mattp

The first pitch of Narrow Arrow at Index is a poor choice.

That snow field that you traverse to get to the final gully at the summit pinnacle is way steep and very exposed. I've seen more than one:

You're lucky they weren't euros, or they might have done worse than that. In the Bugaboos and in Chamonix, I've had eurodogs pull down on my belay rope while I was leading!

From the article cited: "The CIA had sent Joseph Wilson to West Africa in February 2002 to check if Iraq had tried to buy uranium from Niger, the world's third-largest producer of mined uranium..." This story about how They (with a capital "T") knew the uranium purchase thing was BS has been repeated in various news sources all around the world lately. Similar stories about Their (again with a capital "T") distorted presentation of, or out-and-out misrepresentation of, various intelligence reports abound. If you don't believe it was BS, you must be seriously committed to denying the truth. We can still argue about whether or not GW and buddies made a good decision about whether and when to invade Iraq, but I don't think anybody can credibly argue that we were not fed a lot of B.S. about the reasons why.

Greg's got it right. Just go ahead and cut it, melt it, and as it cools you just roll it between your fingertips (cord) or pinch it (webbing).

Come on, Greg: I bet you were all over them with the French kisses, too. "You love me more than Nathan, don't you?"

"Please, honey, don't let me go..."

Careful there, Cavey. Your partner GregW was admonishing me about the evils of "aggressive route cleaning" just the other day. You never know who might turn out to be a tree hugger. Hell, I bet you even hugged a tree up there on Mount JungleGym.

Right... And those Japanese responsible were prosecuted as war criminals. If the cause of death of some detainees are proven to be homicide then I hope those responsible will be similarly brought to account. "In March, Amnesty wrote to President Bush to complain about the treatment of detainees after US military officials reportedly confirmed that post-mortem reports in the cases of the two men who died at Bagram gave cause of death as 'homicide' and 'blunt force injuries'. " No. If there had POW status this wouldn't be a problem, as they would have some legal status, rights and recourse, but they don't. The classification of "enemy noncombatant" has no legal standing, largely because it was invented after 9/11 and is not recognised internationally. You just don't get it. It's a totally different thing because We are America, damn it! We don't need them; they need us.

Dude! It's the middle of the summer. Skip Yosemite and head for the Bugaboos! There are spectacular climbs there, starting at 5.4, and you won't fry. The weather tends to be poor, so its a good idea to plan to spend a week or ten days there and take a couple of good books -- but the hut is great. Just don't forget the chicken wire to keep the porcupines away from your car.

Greg: I found a 300 foot stretch of vertical treeclimbing on Mt. Junglefuck. A grove of cedars formed perfect stair-steps, each one with a pistolbutt forming a perfect flat stair tread with a convenient handrail next to it (they were growing outward and then upward from rock, so the base of each tree was shaped like a pistol with the handle agains the rock and the barrel pointing up) . Are these the kind of friends you made?

Sorry you missed it, Wayne. On Saturday, July 5, I went back to see if some gym-honed climbers could have their way with it. Low and behold, they did. Up to this point, various talented climbers from cc.com have managed to climb the crux pitch after taking a fall or a hang, but the famed Jason Gunderson flashed the crux moves for the first sporto on-sight redpoint ascent and the even more famous Rod Fox managed to hesitate and match feet right in the middle of the crux step-up move! They get the glory, not you. Their secret? It's all about energy and freeing the inner climber within. Here's Rod, visualizing success prior to starting up pitch 3. Here's the obligatory buttshot of Jason on the crux. And here's a picture looking down at Rod in the same location. I lead the next pitch with only a momentary shake (not quite skechveg McRichter) (camera tilted for effect). In true sporto style, we continued on to the top of the seventh pitch before electing to forgo the last (too easy) pitch and rap off to find our friends and some cold beer left in a pool down below. Don't worry, Wayne, there's still some fun to be had up there. I'm going back to continue tinkering with the route and you're welcome to join me for a tour!

Its clear from this thread that many of us think the South Ridge is preety casual, but I wouldn't go so far as Ned and say "there is no exposure whatsoever." You could slip several hundred feet and slam into a rock, so its not quite Kansas.

Crampons are certainly NOT necessary for a climb of the south ridge of Adams -- though the above poster who said the existing steps are not likely to be very good is correct and, especially early in the day, you may well elect to use them if you have them with you. Overall, I think you will be making the day more taxing by wearing heavier boots and carrying crampons, but for the upper several hundred feet on that slope above the Lunch Counter, you might well be happy with that choice. If you can, get some strap-on aluminum crampons and wear regular hiking boots.

Goat: in your attempt to rebut my post, you have proven my point. I wrote that Fairweather professes to like debate but then expresses indignation at the willingness of someone (Gowans) to express their views. He had not said that he disagreed with Gowans so much as that he felt Gowans was wrong to say what he thought on these issues. My second main point was that you and Fairweather are all into this "we are the strongest nation on earth and that is the way it should be and everybody should do what we say" business, and that you keep thrusting these ideas at us without engaging in direct discussion. In your point-by-point rebuttal, you address neither of these points, but to assert that you have debated back and forth. However, way back on, like, page 3 o4 4 of this thread, folks were talking about our ignorance as a nation, the arrogance of our foreign policy, and whether or not it had anything to do with why people hate us, and you come into the discussion with your statement that we should not consider using fewer resources and that there is no reason we should sign any of the treaties that are sought by virtually all of the nations that we recognize as "civilized nations." Yes, these points were tangential to the main gist of the discussion, but you completely ignored the main points and jumped in with your "tired old rhetoric." Back to your point-by-point rebuttal, you write that: WTF??? Are you trying to say that your statements are no more rhetorical than those from the poster's that you call the "far leftists" on this board? Are you saying your ideas are no older than any others? Are you saying that old ideas can be good ideas? Come out and say it, man! (And, by the way, I disagree with you on both points.) And then you continue. You try to rebut my characterization of your position that we should only cooperate with those who will "hop to," and you deny that you think this but then you (for like the third time in this thread alone) assert how it is our right to only support those nations that "support our position." I have to agree with your premise, at some level, but you have to recognize, I think, that where we issue specific demands and tie those to whether or not we will give or withhold economic aid and military support, we are doing so as the richest and most powerful nation on the earth. For the nations that we manipulate this way, it is not a matter of "free choice." Clearly, you don't want to cede this point but the fact is you are advocating cooperating only with those nations that are willing to "hop to." Arguing with you is like trying to debate with a delusional schizophrenic sometimes. And then you try to debate my "newsflash" about how Gowan's "laundry list" is a set of ideas that are really quite mainstream. The nonsense of your rebuttal of this point has already been taken up by others. It's not like J. Gowans set forth the dogma of Norm Chomski or anything. Take a look at JayB's posts for an example of someone who I disagree with, but with whom I can at least have an engaged debate. The level of engagement is not measured by the number of times you can break somebody's post into pieces and then post something that in some way addresses each micropoint, but whether or not you can follow their arguments, respond, and then whether or not they can follow yours and respond. By the way: happy Fourth of July. I saw a bald eagle this morning -- in a Seattle Park. A Seattle park that is under continual development for special interest groups and is now proposed for privatization and huge areas of astroturf. I wonder if the eagle will be flying there after they have redeveloped the whole thing.

Old man- I have used a synthetic overbag over down. It works very well for winter camping, whether it be in a tent or snowcave -- the moisture mostly goes into the outer bag and your down stays quite dry (though you certainly don't need the extra warmth in a snowcave).

Ade makes a good point about counting ounces. I don't know if it has been covered or not, but to that I'll add a note that the highest fill power down may not be what you want. I don't know what his theory may be now, but as of a few years ago I remember a certain small-shop owner promoting some bags that contained FEATHERS in addition to the down, because they would help it hold loft when starting to get damp, dirty or beaten. My Feathered Friends down helios jacket, filled with some VERY LIGHT down that puffs up beautifully when fully dry and puffed up incredibly well when new, lost its original loft very quickly and goes limp when stuffed in and out of my pack every time I take a break on a ski trip (the super light fabric it is sewn of doesn't help with this issue). The same is true for my light weight down bag made of high fill-power down and a very light shell -- get the slightest moisture on it such as when sleeping in a damp or frosty tent or crawl inside with weat clothes on, and it flattens considerably. This issue was not nearly so great with prior down jackets and sleeping bags that I have had which were filled with down that was not quite so light and had a shell that was not quite so thin. (Yes, to compensate for the thin shell fabric I could always use a shell coat or a bivvy bag, but this would add more than the few extra ounces that would come from a slightly better shell on the coat or sleeping bag itself.) For the way I use these products, the measured loft in dry, clean, and new conditions is far from the actual loft I get in the field and an extra ounce or three of weight assciated with a more water resistent shell or some sturdier feathers might actually be a plus. Lighter may not always equal better, but shave a few grams off the published weight of a product and lots of people will buy a pack or a sleeping bag or a carabiner based on that factor alone.

Jake - Don't expect to find much ice climbing in the Olympics. I don't believe there are any ice faces at all, and any glaciers that have icefalls are a long way from the road so it may not be worth it to carry ice climbing gear just for some serac practice. There are some beautiful peaks in the range, though, and the Olympus group in particular is quite alpine with glaciers flowing off the peaks in all directions. For easy access, the east flank of the range has several peaks that are not glaciated but which have very enjoyable moderate rock routes, and the backpacking opportunites are superb. The guidebook provides scant information and is out of date, although I am not sure there has been much new route activity and the only drawback there would be that some of the access information will be incorrect.

Summer - I have some things to take care of before the long weekend, but I'm done whenever I want to be. I'd be interested in heading out there, say, at 3:00, and I'd be more interested in Little Si than Exit 38, but mainly I just want to go out and get some exercise.

How long are you and "some folks" going to stay?

Fairweather: Although you say you like the debate and you claim to be proud of what a free society this is, you suggest that one who can't even vote here should not "inject theirself" into politics here and you don't think Gowans should be saying those things because it shows that he is rude and unappreciative. I don't know whether Gowans has injected himself into our politics (spraying on this site doesn't in my mind constitute being involved in politics), but why shouldn't he? It looks to me as if you and your pal Mountain Goat refuse to directly engage with people who disagree with you, but instead keep flinging the same old tired rhetoric that we've read here so many times before. We know you think that anybody who criticizes the Administration is unAmerican and the U.S. should not enter into cooperative relationships with any nation that won't hop to our command and that we should only maintain those relationships as long as they suit our immediate purposes -- but let's see some discussion here even if it is only for amusement's sake. Newsflash: Gowans' "over the top" laundry list is really a rather mild set of ideas probably shared by nearly half of all Americans. It is not some far leftist manifesto.

I bet he WAS right. What was that technique? Piolet ramasse or something like that ? It usually works...

I don't know about skipping out of the office at noon, but after work I'd go.

Bummer. I pointed out the earlier error to Jim and he was initially skeptical but after I showed him some photos he correctly labelled it in Select Climbs, and then I pointed it out to Fred and perhaps he has it mislabeled in the new Green guide. I'll have to check it out... meanwhile, blame the confusion on me. I was only trying to help - honest.

Yes, I've climbed little snow walls for fun even though I should probably not admit it because on this bulletin board there was not long ago a hell of a lot of ridicule of a certain cc.comer for doing just that. And I know that people go out and practice the pluge step and step-kicking and the like, so my statement that "I've never heard of anybody going to Paradise to practice climbing up and down snowbanks" was a little sloppy. What I should have said was that "I've never heard of anyboy becoming competent on snow" by practicing it in a "workshop" or on day-trips to Paradise. To get competent at snow-travel, I think you have to climb up and down lots of mountains, with and without a pack, with and without proper mountain boots or crampons or ice axe, and in a variety of different snow conditions and settings. It is an art, not a science. That is why I said that I don't really disagree with Alipine K that the decision to use ski poles rather than an axe depends on how you feel, but I suggested that we not confuse confidence with competence.