How to go to Galapagos for only $5000....

[Jeff Wagg]

So.. there is one unique cabin on the ship that is still available. It's the penthouse suite, it has one queen bed and two single beds (that can become a queen bed). It's by far the fanciest and largest cabin aboard, with two balconies, two bathroom, and two couches.
http://www.randi.org/amazingmeeting/cruise3/penthouse.jpg


It's most stunning feature.. it's the cheapest cabin on board. At $20,000, it sleeps four.. which breaks down to $5,000 a person.

If you can find three other people to go with you.. two of whom don't mind sharing a bed, you can go on the Galapagos cruise (http://www.amazingmeeting.com) for just $5,000.

Still a lot.. but a bargain when you consider how nice the cabin is. As of this writing, the cabin is still available, but space is filling up fast.

[Wowbagger]

Whoa!

Say, any of y'all skepchicks wanna share the bed with Wowbagger?

(I promise not to snore, too much.)

[Jeff Wagg]

Snoring requires sleeping. Somehow, I don't think that's what's on your mind.

[Wowbagger]

Snoring requires sleeping. Somehow, I don't think that's what's on your mind.
With two other people in the room, I doubt I would be doing much else than sleep.

[HarryKeogh]

I'm holding out hope for a "How to go to Galapagos for only $500" thread.

[Solus]

I'm holding out hope for a "How to go to Galapagos for only $500" thread.

I'm with you, there should be a steerage section of the ship. Even if the cabins are the size of a closet and we have to bring our food that would be fine. :p

[Skeptic Ginger]

The $5,000 is manageable, but you are forgetting airfare to the port of departure. I would seriously consider it if it really were only $5,000. I'm pretty sure I don't snore.

Looks like I'd need $7,000 bare minimum. I'll mull it over.

[Jeff Wagg]

Nah, airfare is $6-700. I don't know what you'd need the extra $1300 for. And heck, for all I know you live in Quito and you won't need any airfare. :)

[Skeptic Ginger]

Nah, airfare is $6-700. I don't know what you'd need the extra $1300 for. And heck, for all I know you live in Quito and you won't need any airfare. :)
Don't know, I just did a quick Expedia check for similar dates in Aug 07 and it was ~$1,400 Seattle to Quito. They can't give a price for a year out. I rounded up for the misc expenses like hotel overnight coming and going. It's pretty hard to time your flight arrival for the boat departure.

So is it only $700 from Florida? That would make it cheaper to fly there first.

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Don't know, I just did a quick Expedia check for similar dates in Aug 07 and it was ~$1,400 Seattle to Quito.

That surprises me. I checked St. Louis to Quito for Aug 07, and it was about $740 on American. I wonder why Seattle would be almost double?

[Jeff Wagg]

Don't know, I just did a quick Expedia check for similar dates in Aug 07 and it was ~$1,400 Seattle to Quito. They can't give a price for a year out. I rounded up for the misc expenses like hotel overnight coming and going. It's pretty hard to time your flight arrival for the boat departure.

So is it only $700 from Florida? That would make it cheaper to fly there first.

Yeah, I can't figure out why Seattle would be so much more either. As for the hotel, it's included.

[Hindmost]

The extra cost may have to do with expats and exchange students returning to their respective homes...airlines take advantage of this and kick up the prices on certain fares.

glenn

[Skeptic Ginger]

Yeah, I can't figure out why Seattle would be so much more either. As for the hotel, it's included.
OK, guess I'll look at the web page.

About how much is the Machu Picchu trip?

I'm going to check on a few other cities to fly out of.

I might just have to join you all.

[Skeptic Ginger]

Oh you guys are going to hate me for posting this:Tourists Put Galapagos at Risk (http://www.galapagos.org/news/05_2007_nyt.html)The Galapagos Islands may soon be added to the World Heritage in Danger list. Recently, at the urging of the Ecuadorean government, a UNESCO mission visited the national park and marine reserve there and confirmed that it is ''under threat,'' in part because of the ''uncontrolled development of tourism.''

''Tourism is the principal economic activity, which not only draws a large number of visitors to the site, but also promotes immigration for employment,'' said Kishore Rao, deputy director of the World Heritage Center in Paris. He said that alien animal and plant species could severely affect the fragile ecosystem, which includes giant tortoises, marine iguanas and blue-footed boobies. As a result, he added, ''There is a need to plan and manage tourism in a much more sustainable and equitable manner.''

''We share UNESCO's concerns,'' said Johannah Barry, president of the Galapagos Conservancy, noting that the population on the islands has more than doubled in the last decade to 30,000. In the last 20 years, the number of tourists has risen to roughly 100,000 in 2006 from 20,000 visitors in 1985, according to Galapagos National Park figures.

The islands, which were once visited by small groups, are now being visited by large vessels, said Barry, who explained that visitors are now backed up on the footpaths since only small groups are allowed on a trail at a time.

Last winter, Judith Falloon-Reid of Discovery World Cruises, said the line took 500 people to the Galapagos four times. She says it has scheduled two cruises there in 2008.

''Large ships impact the shoreline and don't maintain the integrity of the island,'' said Greg Findley, the founder of Detour, which takes 300 travelers a year to the Galapagos, on ships carrying 16 to 32 passengers.

''I am hoping the industry will sit down and decide on regulations,'' Barry said. "The whole idea is to swim and walk with the animals, not line up with 50 other people to go on shore.'' The ship takes 98 people?

Not that I would mind 98 people who are all friends as much as 98 strangers.

Has this been discussed anywhere?

[phyz]

I'm all for regulations restricting visitation. Preserve this treasure! In the meantime, I'm booked for AA3. If regulations preclude such visitations in the future, so be it. But 98 people are going to visit via Celebrity's Xpedition in August '08. And I plan on being one of them.

[Dicon]

Don't know, I just did a quick Expedia check for similar dates in Aug 07 and it was ~$1,400 Seattle to Quito.

That's odd... I've checked the SEA to UIO prices a few times now on Expedia and they always come up around $800. In fact, right now I'm seeing several priced at $879.

But then again, airline pricing is one of the world's greatest mysteries, so you may have looked at time they were feeling grumpy.

[The Central Scrutinizer]

So.. there is one unique cabin on the ship that is still available. It's the penthouse suite, it has one queen bed and two single beds (that can become a queen bed). It's by far the fanciest and largest cabin aboard, with two balconies, two bathroom, and two couches.
http://www.randi.org/amazingmeeting/cruise3/penthouse.jpg


It's most stunning feature.. it's the cheapest cabin on board. At $20,000, it sleeps four.. which breaks down to $5,000 a person.

If you can find three other people to go with you.. two of whom don't mind sharing a bed, you can go on the Galapagos cruise (http://www.amazingmeeting.com) for just $5,000.

Still a lot.. but a bargain when you consider how nice the cabin is. As of this writing, the cabin is still available, but space is filling up fast.

OK, as of now, myself and BillC have the cabin reserved. So we are looking for 2 roomates, to share the queen bed (we have grabbed the two singles). It would be nice to have a skepchick or two, because 4 guys in a room might be a bit gay, but I guess we'll take what we can get.

PM me if you are interested.

[Beleth]

Oh you guys are going to hate me for posting this:
Okay, objection noted. Feel free not to go.

Not that I would mind 98 people who are all friends as much as 98 strangers.
What on earth difference would it make to the Galapagos ecosystem if the 98 people were friends or not?

[Antiquehunter]

Re: Skeptigirl

I was just in the Galapagos in 2007, on a small ship of 16 people. While a tour of 98 people is obviously, larger than a typical small ship cruise, the Ecuadorean park service does a terrific job limiting the number of people and the times people are allowed to visit specific islands. 100 people on a cruise is MUCH less an impact than 500 people on a cruise as cited in the article you posted. I must admit that I can't see how you'd be able to control 500 people effectively on these small islands.

In the waters was a Celebrity cruise ship, and we never encountered these individuals nor did we have any lineups / problems on any island or a trail. I have every confidence that the JRef participation will be of next to no environmental impact. I'm also quite confident that Celebrity will responsibly manage the movement of their passengers. Furthermore, I'm willing to hazard a guess that the knowledge level and the level of responsibility of the average JRef passenger by far exceeds the typical Celebrity cruiser. This is a JRef event, not a frat party.

When you consider that there are reportedly 100,000 visitors a year, we represent .1% of the annual number.

Just curious - you were somewhat negative about the first cruise here:
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=57339

Any particular reason why it appears you delight in raining on parades?

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Furthermore, I'm willing to hazard a guess that the knowledge level and the level of responsibility of the average JRef passenger by far exceeds the typical Celebrity cruiser. This is a JRef event, not a frat party.

I can't over emphasize how important this point is in my decision to go. If I had to go on a "regular" cruise with 500 idiot tourists, I'm sure at some point I would have to strangle some retard who said that evolution was "just a theory".

[Skeptic Ginger]

That's odd... I've checked the SEA to UIO prices a few times now on Expedia and they always come up around $800. In fact, right now I'm seeing several priced at $879.

But then again, airline pricing is one of the world's greatest mysteries, so you may have looked at time they were feeling grumpy.Are you looking at August?

[Skeptic Ginger]

Okay, objection noted. Feel free not to go.

What on earth difference would it make to the Galapagos ecosystem if the 98 people were friends or not?It wouldn't matter to the ecosystem, and I wasn't feeing guilty about contributing to the damage as you have interpreted.

My concern was being disappointed expecting what I picture a trip to the Galops to be and ending up with big crowds of people everywhere. That link said people are having to wait at trail heads as only a few at a time are let through. So your 4 hours on the island end up being 3 hours of waiting around.

[Skeptic Ginger]

Re: Skeptigirl

I was just in the Galapagos in 2007, on a small ship of 16 people. While a tour of 98 people is obviously, larger than a typical small ship cruise, the Ecuadorean park service does a terrific job limiting the number of people and the times people are allowed to visit specific islands. 100 people on a cruise is MUCH less an impact than 500 people on a cruise as cited in the article you posted. I must admit that I can't see how you'd be able to control 500 people effectively on these small islands.

In the waters was a Celebrity cruise ship, and we never encountered these individuals nor did we have any lineups / problems on any island or a trail. I have every confidence that the JRef participation will be of next to no environmental impact. I'm also quite confident that Celebrity will responsibly manage the movement of their passengers. Furthermore, I'm willing to hazard a guess that the knowledge level and the level of responsibility of the average JRef passenger by far exceeds the typical Celebrity cruiser. This is a JRef event, not a frat party.

When you consider that there are reportedly 100,000 visitors a year, we represent .1% of the annual number.

Just curious - you were somewhat negative about the first cruise here:
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=57339

Any particular reason why it appears you delight in raining on parades?
I knew if I tried to post something for an honest discussion I'd get crap for it. You all are wrong about what I was most concerned about, but that's life. I would remind those of you who don't like anything negative to bother your worlds that it seems foolish to limit any discussion. You should be addressing the actual issues here (as you are, A.h., with the description of your recent trip) and not getting annoyed with me for bringing it up.

The big cruise ship was a whole different matter, and I would not go on one. There are frequent mini-epidemics on board large cruise ships. Most are minor illnesses but still, one has to decide whether the incidences of infection are frequent enough that there is too high of a chance that your trip will be ruined by getting sick. Big ships can have 5,000 people all bringing organisms from different parts of the country into one big shared space. It is similar to kids returning to school in September where a couple sick kids who in the summer would have had few contacts and will now be in classrooms where 30 kids will be exposed. The problem doesn't apply to a ship with 100 people.

So, I am pleased to hear you did not encounter the crowds. I was especially dismayed about the information the population on the islands had doubled in only a decade. That and like I said, the comment about having to wait at trailheads. You picture the Galops as a few people and a lot of nature. You don't want to get there and find crowds all vying for a picture of one iguana on a rock.

I have done extensive traveling. I avoid the tourist traps like the plague. I imagine thats how a lot of you feel as well.

Anyway, I'm still thinking about it because after I posted that yesterday I started thinking about the fact global warming could just wipe the islands out as we see them today. It may be too late to see them several years from now.

[Antiquehunter]

I would have to strangle some retard who said that evolution was "just a theory".

But it is 'just' a theory. ;)

[Antiquehunter]

The big cruise ship was a whole different matter, and I would not go on one. There are frequent mini-epidemics on board large cruise ships. Most are minor illnesses but still, one has to decide whether the incidences of infection are frequent enough that there is too high of a chance that your trip will be ruined by getting sick. Big ships can have 5,000 people all bringing organisms from different parts of the country into one big shared space. It is similar to kids returning to school in September where a couple sick kids who in the summer would have had few contacts and will now be in classrooms where 30 kids will be exposed. The problem doesn't apply to a ship with 100 people.

Yup - and when you go to Las Vegas, or Disneyworld, or that beach resort in Cabo San Lucas, you are also fraternizing with people who are bringing organisms from other parts of the country / world into one big more or less shared space. On the risk/reward perspective, if I adopted the approach above, I wouldn't travel anywhere. I work in Kabul (I'm leaving Vancouver in a couple of hours) so my risk tolerance may be higher than some. But refusing to cruise because of the risk of the sniffles or a stomach bug, or an exceedingly RARE outbreak of something more serious seems a little over the top to me. But, to each his/her own.


So, I am pleased to hear you did not encounter the crowds. I was especially dismayed about the information the population on the islands had doubled in only a decade. That and like I said, the comment about having to wait at trailheads. You picture the Galops as a few people and a lot of nature. You don't want to get there and find crowds all vying for a picture of one iguana on a rock.


Actually, for MOST of the animals, there are so many of them that you can get your photos without a problem. Marine iguanas, blue footed boobies and sea lions are EVERYWHERE. You need to be careful not to step on them. For some of the scarcer animals then yes, you may miss out if you have a dingbat in your group who raises their voice or runs towards the animal trying to hug it - but for the most part the animals in the Galapagos know no fear, and if you see one, you'll probably see a couple of dozen. The rarest thing I saw was a vermilion flycatcher on Santa Cruz - we only spotted two the entire time on that island. They are pretty scarce, and they're small and fast.

[Dicon]

Are you looking at August?

Yep. Depart 8/7 and return 8/19. Seattle to Houston on Continental, then Houston to Quinto (via Panama City) on Copa. $879. There's also one that omits the stop in Panama City for $985.

[Skeptic Ginger]

Yup - and when you go to Las Vegas, or Disneyworld, or that beach resort in Cabo San Lucas, you are also fraternizing with people who are bringing organisms from other parts of the country / world into one big more or less shared space. On the risk/reward perspective, if I adopted the approach above, I wouldn't travel anywhere. I work in Kabul (I'm leaving Vancouver in a couple of hours) so my risk tolerance may be higher than some. But refusing to cruise because of the risk of the sniffles or a stomach bug, or an exceedingly RARE outbreak of something more serious seems a little over the top to me. But, to each his/her own.

I have been a specialist in infectious disease in private practice for 17 years now. And I read every day about outbreaks of infectious disease around the world. I have also traveled extensively in many different countries. And I know what the conditions are that are a problem. So yes, to each his own. If I thought cruising on big ships was the end all and be all, I'd go. I get in my car everyday and that obviously carries more risk.

Actually, Las Vegas quite often sees outbreaks of influenza earlier than many large cities in the country because tourism is the main industry for the city. Here is the Google search for epidemiology large cruise ships (http://www.google.com/search?q=epidemiology+large+cruise+ships&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a). It isn't clear if the incidence of infection on large cruise ships is really greater or whether there is more reporting since the cases stand out.

One difference in a city is you are mixing with a much larger group of individuals. The cruise ship, because it has the same 5,000 people for a week or more means there is more chance for the outbreak to amplify. It is the amplification that increases the risk, not just the chance of running into any single case of an infection.

The amplification factor would apply to a ship of 98 but the 98 people have a very low chance of including a person carrying something.

It's really a shame I can't discuss any of this without all the judgmental disapproval.

"Any particular reason why it appears you delight in raining on parades?"

"But refusing to cruise because of the risk of the sniffles or a stomach bug, or an exceedingly RARE outbreak of something more serious seems a little over the top to me. But, to each his/her own."

Beleth: "Okay, objection noted. Feel free not to go."

[phyz]

Yep. Depart 8/7 and return 8/19. Seattle to Houston on Continental, then Houston to Quinto (via Panama City) on Copa. $879. There's also one that omits the stop in Panama City for $985.
For matching dates in 2007, I was searching 8/10-8/20. Not much of a chance flying to/from Sacramento, so I resorted to SFO. If everything works out, SFO will be the worst part of the trip. Or perhaps it will be the very first good experience I have at that place.

Anyway, the numbers/routes/airlines are similar--in the neighborhood of $750-$1000. Anyone know how far in advance the airline reservations can be made?

[Antiquehunter]

It's really a shame I can't discuss any of this without all the judgmental disapproval.



I apologize if I sound judgmental - its just that I disagree with your position. My perception, based on your posts on the topic, is that - no matter your expertise and experience in the topic - is that you are over-reacting to a risk. A risk that a) doesn't bear any particularly serious overtones (barring some wacky outbreak of legionnaires disease, ebola, or something), b) can be mitigated to a degree by taking reasonable precautions and c) is somewhat irrational when compared to risks one assumes every day as part of being alive.

I don't disagree that travelling on a cruise ship in rather close quarters MAY put you at a slightly higher risk of contracting some sort of mild infectious disease - like a flu or a stomach bug. However, my opinion is also that I may encounter opportunities to contract a similar annoying ailment by flying, working in an office, visiting a hospital, visiting a friend who is sick / has sick people at the house etc... I could also get mugged walking down the street, hit by a car, struck by lightning, die of food poisoning from eating a raw oyster, be a victim of a terror attack etc... I CHOOSE to live my life in light of all these risks, and taking a cruise once in a while is a risk I'm willing to take - in fact its one I take pretty lightly, much more lightly than embarking a rinky-dink plane on a dodgy airline from Dubai to Kabul.

You are not - that is fine, and is entirely your choice. But I do object to what I perceive to be an overbearing attitude towards risk, suggesting that going on a cruise (with JRef colleagues) is a 'bad' thing. As Beleth implied - a cruise is not for you - so don't go. 'Nuff said.

[Skeptic Ginger]

But AH, I posted the stuff about the over crowded tourism to discuss it. How is that "an overbearing attitude towards risk"?

And you went back to a different thread where you brought up a completely different discussion, you call "an overbearing attitude towards risk". First, it wasn't even under discussion here at all, and second, in the thread I did discuss it in, I have expertise in the field of infectious disease and I posted citations, discussed the risk perception and the different priorities issues. I certainly recognize there is no right or wrong over a risk decision. That's absurd, everything has risk and of course people are going to view them differently.

I ask again, why should discussion of any of these issues be treated as "overbearing"? It's like censorship via social pressure. It's one thing to get in pissing contests over disagreements, after they've been discussed. It's one thing to have friction where members have differing political philosophies. But to make it known you are displeased I should broach a subject at all really limits what people are going to be willing to bring up. How does that serve a skeptic well?

[UnrepentantSinner]

Did any JREFers get sick (no, alcohol induced vomiting and hangovers don't count) on TAA?

And can this thread get back to it's original purpose instead of becomming a 3 page pissing contest like it that one AH linked to did?

[Antiquehunter]

Well, there was a broken hip...

[The Central Scrutinizer]

I knew if I tried to post something for an honest discussion I'd get crap for it. You all are wrong about what I was most concerned about, but that's life. I would remind those of you who don't like anything negative to bother your worlds that it seems foolish to limit any discussion. You should be addressing the actual issues here (as you are, A.h., with the description of your recent trip) and not getting annoyed with me for bringing it up.

The big cruise ship was a whole different matter, and I would not go on one. There are frequent mini-epidemics on board large cruise ships. Most are minor illnesses but still, one has to decide whether the incidences of infection are frequent enough that there is too high of a chance that your trip will be ruined by getting sick. Big ships can have 5,000 people all bringing organisms from different parts of the country into one big shared space. It is similar to kids returning to school in September where a couple sick kids who in the summer would have had few contacts and will now be in classrooms where 30 kids will be exposed. The problem doesn't apply to a ship with 100 people.

So, I am pleased to hear you did not encounter the crowds. I was especially dismayed about the information the population on the islands had doubled in only a decade. That and like I said, the comment about having to wait at trailheads. You picture the Galops as a few people and a lot of nature. You don't want to get there and find crowds all vying for a picture of one iguana on a rock.

I have done extensive traveling. I avoid the tourist traps like the plague. I imagine thats how a lot of you feel as well.

Anyway, I'm still thinking about it because after I posted that yesterday I started thinking about the fact global warming could just wipe the islands out as we see them today. It may be too late to see them several years from now.

On top of that, I heard that a lot of cruise ships sink. :eek:

[The Central Scrutinizer]

But AH, I posted the stuff about the over crowded tourism to discuss it. How is that "an overbearing attitude towards risk"?


This thread is about how to go to the Galapagos for $5,000.

If you want to discuss people catching ebola on cruise ships, start another thread.

[UnrepentantSinner]

Well, there was a broken hip...

I think Hal's attempts to dance are as off topic from the OP as the disease tangent, but if you want to start a new thread, I would love to discuss how every move he makes from the Charleston to The Electric Slide looks more like the Monster Mash.

RRrrmmhhhh.. launch codes...

Arrrggghhh.. Hobbes, Locke, Mills, Marx...

MmmmMMmmm.. Elaine...

[Mattfn]

Anyone know how far in advance the airline reservations can be made?

Most airlines will book 300 days to a year in advance.....Southwest being one exception.

When I had looked over a month ago, again with the corresponding August dates for this year, fare from Boston was running $760 to $1000.

[Skeptic Ginger]

This thread is about how to go to the Galapagos for $5,000.

If you want to discuss people catching ebola on cruise ships, start another thread.

Don't tell that to me, tell it to Antiquehunter. He's the one that brought it up.

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Don't tell that to me, tell it to Antiquehunter. He's the one that brought it up.

Don't be dense. He only brought it up in response to your ridiculous (and off topic) post about the place being over run with tourists. But if they're all getting sick on cruise ships, it's amazing any of them are well enough to actually tour the island.

[Skeptic Ginger]

Don't be dense. He only brought it up in response to your ridiculous (and off topic) post about the place being over run with tourists. But if they're all getting sick on cruise ships, it's amazing any of them are well enough to actually tour the island.
I posted something about over crowding on tourists trails. What the he!! does that have to do with a thread and posts on a completely different subject? If anyone is being ridiculous it's all this crap over, heaven forbid, I posted something that didn't meet the standards of the clique.

[phyz]

I posted something about over crowding on tourists trails.

An issue appropriate to the forum subtopic, perhaps. But not to this thread. In this case, the "New Thread" button is your friend.

...I posted something that didn't meet the standards of the clique.

I have been/will be reasonably accused of many things throughout my days. Being in a clique will not be any of them.

Anyway, you're free to have yor say--even in this subtopic. But you're best to start a new thread rather than jumping in with a non sequitur.

Peace, peoples.

[The Central Scrutinizer]

I posted something about over crowding on tourists trails. What the he!! does that have to do with a thread and posts on a completely different subject? If anyone is being ridiculous it's all this crap over, heaven forbid, I posted something that didn't meet the standards of the clique.

Yep, it didn't meet our standards. Start a new thread. Or, you could discuss going to the Galapagos for $5,000. Which will also be wasting our time, since you aren't going.

[Mattfn]

Rereading this thread reveals Skeptigirl posted part of an article that might have been of interest to people trying to decide what kind of experience TAA3 might be. Her only question was that if the points in the article had been discussed.

It's completely reasonable to ask about tourist load on the Galaps after seeing that article to me, though perhaps indeed on another topic thread. What followed of course was really off, but had been started by bringing something from another thread. Nor should anyone have issue with her getting a bit upset with the negative response she got for bringing it up, and some putting attitude in her post that isn't there, as there was no reason for that to have happened, and she has the right to protest when someone attempts that. The comments just about first hand experiences at the Galaps that don't support the article was all that was called for here.

Sorry for bringing it up again, but this business of jumping on her was wrong, even if there was some history I am unaware of, and I felt I needed to say so.

There, all nicely back. So who shall be rooming with BillC & CS? Even if I found unbelievable deals for flights, hotels and such through the end of next June, I couldn't swing this, so someone else must work to corrupt them, especially BillC.

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Rereading this thread reveals Skeptigirl posted part of an article that might have been of interest to people trying to decide what kind of experience TAA3 might be. Her only question was that if the points in the article had been discussed.

It's completely reasonable to ask about tourist load on the Galaps after seeing that article to me, though perhaps indeed on another topic thread. What followed of course was really off, but had been started by bringing something from another thread. Nor should anyone have issue with her getting a bit upset with the negative response she got for bringing it up, and some putting attitude in her post that isn't there, as there was no reason for that to have happened, and she has the right to protest when someone attempts that. The comments just about first hand experiences at the Galaps that don't support the article was all that was called for here.

Sorry for bringing it up again, but this business of jumping on her was wrong, even if there was some history I am unaware of, and I felt I needed to say so.

I disagree. Yes, perhaps it might be of interest, but it was completely off topic, and in light of the link AH provided, it seems like this is a recurring theme - pour negativity onto an activity in which she isn't going to participate.

There, all nicely back. So who shall be rooming with BillC & CS? Even if I found unbelievable deals for flights, hotels and such through the end of next June, I couldn't swing this, so someone else must work to corrupt them, especially BillC.

How come I can't be corrupted? :(

[BillC]

... someone else must work to corrupt them, especially BillC.Too late; I am already corrupted.

[Skeptic Ginger]

Thank you Mattfn.

Guess TCS just made my decision easy.

[phyz]

...someone else must work to corrupt them, especially BillC.
Hey, I don't have a roomie and I need some corruption, too. C'mon!

[Patricio Elicer]

OK, as of now, myself and BillC have the cabin reserved.


Wow!, that makes two of the coolest JREF kids onboard together. I wish I could join, but sadly I don't have time on this occasion. Anyway, hopefully for you two, you'd find a couple of skepchicks to fill in the cabin "empty slots". Much better than an angled-smelly-hairy guy like myself :D ;) .

[Mattfn]

Just saying ignoring & redirection are good techniques for off-topic posts too, and would have prevented what happened.

Too late; I am already corrupted.

Ah, I hadn't realized I had finished the job (pats self on back). And he still likes me! So by all means, the future roommates must concentrate on CS. And maybe they'll even invite you to visit, Phyz! When they scrounge up that $500 package, I'll come and help!

Corruption tips and techniques available upon request. Maybe I'll get together with some other skilled ones on here and we'll publish a handy pamphet.

[Linda]

As far as sharing the penthouse cabin, Rich, our new Media Manager, is going to be coming on TAA3 and is interested in bunking in. I told him of the sleeping arrangements, and his comment was "I don't care...I've been to BMX races where guys sleep 3 to a bed. " He's straight too. And ladies, he's available. He's in his late 20's, good-looking and speaks Spanish. We have Rich to thank for the quality and speed of getting the TAM5 DVDs, as he did the editing. He did such a great job we hired him fulltime. He's also responsible for the new website additions.

[The Central Scrutinizer]

As far as sharing the penthouse cabin, Rich, our new Media Manager, is going to be coming on TAA3 and is interested in bunking in. I told him of the sleeping arrangements, and his comment was "I don't care...I've been to BMX races where guys sleep 3 to a bed. " He's straight too. And ladies, he's available. He's in his late 20's, good-looking and speaks Spanish. We have Rich to thank for the quality and speed of getting the TAM5 DVDs, as he did the editing. He did such a great job we hired him fulltime. He's also responsible for the new website additions.

Hmmmm......considering I'm in my 40's, balding and overweight, maybe we could use him as a chick magnet and take his extras!

Have him PM me.

And that goes for others - we still need 2 more roomies for the penthouse. It's me and BillC so far.

[ottle]

Thank you Mattfn.

Guess TCS just made my decision easy.

I haven't been posting much lately but saw the article today about the Galapagos being overrun and then found this thread. Now I'm scared to post :)

I agree with Mattfn - it seems like skeptigirl was just trying to ask if anyone had talked about this issue anywhere else and solicit opinions.

But I'm going back into hiding now so I guess it doesn't matter :)

[UnrepentantSinner]

And that goes for others - we still need 2 more roomies for the penthouse. It's me and BillC so far.

This is financially reckless of me, and as much as I'd loathe to share space with Scrut, if someone is willing to share the big bed with me, I'm tentatively noting my interest. I do want to stress tentatively.

[The Central Scrutinizer]

This is financially reckless of me, and as much as I'd loathe to share space with Scrut, if someone is willing to share the big bed with me, I'm tentatively noting my interest. I do want to stress tentatively.

NO SMOKING!!!! :)

OK gang, I'm out of town until Sunday night. I have a PM or two, those who are interested (including USA), PM me your level of interest. I'd like to get this lined up by next week.

[Skeptic Ginger]

Thank you ottle.

Except for the uncalled for stuff in Antiquehunter's post, he did have some useful comments about it.

[Jalbietz]

So Scrut and BillC, since you will have the swankiest room, does this mean that you will be hosting a nice little shindig one night? (not too late though, I like to sleep too!)

[BillC]

The good thing about throwing a noisy party on a boat is that they can't throw you out.



I hope.

[Doubt]

So Scrut and BillC, since you will have the swankiest room, does this mean that you will be hosting a nice little shindig one night? (not too late though, I like to sleep too!)

Probably won't need to use the room for that. We have the whole ship.

[Jalbietz]

Good point, Doubt. Can't say I would expect anything from this crew that would get anyone tossed overboard, so probably not much need to contain it in one room anyway.

That being said, I'd be fearful of disturbing Randi's sleepy time... have you seen what that guy can do to a spoon with his mind?!!!

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Probably won't need to use the room for that. We have the whole ship.

Correct. The party will be on the ship, not in our room.