|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Vandeman's ignorance busted (yet again) - this one!!!!!!
On Monday, August 5, 2013 6:29:06 PM UTC-7, I love Mike wrote:
On Monday, August 5, 2013 4:44:20 PM UTC+12, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Sunday, August 4, 2013 6:00:47 PM UTC-7, I love Mike wrote: On Saturday, August 3, 2013 5:58:19 PM UTC+12, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Monday, July 22, 2013 4:57:53 PM UTC-7, I love Mike wrote: See second paragraph below from Vandeman, which was on this group: Mike Vandeman Jul 20 On Saturday, June 15, 2013 5:44:12 PM UTC-7, I love Mike wrote: I have challenged you before to provide peer reviewed scientific evidence that mountain biking in damaging NZs natural environment. You have come up with nothing to support your claims. There are reason for this. Yeah, the reason is that no one in New Zealand CARES enough to study the negative impacts of mountain biking. All you care about is MONEY! By the way, how are the moa and thylacine doing lately? Learn something about your own endangered species: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/ar...ectid=10797165 As illustrated by Vandeman suggesting the thylacine (or tasmanian tiger) was in New Zealand it is obvious Vandeman is a lightweight when it comes to science and environmental issues. In case you don't know Tasmania is not part of New Zealand. It is in Australia. More importantly if Vandeman had bothered to read about New Zealand's environmental issues from the scientific community he would quickly discover that the impact of introduced mammals - namely possums, rats, cats and ungulates are the main concerns regarding New Zealand's native biodiversity (I have told of this before numerous times). What's more none of the species in the article Vandeman has provided are directly impacted by mountain biking . Kakapo, for example, are only found in offshore islands which are basically off limits to humans. Interestingly what Vandeman won't tell you is that there is actually growing support for more mountain biking in New Zealand's natural areas (ie national parks) from environmental groups and recreationists. The rationale behind this is that people want additional recreational experiences and the negative impact of mountain biking is more imagined than real according to research from our Department of Conservation. To me it is obvious that Vandeman, although he pretends to be a scientist is nothing more than an extremist who clearly believes in his own agenda rather than scientific facts. The unfortunate outcome of Vandeman's extremism and irrationality is that he gives the environmental movement a bad name. No response but I am not surprised. You just look like an idiot asking me how the thyalcine and moa are going! To repeat my point - Tasmania is not part of New Zealand. It is in Australia. Duhhhhhhhhhhh............... Non sequitur. Tell us again that whopper about the laws of physics and biology being different in New Zealand from everywhere else (including Australia)! If you had bothered to read about the science regarding new Zealand and Australia's biodiversity issues you would find that the key environmental problems are climate change and the impact of mammalian predators on native biodiversity. In the case of New Zealand, for example, many of our endangered species such as Kiwi are on the brink of extinction on the mainland because of predation by dogs, stoats, rats and cats etc. The evil mountain bike isn't the cause of decline old chum. A 12 year old could tell you that. Maybe it would be an idea that you actually did some homework before making statements about another countries environmental issues and mountain biking? Mountain biking destroys wildlife habitat. That's all we need to know, to ban it. |
Ads |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Vandeman's ignorance busted (yet again) - this one!!!!!!
On Tuesday, August 6, 2013 3:47:30 PM UTC+12, Mike Vandeman wrote:
On Monday, August 5, 2013 6:29:06 PM UTC-7, I love Mike wrote: On Monday, August 5, 2013 4:44:20 PM UTC+12, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Sunday, August 4, 2013 6:00:47 PM UTC-7, I love Mike wrote: On Saturday, August 3, 2013 5:58:19 PM UTC+12, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Monday, July 22, 2013 4:57:53 PM UTC-7, I love Mike wrote: See second paragraph below from Vandeman, which was on this group: Mike Vandeman Jul 20 On Saturday, June 15, 2013 5:44:12 PM UTC-7, I love Mike wrote: I have challenged you before to provide peer reviewed scientific evidence that mountain biking in damaging NZs natural environment. You have come up with nothing to support your claims. There are reason for this. Yeah, the reason is that no one in New Zealand CARES enough to study the negative impacts of mountain biking. All you care about is MONEY! By the way, how are the moa and thylacine doing lately? Learn something about your own endangered species: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/ar...ectid=10797165 As illustrated by Vandeman suggesting the thylacine (or tasmanian tiger) was in New Zealand it is obvious Vandeman is a lightweight when it comes to science and environmental issues. In case you don't know Tasmania is not part of New Zealand. It is in Australia. More importantly if Vandeman had bothered to read about New Zealand's environmental issues from the scientific community he would quickly discover that the impact of introduced mammals - namely possums, rats, cats and ungulates are the main concerns regarding New Zealand's native biodiversity (I have told of this before numerous times). What's more none of the species in the article Vandeman has provided are directly impacted by mountain biking . Kakapo, for example, are only found in offshore islands which are basically off limits to humans. Interestingly what Vandeman won't tell you is that there is actually growing support for more mountain biking in New Zealand's natural areas (ie national parks) from environmental groups and recreationists. The rationale behind this is that people want additional recreational experiences and the negative impact of mountain biking is more imagined than real according to research from our Department of Conservation. To me it is obvious that Vandeman, although he pretends to be a scientist is nothing more than an extremist who clearly believes in his own agenda rather than scientific facts. The unfortunate outcome of Vandeman's extremism and irrationality is that he gives the environmental movement a bad name. No response but I am not surprised. You just look like an idiot asking me how the thyalcine and moa are going! To repeat my point - Tasmania is not part of New Zealand. It is in Australia. Duhhhhhhhhhhh............... Non sequitur. Tell us again that whopper about the laws of physics and biology being different in New Zealand from everywhere else (including Australia)! If you had bothered to read about the science regarding new Zealand and Australia's biodiversity issues you would find that the key environmental problems are climate change and the impact of mammalian predators on native biodiversity. In the case of New Zealand, for example, many of our endangered species such as Kiwi are on the brink of extinction on the mainland because of predation by dogs, stoats, rats and cats etc. The evil mountain bike isn't the cause of decline old chum. A 12 year old could tell you that. Maybe it would be an idea that you actually did some homework before making statements about another countries environmental issues and mountain biking? Mountain biking destroys wildlife habitat. That's all we need to know, to ban it. Again more dribble....Yawn.....You are a highly ignorant man... |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Vandeman's ignorance busted (yet again) - this one!!!!!!
On Tuesday, August 6, 2013 3:47:30 PM UTC+12, Mike Vandeman wrote:
On Monday, August 5, 2013 6:29:06 PM UTC-7, I love Mike wrote: On Monday, August 5, 2013 4:44:20 PM UTC+12, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Sunday, August 4, 2013 6:00:47 PM UTC-7, I love Mike wrote: On Saturday, August 3, 2013 5:58:19 PM UTC+12, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Monday, July 22, 2013 4:57:53 PM UTC-7, I love Mike wrote: See second paragraph below from Vandeman, which was on this group: Mike Vandeman Jul 20 On Saturday, June 15, 2013 5:44:12 PM UTC-7, I love Mike wrote: I have challenged you before to provide peer reviewed scientific evidence that mountain biking in damaging NZs natural environment. You have come up with nothing to support your claims. There are reason for this. Yeah, the reason is that no one in New Zealand CARES enough to study the negative impacts of mountain biking. All you care about is MONEY! By the way, how are the moa and thylacine doing lately? Learn something about your own endangered species: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/ar...ectid=10797165 As illustrated by Vandeman suggesting the thylacine (or tasmanian tiger) was in New Zealand it is obvious Vandeman is a lightweight when it comes to science and environmental issues. In case you don't know Tasmania is not part of New Zealand. It is in Australia. More importantly if Vandeman had bothered to read about New Zealand's environmental issues from the scientific community he would quickly discover that the impact of introduced mammals - namely possums, rats, cats and ungulates are the main concerns regarding New Zealand's native biodiversity (I have told of this before numerous times). What's more none of the species in the article Vandeman has provided are directly impacted by mountain biking . Kakapo, for example, are only found in offshore islands which are basically off limits to humans. Interestingly what Vandeman won't tell you is that there is actually growing support for more mountain biking in New Zealand's natural areas (ie national parks) from environmental groups and recreationists. The rationale behind this is that people want additional recreational experiences and the negative impact of mountain biking is more imagined than real according to research from our Department of Conservation. To me it is obvious that Vandeman, although he pretends to be a scientist is nothing more than an extremist who clearly believes in his own agenda rather than scientific facts. The unfortunate outcome of Vandeman's extremism and irrationality is that he gives the environmental movement a bad name. No response but I am not surprised. You just look like an idiot asking me how the thyalcine and moa are going! To repeat my point - Tasmania is not part of New Zealand. It is in Australia. Duhhhhhhhhhhh............... Non sequitur. Tell us again that whopper about the laws of physics and biology being different in New Zealand from everywhere else (including Australia)! If you had bothered to read about the science regarding new Zealand and Australia's biodiversity issues you would find that the key environmental problems are climate change and the impact of mammalian predators on native biodiversity. In the case of New Zealand, for example, many of our endangered species such as Kiwi are on the brink of extinction on the mainland because of predation by dogs, stoats, rats and cats etc. The evil mountain bike isn't the cause of decline old chum. A 12 year old could tell you that. Maybe it would be an idea that you actually did some homework before making statements about another countries environmental issues and mountain biking? Mountain biking destroys wildlife habitat. That's all we need to know, to ban it. Motherhood statements like that simply serve to totally undermine your argument old chum. |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Vandeman's ignorance busted (yet again) - this one!!!!!!
Mountain biking destroys wildlife habitat. That's all we need to know, to ban it. Indeed it does ... to pretty much the same degree as hiking ... you want to ban that too ????? Your house destroys wildlife habitat ... shall we pop round and knock it down and you can relocate to a small, wooden hut somewhere remote ? |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Vandeman's ignorance busted (yet again) - this one!!!!!!
On Tuesday, August 6, 2013 1:47:44 AM UTC-7, Blackblade wrote:
Mountain biking destroys wildlife habitat. That's all we need to know, to ban it. Indeed it does ... to pretty much the same degree as hiking BS. Mountain bikers travel much farther than hikers, destroying much more habitat. Idiot. Vandeman still 1000, mountain bikers ZERO. .... you want to ban that too ????? Your house destroys wildlife habitat ... shall we pop round and knock it down and you can relocate to a small, wooden hut somewhere remote ? |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Vandeman's ignorance busted (yet again) - this one!!!!!!
BS. Mountain bikers travel much farther than hikers, destroying much more habitat. Idiot. Vandeman still 1000, mountain bikers ZERO. You are a glutton for punishment aren't you ? That statement has been refuted in peer-reviewed journals and scientific research again and again and again. Why do you both spouting nonsense ? |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Vandeman's ignorance busted (yet again) - this one!!!!!!
On Tuesday, August 6, 2013 7:08:36 AM UTC-7, Blackblade wrote:
BS. Mountain bikers travel much farther than hikers, destroying much more habitat. Idiot. Vandeman still 1000, mountain bikers ZERO. You are a glutton for punishment aren't you ? That statement has been refuted in peer-reviewed journals and scientific research again and again and again. Why do you both spouting nonsense ? Liar. Cite even ONE scientific article that claims that hikers travel farther than mountain bikers. (HINT: you CAN'T, because it isn't true.) STILL Vandeman 1000, mountain bikers ZERO. |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Vandeman's ignorance busted (yet again) - this one!!!!!!
|
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Vandeman's ignorance busted (yet again) - this one!!!!!!
On 8/6/2013 1:47 AM, Blackblade wrote:
Mountain biking destroys wildlife habitat. That's all we need to know, to ban it. Indeed it does ... to pretty much the same degree as hiking ... you want to ban that too ????? That is true. Every study done on wildlife impact shows this to be true. There was one difference that the studies showed though. Mountain bikers move through the habitat more quickly while hikers linger longer. Thus mountain bikers were found to have more opportunities to encounter wildlife in a given amount of time. Conversely, the hikers displaced the wildlife from their habitat for a longer period of time by virtue of being in the area longer. The other issue is the level of damage that different transport means cause to the landscape because this affects wildlife as well. Horses cause the most damage by far. Hikers and cyclists cause about the same amount of damage to the landscape. |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
Vandeman's ignorance busted (yet again) - this one!!!!!!
Surely the level of environmental impact would be location specific?
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Landis busted, Armstrong busted | birdbrain | Racing | 5 | January 19th 13 08:10 AM |
Mike Vandeman returns, bigger, better, stronger. You only think youshafted Vandeman. | Andre Jute[_2_] | Techniques | 26 | September 30th 11 04:09 AM |
Mike Vandeman returns, bigger, better, stronger. You only think you shafted Vandeman. | Jym Dyer | Social Issues | 2 | September 28th 11 03:40 AM |
Mike Vandeman: Is there Any Limit to Human Ignorance? | Gary S. | Mountain Biking | 7 | September 26th 05 05:02 PM |