Analysis Of Helicopter Rescues On Everest

”Just taking risks for risk's sake, that doesn't do it for me. I'm willing to take risks that I think are worth it, and I've worked so hard to make sure that I survive.” Chris Hadfield. This quote proves that people who take risks, only do it if it is worth it. Basically, they know the consequences and know that it is dangerous, but they still do it. They want to survive.
My first source is Helicopter Rescues Increasing on Everest is transcribed for Robert Siegel’s radio show and is a nonfiction radio interview whose purpose is to inform the readers. The next source is” Why Everest?” It is a nonfiction informational article is written by Guy Moreau to inform readers of the dangers of Everest. The last source is “Ranger Killed During Rescue of Climbers on Mount Rainier”. It is a nonfiction newspaper article that is written by …show more content…
According to the text, it says”And they got one climber off, and they crashed attempting to rescue the second man.”(Heil, Lines 29-30) They didn’t even rescue the other climber so it wasn’t even worth it. The people rescuing the climber ended up dying so this means that there was no point in saving the climber because there would be even more deaths. According to the passage, it says”A rapidly lowering cloud ceiling and 40-mph winds made it tough for a Chinook helicopter from Joint Base Lewis-McChord to reach the climbers, but three were eventually lifted away at around 9 p.m, Bacher said. The fourth climber stayed on the mountain overnight with rescue rangers.”(Seattle Times, Lines 31-36) They didn’t even get a climber off of the mountain and only took three. They basically sacrificed the climber to save the others. The climber could die while staying with the ranger because of low oxygen or no food. Others may say that he might’ve volunteered to stay while the others go, but I argue that it still doesn’t change the fact that he could die rescuing the other