Everest 1996: Charlotte Fox's account and the 1PM turn-around time 

Jup, was very overwhelmed at the detail of information at first. But took the time to not write it off and it's widened my opinion

Don't know how I found this channel but yeah I agree. I'd heard a decent amount about the 96 tragedy but this guy peels it back a few layers deeper. I didn't know Krakauer had this many problems.

Agreed. No dramatics. Just detail, facts, told in a dispassionate way. Love it.

How was it a fraud?

@@TheHSIHP You are right it was not fraud. However many of his assertions were proven to be very questionable by multiple sources. That is why the book was very questionable.

Thank you! That entire story romanticized going out into the wild... Wildly unprepared .

I'd really like to watch the interview of Sandy Pittman-Hill that you refer to. Is it on RU-vid? What's the title? I'd like to have a more accurate understanding of her, and what she went through because of Krakauer's portrayal of her.

@@ellyw7201 I tried to post a link in a reply to your comment yesterday or the day before, but it seems to have disappeared. Sometimes RU-vid channels don’t want people posting links to videos in the comments. If you Google search “Sandy Hill, harvest series” it will come up.

I hope you see this but me and another commenter are looking for that video hopefully you can give us some keywords to locate it?

@@Chellz801 Try "Podcast: Surviving Everest & social death with Sandy Hill" YT Harvest series

He didn’t vilify him IMO. He definitely had disdain for a) his choice to climb without O’s as a guide, b) his “very Russian approach” to clients which was contrary to what Fisher had asked him to do, and c) how he unceremoniously walked away from the MM clients while at the Summit (though he later found out more about this), and at least 2 more instances where he deliberately went against Fisher’s (but was making almost Triple what other guides were). I def think he has his opinions about Anatoli, but it was clear he respected him, and toward the end of the book he mentions how heroic Anatoli was in doing what he did to save people. He also explains that he had conversations with Anatoli well after the expedition where Anatoli explains why he left clients on the summit in such an apparent huff, and gives him credit. So, I don’t think he vilified him. I just think his view of what a good guide does/should do was aligned with Hall & Fisher (to some extent) but not with Boukleev.

​@@miketausig4205...He has no business to comment on Scott Fisher 's team..he was with Rob Hall's team & should have written about Rob's failures resulting in 4 deaths including Rob's..

⁠@@mchandrashekhar4043no business? HE WAS THERE! The two leadership groups of the teams made a decision to work together. Had it not been for Rob Hall, it could have been worse, since the leadership of Mountain Maniacs started making bad decisions much further down the mountain. It’s not his “job” to write for one or the other, but as a survivor and writer who happened to be a part of one of the worst events on Everest. Hell…because of Fischer’s poor decision making, people died. Had he been there, it’s possible they would have still died, but at least the MM team would have had their leadership contingent in place.

Sheesh…..

​@@miketausig4205 *Mountain Maniacs (MM) I am just a SAFE GUY in Eugene, Trying to Learn this!!!* *I Don't Know WHY I am suddenLy so Fascinated!!! I'm usuaLLy NOT the Type!!!!* *I Think, that U-Tube Guy Dr. Dan Grande, GOT me INTO this!!! (Dam Dan)!!!!* *Dam Dan Grande did aPsychiatric RePort on Sandra Pittman! So, I GoogLed Her, & then went Crazy!!!* *I've, BeFore This, ALways thought that(MM) stood for-> MariLyn Monroe!!!!* *There are at Least(40) Aspects & Versions, of this TerriBLe 1996 (Everest Epic-sode )!!!* *ME??? I FeeL SoRRy for that 90-lb.Japan GirL, & they just Left Her, there was No One for HER!!!* *Justin . James . Martyr (AT) G .c | Eugene, Oregon | Sept. 15, 2024*

Absolutely

Subscribe and smash that like button

Well to be fair he needed material for his upcoming world speaking tour

But also made it clear he's an "amateur" climber and therefore barely able to survive with no extra capacity to help save others.

He wants to be a Boukreev class climber so much.

The fact that no Mountain Madness clients died is well hidden in Krakauer's account. Boukreev was a superman.

Krakauer was an experienced snow and ice climber. A very good climber- but not a very good FELLOW climber….that’s why so many of his climbs were solo.

This is by far the best channel about anything regarding Everest. Michael actually does the research and chases down the sources and fact checks things himself. Thorough and honest content like this is rarer and rarer

This has been answered.

And Rob Hall was a father in waiting. what a cad!

That’s a fair point, but Fischer and Hall both died. Krakauer took the tragedy and turned it into a cash cow for himself, at the expense of many other people. There is a level of deceit here that to me is … icky as hell.

Plenty of channels use Krakauers point of view because that is easy to use source requiring minimum of research because you can just use the argument "that must be true, he was there" without any criticism or doubt treating his work as the sole source of truth. And the fact that he is Racist, xenophobic, egoistic, egocentric, sexist coward who is twisting the story just to make himself look like a hero and hide his true actions - it all doesn't matter because he is a MAN who wrote a BOOK

I do point out in this video that Rob Hall's decision to stop Doug Hansen form returning to camp and encourage him to push on directly cost the lives of Rob Hall, Doug Hansen, and Andy Harris, and indirectly Yasuko Namba. I also point out both in this video and the "Yellow Brick Road" video that Scott Fischer "stunt" caused the problems on his team. Most people who view these videos already share your view -- that Rob Hall and Scott Fisher were responsible. What I cover in these videos is the commercial reasons why Krakauer doesn't present such a simple narrative in his book -- namely, that Rob Hall had a deal with his employer, Outside Magazine. Understanding how bias and corporate sponsorship of "journalism" works is useful far beyond mountaineering literature. Many people read Krakauer's book and said "something feels off here." These videos are addressed to that rather large audience -- people that already can make up their own minds about the responsibility of Rob Hall and Scott Fischer (they don't need me to tell them), but what they can learn from is the "literary" techniques Krakauer used to promote the paying client of Outside Magazine and craft a compelling but fictional book that would sell well. Lou Kasischke addresses various issues he views as "leadership failures" in After the Wind. I'll look into those a little more when I cover exactly what the deal with Outside Magazine was and how that deal essentially guaranteed significant problems for Rob Hall -- and that is why Scott Fischer turned down the exact same deal. Fischer was given the last option and he turned it down because there was no way you could make that deal and have a successful expedition. Adventure Consultants were doomed to some type of major failure (not necessarily people dying) as soon as that deal was made. It is also what caused all the other issues you mention -- issues that 99% of viewers are already well aware of.

It's actually criminal and then seeing JK go around the world giving paid speeches is beyond disgusting

Nah... I don't believe that Anatoly was giving a sh!t about it. More so, he got awarded for his actions a David A. Sowles Memorial Award by the American Alpine Club! The media was cheering him, and so on.. The Krak selfish story wasn't the only one, and much less impactful than. But the book went popular, and as the time went by... it become the most famous version of the incident. Anatoly died in 98' or 99' so luckily he avoided the sh!t throwing... Sandy Pittman was the next victim after that.

@@stormtrooper9404 krakys story about pitman also isn’t backed up by the photos he actually put in his book, the photos actually contradict what he said about her struggling up the Hillary step and lagging behind…….

@@ritid69Yea.. I am in awe watching this channel! My eyes opened for many things I thought I knew..

There was a book about that by an English climber. A Good Day To Die, or something similar. The author talks at length about the South African team having more up to date weather forecasts, so they negotiated with Rob Hall to switch summit windows, knowingly allowing the Adventure Consultants Team to climb into the storm on 10th May. It was a detailed account, as I recall. Sorry I cannot remember the author. The leader of the Jaapies has remained quiet on events in 1996.

Yes. Storytelling is very powerful, and Jon Krakauer is a very good storyteller. That said, there are internal contradictions in his book that are fairly easy to spot even to an untrained eye. One is discussed in this video: it is the story of the Montenegrin expedition, too green to know where to use ropes but also experienced enough to make the correct decision to turn around very close to the summit - the same impressively coolheaded decision that he praises Goran Kropp for so much elsewhere in the book... Or the mysterious "ill humor" of Ang Dorje. Or how differently JK judges different people for not using oxygen (Boukreev, Lopsang, Groom). Once you start looking for these things, it's all coming apart.

@@rabarbarum Very true! It doesn't actually take a lot of knowledge to spot the issues, just a wariness of the trustworthiness of the storyteller. Something we should all cultivate when approaching non-fiction work.

​@@rabarbarum Sorry, but _too green to know where to use ropes but also experienced enough to make the correct decision to turn around very close to the summit_ Is NOT an internal contradiction I'm sorry if you can discern that fact, but I know I'm right because logic is literally my profession. How many proofs by contradiction have you written? This is so silly it's incredibly easy I'd undoubtedly do the former but absolutely do the latter, that is, had I been in the same situation Experience is not required to make a choice that could very well save your life

It's been awhile since I read the book, but I thought Krakauer had explained one of the Sherpa had a toothache and thought the other was showboating or not doing his share. So from what I remember there was an explanation of sorts. I read Anatoli's book as well as Krakauers, and Leah's book and the book by the lawyer or other climber who turned back. Not to disparage Anatoli's climbing, but there's a difference between climbing and guiding, isn't there? While Anatoli was clearly a competent climber and saved lives, he did book it back to base camp while the other guides were struggling to manage the group. Seems like there was a difference of opinion between Scott and Anatoli on a guide's purpose and duties. He was certainly instrumental in saving lives, but he could have been useful if he had stayed with the group he was supposed to be guiding.

@@Jose_Hunters_EWF_Remixes Lol what are you on about? This is not formal logic. The point is that Krakauer uses literary techniques to create a certain impression but the facts, even those that he himself acknowledges, suggest something else. The subsequent revisions of the text, and his stubborn refusal to self-correct even when it was made abundantly clear to him that he misrepresented or misunderstood someone, indicate self-serving intentionality on his part. Creating images and evoking emotions in the reader’s mind is a subtle craft. It has nothing to do with fucking proofs by contradiction. BTW I hate to speak from authority but if you must know, I literally used to teach logic and argumentative writing at university.

But you offer noting but you own opinion. Do you know Jon Krakauer? Michael Groom? Lou Kisischke? Did you talk to any of them? Is there a reason there as no ambiguity with Groom, Kasiscke, Hutchison, Taske? They all knew it was 1PM. But Krakauer says there is "ambiguity" so you believe him based on nothing more than wishful thinking. Any reason Krakauer left this "ambiguity" out of his 1996 article? Any reason he left this "ambiguity" out of his analysis? You just ignore the mountain of problem's with Krakauer's account and present it is as molehill. And where do you get that "Those lower down turned around because even if it was 2 they stood no chance. " You just make it up. They turned around at 11:30. You think you can't make it from South Summit to the Summit in 2.5 hours? Krakauer, Beidleman, Schoening and Martins made it in less than 1.5 hours. In any case, they all explained their decisions and that it was that they could not make it by 1PM. You are just making excuses... “One of the saddest lessons of history is this: If we’ve been bamboozled long enough, we tend to reject any evidence of the bamboozle. We’re no longer interested in finding out the truth. The bamboozle has captured us. It’s simply too painful to acknowledge, even to ourselves, that we’ve been taken. Once you give a charlatan power over you, you almost never get it back.” ― Carl Sagan, The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark

@mikes3756 If you believe your point is correct, then we need to start to criticise Krakouer's book for not blaming the leader and instead blaming everyone else. Remember, Krakouer's book is intended to be investigative journalism, accurately portraying the situation. Therefore, Krakouer's main complaints should have been directed at the poor leadership

That is a book that someone is trying to sell. But "highly accurate weather reports" did not exist in 1996 and would have likely been required to be kept secret anyway. When I went in 2013, one service offered more accurate forecasts. It cost hundreds of dollars and they required you to keep it secret. They couldn't make much money if they just sold it to one person and then had it shared with everyone. So, just ask Graham Radcliffe who produced the "highly accurate weather reports", who did they sell them too, and did the terms of sale have any confidentiality terms? The main advantage to have climbed Everest is that I know what Yak Dung smells like.

Ive read grahams book. Its def worth a read just because of an outsider's perspective of the main teams/ppl involved. In regards to the weather info, he did point out it wasnt shared between all teams for the reasons you mentioned - contracts, money and secrecy. And that it was baby science at the British weather beurau. Its def worth a read though and ill be interested in how you break the book down if you ever decide to do a review.​@michaeltracy2356

I can think of at least 4 books I read by different authors about the 1996 Everest events, possibly more By reading all these, you can get a clearer better picture of what actually happened, and not from a single source Tracy is a competent and reliable source, but he seems to have a raging boner for krakauer (don't mean that he's gay) Read those books, but read krakauer's last

The channel Adventures Gone Wrong has a great 3 part series on Everest 1996. The host basically read everyone’s book on the accident, and tried to compile them all into a common timeline of agreed upon events and average times. Also provides the climbing and personal backgrounds of everyone involved. She is a very compelling storyteller as well, I’d highly recommend checking her channel out!

I'm curious about that too. And where was Mike Groom? I know he was helping Yasuko and Beck, but once they really get into the storm he dissappear

It is generally put in by the expedition representative. It is not always accurate, but it does reflect what the expedition reported about itself.

@@michaeltracy2356 Thankyou, that makes sense. I'll look at it again in that context.

Id never go with Russell Brice. WWWexpeditions ripped me off, too. Thanks Christine Gee!

If it’s the same Brice as in the documentary ”Sherpa” (2015), then meh. Idk about his leadership but in that film he came across as a condescending Westerner. Not as bad as some of his clients, but still.

​@@rabarbarum Russell Brice is a New Zealander. He was expensive, but he made sure you were looked after. He was very detail oriented and safety conscious ... right down to logging the time & nature of each call & everyone's positions on the mountain & their health.

But had Rob Hall lost a client before 1996? These videos are taking us deeper than a personal motivation of Hall's sentiments causing the death of three or four people. That is certainly how it is seen in NZ where his "self sacrifice" for his client is generally lauded. But what if it wasn't just a selfless desire for Doug to realise his dream? To what extent was Hall motivated by other - possibly even rational - factors that have a wider application for us beyond mountaineering? This is what I am finding so compelling in this analysis.

It could absolutely happen under anyone's leadership. All you need is an unfortunate confluence of events and personalities.

Krakauer did not fix any rope. Boukreev fixed the rope on the Hillary Step -- but photos show significant ropes from prior seasons, so the job would not have taken long. Beidleman belayed Boukreev on the Step. Krakauer seems to have carried a rope to somewhere, but that is not clear. He unfortunately does not states exactly what it is that he did. Above the Hillary Step, Beidleman and Adams fixed the rope. Krakauer asked to go ahead because he was running out of oxygen. Then Boukreev also left the rope fixing team to proceed to the summit. This seems pretty clear that Boukreev did not want Krakauer to get there first. Whether this was on a directive from Scott Fischer remains unknown, but Boukreev "stealing" the first summit of the season from Krakauer, I suspect, is what drove a lot of the animosity towards Boukreev.

@@michaeltracy2356 Thanks for clarifying that.

By the way, every time you mention Beidleman in these videos, there seem to be little inconsistencies or errors in his statement. He seems genuinely good and responsible person so do you think he's maybe "covering up" the supposed stunt given he was waiting on the summit so long with his clients? Or he is completely fine and that's just my wrong impression?

@@dawry9408 I've been wracking my brain trying to think about what sort of "stunt" is even feasible at 29,000 feet on the highly constrained summit of Everest. Laying out a flag on the summit? Throwing some kind of dyed powder into the air? Forming themselves into some kind of shape (maybe MM)? I really don't know

@@joshwhite3339 Many things are possible but it surely required at least two people in Scott and Lopsang and possibly more. We will never know since no one from MM ever happened to elaborate on it and Gammelgaard is the only one who mentioned it.

According to "Bitch" Magazine... "Regularly referred to as 'Marty Stu,' or 'Gary Sue,' they are especially prevalent in science fiction and fanfic, such as Star Wars' blandly handsome protagonist Luke Skywalker or Star Trek's Wesley Crusher,... " works.bepress.com/raizelliebler/14/ . But I don't see Krakauer so much as a Wesley Crusher. Seems more like a Ferengi... "Episodes of the series portray the Ferengi's hyper-capitalistic emphasis on profit and sexist social norms..." en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferengi. The "First Rule" of the Ferengi being most applicable here ... "Once you have their money, you never give it back." Also, "A good lie is easier to believe than the truth."

Because they hadn't got to the Hillary Step and they would have kept some rope to fix the Hillary Step -- just common sense.

How would you know that?

Rob Hall was with Mike Groom and Andy Harris at about 7AM on the Balcony. Those were the only AC people with radios, so there really wasn't any point of using them at that time. At 12PM Hall and Groom were together on South Summit, Harris had just left with Krakauer. Obviously, no need to radio Groom, and there really wasn't any reason to radio Harris at that point. Hall radios down his summit at 2:30, but Groom is with him on the Summit -- Harris is heading to South Summit. Harris had an earlier conversation with Hall as they passed each other -- Hall going up, Harris going down. While he have no way of knowing what was said, immediately after that Harris returned to South Summit and started trying to find oxygen bottles to being back up to Rob Hall. It is reasonable to assume that that when Rob Hall talked to Harris he instructed him to do one of two things: (1) go to South Summit and get more bottles and wait for Hall's radio call to see if he needed them brought up or (2) go get the bottles, no need to wait for a call. Rob then calls down at 4:30 asking for the bottles, but it is not clear what he had told Harris. Harris was clearly waiting at the South Summit even though, by that time, Harris had his own oxygen and could head down. So either Harris took it upon himself to understand that Hall was in trouble or Rob Hall told him earlier that he might be in trouble. But in either case, I don't see how additional radio calls would have helped significantly. I detail the oxygen problem at South Summit in the videos series about that. Whether the oxygen was stolen, misplaced, or just magically disappeared, the problems were that Andy Harris could not locate full bottles of oxygen at South Summit to bring up to Rob Hall. It is unlikely that receiving a radio call at 2:30 would have assisted Harris in locating any of the full bottles as Rob Hall had no idea what the oxygen situation on South Summit was at that point in time -- no one did.

He must be asleep.

It’s my understanding that the different expeditions on K2 in 2008 divvied up all the sections they felt needed to be fixed, however there were communications issues because of all the different languages being spoken, the lead HAP who had K2 experience fell ill and had to descend, and too much of the rope fixing was left for the Sherpa hired by the South Korea expedition, nearly all of whom were on supplemental oxygen carried up by those same Sherpa.

By my current understanding - the 1996 Everest disaster was due from poor/bad decisions (first time I even heard about a 10 AM turnaround if you had not made it to the South Summit) + summit fever + horrific weather; the 2008 K2 disaster was from poor/bad decisions + summit fever and bad luck (slip & fall after unclipping from fixed rope along transverse;fatal complications caused by multiple avalanches from the the hanging serac) - the weather on the 2008 climb was not a major factor - except in its contributing to the breaking of the serac).

Perhaps a bit of both. The issue with gender is that Krakauer refused to acknowledge the written accounts of Charlotte Fox or Lena Gammelgaard. Although both provided very different versions of events than Krakauer's, he just ignored them. He did respond to criticism from male climbers -- Boukreev and Lopsang. His bias against women in general is covered in the book "False Summit: Gender in Mountaineering" by Julie Rak. That books details some of his bias against various women on the 1996 teams, but there are certainly far more examples than Rak lists in her book.

It's in many of the climbers accounts that Scott assisted with a climber in trouble back down to camp 1 and then had to climb back up to his clients. It was just too much. Helping rescue someone ended up costing him his life.

@@Aztom40 yep. Especially if you had been having sex all night.. 😉

According to "Bitch" Magazine... "Regularly referred to as 'Marty Stu,' or 'Gary Sue,' they are especially prevalent in science fiction and fanfic, such as Star Wars' blandly handsome protagonist Luke Skywalker or Star Trek's Wesley Crusher,... " works.bepress.com/raizelliebler/14/ .

How many are already in therapy and go with their therapist's full encouragement, therapy and Everest alike being vanity projects to them

Pollution...rofl .. do you even understand how massive the mountain actually is...

Which "many versions" are you talking about? Everyone says the turn around time was 1PM except for Jon Krakauer. The time was set by Rob Hall at base camp where they were not really "oxygen deprived." Every single other person remember 1PM -- except Krakauer. Krakauer didn't make it by 1PM, so he "remembers" a 2PM turnaround time. Think about it.

@@michaeltracy2356 Michael, it looks like Beck Weathers says the turn around time was 2pm in a talk (link here). What are your thoughts on that? ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-9u4iTBQNlrw.html (approx. 10 minute mark)

Why the fascination with Beck? It seems like he went there to commit suicide and changed his mind sometime during the storm. His book covers it in depth, but it has been erased from the "hero" or "miracle" story you seem to believe. His actions caused Groom to loose his toes and Namba to loose her life. All because he wanted to go to the Mountain and die. Great he changed is mind. Great he survived. But I don't buy the "miracle". Namba died for his "miracle." I find his attitude repulsive. Pretending that he went there to climb the mountain when his book tells a very different story. Pretending that people did die to indulge is selfish game. I am sorry, I do no share your view of the man -- and I don't think you know 1/2 of the real story.

​@@michaeltracy2356awakening from 22 hours of freezing in those conditions, getting up and walking 400 meters in a raging storm, essentially blind straight into camp 4 is pretty miraculous regardless of what his mental state had been. He was also told to stay put by Rob when he could no longer continue until Rob returned. Call me skeptical, but he had plenty of opportunity to wander off and die the hours he waited for Rob UNLESS all these things I read in various accounts of these events are erroneous too. I watched a couple of your videos today and subscribed because as I had stated, they have interesting information however, in my years of enjoying RU-vid productions, I never had any of the creators make assumptions about me or display hostilities as if I had been an unreasonable critic.

Oh, and yes according to many online articles about Weathers, including his own, he did indeed suffer from lifelong depression, even having suicidal thoughts but none suggested he went to Everst to end his life, rather his mountain climbing was the therapy he sought. His will to live is undeniable and when the group got lost, Namba was the one who was essentially helpless, unable to walk.

Weathers was short ropped down the entire slope from the Balcony by Mike Groom -- Weathers being unable to walk on his own. Namba made it down about 1/2 way under her own power before running out of oxygen. And Krakauer's account leaves on wondering exactly what Beck had "all figured out" -- it's on page 226. Krakauer's version:""So I'm trying to shove her hands back into her mittens when all of a sudden Beck mumbles, 'Hey, I've got this all figured out.' Then he kind of rolls a little distance away, crouches on a big rock, and stands up facing the wind with his arms stretched out to either side. A second later a gust comes up and just blows him over backward into the night, beyond the beam of my headlamp. And that was the last I saw of him. " Weathers mentions it in his book (p.149). And if you bothered to read Weather's book, it doesn't agree with you either... "Yasuko and I were the acute problems, however. Neal took her and headed on down the Triangle. Mike short-roped me, which is exactly what it sounds like." Weathers, Beck; Michaud, Stephen G.. Left for Dead (p. 149). Random House Publishing Group. No one else has Yasuko with Beidleman that high up, but, ok, you want to believe everything Beck says -- then he is saying the exact opposite of what you are saying. I will also note, I do not appreciate your "the whole internet prove me right." If you can't cite a specific source for your material and have that source agree with what you want it to say, then don't post it. If you don't wish to take the time or effort to verify things before you say them, then do not post them in this channel. It looks like Weathers did wander off with the intent to die. That is my take from the account in Krakauer's book. I realize he did not come out and say, "Ok, now I am going to wander off and die," and no doubt you will take that as "proof" that he didn't. But a reasonable person certainly could conclude that he did. More problematic is that Weathers mentions the incident in his book and doesn't say a single thing about it. Not a "Oh, I don't remember that part" or a "Oh, I was really out of it at that point." Sometimes silence says more than words. You want to believe Weathers because you liked the story that has been pushed on you. Weather's version of so many things has changed from each telling and little to none of the version in his book matches up with other people's accounts. It comes across as an invented survivor story. As with all invented stories, it will be good. The only problem with it is that I do not think a single piece of it is true. Glad he survived. But going around giving speeches and promoting it like it is some "miracle" while ignoring all the problems with his ever changing accounts are not what I expect from respectable accounts of what happened. But a sucker is born every minute, so these things will continue draw in a certain type of individual.

If it is all so obvious, why do you need to point it out in the comments?

Have you tried not clicking on the videos?

Rofl ..jk ..actually ruined the actual hero of this disasters reputation ..and now you are trying to defend jk...

Jose, this RU-vid channel never accused Krakouer of being too factual or accurate or thorough. Had Krakouer's book been made to the same standards as this video then the owner of the channel would have no videos on it