3 ms·

One of my favorite quotes is by Amundsen, who led the group that first reached the South pole: "Adventure is just bad planning."

jfk13 5y ago
While it's a cute saying, it's not entirely fair. Luck also plays a large rôle. The Antarctic could perfectly well have killed Amundsen, too, just like it killed Scott. It's true his journey was better planned and prepared, but that didn't mean his success -- or indeed survival -- was guaranteed.
- hcrisp 5y ago
  “For scientific discovery give me Scott; for speed and efficiency of travel give me Amundsen; but when disaster strikes and all hope is gone, get down on your knees and pray for Shackleton.” – Antarctic explorer, Sir Raymond Priestly
- Dowwie 5y ago
  Scott brought machines and ponies to Antarctica. He brought an additional crew member without having sufficient resources for him. He also had the men sled-haul supplies. Amundsen brought dogs and just enough crew. The dogs pulled the sleds and the crew ate the dogs as they went along, and as according to plan. Amundsen earned his victory.
  - EdwardDiego 5y ago
    Siberian ponies were regularly used in Antarctica. Shackleton himself had used them in an earlier expedition, and a German expedition contemporaneous to Scott's was using them also.
  - bener 5y ago
    As far as this book claims, aside from being resilient and brave, Scott seems to have bungled his way through most of his life. The fatal expedition seems to have been a long string of bad decisions and underestimation. I feel like the book is somewhat biased against Scott, but it also seems like he gets a lot wrong, compared to someone like Amundsen who really set the bar for Antarctic exploration and preparation. https://books.google.co.nz/books/about/The_Last_Place_on_Earth.html https://books.google.co.nz/books/about/The_Last_Place_on_Ear...

3 ms·

One of my favorite quotes is by Amundsen, who led the group that first reached the South pole: "Adventure is just bad planning."

by dhbradshaw 5y ago

jfk13 5y ago
While it's a cute saying, it's not entirely fair. Luck also plays a large rôle. The Antarctic could perfectly well have killed Amundsen, too, just like it killed Scott. It's true his journey was better planned and prepared, but that didn't mean his success -- or indeed survival -- was guaranteed.
- hcrisp 5y ago
  “For scientific discovery give me Scott; for speed and efficiency of travel give me Amundsen; but when disaster strikes and all hope is gone, get down on your knees and pray for Shackleton.” – Antarctic explorer, Sir Raymond Priestly
- Dowwie 5y ago
  Scott brought machines and ponies to Antarctica. He brought an additional crew member without having sufficient resources for him. He also had the men sled-haul supplies. Amundsen brought dogs and just enough crew. The dogs pulled the sleds and the crew ate the dogs as they went along, and as according to plan. Amundsen earned his victory.
  - EdwardDiego 5y ago
    Siberian ponies were regularly used in Antarctica. Shackleton himself had used them in an earlier expedition, and a German expedition contemporaneous to Scott's was using them also.
  - bener 5y ago
    As far as this book claims, aside from being resilient and brave, Scott seems to have bungled his way through most of his life. The fatal expedition seems to have been a long string of bad decisions and underestimation. I feel like the book is somewhat biased against Scott, but it also seems like he gets a lot wrong, compared to someone like Amundsen who really set the bar for Antarctic exploration and preparation. https://books.google.co.nz/books/about/The_Last_Place_on_Earth.html https://books.google.co.nz/books/about/The_Last_Place_on_Ear...