catbirdseat

Fenderfour?

I think they are making too much of the size thing. Size is one of those traits that can change very rapidly with relatively minor genetic alterations.

Similarities — whether of DNA, anatomy, embryonic development, or anything else — are better explained in terms of creation by a common Designer than by evolutionary relationship. The great differences between organisms are of greater significance than the similarities, and evolutionism has no explanation for these if they all are assumed to have had the same ancestor. How could these great gaps between kinds ever arise at all, by any natural process? One studies relationships by looking at both similarities and differences. We study evolution by making some assumtions about the rate at which differences arise (which we validate when we can, such as through the fossil record). The greater the differences the greater the evolutionary distance, i.e. time has elapsed since the common ancestor lived on earth. If we look at the accumulation of genetic markers in the Y-chromosome and mitochondria of modern man (more recent than 30,000 years) we can study his geographical migrations through time from the common ancestor in Africa. We can compare the data we get to similarities in languages. Furthermore we can also use radiocarbon dating of remains. All three of these methods agree fairly well. Extend this to the study of more ancient and distantly related hominids. The genetic differences accumulate to the point that they become significant enough to define a species boundary. As different as the many "races" of man may seem to each other there is really little difference. We know that within populations of people there is much more genetic variation than between populations. The reverse is true when comparing different species.

The most radical test was a belay loop cut 75-80%. It failed at 8 kN. This is a lot more force than one can exert using any belay device. Take home message is that minor wear and tear is not a concern.

Joseph, your definition of sport climbing is quite different from mine. I don't believe sport climbing naturally equates to bad behavior.

You forgot the poll option, "Chop the route only after you've had a chance to climb it".

I just wanted to report that the Everett Mountaineers put a crew of eleven on the Eightmile Trail to Three O'Clock Rock as part of National Trails Day on June 2nd. The work focused on removing downed trees and also some tread work. I haven't been up there to see the work yet myself. Anyone been up there? How's it look?

There once was a clothing maker named Snow Lion out of Berkley, CA. Holubar was selling close out down parkas following the demise of Snow Lion- $40 for a $100 jacket. There were two left, a large (blue) and an extra large (rust orange). My brother and I each decided to buy one. Even though I wore a large, I let my brother have the large and I took the extra large, since I was a little bigger than he. We took our new parkas on a backpacking trip in the Sierra Nevada range. We each strapped the parkas in their stuff sacks to the back of our packs because we didn't have room inside. I remember telling my brother to double tie the jacket, but he didn't listen. When we pulled off the trail for a rest break, his jacket was gone. We all hiked back and searched for that jacket, but never found it. It likely bounded down a slope. Here it is 25 years later and I still have my orange jacket and seldom wear it because it is too warm.

A lot of those proposed set-ups were just intellectual exercises thrown out there for discussion. People love being creative, if not always practical. Anchors will always be a compromise between equalization, extension and complexity. I think the Equallette isn't too bad when it comes to set-up time, provided that the cord is carried with the limiter knots already tied on it. The problem with that is that is if you wanted to go back to the conventional tie-off method, it would take time to remove those knots. I've worked with teaching the Equallette to novices and to my surprise, they don't have any more trouble learning it than the tie-off method. They seem to be able to tie it about as fast too.

Hawkeye69, you misread what he said. He said "natural lines", not "natural rock". There is a big difference.

We were climbing at Castle Rock last weekend and met another party of climbers who told us they had been up at Midnight Rock, but had been forced to withdraw because of nesting falcons. "Were you attacked by the falcons?" "No, but we would have been had we not left. They looked very agitated." "Did you not see any signs warning of a falcon closure?" "No we didn't see any signs. We went up from the top of Castle Rock". "Hmmm, I suppose it is possible that someone removed the signs". Later, I saw that all the signs were still in place in three different locations.

I should point out that the best location to place said yellow TCU is also the best location for a finger jam. I'm sure that whoever removed the hanger was thinking that the route protects fine with gear, but the result was to effectively make the route harder. Without that finger jam it really is harder. Perhaps there is another place that gear could go? The corner crack below is quite thin and it would require very small cams. Has anyone else done this route? The orange TCU he mentions is not high enough by itself to keep you from breaking an ankle on a ledge before you can pull the crux.

I get itchy just thinking about it. I wouldn't do that unless I were wearing a moon suit.

I left a pair of prescription safety glasses on a plane. My name and phone number were even on the case. I called them immediately that night and was told they could not recover them for me. They just give away all eyeglasses they find. I was pissed off. If I remember correctly this was United Airlines. I doubt any other US airlines are any better. All US carriers are bad.

Where is bobby_peru?

The idea of the equallette and the duoglide was that the sliding-x suffered from too much friction because of the twist. The knots serve several functions. 1) They act as limiters to reduce extension. 2) They prevent failure of the system just as the twist does in a sliding-x. 3) They isolate the cord or sling into independent segments. By putting two carabiners instead of one, there is redundancy. A single strand can be cut in any place without total failure of the anchor. By the way, the equallette has more effective length because you are no longer sending two strands to each piece, but rather one, since you are using a clove hitch. How much cord is used will depend on how far apart the pieces are.

So no one here makes a double sliding X for a 3-piece anchor using a cordelette? I don't. It has too much potential for extension. The other issue with it is that it doesn't really equalize as well as you'd expect. There is so much friction between strands that it doesn't test out much better than a tied off cordellette.

Jens, I'd be happy to give you a lift to a Pub Club, if we ever have another one. Isn't it about time? Dave!

Next time try milk. It works better than water, at least in rinsing your mouth, so it should work in...other applications involving removal of chili residue.

Nothing funny or strange about it. Ropes are measured in meters. It's less hassle to use meters.

Thanks for the great pictures. That's the Kautz trip I remember so well from last year. Looks like it is getting more and more difficult to get onto the route.

There are other reasons besides those in the Moyer report to use Nylon rather than high strength cord. These have to do with distribution of force among anchor points as described by Long in his new anchors book.

I'll challenge you to equalize three pieces with your two slings faster than I can do it with my cordellette. The only exception would be three very closely spaced pieces that could be equalized with a single double length runner. And you can't do it faster using the rope either, at least not if you do it right.

I said to the man are you trying to tempt me? Because I come from the Land of Plenty.