captain_stan

You've just described the static line and IAD training methods which may be available to you as close as East Troy, WI. Back in the day, static line was the standard. I earned my A license w/o exceeding 10,000' AGL and still graduate A-license holders that way to this day w/ IAD method. As an instructor, I think a program could be tailored to achieve this from 8000' AGL if necessary--it would just take more jumps to get the working time. If you found that you couldn't exceed hop-&-pop altitude w/o discomfort, you could dedicate your efforts to canopy control, accuracy, and swooping after earning your license, hoping for a medical improvent later. I'm having all the fun I can stand on a retirement budget, usually buying a lift to only 3-4K' unless I'm training a student. In static line or IAD training, you could start jumping from 3500' and work your way up to higher altitudes as your condition permitted, meaning more canopy time in the beginning to let you have some fun while you are "testing the waters." Best of luck & keep looking for a creative solution.

Well said. The OP raises the question as to the existence of "a higher power," outside ourselves, to which we must surrender as a pre-requisite for personal growth. I say that "higher power" is inside us all the time waiting to be tapped, but I agree that the concept of surrendering may have some value. Letting go of our ego boundaries is a worthwhile form of surrendering to our subconscious, which of couse is not an exteral power, but an internal one. This process can lead to a greater acceptance of the world around us and ultimately a better understanding of ourselves. Religion can provide a mechanism to facilitate some of this process by utilizing symbolism, but this can be counterproductive if taken too literally.

Let me guess--you never rolled the left and right halves of the nose and stuffed them into the center cell? This old man will still jump one if I can pack it myself.

Every time the clergy have tried to explain it to me, it was apparent that they were referring to their church.

I can understand a seller being mistaken about the model/size of the reserve he owned, or not wanting to unpack it, but I wouldn't consider buying it before seeing the data card--via emailed photo if necessary. Of course only the inspection will reveal that the packed reserve matches the data card. I took in a repack job that had critical data worn off the orphaned reserve's "death label" so it couldn't be verified as "approved." I was probably the first rigger to refuse to repack it.

Exactly--the only real drawback, which can indeed be managed or improved. Any old-timer who's jumped one can help with packing tips, or a forum search will provide these. I make my own sliders, so adding a pocket is a no-brainer for me. Although they turn somewhat sluggishly, they flare very well. I put about 100 jumps a Sabre 120 loaded at 1.5 and was pleased with the landing. The square planform is suitable for wingsuiting, and the short, forgiving recovery arc is suitable for a novice who wants to start using front risers on final.

Absoultely correct. Understanding causal theory is a wonderful thing. But after a point, complicated explanations just add more fluff to the issue. Avoiding the repetion of your negative experience is exactly as simple. as you have expressed.

I bought a hard-bound, horizontally ruled personal journal at a book store one time. I made a template and hand-drew in some vertical lines to delineate date, jump #, etc. I logged 1000 jumps in that one. Now I'm using a small binder that looks like a personal planner, complete with external clasp and internal pen-holder + pockets for ID, etc. It's covered in black Cordura and hold 4x6" loose-leaf sheets which I print-out by computer, cut w/ a paper cutter, and punch w/ 6 holes per sheet. At the end of every year, I take out all the pages, clip them together for storage, and fill it with more blank sheets.

We've been equally despised by both sides for so long that I can hardly tell them apart anymore.

Thanks for recognizing my intention. Just as significant is my use of the word "choose." In the absence of proof or disproof, when there is no intellectual basis, belief becomes a matter of choice. We are hearing from some believers and non-believers who think that such a choice must be made. I say that when the process becomes that subjective, such choices may have meaning to those individuals but have no value beyond that.

Don't be too hard on them; I attribute this to cultural differences. In the US, we have an arrogant, intolerant, abusive brand of religion that can indeed behave very offensively. And since atheism is often reactionary, a greater offense is met with a stronger backlash.

So is the question of whether Casey Anthony deliberately killed her daughter. Both of these questions have been argued, and some people feel compelled to make an emotional decision to accept an absolute, yes-or-no answer, even though they may never know the truth. To admit that one doesn't have enough information to reach an absolute conclusion is more rational than clinging to an answer that makes us feel good.

You're gonna have a hard time selling that idea here. There's good evidence to the contrary in my case. It would be more correct to say we're just less interested in arguing or trying to convince others.

I can only guess what your rigger charges, but I replace kill-lines cheaper than I patch canopies. Such a PC repair might be a good investment if needed. Also be sure and check the kill line length on that "extra" PC if you're gonna swap those out. Good luck!

Is that a rhetorical question? How can I have a meaningful dialog with someone who insists he knows what "everyone wants?" Let me make this easier for both of us--I can't interest myself in hearing the standard "Christian" dogma yet another time. Nor can I think of a good reason to debate your issues. This thread is about agnosticism, not Christianity. Be a good sport and have a go at the atheists.

I don't expect to arrive anywhere when I die, nor do I have any reason to hope or fear that a god will be at any such destination. Although I don't have any reason to think a god exists, I have a particularly strong opinion that I need not fear it if indeed it does. "Christians" who try to incite us to live in fear of their god have ushered many otherwise open-minded folks into the ranks of atheism. But my observation of this behavior doesn't bias me against the existence of any god. Since you asked my opinion, let me put it this way: My opinion of your ideology is similar to your opinion of the Roman Catholic Church.

If you can convince yourself that you know what "everyone wants," then you can convince yourself of anything. That would be called "delusion."

Now that's a hilarious observation. Can you imagine how proud it makes me to have stirred this up?

The thing is, they probably don't really want anything to do with you either, but may think you just aren't important enought to hate. So we tolerate you. You'd rather be hated? Some people are never happy...

Now that's pompous as hell and almost clever! But what if I simply have enough humility to admit that there are things I don't know?

Unite my ass! I'd settle for tolerance!

The old-school HG rule of thumb was "Don't fly any higher than you are willing to fall." Like skydiving, hang-gliding has fortunately become much safer in modern times.

WTF do you know about what I hope? The fact that you sit on the fence. Fences are for smug, intolerant people like you to build. It's true enough that arbitrarily chosing one side or the other, for the sake of belonging, has little appeal to me. Atheists and evangelists, Democrats and Republicans all show me equal contempt for my refusal to commit to being their ally or enemy. And you pretend to know my hope. If I hoped for truth and ideological tolerance, I'd have a hard time finding them in any of these groups.

WTF do you know about what I hope? You're nothing more than a weak attempt to redefine what I have said to make it fit your agenda.

Think of us as slackers who are almost, but not quite, up to your level of disbelief. I'd be comfortable enough being labeled a "backsliding atheist"