Everyone, Meet Ed!

Sam Miller wrote:

This is a non issue for fist cracks in IC if youre placing gear properly, more of a consideration for thin routes

To be fair, lots of things are nonissues with proper gear placement. 

Lots of things are also non issues with less people in delicate areas.

Greg D wrote:

Wow.  So much bs in this post.  I did fall on a small cam in Moab and blew out the rock.  But, it hadn't rained in 17 years.   Rain was not a factor.  

And that bull shit about the anchors.  Wow.  

Now tell me exactly how much water a 400 foot vertical rock face will see when 1/4 inch of rain accumulates on a horizontal surface?  Heck, how about when 3 inches fall, which is so rare?  Then, tell me how much water will get into the cracks.  For extra points, how much will "absorb" into the vertical faces where the bolts reside?  

couldn't tell you much in the form of scientific data. However, a working understanding of the mechanisms that cause this type of hole erosion says a lot. In soft sandstone, the expansion bolt breaks off a small amount of the sand grains that form the surface of the hole. Over time, this makes the hole larger, nanometer by nanometer, depending on how solid the rock is.This could mean a decade in super soft sandstone, or a century or more in harder sandstone.

Obviously, anything that makes grains of sand flake off more easily is going to accelerate this process. I'm pretty sure that water has this effect and is very well documented. If you doubt that this effect exists then I would highly suggest that you seek out the literature where I'm sure you will find data beyond your heart's desire.  

Sam Miller wrote:

This is a non issue for fist cracks in IC if youre placing gear properly, more of a consideration for thin routes

Good point. I didn't realize the route in question was exclusively a fist crack. However, I don't think this should undermine the general principal of staying off of wet sandstone. Even if you are extremely well informed and can make the decision to climb a route, knowing there is an acceptably low risk of damaging the rock, most of the people who see you doing this aren't so well informed.

They may see you and think that it is perfectly acceptable to climb on wet sandstone in general, without an expertise in understanding and mitigate potential damages to the rock

mediocre wrote:

Rock wear and tear is painfully obvious in the Moab/Indian creek area, if you don’t see the top rope grooves you’re not paying attention, if you don’t see the dulling o the edges of the cracks you’re not paying attention. 

I think it’s agreed/proven that the particular type of sandstone in that area is weakened by water.

It’s already a soft type of rock, So even if it absorbs 1/10 of a percent of a quarter of an inch of rain it’s going to be softer. What don’t you understand here?

What a mediocre response. 

I love the Moab area and respect it.  But, well thought out and educated responses are beneficial to everyone.  I won't tell you what I understand.  You wouldn't understand.  I'm tired of stupid people getting behind causes that appear to be positive but lack intelligent analysis.  

Top rope groves are especially bothersome to me, obviously the result of top ropes and lowering.  Rain or shine, these are all over the desert.  

If you have never been to ic don't respond.  You are not helping this discussion.    

Greg D wrote:

What a mediocre response. 

I love the Moab area and respect it.  But, well thought out and educated responses are beneficial to everyone.  I won't tell you what I understand.  You wouldn't understand.  I'm tired of stupid people getting behind causes that appear to be positive but lack intelligent analysis.  

Top rope groves are especially bothersome to me, obviously the result of top ropes and lowering.  Rain or shine, these are all over the desert.  

If you have never been to ic don't respond.  You are not helping this discussion.    

That’s some great doublespeak. You should run for president. If I worked in the coal industry I would vote for you.

mediocre wrote:

That’s some great doublespeak. You should run for president. If I worked in the coal industry I would vote for you.

Please be specific regarding double speak. I'm happy to respond.  

eli poss wrote:

Good point. I didn't realize the route in question was exclusively a fist crack.

Only if your hands are as small as our president's

What's the actual problem if a route changes? It was 5.10 now it's 5.11, so what?

I would like to encourage everyone to climb Scarface wet so I can finally fit my hands in it.

Tradiban wrote:

What's the actual problem if a route changes? It was 5.10 now it's 5.11, so what?

I would like to encourage everyone to climb Scarface wet so I can finally fit my hands in it.

#slowchipping

Greg D wrote:

Cop out.  Let's go head to head.  Tired of stupid people.  

Oops   You deleted your responses before I quoted it, not surprised. Then posted BS below.

Admins trimmed several posts in this thread that were just bickering, my bickering included

Tradiban wrote:

What's the actual problem if a route changes? It was 5.10 now it's 5.11, so what?

In twenty years of climbing at the Creek, I've seen Incredible Hand Crack go from tight hands, to perfect hands, to a baggy-cups jam it up to your elbow, worthless pile. (RIP Incredible Handcrack)  Anything we can do to delay this process is a positive, even if it requires a little public Ed-ucation.  Good on Sam for making this post.  If you can't send Scarface, learn to ringlock.

Hobo Greg wrote:

Do you have proof of that? Because I've also heard from people who have been there just as long that it has not changed one bit.

All you have to do is look at it.  The erosion is obvious.  It went from baggy red camalots to blue camalots in the crux bulge.  Old guidebooks call for 2.5 friends (red camalot).  Those won't come close to working these days.

Dave McRae wrote:

In twenty years of climbing at the Creek, I've seen Incredible Hand Crack go from tight hands, to perfect hands, to a baggy-cups jam it up to your elbow, worthless pile..

Hobo Greg wrote:

Do you have proof of that? Because I've also heard from people who have been there just as long that it has not changed one bit.

From David Blooms first IC guidebook (2004). I suspect the size progression has continued unabated for the past 14 years.

Hobo Greg wrote:

Why bother, it's not like you believe in the evidence anyone would show you anyway. #fakenews #tinfoilhat

Mark E Dixon wrote:

Anyway, Ed is welcome to tell his side of the story. 

Finally, discouraging others from imitating Ed so they won't get shamed in the future seems worthwhile.

I think you're onto something here ... Ed is actually never going to show up here because Ed is actually Sam! 

Sam took a "shaming picture" of himself (or maybe a buddy of his) to intimidate future Ed's to make them stay off of wet rock. So Sam has (somewhat) successfully accomplished what he set out to do even without offending anyone. I think Sam is a really smart guy. Notice how Ed = Sam is actually just barely touching that rock in the picture and how Sam gently sidesteps the question how he knows the guy's name is Ed on p. 2!

Patrik wrote:

Sam took a "shaming picture" of himself to intimidate future Ed's to make them stay off of wet rock. 

To be honest, and certainly not to doubt anyone that was there that day, I'm just not seeing wet rock in that photo.

Greg D wrote:

Please be specific regarding double speak. I'm happy to respond.  

Double speak as in you contort your responses to make people think you have something to add or you know what you’re talking about.  But kudos to you, I fed the troll. Rock on. Just make sure it’s dry.

Marc801 C wrote:

To be honest, and certainly not to doubt anyone that was there that day, I'm just not seeing wet rock in that photo.

Wet rock is fake news! Ed is running a pedophile pizza parlor out of the basement of his truck in Creek Pasture!!! 

We're onto you, you Globalist Cucks!!!!

Marc801 C wrote:

To be honest, and certainly not to doubt anyone that was there that day, I'm just not seeing wet rock in that photo.

The rocks in the foreground, certainly more exposed to the elements than the inside of the crack, appear to be dry. Even the dirt at the base appears to be dry. This whole thread is a tempest in a teapot.

What is posting this supposed to accomplish?

You can blame Ed, but there are hundreds of Ed's. Will be more. The creek is a fragile resource that is getting blown up by glossy photos and a promise of "solitude."
Blame everyone who advertises it. In fact, better yet blame no one. You educated them, I assume you were super cool about it and not passive aggressive like you are on this post with the guys photo and his lady and all that. 

Past that, what can you do? People make their own decisions and on the scale of offenses this probably isn't warranting the public callout. Ed won't kill a climb, one hundred Ed's might. Not much you can do when the crag sees tens of thousands...