|
|
|||||||
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
| Ads |
|
#2
May 7th 10, 07:50 PM
posted to alt.mountain-bike,rec.bicycles.soc,rec.backcountry,ca.environment,sci.environment
|
|||
|
|||
Why Is the Supply of HYPOCRITE Environmentalists Endless?
On May 7, 12:25*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote:
Does Michael Vandeman use commercial air travel when other options are available? The question is an important one due to the fact that air travel is very destructive to the environment and should not be used by someone who claims they are concerned with wildlife and their habitat. The research shows that Michael J. Vandeman has spoken at, presented papers, or attended at least a dozen environmental conferences around the world. The research also shows that Michael Vandeman has traveled to these conferences by means other than walking. The hypothesis is that Michael J. Vandeman used commercial air travel to attend said conferences. Michael J. Vandeman was asked how he got to said conferences and he gave a vague answer claiming he used "public transportation". The data shows that there are no public means of transportation to international destinations around the globe. Travel to such destinations can only be accomplished by driving (Canada/Mexico/South America) swimming, sailing, commercial and private sea vessels, commercial and private air transportation. Analyzing the data shows that it isn't feasable to swim so we can eliminate that method. He doesn't own a car so he did not drive to any in the Americas. We can also eliminate sailing and commercial and private sea vessels as Michael has never been abset from Usenet and his local ISP for the period of time that would be required to make such a voyage. That leaves commercial and private air transportation. Private air transportaion would be cost prohibitive to someone with his income so the the only conclusion possible is that Michael J. Vandeman flew to the dozen international conferences on commercial airlines. Michaels use of commercial use of air travel means that he has conributed to greenhouse emissions at a rate that is five times what an average person who owns a vehicle would contribute in a year. Multply that by the number of trips and it becomes clear that Michael J. Vandeman has contributed to global warming and greenhouse emissions at a level that is equal to 60 years for the average person, far exceeding the damage that any mountain biker would do his his entire lifetime. The conclusion is that Michael J. Vandeman is an environmental hypocrite. This cannot be refuted as it was done scientifically by a person who is qualified to use such a method correctly. 
|
|
#3
May 8th 10, 06:10 AM
posted to alt.mountain-bike,rec.bicycles.soc,rec.backcountry,ca.environment,sci.environment
|
|||
|
|||
|
Why Is the Supply of HYPOCRITE Environmentalists Endless?
On May 7, 11:50*am, Bill Weir wrote:
On May 7, 12:25*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote: Does Michael Vandeman use commercial air travel when other options are available? The question is an important one due to the fact that air travel is very destructive to the environment Not when accompanied by measures to make it carbon neutral. DUH! and should not be used by someone who claims they are concerned with wildlife and their habitat. This is called a "red herring". You are just trying to divert attention away from your own admitted motor vehicle use, hypocrite. The research shows that Michael J. Vandeman has spoken at, presented papers, or attended at least a dozen environmental conferences around the world. The research also shows that Michael Vandeman has traveled to these conferences by means other than walking. No, it doesn't, liar. I have walked to EVERY conference. The hypothesis is that Michael J. Vandeman used commercial air travel to attend said conferences. Michael J. Vandeman was asked how he got to said conferences and he gave a vague answer claiming he used "public transportation". There's nothing vague about it. The data shows that there are no public means of transportation to international destinations around the globe. Yes, there is. They ALL have public transit. Travel to such destinations can only be accomplished by driving (Canada/Mexico/South America) swimming, sailing, commercial and private sea vessels, commercial and private air transportation. Analyzing the data shows that it isn't feasable to swim so we can eliminate that method. He doesn't own a car so he did not drive to any in the Americas. We can also eliminate sailing and commercial and private sea vessels as Michael has never been abset from Usenet and his local ISP for the period of time that would be required to make such a voyage. You just fabricated that. You have no way of knowing, especially since the Internet is available everywhere, including in the polar regions. That leaves commercial and private air transportation. Private air transportaion would be cost prohibitive to someone with his income You have no idea what my income is, liar. so the the only conclusion possible is that Michael J. Vandeman flew to the dozen international conferences on commercial airlines. Michaels use of commercial use of air travel means that he has conributed to greenhouse emissions at a rate that is five times what an average person who owns a vehicle would contribute in a year. Not when made carbon neutral by any of a number of means in common use. Multply that by the number of trips and it becomes clear that Michael J. Vandeman has contributed to global warming and greenhouse emissions at a level that is equal to 60 years for the average person, far exceeding the damage that any mountain biker would do his his entire lifetime. BS. Many mountain bikers fly to foreign countries to ride. They actually need to travel farther than anyone else, because they don't experience anything they are passing whild riding, and get bored quickly with every trail they ride. Most of them DRIVE to their trails at least once EVERY WEEK. VERY FEW have trails close enough to ride to. The conclusion is that Michael J. Vandeman is an environmental hypocrite. This cannot be refuted as it was done scientifically by a person who is qualified to use such a method correctly. As shown above, you don't have a clue what you are doing, and are a flaming hypocrite yourself. The fact that you defend mountain biking and use motor vehicles shows exactly how anti-environment you are. And the fact that you attack people who are defending wildlife and the environment makes you a pretty sick person, definitely in need of psychiatric help (but unlikely to accept it). You should be HELPING me, not tilting at windmills like the typical mountain bikers such as the one whose email started this thread.
|
|
#4
May 8th 10, 09:21 PM
posted to alt.mountain-bike,rec.bicycles.soc,rec.backcountry,ca.environment,sci.environment
|
|||
|
|||
|
Why Is the Supply of HYPOCRITE Environmentalists Endless?
"Get a life, and a mountain bike!"
It is quite interesting. And typical of mountain bikers: their entire life is riding a bike in circles, which is obviously not any kind of life whatsoever. It's nothing more than having an itch that needs to be scratched once a week, and benefits ABSOLUTELY NO ONE except the mountain bike industry. And that is a "life"??????????????? Hahahaha!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
|
|
#5
May 9th 10, 01:24 AM
posted to alt.mountain-bike,rec.bicycles.soc,rec.backcountry,ca.environment,sci.environment
|
|||
|
|||
|
Why Is the Supply of HYPOCRITE Environmentalists Endless?
On May 8, 1:10*am, Mike Vandeman wrote:
On May 7, 11:50*am, Bill Weir wrote: On May 7, 12:25*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote: Does Michael Vandeman use commercial air travel when other options are available? The question is an important one due to the fact that air travel is very destructive to the environment Not when accompanied by measures to make it carbon neutral. DUH! and should not be used by someone who claims they are concerned with wildlife and their habitat. This is called a "red herring". You are just trying to divert attention away from your own admitted motor vehicle use, hypocrite. The research shows that Michael J. Vandeman has spoken at, presented papers, or attended at least a dozen environmental conferences around the world. The research also shows that Michael Vandeman has traveled to these conferences by means other than walking. No, it doesn't, liar. I have walked to EVERY conference. The hypothesis is that Michael J. Vandeman used commercial air travel to attend said conferences. Michael J. Vandeman was asked how he got to said conferences and he gave a vague answer claiming he used "public transportation". There's nothing vague about it. *The data shows that there are no public means of transportation to international destinations around the globe. Yes, there is. They ALL have public transit. *Travel to such destinations can only be accomplished by driving (Canada/Mexico/South America) swimming, sailing, commercial and private sea vessels, commercial and private air transportation. Analyzing the data shows that it isn't feasable to swim so we can eliminate that method. He doesn't own a car so he did not drive to any in the Americas. We can also eliminate sailing and commercial and private sea vessels as Michael has never been abset from Usenet and his local ISP for the period of time that would be required to make such a voyage. You just fabricated that. You have no way of knowing, especially since the Internet is available everywhere, including in the polar regions. *That leaves commercial and private air transportation. Private air transportaion would be cost prohibitive to someone with his income You have no idea what my income is, liar. *so the the only conclusion possible is that Michael J. Vandeman flew to the dozen international conferences on commercial airlines. Michaels use of commercial use of air travel means that he has conributed to greenhouse emissions at a rate that is five times what an average person who owns a vehicle would contribute in a year. Not when made carbon neutral by any of a number of means in common use. Multply that by the number of trips and it becomes clear that Michael J. Vandeman has contributed to global warming and greenhouse emissions at a level that is equal to 60 years for the average person, far exceeding the damage that any mountain biker would do his his entire lifetime. BS. Many mountain bikers fly to foreign countries to ride. They actually need to travel farther than anyone else, because they don't experience anything they are passing whild riding, and get bored quickly with every trail they ride. Most of them DRIVE to their trails at least once EVERY WEEK. VERY FEW have trails close enough to ride to. The conclusion is that Michael J. Vandeman is an environmental hypocrite. This cannot be refuted as it was done scientifically by a person who is qualified to use such a method correctly. As shown above, you don't have a clue what you are doing, and are a flaming hypocrite yourself. The fact that you defend mountain biking and use motor vehicles shows exactly how anti-environment you are. And the fact that you attack people who are defending wildlife and the environment makes you a pretty sick person, definitely in need of psychiatric help (but unlikely to accept it). You should be HELPING me, not tilting at windmills like the typical mountain bikers such as the one whose email started this thread. You have offered NOTHING to refute the evidence because you can't. You have not shown ANY proof that I have defended mountain bikers, it's just your way of diverting attention from your selfish transportation choices. You are a proven environmental hypocrite only concerned with your own, selfish interests. Please stop raping the upper atmosphere Micahel J. Vandeman.
|
|
#6
May 9th 10, 01:28 AM
posted to alt.mountain-bike,rec.bicycles.soc,rec.backcountry,ca.environment,sci.environment
|
|||
|
|||
|
Why Is the Supply of HYPOCRITE Environmentalists Endless?
On May 8, 1:10*am, Mike Vandeman wrote:
You should be HELPING me, not tilting at windmills like the typical mountain bikers such as the one whose email started this thread. I cannot help or support someone who is selfish and has no true concern for the environment. Let me know when you cease using commercial airlines and then I'll help you, until then you're just another attention seeker.
|
|
#7
May 9th 10, 03:32 AM
posted to rec.bicycles.soc
|
|||
|
|||
|
Why Is the Supply of IDIOT Mountain Bikers ENDLESS?????
On 05/07/2010 09:25 AM, Mike Vandeman wrote:
Your a asshole! Get a life, and a mountain bike! I'm still riding a mountain bike for a few good reasons. A. If I see something interesting I will go off road and into stuff that would probably give me a flat. B. My Schwinn Super Sport has too large a frame for me. C. With road slicks at 60 PSI the rolling resistance is not that bad. D. I can't do the aero crouch thing without getting a very sore neck. E. I socialize with people I meet along the way. F. By going slower I tend to find things on the side of the road. Channel locks, pliers, and even a 3/4 inch industrial drill. Can't do that from a car or even doing aero and not looking at the sides of the road. I do take offense at anyone calling mountain bikers idiots as a lumped together group. There are some really bad road riders too so they might just pull a 'Darwin' before me. Bill Baka
|
|
#8
May 9th 10, 05:27 AM
posted to alt.mountain-bike,rec.bicycles.soc,rec.backcountry,ca.environment,sci.environment
|
|||
|
|||
|
Why Is the Supply of HYPOCRITE Environmentalists Endless?
On May 8, 5:24*pm, Bill Weir wrote:
On May 8, 1:10*am, Mike Vandeman wrote: On May 7, 11:50*am, Bill Weir wrote: On May 7, 12:25*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote: Does Michael Vandeman use commercial air travel when other options are available? The question is an important one due to the fact that air travel is very destructive to the environment Not when accompanied by measures to make it carbon neutral. DUH! and should not be used by someone who claims they are concerned with wildlife and their habitat. This is called a "red herring". You are just trying to divert attention away from your own admitted motor vehicle use, hypocrite. The research shows that Michael J. Vandeman has spoken at, presented papers, or attended at least a dozen environmental conferences around the world. The research also shows that Michael Vandeman has traveled to these conferences by means other than walking. No, it doesn't, liar. I have walked to EVERY conference. The hypothesis is that Michael J. Vandeman used commercial air travel to attend said conferences. Michael J. Vandeman was asked how he got to said conferences and he gave a vague answer claiming he used "public transportation". There's nothing vague about it. *The data shows that there are no public means of transportation to international destinations around the globe. Yes, there is. They ALL have public transit. *Travel to such destinations can only be accomplished by driving (Canada/Mexico/South America) swimming, sailing, commercial and private sea vessels, commercial and private air transportation. Analyzing the data shows that it isn't feasable to swim so we can eliminate that method. He doesn't own a car so he did not drive to any in the Americas. We can also eliminate sailing and commercial and private sea vessels as Michael has never been abset from Usenet and his local ISP for the period of time that would be required to make such a voyage. You just fabricated that. You have no way of knowing, especially since the Internet is available everywhere, including in the polar regions. *That leaves commercial and private air transportation. Private air transportaion would be cost prohibitive to someone with his income You have no idea what my income is, liar. *so the the only conclusion possible is that Michael J. Vandeman flew to the dozen international conferences on commercial airlines. Michaels use of commercial use of air travel means that he has conributed to greenhouse emissions at a rate that is five times what an average person who owns a vehicle would contribute in a year. Not when made carbon neutral by any of a number of means in common use. Multply that by the number of trips and it becomes clear that Michael J. Vandeman has contributed to global warming and greenhouse emissions at a level that is equal to 60 years for the average person, far exceeding the damage that any mountain biker would do his his entire lifetime. BS. Many mountain bikers fly to foreign countries to ride. They actually need to travel farther than anyone else, because they don't experience anything they are passing whild riding, and get bored quickly with every trail they ride. Most of them DRIVE to their trails at least once EVERY WEEK. VERY FEW have trails close enough to ride to. The conclusion is that Michael J. Vandeman is an environmental hypocrite. This cannot be refuted as it was done scientifically by a person who is qualified to use such a method correctly. As shown above, you don't have a clue what you are doing, and are a flaming hypocrite yourself. The fact that you defend mountain biking and use motor vehicles shows exactly how anti-environment you are. And the fact that you attack people who are defending wildlife and the environment makes you a pretty sick person, definitely in need of psychiatric help (but unlikely to accept it). You should be HELPING me, not tilting at windmills like the typical mountain bikers such as the one whose email started this thread. You have offered NOTHING to refute the evidence because you can't. You have not shown ANY proof that I have defended mountain bikers, It was extremely difficult for you to find, since it was in your VERY LAST POST: "Multply that by the number of trips and it becomes clear that Michael J. Vandeman has contributed to global warming and greenhouse emissions at a level that is equal to 60 years for the average person, far exceeding the damage that any mountain biker would do his his entire lifetime." it's just your way of diverting attention from your selfish transportation choices. I don't have any "selfish transportation clhoices". You are a proven environmental hypocrite You have proven NOTHING. You couldn't "prove" your way out of a paper bag, motor vehicle-using hypocrite. only concerned with your own, selfish interests.
|
|
#9
May 9th 10, 05:30 AM
posted to alt.mountain-bike,rec.bicycles.soc,rec.backcountry,ca.environment,sci.environment
|
|||
|
|||
|
Why Is the Supply of HYPOCRITE Environmentalists Endless?
On May 8, 5:28*pm, Bill Weir wrote:
On May 8, 1:10*am, Mike Vandeman wrote: You should be HELPING me, not tilting at windmills like the typical mountain bikers such as the one whose email started this thread. I cannot help or support someone who is selfish and has no true concern for the environment. Let me know when you cease using commercial airlines and then I'll help you, until then you're just another attention seeker. 1. You have never proven that I have used commercial airlines. 2. You deliberately ignored the fact that most environmental conferences buy carbon credits that cancel the impacts of people who fly. Whatever your goal is, telling the truth isn't part of it, hypocrite.
|
|
#10
May 9th 10, 04:35 PM
posted to alt.mountain-bike,rec.bicycles.soc,rec.backcountry,ca.environment,sci.environment
|
|||
|
|||
|
Why Is the Supply of IDIOT Mountain Bikers ENDLESS?????
"Mike Vandeman" wrote in message news:e24017e0-14eb-4308-b84c- Your a asshole! Get a life, and a mountain bike! We've covered this before. There only appears to be an endless supply because by your own postings there are 50 million gearsets built by Shimano. The endless supply of crap is what YOU manage to come up with. Seriously, there is only one of you, yet you post the same supply of endless drivel over and over again. And, you don't even have courtesy of trimming the headers! I'll bet you walk along the trail with both arms spread wide just so you can complain that others don't share. Talk about idiot. Pot, meet Kettle.
|
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Linear Mode
