Chockstone Forum

      Sponsored By
      ROCK
   HARDWARE

Chockstone Photography

Australian Landscape Prints

Chockstone Forum - General Discussion

General Climbing Discussion

Topic Date User

The Irish Solution to The Ben Lomond Problem 10-Oct-2017 At 5:00:44 PM Wendy

Message

On 10-Oct-2017 johny wrote:
>Wendy, I think the quality of your debate style is moving from High School
>to Junior High School. Slippery slopes do exist. This does not mean that
>every time someone invokes the term it is accurate (duh) such as gay marriage,
>and the litany of ridiculous analogies you came up with.
>
>People (yes actual people, not hypothetical people in a debate) told Gerry
>that since there were abseil bolts they could bolt sport climbs. Regardless
>of what YOU think of this justification it was the reason given by a prolific
>bolter. It has nothing to do with Gay marriage, drowning or any of your
>other red herrings.

Yep, but it is not inevitable that an abseil station will lead to bolts. THe person's justification was also flawed.
>
>Your argument that since people had dodgy bolts and tat on Balls Pyramid
>therefore old climbers were not clean and perfect therefore we can have
>bolts on Ben Lomond is so far off the mark it is almost painful to need
>to point this out.

That's not what I said. I said that Gerry was romanticising traditional climbing. The fact that traditional climbing did leave an impact on the rock doesn't justify more impact on the rock. That would be the same flawed argument as the bolter who said that one bolt exists, therefore more bolts may as well exist.I just don't know the fancy name for that logical fallacy.

The OP is about Fair Head so at least start there for
>comparisons. It doesnt matter that 40 years ago French climbers bolted
>the shit out of Ceuse or how many bolts were on Balls. Ben Lomond has been
>a ground up style nearly bolt free crag from the beginning. That is the
>tradition of BEN LOMOND.

So why doesn't this convenient slippery slope start earlier then? Surely the existance of tat means that fixed anchors exist, therefore chain may as well exist, there for bolts may as well exist ... ad infinitum. Or if we fix a rope at the top, then we may as well put in a permanent anchor with which to fix the rope with, if we have an anchor at the very top, we may as well have one at the top of the routes etc etc. You can construct a slippery slope anywhere. It's just that Gerry likes to stop his slippery slope at a fixed rope from a trad anchor. It's still put a stop to the slippery slope. There is nothing inevitable about the progress downhill and we are constantly negotiating our position on them all the time.
>
>Seriously Wendy reading your arguments reminds me of discussions with
>Christians about the existence of God: Many circular ad hoc arguments to
>prove technical points but avoid the real issues entirely.

What real issues? As far as I see them we have an fear mongering logical fallacy to justify a romantic ideal. Hold your romantic idea. Just don't expect me to give you any credit for illogical arguments supporting it.
>
>After all the distractions in your argument you settle on a supposed rational
>adults ability to stop going down the slippery slope by limiting bolting
>to appropriate abseil stations. Yeah I agree. I think a lot of people do.
>I also think it is POSSIBLE that some people will take abseil bolts too
>far. Gerry explained how it could happen 4 pages ago. Its entirely possible.

Yep, and lots of other things are possible too. How likely a possibility does something have to be?
>
>
>Recently you (being a rational person) bolted a route at araps that was
>chopped. I guess you claim the chopper was being irrational. Well here
>go. No bolts means no ambiguity.

Actually, in that case it meant being rude and arrogant.
>
>I think at this stage it is more in line with tradition and spirit of
>place to keep Ben Lomond entirely bolt free. I also like the romantic notion
>of an intentionally bolt free crag.
>