Is Mountain Biking Healthful Exercise?

On Friday, January 11, 2013 7:35:25 AM UTC-8, wrote:
On Thursday, January 10, 2013 11:35:32 PM UTC-5, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Thursday, January 10, 2013 6:03:13 AM UTC-8, wrote: Using your psychophysics background, how about you tell me the speed ceiling at which one can no longer "enjoy nature." Since hikers can enjoy it and mountain bikers can't, and you claim the difference is speed, tell me the speed I have to stay below. I want to make sure I do it right. I never said the difference is speed, idiot. It's speed, being on top of a bike, being on unpredictable trails, etc. "As to the beautiful scenery, only hikers & equestrians are able to enjoy it. Mountain bikers are DOING NOTHING but looking at the trail directly in front of them, & HAVE NO TIME to "enjoy scenery"." (emphasis mine) So it was about time (affected by speed, obviously).

BS. You lose again.

Now it's about a few other things as well. Why don't you take some time to collect your "thoughts" and get back to me on this one. Silly man, you don't get to define "enjoying nature" for anyone but yourself. It's subjective. Or do you think you can quantify "enjoyment" for me? And no, idiot, peripheral vision isn't "subconscious." Ask any astronomer how he looks at the stars.

That may be the ONLY time it's conscious. Certainly not while mountain biking. Any attention given to peripheral vision would detract from attention to the trail, and result in a CRASH. So there's absolutely no reason to use one's peripheral vision while mountain biking. DUH!

Through a telescope. If he were on a mountain bike, his peripheral vision would be useless. Really, Mike? Using peripheral vision to look at the stars is a basic example of conscious use of peripheral vision taught in just about every undergraduate perception class and well known by every amateur stargazer. Clearly, I was giving your education WAY too much credit. http://dailyuw.com/archive/2008/04/0...s#.UPAimuS_J8E Again, hardly "subconscious." Did you buy your Ph.D from an ad in the back of Rolling Stone? Your responses are an ever-increasing testament of your complete ignorance of mountain biking. Maintaining awareness beyond the "trail in front of their front tire" is an essential part of mountain biking. Prove it.

It's obvious. You are just pretending to disagree. You KNOW I'm right. You just don't have the guts to admit it, COWARD.

That's just your asserton, with no basis in fact. Are you suggesting a mountain biker would be equally effective riding while looking through a toilet paper tube as without? This would still easily allow him to see the trail in front of his front tire, after all. I shouldn't have to explain the difference between foveal and peripheral vision to someone who claims to have a Ph.D in psychology. Go read a chapter on visual perception in an undergraduate textbook and get back to me. The burden of proof is on you. Prove to me that mountain biking ONLY requires foveal vision. Feel free to consult one of your archaic textbooks. Again, that is a fact you clearly can't grasp because you don't understand mountain biking (not to mention human perception of motion). That's amazingly irresponsible for someone attempting to make objective observations about mountain biking, but it explains why you can't get a publication on the topic in a refereed journal. You keep changing the subject, because you can't bear to admit that you are just WRONG. You don't understand mountain biking (not to mention human perception of motion). Therefore, you are ignorant of the fact that maintaining awareness beyond the "trail in front of their front tire" is an essential part of mountain biking. My driving example was just fine. It's your experience that's limited. Roads aren't always smooth and straight, and they include numerous external hazards, like other cars. Glancing at a mirror requires maintaining awareness of the changing conditions of the road ahead. Likewise, analogous scanning patterns constantly occur while riding a bike. BS. Mountain bikes don't have rear view mirrors, or any other mirrors. Since roads are guaranteed to be as straight and smooth as possible, it's safe to glance away for a second. That's not true for mountain biking, because trails aren't straight or smooth. They are very hazardous for anyone ON A BIKE, because of that. That's why serious accidents and even deaths are commonplace for mountain bikers. So now we're down to one second. Fascinating. Based on what you are saying, I could put on a clown costume and stand next to the trail, and I would be completely invisible to a mountain biker because he'd be focusing on the trail in front of his tire. I would, however, exist in his "subconscious" in my clown disguise, according to you. Trail conditions vary. Some sections are quite straight and smooth. Some smooth sections even go for many miles uphill, limiting speed and allowing well over two seconds to enjoy the scenery. You've also now moved from the biker crashing "immediately" to "a couple of seconds" after turning attention from the trail ahead. What's the time frame going to be in your next response? There's no difference. Only to someone dumber than a bag of rocks. Or a liar. Which are you? im·me·di·ate·ly (Adverb) 1. At once; instantly. 2. Without any intervening time or space. That's not "a couple of seconds," dolt. Are you going to answer my question about vampires? As soon as you start telling the truth -- which I know is never going to happen. As I've demonstrated, you are the one lying in this thread, Mike. So what does putting salt on a vampire do? And why are you afraid to answer the question?

Tell the truth, for once in your totally worthless life. Heck, you can't even tell the truth about your own NAME! It's silly to expect such a person to tell the truth about anything else....

On 1/11/2013 9:35 AM, wrote:
Only to someone dumber than a bag of rocks. Or a liar. Which are you?

A jury of his peers found Vandeman to be a liar, and convicted him of
crimes.

--
Tom $herman

The thing I just don't get is why you knowingly spout such drivel Mr Vandeman.

Unless you are a 100% fraud, you should know the truth of what Shraga is saying about foveal and peripheral vision. Either that, or you are lying about your academic record.

So, why do you bother ? If you engaged sensibly instead of just metaphorically laying about you with such inept abandon you might actually change people's minds. As it is, you convince no-one so, against your own stated objectives on your site, you fail.

On Sunday, January 13, 2013 2:04:54 PM UTC-8, Blackblade wrote:
The thing I just don't get is why you knowingly spout such drivel Mr Vandeman. Unless you are a 100% fraud, you should know the truth of what Shraga is saying about foveal and peripheral vision.

It's irrelevant, because seeing something in one's peripheral vision, without paying any attention to it, doesn't constitute "enjoying nature". That's like saying that you "saw Los Angeles", when all you did was drive through on the freeway.

Either that, or you are lying about your academic record. So, why do you bother ? If you engaged sensibly instead of just metaphorically laying about you with such inept abandon you might actually change people's minds. As it is, you convince no-one so, against your own stated objectives on your site, you fail.

I don't expect to convince any mountain biker, because they are too dishonest. You will continue lying FOREVER, when you know I'm right. You are the only one who loses. You wouldn't know the truth if it hit you in the head, which it DOES, every time you read what I wrote.

On Friday, January 11, 2013 11:46:24 PM UTC-5, Mike Vandeman wrote:
On Friday, January 11, 2013 7:35:25 AM UTC-8, wrote:

Ask any astronomer how he looks at the stars.

That may be the ONLY time it's conscious. Certainly not while mountain biking. Any attention given to peripheral vision would detract from attention to the trail, and result in a CRASH. So there's absolutely no reason to use one's peripheral vision while mountain biking. DUH!


Peripheral vision is an essential part of motion detection, you complete idiot, and therefore an essential part of mountain biking. If you can't grasp that fundamental characteristic of human visual perception, then I don't think I'm going to be able to find words small enough for your feeble mind to understand.

You are an insult to everyone with a Ph.D.

Your responses are an ever-increasing testament of your complete ignorance of mountain biking. Maintaining awareness beyond the "trail in front of their front tire" is an essential part of mountain biking. Prove it.

It's obvious. You are just pretending to disagree. You KNOW I'm right. You just don't have the guts to admit it, COWARD.

This is the best, and most explanatory, of your responses; because here, you just responded to your own request to "prove it."

You can't even follow a basic conversation. How sad for you.

Tell the truth, for once in your totally worthless life. Heck, you can't even tell the truth about your own NAME! It's silly to expect such a person to tell the truth about anything else....

Wow, Mike. Way to shy away from my response. What's the matter? Did I hurt your feelings?

But seriously... What happens when you put salt on a vampire?

On Sunday, January 13, 2013 5:49:51 PM UTC-5, Mike Vandeman wrote:
On Sunday, January 13, 2013 2:04:54 PM UTC-8, Blackblade wrote:

The thing I just don't get is why you knowingly spout such drivel Mr Vandeman. Unless you are a 100% fraud, you should know the truth of what Shraga is saying about foveal and peripheral vision.



It's irrelevant, because seeing something in one's peripheral vision, without paying any attention to it, doesn't constitute "enjoying nature". That's like saying that you "saw Los Angeles", when all you did was drive through on the freeway.

Wrong. Because you don't get to define anyone's enjoyment but your own.

I don't expect to convince any mountain biker, because they are too dishonest. You will continue lying FOREVER, when you know I'm right. You are the only one who loses. You wouldn't know the truth if it hit you in the head, which it DOES, every time you read what I wrote.

Of course we do, because the truth is that you are a fruitcake.

On Sunday, January 13, 2013 6:09:53 PM UTC-8, wrote:
On Friday, January 11, 2013 11:46:24 PM UTC-5, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Friday, January 11, 2013 7:35:25 AM UTC-8, wrote: Ask any astronomer how he looks at the stars. That may be the ONLY time it's conscious. Certainly not while mountain biking. Any attention given to peripheral vision would detract from attention to the trail, and result in a CRASH. So there's absolutely no reason to use one's peripheral vision while mountain biking. DUH! Peripheral vision is an essential part of motion detection, you complete idiot, and therefore an essential part of mountain biking.

BS. There is no motion to detect, except your own. The only thing a mountain biker needs to pay attention to is the trail in front of them, which is exactly what they do. All else is a distraction. So your claim to be "enjoying nature" is, of course, pure hogwash. Everybody else knows it, except mountain bikers. They alone can't tell the truth, or their little game will be over.

If you can't grasp that fundamental characteristic of human visual perception, then I don't think I'm going to be able to find words small enough for your feeble mind to understand. You are an insult to everyone with a Ph.D. Your responses are an ever-increasing testament of your complete ignorance of mountain biking. Maintaining awareness beyond the "trail in front of their front tire" is an essential part of mountain biking.

Explain WHY. (Hint: you CAN'T, because it isn't true.)

Prove it. It's obvious. You are just pretending to disagree. You KNOW I'm right. You just don't have the guts to admit it, COWARD. This is the best, and most explanatory, of your responses; because here, you just responded to your own request to "prove it." You can't even follow a basic conversation. How sad for you. Tell the truth, for once in your totally worthless life. Heck, you can't even tell the truth about your own NAME! It's silly to expect such a person to tell the truth about anything else.... Wow, Mike. Way to shy away from my response. What's the matter?

Cat got your tongue? Tell the world exactly WHY you are afraid to use your real name! (HINT: you are too much of a COWARD to do so. Go ahead, change the subject again.)

Did I hurt your feelings? But seriously... What happens when you put salt on a vampire?

On Sunday, January 13, 2013 6:16:22 PM UTC-8, wrote:
On Sunday, January 13, 2013 5:49:51 PM UTC-5, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Sunday, January 13, 2013 2:04:54 PM UTC-8, Blackblade wrote: The thing I just don't get is why you knowingly spout such drivel Mr Vandeman. Unless you are a 100% fraud, you should know the truth of what Shraga is saying about foveal and peripheral vision. It's irrelevant, because seeing something in one's peripheral vision, without paying any attention to it, doesn't constitute "enjoying nature". That's like saying that you "saw Los Angeles", when all you did was drive through on the freeway. Wrong. Because you don't get to define anyone's enjoyment but your own.

Yes, I do, when their claim is absolute BS. "Enjoying bature" is physically impossible while mountain biking. Peripheral vision doesn't constitute "enjoyment of nature", because 99% of the time it's UNCONSCIOUS. But you already knew that, and chose to LIE about it.

Besides, any message from you that doesn't start with your REAL NAME is BS.

I don't expect to convince any mountain biker, because they are too dishonest. You will continue lying FOREVER, when you know I'm right. You are the only one who loses. You wouldn't know the truth if it hit you in the head, which it DOES, every time you read what I wrote. Of course we do, because the truth is that you are a fruitcake.

Your only "skill" is name-calling. You apparently can't tell the truth about ANYTHING, even your own name!!! What a sad excuse for a human being you are.

Blackblade wrote: The thing I just don't get is why you knowingly spout such drivel Mr Vandeman. Unless you are a 100% fraud, you should know the truth of what Shraga is saying about foveal and peripheral vision.

It's irrelevant, because seeing something in one's peripheral vision, without paying any attention to it, doesn't constitute "enjoying nature".. That's like saying that you "saw Los Angeles", when all you did was drive through on the freeway. Wrong. Because you don't get to define anyone's enjoyment but your own.

Yes, I do, when their claim is absolute BS. "Enjoying bature" is physically impossible while mountain biking. Peripheral vision doesn't constitute "enjoyment of nature", because 99% of the time it's UNCONSCIOUS. But you already knew that, and chose to LIE about it.

You really are full of it. So the millions, and growing, who ride mountainbikes for fun, exercise and to get into a natural environment are all wrong and you, solely, are right. We are all closet masochists and we don't enjoy it at all ?????? !!!!!

I enjoy the sights, sounds, smells and all the sensations of being in a natural environment on my bike.

You clearly can't empathise with this any more than you can empathise with the families and friends of the bereaved. So, if you really are a Psychology PhD, I suggest you self-diagnose. To me, you look like a classic case of Narcissistic Personality Disorder.

I don't expect to convince any mountain biker, because they are too dishonest. You will continue lying FOREVER, when you know I'm right. You are the only one who loses. You wouldn't know the truth if it hit you in the head, which it DOES, every time you read what I wrote.

So, if what you write is the truth, how come you never have any verification for what you state ? Instead, you simply make more bald assertions without a shred of supporting evidence. What hits me in the head, every time I see you've updated a thread, is "I wonder what nonsense he's going to come back with ...".

Your only "skill" is name-calling. You apparently can't tell the truth about ANYTHING, even your own name!!! What a sad excuse for a human being you are.

Appeal to authority is a classic logical error. It doesn't matter who he is, simply that he provides evidence to support his position. Since he does and you don't, I think he wins.

On Sunday, January 13, 2013 11:42:13 PM UTC-5, Mike Vandeman wrote:

Yes, I do, when their claim is absolute BS. "Enjoying bature" is physically impossible while mountain biking. Peripheral vision doesn't constitute "enjoyment of nature", because 99% of the time it's UNCONSCIOUS. But you already knew that, and chose to LIE about it.


What's "bature?" Is it something they teach at "Berkelery?"

Cite the source that establishes that 99% of peripheral vision is "unconscious." It should be easy, unless you're lying.

Besides, any message from you that doesn't start with your REAL NAME is BS.

Really? Did your parents name you "Mike?" Does it say, "Mike" on your birth certificate?

Why are you afraid to use your real name, "Mike?"