mountaineering

you can have 'great risk assessment skills' and still do things that other people would consider stupid risks

not sure what the argument here is

cars are stupidly risky is a great argument against cars, not a great argument for rock climbing

you can have 'great risk assessment skills' and still do things that other people would consider stupid risks

― iatee, Wednesday, November 21, 2012 1:19 PM (2 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

only if you admit that youre taking a stupid risk

crossing a busy street is risky. but it's part of daily life and people need to do it multiple times a day in order to meet basic needs relating to food/clothing/shelter. moutaineering is a hobby, not part of daily life, only meets self-actualization needs.

well you can admit that you're taking a stupid risk when judged by other peoples risk preferences but not based on your own taste for risk

it's more that you are taking a smart risk you just have stupid tastes for risk

hypothetically but generally in the real world denial enters into the equation

there's the risk of getting mauled by a lion when in the process of hunting that lion for your meal. then there's the risk of getting mauled by a lion cause you get your kicks by running though lion dens w/impala carcasses strapped to you.

yeah I mean I prob don't agree w/ aimless' characterization of these guys as cliff-hanging warren buffets but I think people can still make 'rational decisions' that most people would consider really stupid, because they rationally act on their stupid preferences

yeah i agree that thats part of it, i certainly have done things that are dangerous and i consider myself p risk adverse to physical danger, i just decided it was worth it, but also theres denial and acting on mistaken unexamined assumption bad infos etc

how it looks to me:

lagoon considers X to be a stupid risk, for example, hanging in a nest on the side of a big wall in Yosemite. some people other than lagoon also consider X to be a stupid risk.

gbx, otoh, explains that X is nowhere nearly as risky as it looks to the untrained eye, because of the engineering specs of the hardware and other equipment, and the composition of the rock and how the hardware interacts with the rock, with redundancies included for safety, and staying on an anchored belay at all times. Not to mention that elite climbers understand the danger of mountain weather and remain prepared to retreat when adverse conditions threaten.

lagoon insists that because many people deem this risk to be stupid, gbx can only be correct if he admits the stupidity of relying on engineering, experience and redundancy to remain safe, because lol, just look at it!

how can we ever decide who is correct here?

coin flip

well you could look at the fact that people not infrequently die or are badly injured from mountain climbing

i mean lol just look at this dead crumpled body, engineering! expertise!

your credulousness in the face of expertise is kind of charming tho aimless

your insistence that expertise precisely equates with stupidity is equally charming.

i have some stock market tips for you, pm me

I thought he was saying that managing risk does not mean that those risks aren't still there

was just looking on this friends facebook page for a rant he had abt people not doing ice climbing right, i couldnt find it but i did find this

http://www.ukclimbing.com/news/item.php?id=67521

The 37 year old mountainguide and geologist was, according to friends, a careful and serious climber. He was the president of the Rätikon Climbing Club and author of the Rätikon climbing guide.

obvs just anecdotal but its interesting how in these conversations people are always all oh yeah well if youre not doing it right then of course its dangerous you just have to not be a stupid fuck up, but no one does everything right all the time and there are a million things to be right about and no one knows everything, situations are dynamic etc mistakes will be made

There are damn fool rock climbers, too, who take damn fool risks. The sport has a way of weeding them out before they climb any really big walls. The elite climbers are never that particular kind of fool. They die, too, but not because they stupidly underestimated the dangers they faced.

― Aimless, Wednesday, November 21, 2012 1:01 PM (47 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

like this is not actually a bright line, everyone is a damn fool from time to time

Mountaineering looks like fun.

I went off, ate a meal, and have returned with the thought that, perhaps some of this tussle is generational. Most of my direct mountaineering experience took place in the 1970s and early 80s and most of my recent interaction with mountain climbers has been with my age group peers. That predates this whole X-treme Sports mania that grew up in the 1990s.

The nearest parallel I can come up with is flying. lagoon probably flies on commercial airlines. in this he exhibits the same trust in expertise that he clucked about in my case, except commercial pilots and flight engineers are not just highly trained, but also licensed, carefully screened and embedded in tightly contolled systems to ensure safety. Climbers are not.

There was a time when climbers were a tiny group of specialists on the far fringe of the population and the best of them were serious minded and analytical types, inventing techniques and refining them with the dedication of engineers. I'm pretty sure this ethos has been signifigantly eroded by the X-treme sports movement, who I would liken to the barnstorming pilots of the post-WWI era. Those guys crashed frequently, accepted injuries as part of the game, and died pretty often as a result. They weren't exactly damn fools so much as careless about the mortal risk.

this entire argument could have been prevented if we had remembered that gen x is short for gen x-treme

but I think denying lagoon's point altogether is weird

like, ppl who climb mountains surely reckon with the inherent danger of doing so the same way ppl who do big wave surfing etc.
yes there are degrees of danger seeking; there's degrees of mountaineering like there's degrees of surfing. but you're still at some point reckoning with the knowledge that you are one person against nature

idk. I don't think lagoon's really off base, and it is kinda weird how defensive ppl get about this

shrug, I have no horse in this race though so #twocents

Just had a super sweet climbing sesh - back on 5.9, slowly but surely, aw yeah (didn't climb indoors or out this summer, but did some bouldering). I realize that the cars and airplanes analogies aren't going to win any arguments, of course. More pointing out the extreme risk is all around us. I think the interesting question is around what risk is to some people and how one defines a risk level (of death or injury)- not only by a situation but by the circumstances of a situation. Climbing gear and experience is part of circumstance. And risk is still higher than going for a jog, sure (unless you're jogging in cougar territory maybe or in traffic.)

Anyway, climbing and mountaineering is super fun to me and I would never deny the risk involved but I also acknowledge that these activities are way more engaging to me than jogging or lifting weights, both of which I used to be into. I don't know any climbers/mountaineers in my circle of friends and acquaintances who would say these activities are full-on safe for anyone and everyone.

ercise

haha on iphone so didn't see that bit of dangling word left there

ercise otm

to use the racecar analogy, it's like, sure you can put in a rollcage into the racecar, put in lil inflatable pillows around the driver's neck, you can put in a horsepower limit, you can move the spectators back away from the track, you can have a fire crew availalble 24/7, but it's still a v v v dangerous sport and you'll be safer by not racing cars in the first place!

that said shine on you crazy climbers

my little theory about climbing, especially in a gym, becoming a more popular sport these days is that people are, consciously or unconsciously, sick of living in a mainstream culture of fear and the associated ultra-safe lifestyle. like what's the point, etc. climbing gyms are pretty safe places as far as climbing goes, so i'm not saying this is about rebellion and throwing caution to the wind, but it's about something about control and risk and understanding what safety really is as opposed to safety being not doing anything risky outside of the "normal" risky "everyday" stuff like driving a car or believing that the current consumer capitalism is the neverending future.

also sweet sweet adrenaline + endorphines

endorphines are a myth imo

mythical or not in their function, they are neurotransmitters that i spelled wrong

Anecdotally, this kind of exercise makes me high for whatever reasons, like I am high right now and just ate a bunch of DUMPLINGS! ohyeah

the general unwillingness to own up to the fact that theyre doing a dangerous thing because they enjoy it does make me think that theres a level of denial going on

i don't think anyone is "unwilling to own up to the fact" that climbing is dangerous, dude. it is, as every instructional manual and safety waiver says, an "inherently dangerous activity." and while my driving while smoking/texting analogy may have been shaky, the point was essentially this: just because climbing LOOKS risky does not mean that it is as risky as you, untrained person, think it is. like, objectively. it's easy to say "dogg ur hanging from the side of a mountain, if that isn't risky to u then ur in denial." and you're right, it IS risky. and you're also right in that many people (some climbers, some non-climbers), don't have a well-formed evaluation of what exactly it is that's risky about what they are doing. people like you.

like, if i am on lead, and five feet above a bolt, and the climb is overhanging (ie - like most climbing gyms), i know that if i fall i will go at least ten feet down and swing into the wall. the most likely outcome is that nothing will happen and i will bump the wall unscathed. if my fall is weird, i could twist my ankle when i collide with the wall (know how to fall). if the rope was behind my leg, i could flip upside down and that would be bad, because i could hit my head (don't let the rope go behind your leg, also wear a helmet). if my belayer is inattentive, i could go further than ten feet before the catch, and maybe hit the ground. if i tied my knot incorrectly, it could fail. if i didn't double-back my harness, it could fail. if the biner was cross-loaded, it could fail, but they're strong enough these days that even that isn't THAT likely (many can take 8-9kN, which is about 2000lb of force). if i had z-clipped, then i could fall further than expected. these are all possible. and are possibilities that would not exist if i were not climbing. but they aren't necessarily PROBABLE---they can be mitigated, easily, to a point where yes, taking a lead fall is very likely safer than riding my bike down a busy street.

what is far less likely to happen is that the bolt will fail, or the rope break (a virtual impossibility in this situation, like "struck by lightning" odds). these are all measured risks, and of course i think i am an expert at measuring them, and of course i'm not as good at it as i think i am. but i am waaaaay better at it than you are. not because i'm super special, but because some of the less intuitive risks (why should it matter if a biner is cross-loaded?) are not really obvious to someone who hasn't had experience or instruction.

basically (and to echo aimless): some climbers are reckless, some are not. but it's a little weird to suggest that the very act of going climbing means that you are, de facto, delusional about how safe what you're doing is. otherwise you could say that anyone that incurred risk of any kind (driving, again) is totally delusional. and you'd be logically right, and practically wrong, boring, and insufferable. i'd think that many experienced climbers would say that, if anything, they OVER-estimate how dangerous a given thing might be (that is good risk management). i have been totally gripped in situations where the most likely worst-case scenario (falling) would've been scary, but safe: the pro would've held (you guys really do not seem to grasp how strong good protection is), and the fall would've been clean. but i was scared anyway because falling is inherently scary.

i think a lot of this comes down to letting the consequences of risk inflate the actual probability of that consequence. climbing/mountaineering is an activity where the worst-possible outcome is death. this is true. and not doing it will completely reduce the risk of death by climbing to 0%. but that does not mean that doing it safely and conscientiously dramatically increases your risk of dying, tomorrow, in any appreciable way. it could! but for many, it doesn't.

its like i was talking to a friend who does back country skiingand i asked him how he felt abt the risk of death involved in it, and he was like oh its not that dangerous and besides we all wear avalanche beacons

avalanche risk is actually a perfect example of a perceived risk that has been studied, and that has data to support it. backcountry skiing is increasingly popular, and loads of people are getting into it without any knowledge or know-how when it comes to risk management (which is pretty much entirely avalanche related). and people are dying.

bros wear avalanche beacons like talismans, and assume that simply having one will keep them safe. which is garbage, of course, since an avalanche beacon does nothing to keep you from getting caught in a slide in the first place, nor does it really do much to get you out of one. someone still has to do all the shoveling, and all that's going to do is turn up your lifeless, mangled body.

from Bruce Tremper, an actual avalanche expert:

To give you an example, let's make the following assumptions:
* You travel in avalanche terrain 100 days per year
* You cross 10 avalanche slopes per day
* The snow is stable enough to cross on 95 percent of the slopes
* For every avalanche you accidentally trigger, you get caught every third time, and killed every tenth time

(he then includes an actuarial table i won't completely recreate, but:)

% decisions correct    avys triggered    number of times killed/yr    expected lifetime
          99.99                        0.1                            0.01                            100yrs
          99.9                          1                               0.1                                10yrs
           ...          
          95*                            50                              5                                  2mos

*People with no avalanche skills and assuming snow is stable on 95 percent of the slopes

boo formatting :(

but that does not mean that doing it safely and conscientiously dramatically increases your risk of dying, tomorrow, in any appreciable way. it could! but for many, it doesn't.

― well if it isn't old 11 cameras simon (gbx), Wednesday, November 21, 2012 7:47 PM (1 hour ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

depends on if youe climbing tomorrow

basically (and to echo aimless): some climbers are reckless, some are not. but it's a little weird to suggest that the very act of going climbing means that you are, de facto, delusional about how safe what you're doing is. otherwise you could say that anyone that incurred risk of any kind (driving, again) is totally delusional. and you'd be logically right, and practically wrong, boring, and insufferable.

ha and how would you describe posting huge blocks of text abt how you know how to clamp into a thing, and fwiw as ive said itt its not just the fact that climbers climb that make me think theyre delusional and/or somewhat dishonest in their arguments abt this topic but they way they talk abt it, i mean i certainly hope people who climb way up on rocks know how to use all their doohickies

i mean instead of explaining what a master of safety you are why dont you tell us abt a time you bit off more than you could chew climbing and were afraid for your life

Are you having a bad day or did you just run out of kittens to torture?

excellent contribution laurel

what instigated lagoon calling people insane for going rock climbing?

omg i am being strawmanned so hard itt

cant believe lagoon killed gbx by intentionally knocking him off a sheer rockface :(

he had to learn somehow

apologies lag∞n I was confused by your crayon-face, burlap skin, and flannel shirt

a mountaineer fell on his house, killed his perlt bunny

when will u all SEE

*pet

dammit

aforementioned bunny, in happier days, as we would all like to remember it:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/4/4f/Pat_the_Bunny_image.jpg/200px-Pat_the_Bunny_image.jpg

(bites knuckle and turns away)