant? Hmmm... So let me get this right. If you take a quote out of context No, I didn't. I quoted the relevant part. And it wasn't my major point, anyway, which was that they didn't measure erosion. *and use it to formulate an argument against a report, yet you still consider it a good argument? Your "lit review" claims the Wilson and Seney quote you gave as a reason to question the results...but if you include the full quote, your argument isn't justified. ("E" for effort in trying to redirect the discussion away from your deception.) Yes, it is. The fact that you refuse to include any details is proof that you are LYING. Geee...sounds like your quote from Wisdom about flight speeds...you know the one. It's where you conveniently snip out the fact that the evening mean movement rate of elk for mountain bike events was the same as hiking events. The dot-dot-dot thing is a convenient way of glossing over that text you don't want others to see, ain't it? You are cherry-picking irrelevancies. Oh...and don't forget that Wisdom et al suggest things contrary to you...like the fact that participant populations needs to be included and addressed (Does recreationist equivalent ring a bell?). Irrelevant. And one more thing....have you figured out the difference between speed and distance yet? You keep posting your "lit review" where you talk about speed as proof about relative distances traveled. (You know...number of teams to cover a set distance over a set time...it's in you comments about Wisdom et al). I know certain vehicles with 100 mph average speeds (dragsters), but a hiker will go a lot further in typical distance covered. You are just trying to avoid admitting that I'm right: a mountain biker has a much greater impact on wildlife & the environment than a hiker. Wrong. More opinion, not fact from Michael J. Vandeman. Hikers are more likely to spend the night in wildlife habitat, cook meals in wildlife habitat, go off-trail in wildlife habitat, litter in wildlife habitat, defecate in wildlife habitat, light fires in wildlife habitat. You fabricated all of that misinformation. E.g. most mountain biking is in parks near cities, where camping isn't allowed. Wrong. Michael J. Vandeman is once again defeated by the FACTS. An animal may be bothered for a few seconds by a mountain-biker passing through, but it will be disrupted for hours, even days when someone sets up camp, starts cooking meals, urinates/defecates, builds a fire, sleeps and more in an animals living space. Ditto. Liar. Accept your defeat like the neutered man that you are, Michael J. Vandeman Liar. I will take that as your acceptance of defeat in this particular debate. At least we now agree that hikers are more disruptive to wildlife and their habitat than mountain bikers. You're finally learning. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
The Impacts of Mountain Biking on Wildlife and People -- A Review of the Literature | Mike Vandeman | Social Issues | 0 | July 19th 08 04:42 PM |
The Impacts of Mountain Biking on Wildlife and People -- A Review of the Literature | Mike Vandeman | Social Issues | 2 | April 21st 08 02:25 AM |
The Impacts of Mountain Biking on Wildlife and People -- A Review of the Literature | Mike Vandeman | Mountain Biking | 0 | October 22nd 06 03:40 AM |
The Impacts of Mountain Biking on Wildlife and People -- A Review of the Literature | Mike Vandeman | Social Issues | 11 | August 22nd 06 03:47 PM |
The Impacts of Mountain Biking on Wildlife and People -- A Review of the Literature | Mike Vandeman | Mountain Biking | 9 | August 6th 06 12:04 AM |