Mt. Everest: A McDonalds Experience

Jason P

It could use one of those Coors Light portals as well.

:ugeek:

MayDay10

$8000 for training? $2K Phone bill?

if the writer wanted to be taken seriously, he shouldnt have so obviously inflated numbers

Byrnzie

Bentleyspop wrote:

For a lot of the people who attempt to summit Everest they have been climbing and "training" for years if not decades. So the training $ figure is a bit off.

Not all of them are properly trained. And this is a big part the problem.

Byrnzie

You'd have thought that part of the £40,000 they're made to pay would go towards the cleaning up of their shit after they leave. Makes you wonder who's pocketing all that money.

Byrnzie

chadwick wrote:

it bothers me big time that assholes do not take out what they bring into such a place. people who leave trash & junk behind should be kicked in the nuts or the ass.

Everest... the way things are reading it sounds as if this mountain & other incredibly spiritual locales are common landfills like many us cities or other disgusting shitholes around the globe. the people of Nepal should hire me to slap folks around who return from the hike with debris left on the mountain. I also like the cash deposit they have put in place, bring back your garbage, get your deposit back.

truly if they were into changing shit up, i believe they should shut down climbing for a few years & see how these littering fuckers like that. of course this is my vision and not the Nepalese people's way as they are kinder than i.

basically without a shadow of doubt the human race is garbage & the most cruel & disgusting animals on the planet that have ever lived.

Damn right. A lot of the climbers these days are just wankers who want to summit the mountain for the sole purpose of boasting to their friends about it, and to add another notch to their C.V's.

Jason P

Byrnzie wrote:

You'd have thought that part of the £40,000 they're made to pay would go towards the cleaning up of their shit after they leave. Makes you wonder who's pocketing all that money.

brianlux

Byrnzie wrote:

Bentleyspop wrote:

For a lot of the people who attempt to summit Everest they have been climbing and "training" for years if not decades. So the training $ figure is a bit off.

Not all of them are properly trained. And this is a big part the problem.

I agree, Byrnzie. I was talking with a customer in the bookstore today who, as it turns out, is a mountaineer and he talked about the same thing. He said that is the main reason 10 people died on Everest last year. He described the procession on people climbing that mountain as "a parade", that it has become a quest for mostly rich people who are "hauled up the mountain". It's a joke.

Thirty Bills Unpaid

One of the best books a person could ever read is Jon Krakauer's Into Thin Air. It details an actual tragic event on Everest where eight people died near the summit as a storm engulfed a number of commercial expeditions attempting to summit at the same time. Jon is a well-known writer that had the misfortune of getting caught in the story as he was on assignment.

To many of the points people have brought up to this point in time: summiting Everest is for richer people- it costs a ton to not only leave your job for the better part of a year, but to also pay for equipment, guides, and sherpas to pack your shit.

For some highly inadequate adventure enthusiasts- incapable of climbing on their own- they even need their asses wiped. Summiting Everest can be done for the right price. Rich people can pay for sherpas to drag their ass to the summit, take pictures of them at the top of the world, and then return home to throw lavish cocktail parties while entertaining their admiring friends with a slide show of their awesome accomplishment.

The thin air prevents rescue vehicles such as helicopters to come to the rescue of endangered climbers. Climbers in trouble are left to their own means as other climbers will climb right past stricken with summit fever. Rescues are difficult because at the summit people are hypoxic and generally sick and weak- their minds and bodies do not function normally. They can barely manage themselves let alone others. For many of these reasons, people leave their crap on the side of the mountain.

Everest has become commercialized and offers countries surrounding it the opportunity to profit from its appeal. It's likely not going to get better any time soon.

catefrances

Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:

One of the best books a person could ever read is Jon Krakauer's Into Thin Air. It details an actual tragic event on Everest where eight people died near the summit as a storm engulfed a number of commercial expeditions attempting to summit at the same time. Jon is a well-known writer that had the misfortune of getting caught in the story as he was on assignment.

To many of the points people have brought up to this point in time: summiting Everest is for richer people- it costs a ton to not only leave your job for the better part of a year, but to also pay for equipment, guides, and sherpas to pack your shit.

For some highly inadequate adventure enthusiasts- incapable of climbing on their own- they even need their asses wiped. Summiting Everest can be done for the right price. Rich people can pay for sherpas to drag their ass to the summit, take pictures of them at the top of the world, and then return home to throw lavish cocktail parties while entertaining their admiring friends with a slide show of their awesome accomplishment.

The thin air prevents rescue vehicles such as helicopters to come to the rescue of endangered climbers. Climbers in trouble are left to their own means as other climbers will climb right past stricken with summit fever. Rescues are difficult because at the summit people are hypoxic and generally sick and weak- their minds and bodies do not function normally. They can barely manage themselves let alone others. For many of these reasons, people leave their crap on the side of the mountain.

Everest has become commercialized and offers countries surrounding it the opportunity to profit from its appeal. It's likely not going to get better any time soon.

that book breaks my heart. it also strongly enforces why I wont go higher than base camp. I prefer to breath on my own and im kinda attached to my fingers, toes and nose.

catefrances

Byrnzie wrote:

You'd have thought that part of the £40,000 they're made to pay would go towards the cleaning up of their shit after they leave. Makes you wonder who's pocketing all that money.

the nepalese and chinese govts for one. they don't let you climb for free.

STAYSEA

Brian... I'll give you sources later.

There is trash, and Dead bodies for reasons.

That Mountain defeats most humans. When a member of the group dies, they are usually left.

Energy is too precious to your own life, and it's widely known , it's acceptable to leave the fallen where they lay.

FEW! actually go back to claim the body when they get strength back.

It's not a tourist attraction, and it is. How many people make it to the summit? not many

They should build Mickey D's at the bottom.

STAYSEA

catefrances wrote:

Byrnzie wrote:

You'd have thought that part of the £40,000 they're made to pay would go towards the cleaning up of their shit after they leave. Makes you wonder who's pocketing all that money.

the nepalese and chinese govts for one. they don't let you climb for free.

Most climbers would die with out a Sherpa. It's unspoken. :shock:

catefrances

STAYSEA wrote:

Brian... I'll give you sources later.

There is trash, and Dead bodies for reasons.

That Mountain defeats most humans. When a member of the group dies, they are usually left.

Energy is too precious to your own life, and it's widely known , it's acceptable to leave the fallen where they lay.

FEW! actually go back to claim the body when they get strength back.

It's not a tourist attraction, and it is. How many people make it to the summit? not many

They should build Mickey D's at the bottom.

yeah.. no... itd take all the strength you regained to get back up the mountain(not to mention down again hauling the corpse) to claim the body/ies of the fallen. and that's if you can actually find them again... weathers not known for its statis.

STAYSEA

catefrances wrote:

STAYSEA wrote:

Brian... I'll give you sources later.

There is trash, and Dead bodies for reasons.

That Mountain defeats most humans. When a member of the group dies, they are usually left.

Energy is too precious to your own life, and it's widely known , it's acceptable to leave the fallen where they lay.

FEW! actually go back to claim the body when they get strength back.

It's not a tourist attraction, and it is. How many people make it to the summit? not many

They should build Mickey D's at the bottom.

yeah.. no... itd take all the strength you regained to get back up the mountain(not to mention down again hauling the corpse) to claim the body/ies of the fallen. and that's if you can actually find them again... weathers not known for its statis.

Those that have lost... and get a chance to go back... do. They usually mark the exact coordinates. The trip is only about the recovery. Most cases they can use a helicopter... weather permitting, and money talks. Most dead bodies and trash are just left forever, no one can be a maid for Everest. It's unrealistic. It's SAD. :(

brianlux

STAYSEA wrote:

How many people make it to the summit? not many

Good question- you piqued my interest. According to wiki answers, 2700 people have successfully climbed to the summit of Everest.

Wise geek says "Though it's impossible to say how many people have reached Everest's summit at any given time since the number changes every year, as of September 2011 over 3,100 climbers from over 20 countries had made over 5,100 recorded climbs. As of 2012 there were over 220 recorded fatalities, "

UK Answers say "As of the end of the 2004 climbing season, 2,238 people had reached the summit (1,148 of them since 1998) and 186 people died while summitting."

And those are just the figures for successful climbs. The sheer number of attempts is outrageous.

What ever the exact answer, I really have to think that's too many people on that mountain, too many dead bodies (taken or left) and definitely too much trash. But then you know me, I'm much more in favor of leaving pristine wilderness.

brianlux

Another interesting article:

http://news.yahoo.com/mount-everest-too ... m9s;_ylv=3

The world's highest peak is so crowded with climbers that some are seriously considering installing a ladder on the famed Hillary Step to ease congestion. While the ladder is intended for use for those descending from the peak, the proposal still casts Mt. Everest's long-running overcrowding issue into stark relief.

"Most of the traffic jams are at the Hillary Step because only one person can go up or down. If you have people waiting two, three or even four hours that means lots of exposure [to risk]. To make the climbing easier, that would be wrong. But this is a safety feature," said Sherpa, who co-ordinates the work to prepare the traditional route up the mountain for clients who pay between $45,000 and $75,000."

The story of Everest's epic traffic jam has been bubbling under the surface for awhile. National Geographic, for instance, has a great piece on Everest crowds in their June issue, marking the 60th anniversary of Edmund Hillary's ascent to the peak. Apparently, the path to ascent is now littered with garbage, and corpses:

"We were forced to move at exactly the same speed as everyone else, regardless of strength or ability. In the swirling darkness before midnight, I gazed up at the string of lights, climbers’ headlamps, rising into the black sky. Above me were more than a hundred slow-moving climbers. In one rocky section at least 20 people were attached to a single ratty rope anchored by a single badly bent picket pounded into the ice. If the picket popped, the rope or carabiner would instantly snap from the weight of two dozen falling climbers, and they would all cartwheel down the face to their death.

Panuru, the lead Sherpa of our team, and I unclipped from the lines, swerved out into open ice, and began soloing—for experienced mountaineers, a safer option. Twenty minutes later, another corpse. Still attached to the line of ropes, he was sitting in the snow, frozen solid as stone, his face black, his eyes wide open."

The magazine proposes several other options for fixing Everest's crowd problem, none of which involve a ladder. Their solutions include fewer permits, certifying climbers for experience, reducing team size, and making sure litter (and bodies) are removed from the mountain.



The highlighted ideas make the most sense, do they not?

even flow - question mark

Maybe they should start summiting without oxygen and have a time limit to get up and get out. You know, kind of make it a feat of humankind again instead of a tourist destination.

hedonist

brianlux wrote:

The magazine proposes several other options for fixing Everest's crowd problem, none of which involve a ladder. Their solutions include fewer permits, certifying climbers for experience, reducing team size, and making sure litter (and bodies) are removed from the mountain.
[/i]


The highlighted ideas make the most sense, do they not?

Absolutely - and as was mentioned earlier, have funds set aside or built into the fees to account for the clean-up (sounds weird including "bodies" into that equation, but such is this reality).

I sure hope people know what they're getting into when they begin this trek.

I can't see losing my life over achieving such a feat, but that's just me.

Snakeduck

Just toss the dead ones off the side of the mountain before they have a chance to get frozen in ice... or ride the bodies like a sled to the bottom.

mikepegg44

STAYSEA wrote:

Most climbers would die with out a Sherpa. It's unspoken. :shock:

I love it. The climber who has reached their ultimate goal up to that point stands on top of the world and calls it the greatest moment of their life. The Sherpa meanwhile calls it just another Tuesday.