Results 41 to 60 of 121
Thread: Chambers
-
04-05-2007, 04:28 PM #41
Apology for Rockgremlin
RockGremlin
I meant no disrespect by suggesting your Chambers post was ego-driven. I think it was a fair assessment given the balls-driven nature of this site (lots of fun sometimes). It is my opinion that posting the location of an R/X canyon w/o beta is likely to do more harm that good; ergo, ego. Obviously I do not know you or your true motivation
-
04-05-2007 04:28 PM # ADS
-
04-05-2007, 04:37 PM #42
Not an apology for Shane
Shane
We've shared a lot of good times, including an honest little epic. Why you persist in abusing friendships is beyond me...and beyond the pale.
Karma - it's what's for dinner.
hank
-
04-05-2007, 04:40 PM #43
Re: Apology for Rockgremlin
Hey Hank -
No worries. I'm pretty thick skinned. I like to help out when I can, and ironically, that mindset can draw the ire of many within the canyoneering community. I mean no offense, nor mean to boast when I offer up beta....just thought I'd help out.
So......when a we doin' a canyon?It's only "science" if it supports the narrative.
-
04-05-2007, 05:06 PM #44
Re: Apology for Rockgremlin
Originally Posted by rockgremlin
Originally Posted by rockgremlin
Originally Posted by rockgremlin
-
04-05-2007, 05:31 PM #45
Re: Not an apology for Shane
Originally Posted by hank moon
The n00b pic was a joke..... if it offended you I apologize. It was meant in good fun.
-
04-05-2007, 06:42 PM #46
Re: Apology for Rockgremlin
Rockgremlin, I am actually curious how you got those coordinates for "Chambers", especially with 99.99% certainty?
nat smale
-
04-06-2007, 05:23 AM #47
wow, looks like i missed a lot.
Originally Posted by rockgremlin
it's not entirely your fault, obviously, but if it were your information that lead the person there ...
also by broadbanding it, others have access and might be drawn there too, ...
if it's a difficult canyon, this could present a problem, for example (one of many) if someone doesn't know the technical difficulties, especially in a remote area.
Originally Posted by rockgremlin
but if you say the following
Originally Posted by rockgremlin
as is nat, i am curious too how you got the coordinates.
-
04-06-2007, 07:24 AM #48Originally Posted by stefan
-
04-06-2007, 08:00 AM #49
Sheesh...now I know how Oliver North felt!
Earlier this year, I was canyoneering with a couple of guys -- some who post here, and some who do not. I got a glimpse of an enlarged map of a part of the Roost containing four slots -- all between NFRR, and the Pasture forks. Rumors were that several of these were pretty good slots, and one resembling "a small scale version of Shenanigans was the first slot north of NFRR." The guy who owned the map doesn't post on Uutah, in fact he doesn't post on any of the canyons forums, but I'm pretty sure he lurks.
The map that Shane posted earlier in this thread highlighting the four slots with a dashed line is pretty much a carbon copy of the map that was shown me. All I had to do was pick the coords off the map for "slot #1"It's only "science" if it supports the narrative.
-
04-06-2007, 08:06 AM #50
You know, the ironic thing about this thread is that, there are some folks out there who don't want this beta published, but the more they question my sources, the more popular this thread becomes. My last post explicitly describes the location of Chambers, not mentioned before in any of my other posts.
If the grilling continues, I suspect there will be bolts in Chambers before this weekend.It's only "science" if it supports the narrative.
-
04-06-2007, 08:31 AM #51Originally Posted by rockgremlin
but i am far more concerned about broadbanding coordinates about difficult canyons without beta, especially in response to a photojournal entry showing enticing photos of such a canyon? i was more interested in your response to this
-
04-06-2007, 08:38 AM #52Originally Posted by stefan
Originally Posted by SombeechIt's only "science" if it supports the narrative.
-
04-06-2007, 08:44 AM #53Originally Posted by stefan
But we do appreciate the warning and your concern.
-
04-06-2007, 08:53 AM #54Originally Posted by Iceaxe
superiority? bah. i certainly don't have a complex, do you?
my concern had more to do with the unexpected use of information. hence PMing can be very useful
-
04-06-2007, 09:05 AM #55Originally Posted by rockgremlin
-
04-06-2007, 09:10 AM #56Originally Posted by stefan
And let's get serious.... all the whining in this thread is really the result of a certain group of individuals who do not want the canyon published yet because it does not meet their self-serving agenda. Don't feed me all this its for safety bullshit. If you were truly concerned about safety you would have taken a minute and explain the dangers and what to be aware of.
-
04-06-2007, 09:15 AM #57
EZ there Shane...let's not polarize ourselves....too much.
It's only "science" if it supports the narrative.
-
04-06-2007, 09:15 AM #58Originally Posted by rockgremlinnat smale
-
04-06-2007, 09:20 AM #59
No offense Nat, however you were one of about four people who questioned me not only here but via private emails. Kinda felt like the Inquisition there....
It's only "science" if it supports the narrative.
-
04-06-2007, 09:37 AM #60but i am far more concerned about broadbanding coordinates about difficult canyons without beta
For example, some of us are out there doing canyons without beta. If someone has done it and knows it do be difficult, sometimes a heads up is good to know.
Chambers is something I haven't divulged the location on simply because I was asked not too.
I had known about (but haven't done) the canyon for a very long time, several years ago, and undoubtable others have too. It's right next to some very popular canyons and right near the trailheads for them.
The reason I have not shared is because someone (in this case MK) asked me not to. When ever someone ask me not to, I do not share. I was not aware that it was a sensitive issue until after MK asked me not to share, nor did I know that this particular canyon was Chambers until SB told me it was one and the same.
Since this canyon is right next to some roads and right next to some very popular trailheads, it doesn't seem that secret, but personally, I still do not share the info.
It's coming out in a guidebook soon anyway, so won't be "secret" after that.
There are hundreds, no, thousands of other canyons out there so there is no reason to be upset if someone doesn't divulge the location of every single one on this or any other forum.Utah is a very special and unique place. There is no where else like it on earth. Please take care of it and keep the remaining wild areas in pristine condition. The world will be a better place if you do.
Similar Threads
-
Any advice for Chambers Canyon in Robbers Roost?
By reubencousin in forum CanyoneeringReplies: 11Last Post: 04-21-2009, 11:34 AM -
Chambers Video
By shaggy125 in forum CanyoneeringReplies: 4Last Post: 03-18-2009, 07:41 AM -
chambers and white roost conditions
By marc olivares in forum CanyoneeringReplies: 15Last Post: 04-24-2008, 08:45 AM -
Chambers and Big Bad Ben added to Tom's Utah Canyoneering Gu
By ratagonia in forum CanyoneeringReplies: 7Last Post: 12-12-2007, 05:20 PM -
TR: 20070419 - UT, Roost Canyons: Whites, Buck and Chambers
By AJ in forum CanyoneeringReplies: 5Last Post: 08-31-2007, 12:15 AM
Visitors found this page by searching for:
Outdoor Forum