Page 1 of 1


PostPosted: Wed Dec 23, 2009 10:50 am
by DSunwall
More importantly, 300' doesn't change with tradition. 200 years from now when the majority of peak names have changed, the prominences have not. It doesn't matter what you call something or what people think are points deserving of status as a summit when there is no science or consistent criteria behind those opinions. The physical properties speak for themselves. That is what the p300 rule is in use for here - a consistent minimum acceptance criteria. We've been over this enough times now.

Good argument. The only negative I see is using feet rather than meters, most likely metric will be the only measurement in use in 200 years. A 100 meter rise would make more sense. What happens when you start on Europe? :rofl:

Re: 300'

PostPosted: Fri Dec 25, 2009 8:53 pm
by John Kirk
Europeans are already pretty far along in this. If you do all the p300 footers, by default you've done the 100m summits.