11-24-2006, 06:56 PM
|
#26 (permalink)
|
| Guest | Re: Last Child in the Woods -- Saving Our Children from Nature-Deficit Disorder
On Fri, 24 Nov 2006 17:39:13 -0500, "S Curtiss" <stevecurtiss@cox.net>
wrote:
>
>"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.
So you admit that there is absolutely no good reason to allow bikes
off-road? QED
>> 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.
>>>>>
>
===
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
|
|
|  |