mattp

Don't misunderstand me -- if you can make some headway toward cutting out the juvenile spew and antabonistic rhetoric from even a tiny slice of the board, I'm all for it. I'm just questioning what it is that is to be expected of the NEW ROCKCLIMBING FORUM and, in the case of Dwayner, I wonder if he may be receiving special treatment.

RuMR, you must be referring to the new "BETA ONLY" forum.

I agree with you there, Mr. P., but it would be a new development if the moderators of cc.com adopted a policy of cutting posts that they perceive those as childish attempts to put down others and gain attention or otherwise exhibit some form of "bad behavior." In my view, Dwayner is no more of an impediment to thoughtful bolting discussions than some others around here.

I disagree with you and Puget on this point, Mr. White. In my view, the NEW ROCK CLIMBING FORUM would in fact be the most appropriate place for a discussion of bolting practices. I think Erik has hit closer to the mark: Dwayner has become tiresome with his constant recycling of the same spew, and he has less credibility on this matter than active rock climbers. However, there are many of us on this site who repeat the same old arguments ad nauseam and speak(spray) with little credibility. Is THE NEW ROCK CLIMBING FORUM a unique part of the board where we are going to be expected to be respectful and thoughtful and stuff?

I agree with all that you just stated, Erik, but I also hope that we don't just try to "cut and run" from Iraq. I think that neither invasion was justified, but now that we are there I think we have an obligation to try to be sure that both countries land on their feet.

Dale- I did not state that I have never heard of injuries in a short fall -- I have heard of plenty and my brother boke his ankle in a short fall just a few months ago. I was referring to prior discussion of the advantages of the "softer" catch afforded by "the hop" and I said that I, personally, had never heard of an injury caused solely by the shock of the catch. If you read the discussion, you would also see that I said I fully believe that Rudy was hurt by being "short roped." However, in this and in prior discussions I have repeatedly stated, and I continue to believe it is true, that when the rock is not overhanging, the shorter you fall, the less is the danger of hitting things. In my own experience, I have also found that pieces generally either hold or fail - that is, that a dynamic belay is usually not going to make the difference between a piece that holds and one that does not hold. Read carefully here: OUTSIDE OF SPORT CRAGS AND GYMS, most rock-climbing falls take place on terrain that is not overhanging. The modern technique of having the belayer hop up to, in effect, let rope OUT is one that I would recommend in very limited situations (generally where the leader is on overhanging terrain with no prospect of hitting anything if he or she isn't pulled back toward the rock and belayer is on the ground or a very good ledge). Yours and others' responsed to my arguments on this point seem to ignore the fact that I specifically have said that I see the value of the dynamic catch where it is most commonly used. Laugh all you want, but then see if you can understand and respond to what I wrote.

Thanks for the update. The smoke in the upper Methow Valley was so thick the last few mornings that you couldn't see accross the valley and the fire trucks and helicopters were racing up and down the valley about every hour or two, though I talked to a firefighter this afternoon who said that the fire had not really threatened the homes up there yet. Did it blow up today?

I'd say the west slabs descent is probably as good as Catbird's way, Gary. The easiest way back to the top of Catbird's descent involves at least two raps which provide opportunities to get a rope stuck and there is also a bit of wandering about involved -- then four or five raps (I haven't rapped this way)with the last being extremely low angle or you can down climb, and then you have to find your way back to the start of the route. All things considered, the West Slabs descent is the way I'd go. By the way - way to go, completing the climb to the top of the dome. Yes, there is some run-out climbing up there, but it really isn't all that bad and I find it illustrative of how they younger generation these days just can't cut it that 90% or better of the parties on the W. Buttress routes rap from the terrace these days rather then completing the climb. (From there, Catbird's descent sounds like it may be the best way down though I'd take Jacob's Ladder for sentimental reasons.)

That is exactly the point made in the forward to the new printing of "Blinded by the Right" - that despite the fact that he provides copious details which are extremely easy to verify, nobody mentioned in the book has come forth to say that he has lied or made a mistake. And he calls everybody who is anybody in the neoconservative movement a liar and tells on what day and in which place they lied. The fact that nobody argues with what he has written goes a long way to suggest that he was correct. It does appear that many of the conservative icon's have a serious problem with fact checking, doesn't it? Sadly, it seems, most people who listen to Rush Limbaugh or read Ann Coulter or Bernard Goldberg don't care.

cd

Just last night he told me it was going to come out in October.

Try reading the books, rather than just looking at the title. At least these books from the "left" contain more than the mostly unsubstantiated allegations and random spew of a book like "Bias."

I'm with you there, Greg. That is why I like Darrington -- there is some "alpine feel" to it. But in my book, strictly speaking, it is not truly "alpine;" there are no glaciers; an essential ingredient for "alpine climbing" is a glacier or at least year 'round snow. The factors, "Nice exposure, no easy way off, route finding, and no easy rescue" simply make it what I would call "interesting." My favorite type of climbing, for the purpose of answering Dryad's initial question, is "interesting" climbing. That may be found in Death Valley or the Alaska Range. Perhaps what I mean is what is commonly referred to, often rather derisively, as "adventure climbing."

Good call, Dru. I recently looked at David Parker's racking thingamajig and thought that it looked pretty good for racking ice screws. But I suppose that means I should get with the program and be sure to have a hammer holster specifically made for my ice tools, a collection of draws that I use only for sport climbing, a belay 'biner that may be different from the one I use for rapelling, extra light ones for some climbs and bigger ones for ice climbing, and ovals for aid and .... The racking clips DO look good -- don't get me wrong. But I find that I kind of like the Petzl Spirits for just about every application, and they are not the lightest but then again they are not really very heavy either.... And I do not use my ice screws when I use them to clip gear to my harness. hmmmm; can one 'biner do it all? It is all a personal choice, agreed.

I have had problems using the wire gate 'biners in the winter where I rack ice screws directly to my harness with them and they unclip themselves so I inadvertently leave a screw behind at a belay. This has happened several times, and I have never had it happen with any other type of carabiner. I also do not like the aggressive gate hooks on the wire gate biners - especially for racking wired stoppers.

I'm sure that with modern climbing styles being what they are, nobody is going to be persuaded to use and old fashioned ice axe, but have any of you folks practiced the self arrest with both a 50 cm axe and a 70 cm one? How many of you have ever tried using a 70 cm axe on a mountain climb and traded back and forth with your buddy who has the 50 and a ski pole to see which was more useful on moderate terrain? How many of you, who worry about the weight of other items in your pack, carry an ice axe, ski pole, and a picket for a moderate climb?* Just curious. *credit to Lowell Skoog for pointing out that many climbers these days now carry these three tools in situations where we used to carry only the axe in the old days.

There are two routes between Total Soul and Silent Running, "Revolver" and "Penny Lane." I don't remember which is which. I believe both are 5.10, and the one next to Total Soul is pretty much a new line whereas at least part of the one farther right has been there for several years but has recently seen old hardware replaced with new. There is also the old route "Bushy Galore," up an intermitten dihedral system fully of bushes, for the 5.7-X bush puller.

What? Nobody wants to stand up for the righteousness of ski poles and the 50cm tool for general mountaineering?

I believe that the Adze is quite often actually MORE effective in slushy summer snow where the pick will just rake through if there isn't anything more firm within the top 6" or so and, yes, the Adze IS more comfortable. It is really not that hard to turn your ice axe around in the event of a fall -- especially if you practice it at all. I believe that plain old inexperience is probably much more of a hazard, as is wearing crampons on a slope where they are not necessary. I also believe that the modern practice of using ski poles on lesser slopes and carrying only 50mm tools is probably more dangerous than holding the ice axe "backwards" -- grab your 50 cm tool and lie down on the snow some time and look where that spike is in relation to your abdomen; then switch out for the more traditional 70 cm ice axe and check it out. I haven't conducted a statistical analysis of ANAM to see if my theory holds, but the short tols sure look like an obvious danger to me and, despite what they guy said, I would guess that the shortness of his axe may have been more of an issue in this recent accident than was using the adze instead of the pick -- it wasn't either adze or pick that went into his belly (I can't tell from the picture, but it looks as if it may be a "modern" length tool).

Catbird, you have way too much time on your hands if you have time to wash the smoke out of your slings!!!

There is a long tradition of naming themes up there. Besides all the Monarchy names (Monarch, Queen, Princess, Throne, Concubine, Page, etc.); there are the devilish ones (Cerberus, Ogre, Satan, Jezebel, Belial, Sciron); the Ape ones (Ape, Throwback); bears (Polar Bear, Cub, Horriblis); and now the Turtlehead theme.

I bet most of those who don't trust the supposed "liberal media" will not agree that the BBC could be seen as a benchmark against which to measure our press, Catbird. e BBC published that story about how the African uranium purchase was a bogus story -- way back in, like, January. It took our "liberal"press, and even our unpatriotic liberal politicians, six months to catch on.

Fairweather - Exactly what question did you answer in answering the "first question?" I asked how exactly it was that you think Clinton lied to us about Kosovo and how would the press' treatment of that lie show a liberal news bias whereas their treatment of Bush's "misleading" us about Iraq does now show an equal bias to the right? Times have changed is all you can say? Do I understand you correctly - that it it is only because of 9/11 that the press has temporarily "wised up" and they are going to go back to a liberal slant any day now? If they are following changes in public opinion (which I would agree with you is pretty sad), aren't they merely being commercially driven rather than idealistically driven? I am glad that you didn't say "Fox News" in answering "the second question." On this point, we may well agree. You can't get real news. The media is mostly presenting commercial messages.

By the way - what is with this "finally allowed inspections in." As far as I remember, the ONLY time in the entire twelve years or whatever it was that we did not have inspectors there was when WE called them back because WE were going to bomb. Yes, I believe that Saddam was interfering with the inspections at many points along the way, but "finally allowed inspections in" is clearly a misstatement of the reality.

He said that Saddam would not allow inspections. The truth is that WE decided to discontinue inspections at a time when just about everybody else in the world was urging us to give the inspections more time. Bush didn't say it had been "too little too late," or even anything remotely like that. I don't think "lie" is too strong of a word. Either it is "lie" or perhaps "self-deception." Is it OK for a Republican president to lie, but not a Democratic one? Does any of this have bearing on the question of whether the press presents a consistent liberal slant to the news?