Posted on 06/14/2006 5:50:58 AM PDT by Mr. Brightside
OK are we dealing with a politically correct euphemism here? Does "big" mean he was FAT? Or does "big" mean he was 6'8" 265 lbs?
It is a shame, but they KNEW the risk going up.
Fat people rarely are found climbing mountains, especially difficult climbs like Everest. This individual was probably tall and weighed in excess 200 lbs.
I just have to wonder, in this day and age, if the REAL reason they didn't attempt a rescue was because of the condition of his arms and legs. Perhaps they played God and decided that his "quality of life" wouldn't be "worth it" considering he would probably be a quadruple amputee if he survived.
was the dying guy climbing alone? wierd
Yes, skip Everest. It has become a zoo, way too many unskilled folks with too much money to spend on bragging rights. A blind man climbed it....c'mon, it is no longer the challenge it once was. However, you DO sound like the kinda guy who would enjoy K2.
If his arms and legs were frozen to the elbows and knees, it seems like they could have "made him smaller".
I realize the logic of your reply is compelling. That would not stop, however, someone 'fat' making an illogical attempt on Everest.
Someone would have had to make a careful(?) exam to discern his limbs were frozen. Or perhaps they just could not articulate the joints. hmmm.
Many missing details/facts still.
I too noticed the lack of detail there and went searching. I found two URLs with pictures, for what they're worth:
Not likely. They saved themselves. In such an environment it is impossible to assist anyone down. This is not rock-hopping in the Tetons. Everyone on such a climb is in grave danger. Considering the degree of frost-bite and the likely incoherent state, it would be impossible for several people to get him down without dying themselves. Hillary is a great climber, but in this case I think he spoke ill of a fellow Kiwi before all the facts were in.
People need to stop struggling with the concept that you can get yourself into a situation where others are physically incapable of getting you out. I'm not sure why this is so hard for personal responsibility hawks on this board to understand.
They couldn't rescue him. End of story.
Unfortunately people die in the Himalaya, even at lesser altitudes and on more navigable terrain than the top of the 3rd Hilary Step.
Having been up to the Everest region, at a certain level of altitude and acclimatization every step becomes a fight and a struggle, and the paramount chores are (a) breathing and (b) putting one foot in front of the other. Guides - they struggle too - bear the additional burden of worrying about and assisting their clients.
And that's the bottom line here: the guides who are being accused had to make hard decisions about the survival of their clients versus the survival of a climber who was in near-death state.
By helping the stricken climber, they would also be paying much less attention to their own clients (at altitude, thinking is very sequential and it's a struggle to think clearly and carefully). It's pretty obvious to me that they put their clients first, which was the right thing to do (even if the clients didn't like it or understand it).
You are bad. Now go to your room.
Just tryin to help.....says Jeff Dahmer.
Expect a court challenge from the ACLU.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.