<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Let&#8217;s Talk Style</title>
	<atom:link href="http://climbingnarc.com/2009/01/lets-talk-climbing-style/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://climbingnarc.com/2009/01/lets-talk-climbing-style/</link>
	<description>So obsessed with climbing it hurts...</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 Feb 2012 16:07:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gray</title>
		<link>http://climbingnarc.com/2009/01/lets-talk-climbing-style/comment-page-1/#comment-5351</link>
		<dc:creator>Gray</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 19 Apr 2009 12:17:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://climbingnarc.com/?p=2287#comment-5351</guid>
		<description>The original topic was regarding style. I suppose I agree with many of the points if we are only concerned with or currently discussing style.

It is more impressive to climb without gear than with.

That would leave me out of the picture however and I&#039;m more concerned with me than with style (within reason).

I disagree with most of the comments regarding top roping. I find no mental stimulation from top roping. I&#039;ll go to the gym for that or tolerate it outside to get beta for a lead (yes I know...lower style points for that).

I disagree with most of the posts regarding sport climbing. I think it has a place. In an area where the climbing has been traditionally predominately trad I think sport climbing should probably be limited (it depends on the view of the community).

In most places I think there is room for both. I don&#039;t agree that sport takes the mental aspect out of the experience. It&#039;s a matter of degree. It depends on the skill level of the climber.

If one goes from leading a 5.10 whatever  vertical or overhung sports route to leading trad on a 5.7 slab I&#039;d say the sport route is more mentally and physically demanding.

Both types of climbing for the most part are contrived. Where I live both trad and sports routes in many cases are crowded, have bolted anchors and aren&#039;t natural at all. Why is one better than the other.

I primarily lead sports routes. I&#039;ve been on a few trad climbs that involved very little climbing, a lot of driving and hiking, crowds and a level of difficulty (lack of) that made me want to free solo or just lay down to take a nap.

It&#039;s a big country. There&#039;s room for sport and trad and there should be thought and respect before doing anything that would affect the environment and the varying interests of climbers.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The original topic was regarding style. I suppose I agree with many of the points if we are only concerned with or currently discussing style.</p>
<p>It is more impressive to climb without gear than with.</p>
<p>That would leave me out of the picture however and I&#8217;m more concerned with me than with style (within reason).</p>
<p>I disagree with most of the comments regarding top roping. I find no mental stimulation from top roping. I&#8217;ll go to the gym for that or tolerate it outside to get beta for a lead (yes I know&#8230;lower style points for that).</p>
<p>I disagree with most of the posts regarding sport climbing. I think it has a place. In an area where the climbing has been traditionally predominately trad I think sport climbing should probably be limited (it depends on the view of the community).</p>
<p>In most places I think there is room for both. I don&#8217;t agree that sport takes the mental aspect out of the experience. It&#8217;s a matter of degree. It depends on the skill level of the climber.</p>
<p>If one goes from leading a 5.10 whatever  vertical or overhung sports route to leading trad on a 5.7 slab I&#8217;d say the sport route is more mentally and physically demanding.</p>
<p>Both types of climbing for the most part are contrived. Where I live both trad and sports routes in many cases are crowded, have bolted anchors and aren&#8217;t natural at all. Why is one better than the other.</p>
<p>I primarily lead sports routes. I&#8217;ve been on a few trad climbs that involved very little climbing, a lot of driving and hiking, crowds and a level of difficulty (lack of) that made me want to free solo or just lay down to take a nap.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s a big country. There&#8217;s room for sport and trad and there should be thought and respect before doing anything that would affect the environment and the varying interests of climbers.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Volker</title>
		<link>http://climbingnarc.com/2009/01/lets-talk-climbing-style/comment-page-1/#comment-4642</link>
		<dc:creator>Volker</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 01 Feb 2009 01:31:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://climbingnarc.com/?p=2287#comment-4642</guid>
		<description>Having witnessed natives climb, using shoes and chalk definetly is not out the debate disregarding the fact they can perform were we can&#039;t any more. Both mental and physically.

People start to use shoes like the La Sportiva solution because they can with a muscle that has strenghtend through regular climbing excercise. Being used to barefoot walk you can climb in high grades without shoes. Vibram Lizard Five Fingers are pointing this way. So why is this crutch of civilization accepptable? It&#039;s common consent not to discuss, but still better style without.

From this viewpoint only a loincloth is acceptable minimum for some privacy on photos. People agree less to be inacceptable, to stick wth the same logic.

The first ascender defines the style. Most people have come to agree on this. Later climbers can free a route, but they don&#039;t remove fixed pro.
A first ascender is asked to use as little fixed pro as possible.
We can&#039;t judge his doings unless other prove him wrong by actually going there putting themself at the same risk. Even then, the first ascender might have been in different conditions and climbed on the edge of his abilities. There&#039;s no fair judgement.

Probably with the invention of glued bolts there is no justification left for drilling bolts any more, except from extending climbing parcours close to civilisation. the current increase in via ferrates trying to be more and more spectacular in the Alps is starting to become a major ethics problem fast.

High injury stats on a route can justify drilling bolts in dedicated sports area. That means somebody actually has to get hurt to justify thinking about it. As you can&#039;t undo this leaving nature as we found it has a high value. More than life and health? Well, if you want to stay healthy, climb in the gym. Rockfall is a frequent danger, not talking about pro or falls at all. This is your descision. Out of that descision you can&#039;t define a right to change the setting for everybody.

Opening a new route that is different. Were past the stage were the summit is the only goal, so bolting your way up is looked down on, rightfully. You can&#039;t make yourself a name by that any more.

I support the idea of honouring the deeds of the first ascender.
He should put down his view on style on the topo, allowing or banning to increase the level of pro. First 2 repeaters should comment this on a new route and their vote on safety should stick, with no split descision possible. Probably we&#039;ll need to formalize this in the community. Dedicating routes, crags and areas to styles is already pointing in this direction.

A chopped bolt should be replaced by a new one. This endangers others, can&#039;t undo anything is a reckless act putting innocent fellow climbers at risk of death.

In theory it is possible to sue them in case of an accident.
To my knowledge that hasn&#039;t happened yet, but is sure to come.
You can&#039;t put yourself above other, starting to dismantle a skilift or a via ferrata because you personally despise it.

With sport climbing and via ferrata becoming more mainstream ethics become a bigger concern were civilization is close by. To some degree why not - communities have a right to decide on the use of their mountain environment. On the other hand national parks and natural heritage should be protected as well as the first ascenders heritage needs protection. That&#039;s difficult to near impossible if not put on record.

Starting to do so no can define a status quo to start from.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Having witnessed natives climb, using shoes and chalk definetly is not out the debate disregarding the fact they can perform were we can&#8217;t any more. Both mental and physically.</p>
<p>People start to use shoes like the La Sportiva solution because they can with a muscle that has strenghtend through regular climbing excercise. Being used to barefoot walk you can climb in high grades without shoes. Vibram Lizard Five Fingers are pointing this way. So why is this crutch of civilization accepptable? It&#8217;s common consent not to discuss, but still better style without.</p>
<p>From this viewpoint only a loincloth is acceptable minimum for some privacy on photos. People agree less to be inacceptable, to stick wth the same logic.</p>
<p>The first ascender defines the style. Most people have come to agree on this. Later climbers can free a route, but they don&#8217;t remove fixed pro.<br />
A first ascender is asked to use as little fixed pro as possible.<br />
We can&#8217;t judge his doings unless other prove him wrong by actually going there putting themself at the same risk. Even then, the first ascender might have been in different conditions and climbed on the edge of his abilities. There&#8217;s no fair judgement.</p>
<p>Probably with the invention of glued bolts there is no justification left for drilling bolts any more, except from extending climbing parcours close to civilisation. the current increase in via ferrates trying to be more and more spectacular in the Alps is starting to become a major ethics problem fast.</p>
<p>High injury stats on a route can justify drilling bolts in dedicated sports area. That means somebody actually has to get hurt to justify thinking about it. As you can&#8217;t undo this leaving nature as we found it has a high value. More than life and health? Well, if you want to stay healthy, climb in the gym. Rockfall is a frequent danger, not talking about pro or falls at all. This is your descision. Out of that descision you can&#8217;t define a right to change the setting for everybody.</p>
<p>Opening a new route that is different. Were past the stage were the summit is the only goal, so bolting your way up is looked down on, rightfully. You can&#8217;t make yourself a name by that any more.</p>
<p>I support the idea of honouring the deeds of the first ascender.<br />
He should put down his view on style on the topo, allowing or banning to increase the level of pro. First 2 repeaters should comment this on a new route and their vote on safety should stick, with no split descision possible. Probably we&#8217;ll need to formalize this in the community. Dedicating routes, crags and areas to styles is already pointing in this direction.</p>
<p>A chopped bolt should be replaced by a new one. This endangers others, can&#8217;t undo anything is a reckless act putting innocent fellow climbers at risk of death.</p>
<p>In theory it is possible to sue them in case of an accident.<br />
To my knowledge that hasn&#8217;t happened yet, but is sure to come.<br />
You can&#8217;t put yourself above other, starting to dismantle a skilift or a via ferrata because you personally despise it.</p>
<p>With sport climbing and via ferrata becoming more mainstream ethics become a bigger concern were civilization is close by. To some degree why not &#8211; communities have a right to decide on the use of their mountain environment. On the other hand national parks and natural heritage should be protected as well as the first ascenders heritage needs protection. That&#8217;s difficult to near impossible if not put on record.</p>
<p>Starting to do so no can define a status quo to start from.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Matt</title>
		<link>http://climbingnarc.com/2009/01/lets-talk-climbing-style/comment-page-1/#comment-4601</link>
		<dc:creator>Matt</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Jan 2009 03:05:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://climbingnarc.com/?p=2287#comment-4601</guid>
		<description>Hey Rhoads

Gotcha...hats off to you, in all sincerity, for tackling this hydra and for stating a good, clear view of the style discussion. I think for the purposes of any essay on style, it makes sense, for succinctness, to leave out the eco/impact aspects, because that does open a whole new can of worms. But in the real world — and I think it&#039;s why climbers still carry on these debates so heatedly — they tend to overlap...a lot.

More bolts = more users = more impact, or so the argument goes. Less gear = higher demands on the climbers = less users. Not to mention the whole aesthetic-drawbacks-of-bolts vs. clean gear discussion that&#039;s the simmering background to all this, going back to the first sport-v-trad bolt wars of the 1980s.

Anyway, no easy answers, but thanks for putting the thoughts out there. Happy climbing!

Matt</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hey Rhoads</p>
<p>Gotcha&#8230;hats off to you, in all sincerity, for tackling this hydra and for stating a good, clear view of the style discussion. I think for the purposes of any essay on style, it makes sense, for succinctness, to leave out the eco/impact aspects, because that does open a whole new can of worms. But in the real world — and I think it&#8217;s why climbers still carry on these debates so heatedly — they tend to overlap&#8230;a lot.</p>
<p>More bolts = more users = more impact, or so the argument goes. Less gear = higher demands on the climbers = less users. Not to mention the whole aesthetic-drawbacks-of-bolts vs. clean gear discussion that&#8217;s the simmering background to all this, going back to the first sport-v-trad bolt wars of the 1980s.</p>
<p>Anyway, no easy answers, but thanks for putting the thoughts out there. Happy climbing!</p>
<p>Matt</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: sock hands</title>
		<link>http://climbingnarc.com/2009/01/lets-talk-climbing-style/comment-page-1/#comment-4599</link>
		<dc:creator>sock hands</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Jan 2009 21:34:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://climbingnarc.com/?p=2287#comment-4599</guid>
		<description>note: i&#039;m a trotter fanboy and my comments about bolt bashing were made generally, like all my comments that do not specicially idenfify someone, rather than continuing on the example raised previosuly.  

note 2:  NEW ETHICAL DEBATE:

climbers with a wingspan of more than 5&#039;11&quot;:  all &quot;ascents&quot; = invalid.

discuss.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>note: i&#8217;m a trotter fanboy and my comments about bolt bashing were made generally, like all my comments that do not specicially idenfify someone, rather than continuing on the example raised previosuly.  </p>
<p>note 2:  NEW ETHICAL DEBATE:</p>
<p>climbers with a wingspan of more than 5&#8217;11&#8243;:  all &#8220;ascents&#8221; = invalid.</p>
<p>discuss.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rhoads</title>
		<link>http://climbingnarc.com/2009/01/lets-talk-climbing-style/comment-page-1/#comment-4598</link>
		<dc:creator>Rhoads</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Jan 2009 19:32:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://climbingnarc.com/?p=2287#comment-4598</guid>
		<description>Matt, not my photo, Narc put that there, so there&#039;s not a hidden message there from me.
You are right regarding the &quot;removal&quot; vs. &quot;chopping&quot; but the point I&#039;m trying to make isn&#039;t environmental it&#039;s style. I will save the environmental ethics debate for somewhere else. But if I must......
What&#039;s wrong with Sonnie&#039;s &quot;removal&quot; is that he rated it &quot;R&quot; and and therefore made a safe climb with bolts now dangerous. But! Extra style points because the line was previously unclimbed.

Scott, once again this is about style not environment, but yes, it is possible to patch a bolt hole cleanly and make it invisible but that isn&#039;t always what happens is it? And how many patches will the rock take before it becomes destroyed?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Matt, not my photo, Narc put that there, so there&#8217;s not a hidden message there from me.<br />
You are right regarding the &#8220;removal&#8221; vs. &#8220;chopping&#8221; but the point I&#8217;m trying to make isn&#8217;t environmental it&#8217;s style. I will save the environmental ethics debate for somewhere else. But if I must&#8230;&#8230;<br />
What&#8217;s wrong with Sonnie&#8217;s &#8220;removal&#8221; is that he rated it &#8220;R&#8221; and and therefore made a safe climb with bolts now dangerous. But! Extra style points because the line was previously unclimbed.</p>
<p>Scott, once again this is about style not environment, but yes, it is possible to patch a bolt hole cleanly and make it invisible but that isn&#8217;t always what happens is it? And how many patches will the rock take before it becomes destroyed?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Scott</title>
		<link>http://climbingnarc.com/2009/01/lets-talk-climbing-style/comment-page-1/#comment-4596</link>
		<dc:creator>Scott</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Jan 2009 06:00:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://climbingnarc.com/?p=2287#comment-4596</guid>
		<description>Clearly, in your mind, the removal of a bolt (that can be replaced by clean gear) always leaves a scar in the way of an offending stub of steel or a hole.  You know, holes are reasonably easy to patch.  A patched hole is usually pretty hard to see from the ground.  That said, even without patching, a holes is less noticeable than a bolt hanger.  The hole doesn&#039;t glint in the sun (or have a so-so paint job).  Most obviously, the hole simply does not protrude from the rock.  Hell, even the steel stubs that the classic chop job leaves are less visible than bolt hangers.

If FAists would, when ever possible, use bolts that can later be removed, those nifty Powers Bolts, for example, it would greatly clean up bolt replacement, hardware upgrade, as well as the chopper&#039;s removal of a bolt in favor of clean gear.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Clearly, in your mind, the removal of a bolt (that can be replaced by clean gear) always leaves a scar in the way of an offending stub of steel or a hole.  You know, holes are reasonably easy to patch.  A patched hole is usually pretty hard to see from the ground.  That said, even without patching, a holes is less noticeable than a bolt hanger.  The hole doesn&#8217;t glint in the sun (or have a so-so paint job).  Most obviously, the hole simply does not protrude from the rock.  Hell, even the steel stubs that the classic chop job leaves are less visible than bolt hangers.</p>
<p>If FAists would, when ever possible, use bolts that can later be removed, those nifty Powers Bolts, for example, it would greatly clean up bolt replacement, hardware upgrade, as well as the chopper&#8217;s removal of a bolt in favor of clean gear.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Matt</title>
		<link>http://climbingnarc.com/2009/01/lets-talk-climbing-style/comment-page-1/#comment-4588</link>
		<dc:creator>Matt</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 24 Jan 2009 17:26:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://climbingnarc.com/?p=2287#comment-4588</guid>
		<description>Passive gear: nuts, hexes, RPs — anything that slots passively into a crack, for lead or anchor protection

Active gear: spring-loaded camming devices (Friends, Camalots, cams, TCUs), Big Bros, Ball Nuts, Sliders, etc. — anything the leader must ACTivate before placing on lead or as an anchor

Fixed gear: pitons, bolts, RURPs, etc — &quot;permanently&quot; affixed to the rock as protection

Chopping: not what Sonnie did on The Path - see your photo above, of a chopped bolt. What Sonnie did was remove the hardware; there&#039;s a big difference, both in intent and end result.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Passive gear: nuts, hexes, RPs — anything that slots passively into a crack, for lead or anchor protection</p>
<p>Active gear: spring-loaded camming devices (Friends, Camalots, cams, TCUs), Big Bros, Ball Nuts, Sliders, etc. — anything the leader must ACTivate before placing on lead or as an anchor</p>
<p>Fixed gear: pitons, bolts, RURPs, etc — &#8220;permanently&#8221; affixed to the rock as protection</p>
<p>Chopping: not what Sonnie did on The Path &#8211; see your photo above, of a chopped bolt. What Sonnie did was remove the hardware; there&#8217;s a big difference, both in intent and end result.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: steve schultz</title>
		<link>http://climbingnarc.com/2009/01/lets-talk-climbing-style/comment-page-1/#comment-4570</link>
		<dc:creator>steve schultz</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Jan 2009 17:39:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://climbingnarc.com/?p=2287#comment-4570</guid>
		<description>Chuck Norris IS God.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Chuck Norris IS God.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: sock hands</title>
		<link>http://climbingnarc.com/2009/01/lets-talk-climbing-style/comment-page-1/#comment-4568</link>
		<dc:creator>sock hands</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Jan 2009 16:20:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://climbingnarc.com/?p=2287#comment-4568</guid>
		<description>not that disclaimer seem to work, but here&#039;s mine:  i appreciate the differing viewpoints on all these issues, but let me pratter on a bit more:

while bolts in a rock are permanent, i find it strange that it keeps people up all night compared to the environmental impacts we have on the planet in all other aspects of our lives.  perhaps this is because we feel that some of our impacts are unavoidable, whereas we can focus on a small issue like bolts in some obscure cliff that no one but climbers and land managers care about?  it&#039;s like how folks get eating disorders when they feel they cannot control other aspects of their lives... they can control their eating...  it&#039;s a psychological thing.

now do not get me wrong, i certainly feel that traddable cliffs should be left without bolts.  i have no aversion to gear... though i&#039;m not very skilled in placing it, knowing that non-climbers think i look cooler with trad gear than foam mats is decent compensation...

but again, the issue is in the minds of climbers and land managers.  it is important for the community to set responsible standards for itself, but once a bolt goes in, the deed has been done.  chopping bolts has NEVER done anything to stop people from other controversial bolting jobs.  the &quot;statement&quot; of chopping bolts is just hot air, whether justified or not.  so, my only point is that if you do not agree with a bolt placement, get over it.  maybe take the hanger and replace one of those homemade jobs on an old sport climb elsewhere, so folks can still use a wired nut to use the already placed bolt.  as soon as you smash the bolt, your righteous indignation just made you as much of an asshole as the one who placed it.  

finally, i like that the idea of climbing as ridiculous is still strong in the community... it reminds us that we are all just full of hot air and dooshbaggery... allows us deflate the ego a bit and be a better part of our small community... but on balance, remember that other high dollar things like the fashion industry and various other keeping up with the joneses things are just as pointless in the grand scheme.  the value of climbing is how it makes us all feel.  often frustrating, but overall, climbing enriches our lives more than a fancy new suit or a polished new sports car.  so, while it is good to keep it all in perspective, the truth we all like to deny is that climbing makes us feel good and makes us feel like part of a community.  to corrode those important and meaningful aspects of climbing based on minute details of ethics is a loss that can resonate beyond the simple minds of the combatants.

word, fools.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>not that disclaimer seem to work, but here&#8217;s mine:  i appreciate the differing viewpoints on all these issues, but let me pratter on a bit more:</p>
<p>while bolts in a rock are permanent, i find it strange that it keeps people up all night compared to the environmental impacts we have on the planet in all other aspects of our lives.  perhaps this is because we feel that some of our impacts are unavoidable, whereas we can focus on a small issue like bolts in some obscure cliff that no one but climbers and land managers care about?  it&#8217;s like how folks get eating disorders when they feel they cannot control other aspects of their lives&#8230; they can control their eating&#8230;  it&#8217;s a psychological thing.</p>
<p>now do not get me wrong, i certainly feel that traddable cliffs should be left without bolts.  i have no aversion to gear&#8230; though i&#8217;m not very skilled in placing it, knowing that non-climbers think i look cooler with trad gear than foam mats is decent compensation&#8230;</p>
<p>but again, the issue is in the minds of climbers and land managers.  it is important for the community to set responsible standards for itself, but once a bolt goes in, the deed has been done.  chopping bolts has NEVER done anything to stop people from other controversial bolting jobs.  the &#8220;statement&#8221; of chopping bolts is just hot air, whether justified or not.  so, my only point is that if you do not agree with a bolt placement, get over it.  maybe take the hanger and replace one of those homemade jobs on an old sport climb elsewhere, so folks can still use a wired nut to use the already placed bolt.  as soon as you smash the bolt, your righteous indignation just made you as much of an asshole as the one who placed it.  </p>
<p>finally, i like that the idea of climbing as ridiculous is still strong in the community&#8230; it reminds us that we are all just full of hot air and dooshbaggery&#8230; allows us deflate the ego a bit and be a better part of our small community&#8230; but on balance, remember that other high dollar things like the fashion industry and various other keeping up with the joneses things are just as pointless in the grand scheme.  the value of climbing is how it makes us all feel.  often frustrating, but overall, climbing enriches our lives more than a fancy new suit or a polished new sports car.  so, while it is good to keep it all in perspective, the truth we all like to deny is that climbing makes us feel good and makes us feel like part of a community.  to corrode those important and meaningful aspects of climbing based on minute details of ethics is a loss that can resonate beyond the simple minds of the combatants.</p>
<p>word, fools.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: sock hands</title>
		<link>http://climbingnarc.com/2009/01/lets-talk-climbing-style/comment-page-1/#comment-4565</link>
		<dc:creator>sock hands</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Jan 2009 15:59:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://climbingnarc.com/?p=2287#comment-4565</guid>
		<description>and chuck norris kills a god...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>and chuck norris kills a god&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

