Streaming on Netflix. I had completely forgotten about this event. I thought it was well done and the build up was intense. Watching the survivor interviews was tough to watch at times.
Post Reply
1 of 1
The Volcano: Rescue From Whakaari
2,441 Views |
23 Replies |
Last: 3 yr ago by KidDoc
Pretty good.
Basically boiled alive.
Didnt like the tone of some, saying they were misled, or 'no one has taken responsibility'
They went to an active, steaming volcano. One that had erupted every 3-4 years or so.
At that rate, you knew you at least had a 1-1000 chance of going on an eruption day.
They went, they gambled, they lost. It is sad, and a terrible ordeal. But it is hardly anyone's fault.
Interesting some of those who helped, and some who chose not to.
Basically boiled alive.
Didnt like the tone of some, saying they were misled, or 'no one has taken responsibility'
They went to an active, steaming volcano. One that had erupted every 3-4 years or so.
At that rate, you knew you at least had a 1-1000 chance of going on an eruption day.
They went, they gambled, they lost. It is sad, and a terrible ordeal. But it is hardly anyone's fault.
Interesting some of those who helped, and some who chose not to.
Some people are too dumb to be able to understand the risks they are taking and many people believe that if others are doing a thing then it must be fine. I feel bad for those type that get caught up in this.
I believe that this kind of excursion could be worthwhile and that there are people who truly understand the risks might choose to do it anyway, but commercializing it to the extent they did was lunacy. I cant believe nobody understood that they were just doing this until this inevitably was going to happen while tours were on the island. Also, did they not go into the weird fact that this volcanic island is privately owned?
I believe that this kind of excursion could be worthwhile and that there are people who truly understand the risks might choose to do it anyway, but commercializing it to the extent they did was lunacy. I cant believe nobody understood that they were just doing this until this inevitably was going to happen while tours were on the island. Also, did they not go into the weird fact that this volcanic island is privately owned?
It's privately owned, partially due to its history as a sulfur mining location, but the owners have an agreement with the government that it is a public scenic reserve.
I wouldn't say people people are too "dumb" to understand the risks. People simply aren't made to think in probability. Our minds prefer black and white, and probability is too grey. We often greatly over and under estimate certain risks, and I'm sure this was probably one of those times. It I say you have cancer, but it's treatable and the treatment has an 80% survival rate, you're going to feel pretty good. If I tell you you have cancer and it's treatable, but the treatment has a 20% mortality rate, you're going to feel kind of nervous. They're really the same thing though. If someone frames the risk as, there's a 99.9% chance everything will be fine, it induces a much more optimistic assessment than saying there's a .1% chance you'll die.
Past performance does not guarantee future returns, and the past frequency and timing of eruptions may or may not be relevant to current risk. This volcano could erupt twice in a month and then be silent for several years. Even if it were steaming, that isn't exactly portentous of an eruption. Yellowstone has steam vents and a fair amount of geological activity, yet no one bats an eye at visiting. People live on Hawaiian islands with active volcanic activity. The fact is, volcanology is unpredictable, and given seemingly low odds of an event, people will take the risk without appreciating things like the law of large numbers and regression to the mean.
I wouldn't say people people are too "dumb" to understand the risks. People simply aren't made to think in probability. Our minds prefer black and white, and probability is too grey. We often greatly over and under estimate certain risks, and I'm sure this was probably one of those times. It I say you have cancer, but it's treatable and the treatment has an 80% survival rate, you're going to feel pretty good. If I tell you you have cancer and it's treatable, but the treatment has a 20% mortality rate, you're going to feel kind of nervous. They're really the same thing though. If someone frames the risk as, there's a 99.9% chance everything will be fine, it induces a much more optimistic assessment than saying there's a .1% chance you'll die.
Past performance does not guarantee future returns, and the past frequency and timing of eruptions may or may not be relevant to current risk. This volcano could erupt twice in a month and then be silent for several years. Even if it were steaming, that isn't exactly portentous of an eruption. Yellowstone has steam vents and a fair amount of geological activity, yet no one bats an eye at visiting. People live on Hawaiian islands with active volcanic activity. The fact is, volcanology is unpredictable, and given seemingly low odds of an event, people will take the risk without appreciating things like the law of large numbers and regression to the mean.
My favorite part was the person who justified their safety by pointing out that the last few eruptions had been at night while tour groups weren't on the island.
I thought it was okay. not near enough live footage for it to be great(not their fault). it was basically just them telling the story with shots of a boat being played.
Story is crazy though.
Story is crazy though.
I really enjoyed this. I think it is sad that it hasn't re-opened to tours, that must be horrible for that coastal town. The one big white guy that survived got on my nerves though. In the beginning he was talking about signing the waivers and they were asking about next of kin then at the end he said he had no idea of the risk and wouldn't have gone if he knew it could erupt-- what a dummy.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
KidDoc said:
I really enjoyed this. I think it is sad that it hasn't re-opened to tours, that must be horrible for that coastal town. The one big white guy that survived got on my nerves though. In the beginning he was talking about signing the waivers and they were asking about next of kin then at the end he said he had no idea of the risk and wouldn't have gone if he knew it could erupt-- what a dummy.
I'd be curious what was included on the waiver. One question I had was there clear understanding of what the threat level that day meant.
I sign waivers for my kids to play in a trampoline park and don't think anything of it. I'm not trying to necessarily equate the 2, but you get my point.
I will say that I would have no desire to tour a volcano that had erupted multiple times in the last 10 years.
Whakaari/White Island tour operators 'can't waiver their way out of safety obligations' | Stuff.co.nzJDUB08AG said:KidDoc said:
I really enjoyed this. I think it is sad that it hasn't re-opened to tours, that must be horrible for that coastal town. The one big white guy that survived got on my nerves though. In the beginning he was talking about signing the waivers and they were asking about next of kin then at the end he said he had no idea of the risk and wouldn't have gone if he knew it could erupt-- what a dummy.
I'd be curious what was included on the waiver. One question I had was there clear understanding of what the threat level that day meant.
I sign waivers for my kids to play in a trampoline park and don't think anything of it. I'm not trying to necessarily equate the 2, but you get my point.
I will say that I would have no desire to tour a volcano that had erupted multiple times in the last 10 years.
Quote:
Tourists who travelled to the island were often asked to sign a waiver saying they understood the risk involved.
Dave Doggart visited at Easter and said the waiver he signed made it clear it was an unpredictable and active volcano.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
in my opinion, the only way anyone should have any responsibility for their safety is if they actively misled the tourists.
but if they said, 'this is an active volcano and has erupted in recent years, and could erupt any time' that pretty much puts it all on the tourist at that point.
but if they said, 'this is an active volcano and has erupted in recent years, and could erupt any time' that pretty much puts it all on the tourist at that point.
People today, generalizing, believe there safety rails in place for anything they are allowed to do. "Well the government wouldn't let me go to this volcano if I could die"
JDUB08AG said:KidDoc said:
I really enjoyed this. I think it is sad that it hasn't re-opened to tours, that must be horrible for that coastal town. The one big white guy that survived got on my nerves though. In the beginning he was talking about signing the waivers and they were asking about next of kin then at the end he said he had no idea of the risk and wouldn't have gone if he knew it could erupt-- what a dummy.
I'd be curious what was included on the waiver. One question I had was there clear understanding of what the threat level that day meant.
I sign waivers for my kids to play in a trampoline park and don't think anything of it. I'm not trying to necessarily equate the 2, but you get my point.
I will say that I would have no desire to tour a volcano that had erupted multiple times in the last 10 years.
Most waivers are boiler plate, CYA stuff. No one sees signing a waiver as an indicator of risk because they're so ubiquitous. You sign them all the time because they're a formality, and nothing happens. They're basically like California cancer warnings.
The threat level is, IMO, confusing. Scale is 0-5. Whaakari was/is almost constantly at a 2. Based on that, 2 wouldn't seem out of the ordinary and wouldn't seem all that dangerous since it's on the low side of the middle of the scale, except 3 is basically, "Bad stuff is actively coming out of vents," 4 is, " This thing is spewing lava," and 5 is, "Welcome to Mt. St. Helens!" Despite being in the middle of the scale and the norm, 2 is actually the last step before, "You're going to be in deep **** if this goes any further." Personally, looking at a 0-5 scale, I wouldn't equate 2 to, "This thing could cook of at any second."
Yeah, if you're gonna be standing at the edge of the acid lake in the caldera, you're gonna want that to be like 0, but like, if you totally want to see something cool, you probably need it to be simmering at dangerous AF level 2.
The helicopter pilot who ran and dove in the ocean was very very very lucky…
This was pretty incredible. I can't even imagine
And yeah...New Zealand commercial helicopter pilots are some badass MFers.
And yeah...New Zealand commercial helicopter pilots are some badass MFers.
We watched this and thought of one of our own trips. So we were on the Big Island in 2017 when Kilauea was gently erupting where lava was seeping out and creating amazing glowing red rivers of lava. We had seen YouTubes of people hiking out to roast hot dogs and marshmallows and take amazing pics of these lava rivers.
We wanted to see it - it's a once in a lifetime deal and 90% of the time there is nothing going on at Volcano National Park - so when else could we see real lava up close. There's still a national park hotel a couple miles from the main active crater, so it had to be safe, right. We had a guide that takes people on hikes over the hardened lava to the flowing lava. It was hot, made sounds like breaking glass, super bright orange, and it was awesome. Took our kids too. Would never do it again.
A couple months later we read that one of the guides from the same hiking company we used died right where we had hiked, when a brief rain caused a cloud of poisonous gasses to drift over him and his hiking group and he succumbed to the fumes. A couple people were also hospitalized. We didn't even think of that as a possibility, thanked the Lord it didn't happen to us, and would never do something with that kind of unpredictability again. Mother Nature doesn't lose.
We wanted to see it - it's a once in a lifetime deal and 90% of the time there is nothing going on at Volcano National Park - so when else could we see real lava up close. There's still a national park hotel a couple miles from the main active crater, so it had to be safe, right. We had a guide that takes people on hikes over the hardened lava to the flowing lava. It was hot, made sounds like breaking glass, super bright orange, and it was awesome. Took our kids too. Would never do it again.
A couple months later we read that one of the guides from the same hiking company we used died right where we had hiked, when a brief rain caused a cloud of poisonous gasses to drift over him and his hiking group and he succumbed to the fumes. A couple people were also hospitalized. We didn't even think of that as a possibility, thanked the Lord it didn't happen to us, and would never do something with that kind of unpredictability again. Mother Nature doesn't lose.
I toured Whakaari about 15 years ago. It was an awesome experience. There was no question about the reality of putting your life in the hands of Mother Nature. Not sure where any tourist would get the idea that it was totally safe. It was risky, but so is driving in Houston, and the the payoff at White Island is so much better.
The documentary was cool to watch, terrible for those people who drew the short straw that day. It brought back lots of great memories and the smell of Sulphur.
The chance of eruption was always there and talked about by the guides. On the tour we bypassed the ruins of a small Sulphur mining operation that was destroyed in an eruption decades ago. If a tourist thought that tour was as safe as a Disneyland "Land of Volcano's" attraction then they were just stupid.
The documentary was cool to watch, terrible for those people who drew the short straw that day. It brought back lots of great memories and the smell of Sulphur.
The chance of eruption was always there and talked about by the guides. On the tour we bypassed the ruins of a small Sulphur mining operation that was destroyed in an eruption decades ago. If a tourist thought that tour was as safe as a Disneyland "Land of Volcano's" attraction then they were just stupid.
the only thing that bothered me was they were claiming there were 8 dead left on the island and the other 56 were taken off on the two larger boats...
yet somehow another FIFTEEN died. so that was never explained or really addressed.
how was the New Zealand government so unprepared when the volcano had literally exploded twice in the previous 6 years?!!?
and yeah, no way in @#$@# I am going to an island which is an active volcano.
"sure, it's fine! It only erupts every three years!"
yet somehow another FIFTEEN died. so that was never explained or really addressed.
how was the New Zealand government so unprepared when the volcano had literally exploded twice in the previous 6 years?!!?
and yeah, no way in @#$@# I am going to an island which is an active volcano.
"sure, it's fine! It only erupts every three years!"
As soon as this documentary started I said "F around with nature and find out!"
when every day on the planet is precious, I just don't understand people who take additional large risks for a few pictures.
when every day on the planet is precious, I just don't understand people who take additional large risks for a few pictures.
I noticed that too but I assume the additional deaths were those who were alive when they left on the boats but succumbed to their injuries later on.
I totally get it. You are far more likely to die driving in a city than visiting this active volcano. Life is risk every day all the time may as well enjoy what you can. I scuba, race cars, skydive, work with sick & contagious people every work day. I find it sad that they have not resumed tours of this fascinating part of the world. I hit up Yellowstone this year and that is a very dangerous area if/when it ever erupts but I didn't spend any time worrying about it because it wouldn't make any difference if I was worried or not.LMCane said:
As soon as this documentary started I said "F around with nature and find out!"
when every day on the planet is precious, I just don't understand people who take additional large risks for a few pictures.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
i am totally with you, we race cars, horses, you name it. and i agree that they should resume tours, but that risk was pretty far out there. it had erupted at least every 3 years, so you had at least a 1-1000 chance of an eruption on your day. 1-1000 is pretty high odds. it didnt look worth it to me.KidDoc said:I totally get it. You are far more likely to die driving in a city than visiting this active volcano. Life is risk every day all the time may as well enjoy what you can. I scuba, race cars, skydive, work with sick & contagious people every work day. I find it sad that they have not resumed tours of this fascinating part of the world. I hit up Yellowstone this year and that is a very dangerous area if/when it ever erupts but I didn't spend any time worrying about it because it wouldn't make any difference if I was worried or not.LMCane said:
As soon as this documentary started I said "F around with nature and find out!"
when every day on the planet is precious, I just don't understand people who take additional large risks for a few pictures.
I dont thhink the claim in bold is anywhere close to the case. There is about 1 traffic death per 100 million miles travelled. The average person could drive non-stop for their entire lifetime many times over and never die in a car accident.KidDoc said:I totally get it. You are far more likely to die driving in a city than visiting this active volcano. Life is risk every day all the time may as well enjoy what you can. I scuba, race cars, skydive, work with sick & contagious people every work day. I find it sad that they have not resumed tours of this fascinating part of the world. I hit up Yellowstone this year and that is a very dangerous area if/when it ever erupts but I didn't spend any time worrying about it because it wouldn't make any difference if I was worried or not.LMCane said:
As soon as this documentary started I said "F around with nature and find out!"
when every day on the planet is precious, I just don't understand people who take additional large risks for a few pictures.
This island has had multiple incidents. They started mining sulphur there and after about a year, the entire camp was destroyed and ten miners were killed in a caldera collapse.
Lets say we equalize one trip to see the volcano as a 100 mile car trip or whatever. 22 people died. So that would be the equivalent number of deaths as 2.2 billion miles driven, and if our assumption is that its as dangerous as a 100 mile trip, that means 22 million visitors would need to go out to the island before you would expect 22 fatalities and I guarantee you its way less than that. My guess is that maybe they took tens of thousands people maximum out to the island maximum in a year? Its certainly way more dangerous than driving, IMO. Its also 32 deaths in a hundred+ years in multiple incidents so its also not like one fluke incident skew, either.
Yellowstone is nowhere near the same level of volcanic risk. Hawaii as well, although people can and do get hurt or even killed by volcanism there as well. Those are heavily studied, monitored, and even staffed by large numbers of people and these places are truly safely visited by millions of people. Going to this place was very dangerous IMO, especially for the people that were going there every day as their job. IMO that was a job where if you kept doing it, it would definitely kill you in your lifetime, and you are definitely not getting the once in a lifetime thrill out of it either like the person going there once.
Great point I was thinking more of population death rate vs individuals. Most people drive daily but not many visit active volcanoes daily!JJxvi said:I dont thhink the claim in bold is anywhere close to the case. There is about 1 traffic death per 100 million miles travelled. The average person could drive non-stop for their entire lifetime many times over and never die in a car accident.KidDoc said:I totally get it. You are far more likely to die driving in a city than visiting this active volcano. Life is risk every day all the time may as well enjoy what you can. I scuba, race cars, skydive, work with sick & contagious people every work day. I find it sad that they have not resumed tours of this fascinating part of the world. I hit up Yellowstone this year and that is a very dangerous area if/when it ever erupts but I didn't spend any time worrying about it because it wouldn't make any difference if I was worried or not.LMCane said:
As soon as this documentary started I said "F around with nature and find out!"
when every day on the planet is precious, I just don't understand people who take additional large risks for a few pictures.
This island has had multiple incidents. They started mining sulphur there and after about a year, the entire camp was destroyed and ten miners were killed in a caldera collapse.
Lets say we equalize one trip to see the volcano as a 100 mile car trip or whatever. 22 people died. So that would be the equivalent number of deaths as 2.2 billion miles driven, and if our assumption is that its as dangerous as a 100 mile trip, that means 22 million visitors would need to go out to the island before you would expect 22 fatalities and I guarantee you its way less than that. My guess is that maybe they took tens of thousands people maximum out to the island maximum in a year? Its certainly way more dangerous than driving, IMO. Its also 32 deaths in a hundred+ years in multiple incidents so its also not like one fluke incident skew, either.
Yellowstone is nowhere near the same level of volcanic risk. Hawaii as well, although people can and do get hurt or even killed by volcanism there as well. Those are heavily studied, monitored, and even staffed by large numbers of people and these places are truly safely visited by millions of people. Going to this place was very dangerous IMO, especially for the people that were going there every day as their job. IMO that was a job where if you kept doing it, it would definitely kill you in your lifetime, and you are definitely not getting the once in a lifetime thrill out of it either like the person going there once.
I did stumble upon a really interesting website about the volcano. They appear to have very active monitoring of the island. I would personally like to.visit it but only if it was at level 1 of unrest. Due to the unpredictable nature of volcanoes I don't see how an industry of any type of tourism could be maintained when it can go level 2+ for years at a time.
https://volcano.si.edu/showreport.cfm?doi=10.5479/si.GVP.BGVN202002-241040#:~:text=Whakaari%2FWhite%20Island%20has%20been,visiting%20the%20island%20in%202018.
From the data on that website this eruption was.pretty predictable.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
Featured Stories
See All
44:52
19h ago
4.2k
The Loochador Podcast: Spring practice starts on Friday
by Billy Liucci
McMillan's vision comes to fruition with NCAA Tournament inclusion
by Olin Buchanan
Baseball Thoughts: Different questions pop up during Norman trip
by Ryan Brauninger
Five in Five: Offseason intel as spring ball begins
by Billy Liucci
Former A&M wideout Christian Kirk signs with San Francisco
by Richard Zane