Uncle_Tricky

Green groweth high on the mountain, aspiring to height and light, and so do roots strive earthward. But the wind, which we do not see, tortures and bends it in whatever direction it pleases. But it is by the invisible fungidelic hand that we are bent and tortured the best. What do I want up high? I dwell too near the realm of the clouds, waiting for the first strike of green lightening hallucinations. This thread is about Washington trips, right? [ 09-23-2002, 04:43 PM: Message edited by: Uncle Tricky ]

With both feet I stand firmly on ground, on eternal ground, on hard primeval rock, on this highest hardest primeval mountain range to which all the winds come. And even though what I do up here is folly, is it still better than if I became solemn down there from waiting? Here ye high on the hill I be a swaggering wrathsnorter, a holy howling storm out of the mountains, an impatient one who shouts down into the valleys: "listen up or I shall whip you with the scourge of god and eat ye provisions!" Thus spoke Zarathustra-------> [ 09-23-2002, 05:21 PM: Message edited by: Uncle Tricky ]

Not only one sun had set for me. A path that ascended defiantly through stones, malicious, lonely, not cheered by herb or shrub. Upward--defying the spirit of gravity, my devil and archenemy. You threw yourself up high, but evey stone that is thrown must fall. Sentanced to yourself and your own stoning. Thus spoke Zarathustra.

Whoever climbs high mountains laughs at all the tragic plays and tragic seriousness. And when I saw my devil I found him serious, thorough, profound and solemn: it was the spirit of gravity--through him all things fall. Not by wrath does one kill but by laughter. Come, let us kill the spirit of gravity! Thus spoke Zarathustra.

In the mountains the shortest way is from peak to peak: but for that one must have long legs. This cloud which I see beneath me, this blackness and gravity at which I laugh--this is your thundercloud. Thus spoke Zarathustra.

Budding Prospects -- TC Boyle The River Why and The Brothers K -- David James Duncan A Fools Progress -- Abbey People of the Deer -- Farley Mowat The Revolt of the Cockroach People -- Oscar Zeta Acosta (Acosta was Hunter S. Thompson's "samoan attorney" in Fear and Loathing.) A History of Warfare -- John Keegan Beyond the Vertical -- Layton Kor Of Men and Mountains -- William O. Douglas

Trapped in spray? Float and carry a snafflehound! Avoid rapid panicky movements at all costs if you fall into spray such as a thread of this nature. Lie on your back and spread your arms as you would to float in water. Safer or saner companions can use branches or material like canvas as a platform to get nearer to you. A rope is always handy for the extraction of spray victims. If you are on your own you need to have a sturdy snafflehound with you for leverage. To get out by yourself, you should put the snafflehound perpedicular to the spray and pull yourself over it so that it is beneath your back. You should stop sinking after a while - spray is much denser that salt water and humans can easily float in it - at which point you should slide the snafflehound beneath your hips and slowly raise each leg out of the spray. Once out, roll slowly over the spray onto a less treacherous surface. Note: This spray extraction technique is currently under boycott by the People for Ethical Treatment of Snafflehounds (PETS). [ 09-18-2002, 08:05 PM: Message edited by: Uncle Tricky ]

I didn't realized that SHUT THE FUCK UP now came in a can. Is it "dolphin friendly"? The freeze dried variety ain't so bad--if you mix it with corned beef and hash! "Mommy, what's for dinner?" "SHUT THE FUCK UP, dear."

Let's face it, humanity is a plague upon the globe, a cancer on the planet, a pox on all our houses! Too many of the indicators of our growth and destruction of the planet are pegged at "exponential." Will we destroy the earth? Hell no. We will destroy ourselves and the earth will keep on spinning round the sun til it's swallowed by the great horny toad in the sky. Step back one moment, gentle readers, and look at people as just another species of critter running around eating, copulating and crapping. Never has one species been so outta whack with the rest. Naively, we believe that science will save us from biology, so we rush to the future, and whoa, what's that if it ain't air under our feet? Is that the last thot of a lemming before it plunges ass over teacup into mother ocean? Oh yeah, nature has a way of correcting excesses, and we my friends are soon to stand corrected like the lovely Ms. Applebee corrected the crap out of my seventh grade math test. Yup, that dea woman was an avenging angel of red marker destruction. I think we'd all agree that there is a common sensical solution to all of these problems we've discussed for far in this brain bending thread. It's obvious we need one benevolent socialist world government, a world court, and a world army with teeth that will swoop down like a big-eared brown bat in the middle of the darkest hour and save us from ourselves. Yeah, sure there will probably be some people that resist the idea of global enlightenment at first. But there are plenty of gulag archipelagos out there where the world government can send these terrorist dissadents for a period of psychological retraining. While we may disagree as to the exact nature of the problems facing us, it's encouraging that we all agree that an all powerful UN is the solution. "In the next century, nations as we know them will be obsolete; all states will recognize a single, global authority. National sovereignty wasn't such a great idea after all." Strobe Talbot, President Clinton's Deputy Secretary of State, as quoted in Time, July 20th, l992.

Mtngoat wrote: quote: Since these issues are entirely value based in personal views, with no way of determining objective positions (Since objectivism rejects feelings as proof) there is really no way to comment. So where do the paths of objectivism and climbing cross? Is it true the Objectivist axioms are set up in such a way that they are irrefutable? Does anyone trying to object to them have to implicitly assume them even before he or she can formulate a counter-argument? Where is the line that divides things that are based on objective Truth and those that are based "entirely on personal views" as you say? Does it depend on where you are standing? How bout giving me three example of each and explaining where Truth stops and personal views take over. I'm also curious about objectivism would operate in a universe devoid of human existence. Is it a natural law? Is man really a tabula rasa upon birth? Is it possible to refute the so-called Universal Refutation of Philosophy? Is it logically impossible for me to be aware of anything unreal? Is the identity of a thing identical with its properties? Is there is only one reality, namely the way things are? Do you regard phenomenology as the dookie in the pool at the objectivist barbecue? Are we really the only animals capable of logic, and therefore supposedly acting on the basis of rationality rather than some chaotic evolutionary biological imperitive? So objectivism will show you the Truth! and provide you with a unified field theory for making moral and rational judgements when it comes to eveything besides climbing? Bummer, I was hoping you'd just finished the tedious task of supergluing the 11th commandment back together! [ 09-17-2002, 04:41 PM: Message edited by: Uncle Tricky ]

The giardia in the Nalgene bottle of MtnGoat's cultic devotion to philosophy of Objectivism is not in the use of reason, or in the emphasis on individuality, or in the belief that humans are self motivated, or in the conviction that capitalism is the ideal system. The wet runout rhetorical slab that faces MtnGoat is the belief that absolute knowledge and final Truths are attainable through reason, and therefore there can be absolute right and wrong knowledge, and absolute moral and immoral thought and action. For MtnGoat, once a principle has been discovered through reason to be True, that is the end of the discussion. If you disagree with the principle, then your reasoning is flawed. So, MtnGoat, let's hear the objectivist take on bolting issues and sport climbing. Using Reason, what conclusions of absolute Truth or moral Right or Wrong have you arrived at in regards to these topics? ------ "We objectivists are not a cult in the literal, dictionary sense of the word, but certainly there was a cultish aspect to our world . . . . We were a group organized around a charismatic leader (Ayn Rand), whose members judged one another's character chiefly by loyalty to that leader and to her ideas" Nathaniel Branden, Rand's chosen intellectual heir. [ 09-17-2002, 02:47 PM: Message edited by: Uncle Tricky ]

MtnGoat, you seem uninterested in refuting any of the a priori truths that I've stated thus far. MtnGoat wrote: "No, we're going after him [saddam] because he's a worse, less principled threat than we are." Are you trying to say we're an exceptional, differently-principled threat to the world? ----- "A snafflehound must nevertheless make himself feared in such a manner that he will avoid hatred, even if he does not acquire love; since to be feared and not to be hated can very well be combined..."

Sorry to have reprecipitated this over-howed row. Anyway, I'm beginning to believe that MtnGoat and DFA are auto response bots created by MIT grad students. Complex logarithms, but GIGO as they say...

TV is the most powerful weapon in our high tech arsenal. "Thus, those skilled in war subdue the enemy's army without battle. They capture the cities without assaulting them and overthrow the state without protracted operations." (More Sun Tzu)

Baaaaa! Baaaaa! Actually, I think that after we invade and conquer Iraq, we should head East and take out Iran, the second leg of the Axis of Evil. After that, we should recognize what's plainly staring us in the face and invade Saudi Arabia. After all, that's where most of the money and terrorists came from anyway. And then we should invade Pakistan, because it's ruled by an evil dictator, who has admitted posessing weapons of mass destruction in the form of nukes. Plus Pakistan is a hotbed of Islamic fundamentalists, so occupying it would make us safer. And of course we can't forget about North Korea, those terrorists almost beat Ono in speed skating. And hell, while we're in the hood, China is just begging to be liberated.... Sound like a plan that will fit our nation's cold strategic interests? ---- "For to win one hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the acme of skill. To subdue the enemy without fighting is the acme of skill." Sun Tzu, the Art of War

quote: SK wrote: what is it that we do when the government of a people is evil? It depends. If we think their evil helps our good, like Saddam when he was fighting Iran, or Osama when he was fighting the Soviets in Afghanistan, then we give them weapons and training and money. Or, if its a brutal but effective dictatorship serves our strategic or economic needs, like Saudi Arabia, we'll help them consolidate their grip on power, sure that a friendly evil dictator is preferable to a hostile democracy. And its worked real swell, eh? With friends like we bought, who needs enemies! ---- "one calleth retreat what another calleth strategic redeployment..." "Run away!!!" [ 09-16-2002, 12:10 PM: Message edited by: Uncle Tricky ]

W on global warming: "We'll get used to it." Now that's some classic plain talkin straight shootin truth, and damn funny to boot!

Wha? I've already submitted three candidates that could do the job as well as any shrubby bush!

And the winner for the Righteous Well Armed Dream Team Ticket for 2004 is......... Charlton for Prez: and Ted for VP: [ 09-16-2002, 03:16 PM: Message edited by: Uncle Tricky ]

When neither fly fishing nor bottom fishing can be practiced, in consequence of certain forbidding circumstances of water and season, trolling can be resorted to as an excellent substitute. The best general bait for all sorts of trolling is the Clinton. The baits must be strong and lively, and placed on the hooks with as little injury to them as possible. Allow the bait to swim, here and there, generally at mid-water, but in deep places, deeper, drawing it up gently to the surface now and then, letting it sink again and guiding it to the best looking spots of the locality. The merit of Clinton bait is that is allows the troller to strike quickly, before the fastidious fish suspecting something wrong, has time to eject the bait from his mouth. [ 09-16-2002, 02:49 PM: Message edited by: Uncle Tricky ]

What we need right now is a leader who will feel our pain. I say we change the constitution to bring back a leader with real vision, leadership and integrity!

quote: Veggie wrote: Yep, Bush is a good leader in these difficult times. Tell me who you'd think would be better

Spray is fun. I'm all for Machiavellian solutions, including war, assuming they work. "war, adventure, hunting, dancing....all involve vigorous, free, joyful activity." (Nietzsche) "one should never allow chaos to develop in order to avoid going to war, because one does not avoid a war but instead puts it off to his disadvantage." (Machiavelli) "you may not ber interested in war, but war is interested in you." (Trotsky)

There's also 10 or 12 selected climbs covered in Nelson's Classics Vol 2. Tieton is also covered in the WA Rock book, tho not very completely or accuratly.

Ms. Leithal, congratulations on your semiannual post! I see our conversation induced you to participate in this wonderful adventure we call cc.com. I'm looking forward to your April 2003 post already!