... to what end? This only makes sense if you're working backwards from Krakauer-is-lying-about-everything. In trying to push your 'narrative,' what sort of asinine, 4D-chess are you meant to be playing, including photos that are internally inconsistent??

It's not a zine or a blog. It's a published fucking book. It's had several sets of eyes on it. If the photos WERE internally inconsistent, you'd either address it or, if you're a bit of a liar, leave out the ones that don't support your narrative, but like... you have to presuppose you're a lying total piece of shit to even back into this WILD assertion.

It's ludicrously bad-faith, but not something I'm unfamiliar with, sadly. Seems to be going around these days.