Jump to content


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by bDubyaH

  1. There is a lot of junk science and bias in the whole global warming debate. It makes it very difficult to know exactly what the whole truth is. I definitely favor more solid research in climate studies.



    this was a bit of my response to a flipant comment by our congressman "I don't believe it is our fault. That's an opinion," Young said. "It's as sound as any scientist's."

    said about a report from this group. The Arctic Climate Impact Assessment was commissioned by the Arctic Council, an international commission representing eight countries, including the United States, and six indigenous groups. About 300 scientists participated, with scientists from Alaska playing a major part.


    this is an international group providing overwhelming evidence that humans are influencing the arctic enviro (making it warmer) and he thinks his opinion carries as much weight. this is the same sort of thing that is going on with the whole creationist/id thing (to try and get this back OT). opinions are taking the place of science.

  2. I'm not defending "creationism" here - but sometimes it is useful to find a common ground.

    i didn't get the vibe that you were defending it, and i am all for common ground. my beef is that the creationist/id club isn't using standardized tactics (peer-reviewed science) to get their message in schools. having spent the last decade training to be a scientist this really raises my hackles. i don't know if science has just done a really poor job educating the public on how these methods work or whether the public is just swayed by anything that sounds remotely scientific. but then i live in a state where our congressman is of the opinion that global warming is not influencing the arctic...this after he was given a peer-reviewed report from top arctic climatologists. so what do i know

  3. I took AP biology in 10th grade. That was really the only class where evolution was taught in elementary/secondary education - that I can recall, and it constituted a really small portion of the course material. I don't see a problem with deferring this subject matter until college for those areas where this is a sensitive issue, or at least allowing for an opt-out from students. It's really a small part of science curriculum in the big scheme of things. As a caveat I assume we are all talking about macro-evolution here...


    kask, i'm rather surprised. while evolution may be a small part of the science curriculum, it is of vast importance and underlies damn near everything taught in a secondary biology class. particularly AP, which usually tend towards cellular function and anatomy (i may be wrong it has been quite a while). i imagine genetics comes in to play even more these days than back in my day, so how does one go about explainng that we have essentially the same make-up as every other mammal particularly at the earliest (fetal) developmental stages. for that matter why go cut up cats and pigs to learn about anatomy...how is it related to us.

    in short i think that it is of huge importance to present the underlying theory, particularly to people who may not go on to college.

  4. So a friend of mine snowboards, and snowshoes to get there.

    He claims he keeps up with his telemark brethren.

    I have not gone yet, but plan to real soon now.

    I think I will snowshoe, then jump on my snowboard.


    Can I expect to keep up with the ski crowd on a bc tour?

    Would anyone recommend this approach on a longer (5 day or so) backcountry tour covering about 20 miles?


    unless the snow is really deep or really steep or the tele'ers are meek, or your friend is a cardio monster his claims are junk. i used to do the bootpack/snowshoe to snowboard thing...now i tele. for a reason, it's better in the bc.


    if the bc tour is mostly going into an area staying there and getting turns the snowshoes should work ok, if it is more of a moe camp everyday sort of thing it won't be as fun for you. my $0.02

  5. I'd look at the Integral Designs knockoff of the Bibler.

    those are great tents, i haven't used the eldo, but have used the bombshelter, great tent thumbs_up.gif

    i own the mt. hardwear, but it was from sponsorship so take my opinion as you wish, i like it, nice and bright, the walls will weep on you big time, be sure to bring a towel along

    don't think you can go wrong with any of the 3

  6. it is my understanding that creationism is a christian based theory, coming from the bible. which ought to make all creationists christians...if their not they're really confused people.

    ID is a slightly different animal, where they have taken out the heavy christian emphasis in order to propogate its use in schools. it is nontheless a christian backed idea.


    what does this prove? don't know, although i could go out on a limb and say that yes all creationists are christians and i would wager that i would be right a significant amount of the time (alpha = 0.05, hell i'd even give it alpha = 0.01)


    as far as your english comprehension, hell i can't even keep track of where this spray is/has gone.

  7. have to agree with dru here. i know plenty of christians who are not creationists, but have yet to meet a single creationist who does not see themselves as a good christian.


    No-one was arguing this. What would this prove anyways?


    Answer this then. Why were you jumping on this when no-one claimed it.


    Also, what would this prove?

    scott, this question is in reference to a comment i made. and to be quite honest i don't understand the question

  8. scott, back a page you pulled something i stated into a question for dru. is this what you are referring to or am i just lost in bogged down cyber space?

    either way i am guessing that you are intelligent enough to know that creationism is some silly ass shit that shouldn't usurp evolution, since it has no scientific backing. if not, then i laugh mercilessly at you...cause that's the kind of ass i am


  9. back to the original post

    Personally, I think the Keebler eleves are the result of an unholy union between wood elves and the Pillsbury Dough Boy. Current Darwinian 'theory' provides no evidence to the contrary. I demand my views be taught in a 'fair and balanced' manner.....

    foraker, i agree. i believe this should be taught in schools as well, if we get enough people to think the same thing we will have the dominant paradigm. we got work to do...let's rally

  10. The converse does not apply. "All creationists are Christians" does not mean that "All Christians are creationists". The second is demonstrably false but we are discussing the first. Geek_em8.gif


    have to agree with dru here. i know plenty of christians who are not creationists, but have yet to meet a single creationist who does not see themselves as a good christian.

    creationism has not stood up against the rigors of science well, that is why evolution is the dominant theory. the problem with ID and whatnot is not that it exists and is a competing theory, every scientist worth his/her salt welcomes competing theories. the problem is that the people driving the current round of creationism are circumventing the scientific process, by using big words at public school meetings and convincing the general non-scientific public that evolution doesn't explain it all. there is an agreed upon scientific process that works pretty darn well. if the ID foks can validate their theory via this process, i will accept it, but they haven't therefore they need to step back and let the dominant theory remain.

  11. especially if you do much resort skiing when there isn't a bunch of pow. there are some days where a good carving ski or an all-mountain/park ski are much more fun than a fatty.

    oops, i don't have this "problem"...all bc all the time

  12. if you are looking for more of a ski mountaineering setup i would get AT gear with the older(slightly) silvretta. this will allow you to use any climbing boot that takes step-in crampons. i have a number of friends who use these bindings with AT boots as their regular bc ski set-up, and they keep up just fine.

    i tele so i'm biased, but you can pretty much mountaineer any peak in tele boots. wouldn't want to be doing full apline style climbing or anything like that, but my buddy went up mt. fairweather in his t-2's. also for big cold trips you can take a thermo liner that fits in your tele boots and in your mt boots and just swap shells when the climbing calls for it (for really long trips only....like denali). the tele learning curve is fairly steep, helps if you spend a season or two on-piste to get the skill level up, having a solid alpine background has defeintely bailed me out more than once in the steeps.

    i am also an ex-snowboarder and have seriously been considering getting a splitboard, my g-friend has one and i help her across the flats and whatnot. great if you are really into snowboarding, otherwise a bit of work. there are new stiffer boards than the voile noodle that edge better, but traversing on these fatties can be a problem. for ski mountaineering i would rule the current models out unless boarding is a. what your best at or b. all you know.


    i would reccommend you get the AT set-up, or go tele if you want to get that good internal feeling of being slightly elite...kinda like when you pass all the stopped cars as uyou ride your bike to work yelrotflmao.gif

  13. i haven't heard of anyone being on the K-L route in a while. word is that it is quite conditions dependent and the conditions haven't been good. it has seen plenty attempts over the years, with a low success rate.

  14. I wouldn't trust them, but it may be a good idea to back the screw belay up by clipping your tools into it nonetheless.

    i pretty much always do this. place the screws, then clip the axes as backups, they are there might as well use em.

  15. we got stopped flat by a huge double crevasse. not to mention a warm breeze at 3am and sluffing seracs. some friends who had been up on the route earlier in the season that year didn't even know there was a crevasse there at all. when did you head up climzalot? seems like the NW basin has been a bit squirrly the last few years.

  16. the latest i've been on Hunter was early July about 4 years ago. got turned back due to warm weather. seems like the freeze line was hovering around 10,000' if we could have gotten a cold night we could bust a move up to better terrain. But we waisted our cold weather on another peak. June should be fine if we have a decent (cool/cold) spring.

    sidenote: i believe Becky and Co. originally climbed the west ridge in July (may be mistaken). I'd go for it in June.

  17. you can get the special tips if you want, but i have jaks, which are bigger than the pr's and the metal clip has worked fine for a few seasons now. look over at telemarktips.com for a whole slough of ways to make skins stay on a twintip ski.

  18. you can modify any tool, but for my money and even more important time just buy a pair of armored gloves

    as far as axes here ya go but really you are thinking too hard about all of this. any modern axe will be more than enough to see you through several seasons of climbing. if you get into the full mixed scene then you will want the specialized tools, which you can buy later. otherwise just go bash some ice with whatever you've got and have fun. cheers!

  19. i have pulsars... and a permanately bruised pinky to show for it. the reach for all these tools is the same probably about 45cm. the difference comes from the bent shaft, which will allow you to swing/hook around bulges. the bent shaft gives your knuckles a bit of a break and i feel that it provides a slightly more natural gripping position (but not as good as say the ergos). all that said, pulsars have been around for freakin eternity, there is a reason for that, but more modern designs are defintely nicer. axar is a great tool, but my nexy set is gonna be quarks. cheers and happy knuckle bashing