11-24-2006, 06:55 PM
|
#19 (permalink)
|
| Guest | Re: Last Child in the Woods -- Saving Our Children from Nature-Deficit Disorder
On Fri, 24 Nov 2006 17:23:14 -0500, "S Curtiss" <stevecurtiss@cox.net>
wrote:
>
>"Mike Vandeman" <mjvande@pacbell.net> wrote in message
>news:ipiem21jku1hrg3fb551gik5dhci650nl3@4ax.com.. .
>> On Fri, 24 Nov 2006 01:59:25 -0500, "S Curtiss" <stevecurtiss@cox.net>
>> wrote:
>>>>>>>Even the most recent research shows your opinions constitute the bulk
>>>>>>>of
>>>>>>>the lies being presented.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Re: "A Comparative Study of Impacts to Mountain Bike Trails in Five
>>>>>> Common Ecological Regions of the Southwestern U.S." (White et al 2006)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1. Are the authors mountain bikers? They seem to be promoting mountain
>>>>>> biking -- trying to make it seem environmentally acceptable.
>>>>>
>>>>>Yawn.... Did you say something?
>>>>>Your credibility has been rendered suspect (by your own actions) to the
>>>>>point that your questions of this paper and your opinions of the
>>>>>research
>>>>>contained are unimportant. You do nothing to counter the information but
>>>>>ridicule the findings.
>>>>
>>>> And I give specific scientific REASONS why they are WORTHLESS.
>>>
>>>You haven't presented one good reason to accept your opinions are more
>>>valid
>>>than the findings presented by the actual researchers who performed the
>>>actual study (or studies).
>>
>> I just did, and you erased it. The truth hurts, doesn't it?
>
>You said NOTHING but the same opinion you have stated before. You did what
>you always do when confronted with information counter to your OPINION. You
>simply proclaim it invalid and attempt to discredit it with your OPINION.
>You have not performed a single field study yourself and rely on others to
>do so. If it matches your opinion, you proclaim it is "proof". If it does
>not support your opinion, you discount it.
>I erased NOTHING because there was NOTHING to erase because you said NOTHING
>of relevance.
How would you know, since you obviously didn't READ it?
>> You have not created a single bit of information.
>>>You have simply pointed to research you agree with and proclaim it "valid"
>>>and pointed to research counter to your opinion and proclaimed it "junk".
>>>"Because you say so" is not good enough. That is proven as your opinions
>>>have been presented time and again and discounted by the people whose job
>>>it
>>>is to assess information in the creation of rules of access and trail
>>>useage.
>>>You are merely a child making a huff for not getting his way. It is sad.
>>>It
>>>is pathetic. It is hysterical.
>>>
>> ===
>> 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
>
===
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
|
|
|  |