tonyh29 Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 Last weekend saw a mad rush of rich people with bucket lists being towed up Mt Everest by Sherpas , for around $10,000 a pop . 200 people attempted to summit last weekend alone , with 6 rumoured to have died .. partly due to "traffic jams" on the mountain resulting in them running out of oxygen .. Many people on the ascent walked past climbers in difficulty and left them to die , the excuse being that there was "nothing I could do" , they knew the risks etc etc . One woman climber became the youngest female to summit and even openly told how she walked past a climber in difficulty ... hope the glory was worth it ,for the 30 minutes or so you held the record until that younger female ascended just behind you I suppose it's easy to sit here and say we would do the right thing and help , but maybe in the same situation with the adrenaline and fatigue we couldn't say for sure , however , Nadav Ben-Yehud gave up his summit attempt to aid a struggling climber , he carried him down the mountain for hours to a camp at lower elevation ... a true hero imo I've experienced altitude sickness first hand ( my life was saved by a 60 year old woman and a Sherpa ) and know that altitude can affect your thinking and judgement but its' quite saddening to see people disregard a fellow human beings life like this .. this picture shows the trail of climbers setting out to make the ascent last weekend ... Maybe its time the Nepal government acted and set strict controls and limits instead of chasing the Yankee $ ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjmooney Posted May 30, 2012 VT Supporter Share Posted May 30, 2012 Anybody who uses "summit" as a verb deserves to be thrown off! (Sorry) Otherwise, I agree. I'm not remotely into doing anything that requires that degree of discomfort, but I'm sure the feeling of being up there - and the view - is fantastic. But when people get competitive about it, like it makes them 'better' than somebody else, I'm at a real loss. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Rev Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 Anybody who uses "summit" as a verb deserves to be thrown off! (Sorry) . I think you should table a motion to get that removed from the English language. I'll book a week off work if you need any help with the paperwork. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coda Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 I'd love to sledge down the bit in that photo. The government are setting something up with a weather station and doctors. They should all know the risks involved. Imagine if you had scaled Everest and everytime you recounted the story you were reminded of the dying person you ignored. Wouldn't be a good memory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted May 30, 2012 VT Supporter Share Posted May 30, 2012 I'd like to think I wouldn't be able to walk past someone knowing chances are they will die. I know what my mind is like and it would haunt me. There's also something... bizarre I guess, to me, about a bunch of rich bastards paying 10 grand to climb it. It cheapens it somehow, buying an achievement. I also wonder how many are actually prepared to do it - I guess 50 years of going up it has made it a little easier but it still must be one of the hardest things a person could possibly do, but I wonder if the people queuing up to pay are thinking about that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amsterdam_Neil_D Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 If someone has 10 million in the bank and walks past someone begging for food / help is that not the same thing or worse ? (Considering the peopel on the mountain choose to be there and know the risks) I don't know the answer, just wondering. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BOF Posted May 30, 2012 Moderator Share Posted May 30, 2012 A few things. Firstly and most importantly I'm not a mountaineer, so I would be far more motivated to help someone in trouble than I would be by reaching the top. Secondly, I'm not qualified to comment on the risks/dangers of stopping to help someone who themselves are in difficulty. I believe it's life-threateningly dangerous so there may be cases where people actually couldn't help without very easily putting themselves in grave danger. I'd say the risks of certain situations need to be weighed up. There's helping and then there's helping if you get me. Finally, I can't answer the question for those who are motivated by reaching the top because I'm not wired like them. But I would like to hope that they at least have to wrestle with their conscience and not make the decision easily. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PussEKatt Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 I think the rich people that are bieng TOWED UP are about as stupid as you can get.They are NOT climbing that mountain,the sherper is and on top of that the sherper is having to TOW a useless twit behind him ?! WTF achievement is that ? They may as well get a TOW behind a bike and win the Tour De France or how about going big game hunting in Africa in an armoured car. As far as the ones that ignored climbers that were in trouble. WTF was that for ? so they could be the 327th person that got towed up to the summit ? Compared to a persons life that is a very sad choice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BOF Posted May 30, 2012 Moderator Share Posted May 30, 2012 Anybody who uses "summit" as a verb deserves to be thrown off! (Sorry) There is summit seriously wrong with those people. That's almost a verb. It should end in 'ing' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PussEKatt Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 I think those people have reached the summit of stupidity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RunRickyRun Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 Anybody who uses "summit" as a verb deserves to be thrown off! (Sorry) There is summit seriously wrong with those people. That's almost a verb. It should end in 'ing' That's so bad, I'm summitting my resignation in protest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted May 30, 2012 VT Supporter Share Posted May 30, 2012 If someone has 10 million in the bank and walks past someone begging for food / help is that not the same thing or worse ? (Considering the peopel on the mountain choose to be there and know the risks) No. You not giving any money or food to a begger doesn't condemn him to death. ANd if you did give him some food, it wouldn't save him from starvation (unless you gave him a LOT of food) Walking past someone on a mountain who's in difficulty is much worse. Their life is directly affected by your action. You stopping to help could quite realistically save their life. Similarly, walking on without helping could very well be leaving them to die. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillyShears Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 'Into Thin Air' by Jon Krakauer is a good read. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrentVilla Posted May 30, 2012 Moderator Share Posted May 30, 2012 3 confirmed dead and 2 missing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maqroll Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 Somewhat analogous to Free Market Capitalism....personal ethics just hold you back... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 Is this a question of context? Many people climbing Everest know the rules, you might die 100ft from someone elses souvenir photo shoot. If you die, you'll probably be left there. Boxers know that they need to hit the other guy as hard as possible in the head. This could kill or wound the other guy. Do they hold back? No, it's ok in context. Personally I couldn't do it, I couldn't walk on by. But then I wouldn't go up Everest anyway, I don't need to trample all over Everest or the Arctic or the Rainforest thanks, I'm just not that selfish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted May 30, 2012 Author Share Posted May 30, 2012 Somewhat analogous to Free Market Capitalism....personal ethics just hold you back... Can't say I really subscribe to that point of view Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted May 30, 2012 Moderator Share Posted May 30, 2012 Thats a queue of people coming down a mountain, not going up it. [/pedant] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted May 30, 2012 Author Share Posted May 30, 2012 Is this a question of context? Ultimately I think yes ... Was chatting to a dive buddy today and he said For arguments sake say he had got into difficulty and was down at 90m but still alive and in trouble , he wouldn't expect a fellow diver to come down to help him , it would almost certainly be a suicide mission ... I suspect mountaineers would feel a similar way and it's more likely non mountaineers that find it quite abhorrent Where I may differ is that if my mate was drowning at 90m and I couldn't help , I wouldn't then carry on with my dive and explore a shipwreck or two before ascending ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted May 31, 2012 Share Posted May 31, 2012 Is this a question of context? Ultimately I think yes ... Was chatting to a dive buddy today and he said For arguments sake say he had got into difficulty and was down at 90m but still alive and in trouble , he wouldn't expect a fellow diver to come down to help him , it would almost certainly be a suicide mission ... I suspect mountaineers would feel a similar way and it's more likely non mountaineers that find it quite abhorrent Where I may differ is that if my mate was drowning at 90m and I couldn't help , I wouldn't then carry on with my dive and explore a shipwreck or two before ascending ... But the Everest example is quite different. It's not about people risking their life to save someone, it's a case of them not stopping because to do so would mean their planned ascent couldn't happen, because any assistance would mean staying with the person, giving them practical help over several hours and so on. Since they wouldn't be able to just resume the ascent afterwards, or go the next day, it would mean that a trip they had planned for and saved for over several months or years would be lost. So it's a case of placing their desire not to abort their ascent, over someone else's life. This is not at all morally equivalent to risking their own life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts