On Thu, 31 Jul 2008 16:32:04 -0700 (PDT), Siskuwihane
<Siskuwihane1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>On Jul 31, 5:57 pm, Mike Vandeman <mjva...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> On Thu, 31 Jul 2008 11:06:52 -0700 (PDT), Siskuwihane
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> <Siskuwiha...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> >On Jul 31, 10:55 am, Mike Vandeman <mjva...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> >> On Thu, 31 Jul 2008 03:17:46 GMT, "M. Halliwell"
>>
>> >> <templetagteam@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> >> >Mike Vandeman wrote:
>>
>> >> >>>>> Oh, so now you are claiming, because you have "studied" that
you are an
>> >> >>>>> engineer, agrologist, forester, biologist and so forth. I'm
sure the
>> >> >>>>> regulating bodies in California would love to hear that (don't
proclaim
>> >> >>>>> it too loudly, Mike).
>> >> >>>> Yes. *****sing mountain biking impacts doesn't require any
>> >> >>>> credentials. What are your qualifications in conservation
biology?
>>
>> >> >>> Your claim of being an engineer is noted. Please be advised that
>> >> >>> engineering is a regulated field and claiming such without
adequate
>> >> >>> qualifications and certification can open you to censure by the
state
>> >> >>> regulating body.
>>
>> >> >> BS. Show me where I claimed to be an engineer.
>>
>> >> >First thing I said Mike: "Oh, so now you are claiming, because you
have
>> >> >"studied" that you are an engineer, agrologist, forester, biologist
and
>> >> >so forth."...your first answer: "Yes."
>>
>> >> >Perhaps you need to be a little more clear with your use of the
english
>> >> >language?
>>
>> >> NO. It's obvious that I didn't mean a professional. You twisted my
>> >> statement to mean that. But what else could we expect from a
MOUNTAIN
>> >> BIKER?????
>>
>> >Michael J. Vandeman is an armchair environmentalist. He does no actual
>> >hands-on research himself so his "findings" are bogus.
>>
>> So a "review of the literature" isn't science? That would come a big
>> news to all scientists.
>
>No more than a review of the new Batman movie. Your "reviews" are on
>par with Roger Ebert, nothing more than opinion.
>
>
>> He has been
>>
>> >proven wrong hundreds of times.
>>
>> BS. Not by any real SCIENTIST. None of the SCIENTISTS who have heard
>> me speak have found anything wrong with my papers on mountain biking.
>
>I'm sure your papers were just fine for whiping ***** when they
>restroom was out of toilet paper, but in the real world, ALL your
>claims have been refuted and proven false by REAL research.
How would YOU know? You can't even SPELL, much less judge scientific
quality.
--
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!
http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande
|
