Factual Information > Publications / Media

Fact check on The New Yorker article

<< < (3/3)

WAB:
I agree with almost all points of this statement, but I would like to clarify something and add my small comments …
I read the article as soon as I accidentally came across it on the Internet.


--- Quote from: Teddy on May 16, 2021, 01:47:06 AM --- In the article there is not a word of Kolevatov. Dyatlov ain't genius. Lyudmila is not an ardent Komsommol member.
--- End quote ---

As far as I know this well, it is absolutely certain. Just don't take these (much less opposing) statements to the point of fanaticism. Unfortunately, such a tendency has been present here for some time .
Yes, they were just regular guys of that generation, completely typical of all students of that time. The differences in the status of their parents were not perceived by them in any way and it did not affect their relationships in any way. On the contrary, the richer ones tried to help their poorer fellows as much as they could and did not make any charity out of it. The help was usually by their own actions in pursuit of a common goal. They had more opportunities to do so. Which they used for the common good.
And the excessive politicization of this case is unnecessary here, too. It can only be purposely "stirred up", but that will only confuse things and lead to the wrong result. There was no politics in this event, even those political events that took place they only played around with jokes.



--- Quote from: Teddy on May 16, 2021, 01:47:06 AM ---You can't make up shite like ... Dyatlov’s group would ski two hundred miles, on a route that no Russian, as far as anyone knew, had taken before.
Why is he making up stuff?
--- End quote ---

Well, this is quite easy to understand. Many journalists have a very superficial knowledge of the subject, with a complete lack of knowledge of the details that determine the degree of truthfulness of the description. I think the author didn't mean to distort it on purpose, but his lack of knowledge did. Although sometimes journalists purposely distort texts in order to create fake scoops.
If he has the desire and need to continue the topic in a more truthful way of presentation, I can write him personally(!) a review of this article with a full and detailed justification of all objections and "bloopers" (as we say about errors in the press). Then have him write to my address, which you know well. Only I can't guarantee very fast and large volume of answers due to my understandable physical capabilities. Sometimes I can't read or write anything for days on end.



--- Quote from: Teddy on May 16, 2021, 01:47:06 AM ---How can there be a note found on Otorten if no one has been there? As far as anyone knew, more like as far New Yorker knew.
The whole article is political. From the very beginning all Douglas Preston wanted is to get Kuryakov on the line, to get his side of the story, because he sniffed a scandal.
--- End quote ---

Of course he does. Even if he does not live in New York, since he writes in this newspaper, "his ".... existence, defines his consciousness"(c) What can write a person who has no experience of such travel, who knows almost nothing about the given area and the history of another country 60 years ago?
First of all one has to wonder what is the ultimate purpose of his publication? If it is just a way to make money for a sensation, then what questions can there be to him. The subject is already too hyped in the world, which is very surprising to me. It would be worse if there was a political order here, but that seems very unlikely to me.


--- Quote from: Teddy on May 16, 2021, 01:47:06 AM ---I am the monster? Because I am trying not see what the press is doing with the truth?
--- End quote ---

As far as I understand contemporary reality, this is practically a mainstream trend in today's press world. It's very sad, but that's just the way it is.  For the press, truth is always secondary, it is important that as many people as possible read them and buy their information. Nobody cares about its quality anymore.


--- Quote from: Teddy on May 16, 2021, 01:47:06 AM ---The monster is telling me to continue posting true facts, you can do with them whatever you want.
The way things are right now soon you will be able to say or write anything about Dyatlov Pass and it would fly. Why bother with the truth, right? If all you want is build a monument. Who cares abut the truth.
--- End quote ---

This is also true in today's world. You can't make much money from the truth. You have to go deeper into knowledge, which means fewer people will read. You have to put a lot of effort and time into acquiring knowledge, and most readers don't like that. You can't get by with Wikipedia alone.


--- Quote from: Teddy on May 16, 2021, 01:47:06 AM ---I can't wrap my mind around this eurocentric: you are calling me a all-consuming monster for trying to preserve their memory for nine years now by publishing every fact I can get my hand on and spending all my time on the case, and you are glorifying someone that got an assignment, got paid and checked out, and didn't get it right?
--- End quote ---

Teddy, I very much appreciate your efforts, your activities and your results of this, but there is still a lot to be refined here in terms of reliability and accuracy of information. Because so much is built on "opinions", "statements" and "quasi-scientific approach" (this is when some knowledge is exchanged for others, although the "words" may coincide).
This is all needed to solve this "puzzle" correctly and objectively to the end. The puzzle can be put together without some elements, if you know the general patterns of what should be there, in accordance with the laws of nature. But it cannot be put together if some (if not too many) elements are wrong (e.g., replaced from another puzzle).


--- Quote from: Teddy on May 16, 2021, 01:47:06 AM ---Commercial ambition - no. I am trying to get the truth into your tiny brain by making it a book. It seems like this is the format people get to read information cover to cover.

--- End quote ---

I can't say anything definite about the book, since I haven't read it in full, but even from the fragment that I have access to with "the falling tree and the transfer of the tent" I can say that it is as fantastic as Rakitin's "fiction". By the way, I have a great suspicion that Igor is one of the "company called _Rakitin_ proper." There were several people there, but some turns of speech and logic of reasoning very much resemble the same. Unfortunately he has a very weak (or even complete lack of knowledge of the details of a particular area, which allows the same to nullify this hypothesis.)
The entire plot is built on Kuntsevich's earlier statement about everything described about "the tree and carrying the tent", although he himself did not say "about the tree" but replaced it with "mopping up", but this is completely wrong both in terms of building the tactics of such trips and in terms of the expediency of their actions. All these details with a lot of details I have already described on various forums and in books, which was published Kuntsevich himself.
We have good and friendly relations for many decades, but, as Aristotle said: " Amicus Kuntsevich Platon, sed magis amica est veritas "(c).  grin1
If he speaks nonsense, I object to him so directly and sharply always. Unfortunately, he quite often does not say to the public and the press what is really there. However, our disagreements do not prevent us both from doing business in the direction of researching the case of the Dyatlov group together and to both our mutual benefit.

Teddy:
Dear WAB, you always speak the truth about the case, so what is you opinion about me, Igor or the book doesn't matter, especially since you haven't read it. I take no offense from you because you know the case and you have put up the time to be considered an expert. I am for ever grateful for any of your time here, and I hear your words. I can take criticism from you because you have the knowledge. Your feedback is not emotional or ad hominem.

Ziljoe:
Hi Teddy,

I don't think Eurocentric was attacking you. I think he was referring to the article or another book.

The press just write what will sell.

Teddy:

--- Quote from: Ziljoe on May 16, 2021, 10:03:57 AM ---Hi Teddy,

I don't think Eurocentric was attacking you. I think he was referring to the article or another book.

The press just write what will sell.

--- End quote ---

If this is the case I will retract my comment with an apology. It's eurocentric's turn to clarify who is the all-consuming monster.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[*] Previous page