A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » rec.bicycles » Mountain Biking
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Mike Vandeman



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old March 13th 05, 02:55 AM
Fish
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Mike Vandeman

I will probably get into trouble for "feeding the troll" but I find him
quite a nice little hobby to while away the lonly hours.

This is a challenge to Mike

Provide us with (any of the following)

1. Statistics
2. Written confirmation
or 3. photographic evidence

To prove that Mountain biking is "Bad" for nature
Heres the tricky part

Anything you supply must be free from speculation Rumors or anything
unproven. and sources you quote must come from real people who would be in
the position to scientifically confirm there results and they must be
traceable not just a email adress, proof of the position they hold that
would allow the to confirm results. anything you supply or quote must be
linked to the person who is claiming it in a way we can prove once again not
just a email address. Any thing you supply/quote will HAVE to be
scientifically reported!! I cannot stress this enough.

If Mike can supply this evidence which proves that mountain bikeing is
dramatically "BAD" for nature then I for one will listen and possibly do my
bit. but if he cant supply this then I will have to stay Innocent until
somebody proves me guilty.


DARE/ CAN YOU MEET THE CHALLENGE MIKE ????


Ads
  #2  
Old March 13th 05, 04:15 AM
Westie
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Fish wrote:
I will probably get into trouble for "feeding the troll" but I find him
quite a nice little hobby to while away the lonly hours.

This is a challenge to Mike

*yawn*
And what exactly is this going to accomplish?

You're going to have to be more clever than that.
--
Westie
  #3  
Old March 13th 05, 12:43 PM
DecSim
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Sorry Fish but yes *yawn*

It won't happen and will surely end up with Mike screaming BS and Liar
at people

http://www.geocities.com/mike_vandeman_the_extremist/

  #4  
Old March 13th 05, 04:04 PM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Do a GOOGLE for his post for the last 8 years and the info you seek
will be there.




MTBMAN

  #5  
Old March 14th 05, 04:12 AM
Mr_Kingkillaha
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


QUOTE=Fish I will probably get into trouble for "feeding the troll" but
I find him
quite a nice little hobby to while away the lonly hours.


If you are that bored you should just pile up some real evidence
supporting MTB, you will get the same result...


...Vandeman will disagree! Suprise!

You will have more fun that way, and you will actually be
counterproductive to his cause.


--
Mr_Kingkillaha

  #6  
Old March 14th 05, 04:34 AM
Micheal Artindale
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Mr_Kingkillaha"
wrote in message
...

QUOTE=Fish I will probably get into trouble for "feeding the troll" but
I find him
quite a nice little hobby to while away the lonly hours.


If you are that bored you should just pile up some real evidence
supporting MTB, you will get the same result...


..Vandeman will disagree! Suprise!

You will have more fun that way, and you will actually be
counterproductive to his cause.


Fish likely live in an area like me, snow covered for several months.

I beat the winter by xc skiing, and snowmobiling..... i love breaking a
trail where no trail is....

More fuel for th troll, but true.

Micheal


  #7  
Old March 14th 05, 06:14 AM
Fish
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Mr_Kingkillaha"
wrote in message
...

QUOTE=Fish I will probably get into trouble for "feeding the troll" but
I find him
quite a nice little hobby to while away the lonly hours.


If you are that bored you should just pile up some real evidence
supporting MTB, you will get the same result...


..Vandeman will disagree! Suprise!

You will have more fun that way, and you will actually be
counterproductive to his cause.

Its a good idea but I feel it would be agaist the rules that I set out

...... Mike has clearly read all the existing documentation out there and
chosent o ignore it so simply re-cycling other peoples reasearch into my own
paper would be pointless, annoying and it would be exactly what mike is
doing and I have absolutly no scientific bacground except at GCSE level
although I did do well this does not qualify me to perform scientific
reaserch. TAKE NOTE OF THIS MIKEY BOY!!!!

Although It would be fun to read all the argument's counter arguments and
counter counter arguments put forward by professionals and try to come to my
own unbiased decision although Unbiased would be difficult as I am already
biased!! Im sticking with the argument

INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY.

The best I could hope to do is go out and take some photo's of well known
and well used mountain biker haunts and show the lack of soil damage. but
mike would argue some way anyway so its kinda pointless.

In fact a good plan would be to take a trail that has been off limits to
bikes for the last 5 years at least and compare it to a trail which is still
fully acessable to bikes.

Man your right I am bored .....Mayby I should appoint myself as a full time
Mike fighter. At least until I find a job. Save the rest of you the bother


  #8  
Old March 14th 05, 06:49 AM
Mr_Kingkillaha
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


Although It would be fun to read all the argument's counter arguments
and
counter counter arguments put forward by professionals and try to come
to my
own unbiased decision although Unbiased would be difficult as I am
already
biased!! Im sticking with the argument

INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY.

The best I could hope to do is go out and take some photo's of well
known
and well used mountain biker haunts and show the lack of soil damage.
but
mike would argue some way anyway so its kinda pointless.


That is more of what I was hinting at, Mike doesn't care about texts by
MTB'ers. It would have to be hard even for him to argue with photo
evidence. It is definately pointless unless you are having fun knowing
he is actually at home squirming, behind his "Internet tough guy" thing
he's always doing.


--
Mr_Kingkillaha

  #9  
Old March 15th 05, 06:13 PM
Gary S.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 17:14:31 -0000, "Fish"
wrote:

"demonmaster" wrote in message
. yvirf...
mountain bikers are never innocent!! by the way -- are trek bikes still
pretty good at the under 500 dollar range? I have an old trek I just
rebuilt and its been working really well but being it's pretty old I was
thinking of replacing it. Don't really know whetehr I want another
off-the-shelf bike like a trek. really want a custom frame. I'd just swap
all the
components off the trek since they are in great shape. however having a
hard time finding custom under 500.


I have no idea you will probably be best to start a new post for this .

It might also make sense to check which group this is posted to, if
you are getting into such specifics for a bicycle purchase.

Just because Mikie has no control over which groups he posts to, does
not mean that you need to follow suit.

With custom frames, there is no way they are going to cost below a
certain price for a frame; it is not cost effective to do custom
one-off work at a mass-produced price point.

Happy trails,
Gary (net.yogi.bear)
--
At the 51st percentile of ursine intelligence

Gary D. Schwartz, Needham, MA, USA
Please reply to: garyDOTschwartzATpoboxDOTcom
  #10  
Old March 17th 05, 09:49 PM
demonmaster
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default



none

On Tue, 15 Mar 2005, Gary S. wrote:



On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 17:14:31 -0000, "Fish"
wrote:

"demonmaster" wrote in message
virf...
mountain bikers are never innocent!! by the way -- are trek bikes still

snip t a custom frame. I'd just swap
all the
components off the trek since they are in great shape. however having a
hard time finding custom under 500.


snip

With custom frames, there is no way they are going to cost below a
certain price for a frame; it is not cost effective to do custom
one-off work at a mass-produced price point.


why's that? even if it takes a day to cut and weld the tubes that is still
over 100 an hour being charged for labor. why would it not be cost
effective to charge less for labor?


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Mike Vandeman is Dead? John Mountain Biking 0 January 14th 05 08:50 PM
The Mike Vandeman "FAQ" kantspel Mountain Biking 28 October 6th 04 05:52 PM
Frequently asked questions about Mike Vandeman DudeMan Mountain Biking 1 July 4th 04 02:22 PM
Mike Vandeman qa2 Mountain Biking 26 November 18th 03 12:16 PM
Open Letter to Mike Vandeman John Morgan Mountain Biking 5 July 16th 03 05:35 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:32 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2022 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.