June 23, 2018, 02:21:08 PM
Dyatlov Pass Forum

Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
Materials Modern / Re: Fundraiser to Reopen the Case
« Last post by WAB on Today at 07:53:47 AM »
This is update #5 from Keith McClosky's fundraiser to reopen an investigation into the Dyatlov Pass Incident:

Update 5
Posted by Keith McCloskey
2 days ago

Yuri Kuntsevich has said that the work on the investigation of the case is now starting. He is seeing a relative of Rustem Slobodin who lives in Ekaterinburg first for him to complete the documents for the court and then he is then doing the same with Yuri Doroshenko’s sister who is in Kazakhstan. Yuri is also taking documents proving kinship with the deceased from other relatives of the group. This is the first step to recognise them as having a direct legal interest in having the case reopened
A very big thank you from Yuri at the Dyatlov Foundation, Prosecutor Leonid Proshkin and myself to everyone who is helping to make this possible. In the meantime we are now only £380 away from reaching our goal. If you can please spread the word far and wide just to get this final hurdle completed, we will be there.
I was in the middle of typing this update from Yuri when Coral Hull has just made a second donation taking us now to within £350 of the target – Coral, thank you so much for your help.
More updates will follow.
Help spread the word!

https://uk.gofundme.com/solvedyatlov

From Tristan: We are currently 350 pounds shy of reaching the goal. So so so so close. If anybody can help even donate a few bucks, it will all help!

Dear CalzagheChick !
 Before to expect for success of this new investigation, let's understand, what chances of success are and that everyone should receive at the end of this investigation.
1. I have closely read Leonid Proshkina's all materials in the new book just issued by Dyatlov fund. There right at the beginning there are I 3 articles too. All his arguments are reduced to that investigation has made be relative many mistakes of only bureaucratic type and he cannot explain the reason of dead Dyatlov group. But it not argument for renewal of investigation. Leonid Proshkin means, that there was that that technogenic, however any certificates of it are not present. From a word which means - any. Besides, his claims concerning the rocket version to me as to the expert in this section of technical equipment was simply ridiculous to read. And that he (or who another) cannot explain that, why so events developed, it at all argument for a legal direction of investigation. There is only a scientific direction. However it not the complaint in Office of Public Prosecutor, and separate research. In it in a measure of forces and opportunities the community which discusses at forums also is engaged. Certainly serious discussion turns out only at those who has sufficient knowledge and practice. All works is more theoretical, practical researches, of particular in the winter on that district 2 persons were engaged only. He is Alexander Alekseenkov and I. When you start to read, that about those conditions that were during all events at Dyatlov group, to me it becomes sad from reasonings at a children's level of younger age. By the way, if to compare this criminal case with similar which started on other similar failures there mistakes and defects was even more. Therefore incompleteness and mistakes of investigation it occurs because inspectors are not ready to such events and such conditions. From the 20 search and rescue works where I participated, I saw 5 … 7 criminal cases, therefore to me is with what to compare.
2. Even if this investigation will be again started (it is practically unreal case on probability) all the same it will be necessary to begin with conditions on district in the same conditions. Who will be engaged it? Visiting to place for 1 day will give nothing. Even because in bad weather there the usual person will not get, and to compare to good weather it there is a full absurdity. Inspectors it is usual people, city dwellers which have no enough preparation for normal travel there, even on 3 … 4 days. For such level some years of preparation are necessary. At me such preparation almost 60 years, at Alexander Alekseenkov  more than 40 years. Neither I, nor at Alexander do not have even small suspicion on the artificial reason of destruction of Dyatlov group. As well as suspicions, that who there could get that the stranger, except for hikers and Mansi. The it place is hardly removed to it and wild. Even now the first attempt will get there to the casual person impossible. Let's not speak, that she will have though what that sense, except for extreme travel. If investigation will address to experts except for us, them to not find. And if will address to whom that to another who there was not or knows features much worse us it will be again wrong investigation and all will return on the same place where now it is. Even it will be even worse. Because it discredits concept of investigation.
3. The arguments brought by Leonid Proshkin are not essential. Because anything new there it is not resulted, and the limitation period on such affairs for a long time has expired. Attempt to give reason for renewal of investigation by that there was a murder, is not solvent, because any proofs there are not present. And on unsubstantiated assumptions of anything to renew it will not be possible. Words and suspicions, it not is proofs. And if to speak about an opportunity of murder bat it is nonsense. It could not be made, and there was no reason to this. Some time is possible to think out this reason, but that fact available is not present.
I not in коем a case am not going to dissuade anybody to collect of money for renewal of investigation, but this money only for initial work of lawyers. And it not only does not guarantee the beginning of investigation, but also will not give what that of results, except for reputation image and material purchases to lawyers.
I for that investigation would be, but only fair and under the initiative of the most investigatory committee. And the way which it can be reached{achieved}, is not on the basis of the finance. It is necessary constantly (speaking images) « are knocked on doors of administration of the president RF».
By the way, to inquiries from foreign citizens our officials concern much better, than to inquiries from the citizens. You would write inquiry about the address to the President of the Russian Federation Vladimir Putin, that you have familiarized with this case, and cannot understand, that there has taken place, because the official information very not clear and confusing. This case is very unusual and mysterious. Could not charge He to whom with that from to his officials understand with this case and to inform were interested foreign citizens? It would be much more powerful argument, concerning the complaint Leonid Proshkin to investigatory committee. The letter is necessary to write from group of interested people or from what that to the informal (independent) organization.
As far as I know, Vladimir Putin concerns to such requests with interest and is very benevolent.
It for a long time and hardly, but for money true you will not buy. As soon as there that certain will tell, so the investigatory committee there and then will begin investigation. Only then all again will return on a way of scientific studying of a problem. Сriminal find there is impossible. All is determined by conditions of a place.

So, let's present, what we would like to receive at the end of this action?
My scientific practice speaks, that if not know, that it is necessary to receive in the end and as it should be made precisely the result always will be negative.
2
Materials Modern / Fundraiser to Reopen the Case
« Last post by CalzagheChick on June 22, 2018, 11:15:01 AM »
This is update #5 from Keith McClosky's fundraiser to reopen an investigation into the Dyatlov Pass Incident:

Update 5
Posted by Keith McCloskey
2 days ago

Yuri Kuntsevich has said that the work on the investigation of the case is now starting. He is seeing a relative of Rustem Slobodin who lives in Ekaterinburg first for him to complete the documents for the court and then he is then doing the same with Yuri Doroshenko’s sister who is in Kazakhstan. Yuri is also taking documents proving kinship with the deceased from other relatives of the group. This is the first step to recognise them as having a direct legal interest in having the case reopened
A very big thank you from Yuri at the Dyatlov Foundation, Prosecutor Leonid Proshkin and myself to everyone who is helping to make this possible. In the meantime we are now only £380 away from reaching our goal. If you can please spread the word far and wide just to get this final hurdle completed, we will be there.
I was in the middle of typing this update from Yuri when Coral Hull has just made a second donation taking us now to within £350 of the target – Coral, thank you so much for your help.
More updates will follow.
Help spread the word!

https://uk.gofundme.com/solvedyatlov

From Tristan: We are currently 350 pounds shy of reaching the goal. So so so so close. If anybody can help even donate a few bucks, it will all help!
3
Alexander Kolevatov / Re: Alexander Kolevatov
« Last post by WAB on June 15, 2018, 12:57:11 PM »
I do not assume that one of them has been responsible for the group's death. But knowledges of skills, experience and characters can help to understand what did they do during the last night.


Galina, infinite digging in private life of participants of travel Dyatlov travel, it is a deadlock way to definition of the reason of their  destruction. Whom they would not be, it on what does not influence. The nature much more important and powerful factor what to lead them to death. All conspirology theories arise because their authors not a condition neither to imagine, nor to estimate a role at native factors. About it still Ch. Darvin said that: «Ignorance gives rise to confidence rather than knowledge is more often»©.
Without knowing features and details of ski tourism, without knowing features of a place in the winter, without knowing what errors and troubles searchers, and, especially, lawyers could admit when examined and described event, without knowing in general any details, say, weather and other to what you can come? Imaginations on this theme and so already more than enough. Can be better to pass to selection of the facts which already are up to the end clear and only on them to build assumptions? Though that you to what want to compare, if experts any are not present, and there are only rather muddy representations?
It is sad all.
4
Alexander Kolevatov / Re: Alexander Kolevatov
« Last post by WAB on June 15, 2018, 12:54:06 PM »
So do you think he had another handle by which he went? Are you suggesting that in Sverdlosk he was Kolevatov and in Moscow he was somebody else?

What was his degree in, I forget...but he was a scientist no less right?

How many years do you have in your research on all members and the DPI Galina?
1) duality. All the time I m feeling some duality about him.
2) about degree. It's very difficult to compare European and ussr education systems. Very simple answer for understanding: college - bachelor degree. Institute - master degree. It's mean he had a bachelor degree in metal production. He was going to get a master degree in radioactive metal production.



1. If to compare the importance level of the graduate of technical school to level of the bachelor in Europe and the USA it is not absolutely correct. The bachelor it is a bit more than the graduate of technical school, both on level of knowledge, and by position in a society (everyone - in the). The engineer Soviet graduated from the institute (university) it a little above the master "in the west", but only on width of coverage of knowledge and ability to be retrained. "In the west", narrower, but deep specialisation on a certain direction. I have faced that there is few training in adjacent areas. For example, I am by training the mechanical engineer, but to the course of requirements of my business  have easily mastered electronics and applied to medicine technical areas (biomechanic). Mathematical preparation was additional, necessarily to be engaged mathematical modelling and was carried out on the basis of the Moscow State Lomonosov University.
2. Kolevatov was trained on physicotechnical branch UPI and there preparation was not only in the field of radioactive materials. For example, V.G.Karelin too has ended physicotechnical branch UPI and all life is engaged in physics and chemistry of reception of tungsten. It is completely not radioactive material. And as Kolevatov was only on 4 course, I am not assured that he has already chosen a direction in which it should specialise.
3. By the way, it is necessary to specify that scientists happen two different specialisations. The first are engaged in the fundamental science, the second - applied researches. Physicotechnical branch UPI prepared scientists only for applied specialisation.
5
Alexander Kolevatov / Re: Alexander Kolevatov
« Last post by WAB on June 15, 2018, 12:48:26 PM »
Quote
-made new friends
-tourism
- secret keeper?
Sasha  hiked  the mount Sabliya (Sabre, Cабля),  Pre-Polar Ural, as a member of some Moscow's group. This is a difficult trek. 



Galina, here even here you do not show precisely that it would be. On their travel in Subpolar Ural Mountains their primary goal was not «to get on mountain the Sabre», and an alloy on a raft on the river Synja. But on foot there it is necessary to reach for some honeycombs of km. Here as a point - a reference point Mountain the Sabre also has been entered in the route book.
Travel was not so much difficult (difficult it was), how many the unknown person in details. Here in it also there was a basic complexity of a route.

I was just interested in finding information about this hike. Everything was structured in USSR and I was trying to find the club that could organize this trek.

I explain: this campaign has been organised on the basis of the several organisations under a platitude of gathering of people which the club of Travellers of the Leningrad area of Moscow was at that time. In which territory was both "institute Bochvara" and "institute Kurchatova", factory №30 («a Znamja Truda»), P.O.Suhoy's KB, S. V.Ilyushin's KB, well and ours МАI, including. 10 … 15 years ago I was there the chairman of the Routing commission of this club.
In group where Kolevatov travelled there were people from "institute Bochvar" and "institute Kurchatov". But it is two absolutely different organisations. They from the different ministries. At them even sport clubs different - "institute Bochvar", it VSO "Trud", and "institute Kurchatov", it VSO "Dynamo".
Documents of 1950th years has not remained. Since then the club 3 times was reformed. So even by 1968 when I there was the chairman of the Routing commission, they any more were not. They could remain only at whom that of participants of this travel. Or to their children and grandsons.

I coudn't. Then I thought - there is no information about ordinary groups, maybe it was not an ordinary one? May be it was a group of "secret keepers" who had  restrictions on contacts and did not belong to any ordinary sports organization? I began to look for memories of the tourism of people who belonged to this category. Bingo! I was right! I found the memories of a scientist about how they wanted to be engaged in tourism and then the director of a secret organisation helped them organize a tourist section which has been out of ordinary turists clubs.
 The director who support the tourism was Dmitriy Ivanovich Blohincev

Yes, there was such person who very much supported travellers. But since 1956 it worked in Dubna of UINR, and before in Obninsk and the Moscow State Lomonosov University. Besides, at it the son was the inveterate traveller. But it had no relation to Kolevatov. Therefore it is not necessary to create unreal myths. In the rank of academician АН the USSR and the laboratorian of branch institute I have described a difference.

https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%91%D0%BB%D0%BE%D1%85%D0%B8%D0%BD%D1%86%D0%B5%D0%B2,_%D0%94%D0%BC%D0%B8%D1%82%D1%80%D0%B8%D0%B9_%D0%98%D0%B2%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B8%D1%87
Even now i can not find information about him in English))

It does not mean that it confidential, it means that it simply is not present in English.
D.I.Blohintsev is the physicist-theorist. It not those «confidential physicists» who make nuclear bombs.

I changed direction of searching a finally found the leader of that group. All members of the group worked in secret nuclear Institutes. Two of them ( including the
leader) were children  to their fathers)))
 The father of leader is... Blohincev Dmitiy Ivanovich
 The father of second one - Anatoly Alexandrov https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anatoly_Alexandrov_(physicist)

It especial does not mean anything too. Many leading scientists were inveterate travellers or climbers. For example Rem Khohklov - the climber and the rector of the Moscow State Lomonosov University , Even the prime minister of the USSR at Khruschev and Brezhnev by name Alecksey N Kosygin liked to float  kayaking float during holiday.
Both man - Leonid Dmitrievich Blohintsev and Yury Anatolevich Aleksandrov - worked at "institute Kurchatov" where Yury's father was at that time depty I. V. Kurchatov. It positively concerned hobby of the son, but any patron was not. It in general in clubs of travellers had no place. Another matter that both sons of academicians had good maintenance with money and other.

It was a TOP of the very closed scientific secret elite, and Sasha was accepted.

Once again I ask, it is not necessary to create « pudgy myths». D.I.Blohintsev and A. P.Aleksandrov with Kolevatov «for a hand did not greet» (they did not have close and friendly relations). Kolevatov there was the usual laboratorian which in Moscow at that time were ten thousand, and academicians АS USSR, were academicians. It is not necessary is artificial to create between them communications which did not exist.

Duality. Why did he leave Moscow

I already wrote, it has left Moscow to native to Sverdlovsk because it was more comfortable to live together with a family. It is very considerable factor. In Moscow Kolevatov had no special blessings. And the big prospect at Moscow his was not.
6
Alexander Kolevatov / Re: Alexander Kolevatov
« Last post by WAB on June 15, 2018, 12:29:50 PM »
Galina, let's decide that you want: or to details to study the invoice, or to think out myths, then in them definitively to trust, and still further to broadcast it to people who in you trust? Especially in the countries where many do not understand thin details of history and occurred …
I understand that it is much easier to me to compare because I have practically lived this epoch in real time. I already well remember all that was after Stalin's death and fragments I remember that was a little before it. Therefore on the general questions to me to object very difficultly. I as equals communicate with contemporaries of Dyatlov. Was very well and it is mutually familiar with Yury Yudin. Yudin even specified many questions at me. Especially it was appreciable, when we together with it and Eicher helped it to write the book for Donni. That there it has turned out is as at us speak - a question of the second (number two). Therefore give: or to result documents directly on the concrete person in the concrete organisation and in a concrete case, or we will not think out myths, and we will perceive words of the live witness of that epoch.
So, let's understand with merits of case …

Quote
All members of Dyatlov's group joined Komsomol at age 14, as soon as it was allowed. Sasha at age 18, during passing a security check   "in the secret institute'.
Some duality presents in this situation. Was it ideological decision or just necessary requirement?

«Safety check» this necessary action for any "regime" enterprise, is not dependent on where it is, in Russia, in the USA, in China, or in Northern Korea. It is spent always, and no any relation to the introduction into Komsomol has. The result of check would be identical to Kolevatova is not dependent on that, there was it in Komsomol or not. The Komsomol is separate independent a political direction in life of youth of that time in the USSR. In such firms in the fifties accepted irrespective of Komsomol if the person had a corresponding formation and recommendations. «Check safety» was obligatory for all those who applied for work in these firms. I know it on myself and many my acquaintances. Practically. At the time of a little later, but not much more.

WAB
Quote
he lived in Moscow one and it had complexities in his life
What do we know about his life in Moscow?

It is a little. But it is enough what to have almost full idea about his life far from the native.

Quote
Payment in Moscow according to its post was small
  - His salary was about 900-1000 rubles per month, while the average wage in the USSR was 600-700 rubles, the scholarship - 250-350 rubles per month.

It is not necessary so all to deform. You do not know about its salary. You have a sheet of its salary вто it is a high time? No. Therefore it is necessary to compare not god knows with what, and with a reality. At that time the father worked for me as the engineer (on mine then already senior) at rather uneasy defensive factory. Its salary was that that 1000 or 1100 roubles. The laboratorian (a post on 4 steps more low!) did not receive 1000 roubles, its salary was about those 600 … 700 roubles even taking into account that at "institut Bochvar" for certain paid and «for harm», that is for made radioactive materials. But Kolevatov with such materials, or not, it still the big question because this enterprise worked with the big nomenclature of materials of type «Heavy metals» - lead, tungsten, molybdenum, mercury, silver, copper, zinc, bismuth, and others.

  - He got free housing in a new building which well-known scientists also lived.  Moscow was a closed city and no one could come to live there.

It too is lie. If under the name «has received free habitation» it is meaningful - «to receive a place in a hostel» it was. Because the enterprise should is obliged to provide all «young experts» (such term was in the USSR and it mattered about those who has ended the higher or average special educational institution and has been appointed to work in the given enterprise) with a place where they should live. And it did not depend on in what house it was. In new or in the old. But Kolevatov could or live at relatives or rent apartment (at us speak - to rent a room). As far as I know, relatives at it in Moscow was not.
Moscow was not the closed city. Any there could arrive. It is Vladivoskok, Sverdlovsk, Sevastopol, Murmansk (is more exact - Severomorsk) were closed. There to arrive simply so it was impossible. There were restrictions for visiting by foreigners. The admission was required. Moscow the closed city was not. In Moscow there was no possibility to arrive and will get a job. Then would not accept. And to arrive and live informally, without registration it was possible. But for those experts who were required to the important enterprises and large factories, there were exceptions. Them typed specially or distributed from educational institutions. For example, same Kolevatov. It has ended technical school (about that that this such - will be written more low) and was necessary to "institute Bochvara". It there have distributed. Technical schools with such profile as at Kolevatov was a little. It could be in general one to all USSR. Therefore anything surprising in such distribution is not present. It not the privilege, and necessity for the necessary expert. On its place there could be everybody another from this technical school.


  ( Now this is one of the most prestigious areas of Moscow with very expensive apartments )

It now when there all is built up also it already far and not suburb (and partially, at that time still was and not Moscow)
Here is Moscow map 1952 on this area:
 


Learn? Bilding it are that is painted over red (stone), orange (wooden) and cherry (buildings of factories and institutes)

And here area borders of Moscow for 1957. They have been established in 1954, and this scheme was made for certain to Festival of youth and students in Moscow in 1957. There inscriptions in English.
 


As you can see, there still there are no many areas of building around the October field, and there are only sites of "institute Kurchatov" and "institute Bochvar" (are noted red)

And here modern Yandex-scheme on this area:
 


Here is a building map for 1968:
 


And for descriptive reasons the companion that would be visible as it is now built up:
 


On schemes it is designated:
1."Institute Kurchatov".
2."Institute Bochvar"
3.Street by name Oktjarbsky pole (now Marshal Birjuzov)
4.The Bridge between street Alabjana and street of the Narodnogo opolchenia
5.Crossing of street of the Narodnogo opolchenia and street  Marshal Birjuzov
6.The House which you have shown in a picture

As they say - feel a difference. I will remind that with 1958 on 1965 in Moscow it has been constructed knowledge in 3 times more than was in 1953. And the area of Moscow as cities has increased almost in 4,5 times.


And that you show in this picture, already building has begun it also the end of 60th years. All to a pain familiar, but in any way I can not remember. Especially this pub …?
Sheeeet! Yes it round the corner from the underground where I sit down into «т19» bus …
Here and the true moment. This building have constructed in the late sixties, therefore Kolevatov there in any way could not live. He has not had time to invent a time machine yet. J
Also look at a card of 1952 … And tell, where there were such houses?
Yes, it not the cheapest area of Moscow, but it not is "Arbat", not is "Peshkov-strit" grin1 and not is «Molochny pereulok» … On a rating it somewhere at once behind first ten …
And when there lived Kolevatov, there even projects from such houses were not.

- he worked very well, but  he was also very active in the social life of the institute. He became a member of Institute Komsomol committee, leaded shooting sport section. Began to engage in tourism, made new friends.

It is all truly, but this typical behaviour for active youth of that time.

WAB
Quote
He worked on the lowest scientific post
Duality and   different assessment of his job position. "The lowest scienific post" - compared to what?

And I have written, in comparison with a position of the engineer about the same enterprises for value.
Typical the table of ranks for the engineering level:
The laboratorian - the technician - the item the technician - the engineer - the item engineer - the leading engineer - it is not so important further.

And scientific level.
The laboratorian - the item the laboratorian - the younger research assistant - the senior research assistant - the assistant (assistant – professors, is I say for English-speaking readers) - the senior lecturer - the professor - corresponding member АS - academician АS.
These levels do not correspond each other. They are independent. But, as Kolevatov was on a post of the laboratorian, I and say that «It worked over the lowest scientific post» (c)
And I am not assured that they had «a scientific level». It was faster "engineering".

Of course he has not been a "leading scientist", but for the 19 year old boy who just graduated ordinary college he had a very good position and he was involved to some scientific research.

It «very good position» (c) was absolutely typical for any, possessing the same skills and formation. It is necessary to note still, what even formation at level "technical school" has been not so extended. Many who has ended technical school, at that time were on engineering posts. After war, quantity and preparation level has a little fallen. And demographic position was heavy. Very many who had education even before war have been killed in the war.
For example, even in first group of astronauts USSR where there was Yury Gagarin, there was only one pilot with higher education - Vladimir Komarov, and just some persons with formation in technical school volume. From 20 persons, it was 1 + 5 (?) … the others had education only in volume of a military college of pilots. It is «almost technical school», but with smaller level common-technical formations.

But WAB talking about his "Lowest position" has in mind a bit different moment.
Did he has a access to classified information? Was he a "secret keeper" working in Secret Instittute?


Some words about "the confidential keeper" (c). To the expert of level "laboratorian" of any especial secrets it was not informed. Privacy level has been caused by what not was the subjects and a direction of works in those enterprises which had confidential workings out is known. It is the second level of protection as there is an external cover, and all the most valuable is in the internal.
It was not familiar even with the general questions over which worked at "institute Bochvar". It was not necessary For its direct work, therefore to it it and did not inform.
It was not neither Opengamer, nor Teller, Fermi. And if to use analogue with Mahattan project further, it was the usual laboratorian in this project which at all did not know that they should receive in the end of work.
Therefore it is not necessary to exaggerate its values and the relation to privacy.
7
Infra-sound / Gravity fluctuation / Teleportation / Re: Infrasound? Most unlikely.
« Last post by WAB on June 13, 2018, 12:50:32 PM »

I agree fully with you on one aspect in the above: Because of the typography in mountain areas and in particular when there is a large massive where air is coming in from several directions with different temperatur and humidity, the weather can often change very fast and unpredictably. You are wholly correct in that observation.

However, the significance of the reports from the surrounding areas is that even if it is theoretically possible that there may locally have been a stormy weather in the Dyatlov pass area that possibility is not supported by the reports from the weather stations. So where does that leave us? There is a "might be" here, but the trouble is that the alleged storm is not indicated by any sources or traces. On the contrary, the conditions around the tent tend to indicate that there had been absolutely no snowstorm on February 1. Indications would rather point to the opposite: If there had been a violent storm on that evening, the footprints from the nine students down the slope towards the forest area would certainly have been erased that same night.

Further: I do not mean to be rude, but it has to be said that the videos presented above are not evidence of anything. These videos merely show us what it looks like in a particular type of weather. It does not prove what conditions were present at the Dyatlov pass on the evening when the students perished. It does not remotely prove that infrasound was the reason why the students left their tent.

Ever since 1959, official versions of what happened have maintained that the tragedy was due to accidents and "a series of mistakes by Igor Dyatlov," and it has been confirmed that it was signalled from above that the conclusion of the incomplete investigation should be that it was all an accident and that nothing else than natural forces were involved. Today we have theories about man-eating yetis, ball lighting, UFOs landing and killing the students, nonexistent fires and smoke in the tent, infrasound effects that supposedly scared nine adult people out of a tent and made them flee a mile away to their death in the cold, and even fighting between the students themselves has been proposed as the cause of the tragedy. It is perhaps time to try a more analytic and realistic approach, in accordance with the ideals and demands of fact-based science.

Whenever extraordinary claims are made, these claims must be backed up by some extraordinary strong evidence. To claim that infrasound was the culprit, and to further claim that the students were so mentally disordered with an altered consciousness that they cut their own tent and fled far away to a certain death, must be considered extraordinary claims. By the way: Even if the tent was cut from the inside, it still does not tell us who did the cutting. We do not know who cut the tent, and we do not know that the students left the tent throught the cuts either. This is just one of many unwarranted assumptions.

To finally claim that all the subsequent injuries (which were all consistent with a lethal attack by humans with evil intent) were due to an extremely improbable series of sub-events that by coincidence worked together to take nine lives in the course of a few hours, is so extraordinary that it exceeds the border of the realistic by quite some margin. Like ball lighting, the infrasound theory certainly makes a good history, but with risk of being offensive I can only say that the infrasound theory not only lacks substantial evidence. The hypothetical course of events that has to accompany the infrasound theory is neither indicated nor at all probable, and this is also shown by all the fantastic explanations that have to be invoked to dismiss the evidence that the Dyatlov pass tragedy was an act of violence amounting to merciless homicide.

I wrote that did interolation analysis of the information from nine "nearest" meteorological stations which are around. I have written "nearest" so-called because the nearest is on distance ~ 90 km (~60 miles). In addition, we observed weather in the winter 2013, 2014 and 2015 and compared that has been fixed on "the nearest" meteorological stations. Then having the information from them and actual weather on a place, we consider what it there could be with big a probability on February, 01st and 02 1959 by analogy. What to object concerning such way, it is necessary to have a minimum 10 times bigger volume of supervision and accurately to specify to us in what there is our error. Other objections simply are not serious and is estimated only by that the opponent wishes that that to object (for the process of objection), but it does not have any information.
To take the information on weather for 100 km from a place, it is equivalent to that it is necessary to take it in Africa. It will be another anyway.

No, it not so. I had to observe similar traces even longer time later and at strong winds. Besides, traces have remained in such places where on them the strong wind did not operate. These are features of a microrelief. They have disappeared for two reasons:
1. Them fell asleep snow and them could not find.
2. Them has destroyed a wind. If you read criminal case that should know that they were not at once about tent. It is that case when from has brought snow because at once on a tent place the slope excess (a little more abrupt part) begins and there snow was postponed. Therefore them there have not seen. Then there was a wavy slope where traces have remained in a concave part of a slope and have been destroyed in a convex part of a slope. After the first bushes have begun, traces have been again filled up by snow. There there is a zone of adjournment of snow. Under snow they were, but they could not be found. Generally speaking, traces were only small sites. They were far apart. But there was a possibility to track a direction and a movement trajectory very approximately. To track only on very small site.
I do not assert that there there was a storm how much I investigated conditions, it turns out so that the wind was ~ 12 … 15 m/s (knots) and temperature ~-15 … 18С (F) on a tent place. In process of movement downwards, the wind has stopped a little above a place where have found Zinu, and the temperature was more low. By my approximate calculations, the cedar practically did not have a wind, but the temperature was ~-20 … 22С (F). It has been checked up in January 2015 when above (where there was a tent) there was a wind 20 … 25 m/s (knots).
Nevertheless, even absence of a storm creates conditions for this purpose that there would be an infrasound. But its parametres in the given conditions very much depend on many factors. For example, from a direction of a wind, temperature of a stream of air, humidity (depend on density of air which very much depends on humidity) an interval in flaws and etc. more precisely

This video is a weather illustration when many surrounding meteorological stations gave speed of a wind nearby 3. 5 km/s. And as to proofs, to be exact, as they are perceived by different people, this concept very subjective. For example, if will occur (I do not want it, this offer hypothetical) that in the winter, on the same place, happens too most with other group always there will be people who will confirm: «It not the proof, the head had other surname … year not is 1959 …. This group not from university UPI … and etc.»
And, even if in it there will be 9 persons, dates and weather … will coincide.

1. No official version existed and is not present in the nature in general. In total article of criminal case that has occurred is written absolutely precisely. But it not concrete instructions on the reason. Therefore everyone finishes thinking about all happened how he wants.
2.  Igor Dyatlov did not make any errors. If you them name, will be the first who could make it. I well enough know all details of a route and I have level of the Master on ski travel already more than 40 years. Those opinions that you read, are no more than personal opinions and they are erroneous. I can prove you it, only I should understand that you have high enough skill level on the given travel. Otherwise it will be conversation about what that concrete, and is simple for the sake of conversation process.

Well so I to you also cite exclusively scientific data. And the information received directly in a place of events in similar conditions. But it does not mean that it is necessary to use any unchecked or impossible information in the nature. And what you can offer? Meanwhile I did not see any answer to some concrete questions which I set in last letters.

And what does not suit you in this case? That you tell all should be made and in other versions. However there it does not turn out at all a logical chain of events. For example, if you want to prove murder should show the real reason because of what it has been made. Then should show possibility to make such on a place of events and the same conditions. But even with the first point (reason) there will be insuperable difficulties. If you consider that all has been made simply because so it wanted, it is very naive representations.
And whenever possible simply to come on this place, you cannot offer anything at all. Because do not know logistics and movement conditions there.

Let's tell all precisely? You do not know it. I know what to get imperceptibly to this area and to find tent at night on a slope it is impossible. As the proof I am ready to see it on a place of events in the winter when you there will arrive. And to get you there should the same as there was group Djatlova, and after it your villains.
You are agree?

Anything improbable there was not. All chain of events turns out naturally. In all it is possible easily it will be convinced there on a place, of winter conditions. But you did not do it, and I did it some times. Therefore it turns out that you show only words which do not prove to be true practice, and I show the supervision on place with the big statistics.

What is the theory of "a shone sphere»? That theory is not present. There are many conversations that where that that was shone. But anything concrete it has not been told. It not the theory, it is simple conversations. There are attempts to prove what that a hypothesis that Woodpeckers the command was lost from what that shone, but there too only one conversations. The facts are absent completely. It has no relation to an infrasound. For a long time already have understood that supervision of these of "shone spheres» to within minutes have coincided with event of start of rockets from the cosmodrome Baikonur. Other supervision was not, there were only conversations about them. But no acknowledgement are present. There are only conversations about it.
You suggest to consider conversations by the facts?

I asked to tell it already some times: you can result what concrete objections of probability of an infrasound? While you tell only the general words in which there is nothing concrete. If it simply your opinion anybody cannot forbid it. However it is not necessary to give out it for what that an objective estimation.
The course of events is already described for a long time, but you did not read it. It is in Russian. I have no possibility it to translate and adapt for understanding specially for you. There very much great volume of the text.
I understand what to convince you is useless, therefore and I am not going to do it later.
8
Infra-sound / Gravity fluctuation / Teleportation / Re: Infrasound? Most unlikely.
« Last post by WAB on June 13, 2018, 12:43:00 PM »

Unfortunately I have possibility to write very seldom on this site.
Therefore I ask to excuse for a delay and the big text at once.
The text is difficult for breaking under paragraphs, therefore I will give completely the objections and judgements.



It is quite a stretch to state that nine resourceful people were scared by the alleged sonic phenomenon to the point that they even cut open their own tent and went out in the cold. It should also be mentioned that there is no proof whatsoever that the cutting of the tent were done by the hikers. Whether or not the tent was cut from the inside - and that is highly uncertain because there was no proper scientific investigation of the tent and its cuts - there is no reason to believe that the students did it. The assumption that the students cut their tent is a good example of an unfounded and rash conclusion.

As for the possibility that infrasound altered the minds of the nine unfortunates so that they performed a series of irrational actions, the one factor is that it is a very unlikely scenario that all nine students were so frightened that they not only fled far away from the tent but also did not return when it would soon after such an exit become clear that there was no danger present.

In addition it is physically impossible that such infrasound could occur on that day since the velocity of the wind on February 1 were insufficient to create the phenomenon. Svetlana Oss refers to the registered reports from three different weather stations: "Nyaksimvol - 6 m/sec, Ivdel - 5 m/sec and Troitsk-Pecherski 5.5 m/sec." According to the proponents of the infrasound theory themselves such velocities cannot create infrasound, and even if these three weather stations are not situated at the Dyatlov pass it has been shown that the combined data from these three stations together give a pretty accurate picture of the conditions at the site of the Dyatlov incident.

There simply was not enough wind in the area during the fateful night to create the hypothetical infrasound effect.

Any proofs does not exist. That there was that that another, except a case of natural damage. It is thought out by people who cannot understand physics of process of reception of damages under natural conditions.
Proofs are not conversations on theme, and material traces which are a consequence of real actions, instead of thought up.
Besides, they would like to find what that criminal events. So it is more interesting to them to understand this case. But between desires and truth there is a science which is called biomechanics of reception of a trauma. To a natural case detailed consideration of topology of traumas deviates. It is impossible to strike in a ju-jitsu a plane of very big sizes or a narrow superfirm subject of the conic form 3,5 х 2 sm (1,5 х 1 in). It will be surrealism.
To accept or not to accept as obvious to any person, it is subjective opinion. The opinion depends only on desire of the person, instead of from an objective reality.
You persistently do not want to accept a condition and the district characteristic because you them did not see and cannot imagine them.

There are no numerous certificates and, especially, objective data that it was a crime. It simply ideas of people which gravitate to conspirology. I studied this case directly on a place, professionally was engaged in researches in the biomechanic, studied all available documents and talked practically to all participants of events who were live to 2006, any objective certificates was not present. There are very indistinct memoirs which are accompanied by touch of hearings and legends. But no confirmed certificates are present. Many people far from professionals think out any improbable versions which are impossible actually. There is no objective information more. I hope that you understand a difference that what that the person speaks words, and in practice it appears, it not so. It is called as subjective opinion. More often this opinion appears incorrect. As it are takes place in this case.

9
Non-DP Related Mysteries! / Re: Chivruay tragedy 1973
« Last post by WAB on June 13, 2018, 08:55:17 AM »
Excuse me, old references do not work. I will try to reboot them now, but I do not know, whether time for it … will suffice me

Has made new references. Now should be are visible to a photo and schemes
10
Non-DP Related Mysteries! / Re: Chivruay tragedy 1973
« Last post by WAB on June 13, 2018, 08:41:31 AM »
Excuse me, old references do not work. I will try to reboot them now, but I do not know, whether time for it … will suffice me
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10