On Aug 2, 6:25=A0pm, Mike Vandeman <mjva...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> On Sat, 2 Aug 2008 12:29:00 -0700 (PDT), Siskuwihane
>
>
>
>
>
> <Siskuwiha...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> >On Aug 2, 1:51=A0pm, Mike Vandeman <mjva...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> >> On Sat, 2 Aug 2008 04:45:49 -0700 (PDT), Siskuwihane
>
> >> <Siskuwiha...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> >> >On Aug 2, 1:30=A0am, Mike Vandeman <mjva...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> >> >> On Thu, 31 Jul 2008 16:32:04 -0700 (PDT), Siskuwihane
>
> >> >> <Siskuwiha...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> >> >> >On Jul 31, 5:57=A0pm, 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=A0am, Mike Vandeman <mjva...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrot=
e:
> >> >> >> >> 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
a=
ny
> >> >> >> >> >>>> credentials. What are your qualifications in
conservatio=
n biology?
>
> >> >> >> >> >>> Your claim of being an engineer is noted. Please be
advis=
ed that
> >> >> >> >> >>> engineering is a regulated field and claiming such
withou=
t 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,
becau=
se you have
> >> >> >> >> >"studied" that you are an engineer, agrologist, forester,
bi=
ologist 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
twist=
ed 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.
>
> >> >> >> =A0He has been
>
> >> >> >> >proven wrong hundreds of times.
>
> >> >> >> BS. Not by any real SCIENTIST. None of the SCIENTISTS who have
h=
eard
> >> >> >> me speak have found anything wrong with my papers on mountain
bi=
king.
>
> >> >> >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
scientifi=
c
> >> >> quality.
>
> >> >My misspelling of the word "wiping" doesn't negate your lack of
> >> >qualifications, but you "probaby" knew that.
>
> >> >Sorry that your claims about mountain-bikng were debunked by real
> >> >researchers,
>
> >> LIAR. Name even ONE "real researcher" who has "debunked" my claims. I
> >> know you can't. You are nothing but hot air.
>
> >Wilson and Seney debunked you years ago.
>
> That's an OBVIOUS LIE! Their article was published before mine! Their
> so-called "erosion study" was pure hokum, and they have NEVER
> responded to my critique or email -- obviously because I'm RIGHT! And
> NOT ONE of the SCIENTISTS who have heard or received my paper has ever
> found anythng wrong with it. You are full of it. I notice that you
> didn't respond, when I asked you to state your qualifications --
> because you don't HAVE any!
anythng??
Direct me to the site that has the results of YOUR actual field tests,
not some armchair research you did.
Are you surprised they didn't respond to you? No doubt they would have
responded to someone who was qualified to question them, not some
Environmental Dear Abby.
> =A0You tried to refute their
>
> >findings with opinion but you never did anything real to back it up,
> >as usual. Your keyboard research is a farce.
>
> It's obvious that you have no idea what you are talking about. You are
> just blowing how air, like ALL mountain bikers.
But I'm not a mountain-biker, stop LYING, I know that's hard for you
to do.
>
> Thanks for a good laugh, FRAUD! But what can we expect from someone
> afraid to use their real name?!
Unless we see your field studies, you are the true fraud.
|
