A letter I agree with..

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Dear Sir

It is intriguing that numerous conservation organisations invite
people to travel throughout the country without considering this is
damaging the very natural environment they are purporting to conserve.
They seem to have the mistaken theory that if they mention people
should travel by public transport or car share, thus not damaging the
environment as much as they might, they can claim they're actually
conserving it. What nonsense!

Angus, bugger off back to your own ng. You don't give a toss about walking
and this isn't about walking, so why post it here? If you are trying to
raise awareness why havent you posted this to all the other ngs in the uk
hierarchy?

Graham

On Tue, 12 Jun 2007 23:09:13 GMT, "Graham Seed" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Dear Sir

It is intriguing that numerous conservation organisations invite
people to travel throughout the country without considering this is
damaging the very natural environment they are purporting to conserve.
They seem to have the mistaken theory that if they mention people
should travel by public transport or car share, thus not damaging the
environment as much as they might, they can claim they're actually
conserving it. What nonsense!

Angus, bugger off back to your own ng. You don't give a toss about walking
and this isn't about walking, so why post it here? If you are trying to
raise awareness why havent you posted this to all the other ngs in the uk
hierarchy?

Graham

Actually it's very much about "walking" and destination.

Conservation organisations such as the JMT, NT RSPB, WT and others
encourage people to travel to places where they can walk in the full
knowledge that they will travel by car.

Now, it doesn't worry me if any walker travels by car to any place to
walk, but it is dishonest to encourage it under the banner of
"conservation".

Do you find that difficult to comprehend?

Angus Macmillan
www.roots-of-blood.org.uk
www.killhunting.org
www.con-servation.org.uk

All truth passes through three stages:
First, it is ridiculed;
Second, it is violently opposed; and
Third, it is accepted as self-evident.
-- Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860)

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

On Tue, 12 Jun 2007 23:09:13 GMT, "Graham Seed" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Dear Sir

It is intriguing that numerous conservation organisations invite
people to travel throughout the country without considering this is
damaging the very natural environment they are purporting to conserve.
They seem to have the mistaken theory that if they mention people
should travel by public transport or car share, thus not damaging the
environment as much as they might, they can claim they're actually
conserving it. What nonsense!

Angus, bugger off back to your own ng. You don't give a toss about walking
and this isn't about walking, so why post it here? If you are trying to
raise awareness why havent you posted this to all the other ngs in the uk
hierarchy?

Graham

<snip irrelevant dross>

Why havent you posted to any of the uk.rec.car ngs?

Grham

On Wed, 13 Jun 2007 08:12:58 GMT, "Graham Seed" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

On Tue, 12 Jun 2007 23:09:13 GMT, "Graham Seed" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
> Dear Sir
>
> It is intriguing that numerous conservation organisations invite
> people to travel throughout the country without considering this is
> damaging the very natural environment they are purporting to conserve.
> They seem to have the mistaken theory that if they mention people
> should travel by public transport or car share, thus not damaging the
> environment as much as they might, they can claim they're actually
> conserving it. What nonsense!
>
Angus, bugger off back to your own ng. You don't give a toss about walking
and this isn't about walking, so why post it here? If you are trying to
raise awareness why havent you posted this to all the other ngs in the uk
hierarchy?

Graham

<snip irrelevant dross>

Why havent you posted to any of the uk.rec.car ngs?

Grham

Because it's not aimed at people using cars.

Re:

Actually it's very much about "walking" and destination.

Conservation organisations such as the JMT, NT RSPB, WT and others
encourage people to travel to places where they can walk in the full
knowledge that they will travel by car.

It's about fake conservation organisations.

Angus Macmillan
www.roots-of-blood.org.uk
www.killhunting.org
www.con-servation.org.uk

All truth passes through three stages:
First, it is ridiculed;
Second, it is violently opposed; and
Third, it is accepted as self-evident.
-- Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860)

<[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

Because it's not aimed at people using cars.

Re:

Actually it's very much about "walking" and destination.

Conservation organisations such as the JMT, NT RSPB, WT and others
encourage people to travel to places where they can walk in the full
knowledge that they will travel by car.

It's about fake conservation organisations.

Your argument is with those people you accuse of being fake
conservationists. You say it isn't aimed at people using cars. Neither
should it be aimed at walkers. There are probably an equal number of people
who claim to be conservationists who are walkers as there are car
enthusiasts. As you say - YOU are not a conservationist so although you're
quite happy to destroy the planet, you're not a hypocrite. Well there are
probably an equal number of people who are - in your eyes - hypocrites on
this walking ng as there are hypocrites on any car ng, or for that matter
alt.2eggs.sausage.beans.tomatoes.largetea.cheerslove, so my point is -
either discuss this on the appropriate ng or discuss it with everyone.

Graham

Graham Seed said:

<[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Because it's not aimed at people using cars.

Re:

Actually it's very much about "walking" and destination.

Conservation organisations such as the JMT, NT RSPB, WT and others
encourage people to travel to places where they can walk in the full
knowledge that they will travel by car.

It's about fake conservation organisations.

Quoted message said:

Your argument is with those people you accuse of being fake
conservationists. You say it isn't aimed at people using cars. Neither
should it be aimed at walkers. There are probably an equal number of people
who claim to be conservationists who are walkers as there are car
enthusiasts. As you say - YOU are not a conservationist so although you're
quite happy to destroy the planet, you're not a hypocrite. Well there are
probably an equal number of people who are - in your eyes - hypocrites on
this walking ng as there are hypocrites on any car ng, or for that matter
alt.2eggs.sausage.beans.tomatoes.largetea.cheerslove, so my point is -
either discuss this on the appropriate ng or discuss it with everyone.

Discussing it here is one thing, but starting a series of new threads all
on the same subject is as far as I am concerned a good way to turn me
against whatever he is trying to achieve.

Roos

On Wed, 13 Jun 2007 18:14:14 GMT, "Graham Seed" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

<[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

Because it's not aimed at people using cars.

Re:

Actually it's very much about "walking" and destination.

Conservation organisations such as the JMT, NT RSPB, WT and others
encourage people to travel to places where they can walk in the full
knowledge that they will travel by car.

It's about fake conservation organisations.

Your argument is with those people you accuse of being fake
conservationists. You say it isn't aimed at people using cars. Neither
should it be aimed at walkers. There are probably an equal number of people
who claim to be conservationists who are walkers as there are car
enthusiasts. As you say - YOU are not a conservationist so although you're
quite happy to destroy the planet, you're not a hypocrite. Well there are
probably an equal number of people who are - in your eyes - hypocrites on
this walking ng as there are hypocrites on any car ng, or for that matter
alt.2eggs.sausage.beans.tomatoes.largetea.cheerslove, so my point is -
either discuss this on the appropriate ng or discuss it with everyone.

Graham

Read what I wrote in the letter and what I wrote above, which I quote
below.

"Conservation organisations such as the JMT, NT RSPB, WT and others
encourage people to travel to places where they can walk in the full
knowledge that they will travel by car."

Where do I say that individual people are fake conservationists unless
they argue for the fakes?

It's the organisations that are the fakes by encouraging people to
travel to destinations to walk. That's why its worthwhile
highlighting it here.

I don't ever recall calling you a fake conservationist.

Angus Macmillan
www.roots-of-blood.org.uk
www.killhunting.org
www.con-servation.org.uk

All truth passes through three stages:
First, it is ridiculed;
Second, it is violently opposed; and
Third, it is accepted as self-evident.
-- Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860)

Roos Eisma said:

Graham Seed said:

<[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Because it's not aimed at people using cars.

Re:

Actually it's very much about "walking" and destination.

Conservation organisations such as the JMT, NT RSPB, WT and others
encourage people to travel to places where they can walk in the full
knowledge that they will travel by car.

It's about fake conservation organisations.

Quoted message said:

Your argument is with those people you accuse of being fake
conservationists. You say it isn't aimed at people using cars. Neither
should it be aimed at walkers. There are probably an equal number of people
who claim to be conservationists who are walkers as there are car
enthusiasts. As you say - YOU are not a conservationist so although you're
quite happy to destroy the planet, you're not a hypocrite. Well there are
probably an equal number of people who are - in your eyes - hypocrites on
this walking ng as there are hypocrites on any car ng, or for that matter
alt.2eggs.sausage.beans.tomatoes.largetea.cheerslove, so my point is -
either discuss this on the appropriate ng or discuss it with everyone.

Discussing it here is one thing, but starting a series of new threads all
on the same subject is as far as I am concerned a good way to turn me
against whatever he is trying to achieve.

Roos

If you don't want to read them you have that option.

Angus Macmillan
www.roots-of-blood.org.uk
www.killhunting.org
www.con-servation.org.uk

All truth passes through three stages:
First, it is ridiculed;
Second, it is violently opposed; and
Third, it is accepted as self-evident.
-- Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860)

<[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

Read what I wrote in the letter and what I wrote above, which I quote
below.

"Conservation organisations such as the JMT, NT RSPB, WT and others
encourage people to travel to places where they can walk in the full
knowledge that they will travel by car."

Yes. I've already ready read that. We've all already read it a million times
over. It is pointless trying to discuss this. Your quote is irrelevant.
Shall I quote it again for you? how about....

"Conservation organisations such as the JMT, NT RSPB, WT and others

Quoted message said:

encourage people to travel to places where they can paint in the full
knowledge that they will travel by car."

"Conservation organisations such as the JMT, NT RSPB, WT and others

Quoted message said:

encourage people to travel to places where they can fish in the full
knowledge that they will travel by car."

"Conservation organisations such as the JMT, NT RSPB, WT and others

Quoted message said:

encourage people to travel to places where they can climb in the full
knowledge that they will travel by car."

Get the idea? Goodbye.

Graham

"Roos Eisma" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

Discussing it here is one thing, but starting a series of new threads all
on the same subject is as far as I am concerned a good way to turn me
against whatever he is trying to achieve.

Exactly. Undeneath all the vitriol he may have a point but his tactics
ensure he has few supporters. He ought to get out more, infact I suggest a
traverse of Bidean Druim nan Ramh for starters! :-)

Graham

On Wed, 13 Jun 2007 22:32:09 GMT, "Graham Seed" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

"Roos Eisma" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

Discussing it here is one thing, but starting a series of new threads all
on the same subject is as far as I am concerned a good way to turn me
against whatever he is trying to achieve.

Exactly. Undeneath all the vitriol he may have a point but his tactics
ensure he has few supporters. He ought to get out more, infact I suggest a
traverse of Bidean Druim nan Ramh for starters! :-)

Graham

Try working hard and you'll find more satisfaction than oohing and
aahing about views from mountains :-)

Angus Macmillan
www.roots-of-blood.org.uk
www.killhunting.org
www.con-servation.org.uk

All truth passes through three stages:
First, it is ridiculed;
Second, it is violently opposed; and
Third, it is accepted as self-evident.
-- Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860)

On Wed, 13 Jun 2007 22:17:29 GMT, "Graham Seed" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

<[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

Read what I wrote in the letter and what I wrote above, which I quote
below.

"Conservation organisations such as the JMT, NT RSPB, WT and others
encourage people to travel to places where they can walk in the full
knowledge that they will travel by car."

Yes. I've already ready read that. We've all already read it a million times
over. It is pointless trying to discuss this. Your quote is irrelevant.
Shall I quote it again for you? how about....

"Conservation organisations such as the JMT, NT RSPB, WT and others

Quoted message said:

encourage people to travel to places where they can paint in the full
knowledge that they will travel by car."

"Conservation organisations such as the JMT, NT RSPB, WT and others

Quoted message said:

encourage people to travel to places where they can fish in the full
knowledge that they will travel by car."

"Conservation organisations such as the JMT, NT RSPB, WT and others

Quoted message said:

encourage people to travel to places where they can climb in the full
knowledge that they will travel by car."

Get the idea? Goodbye.

Graham

I think it took a while but you seem to have got the idea at last.

Conservation organisations such as the JMT, NT RSPB, WT are fakes.

Angus Macmillan
www.roots-of-blood.org.uk
www.killhunting.org
www.con-servation.org.uk

All truth passes through three stages:
First, it is ridiculed;
Second, it is violently opposed; and
Third, it is accepted as self-evident.
-- Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860)

<[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Try working hard and you'll find more satisfaction than oohing and
aahing about views from mountains :-)

1. You don't know how hard I work
2. Have you ever climbed a mountain to see the views?

Graham

On Thu, 14 Jun 2007 07:23:59 GMT, "Graham Seed" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

<[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Try working hard and you'll find more satisfaction than oohing and
aahing about views from mountains :-)

1. You don't know how hard I work

My father used to say that if one had energy to dispel after a day
work one wasn't working hard enough.

Quoted message said:

2. Have you ever climbed a mountain to see the views?

Yes. And found the effort wasn't worth the return.

Quite honestly, I don't see what people see in views.

Quoted message said:

Graham

Angus Macmillan
www.roots-of-blood.org.uk
www.killhunting.org
www.con-servation.org.uk

All truth passes through three stages:
First, it is ridiculed;
Second, it is violently opposed; and
Third, it is accepted as self-evident.
-- Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860)

The message <[email hidden]>
from "Graham Seed" <[email hidden]> contains these words:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Try working hard and you'll find more satisfaction than oohing and
aahing about views from mountains :-)

1. You don't know how hard I work
2. Have you ever climbed a mountain to see the views?

Climbing a mountain *is* hard work. That Bloody Angus doesn't indulge in
such an activity suggests he is really averse to anything like hard
work.

--
Roger Chapman
Nearest Marilyn still to be visited - Great Orme.
89 miles as the crow flies,
considerably more as the walker drives.

On Thu, 14 Jun 2007 09:55:14 +0100, Roger <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

The message <[email hidden]>
from "Graham Seed" <[email hidden]> contains these words:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Try working hard and you'll find more satisfaction than oohing and
aahing about views from mountains :-)

1. You don't know how hard I work
2. Have you ever climbed a mountain to see the views?

Climbing a mountain *is* hard work. That Bloody Angus doesn't indulge in
such an activity suggests he is really averse to anything like hard
work.

See my response to Graham Seed :-)

Angus Macmillan
www.roots-of-blood.org.uk
www.killhunting.org
www.con-servation.org.uk

All truth passes through three stages:
First, it is ridiculed;
Second, it is violently opposed; and
Third, it is accepted as self-evident.
-- Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860)

Roger said:

The message <[email hidden]>
from "Graham Seed" <[email hidden]> contains these words:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Try working hard and you'll find more satisfaction than oohing and
aahing about views from mountains :-)

1. You don't know how hard I work
2. Have you ever climbed a mountain to see the views?

Climbing a mountain *is* hard work. That Bloody Angus doesn't indulge in
such an activity suggests he is really averse to anything like hard
work.

Oh come now Roger, he works his fingers (two of them at least) to the bone.

Roy.