."Mike Vandeman" <mjvande@pacbell.net> wrote in message .news:qo5451lvmfucn2t13pch99ot22i9qhfdll@4ax.com... .> Proof? In fact, IMBA has a study on their web site showing that the vast .> MAJORITY of mountain bikers don't obey the law. . .Would you care to provide a link?
They removed it. I guess they realized it wasn't favorable to mountain biking. The study was done in Marin County. The vast majority of mountain bikers rode through a stream, in spite of a sign saying to use the bridge. === 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.)
"Mike Vandeman" <mjvande@pacbell.net> wrote in message news:qo5451lvmfucn2t13pch99ot22i9qhfdll@4ax.com...> Proof? In fact, IMBA has a study on their web site showing that the vast> MAJORITY of mountain bikers don't obey the law.
"Mike Vandeman" <mjvande@pacbell.net> wrote in message news:5fn6519aq6936f25qa0ietlsurffqm2232@4ax.com...> On Wed, 06 Apr 2005 02:09:19 GMT, "Scott Ehardt"> <SCEhardt--((REM@VE))--SCEhardt.com> wrote:>
."Mike Vandeman" <mjvande@pacbell.net> wrote in message> .news:qo5451lvmfucn2t13pch99ot22i9qhfdll@4ax.com...> .> Proof? In fact, IMBA has a study on their web site showing that the
vast> .> MAJORITY of mountain bikers don't obey the law.> .> .Would you care to provide a link?>
They removed it. I guess they realized it wasn't favorable to mountain
biking.> The study was done in Marin County. The vast majority of mountain bikers rode> through a stream, in spite of a sign saying to use the bridge.
Mikey - If this "study" ever really existed, a copy of the page should be somewhere (e.g., http://www.archive.org/ )...unless you're lying, or deluded (my bet's on the latter).
GG
===> 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.)>
On Tue, 5 Apr 2005 22:42:55 -0700, "GaryG" <sorrynoemail@NOSPAMX.com> wrote:
."Mike Vandeman" <mjvande@pacbell.net> wrote in message .news:5fn6519aq6936f25qa0ietlsurffqm2232@4ax.com... .> On Wed, 06 Apr 2005 02:09:19 GMT, "Scott Ehardt" .> <SCEhardt--((REM@VE))--SCEhardt.com> wrote: .> .> ."Mike Vandeman" <mjvande@pacbell.net> wrote in message .> .news:qo5451lvmfucn2t13pch99ot22i9qhfdll@4ax.com... .> .> Proof? In fact, IMBA has a study on their web site showing that the .vast .> .> MAJORITY of mountain bikers don't obey the law. .> . .> .Would you care to provide a link? .> .> They removed it. I guess they realized it wasn't favorable to mountain .biking. .> The study was done in Marin County. The vast majority of mountain bikers .rode .> through a stream, in spite of a sign saying to use the bridge. . .Mikey - If this "study" ever really existed, a copy of the page should be .somewhere (e.g., http://www.archive.org/ )...unless you're lying, or deluded .(my bet's on the latter).
You should be smart enough to find it. Or even easier, ask IMBA for a copy.
.GG . .> === .> 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.) .> .> http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande .
=== 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.)
"Mike Vandeman" <mjvande@pacbell.net> wrote in message news:a7ie5199ip22i9q9ee78tkpo5pqn1slau6@4ax.com...> On Tue, 5 Apr 2005 22:42:55 -0700, "GaryG" <sorrynoemail@NOSPAMX.com> wrote:>
."Mike Vandeman" <mjvande@pacbell.net> wrote in message> .news:5fn6519aq6936f25qa0ietlsurffqm2232@4ax.com...> .> On Wed, 06 Apr 2005 02:09:19 GMT, "Scott Ehardt"> .> <SCEhardt--((REM@VE))--SCEhardt.com> wrote:> .>> .> ."Mike Vandeman" <mjvande@pacbell.net> wrote in message> .> .news:qo5451lvmfucn2t13pch99ot22i9qhfdll@4ax.com...> .> .> Proof? In fact, IMBA has a study on their web site showing that the> .vast> .> .> MAJORITY of mountain bikers don't obey the law.> .> .> .> .Would you care to provide a link?> .>> .> They removed it. I guess they realized it wasn't favorable to mountain> .biking.> .> The study was done in Marin County. The vast majority of mountain
bikers> .rode> .> through a stream, in spite of a sign saying to use the bridge.> .> .Mikey - If this "study" ever really existed, a copy of the page should be> .somewhere (e.g., http://www.archive.org/ )...unless you're lying, or deluded> .(my bet's on the latter).>
You should be smart enough to find it. Or even easier, ask IMBA for a
copy.
You're the one making the claim here, Mikey.
.GG> .> .> ===> .> 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.)> .>> .> http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande> .>
===> 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.)>
On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 00:08:38 GMT, Mike Vandeman <mjvande@pacbell.net> wrote:
.As usual that is bigotry, not evidence.
Read the report. Maybe IMBA will be honest enough to provide it to you. MAYBE.
But IMBA are not coming here and claiming the report is some kind of revealed truth. You are. You are the one claiming that lawbreaking is the particular preserve of mountain bikers.
So you need to provide some evidence that mountain bikers are more likely to break the law than the average joe. Given that nine out of ten drivers freely admit to breaking the law you need to provide some independent evidence that more than 90% of *all* mountain bikers (not just some arbitrarily selected subset) break the law. You have not yet provided any such proof.
On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 17:37:29 +0100, "Just zis Guy, you know?" <norfolk.inspam@dev.null> wrote:
.On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 00:08:38 GMT, Mike Vandeman <mjvande@pacbell.net> .wrote: . .>.As usual that is bigotry, not evidence. . .>Read the report. Maybe IMBA will be honest enough to provide it to you. MAYBE. . .But IMBA are not coming here and claiming the report is some kind of .revealed truth.
Yes, they do. It's a blatant LIE.
You are. You are the one claiming that lawbreaking .is the particular preserve of mountain bikers. . .So you need to provide some evidence that mountain bikers are more .likely to break the law than the average joe.
I did. You have to do your homework.
Given that nine out of .ten drivers freely admit to breaking the law you need to provide some .independent evidence that more than 90% of *all* mountain bikers (not .just some arbitrarily selected subset) break the law. You have not .yet provided any such proof. . .Guy
=== 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.)
On Fri, 22 Apr 2005 00:33:16 GMT, Mike Vandeman <mjvande@pacbell.net> wrote:
.>.As usual that is bigotry, not evidence.
.>Read the report. Maybe IMBA will be honest enough to provide it to you. MAYBE.
.But IMBA are not coming here and claiming the report is some kind of>.revealed truth.
Yes, they do. It's a blatant LIE.
Do point me to the post from IMBA, then. The only ones I can see around here are from you.
You are. You are the one claiming that lawbreaking>.is the particular preserve of mountain bikers.
.So you need to provide some evidence that mountain bikers are more>.likely to break the law than the average joe.
I did. You have to do your homework.
No, you made an assertion without evidence, as usual. I can cite studies that show that from a randomly selected group of drivers, anything up to 90% will not only be lawbreakers, but freely admit to it. For your assertion to stand you need to provide conclusive evidence that the propensity for lawbreaking among a randomly selected group of mountain bikers is significantly higher than that. You have repeatedly failed to do so. I am forced to the conclusion that your statement is just more of your bigotry.
On Fri, 22 Apr 2005 12:41:11 +0100, "Just zis Guy, you know?" <norfolk.inspam@dev.null> wrote:
.On Fri, 22 Apr 2005 00:33:16 GMT, Mike Vandeman <mjvande@pacbell.net> .wrote: . .>.>.As usual that is bigotry, not evidence. . .>.>Read the report. Maybe IMBA will be honest enough to provide it to you. MAYBE. . .>.But IMBA are not coming here and claiming the report is some kind of .>.revealed truth. . .>Yes, they do. It's a blatant LIE. . .Do point me to the post from IMBA, then. The only ones I can see .around here are from you. . .> You are. You are the one claiming that lawbreaking .>.is the particular preserve of mountain bikers. . .>.So you need to provide some evidence that mountain bikers are more .>.likely to break the law than the average joe. . .>I did. You have to do your homework. . .No, you made an assertion without evidence, as usual. I can cite .studies that show that from a randomly selected group of drivers, .anything up to 90% will not only be lawbreakers, but freely admit to .it. For your assertion to stand you need to provide conclusive .evidence that the propensity for lawbreaking among a randomly selected .group of mountain bikers is significantly higher than that. You have .repeatedly failed to do so. I am forced to the conclusion that your .statement is just more of your bigotry.
Ask IMBA for the reference. Your failure to do your homework proves you are wrong.
.Guy
=== 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.)
On Fri, 22 Apr 2005 16:11:04 GMT, Mike Vandeman <mjvande@pacbell.net> wrote in message <sf8i61188g8f8sds8k9opin9on43bea02s@4ax.com>:
.you made an assertion without evidence, as usual. I can cite>.studies that show that from a randomly selected group of drivers,>.anything up to 90% will not only be lawbreakers, but freely admit to>.it. For your assertion to stand you need to provide conclusive>.evidence that the propensity for lawbreaking among a randomly selected>.group of mountain bikers is significantly higher than that. You have>.repeatedly failed to do so. I am forced to the conclusion that your>.statement is just more of your bigotry.
Ask IMBA for the reference. Your failure to do your homework proves you are>wrong.
Ah, the "burden of proof" fallacy combined with the appeal to authority fallacy. Two in one post! Well done.
You say that the vast majority of mountain bikers don't obey the law: that may or may not be true, and I don't care overmuch. The fact remains that unless the proportion is over 90%, they are as representative of the average joe as are drivers, the vast majority of whom also freely admit to breaking the law. So it is not mountain bikers but *people in general* who break the law. Unless you can show that the proportion of mountain bikers who break the law is significantly above that for drivers (i.e. 90% or thereabouts), the fact, if fact it is, is entirely irrelevant. It is a non-point. It merely says that mountain bikers are ordinary, fallible humans just like anybody else.
