Depending on how you define it, there are four candidates for the tallest mountain on Earth. Highest point above sea level: Mount Everest Farthest point from Earth's center: Chimborazo Tallest mountain base to peak: Mauna Kea Tallest mountain base to peak above water: Denali
All correct. I live on the slopes of Mauna Kea. We around here like to lay claim on living on Earth's tallest mountain! (Just that more than half its height lies below water :) . . .
"Tallest mountain base to peak above water: Denali" No, there are several mountains in the Himalayan range that easily have higher base to top elevations than Denali. Nanga Parbat has top at 8126m asl. and slopes go down to Indus valley 1000-1200m asl over 25 to 50kms distance, 6900-7100m vertical. And when considered somewhat longer but visible distance, Kanchenjunga may top them all with 8586m asl. summit to
@@stonew1927 Geology and specially hills and mountains was my interest when I was kid, even todays I sometimes get into mood to continue. Even studied geology a bit in university.
Exactly. So many Colorado people always hate on us oregon people saying “ we have so many 14s!” And I’m like “ I know. I’ve been. But the base area starts at like 10000 feet anyways so the mountain is only 4000 feet and doesn’t look that big. Sure mount hood is 12,000 feet, but it’s straight up from sea level pretty much and LOOKS much bigger
geologist here: subduction can’t occur between two continents, so make sure you say that it’s between the North American Plate and the Pacific Plate (you said “between 2 continents”). Oceanic crust is way denser than continental crust, so it subducts. Continental crust won’t subduct under other continental crust, so it just folds up (like Appalachia and the Himalaya). great video!
Lies!!! The top continent said " I'm bigger than you, you dirt ". While the bottom continent said " nah uh! I'm bigger that you, you pebble ". They've been sumo wrestling it out for millions of years until top continent threw sand at bottom continent's crusty eyes and claimed the mantel. Granite, the bottom continent will train its body like a rock and come up with a boulder strategy for the next time they meet in the diamond league.
@@Lunch_Peak Mostly due to the composition of oceanic plates being of denser igneous rock such as basalt and gabbro along with the great deal of water pushing down on the rock makes it more dense.
@@Lunch_Peak like geode said, mainly compositional differences cause the density difference. basalt and gabbro are common, and they are both high in dense materials like iron and magnesium (termed “mafic rocks”), and continental crust is made up of less dense material (largely granite) that contains more silica (termed “felsic” rock).
When I visited Denali National Park, I didn't see the mountain as it was obscured by clouds. The guide said that it was very common to not get a view, thou when its clear it's high very impressive.
It's tough. Most of the time I was in Denali we couldn't see the mountain either. But at the last minute, on our way out, it emerged from the clouds with the sunset behind it. Absolutely spectacular. I hope you get another chance to see it!
@@NationalParkDiaries Seems to be the common story for many who head up there to see it. Need to fake out the mountain and pretend to leave early I guess.
When I was in Alaska almost 10 years ago, we went to Denali NP, and didn't see the mountain at all. On the day we were to fly out of Anchorage, we went to Earthquake Park before our flight, and sure enough we could see it from there for about 10 minutes before clouds took over again. Even from hundreds of miles away, it was impressive.
I hate when mountains are only described based on their peak elevation above sea level. Thank you for taking the time to explain why denali is one of the "tallest" from base to tip!
Denali is the tallest from base to peak(climbable height) ,not "one of the tallest",because Mauna Kea is the absolute tallest but most of it is underwater...So...in other words...if we stand in front of every single one of the world's big mountains Denali is gonna look the tallest because it is...and that's all it matters
@@towardsheaven4196 I would argue that there are himalayan mountains (nanga parbat/dhaulagiri/annapurna etc) which are taller from base to peak. Denali gets points for the plains around it being quite flat, like why kilimanjaro is famous. But Dhaulagiri rises 7000m from the nepalese plains, denali only reaches about 5500. I mean, just look at them. mind blowing verticality. Denali is super cool though. earth.google.com/web/@28.56756902,83.73669921,4175.02605275a,31460.82391094d,35y,37.77870861h,87.89204615t,0r
@@towardsheaven4196 This is wrong. I made two comments of a few Himalayan mountains to the thread made by @davidguthary8147 . Notably: "Denali has got 6190m to 1675m = 4515m+ vertical over 9kms." "From Annapurna 1 8091m asl or "Fang" 7647m asl down the slopes to
I lived in Alaska for a fairly long time (17 years) and worked in Denali National Park for two summers. No matter how often I saw the mountain it never ceased to thrill me. If anything, each time I saw it I realized even more how truly fortunate I was to be there. (My tip for anyone and everyone is: Don't wait until you're old and retired to visit Alaska. Go while you still have the energy and stamina to really explore the state. It's a hiker's paradise. And don't be surprised if, like me, you go for a visit and decide to stay for years!)
The reason why mt Everest isn’t prominent is the Himalayas are so formidable, caused by the collision of the Indian and the Asian plates, every other mountain there tops 27000 ft.
True, yet having visited Nepal and done some trekking there, I can assure you that the Himalaya are exceedingly formidable. Will never forget the first time I laid eyes on them from the capital, Kathmandu. Their height in the distance took my breath away....
Denali has a healthy self esteem and doesn’t let anything push it down…instead grows higher. What a lesson for us all! Keep on being great, Denali. 🙏🏼💛
@@NationalParkDiaries 😂❤️We have to put some humor in it! Seriously, this is an excellent video…thank you so much for sharing new information and insight! God Bless!
I grew up in Alaska, on a clear day you can see Mount McKinley from Anchorage where I lived. I also traveled up to Denali national Park thanks to my wonderful mother and saw Denali more than once up close. Absolutely beautiful area
Mt. Rainier is just as impressive as Denali to me, and for similar reasons. I have no idea why mountains are ranked according to their elevation rather than their prominence...it makes no sense. A lot of "tall" mountains are just short mountains that rest upon high plateaus; they're basically like a short guy who stands on a chair and then claims he's tall. When people visualize a mountain in their heads or draw a mountain on a piece of paper, they're visualizing or drawing the prominence, not the elevation of the summit above sea level.
Mt Fuji shares the same characteristics. Prominence is underrated. Fuji is only 12,395 above sea level but it's prominence is only a few feet shorter than its elevation, so it towers above the surrounding landscape, making it look huge. Fuji's conical shape is almost perfect, so it's striking.
@@brandonb.5304 I also like Mt. Fuji. It's the same kind of mountain as Mt. Rainier...stratovolcano. I assume Rainier has been more damaged by eruptions than has Fuji, hence Rainier's blunted top. Rainier is definitely due for an eruption, and since I live next to it I hope it gives some advanced warning before it goes bonkers. What's really interesting about both mountains is how young they are: Mt Rainier is only 1/2 million years old, which means neanderthals were on the Earth before Rainier was. Fuji is even younger: 100,000 years, which means it came into being around the time of the first wave of human migration out of Africa. Fuji is a baby.
Yep, agreed. When I was first in the Rocky Mountains, I was actually quite underwhelmed. Coming from the East Coast, most mountains start at practically sea level as well. The tallest mountains reach 6+ thousand feet and almost all of that is prominence. Driving up to the Rockies from the east, I was expecting mountains that were like twice the height (read twice as prominent) as those in the east. When I got out there and found that most were about 6000 feet prominent from the heigh planes, I was so bummed out. I had dreams of skiing 10000 foot lines from top to bottom. Suffice it to say I was a bit let down.
Awesome. I saw Denali when I was young. You cannot capture the scale of it in a video. You see the base of a mountain rising into the clouds. Then in a break in the clouds, you can see the summit rising way higher. It's insane.
I am armenian and grew up looking at the 16k+ft mount Ararat with a prominence at 14k ft i still miss it as i have spent half my life in the barely hilly ne ohio
So many Colorado Rockies people are always bashing mount rainier here in the Pacific Northwest saying their mountains are slightly taller. And I’m like? Yeah above sea level. In person the prominence difference is huge
@@PhaseSkater True. I'd rather see a huge mountain, not breathe thinner air on a smaller mountain. The Canadian and pacific northwest rockies are clear of the colorado rockies. a metric called Jut illustrates that nicely
What's so crazy about it is this: Everest and Aconcagua are the tallest peaks among tall mountain ranges, Denali stands almost alone, no other mountains boxing it in or obstructing its majesty
Glad you enjoyed it! We missed the mountain goats and bears on our trip, but did catch some moose, humpback whales, Dall's porpoises, Stellar's sea lions, and a bunch of sea otters.
0:34 “it immediately draws your eye when it comes into view” … if you happen to be incredibly lucky and it’s not obscured by clouds! Back in 2001 I drove up from New Jersey to see Denali (took 2 whole weeks for the drive, it’s a big country!) but when I arrived it was so cloudy and foggy that I couldn’t see anything of the mountain at all. Fortunately there was a huge mural photograph of the mountain on the wall in the visitor center that gave a sense of what I missed, and was good for the obligatory selfie. I hope to get back again some day, hopefully with better weather.
I climbed McKinley back in 1983 with Colorado Outward Bound School. It took 28 days to reach the summit starting from the Muldrow glacier and 4 days to descend to base camp. It's an amazingly beautiful mountain.
It'd be great to see a video on Mt St Elias. St Elias has similar extreme vertical relief from the surroundings, and has geological anomalies resulting in its fast growth
@@i7Qp4rQ 18,000 ft. tall is nothing to sneeze at. Mt. Logan only 26 km. away across the border in Yukon, Canada is even taller at over 19,500. The video completely overlooked these sentinels that are only marginally shorter than Denali.
@@stonew1927 Indeed, they are great towering mountains over vast lowlands. Greatest relief Ive seen is Mt. Teide around 3,7km - from a window of a plane, I assumed it as being a cloud at first. Non Himalayan mountains often get overlooked though. But as opposing to the video Ive to say that even Mt. Everest has visual elevation up to and even over 6kms: "Everest View Point" Bit north of Lukla for example is at around 3000m asl. And from Ramitay View Point towards Kangchenjunga has visual elevation from below 250m asl. to 8586m - Which may be the world's greatest 'visible elevation', at least that Im aware of. Ive been looking into this kind stuff from since I was kid.
@@i7Qp4rQ I've actually seen Everest from a trekking point northwest of Darjeeling, India, closer to Kanchenjunga. Kanchenjunga itself was extremely impressive. It seemed to rise all on it's own above the surrounding landscape. Meanwhile, Everest off in the distance towards the west actually seemed a bit lower than some of the other peaks in the area. It's just a matter of perspective . . .
Great report. Thank you. A couple of things; Mt. Logan is over 19,500 ft. high and not that far from Denali, as it is located in Southwest Yukon near the Alaska border. Nearby Mt. St. Elias is over 18,000 ft. tall. Granted, neither is as tall as Denali, but they are in the vicinity locally and height wise, especially Mt. Logan. Secondly, how come it is not a volcano given that the Pacific plate is subducting under the North American plate? I understood your explanation and find it fascinating, but still curious about why it is not a volcano. Thirdly, I'm glad they switched the name from Mt. McKinley a few years ago. Denali is its proper name and honors the native tribes that have lived in the area for thousands of years and had a relationship with it. And Denali just sounds cooler anyway . . .
A volcano need sto have a magma chamber. Normal mountains like these and volcanos are both driven by plate tectonics. However this are just rock forced up into the shape by one plate sliding under the other. A volcano has melted material of one plate rising to the surface and normally it starts to store into a large chamber known as a magma chamber. When it risises to the surface again it can be a calm out flowing of lava, what magma, is called once it reaches the surface or it can be explosive like mount st Helen's and other sof history. The build up of cooled lava is was forms Volcanoes mountain shape and built them taller and taller. Typical all yoy need is a hot spot ( an area where magma subducts to the surface) in order for a volcano to form an example of this is the Hawaiian Islands chain, they are all essentially tall mountains that started off as underwater volcanoes. While most summits like the Himalayas have to be where plates collide in order to form.
@@biohazardlnfS I already understand the geological processes and mechanics that go into forming mountains and volcanoes. Just curious as to why this particular mountain, Denali, is not volcanic given it's location and the fact that there are multiple volcanos nearby in Alaska.
Ive always loved looking at mountains. That natural raw aesthetic that i cant really explain always captivated me. Denali is definitely one of the most visually impressive mountains ive seen. I can completely understand why the natives held it in such reverence.
So,...I was doing some drone video at a mountain-top Thai temple complex south of Chiang Mai Thailand. Two Thai men arrived on bicycles and ran up the 325 stair steps twice. After they stopped to breathe I chatted with them. They told me they were training to go to Denali to ride their bicycles. I asked them if they knew grizzly bears can run 55 kph. The look they exchanged when I said that let me know they had no clue how dangerous grizzly bears are.
A minor correction. The Denali Fault is not the boundary between two plates. The Alaska-Aleutian Megathrust is where the Pacific Plate subducts under the North American Plate. The Denali Fault is a strike-slip fault caused by the bend in the plate boundary where the Fairweather Fault terminates.
I have been hoping for a video on specific mountain’s geology for so long!! Please please please make more of these, especially on mountains like Longs Peak (Rocky Mountain NP), Grand Teton, or Mount Whitney (Sequoia NP)
@ 3:12 the mantle actually consists of solid rock. This magma ocean thing is a rather persistent misconception. It does however flow, just like solid glaciers do.
@@nmarbletoe8210 Solid enough to consist of several different minerals each with their distinct crystal lattice and solid in the sense of having a shear strength (fluids don't have that). Which in turn means the mantle can propagate transverse waves, be they acoustic or seismic, where a fluid cannot. Also geologists speak of competence rather than viscosity. A more competent rock being more resistant to deformation and flow.
I drive past Denali 5 times a year studying at University of Alaska Fairbanks. Many people and friends of mine at university train to climb Denali. Couldn’t make it work this year but maybe next summer 😎. Thanks for making this video it’s always cool to see people make videos about Alaska and the things she beholds.
Sounds awesome. I fell in love with Alaska last year when I visited and now I'm trying to figure out when I'll be able to come back lol. Thanks for watching!
That's pretty cool and it makes sense on why it is so large, by volume it is the 2nd largest mountain. I guess something similar happens with Mt. Logan, which is the largest by volume.
I had the fortunate circumstance to drive in to Wonder Lake at the very unfortunate expense of some ones life. We had reservations in July 1981 for Wonder Lake CG. When we arrived at the entrance we were informed that the day before an NP bus had rolled off the road killing a passenger. They had stopped all bus service. The NPS wasn't sure what to do, so they just let us drive on our own to Wonder Lake. It was the most amazing experience. We could stop anywhere to photograph scenery and wildlife and there were plenty of caribou and griz. At the campground we ran into two people that had just summited Denali. It was a memory that kept with me. In 1999 I attempted and successfully summited the peak with 2 friends. Obviously one of the best experiences ever on both trips.
Denali, also known as Mount McKinley, is the highest peak in North America, towering over Alaska's wilderness at 6,190 meters. The mountain is located in Denali National Park and Preserve, a stunningly beautiful area of rugged wilderness that covers over 6 million acres.
There’s a great inspirational metaphor in here somewhere about granite being both “less dense”, “rising to the top faster”, and “resistant to the forces trying to tear it down”
When talking about how 'tall' a mountain is, Everest makes a good example due to how well known it is. But alongside it, I would have also added Mauna Kea as another illustration of what can constitute how "tall" a mountain is, given that it is taller than Everest is high. Which is afterall not nearly as well defined a term as for example "height" is. Doing this would not have added much time to the video and would help illustrate the concept that much better, imo anyways. So many people focus on that "above sea level" part of things that they completely forget that many mountains start well below sea level and literally have no clue about things such as the weight of a mountain causing the surrounding land to become depressed. (and its not like you have to get into more esoteric aspects like how much the land is compressed by the mountain either, though it is quite interesting, btw, doing this brings Mauna Kea from about 30k feet, up to being around 56,000 feet tall.... yes 56k, straight out of the USGS's mouth).
Well maybe we should start measuring starting at the top of the mountain in a straight line through the center of the planet and on until land stops on the opposite hemisphere? Then it would be fare for all mountains. lol
@@williambrandondavis6897 I bet you thought you were clever. I am here to tell you that you are not. I am also here to tell you that fare is not the same thing as fair. Please learn the language before trying to use it for insulting people.
Geographical North America (the continent) is not only CA, US, MX and Greenland! Still.. including all of the caribbean and belize, el salvador, honduras, nicaragua, costa rica and panama.
Everest isn't the tallest mountain from base to peak. It's just the highest point above sea level. The tallest mountain from base to peak is actually Mauna Kea.
Denali's mother was getting good food and proper care, so when it was born it grew into a very large mountain, just like me. My mother was in the military, was fed regular food in what ever quantity she wanted and gave birth to a baby almost half her size, she was four foot eleven inches, I was twenty two and a half inches, see Big Mountain.6'3''325#
I rode my motorcycle to Alaska from California, and as I was going by Denali and had a senior parks pass, I rode in. I got stopped way before the mountain, and they expected you to ride on a shuttle bus the rest of the way to the mountain. I passed.
While not in the same category as Denali, the prominence of Telescope Peak and the Panamint Range in Death Valley NP is truly awe-inspiring. Since these mountains literally rise from at or even below sea level to upwards of 11,000 feet.
I appreciate the geology of how Denali came to dominate the geography of the area; that part was excellent. However...after over twenty years of serving native Alaskans of Interior Alaska, years of living in villages, and having Alaskan Native family I promise you the "reverence for Denali" you refer to doesn't exist. There is no food up there, it's only service is as a barrier to movement and as a landmark. Don't buy into the "Dances with Wolves" narrative. Yes, a beautiful landmark but nothing sacred.
I heard once that my grandfather had climbed it, though I don't know how much of it he climbed. In his Will I remember he wanted his ashes to be spread over the mountain. I guess he climbed the whole way up, or he just really liked that mountain. *his ashes have not been spread. I assume it is not allowed.
Why is Denali third in prominence behind Mt Everest if Everest starts at 14000’ while Denali starts at 2,000’. Wouldn’t that put Denali on top of Everest by roughly 3,000’?
Prominence can be kind of confusing. I think the Wikipedia article does a pretty good job explaining it: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Topographic_prominence What you're describing is the distance from the mountain's base to its summit, which is different from prominence because mountain statistics are weird lol. Here's the list of most prominent mountains as well: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mountain_peaks_by_prominence
Great video and a fabulous channel! The mountains in 5:33-5:46 are actually not the Alaska range but the Utah Wasatch range, looking to the SW through Parley's canyon. The camera angle is from the vantage point of the ridge north of interstate 80 that runs east west through Parley's canyon. You can even seen the smoggy haze of the Salt Lake City valley and the Kennecott copper mine in the mountain range in the far distance.
@@NationalParkDiaries I love your channel! I'm involved in another producing videos for another UA-cam channel that puts out a video a day, so I know quite well the pressure of finding beautiful B roll that helps keep viewers attention while helping to illustrate a point. BTW, I also own a tour company (Utah Luxury Tours) that creates customized experiences for clients in the western USA national parks. Your videos are a fabulous source of insight, information, and stories that help me prep. So many thanks!
Thanks so much Taylor, glad you're enjoying everything and so glad to know they're helpful for your business! I always love hearing how people are using these videos, so thanks for sharing! But yeah, B-roll is a struggle lol. I'm trying to incorporate more of my own footage, but travel isn't always in the cards unfortunately. What channel do you help out on?
@@NationalParkDiaries thanks!! I’m from Ontario, Canada so it would be quite the trek out there but I think I can convince my fiancée it would be worth it. Lots to see along the way!
Denali is the tallest from base to peak(climbable height) because Mauna Kea is the absolute tallest but most of it is underwater...So...in other words...if we stand in front of every single one of the world's big mountains Denali is gonna look the tallest because it is...and that's all it matters
The Himalayas k2 Annapurna everest and all the other 8000m peaks are at a high elevation to begin with the prominence is the difference between surrounding land and Mt peak that is why its so much taller looking beutiful mountain!
Depending on how you define it, there are four candidates for the tallest mountain on Earth.
Highest point above sea level: Mount Everest
Farthest point from Earth's center: Chimborazo
Tallest mountain base to peak: Mauna Kea
Tallest mountain base to peak above water: Denali
All correct. I live on the slopes of Mauna Kea. We around here like to lay claim on living on Earth's tallest mountain! (Just that more than half its height lies below water :) . . .
"Tallest mountain base to peak above water: Denali"
No, there are several mountains in the Himalayan range that easily have higher base to top elevations than Denali.
Nanga Parbat has top at 8126m asl. and slopes go down to Indus valley 1000-1200m asl over 25 to 50kms distance, 6900-7100m vertical.
And when considered somewhat longer but visible distance, Kanchenjunga may top them all with 8586m asl. summit to
@@i7Qp4rQ Dude you've done your research! Hats off to you ...
@@stonew1927 Geology and specially hills and mountains was my interest when I was kid, even todays I sometimes get into mood to continue. Even studied geology a bit in university.
@@i7Qp4rQ Thanks for the information G 🤝🏻
Yep. Prominence is what makes a mountain striking. A mountain can be 7000m but if it’s only 1000m in prominence, it really doesn’t look that massive
My vote goes for relief.
More like height from base to top
Exactly. So many Colorado people always hate on us oregon people saying “ we have so many 14s!” And I’m like “ I know. I’ve been. But the base area starts at like 10000 feet anyways so the mountain is only 4000 feet and doesn’t look that big. Sure mount hood is 12,000 feet, but it’s straight up from sea level pretty much and LOOKS much bigger
As I have been informed: from base to summit, the tallest mountain arguably is Mauna Kea.
@@philipb2134 I heard Olympus Mons is. The trouble is, both are quite visually limited.
geologist here: subduction can’t occur between two continents, so make sure you say that it’s between the North American Plate and the Pacific Plate (you said “between 2 continents”). Oceanic crust is way denser than continental crust, so it subducts. Continental crust won’t subduct under other continental crust, so it just folds up (like Appalachia and the Himalaya).
great video!
Noted, thanks for the correction!
Lies!!! The top continent said " I'm bigger than you, you dirt ". While the bottom continent said " nah uh! I'm bigger that you, you pebble ". They've been sumo wrestling it out for millions of years until top continent threw sand at bottom continent's crusty eyes and claimed the mantel. Granite, the bottom continent will train its body like a rock and come up with a boulder strategy for the next time they meet in the diamond league.
What exactly makes the Oceanic plates so much more dense, and the Continental ones less so?
@@Lunch_Peak Mostly due to the composition of oceanic plates being of denser igneous rock such as basalt and gabbro along with the great deal of water pushing down on the rock makes it more dense.
@@Lunch_Peak like geode said, mainly compositional differences cause the density difference. basalt and gabbro are common, and they are both high in dense materials like iron and magnesium (termed “mafic rocks”), and continental crust is made up of less dense material (largely granite) that contains more silica (termed “felsic” rock).
When I visited Denali National Park, I didn't see the mountain as it was obscured by clouds. The guide said that it was very common to not get a view, thou when its clear it's high very impressive.
It's tough. Most of the time I was in Denali we couldn't see the mountain either. But at the last minute, on our way out, it emerged from the clouds with the sunset behind it. Absolutely spectacular. I hope you get another chance to see it!
@@NationalParkDiaries Seems to be the common story for many who head up there to see it. Need to fake out the mountain and pretend to leave early I guess.
I lived in Anchorage for three years. I could see Denali from over 200 miles on many days. It helped that I lived there.
I was there once, apparently on the perfect day, and it was completely clear. Something very impressive to see.
When I was in Alaska almost 10 years ago, we went to Denali NP, and didn't see the mountain at all. On the day we were to fly out of Anchorage, we went to Earthquake Park before our flight, and sure enough we could see it from there for about 10 minutes before clouds took over again. Even from hundreds of miles away, it was impressive.
I hate when mountains are only described based on their peak elevation above sea level. Thank you for taking the time to explain why denali is one of the "tallest" from base to tip!
You bet, thanks for watching!
Exactly. So many Colorado Rockies people are like “ our mountains are bigger than mounts Shasta and mount rainier” lol
Denali is the tallest from base to peak(climbable height) ,not "one of the tallest",because Mauna Kea is the absolute tallest but most of it is underwater...So...in other words...if we stand in front of every single one of the world's big mountains Denali is gonna look the tallest because it is...and that's all it matters
@@towardsheaven4196 I would argue that there are himalayan mountains (nanga parbat/dhaulagiri/annapurna etc) which are taller from base to peak. Denali gets points for the plains around it being quite flat, like why kilimanjaro is famous. But Dhaulagiri rises 7000m from the nepalese plains, denali only reaches about 5500.
I mean, just look at them. mind blowing verticality. Denali is super cool though. earth.google.com/web/@28.56756902,83.73669921,4175.02605275a,31460.82391094d,35y,37.77870861h,87.89204615t,0r
@@towardsheaven4196 This is wrong.
I made two comments of a few Himalayan mountains to the thread made by @davidguthary8147 .
Notably: "Denali has got 6190m to 1675m = 4515m+ vertical over 9kms."
"From Annapurna 1 8091m asl or "Fang" 7647m asl down the slopes to
I lived in Alaska for a fairly long time (17 years) and worked in Denali National Park for two summers. No matter how often I saw the mountain it never ceased to thrill me. If anything, each time I saw it I realized even more how truly fortunate I was to be there.
(My tip for anyone and everyone is: Don't wait until you're old and retired to visit Alaska. Go while you still have the energy and stamina to really explore the state. It's a hiker's paradise. And don't be surprised if, like me, you go for a visit and decide to stay for years!)
wow wow wow hikers delight i bet
The reason why mt Everest isn’t prominent is the Himalayas are so formidable, caused by the collision of the Indian and the Asian plates, every other mountain there tops 27000 ft.
True, yet having visited Nepal and done some trekking there, I can assure you that the Himalaya are exceedingly formidable. Will never forget the first time I laid eyes on them from the capital, Kathmandu. Their height in the distance took my breath away....
Denali has a healthy self esteem and doesn’t let anything push it down…instead grows higher. What a lesson for us all! Keep on being great, Denali. 🙏🏼💛
😂❤
@@NationalParkDiaries 😂❤️We have to put some humor in it! Seriously, this is an excellent video…thank you so much for sharing new information and insight! God Bless!
@@mj11222 Absolutely! And thanks for watching, glad you liked it!
@@NationalParkDiaries You’re so welcome! 😊
I grew up in Alaska, on a clear day you can see Mount McKinley from Anchorage where I lived. I also traveled up to Denali national Park thanks to my wonderful mother and saw Denali more than once up close. Absolutely beautiful area
Cringe at the name mount McKinley
@@PhaseSkater The irony of you cringing, then saying the name. 🤣
#MountMcKinley 😜
@@PhaseSkater cope harder indian
@@DevinDeCremer Well, I'm going with since the Russians owned it forever (sorta) I'm calling the mountain - Tenada.
@@PhaseSkater edge lord
I asked my daughter this question and she said, "because it is a mountain."
😆 🤣 😂
Mt. Rainier is just as impressive as Denali to me, and for similar reasons. I have no idea why mountains are ranked according to their elevation rather than their prominence...it makes no sense. A lot of "tall" mountains are just short mountains that rest upon high plateaus; they're basically like a short guy who stands on a chair and then claims he's tall. When people visualize a mountain in their heads or draw a mountain on a piece of paper, they're visualizing or drawing the prominence, not the elevation of the summit above sea level.
Mt Fuji shares the same characteristics. Prominence is underrated. Fuji is only 12,395 above sea level but it's prominence is only a few feet shorter than its elevation, so it towers above the surrounding landscape, making it look huge. Fuji's conical shape is almost perfect, so it's striking.
@@brandonb.5304 I also like Mt. Fuji. It's the same kind of mountain as Mt. Rainier...stratovolcano. I assume Rainier has been more damaged by eruptions than has Fuji, hence Rainier's blunted top. Rainier is definitely due for an eruption, and since I live next to it I hope it gives some advanced warning before it goes bonkers. What's really interesting about both mountains is how young they are: Mt Rainier is only 1/2 million years old, which means neanderthals were on the Earth before Rainier was. Fuji is even younger: 100,000 years, which means it came into being around the time of the first wave of human migration out of Africa. Fuji is a baby.
Personally when I think tallest mountains I think Everest and the other 8000m peaks first. Truly places where humans do not belong.
Exactly how I feel about Shasta it's a very massive mountain surrounded by hills
Yep, agreed. When I was first in the Rocky Mountains, I was actually quite underwhelmed.
Coming from the East Coast, most mountains start at practically sea level as well. The tallest mountains reach 6+ thousand feet and almost all of that is prominence.
Driving up to the Rockies from the east, I was expecting mountains that were like twice the height (read twice as prominent) as those in the east. When I got out there and found that most were about 6000 feet prominent from the heigh planes, I was so bummed out. I had dreams of skiing 10000 foot lines from top to bottom. Suffice it to say I was a bit let down.
Awesome. I saw Denali when I was young. You cannot capture the scale of it in a video. You see the base of a mountain rising into the clouds. Then in a break in the clouds, you can see the summit rising way higher. It's insane.
It really is an incredible mountain and you're right, a video just doesn't do it justice. Everybody go see Denali if you can!
The Alaskan landscape is incredible, I live on the foothills of the Rocky Mountains and they don't have anything on these behemoths
I am armenian and grew up looking at the 16k+ft mount Ararat with a prominence at 14k ft i still miss it as i have spent half my life in the barely hilly ne ohio
@@draggy6544 so cool
So many Colorado Rockies people are always bashing mount rainier here in the Pacific Northwest saying their mountains are slightly taller. And I’m like? Yeah above sea level. In person the prominence difference is huge
@@PhaseSkater True. I'd rather see a huge mountain, not breathe thinner air on a smaller mountain. The Canadian and pacific northwest rockies are clear of the colorado rockies. a metric called Jut illustrates that nicely
What's so crazy about it is this: Everest and Aconcagua are the tallest peaks among tall mountain ranges, Denali stands almost alone, no other mountains boxing it in or obstructing its majesty
Exactly! It's an incredible sight to see. There's simply nothing else around it that comes close to its grandeur!
Great video! It brought back all my memories of our trip to Alaska. We saw Mountain goats, moose and bears.Thanks
Glad you enjoyed it! We missed the mountain goats and bears on our trip, but did catch some moose, humpback whales, Dall's porpoises, Stellar's sea lions, and a bunch of sea otters.
@@NationalParkDiaries I agree on the Tetons, please do a video on them!!
One of the most beautiful mountain I summited ... such a joy and ultimate respect to climb Denali
That's quite the accomplishment! Congratulations!
0:34 “it immediately draws your eye when it comes into view” … if you happen to be incredibly lucky and it’s not obscured by clouds! Back in 2001 I drove up from New Jersey to see Denali (took 2 whole weeks for the drive, it’s a big country!) but when I arrived it was so cloudy and foggy that I couldn’t see anything of the mountain at all. Fortunately there was a huge mural photograph of the mountain on the wall in the visitor center that gave a sense of what I missed, and was good for the obligatory selfie. I hope to get back again some day, hopefully with better weather.
2 weeks? You must have stopped for a few days
I climbed McKinley back in 1983 with Colorado Outward Bound School. It took 28 days to reach the summit starting from the Muldrow glacier and 4 days to descend to base camp. It's an amazingly beautiful mountain.
Glad you climbed DENALI.
It'd be great to see a video on Mt St Elias. St Elias has similar extreme vertical relief from the surroundings, and has geological anomalies resulting in its fast growth
Mt. St. Elias seems to be one of the mountains that should be far more famous.
@@i7Qp4rQ 18,000 ft. tall is nothing to sneeze at. Mt. Logan only 26 km. away across the border in Yukon, Canada is even taller at over 19,500. The video completely overlooked these sentinels that are only marginally shorter than Denali.
@@stonew1927 Indeed, they are great towering mountains over vast lowlands. Greatest relief Ive seen is Mt. Teide around 3,7km - from a window of a plane, I assumed it as being a cloud at first. Non Himalayan mountains often get overlooked though. But as opposing to the video Ive to say that even Mt. Everest has visual elevation up to and even over 6kms: "Everest View Point" Bit north of Lukla for example is at around 3000m asl. And from Ramitay View Point towards Kangchenjunga has visual elevation from below 250m asl. to 8586m - Which may be the world's greatest 'visible elevation', at least that Im aware of. Ive been looking into this kind stuff from since I was kid.
@@i7Qp4rQ I've actually seen Everest from a trekking point northwest of Darjeeling, India, closer to Kanchenjunga. Kanchenjunga itself was extremely impressive. It seemed to rise all on it's own above the surrounding landscape. Meanwhile, Everest off in the distance towards the west actually seemed a bit lower than some of the other peaks in the area. It's just a matter of perspective . . .
@@stonew1927 The trouble with Everest is that its visibility is obscured by its own flanks and wall of great mountains.
Great report. Thank you. A couple of things; Mt. Logan is over 19,500 ft. high and not that far from Denali, as it is located in Southwest Yukon near the Alaska border. Nearby Mt. St. Elias is over 18,000 ft. tall. Granted, neither is as tall as Denali, but they are in the vicinity locally and height wise, especially Mt. Logan. Secondly, how come it is not a volcano given that the Pacific plate is subducting under the North American plate? I understood your explanation and find it fascinating, but still curious about why it is not a volcano. Thirdly, I'm glad they switched the name from Mt. McKinley a few years ago. Denali is its proper name and honors the native tribes that have lived in the area for thousands of years and had a relationship with it. And Denali just sounds cooler anyway . . .
A volcano need sto have a magma chamber. Normal mountains like these and volcanos are both driven by plate tectonics. However this are just rock forced up into the shape by one plate sliding under the other. A volcano has melted material of one plate rising to the surface and normally it starts to store into a large chamber known as a magma chamber. When it risises to the surface again it can be a calm out flowing of lava, what magma, is called once it reaches the surface or it can be explosive like mount st Helen's and other sof history. The build up of cooled lava is was forms Volcanoes mountain shape and built them taller and taller. Typical all yoy need is a hot spot ( an area where magma subducts to the surface) in order for a volcano to form an example of this is the Hawaiian Islands chain, they are all essentially tall mountains that started off as underwater volcanoes. While most summits like the Himalayas have to be where plates collide in order to form.
@@biohazardlnfS I already understand the geological processes and mechanics that go into forming mountains and volcanoes. Just curious as to why this particular mountain, Denali, is not volcanic given it's location and the fact that there are multiple volcanos nearby in Alaska.
Ive always loved looking at mountains. That natural raw aesthetic that i cant really explain always captivated me. Denali is definitely one of the most visually impressive mountains ive seen. I can completely understand why the natives held it in such reverence.
So,...I was doing some drone video at a mountain-top Thai temple complex south of Chiang Mai Thailand. Two Thai men arrived on bicycles and ran up the 325 stair steps twice. After they stopped to breathe I chatted with them. They told me they were training to go to Denali to ride their bicycles. I asked them if they knew grizzly bears can run 55 kph. The look they exchanged when I said that let me know they had no clue how dangerous grizzly bears are.
and the bears could presumably bicycle even faster than they can run
I read the title as "why is denial so tall?" and thought to myself "Yep. This is what I would watch. The UA-cam algorythm worked it's magic".
Isn't Mt McKinley the tallest mountain in North America?
I’ve never heard of that one
@@sachemofboston3649 turns out Mt McKinley and Denali are one and the same
A minor correction. The Denali Fault is not the boundary between two plates. The Alaska-Aleutian Megathrust is where the Pacific Plate subducts under the North American Plate. The Denali Fault is a strike-slip fault caused by the bend in the plate boundary where the Fairweather Fault terminates.
I have been hoping for a video on specific mountain’s geology for so long!! Please please please make more of these, especially on mountains like Longs Peak (Rocky Mountain NP), Grand Teton, or Mount Whitney (Sequoia NP)
Thanks for the feedback! I think one on the Tetons would be really interesting. They have such a unique geology.
My Chief (304th RQS) use to spend 30days a year up on Denali with the rescue community. Great stories. The Alaskan PJs (210th) are phenomenal.
@ 3:12 the mantle actually consists of solid rock. This magma ocean thing is a rather persistent misconception. It does however flow, just like solid glaciers do.
solid-ish perhaps? viscosity in between cold rock and molten rock?
@@nmarbletoe8210 Solid enough to consist of several different minerals each with their distinct crystal lattice and solid in the sense of having a shear strength (fluids don't have that). Which in turn means the mantle can propagate transverse waves, be they acoustic or seismic, where a fluid cannot.
Also geologists speak of competence rather than viscosity. A more competent rock being more resistant to deformation and flow.
Damn, this channel is massively underrated
Thanks for being here!
I love mount McKinley
I drive past Denali 5 times a year studying at University of Alaska Fairbanks. Many people and friends of mine at university train to climb Denali. Couldn’t make it work this year but maybe next summer 😎. Thanks for making this video it’s always cool to see people make videos about Alaska and the things she beholds.
Sounds awesome. I fell in love with Alaska last year when I visited and now I'm trying to figure out when I'll be able to come back lol. Thanks for watching!
That’s a definite location I would love to visit. In my opinion it’s the most impressive mountain in the world.
I was lucky enough to see it last year and it's incredible. I hope you make it out there at some point!
MOUNT MCKINLEY
That's pretty cool and it makes sense on why it is so large, by volume it is the 2nd largest mountain. I guess something similar happens with Mt. Logan, which is the largest by volume.
I had the fortunate circumstance to drive in to Wonder Lake at the very unfortunate expense of some ones life. We had reservations in July 1981 for Wonder Lake CG. When we arrived at the entrance we were informed that the day before an NP bus had rolled off the road killing a passenger. They had stopped all bus service. The NPS wasn't sure what to do, so they just let us drive on our own to Wonder Lake. It was the most amazing experience. We could stop anywhere to photograph scenery and wildlife and there were plenty of caribou and griz. At the campground we ran into two people that had just summited Denali. It was a memory that kept with me. In 1999 I attempted and successfully summited the peak with 2 friends. Obviously one of the best experiences ever on both trips.
Denali, also known as Mount McKinley, is the highest peak in North America, towering over Alaska's wilderness at 6,190 meters. The mountain is located in Denali National Park and Preserve, a stunningly beautiful area of rugged wilderness that covers over 6 million acres.
Thanks for a great presentation. 👍
Thanks for watching!
Beautiful, Majestic mountain!! Was in total awe of it when I visited!
Amazing video! I learned a lot, thank you!
You bet, thanks for watching!
I still call it Mount McKinley. Just like Bombay, Burma and Constantinople. I'm stuck in the past.
I too don't fall for liberal propaganda native-washing everything 🤩
@@BendwowDenali sounds alot better
the summit of Denali is the coldest place in the northern hemisphere
I didn't know Denali was a hunk o' granite! So cool!
If its "simply referred to as the tall one" WHY RENAME IT?! It's Mount McKinley to me!
Wish i loved geology in high school like i do now.
There’s a great inspirational metaphor in here somewhere about granite being both “less dense”, “rising to the top faster”, and “resistant to the forces trying to tear it down”
Denali as a motivational speaker 👌
Ive flown between Anchorage and Fairbanks often. It is the prominence that is so striking. Always love giving flybys.
Its crazy how strong that part of the ring of fire is for such a mountain
Being from the NorthEast, I’m amazed at seeing Denali from Anchorage. In my frame of reference, it’s like seeing multiple states away
But Assam has plenty of Mountains, no?
JK, I know you are referring to the US Northeast, not Indian Northeast
6:18 those darker foothills in front of Denali are about the size of the tallest Appalachian! fun fact!
Q: Why is Denali so tall?
A: Because it's a mountain.
I learned something today! thanks!
You're welcome, thanks for watching!
When talking about how 'tall' a mountain is, Everest makes a good example due to how well known it is. But alongside it, I would have also added Mauna Kea as another illustration of what can constitute how "tall" a mountain is, given that it is taller than Everest is high. Which is afterall not nearly as well defined a term as for example "height" is. Doing this would not have added much time to the video and would help illustrate the concept that much better, imo anyways.
So many people focus on that "above sea level" part of things that they completely forget that many mountains start well below sea level and literally have no clue about things such as the weight of a mountain causing the surrounding land to become depressed.
(and its not like you have to get into more esoteric aspects like how much the land is compressed by the mountain either, though it is quite interesting, btw, doing this brings Mauna Kea from about 30k feet, up to being around 56,000 feet tall.... yes 56k, straight out of the USGS's mouth).
Only if master trump goes through with his plan, to drain the ocean.
@@uberkloden I can recommend a good psychiatrist. Sounds as if you might need one.
Well maybe we should start measuring starting at the top of the mountain in a straight line through the center of the planet and on until land stops on the opposite hemisphere? Then it would be fare for all mountains. lol
@@williambrandondavis6897 I bet you thought you were clever. I am here to tell you that you are not. I am also here to tell you that fare is not the same thing as fair. Please learn the language before trying to use it for insulting people.
I used to be able to see Denali from my house, 130 miles away!
Ii was stationed there for a while. At night it brightens the sky.Drove from there back to Ronald Washington. Glad I was there.
As a non-american I thought the name Denali is the top trim of GMC's vehicles until I saw this video. lol
I'm going to be honest... I read the title of the thumbnail and video as "denial"
Geographical North America (the continent) is not only CA, US, MX and Greenland! Still.. including all of the caribbean and belize, el salvador, honduras, nicaragua, costa rica and panama.
Mt. McKinley is amazing 🤩
Okay so I read the title as "Why is denial so tall?" 😂
Anyone else read the title as "why is denial so tall"?
Cuz she is "Strong like a Megatron, long like a marathon"
Can't wait to visit Mt. Mckinley
Another comment for the algorithm. Loving this channel.
Hahahaha, thank you!!
Mt McKinley is pretty picturesque.
Mt. McKinley is definitely a stunner.
Everest isn't the tallest mountain from base to peak. It's just the highest point above sea level. The tallest mountain from base to peak is actually Mauna Kea.
Are we going to fight over whose is bigger.
I've seen Denali from Anchorage on a clear day, it's breathtaking.
Denali's mother was getting good food and proper care, so when it was born it grew into a very large mountain, just like me. My mother was in the military, was fed regular food in what ever quantity she wanted and gave birth to a baby almost half her size, she was four foot eleven inches, I was twenty two and a half inches, see Big Mountain.6'3''325#
Mt. McKinley Mt. McKinley Mt. McKinley. Never heard of that "denali" fella.
It’s been Denali a lot longer than it’s been “Mt McKinley”
I rode my motorcycle to Alaska from California, and as I was going by Denali and had a senior parks pass, I rode in. I got stopped way before the mountain, and they expected you to ride on a shuttle bus the rest of the way to the mountain. I passed.
I actually have a video on why you have to do that if you're interested: ua-cam.com/video/FifzGB0kTw8/v-deo.html
While not in the same category as Denali, the prominence of Telescope Peak and the Panamint Range in Death Valley NP is truly awe-inspiring. Since these mountains literally rise from at or even below sea level to upwards of 11,000 feet.
It's crazy how different these mountains can appear based solely on their surroundings!
I appreciate the geology of how Denali came to dominate the geography of the area; that part was excellent. However...after over twenty years of serving native Alaskans of Interior Alaska, years of living in villages, and having Alaskan Native family I promise you the "reverence for Denali" you refer to doesn't exist. There is no food up there, it's only service is as a barrier to movement and as a landmark. Don't buy into the "Dances with Wolves" narrative. Yes, a beautiful landmark but nothing sacred.
As an Alaska resident of over sixty years I agree 100%
just call it mckinley then
On a clear day in Anchorage you can see Denali 136 air miles away. It looks massive even at that distance.
So interesting! Thank you for making this video!
You're welcome, thanks for watching!
Grew up looking at that mountain.. when you could see it.
No shade to the natives, but are you seriously gonna just name the tallest thing you can find your word for tall? Pretty uncreative
thats because natives dgaf what anyone calls it, losers in washington obsessed with tearing down american history renamed it. hence the uncreativity
What was the highest mountain in the world before Denali was discovered?
I read "Why is Denial So Tall?"
And thought this was a video about why denial is so prominent or something.
😂😂😂😂
I heard once that my grandfather had climbed it, though I don't know how much of it he climbed. In his Will I remember he wanted his ashes to be spread over the mountain. I guess he climbed the whole way up, or he just really liked that mountain.
*his ashes have not been spread. I assume it is not allowed.
Why is Denali third in prominence behind Mt Everest if Everest starts at 14000’ while Denali starts at 2,000’. Wouldn’t that put Denali on top of Everest by roughly 3,000’?
Prominence can be kind of confusing. I think the Wikipedia article does a pretty good job explaining it: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Topographic_prominence
What you're describing is the distance from the mountain's base to its summit, which is different from prominence because mountain statistics are weird lol.
Here's the list of most prominent mountains as well: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mountain_peaks_by_prominence
I see that. Super confusing but if you really read into it does start to make sense.
Denali completly overcome the other mountains around him he looks like a giant among the giants
Maybe Denali just had tall parents.
Weird, I thought I knew most important mountains in the world. I never heard of this one.
Where did you get the photo of the Native Alaskans standing in front of the cabin?
Excellent video my man
Thanks Sean!
I thought the title was "denial" lol
I see it all the time. Its massive beyond what this shows.
I'm pretty sure this is the mountain I use to draw in my school book as a kid
Mount McKinley or Denali is probably the most beautiful place I’ve been
Amazing channel! You need more subs!
Thanks! It's been growing pretty steady here the last few weeks and I'm excited to keep it going!
Great video and a fabulous channel! The mountains in 5:33-5:46 are actually not the Alaska range but the Utah Wasatch range, looking to the SW through Parley's canyon. The camera angle is from the vantage point of the ridge north of interstate 80 that runs east west through Parley's canyon. You can even seen the smoggy haze of the Salt Lake City valley and the Kennecott copper mine in the mountain range in the far distance.
Thank you and good eye! I mainly used that footage to illustrate a general talking point, but thanks for pointing it out!
@@NationalParkDiaries I love your channel! I'm involved in another producing videos for another UA-cam channel that puts out a video a day, so I know quite well the pressure of finding beautiful B roll that helps keep viewers attention while helping to illustrate a point. BTW, I also own a tour company (Utah Luxury Tours) that creates customized experiences for clients in the western USA national parks. Your videos are a fabulous source of insight, information, and stories that help me prep. So many thanks!
Thanks so much Taylor, glad you're enjoying everything and so glad to know they're helpful for your business! I always love hearing how people are using these videos, so thanks for sharing!
But yeah, B-roll is a struggle lol. I'm trying to incorporate more of my own footage, but travel isn't always in the cards unfortunately. What channel do you help out on?
@@NationalParkDiaries ua-cam.com/channels/Ssrx8lFpeuBjNIE7FNm2CQ.htmlvideos
@@NationalParkDiaries I may be heading to Israel soon to get more b-roll. And yep, it's big time and money commitment to do it.
This video made me really want to visit Denali someday.
It's a truly incredible place. I hope you get the chance someday!
@@NationalParkDiaries thanks!! I’m from Ontario, Canada so it would be quite the trek out there but I think I can convince my fiancée it would be worth it. Lots to see along the way!
@@zachsmith98 You can show them this video as well lol. But yes, lots to see on the way and it's so worth it! Best of luck!
Answer: Because it's a mountain.
Problem = solved.
Denali is the tallest from base to peak(climbable height) because Mauna Kea is the absolute tallest but most of it is underwater...So...in other words...if we stand in front of every single one of the world's big mountains Denali is gonna look the tallest because it is...and that's all it matters
Why did you copy and paste this 2 times? Are you a bot?
Mount Mckinley isn’t just another face in the crowd.
The Himalayas k2 Annapurna everest and all the other 8000m peaks are at a high elevation to begin with the prominence is the difference between surrounding land and Mt peak that is why its so much taller looking beutiful mountain!
Me educated in the 80's.... Running to Google to check if this is what was Mt McKinley.
Well done!
Thank you!
Because it ate its veggies when it was a kid?
Denali looking gooood