Jump to content

willstrickland

Members
  • Posts

    3512
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by willstrickland

  1. Don't mistake my sentiment here, but I need to point out: The old dads in the 50s to mid 60s weren't bolting with hand drills because of some ethical issue or prohibition under the law. The Wilderness Act was passed in 1964. Those cats were using hand drills because that was all they had.
  2. Now correct me if I'm wrong here.... It seems that alot of prospective homeowners are fed the line "the interest and taxes are fully deductible". What that seems to imply is that you simply pay that much less in taxes..."free money" so to speak. But my understanding (I don't know for sure because I don't own a home) is that those expenses are simply deducted from your taxable income, so the actual savings is whatever your tax bracket is (e.g. 28%) of that amount. So in reality you just get a discount on it. I've heard plenty of my friends buying their first home who seemed to be under the impression that those exenses didn't matter because "I get it all back in taxes anyway".
  3. The House of Saud will fall within the next 25 years. The unemployment in Saudi Arabia is staggering, especially among young men. If you think the income discrepancy here is bad, look at how the royalty there lives compared to the common man. Take a bunch of poor young men, with no avenue for escape or bettering themselves, and nothing to keep them busy. Then oppress most of their freedoms. Add fundamentalist religion and you get a powderkeg.
  4. Perot wasn't an independent, his party (Reform) is actually still recognized (Nader is using it to get on the ballot in some places I believe). And I don't believe the 17% was a record for a "third" party either...what about the Bull Moose? TR finished second behind Wilson and the Republican Taft finished third. Vote split was around 40-25-20 or thereabouts.
  5. Don't forget this one dudes...best rock in Georgia...water slides, train, laser shows, concerts, cable car, but NO CLIMBING ALLOWED!
  6. Fairweather, the first one was funny the second one is kinda lame. Oh well, 50% is pretty good....better than what Shrub got in the election. Who do you think was the most underrated?
  7. No shit? Teresa is there? Oops, gotta go...Cheney is here and we gotta meet Scalia in an undisclosed duck blind in ANWR. We gotta hurry because Dick needs to go over those Halliburton no bids and KBR overcharges before the sun comes up on Iraq and he institutes the stop loss order.
  8. I stand corrected. Still voting Libertarian.
  9. That picture is hilarious! Where is that chos..I mean crag? 3 bolts in 6 feet, justbe careful not to accidentally reach over and clip the bolts on the adjacent route, that's "off, brah".
  10. Courtesy of Greg Barnes, ASCA: Approximately AD 1300 Prehistoric Anasazis in the southwest United States drilled holes for posts and carved steps up sheer rock walls in Chaco Canyon and elsewhere, and also pounded logs into cracks to form ladders. The surviving examples are clearly in locations for use as trails. However, since the Chaco Canyon culture and others were highly advanced, it’s quite possible that even 5th class spires were ascended for recreation or religious purposes, and that the intervening centuries have erased any traces. Rock art examples are frequently found in places requiring modern 5.0-5.6 climbing to access. 1875 The hugely popular trail up Half Dome ascends a steep slab at the top, and modern hikers use large cables secured by giant bolts and steel posts. The entire dome was deemed “perfectly inaccessible” by Josiah Whitney, but in 1875 George Anderson, a trail builder from Scotland, drilled holes, pounded spikes in them, stood on them, and repeated, gaining the top in a bold feat of mountaineering (he was alone as well – no partners!). Here was the first famous case of the use of “bolts” for climbing in the U.S., in this case as points of aid as well as protection by having the rope tied into the spike below him as he went. George Anderson also did a route on Yosemite's Mt. Starr King where he used at least one protection bolt. 1911 John Otto pounded and carved his way to the top of the 350’ Independence Monument in Colorado National Monument after living at its base for five years. Installing pipes in holes and chopping holds in the soft sandstone, he made his way to the top on July 4th. Otto labored for years to attract tourists and publicize the Monument, saying “I want to see this scenery opened up to all people.” His labors paid off, and the Monument was declared and the land protected in 1911. No climber would today justify carving a vertical trail up the rock, but Otto’s achievement was amazing, and the times and ethics were quite different from today. 1933-1934 At Pinnacles National Monument, south of San Francisco, bolts were used in modern climbing for possibly the first time in the United States by David Brower, along with Hervey Voge and George Rockwood, in the first ascents of the North and South summits of Condor Crags at Pinnacles National Monument (November 1933). A year later, Brower, his brother Ralph, and Dick Leonard established the Regular Route on Tuff Dome. This route set another first, as two bolts were placed specifically to protect 5.6 free climbing. Also in 1934, the first ascent of Lower Cathedral Spire in Yosemite involved the carving of artificial holds up the edge of a flake. Unremarkable at the time, such an act would today be far more controversial than the use of bolts, and with justification, as bolts can normally be erased to the point where even a climber can not find them, while a notched flake will last until the destruction of the flake, and cannot be reversed. 1939 The first ascent of the spectacular desert monolith Shiprock is often cited as the first use of modern climbing bolts. Again, David Brower, who would in later decades become perhaps the single most influential environmentalist and conservationist in the world, was involved, and the team used bolts for belay and rappel on the desperately loose, poor quality rock. They were aware of the inherently controversial nature of bolting and hammering, and referred to themselves as “rock engineers,” a derisive term used by eastern mountaineers opposed to the new techniques being used in the West. An immense amount of information is available on the last half century of climbing in the United States, and I’ll summarize the 40s-70s very quickly, because to do justice to this period would require way too much space. Bolts have always been controversial. They were rarely used, but even when used were questioned and debated. Bolts were used for aid and to protect free climbing. Debates raged when more and more bolts were used on big walls. The debates sometimes included chopping of “excess” bolts by better climbers on subsequent ascents (later to be reversed greatly through the addition of “chicken” bolts by worse climbers). Leaving the bolt kit behind on ascents of the established big walls was the highest statement of ethics (and dangerous!); if the team was not capable of the difficult pitoncraft or free climbing of the first ascent team, they would not reach the top. Warren Harding became known for forcing aid routes up blank faces through bolts, but he had been the first to summit El Capitan, so criticism was limited. Free climbing generally had little debate since bolts were almost universally placed from stance on lead; even the addition of a few bolts to the classic Snakedike, done with permission of the first ascent team, was seen as simply allowing the amazing route to be done (somewhat) safely by others. Some tightly-bolted routes caused stirs, especially on the rare occasions when bolts were used for aid while placing the next bolt, then the route free climbed once it had been aided. A huge debate surrounded the large numbers of bolts used on the first ascent of the Dawn Wall (aka Wall of Early Morning Light) on El Capitan; for the first time, a major route was (partially)“erased,” or chopped, by the second ascent team. But, generally, all free climbing routes were done ground-up from stance, and the inherent limitations on climbing by that method produced routes which were bold, run-out, and mentally challenging. A major debate, and big bolt battles within the climbing community, occurred in the 1980s and to some extent continues to this day. Two changes brought this about: rappel bolting began, which allowed the pioneers to put up routes stretching the difficulty limits to new heights; and the advent of motorized drills allowed the immense time to drill a bolt to be cut by a factor of 50 (and effort by a nearly infinite factor). In a short time, these two developments also allowed less experienced and less advanced climbers to bolt routes, often drilling on rappel where advanced climbers could drill on lead. It also lowered the commitment level – instead of days of drilling and sore elbows and hands, a few hours produced a new route. Huge ethical battles, bolt chopping, fist-fights, and arguments raged. The very fact that bolts could so easily be installed by anyone in great quantity almost pre-determined that rappel-bolted sport climbing would win by sheer quantity. By the ‘90s, large numbers of well-bolted climbs reduced the psychological component of climbing and increased the physical component in many locations. Today many climbers routinely climb at levels that they would never conceive of on traditionally bolted face climbs, and many areas have seen wave after wave of bolting consuming nearly every available section of rock. Traditionally protected testpiece face climbs of the 1980s have often never seen a second ascent. The climbing community changed in composition, and climbers began to expect that well-protected face climbs were the rule instead of the exception. Indoor gyms appeared on the scene, and the number of climbers who had no clue at all about the seriousness and danger level on traditional routes skyrocketed. The rating system grew largely meaningless as nearly no components describing seriousness, type of climbing, and commitment were used. Today many climbers are used to thinking of themselves as“5.11 climbers,” when in fact they are not even slightly prepared for the seriousness and difficulty encountered on 5.8 climbs outside. Some routes at the 5.9 and 5.10a level in Yosemite, such as Steck/Salathé, Lost Arrow Chimney, and the Crack of Doom, are more difficult and dangerous by far than the “hardest” routes in the world, currently 5.15. Since all of the latter have lots of closely spaced bolts, there is little danger commitment required - instead, ferocious power, technical skill, and perseverance are required. However, bolt chopping continues to this day, as tightly bolted routes and new rappel stations where downclimbing was the previous norm are chopped. Debates still rage, and many climbers rappel bolt routes only to come to a later realization that they should not have done so. A tiny minority of first ascensionists continue with tradition and establish bold new routes on lead with only occasional use of bolts. Now, the pendulum may be swinging back, as more climbers turn to no-rope bouldering, and a resurging interest in ground-up traditional climbing may be occurring. It is difficult to say however, as the simple fact is that sport climbing is much safer, and even those who carry on the traditional methods often climb sport climbs on “psychological days off.” Very few climbers are capable of bold climbing at high levels, and fewer still are capable of doing so routinely. The popularity of routes has many factors, but good protection is primary, overshadowed only by rating and perhaps accessibility. Like it or not, well-protected sport climbs draw crowds, and thus land managers concentrating on bolts do so with some reason. However, Joshua Tree demonstrates that a good 5.7 crack sees endless traffic, while a tightly-bolted 5.13 never even has the grass at its base disturbed by a single footprint. The most ominous sign for climbers is that the surging popularity of climbing has brought land management agencies into the onerous task of trying to regulate climbing, as they were forced to do with hiking and backpacking a generation ago. One obvious method is to prohibit the use of bolts. The U.S. Forest Service announced that it would do just that in 1998, and retracted that announcement under the massive protests of climbers and the climbing industry. However, a Negotiated Rulemaking Committee was formed, and it could not agree on a compromise, so the Forest Service will shortly issue its new policy, which could entirely ban bolts, pitons, slings, and any other fixed climbing gear. It is important to remember what David Brower said in 1999 - that bolts are tiny and easily removed, and that the land managers have no business telling climbers what to do with bolts when they routinely allow and encourage logging, mining, grazing, oil drilling, and paving the parks for RVs and tour buses. Some environmentalists claiming to hold the moral high ground while attacking the use of bolts by climbers should look in the mirror and deal with real issues like pollution, global warming, stopping development, wilderness preservation, etc. Many climbers, from John Muir to David Brower to today, are among the strongest and most vocal environmentalists. The issue of climbing anchors is a meaningless one in the overall environment, and little climbing bolts can be removed trivially easily. Having "hikers" attack "climbers" over little bolts that no one can spot without detailed directions is an obvious divide and conquer tactic by those wishing to weaken the conservation movement. Greg Barnes
  11. Bad advice b-rock. There are plenty of reasons not to buy. The general rule of thumb is you should plan on being there at least 3 years, preferably 5. You will be paying homeowners insurance, property taxes, home maintenance and upkeep, and devoting time (how much is your free time worth to you?). You will suddenly need things like a lawn mower. You will pay closing costs, inspection fees, and many things beyond the price of the home. Once you have a home, you will need to furnish it. If your female is involved in this furnishing/decorating, your costs just went WAY up. Combine that with the fact that the housing market is WAY overheated right now, in the western cities in particular. You are not likely to find a good value. Many financial types have been warning of a housing bubble and the voices are growing louder. The only thing, IMO, that is positive on that front right now is that rates are very, very low and will be rising. If you plan to rent out your extra space, you can make it work alot easier. Studies show that renters have less fights, more sex, and more free time than homeowners. Think about that one. In general, owning your own home is very advisable. But look at the mortgage amortization tables and see how much you would actually be accruing in equity if you have to move in a certain number of years, compared to costs like closing, prop tax, homeowners ins, etc. Don't count on appreciation because a bubble will decimate those dreams.
  12. So negotiate with them. Remind them that you have fufilled all your obligations on time for the past year, and you simply forgot the date, or were out of town, or whatever. Especially if it was truly one day late, they should give you a pass for the first time if you have a year of on-time payments. If they don't want to flex, tell them that they can waive it, or you will find somewhere else to live. I GUARANTEE that it will cost them more than $50 in lost rent, time to show it, time to process a new tenant, cleaning costs, etc. Or you could just leave a flaming bag of poo on your landlord's doorstep. Or pay it in pennies.
  13. Best: Teddy Roosevelt or Jefferson. Most underrated: Eisenhower.
  14. You know what's odd about those "Swift Boat Veterans Against Kerry" ? Not one of them actually served WITH him. I saw a former CO quoted, and the officer who took command of his boat after Kerry returned to the US. I've not heard any of the men actually served under him, on his crew say anything detrimental about his service. It's easy to criticize when your in the rear with the gear. Show me one of his own men criticizing him and I'll put some stock in it. I'm voting Libertarian.
  15. willstrickland

    IT STARTED!!

    We can't see it up here
  16. Saw Dan Larson in the "who's online" last week. Started to PM him and ask what all he's climbed in the last couple of years and what (if anything) besides Ranier. Then I though, "nah, who cares, HE SUCKS".
  17. So tell me again what this has to do with Iraq? Sure skippy, let's do that. Funny how that works. Bush Sr. led us into Gulf WarI, Iraq never attacked us. Yes, and Bush41 never even finished Gulf War I. But Shrub started Gulf War II, and it's deja-vu all over again, Iraq never attacked us. That's funny, last I checked Afghanistan is run by warlords in the opium trade, and Iraq is an occupied nation. Hmm, last I checked those were IAEA inspectors. And if inspectors work there as a alternative to bloodshed, then why not in Iraq? Really? I seem to remember two separate prolonged sniper incidents, one in DC and one in Ohio. Making a good run at it anyway. Did Janet land on a aircraft carrier and proclaim "Mission Accomplished" 1/4 of the way through the affair? Hmm, yet Hillary managed to find something. Ahh yes, "take" Iraq. I suppose that occurs when armed resitance ceases? Still waiting. Perhaps if they had actually recounted the votes in Florida and not engaged in shady practices to strike african americans from the voter roles in the first place, there would be no Bush43. Look, I'm just playing devil's advocate here...but if you're going to refute the "worst in history" claim, a simpleton rant from a college republican probably isn't the best place to start. You've used the equivalent of a young Cal Thomas. Try some of the more intelligent policy wonks and writers. Kristol, Brooks, etc.
  18. Good point Josh and Jon. One of the outposts protecting our collective asses is right down the road from me. And any of you that use GPS are using US military technology and sattelites. Remember that the next time you're navigating in a whiteout or heavy veg.
  19. willstrickland

    chatter

    Howdy doody time
  20. Thanks Loren. I should have paid closer attention, the ones I'm considering buying are the Extreme S, rather than the regular S. However, I found a pair of the old Trango Extremes like jjd has in the photo there for pretty cheap, new. Anyone climbed in both the old Extremes and the Extreme S? Prefer one over the other, etc?
  21. The "news" came out last August. The source was supposed to be one of his aides/confidants. Powell denied it, saying he served "at the pleasure of the president" or something vaugely homoerotic like that. It's more or less standard fare for Sec State to serve one term and move on. What interested me was that all the speculation around the time the "news" came out was that Condi would be his replacement as Sec State. Now the word on the street is that she's moving along as well. I'm interested in who would be the next choice (assuming that Bush "wins" another election).
  22. Fat Teddy, as a staunch supporter of the Bush admin, tell me: Will Condi Rice and Colin Powell serve another stint if Bush is re-elected? And if no (because everything I'm hearing indicates that they will not) why would they decline the honor? I have my own cynical beliefs of why, but I want to hear from the pro-Bush side.
  23. RE: the HR monitors. I've checked the ones on the machines...stairmaster, bike, etc against what my watch/strap said. They are pretty close, within a couple of bpm.
  24. The question is not whether Natl Guard service is honorable - it is, no doubt. The question with Bush is: Was it immoral and/or cowardly to use his family influence to bypass the waiting list when he otherwise stood a very good chance of going to Vietnam. As I've said before, any legislator will have his voting record used against him because voting records do not necessarily represent their stance on issues. EX: You vote against a military spending bill that has tons of pork riders and ridiculous projects (the rental of fueling tanker planes comes to mind) and you are labeled "weak on defense". It's the curse of the legislator. I don't like Kerry. I don't like Bush. If I were living in WA or OR, I'd vote for Kerry. With a GOP controlled congress, he can't inflict much radical change and I can't stomach the idea of 4 more years of Bush. I think he can hold down the fort until McCain can take the helm in '08. Since I live in AK, where Bush will easily win the state, I will vote my true preference - Libertarian. I'd love to see a McCain/Powell ticket in 2008. I would volunteer for that campaign.
  25. Well shazam! I didn't have any trouble locating them: http://www.johnkerry.com/about/military_records.html Pope do you think that hurdling over thousands of names on the Guard waiting list was EASY? Shit bro, we're talking about a man with jumping skills on par with Carl Lewis and Bob Beaman.
×
×
  • Create New...