On Aug 11, 11:53=A0pm, Mike Vandeman <mjva...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Aug 2008 06:10:22 -0700 (PDT), Siskuwihane
>
>
>
>
>
> <Siskuwiha...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> >On Aug 11, 12:19=A0am, "Jeff Strickland" <cr...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> >> "Mike Vandeman" <mjva...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>
> >>news:r7ru94pjgdvctag600bobk58k4sqp9o5p0@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> >> > On Sun, 10 Aug 2008 11:40:28 -0700, "Jeff Strickland"
> >> > <cr...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> >> >>Mike picks and chooses the literature that fits his selfish agenda
a=
nd
> >> >>posts
> >> >>it.
>
> >> >>The really sad thing is, most of his self selected literature is
> >> >>inaccurate
> >> >>or does not apply to his agenda.
>
> >> > The tipoff that you are lying is that you NEVER give any specifics
t=
o
> >> > back up your BS.
>
> >> I'm exhausted of citing specifics. You ignore them anyway.
>
> >> Here's a specific for you, if you were 100% correct AND 100% of every
=
route
> >> was an environmental wasteland that demanded complete intervention
and
> >> restoration, we would have to step up to save 0.004% (rounded up) of
t=
he
> >> environment that was laid to waste because of bicycle activity.
>
> >That's just one reason why Michael J. Vandeman is the laughing stock
> >of the environmental movement, he chooses to fight a very minor
> >problem while real habitat crumbles around him.
>
> >At a rally this past Saturday, I mentioned his name to a few people
> >and while some never heard of him, a few people started to laugh and
> >comments of "nutcase" and "kook" were common. It was discussed how no
> >one took him seriously and when I mentioned I believed he did more to
> >hurt his cause than help it, all agreed.
>
> Mountain bikers, no doubt -- a notoriously unreliable source of
> information.
So you were there?
Sorry Michael J. Vandeman, you haven't a clue as to who was there, as
usual.
|
