Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm going to go ahead and judge. 1 in 10. Your have a 10% chance of dying if you attempt a summit, right? How much pain is your untimely death going to cause if it happens? How many everest orphans and widows are there? Include in that the considerable cost and time investment to do this when you could be creating something, exploring something that has a conceivable chance of helping humanity, or just plain investin…
10% failure rate is bad on a website about startups ? Now, we're talking life instead of life savings, but I find it hard to say that their decision is wrong in any ethical or moral sense, and I'm curious what moral framework would justify your viewpoint. Additionally, burning through your life savings (and that of friends/family) can easily cause more long-term harm than having a mom or dad that died while climbing…
Everest is littered with dead, exposed bodies
171–180 of 266 posts
Re: Everest is littered with dead, exposed bodies
#172Earlier quoted context omitted.
Climbing Mt. Everest has nothing to do with exploration, and hasn't had for a long time. It's an industry catering to reckless thrill-seekers.
> Climbing Mt. Everest has nothing to do with exploration At an organizational level, you are correct. There are very few places left unexplored by the human race on this planet. However, on an individual level, if you have never been to the summit of Everest, then it is very much a personal exploration. Maps and guides reduce the required effort from superhuman to formidable, but I see a clear exploratory factor. At…
Actually, IIRC, most of our oceans are completely unexplored.
Re: Everest is littered with dead, exposed bodies
#173Earlier quoted context omitted.
> These were people who no mountaineer in the world would accuse of being irresponsible, inexperienced, unprofessional, or, even, unsafe. This is what gets me about mountain climbing - you can't really be good at it, at least not in the sense that it will save your life. There are so many unknowable, uncontrollable factors that make the difference between life and death, to the extent that you play Russian Roulette w…
> not in the sense that it will save your life There are countless counter-examples to this claim. For example, Jerzy Kukuczka's spent three nights out above 8000m on K2 without food, water, tent, or sleeping bag. During this time, he covered substantial technical ground to summit their new route (the South Face) and descended safely without assistance and even without frostbite. His partner, Tadeusz Piotrowski, was…
Re: Everest is littered with dead, exposed bodies
#174Earlier quoted context omitted.
"... Though not as morbid, I would imagine "stepping over dead bodies" and "leaving teammates behind" is a rather common experience in startups as well, though potentially frowned upon (but even then, it would depend on the situation). ..." You're kidding right? Working in a Startup, in a cushy office with access to water, food & external help is not in the same league as roughing it. Having said that the lessons you…
> In the field, you never leave anyone behind . Never! This mentality is encouraged because otherwise it would be harder to recruit soldiers, but it's bad strategy. There are times when the success of a mission may depend on leaving someone behind. EDIT> Just as the "never leave anyone behind" meme is an artificial construct, you might be able to train a force with a culture of "I will never force my mates to have to…
Re: Everest is littered with dead, exposed bodies
#175Earlier quoted context omitted.
10% is the wrong statistic. According to the article, for every 10 people who reach the summit, 1 person dies in the attempt. So, already, that's somewhat less than 1/10, because not every person who dies does so after reaching the summit. But it also doesn't count the many people who start climbing the mountain but turn around before the summit and make it down alive. The true statistic is likely much less than 10%.
Although those who don't climb Everest have a 100% mortality rate (Perhaps 99.9999% if you include the Dalai Lama)
[1]: http://www.prb.org/Articles/2002/HowManyPeopleHaveEverLivedo...
Re: Everest is littered with dead, exposed bodies
#176Earlier quoted context omitted.
At least choose a better example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lincoln_Hall_(climber) . Beck Weathers wasn't suffering from altitude sickness and made it back to camp IV on his own. I didn't say it was futile to attempt a rescue, I said it was comparatively more futile to attempt a rescue. You have to make an assessment - is it likely that we can save this person and is it worth the risk? Then there is the psychologi…
Beck was left by people who were perfectly capably of helping, despite evidently still being capable of getting himself down. Your example is good too, but there are many, many examples of people in radio contact with a camp only a few hours of non-technical terrain away, but where the people in camp don't actually do anything in time. Also, being physically present next to the person who needs help seems like a bit…
I'm just saying that the technical difficulty of a rescue isn't the only criteria. In the case of Minamiura, his survivability if he was rescued was high. The chance of him being rescued was low. For someone suffering HAPE/HACE on Everest it's probably the reverse. I didn't mean to suggest that they should be left behind.
Re: Everest is littered with dead, exposed bodies
#177Earlier quoted context omitted.
> not in the sense that it will save your life There are countless counter-examples to this claim. For example, Jerzy Kukuczka's spent three nights out above 8000m on K2 without food, water, tent, or sleeping bag. During this time, he covered substantial technical ground to summit their new route (the South Face) and descended safely without assistance and even without frostbite. His partner, Tadeusz Piotrowski, was…
That's not really a counterexample, at least not to the claim you're disagreeing with. He was not just lucky, but he was nonetheless quite lucky. If apparently solid ground had just given way under Jerzy Kukuczka or the terrain above him had come crashing down on his head, or the temperature had suddenly dropped a lot further, he still would have died, wouldn't he?
I do believe that Jerzy lived through that event due to his preparation/talent for handling extreme conditions and his mental focus (to keep warm when sitting in the snow all night, to not make mistakes after being out for so long). Piotrowski was no slouch, but he fell because he got sloppy. Perhaps his physiology was also somehow less robust. Note that lots of other people have died because of one night out in the same conditions, even following a comfortable tent-bound night of sleep and a day with food and water. These two were strung out from their big new route and after the second night of sitting in the snow shivering without food or water, they still broke trail up to the summit. It was after the third night out that Piotrowski finally got sloppy on the ice climbing.
Re: Everest is littered with dead, exposed bodies
#178Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, this is a hugely selfish act You say that like being selfish is automatically and unquestionably a bad thing.
No, I said that like there's a recklessly selfish spectrum and this is pegged near one end with driving while extremely intoxicated, habitually using heroin, etc. At the other end are mildly selfish acts. Playing an X-box is a mildly selfish act. It's fun, but probably isn't a real big win for family, friends, society, etc. Not too damaging to them, though, unless done in excess. Getting massively drunk and then driv…
Re: Everest is littered with dead, exposed bodies
#179Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's actually only about half that price or less (in the US), unless you get into the really extreme stuff. There is a lot more to diving safety than just using the correct gas mixes. The training and procedures developed by groups like the WKPP and GUE have now taken nearly all the risk out of technical diving. http://www.gue.com/
Yes for caves. Caves are easy and safe compared to deep open ocean wrecks. Caves may actually be within the "reasonable to do recreationally" level, and WKPP is or was actually doing worthwhile environmental science too. Outside of the US, helium is seriously expensive. I was figuring dual rebreathers, or rebreather + OC bailout. $800 in gas alone for a 100m training dive for TDI Adv Nitrox, open circuit. WKPP and GU…
Having a unified team actually increases your flexibility. When all your dive buddies have similar equipment and training then they're essentially interchangeable (within reasonable limits). Solo sport diving is always and everywhere a bad idea. You need someone to assist if you get entangled or have a serious equipment problem. Plus it's nice just to have some company and another set of eyes to spot interesting marine life. If you can't find a qualified buddy then just skip the dive; there is nothing underwater worth risking your life. There have been too many incidents of solo divers ending up dead for unexplained reasons, because there were no witnesses and no one to help.
The dive computers available today are simply not useful. The fundamental problem is that a computer can't accurately measure bubbles and dissolved gasses in your body. All they can do is run some simple, idealized models (i.e. "first assume a spherical cow") which are fairly close to what a typical person will experience during a limited range of dive profiles. For example, the models I have seen — including VPM, RGBM, and others — fail to properly account for the oxygen window during decompression and so will stretch ascent times out unnecessarily. A lot of divers lack the scientific background necessary to understand the difference between accuracy and precision. A dive computer will display highly precise numbers, but who knows whether they are accurate? Despite their limitations, the mathematical models are useful for understanding the general shape of the decompression curve across a spectrum of possible profiles. Once you understand that then you don't need a dive computer, or computed tables. No one I dive with would actually try to reference a table in the middle of a dive. If you want to waste money on an expensive dive computer then go ahead, just don't fool yourself into believing what it tells you.
Helmets are unnecessary for sport diving; don't dive in places where heavy things can fall on your head. A light on your helmet will blind your dive buddy when you look at him, plus having things stick out from your head is an entanglement hazard. Bring snorkel in your pocket if you want; it won't hurt but I've never found them useful. There's nothing wrong with bringing a bag of tools when you need them but please leave the wrecks intact so the rest of us can enjoy them, too.
Re: Everest is littered with dead, exposed bodies
#180I recently got back (almost exactly a month ago) from a month long climbing trip in Nepal with some friends. We had three guides, all three of whom have climbed Everest multiple times. One of our guides, who has summited 5 times, described Everest as his "bad habit". As a relative newbie to high altitude mountaineering (the highest I got was ~19,850 feet), climbing in Nepal was really, really hard. You are never warm…
I'm going to go ahead and judge. 1 in 10. Your have a 10% chance of dying if you attempt a summit, right? How much pain is your untimely death going to cause if it happens? How many everest orphans and widows are there? Include in that the considerable cost and time investment to do this when you could be creating something, exploring something that has a conceivable chance of helping humanity, or just plain investin…
I was going to create a startup, but unfortunately I think it's just too selfish of an act. What if by giving up my cubicle I screw over my family and pets that depend on me? Can I be so selfish as to give up my livelihood, my life savings and dedicating every waking moment to making my startup succeed?
I would argue that creating a startup--much like climbing Everest--is a risky endeavor with unspeakable rewards. I am not a mountaineer, and I would never risk my life on a mountain just for the pride.
But you have to wonder, as we sit here talking about it on the Internet, do these people know how to really live in a way we haven't experienced? Maybe it's the physical exertion or the satisfaction of accomplishing one's dreams, but you can't chalk up every hardcore mountaineer (or any other deadly hobby, for that matter) as mere adrenaline junkies. The real debate here is whether or not it's worth it to risk your life in order to live it to the fullest.