| Re: Last Child in the Woods -- Saving Our Children from Nature-Deficit Disorder
"Mike Vandeman" <mjvande@pacbell.net> wrote in message
news:kniem2t6nlebkc1lcq2p19untod4ar1qf1@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 24 Nov 2006 01:39:28 -0500, "S Curtiss" <stevecurtiss@cox.net>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Mike Vandeman" <mjvande@pacbell.net> wrote in message
>>news:u7sbm2dro5andh92bqcavmarpqsaeho13u@4ax.com. ..
>>> On Thu, 23 Nov 2006 11:01:46 -0500, "S Curtiss" <stevecurtiss@cox.net>
>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>Because the public allows it,
>>>>>
>>>>> That's not a reason to allow it. You just restated the fact that it's
>>>>> allowed. WHY should it be allowed? OBVIOUSLY, you can't come up with a
>>>>> single good reason to allow bikes off-road.
>>>>The simple reason they ARE allowed and continued access on public lands
>>>>is
>>>>expanding proves the reasons (as stated so many times) are valid.
>>>
>>> WHAT reasons? You haven't managed to give even ONE good reason to
>>> allow bikes off-road.
>>We (or I) do not have to prove anything to you.
>
> So you admit that there is absolutely no good reason to allow bikes
> off-road? QED
>
Pathetic. Your own integrity suffers in the context of this entire
conversation. That is OBVIOUS. The FACT your opinions have not been
accepted by those in control of making decisions, who have access to all of
the research, speaks to the validity of the reasons to allow off-road
cycling much more than your missrepresented claims ever have.
The TRUTH is out there... on non-polluting, non-impacting, human powered
wheels.
> Off-road cycling continues
>>to grow. The cooperative efforts continue to increase awareness and
>>acceptance. The community of off-road cyclists continues to create allies
>>with other groups and collectively create a larger voice against the
>>destruction of sprawl and development. The policy makers continue to
>>accept
>>the actual FACTS of comparative research despite your attempts at
>>presenting
>>lies.
>>You continue to stand in favor of development by attempting to drive
>>wedges
>>with missinformation. You must be proud. Your stated cause of 8 years (I
>>spent the previous 8 years fighting auto dependence and road
>>construction.)
>>has been overshadowed by your current goal to decrease the cooperative
>>voice
>>to preserve.
Your lack of comment at this point has spoken volumes.
>>>
>>> Your
>>>>choice to ignore these reasons is unimportant as cooperation,
>>>>understanding
>>>>and real progress continues. Your demand for a "reason" is merely your
>>>>game
>>>>of words and also unimportant. Your own choices to ignore information
>>>>counter to your opinions and your own tactics of discussion in the face
>>>>of
>>>>this information has left you unimportant.
>>>>The FACTS are that the groups involved in making regulations and the
>>>>diverse
>>>>groups of "outdoor visitors" and their policy makers ARE recognizing the
>>>>validity of the "reasons" and the similarities of impacts to recognize
>>>>the
>>>>benefits of cooperative efforts.
>>>>
|