Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Remains of Andrew "Sandy" Irvine Found on Everest: Could Solve Mystery

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Remains of Andrew "Sandy" Irvine Found on Everest: Could Solve Mystery



    c.d.

  • #2
    The game's afoot...
    Sapere Aude

    Comment


    • #3
      ... but what's it all aboot?
      Kind regards, Sam Flynn

      "Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)

      Comment


      • #4
        The question is ... it's a boot and a sock, where's the rest? I mean there is a difference of approx. 2100m between where Mallory and Irvine were found, surely his body will be as well preserved as Mallory ... but why only a boot and sock and no foot ...
        "Seek the absence of the normal, and find the presence of the abnormal"

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Juniper4576 View Post
          The question is ... it's a boot and a sock, where's the rest? I mean there is a difference of approx. 2100m between where Mallory and Irvine were found, surely his body will be as well preserved as Mallory ... but why only a boot and sock and no foot ...
          Does anyone even try to summit from the North Face today? and wonder why they chose that route vs. South. This is very interesting.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Juniper4576 View Post
            The question is ... it's a boot and a sock, where's the rest? I mean there is a difference of approx. 2100m between where Mallory and Irvine were found, surely his body will be as well preserved as Mallory ... but why only a boot and sock and no foot ...
            depends on the percentage of exposure to elements

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Filby View Post

              Does anyone even try to summit from the North Face today? And wonder why they chose that route vs. South. This is very interesting.
              From what I have read, the North face of Everest is the hardest, coldest and statistically most fatal route to take. It would be interesting to know why they both took this route. I doubt it was lack of knowledge (in mountaineering), but could it be lack of knowledge of Everest itself? Did it favour their experience?

              I have read conflicting reports on the find of Irvine; there wasn't a foot in the boot, there was a foot in the boot. If there was, how did it become detached? If there wasn't could be, Irvine pulled off his boot(s) and socks having suffered from paradoxical undressing caused by severe hypothermia or dying from severe hypothermia; however the boot looks fully laced up.

              I believe one or the other fell, I guess they would be tied together, and subsequently dragged the other with them.

              In regard to if they made it to the top of the world, I don't know, I like to think they did. I am sure I read 80% of fatalities come from the descent and not the accent.

              "Seek the absence of the normal, and find the presence of the abnormal"

              Comment


              • #8
                Mallory's body had a broken rope tied around it when his body was discovered. It is generally believed that he was in the lead with Irvine belaying him when he slipped and fell. The force was so strong that it snapped the rope sweeping both of them off their feet and down the mountain.

                Ghosts of Everest is an excellent book on the finding of Mallory's body and the "clues" left behind by his clothing and the contents of his pack as to whether or not they reached the summit.



                A number of years ago I saw Sir Edmund Hillary speaking at the Smithsonian in Washington. D.C. He was a class act. Standing room only and he received a standing ovation at the end of his talk. Of course he was asked about Mallory and Irvine. He had tremendous respect for their accomplishment but very tactfully suggested that a "successful" summit required getting back to base camp alive.

                I have complete respect for Mallory and Irvine but when you consider what they were up against: no knowledge of the best route to take, Irvine's inexperience, wool clothing, leather boots, faulty oxygen cylinders etc. I don't think they made it to the top.

                c.d.

                Comment


                • #9
                  This is also an excellent account of what probably happened to them:

                  George Mallory and Andrew Irvine disappeared near the summit of Mount Everest on June 8, 1924 - 29 years before Hillary & Tenzing climbed the mountain from the south side. Read Part 1 of this in-depth, 3-part series by Jake Norton about what really happened to Mallory & Irvine in 1924.


                  c.d.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    A wacky thought, Mallory fell and Irvine had the terrible choice and cut the line, hence the reason Mallory had a rope burns on his torso and broken bones in line with a fall. Irvine himself fell on the descent. I can't explain, however, the distance between Mallory and the foot.
                    "Seek the absence of the normal, and find the presence of the abnormal"

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Juniper4576 View Post
                      A wacky thought, Mallory fell and Irvine had the terrible choice and cut the line, hence the reason Mallory had a rope burns on his torso and broken bones in line with a fall. Irvine himself fell on the descent. I can't explain, however, the distance between Mallory and the foot.
                      The NatGeo article links in Norton's article states his niece, who has worked hard to figure out what happened to him, believes that glacier movement or other natural forces may have caused it.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Writing from memory here but I think the North face (in Tibet) of Oomalangma (Tibertan name) was the only side climbers from the West were allowed to climb before WWII but because of political changes the South face (in Nepal) of Sagarmatha (Nepalese name) was the only side they could use after the war. I think China annexing Tibet and thus assuming control of the North face put pay to that route. I can't remember why Nepal banned climbers before the war but accepted them after. i'm sure someone here knows.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Filby View Post

                          The NatGeo article links in Norton's article states his niece, who has worked hard to figure out what happened to him, believes that glacier movement or other natural forces may have caused it.
                          Funny you say that, the time of year they were up there didn't favour the route they took, avalanche etc...but did they know any better? ... I doubt it.
                          "Seek the absence of the normal, and find the presence of the abnormal"

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X