Yup, are you paying attention when you quote someone?

You can't have an accurate emotional response to some information if the said information is inaccurate or incorrect.

I mean say someone where to come on here and say you abuse your kid and then asked what emotional response we had about it. Later we learned that said incident was you placing your kid in a time out by having her/him stand in a corner for ten minutes.

Do you think the emotional response would be different?

Edit to remove yanqui's cheesed quoting.

In your OP you linked an article that said the ropes where still there with when in fact they had already been taken down.


You then went on to ask for an emotional response to both the bolts being added and the ropes being left on the wall.


You knowing and being friends with the man who directed the cleanup is irrelevant and that has nothing to do with your OP.


I never said that you attacked anyone.

You did say that but you omitted that a crew paid by the sponsors came back and removed the ropes. This had been done before you posted the thread. While what you said isn't inaccurate it also isn't the truth. This type of truth telling is what you come to expect from a child, not an adult like yourself.


Moving on ;my point is that omitting that the ropes had been removed already affects the emotional response you asked for.

Sorry, I forgot that the second poster linked an article.

In your OP you linked an article that said the ropes where still there with when in fact they had already been taken down.

They were left on the wall...for months. It doesn't mean much that he posted after they were removed, the point remains that the film team behaved poorly by adding 60 bolts and leaving the ropes there for months. How are you getting a different interpretation of this?

They were left on the wall...for months. It doesn't mean much that he posted after they were removed, the point remains that the film team behaved poorly by adding 60 bolts and leaving the ropes there for months. How are you getting a different interpretation of this?

Chad has never really been "on top of things." He's like that guy that jumps into a conversation half way through. hahaha

Oh I know the ropes where on the wall for months . . .

I'm not getting a different interpretation of the incident; I'm saying that Y asked for a response before knowing / revealing all the facts about what happened.

Y was outraged by what the climber and his sponsors did and wanted us to feel the same way. In doing so he overlooked information that affected the 'emotional response' he was asking us to make. Is it possible that Y simply didn't know about the fixed lines being taken down, sure? I will say this however, Y says he knows and is friends with the man who coordinated the recovery effort. Y also says he is connected to the area where the fixed lines where left.

With all of his connections to the area and it’s people I find it hard to believe that Y had no idea the fixed lines had been already removed. Users here who have no connection to the area and no friendship with the man that lead the removal of the fixed lines where able to quickly and easily learn that the fixed lines had already been removed.

Oh I know the ropes where on the wall for months . . .

I'm not getting a different interpretation of the incident; I'm saying that Y asked for a response before knowing / revealing all the facts about what happened.

Y was outraged by what the climber and his sponsors did and wanted us to feel the same way. In doing so he overlooked information that affected the 'emotional response' he was asking us to make. Is it possible that Y simply didn't know about the fixed lines being taken down, sure? I will say this however, Y says he knows and is friends with the man who coordinated the recovery effort. Y also says he is connected to the area where the fixed lines where left.

With all of his connections to the area and it’s people I find it hard to believe that Y had no idea the fixed lines had been already removed. Users here who have no connection to the area and no friendship with the man that lead the removal of the fixed lines where able to quickly and easily learn that the fixed lines had already been removed.

I still think the fact that they were taken down is irrelevant to the point that they were left up for months and that new bolts were added. I would have had the same emotional response with or without knowing they had been taken down, unless of course it came to be known that the ropes were taken down after a few months due to incredibly difficult weather, or something like that, which doesn't seem to be the case.

The carelessness of the team's effort is the main point, not that they paid someone to take them down later or that they were taken down before Yanqui's post.

You mean like what you just did here in this thread?

I thank you for proving my point.

You had a point?

Oh wow, are you still talking?

Apparently one of these Red Bull sponsored climbers strutted off to Patagonia, complete with film crew, to free climb Cerro Torre. The weather was awful and the "expedition" was a dismal failure. The whole bunch went running back to Europe, leaving hundreds of meters of fixed ropes hanging on the wall and something like 60 new bolts on the lower half of the Compressor Route.

What the fuck?


Edited to add for clarity: This story was posted two weeks later:

Hi RC.com folks. We've posted a story about this situation at Alpinist.com:

http://www.alpinist.com/...ama-compressor-bolts

Erik Lambert
Online Editor, Alpinist.com

couple Q's for ya Tim.....

Who do you blame for this yanqui?

More specifically, who do you blame the 60 bolts on? And who do you blame the 700 m. of fixed rope on?
Please be specific.

Have you climbed Cerro Torre, the Compressor Route, or any other major peak in Los Glaciers?

Do you live in El Chalten?

just askin.

I blame the guy who put up the first 450 bolts.

Sure 60 more were added and 700 meters of rope. But in all honesty. You were Insulting the climber probably on a contract with Red Bull. Who more than likely did not put the bolts up for the film crew. Also wasn't it said the film crew was hired by Red Bull? Not already part of the Red Bull company?

If so, more than likely Red Bull or the Climbers can not legally make the film crew remove the rope. So blame the film crew. Also there are plenty of other people that bail and leave gear all of the time (in smaller amounts) I do not see you complaining about everyone.

I don't to agree with adding bolts to climbs or leaving gear. In a perfect world we could all free solo are way and leave no trace. however, You are mad they added 60 bolts to a 450 bolt climb? To me it seems like there is a bit of contradiction in your statement.

You also bad mouthed Europe in your sentence structure. Could no South American or North American do such thing and run home?


I probably will not bother checking this thread again. But I am just pointing out that while I agree with you. Your statements give a meathead outlook on the whole thing.

Why? You feeling lonely?

I blame the guy who put up the first 450 bolts.

Sure 60 more were added and 700 meters of rope. But in all honesty. You were Insulting the climber probably on a contract with Red Bull.

Who more than likely did not put the bolts up for the film crew. Also wasn't it said the film crew was hired by Red Bull? Not already part of the Red Bull company?

If so, more than likely Red Bull or the Climbers can not legally make the film crew remove the rope. So blame the film crew. Also there are plenty of other people that bail and leave gear all of the time (in smaller amounts) I do not see you complaining about everyone.

I don't to agree with adding bolts to climbs or leaving gear. In a perfect world we could all free solo are way and leave no trace. however, You are mad they added 60 bolts to a 450 bolt climb? To me it seems like there is a bit of contradiction in your statement.

You also bad mouthed Europe in your sentence structure. Could no South American or North American do such thing and run home?

I probably will not bother checking this thread again. But I am just pointing out that while I agree with you. Your statements give a meathead outlook on the whole thing.

In an interview with Redbull.com on November 17, 2009—the day before he departed for Argentina—Lama compared the ethics of today with Maestri's: "Cesare Maestri, who made the first ascent in 1970, left an entire highway of bolts and pitons in the mountain's south-east face, which has nothing to do with today's climbing ethics... Back in the days of old school mountaineering only conquering the peak was important—not so much how this goal was reached." Lama added that he planned to make the first free ascent of the Compressor Route and return home without leaving any noticeable mark on the iconic peak. He stated that it was "not in our interest to leave any traces."

Haha! You clearly don't understand.