[sarbar]

True, true. I quess I am used to seeing Shuksan from the angle of where it looks like it is on top of Baker-teh angle you get from up above when hiking around Baker and from Hwy 20.

[#19]

[Newt]

Regardless of shape, it just seems to easterly for Shuksan. Can anyone get a photo from Queen Anne with a few more peaks/hills in it? Newt

[jimmymac]

Yeah, They look too far apart. I guess that close-in Queen Anne Hill makes the chunk of Cascade horizon in distance look wide. In reality, we're just looking at the few degrees that separate Baker from Shuksan. I'm glad I didn't have a paycheck to bet on it not being Shuksan.

[#19]

[Sore Feet]

Even from Concrete, Shuksan and Baker look a lot further apart than they actually are. Probably due to the fact that Shuksan is further north than Baker. Personally, I don't ever recall being able to see Shuksan from anywhere but maybe the top of the Space Needle in this area. Certainly can't see it from ground level in too many places around the sound.

[jimmymac]

From liembo's West Seattle viewpoint, you're looking across the top of the Finney Block at Baker and Shuksan.

[touron]

I think you can see Baker and Shuksan pretty easily from the hills bordering the Rainier Beach area.

[Synchro]

ok, so i pull out Topo on the PC. and after flipping back and forth in Topo and posting stuff and editing i agree with the folks here that that is Shuksan. I think what is throwing people off, including myself, and the reason why i flipped into topo, is that it doesn't seem possible in the minds eye that they could be that close. but from looking at readings in topo, and thus taking out the distortion provided by photographic lenses, i agree with others.

[#19]

some of you crack me up. sometimes it doesn't take technology to figure things out. I knew what the sharp peak was 25 years ago when I saw it from the SNeedle and have seen it from many Puget Sound location ever since. What other white pyramid that looks just like Shuksan from the S could it be? BTW, ever notice that you can see the Twin Sisters Range from many of the locs. How about Glacier Peak? Same drill. It is there for the looking at if you know where to look.

[touron]

Hey everybody, how do you know it's not just a new mountain--one that grew overnight. It does happen, but is rarely seen. Most people don't notice, because mountains look like, well, mountains. Plus, mountains grow in the winter, not summer when there would be alot of observers. And they don't show up on maps because most maps were done along time ago and "most" mapmakers are too lazy to put in a new mountain. I was snowshoeing once in a valley, set up camp, and next day found I had to rappel to get back to where I started. A word for the wise, valleys don't always stay that way. Always carry a rope as the 11th essential.

[Tom]

[#19]

Like I said, it doesn't take technology, but of course it's fun. I think I used a highway map and a ruler to confirm what I knew years ago. Count me as a techno freak too.

[touron]

I don't get it. I'm following those red lines in Tom's post and all I'm getting is sky and a few stars.

[touron]

Someone with a camera ought to take a picture of the Seattlel side of the western slope of the cascades and label the peaks in that range. White Horse, 3 Fingers, and Big 4 are easy to pick out, but all the others I do not know from Adam.