Theories Discussion > The stove
Why did they leave
Marchesk:
--- Quote from: hanno on April 01, 2018, 03:29:26 PM ---Hello. A stove accident as introduced by C. Williams is my favorite. Why? Because it explains a lot that other theories can not explain.
--- End quote ---
Agreed. His explanation explains events better than any other theory. And we know there was a stove, unlike the Mansi, KGB, explosion, avalanche, mushrooms, infrasound, etc. All those theories suffer from the one big problem that there is no direct evidence for their existence in this case.
It makes so much sense of why they would cut the tent the way they did, were individually dressed the way they were, and left the way they did. At least on his version of events. I like that he narrated both the discovery of the tent and the events that night, even though it's fictionalized. It nicely ties together what we do know.
Per Inge Oestmoen:
--- Quote from: hanno on April 01, 2018, 03:29:26 PM ---What is your opinion? Could a stove accident be the impulse that has led to the tragedy?
--- End quote ---
In short, no.
In this case, a stove accident could not lead to the tragedy.
1. The portable oven they had, was not used this fateful night. This means it is proven impossible that the stove could create an accident.
2. Even if the oven had been used, it would be highly unlikely because people who leave a tent because a stove accident do not flee long distances. The nine who would soon perish did moreover not flee the tent, there was nothing that indicated any panic or disorientation. The tracks indicate that they left in an orderly manner. This makes perfectly sense if they were forced at gunpoint to leave the tent in the cold with insufficient clothing and no gloves, by determined attackers who calculated that their victims would soon freeze to death so that there would be no direct evidence of homicide.
The modern-day forensic expert Natalia Sakharova has questioned whether it is sufficiently documented that the tent was cut from the inside. There is also a possibility that a knife was first driven into the tent and then cut from the inside. But that is speculation so far. Even if the tent was cut from the inside, that does not mean that the Dyatlov group members did the cutting. In fact, their knives were found in the tent - and all these knives were in their sheaths. Why is it taken for granted that if the tent was indeed cut from the inside, the Dyatlov group must have done it themselves?
Marchesk:
--- Quote from: Per Inge Oestmoen on May 03, 2018, 06:10:23 AM ---1. The portable oven they had, was not used this fateful night. This means it is proven impossible that the stove could create an accident.
--- End quote ---
Is it possible for the stove to have been disassembled after use, and the wood to have been reduced to embers, with the exception of one piece they didn't use? The smoke would have been the result of a draft from opening the tent when one of them went out to take a leak and then returned, causing the embers to be fanned into smoking, and blowing out their candles. The darkened tent quickly fills with smoke. Zina and at least one other has a nosebleed as a result, leading them to cut the tent in an attempt to vent, and then exit when that fails.
--- Quote from: Per Inge Oestmoen on May 03, 2018, 06:10:23 AM ---2. Even if the oven had been used, it would be highly unlikely because people who leave a tent because a stove accident do not flee long distances.
--- End quote ---
Unless they couldn't vent the tent in a timely fashion, leading to concern about being exposed to the wind poorly dressed, and decided to build a fire and look for shelter elsewhere for the night.
Per Inge Oestmoen:
--- Quote from: Marchesk on May 03, 2018, 06:43:15 AM ---
--- Quote from: Per Inge Oestmoen on May 03, 2018, 06:10:23 AM ---1. The portable oven they had, was not used this fateful night. This means it is proven impossible that the stove could create an accident.
--- End quote ---
Is it possible for the stove to have been disassembled after use, and the wood to have been reduced to embers, with the exception of one piece they didn't use? The smoke would have been the result of a draft from opening the tent when one of them went out to take a leak and then returned, causing the embers to be fanned into smoking, and blowing out their candles. The darkened tent quickly fills with smoke. Zina and at least one other has a nosebleed as a result, leading them to cut the tent in an attempt to vent, and then exit when that fails.
--- Quote from: Per Inge Oestmoen on May 03, 2018, 06:10:23 AM ---2. Even if the oven had been used, it would be highly unlikely because people who leave a tent because a stove accident do not flee long distances.
--- End quote ---
Unless they couldn't vent the tent in a timely fashion, leading to concern about being exposed to the wind poorly dressed, and decided to build a fire and look for shelter elsewhere for the night.
--- End quote ---
1. How likely is it that people who leave a tent because of smoke formation and ventilation difficulties decide to go far from the tent, and does it seem probable that any adult person could believe that such action would increase their chances of survival in winter conditions? There simply is no ground for assuming that there was any smoke in the tent that could force the nine to leave their tent. There is still less reason to believe that people who had smoke in their tent would choose to move more than a kilometer away in the cold, instead of working to remedy the situation in the tent. If there had been smoke, nothing would have prevented the trekkers from staying to solve the problem right there.
2. Zinaida bled from the nose during the last night of her life, she evidently had blood in her face when her body was found.
But Zina had much more serious trouble than just a nosebleed, as is clear from the autopsy report:
"dark red abrasion on the right frontal eminence"
"dark red abrasion on the upper eyelids"
"brown red graze on the bridge and tip of the nose"
"numerous abrasions on the left cheekbone"
"bruised skin on the right side of the face"
"brown-red abrasion on the back of both hands in the area of metacarpal phalangeal and inter-phalangeal joints"
"wound with jagged edges and missing skin on the back of the right hand at the base of the third finger"
"a long bright red bruise 29x6 cm in the lumbar region on the right side of the torso. The bruise looks like left from a baton"
These injuries were of course not caused by smoke, and frankly speaking it is extremely unlikely that they could have been the result of her stumbling around in the snow either.
Marchesk:
--- Quote from: Per Inge Oestmoen on May 03, 2018, 08:29:31 AM ---If there had been smoke, nothing would have prevented the trekkers from staying to solve the problem right there.
--- End quote ---
The weather while standing outside the tent trying to deal with the smoke would be what prevented them from staying long enough. They had to decide whether the tent was usable before they started suffering hypothermia, or find shelter elsewhere. They weren't properly dressed, and they were exposed to the wind on the side of a mountain.
--- Quote from: Per Inge Oestmoen on May 03, 2018, 08:29:31 AM ---There is still less reason to believe that people who had smoke in their tent would choose to move more than a kilometer away in the cold,
--- End quote ---
The mile away is where the tree line was. There's no in between spot. You stay at the tent or go to the trees.
--- Quote from: Per Inge Oestmoen on May 03, 2018, 08:29:31 AM ---There simply is no ground for assuming that there was any smoke in the tent that could force the nine to leave their tent.
--- End quote ---
It all depends on whether the stove was used that night to heat up the tent and their food/drink, and then disassembled, possibly because of the wind on the slope. I've seen discrepancies in what condition the stove was found in. If it had unused wood, then it wasn't used. But if it had embers, then it most likely was. So which was it?
One problem we have to deal with in these sort of cases is that some of the evidence is ambigious or contradictory. Depends on who remembers seeing what. Unless the stove was photographed or it's condition was carefully documented, we're going off the search team's memory. Did the investigators bother to examine it? If so, did they report what was inside the stove?
The big advantage of the stove theory is that we know for a fact it was inside the tent, and that smoke is very hard on humans in a confined area.
--- Quote from: Per Inge Oestmoen on May 03, 2018, 08:29:31 AM ---But Zina had much more serious trouble than just a nosebleed
--- End quote ---
Right, but did she acquire the rest of those injuries gathering firewood, digging out the snow den, and trying to return to the tent?
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version