Eco terrorist Mike's friend caught. - Page 6 - Cycling Mob: Road Cycling, Mountain Biking and More

02-09-2007, 05:30 PM

On 9 Feb 2007 16:17:52 -0800, "Beej" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:

>On Feb 8, 6:06 pm, Mike Vandeman <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:
>> >> A mountain biker is only destructive.
>>
>> >What about mountain bikers who aren't riding mountain bikes?
>>
>> Then they are probably destrroying somehting else, equally selfishly.
>
>And yet, despite this, you're not interested in banning bikers. I'm
>starting to seriously question your motivations.

It's about time you started thinking. What did you come up with?

>-Beej
===
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. ]

02-09-2007, 05:39 PM

Mike Vandeman wrote:
> On Thu, 08 Feb 2007 18:56:35 -0800, cc <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:
>
>> Mike Vandeman wrote:
>>> On Thu, 08 Feb 2007 13:45:44 -0800, cc <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Mike Vandeman wrote:
>>>>> 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!
>>>> Are you seriously that stupid? They DIFFER in that one is a REPTILE and
>>>> one is HUMAN.
>>> That is a category, not a difference.
>> Mike, categorical is one kind of differentiation. Try using a dictionary.
>
> So you admit that you can't or won't answer the question?

You are truly unbelievable. If it is in a different category, e.g.
species, it is by definition different.

02-09-2007, 06:31 PM

Mike Vandeman wrote:
> On 9 Feb 2007 16:17:52 -0800, "Beej" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:
>
>> On Feb 8, 6:06 pm, Mike Vandeman <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:
>>>>> A mountain biker is only destructive.
>>>> What about mountain bikers who aren't riding mountain bikes?
>>> Then they are probably destrroying somehting else, equally selfishly.
>> And yet, despite this, you're not interested in banning bikers. I'm
>> starting to seriously question your motivations.
>
> It's about time you started thinking. What did you come up with?
>

You try first. We're waiting ...

02-09-2007, 07:26 PM

--
No Signature. Read on.
"Mike Vandeman" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
news:[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]...
> On Thu, 08 Feb 2007 18:56:35 -0800, cc <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:
>
>>Mike Vandeman wrote:
>>> On Thu, 08 Feb 2007 13:45:44 -0800, cc <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Mike Vandeman wrote:
>>>>> 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!
>>>> Are you seriously that stupid? They DIFFER in that one is a REPTILE and
>>>> one is HUMAN.
>>>
>>> That is a category, not a difference.
>>
>>Mike, categorical is one kind of differentiation. Try using a dictionary.
>
> So you admit that you can't or won't answer the question?
> ===
> 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. ]

Here is the difference mike. A Human is capable of curing disease,
intelligent thought, and social interaction.

A mike vandeman is a species that is incapable of thought. He/She is only
worried about the next cricket dinner, and reproduction. The mike vandeman
species hatches it's eggs from a nest. The vandelings crawl out into the
world with all the survival instinct they need. The vandespecies is like a
reptile, only lower on the food chain.

Here is an interesting fact for you Mike: of the top ten Global Fortune 500
companies 9 are either auto industry, or oil industry. What does that mean
to you? Are really that dumb. Tourism causes global warming, and habitat
destruction, not bicycles.

Now back to bashing bicycles. You ignorant twit. Shut up before I verbally
whup your tail.......again.

02-09-2007, 07:40 PM

On Feb 9, 5:30 pm, Mike Vandeman <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:
> It's about time you started thinking. What did you come up with?

That you're not really as pro-environment as you claim, when you're
not interested in banning these people you say are so destructive.

-Beej

02-10-2007, 12:27 AM

"Mike Vandeman" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
news:[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]...
> On Thu, 08 Feb 2007 18:56:35 -0800, cc <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:
>>>>>>>> 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!
>>>> Are you seriously that stupid? They DIFFER in that one is a REPTILE and
>>>> one is HUMAN.
>>>
>>> That is a category, not a difference.
>>
>>Mike, categorical is one kind of differentiation. Try using a dictionary.
>
> So you admit that you can't or won't answer the question?
There is no question. Any qualities, beneficial or not, that you choose to
imply onto a snake has no reference to any qualities you choose to imply
onto "mountain bikers".
The snake is destructive in as much as it kills and moves. How do you
measure "beneficial"? Beneficial to it's prey? Beneficial to it's
surroundings? Beneficial to humans?
Your statement that the "mountain biker is just destructive" is a statement
made from your opinion of "mountain bikers". The ONLY difference you seem to
care about is that the snake does not ride a bicycle and that simple fact is
obvious and nonsense.
Your attempts to force attention away from the FACTS of the case is also
obvious.
It is FACT this man was purposefully rigging trails in such a way as to
cause injury.
It is FACT this man's activities can be classified as terrorism.
It is FACT he was breaking the law.

Any implications you make towards the activities of cyclists while riding
are a non-issue as off-road cycling is legal and recognized. Your OPINION
has no weight in the matter

02-10-2007, 09:16 AM

On 9 Feb 2007 19:40:35 -0800, "Beej" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:

>On Feb 9, 5:30 pm, Mike Vandeman <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:
>> It's about time you started thinking. What did you come up with?
>
>That you're not really as pro-environment as you claim, when you're
>not interested in banning these people you say are so destructive.

Are you really that dumb? As I have always said, most of the
destructiveness is due to the presence of BIKES. DUH!

>-Beej
===
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. ]

02-10-2007, 09:17 AM

On Fri, 09 Feb 2007 17:39:20 -0800, cc <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:

>Mike Vandeman wrote:
>> On Thu, 08 Feb 2007 18:56:35 -0800, cc <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:
>>
>>> Mike Vandeman wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 08 Feb 2007 13:45:44 -0800, cc <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Mike Vandeman wrote:
>>>>>> 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!
>>>>> Are you seriously that stupid? They DIFFER in that one is a REPTILE and
>>>>> one is HUMAN.
>>>> That is a category, not a difference.
>>> Mike, categorical is one kind of differentiation. Try using a dictionary.
>>
>> So you admit that you can't or won't answer the question?
>
>You are truly unbelievable. If it is in a different category, e.g.
>species, it is by definition different.

That doesn't explain HOW they are different.
===
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. ]

02-10-2007, 09:18 AM

On Fri, 9 Feb 2007 20:26:50 -0700, "TJ" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:

Did you say something?
===
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. ]

02-10-2007, 09:19 AM

On Sat, 10 Feb 2007 03:27:35 -0500, "S Curtiss" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>
wrote:

>
>"Mike Vandeman" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
>news:[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].. .
>> On Thu, 08 Feb 2007 18:56:35 -0800, cc <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> 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!
>>>>> Are you seriously that stupid? They DIFFER in that one is a REPTILE and
>>>>> one is HUMAN.
>>>>
>>>> That is a category, not a difference.
>>>
>>>Mike, categorical is one kind of differentiation. Try using a dictionary.
>>
>> So you admit that you can't or won't answer the question?
>There is no question. Any qualities, beneficial or not, that you choose to
>imply onto a snake has no reference to any qualities you choose to imply
>onto "mountain bikers".
>The snake is destructive in as much as it kills and moves. How do you
>measure "beneficial"? Beneficial to it's prey? Beneficial to it's
>surroundings? Beneficial to humans?
>Your statement that the "mountain biker is just destructive" is a statement
>made from your opinion of "mountain bikers". The ONLY difference you seem to
>care about is that the snake does not ride a bicycle and that simple fact is
>obvious and nonsense.
>Your attempts to force attention away from the FACTS of the case is also
>obvious.
>It is FACT this man was purposefully rigging trails in such a way as to
>cause injury.
>It is FACT this man's activities can be classified as terrorism.
>It is FACT he was breaking the law.
>
>Any implications you make towards the activities of cyclists while riding
>are a non-issue as off-road cycling is legal and recognized. Your OPINION
>has no weight in the matter

Did you say somehting?
===
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. ]