|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Why People Mountain Bike: "the adventure of the ride is what gets my juices flowing"
"Mike Vandeman" wrote in message news On Tue, 30 May 2006 13:24:43 -0400, "S Curtiss" wrote: first off lets do what mike never does and snip some of the crap Not that he makes it easy cutting into the middle of sentances to post his comments. Apologies for not colour coding it for those using an email browser. I come in through cyclingforums because of the added security. Jeesh. davebee Wrote: MV has not based his science on anything officially recognised and his acusations that everything that goes against his "facts" is controlled by a mountainbikers conspiracy is bizarre to say the very least. Surprisingly, underneath all the crap and the egomania and the accusations I think Vandeman makes a reasonably valid point to the extent that wilderness should be protected. MV Wrote: And wildlife. You forgot that part. wilderness, wildlife... whats the diffence? I'm glad you admit not knowing the difference. The wilderness implies the area and everything contained therin. Right, but not all habitat is wilderness. DUH! I'm glad you admit KNOWING the difference... finally. Now you can stop treating all areas as if they are designated wilderness in your statements. I have never done so. I rarely talk about wilderness, because it's subjective. The topic is HABITAT. DUH![/color] Funny how now you disown your own writings which are inclusive of terminology for wilderness, habitat and wildlife. You claim to want "human free habitat" in every signature, which would begin with "wilderness" designations. You conveniently change terminology to fit your defense. Maybe, if you applied some consistency of terminology, you would also earn some credibility. You can also, since you acknowledge "not all habitat is wilderness", stop misrepresenting the legal and acceptable use of trail systems by non-hikers. You can also, since you acknowledge "not all habitat is wilderness", stop citing your references to wilderness habitat when referring to access for off-road cycling in non-wilderness areas. Can anyone decipher what this idiot is trying to say? Funny - we've been asking that about your posts for around 10-12 years. So far, no other person of science or significance has answered in the affirmative. Your obtuseness requires that everybody spells things out to you as if you are a 2 year old child with mental health problems. And then you pounce ont he omission of a single word or a slightly inadequate description. At least FOR THE MOST PART people try to explain things for you without resorting to personal insults. davebee Wrote: you also have to permit recreation away from developed urban areas. MV Wrote: This I agree with, howevert here is absolutely no reason to allow BIKES off-road. THEY aren't alive, and don't need recreation. Are you really THAT dense? There is no need to be rude. The bicycle of course is a tool for people to use to aid their enjoyment of the outside. because you fail to grasp the idea perhaps you should consider this. I assume when you go walking you wear a pair of hiking boots. Your boots are comparable to my bike, given so much as they are a tool to aid your enjoyment. Likewise your boots do not require recreation. Okay, not tell me WHY you can't recreate without bring your bike onto tre trail? Are you incapable of walking? In other words, Why should we allow bikes off-road? Give me one good reason why I or any land manager should allow bikes off-road. (Hint: there aren't any!) We've had this discussion (over and over and over...) So when are you going to answer the question????? For anyone who is objective and intelligent, I have answered it.... again. See below for context. "Apparently, your opinion even supercedes reality. Land managers across the country are working with cycling organizations to enhance cooperation among all user groups. The Bureau of Land Management has a national action plan in place just for the purpose. The BLM recognizes the benefits of off-road cycling and your opinions of off-road cycling and the reasons given supporting the benefits of off-road cycling are a non-issue. It is simple. You try to close your eyes and cover your ears by placing your OPINION as a determining factor as what is valid. However, it has been PROVEN to those who make the decisions that off-road cycling offers benefits of health, increased awareness of the importance of preservation, cooperative maintenance, economic benefits and more. Your OPINION as to the validity of these benefits is null. Your OPINION of off-road cycling is null. All you have is your OPINION resting on a carefully selected foundation of chosen information." ----------- Still waiting! ... === For what - the Synanon space ships to retrieve you back to their equivalent of a "rubber room"? |
Ads |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Why People Mountain Bike: "the adventure of the ride is what gets my juices flowing"
I got a true taste of why people mountain bike today, by NOT mountain
biking. Its been raining all week, so I did as I've always done - either not ride or ride on the road. I did this long before I read any of Vandeman's nonsense. Road riding is like flying - hours of boredom occasionally interrupted by moments of sheer terror. Still, I needed some exercise. To break up the monotony a bit, I took a different route. There was a lot more traffic than I anticipated. I was hugging the shoulder as much as possible, but still had two SUVs got way too close. Right after one near-miss, a passenger in a truck yelled "are you having fun"? Of course I wasn't. I didn't miss the irony of having near-misses with 3,000 pound vehicles while engaging in something for the purpose of "improving my health". I'll be so glad when the fireroads dry out at least. They don't have the joy of singletrack, but its a lot better than this. I may have gotten some scrapes from mountain biking over the years, but I don't feel the need to have an up-to-date will just because of it. -- -BB- To e-mail me, unmunge my address |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Why People Mountain Bike: "the adventure of the ride is what gets my juices flowing"
On Wed, 31 May 2006 18:54:52 GMT, Mike Vandeman wrote:
So it's okay to get hurt mountain biking, but not on the road? Its not a matter of just getting hurt. The morning after my post, I learned that a couple of cyclists had been struck by a car and killed on a similar highway not too far from my house. It's haunting to see the picture of the police standing on a road with which I'm familiar, and bits of bicycle scattered around: http://www.koin.com/storyimages/hwy47_053106.jpg It's a shocking, tragic reminder of the danger of what I was doing. And far too common. Yeah, I'll take off-road biffs over that any day. -- -BB- To e-mail me, unmunge my address |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Why People Mountain Bike: "the adventure of the ride is whatgets my juices flowing"
Mike Vandeman wrote:
On Tue, 30 May 2006 16:37:35 -0700, cc wrote: I suggest that it's at least 5 -10 times as harmful. That's certainly significant. That's based on relative distance travelled. http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande So, how far and how many times a week does the average hiker travel and how far and how many times a week does a mountain biker travel? Also, post where you secured this information... |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Why People Mountain Bike: "the adventure of the ride is what gets my juices flowing"
On Wed, 31 May 2006 21:32:34 -0400, ChainSmoker
wrote: Mike Vandeman wrote: On Tue, 30 May 2006 16:37:35 -0700, cc wrote: I suggest that it's at least 5 -10 times as harmful. That's certainly significant. That's based on relative distance travelled. http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande So, how far and how many times a week does the average hiker travel and how far and how many times a week does a mountain biker travel? Also, post where you secured this information... You tell me. Do your homework. === 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.) http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Why People Mountain Bike: "the adventure of the ride is whatgets my juices flowing"
Mike Vandeman wrote:
On Wed, 31 May 2006 21:32:34 -0400, ChainSmoker wrote: Mike Vandeman wrote: On Tue, 30 May 2006 16:37:35 -0700, cc wrote: I suggest that it's at least 5 -10 times as harmful. That's certainly significant. That's based on relative distance travelled. http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande So, how far and how many times a week does the average hiker travel and how far and how many times a week does a mountain biker travel? Also, post where you secured this information... You tell me. Do your homework. === 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.) http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande Ok. I will bite. Searching the newsgroups and reading hiker comments the average hike is 10 miles with longer hikes up to 30 miles. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Why People Mountain Bike: "the adventure of the ride is whatgets my juices flowing"
Mike Vandeman wrote:
On Thu, 01 Jun 2006 15:46:17 -0400, ChainSmoker wrote: Mike Vandeman wrote: On Wed, 31 May 2006 21:32:34 -0400, ChainSmoker wrote: Mike Vandeman wrote: On Tue, 30 May 2006 16:37:35 -0700, cc wrote: I suggest that it's at least 5 -10 times as harmful. That's certainly significant. That's based on relative distance travelled. http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande So, how far and how many times a week does the average hiker travel and how far and how many times a week does a mountain biker travel? Also, post where you secured this information... You tell me. Do your homework. === 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.) http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande Ok. I will bite. Searching the newsgroups and reading hiker comments the average hike is 10 miles with longer hikes up to 30 miles. BS. But even if we accept your figures, I studies mountain biking ride announcements. They averaged 27 miles & went from 8 to 112 miles (in a single day). So even if we accept your bogus figures, mountain bikers travel 3 times as far as hikers, and thus have at least 3 times the impacts. === 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.) http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande Using the above data we both have acquired, and following your determination that mountain biking has 3 time the impact of hiking because mountain bikers travel 3 time the distance of hikers: We of course need therein to consider the number of hikers vs the number of mountain bikers. There are 55 million hikers and 10 million mountain bikers. Applying our collective assumptions which includes similar number of times hikers and bikers get to venture out; The overall impact of hiking is much greater since there are a 5 to 1 ratio of hikers to bikers. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Why People Mountain Bike: "the adventure of the ride is what gets my juices flowing"
On Fri, 02 Jun 2006 09:40:37 -0400, ChainSmoker
wrote: Mike Vandeman wrote: On Thu, 01 Jun 2006 15:46:17 -0400, ChainSmoker wrote: Mike Vandeman wrote: On Wed, 31 May 2006 21:32:34 -0400, ChainSmoker wrote: Mike Vandeman wrote: On Tue, 30 May 2006 16:37:35 -0700, cc wrote: I suggest that it's at least 5 -10 times as harmful. That's certainly significant. That's based on relative distance travelled. http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande So, how far and how many times a week does the average hiker travel and how far and how many times a week does a mountain biker travel? Also, post where you secured this information... You tell me. Do your homework. === 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.) http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande Ok. I will bite. Searching the newsgroups and reading hiker comments the average hike is 10 miles with longer hikes up to 30 miles. BS. But even if we accept your figures, I studies mountain biking ride announcements. They averaged 27 miles & went from 8 to 112 miles (in a single day). So even if we accept your bogus figures, mountain bikers travel 3 times as far as hikers, and thus have at least 3 times the impacts. === 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.) http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande Using the above data we both have acquired, and following your determination that mountain biking has 3 time the impact of hiking because mountain bikers travel 3 time the distance of hikers: We of course need therein to consider the number of hikers vs the number of mountain bikers. There are 55 million hikers and 10 million mountain bikers. Applying our collective assumptions which includes similar number of times hikers and bikers get to venture out; The overall impact of hiking is much greater since there are a 5 to 1 ratio of hikers to bikers. Irrelevant. Ethics applies to individuals, not crowds. If you can reduce your impact by hiking rather than mountain biking, you SHOULD. Not that you know anything about ethics. === 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.) http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Why People Mountain Bike: "the adventure of the ride is whatgets my juices flowing"
Mike Vandeman wrote:
On Fri, 02 Jun 2006 09:40:37 -0400, ChainSmoker wrote: Mike Vandeman wrote: On Thu, 01 Jun 2006 15:46:17 -0400, ChainSmoker wrote: Mike Vandeman wrote: On Wed, 31 May 2006 21:32:34 -0400, ChainSmoker wrote: Mike Vandeman wrote: On Tue, 30 May 2006 16:37:35 -0700, cc wrote: I suggest that it's at least 5 -10 times as harmful. That's certainly significant. That's based on relative distance travelled. http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande So, how far and how many times a week does the average hiker travel and how far and how many times a week does a mountain biker travel? Also, post where you secured this information... You tell me. Do your homework. === 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.) http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande Ok. I will bite. Searching the newsgroups and reading hiker comments the average hike is 10 miles with longer hikes up to 30 miles. BS. But even if we accept your figures, I studies mountain biking ride announcements. They averaged 27 miles & went from 8 to 112 miles (in a single day). So even if we accept your bogus figures, mountain bikers travel 3 times as far as hikers, and thus have at least 3 times the impacts. === 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.) http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande Using the above data we both have acquired, and following your determination that mountain biking has 3 time the impact of hiking because mountain bikers travel 3 time the distance of hikers: We of course need therein to consider the number of hikers vs the number of mountain bikers. There are 55 million hikers and 10 million mountain bikers. Applying our collective assumptions which includes similar number of times hikers and bikers get to venture out; The overall impact of hiking is much greater since there are a 5 to 1 ratio of hikers to bikers. Irrelevant. Ethics applies to individuals, not crowds. If you can reduce your impact by hiking rather than mountain biking, you SHOULD. Not that you know anything about ethics. Mike, you can't make an argument based on the numbers of miles traveled per biker and then reject one based on how many hikers there are compared to bikers. You make no sense! Go back to studying eating habits. |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Why People Mountain Bike: "the adventure of the ride is whatgets my juices flowing"
Mike Vandeman wrote:
On Fri, 02 Jun 2006 09:40:37 -0400, ChainSmoker wrote: Mike Vandeman wrote: On Thu, 01 Jun 2006 15:46:17 -0400, ChainSmoker wrote: Mike Vandeman wrote: On Wed, 31 May 2006 21:32:34 -0400, ChainSmoker wrote: Mike Vandeman wrote: On Tue, 30 May 2006 16:37:35 -0700, cc wrote: I suggest that it's at least 5 -10 times as harmful. That's certainly significant. That's based on relative distance travelled. http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande So, how far and how many times a week does the average hiker travel and how far and how many times a week does a mountain biker travel? Also, post where you secured this information... You tell me. Do your homework. === 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.) http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande Ok. I will bite. Searching the newsgroups and reading hiker comments the average hike is 10 miles with longer hikes up to 30 miles. BS. But even if we accept your figures, I studies mountain biking ride announcements. They averaged 27 miles & went from 8 to 112 miles (in a single day). So even if we accept your bogus figures, mountain bikers travel 3 times as far as hikers, and thus have at least 3 times the impacts. === 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.) http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande Using the above data we both have acquired, and following your determination that mountain biking has 3 time the impact of hiking because mountain bikers travel 3 time the distance of hikers: We of course need therein to consider the number of hikers vs the number of mountain bikers. There are 55 million hikers and 10 million mountain bikers. Applying our collective assumptions which includes similar number of times hikers and bikers get to venture out; The overall impact of hiking is much greater since there are a 5 to 1 ratio of hikers to bikers. Irrelevant. Ethics applies to individuals, not crowds. If you can reduce your impact by hiking rather than mountain biking, you SHOULD. Not that you know anything about ethics. === 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.) http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande Ethics are irrelevant to applicability of a group's fundamental moral code. I am one of the 55 million hikers and one of the 10 million bikers, thus our evaluation above indicates I should mountain bike more and hike less to reduce overall impact. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Bicycle is king of the road as gas costs rise | cfsmtb | Australia | 14 | May 9th 06 12:35 AM |
The Ugly Bike | [email protected] | General | 4 | October 17th 05 02:43 PM |
Cheat Mountain Challenge Ride Report (2005/09/25) | Chris BeHanna | General | 0 | September 30th 05 05:19 AM |
Frequently Asked Questions about Mountain Biking | BB | Mountain Biking | 31 | July 4th 04 02:35 AM |
Biker Killed by Mountain Lion | Dennis | Recumbent Biking | 228 | March 27th 04 02:39 PM |