peterSale

Dear Cyanna,

Are you still out there?

Don’t be afraid to answer me. As long as you are honest with yourself (and me) I will defend your opinions. I may not like them or agree with them. But they are yours and you are entitled to them.

This has been, and always will, be my Main Point.

Who has the right to force you, ask you or encourgage you to change what you think is right to what they think is right? Certainly not me or any of the other hypocrites on this site.

peterSale

Dear Keith,


Sorry to take up so much of your thread. Did you have any idea what you would start?

But I can't stand hypocrites who call others hypocrites.

Climb if you want to climb. Don't if you don't. It is YOUR Choice YOUR conscience. You won't stand out from the crowd either way.

All the best.

Peter_S_Aus

I think I’ll respond. peterSale seems to have a problem with my wife and I going to Venice, greenhouse gas and all that. I note that he mentions that he has visited some 35 countries, presumably not under his own steam. We like Venice, and I suppose we’ll make a small contribution to the local economy when we visit. It is not exactly the sin of Onan to visit a place that one likes.

I visited Uluru about 15 years ago. I created virtually NO greenhouse gas in the process, unless you count about 1000 km by bus, and travelling from Townsville to Mt Isa by train. The balance of the trip was made by bicycle. http://www.fodors.com/community/aust...-road-trip.cfm refers. Maybe I was a bit fit by the time I made it to Yulara with a few thousand kilometres on the clock, so meandering up the rock was no big deal. As I said in the trip report referenced, I’m not proud of that, and was ignorant at the time. I suppose I was a bit proud of my means of transport to Yulara, and I guess I discovered a little of the geomorphology of this country in 8000 km of cycling.

So, climbing Uluru. Climb if you want to. Don’t climb if you don’t want to. The traditional owners, who have leased the area to National Parks, ask that you don’t climb, and ask that you don’t photograph some areas at the base of the rock. It is their right to make such a request, and you won’t get into trouble from anyone, except maybe your own conscience, if you ignore their request. It is the right of anyone, unless climbing is prohibited, to ignore such a request. Simple.

There’s a parallel, the Sistine Chapel. Photography is not allowed. The fact that you’ve paid to get in does not exempt you from that rule, and it’s their rule. It is policed by gentlemen who shout a bit and flash laser pointers into the eyes of the many people who break the rule. I guess they think they have the right to police their rules – and the fact that I don’t share their religion does not exempt me from their rules.

Peter_S_Aus

And Pete, if you want to get inside my head a little more, an extract from something I wrote a while ago:

I’m reminded of the patience of Aboriginal people. At Wattie Creek, the Garunji people achieved land rights by sitting on the ground for eight years. It makes Wattie Creek a special place in Australian history. And when I was at the Barunga Aboriginal Festival a few weeks later, I heard over the PA, “Where’s the Wattie Creek football team”. Puts a bit of a lump in the throat, it would be like hearing the Gallipoli soccer side called, or the Kokoda rugby team summonsed. People with a link, a thread, to places where there has been great courage displayed. Or the Agincourt Archery Club if you were English, I suppose.

So it will take a while before people desist from climbing Uluru - maybe 50 years, maybe 100. The traditional owners are patient people. They know how to wait.

stormbird

Well, PeterSale I think you'll find that Big Red is not part of any traditional land held by our Aborigines nor is it part of any National Park. Our vehicle required no attention after our day on Big Red - no new shocks, no new brakes, no new anything in fact.

Making fun of dementia - not sure what that is but guessing it was the joke I relayed in the Lounge about the friends through the years from about 20 to 90 at the restaurant?? It's a joke for heavens sake.

Our Lamb ads promote racial and cultural stereotypes?

Your first post here was a 'pot stirrer' to say the least and you surely didn't expect us all to pat you on the back for your efforts there.

You've posted this thread across three different topics - a little bizarre behaviour really.

Now you've come back and rather than posting you are seriously ranting now Peter and at a point now where no-one can take your comments seriously as they are what I consider bordering on hysteria.

<<I might change my alias again and… I might not.>> Emphasis on 'again' could this be our old mate Bushranger? He didn't last long either!

stormbird

And BTW, FYI - I certainly don't consider myself a hypocrite but I certainly appreciate your right to think so.

peterSale

Stormbird. ALL of Australia has traditional owners. That's what Mabo was all about. Just because there is no claim in place or it is not declared does not mean is does not belong to them or they will not be offended. I agree YOUR 4WD was fine, it was the other that needed fixing.

I know that you don't think you are a hypocrite. Most hypocrites don't. That's what makes you so hilarious. That is why the bible quote is so apt.

And don't trot out the old "it is only a joke" defense. Try that in a workplace tribunal or a court. See how far it gets you.

I only "rant" in this thread. That's because you keep taking the bait and showing your true colours. I am naturally verbose. I like words and I like to get people to think. Others in the other threads like me. Not because we share the same views, but because we are open to other people's opinions.

peterSale

Dear Peter_S_Aus

Now the we have stopped calling each other names...
I don’t want to get into anybody’s head. It is bad enough being in mine!

There is no doubt the climb will be closed. That is why I visited this year. (yes, yes, we’ve done the whole ignorance and selfish bit)

But I think you do yourself a disservice. I think it will be closed in the next five to ten years. It is clearly one of the goals in the ten year management plan ending in 2020. As soon as the climber number drop to 20% of visitors. My sore point is that they are artificially speeding up the process by what are perceived as spurious closures.

Certainly as land owners they have the right to close it if they want. They have played the political/cultural game and won. I have covered my views on that and the inherent contradictions.

But just because they have the right, does not mean they are correct in the way they exercise it. Just as people disagree with me exercising my current right to climb it. And this goes for any right. A smoker has the right to smoke but should he do it next to you at an outdoor cafe?

Your Sistine Chapel example though, has one flaw. You can visit it. You can marvel at all of its beauty. I haven’t been there so I can’t comment, but are tourists stopped from seeing the most beautiful and special parts? We will be when the climb is closed.

To most tourists the Rock is just a rock and they do it and themselves no honour by trampling over it. But to others like myself, it is special. I would like to see a compromise. Small guided groups? Written application? I don’t know.

My main concern I suppose is that it was originally declared a World Heritage are for its geology then seven years later for its cultural significance. As a World Heritage area it should belong to or at least be accessible to anyone who is truly interested in either of these two aspects. How you would judge that is another debate for another day. It just seems that the geological aspect has faded into the background. And for me that is shame.

I’ve said it in my other thread. I am not interested in any Cultures per se. That is not why I travel. Geomorphology is.

Is this better than name calling?

MonicaRichards

PeterSale, seriously, that was the best you could do? I must indeed really be a hypocrite if I replaced my furniture bought when I was 28 and newly married 14 years later with a more updated style and then was frustrated when St. Vincent de Paul wouldn't take the old one.

ViOnline

Before my trip to Australia I was dreaming about climb to the top of the Ayers Rock, but my interest in climb was gone when I arrived there. Read this if you have any doubts about climb it or not
http://www.shorttraveltips.com/desti...imb-it-or-not/

peterSale

You don't climb Ayers Rock because it is the biggest. You climb it because it is there and because it is special.

Sadly, you missed one of the best walking experiences in the world. The five hours I spent on top was not nearly long enough. I would have needed at least another three to see it properly. But, thanks to silly regulations there was not enough time.

It is however, your conscience and your choice.

Peter_S_Aus

Nobody will prevent you climbing if your heart is set on it. The signs request that you do not climb, and that’s a request only. But when the climb is closed, then that’s a prohibition and you must not climb.

The climb is closed when the rangers consider the conditions are unsafe – too windy, too hot, rain threatening. They are naturally conservative with closing the climb, because it is the rangers who have to risk themselves if people climb when the conditions are unsafe.

ViOnline

@peterSale, that is the reason why I did NOT climb, because it is special rock for locals.
I don't think I missed anything, because I climbed Mount Augustus, where you can spend as much time as you wish and be there by yourself.