|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#61
|
|||
|
|||
ANOTHER Dead Mountain Biker
On Mar 10, 1:34*am, Mike Vandeman wrote:
On Mon, 9 Mar 2009 04:41:23 -0700 (PDT), Kayak44 wrote: On Mar 9, 12:23*am, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Sun, 8 Mar 2009 20:19:35 -0700 (PDT), Kayak44 wrote: On Mar 8, 8:00*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Sun, 8 Mar 2009 13:54:33 -0700 (PDT), Kayak44 wrote: On Mar 8, 2:33*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Sat, 7 Mar 2009 14:45:25 -0800 (PST), Kayak44 wrote: On Mar 7, 11:48*am, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Thu, 5 Mar 2009 04:52:37 -0800 (PST), wrote: On Mar 4, 8:07*pm, Chris wrote: On Mar 1, 12:28*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Sat, 28 Feb 2009 15:17:33 -0800 (PST), Chris wrote: On Feb 28, 9:19 am, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Thu, 26 Feb 2009 17:53:10 -0800 (PST), Chris I have made this point in the past only to have Mike dispute it. It seems his memory is selective and short. Because it is not valid. DUH! Your point is the one which is not valid Mike. You are not using science to demonstrate that "mountain biking" (be it the type of bicycle, type of riding, or the industry which makes mountain bikes) killed anyone in any of the examples that I have seen you post here, but instead your personal bias. There is no cause based effect, which resulted in any of the deaths or injuries that you have posted which are attributable to "mountain biking". It's roughly akin to saying that it is the fault of the vehicle type which resulted in someone's injury or death without looking at road/off road conditions, other vehicles, weather conditions, health conditions, maintenance history of the vehicles involved, piloting abilities of the driver(s)/rider(s) involved, or any other mitigating circumstances. Warning: Improbable, but relevant comparison ahead with bad humor, my personal bias against SUVs, and personal adoration of steamrollers. "Grr! An SUV just ran over my dog after hitting some ice, jumping a curb, and crashing through my living room wall where my dog was crated, therefore SUVs kill animals. Cars and steamrollers would have never run over my dog if the driver had seen it, the road was dry, they were driving 5 MPH, and we were 100 feet away! Damn you SUVs!" If there is anyone avoiding any resemblance to scientific analysis, and blatant disregard of the facts at hand, it is you Mike. Chris “I would like to dedicate this post to the amusement of others, and my own ego! I never thought we could make it this far without either of you! Thank to so much!” Are you claiming that people never die from mountain biking? Where is your evidence? - Show quoted text - I would ask you to stop trying to put words in my mouth, but if you have so little class to mock the dead and their grieving friend who witnessed them die for an activity they enjoy which plays no roll in their death, it seem impossible that you would grant me such a simple courtesy. To answer your ridiculous question, no. I am not claiming mountain biking has not ever claimed anyone's life, which is a damn sight better than you for saying anyone who dies while in possition of one, or while mountain biking deserved to die. I'm curious what else earns the Mike Vandeman Deserves to Die award? Oil companies? Car makers? Strip mining? Factory farming? Logging? With all the people doing horrid things to the planet and one another, it is short sighted of you in my opinion to suggest death is deserved for a recreational sport. Maybe you haven't seen the news of late, but there are more than a few wars going on just now, ethnic cleansing, and other far more serious issues than mountain biking. You would be well advised to gain some perspective on what is actually important, versus what you are trying to manufacture as important.- Hide quoted text - Those other problems are just too tough for a phony environmentalist to tackle. Much easier to sit behind a keyboard and pretend to care about the planet. It's pretty LOW for mountain bikers to try to take advantage of those other distractions to get away with murdering wildlife and the environment. Thanks for demonstrating just how despicable mountain bikers are! The term "mountain-biker" has nothing to do with me, so your point it moot. Sorry. Mountain biker sympathizer. Wrong again. You should stop calling yourself an "environmentalist" and an "advocate for wildlife" as you are neither. You make no sense. I make perfect sense. You should stop calling yourself an "environmentalist" because you are not one. You should stop calling yourself an "advocate for wildlife" because you are not one. You are nothing more than an armchair scientist with a boner for mountain bikers. You do nothing for the environment or wildlife. Makes perfect sense. Nope, it's not supported by the facts. I guess you've never bothered to look at my website. If you aren't a mountain biker, why are as ignorant and lazy as they are? -- I've never seen, heard of or viewed ANY animal that has benefited from your silly website. Huge amounts of real habitat are being destroyed daily by surface mining, gas and oil exploration, lumbering, fertilizer and chemical runoff and other commercial activities while you sit on your lazy ass and complain about someone riding a bicycle. You haven't the balls to take on a real environmental problem. Obviously, you STILL haven't seen my website, or you couldn't say that. And you haven't the foggiest idea how to judge mountain biking impacts on wildlife. But what can we expect from a mountain biker sympathizer? Certainly not HONESTY! You haven't the balls to take on a real environmental problem. You are nothing more than a glory whore. Highway construction is not "a real environmental problem"? You are a joke. With 61,000 square miles of the US paved for roadways and parking, you haven't accomplished much, if anything, in that regard. |
Ads |
#62
|
|||
|
|||
ANOTHER Dead Mountain Biker
On Tue, 10 Mar 2009 09:48:42 -0700 (PDT), Kayak44
wrote: On Mar 10, 1:34*am, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Mon, 9 Mar 2009 04:41:23 -0700 (PDT), Kayak44 wrote: On Mar 9, 12:23*am, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Sun, 8 Mar 2009 20:19:35 -0700 (PDT), Kayak44 wrote: On Mar 8, 8:00*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Sun, 8 Mar 2009 13:54:33 -0700 (PDT), Kayak44 wrote: On Mar 8, 2:33*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Sat, 7 Mar 2009 14:45:25 -0800 (PST), Kayak44 wrote: On Mar 7, 11:48*am, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Thu, 5 Mar 2009 04:52:37 -0800 (PST), wrote: On Mar 4, 8:07*pm, Chris wrote: On Mar 1, 12:28*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Sat, 28 Feb 2009 15:17:33 -0800 (PST), Chris wrote: On Feb 28, 9:19 am, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Thu, 26 Feb 2009 17:53:10 -0800 (PST), Chris I have made this point in the past only to have Mike dispute it. It seems his memory is selective and short. Because it is not valid. DUH! Your point is the one which is not valid Mike. You are not using science to demonstrate that "mountain biking" (be it the type of bicycle, type of riding, or the industry which makes mountain bikes) killed anyone in any of the examples that I have seen you post here, but instead your personal bias. There is no cause based effect, which resulted in any of the deaths or injuries that you have posted which are attributable to "mountain biking". It's roughly akin to saying that it is the fault of the vehicle type which resulted in someone's injury or death without looking at road/off road conditions, other vehicles, weather conditions, health conditions, maintenance history of the vehicles involved, piloting abilities of the driver(s)/rider(s) involved, or any other mitigating circumstances. Warning: Improbable, but relevant comparison ahead with bad humor, my personal bias against SUVs, and personal adoration of steamrollers. "Grr! An SUV just ran over my dog after hitting some ice, jumping a curb, and crashing through my living room wall where my dog was crated, therefore SUVs kill animals. Cars and steamrollers would have never run over my dog if the driver had seen it, the road was dry, they were driving 5 MPH, and we were 100 feet away! Damn you SUVs!" If there is anyone avoiding any resemblance to scientific analysis, and blatant disregard of the facts at hand, it is you Mike. Chris “I would like to dedicate this post to the amusement of others, and my own ego! I never thought we could make it this far without either of you! Thank to so much!” Are you claiming that people never die from mountain biking? Where is your evidence? - Show quoted text - I would ask you to stop trying to put words in my mouth, but if you have so little class to mock the dead and their grieving friend who witnessed them die for an activity they enjoy which plays no roll in their death, it seem impossible that you would grant me such a simple courtesy. To answer your ridiculous question, no. I am not claiming mountain biking has not ever claimed anyone's life, which is a damn sight better than you for saying anyone who dies while in possition of one, or while mountain biking deserved to die. I'm curious what else earns the Mike Vandeman Deserves to Die award? Oil companies? Car makers? Strip mining? Factory farming? Logging? With all the people doing horrid things to the planet and one another, it is short sighted of you in my opinion to suggest death is deserved for a recreational sport. Maybe you haven't seen the news of late, but there are more than a few wars going on just now, ethnic cleansing, and other far more serious issues than mountain biking. You would be well advised to gain some perspective on what is actually important, versus what you are trying to manufacture as important.- Hide quoted text - Those other problems are just too tough for a phony environmentalist to tackle. Much easier to sit behind a keyboard and pretend to care about the planet. It's pretty LOW for mountain bikers to try to take advantage of those other distractions to get away with murdering wildlife and the environment. Thanks for demonstrating just how despicable mountain bikers are! The term "mountain-biker" has nothing to do with me, so your point it moot. Sorry. Mountain biker sympathizer. Wrong again. You should stop calling yourself an "environmentalist" and an "advocate for wildlife" as you are neither. You make no sense. I make perfect sense. You should stop calling yourself an "environmentalist" because you are not one. You should stop calling yourself an "advocate for wildlife" because you are not one. You are nothing more than an armchair scientist with a boner for mountain bikers. You do nothing for the environment or wildlife. Makes perfect sense. Nope, it's not supported by the facts. I guess you've never bothered to look at my website. If you aren't a mountain biker, why are as ignorant and lazy as they are? -- I've never seen, heard of or viewed ANY animal that has benefited from your silly website. Huge amounts of real habitat are being destroyed daily by surface mining, gas and oil exploration, lumbering, fertilizer and chemical runoff and other commercial activities while you sit on your lazy ass and complain about someone riding a bicycle. You haven't the balls to take on a real environmental problem. Obviously, you STILL haven't seen my website, or you couldn't say that. And you haven't the foggiest idea how to judge mountain biking impacts on wildlife. But what can we expect from a mountain biker sympathizer? Certainly not HONESTY! You haven't the balls to take on a real environmental problem. You are nothing more than a glory whore. Highway construction is not "a real environmental problem"? You are a joke. With 61,000 square miles of the US paved for roadways and parking, you haven't accomplished much, if anything, in that regard. More than you! -- 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 |
#63
|
|||
|
|||
ANOTHER Dead Mountain Biker
On Mar 12, 12:33*am, Mike Vandeman wrote:
On Tue, 10 Mar 2009 09:48:42 -0700 (PDT), Kayak44 wrote: On Mar 10, 1:34*am, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Mon, 9 Mar 2009 04:41:23 -0700 (PDT), Kayak44 wrote: On Mar 9, 12:23*am, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Sun, 8 Mar 2009 20:19:35 -0700 (PDT), Kayak44 wrote: On Mar 8, 8:00*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Sun, 8 Mar 2009 13:54:33 -0700 (PDT), Kayak44 wrote: On Mar 8, 2:33*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Sat, 7 Mar 2009 14:45:25 -0800 (PST), Kayak44 wrote: On Mar 7, 11:48*am, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Thu, 5 Mar 2009 04:52:37 -0800 (PST), wrote: On Mar 4, 8:07*pm, Chris wrote: On Mar 1, 12:28*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Sat, 28 Feb 2009 15:17:33 -0800 (PST), Chris wrote: On Feb 28, 9:19 am, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Thu, 26 Feb 2009 17:53:10 -0800 (PST), Chris I have made this point in the past only to have Mike dispute it. It seems his memory is selective and short. Because it is not valid. DUH! Your point is the one which is not valid Mike. You are not using science to demonstrate that "mountain biking" (be it the type of bicycle, type of riding, or the industry which makes mountain bikes) killed anyone in any of the examples that I have seen you post here, but instead your personal bias. There is no cause based effect, which resulted in any of the deaths or injuries that you have posted which are attributable to "mountain biking". It's roughly akin to saying that it is the fault of the vehicle type which resulted in someone's injury or death without looking at road/off road conditions, other vehicles, weather conditions, health conditions, maintenance history of the vehicles involved, piloting abilities of the driver(s)/rider(s) involved, or any other mitigating circumstances. Warning: Improbable, but relevant comparison ahead with bad humor, my personal bias against SUVs, and personal adoration of steamrollers. "Grr! An SUV just ran over my dog after hitting some ice, jumping a curb, and crashing through my living room wall where my dog was crated, therefore SUVs kill animals. Cars and steamrollers would have never run over my dog if the driver had seen it, the road was dry, they were driving 5 MPH, and we were 100 feet away! Damn you SUVs!" If there is anyone avoiding any resemblance to scientific analysis, and blatant disregard of the facts at hand, it is you Mike. Chris “I would like to dedicate this post to the amusement of others, and my own ego! I never thought we could make it this far without either of you! Thank to so much!” Are you claiming that people never die from mountain biking? Where is your evidence? - Show quoted text - I would ask you to stop trying to put words in my mouth, but if you have so little class to mock the dead and their grieving friend who witnessed them die for an activity they enjoy which plays no roll in their death, it seem impossible that you would grant me such a simple courtesy. To answer your ridiculous question, no. I am not claiming mountain biking has not ever claimed anyone's life, which is a damn sight better than you for saying anyone who dies while in possition of one, or while mountain biking deserved to die. I'm curious what else earns the Mike Vandeman Deserves to Die award? Oil companies? Car makers? Strip mining? Factory farming? Logging? With all the people doing horrid things to the planet and one another, it is short sighted of you in my opinion to suggest death is deserved for a recreational sport. Maybe you haven't seen the news of late, but there are more than a few wars going on just now, ethnic cleansing, and other far more serious issues than mountain biking. You would be well advised to gain some perspective on what is actually important, versus what you are trying to manufacture as important.- Hide quoted text - Those other problems are just too tough for a phony environmentalist to tackle. Much easier to sit behind a keyboard and pretend to care about the planet. It's pretty LOW for mountain bikers to try to take advantage of those other distractions to get away with murdering wildlife and the environment. Thanks for demonstrating just how despicable mountain bikers are! The term "mountain-biker" has nothing to do with me, so your point it moot. Sorry. Mountain biker sympathizer. Wrong again. You should stop calling yourself an "environmentalist" and an "advocate for wildlife" as you are neither. You make no sense. I make perfect sense. You should stop calling yourself an "environmentalist" because you are not one. You should stop calling yourself an "advocate for wildlife" because you are not one. You are nothing more than an armchair scientist with a boner for mountain bikers. You do nothing for the environment or wildlife. Makes perfect sense. Nope, it's not supported by the facts. I guess you've never bothered to look at my website. If you aren't a mountain biker, why are as ignorant and lazy as they are? -- I've never seen, heard of or viewed ANY animal that has benefited from your silly website. Huge amounts of real habitat are being destroyed daily by surface mining, gas and oil exploration, lumbering, fertilizer and chemical runoff and other commercial activities while you sit on your lazy ass and complain about someone riding a bicycle. You haven't the balls to take on a real environmental problem. Obviously, you STILL haven't seen my website, or you couldn't say that. And you haven't the foggiest idea how to judge mountain biking impacts on wildlife. But what can we expect from a mountain biker sympathizer? Certainly not HONESTY! You haven't the balls to take on a real environmental problem. You are nothing more than a glory whore. Highway construction is not "a real environmental problem"? You are a joke. With 61,000 square miles of the US paved for roadways and parking, you haven't accomplished much, if anything, in that regard. More than you! You haven't a clue, as usual. |
#64
|
|||
|
|||
ANOTHER Dead Mountain Biker
On Mar 8, 11:37 am, Mike Vandeman wrote:
Show me where you see "glee", LIAR. Like all mountain bikers, you FABRICATE everything, because you don't have the guts to tell the truth. Ah, the classic Mike foil, a battle over minutia. You want me to prove your intent, versus the perception of intent. I concede that it is my perception that you post these things with glee, or malice, but I have no doubt that your intent is not altruistic. You continuing to suggest that you are warning people about the dangers of mountain bikes is disproved by the very things you post as they usually have nothing to do with mountain biking, but instead just the inclusion of a mountain bike. You fabricated that. It simply states a fact. No fabrication at all. As I stated, it is very much a "they got what they deserved" implication. It is your tone which does this, not my perception of it. You are a liar because you claim as fact things that (1) aren't true and which (2) you know aren't true. DUH! I have made no such claims, and you cannot speak to what I know or do not know. You are claiming that I am lying, but you have no proof of this, nor could you prove it. It is a theory at best, and no less wrong. It is a distraction from the point by assaulting my character and accusing me of a liar and not addressing the merits of the arguments. BS. It's the best way to warn people of a danger, so they don't do the same. You make no sense whatsoever. I guess we should never publish articles about accidents & disasters? Do you complaing to the medis for covering 911 etc? I doubt it, HYPOCRITE. You are not warning people about the right thing. I have yet to see one of the new stories you have posted here where mountain biking cause anyone's death. Claming that I am lying about this point is unfounded and unproven. Hypocrisy is something you specialize in, not me. Chris |
#65
|
|||
|
|||
ANOTHER Dead Mountain Biker
On Mar 8, 5:00*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote:
I guess you've never bothered to look at my website. Your website is ****e, devoid of credible citations, references, any sort of readable presentation, or more than the most basic of HTML programming. It is self-congratulatory at best. Chris |
#66
|
|||
|
|||
ANOTHER Dead Mountain Biker
On Thu, 12 Mar 2009 21:53:56 -0700 (PDT), Chris
wrote: On Mar 8, 11:37 am, Mike Vandeman wrote: Show me where you see "glee", LIAR. Like all mountain bikers, you FABRICATE everything, because you don't have the guts to tell the truth. Ah, the classic Mike foil, a battle over minutia. You want me to prove your intent, versus the perception of intent. I concede that it is my perception that you post these things with glee, or malice, but I have no doubt that your intent is not altruistic. As I said, you FABRICATED that, on the basis of no evidence whatsoever. Admit it: you are an incorrigible LIAR. You continuing to suggest that you are warning people about the dangers of mountain bikes is disproved by the very things you post as they usually have nothing to do with mountain biking, but instead just the inclusion of a mountain bike. You fabricated that. It simply states a fact. No fabrication at all. As I stated, it is very much a "they got what they deserved" implication. It is your tone which does this, not my perception of it. BS. You can't define tone nor point to what creates the alleged "tone". You are just LYING, plain & simple. You are a liar because you claim as fact things that (1) aren't true and which (2) you know aren't true. DUH! I have made no such claims, and you cannot speak to what I know or do not know. You are claiming that I am lying, but you have no proof of this, nor could you prove it. It is a theory at best, and no less wrong. It is a distraction from the point by assaulting my character and accusing me of a liar and not addressing the merits of the arguments. BS. It's the best way to warn people of a danger, so they don't do the same. You make no sense whatsoever. I guess we should never publish articles about accidents & disasters? Do you complaing to the medis for covering 911 etc? I doubt it, HYPOCRITE. You are not warning people about the right thing. I have yet to see one of the new stories you have posted here where mountain biking cause anyone's death. LIAR. Claming that I am lying about this point is unfounded and unproven. Hypocrisy is something you specialize in, not me. Chris -- 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 |
#67
|
|||
|
|||
ANOTHER Dead Mountain Biker
On Thu, 12 Mar 2009 22:01:20 -0700 (PDT), Chris
wrote: On Mar 8, 5:00*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote: I guess you've never bothered to look at my website. Your website is ****e, devoid of credible citations, references, any sort of readable presentation, or more than the most basic of HTML programming. It is self-congratulatory at best. Chris If you had bothered to look at it, you would have known that I worked to stop highway construction, probably while you were (1) in diapers or (2) twiddled your thumbs. -- 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 |
#68
|
|||
|
|||
ANOTHER Dead Mountain Biker
On Mar 18, 8:05*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote:
On Thu, 12 Mar 2009 22:01:20 -0700 (PDT), Chris wrote: On Mar 8, 5:00*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote: I guess you've never bothered to look at my website. Your website is ****e, devoid of credible citations, references, any sort of readable presentation, or more than the most basic of HTML programming. It is self-congratulatory at best. Chris If you had bothered to look at it, you would have known that I worked to stop highway construction, probably while you were (1) in diapers or (2) twiddled your thumbs. By "worked" do you mean "added to an already boring website that consisted mostly of other peoples writings"? |
#69
|
|||
|
|||
ANOTHER Dead Mountain Biker
On Thu, 19 Mar 2009 04:26:33 -0700 (PDT), Kayak44
wrote: On Mar 18, 8:05*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Thu, 12 Mar 2009 22:01:20 -0700 (PDT), Chris wrote: On Mar 8, 5:00*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote: I guess you've never bothered to look at my website. Your website is ****e, devoid of credible citations, references, any sort of readable presentation, or more than the most basic of HTML programming. It is self-congratulatory at best. Chris If you had bothered to look at it, you would have known that I worked to stop highway construction, probably while you were (1) in diapers or (2) twiddled your thumbs. By "worked" do you mean "added to an already boring website that consisted mostly of other peoples writings"? No, things like filing lawsuits to stop highway construction. My links contains links (DUH!) to other websites. The rest of my website is my own writing. But you already knew that, and chose to lie anyway. You are hopeless. -- 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 |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
ANOTHER Dead Mountain Biker | Mike Vandeman | Mountain Biking | 71 | March 20th 09 04:11 AM |
ANOTHER Dead Mountain Biker! | Mike Vandeman | Mountain Biking | 2 | June 14th 08 06:49 AM |
Mountain Biking is DANGEROUS! -- Mountain Biker Found Dead In Capitol State Forest, WA | [email protected] | Mountain Biking | 4 | February 12th 05 11:33 PM |
Mountain Biking is DANGEROUS! -- Mountain Biker Found Dead In Capitol State Forest, WA | treefrog | Social Issues | 1 | February 12th 05 11:33 PM |
Mountain Biking is DANGEROUS! -- Mountain Biker Found Dead In Capitol State Forest, WA | [email protected] | Social Issues | 0 | February 9th 05 11:32 PM |