Eco terrorist Mike's friend caught. - Page 4

02-06-2007, 04:30 PM

On Tue, 6 Feb 2007 08:49:49 -0800, "Pete Rissler"
<[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].nv.us> wrote:

>"Mike Vandeman" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
>news:[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].. .
>> On 5 Feb 2007 23:21:35 -0800, "Beej" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:
>>
>>>On Feb 5, 5:41 pm, Mike Vandeman <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:
>>>> >Besides, if you can't see the difference between killing a snake and a
>>>> >human, you certainly belong in a padded room.
>>>>
>>>> In the case of mountain bikers, what IS the difference, except that
>>>> the snake is beneficial, and the mountain biker is just destructive?
>>>
>>>One of them is covered by California Penal Code section 187, and the
>>>other is not.
>>
>> One of them is covered by the ESA, and the other one is covered by
>> vermin statutes.
>
>Unless the snake is Federally listed as either an Endangered or Threatened
>Species then it is not covered under the Endangered Species Act.

You still haven't answer the question: what's the difference between a
beneficial snake & a destructive mountain biker?
===
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!

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

02-06-2007, 04:32 PM

On Tue, 6 Feb 2007 11:57:59 -0500, "S Curtiss" <stevecurtiss@cox.net>
wrote:

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

f6gs21fh1mri5i4311rvuffpkr520jmqh@4ax.com.. .
>> On Mon, 5 Feb 2007 20:39:02 -0500, "S Curtiss" <stevecurtiss@cox.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>>
>>>>>J wrote:
>>>>>> [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Good Job to the citizen, not police that caught this guy.
>>>>>
>>>>>The guy needs to have the book thrown at him. Attempted murder
>>>>>included.
>>>>
>>>> Why? Mountain bikers murder horses and wildlife every day, and think
>>>> nothing of it.
>>>
>>>"Murder"...? Murder is premeditated. One story you posted some time back
>>>was
>>>an accident involving equestrians and cyclists meeting on a trail and was
>>>reported with skewed language
>>>referring to the bicycles as a "strange metal beast". The other openly
>>>refers to the MAJORITY of cyclists as responsible taking into account the
>>>unjustified categorizing of ALL cyclists.
>>>
>>>Both incidents were reported originally as unfortunate and accidents. Yet
>>>you interject "murder"...?
>>
>> By riding without regard to the safety of wildlife and other people,
>> mountain bikers deliberately kill them. That's murder.
>Your subjective and inclusive statement "mountain bikers deliberately kill
>them" is simply an extension of your OPINION of off-road cycling and hardly
>carries any meaning concerning the riding habits and conservation goals of
>the off-road cycling community.
>There is absolutely NO evidence gathered by any research that shows cyclists
>are riding to deliberately kill anything.
>
>Produce EVIDENCE from a scientific source showing all mountain bikers are on
>the trail to deliberately kill anything,

It's IMPOSSIBLE to mountain bike without killing animals & plants,
hence they are murderers: they do it deliberately. They should know
better.

or by not doing so, acknowledge you
>are simply lying and spouting an unfounded opinion generated by your own
>hatred of the activity.
>>
>>>And this to justify a terrorist whose actions could have killed and did
>>>cause serious injury to human beings...?
>>>
>>>PATHETIC!!!!!!
>>>
>
===
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!

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

02-06-2007, 04:34 PM

On Tue, 06 Feb 2007 09:36:45 -0800, cc <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:

>Mike Vandeman wrote:
>> On Mon, 05 Feb 2007 18:39:37 -0800, cc <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:
>>
>>> Mike Vandeman wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 05 Feb 2007 10:40:11 -0800, cc <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Mike Vandeman wrote:
>>>>>> On Sat, 3 Feb 2007 17:59:52 -0800, "Bill Sornson" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> J wrote:
>>>>>>>> [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Good Job to the citizen, not police that caught this guy.
>>>>>>> The guy needs to have the book thrown at him. Attempted murder included.
>>>>>> Why? Mountain bikers murder horses and wildlife every day, and think
>>>>>> nothing of it.
>>>>> Mountain bikers murder horses every day? Do you smoke crack?
>>>> I know of several that were killed by mountain bikers speeding around
>>>> blind turns and forcing them off a cliff.
>>> well, besides the obvious skew here, these events are extremely few and
>>> far between. but you knew that.
>>
>> Not due to any concern of mountain bikers. They ride recklessly
>> regardless of who is on the trail.
>>
>
>Mike, this is pretty typical.
>Cognitive bias, proof by
>example, and proof by
>assertion. No wonder you never
>published. Looks like the only
>thing you learned is how to
>string together logical fallacies.
>
>>>>> Besides, if you can't see the difference between killing a snake and a
>>>>> human, you certainly belong in a padded room.
>>>> In the case of mountain bikers, what IS the difference, except that
>>>> the snake is beneficial, and the mountain biker is just destructive?
>>>>
>>> you proved my point, you sick ****.
>>
>> You didn't answer the question.
>>
>
>One is HUMAN, you idiot. Not
>to mention the INTENT of the
>murderer stringing booby-traps
>for them.

You still haven't answered the question: " In the case of mountain
bikers, what IS the difference, except that the snake is beneficial,
and the mountain biker is just destructive?". Admit it: you CAN'T.
Tw
===
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!

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

02-06-2007, 04:35 PM

On Tue, 06 Feb 2007 20:22:22 GMT, Me <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:

>In article <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>,
> Mike Vandeman <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:
>
>>
>> By riding without regard to the safety of wildlife and other people,
>> mountain bikers deliberately kill them. That's murder.
>>
>
>No MIkey, that is NOT Murder, it is Manslaughter,

"Manslaughter" to kill a snake? Boy, you sure are confused....

and that is a Totally
>Different Offense.....
>
>Just where did you get you DR of JurASSprudence.... LawSchools R' Us.....
>
>
>
>> ===
>> 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!
>>
>> [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
>
>Me a long time Mikey basher..........
===
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!

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

02-06-2007, 04:56 PM

Mike Vandeman wrote:
> On Tue, 06 Feb 2007 09:36:45 -0800, cc <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:
>
>> Mike Vandeman wrote:
>>> On Mon, 05 Feb 2007 18:39:37 -0800, cc <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Mike Vandeman wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, 05 Feb 2007 10:40:11 -0800, cc <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Mike Vandeman wrote:
>>>>>>> On Sat, 3 Feb 2007 17:59:52 -0800, "Bill Sornson" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> J wrote:
>>>>>>>>> [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Good Job to the citizen, not police that caught this guy.
>>>>>>>> The guy needs to have the book thrown at him. Attempted murder included.
>>>>>>> Why? Mountain bikers murder horses and wildlife every day, and think
>>>>>>> nothing of it.
>>>>>> Mountain bikers murder horses every day? Do you smoke crack?
>>>>> I know of several that were killed by mountain bikers speeding around
>>>>> blind turns and forcing them off a cliff.
>>>> well, besides the obvious skew here, these events are extremely few and
>>>> far between. but you knew that.
>>> Not due to any concern of mountain bikers. They ride recklessly
>>> regardless of who is on the trail.
>>>
>> Mike, this is pretty typical.
>> Cognitive bias, proof by
>> example, and proof by
>> assertion. No wonder you never
>> published. Looks like the only
>> thing you learned is how to
>> string together logical fallacies.
>>
>>>>>> Besides, if you can't see the difference between killing a snake and a
>>>>>> human, you certainly belong in a padded room.
>>>>> In the case of mountain bikers, what IS the difference, except that
>>>>> the snake is beneficial, and the mountain biker is just destructive?
>>>>>
>>>> you proved my point, you sick ****.
>>> You didn't answer the question.
>>>
>> One is HUMAN, you idiot. Not
>> to mention the INTENT of the
>> murderer stringing booby-traps
>> for them.
>
>
> You still haven't answered the question: " In the case of mountain
> bikers, what IS the difference, except that the snake is beneficial,
> and the mountain biker is just destructive?". Admit it: you CAN'T.
> Tw
> ===

Can you read? The snake is not HUMAN.

02-06-2007, 04:56 PM

"Mike Vandeman" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
news:[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]...
> On Tue, 6 Feb 2007 08:49:49 -0800, "Pete Rissler"
> <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].nv.us> wrote:
>
>>"Mike Vandeman" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
>>news:[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]. ..
>>> On 5 Feb 2007 23:21:35 -0800, "Beej" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Feb 5, 5:41 pm, Mike Vandeman <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:
>>>>> >Besides, if you can't see the difference between killing a snake and
>>>>> >a
>>>>> >human, you certainly belong in a padded room.
>>>>>
>>>>> In the case of mountain bikers, what IS the difference, except that
>>>>> the snake is beneficial, and the mountain biker is just destructive?
>>>>
>>>>One of them is covered by California Penal Code section 187, and the
>>>>other is not.
>>>
>>> One of them is covered by the ESA, and the other one is covered by
>>> vermin statutes.
>>
>>Unless the snake is Federally listed as either an Endangered or Threatened
>>Species then it is not covered under the Endangered Species Act.
>
> You still haven't answer the question: what's the difference between a
> beneficial snake & a destructive mountain biker?

The number of letters? Perhaps the spelling? Your turn, what is the correct
answer.

02-06-2007, 05:00 PM

"Mike Vandeman" <mjvande@pacbell.net> wrote in message
news:juais2lgbq0j7b52flgq5mf6371392s6oe@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 6 Feb 2007 11:57:59 -0500, "S Curtiss" <stevecurtiss@cox.net>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Mike Vandeman" <mjvande@pacbell.net> wrote in message
>>news

f6gs21fh1mri5i4311rvuffpkr520jmqh@4ax.com. ..
>>> On Mon, 5 Feb 2007 20:39:02 -0500, "S Curtiss" <stevecurtiss@cox.net>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>J wrote:
>>>>>>> [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Good Job to the citizen, not police that caught this guy.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>The guy needs to have the book thrown at him. Attempted murder
>>>>>>included.
>>>>>
>>>>> Why? Mountain bikers murder horses and wildlife every day, and think
>>>>> nothing of it.
>>>>
>>>>"Murder"...? Murder is premeditated. One story you posted some time back
>>>>was
>>>>an accident involving equestrians and cyclists meeting on a trail and
>>>>was
>>>>reported with skewed language
>>>>referring to the bicycles as a "strange metal beast". The other openly
>>>>refers to the MAJORITY of cyclists as responsible taking into account
>>>>the
>>>>unjustified categorizing of ALL cyclists.
>>>>
>>>>Both incidents were reported originally as unfortunate and accidents.
>>>>Yet
>>>>you interject "murder"...?
>>>
>>> By riding without regard to the safety of wildlife and other people,
>>> mountain bikers deliberately kill them. That's murder.
>>Your subjective and inclusive statement "mountain bikers deliberately
>>kill
>>them" is simply an extension of your OPINION of off-road cycling and
>>hardly
>>carries any meaning concerning the riding habits and conservation goals of
>>the off-road cycling community.
>>There is absolutely NO evidence gathered by any research that shows
>>cyclists
>>are riding to deliberately kill anything.
>>
>>Produce EVIDENCE from a scientific source showing all mountain bikers are
>>on
>>the trail to deliberately kill anything,
>
> It's IMPOSSIBLE to mountain bike without killing animals & plants,
> hence they are murderers: they do it deliberately. They should know
> better.

It's IMPOSSIBLE (by your standards) to participate in any activity (on road
or off, in the city or country, even while sitting at your computer) without
killing animals & plants,

> hence they are murderers: they do it deliberately. They should know
> better.

>
> or by not doing so, acknowledge you
>>are simply lying and spouting an unfounded opinion generated by your own
>>hatred of the activity.
>>>
>>>>And this to justify a terrorist whose actions could have killed and did
>>>>cause serious injury to human beings...?
>>>>
>>>>PATHETIC!!!!!!
>>>>
>>

02-06-2007, 09:23 PM

"Mike Vandeman" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
news:[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]...
> On Tue, 6 Feb 2007 11:57:59 -0500, "S Curtiss" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>
> wrote:
>>>>>>>J wrote:
>>>>>>> [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Good Job to the citizen, not police that caught this guy.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>The guy needs to have the book thrown at him. Attempted murder
>>>>>>included.
>>>>>
>>>>> Why? Mountain bikers murder horses and wildlife every day, and think
>>>>> nothing of it.
>>>>
>>>>"Murder"...? Murder is premeditated. One story you posted some time back
>>>>was
>>>>an accident involving equestrians and cyclists meeting on a trail and
>>>>was
>>>>reported with skewed language
>>>>referring to the bicycles as a "strange metal beast". The other openly
>>>>refers to the MAJORITY of cyclists as responsible taking into account
>>>>the
>>>>unjustified categorizing of ALL cyclists.
>>>>
>>>>Both incidents were reported originally as unfortunate and accidents.
>>>>Yet
>>>>you interject "murder"...?
>>>
>>> By riding without regard to the safety of wildlife and other people,
>>> mountain bikers deliberately kill them. That's murder.
>>Your subjective and inclusive statement "mountain bikers deliberately
>>kill
>>them" is simply an extension of your OPINION of off-road cycling and
>>hardly
>>carries any meaning concerning the riding habits and conservation goals of
>>the off-road cycling community.
>>There is absolutely NO evidence gathered by any research that shows
>>cyclists
>>are riding to deliberately kill anything.
>>
>>Produce EVIDENCE from a scientific source showing all mountain bikers are
>>on
>>the trail to deliberately kill anything,
>
> It's IMPOSSIBLE to mountain bike without killing animals & plants,
> hence they are murderers: they do it deliberately. They should know
> better.
You provide an OPINION. Provide evidence and PROOF that off-road cyclists
deliberately kill anything. The "deliberate" activity of riding is not the
same thing as the "deliberate" activity of killing. You have yet to provide
anything that proves all off-road cyclists ride in such a way that death is
a by-product of any higher incidence than any other activity. You have only
posted extreme instances highlighting unfortunate accidents or a renegade
minority of the whole of the otherwise respectfull majority.
*Either respond to the total context, or by not doing so, acknowledge that
the context is true.

>
> or by not doing so, acknowledge you
>>are simply lying and spouting an unfounded opinion generated by your own
>>hatred of the activity.
No evidence from a scientific source. Only split context to spout your
opinion. Therefore it is taken as fact you can not provide scientific
foundation for your statements.
>>>
>>>>And this to justify a terrorist whose actions could have killed and did
>>>>cause serious injury to human beings...?
>>>>
>>>>PATHETIC!!!!!!
>>>>

02-07-2007, 05:48 AM

"Mike Vandeman" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
news:[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]...
> On Mon, 5 Feb 2007 15:57:10 -0500, "Marty" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>
> wrote:
>
> Yes, we know mountain bikers think VIOLENCE is the answer to all their
> problems.
>

We? You have a mouse in your pocket? You make me laugh.

It's really not that complicated.

BTW, I'm not a mountain biker right now. I'm riding a chair. So that makes
me a violent chair rider. In a minute I'm getting more coffee...............

Marty

02-08-2007, 07:33 AM

On Tue, 06 Feb 2007 17:56:09 -0800, cc <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:

>Mike Vandeman wrote:
>> On Tue, 06 Feb 2007 09:36:45 -0800, cc <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:
>>
>>> Mike Vandeman wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 05 Feb 2007 18:39:37 -0800, cc <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Mike Vandeman wrote:
>>>>>> On Mon, 05 Feb 2007 10:40:11 -0800, cc <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Mike Vandeman wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Sat, 3 Feb 2007 17:59:52 -0800, "Bill Sornson" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> J wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Good Job to the citizen, not police that caught this guy.
>>>>>>>>> The guy needs to have the book thrown at him. Attempted murder included.
>>>>>>>> Why? Mountain bikers murder horses and wildlife every day, and think
>>>>>>>> nothing of it.
>>>>>>> Mountain bikers murder horses every day? Do you smoke crack?
>>>>>> I know of several that were killed by mountain bikers speeding around
>>>>>> blind turns and forcing them off a cliff.
>>>>> well, besides the obvious skew here, these events are extremely few and
>>>>> far between. but you knew that.
>>>> Not due to any concern of mountain bikers. They ride recklessly
>>>> regardless of who is on the trail.
>>>>
>>> Mike, this is pretty typical.
>>> Cognitive bias, proof by
>>> example, and proof by
>>> assertion. No wonder you never
>>> published. Looks like the only
>>> thing you learned is how to
>>> string together logical fallacies.
>>>
>>>>>>> Besides, if you can't see the difference between killing a snake and a
>>>>>>> human, you certainly belong in a padded room.
>>>>>> In the case of mountain bikers, what IS the difference, except that
>>>>>> the snake is beneficial, and the mountain biker is just destructive?
>>>>>>
>>>>> you proved my point, you sick ****.
>>>> You didn't answer the question.
>>>>
>>> One is HUMAN, you idiot. Not
>>> to mention the INTENT of the
>>> murderer stringing booby-traps
>>> for them.
>>
>>
>> You still haven't answered the question: " In the case of mountain
>> bikers, what IS the difference, except that the snake is beneficial,
>> and the mountain biker is just destructive?". Admit it: you CAN'T.
>> Tw
>> ===
>
>Can you read? The snake is not HUMAN.

So what? What's the DIFFERENCE between them? DUH!
===
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!

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]