As a devout Christian I find this post insulting and shameful. I am motivated to write in because the jihad is a muslim ideal and any Christian that aligns himself with these beliefs is insulting the Lord. As a Christian you should hold yourself to higher ideals then this. By representing yourself as a holy warrior executing violent acts is exactly what Christianity is not based on. To the man who uses a holy symbol as his avatar for this site, you should not only know better but act better. God demands you worship none other then him and by dressing up and acting this way, you insult him. The jihad follow a God that is much different then ours. You should have been a bigger man then this. I would not expect this from a fellow Christian, I am ashamed.There are many tasteless jokes posted on this site but none that disgrace my faith and other Christians as much as your actions. You should spend a little more time in church then at the crag and review what your really are made of…as a son of God, and as a good person.
'Crazyclimber'- I hope that was a parody, but if not, I'm here to remind you that god didn't demand anything- his followers and scribes did. I'm not game for letting a figment of someone else's imagination dictate the appropriateness of my humor or that of the GP. I myself was mildly amused by this.
Said previously in another post: "God demands you worship none other then him and by dressing up and acting this way, you insult him. The jihad follow a God that is much different then ours. You should have been a bigger man then this. I would not expect this from a fellow Christian, I am ashamed.There are many tasteless jokes posted on this site but none that disgrace my faith and other Christians as much as your actions. You should spend a little more time in church then at the crag and review what your really are made of…as a son of God, and as a good person."
Well, I offer you the following: James 3 - Taming the Tongue "Not many of you should become teachers, my fellow believers, because you know that we who teach will be judged more strictly. We all stumble in many ways. Anyone who is never at fault in what they say is perfect, able to keep their whole body in check. When we put bits into the mouths of horses to make them obey us, we can turn the whole animal. Or take ships as an example. Although they are so large and are driven by strong winds, they are steered by a very small rudder wherever the pilot wants to go. Likewise, the tongue is a small part of the body, but it makes great boasts. Consider what a great forest is set on fire by a small spark. The tongue also is a fire, a world of evil among the parts of the body. It corrupts the whole body, sets the whole course of one’s life on fire, and is itself set on fire by hell. All kinds of animals, birds, reptiles and sea creatures are being tamed and have been tamed by mankind, but no human being can tame the tongue. It is a restless evil, full of deadly poison. With the tongue we praise our Lord and Father, and with it we curse human beings, who have been made in God’s likeness. Out of the same mouth come praise and cursing. My brothers and sisters, this should not be. Can both fresh water and salt water flow from the same spring? My brothers and sisters, can a fig tree bear olives, or a grapevine bear figs? Neither can a salt spring produce fresh water."
But hey- that's your book not mine. Regardless, I like to tell people who judge:
"As I understand it, your faith and your god suggest that judging and damning others is taboo... You, at great peril to yourself, have taken time out of your busy day today to judge me. Wow, thank you, sincerely!"
It might also serve you well to sit down and reread 1 Corinthians 4 and the letters to the Colossians. Frankly I'm somewhat of a persuasion similar to that of F.W. Nietzsche. That is to say that I'm sympathetic to the teachings of Jesus, not a big fan of Paul, to put it lightly... but again, it's your book, not mine.
Jeez Jim, and I thought your world was purely black/white. (1 bit per pixel in graphics terms.) Sounds like you upgraded your graphics card ? Your last post makes... sense to me. (Gasp)
If I were king, power drills would not be allowed in the Stronghold. That may sound odd, but these things are situational to me. The Stronghold is not Milagrosa. (Oh...okay... maybe I'd allow them on crags less than 100 feet high.)
A couple of things bother me about the photo. One is: it looks like you are hiding behind the costumes. (BTW it's the women who wear the scarves, not the men.) I think you would be better served by publishing a list of the names of those who were in on the decision. The other is: you make it look like a light-hearted lark, when actually chopping is a pretty heavy deal within the tiny, myopic world of climbing. I've talked to people on BOTH sides who seemed a bit torn-up and pressurized by it, not light-hearted.
I'm usually happy to make fun of anything. So much so that people tend to think of me as callous. But in this case... not so much.
Oh, and "Chronicle" has an "h". Sorry, couldn't resist !
John, Sounds like your happy I may have justified your past actions. Not so. I never said Crankenstein should have been chipped, but that doesn't change my premise that Scott's chipping on the Rockafellow Dome was way more egregious than your recent chip fests or EFR's chipping on Crankenstein. Chipping is never justified in my mind. But I've only got so much time and I need to pick my battles. Scott's chisel was a battle I was willing to fight.
I also find it more than puzzling that someone who chips holds regularly feels he has any moral authority to advocate for the out right ban of power drills in the Stronghold.
Jihadist do were scarfs to protect their identity. I see it on CNN all the time. Geir and I felt the utmost secrecy was paramount in this operation... Oh crap, forget I said that.
I'm a bad spellar and Photoshop doesn't have spell chek. Should have caught the "H" though. My bad.
I have a few questions for Jim and Geir: Why didn't you stop at fixing the problem of the chipped holds? Why was it necessary to remove ANY bolts; especially bolts from other completely natural pitches? Please help me understand the logic behind your actions. If the chipped holds were so deplorable, then it seems to me that filling them in would have been the reasonable and final solution, not to mention it would have given every climber the right to decide for themselves whether to aid through that pitch or work a challenging piece of granite~ Was it safe to assume there was not a single climber out there who could have climbed it without the chipped holds? Maybe that climber was you?
TRP, If all we had done was filled the chiseled holds what would that say to anyone else who is thinking chiseling some section of rock in the Stronghold he or she can't climb. It would have said, go ahead and chisel it, the worst that can happen is someone will fill in my chiseled holds.
Sorry TRP but given the fact that there are people out there, like you, who are more than willing to give Scott a pass on what he did, a stronger condemnation was in order and completely justified.
Keep in mind there were, in the original postings, several people that advocated taking every pitch down. We opted to let the first two remain, as they (1) didn't have any chiseled holds and (2) didn't cross an existing "R" route. (There were bolts and an anchor on the 3rd pitch that any one on Lumpy Unmentionables would have climbed to. Consequently completely altering the commitment necessary to climb that route.)
I just found all of the recent comments. I think it is appropriate to cross-post this quote I came across from a Mark Twain novel.
Any thoughts? "Well, there were sixty-eight people there, and sixty-two of them had no more desire to throw a stone than you had."
"Oh, it's true. I know your race. It is made up of sheep. It is governed by minorities, seldom or never by majorities. It suppresses its feelings and its beliefs and follows the handful that makes the most noise. Sometimes the noisy handful is right, sometimes wrong; but no matter, the crowd follows it. The vast majority of the race, whether savage or civilized, are secretly kind-hearted and shrink from inflicting pain, but in the presence of the aggressive and pitiless minority they don't dare to assert themselves. Think of it! One kind-hearted creature spies upon another, and sees to it that he loyally helps in iniquities which revolt both of them. Speaking as an expert, I know that ninety-nine out of a hundred of your race were strongly against the killing of witches when that foolishness was first agitated by a handful of pious lunatics in the long ago. And I know that even to-day, after ages of transmitted prejudice and silly teaching, only one person in twenty puts any real heart into the harrying of a witch. And yet apparently everybody hates witches and wants them killed. Some day a handful will rise up on the other side and make the most noise - perhaps even a single daring man with a big voice and a determined front will do it - and in a week all the sheep will wheel and follow him, and witch-hunting will come to a sudden end.
About as much as a point as some quote from a Mark Twain novel.
Here are some questions you could possibly answer Dan, or whomever. Was the bolt ladder put there so the section could be aided or were they installed for the protection of the chiseled holds to come int the future? If it is the latter then shouldn't the bolts have been removed then also?
I don't get why people are getting all pissed off. There are 2 parties involved here. The one's who intalled the route and the one's who took it down and patched it. Why not let them deal with it from here, instead of constantly chiming in. I'm sorry, but all your, and others, ranting and carrying on is not helping solve this issue. If you want to be helpful, help in getting the two parties together to discuss and fix the problem.
If you found nothing relevant about the Mark Twain quote, then that is fine. It was intended to be food for thought.
To answer your questions, which I asked Scott tonight, yes, the bolt ladder was put there so the section could be aided. In an egotistical fit during the same season, Scott went back and chiseled the holds so the section could be freed. It was the former scenario of which you mentioned, so do you think that the bolts should not have been removed? I would not disagree with you on that.
My problem with the situation is how it was handled. From the repeated sacrifice of access, to the biased voter selection, to the lack of transparency throughout the process, and the personal nature of the chopping, I think that is why some of us are pissed. My point in writing so much about this is to make people aware of what happened so, in the future, we can come up with a better solution as a community than a vigilante chopping.
You are right that the personal aspect of this should be handled between the parties involved. This is currently in the works and will be happening soon. Had Geir and Jimbo attempted to directly address the issues with Scott before the chopping, I doubt the same drastic actions would have been taken. Unfortunately for all of us, they didn't make any attempt to get together with Scott.
Dan, Which part of that month long email banter, WHICH SCOTT WAS ON, don't you understand. For the 1000th time Scott had every opportunity to chime in or email Geir or me directly. You continue to ignore the facts in this matter. Maybe you should stop listening to Scott and do some fact checking for yourself.
The fact that Scott didn't respond to the group emails is independent of your and Geir's failure to contact him directly.
Considering you have a propensity to sling insults just for the sake of your own enjoyment because, according to you, it's the only way you stay interested, I understand why Scott wouldn't want to jump into water infested with sharks who are out for blood.
Rickd's part of the email exchange, which I already posted on the other thread, is a prime example:
"You have got to be kidding me.
I promise to remove 10 scott ayers routes if this is done.
You want a war you can't win- I'm that guy fellas.
Scott get your fat ass up there and remove that thing (all of it) by the end of this holiday.
(Assholes kissing SA's butt, fuck)Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry"
Is this what you call "banter," Jimbo? Is this respectful and legitimate debate and exchange of ideas? You guys are grown men. Act like it, for once.
Jimbo, here are some words of yours from your New Years letter to Anders and Mike Diesen. Any thoughts on them now?
"...The point is most people are less than qualified to make the claims they do and most don't realize it. No fault of there own perhaps but true non the less. I should, however, realize they are just trying to help in any given situation. Just because they haven't been "doing it" for 31 years doesn't give me the right to chastise them endlessly. There motives, most of the time, are pure and they are genuinely trying to help.
So that's a bit of insight into my cantankerous ways. I'm a smuck sometimes."
Aleix, unlike you, I have directly and personally contacted the parties involved. I have spoken with Scott extensively about these issues. I have repeatedly privately emailed Geir, which he ignored and continues to do so.
You on the other hand, have only been in contact with Geir and Jimbo about these issues. I know Scott has repeatedly attempted to contact you, by telephone and email, though you have apparently ignored him.
Everything I have quoted is backed up. So, you are absolutely wrong that I am lying. If you are accusing Jimbo and Geir about lying about their feelings, well then they apparently lied to you too. You might want to address that if you think it is true. I, for one, believe Geir and Jimbo when they says he chopped the route.
As I have repeated, anything I am saying that represents Scott's words is hearsay. I encourage you to stop ignoring his various attempts to contact you, man up, and call him back. You can ask him yourself about the A0 bolt ladder. He told me that is exactly what it was. Ask him yourself.
Congratulations again on climbing the route post-chopping without any protection and your momumental success in freeing the fourth pitch!
Dan, I have no reason to reply to you. You failed to get involved with the discussion and there is documented proof that you knew about it. I'm not the least bit obligated to address your complaints now that (after the fact) you don't like the outcome. Try actually participating next time and maybe you'll have some credibility.
Paul, I'm not sure you understand the context of my comment. Perhaps I should have been more clear, for your sake. "Natural," was referring to the climbing, not the protection. I can explain in further simplicity, if necessary.
Geir, Like I said, you can pretend the mess you made will disappear. People will continue to discuss your deplorable actions. Cheap insults and threats further cripple your already waning credibility. Be part of the solution, or don't. It's your choice.
You all have a magnificent playground. I live near Yosemite, but have spent several weeks in South Arizona in the past few years. Yes, some Cochise stuff is run out and dangerous, other sheepshead area routes seem over bolted, maybe over cleaned and somewhat glued.
This is the internet at its worst! I couldn't help but post to be part of this debacle! We have a Nietzschean advocating tolerance! Christians who preach the Law, not the Gospel! Chippers who chop! I don't know any of you! I've climbed at the stronghold two times (trade routes)! Both amazing adventures! I'd rather see access (to an area that is not local for me) totally gone than purported abominations put up. Not that I will ever be able to climb them either way! Chop on!
ps. - I'm a pastor and think the jihad joke is amusing. If you ever need a pastoral chop, I enjoy taking self-righteousness to new levels. Sin boldly, but believe more boldly still (in Christ Jesus, not in the will to power). May peace come to the Arizona climbing community!