Hillary rips climbers who left dying man

A grim article of a 34 yr old left on Everest.

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/1106AP_Everest_Abandoned_Climber.html

Very sobering article !!! Sad to see how a goal can get in the way of common decency but I guess up that high maybe you'd have to go being prepared for the "every person for themselves" attitude . . .

sli74

here is another article about it: http://www.smh.com.au/news/World/Hi...r-Everest-death/2006/05/24/1148150287767.html

-Dr. Wu

Ya know, I guess I'll just be quiet about this one.

That's a very sad commentary.

Very unfortunate and sad situation to all involved.

Anyone else think its rediculous that most of the blame for not strapping him on his back and carrying him to safety (even though thats impossible), was on the man with FAKE LEGS!!

Did it say what route they were on? South Col? North face?

It is interesting that they guy with fake legs gets the brunt of the criticism.

The guy who died was climbing solo. Now, that isn't to say that he should die because he didn't have any teammates, but there are more inherent risks to climbing solo, which he obviously must have understood.

Wasn't it Hillary who openly criticized guides (in general) on Everest?

I'm sorry I just don't get the disregard for human life, at any cost. I can't imagine passing someone in obvious distress and leaving them there to die. And I don't think I am being judgemental when I say that. There were several people on that mountain the day Inglis was cliimbing, and not one person had the decency to fight for that man's life. Sometimes all it takes is the strength of one person to stand up for someone and others will follow.
kmac

kmac said:

There were several people on that mountain the day Inglis was cliimbing, and not one person had the decency to fight for that man's life.

Click to expand...

Shades of Kitty Genovese _ just a different terrain and a different era.

Sounds a little like Into Thin Air. Money makes the world go round. Would you stop and help someone who was dying if they stood in the way of your life's goal? What if you had worked 70 hour weeks your whole life to afford the one chance to climb the mountain, and happened to come upon this man, who with your help would probably die anyway? Would you go to the top? Would you only help if you were a guide who collected $75,000 per person fees? I can't say what I would have done, so I don't want to judge people who I don't know in an article that was written by someone who probably wasn't there. As far as the double amputee.... Whatever. If he could have helped the guy, shame on him. If not, then he couldn't. At the end of the day, we all have to deal with our own moral compass, and be our own judge. Sleep well, knowing that you lived your day in the just way.

None of us were there. How can we comment on this? Hillary wasn't there either. Maybe he shouldn't be commneting either. Granted, he has first hand knowledge of the mountain, but not of this specific situation at this point in time at that point on the mountain. (FWIW, Hillary has been very critical of the current state of climbing Everest.)
With that in mind, Hillary should know better than most that the amount of assistance you can give someone at 28,000 feet is relative. It's not like passing someone on the Tuckerman Ravine Trail. Ooops...I guess I commented...but I'm commenting on Hillary's commenting.

In any event, it's sad that this climber lost his life. I truly admire anyone chasing their dream.

the discovery channel has a great documentary about this exact subject they run from time to time. the whole concept that a "summit fever" overtakes peoples heads and they lose the ability to be human. they analyze a number of forces involved, but either way it is sad and disturbing. i don't remember the name, but considering the events of this year they will probably show it again. i can't imagine some goal being so all consuming as to not stop to offer a person whatever assistance you can. whether or not you choose to sacrifice your life to try and help them is another subject, but leaving them to die for a chance to stand on top of a mountain just doesn't seem worth it and i love to stand on top of mountains. i've read enough moutaineering literature to know things on those high peaks can get difficult and complicated, but how do people lose all compassion for another human life?

bryan

bryan said:

but how do people lose all compassion for another human life?

Click to expand...

Lose compassion, or never have it in the first place? I walk by people every day to/from work who are homeless, penniless, and hungry. My apathy rears its head every time. Same thing as Everest, just a different scale.

The fact is that none of us know the facts in this case. Sad? Absolutely. I read one account where the dude was an hour from death and at 27,000 feet, so nobody was going to save him anyway. Who knows? Maybe the climbers are all heartless bastards, but maybe they were realists. These sorts of things happen all the time in mountaineering.

I have ready numerous books on expeditions to Everest/K2/Nanga Parbat.
The message was always the same. If you get into trouble in the "death zone" and you cannot get yourself off the mountain you had best prepare to die because other climbers cannot risk their own lives hauling you off those peaks. With the minus 100 temps I'm suprised more of them didn't die up there. Even wearing oxygen your saturations are not normal when you are above 20,000 feet and this most certainly affects your ability to make rational decisions.
Almost every account I read one or more died on the mountain. I recall Reinhold Messner saying that" 50% of high altitude climbers freeze, fall to or otherwise meet their death in the mountains." It seemed that the more I read the more I came to appreciate that it was a risk that climbers understood and accepted.

kmac said:

I'm sorry I just don't get the disregard for human life, at any cost. I can't imagine passing someone in obvious distress and leaving them there to die. And I don't think I am being judgemental when I say that. There were several people on that mountain the day Inglis was cliimbing, and not one person had the decency to fight for that man's life. Sometimes all it takes is the strength of one person to stand up for someone and others will follow.
kmac

Click to expand...

I totally agree with this statement. There were more than 40 people in that group. To hell with all of them. I don't care if they paid $75,000... that doesn't qualify you to leave someone there to die so that you can go up and touch a summit. The legless jerk is getting the blunt of the criticism because people are going around celebrating his feat, meanwhile he's a heartless murderer as it turns out. Too bad he didn't bite it in New Zealand in that cave -- I bet people had to risk their lives rescuing his sorry butt.

I'd rather risk my life and die trying then step over someone on my way to the summit.

-Dr. Wu

Again, presumption here but from what I have read the other climbers didn't pass him due to fear of endangering themselves by assisting but in the detemrination that there was nothing they could do. (read didn't try and help)

That wouldn't work for me at sea level, nor at 29000 feet.

I always thought I couldn't climb Everest because I was afraid of dying up there. Maybe its becuase I couldn't live with myself walking by a dying man too.....

Seems like people are complacent with death when it comes to Everest...

Was that group of 40 in separate smaller groups?

It's common for humans to not help out if they know there's others out there capable of helping out. This is from "The Tipping Point" by Malcolm Gladwell. Example: Someone hears a scream for help from someone in a large apartment building. They're less likely to respond with the knowledge that there are many others in that same apartment building, also capable of helping. Then, picture someone in a duplex, hearing the same scream for help; they're much more likely to help out.

Boy, sure seems to me that this guy was in a hopeless situation and was on the verge of death. At -100 on the summit, who know what it would have taken to get him to relative safety. I sure hope that those who choose to venture into that danger are willing to count the costs prior to getting on the plane.

I do find it curious that Hillary was so free with his comments when he wasn't there to witness. That many people passing by MUST have meant that the climber's situation was hopeless.

Very few human beings on this planet have the physical ability to do anything but barely move their OWN body at that altitude.

I wouldn't be too quick about condemning anyone, although that does seem to pass as a sport on this board at times.

no different than when

1)someone has a medical emergency in public and nobody helps.
2)someone is getting attack and nobody helps

I think people in general are basically out for themselves anyway.

but....
I think anyone who steps foot on everest know the "deal" - I think its safe to say most on that hill, up that high, are so tired and wasted, its enough to get yourself down, never mind helping someone. I also think if your going to make an attempt on a mtn like everest, you know dying is a very real possibilty and to think if someone is going to help is crazy. If one doesn't like those odds - don't go to everest.


I don't know - of course I never been there so I don't know how it is - my thats my guess on the matter.