sexual_chocolate

if i am to consider your statement above as a serious reply, free of subtle innuendo and camouflaged sarcasm(?), i would note that i am not "anti-bolt" per se, but i certainly advocate a judicious approach, perhaps erring on the side of restraint (I very much appreciate the existence of locales such as the Needles, SD, and grit in England etc. it's a different game, and damn interesting). i can imagine i know what you mean. but without knowing what you mean, it's hard to tell.

As I was ideating over a few things, the following thoughts came up: Was Dana's Arch protectable, or aidable clean before the bolts were added? It seems to me that promoting a clean aid ethic does more to protect the integrity of the rock (and route) than simply slamming bolts next to a crack. And if the crack doesn't protect well enough for a particular climber's free ascent aspirations, perhaps that climber needs to discuss his plans with the most qualified and skilled climbers to get some feedback on the climb's do-ability before simply getting the power tool out. I personally do feel that there are some climbs out there, very protectable, that could have some misguidedly placed bolts removed. Will I do it? Nah, too lazy, and generally I don't see over-bolting as a huge problem within areas in washington that matter.

well done, gary, you've held your own, and now I'M OFF TO INDEX FOOLS!!!!

hey i've been trying to figure out this math problem. like i always thought 1+1=2 and shit, but then this zen dude tells me it equals three or some shit and i got confused. any smart math guys around who can help me out?

most film critics started out as math smart guys i think. i'm not positive though....hey gary's a smart math guy, he might know.

dude, its a MOTHERFUCKING SNOWSTORM. IF YOU WANT TO TRY SOMETHING MOTHERFUCKING NEW, THEN OK WE'LL GO SKIING AT THE MOTHERFUCKING NEW RIVER GORGE. BUT I DON'T THINK IT ROCKS AS A SKI DESTINATION. TOO STEEP. SO FORGET IT.

is it true calculators are really hurting our education? I heard some smart guy once say they were.

either you're consciously really funny, or an uber-geek; either way, you're really funny!

Ahhh jesus you suck. fickle little bitch. no i won't climb in a fucking snowstorm. end of story. truth be told, i've always wanted to get to the new, but not in fucking february. plus, drive?? yeah right.

Hey I heard gary was pretty good at math. is this true?

call 'em. they can fly to monterrey just as easy as us.

alright dude, lets go crank.

Duuuuude!

You got a week, eh? Potrero in the end of feb sounds kinda tempting.

plus, who gives a shit about math scores. math. math! wtf? why would someone be all proud of their math scores? silly.

Just curious... How do their actions make them appear to follow "the one"? What actions are supported by "the one" they "ostensibly" follow? "The One" being Jesus right? The cornerstone for any "born-again", like Bush. So, they both preach about Jesus and salvation, hence, the appearance of virtue and godliness. My point was that they contradict the teachings of Jesus. I don't think it was "bomb thy neighbor" or "kill thine enemy" or "plunder thine enemies treasures" that Jesus was rapping about. George Bush is a cold-blooded murderer, and how "christians" can't see that is entirely due to the fact that we as humans have the uncanny ability to justify the most gross-level hypocrisies because we would rather do that than have our worldview threatened.

Hey I heard someone say that a man who is proud of his intellect is like a prisoner proud of his jail cell. And while you marinate on that for maybe a minute why don't you, is it worth marinating about what "men over X" is? She's such a little strumpet....

Just cut your fucking arm off with your new Hitachi miter saw (if it's up to the task). You don't need your arm for snowboarding.

this bitch dont rope up in snowstorms.

Pope thinks it's a wonderful sport-climb that some day he might have a shot at leading, once the Via Ferrata is in place.

You, my friend , are an unequivocal dork; I like it!

CBS, I don't think mere popularity gives any particular thingamajiggy legitimacy. I would say though that aspects of "religion" are very desirable: Love thy Neighbor, Love thyself, humility, peace, kindness; crap, who would argue with that, besides the most jaded Mortiis followers. If you look above, I never discarded "religion" as a whole. I think it can offer wonderful guidelines or objectives. Heck, who wouldn't want more peace and love and understanding in their lives! I know I do.... And I don't think one should attack religion because of the hypocrisy of its followers. Bush and Robertson etal are not good examples of religious people. One can systematically study the contradictions between their actions and the ones supported by the one they ostensibly follow.

Here we have another one?

I don't understand your comparison; perhaps if you removed the cigar from your vagina, I could understand you better?

Not if you parse it out a bit. First of all, define "religion". I'll say that the mundane and worldly expression of that word seen around us fits his initial definition: Religion is stating assertions, but I personally don't consider it complete in its reach. Secondly, science as "pursuit of truth" is somewhat specious at best, when we can't even agree what "truth" is. Thirdly, he might give "religion", in its exoteric variations, a bit too much credit when in his statement he implicitly endorses "religion" as a "pursuit" of "truth". My own eyes see too many counter-examples to make such a blanket statement. Further, I would claim that "religion", again in its exoteric forms, often in no way benefits the "devotee", instead simply making him a blinded robot mindlessly repeating beliefs handed down to him by authority, which he then needs to protect through perhaps violent measures any time he feels them threatened.