Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is absolutely davastating! my thoughts and prayers are with the families right now.


https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c62dke15357o

Can you imagine heading out for a day of fun and then, THIS??

What is an "accidental" avalanche?

Versus a deliberately triggered avalanche.

But this was just an avalanche. It wasn't an "accidental avalanche." Shit just happens. There was no need whatsoever for the weird modifier.

That makes it accidental vs avalanches that are triggered using techniques such as explosives to make skiiing areas more safe.

+1. The fact that some posters don’t even know this occurs explains so much about some of the commentary.

When skiers trigger an avalanche, that's not just accidental.

Exactly. The women triggered the avalanche.

Definitely not the conditions ripe for avalanches.

"Accidentally" means, by definition, unexpectedly or unintentionally. Is English your first language?

This avalanche wasn't unexpected. What are you talking about? There were avalanche warnings and predictions. So, exactly the opposite of an accident.

If that avalanche wasn't unexpected, why did the expert guides lead their clients through there? It was either accidental or negligence.

But they were highly intelligent, experienced back country skiers, right? They made the choice to go on a ski trip when extreme weather conditions and chance of svalanches had been predicted for a week. Or they weren't smart and experienced enough to look at weather reports? Which is it?

Clearly the guides' decisionmaking was lacking.

What about the decision making of the skiers who embarked on the trip?

Read the NYT article. The guides told them they had to leave in a hurry. There wasn’t room for a discussion.

The decision-making to take this trip befire they left home despite a week's warning of predicted severe weather and very heavy snowfall.

So what’s your point? That you’re smarter than these people? Good for you, I guess, if that’s what you need to feel better about yourself.

Your attempt to shut down the conversation is ridculous. Just sit this one out if you can’t handle it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is absolutely davastating! my thoughts and prayers are with the families right now.


https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c62dke15357o

Can you imagine heading out for a day of fun and then, THIS??

What is an "accidental" avalanche?

Versus a deliberately triggered avalanche.

But this was just an avalanche. It wasn't an "accidental avalanche." Shit just happens. There was no need whatsoever for the weird modifier.

That makes it accidental vs avalanches that are triggered using techniques such as explosives to make skiiing areas more safe.

+1. The fact that some posters don’t even know this occurs explains so much about some of the commentary.

When skiers trigger an avalanche, that's not just accidental.

Exactly. The women triggered the avalanche.

Definitely not the conditions ripe for avalanches.

"Accidentally" means, by definition, unexpectedly or unintentionally. Is English your first language?

This avalanche wasn't unexpected. What are you talking about? There were avalanche warnings and predictions. So, exactly the opposite of an accident.

If that avalanche wasn't unexpected, why did the expert guides lead their clients through there? It was either accidental or negligence.

But they were highly intelligent, experienced back country skiers, right? They made the choice to go on a ski trip when extreme weather conditions and chance of svalanches had been predicted for a week. Or they weren't smart and experienced enough to look at weather reports? Which is it?

Give it a rest. What are you trying to accomplish? People died. Looking back on what happened with 20/20 hindsight is a useful exercise for a small population, which doesn’t include you.

That’s the favorite hobby of the DCUM’s sanctimonious, judgmental cows.

They know everything about everything and won’t hesitate to shit on dead people just to spout off their own ignorant opinions.

Thanks for sharing your own ignorant opinion.

PP's garbage comments are all here for us all to see.

It's a cautionary tale. Necessary for the dimwits who think this was all just a huge accident.

Is it a cautionary tale for you? Were you planning to go back country skiing? I dare guess that you don’t engage in much thoughtful consideration regarding the decisions you make on a regular basis and yet you like to sit in judgment of people who make decisions you wouldn’t and then something bad befalls them. If you have nothing to learn from this then maybe this isn’t the thread for you.

I’m sorry you recently learned about avalanches. There are probably a lot of other gaps in your knowledge. See also: what does accident mean?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bad judgment is not an accident, it’s negligence.

+1 Some people never want to accept resposibility for their choices and the results of their decisions.

You mean the dead ones?

Well people keep saying their families should sue. That’s not accepting responsibility.

There were three fatalities that same week inbounds of ski areas (2 at Heavenly, 1 at Northstar). DH himself pulled someone out of a tree well at Palisades, and there were a few other successful rescues that week as well. While I'm fairly certain I would not have gone out backcountry skiing in those conditions, as a grad student I would ski Tuckerman's Ravine in the middle of a NorEaster which carries a very different set of risks.

There is a lot that is unknown about what happened, and it also raises a lot of questions about shared responsibility with paid guides. I've only used paid guides twice, for relatively safe activities in foreign countries where I didn't know the landscape.

I'm interested in how this plays out, since it hits very close to home for me. But I would disagree with anyone who suggests anything about this trip is obvious, especially since there is a lot more information to come out (most importantly whatever the surviving guide says).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bad judgment is not an accident, it’s negligence.

+1 Some people never want to accept resposibility for their choices and the results of their decisions.

You mean the dead ones?

Well people keep saying their families should sue. That’s not accepting responsibility.

So you’re slandering people who died based on what DCUM idiots say their families should do? Got it.

Who is slandering? It’s a true statement. It was objectively bad judgement to go out in that storm. It’s not a matter of opinion!

(And technically it would be libel and not slander anyway.)

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bad judgment is not an accident, it’s negligence.

+1 Some people never want to accept resposibility for their choices and the results of their decisions.

You mean the dead ones?

Well people keep saying their families should sue. That’s not accepting responsibility.

So you’re slandering people who died based on what DCUM idiots say their families should do? Got it.

Who is slandering? It’s a true statement. It was objectively bad judgement to go out in that storm. It’s not a matter of opinion!

The women and men knew the risks. They had passed avalanche training courses. They were required to carry shovels, probes and beepers used after avalanches to find people buried.

Skiing back country is by definition skiing with high level risk of avalanches.

It was the allure of the back country powder.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bad judgment is not an accident, it’s negligence.

+1 Some people never want to accept resposibility for their choices and the results of their decisions.

You mean the dead ones?

Well people keep saying their families should sue. That’s not accepting responsibility.

So you’re slandering people who died based on what DCUM idiots say their families should do? Got it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is absolutely davastating! my thoughts and prayers are with the families right now.


https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c62dke15357o

Can you imagine heading out for a day of fun and then, THIS??

What is an "accidental" avalanche?

Versus a deliberately triggered avalanche.

But this was just an avalanche. It wasn't an "accidental avalanche." Shit just happens. There was no need whatsoever for the weird modifier.

That makes it accidental vs avalanches that are triggered using techniques such as explosives to make skiiing areas more safe.

+1. The fact that some posters don’t even know this occurs explains so much about some of the commentary.

When skiers trigger an avalanche, that's not just accidental.

Exactly. The women triggered the avalanche.

Definitely not the conditions ripe for avalanches.

"Accidentally" means, by definition, unexpectedly or unintentionally. Is English your first language?

This avalanche wasn't unexpected. What are you talking about? There were avalanche warnings and predictions. So, exactly the opposite of an accident.

If that avalanche wasn't unexpected, why did the expert guides lead their clients through there? It was either accidental or negligence.

But they were highly intelligent, experienced back country skiers, right? They made the choice to go on a ski trip when extreme weather conditions and chance of svalanches had been predicted for a week. Or they weren't smart and experienced enough to look at weather reports? Which is it?

Give it a rest. What are you trying to accomplish? People died. Looking back on what happened with 20/20 hindsight is a useful exercise for a small population, which doesn’t include you.

That’s the favorite hobby of the DCUM’s sanctimonious, judgmental cows.

They know everything about everything and won’t hesitate to shit on dead people just to spout off their own ignorant opinions.

Thanks for sharing your own ignorant opinion.

PP's garbage comments are all here for us all to see.

It's a cautionary tale. Necessary for the dimwits who think this was all just a huge accident.

Is it a cautionary tale for you? Were you planning to go back country skiing? I dare guess that you don’t engage in much thoughtful consideration regarding the decisions you make on a regular basis and yet you like to sit in judgment of people who make decisions you wouldn’t and then something bad befalls them. If you have nothing to learn from this then maybe this isn’t the thread for you.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is absolutely davastating! my thoughts and prayers are with the families right now.


https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c62dke15357o

Can you imagine heading out for a day of fun and then, THIS??

What is an "accidental" avalanche?

Versus a deliberately triggered avalanche.

But this was just an avalanche. It wasn't an "accidental avalanche." Shit just happens. There was no need whatsoever for the weird modifier.

That makes it accidental vs avalanches that are triggered using techniques such as explosives to make skiiing areas more safe.

+1. The fact that some posters don’t even know this occurs explains so much about some of the commentary.

When skiers trigger an avalanche, that's not just accidental.

Exactly. The women triggered the avalanche.

Definitely not the conditions ripe for avalanches.

"Accidentally" means, by definition, unexpectedly or unintentionally. Is English your first language?

This avalanche wasn't unexpected. What are you talking about? There were avalanche warnings and predictions. So, exactly the opposite of an accident.

If that avalanche wasn't unexpected, why did the expert guides lead their clients through there? It was either accidental or negligence.

But they were highly intelligent, experienced back country skiers, right? They made the choice to go on a ski trip when extreme weather conditions and chance of svalanches had been predicted for a week. Or they weren't smart and experienced enough to look at weather reports? Which is it?

Clearly the guides' decisionmaking was lacking.

What about the decision making of the skiers who embarked on the trip?

Read the NYT article. The guides told them they had to leave in a hurry. There wasn’t room for a discussion.

The decision-making to take this trip befire they left home despite a week's warning of predicted severe weather and very heavy snowfall.

So what’s your point? That you’re smarter than these people? Good for you, I guess, if that’s what you need to feel better about yourself.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bad judgment is not an accident, it’s negligence.

+1 Some people never want to accept resposibility for their choices and the results of their decisions.

You mean the dead ones?

Well people keep saying their families should sue. That’s not accepting responsibility.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is absolutely davastating! my thoughts and prayers are with the families right now.


https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c62dke15357o

Can you imagine heading out for a day of fun and then, THIS??

What is an "accidental" avalanche?

Versus a deliberately triggered avalanche.

But this was just an avalanche. It wasn't an "accidental avalanche." Shit just happens. There was no need whatsoever for the weird modifier.

That makes it accidental vs avalanches that are triggered using techniques such as explosives to make skiiing areas more safe.

+1. The fact that some posters don’t even know this occurs explains so much about some of the commentary.

When skiers trigger an avalanche, that's not just accidental.

Exactly. The women triggered the avalanche.

Definitely not the conditions ripe for avalanches.

"Accidentally" means, by definition, unexpectedly or unintentionally. Is English your first language?

This avalanche wasn't unexpected. What are you talking about? There were avalanche warnings and predictions. So, exactly the opposite of an accident.

If that avalanche wasn't unexpected, why did the expert guides lead their clients through there? It was either accidental or negligence.

They miscalculated where they were relative to the runout area of the slope. It was estimated that another 100 yards out and they would have avoided the avalanche path. It was probably difficult to determine in the whiteout, so they shouldn’t have been out in those conditions.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is absolutely davastating! my thoughts and prayers are with the families right now.


https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c62dke15357o

Can you imagine heading out for a day of fun and then, THIS??

What is an "accidental" avalanche?

Versus a deliberately triggered avalanche.

But this was just an avalanche. It wasn't an "accidental avalanche." Shit just happens. There was no need whatsoever for the weird modifier.

Safety is never accidental.

It was this time. The male survivors were held back by their lack of skill and in one case struggling with a binding. They accidentally weren’t bunched directly in the path of the avalanche as the guides had the women. From that point on, led mostly by the electrician is the impression the NYT article leaves, they made good choices in rescue and survival. But their initial survival was entirely accidental.

No it wasn’t.

The phrase is Safety is No Accident.

None of them were thinking Safety, by virtue that they were out in severe avalanche and white out conditions.

The 2 solo men and 1 guide weren’t spared due to being extra safety-minded (they weren’t safety minded at all). One just had bad gear and was slowing the other two down.

That was exactly what I said in response to the PP who wrote Safety is never accidental
You are rewording exactly what I said- their safety and survival were accidental.

Lol.

They never had safety, accidentally or intentionally. The whole time.

They happened to live through the lack of safety and lack of being safe. But they never “had safety.”

Were they literally “safe” from that one avalanche at that one moment? Not really either.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bad judgment is not an accident, it’s negligence.

+1 Some people never want to accept resposibility for their choices and the results of their decisions.

You mean the dead ones?

Anonymous wrote:Bad judgment is not an accident, it’s negligence.

+1 Some people never want to accept resposibility for their choices and the results of their decisions.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is absolutely davastating! my thoughts and prayers are with the families right now.


https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c62dke15357o

Can you imagine heading out for a day of fun and then, THIS??

What is an "accidental" avalanche?

Versus a deliberately triggered avalanche.

But this was just an avalanche. It wasn't an "accidental avalanche." Shit just happens. There was no need whatsoever for the weird modifier.

Safety is never accidental.

It was this time. The male survivors were held back by their lack of skill and in one case struggling with a binding. They accidentally weren’t bunched directly in the path of the avalanche as the guides had the women. From that point on, led mostly by the electrician is the impression the NYT article leaves, they made good choices in rescue and survival. But their initial survival was entirely accidental.

No it wasn’t.

The phrase is Safety is No Accident.

None of them were thinking Safety, by virtue that they were out in severe avalanche and white out conditions.

The 2 solo men and 1 guide weren’t spared due to being extra safety-minded (they weren’t safety minded at all). One just had bad gear and was slowing the other two down.

That was exactly what I said in response to the PP who wrote Safety is never accidental
You are rewording exactly what I said- their safety and survival were accidental.