Re: The Psychology of Mountain Biking

S Curtiss

"Mike Vandeman" <mjvande@pacbell.net> wrote in message
news:j0n460h278s78mrtmd8ickv66fkk1rvhl8@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 23 Mar 2004 12:27:19 -0500, "S Curtiss" <stevecurtiss@yahoo.com>
wrote:
>
> .
> ."Mike Vandeman" <mjvande@pacbell.net> wrote in message
> .news:ehfv50t5bftq7va2c47ku5sc6dtn4db0ma@4ax.com...
> .> January 24, 2000
> .> Tony Acosta
> .> Director, Office of Parks, Recreation, and Cultural Affairs
> .> 1520 Lakeside Drive
> .> Oakland, CA 94612
> .>
> .> Re: The Psychology of Mountain Biking
> .>
> .> Dear Sir:
> .>
> .> For a psychologist, mountain biking is a fascinating
> .> phenomenon. The first thing one notices about them is that they lie
> .> ___
> .
> ."They lie." Or maybe it is claimed that they lie to sway opinions. But
since
> .this is 4 years old, and we're still riding, it would seem actual
> .information has triumphed over claims of "they lie".
>
> You are still lying, huh?

And why, pray tell, is it "lying" to simply disagree with you? Why is it
"lying" to point out your statements of opinion? Why is it "lying" to point
out the date of 1-24-2000? Why is it "lying" to question your claim "that
the first thing to notice is they lie"? Why is it "lying" to say we are
still riding? Why is it lying to say actual information is being used to
argue the case for cycling access?

http://www.mountainbike.co.nz/politics/doc/conflict/
Yes... it is a mtb website, but the article being referenced is not
originated by mtbrs.
Or this release:
http://www.uoguelph.ca/mediarel/01-08-16/biking.html

The above are just two references to studies and information which counter
your "no bikes" diatribe. Even the Sierra Club has an endorsed procedure for
allowing bicycle access. It is very narrow, but it does exist.
http://www.sierraclub.org/policy/co...ion/mtnbike.asp

You haven't proven anything by calling everyone who disagrees with your view
a liar, Mr. Vandeman.

SC