
Subject:
[cohp] Digest Number 5269
From:
cohp@yahoogroups.com
Date:
3/18/2016 1:43 AM
To:
cohp@yahoogroups.com
X-Account-Key:
account2
X-UIDL:
GmailId15388e4bf085b61d
X-Mozilla-Status:
0001
X-Mozilla-Status2:
00000000
Delivered-To:
oldadit@gmail.com
Received:
by 10.76.97.100 with SMTP id dz4csp922166oab; Fri, 18 Mar 2016 01:43:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received:
by 10.140.98.71 with SMTP id n65mr20096956qge.22.1458290605905; Fri, 18 Mar 2016 01:43:25 -0700 (PDT)
Return-Path:
<sentto-346088-5269-1458290604-oldadit=gmail.com@returns.groups.yahoo.com>
Received:
from ng13-vm2.bullet.mail.bf1.yahoo.com (ng13-vm2.bullet.mail.bf1.yahoo.com. [98.139.164.84]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id f195si4262533qhf.83.2016.03.18.01.43.25 for <oldadit@gmail.com> (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 18 Mar 2016 01:43:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received-SPF:
pass (google.com: domain of sentto-346088-5269-1458290604-oldadit=gmail.com@returns.groups.yahoo.com designates 98.139.164.84 as permitted sender) client-ip=98.139.164.84;
Authentication-Results:
mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of sentto-346088-5269-1458290604-oldadit=gmail.com@returns.groups.yahoo.com designates 98.139.164.84 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=sentto-346088-5269-1458290604-oldadit=gmail.com@returns.groups.yahoo.com; dkim=pass header.i=@yahoogroups.com; dmarc=pass (p=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=yahoogroups.com
DKIM-Signature:
v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoogroups.com; s=echoe; t=1458290604; bh=6/0nd1zdbOcySi3e9uONXNiZzQeVMQQG+HUGs/kqR84=; h=List-Id:List-Unsubscribe:Date:From:To:Subject:Reply-To:From:Subject; b=cQMXx+P8mhP3ZC29aaaRzKERBoyzjGromLmg4LMXI0755K+uHgiVLh7W1YJ4hff7rhcu6iAgq7Mhj6EpMDhtOkOk3M8Ct8Hc7/ohFYSbuHhBvKkCfSxD8NGzMMj6slTroQZRzBZWDxk0DpoedAR1aTsBlO1N+Ch53yU1gBzNIkE=
Received:
from [98.139.213.66] by ng13.bullet.mail.bf1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 18 Mar 2016 08:43:24 -0000
Received:
from [10.193.39.8] by tg102.bullet.mail.bf1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 18 Mar 2016 08:43:24 -0000
X-Yahoo-Newman-Id:
346088-d5269
MIME-Version:
1.0
Message-ID:
<1458290604.265.27028.m7@yahoogroups.com>
Mailing-List:
list cohp@yahoogroups.com; contact cohp-owner@yahoogroups.com
Delivered-To:
mailing list cohp@yahoogroups.com
List-Id:
<cohp.yahoogroups.com>
Precedence:
bulk
List-Unsubscribe:
<mailto:cohp-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com>
X-Yahoo-Newman-Property:
groups-digest-ff-m
Reply-To:
"No Reply"<notify-dg-cohp@yahoogroups.com>
Content-Type:
text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding:
quoted-printable

County High Pointing in all 50 states
Yahoo! Groups
County High Pointing in all 50 states Group
7 Messages
Digest #5269
1a
"Lower 48" by powdrfox
1b
Re: "Lower 48" by wingerhp
1c
Re: "Lower 48" by "fplobdell" deadbugman
1d
Re: "Lower 48" by "Beth Lakin" beth3up
1e
Re: "Lower 48" by "Andy Martin" oldadit
1f
Re: "Lower 48" by ginger37372000
2a
Re: John Kirk lists all the USA 300' prominence summits by powdrfox

Messages
1a
"Lower 48"
Thu Mar 17, 2016 5:38 am (PDT) . Posted by:
powdrfox
I have a bone to pick, and it's not with anyone in particular, just the fact that the "lower 48" is a term that a majority of people use. In no sense does "lower 48" represent the 48 states that most people mean when they use the term. Here are some examples:

Lowest, given that low means south: AK and MN are excluded for their northern reach
Or AK and ND are excluded for their farthest north southernmost reach
Lowest HP elevation: AK and CA are excluded
Lowest mean elevation: CO and WY are excluded
Lowest low point elevation: CO and WY are excluded

While Alaska makes the most sense to be excluded from the "lower 48", Hawaii isn't excluded in any of these interpretations.

My solution to the problem is to use a variety of terms that do describe that "48" such as CONUS, the "first 48", the "original 48", or maybe even the "connected 48". "Continental US" is out because Alaska is still on the American continent.

All I ask is that we consider what the terms we use actually mean. And don't take me too seriously.

-Gustav


Reply to sender . Reply to group . Reply via Web Post . All Messages (6) . Top ^
1b
Re: "Lower 48"
Thu Mar 17, 2016 6:49 am (PDT) . Posted by:
wingerhp
could conterminous be the term we would use?

1 : having a common boundary <conterminous countries>. 2 : coterminous. 3 : enclosed within one common boundary <the 48conterminous states>.



Reply to sender . Reply to group . Reply via Web Post . All Messages (6) . Top ^
1c
Re: "Lower 48"
Thu Mar 17, 2016 6:52 am (PDT) . Posted by:
"fplobdell" deadbugman
Contiguous 48?  Or conterminous 48?

----- Original Message -----

From: "powdrfox@yahoo.com [cohp]" <cohp@yahoogroups.com>
To: cohp@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, March 17, 2016 8:38:13 AM
Subject: [cohp] "Lower 48"

 

I have a bone to pick, and it's not with anyone in particular, just the fact that the "lower 48" is a term that a majority of people use. In no sense does "lower 48" represent the 48 states that most people mean when they use the term. Here are some examples:

Lowest, given that low means south: AK and MN are excluded for their northern reach
Or AK and ND are excluded for their farthest north southernmost reach
Lowest HP elevation: AK and CA are excluded
Lowest mean elevation: CO and WY are excluded
Lowest low point elevation: CO and WY are excluded

While Alaska makes the most sense to be excluded from the "lower 48", Hawaii isn't excluded in any of these interpretations.

My solution to the problem is to use a variety of terms that do describe that "48" such as CONUS, the "first 48", the "original 48", or maybe even the "connected 48". "Continental US" is out because Alaska is still on the American continent.

All I ask is that we consider what the terms we use actually mean. And don't take me too seriously.

-Gustav

Reply to sender . Reply to group . Reply via Web Post . All Messages (6) . Top ^
1d
Re: "Lower 48"
Thu Mar 17, 2016 6:52 am (PDT) . Posted by:
"Beth Lakin" beth3up
contiguous
k?n?ti?yo?o?s/
*adjective*

1. sharing a common border; touching.
"the 48 contiguous states"
synonyms: adjacent
<https://www.google.com/search?safe=strict&espv=2&rlz=1CATAAA_enUS652US655&biw=1366&bih=657&q=define+adjacent&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi1ttXt7sfLAhWCmoMKHSr2BQkQ_SoIHTAA>
, neighboring
<https://www.google.com/search?safe=strict&espv=2&rlz=1CATAAA_enUS652US655&biw=1366&bih=657&q=define+neighboring&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi1ttXt7sfLAhWCmoMKHSr2BQkQ_SoIHjAA>
, adjoining
<https://www.google.com/search?safe=strict&espv=2&rlz=1CATAAA_enUS652US655&biw=1366&bih=657&q=define+adjoining&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi1ttXt7sfLAhWCmoMKHSr2BQkQ_SoIHzAA>
, bordering, next-door; More

<https://www.google.com/search?safe=strict&espv=2&rlz=1CATAAA_enUS652US655&biw=1366&bih=657&q=define+touching&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi1ttXt7sfLAhWCmoMKHSr2BQkQ_SoIITAA>
<https://www.google.com/search?safe=strict&espv=2&rlz=1CATAAA_enUS652US655&biw=1366&bih=657&q=define+proximate&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi1ttXt7sfLAhWCmoMKHSr2BQkQ_SoIIjAA>
- next or together in sequence.
"five hundred contiguous dictionary entries"

On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 7:49 AM, wingpeople@gmail.com [cohp] <
cohp@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

>
>
> could conterminous be the term we would use?
>
> 1 : having a common boundary <conterminous countries>. 2 : coterminous. 3
> : enclosed within one common boundary <the 48conterminous states>.
>
>
>
Reply to sender . Reply to group . Reply via Web Post . All Messages (6) . Top ^
1e
Re: "Lower 48"
Thu Mar 17, 2016 1:16 pm (PDT) . Posted by:
"Andy Martin" oldadit


Wikipedia likes Contiguous or Conterminous
>>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contiguous_United_States

National Geographic does not like "lower 48":

>>The term "Lower 48" is also used to refer to the conterminous United
States. The National Geographic style guide recommends the use of
contiguous or conterminous United States instead of lower 48 when the 48
states are meant, unless used in the context of Alaska

----------------- grammar joke section -------------------------------

General: "Sir, we're mining too many useless minerals."

Hitler: "Mine less then"

Grammar Nazi bursts in: "MINE FEWER."

Hitler looks over: "Yes?"

Reply to sender . Reply to group . Reply via Web Post . All Messages (6) . Top ^
1f
Re: "Lower 48"
Thu Mar 17, 2016 5:17 pm (PDT) . Posted by:
ginger37372000
In Alaska the term lower 48 is often associated with the phrase, We really dont care how you do it in the lower 48.

J

From: mailto:cohp@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, March 17, 2016 1:16 PM
To: Cohp Egroup
Subject: [cohp] Re: "Lower 48"

Wikipedia likes Contiguous or Conterminous
>>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contiguous_United_States

National Geographic does not like "lower 48":

>>The term "Lower 48" is also used to refer to the conterminous United
States. The National Geographic style guide recommends the use of
contiguous or conterminous United States instead of lower 48 when the 48
states are meant, unless used in the context of Alaska

----------------- grammar joke section -------------------------------

General: "Sir, we're mining too many useless minerals."

Hitler: "Mine less then"

Grammar Nazi bursts in: "MINE FEWER."

Hitler looks over: "Yes?"

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
Reply to sender . Reply to group . Reply via Web Post . All Messages (6) . Top ^
2a
Re: John Kirk lists all the USA 300' prominence summits
Thu Mar 17, 2016 5:45 am (PDT) . Posted by:
powdrfox
After looking through the ranked peaks list on that site a few months ago, I was immensely impressed with the idea and was even considering shifting my main goals to prominence rather than COHPing. Then I recalled that I live in Iowa... The list of 99 COHPs wins out by shear numbers, but just wait until I move.

Congratulations to John Kirk on completing such an incomprehensible project!

-Gustav
Reply to sender . Reply to group . Reply via Web Post . All Messages (2) . Top ^
Visit Your Group

    New Members 1

Yahoo! Groups
 Privacy  Unsubscribe  Terms of Use
