A short while ago you were representing all hikers. Now it's
just the 'serious' ones. What, precisely, is your definition of 'serious'
? I'm willing to bet it's anyone who happens to agree with you :-).
What a joke.

The only joke here is you and your defense of mountain biking
on trails. Occasional hikers don't count. The only group that counts in this
discussion are serious hikers. If you had the brains you were born with you
would have known that from day one.

Thank you for confirming exactly what I thought you meant all along. As far as you're concerned, you and those nearly exactly like you are the only deserving users of the trails. Sorry, they belong to the public and one tiny minority doesn't get to dictate ... thank goodness.

Your mental attitude is not of the slightest concern to me and you
have, so far, failed to provide me with any data that this view is anything
other than a minority, fanatical sub-set of nutcases.

My mental attitude is that of all serious hikers.

Prove it. Stop pontificating and prove it. There are
millions of hikers, as a report which you posted recently on outdoor recreation
confirmed. Of those, how many are 'serious' and how many agree with you
? I'm willing to bet that you don't know ... so, if you don't know, stop
asserting that you do and admit that it's YOUR OPINION.

Lone individuals and couples hiking various trails many times
a year are serious hikers. Occasional hikers, youth groups, idiots walking their
dogs and once a year family groups don't count.

I'm sure they'll be delighted to hear that their taxes count for nothing and that Ed Dolan will be protecting their interests ....

I'm not promoting anything other than free choice. As you
concede, if I wish to 'risk' my own life and limb that is solely my
concern.

Yes, indeed, who cares about your life and limb, but your
defense of mountain biking on trails encourages others to think it is safe, when
it clearly Is not safe. It is why I hold you culpable.

You've provided nothing material to counteract the real risk levels which are, I reiterate, fatailies 0.00123/million miles and injuries 1.54/1,000 exposures. If you think it's higher ... then prove it.

Since those fatality and risk levels are low compared with many daily activities mountainbiking can, quite justifiably, be quantified as relatively safe.

However, since YOU and your minority of fellow travellers are
completely unwilling to compromise then, no, I don't give a damn about you
anymore. You would happily see me banned from all trails so that you could
enjoy them in splendid isolation whilst requiring me to pay for them through my
taxes.

This is what I mean about extremism begetting extremism.

As a biker on a trail, you are an interloper and a usurper.
The trails were there for the use and enjoyment of hikers long before mountain
bikes were ever invented. You need to get your own trails far removed from
hiking trails. There can be no sharing of trails because it is a conflict of
both means and purpose.

Yawn. You're going in circles Ed.

The reason it appears so to you is that you never take
anything in the context in which it is said. I could do the same to you, but it
is too tiresome to even think about doing. I like to move on.

I've noticed that you do like to move on ... when your ridiculous pronouncements are shown as the nonsense that they are.

I challenge you, yet again, to backup what you've just said. I am willing to bet that you can't show that I've taken contrary positions because I am very careful to be consistent. You just wander around metaphorically lobbing the kitchen sink into every argument ... irrespective of whether you're now actively undermining your own earlier positions.

I am consistent about what matters and do not get hung up on
details like you do. Half the time, my details are provided for your amusement,
but like all Englishmen you do not take notice of amusement. My first duty here
is to enjoy myself. Nothing will ever stand in the way of that.

Ed, I'm simply here because I find argument amusing ... but you are becoming tiresome because of the paucity of yours.