Cycling Mob: Road Cycling, Mountain Biking and More - View Single Post - Wildlife Need Habitat Off-Limits to Humans!

02-09-2007, 11:23 PM

"Mike Vandeman" <mjvande@pacbell.net> wrote in message
news

58qs2l5rrmij8ndba1dejkpknkasp9pck@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 9 Feb 2007 14:51:58 -0500, "S Curtiss" <stevecurtiss@cox.net>
> wrote:
>
>>>>
>>>>"The great push of man's numbers," does not include the random
>>>>visitation
>>>>of
>>>>man to a habitat.
>>>
>>> Prove it. That is just your own opinion, supported by NOTHING.
>>Awww.... Mikey... You are a middle-man whose usefullness has been
>>outdone.
>>The injection of your "total exclusion" opinions into the writings of
>>others
>>is hardly useful, realistic or beneficial to the discussion of
>>preservation.
>>The "middle-man" has been eliminated as the actual reserach and the actual
>>researchers are accessible to everyone. The agencies that used to rely on
>>comments such as yours have access to the original information at the
>>touch
>>of a button. The average person also has access and can make up their own
>>minds without the benefit of elitists' medling.
>>You sit on a "warehouse" of outdated product as everyone else moves
>>forward
>>with direct contact, actual research and educated decisions. You are not
>>smarter than anyone else. Your opinions no longer have influence as nobody
>>is interested in what research you quote as everyone has access to the
>>full
>>context of the original. The actual researcher who complied the original
>>research is much more qualified than you to offer recommendations from
>>their
>>findings.
>>Perhaps you should have a "Going Out Of Business" sale. People may need
>>birdcage filler or fishwraps or puppy-training paper....
>>
>>>
>>> The author, here, was trying to convey the idea that we
>>>>need to set aside space that development efforts will not be allowed to
>>>>reach.
>>>>
>>...which in no way implies that mountain biking should be removed from
>>every
>>natural area. Creating "human free" areas does not imply complete bans on
>>nature cycling in every non-paved area.
>>
>>
>
> Did you say something?

Yep. And anyone with the common sense logic beyond that of a doorknob will
know what it is and that you have nothing to dispute it.

02-09-2007, 11:23 PM	#9 (permalink)
S Curtiss Posts: n/a	Re: Wildlife Need Habitat Off-Limits to Humans! "Mike Vandeman" <mjvande@pacbell.net> wrote in message news58qs2l5rrmij8ndba1dejkpknkasp9pck@4ax.com... > On Fri, 9 Feb 2007 14:51:58 -0500, "S Curtiss" <stevecurtiss@cox.net> > wrote: > >>>> >>>>"The great push of man's numbers," does not include the random >>>>visitation >>>>of >>>>man to a habitat. >>> >>> Prove it. That is just your own opinion, supported by NOTHING. >>Awww.... Mikey... You are a middle-man whose usefullness has been >>outdone. >>The injection of your "total exclusion" opinions into the writings of >>others >>is hardly useful, realistic or beneficial to the discussion of >>preservation. >>The "middle-man" has been eliminated as the actual reserach and the actual >>researchers are accessible to everyone. The agencies that used to rely on >>comments such as yours have access to the original information at the >>touch >>of a button. The average person also has access and can make up their own >>minds without the benefit of elitists' medling. >>You sit on a "warehouse" of outdated product as everyone else moves >>forward >>with direct contact, actual research and educated decisions. You are not >>smarter than anyone else. Your opinions no longer have influence as nobody >>is interested in what research you quote as everyone has access to the >>full >>context of the original. The actual researcher who complied the original >>research is much more qualified than you to offer recommendations from >>their >>findings. >>Perhaps you should have a "Going Out Of Business" sale. People may need >>birdcage filler or fishwraps or puppy-training paper.... >> >>> >>> The author, here, was trying to convey the idea that we >>>>need to set aside space that development efforts will not be allowed to >>>>reach. >>>> >>...which in no way implies that mountain biking should be removed from >>every >>natural area. Creating "human free" areas does not imply complete bans on >>nature cycling in every non-paved area. >> >> > > Did you say something? Yep. And anyone with the common sense logic beyond that of a doorknob will know what it is and that you have nothing to dispute it.