John Oliver - Mount Everest discussion

[SpencerVT]

John Oliver did this very funny and very accurate segment on Mount Everest climbing recently.
Everest seems to have become an example showing the stupidity of humanity.
There is literally tons of human excrement and trash up there. The roles/treatment of the sherpas and methods climbers use to get to the top expedition-style are questionable. The mass death weeks ago from the "traffic jam" was really irresponsible and disturbing. So insane to see a backed-up Disney World length line to reach the summit.

Check it out here, very good segment:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bchx0mS7XOY

 

[skiguy]

IMO some things are just better left off for late night television.

 

[egilbe]

Coworker watched the skit at work and I said to her, that's about $3k worth of down clothing just for that act.

 

[Peakbagr]

F---ing hilarious

 

[Puma concolor]

That which I cannot do myself, I choose to ridicule.

Whatever floats your boat, I guess.

 

[bikehikeskifish]

That was pretty funny. If you enjoyed that, you might also enjoy this hilarious take on mountaineering

Tim

 

[NHClimber]

Darwinism will win the day for sure. Particularly if with a few more quakes K2 becomes the tallest mountain. Imagine the carnage.

 

[Mike P.]

I like John Oliver's comedic style so I liked it. Economics and human hubris is driving too much of the Everest trade. In this particular instance, Darwinism is multi-dimensional. Most of the Everest tourist are the financially fit and many are physically fit. (okay some aren't in great shape) They come from good environments and are successful. Hubris drives them from their comfortable places within society to try and get their name on a trophy and for many of these people Everest is a trophy.

To put this back in a northeast bent, Is a crowded Washington, Whiteface or Marcy the summits you (most of us thinking of ourselves as knowledgeable hikers in the region) would want to be standing on or hiking too during a great weather weekend in summer? (you and a couple of 100 friends) Franconia Ridge on a Saturday? Those of us who love the mountains are looking at something less visited and underrated, we get up early to beat the crowds or go late for sunset when most have left. We can bicker over if there are too many regulations in Baxter, however, those regulations help keep Katahdin and Hamlin much less visited than their neighboring states' high points.

BTW, on several of the continents, the second highest is harder than the highest.

 

[TEO]

That was pretty funny. If you enjoyed that, you might also enjoy this hilarious take on mountaineering

Tim

That was awesome, Tim! Thank you for sharing that.

 

[Mike P.]

Currently Everest is growing, now shrinking as a result of the Indian tectonic plate sliding under the Asian plate.

 

[NHClimber]

Currently Everest is growing, now shrinking as a result of the Indian tectonic plate sliding under the Asian plate.

Enough with the geological truth, debbie downer. I like TJ's idea of demolishing the top then. And I still say a quake could help, at least in the short term!

 

[TEO]

That which I cannot do myself, I choose to ridicule.

Whatever floats your boat, I guess.

Respectfully, I think that you're missing the point of John Oliver's piece, which was pointing out the absurdity that so many unqualified people are allowed to climb, threatening the lives of everyone, including the people who are qualified. And, they're doing it all on the backs of the sherpas, many of whom are dying for their selfish ego trips.

 

[Puma concolor]

That’s fine.

My overall philosophy when it comes to mountain travel is that a certain amount of regulation is necessary to ensure that those who visit the mountains have a true mountain experience. Limits on numbers of climbers (whether it be Everest or Mount Whitney), blue bags, camping restrictions etc etc. But beyond that, I strongly believe that anyone who wishes to voluntarily participate in a mountain activity should be afforded the right to do so. Specific to Everest, that goes for climbers and sherpas alike. No one is forcing Everest climbers to go to Everest and no one is forcing sherpas to choose that line of work. Both weigh the risks and rewards of what they are doing and choose to participate based on their own internal drives. And every year, they combine with one another to put on a show that the entire world is simply unable to ignore. Despite the so-called “cheapening” of what an Everest summit means, people are still mesmerized by the spectacle.

I have no desire to climb Everest and certainly no desire to ever have anyone carry my gear or equipment. But that’s my choice. What I choose to do in the mountains has no greater or less value than what anyone else chooses to do ... including neophyte Everest aspirants.

And since we’re talking music videos here, let me suggest this one ...

Live and Let Die

 

[ChrisB]

John Oliver did this very funny and very accurate segment on Mount Everest climbing recently.
Everest seems to have become an example showing the stupidity of humanity....

Great satire Spencer on what fools we mortals be!!

What is telling for me is that in the photo of the line of climbers on the Hillary Step no one takes the initiative to break out of the line and lead up another section of the route. Maybe because the hired guides are too lazy and the clients lack the skills to do anything other than jug up a fixed line with an ascender.

I guy I know from Nepal claims that the government is the one at fault since it allows this circus to continue. The $$ earned from the increasing number of permits issued is hard to resist. Meanwhile an ecological crisis get ignored.

These days summiting Everest indicates to me: 1. You are in great physical condx, 2. You are well-off financially, 3. You have time to spend on a hobby.

Mountaineering skills? Not necessarily.
cb

 

[DayTrip]

What is telling for me is that in the photo of the line of climbers on the Hillary Step no one takes the initiative to break out of the line and lead up another section of the route.
cb

Isn't that the whole problem on the South route? There is no other realistic way to traverse that section so everyone bottle necks in it? Breaking out of line probably means plummeting to your death.

 

[ChrisB]

Breaking out of line probably means plummeting to your death...

In normal situations, yes. The route takes the path of least resistance.

In a total exercise of Monday-Morning QBing, and the with the added ignorance of never having been there, I nevertheless wonder if the following bypass might be possible. It is more difficult for sure and requires some rock work. But as an alternative to waiting for hours might it be worth considering.

Major downside -- One would need real climbing skills to do it: traverse, rotten rock, etc.

(We should ask Rick Wilcox at IME!)

 

[OldEric]

Meanwhile an ecological crisis get ignored.

What crisis?

 

[OldEric]

In normal situations, yes. The route takes the path of least resistance.

In a total exercise of Monday-Morning QBing, and the with the added ignorance of never having been there, I nevertheless wonder if the following bypass might be possible. It is more difficult for sure and requires some rock work. But as an alternative to waiting for hours might it be worth considering.

Major downside -- One would need real climbing skills to do it: traverse, rotten rock, etc.

(We should ask Rick Wilcox at IME!)

View attachment 6215

It would take so much longer it wouldn't be worth it

 

[nartreb]

In normal situations, yes. The route takes the path of least resistance.

In a total exercise of Monday-Morning QBing, and the with the added ignorance of never having been there, I nevertheless wonder if the following bypass might be possible. It is more difficult for sure and requires some rock work. But as an alternative to waiting for hours might it be worth considering.

Major downside -- One would need real climbing skills to do it: traverse, rotten rock, etc.

(We should ask Rick Wilcox at IME!)

View attachment 6215

Really hard to say without a better look but your proposed route looks truly nasty: exposed slab, then rotten-looking overhang, then snow cornice. I'd be tempted to stay alongside the main route, it looks like there's room just to the left. Either way, laying a new route at altitude is a SLOW process. Most Everest customers could not manage to summit if they didn't have fixed lines to speed them up, and they certainly wouldn't manage to carry extra rope and gear, even if they had the skill to use it. Personally, I see a crowd like that forming on any route that has a bottleneck, and I get off the mountain. I recall Angel's landing - wasn't nearly as crowded as in the Everest photo, but I just wasn't comfortable elbowing through a crowd in a high-exposure situation, even though the route wasn't particularly difficult and altitude wasn't a factor. I turned around after just a couple of gaps in the cables.

 

[TEO]

My overall philosophy when it comes to mountain travel is that a certain amount of regulation is necessary to ensure that those who visit the mountains have a true mountain experience. Limits on numbers of climbers (whether it be Everest or Mount Whitney), blue bags, camping restrictions etc etc. But beyond that, I strongly believe that anyone who wishes to voluntarily participate in a mountain activity should be afforded the right to do so.

In general, I agree with you that anyone who wishes to climb should be able to do so, but with the caveat that you should have a minimum level of experience, from which we can infer skill, and fitness, and that it is ethically acceptable*. If you lack these, you are endangering the lives of hundreds of others. The particular problem with the South/Nepalese approach to Mt. Everest is that there are virtually no regulations: according to the Oliver piece, an ~$11,000 climbing permit fee, and a doctor's note. There are no limits on the numbers of climbers. Defining what a "true mountain experience" is is subjective and a massive grey area, but Oliver's piece highlighted how Everest from the South certainly isn't.

To your point about the sherpas freely choosing their form of employment, the sherpas are all but forced by economics into their jobs. (Oliver noted that not all sherpas are Sherpas, the latter being an ethnic group, the former being a job.) Those living in that region of Nepal essentially have to choose between poverty and being a sherpa. It's akin to being an Appalachian coal miner or Newfoundland fisherman. Do/did you really have much of a choice? These people need these jobs to survive, but they are all inherently dangerous. They still deserve regulations to afford whatever safety is possible, and the they deserve to be afforded respect. It is also a fair question to ask, is it morally justifiable to pursue bagging a peak at the expense of these people's lives, even if they are desperate for work. (Similarly we can ask is it morally justifiable to watch football or is the 2022 FIFA World Cup in Qatar? Oliver, a huge football fan, has previously addressed the Qatar World Cup.)

*It is my understanding that there are some geological features, particularly in the southwestern U.S. and Australia that are considered unethical to climb because they are sacred sites to native populations. There is at least one bona fide 4,000 footer, based on the AMC's 200-foot col standard, and officially surveyed, that is not recognized by any of the major hiking clubs because of ethics.