WHOOPS! Another Mountain Biker Breaks His Neck!

On Sunday, June 9, 2013 9:57:40 AM UTC-7, Blackblade wrote:
Do some real research !





Show us YOUR credentials (non-existent).



BA Computing Science

MBA



Numerous conference papers on Artificial Intelligence, eCommerce and Social Graph Solutions

All of which is irrelevant to mountain biking impacts and conservation biology, both of which I have studied and you have NOT. QED

All of which is entirely irrelevant to the topic at hand. But, you don't have anything relevant either do you ?



I'm not claiming to be an expert in this field ... you are ... but you have no business doing so.

On Sunday, June 9, 2013 9:59:58 AM UTC-7, Blackblade wrote:
Mountain bikers have the right to use the trail -- ON FOOT, just like everyone else. There is no right to bring a bike with them. That was proved in federal court in 1996: http://mjvande.nfshost.com/mtb10.htm. It figures that you would ignore that fact, just as you ignore all other facts.



I thought you said that "Courts prove nothing" Mike ?



Well, at least that's what you said when one found you guilty of three criminal offences.

I was referring to criminal trials. In this case, the federal court's decision is decisive.

On 6/9/2013 9:59 AM, Blackblade wrote:

Mountain bikers have the right to use the trail -- ON FOOT, just like everyone else. There is no right to bring a bike with them. That was proved in federal court in 1996: http://mjvande.nfshost.com/mtb10.htm. It figures that you would ignore that fact, just as you ignore all other facts.

I thought you said that "Courts prove nothing" Mike ?

LOL

Well, at least that's what you said when one found you guilty of three criminal offences.

But it's true that the use of trails varies by what the authorities in
charge of the park allow. For example, there's a state park near me that
does not allow equestrians but allows mountain bikers and hikers. The
exclusion of horses was a condition of the land being donated to the
state by the previous owners.

Up until recently, the U.S. National Parks did not allow mountain biking
at all (on trails) but thankfully that's now changing. The key factor
that has led to the change is the wealth of peer-reviewed, scientific,
studies that proved that the impact to both the trails and to wildlife
is no greater from mountain bikes than it is from hikers.

On Sunday, June 9, 2013 12:32:30 PM UTC-7, sms wrote:
On 6/9/2013 9:59 AM, Blackblade wrote:



Mountain bikers have the right to use the trail -- ON FOOT, just like everyone else. There is no right to bring a bike with them. That was proved in federal court in 1996: http://mjvande.nfshost.com/mtb10.htm. It figures that you would ignore that fact, just as you ignore all other facts.



I thought you said that "Courts prove nothing" Mike ?



LOL



Well, at least that's what you said when one found you guilty of three criminal offences.



But it's true that the use of trails varies by what the authorities in

charge of the park allow. For example, there's a state park near me that

does not allow equestrians but allows mountain bikers and hikers. The

exclusion of horses was a condition of the land being donated to the

state by the previous owners.



Up until recently, the U.S. National Parks did not allow mountain biking

at all (on trails) but thankfully that's now changing. The key factor

that has led to the change is the wealth of peer-reviewed, scientific,

studies that proved that the impact to both the trails and to wildlife

is no greater from mountain bikes than it is from hikers.

Name one such "scientific" study that supports mountain biking, liar.

On Monday, June 10, 2013 2:50:06 AM UTC+12, Mike Vandeman wrote:
On Sunday, June 9, 2013 2:07:03 AM UTC-7, I love Mike wrote:

Vandeman - I asked you to provide peer reviewed scientific evidence that mountain biking was doing damage at redwoods in NZ. You have nothing.



I already did: http://mjvande.nfshost.com/scb7.htm. The article that started this thread also said that. Can't you READ????

Sorry your credentials are laughable in the extreme. All you have is a paper on a website you have hosted. This is NOT a real scientific publication. As a result you have contributed little to the field of environmental management and cannot be taken seriously. Better luck next time....

Mountain bikers have the right to use the trail -- ON FOOT, just like everyone else. There is no right to bring a bike with them. That was proved in federal court in 1996: http://mjvande.nfshost.com/mtb10.htm. It figures that you would ignore that fact, just as you ignore all other facts.

I thought you said that "Courts prove nothing" Mike ?

Well, at least that's what you said when one found you guilty of three criminal offences.

I was referring to criminal trials. In this case, the federal court's decision is decisive.

I know what you were referring to ... you're cherry picking the results you want and ignoring the others. Very dishonest of you. Either accept that courts make valid decisions or don't ... you can't equivocate and just accept what you want because, funnily enough, that makes you a hypocrite. Oh wait ...

All of which is irrelevant to mountain biking impacts and conservation biology, both of which I have studied and you have NOT. QED

I think I pointed that out myself. I DON'T claim any qualifications relevant to the topic.

My point is that you don't have any qualifications, objective research or peer-reviewed results either ... so we're equal.

You feel entitled to challenge people who've done the hard slog of learning what they're talking about, properly devising research to test their hypotheses and publishing in public journals where their work can be challenged. You've done NONE of that ...

Vandeman is a shill.