Theories Discussion > General Discussion

Nine Clumsy Oafs?

(1/2) > >>

amashilu:
Sometimes I almost think I’ve read everything about this mystery; I’m sure I missed some, but it’s got to be close to everything since I’ve been reading for months now and every time I go back and check on something, it turns out I’ve already read it.

I think before agreeing with any one theory, it is important to stand back and look at the overall picture.

I don’t have much to say about theories such as Yeti, teleportation, mushrooms, UFOs, or other strange and improbable ideas, but to propose that these nine people panicked, cut their way out of the tent, ran, stumbled, repeatedly crashed and fell, hitting the sides of their heads, hands, ribs, and ankles on rocks, and tumbled into a ravine by accident and then ALL DIED, like nine clumsy oafs, is just not credible. This is not giving these nine people the respect they earned. They were skilled, tough, experienced, trained, and resourceful. One had been through WW II. They were not panic-prone newbies. The picture of them running helter-skelter without their coats and shoes, perhaps trying to out-run an avalanche by running in front of it, falling in the dark, getting hit by rocks and tumbling into a ravine, truly is material for a Dumb & Dumber movie.

Let’s give these guys some credit.

Indications are that their decisions at the cedar tree and the so-called “den” were intelligent, skilled, and by the book. When you are in a dangerous situation as they were, your training really does kick in. I worked in a prison for 10 years and we were constantly being trained and updated, and it was kind of wonderful to discover that when you actually are in one of those situations you trained for, your brain and muscles automatically do what you were trained to do. You really don’t just panic and run and die. Training actually works.

1) They would never cut their tent. Never. They knew perfectly well that this tent meant their very survival. They took good care of it and sewed the rips every night. This is training and experience.

2) They would never leave voluntarily without their shoes or coats. They knew perfectly well that this meant death.

3) There was no avalanche because training dictates to run perpendicular to an avalanche; you cannot outrun an avalanche by running in front of it. Again, this is training.

4) They did not get out of the tent to avoid a momentary problem, such as smoke from the stove, because if that were the case, they would step aside and wait for it to clear. Instead, they walked away for 45 minutes.

If the problem were a wolverine or a bear, they would not have walked away for 45 minutes. That makes no sense. Is that what you would do? They would have come up with a plan where the 9 of them could try to overcome it.

5) During this walk, they would be thinking and talking: A plan must be put together. They would have come up with some way to survive.

From all indications, their actions at the cedar and the “den” (if it exists) were intelligent, well-planned and executed, based on their mutual training and experience. They do not indicate panic.

6) Assumption: At some point, they decided that D and K would stay at the cedar and watch the tent for whatever danger was still there. These two cut a “window” — that is, all branches that were in the way of their viewing the tent. This is a logical decision. Isn’t this what you would do?

7) Assumption: While D and K cut branches and watched the tent, others in the party dug out a shelter in the snow and put cedar branches in it, to sit on.

8) Assumption: After D and K died, one or more of them cut their friends' clothes off and distributed them among the still-living, then respectfully moved and repositioned the bodies side by side.

All of these things show a smart and brave group, who used all their training and resources to survive a very real danger that was still at the tent.

I do not have a theory of my own, but I know which ones I lean towards.

I would very much like to hear more from people who understand the KGB, the NKVD, the Russian military, the gulags, the bomb tests, from that time period. It seems like the political situation in Russia in 1959 could be relevant.

At any rate, it would be great if we could just remember, going forward, to give these people some credit and respect their intelligence and skills, rather than run the old Bugs Bunny cartoon again.

Manti:
Hi Amashilu!

While I mostly agree with your post, let me just add a few thoughts:


--- Quote ---If the problem were a wolverine or a bear, they would not have walked away for 45 minutes. That makes no sense. Is that what you would do?
--- End quote ---
In case it was a bear, or moose... what else can you do? It will probably linger around the tent as it smells of food. The reason for walking 45 minutes is not directly the animal, but the windy conditions and lack of firewood on the slope, so to be able to keep warm by a bonfire, they had to walk to the forest. What is curious is they walked deeper into the forest than would have been necessary (based on the current forest boundary... this might have been different back then).


--- Quote ---I would very much like to hear more from people who understand the KGB, the NKVD, the Russian military, the gulags, the bomb tests, from that time period
--- End quote ---
The group were in a remote area, the incident happened during or just after a snowstorm. No gulag escapee would be mad enough to risk their lives in the cold.


As for the state security agencies..... this is not how they operate. They efficiently make problematic people disappear, never to be seen again. If they kill them, they make sure. Just leaving 9 Siberians out in the cold is risky because a few might somehow survive. Leaving their bodies behind to be found is just unprofessional. Not what the KGB would do. Of course, this is all assuming they had any reason to go after these guys. Even if they did, they wouldn't do it in the middle of the wilderness. They would just snatch the problematic ones at night from their home. Or lure them somewhere. No need to harm the others.

And there were no nuclear tests at the time. As for conventional bomb tests... wouldn't those destroy the tent, the nearby Mansi chum, and so on?

Sunny:
I have to correct one mistake that I see lots of people say. No, they did not cut a "window" on cedar tree to "watch the tent" from there. That was not their reason for cutting the branches from higher. They simply climbed higher to tree and cut the branches first from higher, to avoid situation that they wouldn't reach out higher branches, after they had cut and burned all the lower ones. That would be very stupid. You could only use branches that are growing from 0-2 meters from ground, and that's it. How do you climb and reach higher branches if there's no low branches to use for climbing? This is my opinion, so stop saying they needed to "watch the tent" from tree. I don't think that was the reason.
Then the wolverine theory. I suppose the stench must be very bad, BUT: would you rather die, than hold your nose and take at least your boots, even if they smell really bad? No I wouldn't. And why not take knives and ice hack, their smeall can not have been too bad, or they could have easily "washed" them in snow. At least most of the smell. Just rub some snow all over the things. Did they even try? Doesn't make sense to me.
I think the boots were vet from snow and ice, and maybe they frozed, so they couldn't put them on anymore.

Ziljoe:

--- Quote from: Sunny on June 19, 2022, 01:40:02 PM ---I have to correct one mistake that I see lots of people say. No, they did not cut a "window" on cedar tree to "watch the tent" from there. That was not their reason for cutting the branches from higher. They simply climbed higher to tree and cut the branches first from higher, to avoid situation that they wouldn't reach out higher branches, after they had cut and burned all the lower ones. That would be very stupid. You could only use branches that are growing from 0-2 meters from ground, and that's it. How do you climb and reach higher branches if there's no low branches to use for climbing? This is my opinion, so stop saying they needed to "watch the tent" from tree. I don't think that was the reason.
Then the wolverine theory. I suppose the stench must be very bad, BUT: would you rather die, than hold your nose and take at least your boots, even if they smell really bad? No I wouldn't. And why not take knives and ice hack, their smeall can not have been too bad, or they could have easily "washed" them in snow. At least most of the smell. Just rub some snow all over the things. Did they even try? Doesn't make sense to me.
I think the boots were vet from snow and ice, and maybe they frozed, so they couldn't put them on anymore.

--- End quote ---

Hi Sunny ,

There are a number of ideas about a 'window' in the ceder. It may be just coincidence that ithis 'window' existed.
It doesn't make much sense , as when you are close to an obstacle , it easy to move your own head to see far away. I guess they may have snapped these branches for the sap in the wood as it helps to get a fire going.

I believe there was plenty of wood/branches on the ground. Their eyesight may have compromised if it was a Wolverine for example.

I too ask the question about the Wolverine. But it might help to understand that the group wouldn't know what just happened if they were sprayed. The spray is toxic although not a killer, they just wouldn't be sure about retrieving more equipment as they may have tried but they were already suffering the effects. If my memory is correct I, I'm sure that it was reported that their was evidence of foot prints close to the tent implying there was a period of standing. I could be wrong on this. There are so many interpretations of what did or didn't happen.

snow wouldn't help wash away the smell, it's also a problem with skunk spray. It would be interesting to put someone in a tent and spray the Wolverine toxic weapon to see how bad it is?.

Manti:
Maybe if it was wolverine spray, they went to the forest to wash themselves and their clothes in the stream?


It could explain the clothes on the ground around the cedar... maybe they hung these to dry?


Even then there's no excuse for not taking all the coats (that were presumably sprayed), and towels with them.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

There was an error while thanking
Thanking...
Go to full version