Why does Michael J. Vandeman avoid the airline question? Will he be
outed as a fraud? Is he one of those people who feel they can do as
they please while telling others they should do things differently?

Michael J. Vandeman, PhD, please explain to us why you use commercial
air travel when you claimed that aircraft were just convenient for
people who don't care about the environment.

In regards to aircraft being essential for conservation, you wrote:

"BS. Not "essential", just "convenient" for people who don't care
about the environment. What do you think we did before the airplane
was invented? Darwin did the most for wildlife, and never flew in an
airplane. The view from the air is BS. It ALWAYS has to be "ground-
truthed" anyway. You are just embarrassed to be caught in your own
HYPOCRISY."

You ask what we did before the airplane was invented and yet you take
commercial airlines to environmental conferences around the globe. Why
didn't you do as Darwin did and take a sailing ship? Why are you such
a hypocrite when it comes to your own conveince? Do you not care about
the environment like you accused others who use airplanes? Is it
different for you for some reason?

Why does Michael J. Vandeman avoid the airline question? Will he be
outed as a fraud? Is he one of those people who feel they can do as
they please while telling others they should do things differently?

Why does Michael J. Vandeman avoid the airline question?

His PhD came from an online school, they sell the program
for $50.

Why does Michael J. Vandeman avoid the airline question?

=v= You may not like what the guy has to say, but it is on-topic
for these newsgroups.  Constant insincere _ad_hominem_ needling
about "environmentalism" and airplanes is not only ineffective,
it's completely off-topic.  Time to give it a rest.

Why does Michael J. Vandeman avoid the airline question? Will he be
outed as a fraud? Is he one of those people who feel they can do as
they please while telling others they should do things differently?


Michael J. Vandeman, PhD, please explain to us why you use commercial
air travel when you claimed that aircraft were just convenient for
people who don't care about the environment.


In regards to aircraft being essential for conservation, you wrote:


"BS. Not "essential", just "convenient" for people who don't care
about the environment. What do you think we did before the airplane
was invented? Darwin did the most for wildlife, and never flew in an
airplane. The view from the air is BS. It ALWAYS has to be "ground-
truthed" anyway. You are just embarrassed to be caught in your own
HYPOCRISY."


You ask what we did before the airplane was invented and yet you take
commercial airlines to environmental conferences around the globe. Why
didn't you do as Darwin did and take a sailing ship? Why are you such
a hypocrite when it comes to your own conveince? Do you not care about
the environment like you accused others who use airplanes? Is it
different for you for some reason?

"Kayak44" <s200hondas... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote in message

news:8650860d-eb5b-4702-a592-f8145915c063 at (no spam) d10g2000yqh.googlegroups.com...





Why does Michael J. Vandeman avoid the airline question? Will he be
outed as a fraud? Is he one of those people who feel they can do as
they please while telling others they should do things differently?

Michael J. Vandeman, PhD, please explain to us why you use commercial
air travel when you claimed that aircraft were just convenient for
people who don't care about the environment.

In regards to aircraft being essential for conservation, you wrote:

"BS. Not "essential", just "convenient" for people who don't care
about the environment. What do you think we did before the airplane
was invented? Darwin did the most for wildlife, and never flew in an
airplane. The view from the air is BS. It ALWAYS has to be "ground-
truthed" anyway. You are just embarrassed to be caught in your own
HYPOCRISY."

You ask what we did before the airplane was invented and yet you take
commercial airlines to environmental conferences around the globe. Why
didn't you do as Darwin did and take a sailing ship? Why are you such
a hypocrite when it comes to your own conveince? Do you not care about
the environment like you accused others who use airplanes? Is it
different for you for some reason?

Who cares.........get a life- Hide quoted text -

Constant insincere _ad_hominem_ needling about
"environmentalism" and airplanes is not only ineffective,
it's completely off-topic.  Time to give it a rest.
Nope. It's completely on-topic. If Michael J. Vandeman
talks-the-talk, he should also walk-the-walk.

=x= That is not on-topic for the bicycle groups, nor for the
backcountry group.  It's theoretically marginally on-topic for
ca.environment because the (as far as you know, sole and only)
plane flight you keep going on about may have left from this
state, but that's hardly much of a peg to hang this hat on.

=x= Perhaps you're one of those people who don't get what
sci.environment is for.  If what you've got has anything to
do with science AND the environment, it's on-topic.  If it's
got nothing to do with science, that's what talk.environment
is for.  But as I said, it's clear that you're not being at
all sincere and it's entirely _ad_hominem_, so really it's
not on-topic anywhere but alt.flame.

Selfishness is the same whether it's riding a mountain-bike
or flying in an Airbus.

=x= Again, selfishness is an entirely other topic, and not
what any of these newsgroups were created to discuss.

=x= Again, please give it a rest.  If you don't like what he
posts and how much he posts, emulating that activity is an
ineffective waste.  Just a one-way ticket to Plonksville.
    <_Jym_

Constant insincere _ad_hominem_ needling about
"environmentalism" and airplanes is not only ineffective,
it's completely off-topic. Time to give it a rest.
Nope. It's completely on-topic. If Michael J. Vandeman
talks-the-talk, he should also walk-the-walk.

Selfishness is the same whether it's riding a mountain-bike
or flying in an Airbus.

=x= Again, please give it a rest.  If you don't like what he
posts and how much he posts, emulating that activity is an
ineffective waste.  Just a one-way ticket to Plonksville.
Are you serious? Good lord man, then plonk and be done.

Public threats about it are just pathetic.

=x= Again, please give it a rest.  If you don't like what he
posts and how much he posts, emulating that activity is an
ineffective waste.  Just a one-way ticket to Plonksville.
Are you serious? Good lord man, then plonk and be done.

Public threats about it are just pathetic.

=x= It's not a threat.  Honestly, it's just friendly advice.
    <_Jym_

"Kayak44" <s200hondas... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote in message

news:cfe030b2-cbd6-44cf-8a30-53564a13970c at (no spam) q14g2000vbi.googlegroups.com...
You care, that's why you took time out to read and respond. Thank you
for caring.

No, I don't care...just like laughing at retards some times

"Kayak44" <s200hondas... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote in message

news:cfe030b2-cbd6-44cf-8a30-53564a13970c at (no spam) q14g2000vbi.googlegroups.com...
You care, that's why you took time out to read and respond. Thank you
for caring.

No, I don't care...just like laughing at retards some times