Tom G
May 4th 06, 07:56 PM
I apologize in advance to anyone who might read this, but the
overwhelming hate spewed by these two flakes is really starting to
bother me.
Just so you know, I do not and have never owned a mountain bike. I
prefer road bikes, though I have been known to travel a dirt road on
occasion.
Mike Vandeman wrote:
> On Thu, 4 May 2006 02:43:09 -0500, "Edward Dolan" >
> wrote:
>
> >Vandeman is long-winded as hell, but that does not mean he is wrong. I do
> >not like to see any kind of bike on a hiking trail anywhere. Trails are for
> >human walking, not for freaking machinery. I would like to see horses banned
> >from all hiking trails too, but I know that is expecting too much.
Nonsense. He couldn't be more wrong is he were inside out and from
another planet. Trails are for following. There are all kinds of
trails, and some trails are open to any form of transport.
Motorcycles, etc. Indeed, what is an interstate but a limited access,
four lane paved trail that is limited to motorized vehicles only?
> I agree that animals should not be used as vehicles. But horses have a
> right to be in North America, because that's where the (genus) horse
> evolved.
You are an idiot. I won't even comment about the 'no animal vehicle'
flake-out. Horses are native to Asia and didn't show up in the western
hemisphere until Europeans brought them. Horses are an
invasive species and should be eradicated at all costs.
Moron.
> >I most definitely do not ever want to see any bikes in a designated wilderness
> >area.
And I don't want to see YOU.
> >Surely there are plenty of forestry roads and fire roads for cyclists.
And plenty of psych wards for you.
> The biology & physics of riding on dirt roads is the same as on dirt
> trails. They belong only on pavement.
Wow. Nothing with wheels should ever leave the pavement. I suppose
this should apply to farming as well? Your flake master, Darth
Vandeman, doesn't seem to have a problem with bikes on forestry and
fire roads. You sir, are an even bigger flake than he.
> >Our world is being overrun with roads and we do not want bikes on footpaths. I
> >have seen footpaths literally destroyed by cycling. They end up not fit for
> >bikes or even for hikers.
But feet on bike paths or roads is OK. Hypocrite. And somehow, the
trails continue to be used... Do you wear leather shoes or belts?
> >Vandeman is right in all his essential points. Cyclists who want to ride in
> >the wilderness and/or natural areas are the worst slobs in the universe. To
> >go off trail on a bike is an even greater abomination. If I were managing a
> >natural area, I would make damn sure no cyclists ever trespassed on my
> >sacred ground. It would be reserved strictly for walkers (hikers).
Vandeman is a psycho and a menace to usenet. He's right about nothing.
However, 'abomination' is a wonderful word, and it applies nicely to
you & your mentor's usenet practices.
> >The hybrid (mountain) bike has its' uses, but trail riding is not one of
> >them.
Yeah, mountain bikes are for riding on the street. Jack off.
> >What is a natural area for? It is for contemplation, not for recreation. If
> >you want recreation, then go to Coney Island or some other freaking
> >god-awful man-made amusement park. When you are in a natural area, you
> >should be doing nothing but communing with God. It is a sacrilege to be
> >doing anything else.
I prefer logging (OK, I prefer hunting & fishing, but I couldn't
resist). It is sacrilege the way you and hairy-palms Vandeman abuse
usenet.
> Thanks. I think that telling the truth is coming back into fashion,
> after it went into hiding for most of the Bush years. Even the
> Democrats are starting to breathe again....
Yup, those Dems is breathing again. Too bad they are hell bent on self
desctuction. The Repubs have tried their damnedest to give it back to
the Dems, but I don't think the Dems can avoid self imolation long
enough to accept it.
> >Regards,
> >
> >Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
> >aka
> >Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
Ed Dolan the Flake is more like it. Order of the Perpetual Sorrows is
RIGHT! I'm sad, too, after wading through so much neck-deep BS. You
inflict perpetual sorrow on usenet with your inane babble.
> 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.)
Is anyone else reminded of 'The Village' here?
A couple of bigger flakes could not be found.
My deepest regrets,
Tom
overwhelming hate spewed by these two flakes is really starting to
bother me.
Just so you know, I do not and have never owned a mountain bike. I
prefer road bikes, though I have been known to travel a dirt road on
occasion.
Mike Vandeman wrote:
> On Thu, 4 May 2006 02:43:09 -0500, "Edward Dolan" >
> wrote:
>
> >Vandeman is long-winded as hell, but that does not mean he is wrong. I do
> >not like to see any kind of bike on a hiking trail anywhere. Trails are for
> >human walking, not for freaking machinery. I would like to see horses banned
> >from all hiking trails too, but I know that is expecting too much.
Nonsense. He couldn't be more wrong is he were inside out and from
another planet. Trails are for following. There are all kinds of
trails, and some trails are open to any form of transport.
Motorcycles, etc. Indeed, what is an interstate but a limited access,
four lane paved trail that is limited to motorized vehicles only?
> I agree that animals should not be used as vehicles. But horses have a
> right to be in North America, because that's where the (genus) horse
> evolved.
You are an idiot. I won't even comment about the 'no animal vehicle'
flake-out. Horses are native to Asia and didn't show up in the western
hemisphere until Europeans brought them. Horses are an
invasive species and should be eradicated at all costs.
Moron.
> >I most definitely do not ever want to see any bikes in a designated wilderness
> >area.
And I don't want to see YOU.
> >Surely there are plenty of forestry roads and fire roads for cyclists.
And plenty of psych wards for you.
> The biology & physics of riding on dirt roads is the same as on dirt
> trails. They belong only on pavement.
Wow. Nothing with wheels should ever leave the pavement. I suppose
this should apply to farming as well? Your flake master, Darth
Vandeman, doesn't seem to have a problem with bikes on forestry and
fire roads. You sir, are an even bigger flake than he.
> >Our world is being overrun with roads and we do not want bikes on footpaths. I
> >have seen footpaths literally destroyed by cycling. They end up not fit for
> >bikes or even for hikers.
But feet on bike paths or roads is OK. Hypocrite. And somehow, the
trails continue to be used... Do you wear leather shoes or belts?
> >Vandeman is right in all his essential points. Cyclists who want to ride in
> >the wilderness and/or natural areas are the worst slobs in the universe. To
> >go off trail on a bike is an even greater abomination. If I were managing a
> >natural area, I would make damn sure no cyclists ever trespassed on my
> >sacred ground. It would be reserved strictly for walkers (hikers).
Vandeman is a psycho and a menace to usenet. He's right about nothing.
However, 'abomination' is a wonderful word, and it applies nicely to
you & your mentor's usenet practices.
> >The hybrid (mountain) bike has its' uses, but trail riding is not one of
> >them.
Yeah, mountain bikes are for riding on the street. Jack off.
> >What is a natural area for? It is for contemplation, not for recreation. If
> >you want recreation, then go to Coney Island or some other freaking
> >god-awful man-made amusement park. When you are in a natural area, you
> >should be doing nothing but communing with God. It is a sacrilege to be
> >doing anything else.
I prefer logging (OK, I prefer hunting & fishing, but I couldn't
resist). It is sacrilege the way you and hairy-palms Vandeman abuse
usenet.
> Thanks. I think that telling the truth is coming back into fashion,
> after it went into hiding for most of the Bush years. Even the
> Democrats are starting to breathe again....
Yup, those Dems is breathing again. Too bad they are hell bent on self
desctuction. The Repubs have tried their damnedest to give it back to
the Dems, but I don't think the Dems can avoid self imolation long
enough to accept it.
> >Regards,
> >
> >Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
> >aka
> >Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
Ed Dolan the Flake is more like it. Order of the Perpetual Sorrows is
RIGHT! I'm sad, too, after wading through so much neck-deep BS. You
inflict perpetual sorrow on usenet with your inane babble.
> 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.)
Is anyone else reminded of 'The Village' here?
A couple of bigger flakes could not be found.
My deepest regrets,
Tom