Re: Econut's avoidance of the truth

On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 04:34:40 GMT, "M. Halliwell"
<templetagteam@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:

>Mike Vandeman wrote:
>(Snip of Mike going off on a tangent again)
>
>> Nonsense. What I left out was IRRELEVANT to the basic question of
>> which form of recreation causes more erosion..
>
>Irrelevant? Hmmm... So let me get this right. If you take a quote out of 
>context

No, I didn't. I quoted the relevant part. And it wasn't my major
point, anyway, which was that they didn't measure erosion.

 and use it to formulate an argument against a re****t, yet you 
>still consider it a good argument? Your "lit review" claims the Wilson 
>and Seney quote you gave as a reason to question the results...but if 
>you include the full quote, your argument isn't justified. ("E" for 
>effort in trying to redirect the discussion away from your deception.)

Yes, it is. The fact that you refuse to include any details is proof
that you are LYING.

>Geee...sounds like your quote from Wisdom about flight speeds...you know 
>the one. It's where you conveniently snip out the fact that the evening 
>mean movement rate of elk for mountain bike events was the same as 
>hiking events. The dot-dot-dot thing is a convenient way of glossing 
>over that text you don't want others to see, ain't it?

You are cherry-picking irrelevancies.

>Oh...and don't forget that Wisdom et al suggest things contrary to 
>you...like the fact that participant populations needs to be included 
>and addressed (Does recreationist equivalent ring a bell?).

Irrelevant.

>And one more thing....have you figured out the difference between speed 
>and distance yet? You keep posting your "lit review" where you talk 
>about speed as proof about relative distances traveled. (You 
>know...number of teams to cover a set distance over a set time...it's in 
>you comments about Wisdom et al). I know certain vehicles with 100 mph 
>average speeds (dragsters), but a hiker will go a lot further in typical 
>distance covered.

You are just trying to avoid admitting that I'm right: a mountain
biker has a much greater impact on wildlife & the environment than a
hiker.

>Michael Halliwell
-- 
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