Theories Discussion > General Discussion

Which commonly known "facts" are not factual?

<< < (11/11)

Ziljoe:
To Jean Daniel Reuss

My argument about the camera films is.
If any professional group of murderers or hit men were involved ,, taking care  into account, premeditation of the task at hand. They would not know if they had been photographed at anytime or beforehand at any location along the route.

Obviously I'm not a professional killer and I have no intention to be so neither vam I a unprofessional killer. .... But on both accounts I would destroy the camera films.  If any of this was staged, ogovernment or loggers , the first thing I would do is destroy the film's. This even goes to teddy and the potential of her theory.  A snapshot could have been taken at any time that showed the reason of the deaths. Whether that be several days in advance or otherwise.?
Why take the chance, ? .

Charles:
nothing here

Jean Daniel Reuss:

The DPI can be compared to a huge jigsaw puzzle in which the pieces are made up of the documents at our disposal.

Everything has to fit together to build the most plausible, most coherent and most complete theory possible.

Maya Piskareva   --->
«.....But, alas, we learn the truth either from the state, or when we find ourselves in another world, where there are no diseases, sorrows and sighing ... In the meantime, it remains to intellectually entertain ourselves with a game of investigation.....»

Taking advantage of Charles' new ideas, I am transforming my TOKEB theory into TOKEC (Tumanov - Oestmoen - Kandr - EBE - Charles).



°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°Some brief insights into TOKEC
No staging and most of the materials are true.

Hostage taking, with death threats against one of the 9 hikers, in daylight, on the morning of 2 February, to explain the exit from the tent and the descent to the cedar.

Presence in the vicinity of the Ivdellag of a group of men animated by a hatred and a murderous rage, the reasons for which can be explained by the history of the dismantling of the Gulag during the Thaw.

(By convention of language I continue to call them "attackers" ).

For the attackers the 9 hikers appeared to be propagandists directed by the PCSU via the Sports Committee and the Road Commission and were therefore enemies.




--- Quote from: Ziljoe on June 13, 2022, 07:36:48 PM ---              Reply #50
If .........murderers....... They would not know if they had been photographed at anytime or beforehand at any location along the route.....
... I would destroy the camera films..............................
... the first thing I would do is destroy the film's......................

--- End quote ---

         1°   
The case of the cameras that were left in the tent.
The attackers were pretty sure that there was nothing compromising in the cameras inside the tent.

Nobody wants to be seen next to their own enemies in a photograph !

The people in Vizhay (26 January) and the workers from District 41 (27 January) who appear in these photos have no hostile intentions towards the hikers



At these events, the attackers did not want to be photographed and moved away.
 

         2°   
The decision for the massacre was taken after Yuri Yudin returned to District 41, i.e. on the evening of 28 January 1959.
Yuri confirmed the route of the (now 9) hikers (through the Auspiya valley) and the attackers departed on 29 January or perhaps only on 30 January.

The attackers did not follow the tracks of the hihers in the Auspiya valley because they knew the faster route which is the route of the Unknown expedition.

https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/Dyatlov-pass-Auspiya-map-routes-cropped-thumb.jpg

The attackers set up camp at the foot of the cedar tree on 1 February. A little before the hikers set up their tent higher up the slope of Kholat Syakhl (the attackers' interception of the hikers could have failed).


°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°
The case of the camera which is carried by Zoloraryov.
         1°   
You reason logically like a person who, at least I assume it, writes calmly on his computer keyboard.

But at the end of a risky, physically exhausting and extremely stressful operation, the attackers did not notice the unexpected presence of this camera.
(The psychological phenomenon that sometimes we only see what we are looking for).

         2°   
• While fighting on the Eastern Front, Zolotaryov had felt the advantage of having a weapon instantly available.
• Returning to a peaceful, touristy civilian life, Zolotaryov had developed the habit of attaching his camera to his jacket in an often inconspicuous way.
Often wild animals (elk, wolverine, bear) appear and then disappear quickly and it is useful to always be ready (to trigger the camera).
• Which is perhaps another reason why Zolotaryov's camera was simply not noticed by the attackers.

(cf. the close-ups of Gorojanin).

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[*] Previous page