IMAX Stay the hell off the mountain already!!

<snip lots of REALLY old news>

ZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz......... Snrfglugl.. <blink> <blink> Huh? Hey! I'm trying to sleep over here. Keep it down.

-Mike 'Everest IMAX AGAIN??!?' Watz-

So why did you support this activity by watching the movie?

(blither, blither, snip)

/dev/null

If you don't like climbing mountains, don't climb them.

There is a big difference between resuing a fisherman (or a climber) than evacuating someone from Denali; though I know you will not see that. Mountaineering is done largely because it is dangerous. There is no reason society should pay the tab. Climbing and fishing are not dangerous; it is the exception that runs into trouble.

They accomplish nothing. Everything is put there for them. Ladders, roaps pitons even guides to carry your stuff and lead the way. They are like all the other followers hanging onto the coattails of their betters who proceeded them. Wasters and polluters all. Bragging rites to their own kind. What

At the last that I heard, there was a plan by the government of Nepal to take care of empty oxygen bottles high on Everest. Basically, when each expedition registers in, they count the number of cylinders and the expedition pays a 'return deposit' of several bucks on each one. Then they climb. When they leave, they may take all or some of the empties out and they get their deposit back. The ones left behind are policed up by the local Sherpa people. They can easily carry down several at a time, and this earns them a couple of months worth of income. So it brings income into the poor Sherpa villages. This is not the best plan possible, but it is a start. The government might raise the deposit fee until climbers handle it better. Got a better plan?

When a climber is high on Everest, equipment expense is not an issue. The climber is within an inch of losing his life, and he is not going to be concerned about a few empty cylinders. I'm not saying that this is proper, but it is reality.

I actually can confirm Bobs Post regarding the retrieval of air Bottles, a couple of years ago I had the opportunity to meet and talk with David Breashears and in the course of our chat he told me that the Sherpas were being paid 'by the Bottle' for what they carried down, but I recall he did say that BC looked sort of like a Trash Dump.

Myself, being a Weekend Warrior, and hardly in the World Class Climer category, use a stove and try to leave no trace. But that's just me.

Regards,

<Clueless vitriol SNIPPED>

Please folks, lets not feed the sick puppy, k?

- Sumo, trolls are us

- Sumo, trolls are us

Truth hurts I see.

The fact that Everest mountain climbers are 1. big babies 2. serve no purpose for the environment but in fact harm it 3. put others at risk- their loving families, the rescue team, others in the team 4 have low sense of self worth and need to prove something dumb to themselves now and again

troll all you want...but facts is facts.

You want exercise? 1. shovel snow in snow areas, or dig a trench 2. help carry boxes of food to the homeless shelters 3. climb the stairs and stop taking the elevators at work!

...thats enough...even I've gotten bored with this thread.

climb yer damn mountain and stay out of the citys so I can get a parking spot for my moped!

Exactly. The same apply in underdeveloped countries. When I was in Bolivia I saw many people throwing trash along the roads, in the streets, etc. One might ask 'why don't they care more about the environment, why do they trash their own land?'. Actually, as I found, they have other priorities. Many are really poor and finding food is at the top of the list. It's so difficult just to stay in life that they don't care about environment.

Ok, I'm late on this thread, and maybe I should have left it alone for a first post to rec.climbing, but...

Ummm - I haven't seen the movie, and I don't have any interest in climbing Mt Everest, but I do have some interest in trekking 6000m up, I ride a bicycle for transport and for recreation - on and off road, I'm quite willing to walk in areas inaccessible to motor vehicles and am even about to try (indoor) climbing. All of these activities are arguably dangerous, but being alive is dangerous and everybody is going to die one day anyway. Some people weigh the costs/benefits of their activities differently to you. If I thought I had the skills and the fitness - and if there were fewer other things I wanted to do in my life before dying - I might be willing to give a big mountain a go too. I feel lucky that I am basically healthy (though way far from an athlete) and have fully functional legs, arms and hands and would like to make use of them before they are taken away from me through a serious injury out of my control, or through a degenerative disease of some sort.

I often choose a bike over motorised transport because it's fun and I want the exercise. There are also 'altruistic' reasons, like reducing resource consumption and reducing pollution, but I don't really 'get' the saint-liness of altruism. You might hop on a plane to India to help the earthquake victims, but you're really only doing that because there is something inside you driving you to do it, and so you get some sort of personal tension release and satisfaction out of doing it. How is that so different to somebody with a need to prove to themself that they are capable of doing something difficult that most people think is dangerous? People on rescue teams have also made a decision that the benefits of their work to themselves outweigh the risks.

You use public roads! And on a moped even? In a collision you probably have more chance of dying then a car occupant - and being on two wheels and being inherently unstable, you're in more danger if there is a mechanical or structural failure. You could probably try justifying this danger by saying that you're helping the environment by consuming less resources, or maybe you just aren't old enough for a car license yet, and don't want to walk or get a job closer to home. But for whatever reason you're increasing your risk of death because you get some sort of personal satisfaction out of it. I don't see a qualititative difference between you travelling on two wheels and somebody climbing a big mountain. What does personal motorised transport cost your country in accidents, pollution and infrastructure? Even without your moped I strongly suspect that resources you consume to support your lifestyle does more damage to the natural environment then any activities you partake in to protect it.

Some people have more money then other people - so? I'm sure that the way you spend your money and time would seem frivolous to some.

Cultures are being destroyed? If anything their vicinity to the mountains is only accelerating the process. It certainly isn't the fault of climbers that this is happening. I don't see how that can not happen without the country closing itself off from the outside world (which would also mean making much 20th century technology illegal).

Don't assume that I don't put any of my time/money into helping people or the environment.

Neil.