Dyatlov Pass Forum

Theories Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: Per Inge Oestmoen on March 12, 2018, 08:15:00 PM

Title: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Per Inge Oestmoen on March 12, 2018, 08:15:00 PM
Why did they leave their tent?

That is a crucial question.

The tragedy started with their leaving their camp.

Everything that subsequently happened is connected to their fleeing their tent, and it is probable to the point of certainty that the unusual force that made them leave their shelter was also responsible for their deaths.

Leaving a safe shelter and fleeing out in the arctic winter in the middle of the night without proper clothing and moreover without proper protection of their feet and hands leads to certain death within a short time, and they must all have known that.

Being aware that staying outside half-dressed and with little or no protection for the most vulnerable parts of the body means death, the only possibility is that they found themselves faced with a situation that was so extraordinarily dangerous that staying where they were would result in immediate and violent inescapable death since the danger must have been so great and forceful that nine healthy people could not hope to fight it even if they had axes and knives. They somehow managed to grab with them some few items like matches, but they evidently did not have the time to put on their warm garments.

The immediacy and gravity of the threat they faced on that fateful night is the only possible reason why they left without taking the three to four minutes it would require to put on their winter clothes, boots and mittens/gloves.

What could it be? Let us consider some possibilities.

- An avalanche. That can be ruled out. The terrain was simply not typical of an area where avalanches occur. No avalanches were reported, and no traces of avalanches were found in the area.

- Atmospheric phenomena in the sky. We can also safely rule them out. These nine trekkers were gifted and knowledgeable people who must have been acquainted with both northern lights and other phenomena, and moreover they would not let themselves be scared out from the tent in a deadly vulnerable condition unless an immensely dangerous physical presence forced them to leave.

- Infrasound with subconscious psychological effects that led to their fleeing their tent. It is likely that we can become nervous and even scared by sound frequencies that are capable of subconsciously influencing us. But it is unrealistic to assume that nine intelligent, experienced and evidently mentally as well as physically strong people would let panic overtake them to such a degree that they would all flee. They all knew very well that to leave their shelter in -25 C in the middle of the dark night improperly dressed and without winter mittens, gloves and winter boots is a suicidal action which will invariably lead to death.

- Yetis do not exist, and even if they did they would most likely not be harmful to humans.

- UFOs do exist, but they are natural phenomena, not extraterrestrials that harm and kill people.

- Known animals can also be excluded. Predatory animals would have left characteristic damage on the bodies, and nothing points to an animal attack on any of the nine trekkers while they were alive.

Realistically, judging from the evidence which is known - including the fact that much of the bodily damage found on nearly all of the unfortunate victims was fully compatible with and even characteristic of forceful physical attack - there is only one natural phenomenon that can have caused the trekkers to leave the tent and thereafter caused their deaths. That phenomenon is an assault by human attackers, a powerful, compelling and relentless assault that were intended to kill all the nine members of the Dyatlov group and also achieved that violent and terrible goal.

That is, the tent and its nine occupants must have been attacked by human assailants during the fateful night of February 02, 1959.
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Loose}{Cannon on March 12, 2018, 08:54:06 PM
This is above all the $9,000 question....  I agree

I do however believe there is a very real possiblity of the 9 becoming unfortunate victims of several events or (chain of events) in which lead to their deaths. 

#1.  Most of the intrigue of this mystery is due to the lack of evidence for all theories which leads one to rely on circumstantial evidence as the basis for the theory they subscribe to the most. 

#2.  Its a 50/50 chance said 'compelling' force came from outside of the tent, or within. I would lean more towards the latter given that the easiest explanation is usually correct.  People tend to focus on more on what compelling force would make them go down the slope rather then what made them leave the tent when approaching this.  For me, its a matter of what inside the tent would they want to flee from, not what is outside they would want to flee towards and subsequently be unprepared as described.    What may have been the reason within the tent for said departure I dont know...  But it shouldn't be overlooked yet alone ruled out.

#3.  The injuries.   I also believe most people tend to see the injuries as 'having' to be caused by someone from outside if the group.  In reality, most victims know their attacker in one way shape or form.  I do believe either case can be made, but I do not like to discount one over the other due to lack of evidence.    We know most sustained injuries consistent with hand/hand combat, but honestly we have no idea who inflicted said injuries..... Could have well been amongst themselves.   Another scenario that shouldn't be overlooked. 

Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Armide on March 14, 2018, 11:25:08 AM
Adding onto Per's point: I'm also willing to believe that they were attacked, and I've found a tiny piece of potential evidence that may support it. We all know that the autopsies were done sloppily and that the descriptions are totally vague, but I noticed how on Igor's body– more specifically his ankles- he had brownish scratches and haemorrhaging to the underlying tissue of both his ankles:

"There are scratches of brown-red color in the area of the left ankle joint on the anterior lateral and on the posterior surfaces of both ankles hollowed over the surface of the skin and also on the (illegible) skin, sized 1 х 0.5 cm and up to 3 х 2.5 cm with hemorrhaging into the underlying soft tissues."

The coroner makes no comment on what may have caused this, but I really think that such symmetrical bruises, especially to the extremities seems to show that he may have been bound at the ankles at one point.

Now I'm no doctor, hell, I haven't even looked at anything biology-related in years, but I'm not the only who believes this might be the case. There's an article in Russian [that Google Translate add-on may come in handy here] in which journalists asked a modern forensic expert his opinion on the odd injuries. He clearly say that "he could not have gotten these bruises falling around in the snow, but rather from circular compression around the ankle, for example as a result of binding from a rope."

I think it's a sign that they may have very well been attacked and bound at one point. By whom? No clue, but it is all quite suspicious.

A bit of a tangent on my part but I think it does reinforce Per's point on the group being attacked; their injuries are just too odd to be natural.

LC, I am willing to believe it is possible that they may have fought between themselves, but as with every other murder theory, my question is simply: Why?

Even if there was some head-butting going on between the leader figures, even if there was some weird romantic-triangle situation, why would they risk their lives to beat the daylights out of each other in such a dangerous area? They were educated young people, even if their disdain for each other grew stronger than their maturity to just let it slide, why would they not wait one more week before beating each other up? It's just odd to me.

Going back to the original point, I don't think that the danger came from inside the tent. Unless one of them in the group was some sort of a psychopathic murder  with suicidal intentions, I can't see why the danger would come from inside the tent...
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: SteveCalley on March 14, 2018, 03:50:09 PM
One metric to determine way to conclude the presence of outside combatants is the difference between punches thrown, and blows received. The hikers seemed to have much more fist and knuckle injury than facial strike marks.   They fought well, but lost. There must have been outside persons, or they thrashed the cedar tree!  twitch7
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Per Inge Oestmoen on March 17, 2018, 08:19:41 AM
One metric to determine the presence of outside combatants is the difference between punches thrown, and blows received. The hikers seemed to have much more fist and knuckle injury than facial strike marks.   They fought well, but lost. There must have been outside persons, or they thrashed the cedar tree!


It is very telling that all those found dead bore the unmistakable marks of being attacked. Even Dyatlov, who bore marks that indicate his being tied before death.

As for the signs that there was a fight, the outside of the knuckles is not where you will find marks if people fall in the snow.

Even more telling is the fact that those who supposedly died last, those down at that so-called "den" beside the little brook, show equally unmistakable signs of being attacked with lethal force - with the intention of killing. It is not possible that these injuries could be the result of a fall, they were all recognizable as typical injuries made by humans with evil intent.

It is important to note it does not take a bomb blast or superhuman strength to cause injuries like the broken ribs of Dubinina and Zolotaryov. Repeated very hard blows to the rib cage or the jumping up and down on the person might well accomplish that. The absence of bruises on the rib cages of these two is as expected, as they were rather well dressed. The same is true for Thibeaux-Brignolles. He had massive head trauma with multiple fractures of the skull without damaged skin, and this was natural when he wore headgear that protected the soft tissue but could not stop the forces from the hard blows which crushed bone. The injuries of Kolevatov also demonstrated that he had been attacked. Broken nose couid have resulted from a fall and the same with the deformed neck, but not the wound behind his ear - and together these injuries strongly suggest that Kolevatov was killed with intent.

As for the theory that these people killed each other, there is no evidence that the death of any of the nine trekkers was caused by fighting within the group. The diaries and the photos that were taken all showed that there was a friendly atmosphere within the group.

One detail regarding the tent: It has been proposed that the tent may have been cut from the outside and not from the inside. However, even if the forensic examination of the damage of the tent may have been lacking in scientific rigor we do not have information that enables us to draw conclusions about who cut it.

But, and there is a big "but": Even if the tent was likely cut from the inside, that does not tell us who cut the tent. The knives belonging to the trekkers stayed in their sheaths inside of the tent, and no knife was ever found outside - not at the fire under the cedar and not at the "den" where the last four members of the team had fled from their attackers. It is entirely possible that the attackers cut the tent, either in the process of forcing the nine victims out or because they wanted to render the tent unusable.

This seems to have been a very calculated, well planned killing with strong intent and where the murderers were very careful not to leave any bullet wounds or knife cuts on the bodies.
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Loose}{Cannon on March 17, 2018, 06:40:19 PM
The novice search team was instructed by Ivanov to use pick axes to chop the tent out of the solidified snow/ice.  The contents extracted from the tent prior was then piled onto the tattered canvas and drug over rocks and ice to the helicopter landing pad. 
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: BottledBrunette on March 23, 2018, 03:05:19 PM
Hello.  I'm brand new.  A few years ago, I saw some little blurb about these mysterious deaths, but, didn't give it much thought.  Then, saw something about it, and looked it up, which lead me to purchasing the book, "Dead Mountain" by Donnie Eichar, and doing lots and lots of looking up as much as I can that my computer will let me.  This brings me to the point.  While looking at all the information, there is another author, Keith ****, I think, who wrote a book and has a website.  This is pretty interesting and fit the mystery of the death, and WHY, for the love of Pete, the hikers left their tents, why some of the hikers had skull fractures and weird things wrong with them that would suggest beatings.  On the website, he has all the reasons why the hikers died, sort of like what is on here.  A psychic medium, bought his book, looked at the pictures of some of the hikers, and then did a thing where she contacted them.  Lyuda was the main speaker. She said they were attacked by some men who had spears that were jabbing and stabbing their tent---hence, the strange holes.  She said they were sticking their spears through the tent at them because they were angry that they were there.  Someone, who was in the front of the tent was grabbed and thrashed over, and they forced all of them out of the tent and forced them to walk down the hill.  I guess some of the men tried to fight them, and that's why they have the wounds they have.  Rustem said they killed him.  Zina said she was frozen.  Lyuda said they killed her.  I can't remember what the other ones said, but, she didn't talk to Kolevatov and Zolotaryov, only because the pictures of them were blurry, which I didn't understand.  The men, who were sort of a tribe that lived on the mountain and they kept telling the hikers, they didn't belong there, and that's why they killed them.  Makes sense to me and explains a lot of things.  I'm sure there will be others who don't agree, but, to me, this answers a LOT of the questions of why in the heck, they all ran out not fully dressed for the weather.
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Loose}{Cannon on March 23, 2018, 06:35:04 PM
Hello Bottled!

Here are the tent holes/tears for your viewing.


(https://image.ibb.co/mRwcN7/0_a29d7_f3776cd_XL.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/fXmcN7/0_a29d8_4cb0a327_XL.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/hWaF9n/0_a29d9_6d9c672b_XL.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/fj0Mh7/0_a5932_37268c21_XL.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/gTAMh7/0_a5935_d0f735e2_XL.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/kfbSN7/0_a5936_a8b208ef_XL.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/kBFbFS/0_a5937_2821635f_XL.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/iYFyUn/0_a5938_343761b9_XL.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/neCOvS/0_a5944_1db3e925_XL.jpg)
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: BottledBrunette on March 27, 2018, 08:46:50 PM
Thank you for putting that up for me, Loose Cannon. 
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: CalzagheChick on April 15, 2018, 09:03:34 PM
Hello.  I'm brand new.  A few years ago, I saw some little blurb about these mysterious deaths, but, didn't give it much thought.  Then, saw something about it, and looked it up, which lead me to purchasing the book, "Dead Mountain" by Donnie Eichar, and doing lots and lots of looking up as much as I can that my computer will let me.  This brings me to the point.  While looking at all the information, there is another author, Keith ****, I think, who wrote a book and has a website.  This is pretty interesting and fit the mystery of the death, and WHY, for the love of Pete, the hikers left their tents, why some of the hikers had skull fractures and weird things wrong with them that would suggest beatings.  On the website, he has all the reasons why the hikers died, sort of like what is on here.  A psychic medium, bought his book, looked at the pictures of some of the hikers, and then did a thing where she contacted them.  Lyuda was the main speaker. She said they were attacked by some men who had spears that were jabbing and stabbing their tent---hence, the strange holes.  She said they were sticking their spears through the tent at them because they were angry that they were there.  Someone, who was in the front of the tent was grabbed and thrashed over, and they forced all of them out of the tent and forced them to walk down the hill.  I guess some of the men tried to fight them, and that's why they have the wounds they have.  Rustem said they killed him.  Zina said she was frozen.  Lyuda said they killed her.  I can't remember what the other ones said, but, she didn't talk to Kolevatov and Zolotaryov, only because the pictures of them were blurry, which I didn't understand.  The men, who were sort of a tribe that lived on the mountain and they kept telling the hikers, they didn't belong there, and that's why they killed them.  Makes sense to me and explains a lot of things.  I'm sure there will be others who don't agree, but, to me, this answers a LOT of the questions of why in the heck, they all ran out not fully dressed for the weather.

I totally read that document on the book's website and I loved every second of reading it. I actually felt comfortable with her "telepathic conversation" in a really weird way
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Per Inge Oestmoen on April 28, 2018, 08:04:19 AM
Hello.  I'm brand new.  A few years ago, I saw some little blurb about these mysterious deaths, but, didn't give it much thought.  Then, saw something about it, and looked it up, which lead me to purchasing the book, "Dead Mountain" by Donnie Eichar, and doing lots and lots of looking up as much as I can that my computer will let me.  This brings me to the point.  While looking at all the information, there is another author, Keith ****, I think, who wrote a book and has a website.  This is pretty interesting and fit the mystery of the death, and WHY, for the love of Pete, the hikers left their tents, why some of the hikers had skull fractures and weird things wrong with them that would suggest beatings.  On the website, he has all the reasons why the hikers died, sort of like what is on here.  A psychic medium, bought his book, looked at the pictures of some of the hikers, and then did a thing where she contacted them.  Lyuda was the main speaker. She said they were attacked by some men who had spears that were jabbing and stabbing their tent---hence, the strange holes.  She said they were sticking their spears through the tent at them because they were angry that they were there.  Someone, who was in the front of the tent was grabbed and thrashed over, and they forced all of them out of the tent and forced them to walk down the hill.  I guess some of the men tried to fight them, and that's why they have the wounds they have.  Rustem said they killed him.  Zina said she was frozen.  Lyuda said they killed her.  I can't remember what the other ones said, but, she didn't talk to Kolevatov and Zolotaryov, only because the pictures of them were blurry, which I didn't understand.  The men, who were sort of a tribe that lived on the mountain and they kept telling the hikers, they didn't belong there, and that's why they killed them.  Makes sense to me and explains a lot of things.  I'm sure there will be others who don't agree, but, to me, this answers a LOT of the questions of why in the heck, they all ran out not fully dressed for the weather.


As for the psychic medium, some people believe in such abilities whereas other do not. Therefore I am a little afraid that some will draw the unfounded conclusion that "because a psychic medium said that they were killed, they were not killed." Here I want to point out that even if one does not believe in psychics, people claiming to have such abilities often have good knowledge and understanding and are no less skilled than others when it comes to interpreting a phenomenon or an event.

More importantly, a close and unprejudiced look at all the injuries of the unfortunate nine hikers leads to the inevitable conclusion that they were killed by human attackers. This is evidenced by the autopsy reports and descriptions of injuries and damage to the bodies that can only have been the result of an attack by humans. This fact of murder was for some reason suppressed, and the first investigators refrained from coming out with the conclusion back in 1959. Why it was so is a separate question, and several explanations are possible.

Svetlana Oss has written a book which in English is named "Don't Go There." That book contains a lot of valuable information about how the fact of murder was concealed by the authorities, and is a must read in particular for anyone who might have any doubts that the nine hikers were victims of homicide. I do not agree with all her conclusions, for example no superhuman strength or stimulants are necessary to break the bones of a human being. But Svetlana Oss' references to forensics and descriptions of injuries are solidly founded and are the strongest part of the book. Also, even if her final conclusion about who the perpetrators were is a possibility it is by no means proven.

Personally, I am of the opinion that we cannot say with certainty who murdered the nine students until someone who knows will tell. The thing that can be said with certainty is that they were attacked and murdered.
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: CalzagheChick on May 07, 2018, 08:54:39 PM
This is above all the $9,000 question....  I agree

I do however believe there is a very real possiblity of the 9 becoming unfortunate victims of several events or (chain of events) in which lead to their deaths. 

#1.  Most of the intrigue of this mystery is due to the lack of evidence for all theories which leads one to rely on circumstantial evidence as the basis for the theory they subscribe to the most. 

#2.  Its a 50/50 chance said 'compelling' force came from outside of the tent, or within. I would lean more towards the latter given that the easiest explanation is usually correct.  People tend to focus on more on what compelling force would make them go down the slope rather then what made them leave the tent when approaching this.  For me, its a matter of what inside the tent would they want to flee from, not what is outside they would want to flee towards and subsequently be unprepared as described.    What may have been the reason within the tent for said departure I dont know...  But it shouldn't be overlooked yet alone ruled out.

#3.  The injuries.   I also believe most people tend to see the injuries as 'having' to be caused by someone from outside if the group.  In reality, most victims know their attacker in one way shape or form.  I do believe either case can be made, but I do not like to discount one over the other due to lack of evidence.    We know most sustained injuries consistent with hand/hand combat, but honestly we have no idea who inflicted said injuries..... Could have well been amongst themselves.   Another scenario that shouldn't be overlooked.

First, your point in #2 is amazing. I've never thought of it that way and I think you're absolutely right--perhaps we should be much more careful when considering the question as it quickly does seem to become confused with the other and they're two totally separate animals in terms of possibilities.

Second, you know I haven't really thought much more beyond this until this moment that you bring it up in point #3, but most everybody was pretty bruised and beaten up in some way, shape or form so why couldn't it just be that they were all throwing blows amongst each other--men and women! they all had facial abrasions for the most part and/or bodily harm. Why does it have to be an outsider at all? Because it's unfathomable for us to imagine men beating on women?
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Loose}{Cannon on May 07, 2018, 09:01:52 PM
Now your cookin with peanut oil!   wink1

Its like the US spies VS KGB...... Who done it?  Welp,  who would be angry at the group for betraying their country by handing off secret information?  Its a no-brainer... common sense stuff!
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Armide on May 08, 2018, 10:01:07 AM
I used to be super into the whole self-destruction theory until recently, funny enough. But one thing that just doesn't stick right with me is that it's not that easy to collapse someone's chest with your fists alone. Is it doable? Sure, but probably not likely. I'd actually be more willing to believe that if they were attacked, their attackers had some kind of weapon that could concentrate more pressure onto a single point, like a rifle butt or something.
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: CalzagheChick on May 08, 2018, 01:06:47 PM
I used to be super into the whole self-destruction theory until recently, funny enough. But one thing that just doesn't stick right with me is that it's not that easy to collapse someone's chest with your fists alone. Is it doable? Sure, but probably not likely. I'd actually be more willing to believe that if they were attacked, their attackers had some kind of weapon that could concentrate more pressure onto a single point, like a rifle butt or something.

Oh goodness I don't think they killed one another with crushing blows and cutting out of glossal muscles... I was just thinking that for all of them being flown off that mountain slope battered, cut, and bruised...like they'd all been in some MMA Jiu Jitzu brawl in an octagon cage, why not entertain the fact that they may have all been physical with one another at some point that evening. I mean, I hate thinking that men pummeled women , but Zinaida's face looked like a domestic abuse case. Obviously the rav4 are out of the question in this mystery because of their deterioration (it hurts me more that Lyuda's legacy goes down in the books as a half deteriorated corpse--her final photographs a naked skeleton, breasts exposed as well as autopsy incisions, no dignity... she was beautiful in her own right and it's no surprise her father passed out on the spot when he was at the very least allowed to see that she was properly dressed for burial... just how inhumane! If people are responsible for those kids--to have left them to rot beyond recognition, their families' final memories to be disturbing images that are hard to even comprehend 60 years later after the end of the Cold War era where most Americans' idea of Russian women are the mail-order brides or sex trafficking victims/forced prostitutes and the idea of men are this very cold-hearted, Russian mafioso covered in tattoos that speak a sinister language all their own) as far as judging having been tossed around and battered.

With so many people putting an emphasis on the condition of the bodies it just occurred to me that there doesn't HAVE to absolutely have been another presence at that camp site. They all looked like they'd been in a cartoonesque brawl just shy of a ACME anvil falling on them from the sky.
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Per Inge Oestmoen on May 08, 2018, 07:26:22 PM
I used to be super into the whole self-destruction theory until recently, funny enough. But one thing that just doesn't stick right with me is that it's not that easy to collapse someone's chest with your fists alone. Is it doable? Sure, but probably not likely. I'd actually be more willing to believe that if they were attacked, their attackers had some kind of weapon that could concentrate more pressure onto a single point, like a rifle butt or something.


This injury is one of the illustrative ones:

http://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/Nikolai-Thibeaux-Brignolle-autopsy-report.png

It does not have to have been a rifle butt, it may have been a baton filled with lead or any hard object. But it is not unreasonable to assume that it could have been a rifle butt. It is bordering on the impossible that nine students would leave their tent and walk into their certain death unless they were forced to do so at gunpoint.

It has been suggested that the place was inaccessible and that there were no other people in the area. It is a remote area, but there were many local people in the area - a fact which does not prove that the local indigenous people were responsible for the nine deaths. The point is that this was no desolate no-man's land.

Kholat Syahkl is far from inaccessible if you have a helicopter and/or a trained group of combat ready men on broad mountain skis. Those who orchestrated and performed their murderous work on February 1, 1959 were no ordinary villains, robbers or street thugs. People who are resourceful enough to meticulously and intelligently orchestrate a murder of nine human beings in such a way that it would appear to be a series of accidents, will certainly have the means to access the area.

A human chest can be broken with repeated elbowing or kicks as well as with some hard object, without great difficulty. I have no particular opinion about exactly how Dubinina's and Zolotarev's chests were broken or what tools were used.

But I know that the breaking of a collarbone and subsequent follow-up with lethal techniques is a known pattern when professional murderers do their work. Svetlana Oss refers to a Natalia Sakharova, a policewoman with 25 years of experience, who said: "After reviewing the trauma of the last four I can guess that the murderers were professionals. The ribs fractures were specific - they could have been the result of jumping on the victim's chest. The skull injuries can't be the result of falling upon rocks."

Nathalia Sakharova, a retired police colonel, is not in doubt that the Dyatlov pass incident was murder.
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Loose}{Cannon on May 08, 2018, 07:37:46 PM
Quote
can't be the result of falling upon rocks

Did she say anything about being hit by a wall of ice and being thrown onto rocks?   Or did she just cover the "oopsie I fell down" narrative she was given? 
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: CalzagheChick on May 08, 2018, 08:00:56 PM
"People that had the resources and intelligence to orchestrate a murder to look like an accident..." is rather the problem here:

It doesn't look like any accident. It didn't in 1959, and it still doesn't going into 2019. Not to mention the "why?" It would have been more resourceful to clean up the entire area and dump the bodies in an incinerator of a nearby facility equipped to burn the dead that way there's zero evidence to have been found as the odds of anybody rolling up on that mountain after the fact were slim to none. A quick and brief cleaning then leaving nature to wind-sweep the rest would have been sufficient enough to orchestrate a great mystery case of disappeared individuals. And hell! There'd still have been all the makings for typical aliens theorists had this been a missing persons case instead--prime example of abduction--if they wanted a cold case to follow history. Higher ups could propose that these young students fled to Norway to live abroad (as had been suggested to Yuri Yudin at one point I believe very early on) and that's why there's zero trace of their belongings. Some people could leave tracks suggesting as much. I mean... all of that would have been a heck of a lot more resourceful and much cleaner than the mess that we continue to investigate to this day.
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Per Inge Oestmoen on May 09, 2018, 01:31:50 PM
 
"People that had the resources and intelligence to orchestrate a murder to look like an accident..." is rather the problem here:

It doesn't look like any accident. It didn't in 1959, and it still doesn't going into 2019. Not to mention the "why?" It would have been more resourceful to clean up the entire area and dump the bodies in an incinerator of a nearby facility equipped to burn the dead that way there's zero evidence to have been found as the odds of anybody rolling up on that mountain after the fact were slim to none. A quick and brief cleaning then leaving nature to wind-sweep the rest would have been sufficient enough to orchestrate a great mystery case of disappeared individuals. And hell! There'd still have been all the makings for typical aliens theorists had this been a missing persons case instead--prime example of abduction--if they wanted a cold case to follow history. Higher ups could propose that these young students fled to Norway to live abroad (as had been suggested to Yuri Yudin at one point I believe very early on) and that's why there's zero trace of their belongings. Some people could leave tracks suggesting as much. I mean... all of that would have been a heck of a lot more resourceful and much cleaner than the mess that we continue to investigate to this day.

The Dyatlov pass incident definitely does not look like an accident. To an unprejudiced eye, it never did. You are absolutely right in saying so.

However, it has turned out that the unknown killers were correct if they assumed that they could fool the public into believing that the Dyatlov pass incident was no more than a tragedy, albeit a terrible one. There have been many books, theories and speculations. Most of the theories have evidently been colored by the official first interpretation that the tragedy was a series of - rather improbable - accidents that took nine lives during the evening of February 1, 1959. In my opinion, an analysis of the whole thing indicates that this situation was precisely what the organizers of the killings wanted to accomplish.

If the nine students had just "disappeared" without trace or if they had been shot and put in closed coffins, the public might have viewed it as more obvious that the official conclusion of an accident was wrong and that a terrible criminal act had occurred.

The way the whole thing happened, means that it can always be claimed that this and that injury was caused by the unfortunates stumbling around in the snow and falling almost every meter, non-existent avalanches, groundless infighting between the students themselves, undocumented altered states of consciousness, falling down into a not very precipitous ravine and mysteriously receive injuries that kill several people by damage typical of something very different from a fall. There has been no lack of official attempts and present tendencies to avoid the most probable conclusion, and this is the result of the way this deed was done. If the killers were indeed resourceful and intelligent professionals, they accomplished just what they wanted: To leave the incident in such a way that the murder could not be easily proven. Past and present history is full of arranged "accidents," "suicides," "heart attacks" and other more or less plausible causes of death that in reality were planned and intelligently executed murders. It is conceivable that the Dyatlov pass tragedy was a case in point.

The group which attacked the hikers could have faced logistic challenges - it is possible that they needed to exit the area fast in order to avoid being observed or because they had to leave immediately after the mission was accomplished. It is very possible that the attackers had expected their victims to perish sooner after having been forced out in the cold. When the young and strong students survived longer than assumed because the weather was only moderately cold, the whole process took longer than expected. That scenario would also explain why Dubinina, Kolevatov, Zolotarev and Thibeaux-Brignolle had the most serious injuries - they were better dressed and they had to be expedited fast and forcefully to ensure their death.

But the exact details are uncertainties. We cannot know for sure. It depends on who the murderers were. If they were less sophisticated and non-professionals, then I agree completely with your statements above. Still, it is clear that the killers must have taken great pains to avoid leaving any bullet wounds and knife cuts that would conclusively prove murder. That is a strong indication that the killers were very far from common criminals and thugs.
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: SimplyMadness on August 05, 2018, 02:11:46 PM
It’s interesting that the oldest theory seriously considered by the investigators at the time was that the Mansi people had something to do with it. Why was that a gut reaction? The idea of an armed man/men forcing 9 hostages out of their shelter isn’t hard to believe at all.

Personally I’ve always found the defense of the Mansi to be a bit weak. About how peaceful they are and how they didn’t have a reason or history of attacking anybody. Of course the Mansi as a people might not have attacked them but it would only take a few disgruntled hunters.


But then there are also many things that don’t sit right with me about this theory either. How do you get into fist fights with armed men and not get shot / stabbed? Why would the bodies be dispersed like they were? Why would captors bent on killing their victims allow them to apparently swap clothing and even climb up a tree to make a fire?
Why would killers allow their victims to have cameras?

There are other things but it’s been awhile and I’ve started to forget a few of the details... I just don’t know.

I’m also no medical expert and sometimes the ultra precise descriptions of the wounds get a bit confusing but anytime I’ve been out in the woods or fields hunting or working I always come back with scratches bruises and cuts. You don’t even know you were injured most of the time, it happens fairly easily to the human body. It’s really not hard for me to visualize getting banged and scraped to hell while stumbling around on the side of a mountain at night. 



Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: sarapuk on August 09, 2018, 04:10:24 PM
Obviously its all speculation as to why they left their tent. Any ones guess. Not enough evidence. We have been told that the tent was cut from the inside. But what happened to the tent after it was taken away for investigation ? Could the tent have been cut from the outside ? And if so, then what by ? A knife ? The claws of a creature of some kind ?
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Loose}{Cannon on August 13, 2018, 09:58:39 PM
Quote
Why would killers allow their victims to have cameras?

Common sense....   I like it
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Blkdahlia on August 14, 2018, 01:55:26 AM
Oh the Tent...
Here in America there is an intelligent TV star by the name of Judge Judy. Her saying clings to my mind in reviewing this case. She says “ If something doesn’t make sense, it’s because it’s a lie.”
Scratching my head over this tent, I stumbled across the article :
THE DEATH OF TOURISTS 1959 - KIZILOV GENNADY IVANOVICH
Pilot Titov flew over the area where the tent was found on Feb 24th and did not see a tent.
Interestingly enough, Karpushin flew over the area on the morning of Feb 25th and spotted the tent... with no snow on top and spotted 2 bodies a male and female beside it.
The weather was fine during this time so nothing happened for snow to magically appear over the tent by the time search team arrived on Feb 26.
I suspect the tent was staged and holds no clues as to what actually happened because I cannot fathom any logical reason for the group to cut their way out from the inside while they could easily exit.
The only conclusion I can come to concerning tent is that it’s destruction was not caused by any Dyatlov group members.
The members of the Dyatlov group were mentally sound experienced campers. None of them would destroy their shelter for any reason at all.
The holes in the tent were either made during the sloppy transporting it off the mountain or stratigically places by an outsider or outsiders. Someone wanting to distract from the actual evidence staged the tent scene in order to prevent focus on other clues and create scenarios broadening room for speculation and possibilities.
Personally, I’m inclined to believe Karpushin. It makes far more sense concluding the incident was staged vs. having to explain all of the mysterious unexplainable circumstances surrounding it. Based on the testimony of Karpushin alone I have formed the opinion that the tent is irrelevant because the condition it was found in can be explained in no acceptable way aside from the holes being intentionally done by the individuals who were responsible for the death of Dyatlov group. Removing the tent evidence opens new possibilities and closes old ones.
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: CalzagheChick on August 24, 2018, 07:06:29 PM
Loose Cannon did a beautiful expose of the tent in one of the evidence threads in the materials section (The Tent I believe it's called). You should read it. He blew every one of us away and even convinced many to cross over to the dark side of discrediting the tent as significant in this case.
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: sarapuk on August 25, 2018, 03:30:49 PM
The Tent is a vital piece of evidence, and its missing. Well that is to say its not for public consumption but probably in some vaults somewhere along with other missing evidence.
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: CalzagheChick on August 28, 2018, 09:07:37 AM
Like I said, you'd have to read LC's article on the tent to understand why many of us feel that it should NOT be credited as a critical piece of evidence in the case.
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: sarapuk on August 28, 2018, 06:16:51 PM
i have read all the articles.
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: sarapuk on August 28, 2018, 06:17:05 PM
i have read all the articles.
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: beanie07 on September 03, 2018, 07:23:55 AM
https://translate.google.com.sg/translate?hl=en&sl=ru&u=http://www.alpklubspb.ru/ass/dyatlov.htm&prev=search


Hi guys.. not sure if anyone posted this link before.
Its a russian website dedicated to the dyatlov's incident.
The text is in russian, but google translate was able to translate it fairly well to be understood in english.

Inside, it does seem to have extensive information backed up with detailed research not found in many english sites.
Think its a good trove of info to explore for new insights as to what happened.


https://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?depth=1&hl=en&prev=search&rurl=translate.google.com.sg&sl=ru&sp=nmt4&u=http://www.alpklubspb.ru/ass/dyatlov_12.htm&xid=17259,15700019,15700124,15700149,15700186,15700191,15700201&usg=ALkJrhjkjrBsgpYV9NCO-h-r7UIu_gTymg
This is their explanation as to why the Dyatlovs left the tent.. (sounds highly plausible imo)..


Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: sarapuk on September 03, 2018, 02:18:01 PM
A very detailed article about avalanches. But by all accounts the location and conditions on the hillside where Dyatlov sited the tent were not conducive for an avalanche. Also in most avalanche scenarios the victims are overcome by the avalanche and may or may not survive. The Dyatlov group by all accounts walked or run away from the tent without taking any equipment with them  !  ?  And they did this for a mile.  Surely an avalanche of any force as is inferred in the article would create a different outcome for the Dyatlov group ! ? 
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: beanie07 on September 04, 2018, 10:23:49 PM
The Dyatlov group by all accounts walked or run away from the tent without taking any equipment with them  !  ?  And they did this for a mile.  Surely an avalanche of any force as is inferred in the article would create a different outcome for the Dyatlov group ! ? 

the article at other chapters shared the following:
real life eg for avalanche at seemingly non-conducive locations -
https://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?depth=1&hl=en&prev=search&rurl=translate.google.com.sg&sl=ru&sp=nmt4&u=http://www.alpklubspb.ru/ass/dyatlov_13.htm&xid=17259,15700019,15700124,15700149,15700186,15700191,15700201&usg=ALkJrhgN-AB6Qub_wsy_zK-zcwePyz_mHw

explanation for injuries sustained (at tent site) but yet not incompletely immobile
https://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?depth=1&hl=en&prev=search&rurl=translate.google.com.sg&sl=ru&sp=nmt4&u=http://www.alpklubspb.ru/ass/dyatlov_08.htm&xid=17259,15700019,15700124,15700149,15700186,15700191,15700201&usg=ALkJrhjjh4E69IaygBdZ1Ug3pxjgYUCeiw


It didn't really cover why the 4 most injured were best dressed though.
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: sarapuk on September 05, 2018, 12:46:57 PM
Why did the Dyatlov Group leave their tent  !  ?  The avalanche theory just doesnt seem to add up.  They were experienced outdoors people and would have known the terrain where they were located.  They would not have pitched camp in an area where there was an avalanche risk. 
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: WAB on September 09, 2018, 01:10:26 PM
The Dyatlov group by all accounts walked or run away from the tent without taking any equipment with them  !  ?  And they did this for a mile.  Surely an avalanche of any force as is inferred in the article would create a different outcome for the Dyatlov group ! ? 

the article at other chapters shared the following:
real life eg for avalanche at seemingly non-conducive locations -
https://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?depth=1&hl=en&prev=search&rurl=translate.google.com.sg&sl=ru&sp=nmt4&u=http://www.alpklubspb.ru/ass/dyatlov_13.htm&xid=17259,15700019,15700124,15700149,15700186,15700191,15700201&usg=ALkJrhgN-AB6Qub_wsy_zK-zcwePyz_mHw

explanation for injuries sustained (at tent site) but yet not incompletely immobile
https://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?depth=1&hl=en&prev=search&rurl=translate.google.com.sg&sl=ru&sp=nmt4&u=http://www.alpklubspb.ru/ass/dyatlov_08.htm&xid=17259,15700019,15700124,15700149,15700186,15700191,15700201&usg=ALkJrhjjh4E69IaygBdZ1Ug3pxjgYUCeiw


It didn't really cover why the 4 most injured were best dressed though.

Dear beanie07  this site is devoted not to incident Dyatlov, and it simply site climbers of  city of St.-Petersburg. That you read, this one of variations on a theme incident Dyatlov the author by name is Evgenie Buyanov. It is very old article and not absolutely correct. Evgenie confirms that there was avalanche, however it is not fact. Its this abstract assumptions. It is not true basically. Because I with my companion Alexander Alekseenkov  some times tried different ways to check up it assumptions directly on that place and in the winter. In different months: January, February, March. The result is that there avalanches cannot be basically. It is because there such environment. We investigated snow structure, dynamics of accumulation snow, tried create different loading above the cut site. There were no possibilities even a small motion of snow. If to see all reports of winter travel for last 60 years  anybody never saw any avalanche phenomena on this place and in general in this area of Northern Ural Mountains.
Nearby there are much more abrupt and extended slopes, but also there too anybody never saw any avalanche phenomena. At all did not see any slipping of snow.
Evgenie Buyanov was not on this place in the winter and uses that applies conditions of high mountains with much more abrupt slopes to the assumption. It is objected by almost all qualified travellers on skis which were in this area in the winter, but it disagrees. But he writes articles on an avalanche theme in incident Dyatlov much.

Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: sarapuk on September 29, 2018, 11:29:26 AM
Why did they leave their tent?

That is a crucial question.

The tragedy started with their leaving their camp.

Everything that subsequently happened is connected to their fleeing their tent, and it is probable to the point of certainty that the unusual force that made them leave their shelter was also responsible for their deaths.

Leaving a safe shelter and fleeing out in the arctic winter in the middle of the night without proper clothing and moreover without proper protection of their feet and hands leads to certain death within a short time, and they must all have known that.

Being aware that staying outside half-dressed and with little or no protection for the most vulnerable parts of the body means death, the only possibility is that they found themselves faced with a situation that was so extraordinarily dangerous that staying where they were would result in immediate and violent inescapable death since the danger must have been so great and forceful that nine healthy people could not hope to fight it even if they had axes and knives. They somehow managed to grab with them some few items like matches, but they evidently did not have the time to put on their warm garments.

The immediacy and gravity of the threat they faced on that fateful night is the only possible reason why they left without taking the three to four minutes it would require to put on their winter clothes, boots and mittens/gloves.

What could it be? Let us consider some possibilities.

- An avalanche. That can be ruled out. The terrain was simply not typical of an area where avalanches occur. No avalanches were reported, and no traces of avalanches were found in the area.

- Atmospheric phenomena in the sky. We can also safely rule them out. These nine trekkers were gifted and knowledgeable people who must have been acquainted with both northern lights and other phenomena, and moreover they would not let themselves be scared out from the tent in a deadly vulnerable condition unless an immensely dangerous physical presence forced them to leave.

- Infrasound with subconscious psychological effects that led to their fleeing their tent. It is likely that we can become nervous and even scared by sound frequencies that are capable of subconsciously influencing us. But it is unrealistic to assume that nine intelligent, experienced and evidently mentally as well as physically strong people would let panic overtake them to such a degree that they would all flee. They all knew very well that to leave their shelter in -25 C in the middle of the dark night improperly dressed and without winter mittens, gloves and winter boots is a suicidal action which will invariably lead to death.

- Yetis do not exist, and even if they did they would most likely not be harmful to humans.

- UFOs do exist, but they are natural phenomena, not extraterrestrials that harm and kill people.

- Known animals can also be excluded. Predatory animals would have left characteristic damage on the bodies, and nothing points to an animal attack on any of the nine trekkers while they were alive.

Realistically, judging from the evidence which is known - including the fact that much of the bodily damage found on nearly all of the unfortunate victims was fully compatible with and even characteristic of forceful physical attack - there is only one natural phenomenon that can have caused the trekkers to leave the tent and thereafter caused their deaths. That phenomenon is an assault by human attackers, a powerful, compelling and relentless assault that were intended to kill all the nine members of the Dyatlov group and also achieved that violent and terrible goal.

That is, the tent and its nine occupants must have been attacked by human assailants during the fateful night of February 02, 1959.

How does one make a claim that YETIS dont exist  !  ?  How do we know  ! ?  They could exist.
How does one make a claim that UFO's exist but are not extraterrestial  !  ?  How do we know  !  ?
I thought that the original investigators had ruled out foul play by other humans  !  ?
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: CalzagheChick on October 01, 2018, 07:00:41 PM
Why did they leave their tent?

That is a crucial question.

The tragedy started with their leaving their camp.

Everything that subsequently happened is connected to their fleeing their tent, and it is probable to the point of certainty that the unusual force that made them leave their shelter was also responsible for their deaths.

Leaving a safe shelter and fleeing out in the arctic winter in the middle of the night without proper clothing and moreover without proper protection of their feet and hands leads to certain death within a short time, and they must all have known that.

Being aware that staying outside half-dressed and with little or no protection for the most vulnerable parts of the body means death, the only possibility is that they found themselves faced with a situation that was so extraordinarily dangerous that staying where they were would result in immediate and violent inescapable death since the danger must have been so great and forceful that nine healthy people could not hope to fight it even if they had axes and knives. They somehow managed to grab with them some few items like matches, but they evidently did not have the time to put on their warm garments.

The immediacy and gravity of the threat they faced on that fateful night is the only possible reason why they left without taking the three to four minutes it would require to put on their winter clothes, boots and mittens/gloves.

What could it be? Let us consider some possibilities.

- An avalanche. That can be ruled out. The terrain was simply not typical of an area where avalanches occur. No avalanches were reported, and no traces of avalanches were found in the area.

- Atmospheric phenomena in the sky. We can also safely rule them out. These nine trekkers were gifted and knowledgeable people who must have been acquainted with both northern lights and other phenomena, and moreover they would not let themselves be scared out from the tent in a deadly vulnerable condition unless an immensely dangerous physical presence forced them to leave.

- Infrasound with subconscious psychological effects that led to their fleeing their tent. It is likely that we can become nervous and even scared by sound frequencies that are capable of subconsciously influencing us. But it is unrealistic to assume that nine intelligent, experienced and evidently mentally as well as physically strong people would let panic overtake them to such a degree that they would all flee. They all knew very well that to leave their shelter in -25 C in the middle of the dark night improperly dressed and without winter mittens, gloves and winter boots is a suicidal action which will invariably lead to death.

- Yetis do not exist, and even if they did they would most likely not be harmful to humans.

- UFOs do exist, but they are natural phenomena, not extraterrestrials that harm and kill people.

- Known animals can also be excluded. Predatory animals would have left characteristic damage on the bodies, and nothing points to an animal attack on any of the nine trekkers while they were alive.

Realistically, judging from the evidence which is known - including the fact that much of the bodily damage found on nearly all of the unfortunate victims was fully compatible with and even characteristic of forceful physical attack - there is only one natural phenomenon that can have caused the trekkers to leave the tent and thereafter caused their deaths. That phenomenon is an assault by human attackers, a powerful, compelling and relentless assault that were intended to kill all the nine members of the Dyatlov group and also achieved that violent and terrible goal.

That is, the tent and its nine occupants must have been attacked by human assailants during the fateful night of February 02, 1959.

How does one make a claim that YETIS dont exist  !  ?  How do we know  ! ?  They could exist.
How does one make a claim that UFO's exist but are not extraterrestial  !  ?  How do we know  !  ?
I thought that the original investigators had ruled out foul play by other humans  !  ?

Because a UFO by definition is simply put an Unidentified Flying Object. It just means that those who witness these phenomena can't explain it and by all accounts neither can the government (in terms of weather balloons, military exercises, etc.) It can very well be an unexpected piece of space debris coming back into the atmosphere. The greatest mistake you can make here is to automatically assume that UFO means extraterrestrial aircraft/spacecraft. That's what was said. UFO's are completely natural and common occurrences.

I'm going to agree with the original poster as well. Yeti and other cryptids have no known, definitive existence on planet Earth so for all argumentative purposes, Yeti do not exist. It's a folk tale told to scare young children across several cultures just like Santa Clause.
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Loose}{Cannon on October 02, 2018, 06:05:28 AM
I understand that Santa can be used as a manipulation tool....  (be good or Santa won't bring you any presents), but whats the purpose of scaring children with Yeti?
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: sarapuk on October 02, 2018, 12:24:05 PM
I and Iam sure that there are many people out there who are open minded about the possibility of extraterrestrial beings. Top scientists have said that they believe in the possibility of such beings.  Yes UFO means unidentified flying object. As for the Yeti and other names used to describe the large ape like creatures apparently seen and sometimes encountered by countless people over hundreds of years, Iam sure that such creatures, imaginary or not, would not just be used to scare children.
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: sarapuk on October 04, 2018, 05:33:17 PM
Svetlana Oss's Blog, page 2
June 10, 2015
Deranged State
There is some evidence that members of the Dyatlov group were in a deranged state when they left the tent.  The idea first came to Lev Ivanov’s mind when he was conducting his investigation back in 1959.   Many years later when retired in Kazakhstan he made a statement that the UFO was responsible for the tragedy. But his very first version was murder  yet not an ordinary one. He suggested that something or somebody first affected their minds and than physically destroyed some of them.


He told about it to Vladislav Bienko, 77, (same age with Dyatlov) who now lives in Minsk. Below is Bienko’s statement given recently to the Komsmolskaya Pravda newspaper. What is very ineresting in this interview is that Ivanov was on friendly terms with Bienko and thus shared his real thoughts with him.


Bienko fairly remembers the winter of 1959 and all of  the group members because he was supposed to go with them to that expedition to Otorten. Three days before the expedition Bienko was forbidden to participate by the University Komsomol Organization. The reason was his previous skipping obligatory work for students. He was sent to work instead of going with his friends.
“There was nothing I could do about it, “he said,” All my provision and equipment I gave to Zolotarev who replaced me”


“We know that you personally have worked with the investigator Ivanov?”


– The prosecutor criminologist Lev Nikitich Ivanov was young, intelligent and honest. Once the first news of the tragedy arrived, he involved me with his work. While he had to be present on the scene, he sent to me the first photographic film from the camera of Yuri Krivonischenko. I was in Sverdlovsk.  The film had to be developed urgently, so I developed it  that very night at my apartment and printed photos of the last day of the group. Truth be told, in my heist I poorly washed paper and the photos now got yellowish.


– Amazing! Why Ivanov has entrusted the film to you, the student, rather than to any forensic expert?


– I do not know. Perhaps he trusted me. And secondly, he was keen to see ASAP-what was there, in the photos? Maybe their departmental lab was not working due to the weekend. Also Ivanov asked me to look through some newspaper articles about UFOs before his departure to the scene. Such reports have appeared in some newspapers of the northern district of Sverdlovsk region, including the major newspaper “Tagil Worker”. Later, when Ivanov returned to Sverdlovsk, he requested additional information from police stations and meteorological services about possible UFO observations in the period close to 1 February 1959. But no one could explain. Ivanov even wrote to the Ministry of Defence of the USSR: are those bright flying spheres, which so many people have eyewitnessed, have anything to do with military or space rocket, or even with any aircraft?


He sent the request and did not expect an answer. But the answer came quickly, in just a couple of weeks, which surprised Ivanov a lot. He was informed that no launches of the  missiles in the area was carried out. It is possible that it was exactly so, because witnesses say that they saw bright spheres above the horizon, which means that even if the was a rocket, it flew far away from the scene of the tragedy. Had it been in the Northern Urals, then the phenomenon would have been visible in meridian. Ivanov  questioned Mansi as well if they had seen something unusual? He collected all the possible information. And he tried to understand what was the reason? He was convinced till the end that the guys left the tent deliberately and in good health, except for the mind. That is to say, they were physically fine but off their heads. But what was the cause of this insanity remained a mystery for Ivanov.  Apparently, it is only in the forest when their the ability to think sensibly returned to them. They tried to go back into the tent, but it was too late – the wind and frost destroyed them.


– So what was his version at that time?


– When Ivanov returned from the scene of the tragedy, he told me that if he was superstitious, he would believe in devilry (чертовщина which means involvement of the infernal). What happened with the guys could not be result of natural processes. The slope where there was a tent is impossible to call steep. Only the mentally sick could imagine an avalanche there…


After Ivanov visited the spot  where the last four bodies were found, and came back, I did not recognize him. From an energetic acumen and socialable person, he turned into a depressed, indifferent. He seemed to have aged for ten years. In responce to my questions, he only said, “You know, Slava, it seems to me that there were two impacts of the elemental forces unknown to us: first – it was a mental impact bs it kicked them out of the tent just out of the blue, and the second – the physical impact that destroyed the three who went away from the main group”.


– Perhaps, Ivanov learned something that was a state secret?


– I can not say.
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Jacques-Emile on November 22, 2018, 10:53:47 AM
The enemy here in understanding the case is impatience, not some bugaboos or cryptids.
Think of the events as scenes in a play. We do not know their correct order, the pages have been shuffled.
The scene at the tent is remarkably placid. Only the damage to the tent portends anything ominous. The searchers found the tent first, they suspected to find the party elsewhere.
Nothing at all would seem weird had someone been there alive. The cuts in the tent draw so much attention because of their uniqueness. They are really not that peculiar.
Evidence suggests that the entire party was there together. They then appear to have left the scene in a fairly orderly manner. Nobody seems to have stayed behind.
They left either voluntarily or due to a compelling force which left no physical evidence at the scene.
These are all clear and self-evident assertions, I say. If we do not study the parts prudently and skeptically, we blunder into all manner of nonsense.
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: sarapuk on November 22, 2018, 12:35:46 PM
We need to be OPEN MINDED, especially with the Dyatlov Mystery.  Also it means that we need to be in a position to accept that maybe what happened was beyond our present understanding of physical reality. So it means that we must look at the possibility that one reason the Dyatlov Group left the TENT was because they were scarred to death by something, and that something may not have been another person or persons.
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Nigel Evans on November 22, 2018, 12:39:06 PM
The answer to why they left must explain these observations :-

Yuri Koptelov, the rescue team member who found the first two bodies, recently made a drawing of the footprints nearest to the tent as they appeared to him and Sharavin. It seemed that the people were not walking but standing in one row, shoulder to shoulder.



Slobtsov’s statement, taken from the criminal case file, is as follows: The footprints were not proceeding in single file, but were abreast in a horizontal line, sometimes closer and converging, sometimes not. I had the feeling the hikers had left the tent in an organized state. It also seems that they were scared, possibly even holding each other by the hand in the darkness. Captain Chernyshov states in his testimony for the criminal case: ‘For about thirty or forty metres I saw very good human footprints walking abreast in parallel chains, as if they were holding each other.’



Svetlana Oss likes the "at gunpoint" theory to explain the above. I of course have other ideas :), from the above it would seem that they had to immediately evacuate the tent and could not return but could stand and observe it close by before electing to descend to the forest in an orderly manner to escape the cold.

It's my assumption that Koptelov's drawing would indicate which way they were facing and that it would be towards the tent.

"as if they were holding each other" if the two Yuri's were walking wounded and assisted by two other members (one each side) then you have two chains of three people right there.
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Jacques-Emile on November 22, 2018, 01:37:31 PM
Also it means that we need to be in a position to accept that maybe what happened was beyond our present understanding of physical reality.   Openness of mind is the best way to think about things.  I see that Coral Hull, a student of case,  http://www.coral-hull.com/testimony/fallenangelsexposed/dyatlovpass/dyatlov-2.html (http://www.coral-hull.com/testimony/fallenangelsexposed/dyatlovpass/dyatlov-2.html) considered the flight from the tent this way.
Quote
In the state of semi sleep and bewilderment, inside the tent, things were about to become very chaotic very quickly, but not before Zolotaryov and Thibeaux-Brignolles had a chance to tell the group, that they had seen UFOs when they had been outside. There would have been no time for questions, speculation and/ or disbelief from the other group members as a 'Bigfoot' screamed again, perhaps towards the end of the tent where the entrance / exit was located as the light outside suddenly increased.

Terrfied and caught unawares, several group members would have grabbed for their knives, in order to make eye sized slits in the tent, to see that was going on, without actually going outside. In typical 'Bigfoot' encounters, where the manifesting entity, has approached campers, they always stay inside the tent, treating the 'Bigfoot' as a wild animal and hoping that it will go away. They do not expose themselves to the unknown entity, by leaving the tent, in order to investigate. They are usually too afraid to do anything. The Dyatlov group was no different, but they were intrepid and curious [rather than frozen in fear], so they used their knives, to make small eye level slits, in the side of the tent, in order to see what was going on. Whatever was going on outside, was shocking enough, to have group members take the drastic action, of cutting slits, into their only means of protection, against the deadly cold.

Okay, so what if they were suddenly lit up by a powerful light, like you often hear about in 'UFO' abduction cases, that they could see through their tent walls? What if they saw silhouettes of beings, that they knew were not of this earth? They may see their tent surrounded by ETs, strange people, or there may even be manifesting demonic entities, in physical celestial bodies. We can only look at patterns, but we will never know what they were seeing, under the effect of the fallen angels, who are manifesting as balls of light, spheres, fireballs, fake UFOs. Something is outside the tent. There are lights, sound, the tent may begin to shake. Whatever it is, it must be astonishing to have these people, make slits in the side of the tent, in order to look out. What are they seeing and hearing? It could be anything, since fallen angels can readily create false visions, hallucinations, altered states of consciousness and OBEs.

I believe that the fallen angels, in orb form, would have made conditions inside the tent extremely uncomfortable, perhaps life threatening, as they began to cook the group, with a blast of electro magnetic microwave radiation, so that in order to escape the searing heat and pain, the individuals still holding knives, that they had used made the slits with, simply slashed the tent so that they all poured outside into the snow, in order to avoid the agony, of being cooked alive, inside the structure.
That is more than reasonable to explain the injuries, openly.  Many theories are possible.
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Nigel Evans on November 23, 2018, 03:22:11 AM

which left no physical evidence at the scene.

Not entirely there is the hot spot of course.
(http://www.viafanzine.jor.br/002imag/03_13/dyatlov4_cedro.jpg)
(http://www.viafanzine.jor.br/002imag/03_13/dyatlov4_nodoa.jpg)
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Loose}{Cannon on November 23, 2018, 05:46:23 AM
Your looking at a darker area Nigel.   Darker areas are created by shadows. Shadows are a result of a relatively low easterly horizon sun (morning), and chunks of snow protruding upward from the surface around it. 

As you can see, these men are digging into hard chunky snow.  Is it unreasonable to assume they were tossing their shovel contents in one area, or that they were flinging it up hill at the investigators? 

Im reminded of the dogs I've buried throughout my life time.  Anyone having ever dug a hole knows the common sense at play here.

Or would it be more reasonable to assume that a piloted fireball parked itself there and the search crew and investigators ignored it? 
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Nigel Evans on November 23, 2018, 07:46:32 AM
Your looking at a darker area Nigel.   Darker areas are created by shadows. Shadows are a result of a relatively low easterly horizon sun (morning), and chunks of snow protruding upward from the surface around it. 

Translated from - http://www.viafanzine.jor.br/site_vf/pag/5/dyatlov_part04.htm
He's making the case for the snow having been warmed up and the resultant slush corrugated by the wind before refreezing.
This of course fits with the longevity of the footsteps, powder at say -20C shouldn't behave like that.



" 1) Presence of a heat source.

 

Weather Report for Ivdel raion:

 

"On the night of 1st. of February 1959, the air temperature dropped almost twice as compared to the morning, reaching -20, -21 ° C. Compared with morning values, air humidity was low, 56%, visibility was of 8 points (on average). Precipitations fell less than 0.5 mm. Wind north-northwest 3 m / sec. Blizzards, hurricanes or storms were not observed . "

 

On the slopes of the Mountain of the Dead, the temperature, obviously, was much lower, due to height and wind. With a high degree of certainty we can add here from five to seven degrees, which means that the temperature in the dyátlovtsy tent was approaching minus 30 degrees. In the conditions of a strong cold, the humidity is low (the indicated value is of 56 percent), and the snow, dry and in powder. There should be no ice at all.

 

But what do we see?

 

- Near the entrance to the tent, there was an ice patch in the shape of sharp, parallel "ribs" (such icy formations are called internationally from Sastrúgui , which is the term of Russian origin). First responders paid attention to this ice islet, with a diameter of about four meters. The ice was very strong, ribbed, as if it were freezing in the form of waves; so that on these sharp "ribs" the snow blocks launched by rescue workers were easily broken off when they were looking for bodies near the tent.

 

Location of the incident. On his back is the promoter Vassili Tempalov and Evgeny Maslennikov. The blue rectangle indicates the

tent installation; the pink oval shows the boundaries of the icy stain near the entrance of the tent; the green line shows the route

of the escape from the tent unto the cedar; 1 - folded tent; 2 - dyátlovtsy backpacks and skis ; 3 - icing, 4 - cedar.

 

Detail of the most iconic stain near the entrance of the tent (enlarged image).

 

Where did this icy stain come from? What was the source of heat that created it?

 

In addition to this icy bruise, a few tens of meters around the tent, the snow was covered with a hard crust of ice. Students Slobtsov and Sharávin, who found the tent, could not approach it on skis! From the Auspiya valley, with no difficulty, they passed skis all over the slope, but near the tent of the Dyátlovtsy they had to take off the skis and walk the last dozens of meters on foot, using the rods to lean. To form this ice crust, a source of heat was also needed to melt the snow, which then froze in the strong cold. But the Dyátlovtsy themselves, on February 1, approached the place to install the tent precisely on the skis, when then, this place had not yet suffered any external impact. In the photo of the tent installation, we see a very dry and powdery snow.


 
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Loose}{Cannon on November 23, 2018, 08:31:39 AM
Ah yes....   the city dwelling reporter that came out to the bush days if not weeks after the discovery of the tent who was ignorant to the conditions of the area.  I would ask...  where is his newspaper article from Feb 1959 stating all these unsubstantiated 'facts' nobody seemed to mention in the actual case files interrogation/testimonies?    This is nothing more then wild speciation in which you cherrypick to drive a narrative.

The tent was found nearly a MONTH later.  Did the sun come out prior to the tents discovery which glazed over the top layer of snow?  Where is all the evidence of these facts within the case files??

Side note...  you 'should' know given your degree.  Heat is NOT the only thing that melts ice.

Are your quotes in the previous post the reporters actual words, or someone regurgitating the reporters statements and twisting them into half-truths? 
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Loose}{Cannon on November 23, 2018, 08:43:10 AM
Proof of the authors ignorance...

shows this picture. 

(http://www.viafanzine.jor.br/002imag/03_13/dyatlov4_cedro.jpg)

and states this....

 
Quote
blue rectangle indicates the tent installation; the pink oval shows the boundaries of the icy stain near the entrance of the tent; the green line shows the route of the escape from the tent unto the cedar;

Fact check.....   The blue rectangle is NOT where the tent was located.  It was locates where the men are digging out the skis layed down as a base to the tent!!!!!!

WILD SPECULATION BUILT UPON FALSE FACTS
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Nigel Evans on November 23, 2018, 09:00:47 AM
This is nothing more then wild speciation in which you cherrypick to drive a narrative.

Ah there's nothing like the hot spot to get you upset...   grin1

I'm not driving a narrative just making the point to Jacques-Emile that there is some physical evidence at the scene (albeit contested) which fits with the peculiar longevity of the footsteps (snow warmed close to melting point before refreezing?). That spot looks like sastrugi to me and fits with the claim that they couldn't ski over the vicinity of the tent on approach. As we both know the official report is a confection with omissions. Now how the sastrugi got there is open to debate but it does fit with electro magnetic phenomena theory of course.
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: sarapuk on November 23, 2018, 03:00:09 PM
I assume that we all agree that the leaving of the TENT is the most important event of this mystery. Unless we are all missing something, the action starts at the TENT. The leaving of the TENT was the beginning of the end for the Dyatlov Group. We will keep coming back to the TENT throughout the investigation.
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Monika on December 03, 2018, 04:47:16 AM
Hello.

I like to join your group.
It seems to me as their tent was in death danger. And out of the tent there was no danger (at least they thought). I am inclined to the idea of a some little-known physical phenomenon (e.g. a plasmoid lighting) that, due to metallic ski rods in the corners of the tent, could create a high voltage on the tent (the tent was under the electric current). That would explain why they could not stay in the tent or even take their things out. It is possible that they waited a while before the tent, but the situation did not change, so they must went away from the tent and from open space. Because they thought there was no other danger outside the tent, they did not have to run and go by organized move to the forest.
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Nigel Evans on December 03, 2018, 05:18:34 AM
Hello.

I like to join your group.
It seems to me as their tent was in death danger. And out of the tent there was no danger (at least they thought). I am inclined to the idea of a some little-known physical phenomenon (e.g. a plasmoid lighting) that, due to metallic ski rods in the corners of the tent, could create a high voltage on the tent (the tent was under the electric current). That would explain why they could not stay in the tent or even take their things out. It is possible that they waited a while before the tent, but the situation did not change, so they must went away from the tent and from open space. Because they thought there was no other danger outside the tent, they did not have to run and go by organized move to the forest.
Hi Monika, yes St Elmo's fire could explain why they left the tent and appear to have stood in a row a little distance away before walking down the hill. But the "electro magnetic phenomena narrative" would seem to have to be expanded to include nitrogen oxides and Ivanov's fire orbs = rollers imo.

You make a good point with "their tent was in death danger. And out of the tent there was no danger (at least they thought)". This would also seem to be the case at Chivruay.

Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Jacques-Emile on December 03, 2018, 06:36:41 AM
Except one opposite which is Faraday cage. A cube made of conducting material excludes all electrical charge. The tent is not in Faraday cage exactly; but the more the similarity is, the more it excludes charge.
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Nigel Evans on December 03, 2018, 08:14:56 AM
Except one opposite which is Faraday cage. A cube made of conducting material excludes all electrical charge. The tent is not in Faraday cage exactly; but the more the similarity is, the more it excludes charge.
But if the surrounding snow is a say a metre deep and hence insulating the ground from the sky except where a tent has been dug down into the snow with a metal stove and other metal objects laid on it's base together with wet clothing and with possibly increasing moisture condensing from breathing. Then you have an earth. Then if you have ionised atmospheric nitrogen oxides they could be attracted into the tent to follow the earth. Then depending on how people are sitting versus lying on the floor there would be an asymmetric exposure to said oxides which (imo) seems to be indicated in the funeral/morgue photos. This could result in the group realising something was wrong with the inside of the tent and electing to stay outside and even exiting very quickly. And something similar happened at Chivruay.
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Loose}{Cannon on December 03, 2018, 08:59:00 AM
Quote
Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?

To complete their top-secret mission of photographing piloted fireballs.........   DUH!!!!

 bigjoke
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Nigel Evans on December 03, 2018, 09:39:38 AM
Quote
Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?

To complete their top-secret mission of photographing piloted fireballs.........   DUH!!!!

 bigjoke
Close but no cigar. clap1
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Jacques-Emile on December 03, 2018, 12:03:33 PM
Convince Gauss and Faraday not moi.
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Nigel Evans on December 03, 2018, 12:34:24 PM
Convince Gauss and Faraday not moi.
I don't think they had a canvas tent with air gaps in mind, more a metal mesh? I think you'd have a problem convincing them.
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Jacques-Emile on December 03, 2018, 01:00:51 PM
Aluminium is a metal, no?  Gauss and Faraday thought that it was. If electrics are just magick, though, your argument is persuasion indeed.
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Nigel Evans on December 03, 2018, 01:15:37 PM
Aluminium is a metal, no?  Gauss and Faraday thought that it was. If electrics are just magick, though, your argument is persuasion indeed.
What aluminum?

Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Star man on December 13, 2018, 11:35:34 PM
Why did the Dyatlov group leave their text.

Whatever it was it must have been compelling.

It was either something so scary that it caused them to panic and risk dying of hypothermia or they were forced.

I struggle to see how a psychotic drug or even a gas could have affected them all the same way and caused them all to leave at the same time without adequate clothing.
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Star man on December 18, 2018, 04:38:55 AM
What about a Siberian Tiger stumbling in or near the camp site?  I know there were no animal tracks found anywhere but maybe it didn’t follow them down the slope and the investigation missed them or they were covered in snow? It would explain why they left the site and did not want to collect their clothes  would also explain choosing a tall cedar tree to make a camp at
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Nigel Evans on December 18, 2018, 05:47:32 AM
I struggle to see how a psychotic drug or even a gas could have affected them all the same way and caused them all to leave at the same time without adequate clothing.
If it was an acrid gas (O3, NO2) you have a plausible reason for leaving the tent urgently. A dose of NO2 at 200ppm is eventually fatal if untreated. Shavarin stated that there was evidence that they stood in a line some distance away. The NO2 narrative would be that this was outside of the denser (acrid) section of the plume looking at the tent wondering what to do. If nitrous oxide (slightly sweet) was still present then it would have affected them equally (except possibly for Nicolai and Semyon who are presumed to be elsewhere. The condition of the snow is used by the NO2 narrative to suggest that they were warm and continued to be as they walked down (persistent footsteps) (these gases are heavier than air and would tend to flow downhill into the forest). At the forest the temp has cooled. NO2 has gone. (bp 21C) but N2O (bp -89C) is still present and continuing to come down the hill possibly intermittently. Hence evidence of silly behaviour, people highly experienced in fieldcraft waste lots of matches lighting a fire. Climbing a tree, falling out of a tree. The narcotic effect would be intermittent. Sometimes they would behave sensibly, sometimes foolishly.
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Star man on December 19, 2018, 11:41:45 PM
How long do the effects of N2O last?  My experience knowledge indicates that it doesn’t last that long. So if they were exposed to such a gas in the tent I can’t see the effects lasting long after they left?  Also the concentration outside the tent couldn’t be that high given dilution factors in open air.
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Nigel Evans on December 20, 2018, 02:26:34 AM
How long do the effects of N2O last?  My experience knowledge indicates that it doesn’t last that long. So if they were exposed to such a gas in the tent I can’t see the effects lasting long after they left?  Also the concentration outside the tent couldn’t be that high given dilution factors in open air.
I think the narrative would have to be that the nitrogen oxides were being continually produced for a considerable period - 1 or 2 hours. The gases we're interested in are heavier than air and so would tend to follow the slope down to the forest (the narrative requires the local wind direction to be from the west). So they're getting occasional or regular balloon fulls over that period. It could be intermittent. It only has to be sufficient to create "combat injuries", match waste, poor tree climbing and perhaps biting off the skin from the back of your hand. Granted he would have been in strong pain but completely biting off the skin from the back of your hand hints at a lack of rationality imo. Then he died with the skin in his mouth. Nitrous oxide can kill you in seconds if sufficiently concentrated. I like the idea that he got enough exposure to it to decide to climb the tree but several metres up got a much stronger dose that caused him to lose control and he fell.
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: sarapuk on December 20, 2018, 02:56:29 PM
How long do the effects of N2O last?  My experience knowledge indicates that it doesn’t last that long. So if they were exposed to such a gas in the tent I can’t see the effects lasting long after they left?  Also the concentration outside the tent couldn’t be that high given dilution factors in open air.
I think the narrative would have to be that the nitrogen oxides were being continually produced for a considerable period - 1 or 2 hours. The gases we're interested in are heavier than air and so would tend to follow the slope down to the forest (the narrative requires the local wind direction to be from the west). So they're getting occasional or regular balloon fulls over that period. It could be intermittent. It only has to be sufficient to create "combat injuries", match waste, poor tree climbing and perhaps biting off the skin from the back of your hand. Granted he would have been in strong pain but completely biting off the skin from the back of your hand hints at a lack of rationality imo. Then he died with the skin in his mouth. Nitrous oxide can kill you in seconds if sufficiently concentrated. I like the idea that he got enough exposure to it to decide to climb the tree but several metres up got a much stronger dose that caused him to lose control and he fell.

But you seem to have conjured up this gas and then developed your speculation  !  ?  There is absolutely NO EVIDENCE to back this up, and I still believe it to be erroneous.  It just doesnt seem to make sense.  The GAS cannot have caused all the EVENTS. Even if it caused the EVENT of leaving the TENT then it still seems completely IMPLAUSIBLE that all the group would completely abandon their safe refuge and go downhill a mile without their personal belongings and clothing for SURVIVAL.
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Nigel Evans on December 20, 2018, 03:16:16 PM
There is absolutely NO EVIDENCE to back this up,
Yes there is, the dark orange skin has few explanations. One of them is NO2 converting to nitric acid and interacting with the keratin on the skin.


The GAS cannot have caused all the EVENTS.
NO2 isn't an explanation for the ravine injuries, but it can explain everything else.

Even if it caused the EVENT of leaving the TENT then it still seems completely IMPLAUSIBLE that all the group would completely abandon their safe refuge and go downhill a mile without their personal belongings and clothing for SURVIVAL.
Not if the tent is surrounded by acrid gas which is affecting their breathing. Enlarged aortas suggests cardio vascular distress. Yuri D's foam suggests pulmonary edema.
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: sarapuk on December 20, 2018, 03:41:29 PM
There is absolutely NO EVIDENCE to back this up,
Yes there is, the dark orange skin has few explanations. One of them is NO2 converting to nitric acid and interacting with the keratin on the skin.


The GAS cannot have caused all the EVENTS.
NO2 isn't an explanation for the ravine injuries, but it can explain everything else.

Even if it caused the EVENT of leaving the TENT then it still seems completely IMPLAUSIBLE that all the group would completely abandon their safe refuge and go downhill a mile without their personal belongings and clothing for SURVIVAL.
Not if the tent is surrounded by acrid gas which is affecting their breathing. Enlarged aortas suggests cardio vascular distress. Yuri D's foam suggests pulmonary edema.

What about DECOMPOSTION conditions, surely that could cause such skin discolouration  !  ? 
I dont subscribe to the idea that the GAS theory caused all the EVENTS except the Ravine Event.
Well that is an interesting theory regarding the TENT being surrounded by GAS but I dont subscribe to that theory. In the First World War there are many harrowing stories of GAS ATTACKS but its interesting that the victims still managed to stay fully clothed etc etc etc etc.
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Nigel Evans on December 21, 2018, 07:52:31 AM

What about DECOMPOSTION conditions, surely that could cause such skin discolouration  !  ? 
Possibly with Lyudmila, but with Yuri D and Zina it can be discounted. The skin changed colour after the morgue photos but only on the hands and face. So decomposition doesn't fit. Some idiot mortician painting their hands and faces with iodine perhaps. I can't think of anything else. Feel free to give it a try.

I dont subscribe to the idea that the GAS theory caused all the EVENTS except the Ravine Event.It's not for everyone...

Well that is an interesting theory regarding the TENT being surrounded by GAS but I dont subscribe to that theory. In the First World War there are many harrowing stories of GAS ATTACKS but its interesting that the victims still managed to stay fully clothed etc etc etc etc.WW1 gas attacks didn't intoxicate?
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Star man on December 21, 2018, 04:44:24 PM
I still think a high scoring candidate for why they left their tent is the military test of a low yield tactical nuclear device.  These weapons were designed to minimise physical damage ( albeit it is still a very big explosion) equivalent of several kilotons.  An air burst of such a device at even a couple of km from their camp site should have the desired effect.  They would be hit with a heat flash that would not have burned them but could possibly cause blindness if stared at directly.  The blast would knock them around in the tent  like someone shaking a bag of wall nuts but would not been sufficient to kill them.  The wind blast would buffet the tent and be enough to throw anyone standing up outside.  The shock wave would likely be sufficient to cause permanent damage to ear drums and hearing.  And they may have been exposed to a significant if not lethal dose of neutron radiation.  At extreme high levels the radiation could have an immediate effect on them, including their nervous systems, causing confusion, disorientation etc.

If after the heat, flash, blast and wind blast they emerged from their tent, they would have seen a huge fireball in the sky.  This may have been enough to cause them to panick and flee from the camp site. 

It is at this time in history that the west were developing these weapons.  Between 1958 and 1961.  It is likely that the russians were also experimenting with these weapons.

Evidence to look for would include a large area of melted ice directly below the detonation point.  The ice may have melted and then froze again forming an icy crust underneath any snow that fallen after the event.

Fallout from the device would remain highly radioactive for about 2 weeks after which it would be safer to reoccupy the area.  Even so depending on fallout plume dispersion, there would still be evidence today if the right core samples were taken and analysed.

There is is circumstantial evidence that different groups of people, some 70km away witnessed orange orbs in  the sky in the direction of the pass that night.  Also Ivanovo later said that he noticed that some of the trees had scorch marks on the tops. 

In terms of the victims if they had been exposed to high levels of radiation, the symptoms would include the rapid deterioration of the stomach lining, intestines as well as the immune system leading to rapid and serious infections of the blood.  This could have killed within 2 days to a few weeks.  The cold was even a bigger threat that night so this would have killed them before any radiation sickness.

The government would certainly not want any probing investigation that may lead to the development of their new technology, or that any tests caused the deaths of these kids.  It would be a good reason to cover it up and shut it down, and ban access to the area to stop people being exposed to any radioactive fallout.

It's also interesting that although the radiation found on the cloths of some of the victims was only minor, that the helicopter pilots refused to take some of the bodies onto the helicopters and said that they wouldn't unless they were in zinc coffins.  Is it possible they knew something the investigators didn't?

Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Nigel Evans on December 22, 2018, 04:20:08 AM
I still think a high scoring candidate for why they left their tent is the military test of a low yield tactical nuclear device.  These weapons were designed to minimise physical damage ( albeit it is still a very big explosion) equivalent of several kilotons.  An air burst of such a device at even a couple of km from their camp site should have the desired effect.  They would be hit with a heat flash that would not have burned them but could possibly cause blindness if stared at directly.  The blast would knock them around in the tent  like someone shaking a bag of wall nuts but would not been sufficient to kill them.  The wind blast would buffet the tent and be enough to throw anyone standing up outside.  The shock wave would likely be sufficient to cause permanent damage to ear drums and hearing.  And they may have been exposed to a significant if not lethal dose of neutron radiation.  At extreme high levels the radiation could have an immediate effect on them, including their nervous systems, causing confusion, disorientation etc.

If after the heat, flash, blast and wind blast they emerged from their tent, they would have seen a huge fireball in the sky.  This may have been enough to cause them to panick and flee from the camp site. 

It is at this time in history that the west were developing these weapons.  Between 1958 and 1961.  It is likely that the russians were also experimenting with these weapons.

Evidence to look for would include a large area of melted ice directly below the detonation point.  The ice may have melted and then froze again forming an icy crust underneath any snow that fallen after the event.

Fallout from the device would remain highly radioactive for about 2 weeks after which it would be safer to reoccupy the area.  Even so depending on fallout plume dispersion, there would still be evidence today if the right core samples were taken and analysed.

There is is circumstantial evidence that different groups of people, some 70km away witnessed orange orbs in  the sky in the direction of the pass that night.  Also Ivanovo later said that he noticed that some of the trees had scorch marks on the tops. 

In terms of the victims if they had been exposed to high levels of radiation, the symptoms would include the rapid deterioration of the stomach lining, intestines as well as the immune system leading to rapid and serious infections of the blood.  This could have killed within 2 days to a few weeks.  The cold was even a bigger threat that night so this would have killed them before any radiation sickness.

The government would certainly not want any probing investigation that may lead to the development of their new technology, or that any tests caused the deaths of these kids.  It would be a good reason to cover it up and shut it down, and ban access to the area to stop people being exposed to any radioactive fallout.

It's also interesting that although the radiation found on the cloths of some of the victims was only minor, that the helicopter pilots refused to take some of the bodies onto the helicopters and said that they wouldn't unless they were in zinc coffins.  Is it possible they knew something the investigators didn't?
So what's the explanation for the ravine deaths?Why were some of the group apparently attempting to return to the tent?

Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Star man on December 22, 2018, 03:48:38 PM
I still think a high scoring candidate for why they left their tent is the military test of a low yield tactical nuclear device.  These weapons were designed to minimise physical damage ( albeit it is still a very big explosion) equivalent of several kilotons.  An air burst of such a device at even a couple of km from their camp site should have the desired effect.  They would be hit with a heat flash that would not have burned them but could possibly cause blindness if stared at directly.  The blast would knock them around in the tent  like someone shaking a bag of wall nuts but would not been sufficient to kill them.  The wind blast would buffet the tent and be enough to throw anyone standing up outside.  The shock wave would likely be sufficient to cause permanent damage to ear drums and hearing.  And they may have been exposed to a significant if not lethal dose of neutron radiation.  At extreme high levels the radiation could have an immediate effect on them, including their nervous systems, causing confusion, disorientation etc.

If after the heat, flash, blast and wind blast they emerged from their tent, they would have seen a huge fireball in the sky.  This may have been enough to cause them to panick and flee from the camp site. 

It is at this time in history that the west were developing these weapons.  Between 1958 and 1961.  It is likely that the russians were also experimenting with these weapons.

Evidence to look for would include a large area of melted ice directly below the detonation point.  The ice may have melted and then froze again forming an icy crust underneath any snow that fallen after the event.

Fallout from the device would remain highly radioactive for about 2 weeks after which it would be safer to reoccupy the area.  Even so depending on fallout plume dispersion, there would still be evidence today if the right core samples were taken and analysed.

There is is circumstantial evidence that different groups of people, some 70km away witnessed orange orbs in  the sky in the direction of the pass that night.  Also Ivanovo later said that he noticed that some of the trees had scorch marks on the tops. 

In terms of the victims if they had been exposed to high levels of radiation, the symptoms would include the rapid deterioration of the stomach lining, intestines as well as the immune system leading to rapid and serious infections of the blood.  This could have killed within 2 days to a few weeks.  The cold was even a bigger threat that night so this would have killed them before any radiation sickness.

The government would certainly not want any probing investigation that may lead to the development of their new technology, or that any tests caused the deaths of these kids.  It would be a good reason to cover it up and shut it down, and ban access to the area to stop people being exposed to any radioactive fallout.

It's also interesting that although the radiation found on the cloths of some of the victims was only minor, that the helicopter pilots refused to take some of the bodies onto the helicopters and said that they wouldn't unless they were in zinc coffins.  Is it possible they knew something the investigators didn't?
So what's the explanation for the ravine deaths?Why were some of the group apparently attempting to return to the tent?

There several possible explanations for the ravine traumas. 

1.  Semyon, lyuda and Thibo fell into the ravine.  There is a significant steep incline close to where they were found.  This could have been even higher if snow had drifted toward the top creating an overhang.  They may have walked onto the overhang and the snow gave way.  They would have been very cold, tired and suffering from possible frost bite.  It would have been very dark and difficult to see where they were walking.  They may not have been able to feel their feet or the ground they were walking on.  I suspect that two of them were helping to carry a third person who was finding it difficult to walk by themselves.  This is a credible scenario I think.

2.  There was more than one devise tested that night and one of these was closer such that they were hit by the wind blast.  This could have picked them up and thrown them hard at the ravine wall.

3.  They injuries were self induced.  Knowing that their deaths were almost certain, they tried to find a quicker less slow and painful way to end it.  They may have witnessed the deaths of their the two Yuris at the cedar tree and decided it was not how they wanted to go.

Of the above I think the first option is the more likely.

I don't really know if the three found on the slope were going back to the tent. Not sure how much light they had to see, but if they were going back to the tent then it was probably because they knew without their clothes they were gong to die.   If they were gong back to the tent why didn't they follow their own tracks they made on the way down the slope?  Might have been easier to find the tent that way given the lack of light?  Unless of course the moon was up or it was approaching dawn when they set off back to the tent.
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: sarapuk on December 22, 2018, 07:01:11 PM

What about DECOMPOSTION conditions, surely that could cause such skin discolouration  !  ? 
Possibly with Lyudmila, but with Yuri D and Zina it can be discounted. The skin changed colour after the morgue photos but only on the hands and face. So decomposition doesn't fit. Some idiot mortician painting their hands and faces with iodine perhaps. I can't think of anything else. Feel free to give it a try.

I dont subscribe to the idea that the GAS theory caused all the EVENTS except the Ravine Event.It's not for everyone...

Well that is an interesting theory regarding the TENT being surrounded by GAS but I dont subscribe to that theory. In the First World War there are many harrowing stories of GAS ATTACKS but its interesting that the victims still managed to stay fully clothed etc etc etc etc.WW1 gas attacks didn't intoxicate?
 

The WW1 GAS ATTACKS certainly affected the nervous systems of soldiers.
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: sarapuk on December 22, 2018, 07:07:03 PM
I still think a high scoring candidate for why they left their tent is the military test of a low yield tactical nuclear device.  These weapons were designed to minimise physical damage ( albeit it is still a very big explosion) equivalent of several kilotons.  An air burst of such a device at even a couple of km from their camp site should have the desired effect.  They would be hit with a heat flash that would not have burned them but could possibly cause blindness if stared at directly.  The blast would knock them around in the tent  like someone shaking a bag of wall nuts but would not been sufficient to kill them.  The wind blast would buffet the tent and be enough to throw anyone standing up outside.  The shock wave would likely be sufficient to cause permanent damage to ear drums and hearing.  And they may have been exposed to a significant if not lethal dose of neutron radiation.  At extreme high levels the radiation could have an immediate effect on them, including their nervous systems, causing confusion, disorientation etc.

If after the heat, flash, blast and wind blast they emerged from their tent, they would have seen a huge fireball in the sky.  This may have been enough to cause them to panick and flee from the camp site. 

It is at this time in history that the west were developing these weapons.  Between 1958 and 1961.  It is likely that the russians were also experimenting with these weapons.

Evidence to look for would include a large area of melted ice directly below the detonation point.  The ice may have melted and then froze again forming an icy crust underneath any snow that fallen after the event.

Fallout from the device would remain highly radioactive for about 2 weeks after which it would be safer to reoccupy the area.  Even so depending on fallout plume dispersion, there would still be evidence today if the right core samples were taken and analysed.

There is is circumstantial evidence that different groups of people, some 70km away witnessed orange orbs in  the sky in the direction of the pass that night.  Also Ivanovo later said that he noticed that some of the trees had scorch marks on the tops. 

In terms of the victims if they had been exposed to high levels of radiation, the symptoms would include the rapid deterioration of the stomach lining, intestines as well as the immune system leading to rapid and serious infections of the blood.  This could have killed within 2 days to a few weeks.  The cold was even a bigger threat that night so this would have killed them before any radiation sickness.

The government would certainly not want any probing investigation that may lead to the development of their new technology, or that any tests caused the deaths of these kids.  It would be a good reason to cover it up and shut it down, and ban access to the area to stop people being exposed to any radioactive fallout.

It's also interesting that although the radiation found on the cloths of some of the victims was only minor, that the helicopter pilots refused to take some of the bodies onto the helicopters and said that they wouldn't unless they were in zinc coffins.  Is it possible they knew something the investigators didn't?

This theory has been tested in the FORUM by various members. Its an unlikely theory. It doesnt go any where near explaining many of the bodily injuries etc.
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Star man on December 22, 2018, 10:35:54 PM
I still think a high scoring candidate for why they left their tent is the military test of a low yield tactical nuclear device.  These weapons were designed to minimise physical damage ( albeit it is still a very big explosion) equivalent of several kilotons.  An air burst of such a device at even a couple of km from their camp site should have the desired effect.  They would be hit with a heat flash that would not have burned them but could possibly cause blindness if stared at directly.  The blast would knock them around in the tent  like someone shaking a bag of wall nuts but would not been sufficient to kill them.  The wind blast would buffet the tent and be enough to throw anyone standing up outside.  The shock wave would likely be sufficient to cause permanent damage to ear drums and hearing.  And they may have been exposed to a significant if not lethal dose of neutron radiation.  At extreme high levels the radiation could have an immediate effect on them, including their nervous systems, causing confusion, disorientation etc.

If after the heat, flash, blast and wind blast they emerged from their tent, they would have seen a huge fireball in the sky.  This may have been enough to cause them to panick and flee from the camp site. 

It is at this time in history that the west were developing these weapons.  Between 1958 and 1961.  It is likely that the russians were also experimenting with these weapons.

Evidence to look for would include a large area of melted ice directly below the detonation point.  The ice may have melted and then froze again forming an icy crust underneath any snow that fallen after the event.

Fallout from the device would remain highly radioactive for about 2 weeks after which it would be safer to reoccupy the area.  Even so depending on fallout plume dispersion, there would still be evidence today if the right core samples were taken and analysed.

There is is circumstantial evidence that different groups of people, some 70km away witnessed orange orbs in  the sky in the direction of the pass that night.  Also Ivanovo later said that he noticed that some of the trees had scorch marks on the tops. 

In terms of the victims if they had been exposed to high levels of radiation, the symptoms would include the rapid deterioration of the stomach lining, intestines as well as the immune system leading to rapid and serious infections of the blood.  This could have killed within 2 days to a few weeks.  The cold was even a bigger threat that night so this would have killed them before any radiation sickness.

The government would certainly not want any probing investigation that may lead to the development of their new technology, or that any tests caused the deaths of these kids.  It would be a good reason to cover it up and shut it down, and ban access to the area to stop people being exposed to any radioactive fallout.

It's also interesting that although the radiation found on the cloths of some of the victims was only minor, that the helicopter pilots refused to take some of the bodies onto the helicopters and said that they wouldn't unless they were in zinc coffins.  Is it possible they knew something the investigators didn't?

This theory has been tested in the FORUM by various members. Its an unlikely theory. It doesnt go any where near explaining many of the bodily injuries etc.

What were the main problems with the falling into the ravine theory? 
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Nigel Evans on December 23, 2018, 07:09:59 AM
The WW1 GAS ATTACKS certainly affected the nervous systems of soldiers.
Not by intoxication.
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: sarapuk on December 23, 2018, 07:04:24 PM
The WW1 GAS ATTACKS certainly affected the nervous systems of soldiers.
Not by intoxication.

Does it matter if it was by intoxication or not  !  ?
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: sarapuk on December 23, 2018, 07:07:42 PM
I still think a high scoring candidate for why they left their tent is the military test of a low yield tactical nuclear device.  These weapons were designed to minimise physical damage ( albeit it is still a very big explosion) equivalent of several kilotons.  An air burst of such a device at even a couple of km from their camp site should have the desired effect.  They would be hit with a heat flash that would not have burned them but could possibly cause blindness if stared at directly.  The blast would knock them around in the tent  like someone shaking a bag of wall nuts but would not been sufficient to kill them.  The wind blast would buffet the tent and be enough to throw anyone standing up outside.  The shock wave would likely be sufficient to cause permanent damage to ear drums and hearing.  And they may have been exposed to a significant if not lethal dose of neutron radiation.  At extreme high levels the radiation could have an immediate effect on them, including their nervous systems, causing confusion, disorientation etc.

If after the heat, flash, blast and wind blast they emerged from their tent, they would have seen a huge fireball in the sky.  This may have been enough to cause them to panick and flee from the camp site. 

It is at this time in history that the west were developing these weapons.  Between 1958 and 1961.  It is likely that the russians were also experimenting with these weapons.

Evidence to look for would include a large area of melted ice directly below the detonation point.  The ice may have melted and then froze again forming an icy crust underneath any snow that fallen after the event.

Fallout from the device would remain highly radioactive for about 2 weeks after which it would be safer to reoccupy the area.  Even so depending on fallout plume dispersion, there would still be evidence today if the right core samples were taken and analysed.

There is is circumstantial evidence that different groups of people, some 70km away witnessed orange orbs in  the sky in the direction of the pass that night.  Also Ivanovo later said that he noticed that some of the trees had scorch marks on the tops. 

In terms of the victims if they had been exposed to high levels of radiation, the symptoms would include the rapid deterioration of the stomach lining, intestines as well as the immune system leading to rapid and serious infections of the blood.  This could have killed within 2 days to a few weeks.  The cold was even a bigger threat that night so this would have killed them before any radiation sickness.

The government would certainly not want any probing investigation that may lead to the development of their new technology, or that any tests caused the deaths of these kids.  It would be a good reason to cover it up and shut it down, and ban access to the area to stop people being exposed to any radioactive fallout.

It's also interesting that although the radiation found on the cloths of some of the victims was only minor, that the helicopter pilots refused to take some of the bodies onto the helicopters and said that they wouldn't unless they were in zinc coffins.  Is it possible they knew something the investigators didn't?

This theory has been tested in the FORUM by various members. Its an unlikely theory. It doesnt go any where near explaining many of the bodily injuries etc.

What were the main problems with the falling into the ravine theory?

The RAVINE was not that deep. There would have been plenty of snow to cushion any bodily impacts. The injuries to at least 2 of the Group are highly unlikely to have been caused by any fall at the RAVINE.
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Star man on December 24, 2018, 03:27:24 AM
The RAVINE was not that deep. There would have been plenty of snow to cushion any bodily impacts. The injuries to at least 2 of the Group are highly unlikely to have been caused by any fall at the RAVINE.

I have discussed the likelihood of the injuries from a fall at the ravine with WAB on this forum  From what I can gather he has been to ravine.  He posted a photograph showing where the 4 were found.  There a steep slop directly above them with rounded large rocks in the stream below.  If they tumbled down this slope and hit the rocks I can imagine that it would inflict some nasty injuries. I would think the broken ribs is a possibility.  Also if snow had been drifting up the side of the ravine it could have formed quite a significant vertical drop.  It looks credible to me.  WAB seems to think the chest injuries could have been sustained this way.  Although would like to understand other view points.
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Nigel Evans on December 24, 2018, 01:49:06 PM
The pathologist ruled out falling?
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: sarapuk on December 25, 2018, 06:06:07 PM
The RAVINE was not that deep. There would have been plenty of snow to cushion any bodily impacts. The injuries to at least 2 of the Group are highly unlikely to have been caused by any fall at the RAVINE.

I have discussed the likelihood of the injuries from a fall at the ravine with WAB on this forum  From what I can gather he has been to ravine.  He posted a photograph showing where the 4 were found.  There a steep slop directly above them with rounded large rocks in the stream below.  If they tumbled down this slope and hit the rocks I can imagine that it would inflict some nasty injuries. I would think the broken ribs is a possibility.  Also if snow had been drifting up the side of the ravine it could have formed quite a significant vertical drop.  It looks credible to me.  WAB seems to think the chest injuries could have been sustained this way.  Although would like to understand other view points.

It has already been made clear by others that the injuries to DUBININA were not caused by a fall at the RAVINE. There were no signs of damage that you would expect from such a fall onto rocks.
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: sarapuk on December 25, 2018, 06:10:11 PM
The pathologist ruled out falling?
 

And not just the pathologist. Others have ruled out a fall at the RAVINE because of the fact that no serious external injuries were found on DUBININA's chest, only the CRUSHED RIBS. A fall on rocks of such severity to crush ribs would also seriously damage the chest wall etc.
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Star man on December 26, 2018, 05:23:11 PM
The pathologist ruled out falling?
 

And not just the pathologist. Others have ruled out a fall at the RAVINE because of the fact that no serious external injuries were found on DUBININA's chest, only the CRUSHED RIBS. A fall on rocks of such severity to crush ribs would also seriously damage the chest wall etc.

Is the pathologist conclusion written in the autopsy report of Dubinina, or somewhere in the case file info?  I'll have to have another look.

Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Nigel Evans on December 26, 2018, 05:42:08 PM
The pathologist ruled out falling?


And not just the pathologist. Others have ruled out a fall at the RAVINE because of the fact that no serious external injuries were found on DUBININA's chest, only the CRUSHED RIBS. A fall on rocks of such severity to crush ribs would also seriously damage the chest wall etc.

Is the pathologist conclusion written in the autopsy report of Dubinina, or somewhere in the case file info?  I'll have to have another look.


The official record contains an interview between Ivanov  and the pathologist. He rules out falling and suggests like an automobile accident or the shockwave from a bomb.
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: sarapuk on December 27, 2018, 02:00:27 PM
Based on the forensic examination of the body of L. A. Dubinina I think that the death of Dubinina was caused by massive hemorrhage into the right ventricle, multiple bilateral rib fractures, and internal bleeding into the thoracic cavity.
The said damage was probably caused by an impact of great force causing severe closed lethal trauma to the chest of Dubinina. The trauma was caused during life and is the result of high force impact with subsequent fall, throw or bruise to the chest of Dubinina.
Damage to the soft tissue of the head and ‘bath skin’ wrinkling to the extremities are the post-mortem changes (rot and decay) of Dubinina’s body, which was underwater before it was found.
The death of Dubinina is through violence.
Medical examiner signature (Vozrozhdenny)
Dyatlov Pass: Document in Russian
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Star man on December 27, 2018, 04:50:19 PM
According to the pathologist wrt interview with Ivanov, the injuries to Dubinina and Zoltorev, we're consistent with that of a blast wave from a bomb.  Others report injuries similar to that of a car crash.  Others suggest a high speed impact such as a fall.

So here are some questions I think are interesting given the suggested causes of the injuries:

1.  If it was an explosion how far away would it have been and why isn't there any scorch marks or evidence of shrapnel?

2. If they fell how come there are no broken limbs as well as the trauma to the chest.  Tibo had a crushed skull but again no broken limbs.  Surely if it was a fall then the impact force would also have broken some other bones?

3 if it was violence how come there is no damage to the outer tissues of the chest?  And why would the attackers leave Semyon with a camera ( potential incriminating evidence). And why did they leave kolevatov alive so that he could embrace his friend before he died?
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: sarapuk on December 28, 2018, 06:01:29 PM
According to the pathologist wrt interview with Ivanov, the injuries to Dubinina and Zoltorev, we're consistent with that of a blast wave from a bomb.  Others report injuries similar to that of a car crash.  Others suggest a high speed impact such as a fall.

So here are some questions I think are interesting given the suggested causes of the injuries:

1.  If it was an explosion how far away would it have been and why isn't there any scorch marks or evidence of shrapnel?

2. If they fell how come there are no broken limbs as well as the trauma to the chest.  Tibo had a crushed skull but again no broken limbs.  Surely if it was a fall then the impact force would also have broken some other bones?

3 if it was violence how come there is no damage to the outer tissues of the chest?  And why would the attackers leave Semyon with a camera ( potential incriminating evidence). And why did they leave kolevatov alive so that he could embrace his friend before he died?

I believe these questions have been addressed in the Dyatlov Pass Forum. Any way [1] No way of knowing how far away a blast could have been, and no metal fragments were ever found, etc. [2] Exactly, a fall that could have caused such injuries would also have broken through the thick skin wall. [3] Presumably you mean violence caused by other people, in which case, exactly, no breakage of the skin wall. And why indeed would attackers leave evidence behind.
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Star man on December 29, 2018, 05:43:22 PM
According to the pathologist wrt interview with Ivanov, the injuries to Dubinina and Zoltorev, we're consistent with that of a blast wave from a bomb.  Others report injuries similar to that of a car crash.  Others suggest a high speed impact such as a fall.

So here are some questions I think are interesting given the suggested causes of the injuries:

1.  If it was an explosion how far away would it have been and why isn't there any scorch marks or evidence of shrapnel?

2. If they fell how come there are no broken limbs as well as the trauma to the chest.  Tibo had a crushed skull but again no broken limbs.  Surely if it was a fall then the impact force would also have broken some other bones?

3 if it was violence how come there is no damage to the outer tissues of the chest?  And why would the attackers leave Semyon with a camera ( potential incriminating evidence). And why did they leave kolevatov alive so that he could embrace his friend before he died?

I believe these questions have been addressed in the Dyatlov Pass Forum. Any way [1] No way of knowing how far away a blast could have been, and no metal fragments were ever found, etc. [2] Exactly, a fall that could have caused such injuries would also have broken through the thick skin wall. [3] Presumably you mean violence caused by other people, in which case, exactly, no breakage of the skin wall. And why indeed would attackers leave evidence behind.

I have done some basic **** packet calculations on the amount of force a body would experience falling 4 to 5 metres onto a flat hard surface.  Assuming Lyuda for instance being a lady weighs approx 9 stone or roughly 60 Kg.  and conservatively assuming that the chest is compressed by up to 15cm on impact then the force experience over those 15 cm of crushing is about 2 tonnes.  That's a significant amount of force even for a 5 metre fall.  Semyon, being heavier would have experienced even greater force, but he would have landed on his side.  If Semyon had landed on his side would expect That his camera would have taken a significant impact too?  Possibly enough to break it?
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: sarapuk on December 30, 2018, 11:15:45 AM
According to the pathologist wrt interview with Ivanov, the injuries to Dubinina and Zoltorev, we're consistent with that of a blast wave from a bomb.  Others report injuries similar to that of a car crash.  Others suggest a high speed impact such as a fall.

So here are some questions I think are interesting given the suggested causes of the injuries:

1.  If it was an explosion how far away would it have been and why isn't there any scorch marks or evidence of shrapnel?

2. If they fell how come there are no broken limbs as well as the trauma to the chest.  Tibo had a crushed skull but again no broken limbs.  Surely if it was a fall then the impact force would also have broken some other bones?

3 if it was violence how come there is no damage to the outer tissues of the chest?  And why would the attackers leave Semyon with a camera ( potential incriminating evidence). And why did they leave kolevatov alive so that he could embrace his friend before he died?

I believe these questions have been addressed in the Dyatlov Pass Forum. Any way [1] No way of knowing how far away a blast could have been, and no metal fragments were ever found, etc. [2] Exactly, a fall that could have caused such injuries would also have broken through the thick skin wall. [3] Presumably you mean violence caused by other people, in which case, exactly, no breakage of the skin wall. And why indeed would attackers leave evidence behind.

I have done some basic **** packet calculations on the amount of force a body would experience falling 4 to 5 metres onto a flat hard surface.  Assuming Lyuda for instance being a lady weighs approx 9 stone or roughly 60 Kg.  and conservatively assuming that the chest is compressed by up to 15cm on impact then the force experience over those 15 cm of crushing is about 2 tonnes.  That's a significant amount of force even for a 5 metre fall.  Semyon, being heavier would have experienced even greater force, but he would have landed on his side.  If Semyon had landed on his side would expect That his camera would have taken a significant impact too?  Possibly enough to break it?

We would need more detail on DUBININA's injuries to be able to say with some certainty whether or not a fall at the ravine was the cause. Also we would really need to know where and how exactly at the ravine she would have been likely to have fell. An exhumation of the body may provide clues as to what may have happened.
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Nigel Evans on December 30, 2018, 01:38:10 PM


1.  If it was an explosion how far away would it have been and why isn't there any scorch marks or evidence of shrapnel?

Any man made high explosive blast would produce a supersonic wave that would burst the lungs. If it was a blast it wasn't HE.



2. If they fell how come there are no broken limbs as well as the trauma to the chest.  Tibo had a crushed skull but again no broken limbs.  Surely if it was a fall then the impact force would also have broken some other bones?

As postulated on the NO2 thread, nitrous oxide could explain this.







Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Star man on December 30, 2018, 05:55:26 PM


1.  If it was an explosion how far away would it have been and why isn't there any scorch marks or evidence of shrapnel?

Any man made high explosive blast would produce a supersonic wave that would burst the lungs. If it was a blast it wasn't HE.



2. If they fell how come there are no broken limbs as well as the trauma to the chest.  Tibo had a crushed skull but again no broken limbs.  Surely if it was a fall then the impact force would also have broken some other bones?

As postulated on the NO2 thread, nitrous oxide could explain this.

Ok so maybe the injuries weren't caused by a shock wave from HE despite what the pathologist said?  It's unlikely they were caused by a car crash either.  So what other possibilities are there?

1.  Could they have fallen from the cedar tree?  There is evidence that they climbed up to 5 metres?  A fall even onto shallow snow would still produce significant forces to the chest in the range of about 2 tonnes.

2.  Could something else have hit fhem in the chest?  Large bolders that had been thrown by something?

3. Is there a type of explosion that could cause the chest injuries but not an explosion capable of bursting the lungs?

Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: sarapuk on January 02, 2019, 05:10:59 PM


1.  If it was an explosion how far away would it have been and why isn't there any scorch marks or evidence of shrapnel?

Any man made high explosive blast would produce a supersonic wave that would burst the lungs. If it was a blast it wasn't HE.



2. If they fell how come there are no broken limbs as well as the trauma to the chest.  Tibo had a crushed skull but again no broken limbs.  Surely if it was a fall then the impact force would also have broken some other bones?

As postulated on the NO2 thread, nitrous oxide could explain this.

Ok so maybe the injuries weren't caused by a shock wave from HE despite what the pathologist said?  It's unlikely they were caused by a car crash either.  So what other possibilities are there?

1.  Could they have fallen from the cedar tree?  There is evidence that they climbed up to 5 metres?  A fall even onto shallow snow would still produce significant forces to the chest in the range of about 2 tonnes.

2.  Could something else have hit fhem in the chest?  Large bolders that had been thrown by something?

3. Is there a type of explosion that could cause the chest injuries but not an explosion capable of bursting the lungs?

1 =  But it wouldnt cause the type of Rib injuries that Dubinina had.  2 =  But thrown objects like boulders would cause Skin Tissue injuries as well.  3 =  A blast is a blast, and its not unusual for powerful blasts to decapitate as well.
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Nigel Evans on January 03, 2019, 02:49:57 AM


Ok so maybe the injuries weren't caused by a shock wave from HE despite what the pathologist said?  It's unlikely they were caused by a car crash either.  So what other possibilities are there?
Ball lightning exploding might fit the problem (because we don't know in detail what it is and how it might explode :)

1.  Could they have fallen from the cedar tree?  There is evidence that they climbed up to 5 metres?  A fall even onto shallow snow would still produce significant forces to the chest in the range of about 2 tonnes.
After those injuries they aren't walking anywhere, certainly not to the ravine from the cedar. Those injuries happened very close to where they were found.

2.  Could something else have hit fhem in the chest?  Large bolders that had been thrown by something?
The lack of surface tissue damage makes it highly unlikely, i think the pathologist said something similar.

3. Is there a type of explosion that could cause the chest injuries but not an explosion capable of bursting the lungs?
Ball lightning?

Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Star man on January 03, 2019, 03:16:08 AM


Ok so maybe the injuries weren't caused by a shock wave from HE despite what the pathologist said?  It's unlikely they were caused by a car crash either.  So what other possibilities are there?
Ball lightning exploding might fit the problem (because we don't know in detail what it is and how it might explode :)

1.  Could they have fallen from the cedar tree?  There is evidence that they climbed up to 5 metres?  A fall even onto shallow snow would still produce significant forces to the chest in the range of about 2 tonnes.
After those injuries they aren't walking anywhere, certainly not to the ravine from the cedar. Those injuries happened very close to where they were found.

2.  Could something else have hit fhem in the chest?  Large bolders that had been thrown by something?
The lack of surface tissue damage makes it highly unlikely, i think the pathologist said something similar.

3. Is there a type of explosion that could cause the chest injuries but not an explosion capable of bursting the lungs?
Ball lightning?


How certain is it that they would not be able to move with those chest injuries?  They may have been carried or supported and they may have been unconscious?  They may have been moved rather than walked themselves?

The ball lightning explosion is an unknown though so you can’t really conclude anything from it.

I think that for a scenario that doesn’t involve murder or a yeti and is a result of some other natural event we should try to look for options that both result in the observed injuries and the compelling need to leave the camp without adequate clothing. They could be one and the same thing?
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Nigel Evans on January 03, 2019, 05:12:23 AM

How certain is it that they would not be able to move with those chest injuries?  They may have been carried or supported and they may have been unconscious?  They may have been moved rather than walked themselves?Well only Zina and Igor would qualify as able bodied, Rustem was slowly dying from internal bleeding and had a fractured skull. Semyon and Lyudmila would be in strong pain (a flail chest makes every breath very painful). In my narrative the ravine would be warmer than the cedar because the warm air would roll across the tops of the trees and fall into the ravine. Hence providing motivation to move the group from the fire and build the den(s).

The ball lightning explosion is an unknown though so you can’t really conclude anything from it.True but it remains the most probable due to Ivanov's conviction.
I think that for a scenario that doesn’t involve murder or a yeti and is a result of some other natural event we should try to look for options that both result in the observed injuries and the compelling need to leave the camp without adequate clothing. They could be one and the same thing?Agreed, hence my theory that electro magnetic processes caused by high winds resulted in (1) hot acrid gases, (2) intoxicating gases. (3) production of fire orbs possibly exploding, possibly with mechanical force (impact), possibly not involved at all in fatalities.
There is good evidence for (1). warmed snow on hill, decision to descend in socks, general lack of frostbite, dark orange hands and faces at funeral forming after photos in the morgue combined with Lyudmila's yellow brown face with a white chin have very very few explanations, foam on cheek. Nicolai found with jacket unfastened and gloves in pockets.
There is circumstantial evidence within a plausible narrative for (2), decision to descend in socks, wasting matches, decision to climb tree, falling out of tree.
There is good evidence for (3) - A highly credible witness (of the evidence, Ivanov) said it must have been the fire orbs. He and the Central Committee (who clearly believed him) could only form this opinion from strongly credible evidence which must have been confiscated photographs. N.B. Yudin said that nearly everyone in the group had a camera?  So there must have been at least nine rolls of exposed film possibly more? And Semyon's notebook, confiscated because it did describe the event?

Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Tracker on January 03, 2019, 10:29:27 AM
They were hit with infra-sound from the Yeti. They were probably nervous already from camping too close to them before. The group mentioned snowman exits prior and took frame 17 pic in light of the situation. They also made light of other events that were occurring in real time as well.

So where are the Yeti prints and trackways that connect them?

Notice the prints in picture below are set into the last tire indention left by the vehicle prior. The Sasquatch winter trackway in this case started and stopped without stepping in from the treeline or off the laneway. Also there's a light layer of fresh snow in case someone might suggest a person sticking out of the trunk or whatever. There's no human prints.  If you can come to terms with that then and perhaps some may reconsider that the Yeti are the most likely responsible for this tradgedy.   

(https://i.ibb.co/pX0G6vG/Sasq-trackway-that-dissappears.jpg) (https://imgbb.com/)
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Star man on January 03, 2019, 04:13:31 PM

How certain is it that they would not be able to move with those chest injuries?  They may have been carried or supported and they may have been unconscious?  They may have been moved rather than walked themselves?Well only Zina and Igor would qualify as able bodied, Rustem was slowly dying from internal bleeding and had a fractured skull. Semyon and Lyudmila would be in strong pain (a flail chest makes every breath very painful). In my narrative the ravine would be warmer than the cedar because the warm air would roll across the tops of the trees and fall into the ravine. Hence providing motivation to move the group from the fire and build the den(s).

The ball lightning explosion is an unknown though so you can’t really conclude anything from it.True but it remains the most probable due to Ivanov's conviction.
I think that for a scenario that doesn’t involve murder or a yeti and is a result of some other natural event we should try to look for options that both result in the observed injuries and the compelling need to leave the camp without adequate clothing. They could be one and the same thing?Agreed, hence my theory that electro magnetic processes caused by high winds resulted in (1) hot acrid gases, (2) intoxicating gases. (3) production of fire orbs possibly exploding, possibly with mechanical force (impact), possibly not involved at all in fatalities.
There is good evidence for (1). warmed snow on hill, decision to descend in socks, general lack of frostbite, dark orange hands and faces at funeral forming after photos in the morgue combined with Lyudmila's yellow brown face with a white chin have very very few explanations, foam on cheek. Nicolai found with jacket unfastened and gloves in pockets.
There is circumstantial evidence within a plausible narrative for (2), decision to descend in socks, wasting matches, decision to climb tree, falling out of tree.
There is good evidence for (3) - A highly credible witness (of the evidence, Ivanov) said it must have been the fire orbs. He and the Central Committee (who clearly believed him) could only form this opinion from strongly credible evidence which must have been confiscated photographs. N.B. Yudin said that nearly everyone in the group had a camera?  So there must have been at least nine rolls of exposed film possibly more? And Semyon's notebook, confiscated because it did describe the event?



Initially Lyuda, Semyon and Thibo may have had significant injuries.  Kolevatov is said to have had a deformed neck, but it's not clear what that means?  He may have been able to walk himself.  Rustem although injured may also have been able to walk himself.  That would leave Dyatlov, Zina, and the two yuris.  Possibly kolevatov.  If one person carries Thibo on his back, and another Lyuda and Semyon is supported and aided by two members of the group they could have moved slowly down the slope.  Obviously there are possible variations on how they could have helped the injured down the slope.

It would have been difficult but if the circumstances are right and adrenaline is pumping they may have been able to make it down the slope together.  if they were helping the injured it may also also explain why their decent seemed more orderly and slow.  I am trying to explore all the possibilities.

I do think that the so called fire orbs may be responsible for what happened that night.  Ivanov may have seen additional supporting evidence. 

One thing to consider is the size of these so called fire orbs.  The witness statements describe them as "moon size". Some of these people were up to 70km from kholat syakhl.  This would mean the fire orbs would have been around about 500 metres in diameter.  So what can create a ball of fire 500 metres in diameter?

Personally I am not stuck on any particular theory at the moment.  I am slowly exploring the options and the possible variables (of which there seem to be many).  My favourite currently is still the military accident. infrasound is a possibility.  I think murder is still a possibility, but it doesn't lend itself to the facts of the case.  For instance Semyon left with his camera, someone the group had knives with them to cut trees.  If they were forced out of the tent and marched down the slope to their deaths I would expect their attackers to have searched them and not allowed them to take knives with them. Also, I would expect none of them to have boots, or that they had different levels of clothing. The distribution of the bodies doesn't match what I would expect for a murder.  There a few key facts that kind of make murder less likely.
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Star man on January 03, 2019, 04:21:47 PM
They were hit with infra-sound from the Yeti. They were probably nervous already from camping too close to them before. The group mentioned snowman exits prior and took frame 17 pic in light of the situation. They also made light of other events that were occurring in real time as well.

So where are the Yeti prints and trackways that connect them?

Notice the prints in picture below are set into the last tire indention left by the vehicle prior. The Sasquatch winter trackway in this case started and stopped without stepping in from the treeline or off the laneway. Also there's a light layer of fresh snow in case someone might suggest a person sticking out of the trunk or whatever. There's no human prints.  If you can come to terms with that then and perhaps some may reconsider that the Yeti are the most likely responsible for this tradgedy.   

(https://i.ibb.co/pX0G6vG/Sasq-trackway-that-dissappears.jpg) (https://imgbb.com/)

Hi Tracker.  Intersting photograph.  So what happened to the rest of the tracks?  I have read various reports about the abilities of these creatures (if they exist) including that their eyes glow red ( whats that all about?), and that they may even have their own form of language.  Maybe this for discussion on a different thread though.
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Tracker on January 03, 2019, 05:23:22 PM
They were hit with infra-sound from the Yeti. They were probably nervous already from camping too close to them before. The group mentioned snowman exits prior and took frame 17 pic in light of the situation. They also made light of other events that were occurring in real time as well.

So where are the Yeti prints and trackways that connect them?

Notice the prints in picture below are set into the last tire indention left by the vehicle prior. The Sasquatch winter trackway in this case started and stopped without stepping in from the treeline or off the laneway. Also there's a light layer of fresh snow in case someone might suggest a person sticking out of the trunk or whatever. There's no human prints.  If you can come to terms with that then and perhaps some may reconsider that the Yeti are the most likely responsible for this tradgedy.   

(https://i.ibb.co/pX0G6vG/Sasq-trackway-that-dissappears.jpg) (https://imgbb.com/)

Hi Tracker.  Intersting photograph.  So what happened to the rest of the tracks?  I have read various reports about the abilities of these creatures (if they exist) including that their eyes glow red ( whats that all about?), and that they may even have their own form of language.  Maybe this for discussion on a different thread though.
They do have some interesting abilities which is why I brought it up. About the prints, they can choose to leave them or not. In this case it was a habituation. The Sasquatch was friendly and showing the researcher they can do this. In another encounter the Sasquatch left a trackway of right foot prints only. With the appropriate stride lengths without any left foot prints in the snow. I've seen a disappearing trackway in heavy mud from a dried up creek.
 To the point- The Yeti were probably right outside the Dyatlov 9's tent on the Mtn side that night. Then they hit the 9 with screams or infrasound and didn't leave a single print. Investigators wouldn't find any obvious evidence it was the Yeti. It's a real game changer for this 60 year old mystery Imo.
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Nigel Evans on January 04, 2019, 05:17:41 AM

Initially Lyuda, Semyon and Thibo may have had significant injuries.  Kolevatov is said to have had a deformed neck, but it's not clear what that means?  He may have been able to walk himself.  Rustem although injured may also have been able to walk himself.  That would leave Dyatlov, Zina, and the two yuris.  Possibly kolevatov.  If one person carries Thibo on his back, and another Lyuda and Semyon is supported and aided by two members of the group they could have moved slowly down the slope.  Obviously there are possible variations on how they could have helped the injured down the slope.I prefer the narrative where the two Yuri's die first and clothes are removed later. There is evidence for this in that the bodies are rolled over sometime after death?

I do think that the so called fire orbs may be responsible for what happened that night.  Ivanov may have seen additional supporting evidence. 
My narrative is that Okishev supports the story that Ivanov showed his evidence to the Central Committee and they ordered a shutdown on the case. That can only be because they saw convincing evidence. It has to be photographs of fire orbs. There are missing cameras, missing film rolls....

One thing to consider is the size of these so called fire orbs.  The witness statements describe them as "moon size". Some of these people were up to 70km from kholat syakhl.  This would mean the fire orbs would have been around about 500 metres in diameter. Imo it's unlikely that the actual objects were that big, perhaps lighting up the surrounding snow/water vapour. "Light surrounded by a mist".


Personally I am not stuck on any particular theory at the moment.  I am slowly exploring the options and the possible variables (of which there seem to be many).  My favourite currently is still the military accident. infrasound is a possibility.  I think murder is still a possibility, but it doesn't lend itself to the facts of the case.  For instance Semyon left with his camera, someone the group had knives with them to cut trees.  If they were forced out of the tent and marched down the slope to their deaths I would expect their attackers to have searched them and not allowed them to take knives with them. Also, I would expect none of them to have boots, or that they had different levels of clothing. The distribution of the bodies doesn't match what I would expect for a murder.  There a few key facts that kind of make murder less likely.Rocket fuel would provide a good source of NO2, but there has to be some persistence to create a poisonous cloud that forces them to abandon the tent.
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Star man on January 04, 2019, 04:41:34 PM

Initially Lyuda, Semyon and Thibo may have had significant injuries.  Kolevatov is said to have had a deformed neck, but it's not clear what that means?  He may have been able to walk himself.  Rustem although injured may also have been able to walk himself.  That would leave Dyatlov, Zina, and the two yuris.  Possibly kolevatov.  If one person carries Thibo on his back, and another Lyuda and Semyon is supported and aided by two members of the group they could have moved slowly down the slope.  Obviously there are possible variations on how they could have helped the injured down the slope.I prefer the narrative where the two Yuri's die first and clothes are removed later. There is evidence for this in that the bodies are rolled over sometime after death?

I do think that the so called fire orbs may be responsible for what happened that night.  Ivanov may have seen additional supporting evidence. 
My narrative is that Okishev supports the story that Ivanov showed his evidence to the Central Committee and they ordered a shutdown on the case. That can only be because they saw convincing evidence. It has to be photographs of fire orbs. There are missing cameras, missing film rolls....

One thing to consider is the size of these so called fire orbs.  The witness statements describe them as "moon size". Some of these people were up to 70km from kholat syakhl.  This would mean the fire orbs would have been around about 500 metres in diameter. Imo it's unlikely that the actual objects were that big, perhaps lighting up the surrounding snow/water vapour. "Light surrounded by a mist".


Personally I am not stuck on any particular theory at the moment.  I am slowly exploring the options and the possible variables (of which there seem to be many).  My favourite currently is still the military accident. infrasound is a possibility.  I think murder is still a possibility, but it doesn't lend itself to the facts of the case.  For instance Semyon left with his camera, someone the group had knives with them to cut trees.  If they were forced out of the tent and marched down the slope to their deaths I would expect their attackers to have searched them and not allowed them to take knives with them. Also, I would expect none of them to have boots, or that they had different levels of clothing. The distribution of the bodies doesn't match what I would expect for a murder.  There a few key facts that kind of make murder less likely.Rocket fuel would provide a good source of NO2, but there has to be some persistence to create a poisonous cloud that forces them to abandon the tent.

It must be true that whoever removed the clothing from the two Yur's knew or thought that Lyuda etc were still alive.  It may have been the ravine four that took the clothes or just the remaining group members who were trying to keep them alive.  The ravine four were better dressed than the others so even with the injuries they had a better chance against the cold and therefore they may have lived longer than the two Yuri's.  There were some items of clothing found between the cedar tree and the ravine.  The exact sequence of events still needs to be thrashed out.  There are quite a few variables that need to be thought through carefully.

It's possible that the orange orbs were smaller and brighter and therefore appeared as a larger more diffuse light source.  It would be interesting to understand the visibility conditions in the area that night.




Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Star man on January 04, 2019, 04:51:40 PM
They were hit with infra-sound from the Yeti. They were probably nervous already from camping too close to them before. The group mentioned snowman exits prior and took frame 17 pic in light of the situation. They also made light of other events that were occurring in real time as well.

So where are the Yeti prints and trackways that connect them?

Notice the prints in picture below are set into the last tire indention left by the vehicle prior. The Sasquatch winter trackway in this case started and stopped without stepping in from the treeline or off the laneway. Also there's a light layer of fresh snow in case someone might suggest a person sticking out of the trunk or whatever. There's no human prints.  If you can come to terms with that then and perhaps some may reconsider that the Yeti are the most likely responsible for this tradgedy.   

(https://i.ibb.co/pX0G6vG/Sasq-trackway-that-dissappears.jpg) (https://imgbb.com/)

Hi Tracker.  Intersting photograph.  So what happened to the rest of the tracks?  I have read various reports about the abilities of these creatures (if they exist) including that their eyes glow red ( whats that all about?), and that they may even have their own form of language.  Maybe this for discussion on a different thread though.
They do have some interesting abilities which is why I brought it up. About the prints, they can choose to leave them or not. In this case it was a habituation. The Sasquatch was friendly and showing the researcher they can do this. In another encounter the Sasquatch left a trackway of right foot prints only. With the appropriate stride lengths without any left foot prints in the snow. I've seen a disappearing trackway in heavy mud from a dried up creek.
 To the point- The Yeti were probably right outside the Dyatlov 9's tent on the Mtn side that night. Then they hit the 9 with screams or infrasound and didn't leave a single print. Investigators wouldn't find any obvious evidence it was the Yeti. It's a real game changer for this 60 year old mystery Imo.

If the Yeti were right outside the tent or near the tent why didn't they just attack the group and take them all out?  They would have been much faster, stronger and easily capable of taking them all down.  Why didn't any of the 9 grab the weapons in the tent?  You probably wouldn't want to attack a yeti with small axe anyway, but it's better than nothing if it came to defending yourself.
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Loose}{Cannon on January 04, 2019, 09:06:37 PM
Up against a Yeti...... gimme the ice-axe.   
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Tracker on January 05, 2019, 12:59:35 PM
They were hit with infra-sound from the Yeti. They were probably nervous already from camping too close to them before. The group mentioned snowman exits prior and took frame 17 pic in light of the situation. They also made light of other events that were occurring in real time as well.

So where are the Yeti prints and trackways that connect them?

Notice the prints in picture below are set into the last tire indention left by the vehicle prior. The Sasquatch winter trackway in this case started and stopped without stepping in from the treeline or off the laneway. Also there's a light layer of fresh snow in case someone might suggest a person sticking out of the trunk or whatever. There's no human prints.  If you can come to terms with that then and perhaps some may reconsider that the Yeti are the most likely responsible for this tradgedy.   

(https://i.ibb.co/pX0G6vG/Sasq-trackway-that-dissappears.jpg) (https://imgbb.com/)

Hi Tracker.  Intersting photograph.  So what happened to the rest of the tracks?  I have read various reports about the abilities of these creatures (if they exist) including that their eyes glow red ( whats that all about?), and that they may even have their own form of language.  Maybe this for discussion on a different thread though.
They do have some interesting abilities which is why I brought it up. About the prints, they can choose to leave them or not. In this case it was a habituation. The Sasquatch was friendly and showing the researcher they can do this. In another encounter the Sasquatch left a trackway of right foot prints only. With the appropriate stride lengths without any left foot prints in the snow. I've seen a disappearing trackway in heavy mud from a dried up creek.
 To the point- The Yeti were probably right outside the Dyatlov 9's tent on the Mtn side that night. Then they hit the 9 with screams or infrasound and didn't leave a single print. Investigators wouldn't find any obvious evidence it was the Yeti. It's a real game changer for this 60 year old mystery Imo.

If the Yeti were right outside the tent or near the tent why didn't they just attack the group and take them all out?  They would have been much faster, stronger and easily capable of taking them all down.  Why didn't any of the 9 grab the weapons in the tent?  You probably wouldn't want to attack a yeti with small axe anyway, but it's better than nothing if it came to defending yourself.
Their intelligent, direct confrontation usually last resort. They fear us and our weapons and there's nine humans in a tent. They most likely just wanted the group to leave their territory and when they didn't.
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Star man on January 05, 2019, 01:03:31 PM
They were hit with infra-sound from the Yeti. They were probably nervous already from camping too close to them before. The group mentioned snowman exits prior and took frame 17 pic in light of the situation. They also made light of other events that were occurring in real time as well.

So where are the Yeti prints and trackways that connect them?

Notice the prints in picture below are set into the last tire indention left by the vehicle prior. The Sasquatch winter trackway in this case started and stopped without stepping in from the treeline or off the laneway. Also there's a light layer of fresh snow in case someone might suggest a person sticking out of the trunk or whatever. There's no human prints.  If you can come to terms with that then and perhaps some may reconsider that the Yeti are the most likely responsible for this tradgedy.   

(https://i.ibb.co/pX0G6vG/Sasq-trackway-that-dissappears.jpg) (https://imgbb.com/)

Hi Tracker.  Intersting photograph.  So what happened to the rest of the tracks?  I have read various reports about the abilities of these creatures (if they exist) including that their eyes glow red ( whats that all about?), and that they may even have their own form of language.  Maybe this for discussion on a different thread though.
They do have some interesting abilities which is why I brought it up. About the prints, they can choose to leave them or not. In this case it was a habituation. The Sasquatch was friendly and showing the researcher they can do this. In another encounter the Sasquatch left a trackway of right foot prints only. With the appropriate stride lengths without any left foot prints in the snow. I've seen a disappearing trackway in heavy mud from a dried up creek.
 To the point- The Yeti were probably right outside the Dyatlov 9's tent on the Mtn side that night. Then they hit the 9 with screams or infrasound and didn't leave a single print. Investigators wouldn't find any obvious evidence it was the Yeti. It's a real game changer for this 60 year old mystery Imo.

If the Yeti were right outside the tent or near the tent why didn't they just attack the group and take them all out?  They would have been much faster, stronger and easily capable of taking them all down.  Why didn't any of the 9 grab the weapons in the tent?  You probably wouldn't want to attack a yeti with small axe anyway, but it's better than nothing if it came to defending yourself.
Their intelligent, direct confrontation usually last resort. They fear us and our weapons and there's nine humans in a tent. They most likely just wanted the group to leave their territory and when they didn't.

Sounds like a reasonable answer.
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Monika on January 06, 2019, 11:58:33 PM

Initially Lyuda, Semyon and Thibo may have had significant injuries.  Kolevatov is said to have had a deformed neck, but it's not clear what that means?  He may have been able to walk himself.  Rustem although injured may also have been able to walk himself.  That would leave Dyatlov, Zina, and the two yuris.  Possibly kolevatov.  If one person carries Thibo on his back, and another Lyuda and Semyon is supported and aided by two members of the group they could have moved slowly down the slope.  Obviously there are possible variations on how they could have helped the injured down the slope.I prefer the narrative where the two Yuri's die first and clothes are removed later. There is evidence for this in that the bodies are rolled over sometime after death?

I do think that the so called fire orbs may be responsible for what happened that night.  Ivanov may have seen additional supporting evidence. 
My narrative is that Okishev supports the story that Ivanov showed his evidence to the Central Committee and they ordered a shutdown on the case. That can only be because they saw convincing evidence. It has to be photographs of fire orbs. There are missing cameras, missing film rolls....

One thing to consider is the size of these so called fire orbs.  The witness statements describe them as "moon size". Some of these people were up to 70km from kholat syakhl.  This would mean the fire orbs would have been around about 500 metres in diameter. Imo it's unlikely that the actual objects were that big, perhaps lighting up the surrounding snow/water vapour. "Light surrounded by a mist".


Personally I am not stuck on any particular theory at the moment.  I am slowly exploring the options and the possible variables (of which there seem to be many).  My favourite currently is still the military accident. infrasound is a possibility.  I think murder is still a possibility, but it doesn't lend itself to the facts of the case.  For instance Semyon left with his camera, someone the group had knives with them to cut trees.  If they were forced out of the tent and marched down the slope to their deaths I would expect their attackers to have searched them and not allowed them to take knives with them. Also, I would expect none of them to have boots, or that they had different levels of clothing. The distribution of the bodies doesn't match what I would expect for a murder.  There a few key facts that kind of make murder less likely.Rocket fuel would provide a good source of NO2, but there has to be some persistence to create a poisonous cloud that forces them to abandon the tent.

It must be true that whoever removed the clothing from the two Yur's knew or thought that Lyuda etc were still alive.  It may have been the ravine four that took the clothes or just the remaining group members who were trying to keep them alive.  The ravine four were better dressed than the others so even with the injuries they had a better chance against the cold and therefore they may have lived longer than the two Yuri's.  There were some items of clothing found between the cedar tree and the ravine.  The exact sequence of events still needs to be thrashed out.  There are quite a few variables that need to be thought through carefully.

It's possible that the orange orbs were smaller and brighter and therefore appeared as a larger more diffuse light source.  It would be interesting to understand the visibility conditions in the area that night.

“There were some items of clothing found between the cedar tree and the ravine”.
There are two reasons why clothing was thrown to the ravine:
The fire has stopped to work, probably because of the strong wind. The two Yuris froze. After that two possible situations may have involved:
1. The other four have taken their clothes in order to get dressed and at the same time to used the clothes to cover bottom of the den. But on the way to the den due to a wind condition and due to weakness and tiredness, they could not keep all the clothes in their hand, and it was drop down on the way.
2. The other four have taken their clothes in order to dress up and at the same time to used the clothes to cover bottom of the den, and they also disposed of some clothes along the way as a navigation as these three who went to the tent for things could later find them (because they (all group of seven)  initially were separated at the fire).
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Monika on January 07, 2019, 12:17:38 AM


Ok so maybe the injuries weren't caused by a shock wave from HE despite what the pathologist said?  It's unlikely they were caused by a car crash either.  So what other possibilities are there?
Ball lightning exploding might fit the problem (because we don't know in detail what it is and how it might explode :)

1.  Could they have fallen from the cedar tree?  There is evidence that they climbed up to 5 metres?  A fall even onto shallow snow would still produce significant forces to the chest in the range of about 2 tonnes.
After those injuries they aren't walking anywhere, certainly not to the ravine from the cedar. Those injuries happened very close to where they were found.

2.  Could something else have hit fhem in the chest?  Large bolders that had been thrown by something?
The lack of surface tissue damage makes it highly unlikely, i think the pathologist said something similar.

3. Is there a type of explosion that could cause the chest injuries but not an explosion capable of bursting the lungs?
Ball lightning?


If the four of them fall into ravine or on each other, Zolotarev camera will be damaged. But the camera was intact only the film was destroyed probably due to water. It seems to be as his injuries occurred when he stood on his feet and what happened to him caused him broke his ribs but it did not knock him down. Would you know someone explain it?
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Nigel Evans on January 07, 2019, 02:14:50 AM


Ok so maybe the injuries weren't caused by a shock wave from HE despite what the pathologist said?  It's unlikely they were caused by a car crash either.  So what other possibilities are there?
Ball lightning exploding might fit the problem (because we don't know in detail what it is and how it might explode :)

1.  Could they have fallen from the cedar tree?  There is evidence that they climbed up to 5 metres?  A fall even onto shallow snow would still produce significant forces to the chest in the range of about 2 tonnes.
After those injuries they aren't walking anywhere, certainly not to the ravine from the cedar. Those injuries happened very close to where they were found.

2.  Could something else have hit fhem in the chest?  Large bolders that had been thrown by something?
The lack of surface tissue damage makes it highly unlikely, i think the pathologist said something similar.

3. Is there a type of explosion that could cause the chest injuries but not an explosion capable of bursting the lungs?
Ball lightning?


If the four of them fall into ravine or on each other, Zolotarev camera will be damaged. But the camera was intact only the film was destroyed probably due to water. It seems to be as his injuries occurred when he stood on his feet and what happened to him caused him broke his ribs but it did not knock him down. Would you know someone explain it?
I'd include Rustem so five, but it could be all seven, Igor and Zina not getting seriously injured just collecting "combat injuries".
I don't think his camera was damaged. Imo the film wasn't destroyed, i think those images are of objects in the night sky and were ignored when the better images were confiscated.

Semyon's exhumation discovered a fractured shoulder blade missed by the pathologist which the exhumation team claim means that he had to be lying on his back, that or he was roughly handled before burial!
I'm not aware of why his injury profile requires him to be on his feet?
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Loose}{Cannon on January 07, 2019, 06:27:24 AM
#1

Experts agree that Rustems skull was cracked due to expansion of the brain when freezing.  We all know the body/brain consists of mostly water and how water expands when freezing. 

#2

The shoulder blade wasn't snapped in half as Nigel may lead you to believe.  It had a few nearly invisible hairline cracks on one side, and one of the TOP US forensic Pathologist says one blow from the front caused this.  The force/energy has to go somewhere. The ribs transferred the force to the shoulder blade and subsequently broke under said force/stress.  The blow was one, and does not have to take place while the victim is on his/her back. 
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Nigel Evans on January 07, 2019, 07:26:27 AM
The shoulder blade wasn't snapped in half as Nigel may lead you to believe. 
You're misquoting me, i said cracks...
Fake news...  lalala1 lalala1 lalala1
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Loose}{Cannon on January 07, 2019, 07:56:19 AM
And I said 'may' lead you to believe.  Its open ended for future use.   

 tongue2

And to be fair and honest....  this is your quote.


Quote
Semyon's exhumation discovered a fractured shoulder blade missed by the pathologist
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Nigel Evans on January 07, 2019, 09:01:45 AM
And I said 'may' lead you to believe.  Its open ended for future use.   

 tongue2

And to be fair and honest....  this is your quote.


Quote
Semyon's exhumation discovered a fractured shoulder blade missed by the pathologist


 "Fair and honest" - such a refreshing change.  bigjoke


To be fair fractured is ambiguous.
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: sarapuk on January 07, 2019, 02:39:27 PM
And I said 'may' lead you to believe.  Its open ended for future use.   

 tongue2

And to be fair and honest....  this is your quote.


Quote
Semyon's exhumation discovered a fractured shoulder blade missed by the pathologist


 "Fair and honest" - such a refreshing change.  bigjoke


To be fair fractured is ambiguous.

Any way, well spotted. Iam sure that many members did not note that cracks were found in a body that were not recorded at the time of investigation in 1959. WHY NOT  !  ?  It is highly unlikely that those cracks were caused after the recovery of the body.
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Per Inge Oestmoen on January 17, 2019, 02:44:07 AM
#1

Experts agree that Rustems skull was cracked due to expansion of the brain when freezing.  We all know the body/brain consists of mostly water and how water expands when freezing. 

#2

The shoulder blade wasn't snapped in half as Nigel may lead you to believe.  It had a few nearly invisible hairline cracks on one side, and one of the TOP US forensic Pathologist says one blow from the front caused this.  The force/energy has to go somewhere. The ribs transferred the force to the shoulder blade and subsequently broke under said force/stress.  The blow was one, and does not have to take place while the victim is on his/her back.


1. No, experts would not agree on that. There is no certainty that this is the explanation - it is a theoretical possibility. To find out more, the skeleton has to be exhumed and the skull examined. Then it should be possible to find out whether the broken skull was the result from inside pressure or an impact from the outside.

2. Such a blow is most likely to have been caused by another human. And quite correctly, it does not have to happen when the victim is on his or her back.
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Nigel Evans on January 17, 2019, 06:08:18 AM


2. Such a blow is most likely to have been caused by another human. And quite correctly, it does not have to happen when the victim is on his or her back.
Or self inflicted from falling over, possibly whilst drunk on N2O...
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: sarapuk on January 17, 2019, 03:24:18 PM
#1

Experts agree that Rustems skull was cracked due to expansion of the brain when freezing.  We all know the body/brain consists of mostly water and how water expands when freezing. 

#2

The shoulder blade wasn't snapped in half as Nigel may lead you to believe.  It had a few nearly invisible hairline cracks on one side, and one of the TOP US forensic Pathologist says one blow from the front caused this.  The force/energy has to go somewhere. The ribs transferred the force to the shoulder blade and subsequently broke under said force/stress.  The blow was one, and does not have to take place while the victim is on his/her back.


1. No, experts would not agree on that. There is no certainty that this is the explanation - it is a theoretical possibility. To find out more, the skeleton has to be exhumed and the skull examined. Then it should be possible to find out whether the broken skull was the result from inside pressure or an impact from the outside.

2. Such a blow is most likely to have been caused by another human. And quite correctly, it does not have to happen when the victim is on his or her back.

Yes an investigation on the remains these days would certainly help the cause. I would only go as far as saying that RUSTEM's skull may have been cracked during freezing. Likewise I would only go as far as saying that maybe a blow caused the fracture or fractures.
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Loose}{Cannon on January 18, 2019, 09:47:53 AM
Quote
2. Such a blow is most likely to have been caused by another human. And quite correctly, it does not have to happen when the victim is on his or her back.


http://forum.dyatlovpass.com/index.php?topic=187.0
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: sarapuk on January 18, 2019, 03:08:04 PM
Yes it seems even the experts can not agree. 
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: cennetkusu on January 29, 2019, 08:35:46 AM
And a good detail is that young people must have been a sudden attack since the tent was cut and ran away. Because if they felt the attack, they'd wear their shoes in advance. So it must have been a very sudden raid ... or they may have heard a terrible sound from inside the tent ... This may have caused them to suddenly cut off the tent. The tent was already dark and feared. And when they heard the horrible sound, they cut the tent and ran away.
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: cennetkusu on January 29, 2019, 08:40:01 AM
If the threat came from outside the tent, it would be absurd to cut the tent out. But the danger came through the tent. And until then, they were surprised to see what they had to do when the awful sound they heard from outside came inside the tent. And they tried to cut the tent and run away. And they didn't even think of dressing and getting their boots.
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: cennetkusu on January 29, 2019, 08:46:17 AM
Semyon was 38 years old and was more mature than young people. And he kept his composure. And he put on his boots in advance and took his camera with him. And a paper pen. It meant there was no human or animal attacking them ... If people attacked, they wouldn't take a camera. The paper wouldn't take in the pen. Because people don't want that kind of evidence. And they destroy it immediately. That means that the attacking (s) is not human or animal .....
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: cennetkusu on January 29, 2019, 08:50:51 AM
And why didn't the young people fear this danger and run away? I was flying because this wasn't a danger walking at the place .... I could fly. That's why they knew it wouldn't help to get away. But they still didn't know if this being would harm them. So they tried their last chance too .... And they decided to go back to the tent for two Yuri ... But on the way back to the tent they were attacked within 5 minutes.
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Kopyrda on February 01, 2019, 09:21:04 AM

Experts agree that Rustems skull was cracked due to expansion of the brain when freezing.  We all know the body/brain consists of mostly water and how water expands when freezing. 

That's interesting, but I wonder why other victims didn't have such skull damage?
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: sarapuk on February 01, 2019, 01:54:33 PM

Experts agree that Rustems skull was cracked due to expansion of the brain when freezing.  We all know the body/brain consists of mostly water and how water expands when freezing. 

That's interesting, but I wonder why other victims didn't have such skull damage?

Yes thats just one of the many interesting factors regarding injuries. And the answer could be that Rustem's Skull was cracked by something, and that something wasnt because the Brain expanded due to freezing.
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Loose}{Cannon on February 02, 2019, 07:03:46 AM
Put a soda in the freezer....  tell me what happens. 
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: sarapuk on February 02, 2019, 04:33:02 PM
Put a soda in the freezer....  tell me what happens.

But we are talking about Brains. And Brains are enclosed within strong Skulls.  And they all had to deal with the same severe freezing weather conditions.
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Nigel Evans on February 02, 2019, 05:54:31 PM
Put a soda in the freezer....  tell me what happens.

But we are talking about Brains. And Brains are enclosed within strong Skulls.  And they all had to deal with the same severe freezing weather conditions.


When we've discussed this issue in the past it's been shown that the brain expands through the sinuses literally coming out of the nostrils... Also Rustem had bruising on both sides of his head?
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Loose}{Cannon on February 02, 2019, 05:59:03 PM
I guess freeze cracking and bruises obviously cannot be two separate injuries/events.      nose1 
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Nigel Evans on February 03, 2019, 02:40:34 AM
I guess freeze cracking and bruises obviously cannot be two separate injuries/events.      nose1
They can but the Laws of Probability are against you.  declare1
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Loose}{Cannon on February 03, 2019, 03:59:09 AM
Seems like a 50/50 deal to me.  There isn't any proof either way.  If you believe in one over the other, the burden of proof is on you. 
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Nigel Evans on February 03, 2019, 04:52:21 AM
Seems like a 50/50 deal to me.  There isn't any proof either way.  If you believe in one over the other, the burden of proof is on you.
Probability isn't a proof, it's just probable.
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: sarapuk on February 03, 2019, 03:55:57 PM
Seems like a 50/50 deal to me.  There isn't any proof either way.  If you believe in one over the other, the burden of proof is on you.

Sounds reasonable. I wonder if this new investigation will include re examining the bodies / bones.
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Tanatos on March 20, 2020, 09:39:48 AM
This is above all the $9,000 question....  I agree

I do however believe there is a very real possiblity of the 9 becoming unfortunate victims of several events or (chain of events) in which lead to their deaths. 

#1.  Most of the intrigue of this mystery is due to the lack of evidence for all theories which leads one to rely on circumstantial evidence as the basis for the theory they subscribe to the most. 

#2.  Its a 50/50 chance said 'compelling' force came from outside of the tent, or within. I would lean more towards the latter given that the easiest explanation is usually correct.  People tend to focus on more on what compelling force would make them go down the slope rather then what made them leave the tent when approaching this.  For me, its a matter of what inside the tent would they want to flee from, not what is outside they would want to flee towards and subsequently be unprepared as described.    What may have been the reason within the tent for said departure I dont know...  But it shouldn't be overlooked yet alone ruled out.

#3.  The injuries.   I also believe most people tend to see the injuries as 'having' to be caused by someone from outside if the group.  In reality, most victims know their attacker in one way shape or form.  I do believe either case can be made, but I do not like to discount one over the other due to lack of evidence.    We know most sustained injuries consistent with hand/hand combat, but honestly we have no idea who inflicted said injuries..... Could have well been amongst themselves.   Another scenario that shouldn't be overlooked.

One of my favorite. Theory as you said the could be a fight among them.,, maybe they divided in two groups a Zolotaryev and Dyatlov. Zolotaryev didn't like the idea of camp on a slope
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Wyndford on May 22, 2020, 03:06:49 PM
That is the big question. Why did they leave the tent?
Why did they slit the tent canvas rather than going out the door?
Why would they leave the tent inadequately dressed?
Why did they move so far from the tent?
Why did they seem afraid to return to the tent even when the alternative was death by hypothermia?

In such a remote location and in such extremes of weather and at such a time of night I think the chances of anyone else being in the vicinity are vanishingly small. Perhaps they were discussing the choice of campsite, which was on a bare hillside and was not ideal and perhaps the thought of avalanches came into their minds. In the still of the night they might have heard the sound of an avalanche somewhere and panicked.
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: alecsandros on May 23, 2020, 04:39:07 AM
Maybe a rocket got accidentally off-course (such as a R-12 Dvina https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R-12_Dvina). Maybe that rocket carried a chemical weapon, in the form of a gas... Maybe the gas was carried by the wind in the direction of the tent... The tent had to be evacuated immediately... It is possible that Zolotaryov managed to take a picture of the rocket explosion (or part of this explosion), after being warned by Thibeaux-Brignolles about the incoming rocket, and he rushed out of the tent holding his camera. It is also possible that Krivonishenko, alterted by the same Thibeaux-Brignolles, managed to take a snapshot of the falling rocket , before it exploded (frame no34 from Krivonishenko's film) [although both frames are difficult to be done , because the R12 rocket had a high speed, and the time between first sighting and explosion (if there was an explosion) would be of the matter of seconds, therefore not enough time to alert the others inside the tent. The rocket pictures can be done though if both Zolotaryov and Krivonishenko were already outside the tent when the rocket was sighted.]

In any case, my opinion is that some evidence was extracted from the scene and put away in some secret archive. Such as 9 (or 10?) negatives from Zolotaryov's camera, Zolotaryov's notebook, etc. This suggests to me that some state secret was compromised , and that the extraction of evidence was needed to conceal the secret. This further invites thought on the chemical rocket theory.
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: alecsandros on May 23, 2020, 07:07:31 AM
About the actions after leaving the tent: does anyone know how they managed to start a fire in -18...-25degC temperatures, with wind, and using only matches ? (as I understand, the bottle of alcohol was found intact by the search teams at the tent, therefore they didn't use it). If I try to start a fire at +18degC and with wind, using only matches, I have little to no chances of succeeding. At -18degC it would be impossible for me to do it. How did they do it ?
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: WAB on May 24, 2020, 12:31:01 AM
About the actions after leaving the tent: does anyone know how they managed to start a fire in -18...-25degC temperatures, with wind, and using only matches ?

Below a place where Zina has been found, the wind below practically is absent. At a cedar the wind exists only at northern direction. In during events wind was western.

(as I understand, the bottle of alcohol was found intact by the search teams at the tent, therefore they didn't use it).


This flask has been found in tent. At its cedar was not.

If I try to start a fire at +18degC and with wind, using only matches, I have little to no chances of succeeding. At -18degC it would be impossible for me to do it. How did they do it ?

They have made it are exists as the fact. We too have easily made it (as experiment) at a cedar in March 2019. It is in addition possible to add that at us snow was much more, therefore there was it was to make more difficultly. And we did not take a branch from a cedar, therefore works on search of fire wood was more.
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: alecsandros on May 24, 2020, 02:49:45 AM
Thanks for the answer !
In your reconstitution of the facts, how long do you think it took the group to descend from the tent to the cedar tree ? 30min ? 40 min ?
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: syneoa on May 24, 2020, 04:11:40 AM
Do we know who was the last man/woman standing? Or is this hard to investigate due to a short time frame between deaths.

By reading about this incredible mystery it seems obvious that someone hid something and that crucial part of evidence could solve this forever.

For me, this looks like a major cover-up and a some kind of mess made by Soviet authorities at a time and thus would really like to see a proper closure of this case.
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Nigel Evans on May 24, 2020, 05:28:48 AM
All we know is that some of the ravine four died wearing clothes belonging to the two yuris.
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: alecsandros on May 24, 2020, 05:41:21 AM
Another problem: why did Zolotaryov take his photo camera at night ? Surely he must have known that any picture taken at night would result in not much, as there was no setup existing that would prepare the night photo shoot. Therefore, either he had it with him all the time, or it was something extraordinarily luminous in the night , that would have a chance in being caught on film.

About that , does anyone know from where did the 9 (or 10) negatives missing? Were they from the same film as the one known (the damaged one), or was it another film altogether?

Best,
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: syneoa on May 24, 2020, 06:15:11 AM
This is for me the most intriguing part. Those missing frames hold the truth of what happened there.
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: alecsandros on May 24, 2020, 06:46:10 AM
This is for me the most intriguing part. Those missing frames hold the truth of what happened there.
It is possible, however given that it was night , it would be difficult for good photos to be done...
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Nigel Evans on May 24, 2020, 07:19:52 AM
Imo it all boils down to the Plane2 photo. If it is genuine then it points to Semyon's mystery photos being either military involvement, atmospheric electrical phenomenon or both.
Wrt to it's veracity, i think the two smudges are very significant. Just as if two pieces of snow/sleet/graupel have hit a lens kept warm by body heat and starting to melt. I struggle with the idea that this photo is a result of say water damage.


 (https://i.ibb.co/PmRD3J5/Zolotaryov-camera-11.jpg) (https://ibb.co/K0YKRB9)
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: alecsandros on May 24, 2020, 09:21:40 AM
Question: how do night photos look like , made with the same camera and in the same conditions ? (half moon, no clouds, some stars visible, medium humidity, some snow).
More to the point - how does the following look under those conditions, when photographed with Zolytariov's camera:
a) globular lightining
b) jet fighter (particularly the exhaust stack(s) )
c) ground-to-ground / ground-to-air rocket or stage of a rocket
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: brad112 on May 25, 2020, 03:10:35 AM
So just to clarify, all the "images" found on the "3 heads", "plane 1", "plane 2" and the rest of the psychic photography were all found supposedly on the 10 frames of Zolotarev strip of film found in Zolotarev's camera?

And the previous 17 frames were cut and removed and found where? At his home?
Thanks,
Brad
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Nigel Evans on May 25, 2020, 03:56:59 AM
So just to clarify, all the "images" found on the "3 heads", "plane 1", "plane 2" and the rest of the psychic photography were all found supposedly on the 10 frames of Zolotarev strip of film found in Zolotarev's camera?

And the previous 17 frames were cut and removed and found where? At his home?

Thanks,
Brad
My understanding is that the photos were found by Ivanov's daughter when he died and handed over to the DP foundation.

It would be really good to see the negatives of these photos (in full) rather than partial images of developed film.

Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: WAB on May 25, 2020, 07:12:52 PM
Thanks for the answer !
In your reconstitution of the facts, how long do you think it took the group to descend from the tent to the cedar tree ? 30min ? 40 min ?

It very much complicated question which depends on set of assumptions. For example, from  psychological condition of group, character of interaction participant`s command, trajectory of movement, exact parametres of weather and another.
The disorder of indications can be very big, from 40 … 50 minutes till 2 o'clock.
For example, Shura Alekseenkov in February 2014 has reached from place of tent to cedar for 40 with small minutes. But it went in the afternoon, he knew, where and as it is necessary go, we with it know this place better than own ranch, therefore it is not basic time. It is possible consider it as the most minimum time of movement from tent to cedar. Any deviation of parametres will increase it very strongly.

Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: WAB on May 25, 2020, 07:16:30 PM
Do we know who was the last man/woman standing? Or is this hard to investigate due to a short time frame between deaths.

1. The Short interval between death is very improbable. It is necessary to analyze in details logic of events and logistics of actions of group. Then it turns out that this disorder of time can make the big size.
2. If judging by that that is described in criminal case and considering that I have told in point 1, the last Alexander Kolevatov should be lost.

By reading about this incredible mystery it seems obvious that someone hid something and that crucial part of evidence could solve this forever.

Why you so think? I think that not clear events occur only in heads of researchers because they do not know many details of district and events. Is no point here that that hide. Though imaginations on a theme of spies and other imaginary essence it is possible to think up infinite set.

For me, this looks like a major cover-up and a some kind of mess made by Soviet authorities at a time and thus would really like to see a proper closure of this case.

You sometime saw as there are such searches in real time and own eyes? I think that it was not. Then it is clear, why you consider that who that confused it specially. In life all submits to laws of information entropy. The nature disseminates the information in the same way as well as warmly. What to collect and order the information it would be necessary to put a lot of time, it is a lot of forces and it is necessary to have many special knowledge that there would be a possibility it to make well.
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: WAB on May 25, 2020, 07:20:50 PM
Imo it all boils down to the Plane2 photo. If it is genuine then it points to Semyon's mystery photos being either military involvement, atmospheric electrical phenomenon or both.

Nigel, you the serious person why at you imaginations gush forth without any measure?
Already many times said that it is:
1. Too small size on a negative (a little thousand or ten-thousand - 10 in a minus of 4 or 5 degrees - an inch share).
2. It not in Simeon's films, and scraps of films of other operators.
3. Scraps not in the end, and in the middle of different films Are located it.
4. It precisely corresponds (both under the form and on the size) to loss of crystals of sulphite of sodium (Na2SO3) of that the film has been washed badly out at development.
It is necessary to know well features and to have good practice of a chemical photo (on a photosensitive film and with chemical processing in a consequence) what not to do such hasty conclusions
It I cannot already explain it to Valentine Jakimenko a lot of time in any way. He agrees with all arguments, but continues to dream on this theme. From it also there is this conversation «about planes», that «removed the falling rocket» and etc.
Could not remove it because the rocket in the end of flight flies with a speed more from 1 to 5 km a second (are some miles a second) and it does not have appreciable luminescence, even at night.
And to remove the plane at night, it in general behind an imagination side. Especially if it high-speed.


Wrt to it's veracity, i think the two smudges are very significant. Just as if two pieces of snow/sleet/graupel have hit a lens kept warm by body heat and starting to melt. I struggle with the idea that this photo is a result of say water damage.

 (https://i.ibb.co/PmRD3J5/Zolotaryov-camera-11.jpg) (https://ibb.co/K0YKRB9)

Before to speak about the sizes «stains on  lens», count the sizes with what they should be on film, and then look at physics course in section "optics" where it is told about images which are in piece, between 2 points of focus of lens.
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: WAB on May 25, 2020, 07:26:46 PM
Another problem: why did Zolotaryov take his photo camera at night ?

It it did not take specially. It did not remove it from itself(himself) after they have come on this place from the previous camp.

Surely he must have known that any picture taken at night would result in not much, as there was no setup existing that would prepare the night photo shoot. Therefore, either he had it with him all the time, or it was something extraordinarily luminous in the night , that would have a chance in being caught on film.

Why all of you so complicate? What to consider that «there was something unusually bright at night which could get to cinema.» (c), it is necessary to have though what that basis for this purpose. It is possible to think up it is artificial anything you like, but the real bases are necessary. What facts result in it?

About that , does anyone know from where did the 9 (or 10) negatives missing? Were they from the same film as the one known (the damaged one), or was it another film altogether?

Why you considers, what that that was gone and even know quantity of these gone "negatives"? You knows precisely, how many they were in a reality, or it is the next idea?
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: alecsandros on May 26, 2020, 01:03:33 AM
Do we know who was the last man/woman standing? Or is this hard to investigate due to a short time frame between deaths.

1. The Short interval between death is very improbable. It is necessary to analyze in details logic of events and logistics of actions of group. Then it turns out that this disorder of time can make the big size.
2. If judging by that that is described in criminal case and considering that I have told in point 1, the last Alexander Kolevatov should be lost.

By reading about this incredible mystery it seems obvious that someone hid something and that crucial part of evidence could solve this forever.

Why you so think? I think that not clear events occur only in heads of researchers because they do not know many details of district and events. Is no point here that that hide. Though imaginations on a theme of spies and other imaginary essence it is possible to think up infinite set.

For me, this looks like a major cover-up and a some kind of mess made by Soviet authorities at a time and thus would really like to see a proper closure of this case.

You sometime saw as there are such searches in real time and own eyes? I think that it was not. Then it is clear, why you consider that who that confused it specially. In life all submits to laws of information entropy. The nature disseminates the information in the same way as well as warmly. What to collect and order the information it would be necessary to put a lot of time, it is a lot of forces and it is necessary to have many special knowledge that there would be a possibility it to make well.
Thank you for the answer !
So between 40min and 2 hours...

Is it correct to think that during the descent from the tent to the cedar, the wind was blowing from their back ? i.e. from West to East ?
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: alecsandros on May 26, 2020, 01:11:46 AM
Why all of you so complicate? What to consider that «there was something unusually bright at night which could get to cinema.» (c), it is necessary to have though what that basis for this purpose. It is possible to think up it is artificial anything you like, but the real bases are necessary. What facts result in it?
I'm thinking about the luminous spheres that were reported by another group, situated 30km East of the Dyatlov group and about the newspaper article signed by Lev Ivanov, published in Nov 1990, concerning the "Mystery of the fireballs". Both accounts suggest that luminous spheres were in the air during the fatal night. Therefore, Zolotaryov (and not only him) could have been attempting to photograph them. However, I am intrigued about what exact capabilities there were for making night pictures. It would be great to see night photos made in 1959 with the existent cameras...

About that , does anyone know from where did the 9 (or 10) negatives missing? Were they from the same film as the one known (the damaged one), or was it another film altogether?

Why you considers, what that that was gone and even know quantity of these gone "negatives"? You knows precisely, how many they were in a reality, or it is the next idea?
[/quote]

I am following the lines here: https://dyatlovpass.com/controversy?flp=1#zolotaryovcamera "The most glaring item to begin with, in the examination of Zolotarev’s film, was that nine frames were missing. There should have been a total of 36 frames but the two strips only had a total of 27 frames. So where were the missing nine frames?"
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Nigel Evans on May 26, 2020, 01:56:28 AM


Hi WAB thanks for your post i'll reply later.
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Marley on May 26, 2020, 05:18:45 AM
Imo it all boils down to the Plane2 photo. If it is genuine then it points to Semyon's mystery photos being either military involvement, atmospheric electrical phenomenon or both.

Nigel, you the serious person why at you imaginations gush forth without any measure?
Already many times said that it is:
1. Too small size on a negative (a little thousand or ten-thousand - 10 in a minus of 4 or 5 degrees - an inch share).
2. It not in Simeon's films, and scraps of films of other operators.
3. Scraps not in the end, and in the middle of different films Are located it.
4. It precisely corresponds (both under the form and on the size) to loss of crystals of sulphite of sodium (Na2SO3) of that the film has been washed badly out at development.
It is necessary to know well features and to have good practice of a chemical photo (on a photosensitive film and with chemical processing in a consequence) what not to do such hasty conclusions
It I cannot already explain it to Valentine Jakimenko a lot of time in any way. He agrees with all arguments, but continues to dream on this theme. From it also there is this conversation «about planes», that «removed the falling rocket» and etc.
Could not remove it because the rocket in the end of flight flies with a speed more from 1 to 5 km a second (are some miles a second) and it does not have appreciable luminescence, even at night.
And to remove the plane at night, it in general behind an imagination side. Especially if it high-speed.

WAB,
The plane "photos" don't look like prints to me but (scans of) negatives. Is this true? Do you know? Because if these are negatives they're obviously not nighttime photographs. (On a negative the night sky looks white and a bright object dark.)
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Nigel Evans on May 26, 2020, 09:24:45 AM
Imo it all boils down to the Plane2 photo. If it is genuine then it points to Semyon's mystery photos being either military involvement, atmospheric electrical phenomenon or both.

Nigel, you the serious person why at you imaginations gush forth without any measure? It's good you think i'm a serious person!  kewl1
Already many times said that it is:
1. Too small size on a negative (a little thousand or ten-thousand - 10 in a minus of 4 or 5 degrees - an inch share).
2. It not in Simeon's films, and scraps of films of other operators. How do you know this? Such certainty from a "serious person" like you?....  kewl1
3. Scraps not in the end, and in the middle of different films Are located it.
4. It precisely corresponds (both under the form and on the size) to loss of crystals of sulphite of sodium (Na2SO3) of that the film has been washed badly out at development. I would need to see the Plane2 negative to form such an opinion. Have you seen it?
It is necessary to know well features and to have good practice of a chemical photo (on a photosensitive film and with chemical processing in a consequence) what not to do such hasty conclusions
It I cannot already explain it to Valentine Jakimenko a lot of time in any way. He agrees with all arguments, but continues to dream on this theme. From it also there is this conversation «about planes», that «removed the falling rocket» and etc.
Could not remove it because the rocket in the end of flight flies with a speed more from 1 to 5 km a second (are some miles a second) not if it malfunctions and it does not have appreciable luminescence, even at night. If the Plane2 photo is genuine then there is some other light source illuminating everything.
And to remove the plane at night, it in general behind an imagination side. Especially if it high-speed.

Before to speak about the sizes «stains on  lens», count the sizes with what they should be on film, and then look at physics course in section "optics" where it is told about images which are in piece, between 2 points of focus of lens. That sentence doesn't translate so well, i'm saying the water drops on Plane2 are the same as in this image
 (https://i.ibb.co/S39ymVj/water-drops-collecting-on-photography-camera-lens-creating-surreal-blurred-liquid-background-effect-P5-HDMB.jpg) (https://ibb.co/z40x2PM)
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: hoosiergose on May 27, 2020, 10:33:57 PM
They left the tent due to the sound of an approaching tornado or perhaps a Willawa (kabatic wind) upon their flight to the safety of the ravine & descending the slope they inadvertently wandered out front of it and that is how several members sustained serious injuries. (Remember it was dark & they could not see it only hear it) a tornado could have easily caused these terrible devastating injuries. I believe that A Tornado - was the unknown compelling force that night - not Bigfoot aka  Menk or A UFO or the Loch Ness monster or Frankenstein ect ect
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: sparrow on May 28, 2020, 06:01:16 AM
Hello Nigel.  If they had to enlarge the photo 1000 times in order to see this shape, then how could they see it with the naked eye?
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Nigel Evans on May 28, 2020, 06:05:21 AM
Hello Nigel.  If they had to enlarge the photo 1000 times in order to see this shape, then how could they see it with the naked eye?
Hi, we need an image of the entire frame of the Plane2 negative in order to answer these questions about scale. Without this it's all just conjecture.
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: sparrow on May 28, 2020, 06:18:33 AM
In a book I have (I'll have to check which one), it gives us the name of someone (a specialist in the area of photography) who examined the photos and the process that he went through to get the Plane 2 picture. He says something about the frames being blank, so he keeps blowing them up till he gets a shape and then he ( of course) names each photo.
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Nigel Evans on May 28, 2020, 08:02:08 AM
In a book I have (I'll have to check which one), it gives us the name of someone (a specialist in the area of photography) who examined the photos and the process that he went through to get the Plane 2 picture. He says something about the frames being blank, so he keeps blowing them up till he gets a shape and then he ( of course) names each photo.
That's certainly the case for the "Eagle" photos and the ones showing the sprocket holes. But it's not clear to me what he's done with the Plane photos?
P.S. it's Valentin Gerasmovich Yakimenko who examined the photos.
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: sparrow on May 31, 2020, 04:22:06 AM
Thanks for the specialists name Nigel. dance1
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: sparrow on May 31, 2020, 04:35:23 AM
Hi Nigel.  It would be nice to find out what kind of plane it could possibly be and check its shape and dimensions with the picture and see if they correspond.  To me, the tail of the plane looks like it is almost as high as the body of the plane is long. loco1
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Nigel Evans on May 31, 2020, 07:28:19 AM
Hi Nigel.  It would be nice to find out what kind of plane it could possibly be and check its shape and dimensions with the picture and see if they correspond.  To me, the tail of the plane looks like it is almost as high as the body of the plane is long. loco1
Hi there. Assuming it is a man made craft.... Any identification of a craft in distress using hypergolic fuel pumped at pressure in a nighttime photo has to deal with the fact that fuel components could be leaking and hence reacting creating "false structure". Also objects travelling at mach speeds create air shear that results in "false structure", e.g. play this at 1.20 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iwn4LVVvAUQ Also it's possible that Plane 1 and 2 are shots of different bits of the same craft falling separately.

So not easy.
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Nigel Evans on May 31, 2020, 07:31:02 AM
What's more interesting is (assuming it's an exposed frame taken at night) where is all that illumination coming from? Burning rocket fuel? A possible explanation for the hot spot?
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: sparrow on May 31, 2020, 11:17:40 PM
That was an interesting video.  But in the video the only thing lit up was the fuel burning at the tail and not the whole rocket (like plane 2 for example).

Also, if that plane was breaking up and going to crash, when it hit you would have heard it and felt it for many miles around.
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Nigel Evans on June 01, 2020, 03:06:19 AM
That was an interesting video.  But in the video the only thing lit up was the fuel burning at the tail and not the whole rocket (like plane 2 for example).

Also, if that plane was breaking up and going to crash, when it hit you would have heard it and felt it for many miles around.
Witnesses saw the flash of an explosion in Ivdel.
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: sparrow on June 02, 2020, 01:19:33 AM
You are right; I forgot about that. 

I am not sure how far Ivdel is from the sight of their tent or the cedar, but even if they did see a flash what about the sound. We used to live about 20 to 30 plus miles from a naval bombing range and when (on the rare occasion) one of the jets/planes crashed, we knew (sounded and felt a lot like when they dropped a bomb).
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Nigel Evans on June 02, 2020, 09:57:36 AM
You are right; I forgot about that. 

I am not sure how far Ivdel is from the sight of their tent or the cedar, but even if they did see a flash what about the sound. We used to live about 20 to 30 plus miles from a naval bombing range and when (on the rare occasion) one of the jets/planes crashed, we knew (sounded and felt a lot like when they dropped a bomb).
Don't forget the very high winds could mask any bang.
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Gorojanin on June 02, 2020, 02:45:48 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/P8DUQ3z.jpg)
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: sparrow on June 02, 2020, 05:57:16 PM
Are you suggesting that the tent was burned by the stove?   
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: sarapuk on June 03, 2020, 02:44:19 PM
Hi Nigel.  It would be nice to find out what kind of plane it could possibly be and check its shape and dimensions with the picture and see if they correspond.  To me, the tail of the plane looks like it is almost as high as the body of the plane is long. loco1

Its not a Plane
Title: Re: Why did the Dyatlov group leave their tent?
Post by: Gorojanin on June 06, 2020, 11:07:20 AM
Are you suggesting that the tent was burned by the stove?

A tent with a cut-out piece is very similar to a tent burned by a stove.