Team Maddie UK

How's about A1 ? I believe that each number is the decimal equivalent of it's hexadecimal predecessor

Conratulations Oh Ruler of Tupperware !!! And on to that grail that is the 2000!!! Martin, Lynn and Maddie

NOT 'SNIPPED' The GC.com list of "countries" is an appalling indictment of the Murricane education system and shows a breathtaking ignorance of real-world Geography. Just take a look at the first page of "countries" to see the absurdities. Åland is a country? No, it is part of Finland. Antarctica is a country? No, it's a continent, not a country. Why are Wallis and Futuna regarded as being a country, but not St Pierre et Michelon? What aren't Svalbard and Jan Mayen regarded as being part of Norway? What about Bear Island? Why are the British Virgin Islands regarded as being a country, but not the Falklands? Why St Helena but not Ascension? After all, St Helena is dependent upon Ascension, not vice-versa. Then there is the issue of whether you should break such a list down into the constituent parts of countries, such as the States of the US, the provinces of Canada etc.. After all, as has already been pointed out, Texas is bigger than a large number of "countries" combined. California, if a country, would have one of the dozen or so largest economies in the world. You could probably put the combined landmasses of half the GC.com list of countries into the Gibson Desert of Western Australia and make not so much as a dent in a tinnie of XXXX or knock the froth off a stubbie of the amber nectar. If you're going to examine the constituent parts of countries, then you immediately have to revisit the questions over why such countries as Scotland were not already in the list of "countries". Whatever one thinks of Nationalism, either for it or agin it, it is undeniable that Scotland has almost all of the characteristics of a country. The Scottish parliament, like its Welsh counterpart, is functionally autonomous from the "Mother of all Parliaments" on devolved issues. Scotland, unlike the individual States of the US, prints and mints its own currency. The Scottish legal system, both Criminal Law and Civil Law is completely distinct from the English equivalent. Culturally and linguistically, Scotland has a very clear separate identity. By almost any measure, except UN recognition, Scotland is a de facto and almost a de jure "country". If you're going to break down the list of countries into constituent "states" and "provinces" then sooner or later you have to decide when to stop. Take the United Arab Emirates as an example. Dubai and Abu Dhabi are both large, culturally identifiable and quite distinct entities. What about the smaller Emirates? What about Sharjah? Ok, I'll give you that one. What about the real teenieweenies? What about Umm al Qawain? It's about the size of a VW Beetle. What about Enclaves? They're "States" too, at least nominally. What about Oman's Madha? It's about the size of the coin-return tray in a Japanese telephonebox. It hasn't even got enough room for a chihuahua's ID-tag-sized Micro -- though it has got a Virt! Should Madha be put in the same "state" category as Canada's Northwest Territories or the Strine Queensland or Brazil's Matto Grosso, or Alaska? Earthcaches are physical, not political geography, but when you try to break it all down into categorised "countries" and/or "states", you cannot ignore political and social geography or even separate it from the geological stuff. The UN recognises about 196 countries, plus a small handful of other "entities" such as Palestine and the Vatican as "observers". Surely that list of countries, which is no doubt available from one of the UN websites, would be a more supportable list of countries, especially for a project which aims to improve education in Geography? Hear... Hear... Martin

I'll go with 5 although it seems to fall apart ....

You'll need to upload the picture somewhere like this free site. Then post the link in the forum using the wee picture icon. Martin

I must apologise for my frivolous comment taking this thread completely off topic. Martin

The Holy Grail was recently spotted at the Shrops 2006 event.

I don't see a problem with condoms in caches. If the kids are young then a quick explanation of what its for would be suffice (no need for the mechanics). Alternatively, you could snatch it up with apparent glee, tear off the wrapping, and blow it up as big as you could. "Look! it's one of those ultra-strong balloons!" Then let the air out slowly so that it makes that rasberry noise and put it back in the box again. "Let's leave it for the next cacher". Thereby entertaining the child and teaching them the value of sharing Martin is it wise to teach kids the value of sharing condoms??? Ahh, but they don't know that they're condoms do they. That's the whole point ))

I don't see a problem with condoms in caches. If the kids are young then a quick explanation of what its for would be suffice (no need for the mechanics). Alternatively, you could snatch it up with apparent glee, tear off the wrapping, and blow it up as big as you could. "Look! it's one of those ultra-strong balloons!" Then let the air out slowly so that it makes that rasberry noise and put it back in the box again. "Let's leave it for the next cacher". Thereby entertaining the child and teaching them the value of sharing Martin you wouldn't be blowing it up if you had a latex alergy ROFLMAO

Wel, well well... Thanks for that. You certainly learn something everyday We could have done with a few rolls at Shrops eh Andy? Martin

Thanks for that tip Alibags. I spent ages sanding boxes when we set out the Zodiac series but time proved that the additional 'key' didn't really help. Now... to find a blow-torch Martin

Lynn currently supplies some Groundspeak and other items from home and does have a supply of cammo tape. A roll of this costs £4-00 + shipping which is £5 total. Just a wee aside in case you're interested... I always thought it was called 'Duck Tape' as well. While in the states though, I discovered that it is actually called Duct Tape and is used (funnily enough for ducting work. I suppose alnog the way some lazy diction has resulted in the corruption. Martin & Lynn

I don't see a problem with condoms in caches. If the kids are young then a quick explanation of what its for would be suffice (no need for the mechanics). Alternatively, you could snatch it up with apparent glee, tear off the wrapping, and blow it up as big as you could. "Look! it's one of those ultra-strong balloons!" Then let the air out slowly so that it makes that rasberry noise and put it back in the box again. "Let's leave it for the next cacher". Thereby entertaining the child and teaching them the value of sharing Martin

Well done to the whole family:) Keep up the good work. Lynn, Martin & Maddie

I honestly think that you (Megalithic) are preaching to the converted. We have had the pleasure of meeting many geocachers in our albeit short history in this sport. All of them, without exception, have impressed me as people who have the utmost respect for ancient monuments and sites. Yes, maybe a cache gets placed somewhere in proximity in an attempt to get others to vist but, No, the site is never compromised. In several cases, the cache may be as much as a mile away along a footpath that takes you past said ancient monument (twice! once there and one back). I can understand your concern but must emphasise that it is unfounded. Our reviewers are ever vigilant to ensure that caches are placed appropriately and offer no risk to these structures or there surroundings. We have recently had a cache placement rejected even though, being familiar with the area, we ourselves saw no problem with it. We simply moved it to an acceptable area. All the geocachers we have met would do the same. Personally, I feel that, if you feel so strongly about these wonderful artefacts, you would be better aiming your efforts and energy towards the folks that are raising funds in a pretence to be protecting them. Martin

I'll take a guess at Firestone Martin You're not the only one.

Approx 30 in Shropshire one or two of which I know already have caches at suitably safe distances Martin

A hard one to get the head around this one. i. The 'speed of the signal' however, is fixed at the speed of light and doesn't vary under any circumstances (this being the major tenet of the theory itself). General Relativity as I recall would suggest that a clock further away from the Earths centre of mass would run faster. That would result in a steadily increasing error in the time difference measured by the receiver. The receiver would have to come to the conclusion that the signal was sent from some time in the future and therefore took a negative amount of time to reach it resulting in a negative distance. (This is getting very confusing so I'm going to stop before my brain explodes). As to the magnitude of the error and the extra points... well you can <insert expletive> right awf! I can't now remember the formulae for calculating this sort of thing as it's now 35 years since I studied Physics at Uni and haven't had cause to use them since. (until now that is Further to this, I seriously doubt that, even with a calculator at my disposal and the formulae ready in my head, I would be able to put the two together in a meanigful manner after a few pints in a pub! ii. 'Speed of the signal'? again see above. Special Relativity is all about the relative speed of the craft to the observer (GPSr in this case). The faster you go the slower your clock goes and you stay much younger than the poor geocacher on the ground hunting his tupperware. This is essentially the opposite effect of the above and would result in a steadily increasing error in a positive sense; the sattelite appearing to be further and further away than it really is. (not nearly as confusing and my brain has now averted a total melt-down) As to the magnitude of the error and the extra points... see (i) above. iii. As stated above they effect the result in opposite senses. iv. This is an interesting one. Since I had never considered this problem before I have to assume that either the resulting errors are too small to be considered significant or that some form of compensation is actually being performed. The former seems unlikely as even if the difference in clock speed was very small it would be cumulative and eventually become significant at some time in the future. So how is it sorted out? Perhaps the US military can uplink to the satelites periodically and reset the clocks? Or, since the effects can be calculated the clocks could be adjusted in some way so that they would be incorrect on the ground but, once in orbit, would run at the correct speed. It would still seem to me however, that the margin of error in terms of the orbit etc. would still require some form of periodic adjustment. This is probably all bollox and my brain will have to explode anyway when I read the Foresters inevitably long and detailed correct explanation once everyone has had a crack at this. Martin

And when was the vacuous 'Wossy' ever on form.

I wouldn't worry too much about this. With the record water-shortage, where are they going to get the water from to fill it up? Martin

Well Done Jon!

Well done on your 100th Cache Martin & Lynn

C NGRATULATI NS on your 1 th find. Glad to have been a part of it. Lynn, Martin & Maddie

Not a true test. A GPS is not needed to locate any cache. True enough. Was a GPS needed to "hide" it? Ahaa.. now this question is much tougher. Depends on the use of the word "needed". If you mean needed to stay within the rules, certainly... The rules clearly state that hiding sites must be visited by a GPS user to get the coordinates for publication... but if you mean needed as in to have accurate reproducible and reliable coordinates then no.... a GPS is not needed. Photos and maps do not lose signal, bounce you from place to place, get upset at clouds, leaf cover, overhead power lines, sunspots, or any of the other real or imagined problems that you can learn all about by reading these pages. Regarding what I have in bold in the quote above, you have basically defined geocaching. If you want to sit in your backyard at night or early morning and find the ISS, there are web sites for that. This is a geocaching web site, not a site to identify satellites. I have 3 programs loaded on my PDA that do that for me. Team Maddie UK, your log is one thing that bothers me about the cache. You took a picture of your watch and a GPS in the grass. The GPS photo is way fuzzy, but knowing old yeller eTrex, I know you are on the satellite screen. There are *no coordinates* on that screen on the yellow eTrex. You basically showed us you had satellite lock. It would be nice if you showed us your coordinates. If I were the cache owner, I would have deleted your log. The page clearly says "Catch this event by either: Making a picture of the ISS crossing. Or a picture, showing your watch, gps and a printout of the crossing from the above mentioned website. You don't show your coordinates nor do you have the printed information from the Heavens Above web site (one of the sites sync'd to my PDA actually). Unfortunately, it was another of the "anything goes" caches. It was not being maintained properly. That cache and your log unfortunately are prime examples of why locationless caches failed on the GC site. I know you won't like hearing that, but it is what it is. You are, of course, correct. However, I'm sure that the placer of this cache took into consideration the fact that a large number of folks logged it at the same time from the same place. Many of the geocaching community are much less pedantic than others and make their judgements within the fun spirit of the game. Additionally, I fail to see why a cache placers generous flexibility could lead to the failure of that type of cache. Martin

Depends on how many females are in the group. While the men are arguing over which GPS is giving the right direction the woman has it done. L