First and foremost, I am not a mountain climber, and I have the ultimate respect for those who attempt the world's highest summits.
I just finished reading a book documenting an amazing expedition in the Himalayas in the 1980s. Riveting from start to finish. But I had a strange feeling after I finished it. Mainly because I was left wondering whether the person who wrote the book --- an extraordinary mountaineer --- actually reached the summit.
The reason for my skepticism: The other members of the climber's team had to turn back short of the summit for various reasons, and the author says he reached the summit by himself. Which he well may have. But he also doesn't have a photo of himself on the summit, which he blamed on the effects of high altitude and a malfunctioning camera. Instead, the only photo he took as "proof" was a shot of an oxygen canister on the ground, against a blank background of snow. He said he found this oxygen canister at the summit, left there by an earlier expedition.
So maybe this is a stupid question from an obvious non-climber, but if someone says they solo summited a major peak with no real photo evidence, how is it determined whether the climber's claim is true or not?