Accident on Tuolumne Peak

[Couloir]

This is messed up. That cat is very lucky.

[sketchfest]

WOW!! That is amazing and gory all at the same time

[mec]

lucky, lucky bastard he is.

[TeleRoss]

Hamburger...yummy.

Somehow I thought it would look more like chicken....maybe that's just from that movie "Alive".

Seriously though, what a story! Wow.

[fenderfour]

Amazing story. The best part - he was doing research on rockfall and wasn't wearing a helmet.

[foraker]

this just screams "wtf?" on so many levels...

[j_b]

"Upon reaching the highway I immediately flagged down a car which slowed, looked me over, and drove on."

 

 

"no, no, don't stop. i just cleaned the car. he is going to put blood all over the backseat."

[catbirdseat]

I hear he is a big fan of Aaron Ralston.

[Jim]

I hear he is a big fan of Aaron Ralston.

 

Another example of idiocy in action and then writing an "adventure story" about it.

[Dan_Harris]

I think the idiocy would have been if he had not written the last few lines about lessons learned. I went up three weeks later (did not know of the accident), also solo, and just to the right of the picture in his report. No rock happened to come loose and I finished the trip unscathed. Am I too an example of idiocy? It is unfortunate, but I am impressed he kept his head and managed to get out.

[Figger_Eight]

Props to him for holding his shit together, though. Yikes.

[Rainierwon]

J-

Another comment from the peanut gallery

If your out doin stuff in the mts the armchair critics would come out enmass if you get caught.

RW

[fenderfour]

J-

Another comment from the peanut gallery

If your out doin stuff in the mts the armchair critics would come out enmass if you get caught.

RW

 

I don't think this is the place that you will find "armchair critics" A majority of the posters here are active climbers, or at least trying to be active climbers.

 

It's always good to analyze someone else's accident to learn from it. That's why "Accidents in North American Mountaineering" is published every year.

[Cobra_Commander]

I don't think this is the place that you will find "armchair critics"

 

If you were not there and you use the words to the effect of "should have", you are an armchair critic. 4th class w/bad consequences is soloed all the time, often by people out on their own. Some forget the risk they are taking in this terrain, but it is often an acceptable risk to them, or so they think.

 

The key is to understand the consequences of your mistakes, both for your body and the many people that care about you.

[archenemy]

That's a bit rough. I think F4 is right to say that an armchair critic is someone who offers criticisms or advice in an area of knowledge in which he was never actively involved. "Should have" may just be another way of processing the information he's read or conveying his opinion.

 

And one of the consequences of our mistakes is that others get to add their coulda shoulda wouldas.

 

That's just my opinion. I prefer armchair quarterbacking anyway.

[E-rock]

Hey, Armchair fucktards. "Rockfall" is not a broken hold in the author's context. "Rockfall" is a catastrophic mass-wasting event. You can't go FIND a "rockfall" unless you are extremely lucky. You can only study the conditions that you think lead to rockfall. A "rockfall" of the scale the author is interested in would do quite a bit of damage to him, helmet or not. I see no logical inconsistency in his decision not to bring a helmet. So shut the fuck up about that stupid point already.

[Cobra_Commander]

I guess I've seen one too many avalanche accident "analysis" online which are almost unbearable to read, even with "industry experts" involved in the discussion.

 

Just have noticed a lot of solo climbers on here doing similar things to this (and much more). After some personal experience, I wanted to remind that in accidents while "4th-classing", the climber (who's fall is quite frequently fatal) is the one who gets off easy.

 

In my opinion it's not wrong at all to do this and is completely necessary at times, but I'd wager a lot of the younger people (and older I suppose) have not fully evaluated the consequences.

[JoshK]

No, but THIS is idiocy:

 

"Upon reaching the highway I immediately flagged down a car which slowed, looked me over, and drove on"

 

[Cobra_Commander]

yes, that is moral decay in a paranoid society

[thelawgoddess]

gross!!!

[E-rock]

"Upon reaching the highway I immediately flagged down a car which slowed, looked me over, and drove on."

 

 

"no, no, don't stop. i just cleaned the car. he is going to put blood all over the backseat."

 

Or more likely: "What the hell is wrong with that guy? Don't slow down! He's probably a serial killer or mass murderer or something..."

[JoshK]

Anybody else think that not stopping for a person in obvious need of medical attention should be as unacceptable/illegal as passing by a car wreck with injured people and not stopping? I can hardly see the difference.

[thelawgoddess]

see e-rock's post.

[archenemy]

I do see not stopping for this guy as serious lack of ethics (prompted by fear).

 

But you drive by accidents on the freeway with injured people. So any law written has to be complicated, cover all grey areas, etc etc.

 

That they passed the Good Samaritan law is a good start, but I could guess that people may also be afraid of being sued, etc...

 

Its sad, very sad.

[j_b]

for what it's worth, i believe people misread Jim's comment. He was commenting on the Ralston story, i.e. how a mistake was turned into a big media adventure story.