This article started off interesting. I thought it was going to be about people overestimating their preparedness. But then it made a sudden turn to climate change. Climate change is so...
This article started off interesting. I thought it was going to be about people overestimating their preparedness. But then it made a sudden turn to climate change.
Climate change is so tangentially related to the facts of this man's death. It's barely relevant. If it were only 125F, it's still not okay to hike across the desert with a liter of water, alone, when you're 70+ years old. It hit 134F on July 10, 1913 in Death Valley. It's not like it suddenly got unexpectedly hot in Death Valley due to climate change and therefore this man couldn't possibly anticipate the weather. We've known how hot it gets there since forever.
A man dying in the desert, while tragic, is also pretty low on the concern list for climate change. I think food and water security, etc. are much more concerning and worthy of discussion. The scary thing isn't needing air conditioning. It's millions or billions of people having their food and water sources threatened.
Also, I'm a little annoyed with these articles that constantly link global warming with it simply being hot outside. It's misleading and I think the oversimplification leads to misunderstanding and feeds the skeptics. People should understand that sometimes adding energy makes things colder locally. Air conditioning, for example. Climate change leads to more extreme weather, not just "it's hot out."
I don't disagree with you that he didn't spend enough time actually talking about Steve and what training he did or how he ended up cooked to death. Maybe if he wanted to talk about climate change...
I don't disagree with you that he didn't spend enough time actually talking about Steve and what training he did or how he ended up cooked to death.
Maybe if he wanted to talk about climate change and heat deaths, talk more about how even healthy well trained humans cook at what temperature.
I think this point was that Steve won't be the last, that even people who think they are prepared are not prepared. All those new people moving to Arizona, for example, all think they're trained and got their 1L bottle of water.
Yeah, I chose the article because it illustrated the risks of hiking in extreme heat, not for anything about climate change. That part was a complete waste or worse.
Yeah, I chose the article because it illustrated the risks of hiking in extreme heat, not for anything about climate change. That part was a complete waste or worse.
I get this mix of anger, pity, and bewilderment when I read these reports of people hiking in 120+ degree weather and invariably dying. Why? Do they think they're invincible? Such a frustrating...
I get this mix of anger, pity, and bewilderment when I read these reports of people hiking in 120+ degree weather and invariably dying. Why? Do they think they're invincible? Such a frustrating thing seeing people throw their lives away over a hiking trip that you could do any other day of the year. But now they're dead, and they left behind people who love them. It's heartbreaking and upsetting.
If you go hiking in any national or state parks in the southwest, you'll often see a sign that says something like I mean they really spell it out for you, and it is explicitly targeted at hikers...
If you go hiking in any national or state parks in the southwest, you'll often see a sign that says something like
Are you an experienced hiker? If you said yes, you are exactly the type of person who will need rescuing or die of heatstroke. DO NOT GO OUT DURING THE DAY IN THE SUMMER. X people died last year trying what you're about to try.
I mean they really spell it out for you, and it is explicitly targeted at hikers who have prepared and think they know what they're getting into. Inexperienced people say "it's hot, this sucks, I don't want to hike." Experienced people are intentionally looking for a challenge, and I think it's hard or impossible to distinguish between "wow I'm really pushing myself to the limit, this is exactly what I wanted" and "I have passed the limit and am now dehydrated and dying".
I suspect that some of these people have lots of experience in what they believe to be equally dangerous situations of extreme cold, or extreme altitude, or huge storms, or whatever. But in basically every other type of extreme weather, there's equipment you can bring and techniques you can use to protect yourself. When it's too hot, there's nothing you can do besides go somewhere else that is not as hot. Any experienced hiker should be intellectually aware of that, but it probably doesn't feel true. It is weird that 50 degrees above room temperature is 1000x more dangerous than 50 degrees below room temperature.
On your final note, I remember the first time my wife (then girlfriend) visited me in PR, in the extreme heat of summer. She couldn't sleep, and was asking what we could do. Nothing. There's...
On your final note, I remember the first time my wife (then girlfriend) visited me in PR, in the extreme heat of summer. She couldn't sleep, and was asking what we could do.
Nothing. There's nothing we can do. You can have a bath, but then you're sweating the minute you're done. You can turn on the fan, but it's just hot air going around. Too poor for AC, and the apartment doesn't have it anyway. With heat, you just kinda have to accept it. And if it gets too hot, then you're in trouble. She's from a colder country, so she was used to just being able to do something to make the bad temperature be less bad. But there's really not much you can do when it's 110F or whatever. Try not to move too much.
Yeah, I'm exaggerating a bit. That's a good tip. Another thing I'd try is putting ice behind the fan so that the air is slightly cooler. But I dunno, having grown up there, I just accepted it. It...
Yeah, I'm exaggerating a bit. That's a good tip. Another thing I'd try is putting ice behind the fan so that the air is slightly cooler. But I dunno, having grown up there, I just accepted it. It was a fact of life, since you can't really make it not be hot ultimately, unless you have AC. And AC is mostly for sleeping, since Puerto Ricans houses don't tend to have it installed centrally; it's in your room for sleeping only.
Reminds me of people moving to my state for school (cheap out-of-state tuition), and they'd post on forums asking how to deal with the heat, how do you get used to it, etc. One thing that stood...
But I dunno, having grown up there, I just accepted it.
Reminds me of people moving to my state for school (cheap out-of-state tuition), and they'd post on forums asking how to deal with the heat, how do you get used to it, etc. One thing that stood out was, "You have to embrace the suck." It sucks, but it's 110 and you have to cross a college campus and everyone else is just as sticky as you.
that only works when the wet bulb temperature is below about 35C. above that, you no longer get any evaporative cooling from sweat or swamp coolers or wet towels. dangerous wet bulb temperatures...
that only works when the wet bulb temperature is below about 35C. above that, you no longer get any evaporative cooling from sweat or swamp coolers or wet towels. dangerous wet bulb temperatures are getting much more common around the world right now and will likely drive mass migrations over the next 15-20yrs and countless deaths
Staying in the cool bath is about the only thing one can do. And if the water that comes out the tap is already heated and the room has no ability to cool it down further then that's that...... If...
Staying in the cool bath is about the only thing one can do. And if the water that comes out the tap is already heated and the room has no ability to cool it down further then that's that...... If I were your girlfriend I would probably asked for an air conditioned ride to the airport and just go home.
I think taking extreme heat risks should invalidate a life insurance policy the same way suicide does. I also think emergency search and rescue should exclude finding thrill seekers. Pay for and...
I think taking extreme heat risks should invalidate a life insurance policy the same way suicide does. I also think emergency search and rescue should exclude finding thrill seekers. Pay for and arrange for your own emergency services before you set out. No one else needs to die for your thrill seeking.
People often will often be charged for their own search and rescue if they acted recklessly or negligently, it depends on state laws and which agency rescues you. In New Hampshire you can buy a...
People often will often be charged for their own search and rescue if they acted recklessly or negligently, it depends on state laws and which agency rescues you. In New Hampshire you can buy a very cheap annual pass that helps fund everyone's search and rescue and exempts you from paying for it if you need it. They will still charge you if you're extremely reckless though. I think it's a good system, I don't know how many other states have it.
I remember reading some German hiker posting on Reddit who did something similarly ill advised (though survivable obviously). And the gist of what he said was basically that he simply did not...
I remember reading some German hiker posting on Reddit who did something similarly ill advised (though survivable obviously). And the gist of what he said was basically that he simply did not understand the scale of distances involved. He kind of assumed that the fact that there were roads and trails for such long stretches with no stopovers or waypoints, meant that the trails must have been doable and people trying to tell him off it were just being wusses.
Obviously that's a sample size of 1, and I'd assume experienced hikers should at least be able to look at the math regarding temperatures and distances and know what they're going to be dealing with. But maybe there's a difference between knowing something on an intellectual level and actually internalizing it.
I think Europeans in particular have trouble with not grasping the loneliness of US wilderness before they have seen it. Any trail in Europe is going to be within some proximity to civilization,...
I think Europeans in particular have trouble with not grasping the loneliness of US wilderness before they have seen it. Any trail in Europe is going to be within some proximity to civilization, with a few obvious exceptions like far north Scandinavia.
Yeah I think aside from Russia, the Australian Outback, Patagonia, and the Asian steppe there's not many places in the world quite like it. Places like Central Africa have similarly huge stretches...
Yeah I think aside from Russia, the Australian Outback, Patagonia, and the Asian steppe there's not many places in the world quite like it. Places like Central Africa have similarly huge stretches that it's not advisable to go into, but I think for the most part the grasslands or jungle are thick enough to where most people wouldn't think to go out there and fuck around. The boundary isn't quite so stark in these sorts of places though. You can just be going and going and going before you realize you're out of reach.
Personally, I’m fine with people voluntarily doing these extremely extreme activities so long as they are adequately informed of the dangers and potential consequences. If they choose to move...
Personally, I’m fine with people voluntarily doing these extremely extreme activities so long as they are adequately informed of the dangers and potential consequences. If they choose to move forward with their plans, then so be it.
And as for the heat - I’ve worked in its like before, and, let me assure anyone in doubt, it’s fucking obvious that it will kill a person if one overstays one’s welcome - something all too easy to do when a body doesn’t even sweat due to the sheer relentlessness of the sun.
This is the type of heat where the body goes almost numb, and everything is just so visually intense; it’s not like walking through an inferno, it is walking through one. People need to adjust their behaviors and expectations of their own physical and mental limitations to such environments accordingly.
Edit: And these extreme experience seekers and their loved ones need to be aware that death is an option. No one is invincible, and situations like this aren’t in any way mysterious or unforeseeable.
Yes, and people need to not pet the pretty bison and not step into the deadly pools in Yellowstone and not take selfies on the edge of cliffs, and not swim above waterfalls, but survivors guilt is...
Yes, and people need to not pet the pretty bison and not step into the deadly pools in Yellowstone and not take selfies on the edge of cliffs, and not swim above waterfalls, but survivors guilt is a real phenomenon, whether rationally justified or not.
I thought it was a moving story with interesting details. And maybe people will learn to respect Death Valley.
I believe we’ve come away with two very different impressions, then, as, to me, this article feels more performative and opportunistic, rather than anything else. A chance to capitalize on the...
I believe we’ve come away with two very different impressions, then, as, to me, this article feels more performative and opportunistic, rather than anything else. A chance to capitalize on the appearance of an appropriate emotion - something sympathetic; a human spin on a right-time-right-place-for-the-author story…
Anyway, I enjoyed reading this and hearing your perspective. This article is good food for thought.
Whether conscious or unconscious, that death is a possibility is the very point of this kind of thrill seeking. For myself, I pursued these types of activity (and almost died twice) driven by...
Whether conscious or unconscious, that death is a possibility is the very point of this kind of thrill seeking. For myself, I pursued these types of activity (and almost died twice) driven by inner pain; and it’s an effective salve.
As I’ve healed, the behavior has diminished, but not vanished. I hold the opinion that wanting to pursuing opportunities to contend against death is hard wired. And it makes evolutionary sense-those willing to go after the tiger both protect and provide for their offspring.
This is not to excuse my or their poor judgment. Those who are thoughtful and careful with the tiger live to catch another one. Also, humans are not* slaves to their instincts. I also don’t know how extreme heat figures. I’ve done around of disc golf at 105F in Austin and was fine, i was drinking about a liter per hour of water.
*maybe not? Consciousness, and conscious choice, might be an illusion or side effect of the nervous system’s mediating motor control?
I have no problem with thrill-seekers, per se; rather, my issue is with the attitude and manner in which we generally approach them. These people have agency. Whether or not they are, as you’ve...
I have no problem with thrill-seekers, per se; rather, my issue is with the attitude and manner in which we generally approach them. These people have agency. Whether or not they are, as you’ve said, compelled by conscious or subconscious instinct toward a need to test themselves, to search after some elusive, particular experience, to skim closer to death, whatever it is, it’s theirs and it’s human. Not everyone needs to be sheltered from it.
This actually comes down to what we each, and then what we collectively, believe or deem to be a good life; what we consider ‘a waste’, a tragedy. Our beliefs over how far we should swaddle the adult members of our society from dangerous, yet personally worthwhile and fulfilling experiences.
Perhaps it’s just a quirk of my own perspective here, but why are these deaths always a shame in and of themselves? Why do we view them that way? Something can be reckless and still necessary for the soul. And yes, we lose people and we mourn them, but there is so much to celebrate, as well.
A conversation should be had before a person embarks on these sorts of activities and adventures, as part and parcel of them, delineating a few remarkably obvious truths: 1) That they wish to go through with whatever it is, and 2) that there is a chance they may die or end up otherwise permanently altered from doing so. People need to be realistic about these things.
(Note: This is me off on a tangent, following a thought. This is not me arguing with anyone or me wishing to engage in argument with anyone. I’m adding this here because tone does not always come across clearly in writing.)
And what of the S&R crews who are now obligated to go out and rescue the person or recover the body? The results of one person's mistakes are rarely confined to that one person.
Personally, I’m fine with people voluntarily doing these extremely extreme activities so long as they are adequately informed of the dangers and potential consequences. If they choose to move forward with their plans, then so be it.
And what of the S&R crews who are now obligated to go out and rescue the person or recover the body? The results of one person's mistakes are rarely confined to that one person.
If the search and rescue teams are properly compensated and geared out, and have signed up for the job through free will of their own, then all’s well. Truth be told, they are simply another side...
If the search and rescue teams are properly compensated and geared out, and have signed up for the job through free will of their own, then all’s well. Truth be told, they are simply another side of the extreme experience seeker personality type - perhaps the more community minded and conscientious side, but still. Two sides of the same coin.
I do agree with a commenter above in believing that thrill-seekers should be obligated to purchase specific insurances or passes to fund these rescue programs, though. But besides that, and another few practicalities, I’m all for letting people take their chances in these extremities, out in the wild, unencumbered. Let them go.
This article started off interesting. I thought it was going to be about people overestimating their preparedness. But then it made a sudden turn to climate change.
Climate change is so tangentially related to the facts of this man's death. It's barely relevant. If it were only 125F, it's still not okay to hike across the desert with a liter of water, alone, when you're 70+ years old. It hit 134F on July 10, 1913 in Death Valley. It's not like it suddenly got unexpectedly hot in Death Valley due to climate change and therefore this man couldn't possibly anticipate the weather. We've known how hot it gets there since forever.
A man dying in the desert, while tragic, is also pretty low on the concern list for climate change. I think food and water security, etc. are much more concerning and worthy of discussion. The scary thing isn't needing air conditioning. It's millions or billions of people having their food and water sources threatened.
Also, I'm a little annoyed with these articles that constantly link global warming with it simply being hot outside. It's misleading and I think the oversimplification leads to misunderstanding and feeds the skeptics. People should understand that sometimes adding energy makes things colder locally. Air conditioning, for example. Climate change leads to more extreme weather, not just "it's hot out."
I don't disagree with you that he didn't spend enough time actually talking about Steve and what training he did or how he ended up cooked to death.
Maybe if he wanted to talk about climate change and heat deaths, talk more about how even healthy well trained humans cook at what temperature.
I think this point was that Steve won't be the last, that even people who think they are prepared are not prepared. All those new people moving to Arizona, for example, all think they're trained and got their 1L bottle of water.
Yeah, I chose the article because it illustrated the risks of hiking in extreme heat, not for anything about climate change. That part was a complete waste or worse.
I get this mix of anger, pity, and bewilderment when I read these reports of people hiking in 120+ degree weather and invariably dying. Why? Do they think they're invincible? Such a frustrating thing seeing people throw their lives away over a hiking trip that you could do any other day of the year. But now they're dead, and they left behind people who love them. It's heartbreaking and upsetting.
If you go hiking in any national or state parks in the southwest, you'll often see a sign that says something like
I mean they really spell it out for you, and it is explicitly targeted at hikers who have prepared and think they know what they're getting into. Inexperienced people say "it's hot, this sucks, I don't want to hike." Experienced people are intentionally looking for a challenge, and I think it's hard or impossible to distinguish between "wow I'm really pushing myself to the limit, this is exactly what I wanted" and "I have passed the limit and am now dehydrated and dying".
I suspect that some of these people have lots of experience in what they believe to be equally dangerous situations of extreme cold, or extreme altitude, or huge storms, or whatever. But in basically every other type of extreme weather, there's equipment you can bring and techniques you can use to protect yourself. When it's too hot, there's nothing you can do besides go somewhere else that is not as hot. Any experienced hiker should be intellectually aware of that, but it probably doesn't feel true. It is weird that 50 degrees above room temperature is 1000x more dangerous than 50 degrees below room temperature.
On your final note, I remember the first time my wife (then girlfriend) visited me in PR, in the extreme heat of summer. She couldn't sleep, and was asking what we could do.
Nothing. There's nothing we can do. You can have a bath, but then you're sweating the minute you're done. You can turn on the fan, but it's just hot air going around. Too poor for AC, and the apartment doesn't have it anyway. With heat, you just kinda have to accept it. And if it gets too hot, then you're in trouble. She's from a colder country, so she was used to just being able to do something to make the bad temperature be less bad. But there's really not much you can do when it's 110F or whatever. Try not to move too much.
My tip for keeping cool at night in hot weather, is to have a wet towel and use it as a blanket.
Yeah, I'm exaggerating a bit. That's a good tip. Another thing I'd try is putting ice behind the fan so that the air is slightly cooler. But I dunno, having grown up there, I just accepted it. It was a fact of life, since you can't really make it not be hot ultimately, unless you have AC. And AC is mostly for sleeping, since Puerto Ricans houses don't tend to have it installed centrally; it's in your room for sleeping only.
Reminds me of people moving to my state for school (cheap out-of-state tuition), and they'd post on forums asking how to deal with the heat, how do you get used to it, etc. One thing that stood out was, "You have to embrace the suck." It sucks, but it's 110 and you have to cross a college campus and everyone else is just as sticky as you.
that only works when the wet bulb temperature is below about 35C. above that, you no longer get any evaporative cooling from sweat or swamp coolers or wet towels. dangerous wet bulb temperatures are getting much more common around the world right now and will likely drive mass migrations over the next 15-20yrs and countless deaths
Staying in the cool bath is about the only thing one can do. And if the water that comes out the tap is already heated and the room has no ability to cool it down further then that's that...... If I were your girlfriend I would probably asked for an air conditioned ride to the airport and just go home.
Honestly, same. It can take up to two weeks to get acclimated to extreme heat temps, just being thrust into that environment just ain't the way to go!
It really does just seem like hubris, huh? Such a senseless loss of life
I think taking extreme heat risks should invalidate a life insurance policy the same way suicide does. I also think emergency search and rescue should exclude finding thrill seekers. Pay for and arrange for your own emergency services before you set out. No one else needs to die for your thrill seeking.
Their poor families .
People often will often be charged for their own search and rescue if they acted recklessly or negligently, it depends on state laws and which agency rescues you. In New Hampshire you can buy a very cheap annual pass that helps fund everyone's search and rescue and exempts you from paying for it if you need it. They will still charge you if you're extremely reckless though. I think it's a good system, I don't know how many other states have it.
I remember reading some German hiker posting on Reddit who did something similarly ill advised (though survivable obviously). And the gist of what he said was basically that he simply did not understand the scale of distances involved. He kind of assumed that the fact that there were roads and trails for such long stretches with no stopovers or waypoints, meant that the trails must have been doable and people trying to tell him off it were just being wusses.
Obviously that's a sample size of 1, and I'd assume experienced hikers should at least be able to look at the math regarding temperatures and distances and know what they're going to be dealing with. But maybe there's a difference between knowing something on an intellectual level and actually internalizing it.
I think Europeans in particular have trouble with not grasping the loneliness of US wilderness before they have seen it. Any trail in Europe is going to be within some proximity to civilization, with a few obvious exceptions like far north Scandinavia.
Yeah I think aside from Russia, the Australian Outback, Patagonia, and the Asian steppe there's not many places in the world quite like it. Places like Central Africa have similarly huge stretches that it's not advisable to go into, but I think for the most part the grasslands or jungle are thick enough to where most people wouldn't think to go out there and fuck around. The boundary isn't quite so stark in these sorts of places though. You can just be going and going and going before you realize you're out of reach.
Personally, I’m fine with people voluntarily doing these extremely extreme activities so long as they are adequately informed of the dangers and potential consequences. If they choose to move forward with their plans, then so be it.
And as for the heat - I’ve worked in its like before, and, let me assure anyone in doubt, it’s fucking obvious that it will kill a person if one overstays one’s welcome - something all too easy to do when a body doesn’t even sweat due to the sheer relentlessness of the sun.
This is the type of heat where the body goes almost numb, and everything is just so visually intense; it’s not like walking through an inferno, it is walking through one. People need to adjust their behaviors and expectations of their own physical and mental limitations to such environments accordingly.
Edit: And these extreme experience seekers and their loved ones need to be aware that death is an option. No one is invincible, and situations like this aren’t in any way mysterious or unforeseeable.
Yes, and people need to not pet the pretty bison and not step into the deadly pools in Yellowstone and not take selfies on the edge of cliffs, and not swim above waterfalls, but survivors guilt is a real phenomenon, whether rationally justified or not.
I thought it was a moving story with interesting details. And maybe people will learn to respect Death Valley.
I believe we’ve come away with two very different impressions, then, as, to me, this article feels more performative and opportunistic, rather than anything else. A chance to capitalize on the appearance of an appropriate emotion - something sympathetic; a human spin on a right-time-right-place-for-the-author story…
Anyway, I enjoyed reading this and hearing your perspective. This article is good food for thought.
I mean yes, writers like this, everything is grist for the mill. I do think she felt bad that she couldn't convince him to stop though.
Whether conscious or unconscious, that death is a possibility is the very point of this kind of thrill seeking. For myself, I pursued these types of activity (and almost died twice) driven by inner pain; and it’s an effective salve.
As I’ve healed, the behavior has diminished, but not vanished. I hold the opinion that wanting to pursuing opportunities to contend against death is hard wired. And it makes evolutionary sense-those willing to go after the tiger both protect and provide for their offspring.
This is not to excuse my or their poor judgment. Those who are thoughtful and careful with the tiger live to catch another one. Also, humans are not* slaves to their instincts. I also don’t know how extreme heat figures. I’ve done around of disc golf at 105F in Austin and was fine, i was drinking about a liter per hour of water.
*maybe not? Consciousness, and conscious choice, might be an illusion or side effect of the nervous system’s mediating motor control?
I have no problem with thrill-seekers, per se; rather, my issue is with the attitude and manner in which we generally approach them. These people have agency. Whether or not they are, as you’ve said, compelled by conscious or subconscious instinct toward a need to test themselves, to search after some elusive, particular experience, to skim closer to death, whatever it is, it’s theirs and it’s human. Not everyone needs to be sheltered from it.
This actually comes down to what we each, and then what we collectively, believe or deem to be a good life; what we consider ‘a waste’, a tragedy. Our beliefs over how far we should swaddle the adult members of our society from dangerous, yet personally worthwhile and fulfilling experiences.
Perhaps it’s just a quirk of my own perspective here, but why are these deaths always a shame in and of themselves? Why do we view them that way? Something can be reckless and still necessary for the soul. And yes, we lose people and we mourn them, but there is so much to celebrate, as well.
A conversation should be had before a person embarks on these sorts of activities and adventures, as part and parcel of them, delineating a few remarkably obvious truths: 1) That they wish to go through with whatever it is, and 2) that there is a chance they may die or end up otherwise permanently altered from doing so. People need to be realistic about these things.
(Note: This is me off on a tangent, following a thought. This is not me arguing with anyone or me wishing to engage in argument with anyone. I’m adding this here because tone does not always come across clearly in writing.)
And what of the S&R crews who are now obligated to go out and rescue the person or recover the body? The results of one person's mistakes are rarely confined to that one person.
If the search and rescue teams are properly compensated and geared out, and have signed up for the job through free will of their own, then all’s well. Truth be told, they are simply another side of the extreme experience seeker personality type - perhaps the more community minded and conscientious side, but still. Two sides of the same coin.
I do agree with a commenter above in believing that thrill-seekers should be obligated to purchase specific insurances or passes to fund these rescue programs, though. But besides that, and another few practicalities, I’m all for letting people take their chances in these extremities, out in the wild, unencumbered. Let them go.
https://archive.li/ZjDB9