There is another thread about the tent, so I apologize starting a new one at my beginning. There is so much things to think about and with all the information circulating around, I just posted some of my thoughts to begin with.
GlennM; I’ve thought about the tent belonging to the school. The stove was an invent of Igor Dyatlov’s and he was a well known character and leader of the sport club’s other hikes. Maybe they gave him permission to alter the tents together with a stove hole too, because that would mean “a greater good for all the pupils,” if other groups would also benefit the altered tent and maybe even the stove borrowed on later treks. I think that was the idea in those times; to make something for the whole community and this kind of work would be approved by the scholars of the school. Why the stove was never used… yeah. I remember that there was one log inside, but the stove was not installed and found eventually in a backpack inside the tent. Maybe it was going to be installed.
I don’t believe at all of the snow slab theory. The tent, when found, proves this impossible with the skis standing beside it and the tent’s shape being in order (meaning: it stayed on the skis under it and was not moved with the snow downwards). The fear of snow slab: that is plausible. The serious damages to the victims is though impossible to happen on the hill, they couldn’t have moved themselves and would suffer great pain even to move them anywhere at all. Do you cause any more harm to your friends in terrible pain? Hell, no.
There is no any reliable reason to think, that Igor Dyatlov would be so stupid after his other hikes, that the tent was put to the hillside. All the videos you have shared show these unbelievable conditions in Kholat Syakhl (thank you all for these videos).
Explanations to “staging” the tent seams reasonable, because we can’t truly understand how it was to live in Russia those days. After all the information given to us, you could lose your family, job and freedom for a minor reason or even a suspect of it.
With Igor B’s theory: I’ve read about your theories, although it is very hard to follow (even with a translator), so this work continues on by my side. This theory would explain perfectly the yellow markings on the victims and their clothes, which I have wondered. In Finland we don’t have those animals, so I’m not an expert and I will check this theory further. I would also be pleased, if my opinions wouldn’t be ignored right away, because the evidence material is very biased and controversial by the Russian authorities. I’m not here to insult people in any way, and I’m open to any theories.
Tree falling on the tent: Fortunately in my yard are huge trees around it: the trees are birches, pines, oaks, rowans and spruces. I know as a fact, that these trees have grown at least from the year of 1952, because the house was build back then. These trees are HUGE; believe me, one of them is large enough, that I can’t get my arms properly around it (I’m a small woman, though, under 160 cm). These trees are truly 20-30 meters tall and the branches are 3-5 meters long. If that kind of a tree falls to your tent, you just get stucked under your tent with injuries and the branches with needles will also just fall over it. The branches are heavy too, they will make injuries as well, but propably won’t cut the tent. That would need a broken, sharp branch to cut the canvas while falling. I’ve dragged some of this kind of branches myself from the road after falling, and they are seriously heavy.
It would be plausible: you are in a serious trouble after this kind of big and old trees. I always fear about our powerlines and even an electricity company sent us some people to cut out branches around the line. This place is so old, that the powerlines are still with a pole, not underground, as usual in Finland. I’ll try to post pictures of these trees, when I learn how to do that. I suck with computers and they (computers…) truly know that.
I also made tests about walking in socks a year-two years ago in the snow. I live in the southern Finland, so the tests are not comparable in those Russians mountains, but we have a large, open area on the left of our house. My sock-walking made huge pits in the deep, frosty snow (about 80 cm deep) and they lasted that way a few months, when there was minus degrees for a long time period. I didn’t photograph those, silly me. (In this winter that is not possible, the weather being 0 degrees Celsius on and off. Maybe next week, there will be minus degrees again?) Maybe I should take photos now and see the next week also, just to experiment the weather changes in prints anyway…
When there is a storm coming, this area of ours make a hell-break-loose anyway. We had our metallic-made round pavillion (with a roof) to go flying in the air at one time, and that wasn’t a cheap version of a pavillion. There were metal structures, heavy as hell, and the thing just flew several meters in the air against a fence. It truly FLEW high in the air. I saw it from the window and couldn’t believe my eyes. Yeah, it got ruined. The structures within it were bended from the force and the impact. Any welders, here, hmm?
So, the forces with the wind in that mountain… I can somehow understand that without actually visited the mountain, so there is no explanation for Dyatlov’s decision to put the tent there. I believe everyone, who has ever visited the mountains and been in awful situations: it is not a reasonable decision to put the tent there.
The tent had to be elsewhere and the situation with the treeline was logical. There was shelter from the winds and water to boil from the streams. I’ll concentrate my opinions to specific topics forward after this topic, so there will be no extra-made topics with a newcomer. Feel free to answer these thoughts, though, without hesitation.