Dyatlov Pass Forum

Theories Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: GKM on January 05, 2021, 05:46:37 AM

Title: Evidence
Post by: GKM on January 05, 2021, 05:46:37 AM
After reading many of the topics on this forum I have decided, my opinion only, that we, myself included, are way off base. In her post about the book Teddy implied that much of the evidence is known but is not being looked at in the correct order. Perhaps we should all start over from scratch. Teddy knows more about this case than anyone and I would consider her the closest one to being an expert. Let's take her advice and look at the entire case step by step, from beginning to end. If Teddy asserts that she has solved the case, well...I believe her.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Teddy on January 05, 2021, 06:06:21 AM
I don't want to throw you off, but I didn't do it alone. By the end of the month I will give you what was given to me, in English and illustrated with maps and diagrams.
The more you try the greater your appreciation will be at the end of the month.

I only pity the readers that will learn about the case together with the resolution. Where is the fun in that?
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Teddy on January 05, 2021, 06:53:24 AM
I wasn't given anything that is secret. 50% of the facts are in the case files, the rest are out there, some even in the context of the case, but the wrong context. Here is a classic example - if some of the hikers were trying to go up the ridge it wasn't to go back to the tent. They were trying to go in this direction but for a different reason. Or Slobodin's icy bed, there is another way to get ice under a body. What I am driving at is that the facts should be looked from a different angle. Otherwise - there is no secret piece of information or a confession. All is old. New is only the interpretation.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: MDGross on January 05, 2021, 08:47:46 AM
Yes, seeing facts from a new perspective is always welcome. It's wonderful being able to say, "Why didn't I see that before?". I sometimes think the hikers left clues as best they could that something was terribly wrong. For example, the way the tent was pitched in such a strange way might have been Dyatlov's way of saying "I know how to set up a tent, but I'm being forced to do it this way."
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Teddy on January 05, 2021, 09:04:58 AM
It all revolves around the tent and where it was found. Even more importantly - where it was not found.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: GKM on January 05, 2021, 11:16:29 AM
I simply cannot wait for this book. I can't wait to FINALLY understand how all of this happened. Anxiously awaiting February 1st.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: NkZ on January 05, 2021, 12:00:43 PM
Teddy's teaser is bringing new waves of thought!
For instance:
+I'm surprised that photos 11 & 12 of the loose film are the tent site: they are making a hole with at least 80 cm deep and 1 month later the tent is less than 20 cm deep in snow. But there are still foot traces down the slope.
+ Why did they mostly die so close to what would have been their normal route. there is no sense in making a shortcut through on the ridges if you are facing the wind.
+ and still this "Mansi, Mansi, Mansi" in my head. from the signs, the raised tomb/sanctuary, the antler on poles found by the search mission, the sudden finding of broken branches leading to the discovery of the den on the second investigation...
+ and thousands of unfitting puzzle pieces! So yes it's possibly there in plain foggy sight
So thank you by anticipation for this start of the year !
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: eurocentric on January 05, 2021, 12:13:34 PM
Musical tents?
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: sarapuk on January 05, 2021, 03:06:14 PM
After reading many of the topics on this forum I have decided, my opinion only, that we, myself included, are way off base. In her post about the book Teddy implied that much of the evidence is known but is not being looked at in the correct order. Perhaps we should all start over from scratch. Teddy knows more about this case than anyone and I would consider her the closest one to being an expert. Let's take her advice and look at the entire case step by step, from beginning to end. If Teddy asserts that she has solved the case, well...I believe her.

Well actually much of the Evidence is missing. The Tent for instance. Cameras and Film are also missing. Very important Evidence is missing.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Star man on January 05, 2021, 03:48:52 PM
Ok.  Let's approach this in a different way -  the tent is possessed?   lol2

Regards

Star man
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: marieuk on January 05, 2021, 04:09:05 PM
Well now I'm really intrigued and still have absolutely no idea - can't wait for your book to come out. 
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Star man on January 05, 2021, 04:12:11 PM
Being serious this time.  I am toying with the idea, that the tent was found, but not on Kholat Syakhl, and not with the dead hikers.  Maybe it turned up somewhere where it should not have been, before the hikers were reported missing.  And possibly with someone who should not have had it?  Possibly, the tent was taken/stolen, leaving the hikers in a desperate situation?  That's alot of possibles.

Regards

Star man
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: eurocentric on January 06, 2021, 04:27:23 AM
Being serious this time.  I am toying with the idea, that the tent was found, but not on Kholat Syakhl, and not with the dead hikers.  Maybe it turned up somewhere where it should not have been, before the hikers were reported missing.  And possibly with someone who should not have had it?  Possibly, the tent was taken/stolen, leaving the hikers in a desperate situation?  That's alot of possibles.

Regards

Star man

I'll predict that the tent was originally said to have been set up in the forest, (the sensible place) and that was where some suffocating and burning military calamity occurs, which then requires a cover-up at state level. Bodies are positioned to make it appear they died after leaving their tent, two with burns placed near a fire to make that suggestion, others placed in a ravine in the hope decomposition will mask their suspicious injuries or the water will decontaminate them, and the tent itself was air-lifted up to the ridge, explaining the assembly point of footprints, with everything neatly laid out inside, to stage it as being abandoned, with the stagers footprints leading back down to the cedar.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Teddy on January 06, 2021, 07:57:05 AM
There is some truth in both Star man and eurocentric ideas about the tent.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Nigel Evans on January 06, 2021, 08:51:26 AM
Being serious this time.  I am toying with the idea, that the tent was found, but not on Kholat Syakhl, and not with the dead hikers.  Maybe it turned up somewhere where it should not have been, before the hikers were reported missing.  And possibly with someone who should not have had it?  Possibly, the tent was taken/stolen, leaving the hikers in a desperate situation?  That's alot of possibles.

Regards

Star man

I'll predict that the tent was originally said to have been set up in the forest, (the sensible place) and that was where some suffocating and burning military calamity occurs, which then requires a cover-up at state level. Bodies are positioned to make it appear they died after leaving their tent, two with burns placed near a fire to make that suggestion, others placed in a ravine in the hope decomposition will mask their suspicious injuries or the water will decontaminate them, and the tent itself was air-lifted up to the ridge, explaining the assembly point of footprints, with everything neatly laid out inside, to stage it as being abandoned, with the stagers footprints leading back down to the cedar.

and then they took fake photos of travelling past the tree line and the tent site being prepared in a treeless area with high winds wearing correct clothing.
and then one of them climbed a cedar to break branches and leave bits of clothing and blood and tissue on the broken branches to imitate someone falling.and then someone collected lots of firewood to make the fire look genuine.and then building a den
and then someone scattered lots of burnt clothing for reasons unknown.all of the above and the descent being performed without boots of course.then you have to fake the labaz which they wouldn't have built of course.

Or they could have instead simply made everything and everyone disappear.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: marieuk on January 06, 2021, 11:05:24 AM
well they're interesting points.  If the tent was pitched somewhere near the Cedar tree, then all the confusing bits about how/why they left the tent, the slow walk down, being under-dressed etc are no longer valid, because they didn't walk a mile away from the tent.  The three discovered up the slope could have been trying to escape from whatever was happening, and the same for the person who climbed the tree.  I guess that would mean the footprints didn't belong to them either?  The fire simply being what they would normally do when setting up camp for the night.  Still leaves a lot of questions though as Nigel says and my head still hurts thinking about it. 
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Teddy on January 06, 2021, 11:22:54 AM
Now you are talking. You have to question everything. Nothing is what it looks like.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Star man on January 06, 2021, 04:33:18 PM
Well, the lack of analysis of the foot prints, and the cuts in the tent near the entrance through the seams have been a problem for me for a while now.  This line of thinking makes it clear why. 

Also, why Yuri D would be climbing a tree with severe frost bite on hands and feet.  Why they were burnt - it doesn't make sense if they were either alive or dead.  If they were alive why would they allow their skin to burn like that, and if they died before the fire did, why did they die?  The flashlight on the 10cm of snow at the tent, the tidy nature of the tent - given the impression that they cut their way out in a panic.

Ok.  So if we cant rely on the evidence at the scene.  How do we figure out what really happened to them?  Solter's statement.  The bodies were very dirty, washed, prepared for burial ( with no relatives to formerly identify them and no autopsy) - odd.  11 bodies overall - odd.  Were the bodies, cleaned, possibly decontaminated, and then air lifted back to Kholat Syakhl for placement?  11 bodies?  Did Solter see two of the same bodies twice, at different times?  First in Feb, when they were prepped, and then in March when they were found again?  Lyuda - burned hair and face, Semyon?  Authorities need to make some changes to their appearance and then place them somewhere where they would decompose.  Missing eyes, tongue?  Chest injuries -  they were thrown by a wind blast, or accidentally dropped from a helicopter when being air lifted back? 

The tent - did the hikers actually  cut it?  Was it shredded by debris from something and made to look like it was cut.  Could there have been an incident that threw up a major amount of dirt, mud, or caused a landslide onto the tent?   Possible chemical weapon - chlorine, heavier than air so hugs the ground, will burn eyes and mucous membranes, - no toxicology report.  Might induce them to cut and tear themselves out of the tent.  Chlorine -  oxidising agent, poison, skin colour?  Oxidised skin may make them look dirty.  Yuri D lungs, grey fluid.  Chlorine causes fluid in the lungs, so you kind of drown.  Nitrogen dioxide would fo the same.  The tent - is there a record somewhere about its recovery and cleaning, prepping it to set back up on Kholat?

If you can't make the hikers disappear, you can always make the scene dissappear instead

Lots and lots of questions.  Needs further thought to piecei t together. 

Regards

Star man
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Star man on January 06, 2021, 05:00:52 PM
Just a further thought on the rib fractures.  I think Solter said that some had broken ribs.  Will have to have another look, but this would mean the ribs were broken either during the incident, or dropped when recovered by helicopter, but I suspect tge first option.

Regards

Star man
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Teddy on January 06, 2021, 11:30:39 PM
Star man leads the way so far.

The legend about the hikers taking clothes from each other is not true. Take a look at the photos of Krivonischenko at the morgue for example.

(https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/Yuri-Krivonischenko-post-mortem-5-.jpg)


(https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/Yuri-Krivonischenko-post-mortem-6-.jpg)

He is brought like that, frozen. See the indentation of the shirt around his waste? A girdle mark is visible on the shirt at the waist level. It can be from the elastic of the inner pants or the tightened belt from the outer pants. This means that at the time his pants were cut off the clothes have already been frozen on his body.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Ziljoe on January 06, 2021, 11:40:25 PM
Teddy ,you are quenching my thirst .

Many thanks.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Ziljoe on January 07, 2021, 12:09:49 AM
Wow, just wow Teddy. I had to cross check . If I'm seeing what I think im seeing , it just doesn't to lie the same way.

I'll let others decide.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: GKM on January 07, 2021, 01:57:31 AM
So perhaps the Yak pilot did actually see the staging of the tent on the 24th. The final set up before the "discovery " by searchers. And perhaps those searchers were deliberately led there by " guides " operating on orders from officials that NO ONE would dare refuse? Is it possible?
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Teddy on January 07, 2021, 02:05:54 AM
All you say is possible, some if it is also highly probable.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Ziljoe on January 07, 2021, 03:07:54 AM
It might explain the change of dates of the first reports. Also lights being seen from a distance by other witnesses. Explains some of the confusion from the nurse and the chest injuries could have could have taken place else where.

It would be quite a large operation to get the bodies out , take photos and put them back in the forest though?
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Teddy on January 07, 2021, 03:26:31 AM
It would be quite a large operation to get the bodies out, take photos and put them back in the forest though?

There are no known photos of the bodies taken "elsewhere".
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Nigel Evans on January 07, 2021, 03:40:52 AM
It would be very easy to remove his trousers slowly (with respect?) and leave a "girdle mark". Particularly if the clothing was stiffening with cold. I hope you've got more than that.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Teddy on January 07, 2021, 03:49:12 AM
It would be very easy to remove his trousers slowly (with respect?) and leave a "girdle mark". Particularly if the clothing was stiffening with cold. I hope you've got more than that.

This is not in the book, just an observation that confirms my theory.
Why would one remove the pants slowly if taking them from a dead body to survive from a hypothermia which is what everyone believes at the moment.
I am giving you clues to the theory, but I don't have time to discuss them at this particular moment.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Teddy on January 07, 2021, 03:55:07 AM
I hope you've got more than that.

Nigel, really, is this what you think of me? I see a wrinkle I write a book?
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: tekumze on January 07, 2021, 04:28:29 AM
It would be very easy to remove his trousers slowly (with respect?) and leave a "girdle mark". Particularly if the clothing was stiffening with cold. I hope you've got more than that.

This is not in the book, just an observation that confirms my theory.
Why would one remove the pants slowly if taking them from a dead body to survive from a hypothermia which is what everyone believes at the moment.
I am giving you clues to the theory, but I don't have time to discuss them at this particular moment.


Dear Teddy, I'm just wondering if I can ask you what enlightened you so much that you suddenly have your own theory. Just a year ago, you claimed that you had no theory.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Ziljoe on January 07, 2021, 04:29:24 AM
Sorry Teddy ,I didn't explain myself well.

I looked at your photo of Krivonischenko in the morgue and agree that it could be a belt or elastic that formed that shape of the shirt.

I also looked at the photo of when Krivonischenko was found under the ceder. His shirt appears to be halfway up his torso when found .

So I was thinking that they may have found Krivonischenko some point earlier ( or even all of them) . The morgue photo of Krivonischenko could predate the photo of him under the ceder based on you pointing out the shirt.

My head was going in the direction of they cut his trousers off at the morgue, someone decided to stage the scene , maybe in a different place and his shirt was dragged up his torso.

I thought that's what you were implying.

I'm no expert on frozen clothing.

I'll get back in my box grin1
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Teddy on January 07, 2021, 04:35:19 AM
Dear Teddy, I'm just wondering if I can ask you what enlightened you so much that you suddenly have your own theory. Just a year ago, you claimed that you had no theory.

All true. read this https://forum.dyatlovpass.com/index.php?topic=756.msg11529#msg11529
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Teddy on January 07, 2021, 04:44:44 AM
Sorry Teddy ,I didn't explain myself well.
...
I'm no expert on frozen clothing.

I'll get back in my box grin1

Ziljoe, actually you are 100% right. This impression on his clothing must have happened during transportation because on the photos under the cedar his shirt is up then down (I think someone tried to cover him up for decency). So my "observation" goes out the window. As I said, this is not in the book. It is something I noticed, but more eyes are better.
As it turns out I ain't expert on frozen clothes either.

(https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/gallery/Krivonischenko-Doroshenko-post-mortem-5.jpg)

(https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/gallery/Krivonischenko-Doroshenko-post-mortem-7.jpg)
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Teddy on January 07, 2021, 04:53:49 AM
Just a year ago, you claimed that you had no theory.

tekumze, it is not my theory. I didn't solve the case. The person who did is the first name that will be on the book, not mine. That person is not ready to come out of the shadows yet. On Feb 1, 2021 he will have to.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Ziljoe on January 07, 2021, 05:02:06 AM
No problem Teddy, I like everyone's theory's.

It's all food for thought and i look forward with what you will reveal in the coming days/weeks.

Glad I could help wink1
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Teddy on January 07, 2021, 05:14:47 AM
I keep looking at the shirt (instead writing the book) and I am not sure if it was pulled down. Maybe this is because the photos were taken from a different angle. Maybe I still have a point. But this is an example about how we will never agree even on points that are photographed, leave alone speculations without any tangible evidence.

Our theory is not build on single facts that could be argued one by one. It is an overall scenario that could explain everything, but details like this one will never be proven. I am not referring to court, even in forums, we will never agree on details. But so far we don't have the big picture where to fit the pieces of the puzzle. This is what's coming on Feb 1, 2021. Only if I stop foruming  lipseal1
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: tekumze on January 07, 2021, 05:23:18 AM
Just a year ago, you claimed that you had no theory.

tekumze, it is not my theory. I didn't solve the case. The person who did is the first name that will be on the book, not mine. That person is not ready to come out of the shadows yet. On Feb 1, 2021 he will have to.

I can't wait to see what the findings will be.
 thumb1
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Nigel Evans on January 07, 2021, 05:56:53 AM
It would be very easy to remove his trousers slowly (with respect?) and leave a "girdle mark". Particularly if the clothing was stiffening with cold. I hope you've got more than that.

This is not in the book, just an observation that confirms my theory.
Why would one remove the pants slowly if taking them from a dead body to survive from a hypothermia which is what everyone believes at the moment.
I am giving you clues to the theory, but I don't have time to discuss them at this particular moment.
If they prevaricated over the removal for just say half an hour it would be enough for the fabric to stiffen.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: sarapuk on January 07, 2021, 01:07:05 PM
Being serious this time.  I am toying with the idea, that the tent was found, but not on Kholat Syakhl, and not with the dead hikers.  Maybe it turned up somewhere where it should not have been, before the hikers were reported missing.  And possibly with someone who should not have had it?  Possibly, the tent was taken/stolen, leaving the hikers in a desperate situation?  That's alot of possibles.

Regards

Star man

Lots of possibles and not much Evidence.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: sarapuk on January 07, 2021, 01:09:56 PM
Being serious this time.  I am toying with the idea, that the tent was found, but not on Kholat Syakhl, and not with the dead hikers.  Maybe it turned up somewhere where it should not have been, before the hikers were reported missing.  And possibly with someone who should not have had it?  Possibly, the tent was taken/stolen, leaving the hikers in a desperate situation?  That's alot of possibles.

Regards

Star man

A prediction. But no Evidence to back up the prediction  !  ?  No Evidence that points to any human outsiders being responsible for the demis of the Dyatlov Group.

I'll predict that the tent was originally said to have been set up in the forest, (the sensible place) and that was where some suffocating and burning military calamity occurs, which then requires a cover-up at state level. Bodies are positioned to make it appear they died after leaving their tent, two with burns placed near a fire to make that suggestion, others placed in a ravine in the hope decomposition will mask their suspicious injuries or the water will decontaminate them, and the tent itself was air-lifted up to the ridge, explaining the assembly point of footprints, with everything neatly laid out inside, to stage it as being abandoned, with the stagers footprints leading back down to the cedar.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: sarapuk on January 07, 2021, 01:11:53 PM


Well put Nigel. A hell of a lot of faking would need to have been done. Hardly KGB territory.

Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: DAXXY on January 07, 2021, 02:07:32 PM
It might be left from transportation ropes.

(https://i.ibb.co/R44T4zb/Dyatlov-pass-1959-search-025-1.jpg) (https://imgbb.com/)

(https://i.ibb.co/z4TrqD1/Kolmogorova-Krivonischenko-post-mortem-1.jpg) (https://imgbb.com/)
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: DAXXY on January 07, 2021, 02:15:10 PM
similar straight marks on sweater

(https://i.ibb.co/Fx8S1Xw/Rustem-Slobodin-post-mortem-15.jpg) (https://ibb.co/WxBbX0y)
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Star man on January 07, 2021, 04:17:50 PM
Well, the lack of analysis of the foot prints, and the cuts in the tent near the entrance through the seams have been a problem for me for a while now.  This line of thinking makes it clear why. 

Also, why Yuri D would be climbing a tree with severe frost bite on hands and feet.  Why they were burnt - it doesn't make sense if they were either alive or dead.  If they were alive why would they allow their skin to burn like that, and if they died before the fire did, why did they die?  The flashlight on the 10cm of snow at the tent, the tidy nature of the tent - given the impression that they cut their way out in a panic.

Ok.  So if we cant rely on the evidence at the scene.  How do we figure out what really happened to them?  Solter's statement.  The bodies were very dirty, washed, prepared for burial ( with no relatives to formerly identify them and no autopsy) - odd.  11 bodies overall - odd.  Were the bodies, cleaned, possibly decontaminated, and then air lifted back to Kholat Syakhl for placement?  11 bodies?  Did Solter see two of the same bodies twice, at different times?  First in Feb, when they were prepped, and then in March when they were found again?  Lyuda - burned hair and face, Semyon?  Authorities need to make some changes to their appearance and then place them somewhere where they would decompose.  Missing eyes, tongue?  Chest injuries -  they were thrown by a wind blast, or accidentally dropped from a helicopter when being air lifted back? 

The tent - did the hikers actually  cut it?  Was it shredded by debris from something and made to look like it was cut.  Could there have been an incident that threw up a major amount of dirt, mud, or caused a landslide onto the tent?   Possible chemical weapon - chlorine, heavier than air so hugs the ground, will burn eyes and mucous membranes, - no toxicology report.  Might induce them to cut and tear themselves out of the tent.  Chlorine -  oxidising agent, poison, skin colour?  Oxidised skin may make them look dirty.  Yuri D lungs, grey fluid.  Chlorine causes fluid in the lungs, so you kind of drown.  Nitrogen dioxide would fo the same.  The tent - is there a record somewhere about its recovery and cleaning, prepping it to set back up on Kholat?

If you can't make the hikers disappear, you can always make the scene dissappear instead

Lots and lots of questions.  Needs further thought to piecei t together. 

Regards

Star man

Ok.  Lets continue with this line of thought.

To understand what happened to the hikers, we need to filter out the facts that cannot be faked so easily or  covered up.  If they couldn't or didn't want to make the hikers disappear, you make the scene disappear.  So that leaves the hikers - the bodies - the injuries.  Lets split the hikers into two groups.  Those with significant injuries and those with superficial injuries.  Who has the significant injuries?  - The rav 4 - convenient.  If the scene is faked, then Kolevatov, is not hugging Semyon.  Kolevatov - he didn't die last - he died first.  He was thrown by some kind of wind blast.  He landed awkwardly - deformed neck - spinal damage - severed spinal cord - cut signal through vegus nerve.  He dies almost instantly.  He didn't die of hypothermia - no frost bite.  Lyuda and Thibo are next.  Difficult to say which.  Both are thrown.  Semyon is next, he is thrown.  Maybe these were outside the tent sitting or standing when it happened?  The remaining 5 survive the initial wind blast.  Chemical weapon - NO.  Chlorine gas - NO.  Chemical weapon unlikely to create a large wind blast.  Chlorine would bleach skin and hair.  Would have distinct smell like bleach.  What else?  "Very very dirty" -Zina's grubby oily looking hands - localised burns to skin and hair - wind blast- flame front - pressure wave- no eye brows, no eyes.  Couldn't be high explosives.  Would be localised, closer - disingrating bodies.  Very very dirty - finger tips and finger nails look ok -  they weren't buried -  SMOKE -  oily sooty, not fully combusted smoke - smoke inhalation -  Yuri D grey foam.  Large fire ball, wind blast and pressure wave - oily sooty smoke - - -  thermobaric device -  Fuel air bomb?  Uses up all oxygen?  Possibly would fit.  Military test gone wrong?  Accident?  Strontium 90 used as tracer?

The remaining 5 live longer than the rav 4.  Were they lying in the tent?  The tent must have been damaged -  did the side that faced the flame front catch fire?  The other side survived?  Shredded by debris?  Was the Kholat tent a different tent altogether?  Its difficult to say.  Wzs the tent even set up, or still packed when it happened?

Yuri D significant frost bite.  Yuri K had frost bite too.  Were they trying to survive without the tent?  Died of frost bite, hypothermia and smoke inhalation.  Inhalation of unburned toxic FAB fuel?  They must have survived for a while to get the frost bite. Could they have survived with their outer clothing and no tent?
 Dyatlov, Zina and Rustem - Rustem may have been knocked about in the wind blast - both temporal lobes?  Odd?  Did the survivors fight?    Could they see.?  Were they blinded by the unburned chemicals and smoke?  Ah blinded -  couldn't find or use their gear and clothing?  That would be desperate.  Geese.  If that's what happened - poor guys.

Other options -  nuclear?  Possible.  Would still generate fire ball, wind blast and oily dirty rainy fallout.  Plus radioactive contamination.  Think FAB is probably more likely.  Anything else?  Where did it happen?  When did it happen?  Lots more questions.

Regards

Star man

 
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: RidgeWatcher on January 08, 2021, 12:05:22 AM
I always thought the idea of the labor/cache was very strange. To store items on virtually a platform in the snow. What if the Dyatlov hikers were unable to come back from Otorton that way. I would have hidden one off the main Auspiya which the group would have to pass on the way back, unlike in the canyon of the Auspiya valley.

If the tent was in the forest it would explain the axe being down there by the near identical cut wood on the floor of the den.

I wonder if it was WAB? That might explain his brilliant and sudden departure?
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: tekumze on January 08, 2021, 12:56:22 AM


I wonder if it was WAB? That might explain his brilliant and sudden departure?
[/quote]


Can you please define more precisely what you mean by  "that might explain WAB brilliant and sudden departure?"
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: tekumze on January 08, 2021, 01:15:12 AM
We had quite a bit of time last year because of Corona 19. And we went with the group to the DPI venue.
What is quite interesting is that the venue is actually completely different than you imagine from information through the mass media. What surprised me the most was that the “ravine” as probably everyone imagines it doesn’t exist at all. I don’t know who has an interest in exaggerating. The area where the "ravine" are supposed to be is a plain stream. No more no less. And yes, the slope of the mountain is something else entirely. It is not possible to understand who could have believed in any landslide theory at all. In practice, there is no possibility that hikers have been injured due to any trips and falls.
Basically what Teddy says happened to us too. When you stand on the scene, you realize that none of what they are trying to sell us is true.
None of what is known can be true.
I will have many more questions after February 1st. Definitely.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: DAXXY on January 08, 2021, 05:55:37 AM
I think there are many situations where translation gives us a different idea.  Ravine could be a Gully.

By avalanche they could mean a snow den collapsing under a bank of snow.  Because it isn't a 'landslide' or 'rockfall' and snow moving down hill is, by definition, an avalanche. 
Some information I have seen online..

Snow dens are better for above the tree line and take time and skill to build, and make the builders wet from snow and sweat.  A snow trench shelter is better and safer in many situations in forest. 

When snow has accumulated on a slope it uses the snow at the base of the slope as a support.  Maximum weight and pressure is directed towards the snow at the base of the slope.  Making a den (a cavity) under a snow slope does not add to the insulation of the den, but greatly increases the risk of the slope collapsing. In many situations a snow trench shelter is safer, especially below the treeline.   It is quick to make, shallow, Less risk from collapse, Has a light weight roof, and good insulation.

I guess the stream was in a gully and the water had to run down a slope.  So the snow accumulated on the slope. Then collapsed on them when they dug a cavity in to the base of the snow slope. All plausible...
This is not to criticize the group for what they did.  They had their own reasons for their choices.  They may have needed to act quickly.

There is a similarity with another case....

The Buryatia  Incident August 1993
https://dyatlovpass.com/hamar-daban
A group of tourists from Kazakhstan, led by professional climber Lyudmila Korovina. Once they made it to Buryatia, the group set out on a journey across the Chamar-Daban mountain range on 2 August. The weather wasn’t on their side: it was pouring down cold rain and snow. Nevertheless, the group continued on their route relatively safely until 5 August.

Six out of seven in their group did not survive.
The only survivor, Valentina Utochenko, 17, later wrote in a statement how, during the difficult descent, carried out in near zero visibility, one of the members of the group was struck down hard, foaming at the mouth and bleeding from the ears. The rest of the group shortly developed the same symptoms.

(Yuri Doroshenko (found at the cedar tree) autopsy....right cheek soft tissue covered with gray foam; gray liquid coming form his open mouth. Most apparent cause is pulmonary edema).

The six members who died had done so almost simultaneously, after rolling around on the ground, tearing their clothes off and clutching their throats. The young woman was left alone. Nearly unconscious, she navigated the power lines until she reached the river at the bottom, where she was rescued by a group of kayaking tourists.
 
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: sarapuk on January 08, 2021, 10:44:03 AM
We had quite a bit of time last year because of Corona 19. And we went with the group to the DPI venue.
What is quite interesting is that the venue is actually completely different than you imagine from information through the mass media. What surprised me the most was that the “ravine” as probably everyone imagines it doesn’t exist at all. I don’t know who has an interest in exaggerating. The area where the "ravine" are supposed to be is a plain stream. No more no less. And yes, the slope of the mountain is something else entirely. It is not possible to understand who could have believed in any landslide theory at all. In practice, there is no possibility that hikers have been injured due to any trips and falls.
Basically what Teddy says happened to us too. When you stand on the scene, you realize that none of what they are trying to sell us is true.
None of what is known can be true.
I will have many more questions after February 1st. Definitely.

Well I have posted elsewhere in this Forum that I think that the use of the word Ravine could be misleading. It doesnt look like a typical Ravine. And there is no significant height. Its highly unlikely that any of the Dyatlov Group could have been seriously injured there. What we should be studying more is the position of the 4 bodies in the Stream.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: eurocentric on January 08, 2021, 01:10:55 PM
Any intro to the DPI brainwashes the reader or viewer with the notion that "they cut their way out and fled in panic, half-dressed into the freezing night", which then generates the big 'Guess The Emergency' game which has kept this mystery alive across 62 years. There'll be many preconditioned enough to be entirely unprepared to entertain the idea of the tent being moved, and there's been two predictable examples already.

But I like a theory, and there are only two other main contenders, which potentially explains as much as possible, satisfying all the known evidences, and it has to be said that the tent being resited, and burnt clothing removed and discarded certainly negates 75% of the oddities in the DPI in one fell swoop, so I think it more than worthwhile exploring, and I look forward to the book.

In the theory I part guessed, predicted by Teddy's clues, the hikers would build their labaz, they arrive at the forest, they make their fire, they set up their tent in their preferred place, the ridge ropes tied to trees, they are properly dressed, everything is as normal up to that point. And then the incident happens.

Anything from a downed missile to them being killed by grenade/ordnance dropped on them by the military who mistake them for escapees at night while operating a dead-or-alive recovery policy. But whatever it was this potentially explains the orbs distant witnesses saw, the burnt tree tops, injuries, scratches, and the tent damage.

Then the cover-up begins, the very next day, and it is beautifully simple, and because the real disaster zone is under tree cover, there's less chance of witnesses, and any footfall there can be explained away as hikers later looking for kindling after abandoning their tent on the ridge.

Burnt clothing is removed, and experienced hikers are left to like rookie idiots who took off clothing in a freezing tent at 3000ft, ignoring their stove and wood by their sides, before being driven out by an unimaginable emergency, for which, whatever it was, there is notably zero material evidence.
 
Their bodies are arranged to make it appear they all died of exposure after descending the pass, and some of them, the incident survivors, ultimately would die of the cold, but perhaps with some help along the way, a few clocks to the head (there is rather a lot of head injuries in this case), a kick to the side, to keep them on the ground, so that the cold did the rest and then they cannot speak of what actually happened. For those who prefer, this is where 3 of the survivors fight and develop knuckle injuries, perhaps after being found hiding in the den.

The tent is air-lifted in a cargo net and tarp, slung under a helicopter, and it is deposited 30 seconds later on the ridge, so that there's no ascending footprints, only the 9 crew who will walk down, in daylight, some told to do so in their bare feet, just as they have skied up. The set down point is the 'assembly footprints' 50 yards away.

Insidiously they use the last diary entry Igor made, which incredibly some here take as a literal plan to be where he expressly did not want to be, away from the sole redeeming feature of his then bleak situation, his comforting warmth, up on that ridge, or they have his handwriting forged to that effect.

But they are unable to set up the ridge ropes properly on a slope, they had nothing to directly refer to in the forest when tied to trees, and this extended tent and stove is unconventional. So they are defeated by the task, explaining why there's no ridge ropes shown tied to the tops of the skis, one of which is also in the wrong position, and the grunts told to set up the tent cannot work out how to install Igor's bespoke creation, the pipe stove, which has to be suspended from that ridge, so they leave it unpacked inside, and collapse the tent and cover it with snow so that it's presented as 'abandoned'.

They have arranged the contents inside like someone with OCD has been round, not the usual attentions of a bunch of knackered hikers who supposedly had just scaled a mountain pass and speed dug a 3ft deep trench in a frozen snowcap before relaxing in their freezing tent and stripping off.

That mock uni leaflet may or may not be genuine. If manufactured it serves to make it appear they were all having a high-functioning time, even while half-dressed in an unheated tent, and is then left in the tent doorway. Notably, too busy with that extracurricular activity, there'd been no time for hikers to write in diaries of how arduous and cold the ascent had been, by far their greatest challenge to date, or to explain why they were apparently toughing it out without heating, something not required for Level 3. Not even the stove-loving lazy Lyuda complains, sat in a tent with a hole so big it needed a coat to plug it, and that vacant tent flue hole.

The stagers make a few unforced errors, there's allegedly a tenth set of skis (maybe some of theirs left behind), a piece of broken ski found nearby (the hikers & incident damaged), and the snapped ski pole cut halfway through. For whatever reason, perhaps damage, they lose or get rid of Zina's camera, but they don't know, without processing the other films, that she is photographed by the others taking pictures.

Did they mistakenly place Zina's photo into Igor's notebook, when it was more likely Yuri D's treasured possession? We are led to believe from some sources that Igor and Zina had been an item, but there's zero body language in any hiking photo, and she had been all over Yuri Y like a bad rash, even twice photographed chatting in a Vizhay doorway, with one photo showing her arm hooked around his, or being helped up by his gallant arms after slipping, and elsewhere, her hand towards his face.

Did they even crossdress Tibo's body in Lyuda's coat and hat for their own humour, another one with a bang to the head, who they'd discover from his ID papers had a father who was executed under Stalin, with him born in a concentration camp, of a French name, so might wish to make indignified fun of him, not a 'true Russian', instead representative of a nation who 'surrendered to Hitler', and which is now the Cold War enemy. Hopefully not, but I can't help thinking it carries that vindictive ring of KGB flavour to it.

Besides the pamphlet, and potentially Igor's diary entry, which may or may not be genuine, the only things which then need faking are the two photo's of the trench digging. This is of itself bizarre, if all sources insist they arrived at 5pm, which even the new inquiry repeats, when darkness fell at 4:29pm, like it does now in Northern Englandm yet the photo's were taken in broad daylight.

Usefully/by design, only one of the 2 apparently location-specific photo's features a hiker's face, a gloweringly cold Yuri K, his face half obscured by snow stuck to it, and appropriately enough, these photo's are not determined to be matched to any hiker film, just part of a collection which came to be known as 'Loose Photo's', so that the negative strip won't be seen.

Then there's Semyon's mysterious camera to explain, which in this scenario may be either a prop strung around his neck to mislead, with images taken elsewhere, or genuine and he was dead when they found him and they didn't realise he'd managed to take photo's of their arrival before he expired. One photo looks remarkably like the shape and colour of a Snowy Owl ('Horn'), a creature which would inhabit and hunt in the forest.

There is also the issue of exchanged clothing. Yuri Y claimed he gave a shirt to Yuri D and then it ended up on Igor - this is otherwise interpreted to mean a half-dressed Igor took the shirt to stay warm after the Yuris' deaths, but equally, in this theory, it can be explained by the military not knowing what shirt to dress Igor with from the tent after they'd taken off his contaminated/burnt one, just as the two burnt Yuris had to be part-stripped, so they picked up the one given by Yuri Y.

And other clothing cut to fashion into sleeves and socks could also be because it can be extremely hard to dress rigid dead bodies in full clothing, bodies here which we know from the autopsies were in some cases moved after death, but it's easy to slip on a sleeve or sock, to make it look like they tried to beat the cold...the same cold we are expected to believe they marched off to their deaths in, inadequately dressed and without taking an axe.

This theory isn't my own preferred one, I painstakingly found one which ticked every box, but that was when accepting the known information, as presented, though the conclusion was as boring as finding Princess Diana simply died in a car accident. But this one, the idea of the tent being staged, holds particular promise IMO, fundamentally because it uniquely addresses the following set of clear absurdities about that tent:

Experienced hikers...motorcycle tourers...mountaineers etc, do not choose to pitch a tent in such an exposed position for no valid reason when there is a better option.

If they do they do not then sit inside, ignoring a stove and fuel they hauled up the elevation, when it's -31C outside around 9pm, and falling, and sit there half-dressed, naively engaging in a jolly time creating a mock publication instead of concerning themselves with survival as temperatures drop overnight and winds pick up. It's bordering on suicide.

If anything happens they do not all as one rip their way out, 9 people in an 12ft tent, via that maniacal slasher number of horizontal & vertical cuts and stabbings, with the one nearest the flap not cutting there or simply ripping the buttons open. It slows everything down.

Once outside they do not suddenly come over all calm and collected, assemble 50 paces away, and walk off in single file, and not recover what they need to take with them if their panic/false alarm has irreparably damaged their tent for overnight stay. It's one or the other; either run like hell if the danger persists, or get your stuff and then go or you'll die anyway.

And they don't waste time covering a felled tent, one which cannot possibly later be felled by snow as it's cut wide open on one side and wind scour should remove the rest, and leave a torch on top of 4 inches of this snow, not without first retrieving what they need to take with them in lethal cold.

This is why the tent has always been so critical to solving the mystery. As told it makes no sense, and that is most likely because it was nonsense all along.

Title: Evidence
Post by: Monty on January 08, 2021, 01:17:56 PM
You sir, wrote the blurb, and I claim my £5.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: GKM on January 08, 2021, 03:20:04 PM
I agree that the location of the tent when "discovered " by searchers is complete nonsense. Most people familiar with the details of the case absolutely had to realize that the hikers would have never set up camp on an exposed ridge when the forest was available a mile away. Far too many people fell for that deception.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Star man on January 08, 2021, 05:21:45 PM
Well, the lack of analysis of the foot prints, and the cuts in the tent near the entrance through the seams have been a problem for me for a while now.  This line of thinking makes it clear why. 

Also, why Yuri D would be climbing a tree with severe frost bite on hands and feet.  Why they were burnt - it doesn't make sense if they were either alive or dead.  If they were alive why would they allow their skin to burn like that, and if they died before the fire did, why did they die?  The flashlight on the 10cm of snow at the tent, the tidy nature of the tent - given the impression that they cut their way out in a panic.

Ok.  So if we cant rely on the evidence at the scene.  How do we figure out what really happened to them?  Solter's statement.  The bodies were very dirty, washed, prepared for burial ( with no relatives to formerly identify them and no autopsy) - odd.  11 bodies overall - odd.  Were the bodies, cleaned, possibly decontaminated, and then air lifted back to Kholat Syakhl for placement?  11 bodies?  Did Solter see two of the same bodies twice, at different times?  First in Feb, when they were prepped, and then in March when they were found again?  Lyuda - burned hair and face, Semyon?  Authorities need to make some changes to their appearance and then place them somewhere where they would decompose.  Missing eyes, tongue?  Chest injuries -  they were thrown by a wind blast, or accidentally dropped from a helicopter when being air lifted back? 

The tent - did the hikers actually  cut it?  Was it shredded by debris from something and made to look like it was cut.  Could there have been an incident that threw up a major amount of dirt, mud, or caused a landslide onto the tent?   Possible chemical weapon - chlorine, heavier than air so hugs the ground, will burn eyes and mucous membranes, - no toxicology report.  Might induce them to cut and tear themselves out of the tent.  Chlorine -  oxidising agent, poison, skin colour?  Oxidised skin may make them look dirty.  Yuri D lungs, grey fluid.  Chlorine causes fluid in the lungs, so you kind of drown.  Nitrogen dioxide would fo the same.  The tent - is there a record somewhere about its recovery and cleaning, prepping it to set back up on Kholat?

If you can't make the hikers disappear, you can always make the scene dissappear instead

Lots and lots of questions.  Needs further thought to piecei t together. 

Regards

Star man

Ok.  Lets continue with this line of thought.

To understand what happened to the hikers, we need to filter out the facts that cannot be faked so easily or  covered up.  If they couldn't or didn't want to make the hikers disappear, you make the scene disappear.  So that leaves the hikers - the bodies - the injuries.  Lets split the hikers into two groups.  Those with significant injuries and those with superficial injuries.  Who has the significant injuries?  - The rav 4 - convenient.  If the scene is faked, then Kolevatov, is not hugging Semyon.  Kolevatov - he didn't die last - he died first.  He was thrown by some kind of wind blast.  He landed awkwardly - deformed neck - spinal damage - severed spinal cord - cut signal through vegus nerve.  He dies almost instantly.  He didn't die of hypothermia - no frost bite.  Lyuda and Thibo are next.  Difficult to say which.  Both are thrown.  Semyon is next, he is thrown.  Maybe these were outside the tent sitting or standing when it happened?  The remaining 5 survive the initial wind blast.  Chemical weapon - NO.  Chlorine gas - NO.  Chemical weapon unlikely to create a large wind blast.  Chlorine would bleach skin and hair.  Would have distinct smell like bleach.  What else?  "Very very dirty" -Zina's grubby oily looking hands - localised burns to skin and hair - wind blast- flame front - pressure wave- no eye brows, no eyes.  Couldn't be high explosives.  Would be localised, closer - disingrating bodies.  Very very dirty - finger tips and finger nails look ok -  they weren't buried -  SMOKE -  oily sooty, not fully combusted smoke - smoke inhalation -  Yuri D grey foam.  Large fire ball, wind blast and pressure wave - oily sooty smoke - - -  thermobaric device -  Fuel air bomb?  Uses up all oxygen?  Possibly would fit.  Military test gone wrong?  Accident?  Strontium 90 used as tracer?

The remaining 5 live longer than the rav 4.  Were they lying in the tent?  The tent must have been damaged -  did the side that faced the flame front catch fire?  The other side survived?  Shredded by debris?  Was the Kholat tent a different tent altogether?  Its difficult to say.  Wzs the tent even set up, or still packed when it happened?

Yuri D significant frost bite.  Yuri K had frost bite too.  Were they trying to survive without the tent?  Died of frost bite, hypothermia and smoke inhalation.  Inhalation of unburned toxic FAB fuel?  They must have survived for a while to get the frost bite. Could they have survived with their outer clothing and no tent?
 Dyatlov, Zina and Rustem - Rustem may have been knocked about in the wind blast - both temporal lobes?  Odd?  Did the survivors fight?    Could they see.?  Were they blinded by the unburned chemicals and smoke?  Ah blinded -  couldn't find or use their gear and clothing?  That would be desperate.  Geese.  If that's what happened - poor guys.

Other options -  nuclear?  Possible.  Would still generate fire ball, wind blast and oily dirty rainy fallout.  Plus radioactive contamination.  Think FAB is probably more likely.  Anything else?  Where did it happen?  When did it happen?  Lots more questions.

Regards

Star man

Another option is a crashed missile of some kind - hits the ground, and fuel explodes creating a fire ball, wind blast and lots of oily smoke.  Some burning  fuel is thrown onto the hikers - as per Nigel's theory.  Yuri K's burned leg, burned clothing (later removed and replaced) and hair. 

If we assume that those with the most superficial injuries and frost bite survived the longest, then it would mean that the two Yuris would have lived the longest.  Did Zina, Dyatlov and Rustem die relatively quickly?  None of them have significant frost bite.  Could they have died from internal injuries from the blast, or toxic substances inhaled.  Thermovaric bomb uses ethylene oxide which is toxic, narcotic and anaesthetic.  Could they have been deliberately targeted?  A thermobaric grenade might have the same effect?  Its less likely to destroy the tent completely?  Seems unlikely to me as the two Yuris appear to have survived long enough to get severe frost bite.

Air mines? 

Looks like it was some kind of explosion.  Takes out the rav4 all in one go.  Thermobaric device still fits better.  Oily smoke and toxic aftermath.

Where did it happen?  If not on Kholat then most likely on the planned route somewhere.  Before the 6th Feb.  Before they made the labaz?

Regards

Star man
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: DAXXY on January 08, 2021, 05:35:19 PM
I agree that the location of the tent when "discovered " by searchers is complete nonsense. Most people familiar with the details of the case absolutely had to realize that the hikers would have never set up camp on an exposed ridge when the forest was available a mile away. Far too many people fell for that deception.

It was on their plan..before the ascent of Otorten.  Also they had done previous expeditions that involved periods above the treeline https://dyatlovpass.com/gallery-1958-Subpolar-Ural

(https://i.ibb.co/RYSwb5z/Screenshot-16.png) (https://imgbb.com/)
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Nigel Evans on January 09, 2021, 01:06:32 AM
Well, the lack of analysis of the foot prints, and the cuts in the tent near the entrance through the seams have been a problem for me for a while now.  This line of thinking makes it clear why. 

Also, why Yuri D would be climbing a tree with severe frost bite on hands and feet.  Why they were burnt - it doesn't make sense if they were either alive or dead.  If they were alive why would they allow their skin to burn like that, and if they died before the fire did, why did they die?  The flashlight on the 10cm of snow at the tent, the tidy nature of the tent - given the impression that they cut their way out in a panic.

Ok.  So if we cant rely on the evidence at the scene.  How do we figure out what really happened to them?  Solter's statement.  The bodies were very dirty, washed, prepared for burial ( with no relatives to formerly identify them and no autopsy) - odd.  11 bodies overall - odd.  Were the bodies, cleaned, possibly decontaminated, and then air lifted back to Kholat Syakhl for placement?  11 bodies?  Did Solter see two of the same bodies twice, at different times?  First in Feb, when they were prepped, and then in March when they were found again?  Lyuda - burned hair and face, Semyon?  Authorities need to make some changes to their appearance and then place them somewhere where they would decompose.  Missing eyes, tongue?  Chest injuries -  they were thrown by a wind blast, or accidentally dropped from a helicopter when being air lifted back? 

The tent - did the hikers actually  cut it?  Was it shredded by debris from something and made to look like it was cut.  Could there have been an incident that threw up a major amount of dirt, mud, or caused a landslide onto the tent?   Possible chemical weapon - chlorine, heavier than air so hugs the ground, will burn eyes and mucous membranes, - no toxicology report.  Might induce them to cut and tear themselves out of the tent.  Chlorine -  oxidising agent, poison, skin colour?  Oxidised skin may make them look dirty.  Yuri D lungs, grey fluid.  Chlorine causes fluid in the lungs, so you kind of drown.  Nitrogen dioxide would fo the same.  The tent - is there a record somewhere about its recovery and cleaning, prepping it to set back up on Kholat?

If you can't make the hikers disappear, you can always make the scene dissappear instead

Lots and lots of questions.  Needs further thought to piecei t together. 

Regards

Star man

Ok.  Lets continue with this line of thought.

To understand what happened to the hikers, we need to filter out the facts that cannot be faked so easily or  covered up.  If they couldn't or didn't want to make the hikers disappear, you make the scene disappear.  So that leaves the hikers - the bodies - the injuries.  Lets split the hikers into two groups.  Those with significant injuries and those with superficial injuries.  Who has the significant injuries?  - The rav 4 - convenient.  If the scene is faked, then Kolevatov, is not hugging Semyon.  Kolevatov - he didn't die last - he died first.  He was thrown by some kind of wind blast.  He landed awkwardly - deformed neck - spinal damage - severed spinal cord - cut signal through vegus nerve.  He dies almost instantly.  He didn't die of hypothermia - no frost bite.  Lyuda and Thibo are next.  Difficult to say which.  Both are thrown.  Semyon is next, he is thrown.  Maybe these were outside the tent sitting or standing when it happened?  The remaining 5 survive the initial wind blast.  Chemical weapon - NO.  Chlorine gas - NO.  Chemical weapon unlikely to create a large wind blast.  Chlorine would bleach skin and hair.  Would have distinct smell like bleach.  What else?  "Very very dirty" -Zina's grubby oily looking hands - localised burns to skin and hair - wind blast- flame front - pressure wave- no eye brows, no eyes.  Couldn't be high explosives.  Would be localised, closer - disingrating bodies.  Very very dirty - finger tips and finger nails look ok -  they weren't buried -  SMOKE -  oily sooty, not fully combusted smoke - smoke inhalation -  Yuri D grey foam.  Large fire ball, wind blast and pressure wave - oily sooty smoke - - -  thermobaric device -  Fuel air bomb?  Uses up all oxygen?  Possibly would fit.  Military test gone wrong?  Accident?  Strontium 90 used as tracer?

The remaining 5 live longer than the rav 4.  Were they lying in the tent?  The tent must have been damaged -  did the side that faced the flame front catch fire?  The other side survived?  Shredded by debris?  Was the Kholat tent a different tent altogether?  Its difficult to say.  Wzs the tent even set up, or still packed when it happened?

Yuri D significant frost bite.  Yuri K had frost bite too.  Were they trying to survive without the tent?  Died of frost bite, hypothermia and smoke inhalation.  Inhalation of unburned toxic FAB fuel?  They must have survived for a while to get the frost bite. Could they have survived with their outer clothing and no tent?
 Dyatlov, Zina and Rustem - Rustem may have been knocked about in the wind blast - both temporal lobes?  Odd?  Did the survivors fight?    Could they see.?  Were they blinded by the unburned chemicals and smoke?  Ah blinded -  couldn't find or use their gear and clothing?  That would be desperate.  Geese.  If that's what happened - poor guys.

Other options -  nuclear?  Possible.  Would still generate fire ball, wind blast and oily dirty rainy fallout.  Plus radioactive contamination.  Think FAB is probably more likely.  Anything else?  Where did it happen?  When did it happen?  Lots more questions.

Regards

Star man

Another option is a crashed missile of some kind - hits the ground, and fuel explodes creating a fire ball, wind blast and lots of oily smoke.  Some burning  fuel is thrown onto the hikers - as per Nigel's theory.  Yuri K's burned leg, burned clothing (later removed and replaced) and hair. 

If we assume that those with the most superficial injuries and frost bite survived the longest, then it would mean that the two Yuris would have lived the longest.  Did Zina, Dyatlov and Rustem die relatively quickly?  None of them have significant frost bite.  Could they have died from internal injuries from the blast, or toxic substances inhaled.  Thermovaric bomb uses ethylene oxide which is toxic, narcotic and anaesthetic.  Could they have been deliberately targeted?  A thermobaric grenade might have the same effect?  Its less likely to destroy the tent completely?  Seems unlikely to me as the two Yuris appear to have survived long enough to get severe frost bite.

Air mines? 

Looks like it was some kind of explosion.  Takes out the rav4 all in one go.  Thermobaric device still fits better.  Oily smoke and toxic aftermath.

Where did it happen?  If not on Kholat then most likely on the planned route somewhere.  Before the 6th Feb.  Before they made the labaz?

Regards

Star man


Askenadzi states that they were told that a missile was responsible.


The 2 yuris could have got the worst frostbite because they took the longest to get to the forest. This fits with a second event on the hill which finished Zinaida and Rustem with Igor joining the Yuris but giving up before the cedar.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Nigel Evans on January 09, 2021, 01:29:13 AM
I agree that the location of the tent when "discovered " by searchers is complete nonsense. Most people familiar with the details of the case absolutely had to realize that the hikers would have never set up camp on an exposed ridge when the forest was available a mile away. Far too many people fell for that deception.

It was on their plan..before the ascent of Otorten.  Also they had done previous expeditions that involved periods above the treeline https://dyatlovpass.com/gallery-1958-Subpolar-Ural (https://dyatlovpass.com/gallery-1958-Subpolar-Ural)

(https://i.ibb.co/RYSwb5z/Screenshot-16.png) (https://imgbb.com/)


The argument(s) for the tent location include deciding to "stay high" for the ascent of mt ortorten due to having failed to get through the DP pass the previous day (and fallen back and left excess weight at the labaz).They were clearly poorly equipped to be above the treeline so staying high could have made sense.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: tekumze on January 09, 2021, 01:35:41 AM
I really thank this forum and with all due respect to all involved, as this is the best polygon to explore the operation of the electrical jump between brain synapses in humans.
I am very sorry that Mr WAB is no longer appearing. He plays a very important role in this whole thought game. From the very beginning, it seemed to me that he was set up as some kind of coordinator, taking care on behalf of the state that public opinion would not lean too far away from the “natural destructive force they could not resist”.
 I hope everything is fine with him.
The world became small and the game of "democratic" processes could not bypass even Russia.
 "Democracy was built on slave ownership. Plato's state."
Only the ways of manipulating the masses have changed. The fact is, then, that when you feel free, you are the least free.
It is impossible to clear and conceal everything. Nine people who have already been enrolled in the system died. Relatives (some of whom are highly ranked in society) and friends and locals still ask questions. And of course journalists who know how to be really "pain in the ass" too.  And something had to be answered to this days.
"The point of disinformation is not to persuade public what to think, but to create the environment where nobody knows what to think." Gypsy.
 There was a need to invent a story that would be as plausible as possible and would obscure the truth. And today it is the same. And for more than 60 years from tragedy, everything has been spinning in the same circle. Without anything moving anywhere.
Why do you think that for the two years, the "reopening of the Dyatlov case" with all possible experts is the 100th check for whether or not there was a snow avalanche? It is precisely because there is always a need to divert attention away from what we do not want that people to know. Anything that was difficult to justify for the state, such as the fault of a rocket, army, monkeys, Jeti, Elvis Presley ..., is best replaced by a natural disaster. Because nobody can blamed or judged the nature.  So far, this formula is the most effective and is used worldwide.
In light of all that is known to the public so far, we are slowly leaning towards the fact that there were no alien, extraterrestrial, paranormal phenomena and also no “natural destructive force they could not resist”.
 ... but merely as throughout the whole history of civilization (which will also be published in Teddy’s book), was an interhuman conflict concealed by the authorities at the time in 1959. Probably because of things screwed up by the the state system and all its apparatuses that maintain it.
 And authorities of today still has no  interests to discover all the facts that happened.

I just started this for one reason only. I look forward to the development of the debate.
And remember: You don't have to believe in things just because you want to believe in them.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Nigel Evans on January 09, 2021, 04:21:12 AM
I really thank this forum and with all due respect to all involved, as this is the best polygon to explore the operation of the electrical jump between brain synapses in humans.
I am very sorry that Mr WAB is no longer appearing. He plays a very important role in this whole thought game. From the very beginning, it seemed to me that he was set up as some kind of coordinator, taking care on behalf of the state that public opinion would not lean too far away from the “natural destructive force they could not resist”.
 I hope everything is fine with him.
The world became small and the game of "democratic" processes could not bypass even Russia.
 "Democracy was built on slave ownership. Plato's state."
Only the ways of manipulating the masses have changed. The fact is, then, that when you feel free, you are the least free.
It is impossible to clear and conceal everything. Nine people who have already been enrolled in the system died. Relatives (some of whom are highly ranked in society) and friends and locals still ask questions. And of course journalists who know how to be really "pain in the ass" too.  And something had to be answered to this days.
"The point of disinformation is not to persuade public what to think, but to create the environment where nobody knows what to think." Gypsy.
 There was a need to invent a story that would be as plausible as possible and would obscure the truth. And today it is the same. And for more than 60 years from tragedy, everything has been spinning in the same circle. Without anything moving anywhere.
Why do you think that for the two years, the "reopening of the Dyatlov case" with all possible experts is the 100th check for whether or not there was a snow avalanche? It is precisely because there is always a need to divert attention away from what we do not want that people to know. Anything that was difficult to justify for the state, such as the fault of a rocket, army, monkeys, Jeti, Elvis Presley ..., is best replaced by a natural disaster. Because nobody can blamed or judged the nature.  So far, this formula is the most effective and is used worldwide.
In light of all that is known to the public so far, we are slowly leaning towards the fact that there were no alien, extraterrestrial, paranormal phenomena and also no “natural destructive force they could not resist”.
 ... but merely as throughout the whole history of civilization (which will also be published in Teddy’s book), was an interhuman conflict concealed by the authorities at the time in 1959. Probably because of things screwed up by the the state system and all its apparatuses that maintain it.
 And authorities of today still has no  interests to discover all the facts that happened.

I just started this for one reason only. I look forward to the development of the debate.
And remember: You don't have to believe in things just because you want to believe in them.


I'd completely agree that the behaviour of the state both then and now strengthens the coverup/conspiracy theories.


However what equally weakens the same is what followed the event, the lack of a cleanup operation to remove all the evidence including the bodies, involvement of civilians in the rescue and subsequent searching and at least one mystery group of government personnel. The state's behaviour then can be explained by :-
However the state's recent behaviour is of course more interesting wrt weighting the evidence for a coverup.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Ziljoe on January 09, 2021, 05:54:36 AM
Well I'm at a complete loss. I've read so much over so many years I haven't a clue.

I suppose the media didn't help much with over exaggerated truths but that's how they sell their stories.

I read loose canons excellent thread on the tent. I have also just read a lot of the case files and witness statements which seem to contradict themselves.....a lot.

The tent was said to be torn in some of their statements and there are admissions that some of the searchers may have done some of the damage.

I just wonder how one would decant a frozen tent that's pinned to the ground and frozen over with snow. I could imagine trying to lift up a flattend tent, making a small incision from the outside  then putting my hand in the hole or existing tears and cutting from the underside , which would be the inside. You don't know what's under the tent so one might peal it open In case there was body's under the canvas.

They did do forensics on the tent cuts under a microscope but also state when they received the tent it was in a crumpled mess. I also find it unusual that there's a picture claiming the actual cut of the searcher that made a hole with the pic ax but none of the other holes were noted in detail. ( Ah yes comrade , sorry I only did one cut , the rest was already done by the KGB)

 I think a lot of it is just poor untrained investigating and recording as opposed to a cover up.

But I'm looking forward to learning otherwise.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: GKM on January 09, 2021, 09:01:59 AM
Although I can't find it now I recall reading that the searchers drank the alcohol found in the hikers tent. But...I also read that Yuri Yudin was unable to acquire alcohol for the trip. What gives? Did the hikers have alcohol or not? And if they didn't then how the heck did the searchers find it in the tent unless it was placed there after the group died? Perhaps this means nothing but it certainly seems strange.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: eurocentric on January 09, 2021, 09:29:49 AM
I agree that the location of the tent when "discovered " by searchers is complete nonsense. Most people familiar with the details of the case absolutely had to realize that the hikers would have never set up camp on an exposed ridge when the forest was available a mile away. Far too many people fell for that deception.

It was on their plan..before the ascent of Otorten.  Also they had done previous expeditions that involved periods above the treeline https://dyatlovpass.com/gallery-1958-Subpolar-Ural

(https://i.ibb.co/RYSwb5z/Screenshot-16.png) (https://imgbb.com/)


There's nothing in that schedule which specifies they must ascend, let alone pitch on the mountain. The two ascents are intended to be Otorten and Oyko-Chakur. One day was allowed for navigation of the pass, and the 1959 resolution to close the case stated they were supposed to head between the peak, referred to as '1079', and another, '880', but were some 500-600m off their map route, as indicated by their trail.

https://dyatlovpass.com/case-files-384-387

Igor was blamed for several gross mistakes, including taking his group up the slope of 1079 from 3pm, in the usual winds and temperatures of -25 to -30, and the presumption was this was done to remain at altitude en route to Mt. Otorten.

That resolution made their own mistake. The trench digging photo's are said to be end-of-reel images, from two cameras, and used the last camera settings to calculate when they were taken based on the exposure, but arrived at 5pm (unless that is simply a mistranslation) - when they should have known it was dark half an hour earlier.

Other sources confirm that Level 3 did not require them to go without overnight heating.

The photo's of the previous hike show a tent at higher altitude, above the tree line, in a much wider mountain range which would require an overnight stay to traverse it, and it's pitched on a level, in weather so calm they can even hang gloves on the ropes.

That tent installation is suspended by two loops of rope either side through the centre eyelet (actually three on one side), and an extra rope tensioning the skis, which are set well away from the tent sides, and they are double-anchored with ski poles.

By contrast the tent on the Dyatlov Pass, which should be crossable in 3 hours, has no visible evidence of ridge ropes tied to the skis, even slipped down if the tent collapsed, and one ski is in the wrong position, unless the intention had been to use a pair downslope and shorter ski poles higher up the slope.

It's the norm to position a ridge tent side-on to the crest of the mountain, but the problem here is both the 30 degree slope and an elongated tent needing extra ridge support.

That slope means the downhill ski needs to be right up against the tent side (one is) to have planting depth at one end and retain height at the top, enough to be higher than the tent ridge. If this was on untouched ground it would be fine, but they have disturbed the snow by digging a trench, which will be because ridge tents have no headroom, and for wind chill protection, so that ski may not be held securely enough in the snow. They cannot risk the tent collapsing on them in the night due to the stove above them.

If alternatively, the tent had been turned 90 degrees, the 2 skis would then be at the same level either side. The problem with that installation, when wanting a trench and levelling a long tent, is they would have to dig deeper on the uphill end, and may even meet the ground, which up there is 50% rock strewn.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: tekumze on January 09, 2021, 10:01:07 AM
Now let’s wait and see what Teddy’s book will reveal. The least I expect is that it won't end with the sentence, "... but we'll probably never know what really happened ..." But that we'll all say together, "Finally. That's it!" Teddy, you've taken on a lot of responsibility. Best of luck.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: sarapuk on January 09, 2021, 10:24:38 AM
I agree that the location of the tent when "discovered " by searchers is complete nonsense. Most people familiar with the details of the case absolutely had to realize that the hikers would have never set up camp on an exposed ridge when the forest was available a mile away. Far too many people fell for that deception.

Its true that the Dyatlov Group should never have set up the Tent in severe weather conditions on an exposed Mountainside, when they had at least some shelter from the Forest area. Sometimes its neccessary however. For instance expeditions to the great Mountain ranges of the World might find themselves caught out in bad weather and need to set up camp quickly even in far from ideal locations. But the area where the Dyatlov Group were travelling was not a great Mountain range. It may have been remote and it may have been cold but they had the potential to get some cover from the Forest. [ Temperatures on Mt Everest can be between minus 15 and minus 40 degrees centigrade. ] Unless of course something was motivating them to camp where they did. What could that something be  !  ? 
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: sarapuk on January 09, 2021, 10:30:00 AM
Well, the lack of analysis of the foot prints, and the cuts in the tent near the entrance through the seams have been a problem for me for a while now.  This line of thinking makes it clear why. 

Also, why Yuri D would be climbing a tree with severe frost bite on hands and feet.  Why they were burnt - it doesn't make sense if they were either alive or dead.  If they were alive why would they allow their skin to burn like that, and if they died before the fire did, why did they die?  The flashlight on the 10cm of snow at the tent, the tidy nature of the tent - given the impression that they cut their way out in a panic.

Ok.  So if we cant rely on the evidence at the scene.  How do we figure out what really happened to them?  Solter's statement.  The bodies were very dirty, washed, prepared for burial ( with no relatives to formerly identify them and no autopsy) - odd.  11 bodies overall - odd.  Were the bodies, cleaned, possibly decontaminated, and then air lifted back to Kholat Syakhl for placement?  11 bodies?  Did Solter see two of the same bodies twice, at different times?  First in Feb, when they were prepped, and then in March when they were found again?  Lyuda - burned hair and face, Semyon?  Authorities need to make some changes to their appearance and then place them somewhere where they would decompose.  Missing eyes, tongue?  Chest injuries -  they were thrown by a wind blast, or accidentally dropped from a helicopter when being air lifted back? 

The tent - did the hikers actually  cut it?  Was it shredded by debris from something and made to look like it was cut.  Could there have been an incident that threw up a major amount of dirt, mud, or caused a landslide onto the tent?   Possible chemical weapon - chlorine, heavier than air so hugs the ground, will burn eyes and mucous membranes, - no toxicology report.  Might induce them to cut and tear themselves out of the tent.  Chlorine -  oxidising agent, poison, skin colour?  Oxidised skin may make them look dirty.  Yuri D lungs, grey fluid.  Chlorine causes fluid in the lungs, so you kind of drown.  Nitrogen dioxide would fo the same.  The tent - is there a record somewhere about its recovery and cleaning, prepping it to set back up on Kholat?

If you can't make the hikers disappear, you can always make the scene dissappear instead

Lots and lots of questions.  Needs further thought to piecei t together. 

Regards

Star man

Ok.  Lets continue with this line of thought.

To understand what happened to the hikers, we need to filter out the facts that cannot be faked so easily or  covered up.  If they couldn't or didn't want to make the hikers disappear, you make the scene disappear.  So that leaves the hikers - the bodies - the injuries.  Lets split the hikers into two groups.  Those with significant injuries and those with superficial injuries.  Who has the significant injuries?  - The rav 4 - convenient.  If the scene is faked, then Kolevatov, is not hugging Semyon.  Kolevatov - he didn't die last - he died first.  He was thrown by some kind of wind blast.  He landed awkwardly - deformed neck - spinal damage - severed spinal cord - cut signal through vegus nerve.  He dies almost instantly.  He didn't die of hypothermia - no frost bite.  Lyuda and Thibo are next.  Difficult to say which.  Both are thrown.  Semyon is next, he is thrown.  Maybe these were outside the tent sitting or standing when it happened?  The remaining 5 survive the initial wind blast.  Chemical weapon - NO.  Chlorine gas - NO.  Chemical weapon unlikely to create a large wind blast.  Chlorine would bleach skin and hair.  Would have distinct smell like bleach.  What else?  "Very very dirty" -Zina's grubby oily looking hands - localised burns to skin and hair - wind blast- flame front - pressure wave- no eye brows, no eyes.  Couldn't be high explosives.  Would be localised, closer - disingrating bodies.  Very very dirty - finger tips and finger nails look ok -  they weren't buried -  SMOKE -  oily sooty, not fully combusted smoke - smoke inhalation -  Yuri D grey foam.  Large fire ball, wind blast and pressure wave - oily sooty smoke - - -  thermobaric device -  Fuel air bomb?  Uses up all oxygen?  Possibly would fit.  Military test gone wrong?  Accident?  Strontium 90 used as tracer?

The remaining 5 live longer than the rav 4.  Were they lying in the tent?  The tent must have been damaged -  did the side that faced the flame front catch fire?  The other side survived?  Shredded by debris?  Was the Kholat tent a different tent altogether?  Its difficult to say.  Wzs the tent even set up, or still packed when it happened?

Yuri D significant frost bite.  Yuri K had frost bite too.  Were they trying to survive without the tent?  Died of frost bite, hypothermia and smoke inhalation.  Inhalation of unburned toxic FAB fuel?  They must have survived for a while to get the frost bite. Could they have survived with their outer clothing and no tent?
 Dyatlov, Zina and Rustem - Rustem may have been knocked about in the wind blast - both temporal lobes?  Odd?  Did the survivors fight?    Could they see.?  Were they blinded by the unburned chemicals and smoke?  Ah blinded -  couldn't find or use their gear and clothing?  That would be desperate.  Geese.  If that's what happened - poor guys.

Other options -  nuclear?  Possible.  Would still generate fire ball, wind blast and oily dirty rainy fallout.  Plus radioactive contamination.  Think FAB is probably more likely.  Anything else?  Where did it happen?  When did it happen?  Lots more questions.

Regards

Star man

Another option is a crashed missile of some kind - hits the ground, and fuel explodes creating a fire ball, wind blast and lots of oily smoke.  Some burning  fuel is thrown onto the hikers - as per Nigel's theory.  Yuri K's burned leg, burned clothing (later removed and replaced) and hair. 

If we assume that those with the most superficial injuries and frost bite survived the longest, then it would mean that the two Yuris would have lived the longest.  Did Zina, Dyatlov and Rustem die relatively quickly?  None of them have significant frost bite.  Could they have died from internal injuries from the blast, or toxic substances inhaled.  Thermovaric bomb uses ethylene oxide which is toxic, narcotic and anaesthetic.  Could they have been deliberately targeted?  A thermobaric grenade might have the same effect?  Its less likely to destroy the tent completely?  Seems unlikely to me as the two Yuris appear to have survived long enough to get severe frost bite.

Air mines? 

Looks like it was some kind of explosion.  Takes out the rav4 all in one go.  Thermobaric device still fits better.  Oily smoke and toxic aftermath.

Where did it happen?  If not on Kholat then most likely on the planned route somewhere.  Before the 6th Feb.  Before they made the labaz?

Regards

Star man

Well we have been down this road a few times. Explosion big enough to do what it did would almost certainly leave traces. That means Evidence of explosion. There is no Evidence of explosion. So next step means if that theory is correct there must have been a cover up. But accidents happened a lot in the USSR, so why cover up ! ? Also those injuries to some of the Dyatlov Group do not look like injuries gained from an explosion.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: eurocentric on January 09, 2021, 10:41:33 AM
Well, the lack of analysis of the foot prints, and the cuts in the tent near the entrance through the seams have been a problem for me for a while now.  This line of thinking makes it clear why. 

Also, why Yuri D would be climbing a tree with severe frost bite on hands and feet.  Why they were burnt - it doesn't make sense if they were either alive or dead.  If they were alive why would they allow their skin to burn like that, and if they died before the fire did, why did they die?  The flashlight on the 10cm of snow at the tent, the tidy nature of the tent - given the impression that they cut their way out in a panic.

Ok.  So if we cant rely on the evidence at the scene.  How do we figure out what really happened to them?  Solter's statement.  The bodies were very dirty, washed, prepared for burial ( with no relatives to formerly identify them and no autopsy) - odd.  11 bodies overall - odd.  Were the bodies, cleaned, possibly decontaminated, and then air lifted back to Kholat Syakhl for placement?  11 bodies?  Did Solter see two of the same bodies twice, at different times?  First in Feb, when they were prepped, and then in March when they were found again?  Lyuda - burned hair and face, Semyon?  Authorities need to make some changes to their appearance and then place them somewhere where they would decompose.  Missing eyes, tongue?  Chest injuries -  they were thrown by a wind blast, or accidentally dropped from a helicopter when being air lifted back? 

The tent - did the hikers actually  cut it?  Was it shredded by debris from something and made to look like it was cut.  Could there have been an incident that threw up a major amount of dirt, mud, or caused a landslide onto the tent?   Possible chemical weapon - chlorine, heavier than air so hugs the ground, will burn eyes and mucous membranes, - no toxicology report.  Might induce them to cut and tear themselves out of the tent.  Chlorine -  oxidising agent, poison, skin colour?  Oxidised skin may make them look dirty.  Yuri D lungs, grey fluid.  Chlorine causes fluid in the lungs, so you kind of drown.  Nitrogen dioxide would fo the same.  The tent - is there a record somewhere about its recovery and cleaning, prepping it to set back up on Kholat?

If you can't make the hikers disappear, you can always make the scene dissappear instead

Lots and lots of questions.  Needs further thought to piecei t together. 

Regards

Star man

Ok.  Lets continue with this line of thought.

To understand what happened to the hikers, we need to filter out the facts that cannot be faked so easily or  covered up.  If they couldn't or didn't want to make the hikers disappear, you make the scene disappear.  So that leaves the hikers - the bodies - the injuries.  Lets split the hikers into two groups.  Those with significant injuries and those with superficial injuries.  Who has the significant injuries?  - The rav 4 - convenient.  If the scene is faked, then Kolevatov, is not hugging Semyon.  Kolevatov - he didn't die last - he died first.  He was thrown by some kind of wind blast.  He landed awkwardly - deformed neck - spinal damage - severed spinal cord - cut signal through vegus nerve.  He dies almost instantly.  He didn't die of hypothermia - no frost bite.  Lyuda and Thibo are next.  Difficult to say which.  Both are thrown.  Semyon is next, he is thrown.  Maybe these were outside the tent sitting or standing when it happened?  The remaining 5 survive the initial wind blast.  Chemical weapon - NO.  Chlorine gas - NO.  Chemical weapon unlikely to create a large wind blast.  Chlorine would bleach skin and hair.  Would have distinct smell like bleach.  What else?  "Very very dirty" -Zina's grubby oily looking hands - localised burns to skin and hair - wind blast- flame front - pressure wave- no eye brows, no eyes.  Couldn't be high explosives.  Would be localised, closer - disingrating bodies.  Very very dirty - finger tips and finger nails look ok -  they weren't buried -  SMOKE -  oily sooty, not fully combusted smoke - smoke inhalation -  Yuri D grey foam.  Large fire ball, wind blast and pressure wave - oily sooty smoke - - -  thermobaric device -  Fuel air bomb?  Uses up all oxygen?  Possibly would fit.  Military test gone wrong?  Accident?  Strontium 90 used as tracer?

The remaining 5 live longer than the rav 4.  Were they lying in the tent?  The tent must have been damaged -  did the side that faced the flame front catch fire?  The other side survived?  Shredded by debris?  Was the Kholat tent a different tent altogether?  Its difficult to say.  Wzs the tent even set up, or still packed when it happened?

Yuri D significant frost bite.  Yuri K had frost bite too.  Were they trying to survive without the tent?  Died of frost bite, hypothermia and smoke inhalation.  Inhalation of unburned toxic FAB fuel?  They must have survived for a while to get the frost bite. Could they have survived with their outer clothing and no tent?
 Dyatlov, Zina and Rustem - Rustem may have been knocked about in the wind blast - both temporal lobes?  Odd?  Did the survivors fight?    Could they see.?  Were they blinded by the unburned chemicals and smoke?  Ah blinded -  couldn't find or use their gear and clothing?  That would be desperate.  Geese.  If that's what happened - poor guys.

Other options -  nuclear?  Possible.  Would still generate fire ball, wind blast and oily dirty rainy fallout.  Plus radioactive contamination.  Think FAB is probably more likely.  Anything else?  Where did it happen?  When did it happen?  Lots more questions.

Regards

Star man

Another option is a crashed missile of some kind - hits the ground, and fuel explodes creating a fire ball, wind blast and lots of oily smoke.  Some burning  fuel is thrown onto the hikers - as per Nigel's theory.  Yuri K's burned leg, burned clothing (later removed and replaced) and hair. 

If we assume that those with the most superficial injuries and frost bite survived the longest, then it would mean that the two Yuris would have lived the longest.  Did Zina, Dyatlov and Rustem die relatively quickly?  None of them have significant frost bite.  Could they have died from internal injuries from the blast, or toxic substances inhaled.  Thermovaric bomb uses ethylene oxide which is toxic, narcotic and anaesthetic.  Could they have been deliberately targeted?  A thermobaric grenade might have the same effect?  Its less likely to destroy the tent completely?  Seems unlikely to me as the two Yuris appear to have survived long enough to get severe frost bite.

Air mines? 

Looks like it was some kind of explosion.  Takes out the rav4 all in one go.  Thermobaric device still fits better.  Oily smoke and toxic aftermath.

Where did it happen?  If not on Kholat then most likely on the planned route somewhere. Before the 6th Feb.  Before they made the labaz?

Regards

Star man


If the incident involved a contaminant which would hang around, such as something radioactive, which would either take ages to clean up or be left where it was to naturally decay, for example the neutron bomb's tritium has a half life of 10.43 years, then they'd likely want to resite the tent and hikers' demise well away from the original scene, not in that forest, or there'd be risk of the rescue teams being affected and then the cover-up is blown.

The book may even suggest they died the night before, at their previous campsite, in which case all the military needed do was continue their ski trail up to the Dyatlov Pass, something which may also explain the hikers being off their planned route (an unfamiliar military mistake).

Perhaps something in the air, a toxic chemical, which in concentration or direct contact burns skin, and burned the inside of Lyuda's mouth if she began to mouth breathe, something which would tend to linger in a sheltered forest, where hikers have less chance to run away fast from it, whereas out in the open, up on the ridge, the wind should disperse it.

Unlike on the ridge, where it's assumed they would all be in the same position, inside the tent, a campsite in the forest allows for some to be in the tent, some outside by a fire, and perhaps others collecting wood, when the incident happens, to explain different exposure and injury levels.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: sarapuk on January 09, 2021, 10:49:36 AM
I agree that the location of the tent when "discovered " by searchers is complete nonsense. Most people familiar with the details of the case absolutely had to realize that the hikers would have never set up camp on an exposed ridge when the forest was available a mile away. Far too many people fell for that deception.

It was on their plan..before the ascent of Otorten.  Also they had done previous expeditions that involved periods above the treeline https://dyatlovpass.com/gallery-1958-Subpolar-Ural

(https://i.ibb.co/RYSwb5z/Screenshot-16.png) (https://imgbb.com/)

Yes good stuff. But the actual places where they did pitch their Tent were not specified. The Route but not the exact places. But its possible that they did pitch the Tent on the exposed Mountainside for the reason that you suggest. I have been trying to tie this final Tent pitching business into the overhaul picture of the Event or Events that happened in that final area of their expedition.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: sarapuk on January 09, 2021, 12:15:56 PM



Askenadzi states that they were told that a missile was responsible.


Or they were told to say that a missile was responsible.

Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: sarapuk on January 09, 2021, 12:23:57 PM
I really thank this forum and with all due respect to all involved, as this is the best polygon to explore the operation of the electrical jump between brain synapses in humans.
I am very sorry that Mr WAB is no longer appearing. He plays a very important role in this whole thought game. From the very beginning, it seemed to me that he was set up as some kind of coordinator, taking care on behalf of the state that public opinion would not lean too far away from the “natural destructive force they could not resist”.
 I hope everything is fine with him.
The world became small and the game of "democratic" processes could not bypass even Russia.
 "Democracy was built on slave ownership. Plato's state."
Only the ways of manipulating the masses have changed. The fact is, then, that when you feel free, you are the least free.
It is impossible to clear and conceal everything. Nine people who have already been enrolled in the system died. Relatives (some of whom are highly ranked in society) and friends and locals still ask questions. And of course journalists who know how to be really "pain in the ass" too.  And something had to be answered to this days.
"The point of disinformation is not to persuade public what to think, but to create the environment where nobody knows what to think." Gypsy.
 There was a need to invent a story that would be as plausible as possible and would obscure the truth. And today it is the same. And for more than 60 years from tragedy, everything has been spinning in the same circle. Without anything moving anywhere.
Why do you think that for the two years, the "reopening of the Dyatlov case" with all possible experts is the 100th check for whether or not there was a snow avalanche? It is precisely because there is always a need to divert attention away from what we do not want that people to know. Anything that was difficult to justify for the state, such as the fault of a rocket, army, monkeys, Jeti, Elvis Presley ..., is best replaced by a natural disaster. Because nobody can blamed or judged the nature.  So far, this formula is the most effective and is used worldwide.
In light of all that is known to the public so far, we are slowly leaning towards the fact that there were no alien, extraterrestrial, paranormal phenomena and also no “natural destructive force they could not resist”.
 ... but merely as throughout the whole history of civilization (which will also be published in Teddy’s book), was an interhuman conflict concealed by the authorities at the time in 1959. Probably because of things screwed up by the the state system and all its apparatuses that maintain it.
 And authorities of today still has no  interests to discover all the facts that happened.

I just started this for one reason only. I look forward to the development of the debate.
And remember: You don't have to believe in things just because you want to believe in them.

Interesting reading your bit of philosophy. But this Dyatlo Case cannot be truly solved without the Evidence to back up any theory. No matter what that theory is. It could be a  simple theory like Avalanche or it could be something more complicated like military accident and cover up. Evidence is needed.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: sarapuk on January 09, 2021, 12:28:14 PM
I really thank this forum and with all due respect to all involved, as this is the best polygon to explore the operation of the electrical jump between brain synapses in humans.
I am very sorry that Mr WAB is no longer appearing. He plays a very important role in this whole thought game. From the very beginning, it seemed to me that he was set up as some kind of coordinator, taking care on behalf of the state that public opinion would not lean too far away from the “natural destructive force they could not resist”.
 I hope everything is fine with him.
The world became small and the game of "democratic" processes could not bypass even Russia.
 "Democracy was built on slave ownership. Plato's state."
Only the ways of manipulating the masses have changed. The fact is, then, that when you feel free, you are the least free.
It is impossible to clear and conceal everything. Nine people who have already been enrolled in the system died. Relatives (some of whom are highly ranked in society) and friends and locals still ask questions. And of course journalists who know how to be really "pain in the ass" too.  And something had to be answered to this days.
"The point of disinformation is not to persuade public what to think, but to create the environment where nobody knows what to think." Gypsy.
 There was a need to invent a story that would be as plausible as possible and would obscure the truth. And today it is the same. And for more than 60 years from tragedy, everything has been spinning in the same circle. Without anything moving anywhere.
Why do you think that for the two years, the "reopening of the Dyatlov case" with all possible experts is the 100th check for whether or not there was a snow avalanche? It is precisely because there is always a need to divert attention away from what we do not want that people to know. Anything that was difficult to justify for the state, such as the fault of a rocket, army, monkeys, Jeti, Elvis Presley ..., is best replaced by a natural disaster. Because nobody can blamed or judged the nature.  So far, this formula is the most effective and is used worldwide.
In light of all that is known to the public so far, we are slowly leaning towards the fact that there were no alien, extraterrestrial, paranormal phenomena and also no “natural destructive force they could not resist”.
 ... but merely as throughout the whole history of civilization (which will also be published in Teddy’s book), was an interhuman conflict concealed by the authorities at the time in 1959. Probably because of things screwed up by the the state system and all its apparatuses that maintain it.
 And authorities of today still has no  interests to discover all the facts that happened.

I just started this for one reason only. I look forward to the development of the debate.
And remember: You don't have to believe in things just because you want to believe in them.


I'd completely agree that the behaviour of the state both then and now strengthens the coverup/conspiracy theories.


However what equally weakens the same is what followed the event, the lack of a cleanup operation to remove all the evidence including the bodies, involvement of civilians in the rescue and subsequent searching and at least one mystery group of government personnel. The state's behaviour then can be explained by :-
  • icbm testing (this would have been the big priority, to suppress interest in lights crossing the sky, the editor of the Tagil Worker newspaper being severely reprimanded for reporting such an event).
  • concerns for defection (Alexander).
  • high ranking families.
  • genuinely puzzled.
However the state's recent behaviour is of course more interesting wrt weighting the evidence for a coverup.

And I will add to that. Governments do and always have had a propensity to cover something up if its in the National Interest to do so.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: sarapuk on January 09, 2021, 12:36:03 PM
Well I'm at a complete loss. I've read so much over so many years I haven't a clue.

I suppose the media didn't help much with over exaggerated truths but that's how they sell their stories.

I read loose canons excellent thread on the tent. I have also just read a lot of the case files and witness statements which seem to contradict themselves.....a lot.

The tent was said to be torn in some of their statements and there are admissions that some of the searchers may have done some of the damage.

I just wonder how one would decant a frozen tent that's pinned to the ground and frozen over with snow. I could imagine trying to lift up a flattend tent, making a small incision from the outside  then putting my hand in the hole or existing tears and cutting from the underside , which would be the inside. You don't know what's under the tent so one might peal it open In case there was body's under the canvas.

They did do forensics on the tent cuts under a microscope but also state when they received the tent it was in a crumpled mess. I also find it unusual that there's a picture claiming the actual cut of the searcher that made a hole with the pic ax but none of the other holes were noted in detail. ( Ah yes comrade , sorry I only did one cut , the rest was already done by the KGB)

 I think a lot of it is just poor untrained investigating and recording as opposed to a cover up.

But I'm looking forward to learning otherwise.

Well the more I look into it the more I see a host of factors at play including Poor Investigation. Poor Autopsy Reports. And potential so called Cover Up, in the National Interest.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: sarapuk on January 09, 2021, 12:39:05 PM
Although I can't find it now I recall reading that the searchers drank the alcohol found in the hikers tent. But...I also read that Yuri Yudin was unable to acquire alcohol for the trip. What gives? Did the hikers have alcohol or not? And if they didn't then how the heck did the searchers find it in the tent unless it was placed there after the group died? Perhaps this means nothing but it certainly seems strange.

According to the Case Files a Flask of Alcohol was found in the Tent by the Searchers. Other than that, its anyones guess.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: sarapuk on January 09, 2021, 12:44:40 PM
Now let’s wait and see what Teddy’s book will reveal. The least I expect is that it won't end with the sentence, "... but we'll probably never know what really happened ..." But that we'll all say together, "Finally. That's it!" Teddy, you've taken on a lot of responsibility. Best of luck.

Well the Forum continues. If there is a new theory that finally tells us what happened then there has to be Evidence to back it up or, CASE NOT SOLVED.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: tekumze on January 09, 2021, 01:05:25 PM
Dear Sarapuk.
Just like you wrote. Proof is needed to solve any problem. And neither yours nor my writing on the forum will solve anything. If you paid attention to my first sentence you may have noticed that I am interested in the forum as a polygon for studying electrical impulses in human brain synapses. That is, how people from different social structures cognitively respond to complex unsolvable events from the past and present. This is part of my dissertation research. Of course, I hope that one day the truth of the Dyatlov group tragedy will be revealed. Only this is unlikely to happen on the forum. What do you think?
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: DAXXY on January 09, 2021, 01:53:47 PM
Ideas come from every persons different life experiences and background. Some are very imaginative and others more plausible and involve what little pieces of evidence are on display. 

Often explanations are mundane like, why is Dyatlov's jacket on the ground outside the tent ?  Because he gave it to someone to stand on while they discussed a search plan for the 2 missing Yuris at the cedar tree.  Walking in snow in layers of wool socks is ok if you keep moving and don't stand still... wool keeps it's insulation qualities even when wet...

There are classic signs of late stage hypothermia affecting the 2 Yuri's at the cedar tree.  One is the cutting off and discarding of their own clothing (Paradoxical Undressing) Another is the evidence of Pulmonary Edema (Grey Foam) on the face and mouth of Yuri Doroshenko, another sign is the burns and the bitten right hand on Yuri Krivonischenko's body due to him experiencing greatly reduced sensation.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Star man on January 09, 2021, 04:19:57 PM
Well, the lack of analysis of the foot prints, and the cuts in the tent near the entrance through the seams have been a problem for me for a while now.  This line of thinking makes it clear why. 

Also, why Yuri D would be climbing a tree with severe frost bite on hands and feet.  Why they were burnt - it doesn't make sense if they were either alive or dead.  If they were alive why would they allow their skin to burn like that, and if they died before the fire did, why did they die?  The flashlight on the 10cm of snow at the tent, the tidy nature of the tent - given the impression that they cut their way out in a panic.

Ok.  So if we cant rely on the evidence at the scene.  How do we figure out what really happened to them?  Solter's statement.  The bodies were very dirty, washed, prepared for burial ( with no relatives to formerly identify them and no autopsy) - odd.  11 bodies overall - odd.  Were the bodies, cleaned, possibly decontaminated, and then air lifted back to Kholat Syakhl for placement?  11 bodies?  Did Solter see two of the same bodies twice, at different times?  First in Feb, when they were prepped, and then in March when they were found again?  Lyuda - burned hair and face, Semyon?  Authorities need to make some changes to their appearance and then place them somewhere where they would decompose.  Missing eyes, tongue?  Chest injuries -  they were thrown by a wind blast, or accidentally dropped from a helicopter when being air lifted back? 

The tent - did the hikers actually  cut it?  Was it shredded by debris from something and made to look like it was cut.  Could there have been an incident that threw up a major amount of dirt, mud, or caused a landslide onto the tent?   Possible chemical weapon - chlorine, heavier than air so hugs the ground, will burn eyes and mucous membranes, - no toxicology report.  Might induce them to cut and tear themselves out of the tent.  Chlorine -  oxidising agent, poison, skin colour?  Oxidised skin may make them look dirty.  Yuri D lungs, grey fluid.  Chlorine causes fluid in the lungs, so you kind of drown.  Nitrogen dioxide would fo the same.  The tent - is there a record somewhere about its recovery and cleaning, prepping it to set back up on Kholat?

If you can't make the hikers disappear, you can always make the scene dissappear instead

Lots and lots of questions.  Needs further thought to piecei t together. 

Regards

Star man

Ok.  Lets continue with this line of thought.

To understand what happened to the hikers, we need to filter out the facts that cannot be faked so easily or  covered up.  If they couldn't or didn't want to make the hikers disappear, you make the scene disappear.  So that leaves the hikers - the bodies - the injuries.  Lets split the hikers into two groups.  Those with significant injuries and those with superficial injuries.  Who has the significant injuries?  - The rav 4 - convenient.  If the scene is faked, then Kolevatov, is not hugging Semyon.  Kolevatov - he didn't die last - he died first.  He was thrown by some kind of wind blast.  He landed awkwardly - deformed neck - spinal damage - severed spinal cord - cut signal through vegus nerve.  He dies almost instantly.  He didn't die of hypothermia - no frost bite.  Lyuda and Thibo are next.  Difficult to say which.  Both are thrown.  Semyon is next, he is thrown.  Maybe these were outside the tent sitting or standing when it happened?  The remaining 5 survive the initial wind blast.  Chemical weapon - NO.  Chlorine gas - NO.  Chemical weapon unlikely to create a large wind blast.  Chlorine would bleach skin and hair.  Would have distinct smell like bleach.  What else?  "Very very dirty" -Zina's grubby oily looking hands - localised burns to skin and hair - wind blast- flame front - pressure wave- no eye brows, no eyes.  Couldn't be high explosives.  Would be localised, closer - disingrating bodies.  Very very dirty - finger tips and finger nails look ok -  they weren't buried -  SMOKE -  oily sooty, not fully combusted smoke - smoke inhalation -  Yuri D grey foam.  Large fire ball, wind blast and pressure wave - oily sooty smoke - - -  thermobaric device -  Fuel air bomb?  Uses up all oxygen?  Possibly would fit.  Military test gone wrong?  Accident?  Strontium 90 used as tracer?

The remaining 5 live longer than the rav 4.  Were they lying in the tent?  The tent must have been damaged -  did the side that faced the flame front catch fire?  The other side survived?  Shredded by debris?  Was the Kholat tent a different tent altogether?  Its difficult to say.  Wzs the tent even set up, or still packed when it happened?

Yuri D significant frost bite.  Yuri K had frost bite too.  Were they trying to survive without the tent?  Died of frost bite, hypothermia and smoke inhalation.  Inhalation of unburned toxic FAB fuel?  They must have survived for a while to get the frost bite. Could they have survived with their outer clothing and no tent?
 Dyatlov, Zina and Rustem - Rustem may have been knocked about in the wind blast - both temporal lobes?  Odd?  Did the survivors fight?    Could they see.?  Were they blinded by the unburned chemicals and smoke?  Ah blinded -  couldn't find or use their gear and clothing?  That would be desperate.  Geese.  If that's what happened - poor guys.

Other options -  nuclear?  Possible.  Would still generate fire ball, wind blast and oily dirty rainy fallout.  Plus radioactive contamination.  Think FAB is probably more likely.  Anything else?  Where did it happen?  When did it happen?  Lots more questions.

Regards

Star man

Another option is a crashed missile of some kind - hits the ground, and fuel explodes creating a fire ball, wind blast and lots of oily smoke.  Some burning  fuel is thrown onto the hikers - as per Nigel's theory.  Yuri K's burned leg, burned clothing (later removed and replaced) and hair. 

If we assume that those with the most superficial injuries and frost bite survived the longest, then it would mean that the two Yuris would have lived the longest.  Did Zina, Dyatlov and Rustem die relatively quickly?  None of them have significant frost bite.  Could they have died from internal injuries from the blast, or toxic substances inhaled.  Thermovaric bomb uses ethylene oxide which is toxic, narcotic and anaesthetic.  Could they have been deliberately targeted?  A thermobaric grenade might have the same effect?  Its less likely to destroy the tent completely?  Seems unlikely to me as the two Yuris appear to have survived long enough to get severe frost bite.

Air mines? 

Looks like it was some kind of explosion.  Takes out the rav4 all in one go.  Thermobaric device still fits better.  Oily smoke and toxic aftermath.

Where did it happen?  If not on Kholat then most likely on the planned route somewhere.  Before the 6th Feb.  Before they made the labaz?

Regards

Star man


Askenadzi states that they were told that a missile was responsible.


The 2 yuris could have got the worst frostbite because they took the longest to get to the forest. This fits with a second event on the hill which finished Zinaida and Rustem with Igor joining the Yuris but giving up before the cedar.

I was thinking more a single event, but who knows.

Regards

Star man
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: GKM on January 09, 2021, 04:34:20 PM
Over and over again I read "NO EVIDENCE ". What evidence do you want? A signed confession? After over 60 years evidence is unlikely to be found. All that is left is plausible theories or some not so plausible theories. The tent is missing, the footprints were never examined by experts, the autopsy reports are, to say the least, extremely lacking. The odds of any evidence appearing "out of the blue "is are slim to none. I hope no is expecting the group to return from the dead to tell us all exactly what happened, how it happened, and why it happened...or WHO is responsible for what happened. I would love to see foolproof evidence but I will not delude myself into believing that EVIDENCE is ever going to appear.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Star man on January 09, 2021, 04:35:08 PM
Well, the lack of analysis of the foot prints, and the cuts in the tent near the entrance through the seams have been a problem for me for a while now.  This line of thinking makes it clear why. 

Also, why Yuri D would be climbing a tree with severe frost bite on hands and feet.  Why they were burnt - it doesn't make sense if they were either alive or dead.  If they were alive why would they allow their skin to burn like that, and if they died before the fire did, why did they die?  The flashlight on the 10cm of snow at the tent, the tidy nature of the tent - given the impression that they cut their way out in a panic.

Ok.  So if we cant rely on the evidence at the scene.  How do we figure out what really happened to them?  Solter's statement.  The bodies were very dirty, washed, prepared for burial ( with no relatives to formerly identify them and no autopsy) - odd.  11 bodies overall - odd.  Were the bodies, cleaned, possibly decontaminated, and then air lifted back to Kholat Syakhl for placement?  11 bodies?  Did Solter see two of the same bodies twice, at different times?  First in Feb, when they were prepped, and then in March when they were found again?  Lyuda - burned hair and face, Semyon?  Authorities need to make some changes to their appearance and then place them somewhere where they would decompose.  Missing eyes, tongue?  Chest injuries -  they were thrown by a wind blast, or accidentally dropped from a helicopter when being air lifted back? 

The tent - did the hikers actually  cut it?  Was it shredded by debris from something and made to look like it was cut.  Could there have been an incident that threw up a major amount of dirt, mud, or caused a landslide onto the tent?   Possible chemical weapon - chlorine, heavier than air so hugs the ground, will burn eyes and mucous membranes, - no toxicology report.  Might induce them to cut and tear themselves out of the tent.  Chlorine -  oxidising agent, poison, skin colour?  Oxidised skin may make them look dirty.  Yuri D lungs, grey fluid.  Chlorine causes fluid in the lungs, so you kind of drown.  Nitrogen dioxide would fo the same.  The tent - is there a record somewhere about its recovery and cleaning, prepping it to set back up on Kholat?

If you can't make the hikers disappear, you can always make the scene dissappear instead

Lots and lots of questions.  Needs further thought to piecei t together. 

Regards

Star man

Ok.  Lets continue with this line of thought.

To understand what happened to the hikers, we need to filter out the facts that cannot be faked so easily or  covered up.  If they couldn't or didn't want to make the hikers disappear, you make the scene disappear.  So that leaves the hikers - the bodies - the injuries.  Lets split the hikers into two groups.  Those with significant injuries and those with superficial injuries.  Who has the significant injuries?  - The rav 4 - convenient.  If the scene is faked, then Kolevatov, is not hugging Semyon.  Kolevatov - he didn't die last - he died first.  He was thrown by some kind of wind blast.  He landed awkwardly - deformed neck - spinal damage - severed spinal cord - cut signal through vegus nerve.  He dies almost instantly.  He didn't die of hypothermia - no frost bite.  Lyuda and Thibo are next.  Difficult to say which.  Both are thrown.  Semyon is next, he is thrown.  Maybe these were outside the tent sitting or standing when it happened?  The remaining 5 survive the initial wind blast.  Chemical weapon - NO.  Chlorine gas - NO.  Chemical weapon unlikely to create a large wind blast.  Chlorine would bleach skin and hair.  Would have distinct smell like bleach.  What else?  "Very very dirty" -Zina's grubby oily looking hands - localised burns to skin and hair - wind blast- flame front - pressure wave- no eye brows, no eyes.  Couldn't be high explosives.  Would be localised, closer - disingrating bodies.  Very very dirty - finger tips and finger nails look ok -  they weren't buried -  SMOKE -  oily sooty, not fully combusted smoke - smoke inhalation -  Yuri D grey foam.  Large fire ball, wind blast and pressure wave - oily sooty smoke - - -  thermobaric device -  Fuel air bomb?  Uses up all oxygen?  Possibly would fit.  Military test gone wrong?  Accident?  Strontium 90 used as tracer?

The remaining 5 live longer than the rav 4.  Were they lying in the tent?  The tent must have been damaged -  did the side that faced the flame front catch fire?  The other side survived?  Shredded by debris?  Was the Kholat tent a different tent altogether?  Its difficult to say.  Wzs the tent even set up, or still packed when it happened?

Yuri D significant frost bite.  Yuri K had frost bite too.  Were they trying to survive without the tent?  Died of frost bite, hypothermia and smoke inhalation.  Inhalation of unburned toxic FAB fuel?  They must have survived for a while to get the frost bite. Could they have survived with their outer clothing and no tent?
 Dyatlov, Zina and Rustem - Rustem may have been knocked about in the wind blast - both temporal lobes?  Odd?  Did the survivors fight?    Could they see.?  Were they blinded by the unburned chemicals and smoke?  Ah blinded -  couldn't find or use their gear and clothing?  That would be desperate.  Geese.  If that's what happened - poor guys.

Other options -  nuclear?  Possible.  Would still generate fire ball, wind blast and oily dirty rainy fallout.  Plus radioactive contamination.  Think FAB is probably more likely.  Anything else?  Where did it happen?  When did it happen?  Lots more questions.

Regards

Star man

Another option is a crashed missile of some kind - hits the ground, and fuel explodes creating a fire ball, wind blast and lots of oily smoke.  Some burning  fuel is thrown onto the hikers - as per Nigel's theory.  Yuri K's burned leg, burned clothing (later removed and replaced) and hair. 

If we assume that those with the most superficial injuries and frost bite survived the longest, then it would mean that the two Yuris would have lived the longest.  Did Zina, Dyatlov and Rustem die relatively quickly?  None of them have significant frost bite.  Could they have died from internal injuries from the blast, or toxic substances inhaled.  Thermovaric bomb uses ethylene oxide which is toxic, narcotic and anaesthetic.  Could they have been deliberately targeted?  A thermobaric grenade might have the same effect?  Its less likely to destroy the tent completely?  Seems unlikely to me as the two Yuris appear to have survived long enough to get severe frost bite.

Air mines? 

Looks like it was some kind of explosion.  Takes out the rav4 all in one go.  Thermobaric device still fits better.  Oily smoke and toxic aftermath.

Where did it happen?  If not on Kholat then most likely on the planned route somewhere.  Before the 6th Feb.  Before they made the labaz?

Regards

Star man

Well we have been down this road a few times. Explosion big enough to do what it did would almost certainly leave traces. That means Evidence of explosion. There is no Evidence of explosion. So next step means if that theory is correct there must have been a cover up. But accidents happened a lot in the USSR, so why cover up ! ? Also those injuries to some of the Dyatlov Group do not look like injuries gained from an explosion.

Its still speculation without evidence DB. Always has been.  I for one don't have evidence to underpin it.  I have some ideas on how to narrow down the - where and when, but I am going to stop now.  And listen.

If Teddy finaly brings an end to the mystery then I hope the 9 hikers can finally rest in piece and it brings closure to any remaining relatives and friends.

Maybe Teddy will have to find another great mystery to solve?

Regards

Star man
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Star man on January 09, 2021, 04:41:02 PM
Well, the lack of analysis of the foot prints, and the cuts in the tent near the entrance through the seams have been a problem for me for a while now.  This line of thinking makes it clear why. 

Also, why Yuri D would be climbing a tree with severe frost bite on hands and feet.  Why they were burnt - it doesn't make sense if they were either alive or dead.  If they were alive why would they allow their skin to burn like that, and if they died before the fire did, why did they die?  The flashlight on the 10cm of snow at the tent, the tidy nature of the tent - given the impression that they cut their way out in a panic.

Ok.  So if we cant rely on the evidence at the scene.  How do we figure out what really happened to them?  Solter's statement.  The bodies were very dirty, washed, prepared for burial ( with no relatives to formerly identify them and no autopsy) - odd.  11 bodies overall - odd.  Were the bodies, cleaned, possibly decontaminated, and then air lifted back to Kholat Syakhl for placement?  11 bodies?  Did Solter see two of the same bodies twice, at different times?  First in Feb, when they were prepped, and then in March when they were found again?  Lyuda - burned hair and face, Semyon?  Authorities need to make some changes to their appearance and then place them somewhere where they would decompose.  Missing eyes, tongue?  Chest injuries -  they were thrown by a wind blast, or accidentally dropped from a helicopter when being air lifted back? 

The tent - did the hikers actually  cut it?  Was it shredded by debris from something and made to look like it was cut.  Could there have been an incident that threw up a major amount of dirt, mud, or caused a landslide onto the tent?   Possible chemical weapon - chlorine, heavier than air so hugs the ground, will burn eyes and mucous membranes, - no toxicology report.  Might induce them to cut and tear themselves out of the tent.  Chlorine -  oxidising agent, poison, skin colour?  Oxidised skin may make them look dirty.  Yuri D lungs, grey fluid.  Chlorine causes fluid in the lungs, so you kind of drown.  Nitrogen dioxide would fo the same.  The tent - is there a record somewhere about its recovery and cleaning, prepping it to set back up on Kholat?

If you can't make the hikers disappear, you can always make the scene dissappear instead

Lots and lots of questions.  Needs further thought to piecei t together. 

Regards

Star man

Ok.  Lets continue with this line of thought.

To understand what happened to the hikers, we need to filter out the facts that cannot be faked so easily or  covered up.  If they couldn't or didn't want to make the hikers disappear, you make the scene disappear.  So that leaves the hikers - the bodies - the injuries.  Lets split the hikers into two groups.  Those with significant injuries and those with superficial injuries.  Who has the significant injuries?  - The rav 4 - convenient.  If the scene is faked, then Kolevatov, is not hugging Semyon.  Kolevatov - he didn't die last - he died first.  He was thrown by some kind of wind blast.  He landed awkwardly - deformed neck - spinal damage - severed spinal cord - cut signal through vegus nerve.  He dies almost instantly.  He didn't die of hypothermia - no frost bite.  Lyuda and Thibo are next.  Difficult to say which.  Both are thrown.  Semyon is next, he is thrown.  Maybe these were outside the tent sitting or standing when it happened?  The remaining 5 survive the initial wind blast.  Chemical weapon - NO.  Chlorine gas - NO.  Chemical weapon unlikely to create a large wind blast.  Chlorine would bleach skin and hair.  Would have distinct smell like bleach.  What else?  "Very very dirty" -Zina's grubby oily looking hands - localised burns to skin and hair - wind blast- flame front - pressure wave- no eye brows, no eyes.  Couldn't be high explosives.  Would be localised, closer - disingrating bodies.  Very very dirty - finger tips and finger nails look ok -  they weren't buried -  SMOKE -  oily sooty, not fully combusted smoke - smoke inhalation -  Yuri D grey foam.  Large fire ball, wind blast and pressure wave - oily sooty smoke - - -  thermobaric device -  Fuel air bomb?  Uses up all oxygen?  Possibly would fit.  Military test gone wrong?  Accident?  Strontium 90 used as tracer?

The remaining 5 live longer than the rav 4.  Were they lying in the tent?  The tent must have been damaged -  did the side that faced the flame front catch fire?  The other side survived?  Shredded by debris?  Was the Kholat tent a different tent altogether?  Its difficult to say.  Wzs the tent even set up, or still packed when it happened?

Yuri D significant frost bite.  Yuri K had frost bite too.  Were they trying to survive without the tent?  Died of frost bite, hypothermia and smoke inhalation.  Inhalation of unburned toxic FAB fuel?  They must have survived for a while to get the frost bite. Could they have survived with their outer clothing and no tent?
 Dyatlov, Zina and Rustem - Rustem may have been knocked about in the wind blast - both temporal lobes?  Odd?  Did the survivors fight?    Could they see.?  Were they blinded by the unburned chemicals and smoke?  Ah blinded -  couldn't find or use their gear and clothing?  That would be desperate.  Geese.  If that's what happened - poor guys.

Other options -  nuclear?  Possible.  Would still generate fire ball, wind blast and oily dirty rainy fallout.  Plus radioactive contamination.  Think FAB is probably more likely.  Anything else?  Where did it happen?  When did it happen?  Lots more questions.

Regards

Star man

Another option is a crashed missile of some kind - hits the ground, and fuel explodes creating a fire ball, wind blast and lots of oily smoke.  Some burning  fuel is thrown onto the hikers - as per Nigel's theory.  Yuri K's burned leg, burned clothing (later removed and replaced) and hair. 

If we assume that those with the most superficial injuries and frost bite survived the longest, then it would mean that the two Yuris would have lived the longest.  Did Zina, Dyatlov and Rustem die relatively quickly?  None of them have significant frost bite.  Could they have died from internal injuries from the blast, or toxic substances inhaled.  Thermovaric bomb uses ethylene oxide which is toxic, narcotic and anaesthetic.  Could they have been deliberately targeted?  A thermobaric grenade might have the same effect?  Its less likely to destroy the tent completely?  Seems unlikely to me as the two Yuris appear to have survived long enough to get severe frost bite.

Air mines? 

Looks like it was some kind of explosion.  Takes out the rav4 all in one go.  Thermobaric device still fits better.  Oily smoke and toxic aftermath.

Where did it happen?  If not on Kholat then most likely on the planned route somewhere. Before the 6th Feb.  Before they made the labaz?

Regards

Star man


If the incident involved a contaminant which would hang around, such as something radioactive, which would either take ages to clean up or be left where it was to naturally decay, for example the neutron bomb's tritium has a half life of 10.43 years, then they'd likely want to resite the tent and hikers' demise well away from the original scene, not in that forest, or there'd be risk of the rescue teams being affected and then the cover-up is blown.

The book may even suggest they died the night before, at their previous campsite, in which case all the military needed do was continue their ski trail up to the Dyatlov Pass, something which may also explain the hikers being off their planned route (an unfamiliar military mistake).

Perhaps something in the air, a toxic chemical, which in concentration or direct contact burns skin, and burned the inside of Lyuda's mouth if she began to mouth breathe, something which would tend to linger in a sheltered forest, where hikers have less chance to run away fast from it, whereas out in the open, up on the ridge, the wind should disperse it.

Unlike on the ridge, where it's assumed they would all be in the same position, inside the tent, a campsite in the forest allows for some to be in the tent, some outside by a fire, and perhaps others collecting wood, when the incident happens, to explain different exposure and injury levels.

Possibly Euro.  Looks like some kind of large explosion  I've decided not to speculate any further.  Gonna just listen now.

Regards

Star man
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: RidgeWatcher on January 09, 2021, 10:22:21 PM
Once the Dyatlov hikers climbed up to the plateau of the Dyatlov Pass, somewhere between Boot Rock and the tent site, Igor Dyatlov wouldn't have dragged his tired group further up the mountain. When you live/visit those latitudes you pay very close attention to the sunlight and where it's at on the horizon, especially in the mountains, they didn't have much time. The group could have spent their weaning daylight minutes going over the pass to the tree line just as fast as climbing up to the tent site and needing extra minutes digging and setting up the tent in the wind.

If they ever were up on Kholat Syakhl it was for a very good reason, as opposed to the cedar or forest. I don't think it is fair to criticize Igor Dyatlov when we don't have all the evidence.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Ziljoe on January 10, 2021, 07:22:02 AM
Having trawled through this website I think they got further . The diaries shouldn't have stopped where they did although some of the diaries are missing.
I would have expected more detail in them.

The labaz is all wrong and should have  been set up later,or further along the trail.

There is so much contradicting details from the witnesses. For example it says there was no sign of a  trail to the tent and others say there was and it was covered with wind blown snow. Plus they found the tent on the first day of searching? With a tiny peak sticking out. That's odd because the Vickers could have been anywhere over the whole planned route.

Most likely in the woods , yet they look at 1079 first.....

And the interview of the nurse,PI about 11 bodies but no autopsy and the two girls being found so close in days together.

It's Teddy that's got me thinking and looking. The tent was closer to otorton perhaps. The search was forced to be where it was.

Just thinking out loud.... twitch7








Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Ziljoe on January 10, 2021, 07:31:02 AM
That's odd because the hikers could have been anywhere over the whole planned route.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: sarapuk on January 10, 2021, 10:53:10 AM
Dear Sarapuk.
Just like you wrote. Proof is needed to solve any problem. And neither yours nor my writing on the forum will solve anything. If you paid attention to my first sentence you may have noticed that I am interested in the forum as a polygon for studying electrical impulses in human brain synapses. That is, how people from different social structures cognitively respond to complex unsolvable events from the past and present. This is part of my dissertation research. Of course, I hope that one day the truth of the Dyatlov group tragedy will be revealed. Only this is unlikely to happen on the forum. What do you think?

Well we each have our reasons for being in the Forum. And it soon starts to be enthralling. I like the investigation aspect as in a law case. Others may approach it differently. Teddy has done a great job with the main Website and this Forum, its probably the best in the World on this Dyatlov Mystery. I noticed that there has been some criticism from certain Russian quarters concerning us so called Amateurs. But I should point out that some of the greatest thinkers in history were Amateurs, ie, they didnt have loads of qualifications and letters after their names, etc. But will the Forum help to solve this Dyatlov Mystery ! ? Who knows. Lots of information has come out of Russia since the demise of the USSR.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: sarapuk on January 10, 2021, 11:01:24 AM
Ideas come from every persons different life experiences and background. Some are very imaginative and others more plausible and involve what little pieces of evidence are on display. 

Often explanations are mundane like, why is Dyatlov's jacket on the ground outside the tent ?  Because he gave it to someone to stand on while they discussed a search plan for the 2 missing Yuris at the cedar tree.  Walking in snow in layers of wool socks is ok if you keep moving and don't stand still... wool keeps it's insulation qualities even when wet...

There are classic signs of late stage hypothermia affecting the 2 Yuri's at the cedar tree.  One is the cutting off and discarding of their own clothing (Paradoxical Undressing) Another is the evidence of Pulmonary Edema (Grey Foam) on the face and mouth of Yuri Doroshenko, another sign is the burns and the bitten right hand on Yuri Krivonischenko's body due to him experiencing greatly reduced sensation.

Yes every one can bring something to this Forum. The Forum is non the less about a real Event that began as a search and soon became a Criminal Case. So I like to look at it in terms that Detectives and also Lawyers would look at a Case, etc.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: sarapuk on January 10, 2021, 11:05:24 AM
Over and over again I read "NO EVIDENCE ". What evidence do you want? A signed confession? After over 60 years evidence is unlikely to be found. All that is left is plausible theories or some not so plausible theories. The tent is missing, the footprints were never examined by experts, the autopsy reports are, to say the least, extremely lacking. The odds of any evidence appearing "out of the blue "is are slim to none. I hope no is expecting the group to return from the dead to tell us all exactly what happened, how it happened, and why it happened...or WHO is responsible for what happened. I would love to see foolproof evidence but I will not delude myself into believing that EVIDENCE is ever going to appear.

Well unfortunately a Case cannot be proven unless there is Evidence to back it up. We do have some Evidence but it doesnt help us to say for certain exactly what happened. Also Evidence has come to light since the demise of the USSR. So who knows, maybe more Evidence is still to come.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: sarapuk on January 10, 2021, 11:08:48 AM
Well, the lack of analysis of the foot prints, and the cuts in the tent near the entrance through the seams have been a problem for me for a while now.  This line of thinking makes it clear why. 

Also, why Yuri D would be climbing a tree with severe frost bite on hands and feet.  Why they were burnt - it doesn't make sense if they were either alive or dead.  If they were alive why would they allow their skin to burn like that, and if they died before the fire did, why did they die?  The flashlight on the 10cm of snow at the tent, the tidy nature of the tent - given the impression that they cut their way out in a panic.

Ok.  So if we cant rely on the evidence at the scene.  How do we figure out what really happened to them?  Solter's statement.  The bodies were very dirty, washed, prepared for burial ( with no relatives to formerly identify them and no autopsy) - odd.  11 bodies overall - odd.  Were the bodies, cleaned, possibly decontaminated, and then air lifted back to Kholat Syakhl for placement?  11 bodies?  Did Solter see two of the same bodies twice, at different times?  First in Feb, when they were prepped, and then in March when they were found again?  Lyuda - burned hair and face, Semyon?  Authorities need to make some changes to their appearance and then place them somewhere where they would decompose.  Missing eyes, tongue?  Chest injuries -  they were thrown by a wind blast, or accidentally dropped from a helicopter when being air lifted back? 

The tent - did the hikers actually  cut it?  Was it shredded by debris from something and made to look like it was cut.  Could there have been an incident that threw up a major amount of dirt, mud, or caused a landslide onto the tent?   Possible chemical weapon - chlorine, heavier than air so hugs the ground, will burn eyes and mucous membranes, - no toxicology report.  Might induce them to cut and tear themselves out of the tent.  Chlorine -  oxidising agent, poison, skin colour?  Oxidised skin may make them look dirty.  Yuri D lungs, grey fluid.  Chlorine causes fluid in the lungs, so you kind of drown.  Nitrogen dioxide would fo the same.  The tent - is there a record somewhere about its recovery and cleaning, prepping it to set back up on Kholat?

If you can't make the hikers disappear, you can always make the scene dissappear instead

Lots and lots of questions.  Needs further thought to piecei t together. 

Regards

Star man

Ok.  Lets continue with this line of thought.

To understand what happened to the hikers, we need to filter out the facts that cannot be faked so easily or  covered up.  If they couldn't or didn't want to make the hikers disappear, you make the scene disappear.  So that leaves the hikers - the bodies - the injuries.  Lets split the hikers into two groups.  Those with significant injuries and those with superficial injuries.  Who has the significant injuries?  - The rav 4 - convenient.  If the scene is faked, then Kolevatov, is not hugging Semyon.  Kolevatov - he didn't die last - he died first.  He was thrown by some kind of wind blast.  He landed awkwardly - deformed neck - spinal damage - severed spinal cord - cut signal through vegus nerve.  He dies almost instantly.  He didn't die of hypothermia - no frost bite.  Lyuda and Thibo are next.  Difficult to say which.  Both are thrown.  Semyon is next, he is thrown.  Maybe these were outside the tent sitting or standing when it happened?  The remaining 5 survive the initial wind blast.  Chemical weapon - NO.  Chlorine gas - NO.  Chemical weapon unlikely to create a large wind blast.  Chlorine would bleach skin and hair.  Would have distinct smell like bleach.  What else?  "Very very dirty" -Zina's grubby oily looking hands - localised burns to skin and hair - wind blast- flame front - pressure wave- no eye brows, no eyes.  Couldn't be high explosives.  Would be localised, closer - disingrating bodies.  Very very dirty - finger tips and finger nails look ok -  they weren't buried -  SMOKE -  oily sooty, not fully combusted smoke - smoke inhalation -  Yuri D grey foam.  Large fire ball, wind blast and pressure wave - oily sooty smoke - - -  thermobaric device -  Fuel air bomb?  Uses up all oxygen?  Possibly would fit.  Military test gone wrong?  Accident?  Strontium 90 used as tracer?

The remaining 5 live longer than the rav 4.  Were they lying in the tent?  The tent must have been damaged -  did the side that faced the flame front catch fire?  The other side survived?  Shredded by debris?  Was the Kholat tent a different tent altogether?  Its difficult to say.  Wzs the tent even set up, or still packed when it happened?

Yuri D significant frost bite.  Yuri K had frost bite too.  Were they trying to survive without the tent?  Died of frost bite, hypothermia and smoke inhalation.  Inhalation of unburned toxic FAB fuel?  They must have survived for a while to get the frost bite. Could they have survived with their outer clothing and no tent?
 Dyatlov, Zina and Rustem - Rustem may have been knocked about in the wind blast - both temporal lobes?  Odd?  Did the survivors fight?    Could they see.?  Were they blinded by the unburned chemicals and smoke?  Ah blinded -  couldn't find or use their gear and clothing?  That would be desperate.  Geese.  If that's what happened - poor guys.

Other options -  nuclear?  Possible.  Would still generate fire ball, wind blast and oily dirty rainy fallout.  Plus radioactive contamination.  Think FAB is probably more likely.  Anything else?  Where did it happen?  When did it happen?  Lots more questions.

Regards

Star man

Another option is a crashed missile of some kind - hits the ground, and fuel explodes creating a fire ball, wind blast and lots of oily smoke.  Some burning  fuel is thrown onto the hikers - as per Nigel's theory.  Yuri K's burned leg, burned clothing (later removed and replaced) and hair. 

If we assume that those with the most superficial injuries and frost bite survived the longest, then it would mean that the two Yuris would have lived the longest.  Did Zina, Dyatlov and Rustem die relatively quickly?  None of them have significant frost bite.  Could they have died from internal injuries from the blast, or toxic substances inhaled.  Thermovaric bomb uses ethylene oxide which is toxic, narcotic and anaesthetic.  Could they have been deliberately targeted?  A thermobaric grenade might have the same effect?  Its less likely to destroy the tent completely?  Seems unlikely to me as the two Yuris appear to have survived long enough to get severe frost bite.

Air mines? 

Looks like it was some kind of explosion.  Takes out the rav4 all in one go.  Thermobaric device still fits better.  Oily smoke and toxic aftermath.

Where did it happen?  If not on Kholat then most likely on the planned route somewhere.  Before the 6th Feb.  Before they made the labaz?

Regards

Star man

Well we have been down this road a few times. Explosion big enough to do what it did would almost certainly leave traces. That means Evidence of explosion. There is no Evidence of explosion. So next step means if that theory is correct there must have been a cover up. But accidents happened a lot in the USSR, so why cover up ! ? Also those injuries to some of the Dyatlov Group do not look like injuries gained from an explosion.

Its still speculation without evidence DB. Always has been.  I for one don't have evidence to underpin it.  I have some ideas on how to narrow down the - where and when, but I am going to stop now.  And listen.

If Teddy finaly brings an end to the mystery then I hope the 9 hikers can finally rest in piece and it brings closure to any remaining relatives and friends.

Maybe Teddy will have to find another great mystery to solve?

Regards

Star man

Well Iam not stopping. I will carry on in this Forum for as long as there is something to discuss, and for as long as Teddy wants to continue with it.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: tekumze on January 10, 2021, 11:14:37 AM
Sarapuk, I totally agree with you. And that's exactly why I'm here, too. Hello to everyone on this forum and thank you for your effort.  thumb1
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Ziljoe on January 10, 2021, 11:22:15 AM
I'm impressed by the bigger picture. This is the 50s , women allowed education, to join men in physical , hard physical adventures, treated like equals . Quite fascinating compared to the west. Just an observation.

It is so interesting to see and read their joy of music or understanding of the different cultures in Russia. They spoke of love, music and passion . The photos all show smiles and adventure. I find that so interesting because of my bigotry of how the USSR was. I was wrong....
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: RidgeWatcher on January 10, 2021, 03:29:16 PM
I, for one, have always enjoyed hearing all the other peoples' ideas on this forum, regardless of evidence. I have always thought the Dyatlov Pass case could be solved with or without evidence. Sometimes, just thinking, and asking questions about a subject can bring about a resolution. I am very curious to see how this case was solved because it could just be someone asking a question about something as simple as clothing or the tent or where something was or wasn't and not necessarily a premise built on evidence.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Star man on January 10, 2021, 03:33:39 PM
Well, the lack of analysis of the foot prints, and the cuts in the tent near the entrance through the seams have been a problem for me for a while now.  This line of thinking makes it clear why. 

Also, why Yuri D would be climbing a tree with severe frost bite on hands and feet.  Why they were burnt - it doesn't make sense if they were either alive or dead.  If they were alive why would they allow their skin to burn like that, and if they died before the fire did, why did they die?  The flashlight on the 10cm of snow at the tent, the tidy nature of the tent - given the impression that they cut their way out in a panic.

Ok.  So if we cant rely on the evidence at the scene.  How do we figure out what really happened to them?  Solter's statement.  The bodies were very dirty, washed, prepared for burial ( with no relatives to formerly identify them and no autopsy) - odd.  11 bodies overall - odd.  Were the bodies, cleaned, possibly decontaminated, and then air lifted back to Kholat Syakhl for placement?  11 bodies?  Did Solter see two of the same bodies twice, at different times?  First in Feb, when they were prepped, and then in March when they were found again?  Lyuda - burned hair and face, Semyon?  Authorities need to make some changes to their appearance and then place them somewhere where they would decompose.  Missing eyes, tongue?  Chest injuries -  they were thrown by a wind blast, or accidentally dropped from a helicopter when being air lifted back? 

The tent - did the hikers actually  cut it?  Was it shredded by debris from something and made to look like it was cut.  Could there have been an incident that threw up a major amount of dirt, mud, or caused a landslide onto the tent?   Possible chemical weapon - chlorine, heavier than air so hugs the ground, will burn eyes and mucous membranes, - no toxicology report.  Might induce them to cut and tear themselves out of the tent.  Chlorine -  oxidising agent, poison, skin colour?  Oxidised skin may make them look dirty.  Yuri D lungs, grey fluid.  Chlorine causes fluid in the lungs, so you kind of drown.  Nitrogen dioxide would fo the same.  The tent - is there a record somewhere about its recovery and cleaning, prepping it to set back up on Kholat?

If you can't make the hikers disappear, you can always make the scene dissappear instead

Lots and lots of questions.  Needs further thought to piecei t together. 

Regards

Star man

Ok.  Lets continue with this line of thought.

To understand what happened to the hikers, we need to filter out the facts that cannot be faked so easily or  covered up.  If they couldn't or didn't want to make the hikers disappear, you make the scene disappear.  So that leaves the hikers - the bodies - the injuries.  Lets split the hikers into two groups.  Those with significant injuries and those with superficial injuries.  Who has the significant injuries?  - The rav 4 - convenient.  If the scene is faked, then Kolevatov, is not hugging Semyon.  Kolevatov - he didn't die last - he died first.  He was thrown by some kind of wind blast.  He landed awkwardly - deformed neck - spinal damage - severed spinal cord - cut signal through vegus nerve.  He dies almost instantly.  He didn't die of hypothermia - no frost bite.  Lyuda and Thibo are next.  Difficult to say which.  Both are thrown.  Semyon is next, he is thrown.  Maybe these were outside the tent sitting or standing when it happened?  The remaining 5 survive the initial wind blast.  Chemical weapon - NO.  Chlorine gas - NO.  Chemical weapon unlikely to create a large wind blast.  Chlorine would bleach skin and hair.  Would have distinct smell like bleach.  What else?  "Very very dirty" -Zina's grubby oily looking hands - localised burns to skin and hair - wind blast- flame front - pressure wave- no eye brows, no eyes.  Couldn't be high explosives.  Would be localised, closer - disingrating bodies.  Very very dirty - finger tips and finger nails look ok -  they weren't buried -  SMOKE -  oily sooty, not fully combusted smoke - smoke inhalation -  Yuri D grey foam.  Large fire ball, wind blast and pressure wave - oily sooty smoke - - -  thermobaric device -  Fuel air bomb?  Uses up all oxygen?  Possibly would fit.  Military test gone wrong?  Accident?  Strontium 90 used as tracer?

The remaining 5 live longer than the rav 4.  Were they lying in the tent?  The tent must have been damaged -  did the side that faced the flame front catch fire?  The other side survived?  Shredded by debris?  Was the Kholat tent a different tent altogether?  Its difficult to say.  Wzs the tent even set up, or still packed when it happened?

Yuri D significant frost bite.  Yuri K had frost bite too.  Were they trying to survive without the tent?  Died of frost bite, hypothermia and smoke inhalation.  Inhalation of unburned toxic FAB fuel?  They must have survived for a while to get the frost bite. Could they have survived with their outer clothing and no tent?
 Dyatlov, Zina and Rustem - Rustem may have been knocked about in the wind blast - both temporal lobes?  Odd?  Did the survivors fight?    Could they see.?  Were they blinded by the unburned chemicals and smoke?  Ah blinded -  couldn't find or use their gear and clothing?  That would be desperate.  Geese.  If that's what happened - poor guys.

Other options -  nuclear?  Possible.  Would still generate fire ball, wind blast and oily dirty rainy fallout.  Plus radioactive contamination.  Think FAB is probably more likely.  Anything else?  Where did it happen?  When did it happen?  Lots more questions.

Regards

Star man

Another option is a crashed missile of some kind - hits the ground, and fuel explodes creating a fire ball, wind blast and lots of oily smoke.  Some burning  fuel is thrown onto the hikers - as per Nigel's theory.  Yuri K's burned leg, burned clothing (later removed and replaced) and hair. 

If we assume that those with the most superficial injuries and frost bite survived the longest, then it would mean that the two Yuris would have lived the longest.  Did Zina, Dyatlov and Rustem die relatively quickly?  None of them have significant frost bite.  Could they have died from internal injuries from the blast, or toxic substances inhaled.  Thermovaric bomb uses ethylene oxide which is toxic, narcotic and anaesthetic.  Could they have been deliberately targeted?  A thermobaric grenade might have the same effect?  Its less likely to destroy the tent completely?  Seems unlikely to me as the two Yuris appear to have survived long enough to get severe frost bite.

Air mines? 

Looks like it was some kind of explosion.  Takes out the rav4 all in one go.  Thermobaric device still fits better.  Oily smoke and toxic aftermath.

Where did it happen?  If not on Kholat then most likely on the planned route somewhere.  Before the 6th Feb.  Before they made the labaz?

Regards

Star man

Well we have been down this road a few times. Explosion big enough to do what it did would almost certainly leave traces. That means Evidence of explosion. There is no Evidence of explosion. So next step means if that theory is correct there must have been a cover up. But accidents happened a lot in the USSR, so why cover up ! ? Also those injuries to some of the Dyatlov Group do not look like injuries gained from an explosion.

Its still speculation without evidence DB. Always has been.  I for one don't have evidence to underpin it.  I have some ideas on how to narrow down the - where and when, but I am going to stop now.  And listen.

If Teddy finaly brings an end to the mystery then I hope the 9 hikers can finally rest in piece and it brings closure to any remaining relatives and friends.

Maybe Teddy will have to find another great mystery to solve?

Regards

Star man

Well Iam not stopping. I will carry on in this Forum for as long as there is something to discuss, and for as long as Teddy wants to continue with it.

I didn't mean that I am stopping from any further discusdion.  I have followed this line through in my head and have my ideas.  But , I am going to wait to see what is presented in the new book.

Regards

Star man
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: sarapuk on January 11, 2021, 11:10:07 AM
I'm impressed by the bigger picture. This is the 50s , women allowed education, to join men in physical , hard physical adventures, treated like equals . Quite fascinating compared to the west. Just an observation.

It is so interesting to see and read their joy of music or understanding of the different cultures in Russia. They spoke of love, music and passion . The photos all show smiles and adventure. I find that so interesting because of my bigotry of how the USSR was. I was wrong....

Well I must confess that I have learnt a lot since being involved in this Forum. And I also confess to having had Communist friends and colleagues from the days of the USSR. Not that the use of the word confess is implying Iam guilty of anything. Its just that as Karl Marx said over a hundred years ago ; ''A specter is haunting Europe—the specter of Communism.''
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: sarapuk on January 11, 2021, 11:15:23 AM
I, for one, have always enjoyed hearing all the other peoples' ideas on this forum, regardless of evidence. I have always thought the Dyatlov Pass case could be solved with or without evidence. Sometimes, just thinking, and asking questions about a subject can bring about a resolution. I am very curious to see how this case was solved because it could just be someone asking a question about something as simple as clothing or the tent or where something was or wasn't and not necessarily a premise built on evidence.

Its not really possible to have a resolution to the Dyatlov Case without the facts to back it up. And that means Evidence. Otherwise its really a Theory at best. Plenty of Theories have passed this way.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Star man on January 13, 2021, 03:59:43 PM
Well, the lack of analysis of the foot prints, and the cuts in the tent near the entrance through the seams have been a problem for me for a while now.  This line of thinking makes it clear why. 

Also, why Yuri D would be climbing a tree with severe frost bite on hands and feet.  Why they were burnt - it doesn't make sense if they were either alive or dead.  If they were alive why would they allow their skin to burn like that, and if they died before the fire did, why did they die?  The flashlight on the 10cm of snow at the tent, the tidy nature of the tent - given the impression that they cut their way out in a panic.

Ok.  So if we cant rely on the evidence at the scene.  How do we figure out what really happened to them?  Solter's statement.  The bodies were very dirty, washed, prepared for burial ( with no relatives to formerly identify them and no autopsy) - odd.  11 bodies overall - odd.  Were the bodies, cleaned, possibly decontaminated, and then air lifted back to Kholat Syakhl for placement?  11 bodies?  Did Solter see two of the same bodies twice, at different times?  First in Feb, when they were prepped, and then in March when they were found again?  Lyuda - burned hair and face, Semyon?  Authorities need to make some changes to their appearance and then place them somewhere where they would decompose.  Missing eyes, tongue?  Chest injuries -  they were thrown by a wind blast, or accidentally dropped from a helicopter when being air lifted back? 

The tent - did the hikers actually  cut it?  Was it shredded by debris from something and made to look like it was cut.  Could there have been an incident that threw up a major amount of dirt, mud, or caused a landslide onto the tent?   Possible chemical weapon - chlorine, heavier than air so hugs the ground, will burn eyes and mucous membranes, - no toxicology report.  Might induce them to cut and tear themselves out of the tent.  Chlorine -  oxidising agent, poison, skin colour?  Oxidised skin may make them look dirty.  Yuri D lungs, grey fluid.  Chlorine causes fluid in the lungs, so you kind of drown.  Nitrogen dioxide would fo the same.  The tent - is there a record somewhere about its recovery and cleaning, prepping it to set back up on Kholat?

If you can't make the hikers disappear, you can always make the scene dissappear instead

Lots and lots of questions.  Needs further thought to piecei t together. 

Regards

Star man

Ok.  Lets continue with this line of thought.

To understand what happened to the hikers, we need to filter out the facts that cannot be faked so easily or  covered up.  If they couldn't or didn't want to make the hikers disappear, you make the scene disappear.  So that leaves the hikers - the bodies - the injuries.  Lets split the hikers into two groups.  Those with significant injuries and those with superficial injuries.  Who has the significant injuries?  - The rav 4 - convenient.  If the scene is faked, then Kolevatov, is not hugging Semyon.  Kolevatov - he didn't die last - he died first.  He was thrown by some kind of wind blast.  He landed awkwardly - deformed neck - spinal damage - severed spinal cord - cut signal through vegus nerve.  He dies almost instantly.  He didn't die of hypothermia - no frost bite.  Lyuda and Thibo are next.  Difficult to say which.  Both are thrown.  Semyon is next, he is thrown.  Maybe these were outside the tent sitting or standing when it happened?  The remaining 5 survive the initial wind blast.  Chemical weapon - NO.  Chlorine gas - NO.  Chemical weapon unlikely to create a large wind blast.  Chlorine would bleach skin and hair.  Would have distinct smell like bleach.  What else?  "Very very dirty" -Zina's grubby oily looking hands - localised burns to skin and hair - wind blast- flame front - pressure wave- no eye brows, no eyes.  Couldn't be high explosives.  Would be localised, closer - disingrating bodies.  Very very dirty - finger tips and finger nails look ok -  they weren't buried -  SMOKE -  oily sooty, not fully combusted smoke - smoke inhalation -  Yuri D grey foam.  Large fire ball, wind blast and pressure wave - oily sooty smoke - - -  thermobaric device -  Fuel air bomb?  Uses up all oxygen?  Possibly would fit.  Military test gone wrong?  Accident?  Strontium 90 used as tracer?

The remaining 5 live longer than the rav 4.  Were they lying in the tent?  The tent must have been damaged -  did the side that faced the flame front catch fire?  The other side survived?  Shredded by debris?  Was the Kholat tent a different tent altogether?  Its difficult to say.  Wzs the tent even set up, or still packed when it happened?

Yuri D significant frost bite.  Yuri K had frost bite too.  Were they trying to survive without the tent?  Died of frost bite, hypothermia and smoke inhalation.  Inhalation of unburned toxic FAB fuel?  They must have survived for a while to get the frost bite. Could they have survived with their outer clothing and no tent?
 Dyatlov, Zina and Rustem - Rustem may have been knocked about in the wind blast - both temporal lobes?  Odd?  Did the survivors fight?    Could they see.?  Were they blinded by the unburned chemicals and smoke?  Ah blinded -  couldn't find or use their gear and clothing?  That would be desperate.  Geese.  If that's what happened - poor guys.

Other options -  nuclear?  Possible.  Would still generate fire ball, wind blast and oily dirty rainy fallout.  Plus radioactive contamination.  Think FAB is probably more likely.  Anything else?  Where did it happen?  When did it happen?  Lots more questions.

Regards

Star man

Another option is a crashed missile of some kind - hits the ground, and fuel explodes creating a fire ball, wind blast and lots of oily smoke.  Some burning  fuel is thrown onto the hikers - as per Nigel's theory.  Yuri K's burned leg, burned clothing (later removed and replaced) and hair. 

If we assume that those with the most superficial injuries and frost bite survived the longest, then it would mean that the two Yuris would have lived the longest.  Did Zina, Dyatlov and Rustem die relatively quickly?  None of them have significant frost bite.  Could they have died from internal injuries from the blast, or toxic substances inhaled.  Thermovaric bomb uses ethylene oxide which is toxic, narcotic and anaesthetic.  Could they have been deliberately targeted?  A thermobaric grenade might have the same effect?  Its less likely to destroy the tent completely?  Seems unlikely to me as the two Yuris appear to have survived long enough to get severe frost bite.

Air mines? 

Looks like it was some kind of explosion.  Takes out the rav4 all in one go.  Thermobaric device still fits better.  Oily smoke and toxic aftermath.

Where did it happen?  If not on Kholat then most likely on the planned route somewhere. Before the 6th Feb.  Before they made the labaz?

Regards

Star man


If the incident involved a contaminant which would hang around, such as something radioactive, which would either take ages to clean up or be left where it was to naturally decay, for example the neutron bomb's tritium has a half life of 10.43 years, then they'd likely want to resite the tent and hikers' demise well away from the original scene, not in that forest, or there'd be risk of the rescue teams being affected and then the cover-up is blown.

The book may even suggest they died the night before, at their previous campsite, in which case all the military needed do was continue their ski trail up to the Dyatlov Pass, something which may also explain the hikers being off their planned route (an unfamiliar military mistake).

Perhaps something in the air, a toxic chemical, which in concentration or direct contact burns skin, and burned the inside of Lyuda's mouth if she began to mouth breathe, something which would tend to linger in a sheltered forest, where hikers have less chance to run away fast from it, whereas out in the open, up on the ridge, the wind should disperse it.

Unlike on the ridge, where it's assumed they would all be in the same position, inside the tent, a campsite in the forest allows for some to be in the tent, some outside by a fire, and perhaps others collecting wood, when the incident happens, to explain different exposure and injury levels.

If you were trying to capture a Yeti.  How would you do it?

Regards

Star man
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: mk on January 13, 2021, 07:38:04 PM
Any intro to the DPI brainwashes the reader or viewer with the notion that "they cut their way out and fled in panic, half-dressed into the freezing night",
This idea was introduced by Maslennikov in the very beginning, while still in the middle of the search & before the 4 were found in the ravine.  He does not shy away from asserting his theories via radiograms:

№1712 27/2
To Sulman
Urgent. Right after the descend we dug out and identified the four bodies found as Dyatlov Zolotaryov Krivanischenko Kolmogorova the deceast were thrown out of the tent by a hurricane, some without boots or pants jackets. The direction of the hurricane was northeast-east so all of them are on one line from the discovered tent the furthest approximately two kilometers from the tent....
Maslennikov


Received by Temnikov
27/2
To Sulman
To determine the time of the accident request the weather report between January 30 and February 2 position and placing of the bodies is indicative of a hurricane
Maslennikov Nevolin


Received by Temnikov
1/3 1025 msk
To Sulman
...the catastrophe was precisely established to be on the night of the second of February. 31/1 in bad weather the group left Auspiya from the overnight which was found first and climbed to the pass but the wind stopped them and they returned to the forest border in the sources of Auspiya and set a camp. It's about the place where our camp is now. In the morning they made a storage and left part of the food here at 15:00 they again went to the pass to Lozva and climbed to the place where the tent was found. Probably they took the slope at the time of the blizzard at altitude 1079, the main ridge behind the slope from the Auspiya to the ravine ascended to the crest, driven by a hurricane wind decided against it and set camp at this place. The tent is installed very tightly under all the rules under the tent all the skis then empty backpacks quilted jackets from one side stacked products on the other shoes, not all the blankets are here all personal things. The tent is set taking into account the strong wind from the top the group had supper in the tent left the food and began to change to take off the wet clothes and shoes and put on a dry ones. It was at this moment that something happened that made the group half-dressed run out of the tent and rush down the slope. Maybe someone dressed went out to relief himself and he was blown away. Jumped to his scream - the rest were also taken down tent is pitched in the most dangerous windy place here is the strongest wind. It was impossible to climb back fifty meters since the tent was torn down the ones further down may have commanded to abandoned it and go into the woods advancing on the slope towards xxxxxxxxxxxxx Auspya where the forest was closer to them they wanted to hide here they could try to find the place of their previous campsite but the terrain is very stony and to the forest is 2-3 times farther. Dyatlov and Kolmogorova lit the fire they were better dressed and went back to look for clothes. They couldn't and they fell. The position of their bodies speaks of this. Everyone agrees on this version of the disaster....
Maslennikov

 
Quote
which then generates the big 'Guess The Emergency' game which has kept this mystery alive across 62 years.
I wonder whether this was intentional or accidental.

Quote
...Insidiously they use the last diary entry Igor made, which incredibly some here take as a literal plan to be where he expressly did not want to be, away from the sole redeeming feature of his then bleak situation, his comforting warmth, up on that ridge, or they have his handwriting forged to that effect.
  Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the case files only contain a typed copy of the group diary in which this was written.  Very convenient for adding anything--no handwriting forgery needed.

Quote
... As told it makes no sense, and that is most likely because it was nonsense all along.
Cue reference to Occam's razor.

Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Star man on January 14, 2021, 02:51:38 AM
Rule number 1:  you can't make sense of nonense.

Regards

Star man
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Nigel Evans on January 14, 2021, 10:09:30 AM
The big argument against "you can't make sense of nonsense" is that 30 years later during glasnost Ivanov (who saw all the evidence first hand, photographs, hand written diaries etc), clearly stated his opinion (fireorbs) and made no reference to other avenues other than apologising to the relatives that he was acting under duress/orders.
So for it to be a big coverup then he has to be THE key player in the same and was still maintaining it 30 years later, but doing so for some unknown reason, i mean why publish a sensationalist article about fireorbs 30 years later if the whole point of the original coverup was to bury the incident?
Ditto Okishev who at the age of 94 seems to have felt it necessary to set the record straight for posterity and nothing he stated contradicts Ivanov.
Imo, deciding that the evidence is nonsense is more nonsensical than accepting it as genuine. As said many times, Ivanov's opinion is the key ingredient, everything else is froth.
and Ivanov said fireorbs and i think the evidence fits that. Also very telling is the legend of the nine hunters, no case there for a state coverup....
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: sarapuk on January 14, 2021, 12:36:44 PM
If you were trying to capture a Yeti.  How would you do it?

Regards

Star man
« Last Edit: January 13, 2021, 04:11:17 PM by Star man »

In North America there are guys who go out in to the wilderness and set big traps, sometimes very big cages.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: sarapuk on January 14, 2021, 01:22:57 PM
Any intro to the DPI brainwashes the reader or viewer with the notion that "they cut their way out and fled in panic, half-dressed into the freezing night",
This idea was introduced by Maslennikov in the very beginning, while still in the middle of the search & before the 4 were found in the ravine.  He does not shy away from asserting his theories via radiograms:

№1712 27/2
To Sulman
Urgent. Right after the descend we dug out and identified the four bodies found as Dyatlov Zolotaryov Krivanischenko Kolmogorova the deceast were thrown out of the tent by a hurricane, some without boots or pants jackets. The direction of the hurricane was northeast-east so all of them are on one line from the discovered tent the furthest approximately two kilometers from the tent....
Maslennikov


Received by Temnikov
27/2
To Sulman
To determine the time of the accident request the weather report between January 30 and February 2 position and placing of the bodies is indicative of a hurricane
Maslennikov Nevolin


Received by Temnikov
1/3 1025 msk
To Sulman
...the catastrophe was precisely established to be on the night of the second of February. 31/1 in bad weather the group left Auspiya from the overnight which was found first and climbed to the pass but the wind stopped them and they returned to the forest border in the sources of Auspiya and set a camp. It's about the place where our camp is now. In the morning they made a storage and left part of the food here at 15:00 they again went to the pass to Lozva and climbed to the place where the tent was found. Probably they took the slope at the time of the blizzard at altitude 1079, the main ridge behind the slope from the Auspiya to the ravine ascended to the crest, driven by a hurricane wind decided against it and set camp at this place. The tent is installed very tightly under all the rules under the tent all the skis then empty backpacks quilted jackets from one side stacked products on the other shoes, not all the blankets are here all personal things. The tent is set taking into account the strong wind from the top the group had supper in the tent left the food and began to change to take off the wet clothes and shoes and put on a dry ones. It was at this moment that something happened that made the group half-dressed run out of the tent and rush down the slope. Maybe someone dressed went out to relief himself and he was blown away. Jumped to his scream - the rest were also taken down tent is pitched in the most dangerous windy place here is the strongest wind. It was impossible to climb back fifty meters since the tent was torn down the ones further down may have commanded to abandoned it and go into the woods advancing on the slope towards xxxxxxxxxxxxx Auspya where the forest was closer to them they wanted to hide here they could try to find the place of their previous campsite but the terrain is very stony and to the forest is 2-3 times farther. Dyatlov and Kolmogorova lit the fire they were better dressed and went back to look for clothes. They couldn't and they fell. The position of their bodies speaks of this. Everyone agrees on this version of the disaster....
Maslennikov

 
Quote
which then generates the big 'Guess The Emergency' game which has kept this mystery alive across 62 years.
I wonder whether this was intentional or accidental.

Quote
...Insidiously they use the last diary entry Igor made, which incredibly some here take as a literal plan to be where he expressly did not want to be, away from the sole redeeming feature of his then bleak situation, his comforting warmth, up on that ridge, or they have his handwriting forged to that effect.
  Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the case files only contain a typed copy of the group diary in which this was written.  Very convenient for adding anything--no handwriting forgery needed.

Quote
... As told it makes no sense, and that is most likely because it was nonsense all along.
Cue reference to Occam's razor.

Good observation about Maslennikov. He seemed quick to push the Hurricane or Tornado Theory. Imagine being thrown nearly 1000 metres thats nearly 3000 feet. I think we could have expected some rather twisted bodies and more injuries. As for the Diaries like with the Newsletter that was found near the entrance to the Tent. Originals seem to be missing.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: sarapuk on January 14, 2021, 01:26:51 PM
The big argument against "you can't make sense of nonsense" is that 30 years later during glasnost Ivanov (who saw all the evidence first hand, photographs, hand written diaries etc), clearly stated his opinion (fireorbs) and made no reference to other avenues other than apologising to the relatives that he was acting under duress/orders.
So for it to be a big coverup then he has to be THE key player in the same and was still maintaining it 30 years later, but doing so for some unknown reason, i mean why publish a sensationalist article about fireorbs 30 years later if the whole point of the original coverup was to bury the incident?
Ditto Okishev who at the age of 94 seems to have felt it necessary to set the record straight for posterity and nothing he stated contradicts Ivanov.
Imo, deciding that the evidence is nonsense is more nonsensical than accepting it as genuine. As said many times, Ivanov's opinion is the key ingredient, everything else is froth.
and Ivanov said fireorbs and i think the evidence fits that. Also very telling is the legend of the nine hunters, no case there for a state coverup....

I agree that something is starring us in the faces and we seem to find ways of going round it. Ivanov. The Fire Orbs or whatever they were. I say UFO's.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: marieuk on January 14, 2021, 03:39:57 PM
A close encounter with a UFO would certainly make me forget to take my shoes, coat etc with me
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Star man on January 14, 2021, 03:55:56 PM
The big argument against "you can't make sense of nonsense" is that 30 years later during glasnost Ivanov (who saw all the evidence first hand, photographs, hand written diaries etc), clearly stated his opinion (fireorbs) and made no reference to other avenues other than apologising to the relatives that he was acting under duress/orders.
So for it to be a big coverup then he has to be THE key player in the same and was still maintaining it 30 years later, but doing so for some unknown reason, i mean why publish a sensationalist article about fireorbs 30 years later if the whole point of the original coverup was to bury the incident?
Ditto Okishev who at the age of 94 seems to have felt it necessary to set the record straight for posterity and nothing he stated contradicts Ivanov.
Imo, deciding that the evidence is nonsense is more nonsensical than accepting it as genuine. As said many times, Ivanov's opinion is the key ingredient, everything else is froth.
and Ivanov said fireorbs and i think the evidence fits that. Also very telling is the legend of the nine hunters, no case there for a state coverup....

It is possible that one piece of evidence at the tent isn't nonsense -  "The Evening Otorten" -  the snowman does exist

There is a very good chance that there were orbs of fire.  Ivanov also referred to scorched tree tops, but in a kind of straight line as if a beam of energy had hit the trees.  I don't think that Ivanov was lying. He may have been telling the truth.  He just wasn't explaing it fully.  For example there is another explanation for the scorch marks other than an energy beam.

Regards

Star man
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Star man on January 14, 2021, 03:59:16 PM
If you were trying to capture a Yeti.  How would you do it?

Regards

Star man
« Last Edit: January 13, 2021, 04:11:17 PM by Star man »

In North America there are guys who go out in to the wilderness and set big traps, sometimes very big cages.

Yeah I think I saw something like that.  How did the attempt to lure a Sasquatch into the trap?

Regards
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Star man on January 14, 2021, 04:32:45 PM
The big argument against "you can't make sense of nonsense" is that 30 years later during glasnost Ivanov (who saw all the evidence first hand, photographs, hand written diaries etc), clearly stated his opinion (fireorbs) and made no reference to other avenues other than apologising to the relatives that he was acting under duress/orders.
So for it to be a big coverup then he has to be THE key player in the same and was still maintaining it 30 years later, but doing so for some unknown reason, i mean why publish a sensationalist article about fireorbs 30 years later if the whole point of the original coverup was to bury the incident?
Ditto Okishev who at the age of 94 seems to have felt it necessary to set the record straight for posterity and nothing he stated contradicts Ivanov.
Imo, deciding that the evidence is nonsense is more nonsensical than accepting it as genuine. As said many times, Ivanov's opinion is the key ingredient, everything else is froth.
and Ivanov said fireorbs and i think the evidence fits that. Also very telling is the legend of the nine hunters, no case there for a state coverup....

I agree that something is starring us in the faces and we seem to find ways of going round it. Ivanov. The Fire Orbs or whatever they were. I say UFO's.

I have a new theory in mind.  Well a few really, but one stands out.  I have been following Teddy's trail of bread crumbs and it has lead me to it.  It is something I had considered before but dismissed it as I believed the date I saw on another document.  You can fit the facts together in a different way and it seems to make sense.  This might sound strange -  but the scenes presented in the dpi might be a reflection of the human subconscious of those at the time.  I might be wrong too.  I have no evidence to back it up.  Am just looking at the existing facts in a different way.  It is like having about half of the pieces of a jigsaw puzzle but not having the original picture to work too.  If you start putting the pieces together in the right order, you start to see the first part of the picture.  It is only then do you notice the bits that are missing and can ask -  what could this part of the picture be?

It isn't UFO's though.

 Regards

Star man
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Nigel Evans on January 14, 2021, 05:04:03 PM
The big argument against "you can't make sense of nonsense" is that 30 years later during glasnost Ivanov (who saw all the evidence first hand, photographs, hand written diaries etc), clearly stated his opinion (fireorbs) and made no reference to other avenues other than apologising to the relatives that he was acting under duress/orders.
So for it to be a big coverup then he has to be THE key player in the same and was still maintaining it 30 years later, but doing so for some unknown reason, i mean why publish a sensationalist article about fireorbs 30 years later if the whole point of the original coverup was to bury the incident?
Ditto Okishev who at the age of 94 seems to have felt it necessary to set the record straight for posterity and nothing he stated contradicts Ivanov.
Imo, deciding that the evidence is nonsense is more nonsensical than accepting it as genuine. As said many times, Ivanov's opinion is the key ingredient, everything else is froth.
and Ivanov said fireorbs and i think the evidence fits that. Also very telling is the legend of the nine hunters, no case there for a state coverup....

I agree that something is starring us in the faces and we seem to find ways of going round it. Ivanov. The Fire Orbs or whatever they were. I say UFO's.

I have a new theory in mind.  Well a few really, but one stands out.  I have been following Teddy's trail of bread crumbs and it has lead me to it.  It is something I had considered before but dismissed it as I believed the date I saw on another document.  You can fit the facts together in a different way and it seems to make sense.  This might sound strange -  but the scenes presented in the dpi might be a reflection of the human subconscious of those at the time.  I might be wrong too.  I have no evidence to back it up.  Am just looking at the existing facts in a different way.  It is like having about half of the pieces of a jigsaw puzzle but not having the original picture to work too.  If you start putting the pieces together in the right order, you start to see the first part of the picture.  It is only then do you notice the bits that are missing and can ask -  what could this part of the picture be?

It isn't UFO's though.

 Regards

Star man

So are you going to tell us?
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Ziljoe on January 15, 2021, 06:05:54 AM
@starman

"It is like having about half of the pieces of a jigsaw puzzle but not having the original picture to work too."

Great analogy  thumb1 sums it up.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Marchesk on January 15, 2021, 06:22:24 AM
There is a very good chance that there were orbs of fire.  Ivanov also referred to scorched tree tops, but in a kind of straight line as if a beam of energy had hit the trees.  I don't think that Ivanov was lying. He may have been telling the truth.  He just wasn't explaing it fully.  For example there is another explanation for the scorch marks other than an energy beam.

The problem is that it was 30 years later and there's no evidence of burned tree tops in the case files to back it up. Nobody else reported seeing that at the time. I have difficulty trusting decades old recollections. Human memory is fallible.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Nigel Evans on January 15, 2021, 07:44:07 AM
There is a very good chance that there were orbs of fire.  Ivanov also referred to scorched tree tops, but in a kind of straight line as if a beam of energy had hit the trees.  I don't think that Ivanov was lying. He may have been telling the truth.  He just wasn't explaing it fully.  For example there is another explanation for the scorch marks other than an energy beam.

The problem is that it was 30 years later and there's no evidence of burned tree tops in the case files to back it up. Nobody else reported seeing that at the time. I have difficulty trusting decades old recollections. Human memory is fallible.


Okishev stated that Ivanov would have certainly removed information from the case files to comply with his orders and Ivanov hints at this in the Leninsky Put article. So it's a valid argument to say you have it the wrong way round, the case files are like a swiss cheese, lots of stuff but with voids and the real story is stated 30 years later during glasnost when Beria ( and his methods ) were both long gone.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: sarapuk on January 15, 2021, 11:41:42 AM
A close encounter with a UFO would certainly make me forget to take my shoes, coat etc with me

Well that depends. Lets not forget that UFO means Unidentified Flying Object. So the so called Fire Orbs would come under that classification.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: sarapuk on January 15, 2021, 11:44:41 AM
The big argument against "you can't make sense of nonsense" is that 30 years later during glasnost Ivanov (who saw all the evidence first hand, photographs, hand written diaries etc), clearly stated his opinion (fireorbs) and made no reference to other avenues other than apologising to the relatives that he was acting under duress/orders.
So for it to be a big coverup then he has to be THE key player in the same and was still maintaining it 30 years later, but doing so for some unknown reason, i mean why publish a sensationalist article about fireorbs 30 years later if the whole point of the original coverup was to bury the incident?
Ditto Okishev who at the age of 94 seems to have felt it necessary to set the record straight for posterity and nothing he stated contradicts Ivanov.
Imo, deciding that the evidence is nonsense is more nonsensical than accepting it as genuine. As said many times, Ivanov's opinion is the key ingredient, everything else is froth.
and Ivanov said fireorbs and i think the evidence fits that. Also very telling is the legend of the nine hunters, no case there for a state coverup....

It is possible that one piece of evidence at the tent isn't nonsense -  "The Evening Otorten" -  the snowman does exist

There is a very good chance that there were orbs of fire.  Ivanov also referred to scorched tree tops, but in a kind of straight line as if a beam of energy had hit the trees.  I don't think that Ivanov was lying. He may have been telling the truth.  He just wasn't explaing it fully.  For example there is another explanation for the scorch marks other than an energy beam.

Regards

Star man

So you are linking the Snowman with the UFO. Thats not a bad idea. And lets not forget where that Newsletter was found. It was found pinned to the Tent near the entrance.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: sarapuk on January 15, 2021, 11:50:04 AM
The big argument against "you can't make sense of nonsense" is that 30 years later during glasnost Ivanov (who saw all the evidence first hand, photographs, hand written diaries etc), clearly stated his opinion (fireorbs) and made no reference to other avenues other than apologising to the relatives that he was acting under duress/orders.
So for it to be a big coverup then he has to be THE key player in the same and was still maintaining it 30 years later, but doing so for some unknown reason, i mean why publish a sensationalist article about fireorbs 30 years later if the whole point of the original coverup was to bury the incident?
Ditto Okishev who at the age of 94 seems to have felt it necessary to set the record straight for posterity and nothing he stated contradicts Ivanov.
Imo, deciding that the evidence is nonsense is more nonsensical than accepting it as genuine. As said many times, Ivanov's opinion is the key ingredient, everything else is froth.
and Ivanov said fireorbs and i think the evidence fits that. Also very telling is the legend of the nine hunters, no case there for a state coverup....

I agree that something is starring us in the faces and we seem to find ways of going round it. Ivanov. The Fire Orbs or whatever they were. I say UFO's.

I have a new theory in mind.  Well a few really, but one stands out.  I have been following Teddy's trail of bread crumbs and it has lead me to it.  It is something I had considered before but dismissed it as I believed the date I saw on another document.  You can fit the facts together in a different way and it seems to make sense.  This might sound strange -  but the scenes presented in the dpi might be a reflection of the human subconscious of those at the time.  I might be wrong too.  I have no evidence to back it up.  Am just looking at the existing facts in a different way.  It is like having about half of the pieces of a jigsaw puzzle but not having the original picture to work too.  If you start putting the pieces together in the right order, you start to see the first part of the picture.  It is only then do you notice the bits that are missing and can ask -  what could this part of the picture be?

It isn't UFO's though.

 Regards

Star man

Iam a bit confused about your new theory. One could say that most Cases are a bit like jigsaw puzzles. Real Detectives who hunt for Criminals, etc, have to gather what Evidence they can as well as all the facts that they can find and put it all together. And presumably in most Cases there will be pieces missing.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: sarapuk on January 15, 2021, 11:54:34 AM
There is a very good chance that there were orbs of fire.  Ivanov also referred to scorched tree tops, but in a kind of straight line as if a beam of energy had hit the trees.  I don't think that Ivanov was lying. He may have been telling the truth.  He just wasn't explaing it fully.  For example there is another explanation for the scorch marks other than an energy beam.

The problem is that it was 30 years later and there's no evidence of burned tree tops in the case files to back it up. Nobody else reported seeing that at the time. I have difficulty trusting decades old recollections. Human memory is fallible.

Yes this question of Burnt Trees is one of the iffy ones in this Dyatlov Case. Because we have no Evidence, surprise surprise, and very liitle has been said about any Burnt Trees by the original Searchers and Investigators. Burnt Trees would surely have warranted someone taking Photographs of them  !  ? 
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Star man on January 15, 2021, 05:22:25 PM
The big argument against "you can't make sense of nonsense" is that 30 years later during glasnost Ivanov (who saw all the evidence first hand, photographs, hand written diaries etc), clearly stated his opinion (fireorbs) and made no reference to other avenues other than apologising to the relatives that he was acting under duress/orders.
So for it to be a big coverup then he has to be THE key player in the same and was still maintaining it 30 years later, but doing so for some unknown reason, i mean why publish a sensationalist article about fireorbs 30 years later if the whole point of the original coverup was to bury the incident?
Ditto Okishev who at the age of 94 seems to have felt it necessary to set the record straight for posterity and nothing he stated contradicts Ivanov.
Imo, deciding that the evidence is nonsense is more nonsensical than accepting it as genuine. As said many times, Ivanov's opinion is the key ingredient, everything else is froth.
and Ivanov said fireorbs and i think the evidence fits that. Also very telling is the legend of the nine hunters, no case there for a state coverup....

I agree that something is starring us in the faces and we seem to find ways of going round it. Ivanov. The Fire Orbs or whatever they were. I say UFO's.

I have a new theory in mind.  Well a few really, but one stands out.  I have been following Teddy's trail of bread crumbs and it has lead me to it.  It is something I had considered before but dismissed it as I believed the date I saw on another document.  You can fit the facts together in a different way and it seems to make sense.  This might sound strange -  but the scenes presented in the dpi might be a reflection of the human subconscious of those at the time.  I might be wrong too.  I have no evidence to back it up.  Am just looking at the existing facts in a different way.  It is like having about half of the pieces of a jigsaw puzzle but not having the original picture to work too.  If you start putting the pieces together in the right order, you start to see the first part of the picture.  It is only then do you notice the bits that are missing and can ask -  what could this part of the picture be?

It isn't UFO's though.

 Regards

Star man

So are you going to tell us?

Hi Nigel -  for now I am just going to continue to think it through.  There are several reasons for this:

1.  Teddy provided some clues to the theory in her book to give people a chance to solve it before the book is published.  It wouldn't be fair to take that opportunity away for others.
2.  My theory might not be correct anyway.
3. Putting aside the aspect of a compelling mystery to be solved.  If the theory I have in mind is correct, then I can only see victims and great sadness, like a painful wound, the re-opening of which might only lead to more sadness.  The truth usually finds its way in the end though and I am sure it will be revealed one day.

Maybe you should have a go yourself.  You have vast knowledge of this case.  Here are some of Teddys clues:

1.  Nothing is as it seems
2. Its all about the tent and where it was found.  More importantly where it was not found.  My own embellishment would be - assume the hikers were never at the camp site.
3.  Solter's statement
4.  Only half of the facts are available in the case files.  I will embellish a little - the information in the case files only presents half of the story.
5. The facts can be put together in a different way.

This is a clue about the theory I have in mind -  The Discovery Channel Documentary is not all over dramatised

Regards

Star man
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Star man on January 15, 2021, 05:27:45 PM
There is a very good chance that there were orbs of fire.  Ivanov also referred to scorched tree tops, but in a kind of straight line as if a beam of energy had hit the trees.  I don't think that Ivanov was lying. He may have been telling the truth.  He just wasn't explaing it fully.  For example there is another explanation for the scorch marks other than an energy beam.

The problem is that it was 30 years later and there's no evidence of burned tree tops in the case files to back it up. Nobody else reported seeing that at the time. I have difficulty trusting decades old recollections. Human memory is fallible.

True, and I dont think its key anyway.

Regards

Star man
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Star man on January 15, 2021, 05:30:14 PM
The big argument against "you can't make sense of nonsense" is that 30 years later during glasnost Ivanov (who saw all the evidence first hand, photographs, hand written diaries etc), clearly stated his opinion (fireorbs) and made no reference to other avenues other than apologising to the relatives that he was acting under duress/orders.
So for it to be a big coverup then he has to be THE key player in the same and was still maintaining it 30 years later, but doing so for some unknown reason, i mean why publish a sensationalist article about fireorbs 30 years later if the whole point of the original coverup was to bury the incident?
Ditto Okishev who at the age of 94 seems to have felt it necessary to set the record straight for posterity and nothing he stated contradicts Ivanov.
Imo, deciding that the evidence is nonsense is more nonsensical than accepting it as genuine. As said many times, Ivanov's opinion is the key ingredient, everything else is froth.
and Ivanov said fireorbs and i think the evidence fits that. Also very telling is the legend of the nine hunters, no case there for a state coverup....

It is possible that one piece of evidence at the tent isn't nonsense -  "The Evening Otorten" -  the snowman does exist

There is a very good chance that there were orbs of fire.  Ivanov also referred to scorched tree tops, but in a kind of straight line as if a beam of energy had hit the trees.  I don't think that Ivanov was lying. He may have been telling the truth.  He just wasn't explaing it fully.  For example there is another explanation for the scorch marks other than an energy beam.

Regards

Star man

So you are linking the Snowman with the UFO. Thats not a bad idea. And lets not forget where that Newsletter was found. It was found pinned to the Tent near the entrance.

No, I dont think UFO.  I do wonder why the pamphlet was left in the tent.  Can understand why it disappeared too.

Regards

Star man
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Star man on January 15, 2021, 05:42:01 PM
The big argument against "you can't make sense of nonsense" is that 30 years later during glasnost Ivanov (who saw all the evidence first hand, photographs, hand written diaries etc), clearly stated his opinion (fireorbs) and made no reference to other avenues other than apologising to the relatives that he was acting under duress/orders.
So for it to be a big coverup then he has to be THE key player in the same and was still maintaining it 30 years later, but doing so for some unknown reason, i mean why publish a sensationalist article about fireorbs 30 years later if the whole point of the original coverup was to bury the incident?
Ditto Okishev who at the age of 94 seems to have felt it necessary to set the record straight for posterity and nothing he stated contradicts Ivanov.
Imo, deciding that the evidence is nonsense is more nonsensical than accepting it as genuine. As said many times, Ivanov's opinion is the key ingredient, everything else is froth.
and Ivanov said fireorbs and i think the evidence fits that. Also very telling is the legend of the nine hunters, no case there for a state coverup....

I agree that something is starring us in the faces and we seem to find ways of going round it. Ivanov. The Fire Orbs or whatever they were. I say UFO's.

I have a new theory in mind.  Well a few really, but one stands out.  I have been following Teddy's trail of bread crumbs and it has lead me to it.  It is something I had considered before but dismissed it as I believed the date I saw on another document.  You can fit the facts together in a different way and it seems to make sense.  This might sound strange -  but the scenes presented in the dpi might be a reflection of the human subconscious of those at the time.  I might be wrong too.  I have no evidence to back it up.  Am just looking at the existing facts in a different way.  It is like having about half of the pieces of a jigsaw puzzle but not having the original picture to work too.  If you start putting the pieces together in the right order, you start to see the first part of the picture.  It is only then do you notice the bits that are missing and can ask -  what could this part of the picture be?

It isn't UFO's though.

 Regards

Star man

Iam a bit confused about your new theory. One could say that most Cases are a bit like jigsaw puzzles. Real Detectives who hunt for Criminals, etc, have to gather what Evidence they can as well as all the facts that they can find and put it all together. And presumably in most Cases there will be pieces missing.

Apologies for talking cryptically about this.  The point I was making is that everyone might be trying to use the 50% of the jigsaw pieces they have to make a picture of a horse, instead of a dolphin, and so they will never notice that the dolphin is swimming in the sea.

Regards

Star man
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Nigel Evans on January 16, 2021, 03:12:55 AM
The big argument against "you can't make sense of nonsense" is that 30 years later during glasnost Ivanov (who saw all the evidence first hand, photographs, hand written diaries etc), clearly stated his opinion (fireorbs) and made no reference to other avenues other than apologising to the relatives that he was acting under duress/orders.
So for it to be a big coverup then he has to be THE key player in the same and was still maintaining it 30 years later, but doing so for some unknown reason, i mean why publish a sensationalist article about fireorbs 30 years later if the whole point of the original coverup was to bury the incident?
Ditto Okishev who at the age of 94 seems to have felt it necessary to set the record straight for posterity and nothing he stated contradicts Ivanov.
Imo, deciding that the evidence is nonsense is more nonsensical than accepting it as genuine. As said many times, Ivanov's opinion is the key ingredient, everything else is froth.
and Ivanov said fireorbs and i think the evidence fits that. Also very telling is the legend of the nine hunters, no case there for a state coverup....

I agree that something is starring us in the faces and we seem to find ways of going round it. Ivanov. The Fire Orbs or whatever they were. I say UFO's.

I have a new theory in mind.  Well a few really, but one stands out.  I have been following Teddy's trail of bread crumbs and it has lead me to it.  It is something I had considered before but dismissed it as I believed the date I saw on another document.  You can fit the facts together in a different way and it seems to make sense.  This might sound strange -  but the scenes presented in the dpi might be a reflection of the human subconscious of those at the time.  I might be wrong too.  I have no evidence to back it up.  Am just looking at the existing facts in a different way.  It is like having about half of the pieces of a jigsaw puzzle but not having the original picture to work too.  If you start putting the pieces together in the right order, you start to see the first part of the picture.  It is only then do you notice the bits that are missing and can ask -  what could this part of the picture be?

It isn't UFO's though.

 Regards

Star man

So are you going to tell us?

Hi Nigel -  for now I am just going to continue to think it through.  There are several reasons for this:

1.  Teddy provided some clues to the theory in her book to give people a chance to solve it before the book is published.  It wouldn't be fair to take that opportunity away for others.
2.  My theory might not be correct anyway.
3. Putting aside the aspect of a compelling mystery to be solved.  If the theory I have in mind is correct, then I can only see victims and great sadness, like a painful wound, the re-opening of which might only lead to more sadness.  The truth usually finds its way in the end though and I am sure it will be revealed one day.

Maybe you should have a go yourself.  You have vast knowledge of this case.  Here are some of Teddys clues:

1.  Nothing is as it seems
2. Its all about the tent and where it was found.  More importantly where it was not found.  My own embellishment would be - assume the hikers were never at the camp site.
3.  Solter's statement
4.  Only half of the facts are available in the case files.  I will embellish a little - the information in the case files only presents half of the story.
5. The facts can be put together in a different way.

This is a clue about the theory I have in mind -  The Discovery Channel Documentary is not all over dramatised

Regards

Star man


All very mysterious.... Well i'm with the mansi (their legend) and Ivanov. So atmospheric electricity is the one to beat imo.



Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: sarapuk on January 16, 2021, 11:09:51 AM
The big argument against "you can't make sense of nonsense" is that 30 years later during glasnost Ivanov (who saw all the evidence first hand, photographs, hand written diaries etc), clearly stated his opinion (fireorbs) and made no reference to other avenues other than apologising to the relatives that he was acting under duress/orders.
So for it to be a big coverup then he has to be THE key player in the same and was still maintaining it 30 years later, but doing so for some unknown reason, i mean why publish a sensationalist article about fireorbs 30 years later if the whole point of the original coverup was to bury the incident?
Ditto Okishev who at the age of 94 seems to have felt it necessary to set the record straight for posterity and nothing he stated contradicts Ivanov.
Imo, deciding that the evidence is nonsense is more nonsensical than accepting it as genuine. As said many times, Ivanov's opinion is the key ingredient, everything else is froth.
and Ivanov said fireorbs and i think the evidence fits that. Also very telling is the legend of the nine hunters, no case there for a state coverup....

It is possible that one piece of evidence at the tent isn't nonsense -  "The Evening Otorten" -  the snowman does exist

There is a very good chance that there were orbs of fire.  Ivanov also referred to scorched tree tops, but in a kind of straight line as if a beam of energy had hit the trees.  I don't think that Ivanov was lying. He may have been telling the truth.  He just wasn't explaing it fully.  For example there is another explanation for the scorch marks other than an energy beam.

Regards

Star man

So you are linking the Snowman with the UFO. Thats not a bad idea. And lets not forget where that Newsletter was found. It was found pinned to the Tent near the entrance.

No, I dont think UFO.  I do wonder why the pamphlet was left in the tent.  Can understand why it disappeared too.

Regards

Star man

Why do you think it disappeared  !  ? 
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: sarapuk on January 16, 2021, 11:17:12 AM
The big argument against "you can't make sense of nonsense" is that 30 years later during glasnost Ivanov (who saw all the evidence first hand, photographs, hand written diaries etc), clearly stated his opinion (fireorbs) and made no reference to other avenues other than apologising to the relatives that he was acting under duress/orders.
So for it to be a big coverup then he has to be THE key player in the same and was still maintaining it 30 years later, but doing so for some unknown reason, i mean why publish a sensationalist article about fireorbs 30 years later if the whole point of the original coverup was to bury the incident?
Ditto Okishev who at the age of 94 seems to have felt it necessary to set the record straight for posterity and nothing he stated contradicts Ivanov.
Imo, deciding that the evidence is nonsense is more nonsensical than accepting it as genuine. As said many times, Ivanov's opinion is the key ingredient, everything else is froth.
and Ivanov said fireorbs and i think the evidence fits that. Also very telling is the legend of the nine hunters, no case there for a state coverup....

I agree that something is starring us in the faces and we seem to find ways of going round it. Ivanov. The Fire Orbs or whatever they were. I say UFO's.

I have a new theory in mind.  Well a few really, but one stands out.  I have been following Teddy's trail of bread crumbs and it has lead me to it.  It is something I had considered before but dismissed it as I believed the date I saw on another document.  You can fit the facts together in a different way and it seems to make sense.  This might sound strange -  but the scenes presented in the dpi might be a reflection of the human subconscious of those at the time.  I might be wrong too.  I have no evidence to back it up.  Am just looking at the existing facts in a different way.  It is like having about half of the pieces of a jigsaw puzzle but not having the original picture to work too.  If you start putting the pieces together in the right order, you start to see the first part of the picture.  It is only then do you notice the bits that are missing and can ask -  what could this part of the picture be?

It isn't UFO's though.

 Regards

Star man

Iam a bit confused about your new theory. One could say that most Cases are a bit like jigsaw puzzles. Real Detectives who hunt for Criminals, etc, have to gather what Evidence they can as well as all the facts that they can find and put it all together. And presumably in most Cases there will be pieces missing.

Apologies for talking cryptically about this.  The point I was making is that everyone might be trying to use the 50% of the jigsaw pieces they have to make a picture of a horse, instead of a dolphin, and so they will never notice that the dolphin is swimming in the sea.

Regards

Star man

I thought jigsaw pieces were meant to be able to fit together. I mean if a piece fits to another piece then how can your analogy work. Its an horse or a dolphin, one or the other.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Nigel Evans on January 16, 2021, 02:42:15 PM
The big argument against "you can't make sense of nonsense" is that 30 years later during glasnost Ivanov (who saw all the evidence first hand, photographs, hand written diaries etc), clearly stated his opinion (fireorbs) and made no reference to other avenues other than apologising to the relatives that he was acting under duress/orders.
So for it to be a big coverup then he has to be THE key player in the same and was still maintaining it 30 years later, but doing so for some unknown reason, i mean why publish a sensationalist article about fireorbs 30 years later if the whole point of the original coverup was to bury the incident?
Ditto Okishev who at the age of 94 seems to have felt it necessary to set the record straight for posterity and nothing he stated contradicts Ivanov.
Imo, deciding that the evidence is nonsense is more nonsensical than accepting it as genuine. As said many times, Ivanov's opinion is the key ingredient, everything else is froth.
and Ivanov said fireorbs and i think the evidence fits that. Also very telling is the legend of the nine hunters, no case there for a state coverup....

It is possible that one piece of evidence at the tent isn't nonsense -  "The Evening Otorten" -  the snowman does exist

There is a very good chance that there were orbs of fire.  Ivanov also referred to scorched tree tops, but in a kind of straight line as if a beam of energy had hit the trees.  I don't think that Ivanov was lying. He may have been telling the truth.  He just wasn't explaing it fully.  For example there is another explanation for the scorch marks other than an energy beam.

Regards

Star man

So you are linking the Snowman with the UFO. Thats not a bad idea. And lets not forget where that Newsletter was found. It was found pinned to the Tent near the entrance.

No, I dont think UFO.  I do wonder why the pamphlet was left in the tent.  Can understand why it disappeared too.

Regards

Star man

Why do you think it disappeared  !  ?


Because everything was confiscated. Diaries, Semyon's notebook, Ortorten News etc, etc. We only have Semyon's photos because Ivanov seems to have hoarded them.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Star man on January 16, 2021, 04:33:10 PM
The big argument against "you can't make sense of nonsense" is that 30 years later during glasnost Ivanov (who saw all the evidence first hand, photographs, hand written diaries etc), clearly stated his opinion (fireorbs) and made no reference to other avenues other than apologising to the relatives that he was acting under duress/orders.
So for it to be a big coverup then he has to be THE key player in the same and was still maintaining it 30 years later, but doing so for some unknown reason, i mean why publish a sensationalist article about fireorbs 30 years later if the whole point of the original coverup was to bury the incident?
Ditto Okishev who at the age of 94 seems to have felt it necessary to set the record straight for posterity and nothing he stated contradicts Ivanov.
Imo, deciding that the evidence is nonsense is more nonsensical than accepting it as genuine. As said many times, Ivanov's opinion is the key ingredient, everything else is froth.
and Ivanov said fireorbs and i think the evidence fits that. Also very telling is the legend of the nine hunters, no case there for a state coverup....

It is possible that one piece of evidence at the tent isn't nonsense -  "The Evening Otorten" -  the snowman does exist

There is a very good chance that there were orbs of fire.  Ivanov also referred to scorched tree tops, but in a kind of straight line as if a beam of energy had hit the trees.  I don't think that Ivanov was lying. He may have been telling the truth.  He just wasn't explaing it fully.  For example there is another explanation for the scorch marks other than an energy beam.

Regards

Star man

So you are linking the Snowman with the UFO. Thats not a bad idea. And lets not forget where that Newsletter was found. It was found pinned to the Tent near the entrance.

No, I dont think UFO.  I do wonder why the pamphlet was left in the tent.  Can understand why it disappeared too.

Regards

Star man

Why do you think it disappeared  !  ?

I think it may be the only piece of evidence at the tent of any relevance.

Regards

Star man
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Star man on January 16, 2021, 04:38:14 PM
The big argument against "you can't make sense of nonsense" is that 30 years later during glasnost Ivanov (who saw all the evidence first hand, photographs, hand written diaries etc), clearly stated his opinion (fireorbs) and made no reference to other avenues other than apologising to the relatives that he was acting under duress/orders.
So for it to be a big coverup then he has to be THE key player in the same and was still maintaining it 30 years later, but doing so for some unknown reason, i mean why publish a sensationalist article about fireorbs 30 years later if the whole point of the original coverup was to bury the incident?
Ditto Okishev who at the age of 94 seems to have felt it necessary to set the record straight for posterity and nothing he stated contradicts Ivanov.
Imo, deciding that the evidence is nonsense is more nonsensical than accepting it as genuine. As said many times, Ivanov's opinion is the key ingredient, everything else is froth.
and Ivanov said fireorbs and i think the evidence fits that. Also very telling is the legend of the nine hunters, no case there for a state coverup....

I agree that something is starring us in the faces and we seem to find ways of going round it. Ivanov. The Fire Orbs or whatever they were. I say UFO's.

I have a new theory in mind.  Well a few really, but one stands out.  I have been following Teddy's trail of bread crumbs and it has lead me to it.  It is something I had considered before but dismissed it as I believed the date I saw on another document.  You can fit the facts together in a different way and it seems to make sense.  This might sound strange -  but the scenes presented in the dpi might be a reflection of the human subconscious of those at the time.  I might be wrong too.  I have no evidence to back it up.  Am just looking at the existing facts in a different way.  It is like having about half of the pieces of a jigsaw puzzle but not having the original picture to work too.  If you start putting the pieces together in the right order, you start to see the first part of the picture.  It is only then do you notice the bits that are missing and can ask -  what could this part of the picture be?

It isn't UFO's though.

 Regards

Star man

Iam a bit confused about your new theory. One could say that most Cases are a bit like jigsaw puzzles. Real Detectives who hunt for Criminals, etc, have to gather what Evidence they can as well as all the facts that they can find and put it all together. And presumably in most Cases there will be pieces missing.

Apologies for talking cryptically about this.  The point I was making is that everyone might be trying to use the 50% of the jigsaw pieces they have to make a picture of a horse, instead of a dolphin, and so they will never notice that the dolphin is swimming in the sea.

Regards

Star man

I thought jigsaw pieces were meant to be able to fit together. I mean if a piece fits to another piece then how can your analogy work. Its an horse or a dolphin, one or the other.

The pieces that make the picture of the horse were not originally in the box.

Regards

Star man

Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: mk on January 16, 2021, 07:31:13 PM
I am genuinely enjoying this conversation. 

Star Man was reminding me of some kind of Poirot/Miss Marple who refuses to spill the beans until the last chapter because he might be wrong and doesn't want to hurt the innocent.  But now I'm cracking up over the metaphor which keeps getting more and more complicated and actually confusing, rather than elucidating, the issue.

Maybe it's neither a horse nor a dolphin.  Maybe it's a hippokampos.   popcorn1

Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Star man on January 17, 2021, 01:21:44 AM
I am genuinely enjoying this conversation. 

Star Man was reminding me of some kind of Poirot/Miss Marple who refuses to spill the beans until the last chapter because he might be wrong and doesn't want to hurt the innocent.  But now I'm cracking up over the metaphor which keeps getting more and more complicated and actually confusing, rather than elucidating, the issue.

Maybe it's neither a horse nor a dolphin.  Maybe it's a hippokampos.   popcorn1

Agree -  was simply trying to point out that not all the facts are relevant and if you try to fit the non relevant ones into the puzzle you will not see the bigger picture.  Forget everything at the tent and the footprints The hikers were never at the tent on Kholat.

Regards

Star man
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: sarapuk on January 17, 2021, 02:38:41 PM
The big argument against "you can't make sense of nonsense" is that 30 years later during glasnost Ivanov (who saw all the evidence first hand, photographs, hand written diaries etc), clearly stated his opinion (fireorbs) and made no reference to other avenues other than apologising to the relatives that he was acting under duress/orders.
So for it to be a big coverup then he has to be THE key player in the same and was still maintaining it 30 years later, but doing so for some unknown reason, i mean why publish a sensationalist article about fireorbs 30 years later if the whole point of the original coverup was to bury the incident?
Ditto Okishev who at the age of 94 seems to have felt it necessary to set the record straight for posterity and nothing he stated contradicts Ivanov.
Imo, deciding that the evidence is nonsense is more nonsensical than accepting it as genuine. As said many times, Ivanov's opinion is the key ingredient, everything else is froth.
and Ivanov said fireorbs and i think the evidence fits that. Also very telling is the legend of the nine hunters, no case there for a state coverup....

It is possible that one piece of evidence at the tent isn't nonsense -  "The Evening Otorten" -  the snowman does exist

There is a very good chance that there were orbs of fire.  Ivanov also referred to scorched tree tops, but in a kind of straight line as if a beam of energy had hit the trees.  I don't think that Ivanov was lying. He may have been telling the truth.  He just wasn't explaing it fully.  For example there is another explanation for the scorch marks other than an energy beam.

Regards

Star man

So you are linking the Snowman with the UFO. Thats not a bad idea. And lets not forget where that Newsletter was found. It was found pinned to the Tent near the entrance.

No, I dont think UFO.  I do wonder why the pamphlet was left in the tent.  Can understand why it disappeared too.

Regards

Star man

Why do you think it disappeared  !  ?


Because everything was confiscated. Diaries, Semyon's notebook, Ortorten News etc, etc. We only have Semyon's photos because Ivanov seems to have hoarded them.

     
Seized by the  Authorities ! ?  I wonder why. Why would they want to seize a newsletter or Diaries unless they contained something which was of importance. For instance if the Dyatlov Group were being followed by something then they would have written something down for sure. Or if they saw something in the Sky.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: sarapuk on January 17, 2021, 02:40:59 PM
The big argument against "you can't make sense of nonsense" is that 30 years later during glasnost Ivanov (who saw all the evidence first hand, photographs, hand written diaries etc), clearly stated his opinion (fireorbs) and made no reference to other avenues other than apologising to the relatives that he was acting under duress/orders.
So for it to be a big coverup then he has to be THE key player in the same and was still maintaining it 30 years later, but doing so for some unknown reason, i mean why publish a sensationalist article about fireorbs 30 years later if the whole point of the original coverup was to bury the incident?
Ditto Okishev who at the age of 94 seems to have felt it necessary to set the record straight for posterity and nothing he stated contradicts Ivanov.
Imo, deciding that the evidence is nonsense is more nonsensical than accepting it as genuine. As said many times, Ivanov's opinion is the key ingredient, everything else is froth.
and Ivanov said fireorbs and i think the evidence fits that. Also very telling is the legend of the nine hunters, no case there for a state coverup....

It is possible that one piece of evidence at the tent isn't nonsense -  "The Evening Otorten" -  the snowman does exist

There is a very good chance that there were orbs of fire.  Ivanov also referred to scorched tree tops, but in a kind of straight line as if a beam of energy had hit the trees.  I don't think that Ivanov was lying. He may have been telling the truth.  He just wasn't explaing it fully.  For example there is another explanation for the scorch marks other than an energy beam.

Regards

Star man

So you are linking the Snowman with the UFO. Thats not a bad idea. And lets not forget where that Newsletter was found. It was found pinned to the Tent near the entrance.

No, I dont think UFO.  I do wonder why the pamphlet was left in the tent.  Can understand why it disappeared too.

Regards

Star man

Why do you think it disappeared  !  ?

I think it may be the only piece of evidence at the tent of any relevance.

Regards

Star man

What interests me is the fact that it was found pinned to the Tent near the Tents entrance. As if they did it quickly before leaving the Tent.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: sarapuk on January 17, 2021, 02:44:36 PM
I am genuinely enjoying this conversation. 

Star Man was reminding me of some kind of Poirot/Miss Marple who refuses to spill the beans until the last chapter because he might be wrong and doesn't want to hurt the innocent.  But now I'm cracking up over the metaphor which keeps getting more and more complicated and actually confusing, rather than elucidating, the issue.

Maybe it's neither a horse nor a dolphin.  Maybe it's a hippokampos.   popcorn1

Maybe using Jigsaws is not the best way to proceed in the Dyatlov Case. Which is after all, complicated enougth.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: sarapuk on January 17, 2021, 02:48:13 PM
I am genuinely enjoying this conversation. 

Star Man was reminding me of some kind of Poirot/Miss Marple who refuses to spill the beans until the last chapter because he might be wrong and doesn't want to hurt the innocent.  But now I'm cracking up over the metaphor which keeps getting more and more complicated and actually confusing, rather than elucidating, the issue.

Maybe it's neither a horse nor a dolphin.  Maybe it's a hippokampos.   popcorn1

Agree -  was simply trying to point out that not all the facts are relevant and if you try to fit the non relevant ones into the puzzle you will not see the bigger picture.  Forget everything at the tent and the footprints The hikers were never at the tent on Kholat.

Regards

Star man

But thats the whole point of Facts. Its the way all Law works. You cant just pick and choose Facts, you need them all. Even in something as unusual as the Dyatlov Mystery.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Star man on January 17, 2021, 03:39:41 PM
The big argument against "you can't make sense of nonsense" is that 30 years later during glasnost Ivanov (who saw all the evidence first hand, photographs, hand written diaries etc), clearly stated his opinion (fireorbs) and made no reference to other avenues other than apologising to the relatives that he was acting under duress/orders.
So for it to be a big coverup then he has to be THE key player in the same and was still maintaining it 30 years later, but doing so for some unknown reason, i mean why publish a sensationalist article about fireorbs 30 years later if the whole point of the original coverup was to bury the incident?
Ditto Okishev who at the age of 94 seems to have felt it necessary to set the record straight for posterity and nothing he stated contradicts Ivanov.
Imo, deciding that the evidence is nonsense is more nonsensical than accepting it as genuine. As said many times, Ivanov's opinion is the key ingredient, everything else is froth.
and Ivanov said fireorbs and i think the evidence fits that. Also very telling is the legend of the nine hunters, no case there for a state coverup....

It is possible that one piece of evidence at the tent isn't nonsense -  "The Evening Otorten" -  the snowman does exist

There is a very good chance that there were orbs of fire.  Ivanov also referred to scorched tree tops, but in a kind of straight line as if a beam of energy had hit the trees.  I don't think that Ivanov was lying. He may have been telling the truth.  He just wasn't explaing it fully.  For example there is another explanation for the scorch marks other than an energy beam.

Regards

Star man

So you are linking the Snowman with the UFO. Thats not a bad idea. And lets not forget where that Newsletter was found. It was found pinned to the Tent near the entrance.

No, I dont think UFO.  I do wonder why the pamphlet was left in the tent.  Can understand why it disappeared too.

Regards

Star man

Why do you think it disappeared  !  ?


Because everything was confiscated. Diaries, Semyon's notebook, Ortorten News etc, etc. We only have Semyon's photos because Ivanov seems to have hoarded them.

     
Seized by the  Authorities ! ?  I wonder why. Why would they want to seize a newsletter or Diaries unless they contained something which was of importance. For instance if the Dyatlov Group were being followed by something then they would have written something down for sure. Or if they saw something in the Sky.

If my theory is correct, then if did contain something of importance.

Regards

Star man
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Star man on January 17, 2021, 03:52:08 PM
The big argument against "you can't make sense of nonsense" is that 30 years later during glasnost Ivanov (who saw all the evidence first hand, photographs, hand written diaries etc), clearly stated his opinion (fireorbs) and made no reference to other avenues other than apologising to the relatives that he was acting under duress/orders.
So for it to be a big coverup then he has to be THE key player in the same and was still maintaining it 30 years later, but doing so for some unknown reason, i mean why publish a sensationalist article about fireorbs 30 years later if the whole point of the original coverup was to bury the incident?
Ditto Okishev who at the age of 94 seems to have felt it necessary to set the record straight for posterity and nothing he stated contradicts Ivanov.
Imo, deciding that the evidence is nonsense is more nonsensical than accepting it as genuine. As said many times, Ivanov's opinion is the key ingredient, everything else is froth.
and Ivanov said fireorbs and i think the evidence fits that. Also very telling is the legend of the nine hunters, no case there for a state coverup....

It is possible that one piece of evidence at the tent isn't nonsense -  "The Evening Otorten" -  the snowman does exist

There is a very good chance that there were orbs of fire.  Ivanov also referred to scorched tree tops, but in a kind of straight line as if a beam of energy had hit the trees.  I don't think that Ivanov was lying. He may have been telling the truth.  He just wasn't explaing it fully.  For example there is another explanation for the scorch marks other than an energy beam.

Regards

Star man

So you are linking the Snowman with the UFO. Thats not a bad idea. And lets not forget where that Newsletter was found. It was found pinned to the Tent near the entrance.

No, I dont think UFO.  I do wonder why the pamphlet was left in the tent.  Can understand why it disappeared too.

Regards

Star man

Why do you think it disappeared  !  ?

I think it may be the only piece of evidence at the tent of any relevance.

Regards

Star man

What interests me is the fact that it was found pinned to the Tent near the Tents entrance. As if they did it quickly before leaving the Tent.

Interesting.  Left somewhere where it would be easily found.  Think about this -  they wrote the note and pinned it near the entrance to the tent, just before the panic and cutting through the side of the tent and decending to the forest in their socks? 

The scene at the tent makes no sense.  Previously I have thought that the only way to explain it is if the hikers had been affected by something that impacted their cognitive functions- hence radiation or infrasound.  But there is a simpler explanation -  they were never there.

Regards

Star man

Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Star man on January 17, 2021, 03:58:30 PM
I am genuinely enjoying this conversation. 

Star Man was reminding me of some kind of Poirot/Miss Marple who refuses to spill the beans until the last chapter because he might be wrong and doesn't want to hurt the innocent.  But now I'm cracking up over the metaphor which keeps getting more and more complicated and actually confusing, rather than elucidating, the issue.

Maybe it's neither a horse nor a dolphin.  Maybe it's a hippokampos.   popcorn1

Agree -  was simply trying to point out that not all the facts are relevant and if you try to fit the non relevant ones into the puzzle you will not see the bigger picture.  Forget everything at the tent and the footprints The hikers were never at the tent on Kholat.

Regards

Star man

But thats the whole point of Facts. Its the way all Law works. You cant just pick and choose Facts, you need them all. Even in something as unusual as the Dyatlov Mystery.

The scene at the tent has little bearing on what actually happened to the hikers.  I suppose that is the main fact, so it is evidence, but only if thought of in the correct way.

Regards

Star man
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: sarapuk on January 18, 2021, 11:47:07 AM
The big argument against "you can't make sense of nonsense" is that 30 years later during glasnost Ivanov (who saw all the evidence first hand, photographs, hand written diaries etc), clearly stated his opinion (fireorbs) and made no reference to other avenues other than apologising to the relatives that he was acting under duress/orders.
So for it to be a big coverup then he has to be THE key player in the same and was still maintaining it 30 years later, but doing so for some unknown reason, i mean why publish a sensationalist article about fireorbs 30 years later if the whole point of the original coverup was to bury the incident?
Ditto Okishev who at the age of 94 seems to have felt it necessary to set the record straight for posterity and nothing he stated contradicts Ivanov.
Imo, deciding that the evidence is nonsense is more nonsensical than accepting it as genuine. As said many times, Ivanov's opinion is the key ingredient, everything else is froth.
and Ivanov said fireorbs and i think the evidence fits that. Also very telling is the legend of the nine hunters, no case there for a state coverup....

It is possible that one piece of evidence at the tent isn't nonsense -  "The Evening Otorten" -  the snowman does exist

There is a very good chance that there were orbs of fire.  Ivanov also referred to scorched tree tops, but in a kind of straight line as if a beam of energy had hit the trees.  I don't think that Ivanov was lying. He may have been telling the truth.  He just wasn't explaing it fully.  For example there is another explanation for the scorch marks other than an energy beam.

Regards

Star man

So you are linking the Snowman with the UFO. Thats not a bad idea. And lets not forget where that Newsletter was found. It was found pinned to the Tent near the entrance.

No, I dont think UFO.  I do wonder why the pamphlet was left in the tent.  Can understand why it disappeared too.

Regards

Star man

Why do you think it disappeared  !  ?

I think it may be the only piece of evidence at the tent of any relevance.

Regards

Star man

What interests me is the fact that it was found pinned to the Tent near the Tents entrance. As if they did it quickly before leaving the Tent.

Interesting.  Left somewhere where it would be easily found.  Think about this -  they wrote the note and pinned it near the entrance to the tent, just before the panic and cutting through the side of the tent and decending to the forest in their socks? 

The scene at the tent makes no sense.  Previously I have thought that the only way to explain it is if the hikers had been affected by something that impacted their cognitive functions- hence radiation or infrasound.  But there is a simpler explanation -  they were never there.

Regards

Star man

A simpler explanation ! ?  Sounds like a more complicated one if you reckon they may not have been at the Tent in the first place. And why would any outsider want to pin a newsletter to the Tent near the Entrance   !  ?
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: sarapuk on January 18, 2021, 11:51:16 AM
I am genuinely enjoying this conversation. 

Star Man was reminding me of some kind of Poirot/Miss Marple who refuses to spill the beans until the last chapter because he might be wrong and doesn't want to hurt the innocent.  But now I'm cracking up over the metaphor which keeps getting more and more complicated and actually confusing, rather than elucidating, the issue.

Maybe it's neither a horse nor a dolphin.  Maybe it's a hippokampos.   popcorn1

Agree -  was simply trying to point out that not all the facts are relevant and if you try to fit the non relevant ones into the puzzle you will not see the bigger picture.  Forget everything at the tent and the footprints The hikers were never at the tent on Kholat.

Regards

Star man

But thats the whole point of Facts. Its the way all Law works. You cant just pick and choose Facts, you need them all. Even in something as unusual as the Dyatlov Mystery.

The scene at the tent has little bearing on what actually happened to the hikers.  I suppose that is the main fact, so it is evidence, but only if thought of in the correct way.

Regards

Star man

Well its true we do have a scene at the Tent. We have a Tent thats empty of bodies but full of personal belongings etc. That is a fact. That is Evidence. But not a fact or Evidence as to where the bodies were. In other words its just speculation regarding the theory that the Dyatlov Group were never at the Tent.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Star man on January 18, 2021, 04:05:59 PM
I am genuinely enjoying this conversation. 

Star Man was reminding me of some kind of Poirot/Miss Marple who refuses to spill the beans until the last chapter because he might be wrong and doesn't want to hurt the innocent.  But now I'm cracking up over the metaphor which keeps getting more and more complicated and actually confusing, rather than elucidating, the issue.

Maybe it's neither a horse nor a dolphin.  Maybe it's a hippokampos.   popcorn1

Agree -  was simply trying to point out that not all the facts are relevant and if you try to fit the non relevant ones into the puzzle you will not see the bigger picture.  Forget everything at the tent and the footprints The hikers were never at the tent on Kholat.

Regards

Star man

But thats the whole point of Facts. Its the way all Law works. You cant just pick and choose Facts, you need them all. Even in something as unusual as the Dyatlov Mystery.

The scene at the tent has little bearing on what actually happened to the hikers.  I suppose that is the main fact, so it is evidence, but only if thought of in the correct way.

Regards

Star man

Well its true we do have a scene at the Tent. We have a Tent thats empty of bodies but full of personal belongings etc. That is a fact. That is Evidence. But not a fact or Evidence as to where the bodies were. In other words its just speculation regarding the theory that the Dyatlov Group were never at the Tent.

Personal belongings yes, but missing cameras, missing photographs, missing, pamphlet, and later a missing tent.  That is suspicious.  Also,  there is no evidence that they were at the tent.

Regards

Star man
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Nigel Evans on January 19, 2021, 03:48:32 AM
There's no evidence that they weren't at the tent?
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: MDGross on January 19, 2021, 08:50:40 AM
Perhaps Teddy's book will help to elucidate whether the group was ever in the tent or not on the tragic night. I've always thought the group pitched the tent where it was eventually found. And once they were in the woods, members of the group built a fire, climbed the cedar, dug out a snow den, removed clothing from the frozen bodies and so forth. But wonder if the group did none of these things. Wonder if outsiders (KGB?, military? both?) did these things to elaborately cover up that the hikers had died in a manner that had to remain a secret. 
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: sarapuk on January 19, 2021, 01:19:31 PM
I am genuinely enjoying this conversation. 

Star Man was reminding me of some kind of Poirot/Miss Marple who refuses to spill the beans until the last chapter because he might be wrong and doesn't want to hurt the innocent.  But now I'm cracking up over the metaphor which keeps getting more and more complicated and actually confusing, rather than elucidating, the issue.

Maybe it's neither a horse nor a dolphin.  Maybe it's a hippokampos.   popcorn1

Agree -  was simply trying to point out that not all the facts are relevant and if you try to fit the non relevant ones into the puzzle you will not see the bigger picture.  Forget everything at the tent and the footprints The hikers were never at the tent on Kholat.

Regards

Star man

But thats the whole point of Facts. Its the way all Law works. You cant just pick and choose Facts, you need them all. Even in something as unusual as the Dyatlov Mystery.

The scene at the tent has little bearing on what actually happened to the hikers.  I suppose that is the main fact, so it is evidence, but only if thought of in the correct way.

Regards

Star man

Well its true we do have a scene at the Tent. We have a Tent thats empty of bodies but full of personal belongings etc. That is a fact. That is Evidence. But not a fact or Evidence as to where the bodies were. In other words its just speculation regarding the theory that the Dyatlov Group were never at the Tent.

Personal belongings yes, but missing cameras, missing photographs, missing, pamphlet, and later a missing tent.  That is suspicious.  Also,  there is no evidence that they were at the tent.

Regards

Star man

Did the Apollo 11 Astronauts land on the Moon  ! ?  I say that they did because there is Evidence of them actually going to the Moon. Some people say that the actual landing was faked. I say that the Dyatlov Group went to the Mountainside because there is Evidence of them going there and I also say that they were at the Tent because of that Evidence.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: sarapuk on January 19, 2021, 01:21:19 PM
Perhaps Teddy's book will help to elucidate whether the group was ever in the tent or not on the tragic night. I've always thought the group pitched the tent where it was eventually found. And once they were in the woods, members of the group built a fire, climbed the cedar, dug out a snow den, removed clothing from the frozen bodies and so forth. But wonder if the group did none of these things. Wonder if outsiders (KGB?, military? both?) did these things to elaborately cover up that the hikers had died in a manner that had to remain a secret.

Well we will need Evidence. Otherwise as I say many times, its just speculation.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: MDGross on January 19, 2021, 02:30:26 PM
Agreed sarapuk. Evidence is at the heart of every theory. I fear hard evidence was destroyed in 1959 or the years following. So we're left with circumstantial evidence on which to build theories. Perhaps, with the permission of present-day family members, the bodies of several hikers could be exhumed. The hikers may yet be able to tell us what happened on that fateful night.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Star man on January 19, 2021, 03:27:54 PM
There's no evidence that they weren't at the tent?

Not yet.

Regards

Star man
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Star man on January 19, 2021, 03:32:17 PM
Perhaps Teddy's book will help to elucidate whether the group was ever in the tent or not on the tragic night. I've always thought the group pitched the tent where it was eventually found. And once they were in the woods, members of the group built a fire, climbed the cedar, dug out a snow den, removed clothing from the frozen bodies and so forth. But wonder if the group did none of these things. Wonder if outsiders (KGB?, military? both?) did these things to elaborately cover up that the hikers had died in a manner that had to remain a secret.

Teddy did provide several clues.  Like its all about the tent and where it was found.  More importantly where it was not found.  Also, if the three on the slope  were climbing the ridge it was not to go back to the tent.

Regards

Star man
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Star man on January 19, 2021, 03:39:20 PM
I am genuinely enjoying this conversation. 

Star Man was reminding me of some kind of Poirot/Miss Marple who refuses to spill the beans until the last chapter because he might be wrong and doesn't want to hurt the innocent.  But now I'm cracking up over the metaphor which keeps getting more and more complicated and actually confusing, rather than elucidating, the issue.

Maybe it's neither a horse nor a dolphin.  Maybe it's a hippokampos.   popcorn1

Agree -  was simply trying to point out that not all the facts are relevant and if you try to fit the non relevant ones into the puzzle you will not see the bigger picture.  Forget everything at the tent and the footprints The hikers were never at the tent on Kholat.

Regards

Star man

But thats the whole point of Facts. Its the way all Law works. You cant just pick and choose Facts, you need them all. Even in something as unusual as the Dyatlov Mystery.

The scene at the tent has little bearing on what actually happened to the hikers.  I suppose that is the main fact, so it is evidence, but only if thought of in the correct way.

Regards

Star man

Well its true we do have a scene at the Tent. We have a Tent thats empty of bodies but full of personal belongings etc. That is a fact. That is Evidence. But not a fact or Evidence as to where the bodies were. In other words its just speculation regarding the theory that the Dyatlov Group were never at the Tent.

Personal belongings yes, but missing cameras, missing photographs, missing, pamphlet, and later a missing tent.  That is suspicious.  Also,  there is no evidence that they were at the tent.

Regards

Star man

Did the Apollo 11 Astronauts land on the Moon  ! ?  I say that they did because there is Evidence of them actually going to the Moon. Some people say that the actual landing was faked. I say that the Dyatlov Group went to the Mountainside because there is Evidence of them going there and I also say that they were at the Tent because of that Evidence.

There is irrefutable evidence that mankind has been to the moon.  An example - A mirror was left, so that we could bounce a laser beam off it and measure the distance to the nearest centimetre.  That is how we have confirmed that the moon is receding from the Earth by about 2cm a year.  That is an easy one to test. 

What irrefutable evidence is there that the hikers were at the tent on Kholat?

Regards

Star man
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Manti on January 19, 2021, 04:52:21 PM
Not only is there no irrefutable evidence they were at the tent... there can't be. Even with today's technology if DNA samples were taken, and matched, even that would not mean they were at the tent because of course they would have touched it before. Perhaps they would have posted an Instagram story from the slope though... that would be evidence.

Nevertheless it seems the most likely scenario. If they weren't at the tent, how did it and their belongings get there and why?
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Star man on January 19, 2021, 11:25:08 PM
Not only is there no irrefutable evidence they were at the tent... there can't be. Even with today's technology if DNA samples were taken, and matched, even that would not mean they were at the tent because of course they would have touched it before. Perhaps they would have posted an Instagram story from the slope though... that would be evidence.

Nevertheless it seems the most likely scenario. If they weren't at the tent, how did it and their belongings get there and why?

Its not the most likely scenario if you give credit to Solter's statement and consider what one thing could cause the vast majority of the injuries in a single event.

Regards

Star man
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Manti on January 20, 2021, 01:31:30 PM
Sorry what is "Solter's statement"? Where can I read it?
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Star man on January 20, 2021, 03:49:11 PM
Sorry what is "Solter's statement"? Where can I read it?

It is on Dyatlov Pass web page.  Try this link.

https://dyatlovpass.com/interview-solter?rbid=18461


Recently I have been looking at the case from a different perspective.  As suggested by Teddy.  If you give credit to Solter's statement then there is clear evidence that things are not right with the scenes or the protocols followed.

I have tried to look at it starting with only several pieces of info:

1. Solter's statement
2. The bodies/injuries/autopsy reports
3.  The hikers own information/diaries etc.  Basically the journey they had planned and where they were

Nothing else

Forget everything you think you know and start from scratch just with the above information and try to determine how you think they died.   When you have a conclusion you will have 50% of the story. 

Then, forgetting all of the scenes ask why and how it could have happened,  and why would there be a need to cover it up.  This is the other 50% of the story.

I think I have the first 50%.  I have several ideas about the second 50%.  It is difficult to pin down the second 50% without any additional information.  There is one idea I find interesting though.

Regards

Star man
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: eurocentric on January 20, 2021, 04:37:28 PM
I'd say the last 50% is the easier part to imagine.
 
The odds of a stray missile randomly landing near hikers, while possible, is going to be millions-to-one considering all the potential impact zones it could have landed. But the focus of a case of mistaken identity, a 'friendly fire' incident at night, with victims under the canopy of trees, when a tired helicopter crew have already been out looking for escapees for most of the day, is much more likely.

There was only 8 hours of available daylight to search a region, and I think they would tend to concentrate on escapees being on the move then, and seeing them in the snow between forests and on passes, and when darkness fell at 4:29pm I can't see them knocking-it-on-the-head and would instead continue until the evening, adopting a new approach of anticipating escapees seeking shelter in forests and lighting a fire.

They may even have followed the hiker tracks to the forest, and the moment they saw a fire their adrenaline would pump and they'd convince themselves "this is them". If the hikers ran or hid, even from fear, it would further suspicion from the air. Some warning shots may have been fired, followed by ordnance, perhaps involving gas, if wishing to explain burns and breathing problems, something designed to subdue.

The next day they'd return and realise they have killed hikers, explaining the military knowing about them before the official alert was given. Had this been a group of Mansi, or Russian hunters, rural people living off grid, then nobody would care enough, they could probably get away with admitting to it. But this was a group of townies, "a bunch of kids"; uni students, their young mechanic friends, and a war veteran, so it would require special handling - a cover-up, rather than admitting to a tragic case of mistaken identity. The secret would die with the helicopter crew not only because of the secrecy required, but because through shame they would never want to publicly admit what they did.

To me, this photo, an enhanced and colourised version of what is the clearest image from Semyon's film, is the smoking gun of the DPI. I have every confidence that if, away from this forum, 1000 people were randomly asked what they thought it was, and perhaps told it was taken at night up a mountain, very few of them would suggest it's a shapeshifting glowing entity, 'fireorb', fireball, ball lightning, UFO or other rare phenomena or folklore, and will instead suggest a headlight of a helicopter or possibly a ground vehicle.

That's because the light has a distinctive, vaguely familiar shape, and is of uniform luminence, usually achieved with a reflector around the bulb. If they looked further and noticed how the beam shines down through cold air they may logically decide on a helicopter. Because only the Soviet military had access to helicopters in 1959 this then places them at the scene, and Semyon's objective in attempting to take photo's of the night sky with his rudimentary camera, in this theory, would be to try to leave clues as to what happened to them.

He would not flee his tent in panic without taking the tools to survive away from that tent, if sited on a mountain ridge, instead grabbing only a camera, but that is something he would be more likely to grab if their tent was already in the forest, the place they supposedly travelled to, when the incident unfolded.

(https://i.ibb.co/N7nP3GP/Photo500438-Enhanced-Colorized.jpg) (https://ibb.co/CWsZtSZ)

(https://i.ibb.co/G9dC9XZ/7-Eagle-1-Light.jpg) (https://ibb.co/f9Xr9b3)
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: sarapuk on January 20, 2021, 04:54:26 PM
Agreed sarapuk. Evidence is at the heart of every theory. I fear hard evidence was destroyed in 1959 or the years following. So we're left with circumstantial evidence on which to build theories. Perhaps, with the permission of present-day family members, the bodies of several hikers could be exhumed. The hikers may yet be able to tell us what happened on that fateful night.

Its up to the Authorities. Maybe one day they will divulge all the Information. But as you are probably aware, Governments sometimes have to keep hidden Information that is not in the public interest to divulge.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: sarapuk on January 20, 2021, 04:56:53 PM
Perhaps Teddy's book will help to elucidate whether the group was ever in the tent or not on the tragic night. I've always thought the group pitched the tent where it was eventually found. And once they were in the woods, members of the group built a fire, climbed the cedar, dug out a snow den, removed clothing from the frozen bodies and so forth. But wonder if the group did none of these things. Wonder if outsiders (KGB?, military? both?) did these things to elaborately cover up that the hikers had died in a manner that had to remain a secret.

Teddy did provide several clues.  Like its all about the tent and where it was found.  More importantly where it was not found.  Also, if the three on the slope  were climbing the ridge it was not to go back to the tent.

Regards

Star man

Clues but not Evidence. Well the Dyatlov Mystery is generally speaking about the Tent and what happened at the Tent and afterwards.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: sarapuk on January 20, 2021, 05:05:27 PM
I am genuinely enjoying this conversation. 

Star Man was reminding me of some kind of Poirot/Miss Marple who refuses to spill the beans until the last chapter because he might be wrong and doesn't want to hurt the innocent.  But now I'm cracking up over the metaphor which keeps getting more and more complicated and actually confusing, rather than elucidating, the issue.

Maybe it's neither a horse nor a dolphin.  Maybe it's a hippokampos.   popcorn1

Agree -  was simply trying to point out that not all the facts are relevant and if you try to fit the non relevant ones into the puzzle you will not see the bigger picture.  Forget everything at the tent and the footprints The hikers were never at the tent on Kholat.

Regards

Star man

But thats the whole point of Facts. Its the way all Law works. You cant just pick and choose Facts, you need them all. Even in something as unusual as the Dyatlov Mystery.

The scene at the tent has little bearing on what actually happened to the hikers.  I suppose that is the main fact, so it is evidence, but only if thought of in the correct way.

Regards

Star man

Well its true we do have a scene at the Tent. We have a Tent thats empty of bodies but full of personal belongings etc. That is a fact. That is Evidence. But not a fact or Evidence as to where the bodies were. In other words its just speculation regarding the theory that the Dyatlov Group were never at the Tent.

Personal belongings yes, but missing cameras, missing photographs, missing, pamphlet, and later a missing tent.  That is suspicious.  Also,  there is no evidence that they were at the tent.

Regards

Star man

Did the Apollo 11 Astronauts land on the Moon  ! ?  I say that they did because there is Evidence of them actually going to the Moon. Some people say that the actual landing was faked. I say that the Dyatlov Group went to the Mountainside because there is Evidence of them going there and I also say that they were at the Tent because of that Evidence.

There is irrefutable evidence that mankind has been to the moon.  An example - A mirror was left, so that we could bounce a laser beam off it and measure the distance to the nearest centimetre.  That is how we have confirmed that the moon is receding from the Earth by about 2cm a year.  That is an easy one to test. 

What irrefutable evidence is there that the hikers were at the tent on Kholat?

Regards

Star man

The Mirrors could have been left by another mission to the Moon without any one having stepped on the Moon. But I have no doubt that Armstrong and Aldrin did step on the surface of the Moon. Back to the Tent, or should I say the Dyatlov Group at the Tent. All indications point to the Dyatlov Group having set up the Tent and having prepared to sleep in the Tent at night when something appears to have happened. Where is the Evidence to say otherwise  !  ? 
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: sarapuk on January 20, 2021, 05:12:01 PM
Not only is there no irrefutable evidence they were at the tent... there can't be. Even with today's technology if DNA samples were taken, and matched, even that would not mean they were at the tent because of course they would have touched it before. Perhaps they would have posted an Instagram story from the slope though... that would be evidence.

Nevertheless it seems the most likely scenario. If they weren't at the tent, how did it and their belongings get there and why?

Thats a reasonable way of putting it.  Another way is that if its a question of Evidence then the long accepted line wins, ie, we have the Tent and its Contents and Footprints nearby and Diaries and Photographs charting their journey up towards the Mountain. Against that we have nothing, no Evidence against that, just pure speculation.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: sarapuk on January 20, 2021, 05:13:56 PM
Not only is there no irrefutable evidence they were at the tent... there can't be. Even with today's technology if DNA samples were taken, and matched, even that would not mean they were at the tent because of course they would have touched it before. Perhaps they would have posted an Instagram story from the slope though... that would be evidence.

Nevertheless it seems the most likely scenario. If they weren't at the tent, how did it and their belongings get there and why?

Its not the most likely scenario if you give credit to Solter's statement and consider what one thing could cause the vast majority of the injuries in a single event.

Regards

Star man

There wasnt a single Event. There were several at least. The Tent. The Cedar Tree. The Ravine.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: sarapuk on January 20, 2021, 05:25:02 PM
Sorry what is "Solter's statement"? Where can I read it?

It is on Dyatlov Pass web page.  Try this link.

https://dyatlovpass.com/interview-solter?rbid=18461


Recently I have been looking at the case from a different perspective.  As suggested by Teddy.  If you give credit to Solter's statement then there is clear evidence that things are not right with the scenes or the protocols followed.

I have tried to look at it starting with only several pieces of info:

1. Solter's statement
2. The bodies/injuries/autopsy reports
3.  The hikers own information/diaries etc.  Basically the journey they had planned and where they were

Nothing else

Forget everything you think you know and start from scratch just with the above information and try to determine how you think they died.   When you have a conclusion you will have 50% of the story. 

Then, forgetting all of the scenes ask why and how it could have happened,  and why would there be a need to cover it up.  This is the other 50% of the story.

I think I have the first 50%.  I have several ideas about the second 50%.  It is difficult to pin down the second 50% without any additional information.  There is one idea I find interesting though.

Regards

Star man

She only cleaned the bodies. And she wasnt absolutely sure of what happened all those years ago when she made those statements in more modern times.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: eurocentric on January 20, 2021, 05:32:59 PM
Reference the rather dubious Moon landing analogy...

The DPI, as presented, would be the equivalent of Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin sitting inside their lander module in their underwear, with the heating turned off, playing Scrabble instead of attending to the risks presented by their location, not following the procedures they were trained for in order to ensure their survival and the completion of their mission.

Despite having the means to survive right by their side, dragged all the way to the Moon, they inexplicably ignore them, and have also landed somewhere they shouldn't be.

They then smash their way out of their capsule instead of exiting via the door provided, roam around without securing their space suit's integrity, and set off in single file, without their flag and experiments, to go and hide in a crater, where they inevitably perish.

Their camera takes photo's of strange objects in the sky, and the only photographic proof we have that they were there are two close-up photo's of a trench, which do not confirm they are on the lunar surface or show the horizon.

If all that happened would anyone believe they were ever on the Moon?
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: eurocentric on January 20, 2021, 05:56:27 PM
I am genuinely enjoying this conversation. 

Star Man was reminding me of some kind of Poirot/Miss Marple who refuses to spill the beans until the last chapter because he might be wrong and doesn't want to hurt the innocent.  But now I'm cracking up over the metaphor which keeps getting more and more complicated and actually confusing, rather than elucidating, the issue.

Maybe it's neither a horse nor a dolphin.  Maybe it's a hippokampos.   popcorn1

If I had a book coming out I'd combine all the most 'imaginative' theories I've read in this forum, it's sure to get into the best seller lists, or at the very least become a better script than that awful movie.

So, I'd have the yeti/menk/sasquatch as an alien from a frozen world, and it evolved to be covered in fur to stay warm. It is said to walk with a lolloping gait, and that is due to differences in gravity, and is generally only seen in colder climates, at altitude, well away from the equator, where the hirsute beast cannot cope with the heat.

The reason no dead yeti or baby yetis have ever been seen, or a lair or dung found, is they do not live and breed here, only visit, and arrive via a wormhole, which only appears on mountains rich in iron, a lodestone where the wormhole flux creates plasmatic effects such as orange orbs, 'fireorbs', glowing entities and ball lightning.

When the wormhole is closed there is a ripple in the space time continuum, explaining the military getting dates wrong, and anything metal, such as aircraft or a passing missile, is sucked towards it like iron filings to a magnet, explaining all the aircraft which crashed in that area across the years.

The number 9, the highest single number, is believed to be one of the combination numbers which unlocks the wormhole, and gadget man Igor Dyatlov had developed a special radio frequency receiver to detect the wormhole's formation, comprising of a small radio, excess salt and a piece of copper wire as an aerial. If the reception of Bill Haley's Rock Around The Clock was interrupted on Berlin radio when at 3000ft they knew what was about to happen.

They headed up that mountain after detecting something and attempted to trap a tourist menk in a pit, digging a deep snow trench. The creature was lured inside with loin steaks and porridge, and the tent arranged to collapse on top of it. The hikers had taken off clothing to evade the menk's thermal vision, which allows it to hunt prey on its frozen world (like when Arnie covered himself with river mud to elude The Predator).

They hypnotised and subdued the trapped menk by cossack dancing around the tent while singing banned communist songs. 'We will not stop until you drink the medicinal vodka!' they shouted, as Semyon whooped that they were going to make history. Soon it was bleary-eyed, toasting Nikita Khrushchev, collapsing into a heap, snoring its head off, and then they lowered themselves in to tie it to logs, intending to haul it out and lay it on a ski sled and drag it back to Vizhay, where bearded man's hospitality would welcome it as a long-lost cousin and make it feel at home as a fellow State outcast.

But the menk came round when they were in the trench and attacked them with its compelling force and tore its way out of the tent using its claws. The drunken menk staggered outside, tripped over a rock and fell. When they do so they instinctively go into a hedgehog ball, so it rolled down the pass towards the forest, its fur not leaving any trace. The hikers assembled to discuss what to do, and decided they had to leave immediately and go after it, determined not to lose their prize and the chance to be in the National Geographic.

The menk, now nursing a hangover, hid in the forest. Slowly its anger grew as it watched the hikers' approach and begin digging another capture pit in the snow, and it decided to exact its revenge. It pounced on Lyuda and Semyon, and delivered not a bear hug, but something far worse, a yeti hug, which cracked ribs, and when Lyuda screamed it ripped out her tongue like the alienised Ripley did the alien's in Alien Resurrection, loosening her hyoid bone. It threw their bodies into the ravine, and captured Igor to hang him upside down by his ankles from a tree, but he escaped. To keep evading the hikers and spring surprise attacks it shapeshifted into many different things, including a dolphin, a horse, a lynx, an eagle, and even a mushroom head.

The rest of the hikers hid in the tallest tree they could find, a cedar, nervously looking back up at the tent. The menk lit itself a fire underneath, using branches which snapped off under its weight when it tried to climb up after them. It tried to smoke them out, but eventually, after warming itself, it shook the tree so violently the hikers fell down like conkers, and then it bonked some of them on their heads with a log as if playing a xylophone.

The military arrived, their radar detecting an anomaly, helicopters, ground vehicles, MiG jets, the lot, but by then the menk had vanished, the wormhole closed, so they staged a Roswell style cover-up, arranging bodies so they looked like they'd been chased or bitten by a combination of overwintering snakes, marauding elks and hungry wolverines, while others died of the cold dressed only in their birthday suits. 'People will never believe this', they thought to themselves, but for 62 years and more, they did.

Rumour has it the Soviets caught a menk in 1952 and were hoping for a breeding pair for military applications, and that the menk helped them develop their space program. They only abandoned Moon landings for the greater goal of the planet Chewbaccaan.

A Stitch In Time Kills Nine is available soon.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: marieuk on January 20, 2021, 06:53:24 PM
love it  grin1
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Star man on January 21, 2021, 12:38:41 AM
I am genuinely enjoying this conversation. 

Star Man was reminding me of some kind of Poirot/Miss Marple who refuses to spill the beans until the last chapter because he might be wrong and doesn't want to hurt the innocent.  But now I'm cracking up over the metaphor which keeps getting more and more complicated and actually confusing, rather than elucidating, the issue.

Maybe it's neither a horse nor a dolphin.  Maybe it's a hippokampos.   popcorn1

If I had a book coming out I'd combine all the most 'imaginative' theories I've read in this forum, it's sure to get into the best seller lists, or at the very least become a better script than that awful movie.

So, I'd have the yeti/menk/sasquatch as an alien from a frozen world, and it evolved to be covered in fur to stay warm. It is said to walk with a lolloping gait, and that is due to differences in gravity, and is generally only seen in colder climates, at altitude, well away from the equator, where the hirsute beast cannot cope with the heat.

The reason no dead yeti or baby yetis have ever been seen, or a lair or dung found, is they do not live and breed here, only visit, and arrive via a wormhole, which only appears on mountains rich in iron, a lodestone where the wormhole flux creates plasmatic effects such as orange orbs, 'fireorbs', glowing entities and ball lightning.

When the wormhole is closed there is a ripple in the space time continuum, explaining the military getting dates wrong, and anything metal, such as aircraft or a passing missile, is sucked towards it like iron filings to a magnet, explaining all the aircraft which crashed in that area across the years.

The number 9, the highest single number, is believed to be one of the combination numbers which unlocks the wormhole, and gadget man Igor Dyatlov had developed a special radio frequency receiver to detect the wormhole's formation, comprising of a small radio, excess salt and a piece of copper wire as an aerial. If the reception of Bill Haley's Rock Around The Clock was interrupted on Berlin radio when at 3000ft they knew what was about to happen.

They headed up that mountain after detecting something and attempted to trap a tourist menk in a pit, digging a deep snow trench. The creature was lured inside with loin steaks and porridge, and the tent arranged to collapse on top of it. The hikers had taken off clothing to evade the menk's thermal vision, which allows it to hunt prey on its frozen world (like when Arnie covered himself with river mud to elude The Predator).

They hypnotised and subdued the trapped menk by cossack dancing around the tent while singing banned communist songs. 'We will not stop until you drink the medicinal vodka!' they shouted, as Semyon whooped that they were going to make history. Soon it was bleary-eyed, toasting Nikita Khrushchev, collapsing into a heap, snoring its head off, and then they lowered themselves in to tie it to logs, intending to haul it out and lay it on a ski sled and drag it back to Vizhay, where bearded man's hospitality would welcome it as a long-lost cousin and make it feel at home as a fellow State outcast.

But the menk came round when they were in the trench and attacked them with its compelling force and tore its way out of the tent using its claws. The drunken menk staggered outside, tripped over a rock and fell. When they do so they instinctively go into a hedgehog ball, so it rolled down the pass towards the forest, its fur not leaving any trace. The hikers assembled to discuss what to do, and decided they had to leave immediately and go after it, determined not to lose their prize and the chance to be in the National Geographic.

The menk, now nursing a hangover, hid in the forest. Slowly its anger grew as it watched the hikers' approach and begin digging another capture pit in the snow, and it decided to exact its revenge. It pounced on Lyuda and Semyon, and delivered not a bear hug, but something far worse, a yeti hug, which cracked ribs, and when Lyuda screamed it ripped out her tongue like the alienised Ripley did the alien's in Alien Resurrection, loosening her hyoid bone. It threw their bodies into the ravine, and captured Igor to hang him upside down by his ankles from a tree, but he escaped. To keep evading the hikers and spring surprise attacks it shapeshifted into many different things, including a dolphin, a horse, a lynx, an eagle, and even a mushroom head.

The rest of the hikers hid in the tallest tree they could find, a cedar, nervously looking back up at the tent. The menk lit itself a fire underneath, using branches which snapped off under its weight when it tried to climb up after them. It tried to smoke them out, but eventually, after warming itself, it shook the tree so violently the hikers fell down like conkers, and then it bonked some of them on their heads with a log as if playing a xylophone.

The military arrived, their radar detecting an anomaly, helicopters, ground vehicles, MiG jets, the lot, but by then the menk had vanished, the wormhole closed, so they staged a Roswell style cover-up, arranging bodies so they looked like they'd been chased or bitten by a combination of overwintering snakes, marauding elks and hungry wolverines, while others died of the cold dressed only in their birthday suits. 'People will never believe this', they thought to themselves, but for 62 years and more, they did.

Rumour has it the Soviets caught a menk in 1952 and were hoping for a breeding pair for military applications, and that the menk helped them develop their space program. They only abandoned Moon landings for the greater goal of the planet Chewbaccaan.

A Stitch In Time Kills Nine is available soon.

Just one problem.  I can't believe that the Menk like porridge.

Regards

Star man
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: eurocentric on January 21, 2021, 01:02:16 AM
It's true that they have a preference for Ready Brek, but are partial to anything oat-based which helps warm them, gets their heart and circulation going. They thought this Goldilocks planet would be the perfect getaway.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Nigel Evans on January 21, 2021, 01:08:35 AM
A good effort but the title needs work, how about - "Menk, missiles, magic helicopters and hypnotic cossacks".
Best to keep it real?
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Star man on January 21, 2021, 01:24:17 AM
It's true that they have a preference for Ready Brek, but are partial to anything oat-based which helps warm them, gets their heart and circulation going. They thought this Goldilocks planet would be the perfect getaway.

I suppose ready brek  does provide a warming glow for hours.  Essential on Kholat

Regards

Star man
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: GKM on January 21, 2021, 03:35:43 AM
Porridge eating menks. That's a good one.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: GKM on January 21, 2021, 03:43:25 AM
I am curious about those who suspect Ufo's are responsible for what happened to the hikers. Unidentified flying objects, meaning it is something in the sky that is unidentified or associated with alien life? Surely it isn't alien lifeforms. That and the yeti are descents into the absurd.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Nigel Evans on January 21, 2021, 04:13:30 AM
I am curious about those who suspect Ufo's are responsible for what happened to the hikers. Unidentified flying objects, meaning it is something in the sky that is unidentified or associated with alien life? Surely it isn't alien lifeforms. That and the yeti are descents into the absurd.
Explain to me what is absurd about this - https://youtu.be/nCEpoeaUeWk
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Star man on January 21, 2021, 04:49:57 AM
I am curious about those who suspect Ufo's are responsible for what happened to the hikers. Unidentified flying objects, meaning it is something in the sky that is unidentified or associated with alien life? Surely it isn't alien lifeforms. That and the yeti are descents into the absurd.

Its unlikely that they were attacked by aliens or a yeti.  But it might not be as obsurd as you think.

Regards

Star man
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: RMK on January 21, 2021, 05:11:08 AM
I am genuinely enjoying this conversation. 

Star Man was reminding me of some kind of Poirot/Miss Marple who refuses to spill the beans until the last chapter because he might be wrong and doesn't want to hurt the innocent.  But now I'm cracking up over the metaphor which keeps getting more and more complicated and actually confusing, rather than elucidating, the issue.

Maybe it's neither a horse nor a dolphin.  Maybe it's a hippokampos.   popcorn1

If I had a book coming out I'd combine all the most 'imaginative' theories I've read in this forum, it's sure to get into the best seller lists, or at the very least become a better script than that awful movie.

So, I'd have the yeti/menk/sasquatch as an alien from a frozen world, and it evolved to be covered in fur to stay warm. It is said to walk with a lolloping gait, and that is due to differences in gravity, and is generally only seen in colder climates, at altitude, well away from the equator, where the hirsute beast cannot cope with the heat.

The reason no dead yeti or baby yetis have ever been seen, or a lair or dung found, is they do not live and breed here, only visit, and arrive via a wormhole, which only appears on mountains rich in iron, a lodestone where the wormhole flux creates plasmatic effects such as orange orbs, 'fireorbs', glowing entities and ball lightning.

When the wormhole is closed there is a ripple in the space time continuum, explaining the military getting dates wrong, and anything metal, such as aircraft or a passing missile, is sucked towards it like iron filings to a magnet, explaining all the aircraft which crashed in that area across the years.

The number 9, the highest single number, is believed to be one of the combination numbers which unlocks the wormhole, and gadget man Igor Dyatlov had developed a special radio frequency receiver to detect the wormhole's formation, comprising of a small radio, excess salt and a piece of copper wire as an aerial. If the reception of Bill Haley's Rock Around The Clock was interrupted on Berlin radio when at 3000ft they knew what was about to happen.

They headed up that mountain after detecting something and attempted to trap a tourist menk in a pit, digging a deep snow trench. The creature was lured inside with loin steaks and porridge, and the tent arranged to collapse on top of it. The hikers had taken off clothing to evade the menk's thermal vision, which allows it to hunt prey on its frozen world (like when Arnie covered himself with river mud to elude The Predator).

They hypnotised and subdued the trapped menk by cossack dancing around the tent while singing banned communist songs. 'We will not stop until you drink the medicinal vodka!' they shouted, as Semyon whooped that they were going to make history. Soon it was bleary-eyed, toasting Nikita Khrushchev, collapsing into a heap, snoring its head off, and then they lowered themselves in to tie it to logs, intending to haul it out and lay it on a ski sled and drag it back to Vizhay, where bearded man's hospitality would welcome it as a long-lost cousin and make it feel at home as a fellow State outcast.

But the menk came round when they were in the trench and attacked them with its compelling force and tore its way out of the tent using its claws. The drunken menk staggered outside, tripped over a rock and fell. When they do so they instinctively go into a hedgehog ball, so it rolled down the pass towards the forest, its fur not leaving any trace. The hikers assembled to discuss what to do, and decided they had to leave immediately and go after it, determined not to lose their prize and the chance to be in the National Geographic.

The menk, now nursing a hangover, hid in the forest. Slowly its anger grew as it watched the hikers' approach and begin digging another capture pit in the snow, and it decided to exact its revenge. It pounced on Lyuda and Semyon, and delivered not a bear hug, but something far worse, a yeti hug, which cracked ribs, and when Lyuda screamed it ripped out her tongue like the alienised Ripley did the alien's in Alien Resurrection, loosening her hyoid bone. It threw their bodies into the ravine, and captured Igor to hang him upside down by his ankles from a tree, but he escaped. To keep evading the hikers and spring surprise attacks it shapeshifted into many different things, including a dolphin, a horse, a lynx, an eagle, and even a mushroom head.

The rest of the hikers hid in the tallest tree they could find, a cedar, nervously looking back up at the tent. The menk lit itself a fire underneath, using branches which snapped off under its weight when it tried to climb up after them. It tried to smoke them out, but eventually, after warming itself, it shook the tree so violently the hikers fell down like conkers, and then it bonked some of them on their heads with a log as if playing a xylophone.

The military arrived, their radar detecting an anomaly, helicopters, ground vehicles, MiG jets, the lot, but by then the menk had vanished, the wormhole closed, so they staged a Roswell style cover-up, arranging bodies so they looked like they'd been chased or bitten by a combination of overwintering snakes, marauding elks and hungry wolverines, while others died of the cold dressed only in their birthday suits. 'People will never believe this', they thought to themselves, but for 62 years and more, they did.

Rumour has it the Soviets caught a menk in 1952 and were hoping for a breeding pair for military applications, and that the menk helped them develop their space program. They only abandoned Moon landings for the greater goal of the planet Chewbaccaan.

A Stitch In Time Kills Nine is available soon.

Epic.  I love it.   lol1

BTW, to which "awful movie" are you referring?  Devil's Pass (2013)?
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: GKM on January 21, 2021, 05:12:24 AM
Absurd that the yeti or aliens were involved with DPI? I do think it is absurd. Human involvement on some level? Yes.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Nigel Evans on January 21, 2021, 05:22:31 AM
Absurd that the yeti or aliens were involved with DPI? I do think it is absurd. Human involvement on some level? Yes.
No offence but your opinion (as is everyone's) is of little importance. What is of more importance is your argument for your opinion.

Care to reply to my question in #161?
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: mk on January 21, 2021, 08:29:44 AM
Explain to me what is absurd about this - https://youtu.be/nCEpoeaUeWk

I wish I spoke French.  It's strange that the creature is so dark if it lives in a snowy place, but I'm sure they had an explanation for that.  Funny: I kept looking for a yeti somewhere, based on the title, but to me that figure looked exactly like a hiker in a hooded coat with a dark backpack.  It wasn't until the clip of the scientists examining the film that I could see how it's supposed to look like a yeti.  They seemed to be talking about the size of the figure and stuff--again, wish I spoke French!

Very interesting film!
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: DAXXY on January 21, 2021, 09:37:36 AM
Interesting how the human mind works. In situations where we have a need for plain explanations to big events but they aren't available we then fill any gaps with imaginative ideas.  It must be this...or it must be that. 

In the UK there are mysterious sightings of a big black panther type of cat in rural areas every year.   Funny how it's just before the tourist season.  Same with the Loch Ness Monster.  Why else would anyone want to go out of their way to a rural Scottish loch.  Empty places need to generate footfall and excite the media producers to make their 'documentaries'.  There is nothing better for this than some old legend of a 'creature' from folklore that is actually real and wanders about looking for groups of explorers with their cameras at the ready so they can perform as soon as the explorer shouts "OK and.....Action!"    lol1

 
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: GKM on January 21, 2021, 10:29:13 AM
Sorry, Nigel, but I had to do something mundane, like work. I still say the yeti is nonsense, but as you pointed out, our opinions count for nothing.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Nigel Evans on January 21, 2021, 10:32:14 AM
Interesting how the human mind works. In situations where we have a need for plain explanations to big events but they aren't available we then fill any gaps with imaginative ideas.  It must be this...or it must be that. 

In the UK there are mysterious sightings of a big black panther type of cat in rural areas every year.   Funny how it's just before the tourist season.  Same with the Loch Ness Monster.  Why else would anyone want to go out of their way to a rural Scottish loch.  Empty places need to generate footfall and excite the media producers to make their 'documentaries'.  There is nothing better for this than some old legend of a 'creature' from folklore that is actually real and wanders about looking for groups of explorers with their cameras at the ready so they can perform as soon as the explorer shouts "OK and.....Action!"    lol1


I'm struggling to connect the DPI with the Loch Ness monster, although i know a someone who might....


Give me a Yeti any day.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Nigel Evans on January 21, 2021, 10:42:59 AM
Sorry, Nigel, but I had to do something mundane, like work. I still say the yeti is nonsense, but as you pointed out, our opinions count for nothing.


No probs, well the scale of the reports and these days the video evidence is becoming compelling imo.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: DAXXY on January 21, 2021, 10:52:14 AM
Interesting how the human mind works. In situations where we have a need for plain explanations to big events but they aren't available we then fill any gaps with imaginative ideas.  It must be this...or it must be that. 

In the UK there are mysterious sightings of a big black panther type of cat in rural areas every year.   Funny how it's just before the tourist season.  Same with the Loch Ness Monster.  Why else would anyone want to go out of their way to a rural Scottish loch.  Empty places need to generate footfall and excite the media producers to make their 'documentaries'.  There is nothing better for this than some old legend of a 'creature' from folklore that is actually real and wanders about looking for groups of explorers with their cameras at the ready so they can perform as soon as the explorer shouts "OK and.....Action!"    lol1


I'm struggling to connect the DPI with the Loch Ness monster, although i know a someone who might....


Give me a Yeti any day.

It's the same process.  There is a big event and people want an explanation.  Monsters and mythical creatures or Aliens coming to life to fill in the gaps in peoples knowledge.
There is nothing wrong with healthy imagination and folklore had a purpose, and if hunting a yeti gets people out in the forest having fun and fresh air then there's nothing wrong in that either.  But that's all it is.  Imagination and lack of factual knowledge. But that's just my own opinion...I respect anybody having a different opinion to mine who believe Yeti's are real.  I hope they are successful in finding one  lol2
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: mk on January 21, 2021, 12:31:51 PM
Same with the Loch Ness Monster.  Why else would anyone want to go out of their way to a rural Scottish loch.
  Beautiful scenery, to get away from Edinburgh and other crowded spots, Urquhart Castle...
I adored Inverness and the area--the whole Monster thing was the most mundane part of it!
Title: Evidence
Post by: Monty on January 21, 2021, 12:40:30 PM
Daxxy (reply 170)
In your bare feet? If you choose to mock an explanation at least do it with your boots on....
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Manti on January 21, 2021, 01:05:06 PM
It is on Dyatlov Pass web page.  Try this link.

https://dyatlovpass.com/interview-solter?rbid=18461 (https://dyatlovpass.com/interview-solter?rbid=18461)


Recently I have been looking at the case from a different perspective.  As suggested by Teddy.  If you give credit to Solter's statement then there is clear evidence that things are not right with the scenes or the protocols followed.

I have tried to look at it starting with only several pieces of info:

1. Solter's statement
2. The bodies/injuries/autopsy reports
3.  The hikers own information/diaries etc.  Basically the journey they had planned and where they were

Nothing else

Forget everything you think you know and start from scratch just with the above information and try to determine how you think they died.   When you have a conclusion you will have 50% of the story. 

Then, forgetting all of the scenes ask why and how it could have happened,  and why would there be a need to cover it up.  This is the other 50% of the story.

I think I have the first 50%.  I have several ideas about the second 50%.  It is difficult to pin down the second 50% without any additional information.  There is one idea I find interesting though.

Regards

Star man
So I have read that interview but I don't know what to take away from it.Is she understood to be saying that no autopsy was done? She says, the bodies came in frozen, they let them thaw, then washed them, put on new clothes, and put them in coffins.

Yet the autopsies in the case files describe the hikers in their original clothing. So that autopsy couldn't have happened at any point because Solter would either be washing bodies cut  by the pathologist (is that the word for a person who does an autopsy), or if doing it afterwards, the pathologist would find them in clean clothes and not their original ones. Solter is contradicting an autopsy being done at all, or at least the autopsy reports from the case files. So it's not possible to consider both Solter and the autopsies credible.


Not only that but Solter also says that there were days not months between the time the two girls were brought to the morgue. This contradicts several statements by the search party, UPI students some of whom knew the hikers. Why would their college friends lie about when they found them?

Or are we supposed to conclude the bodies were washed and put into coffins bound for Sverdlovsk, then taken back to the Urals and dressed back into damaged clothing? That their relatives later identified as theirs?


So 1. and 2. are in contradiction and 3., the hikers diaries tell us nothing about the incident, only about where they were which is in the upper sources of the Auspiya and around the pass. Which is walking distance from where they were found because the search party's base was also in the upper Auspiya, and they managed to walk to the cedar area, search for hours, and walk back to their base every day.So the diaries unfortunately don't tell any information about the incident itself apart from them being in vicinity where they were found.

"Basically the journey they had planned and where they were"I also don't think there can be many conclusions drawn from this. It was similar to journeys other groups of hikers were doing at the time. They were in Mansi hunting forests but there are no stories of hunters being injured under suspicious circumstances, are there?They wouldn't hunt on a military testing range, and they wouldn't be allowed to hunt around a secret nuclear facility or illegal gold mining operation... I don't think the area they were in could give any reason to cover up their deaths.
The Soviet Union had its own testing grounds, in eastern Kazakhstan and on the arctic island of Novaya Zemlya, these areas exclusive zones and no hikers or hunters would have been allowed there.

Additionally I've read Solter's (or her family's) two letters to Yudin and these letters even contradict each other on the number of bodies for example.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: DAXXY on January 21, 2021, 01:25:54 PM
Same with the Loch Ness Monster.  Why else would anyone want to go out of their way to a rural Scottish loch.
  Beautiful scenery, to get away from Edinburgh and other crowded spots, Urquhart Castle...
I adored Inverness and the area--the whole Monster thing was the most mundane part of it!


Yes but it brings in a commercial aspect.  gift shops, Nessie T shirts, post cards, books, the whole merchandising machine. Something for the Children.  shock1  lol1  These business owners in economically dead rural areas know that family tourism makes them very big money and kids get bored with scenery and architecture and the fine gardens of old stately homes. 

Same with TV shows.  Most are made because of their view-ability aspects. TV stations buy these shows not because of their factual content but because impressionable people will watch them and that means the advertisers (who pay the TV station big money) will get their commercials watched.  That's what TV is for.  Selling people stuff.  Yeti's are just another niche in a growing market.   

Someone called me cynical once.  I just laughed.  The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who haven't got it.  lol1 lol2
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: marieuk on January 21, 2021, 01:26:16 PM
Interesting how the human mind works. In situations where we have a need for plain explanations to big events but they aren't available we then fill any gaps with imaginative ideas.  It must be this...or it must be that. 

In the UK there are mysterious sightings of a big black panther type of cat in rural areas every year.   Funny how it's just before the tourist season.  Same with the Loch Ness Monster.  Why else would anyone want to go out of their way to a rural Scottish loch.  Empty places need to generate footfall and excite the media producers to make their 'documentaries'.  There is nothing better for this than some old legend of a 'creature' from folklore that is actually real and wanders about looking for groups of explorers with their cameras at the ready so they can perform as soon as the explorer shouts "OK and.....Action!"    lol1

Well I've seen a black panther, so I know they're out there! As for Scotland I agree with MK, it's  beautiful with amazing scenery and well worth a visit if you like that sort of thing.  But I agree that something less fanciful is probably the most likely explanation. 
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: DAXXY on January 21, 2021, 01:34:10 PM
Daxxy (reply 170)
In your bare feet? If you choose to mock an explanation at least do it with your boots on....

Sorry... lol1  grin1 thumb1
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Ziljoe on January 21, 2021, 02:04:29 PM
Oi !!! Who's slagging my Nessy?

That's my doorstep by the way. You lot can stero type all you want but I spoke to Nessy and "she" wasn't at the dyatlov pass , or seen aliens , yeti's etc.   She is also upset by the commercial gain as she gets nothing.

Back in your box, the lot of you......

Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: DAXXY on January 21, 2021, 02:14:24 PM
Oi !!! Who's slagging my Nessy?

That's my doorstep by the way. You lot can stero type all you want but I spoke to Nessy and "she" wasn't at the dyatlov pass , or seen aliens , yeti's etc.   She is also upset by the commercial gain as she gets nothing.

Back in your box, the lot of you......

I never thought of that...Nessie deserves a cut.  Come to that she should have a contract, and better terms and conditions.  Does she even have a lawyer ?   lol1
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Ziljoe on January 21, 2021, 02:25:20 PM
I never thought of that...Nessie deserves a cut.  Come to that she should have a contract, and better terms and conditions.  Does she even have a lawyer ?   lol1

Lol grin1
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Star man on January 21, 2021, 03:46:34 PM
It is on Dyatlov Pass web page.  Try this link.

https://dyatlovpass.com/interview-solter?rbid=18461 (https://dyatlovpass.com/interview-solter?rbid=18461)


Recently I have been looking at the case from a different perspective.  As suggested by Teddy.  If you give credit to Solter's statement then there is clear evidence that things are not right with the scenes or the protocols followed.

I have tried to look at it starting with only several pieces of info:

1. Solter's statement
2. The bodies/injuries/autopsy reports
3.  The hikers own information/diaries etc.  Basically the journey they had planned and where they were

Nothing else

Forget everything you think you know and start from scratch just with the above information and try to determine how you think they died.   When you have a conclusion you will have 50% of the story. 

Then, forgetting all of the scenes ask why and how it could have happened,  and why would there be a need to cover it up.  This is the other 50% of the story.

I think I have the first 50%.  I have several ideas about the second 50%.  It is difficult to pin down the second 50% without any additional information.  There is one idea I find interesting though.

Regards

Star man
So I have read that interview but I don't know what to take away from it.Is she understood to be saying that no autopsy was done? She says, the bodies came in frozen, they let them thaw, then washed them, put on new clothes, and put them in coffins.

Yet the autopsies in the case files describe the hikers in their original clothing. So that autopsy couldn't have happened at any point because Solter would either be washing bodies cut  by the pathologist (is that the word for a person who does an autopsy), or if doing it afterwards, the pathologist would find them in clean clothes and not their original ones. Solter is contradicting an autopsy being done at all, or at least the autopsy reports from the case files. So it's not possible to consider both Solter and the autopsies credible.


Not only that but Solter also says that there were days not months between the time the two girls were brought to the morgue. This contradicts several statements by the search party, UPI students some of whom knew the hikers. Why would their college friends lie about when they found them?

Or are we supposed to conclude the bodies were washed and put into coffins bound for Sverdlovsk, then taken back to the Urals and dressed back into damaged clothing? That their relatives later identified as theirs?


So 1. and 2. are in contradiction and 3., the hikers diaries tell us nothing about the incident, only about where they were which is in the upper sources of the Auspiya and around the pass. Which is walking distance from where they were found because the search party's base was also in the upper Auspiya, and they managed to walk to the cedar area, search for hours, and walk back to their base every day.So the diaries unfortunately don't tell any information about the incident itself apart from them being in vicinity where they were found.

"Basically the journey they had planned and where they were"I also don't think there can be many conclusions drawn from this. It was similar to journeys other groups of hikers were doing at the time. They were in Mansi hunting forests but there are no stories of hunters being injured under suspicious circumstances, are there?They wouldn't hunt on a military testing range, and they wouldn't be allowed to hunt around a secret nuclear facility or illegal gold mining operation... I don't think the area they were in could give any reason to cover up their deaths.
The Soviet Union had its own testing grounds, in eastern Kazakhstan and on the arctic island of Novaya Zemlya, these areas exclusive zones and no hikers or hunters would have been allowed there.

Additionally I've read Solter's (or her family's) two letters to Yudin and these letters even contradict each other on the number of bodies for example.

That is a fair analysis I think.  And yes, it depends on how much credit you give it.

Regards

Star man
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Star man on January 21, 2021, 03:51:45 PM
Absurd that the yeti or aliens were involved with DPI? I do think it is absurd. Human involvement on some level? Yes.

I think it may be possible that The Snowmanc could be behind the demise of the hikers, but if it was, it did not happen where the tent was found on Kholat Syakhl.  There are other options too.

Regards

Star man
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Star man on January 21, 2021, 04:02:35 PM
Interesting how the human mind works. In situations where we have a need for plain explanations to big events but they aren't available we then fill any gaps with imaginative ideas.  It must be this...or it must be that. 

In the UK there are mysterious sightings of a big black panther type of cat in rural areas every year.   Funny how it's just before the tourist season.  Same with the Loch Ness Monster.  Why else would anyone want to go out of their way to a rural Scottish loch.  Empty places need to generate footfall and excite the media producers to make their 'documentaries'.  There is nothing better for this than some old legend of a 'creature' from folklore that is actually real and wanders about looking for groups of explorers with their cameras at the ready so they can perform as soon as the explorer shouts "OK and.....Action!"    lol1


I'm struggling to connect the DPI with the Loch Ness monster, although i know a someone who might....


Give me a Yeti any day.

It's the same process.  There is a big event and people want an explanation.  Monsters and mythical creatures or Aliens coming to life to fill in the gaps in peoples knowledge.
There is nothing wrong with healthy imagination and folklore had a purpose, and if hunting a yeti gets people out in the forest having fun and fresh air then there's nothing wrong in that either.  But that's all it is.  Imagination and lack of factual knowledge. But that's just my own opinion...I respect anybody having a different opinion to mine who believe Yeti's are real.  I hope they are successful in finding one  lol2

Well if hunting for a Yeti, you will need an effective strategy for capturing one.  Otherwise it is just a picnic.  I wouldnt recommend a butterfly net.

Regards

Star man
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: DAXXY on January 21, 2021, 04:06:51 PM
Beer traps work on slugs  wink1
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Star man on January 21, 2021, 04:10:33 PM
Beer traps work on slugs  wink1

You could leave a keg and hope the Yeti gets smashed.  Not a bad idea.

Regards

Star man
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: DAXXY on January 21, 2021, 04:15:00 PM
He'd have an abominable hangover  thumb1
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Star man on January 21, 2021, 04:37:42 PM
He'd have an abominable hangover  thumb1
  grin1
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Nigel Evans on January 22, 2021, 05:55:39 AM
Turning on the captions and entering the text (by hand) into deepl.com i get the following during the expert discussion :-
il ne semble pas s'agir d'un costume rembourres zoom et un expert en anatomie des primates attache a l'universite de la gao pour l'echelle la suele reference que nous ayons cette image c'est la trace laissee par les alpinistes en utilisant une evaluation conservatrice disons 43 cm pour la larguer de la trace nous pouvons estimer la proportion des membres et la dimension de la creature en s'appuyant sur ces donnees nous allons donc d'un specimen qui est entre 2m et 2m et louis de haute cette evaluation nous permet aussi d'eliminer raisonnablement la fraude c'est un canular aurait necessite des efforts considerables uniquement pour fabriquer le costume

richard green wave est l'un des plus grands cryptolog du monde ils recherchent les preuves de nouvelles especes animales dont 'l'existence n'a pas encore ete demontree

je veux dire qu'il s'agit de puits matin c'est un primate qui n'a rien a faire la mais il est la et c'est justement ce qui fait que c'est tres interessant et qu'il s'agit peut-etre d'une grande decouverte scientifique

de histoires domine des vivants sur de haute montagne  ont ete racontees depuis des siecles sans preuve elles ont pour la plupart ete ecartee comme de simples fable et folkloriste


which translates to :-
it does not appear to be a zoom padded suit and an expert in primate anatomy attached to the university of gao for the scale the only reference we have this image is the trace left by the climbers using a conservative evaluation let's say 43 cm to release the trace we can estimate the proportion of the limbs and the dimension of the creature while being based on these data we thus go of a specimen which is between 2m and 2m and louis of high this evaluation also enables us to reasonably eliminate the fraud it is a hoax would have required considerable efforts only to manufacture the costume

richard green wave is one of the world's leading cryptologists they are looking for evidence of new animal species whose existence has not yet been proven.

I mean it's about morning wells, it's a primate that has nothing to do there but it's there and that's precisely what makes it very interesting and maybe a great scientific discovery.

of stories dominating the living on high mountains have been told for centuries without proof they have mostly been dismissed as mere fable and folkloristic

Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)


Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: mk on January 22, 2021, 06:56:37 AM
Turning on the captions and entering the text (by hand) into deepl.com i get the following during the expert discussion :-
...
Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)
That's a lot of work, but it's good to get an idea what they think about the video.  I suppose that if there are yetis, etc, more of these kinds of things will start turning up as people have their phones on them most of the time.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Waldron on January 22, 2021, 07:39:44 AM
Před rokem jsem se dozvěděl o Dyatlov pass, každý den na to myslím a dík zdejšímu fóru jsem získal přesvědčení, že je všechny zabil Zolotarev. Byl jediný kdo měl boty a byl dobře oblečen. Myslím, že jim v pochodu nestačil a díky svým vojenským schopnostem a psychologickému profilu je to pro mě nejjednodušší vysvětlení. Jejich přesile však neodolal a přeživší zmrzli....
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Jean Daniel Reuss on January 22, 2021, 08:48:13 AM

That's a lot of work, but it's good to get an idea what they think about the video.  I suppose that if there are yetis, etc, more of these kinds of things will start turning up as people have their phones on them most of the time.

Answer to

Quote
    mk:  January 21, 2021, 08:29:44 AM                Reply #165
https://forum.dyatlovpass.com/index.php?topic=772.msg12310#msg12310

https://youtu.be/nCEpoeaUeWk

  ••• « wish I spoke French. » 

 • In this case it would be useless.

By typing (in the bottom right-hand corner of the window) on the the parameter represented by a gearwheel
                     you have access to the usual commands, i.e. :
"vitesses de lecture"  (= reading speeds  --> 0.25 0.5 0.75 Normal=1 1.25 1.5 1.75 2 )
"Sous-titres" (= Subtitles)
  -  By typing on "Français"
  -  "Traduire automatiquement" (= Translate automatically)
    ===>   You have a wide choice of foreign languages to translate subtitles that repeat what is said in French.

   ••• It's strange that the creature is so dark if it lives in a snowy place, but I'm sure they had an explanation for that.  Funny:.................., but to me that figure looked exactly like a hiker in a hooded coat with a dark backpack.

I totally agree. In my opinion, he is obviously a tall (2 metres), well equipped and well trained solitary mountaineer who moves safely and cautiously.

 • at 2.25 :  They said :
a specimen of size between 2 metres and 2 metres x high ---> x = "louis" is incomprehensible with the ear - perhaps x= 'dix" = "louis" = "ten", i.e. 2.10 metres .

 • from 4.06  to 4.08 : photo of a paw print next to an ice axe.
A solitary mountain dweller who is also a prankster because he has fixed a special wider plate under his shoes to walk in the snow to intrigue the passers-by.

   ••• «  It wasn't until the clip of the scientists examining the film that I could see how it's supposed to look like a yeti.  They seemed to be talking about the size of the figure and stuff--again, wish I spoke French! » 

 • at 2.40 : The bearded scientist examining the film should be the cryptozoologist Richard Greenwell  (1942 - November 1, 2005)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Greenwell
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cryptozoology
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Nigel Evans on January 22, 2021, 11:33:18 AM
@Jean Daniel Ruess - many thanks, i looked for a translation option and missed it, google might want to consider updating their UI...

Obviously it's reasonable to argue for a hoax, but am i mistaken or is there a small avalanche in front of the mountaineers? and this explains the animal's course of action, i.e. to get higher asap thus exposing itself to view? Wouldn't a mountaineer get out of his monkey suit asap? It all seems to argue against an elaborate hoax?




Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Nigel Evans on January 22, 2021, 11:44:15 AM
Have found Jeff Meldrum - https://www.isu.edu/biology/people/faculty---professors/jeffrey-meldrum/
Sounds like he's a believer?
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Nigel Evans on January 22, 2021, 11:45:49 AM
https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B003JH8MBA/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?_encoding=UTF8&btkr=1
In this landmark work on a subject too often dismissed as paranormal or disreputable, Jeff Meldrum gives us the first book on sasquatch to be written by a scientist with impeccable academic credentials, an objective look at the facts in a field mined with hoaxes and sensationalism.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: sarapuk on January 22, 2021, 01:10:38 PM
Reference the rather dubious Moon landing analogy...

The DPI, as presented, would be the equivalent of Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin sitting inside their lander module in their underwear, with the heating turned off, playing Scrabble instead of attending to the risks presented by their location, not following the procedures they were trained for in order to ensure their survival and the completion of their mission.

Despite having the means to survive right by their side, dragged all the way to the Moon, they inexplicably ignore them, and have also landed somewhere they shouldn't be.

They then smash their way out of their capsule instead of exiting via the door provided, roam around without securing their space suit's integrity, and set off in single file, without their flag and experiments, to go and hide in a crater, where they inevitably perish.

Their camera takes photo's of strange objects in the sky, and the only photographic proof we have that they were there are two close-up photo's of a trench, which do not confirm they are on the lunar surface or show the horizon.

If all that happened would anyone believe they were ever on the Moon?
I think you have missed the point.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: sarapuk on January 22, 2021, 01:12:49 PM
I am genuinely enjoying this conversation. 

Star Man was reminding me of some kind of Poirot/Miss Marple who refuses to spill the beans until the last chapter because he might be wrong and doesn't want to hurt the innocent.  But now I'm cracking up over the metaphor which keeps getting more and more complicated and actually confusing, rather than elucidating, the issue.

Maybe it's neither a horse nor a dolphin.  Maybe it's a hippokampos.   popcorn1

If I had a book coming out I'd combine all the most 'imaginative' theories I've read in this forum, it's sure to get into the best seller lists, or at the very least become a better script than that awful movie.

So, I'd have the yeti/menk/sasquatch as an alien from a frozen world, and it evolved to be covered in fur to stay warm. It is said to walk with a lolloping gait, and that is due to differences in gravity, and is generally only seen in colder climates, at altitude, well away from the equator, where the hirsute beast cannot cope with the heat.

The reason no dead yeti or baby yetis have ever been seen, or a lair or dung found, is they do not live and breed here, only visit, and arrive via a wormhole, which only appears on mountains rich in iron, a lodestone where the wormhole flux creates plasmatic effects such as orange orbs, 'fireorbs', glowing entities and ball lightning.

When the wormhole is closed there is a ripple in the space time continuum, explaining the military getting dates wrong, and anything metal, such as aircraft or a passing missile, is sucked towards it like iron filings to a magnet, explaining all the aircraft which crashed in that area across the years.

The number 9, the highest single number, is believed to be one of the combination numbers which unlocks the wormhole, and gadget man Igor Dyatlov had developed a special radio frequency receiver to detect the wormhole's formation, comprising of a small radio, excess salt and a piece of copper wire as an aerial. If the reception of Bill Haley's Rock Around The Clock was interrupted on Berlin radio when at 3000ft they knew what was about to happen.

They headed up that mountain after detecting something and attempted to trap a tourist menk in a pit, digging a deep snow trench. The creature was lured inside with loin steaks and porridge, and the tent arranged to collapse on top of it. The hikers had taken off clothing to evade the menk's thermal vision, which allows it to hunt prey on its frozen world (like when Arnie covered himself with river mud to elude The Predator).

They hypnotised and subdued the trapped menk by cossack dancing around the tent while singing banned communist songs. 'We will not stop until you drink the medicinal vodka!' they shouted, as Semyon whooped that they were going to make history. Soon it was bleary-eyed, toasting Nikita Khrushchev, collapsing into a heap, snoring its head off, and then they lowered themselves in to tie it to logs, intending to haul it out and lay it on a ski sled and drag it back to Vizhay, where bearded man's hospitality would welcome it as a long-lost cousin and make it feel at home as a fellow State outcast.

But the menk came round when they were in the trench and attacked them with its compelling force and tore its way out of the tent using its claws. The drunken menk staggered outside, tripped over a rock and fell. When they do so they instinctively go into a hedgehog ball, so it rolled down the pass towards the forest, its fur not leaving any trace. The hikers assembled to discuss what to do, and decided they had to leave immediately and go after it, determined not to lose their prize and the chance to be in the National Geographic.

The menk, now nursing a hangover, hid in the forest. Slowly its anger grew as it watched the hikers' approach and begin digging another capture pit in the snow, and it decided to exact its revenge. It pounced on Lyuda and Semyon, and delivered not a bear hug, but something far worse, a yeti hug, which cracked ribs, and when Lyuda screamed it ripped out her tongue like the alienised Ripley did the alien's in Alien Resurrection, loosening her hyoid bone. It threw their bodies into the ravine, and captured Igor to hang him upside down by his ankles from a tree, but he escaped. To keep evading the hikers and spring surprise attacks it shapeshifted into many different things, including a dolphin, a horse, a lynx, an eagle, and even a mushroom head.

The rest of the hikers hid in the tallest tree they could find, a cedar, nervously looking back up at the tent. The menk lit itself a fire underneath, using branches which snapped off under its weight when it tried to climb up after them. It tried to smoke them out, but eventually, after warming itself, it shook the tree so violently the hikers fell down like conkers, and then it bonked some of them on their heads with a log as if playing a xylophone.

The military arrived, their radar detecting an anomaly, helicopters, ground vehicles, MiG jets, the lot, but by then the menk had vanished, the wormhole closed, so they staged a Roswell style cover-up, arranging bodies so they looked like they'd been chased or bitten by a combination of overwintering snakes, marauding elks and hungry wolverines, while others died of the cold dressed only in their birthday suits. 'People will never believe this', they thought to themselves, but for 62 years and more, they did.

Rumour has it the Soviets caught a menk in 1952 and were hoping for a breeding pair for military applications, and that the menk helped them develop their space program. They only abandoned Moon landings for the greater goal of the planet Chewbaccaan.

A Stitch In Time Kills Nine is available soon.

Nonsense
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: sarapuk on January 22, 2021, 01:17:39 PM
I am curious about those who suspect Ufo's are responsible for what happened to the hikers. Unidentified flying objects, meaning it is something in the sky that is unidentified or associated with alien life? Surely it isn't alien lifeforms. That and the yeti are descents into the absurd.

Why are you curious ! ? Plenty of Evidence of UFO's and Big Foot's.  Evidence from all over the World.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: sarapuk on January 22, 2021, 01:24:05 PM
Absurd that the yeti or aliens were involved with DPI? I do think it is absurd. Human involvement on some level? Yes.

Well we have to go by facts, obviously. We certainly are missing a lot of Evidence. The term UFO means Unidentified Flying Object as you know, and its a subject taken very seriously by probably all of the Worlds Governments, because they pass on Information to their respective Civil Servants who then pass it on to each incoming Government. The inference being that UFO's are potentially Alien to Earth.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: sarapuk on January 22, 2021, 01:27:08 PM
Explain to me what is absurd about this - https://youtu.be/nCEpoeaUeWk

I wish I spoke French.  It's strange that the creature is so dark if it lives in a snowy place, but I'm sure they had an explanation for that.  Funny: I kept looking for a yeti somewhere, based on the title, but to me that figure looked exactly like a hiker in a hooded coat with a dark backpack.  It wasn't until the clip of the scientists examining the film that I could see how it's supposed to look like a yeti.  They seemed to be talking about the size of the figure and stuff--again, wish I spoke French!

Very interesting film!

Yeah I thought it might be another climber. However that was a fairly powerful Avalanche, and the object, if thats the right word to use, just brushed it off and continued walking up the Mountainside.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: sarapuk on January 22, 2021, 01:33:03 PM
Interesting how the human mind works. In situations where we have a need for plain explanations to big events but they aren't available we then fill any gaps with imaginative ideas.  It must be this...or it must be that. 

In the UK there are mysterious sightings of a big black panther type of cat in rural areas every year.   Funny how it's just before the tourist season.  Same with the Loch Ness Monster.  Why else would anyone want to go out of their way to a rural Scottish loch.  Empty places need to generate footfall and excite the media producers to make their 'documentaries'.  There is nothing better for this than some old legend of a 'creature' from folklore that is actually real and wanders about looking for groups of explorers with their cameras at the ready so they can perform as soon as the explorer shouts "OK and.....Action!"    lol1

Actually I studied the Big Cat phenomenon in Britain some years ago. Sightings and other experiences came throughout the year. Most of the witnesses I spoke to were genuine. I only had about 2 cranks call me in several years of research, and cranks tend to be people who dont believe. I had Doctors and Nurses and other professional people and Landowners and Farmers and Game Keepers and even the Police, contact me with a Sighting or other experience. I have a big File on all that.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: sarapuk on January 22, 2021, 01:39:27 PM
Interesting how the human mind works. In situations where we have a need for plain explanations to big events but they aren't available we then fill any gaps with imaginative ideas.  It must be this...or it must be that. 

In the UK there are mysterious sightings of a big black panther type of cat in rural areas every year.   Funny how it's just before the tourist season.  Same with the Loch Ness Monster.  Why else would anyone want to go out of their way to a rural Scottish loch.  Empty places need to generate footfall and excite the media producers to make their 'documentaries'.  There is nothing better for this than some old legend of a 'creature' from folklore that is actually real and wanders about looking for groups of explorers with their cameras at the ready so they can perform as soon as the explorer shouts "OK and.....Action!"    lol1


I'm struggling to connect the DPI with the Loch Ness monster, although i know a someone who might....


Give me a Yeti any day.

It's the same process.  There is a big event and people want an explanation.  Monsters and mythical creatures or Aliens coming to life to fill in the gaps in peoples knowledge.
There is nothing wrong with healthy imagination and folklore had a purpose, and if hunting a yeti gets people out in the forest having fun and fresh air then there's nothing wrong in that either.  But that's all it is.  Imagination and lack of factual knowledge. But that's just my own opinion...I respect anybody having a different opinion to mine who believe Yeti's are real.  I hope they are successful in finding one  lol2

But you seem to be missing the point. Its not about  whether or not any of us believe this that or the other, its about EVIDENCE. If someone witnesses a crime being committed and reports it then that person will be giving EVIDENCE. A sighting is EVIDENCE.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: sarapuk on January 22, 2021, 01:44:11 PM
Absurd that the yeti or aliens were involved with DPI? I do think it is absurd. Human involvement on some level? Yes.

I think it may be possible that The Snowmanc could be behind the demise of the hikers, but if it was, it did not happen where the tent was found on Kholat Syakhl.  There are other options too.

Regards

Star man

Its possible that there are several things going on. The Dyatlov Group may have been scared of something on their journey up towards the Mountain and thats why they camped in the open on the exposed Mountainside. Then something else kicks in at The Tent.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: sarapuk on January 22, 2021, 01:51:37 PM
@Jean Daniel Ruess - many thanks, i looked for a translation option and missed it, google might want to consider updating their UI...

Obviously it's reasonable to argue for a hoax, but am i mistaken or is there a small avalanche in front of the mountaineers? and this explains the animal's course of action, i.e. to get higher asap thus exposing itself to view? Wouldn't a mountaineer get out of his monkey suit asap? It all seems to argue against an elaborate hoax?

It looks like a fairly powerful Avalanche  !  ? And the object seems to brush it off and continue to walk up the Mountainside.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: sarapuk on January 22, 2021, 01:54:49 PM
Have found Jeff Meldrum - https://www.isu.edu/biology/people/faculty---professors/jeffrey-meldrum/
Sounds like he's a believer?

Good find. Yes there are many professional people engaged in research, which is good. And also there are many good witnesses to Big Foot type creatures and other creatures.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: eurocentric on January 22, 2021, 02:06:02 PM

That's a lot of work, but it's good to get an idea what they think about the video.  I suppose that if there are yetis, etc, more of these kinds of things will start turning up as people have their phones on them most of the time.

Answer to

Quote
    mk:  January 21, 2021, 08:29:44 AM                Reply #165
https://forum.dyatlovpass.com/index.php?topic=772.msg12310#msg12310

https://youtu.be/nCEpoeaUeWk

  ••• « wish I spoke French. » 

 • In this case it would be useless.

By typing (in the bottom right-hand corner of the window) on the the parameter represented by a gearwheel
                     you have access to the usual commands, i.e. :
"vitesses de lecture"  (= reading speeds  --> 0.25 0.5 0.75 Normal=1 1.25 1.5 1.75 2 )
"Sous-titres" (= Subtitles)
  -  By typing on "Français"
  -  "Traduire automatiquement" (= Translate automatically)
    ===>   You have a wide choice of foreign languages to translate subtitles that repeat what is said in French.

   ••• It's strange that the creature is so dark if it lives in a snowy place, but I'm sure they had an explanation for that.  Funny:.................., but to me that figure looked exactly like a hiker in a hooded coat with a dark backpack.

I totally agree. In my opinion, he is obviously a tall (2 metres), well equipped and well trained solitary mountaineer who moves safely and cautiously.

 • at 2.25 :  They said :
a specimen of size between 2 metres and 2 metres x high ---> x = "louis" is incomprehensible with the ear - perhaps x= 'dix" = "louis" = "ten", i.e. 2.10 metres .

 • from 4.06  to 4.08 : photo of a paw print next to an ice axe.
A solitary mountain dweller who is also a prankster because he has fixed a special wider plate under his shoes to walk in the snow to intrigue the passers-by.

   ••• «  It wasn't until the clip of the scientists examining the film that I could see how it's supposed to look like a yeti.  They seemed to be talking about the size of the figure and stuff--again, wish I spoke French! » 

 • at 2.40 : The bearded scientist examining the film should be the cryptozoologist Richard Greenwell  (1942 - November 1, 2005)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Greenwell
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cryptozoology


I agree, it is definitely a climber. Freeze it at 1:43 and the hood of his coat is visible, as are the contours of his two tone coat, which is grey down the back, forming a squared end, with black sides.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: eurocentric on January 22, 2021, 02:07:54 PM
Reference the rather dubious Moon landing analogy...

The DPI, as presented, would be the equivalent of Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin sitting inside their lander module in their underwear, with the heating turned off, playing Scrabble instead of attending to the risks presented by their location, not following the procedures they were trained for in order to ensure their survival and the completion of their mission.

Despite having the means to survive right by their side, dragged all the way to the Moon, they inexplicably ignore them, and have also landed somewhere they shouldn't be.

They then smash their way out of their capsule instead of exiting via the door provided, roam around without securing their space suit's integrity, and set off in single file, without their flag and experiments, to go and hide in a crater, where they inevitably perish.

Their camera takes photo's of strange objects in the sky, and the only photographic proof we have that they were there are two close-up photo's of a trench, which do not confirm they are on the lunar surface or show the horizon.

If all that happened would anyone believe they were ever on the Moon?
I think you have missed the point.

Not in the slightest. You made a very dubious analogy, trying to compare those who doubt the tent 'landed' on the ridge, was pitched there by hikers, with those who deny the Moon landings took place.

Quite apart from the fact those of us who consider the tent resiting theory to have some weight do not appear to doubt man landed on the Moon, I certainly don't, I pointed out how the Moon landings would not have been possible had the astronauts not followed their training and procedures, and how an experienced bunch of hikers would have followed theirs too in their own extreme environment in order to survive and finish their own mission.
 
Yet, as presented, they behaved as if in the Bahamas.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: eurocentric on January 22, 2021, 02:08:44 PM
I am genuinely enjoying this conversation. 

Star Man was reminding me of some kind of Poirot/Miss Marple who refuses to spill the beans until the last chapter because he might be wrong and doesn't want to hurt the innocent.  But now I'm cracking up over the metaphor which keeps getting more and more complicated and actually confusing, rather than elucidating, the issue.

Maybe it's neither a horse nor a dolphin.  Maybe it's a hippokampos.   popcorn1

If I had a book coming out I'd combine all the most 'imaginative' theories I've read in this forum, it's sure to get into the best seller lists, or at the very least become a better script than that awful movie.

So, I'd have the yeti/menk/sasquatch as an alien from a frozen world, and it evolved to be covered in fur to stay warm. It is said to walk with a lolloping gait, and that is due to differences in gravity, and is generally only seen in colder climates, at altitude, well away from the equator, where the hirsute beast cannot cope with the heat.

The reason no dead yeti or baby yetis have ever been seen, or a lair or dung found, is they do not live and breed here, only visit, and arrive via a wormhole, which only appears on mountains rich in iron, a lodestone where the wormhole flux creates plasmatic effects such as orange orbs, 'fireorbs', glowing entities and ball lightning.

When the wormhole is closed there is a ripple in the space time continuum, explaining the military getting dates wrong, and anything metal, such as aircraft or a passing missile, is sucked towards it like iron filings to a magnet, explaining all the aircraft which crashed in that area across the years.

The number 9, the highest single number, is believed to be one of the combination numbers which unlocks the wormhole, and gadget man Igor Dyatlov had developed a special radio frequency receiver to detect the wormhole's formation, comprising of a small radio, excess salt and a piece of copper wire as an aerial. If the reception of Bill Haley's Rock Around The Clock was interrupted on Berlin radio when at 3000ft they knew what was about to happen.

They headed up that mountain after detecting something and attempted to trap a tourist menk in a pit, digging a deep snow trench. The creature was lured inside with loin steaks and porridge, and the tent arranged to collapse on top of it. The hikers had taken off clothing to evade the menk's thermal vision, which allows it to hunt prey on its frozen world (like when Arnie covered himself with river mud to elude The Predator).

They hypnotised and subdued the trapped menk by cossack dancing around the tent while singing banned communist songs. 'We will not stop until you drink the medicinal vodka!' they shouted, as Semyon whooped that they were going to make history. Soon it was bleary-eyed, toasting Nikita Khrushchev, collapsing into a heap, snoring its head off, and then they lowered themselves in to tie it to logs, intending to haul it out and lay it on a ski sled and drag it back to Vizhay, where bearded man's hospitality would welcome it as a long-lost cousin and make it feel at home as a fellow State outcast.

But the menk came round when they were in the trench and attacked them with its compelling force and tore its way out of the tent using its claws. The drunken menk staggered outside, tripped over a rock and fell. When they do so they instinctively go into a hedgehog ball, so it rolled down the pass towards the forest, its fur not leaving any trace. The hikers assembled to discuss what to do, and decided they had to leave immediately and go after it, determined not to lose their prize and the chance to be in the National Geographic.

The menk, now nursing a hangover, hid in the forest. Slowly its anger grew as it watched the hikers' approach and begin digging another capture pit in the snow, and it decided to exact its revenge. It pounced on Lyuda and Semyon, and delivered not a bear hug, but something far worse, a yeti hug, which cracked ribs, and when Lyuda screamed it ripped out her tongue like the alienised Ripley did the alien's in Alien Resurrection, loosening her hyoid bone. It threw their bodies into the ravine, and captured Igor to hang him upside down by his ankles from a tree, but he escaped. To keep evading the hikers and spring surprise attacks it shapeshifted into many different things, including a dolphin, a horse, a lynx, an eagle, and even a mushroom head.

The rest of the hikers hid in the tallest tree they could find, a cedar, nervously looking back up at the tent. The menk lit itself a fire underneath, using branches which snapped off under its weight when it tried to climb up after them. It tried to smoke them out, but eventually, after warming itself, it shook the tree so violently the hikers fell down like conkers, and then it bonked some of them on their heads with a log as if playing a xylophone.

The military arrived, their radar detecting an anomaly, helicopters, ground vehicles, MiG jets, the lot, but by then the menk had vanished, the wormhole closed, so they staged a Roswell style cover-up, arranging bodies so they looked like they'd been chased or bitten by a combination of overwintering snakes, marauding elks and hungry wolverines, while others died of the cold dressed only in their birthday suits. 'People will never believe this', they thought to themselves, but for 62 years and more, they did.

Rumour has it the Soviets caught a menk in 1952 and were hoping for a breeding pair for military applications, and that the menk helped them develop their space program. They only abandoned Moon landings for the greater goal of the planet Chewbaccaan.

A Stitch In Time Kills Nine is available soon.

Nonsense

You're only smarting because I missed out crop circles.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: eurocentric on January 22, 2021, 02:18:33 PM
Interesting how the human mind works. In situations where we have a need for plain explanations to big events but they aren't available we then fill any gaps with imaginative ideas.  It must be this...or it must be that. 

In the UK there are mysterious sightings of a big black panther type of cat in rural areas every year.   Funny how it's just before the tourist season.  Same with the Loch Ness Monster.  Why else would anyone want to go out of their way to a rural Scottish loch.  Empty places need to generate footfall and excite the media producers to make their 'documentaries'.  There is nothing better for this than some old legend of a 'creature' from folklore that is actually real and wanders about looking for groups of explorers with their cameras at the ready so they can perform as soon as the explorer shouts "OK and.....Action!"    lol1


I'm struggling to connect the DPI with the Loch Ness monster, although i know a someone who might....


Give me a Yeti any day.

It's the same process.  There is a big event and people want an explanation.  Monsters and mythical creatures or Aliens coming to life to fill in the gaps in peoples knowledge.
There is nothing wrong with healthy imagination and folklore had a purpose, and if hunting a yeti gets people out in the forest having fun and fresh air then there's nothing wrong in that either.  But that's all it is.  Imagination and lack of factual knowledge. But that's just my own opinion...I respect anybody having a different opinion to mine who believe Yeti's are real.  I hope they are successful in finding one  lol2

I agree. Mankind wants to believe in the magical, it goes back to early childhood when you could spend half a day shrieking over the wonder of a snail in the garden as your first introduction to other lifeforms outside your home, and then there's the conditioning from your coercive belief in Santa and how crestfallen you were when you learned the truth. The idea that there are monsters in the mountains and beasties in the lakes and seas helps rekindle that sense of childlike wonder.

Faith offers the same comfort blanket, a belief in a supreme being, a creator, the ultimate man in the mountains, and all these beliefs have one thing in common, there is not a single shred of evidence to prove their existence, no definitive proof, and there never has been, but across millennia, and with many subscribers, it takes on the mantle of fact.

Rustem praying on the hike:
(https://i.ibb.co/PDcbCFT/Frame-5.jpg) (https://ibb.co/z6XLfQ8)

The DPI is certainly a bizarre incident, but plenty of other tragedies and crimes are, and we don't see police forces coming over all David Icke and suggesting it was a visitor from another dimension, or a shy hairy beast unknown to science. "Yes, we believe the deceased was brutally murdered in a motiveless attack and we are asking the public to be especially vigilant and let us know if they have seen a 9ft tall biped covered in thick fur who we believe may have left the scene in a silver spaceship". I wonder what we'd think of the police's credibility if they did.

In my earlier satire I pointed out how no dead yeti has ever been found, or a lair or dung. By now you'd expect at least one of those to apply and any of them, even a skeleton, would confirm if this was a unique species through gene sequencing.

Unless of course you believe they are immortal, never shed fur, and wear nappies.


Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: eurocentric on January 22, 2021, 02:24:47 PM

Epic.  I love it.   lol1

BTW, to which "awful movie" are you referring?  Devil's Pass (2013)?

Yes, or The Dyatlov Pass Incident, as it was called in the UK.


(https://i.ibb.co/rprjQ3F/s-l500.jpg) (https://imgbb.com/)
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Nigel Evans on January 22, 2021, 02:32:33 PM
Have found Jeff Meldrum - https://www.isu.edu/biology/people/faculty---professors/jeffrey-meldrum/ (https://www.isu.edu/biology/people/faculty---professors/jeffrey-meldrum/)
Sounds like he's a believer?

Good find. Yes there are many professional people engaged in research, which is good. And also there are many good witnesses to Big Foot type creatures and other creatures.
and there's a movie following several expert investigations - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b9Mpl2hxxsc
highly recommended.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: DAXXY on January 22, 2021, 02:45:42 PM
Interesting how the human mind works. In situations where we have a need for plain explanations to big events but they aren't available we then fill any gaps with imaginative ideas.  It must be this...or it must be that. 

In the UK there are mysterious sightings of a big black panther type of cat in rural areas every year.   Funny how it's just before the tourist season.  Same with the Loch Ness Monster.  Why else would anyone want to go out of their way to a rural Scottish loch.  Empty places need to generate footfall and excite the media producers to make their 'documentaries'.  There is nothing better for this than some old legend of a 'creature' from folklore that is actually real and wanders about looking for groups of explorers with their cameras at the ready so they can perform as soon as the explorer shouts "OK and.....Action!"    lol1


I'm struggling to connect the DPI with the Loch Ness monster, although i know a someone who might....


Give me a Yeti any day.

It's the same process.  There is a big event and people want an explanation.  Monsters and mythical creatures or Aliens coming to life to fill in the gaps in peoples knowledge.
There is nothing wrong with healthy imagination and folklore had a purpose, and if hunting a yeti gets people out in the forest having fun and fresh air then there's nothing wrong in that either.  But that's all it is.  Imagination and lack of factual knowledge. But that's just my own opinion...I respect anybody having a different opinion to mine who believe Yeti's are real.  I hope they are successful in finding one  lol2

But you seem to be missing the point. Its not about  whether or not any of us believe this that or the other, its about EVIDENCE. If someone witnesses a crime being committed and reports it then that person will be giving EVIDENCE. A sighting is EVIDENCE.

A sighting is a report of their opinion as to what they think they saw.  It needs supporting fact based evidence.  People in all sorts of situations can believe they saw something.  Belief is just that, their own personal belief or opinion.   It's like a scientist doing an experiment.  One successful outcome isn't enough.  He must be able to do the experiment repeatedly to show that the theories in his research are correct.  First comes the hypothesis, then the theory..then if correct and repeatable it becomes an established law.  There is a desire in the human brain not to leave loose ends and it wants things explained so when odd sightings or fleeting glimpses of animals are seen in forests the brain tries to draw on many kinds of imaginative possible explanations.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Ziljoe on January 22, 2021, 03:04:48 PM
"and then there's the conditioning from your coercive belief in Santa and how crestfallen you were when you learned the truth."


What you trying to say Eurocentric?  excuseme
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: DAXXY on January 22, 2021, 03:25:21 PM
"and then there's the conditioning from your coercive belief in Santa and how crestfallen you were when you learned the truth."


What you trying to say Eurocentric?  excuseme

SANTA ?   The truth ?  You don't mean.... shock1...Nooooooo ! 
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Star man on January 22, 2021, 04:07:28 PM
Absurd that the yeti or aliens were involved with DPI? I do think it is absurd. Human involvement on some level? Yes.

I think it may be possible that The Snowmanc could be behind the demise of the hikers, but if it was, it did not happen where the tent was found on Kholat Syakhl.  There are other options too.

Regards

Star man

Its possible that there are several things going on. The Dyatlov Group may have been scared of something on their journey up towards the Mountain and thats why they camped in the open on the exposed Mountainside. Then something else kicks in at The Tent.

I don't think that the hikers were camped where the tent was found on Kholat.  If you give credit to Solter's statement and consider the injuries, I would say that they were caught in some kind of explosion.  It's difficult to say exactly what type, but judging from the amount of smoke,  dirt and dust I think it was a fairly large explosion, with a pressure wave and wind blast and flame front.  They could have been on the outskirts of the explosion.  It may have been some kind of thermobaric device, that would deplete oxygen and have a toxic aftermath.

Regards

Star man
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: DAXXY on January 22, 2021, 04:12:30 PM
Boot rock could have been used for target practice.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Star man on January 22, 2021, 04:41:40 PM
Have found Jeff Meldrum - https://www.isu.edu/biology/people/faculty---professors/jeffrey-meldrum/
Sounds like he's a believer?

Yeah, Prof. Meldrum's foot print casts of Big Foot are very interesting.

Regards

Star man
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Star man on January 22, 2021, 05:02:15 PM
Boot rock could have been used for target practice.

I don't think this area was a military test site., but it is fairly remote so its possible.  Judging by the burns to Yuri K's leg, and the hair of some of the hikers, its is possible the tent was damaged by the pressure wave, debris and the fire, but would depend on if they had set up camp before it happened.

Regards

Star man

Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Nigel Evans on January 23, 2021, 07:34:59 AM


A sighting is a report of their opinion as to what they think they saw.  It needs supporting fact based evidence.  People in all sorts of situations can believe they saw something.  Belief is just that, their own personal belief or opinion.   It's like a scientist doing an experiment.  One successful outcome isn't enough.  He must be able to do the experiment repeatedly to show that the theories in his research are correct.  First comes the hypothesis, then the theory..then if correct and repeatable it becomes an established law.  There is a desire in the human brain not to leave loose ends and it wants things explained so when odd sightings or fleeting glimpses of animals are seen in forests the brain tries to draw on many kinds of imaginative possible explanations.
You really need to watch that video!! It's about a group of scientists (including Prof Jeff Meldrum) who have examined all the evidence todate and they conclude :-Other considerations are inconclusive but i struggle to see how anyone with an open mind could watch that movie and not agree that there is something here. The footprint evidence alone imo is conclusive. Hoaxers couldn't fool the scientists with so much data spread over 20 years and over thousands of miles..
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: GKM on January 23, 2021, 07:54:55 AM
Star man, did you get post one of the photographs that showed what you asserted was the outline of the tent in the bottom right corner?
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: DAXXY on January 23, 2021, 08:58:21 AM


A sighting is a report of their opinion as to what they think they saw.  It needs supporting fact based evidence.  People in all sorts of situations can believe they saw something.  Belief is just that, their own personal belief or opinion.   It's like a scientist doing an experiment.  One successful outcome isn't enough.  He must be able to do the experiment repeatedly to show that the theories in his research are correct.  First comes the hypothesis, then the theory..then if correct and repeatable it becomes an established law.  There is a desire in the human brain not to leave loose ends and it wants things explained so when odd sightings or fleeting glimpses of animals are seen in forests the brain tries to draw on many kinds of imaginative possible explanations.
You really need to watch that video!! It's about a group of scientists (including Prof Jeff Meldrum) who have examined all the evidence todate and they conclude :-
  • The plaster casts of 300 footprints are genuine and of a creature unknown to science.
  • The famous video - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patterson%E2%80%93Gimlin_film is of a female 7.5ft in height with a condition on her lower right thigh considered to be genuine and affecting her gait.
  • The video of a bigfoot racing across a field fits an explanation of it carrying a child on it's back.
  • There's a plaster cast of an imprint of a large primate lying on it's side taken in North America.
Other considerations are inconclusive but i struggle to see how anyone with an open mind could watch that movie and not agree that there is something here. The footprint evidence alone imo is conclusive. Hoaxers couldn't fool the scientists with so much data spread over 20 years and over thousands of miles..

Which video ?

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/why-so-many-people-still-believe-in-bigfoot-180970045/?page=5
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Star man on January 23, 2021, 10:01:17 AM
Star man, did you get post one of the photographs that showed what you asserted was the outline of the tent in the bottom right corner?

Are you talking about frame 34?  I did but I dont think you can use it as evidence.  It's too damaged.

Regards

Star man
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Nigel Evans on January 23, 2021, 10:41:29 AM


A sighting is a report of their opinion as to what they think they saw.  It needs supporting fact based evidence.  People in all sorts of situations can believe they saw something.  Belief is just that, their own personal belief or opinion.   It's like a scientist doing an experiment.  One successful outcome isn't enough.  He must be able to do the experiment repeatedly to show that the theories in his research are correct.  First comes the hypothesis, then the theory..then if correct and repeatable it becomes an established law.  There is a desire in the human brain not to leave loose ends and it wants things explained so when odd sightings or fleeting glimpses of animals are seen in forests the brain tries to draw on many kinds of imaginative possible explanations.
You really need to watch that video!! It's about a group of scientists (including Prof Jeff Meldrum) who have examined all the evidence todate and they conclude :-
  • The plaster casts of 300 footprints are genuine and of a creature unknown to science.
  • The famous video - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patterson%E2%80%93Gimlin_film (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patterson%E2%80%93Gimlin_film) is of a female 7.5ft in height with a condition on her lower right thigh considered to be genuine and affecting her gait.
  • The video of a bigfoot racing across a field fits an explanation of it carrying a child on it's back.
  • There's a plaster cast of an imprint of a large primate lying on it's side taken in North America.
Other considerations are inconclusive but i struggle to see how anyone with an open mind could watch that movie and not agree that there is something here. The footprint evidence alone imo is conclusive. Hoaxers couldn't fool the scientists with so much data spread over 20 years and over thousands of miles..

Which video ?

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/why-so-many-people-still-believe-in-bigfoot-180970045/?page=5 (https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/why-so-many-people-still-believe-in-bigfoot-180970045/?page=5)


https://youtu.be/b9Mpl2hxxsc
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: DAXXY on January 25, 2021, 04:45:03 PM


A sighting is a report of their opinion as to what they think they saw.  It needs supporting fact based evidence.  People in all sorts of situations can believe they saw something.  Belief is just that, their own personal belief or opinion.   It's like a scientist doing an experiment.  One successful outcome isn't enough.  He must be able to do the experiment repeatedly to show that the theories in his research are correct.  First comes the hypothesis, then the theory..then if correct and repeatable it becomes an established law.  There is a desire in the human brain not to leave loose ends and it wants things explained so when odd sightings or fleeting glimpses of animals are seen in forests the brain tries to draw on many kinds of imaginative possible explanations.
You really need to watch that video!! It's about a group of scientists (including Prof Jeff Meldrum) who have examined all the evidence todate and they conclude :-
  • The plaster casts of 300 footprints are genuine and of a creature unknown to science.
  • The famous video - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patterson%E2%80%93Gimlin_film (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patterson%E2%80%93Gimlin_film) is of a female 7.5ft in height with a condition on her lower right thigh considered to be genuine and affecting her gait.
  • The video of a bigfoot racing across a field fits an explanation of it carrying a child on it's back.
  • There's a plaster cast of an imprint of a large primate lying on it's side taken in North America.
Other considerations are inconclusive but i struggle to see how anyone with an open mind could watch that movie and not agree that there is something here. The footprint evidence alone imo is conclusive. Hoaxers couldn't fool the scientists with so much data spread over 20 years and over thousands of miles..

Which video ?

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/why-so-many-people-still-believe-in-bigfoot-180970045/?page=5 (https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/why-so-many-people-still-believe-in-bigfoot-180970045/?page=5)


https://youtu.be/b9Mpl2hxxsc

 lol1 Reminds me of a women's shampoo commercial. Lots of edited shots of slow motion hair and then the science bit  lol2

it's just scientists and academics who've employed their 'methods' for funding and wages but said a load of non-committal type statements.  Loads of possibly's, could be's, Maybe's and things like 'unlike any animal we currently know' (It won't be like an animal you know because it was made by someone in their basement).  lol1.  These people will never say that their creature is all fake because they get paid to keep checking if it is fake or not.  They will also never say anything that could damage their careers as working scientists.  These people have to go to seminars and conferences where they risk being ridiculed by their peers from other institutions.
I'd love to get paid to go on a 6 month Bigfoot hunt.  I'm absolutely 100% certain that I could find some circumstantial evidence to prove categorically once and for all that Bigfoot may possibly exist.  lol2
Am I too cynical ?  nea1

Bigfoot is sometimes confused with Sasquatch...
Yeti never complains.. grin1

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/why-so-many-people-still-believe-in-bigfoot-180970045/?page=5
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Nigel Evans on January 26, 2021, 12:47:04 AM


A sighting is a report of their opinion as to what they think they saw.  It needs supporting fact based evidence.  People in all sorts of situations can believe they saw something.  Belief is just that, their own personal belief or opinion.   It's like a scientist doing an experiment.  One successful outcome isn't enough.  He must be able to do the experiment repeatedly to show that the theories in his research are correct.  First comes the hypothesis, then the theory..then if correct and repeatable it becomes an established law.  There is a desire in the human brain not to leave loose ends and it wants things explained so when odd sightings or fleeting glimpses of animals are seen in forests the brain tries to draw on many kinds of imaginative possible explanations.
You really need to watch that video!! It's about a group of scientists (including Prof Jeff Meldrum) who have examined all the evidence todate and they conclude :-
  • The plaster casts of 300 footprints are genuine and of a creature unknown to science.
  • The famous video - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patterson%E2%80%93Gimlin_film (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patterson%E2%80%93Gimlin_film) is of a female 7.5ft in height with a condition on her lower right thigh considered to be genuine and affecting her gait.
  • The video of a bigfoot racing across a field fits an explanation of it carrying a child on it's back.
  • There's a plaster cast of an imprint of a large primate lying on it's side taken in North America.
Other considerations are inconclusive but i struggle to see how anyone with an open mind could watch that movie and not agree that there is something here. The footprint evidence alone imo is conclusive. Hoaxers couldn't fool the scientists with so much data spread over 20 years and over thousands of miles..

Which video ?

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/why-so-many-people-still-believe-in-bigfoot-180970045/?page=5 (https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/why-so-many-people-still-believe-in-bigfoot-180970045/?page=5)


https://youtu.be/b9Mpl2hxxsc (https://youtu.be/b9Mpl2hxxsc)

 lol1 Reminds me of a women's shampoo commercial. Lots of edited shots of slow motion hair and then the science bit  lol2

it's just scientists and academics who've employed their 'methods' for funding and wages but said a load of non-committal type statements.  Loads of possibly's, could be's, Maybe's and things like 'unlike any animal we currently know' (It won't be like an animal you know because it was made by someone in their basement).  lol1 .  These people will never say that their creature is all fake because they get paid to keep checking if it is fake or not.  They will also never say anything that could damage their careers as working scientists.  These people have to go to seminars and conferences where they risk being ridiculed by their peers from other institutions.
I'd love to get paid to go on a 6 month Bigfoot hunt.  I'm absolutely 100% certain that I could find some circumstantial evidence to prove categorically once and for all that Bigfoot may possibly exist.  lol2
Am I too cynical ?  nea1

Bigfoot is sometimes confused with Sasquatch...
Yeti never complains.. grin1

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/why-so-many-people-still-believe-in-bigfoot-180970045/?page=5 (https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/why-so-many-people-still-believe-in-bigfoot-180970045/?page=5)


Well if i was in their shoes i'd demonstrate caution as well. It's an insane  proposition that there is compelling evidence for something that shouldn't exist. But it's not just scientists and academics btw, there's a fingerprint (and footprint?) expert as well. As he says his testimony puts people in jail so he has to get it right, and he's convinced that the footprints are genuine. Prof Jeff Meldrum makes an even stronger case for the footprints from a bio mechanical perspective, one is forced to accept that they are genuine or have been faked by experts such as himself and others across decades and thousands of miles. Then you have all the eye witnesses, an increasing amount of video footage and that the indigenous peoples of north america and north asia simply accept bigfoot as fact.


I'm currently reading the book that is paired with the film written by Meldrum and there's a lot more evidence in the book. In it he hits a lot harder, making a strong case imo. I've also just received The Hoopa Project and flicking through the eye witness drawings i'm struck at how human the faces are. Some eye witnesses state that they had an opportunity to shoot a bigfoot but felt that the animal was "too human". One of the interesting avenues wrt the dpi is the evidence that bigfoot uses infrasound to hunt with and has a scream that can make your chest and clothing vibrate at an estimated 100m. Ooerr.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: DAXXY on January 26, 2021, 04:50:15 AM
I heard from a lion expert that the reason many African native people walk barefoot is because we have bones in our feet that will vibrate if a dangerous animal is nearby giving a low vibrating growl like lions or elephants do. If they wore shoes or sandals they wouldn't pick up the warning vibration in their feet.
All the circumstantial evidence is just exactly that, no matter how plentiful it is.  The main consistent thing is that these animals are never caught.  It's amazing that these prints are found of giant feet in the woods but these trails are never followed by a tracker or dogs ? how can all the tracks have disappeared ? Tracks like those would be visible in a forest to even a novice tracker.  Dogs could get on a trail like that the next day but they are never used.  I don't buy it.  All the movies are the same. Long distance shaky dark vague figure.  The people who had one in their sights get an attack of conscience at the last second but happily plug deer, bears, pumas, elk, coyote, bobcat, wolves, and any other critters that are in season.  Nope I do not buy it one bit, never have, but if it gets people out in the woods looking for them at least they are getting fresh air and exercise.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Nigel Evans on January 26, 2021, 06:59:14 AM

All the circumstantial evidence is just exactly that, no matter how plentiful it is.  The main consistent thing is that these animals are never caught.  Much more significant is that no corpses or skeletons have ever been found.


It's amazing that these prints are found of giant feet in the woods but these trails are never followed by a tracker or dogs ? how can all the tracks have disappeared ? Tracks like those would be visible in a forest to even a novice tracker.  Dogs could get on a trail like that the next day but they are never used.  I think that's unfair, only state agencies have the resources to quickly deploy dog teams and handlers etc and so far they don't do so. Jeff Meldrum makes the same point in reverse, believing the case is such that they should do so.


I don't buy it.  All the movies are the same. Long distance shaky dark vague figure.  The people who had one in their sights get an attack of conscience at the last second but happily plug deer, bears, pumas, elk, coyote, bobcat, wolves, and any other critters that are in season.  Nope I do not buy it one bit, never have, but if it gets people out in the woods looking for them at least they are getting fresh air and exercise.
I'd be cautious about shooting this guy, human men (and women) vary in the degree of hairyness (hirsute) and you wouldn't want to go down for murdering a hairy version of Arnold Schwarzenegger.... rus1
Also apparently it's illegal in one north western state to shoot a bigfoot.
(https://i.ibb.co/vXLK8Lq/Bigfoot-Composite.jpg) (https://imgbb.com/)
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: GKM on January 26, 2021, 07:52:16 AM
 Odd how every conversation on this forum ends up with talk about the yeti and ufo's, unless, of course, Teddy is involved in it.  lol4
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Nigel Evans on January 26, 2021, 08:35:30 AM
Odd how every conversation on this forum ends up with talk about the yeti and ufo's, unless, of course, Teddy is involved in it.  lol4
If Ivanov hadn't said fireorbs you would have a good point.
But he did, so you don't.... lol4
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: GKM on January 26, 2021, 11:00:20 AM
He mentioned yeti? whist dunno1
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: GKM on January 26, 2021, 11:01:58 AM
Well, I misspelled that completely. Nevermind.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: GKM on January 26, 2021, 11:12:15 AM
TMTOYHN. lol1
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: DAXXY on January 26, 2021, 11:23:07 AM

All the circumstantial evidence is just exactly that, no matter how plentiful it is.  The main consistent thing is that these animals are never caught.  Much more significant is that no corpses or skeletons have ever been found.


It's amazing that these prints are found of giant feet in the woods but these trails are never followed by a tracker or dogs ? how can all the tracks have disappeared ? Tracks like those would be visible in a forest to even a novice tracker.  Dogs could get on a trail like that the next day but they are never used.  I think that's unfair, only state agencies have the resources to quickly deploy dog teams and handlers etc and so far they don't do so. Jeff Meldrum makes the same point in reverse, believing the case is such that they should do so.


I don't buy it.  All the movies are the same. Long distance shaky dark vague figure.  The people who had one in their sights get an attack of conscience at the last second but happily plug deer, bears, pumas, elk, coyote, bobcat, wolves, and any other critters that are in season.  Nope I do not buy it one bit, never have, but if it gets people out in the woods looking for them at least they are getting fresh air and exercise.
I'd be cautious about shooting this guy, human men (and women) vary in the degree of hairyness (hirsute) and you wouldn't want to go down for murdering a hairy version of Arnold Schwarzenegger.... rus1
Also apparently it's illegal in one north western state to shoot a bigfoot.
(https://i.ibb.co/vXLK8Lq/Bigfoot-Composite.jpg) (https://imgbb.com/)

Wait a minute !

(https://i.ibb.co/kSYn5Bg/tlj.jpg) (https://ibb.co/sVLSbRv)
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: RidgeWatcher on January 26, 2021, 12:10:16 PM
Washington State: It is illegal to kill a Bigfoot and the law is on the books, if it exists.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: DAXXY on January 26, 2021, 12:15:31 PM
Washington State: It is illegal to kill a Bigfoot and the law is on the books, if it exists.

I think that law is not about protecting mythical creatures. More about stopping people from shooting someone dressed up in a gorilla suit if they happen to see one, but the guy in the gorilla suit hasn't seen them. 
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: GKM on January 26, 2021, 12:38:19 PM
In all seriousness, Nigel, will you be kind enough to give me the name of the book? I really would like to read it. It is important to keep an open mind. If I am wrong and the Yeti does exist I will owe many people an apology. And I do,very much, love to read. My apologies if I have offended you.   thanky1
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Nigel Evans on January 26, 2021, 01:00:22 PM
In all seriousness, Nigel, will you be kind enough to give me the name of the book? I really would like to read it. It is important to keep an open mind. If I am wrong and the Yeti does exist I will owe many people an apology. And I do,very much, love to read. My apologies if I have offended you.   thanky1


Definitely not offended, quite the opposite i'm enjoying the banter amongst a pleasant group of people and i've no problem with people being skeptical. Plus i'm enjoying the journey here, my understanding of the bigfoot phenomena has made  a quantum leap with this book - "Sasquatch: Legend meets Science" same title as the video.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: RidgeWatcher on January 26, 2021, 01:07:19 PM
Quote
Quote from: RidgeWatcher on Today at 12:10:16 PM
Washington State: It is illegal to kill a Bigfoot and the law is on the books, if it exists.

I think that law is not about protecting mythical creatures. More about stopping people from shooting someone dressed up in a gorilla suit if they happen to see one, but the guy in the gorilla suit hasn't seen them.

I believe I lived in Spokane, Washington for two years when this law took effect. Washington state is heavily Native American with many in the different Government agencies. There are not a lot of people that would run around in a bear suit, believe me, especially during hunting season. I believe it is more in the belief that these different creatures are spiritual in nature and not something you would want to harm.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: DAXXY on January 26, 2021, 02:07:01 PM
Quote
Quote from: RidgeWatcher on Today at 12:10:16 PM
Washington State: It is illegal to kill a Bigfoot and the law is on the books, if it exists.

I think that law is not about protecting mythical creatures. More about stopping people from shooting someone dressed up in a gorilla suit if they happen to see one, but the guy in the gorilla suit hasn't seen them.

I believe I lived in Spokane, Washington for two years when this law took effect. Washington state is heavily Native American with many in the different Government agencies. There are not a lot of people that would run around in a bear suit, believe me, especially during hunting season. I believe it is more in the belief that these different creatures are spiritual in nature and not something you would want to harm.

Creatures that are spiritual in nature ?  It is illegal to shoot non-existent mythical creatures that are spiritual in nature in Washington State ? Have we slipped in to the twilight zone or something ?
If such a law really exists I would be more scared of the people that made it than of meeting any long haired 8ft ape in the forest on a moonlit night.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: RidgeWatcher on January 26, 2021, 05:55:07 PM
DAXXY, You are being rude.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Nigel Evans on January 26, 2021, 11:40:00 PM
Quote
Quote from: RidgeWatcher on Today at 12:10:16 PM
Washington State: It is illegal to kill a Bigfoot and the law is on the books, if it exists.

I think that law is not about protecting mythical creatures. More about stopping people from shooting someone dressed up in a gorilla suit if they happen to see one, but the guy in the gorilla suit hasn't seen them.

I believe I lived in Spokane, Washington for two years when this law took effect. Washington state is heavily Native American with many in the different Government agencies. There are not a lot of people that would run around in a bear suit, believe me, especially during hunting season. I believe it is more in the belief that these different creatures are spiritual in nature and not something you would want to harm.

Creatures that are spiritual in nature ?  It is illegal to shoot non-existent mythical creatures that are spiritual in nature in Washington State ? Have we slipped in to the twilight zone or something ?
If such a law really exists I would be more scared of the people that made it than of meeting any long haired 8ft ape in the forest on a moonlit night.


Possibly not..... https://forum.dyatlovpass.com/index.php?topic=246.0
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Nigel Evans on January 27, 2021, 04:31:44 AM
Just started reading "The Hoopa Project" and the author jumps straight in which the 1969 legislation at Skamania County (Washington State) ordinance 69-01 which due to the large number of sightings (50 between 1950 - 2006) makes it a felony for wanton killing of the creature.


An amendment in 1984 states - "Should the coroner determine any victim/creature to have been humanoid the prosecuting attorney shall pursue the case under existing laws pertaining to homicide."


So best not to kill it, maybe just make a citizens arrest perhaps. N.B. size estimates range from 8 to 12 ft and weighing a 1000 pounds.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: DAXXY on January 27, 2021, 06:22:45 AM
'The purpose behind these laws was actually to protect the safety and well-being of persons living or travelling in these areas when a sasquatch is "sighted", as many well-armed scientific investigators and casual hunters show up to take specimens'

https://www.courthouselibrary.ca/how-we-can-help/our-legal-knowledge-base/sasquatch-bc-law#:~:text=On%20April%201%2C%201969%20the,it%20was%20an%20official%20ordinance.

It's to stop someone running around in a gorilla suit from being shot.  So all the investigators and hunters can show up in a rural area, spend their money in stores, buy fuel, spend on hotels and other accommodation and give loads of free mass media publicity to the place, but they can't shoot it. 
I can see the reasoning behind it.  If someone dressed up in a gorilla suit gets shot there wouldn't be that many applicants for the job a second time. They would have to substantially raise the pay scale.  lol4
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Nigel Evans on January 27, 2021, 06:52:49 AM
'The purpose behind these laws was actually to protect the safety and well-being of persons living or travelling in these areas when a sasquatch is "sighted", as many well-armed scientific investigators and casual hunters show up to take specimens'


They have to say that or else other people will say - "Creatures that are spiritual in nature ?  It is illegal to shoot non-existent mythical creatures that are spiritual in nature in Washington State ? Have we slipped in to the twilight zone or something ? ". kewl1


More seriously your link doesn't mention the detail of the 1984 amendment - if humanoid then it's homicide..
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: DAXXY on January 27, 2021, 07:00:43 AM
'The purpose behind these laws was actually to protect the safety and well-being of persons living or travelling in these areas when a sasquatch is "sighted", as many well-armed scientific investigators and casual hunters show up to take specimens'


They have to say that or else other people will say - "Creatures that are spiritual in nature ?  It is illegal to shoot non-existent mythical creatures that are spiritual in nature in Washington State ? Have we slipped in to the twilight zone or something ? ". kewl1


More seriously your link doesn't mention the detail of the 1984 amendment - if humanoid then it's homicide..

 lol1 Exactly.  But it's still crazy.  People living and travelling there are protected by law anyway, as normal citizens. 

 humanoid is homicide. ?  that's interesting.  Also declaring it an endangered species ? I would have thought they would need some scientific background to do that.  can't find it online. 
Oh wait...
https://scholarworks.umb.edu/ghc/2014/panel2/3/
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: DAXXY on January 27, 2021, 07:46:29 AM
In 1984, the ordinance was revisited and the felony charge was dropped to a
misdemeanor carrying a one year jail sentence and $1000 fine (Prosecutor Bob Leick
realized that the county had overstepped its jurisdictional authority to declare killing a
Sasquatch a felony). The amended ordinance states:

BE IT HEREBY ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
SKAMANIA COUNTY that [the] portion of Ordinance No. 1969­01, deeming the
slaying of Bigfoot to be a felony and punishable by 5 years in prison, is hereby
repealed and in its stead the follow sections are enacted: SECTION 1. Sasquatch
Refuge. The Sasquatch… [is] declared to be endangered species of
Skamania County and there is hereby created a Sasquatch Refuge.

section 4 of the amended ordinance states, “Should the Skamania
County Coroner determine any victim/creature to have been humanoid the Prosecuting
Attorney shall persue [sic] the case under existing laws pertaining to homicide.”

The new ordinance although with more lenient overall punishments, included the ultimate Sasquatch
protection: the hunter, or killer, could be charged with murder
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: DAXXY on January 27, 2021, 09:27:52 AM
Homicide requires a human to kill a human.  The coroner can investigate to see if the animal shot is 'humanoid' meaning a person (because yeti's don't exist), but without a human victim his investigation would be over pretty quickly.  If the victim was a human (in a gorilla suit) then it would be a normal homicide investigation anyway.  So this seems to just be an ordinance stating the normal way the law would handle this situation. Kind of stating the obvious.
They are saying that if you shoot something that you think is a Bigfoot we will prosecute you under homicide laws because they know it has to be a person in a gorilla suit. It can't be anything other than a human for homicide to apply. 

So the people that made this law and put it in place are (by their own actions) demonstrating that they know Bigfoot doesn't exist and if anybody sees something appearing to be a Bigfoot then it is a human dressed up.
You have to start to wonder if these are elected officials ?  do they hold public office ? If they make this law then go on to take part in Bigfoot promoting events would that be classed as delusional behavior ? Could this be seen as conspiracy in public office, or fraud ? 
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Nigel Evans on January 27, 2021, 09:42:48 AM
Homicide requires a human to kill a human.  The coroner can investigate to see if the animal shot is 'humanoid' meaning a person (because yeti's don't exist), but without a human victim his investigation would be over pretty quickly.  If the victim was a human (in a gorilla suit) then it would be a normal homicide investigation anyway.  So this seems to just be an ordinance stating the normal way the law would handle this situation. Kind of stating the obvious.


Sounds to me like the NRA has better lawyers than bigfoot.


So if bigfoot doesn't exist (as you say), if you get one in your rifle sights it's best not to shoot it because it must be a human? Which is where we started with this, so you've just contradicted yourself?
Loving it.  lol2

Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: DAXXY on January 27, 2021, 09:47:53 AM
Homicide requires a human to kill a human.  The coroner can investigate to see if the animal shot is 'humanoid' meaning a person (because yeti's don't exist), but without a human victim his investigation would be over pretty quickly.  If the victim was a human (in a gorilla suit) then it would be a normal homicide investigation anyway.  So this seems to just be an ordinance stating the normal way the law would handle this situation. Kind of stating the obvious.


Sounds to me like the NRA has better lawyers than bigfoot.


So if bigfoot doesn't exist (as you say), if you get one in your rifle sights it's best not to shoot it because it must be a human? Which is where we started with this, so you've just contradicted yourself?
Loving it.  lol2

How ?? Surely you don't think that a person running around in a gorilla suit pretending to be Bigfoot is proof that Bigfoot exists ?    It doesn't exist so they don't want people shooting at people running around in gorilla suits.  They are aware that some people with guns believe that Bigfoot exists ?  is the plural of Bigfoot Bigfeet ?
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Nigel Evans on January 27, 2021, 10:14:36 AM
Homicide requires a human to kill a human.  The coroner can investigate to see if the animal shot is 'humanoid' meaning a person (because yeti's don't exist), but without a human victim his investigation would be over pretty quickly.  If the victim was a human (in a gorilla suit) then it would be a normal homicide investigation anyway.  So this seems to just be an ordinance stating the normal way the law would handle this situation. Kind of stating the obvious.


Sounds to me like the NRA has better lawyers than bigfoot.


So if bigfoot doesn't exist (as you say), if you get one in your rifle sights it's best not to shoot it because it must be a human? Which is where we started with this, so you've just contradicted yourself?
Loving it.  lol2

How ?? Surely you don't think that a person running around in a gorilla suit pretending to be Bigfoot is proof that Bigfoot exists ?    It doesn't exist so they don't want people shooting at people running around in gorilla suits.  They are aware that some people with guns believe that Bigfoot exists ?  is the plural of Bigfoot Bigfeet ?




Reply #225 - You said :-
"The people who had one in their sights get an attack of conscience at the last second but happily plug deer, bears, pumas, elk, coyote, bobcat, wolves, and any other critters that are in season.  Nope I do not buy it one bit, never have, but if it gets people out in the woods looking for them at least they are getting fresh air and exercise. "
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: DAXXY on January 27, 2021, 11:15:10 AM
Yes ??  said what ?

'The people who had one in their sights get an attack of conscience at the last second but happily plug deer, bears, pumas, elk, coyote, bobcat, wolves, and any other critters that are in season.  Nope I do not buy it one bit, never have, but if it gets people out in the woods looking for them at least they are getting fresh air and exercise'.

This means that the people who have reported that they've seen a real Bigfoot while out hunting have 'very conveniently' had an attack of conscience over shooting a Bigfoot they claim to have seen, but have no such feelings for other animals they shoot like deer, bears, pumas, elk, coyote, bobcat, wolves, and any other critters that are in season.
There's no contradiction here.  Oh well...moving on and also 'loving it'     grin1 lol1
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: sarapuk on January 27, 2021, 12:49:08 PM

That's a lot of work, but it's good to get an idea what they think about the video.  I suppose that if there are yetis, etc, more of these kinds of things will start turning up as people have their phones on them most of the time.

Answer to

Quote
    mk:  January 21, 2021, 08:29:44 AM                Reply #165
https://forum.dyatlovpass.com/index.php?topic=772.msg12310#msg12310

https://youtu.be/nCEpoeaUeWk

  ••• « wish I spoke French. » 

 • In this case it would be useless.

By typing (in the bottom right-hand corner of the window) on the the parameter represented by a gearwheel
                     you have access to the usual commands, i.e. :
"vitesses de lecture"  (= reading speeds  --> 0.25 0.5 0.75 Normal=1 1.25 1.5 1.75 2 )
"Sous-titres" (= Subtitles)
  -  By typing on "Français"
  -  "Traduire automatiquement" (= Translate automatically)
    ===>   You have a wide choice of foreign languages to translate subtitles that repeat what is said in French.

   ••• It's strange that the creature is so dark if it lives in a snowy place, but I'm sure they had an explanation for that.  Funny:.................., but to me that figure looked exactly like a hiker in a hooded coat with a dark backpack.

I totally agree. In my opinion, he is obviously a tall (2 metres), well equipped and well trained solitary mountaineer who moves safely and cautiously.

 • at 2.25 :  They said :
a specimen of size between 2 metres and 2 metres x high ---> x = "louis" is incomprehensible with the ear - perhaps x= 'dix" = "louis" = "ten", i.e. 2.10 metres .

 • from 4.06  to 4.08 : photo of a paw print next to an ice axe.
A solitary mountain dweller who is also a prankster because he has fixed a special wider plate under his shoes to walk in the snow to intrigue the passers-by.

   ••• «  It wasn't until the clip of the scientists examining the film that I could see how it's supposed to look like a yeti.  They seemed to be talking about the size of the figure and stuff--again, wish I spoke French! » 

 • at 2.40 : The bearded scientist examining the film should be the cryptozoologist Richard Greenwell  (1942 - November 1, 2005)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Greenwell
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cryptozoology


I agree, it is definitely a climber. Freeze it at 1:43 and the hood of his coat is visible, as are the contours of his two tone coat, which is grey down the back, forming a squared end, with black sides.

Not so sure. I have looked at this many times and it looks similar to the figure in that photo taken by one of the Dyatlov Group. The Arms look very long and the way they move is interesting. Also that was a fairly powerful Avalanche. Yet the figure just brushes it off and walks away uphill. I find that interesting.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: sarapuk on January 27, 2021, 12:55:14 PM
Reference the rather dubious Moon landing analogy...

The DPI, as presented, would be the equivalent of Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin sitting inside their lander module in their underwear, with the heating turned off, playing Scrabble instead of attending to the risks presented by their location, not following the procedures they were trained for in order to ensure their survival and the completion of their mission.

Despite having the means to survive right by their side, dragged all the way to the Moon, they inexplicably ignore them, and have also landed somewhere they shouldn't be.

They then smash their way out of their capsule instead of exiting via the door provided, roam around without securing their space suit's integrity, and set off in single file, without their flag and experiments, to go and hide in a crater, where they inevitably perish.

Their camera takes photo's of strange objects in the sky, and the only photographic proof we have that they were there are two close-up photo's of a trench, which do not confirm they are on the lunar surface or show the horizon.

If all that happened would anyone believe they were ever on the Moon?
I think you have missed the point.

Not in the slightest. You made a very dubious analogy, trying to compare those who doubt the tent 'landed' on the ridge, was pitched there by hikers, with those who deny the Moon landings took place.

Quite apart from the fact those of us who consider the tent resiting theory to have some weight do not appear to doubt man landed on the Moon, I certainly don't, I pointed out how the Moon landings would not have been possible had the astronauts not followed their training and procedures, and how an experienced bunch of hikers would have followed theirs too in their own extreme environment in order to survive and finish their own mission.
 
Yet, as presented, they behaved as if in the Bahamas.

Well personally I believe that Man landed on the Moon via Apollo 11.  And I dont believe that the Tent was set up by any one else other than the Dyatlov Group. All the Evidence and indications point to the Dyatlov Group.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: sarapuk on January 27, 2021, 12:58:51 PM
I am genuinely enjoying this conversation. 

Star Man was reminding me of some kind of Poirot/Miss Marple who refuses to spill the beans until the last chapter because he might be wrong and doesn't want to hurt the innocent.  But now I'm cracking up over the metaphor which keeps getting more and more complicated and actually confusing, rather than elucidating, the issue.

Maybe it's neither a horse nor a dolphin.  Maybe it's a hippokampos.   popcorn1

If I had a book coming out I'd combine all the most 'imaginative' theories I've read in this forum, it's sure to get into the best seller lists, or at the very least become a better script than that awful movie.

So, I'd have the yeti/menk/sasquatch as an alien from a frozen world, and it evolved to be covered in fur to stay warm. It is said to walk with a lolloping gait, and that is due to differences in gravity, and is generally only seen in colder climates, at altitude, well away from the equator, where the hirsute beast cannot cope with the heat.

The reason no dead yeti or baby yetis have ever been seen, or a lair or dung found, is they do not live and breed here, only visit, and arrive via a wormhole, which only appears on mountains rich in iron, a lodestone where the wormhole flux creates plasmatic effects such as orange orbs, 'fireorbs', glowing entities and ball lightning.

When the wormhole is closed there is a ripple in the space time continuum, explaining the military getting dates wrong, and anything metal, such as aircraft or a passing missile, is sucked towards it like iron filings to a magnet, explaining all the aircraft which crashed in that area across the years.

The number 9, the highest single number, is believed to be one of the combination numbers which unlocks the wormhole, and gadget man Igor Dyatlov had developed a special radio frequency receiver to detect the wormhole's formation, comprising of a small radio, excess salt and a piece of copper wire as an aerial. If the reception of Bill Haley's Rock Around The Clock was interrupted on Berlin radio when at 3000ft they knew what was about to happen.

They headed up that mountain after detecting something and attempted to trap a tourist menk in a pit, digging a deep snow trench. The creature was lured inside with loin steaks and porridge, and the tent arranged to collapse on top of it. The hikers had taken off clothing to evade the menk's thermal vision, which allows it to hunt prey on its frozen world (like when Arnie covered himself with river mud to elude The Predator).

They hypnotised and subdued the trapped menk by cossack dancing around the tent while singing banned communist songs. 'We will not stop until you drink the medicinal vodka!' they shouted, as Semyon whooped that they were going to make history. Soon it was bleary-eyed, toasting Nikita Khrushchev, collapsing into a heap, snoring its head off, and then they lowered themselves in to tie it to logs, intending to haul it out and lay it on a ski sled and drag it back to Vizhay, where bearded man's hospitality would welcome it as a long-lost cousin and make it feel at home as a fellow State outcast.

But the menk came round when they were in the trench and attacked them with its compelling force and tore its way out of the tent using its claws. The drunken menk staggered outside, tripped over a rock and fell. When they do so they instinctively go into a hedgehog ball, so it rolled down the pass towards the forest, its fur not leaving any trace. The hikers assembled to discuss what to do, and decided they had to leave immediately and go after it, determined not to lose their prize and the chance to be in the National Geographic.

The menk, now nursing a hangover, hid in the forest. Slowly its anger grew as it watched the hikers' approach and begin digging another capture pit in the snow, and it decided to exact its revenge. It pounced on Lyuda and Semyon, and delivered not a bear hug, but something far worse, a yeti hug, which cracked ribs, and when Lyuda screamed it ripped out her tongue like the alienised Ripley did the alien's in Alien Resurrection, loosening her hyoid bone. It threw their bodies into the ravine, and captured Igor to hang him upside down by his ankles from a tree, but he escaped. To keep evading the hikers and spring surprise attacks it shapeshifted into many different things, including a dolphin, a horse, a lynx, an eagle, and even a mushroom head.

The rest of the hikers hid in the tallest tree they could find, a cedar, nervously looking back up at the tent. The menk lit itself a fire underneath, using branches which snapped off under its weight when it tried to climb up after them. It tried to smoke them out, but eventually, after warming itself, it shook the tree so violently the hikers fell down like conkers, and then it bonked some of them on their heads with a log as if playing a xylophone.

The military arrived, their radar detecting an anomaly, helicopters, ground vehicles, MiG jets, the lot, but by then the menk had vanished, the wormhole closed, so they staged a Roswell style cover-up, arranging bodies so they looked like they'd been chased or bitten by a combination of overwintering snakes, marauding elks and hungry wolverines, while others died of the cold dressed only in their birthday suits. 'People will never believe this', they thought to themselves, but for 62 years and more, they did.

Rumour has it the Soviets caught a menk in 1952 and were hoping for a breeding pair for military applications, and that the menk helped them develop their space program. They only abandoned Moon landings for the greater goal of the planet Chewbaccaan.

A Stitch In Time Kills Nine is available soon.

Nonsense

You're only smarting because I missed out crop circles.

You are the one who is rubbishing what many witnesses have seen or experienced. The Mansi have their Legends and that includes the Menk [ Yeti ]  The Soviet Authorities even set up a Department to search for Evidence of such creatures.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: sarapuk on January 27, 2021, 01:08:02 PM
Interesting how the human mind works. In situations where we have a need for plain explanations to big events but they aren't available we then fill any gaps with imaginative ideas.  It must be this...or it must be that. 

In the UK there are mysterious sightings of a big black panther type of cat in rural areas every year.   Funny how it's just before the tourist season.  Same with the Loch Ness Monster.  Why else would anyone want to go out of their way to a rural Scottish loch.  Empty places need to generate footfall and excite the media producers to make their 'documentaries'.  There is nothing better for this than some old legend of a 'creature' from folklore that is actually real and wanders about looking for groups of explorers with their cameras at the ready so they can perform as soon as the explorer shouts "OK and.....Action!"    lol1


I'm struggling to connect the DPI with the Loch Ness monster, although i know a someone who might....


Give me a Yeti any day.

It's the same process.  There is a big event and people want an explanation.  Monsters and mythical creatures or Aliens coming to life to fill in the gaps in peoples knowledge.
There is nothing wrong with healthy imagination and folklore had a purpose, and if hunting a yeti gets people out in the forest having fun and fresh air then there's nothing wrong in that either.  But that's all it is.  Imagination and lack of factual knowledge. But that's just my own opinion...I respect anybody having a different opinion to mine who believe Yeti's are real.  I hope they are successful in finding one  lol2

But you seem to be missing the point. Its not about  whether or not any of us believe this that or the other, its about EVIDENCE. If someone witnesses a crime being committed and reports it then that person will be giving EVIDENCE. A sighting is EVIDENCE.

A sighting is a report of their opinion as to what they think they saw.  It needs supporting fact based evidence.  People in all sorts of situations can believe they saw something.  Belief is just that, their own personal belief or opinion.   It's like a scientist doing an experiment.  One successful outcome isn't enough.  He must be able to do the experiment repeatedly to show that the theories in his research are correct.  First comes the hypothesis, then the theory..then if correct and repeatable it becomes an established law.  There is a desire in the human brain not to leave loose ends and it wants things explained so when odd sightings or fleeting glimpses of animals are seen in forests the brain tries to draw on many kinds of imaginative possible explanations.

Thats not how the Law works. Have you ever been in a Court of Law  !  ?  A sighting is Evidence and like all Evidence it is scrutinised but not denied or rubbished as some people unfortunately seem to do.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: sarapuk on January 27, 2021, 01:13:31 PM


A sighting is a report of their opinion as to what they think they saw.  It needs supporting fact based evidence.  People in all sorts of situations can believe they saw something.  Belief is just that, their own personal belief or opinion.   It's like a scientist doing an experiment.  One successful outcome isn't enough.  He must be able to do the experiment repeatedly to show that the theories in his research are correct.  First comes the hypothesis, then the theory..then if correct and repeatable it becomes an established law.  There is a desire in the human brain not to leave loose ends and it wants things explained so when odd sightings or fleeting glimpses of animals are seen in forests the brain tries to draw on many kinds of imaginative possible explanations.
You really need to watch that video!! It's about a group of scientists (including Prof Jeff Meldrum) who have examined all the evidence todate and they conclude :-
  • The plaster casts of 300 footprints are genuine and of a creature unknown to science.
  • The famous video - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patterson%E2%80%93Gimlin_film is of a female 7.5ft in height with a condition on her lower right thigh considered to be genuine and affecting her gait.
  • The video of a bigfoot racing across a field fits an explanation of it carrying a child on it's back.
  • There's a plaster cast of an imprint of a large primate lying on it's side taken in North America.
Other considerations are inconclusive but i struggle to see how anyone with an open mind could watch that movie and not agree that there is something here. The footprint evidence alone imo is conclusive. Hoaxers couldn't fool the scientists with so much data spread over 20 years and over thousands of miles..

Well I must admit that until I got onto this Dyatlov Case I used to take many of the stories of Yeti and Big Foot with a pinch of salt. But just like with the Crop Circle and UFO phenomenon there is clearly something going on that isnt due to peoples imagination or mistaken identity or men with planks making Circles, etc.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: sarapuk on January 27, 2021, 01:28:57 PM
I heard from a lion expert that the reason many African native people walk barefoot is because we have bones in our feet that will vibrate if a dangerous animal is nearby giving a low vibrating growl like lions or elephants do. If they wore shoes or sandals they wouldn't pick up the warning vibration in their feet.
All the circumstantial evidence is just exactly that, no matter how plentiful it is.  The main consistent thing is that these animals are never caught.  It's amazing that these prints are found of giant feet in the woods but these trails are never followed by a tracker or dogs ? how can all the tracks have disappeared ? Tracks like those would be visible in a forest to even a novice tracker.  Dogs could get on a trail like that the next day but they are never used.  I don't buy it.  All the movies are the same. Long distance shaky dark vague figure.  The people who had one in their sights get an attack of conscience at the last second but happily plug deer, bears, pumas, elk, coyote, bobcat, wolves, and any other critters that are in season.  Nope I do not buy it one bit, never have, but if it gets people out in the woods looking for them at least they are getting fresh air and exercise.

Well I can understand where you are coming from and of course you have valid points. You are correct when you suggest how come we dont have the Physical Evidence. We have Evidence but its only Sightings and Footprints, although some people reckon there is also Hair Samples. But no Yeti or whatever its called. But lets look at it another way. There are many mysteries in the World and the Universe. Many unexplained things. How are Crop Circles formed  ! ? How are Cattle Mutilated in the way that they are ! ?  And how is that there are so many reports of UFO activity ! ? Etc.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: sarapuk on January 27, 2021, 01:35:28 PM
Odd how every conversation on this forum ends up with talk about the yeti and ufo's, unless, of course, Teddy is involved in it.  lol4

Well thats probably because UFO and Yeti are subjects that are considered in this Dyatlov Mystery, and the Website that teddy set up. When we come against a brick wall or dead end with other Theories we tend to end up with the more exotic possibilities. All Theories have to be considered.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: sarapuk on January 27, 2021, 01:36:50 PM

All the circumstantial evidence is just exactly that, no matter how plentiful it is.  The main consistent thing is that these animals are never caught.  Much more significant is that no corpses or skeletons have ever been found.


It's amazing that these prints are found of giant feet in the woods but these trails are never followed by a tracker or dogs ? how can all the tracks have disappeared ? Tracks like those would be visible in a forest to even a novice tracker.  Dogs could get on a trail like that the next day but they are never used.  I think that's unfair, only state agencies have the resources to quickly deploy dog teams and handlers etc and so far they don't do so. Jeff Meldrum makes the same point in reverse, believing the case is such that they should do so.


I don't buy it.  All the movies are the same. Long distance shaky dark vague figure.  The people who had one in their sights get an attack of conscience at the last second but happily plug deer, bears, pumas, elk, coyote, bobcat, wolves, and any other critters that are in season.  Nope I do not buy it one bit, never have, but if it gets people out in the woods looking for them at least they are getting fresh air and exercise.
I'd be cautious about shooting this guy, human men (and women) vary in the degree of hairyness (hirsute) and you wouldn't want to go down for murdering a hairy version of Arnold Schwarzenegger.... rus1
Also apparently it's illegal in one north western state to shoot a bigfoot.
(https://i.ibb.co/vXLK8Lq/Bigfoot-Composite.jpg) (https://imgbb.com/)

Wait a minute !

(https://i.ibb.co/kSYn5Bg/tlj.jpg) (https://ibb.co/sVLSbRv)

Tommy Lee Jones one of my favourite Actors.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: sarapuk on January 27, 2021, 01:43:13 PM
In all seriousness, Nigel, will you be kind enough to give me the name of the book? I really would like to read it. It is important to keep an open mind. If I am wrong and the Yeti does exist I will owe many people an apology. And I do,very much, love to read. My apologies if I have offended you.   thanky1


Definitely not offended, quite the opposite i'm enjoying the banter amongst a pleasant group of people and i've no problem with people being skeptical. Plus i'm enjoying the journey here, my understanding of the bigfoot phenomena has made  a quantum leap with this book - "Sasquatch: Legend meets Science" same title as the video.

Absolutely. This is an excellent Forum, probably the best of its kind in the World. Its good that we should dig into all the various Theories, criticise and whatever, but be nice to one another as well.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: RidgeWatcher on January 27, 2021, 01:57:31 PM
I found this take on the issue of Bigfoot profound and enlightening, hope you enjoy:
[url]https://youtu.be/9ukvQfUlAog[url]

Yes, I get carried away sometimes myself, Thank you, sarapuk.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: eurocentric on January 28, 2021, 05:03:47 AM
The man who started the Bigfoot craze, in 1958, was found to have faked some footprints, and he later worked with the man who claimed to have filmed a yeti on his first stab at making a documentary, from which the following 'lovely bunch of coconuts' still photo is taken. That film is now widely considered a hoax, especially after a Hollywood special effects man later claimed he made the suit. These stunts notably followed earlier Everest climbers' internationally publicised claims to have seen a yeti in the Himalayas.

(https://i.ibb.co/cFfhJys/patty-hi-res-960-v1-orig.jpg) (https://ibb.co/6P90Yyq)

The Loch Ness monster tales go back hundreds of years, but it wasn't until a 'reputable' man photographed the 'monster', a surgeon, someone seen then, and now, as a reliable witness due to his profession, that the international public imagination caught on, and again other versions appeared in lakes around the world. Years later the surgeon's photo was proven to have been a hoax, admitted to 60 years on.

I suspect that what happens is some historians uncover redundant mythology, some of it tribal and dating back to a time when the Sun was worshipped and some animals were considered to possess supernatural powers, and in the 20th century they staged hoaxes which carried greater credibility because they appeared to have a researched lineage with the past. Then, seeing the success of the hoax, other countries developed their own versions, in the same manner the recent 2001 Space Odyssey monoliths appearing over the New Year were copied around the world.

So there is a pattern to these things, and meanwhile one thing remains a constant - there is never any evidence.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Nigel Evans on January 28, 2021, 05:49:14 AM
I found this take on the issue of Bigfoot profound and enlightening, hope you enjoy:
https://youtu.be/9ukvQfUlAog

Yes, I get carried away sometimes myself, Thank you, sarapuk.
 (https://youtu.be/9ukvQfUlAog

Yes, I get carried away sometimes myself, Thank you, sarapuk.)

I didn't know there was an Australian yeti!

.
https://youtu.be/9ukvQfUlAog

Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Nigel Evans on January 28, 2021, 05:54:56 AM


So there is a pattern to these things, and meanwhile one thing remains a constant - there is never any evidence.
Professor Jeff Meldrum and others would argue against you and they are experts in their fields and you are not (i assume).

https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B003JH8MBA/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?_encoding=UTF8&btkr=1
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Nigel Evans on January 28, 2021, 05:55:35 AM
In all seriousness, Nigel, will you be kind enough to give me the name of the book? I really would like to read it. It is important to keep an open mind. If I am wrong and the Yeti does exist I will owe many people an apology. And I do,very much, love to read. My apologies if I have offended you.   thanky1


Definitely not offended, quite the opposite i'm enjoying the banter amongst a pleasant group of people and i've no problem with people being skeptical. Plus i'm enjoying the journey here, my understanding of the bigfoot phenomena has made  a quantum leap with this book - "Sasquatch: Legend meets Science" same title as the video.

Absolutely. This is an excellent Forum, probably the best of its kind in the World. Its good that we should dig into all the various Theories, criticise and whatever, but be nice to one another as well.
Absolutely.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Nigel Evans on January 28, 2021, 06:07:08 AM
I heard from a lion expert that the reason many African native people walk barefoot is because we have bones in our feet that will vibrate if a dangerous animal is nearby giving a low vibrating growl like lions or elephants do. If they wore shoes or sandals they wouldn't pick up the warning vibration in their feet.
All the circumstantial evidence is just exactly that, no matter how plentiful it is.  The main consistent thing is that these animals are never caught.  It's amazing that these prints are found of giant feet in the woods but these trails are never followed by a tracker or dogs ? how can all the tracks have disappeared ? Tracks like those would be visible in a forest to even a novice tracker.  Dogs could get on a trail like that the next day but they are never used.  I don't buy it.  All the movies are the same. Long distance shaky dark vague figure.  The people who had one in their sights get an attack of conscience at the last second but happily plug deer, bears, pumas, elk, coyote, bobcat, wolves, and any other critters that are in season.  Nope I do not buy it one bit, never have, but if it gets people out in the woods looking for them at least they are getting fresh air and exercise.

Well I can understand where you are coming from and of course you have valid points. You are correct when you suggest how come we dont have the Physical Evidence. We have Evidence but its only Sightings and Footprints, although some people reckon there is also Hair Samples. But no Yeti or whatever its called. But lets look at it another way. There are many mysteries in the World and the Universe. Many unexplained things. How are Crop Circles formed  ! ? How are Cattle Mutilated in the way that they are ! ?  And how is that there are so many reports of UFO activity ! ? Etc.

The story of the panda is illuminating wrt bigfoot imo. - https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/how-america-fell-love-giant-panda-180956692/ (https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/how-america-fell-love-giant-panda-180956692/)
Basically it took 60 years from stories (and a skin) coming out of China of a vegetarian black and white bear. Skeptics dismissed the story, bears were always completely black, brown or white and omnivorous apex predators, what nonsense! There was even speculation of the skin being a type of racoon. The local mountain people all swore of it's existence and considered to it to be a kind of spirit, a deity.

The issue was solved (60 years later) by wealthy individuals mounting an enormous expedition to find the animal.


So perhaps we're in a similar period now perhaps with bigfoot. Only this panda doesn't like the limelight.....
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Star man on January 28, 2021, 06:27:17 AM
I heard from a lion expert that the reason many African native people walk barefoot is because we have bones in our feet that will vibrate if a dangerous animal is nearby giving a low vibrating growl like lions or elephants do. If they wore shoes or sandals they wouldn't pick up the warning vibration in their feet.
All the circumstantial evidence is just exactly that, no matter how plentiful it is.  The main consistent thing is that these animals are never caught.  It's amazing that these prints are found of giant feet in the woods but these trails are never followed by a tracker or dogs ? how can all the tracks have disappeared ? Tracks like those would be visible in a forest to even a novice tracker.  Dogs could get on a trail like that the next day but they are never used.  I don't buy it.  All the movies are the same. Long distance shaky dark vague figure.  The people who had one in their sights get an attack of conscience at the last second but happily plug deer, bears, pumas, elk, coyote, bobcat, wolves, and any other critters that are in season.  Nope I do not buy it one bit, never have, but if it gets people out in the woods looking for them at least they are getting fresh air and exercise.

Well I can understand where you are coming from and of course you have valid points. You are correct when you suggest how come we dont have the Physical Evidence. We have Evidence but its only Sightings and Footprints, although some people reckon there is also Hair Samples. But no Yeti or whatever its called. But lets look at it another way. There are many mysteries in the World and the Universe. Many unexplained things. How are Crop Circles formed  ! ? How are Cattle Mutilated in the way that they are ! ?  And how is that there are so many reports of UFO activity ! ? Etc.

The story of the panda is illuminating wrt bigfoot imo. - https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/how-america-fell-love-giant-panda-180956692/ (https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/how-america-fell-love-giant-panda-180956692/)
Basically it took 60 years from stories (and a skin) coming out of China of a vegetarian black and white bear. Skeptics dismissed the story, bears were always completely black, brown or white and omnivorous apex predators, what nonsense! There was even speculation of the skin being a type of racoon. The local mountain people all swore of it's existence and considered to it to be a kind of spirit, a deity.

The issue was solved (60 years later) by wealthy individuals mounting an enormous expedition to find the animal.


So perhaps we're in a similar period now perhaps with bigfoot. Only this panda doesn't like the limelight.....

How many years did it take to convince people that the world wasn't flat?  Caution is required because if you think you know everything you are unlikely to learn anything.  Without researching all the evidence and keeping an open mind you will always conclude what you want to believe.  Whether it is the truth or not.  Saying that, until there is proof positive you should never conclude anything absolutely either.

Regards

Star man
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: MDGross on January 28, 2021, 07:28:53 AM
Now Nigel, your theories have always had sound scientific reasoning. Natural selection would have made an ancient humanoid extinct millennia ago. If not that, then inbreeding and such a small gene pool would have led to its demise. There are no tigers with giant, protruding teeth; there are no giant apes; there are no sea serpents; and there are no fur-covered, 8-foot tall humanoids that roam the U.S. or Siberia or anywhere else. Bigfoot is the stuff of legend. From the Loch Ness monster to Bigfoot, people can't resist letting their imaginations run wild. The more exotic and dangerous the creature, the better.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Nigel Evans on January 28, 2021, 07:50:07 AM
Now Nigel, your theories have always had sound scientific reasoning. Natural selection would have made an ancient humanoid extinct millennia ago. If not that, then inbreeding and such a small gene pool would have led to its demise. There are no tigers with giant, protruding teeth; there are no giant apes; there are no sea serpents; and there are no fur-covered, 8-foot tall humanoids that roam the U.S. or Siberia or anywhere else. Bigfoot is the stuff of legend. From the Loch Ness monster to Bigfoot, people can't resist letting their imaginations run wild. The more exotic and dangerous the creature, the better.
Hi there, your answer would be more impressive if you had said - "Now Nigel, i have read Professor Meldrum's book and i still think...."
But you didn't, so it isn't...  bang1
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: DAXXY on January 28, 2021, 08:22:52 AM
Just because someone is an academic does not make them more believable or more trustworthy than anyone else.  Academics can also have their own agendas.  Look at the 'academics' who helped dictators like Hitler.  Academics will ride any gravy train that offers them a living where they can use their talents. They need to make a living like everyone else.  In these days of social media and 'documentaries' being made about supernatural phenomenon the film makers feel better about paying and interviewing doctor A or professor B.  It adds a veneer of academic status to the documentary's content.  It's better than just interviewing Frank C who works on a farm.  But I guarantee every academic will never offer proof of Bigfoot's existence or make anything other than non-committal comments like 'further research is needed'  as they hand the media company their contact details.  lol4  Bigfoot should be seen for what it is.  An old fashioned mythical folklore creature like dragons.

People have a right to their beliefs and many people prefer to sit on fences with their open minds.  Open mindedness is fine until someone like an academic working for a higher power comes along with an agenda and starts to fill in gaps using pseudo-intellectual language and edited video clips and lots of very definite sounding statements which are actually complete non-answers.  An open mind is like an open box. Ready to be filled by anyone, you could grow nourishing herbs in your box or you could allow someone else to put a rattlesnake in your box.

If you look at an earlier mass delusion in history 'Witchcraft'.  Witches were actually women healers in rural communities and they knew loads of knowledge but not necessarily why things worked. They would help expectant mothers and heal the sick.  The magic wand comes from a small hardwood staff the 'witch' would carry when visiting expectant mothers to tell them when a baby would be born.  This still exists today in gynecology as the uterine sound.  The mass witch killings across Europe were to establish men as the fountain of all healing and medical knowledge.  Knowledge then came from the wealthy educated male dominated classes.  I wonder how many open minded people allowed themselves to be led to watch their local witch go up in smoke and believed what they were being told by their local dignitaries about how evil their local healers were ? How they cast magic spells using their wands, cooked children, turned themselves in to black cats, or flew on their broomsticks.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Nigel Evans on January 28, 2021, 09:05:59 AM
I've known girls who really flew on their broomstick. Most of them had a black cat. I wonder if i was bewitched?

Best to keep an open mind...
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: MDGross on January 28, 2021, 09:15:34 AM
Well said DAXXY. Shame on you, Nigel (unless you are just having fun???!!!). Evolution and natural selection determine life on earth. No exceptions. Of course, if you can post a photo of you standing with Bigfoot, I will need to rethink everything.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: eurocentric on January 28, 2021, 09:23:46 AM
Just because someone is an academic does not make them more believable or more trustworthy than anyone else.  Academics can also have their own agendas.  Look at the 'academics' who helped dictators like Hitler.  Academics will ride any gravy train that offers them a living where they can use their talents. They need to make a living like everyone else.  In these days of social media and 'documentaries' being made about supernatural phenomenon the film makers feel better about paying and interviewing doctor A or professor B.  It adds a veneer of academic status to the documentary's content.  It's better than just interviewing Frank C who works on a farm.  But I guarantee every academic will never offer proof of Bigfoot's existence or make anything other than non-committal comments like 'further research is needed'  as they hand the media company their contact details.  lol4  Bigfoot should be seen for what it is.  An old fashioned mythical folklore creature like dragons.

People have a right to their beliefs and many people prefer to sit on fences with their open minds.  Open mindedness is fine until someone like an academic working for a higher power comes along with an agenda and starts to fill in gaps using pseudo-intellectual language and edited video clips and lots of very definite sounding statements which are actually complete non-answers.  An open mind is like an open box. Ready to be filled by anyone, you could grow nourishing herbs in your box or you could allow someone else to put a rattlesnake in your box.

If you look at an earlier mass delusion in history 'Witchcraft'.  Witches were actually women healers in rural communities and they knew loads of knowledge but not necessarily why things worked. They would help expectant mothers and heal the sick.  The magic wand comes from a small hardwood staff the 'witch' would carry when visiting expectant mothers to tell them when a baby would be born.  This still exists today in gynecology as the uterine sound.  The mass witch killings across Europe were to establish men as the fountain of all healing and medical knowledge.  Knowledge then came from the wealthy educated male dominated classes.  I wonder how many open minded people allowed themselves to be led to watch their local witch go up in smoke and believed what they were being told by their local dignitaries about how evil their local healers were ? How they cast magic spells using their wands, cooked children, turned themselves in to black cats, or flew on their broomsticks.

Or that a donkey once spoke to a man and this was because an angel inhabited its body... it just goes to show that things written in books by the 'experts' of their day are not automatically what they seem, or worthy of keeping an open mind for.

Tibetan monks thought they had a 300-year-old yeti scalp, but when they were finally convinced to let it go off for testing, by none other than Sir Edmund Hillary, it turned out to be made of goat fur. A similar tale applies to a yeti hand, found to be human. Hair samples once sent to the FBI by the founder of a so-called bigfoot group turned out to be deer.

The only 'evidence' we have are footprints, and the first US ones were fake.

The world's leading yeti hunters, one man after them for 60 years, now claim it to be an Asian bear. The leading hunters no longer believe it is a unique animal, and given all the technology available today how could a species of large animal, totalling hundreds or thousands of individuals in order to be a viable breeding pool, remain undiscovered across several continents.

And then there's the obscure videos, which are always jerky, never settling on the subject for longer than a half second, out-of-focus, and low-fi, like some low budget found footage movie, so that nobody knows what they're looking at and can therefore easily be led.

The DPI has its own yeti, a photo which is of a man for the sake of a little enhancement. It just goes to show that people see what they want to see, and they believe what they want to believe.

(https://i.ibb.co/J3620CY/Photo500598-Enhanced-Colorized.jpg) (https://ibb.co/nPdfZRX)
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: DAXXY on January 28, 2021, 09:27:20 AM
You have to remember also that anyone open minded about Bigfoot is actually being led.  Why ? because their behavior is being modified.  They watch the documentaries and hence the commercials.  They buy the merchandise and books and DVD's.  They go on trips at their own expense to Bigfoot events.  They need to ask themselves who is doing the leading and why ?  who is ultimately benefiting from their 'open mindedness'.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Nigel Evans on January 28, 2021, 10:17:02 AM
Shame on you, Nigel (unless you are just having fun???!!!).
kewl1
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Nigel Evans on January 28, 2021, 10:29:00 AM


The only 'evidence' we have are footprints, and the first US ones were fake.


No Meldrum states that expert analysis of the relevant hairs is that they are of an unknown ape, the footprints are from a creature as agreed by several experts. There is of course the video evidence and the opinion of indigenous people who accept it as fact plus many thousands of non indigenous who claim to have seen it or heard extremely loud screams inconsistent with any other animal (i've read in Russia alone it's 5000 people including it seems Vladimir Putin - https://siberiantimes.com/other/others/news/vladimir-putin-sights-a-yeti-family-in-remote-siberian-mountains/ . Meldrum was involved recently in an investigation of a Siberian yeti but decided it probably a hoax.

Meldrum's case is simply that the evidence warrants serious research.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: eurocentric on January 28, 2021, 12:07:49 PM
A lot of his work seems to have been dismissed by his peers as pseudoscience though. From what I have been reading Meldrum seems to be a bit of a colourful maverick in his field.

Have a read of this scientific report about the gene sequencing of many hairs sent in purportedly belonging to yeti/sasquatch/menk/alma from around the world. Examine Table 1 - not a single sample matched to any unknown animal, nor to any ape. Most common match is to a bear.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4100498/

Note the first name they thank in their acknowledgements is Reinhold Messner, who is one of the most accomplished mountaineers in the world and used to believe in the yeti, which he claimed to have seen, and went on numerous expeditions to uncover, but even he now believes it's a bear.  Meldrum gets a mention later down the list too.

Messner will have provided field samples for analysis - where does Meldrum source his in order to arrive at results entirely at odds with this scientific research and why hasn't his findings been heralded internationally and peer-reviewed as unequivocal proof?

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/news/2017/11/yeti-legends-real-animals-dna-bears-himalaya-science/

You cannot be serious when invoking Vladmir Putin as a reliable witness of anything. I wouldn't believe a single thing that disinforming Pinocchio ever said. I'm only surprised he hasn't claimed to have beaten a yeti in an arm wrestle.


Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Nigel Evans on January 28, 2021, 12:45:27 PM
A lot of his work seems to have been dismissed by his peers as pseudoscience though. From what I have been reading Meldrum seems to be a bit of a colourful maverick in his field.

Have a read of this scientific report about the gene sequencing of many hairs sent in purportedly belonging to yeti/sasquatch/menk/alma from around the world. Examine Table 1 - not a single sample matched to any unknown animal, nor to any ape. Most common match is to a bear.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4100498/ (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4100498/)

Note the first name they thank in their acknowledgements is Reinhold Messner, who is one of the most accomplished mountaineers in the world and used to believe in the yeti, which he claimed to have seen, and went on numerous expeditions to uncover, but even he now believes it's a bear.  Meldrum gets a mention later down the list too.

Messner will have provided field samples for analysis - where does Meldrum source his in order to arrive at results entirely at odds with this scientific research and why hasn't his findings been heralded internationally and peer-reviewed as unequivocal proof?

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/news/2017/11/yeti-legends-real-animals-dna-bears-himalaya-science/ (https://www.nationalgeographic.com/news/2017/11/yeti-legends-real-animals-dna-bears-himalaya-science/)

You cannot be serious when invoking Vladmir Putin as a reliable witness of anything. I wouldn't believe a single thing that disinforming Pinocchio ever said. I'm only surprised he hasn't claimed to have beaten a yeti in an arm wrestle.


Meldrum's hairs come from North America and he makes it clear that there is no dna evidence. But experts (from memory) from Russia and London Zoo amongst others say they're from a non human ape.




Strange thing for Putin to make up?
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Ziljoe on January 28, 2021, 01:35:39 PM
The Putin story with the photos of the yeti's and foot prints was to be printed on the 1st of April.  lol2

Think Russia is pulling your leg Nigel lol4
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Nigel Evans on January 28, 2021, 01:38:32 PM
The Putin story with the photos of the yeti's and foot prints was to be printed on the 1st of April.  lol2

Think Russia is pulling your leg Nigel lol4


Ah!  whacky1
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Ziljoe on January 28, 2021, 01:45:02 PM
The media are brats at confusion.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Nigel Evans on January 28, 2021, 02:03:06 PM
The media are brats at confusion.


If the jokes on me, so be it.  kewl1
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: Ziljoe on January 28, 2021, 03:08:15 PM
The media are brats at confusion.


If the jokes on me, so be it.  kewl1

Cool. I used to read everything I could about the yeti , Bigfoot etc . I still get a bit spooked when out in my tent with a wood stove. I don't like going out in the dark for a call of nature. If I hear a twig snap , it's always a long night. Lol
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: sarapuk on January 29, 2021, 05:26:16 AM
The man who started the Bigfoot craze, in 1958, was found to have faked some footprints, and he later worked with the man who claimed to have filmed a yeti on his first stab at making a documentary, from which the following 'lovely bunch of coconuts' still photo is taken. That film is now widely considered a hoax, especially after a Hollywood special effects man later claimed he made the suit. These stunts notably followed earlier Everest climbers' internationally publicised claims to have seen a yeti in the Himalayas.

(https://i.ibb.co/cFfhJys/patty-hi-res-960-v1-orig.jpg) (https://ibb.co/6P90Yyq)

The Loch Ness monster tales go back hundreds of years, but it wasn't until a 'reputable' man photographed the 'monster', a surgeon, someone seen then, and now, as a reliable witness due to his profession, that the international public imagination caught on, and again other versions appeared in lakes around the world. Years later the surgeon's photo was proven to have been a hoax, admitted to 60 years on.

I suspect that what happens is some historians uncover redundant mythology, some of it tribal and dating back to a time when the Sun was worshipped and some animals were considered to possess supernatural powers, and in the 20th century they staged hoaxes which carried greater credibility because they appeared to have a researched lineage with the past. Then, seeing the success of the hoax, other countries developed their own versions, in the same manner the recent 2001 Space Odyssey monoliths appearing over the New Year were copied around the world.

So there is a pattern to these things, and meanwhile one thing remains a constant - there is never any evidence.

Well crazes are not a modern phenomenon. Take Financial Trading. Plenty of crazy goings on in recent times and yet go back hundreds of years and you had The South Sea Bubble and the Dutch Tulip mania etc etc. Regarding Creatures you can go back further than 1958 to find interest in the so called Big Foots of the World. Same with UFO's. As for Evidence, well Sightings are Evidence, believe it or not.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: sarapuk on January 29, 2021, 05:31:38 AM
I found this take on the issue of Bigfoot profound and enlightening, hope you enjoy:
https://youtu.be/9ukvQfUlAog

Yes, I get carried away sometimes myself, Thank you, sarapuk.
 (https://youtu.be/9ukvQfUlAog

Yes, I get carried away sometimes myself, Thank you, sarapuk.)

I didn't know there was an Australian yeti!

.
https://youtu.be/9ukvQfUlAog

Nor me. But I used to read her books when I was younger. She is very clever and sensible.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: sarapuk on January 29, 2021, 06:02:36 AM
Just because someone is an academic does not make them more believable or more trustworthy than anyone else.  Academics can also have their own agendas.  Look at the 'academics' who helped dictators like Hitler.  Academics will ride any gravy train that offers them a living where they can use their talents. They need to make a living like everyone else.  In these days of social media and 'documentaries' being made about supernatural phenomenon the film makers feel better about paying and interviewing doctor A or professor B.  It adds a veneer of academic status to the documentary's content.  It's better than just interviewing Frank C who works on a farm.  But I guarantee every academic will never offer proof of Bigfoot's existence or make anything other than non-committal comments like 'further research is needed'  as they hand the media company their contact details.  lol4  Bigfoot should be seen for what it is.  An old fashioned mythical folklore creature like dragons.

People have a right to their beliefs and many people prefer to sit on fences with their open minds.  Open mindedness is fine until someone like an academic working for a higher power comes along with an agenda and starts to fill in gaps using pseudo-intellectual language and edited video clips and lots of very definite sounding statements which are actually complete non-answers.  An open mind is like an open box. Ready to be filled by anyone, you could grow nourishing herbs in your box or you could allow someone else to put a rattlesnake in your box.

If you look at an earlier mass delusion in history 'Witchcraft'.  Witches were actually women healers in rural communities and they knew loads of knowledge but not necessarily why things worked. They would help expectant mothers and heal the sick.  The magic wand comes from a small hardwood staff the 'witch' would carry when visiting expectant mothers to tell them when a baby would be born.  This still exists today in gynecology as the uterine sound.  The mass witch killings across Europe were to establish men as the fountain of all healing and medical knowledge.  Knowledge then came from the wealthy educated male dominated classes.  I wonder how many open minded people allowed themselves to be led to watch their local witch go up in smoke and believed what they were being told by their local dignitaries about how evil their local healers were ? How they cast magic spells using their wands, cooked children, turned themselves in to black cats, or flew on their broomsticks.

Or that a donkey once spoke to a man and this was because an angel inhabited its body... it just goes to show that things written in books by the 'experts' of their day are not automatically what they seem, or worthy of keeping an open mind for.

Tibetan monks thought they had a 300-year-old yeti scalp, but when they were finally convinced to let it go off for testing, by none other than Sir Edmund Hillary, it turned out to be made of goat fur. A similar tale applies to a yeti hand, found to be human. Hair samples once sent to the FBI by the founder of a so-called bigfoot group turned out to be deer.

The only 'evidence' we have are footprints, and the first US ones were fake.

The world's leading yeti hunters, one man after them for 60 years, now claim it to be an Asian bear. The leading hunters no longer believe it is a unique animal, and given all the technology available today how could a species of large animal, totalling hundreds or thousands of individuals in order to be a viable breeding pool, remain undiscovered across several continents.

And then there's the obscure videos, which are always jerky, never settling on the subject for longer than a half second, out-of-focus, and low-fi, like some low budget found footage movie, so that nobody knows what they're looking at and can therefore easily be led.

The DPI has its own yeti, a photo which is of a man for the sake of a little enhancement. It just goes to show that people see what they want to see, and they believe what they want to believe.

(https://i.ibb.co/J3620CY/Photo500598-Enhanced-Colorized.jpg) (https://ibb.co/nPdfZRX)


Lets not forget that Sightings are Evidence.  As for experts and academics well its true that some of them do have their own agendas etc.  But not all.  People see what they see and interpret what they see in whatever way that they do.  Take that photo that gets some attention because it has been suggested that it may be a Big Foot type creature. To me its a figure that looks like a Human figure, its got a Body, 2 Legs, 2 Arms, an Head.  However I notice that the figure appears to have  2 very long Arms.  Also the Head seems attached to the Body without a Neck, now that could be because of clothing, obviously. But the Arms dont look thick as you would expect with winter clothing. So those are just a couple of things that get me thinking about that figure.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: sarapuk on January 29, 2021, 06:05:03 AM
A lot of his work seems to have been dismissed by his peers as pseudoscience though. From what I have been reading Meldrum seems to be a bit of a colourful maverick in his field.

Have a read of this scientific report about the gene sequencing of many hairs sent in purportedly belonging to yeti/sasquatch/menk/alma from around the world. Examine Table 1 - not a single sample matched to any unknown animal, nor to any ape. Most common match is to a bear.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4100498/

Note the first name they thank in their acknowledgements is Reinhold Messner, who is one of the most accomplished mountaineers in the world and used to believe in the yeti, which he claimed to have seen, and went on numerous expeditions to uncover, but even he now believes it's a bear.  Meldrum gets a mention later down the list too.

Messner will have provided field samples for analysis - where does Meldrum source his in order to arrive at results entirely at odds with this scientific research and why hasn't his findings been heralded internationally and peer-reviewed as unequivocal proof?

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/news/2017/11/yeti-legends-real-animals-dna-bears-himalaya-science/

You cannot be serious when invoking Vladmir Putin as a reliable witness of anything. I wouldn't believe a single thing that disinforming Pinocchio ever said. I'm only surprised he hasn't claimed to have beaten a yeti in an arm wrestle.

Oh dear, I dont think Vlad would take kindly to such an insult.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: eurocentric on January 29, 2021, 07:37:29 AM
Just because someone is an academic does not make them more believable or more trustworthy than anyone else.  Academics can also have their own agendas.  Look at the 'academics' who helped dictators like Hitler.  Academics will ride any gravy train that offers them a living where they can use their talents. They need to make a living like everyone else.  In these days of social media and 'documentaries' being made about supernatural phenomenon the film makers feel better about paying and interviewing doctor A or professor B.  It adds a veneer of academic status to the documentary's content.  It's better than just interviewing Frank C who works on a farm.  But I guarantee every academic will never offer proof of Bigfoot's existence or make anything other than non-committal comments like 'further research is needed'  as they hand the media company their contact details.  lol4  Bigfoot should be seen for what it is.  An old fashioned mythical folklore creature like dragons.

People have a right to their beliefs and many people prefer to sit on fences with their open minds.  Open mindedness is fine until someone like an academic working for a higher power comes along with an agenda and starts to fill in gaps using pseudo-intellectual language and edited video clips and lots of very definite sounding statements which are actually complete non-answers.  An open mind is like an open box. Ready to be filled by anyone, you could grow nourishing herbs in your box or you could allow someone else to put a rattlesnake in your box.

If you look at an earlier mass delusion in history 'Witchcraft'.  Witches were actually women healers in rural communities and they knew loads of knowledge but not necessarily why things worked. They would help expectant mothers and heal the sick.  The magic wand comes from a small hardwood staff the 'witch' would carry when visiting expectant mothers to tell them when a baby would be born.  This still exists today in gynecology as the uterine sound.  The mass witch killings across Europe were to establish men as the fountain of all healing and medical knowledge.  Knowledge then came from the wealthy educated male dominated classes.  I wonder how many open minded people allowed themselves to be led to watch their local witch go up in smoke and believed what they were being told by their local dignitaries about how evil their local healers were ? How they cast magic spells using their wands, cooked children, turned themselves in to black cats, or flew on their broomsticks.

Or that a donkey once spoke to a man and this was because an angel inhabited its body... it just goes to show that things written in books by the 'experts' of their day are not automatically what they seem, or worthy of keeping an open mind for.

Tibetan monks thought they had a 300-year-old yeti scalp, but when they were finally convinced to let it go off for testing, by none other than Sir Edmund Hillary, it turned out to be made of goat fur. A similar tale applies to a yeti hand, found to be human. Hair samples once sent to the FBI by the founder of a so-called bigfoot group turned out to be deer.

The only 'evidence' we have are footprints, and the first US ones were fake.

The world's leading yeti hunters, one man after them for 60 years, now claim it to be an Asian bear. The leading hunters no longer believe it is a unique animal, and given all the technology available today how could a species of large animal, totalling hundreds or thousands of individuals in order to be a viable breeding pool, remain undiscovered across several continents.

And then there's the obscure videos, which are always jerky, never settling on the subject for longer than a half second, out-of-focus, and low-fi, like some low budget found footage movie, so that nobody knows what they're looking at and can therefore easily be led.

The DPI has its own yeti, a photo which is of a man for the sake of a little enhancement. It just goes to show that people see what they want to see, and they believe what they want to believe.

(https://i.ibb.co/J3620CY/Photo500598-Enhanced-Colorized.jpg) (https://ibb.co/nPdfZRX)


Lets not forget that Sightings are Evidence.  As for experts and academics well its true that some of them do have their own agendas etc.  But not all.  People see what they see and interpret what they see in whatever way that they do.  Take that photo that gets some attention because it has been suggested that it may be a Big Foot type creature. To me its a figure that looks like a Human figure, its got a Body, 2 Legs, 2 Arms, an Head.  However I notice that the figure appears to have  2 very long Arms.  Also the Head seems attached to the Body without a Neck, now that could be because of clothing, obviously. But the Arms dont look thick as you would expect with winter clothing. So those are just a couple of things that get me thinking about that figure.

In the context of this discussion there is no witness in the DPI claiming to have seen a yeti.

An eyewitnesses interpretation of what phenomena they saw can be influenced by the lack of familiarity, fear or being directed to something by media precedence. "I saw a strange light in the sky, ergo it must be one them alien spaceships", "I saw a large hairy animal which moved in a unfamiliar manner therefore it must be a hitherto undiscovered species" (and then hair samples, if available, will disprove this).

It seems somewhat hypocritical of you to routinely dismiss more conventional theories about the DPI as "speculation and lacking evidence" and then be overly receptive of phenomena simply on the basis of an eyewitness account about a strange light in the sky they didn't recognise.

The arms of the man in the DPI 'yeti' photo are of perfectly normal proportions. I'm pretty sure most people would agree. You seem to concede this is a man now, when previously you inisisted the snow level, for which there is no scale on the full frame, was such that he must be at least 8ft tall. Ironically you prove how unreliable eyewitness 'evidence' can be.


Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: sarapuk on January 29, 2021, 03:11:17 PM
Just because someone is an academic does not make them more believable or more trustworthy than anyone else.  Academics can also have their own agendas.  Look at the 'academics' who helped dictators like Hitler.  Academics will ride any gravy train that offers them a living where they can use their talents. They need to make a living like everyone else.  In these days of social media and 'documentaries' being made about supernatural phenomenon the film makers feel better about paying and interviewing doctor A or professor B.  It adds a veneer of academic status to the documentary's content.  It's better than just interviewing Frank C who works on a farm.  But I guarantee every academic will never offer proof of Bigfoot's existence or make anything other than non-committal comments like 'further research is needed'  as they hand the media company their contact details.  lol4  Bigfoot should be seen for what it is.  An old fashioned mythical folklore creature like dragons.

People have a right to their beliefs and many people prefer to sit on fences with their open minds.  Open mindedness is fine until someone like an academic working for a higher power comes along with an agenda and starts to fill in gaps using pseudo-intellectual language and edited video clips and lots of very definite sounding statements which are actually complete non-answers.  An open mind is like an open box. Ready to be filled by anyone, you could grow nourishing herbs in your box or you could allow someone else to put a rattlesnake in your box.

If you look at an earlier mass delusion in history 'Witchcraft'.  Witches were actually women healers in rural communities and they knew loads of knowledge but not necessarily why things worked. They would help expectant mothers and heal the sick.  The magic wand comes from a small hardwood staff the 'witch' would carry when visiting expectant mothers to tell them when a baby would be born.  This still exists today in gynecology as the uterine sound.  The mass witch killings across Europe were to establish men as the fountain of all healing and medical knowledge.  Knowledge then came from the wealthy educated male dominated classes.  I wonder how many open minded people allowed themselves to be led to watch their local witch go up in smoke and believed what they were being told by their local dignitaries about how evil their local healers were ? How they cast magic spells using their wands, cooked children, turned themselves in to black cats, or flew on their broomsticks.

Or that a donkey once spoke to a man and this was because an angel inhabited its body... it just goes to show that things written in books by the 'experts' of their day are not automatically what they seem, or worthy of keeping an open mind for.

Tibetan monks thought they had a 300-year-old yeti scalp, but when they were finally convinced to let it go off for testing, by none other than Sir Edmund Hillary, it turned out to be made of goat fur. A similar tale applies to a yeti hand, found to be human. Hair samples once sent to the FBI by the founder of a so-called bigfoot group turned out to be deer.

The only 'evidence' we have are footprints, and the first US ones were fake.

The world's leading yeti hunters, one man after them for 60 years, now claim it to be an Asian bear. The leading hunters no longer believe it is a unique animal, and given all the technology available today how could a species of large animal, totalling hundreds or thousands of individuals in order to be a viable breeding pool, remain undiscovered across several continents.

And then there's the obscure videos, which are always jerky, never settling on the subject for longer than a half second, out-of-focus, and low-fi, like some low budget found footage movie, so that nobody knows what they're looking at and can therefore easily be led.

The DPI has its own yeti, a photo which is of a man for the sake of a little enhancement. It just goes to show that people see what they want to see, and they believe what they want to believe.

(https://i.ibb.co/J3620CY/Photo500598-Enhanced-Colorized.jpg) (https://ibb.co/nPdfZRX)


Lets not forget that Sightings are Evidence.  As for experts and academics well its true that some of them do have their own agendas etc.  But not all.  People see what they see and interpret what they see in whatever way that they do.  Take that photo that gets some attention because it has been suggested that it may be a Big Foot type creature. To me its a figure that looks like a Human figure, its got a Body, 2 Legs, 2 Arms, an Head.  However I notice that the figure appears to have  2 very long Arms.  Also the Head seems attached to the Body without a Neck, now that could be because of clothing, obviously. But the Arms dont look thick as you would expect with winter clothing. So those are just a couple of things that get me thinking about that figure.

In the context of this discussion there is no witness in the DPI claiming to have seen a yeti.

An eyewitnesses interpretation of what phenomena they saw can be influenced by the lack of familiarity, fear or being directed to something by media precedence. "I saw a strange light in the sky, ergo it must be one them alien spaceships", "I saw a large hairy animal which moved in a unfamiliar manner therefore it must be a hitherto undiscovered species" (and then hair samples, if available, will disprove this).

It seems somewhat hypocritical of you to routinely dismiss more conventional theories about the DPI as "speculation and lacking evidence" and then be overly receptive of phenomena simply on the basis of an eyewitness account about a strange light in the sky they didn't recognise.

The arms of the man in the DPI 'yeti' photo are of perfectly normal proportions. I'm pretty sure most people would agree. You seem to concede this is a man now, when previously you inisisted the snow level, for which there is no scale on the full frame, was such that he must be at least 8ft tall. Ironically you prove how unreliable eyewitness 'evidence' can be.

 I dont dismiss any theories. Iam merely pointing out that there are witnesses to the so called Big Foot type creatures. The only Evidence as far as I know in the Dyatlov Case regarding such creatures is the mention of them in that newspaper that was found pinned to near the entrance of the Tent. Now everyone interprets that photo in the way that they do. To me it looks like very long arms with no thickness. The snow level is to do with the height of the figure not the length of the arms. I dont concede anything, because I never said it was a Big Foot type creature. To me the snow appears to be about 2 foot deep near that figure, and that could make that figure up to 8 feet tall.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: RidgeWatcher on January 29, 2021, 07:03:10 PM
I'm with Jane.

I have spoken to three people who have seen what they describe as not a bear or a man in the woods but something else that instilled a great amount of fear in them. I would refrain from ever arrogantly assuming or even telling them that what they experienced was from reading or watching TV. Some posts are downright condescending and continuing rude. Assuming believers of subjects that they do not believe in are uneducated. Unwise mistake. They assume that others who took the same university courses they did believe exactly like they do. This is called Paternalism and Arrogance.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: DAXXY on January 30, 2021, 09:45:15 AM
I'm with Jane.

I have spoken to three people who have seen what they describe as not a bear or a man in the woods but something else that instilled a great amount of fear in them. I would refrain from ever arrogantly assuming or even telling them that what they experienced was from reading or watching TV. Some posts are downright condescending and continuing rude. Assuming believers of subjects that they do not believe in are uneducated. Unwise mistake. They assume that others who took the same university courses they did believe exactly like they do. This is called Paternalism and Arrogance.

It's not paternalism or arrogance to have a different opinion to someone and explain why you think so, this is a forum where people do that.  For it to be paternalism someone has to have authority over you and make decisions for you. Here you are free to believe anything you like and so is everybody else. Nothing is personal and people state what they think.  People shouldn't be offended by someone who totally disbelieves what they choose to believe in.  This is nothing more than healthy difference of opinion.  But there is a darker facet to all this.  This is a concept that has spread from just belief in to commercialism and peoples actions.  It hasn't just remained as a belief, it has become a motivator.   Just like terrorists are motivated by beliefs that others find ridiculous.  What if someone is hurt because of this ? what if a group of youngsters go off in to the forests and come to harm, is it still OK then ?  is it still just harmless belief in fairy tales ?  I don't think so, but that is just my opinion.  There is a psychological reason why people want Bigfoot to exist.  Basically because they feel it would be a nicer world if there was still some kind of mysterious creature out there, and there is something more than what man has already discovered.    There are also growing commercial reasons because Bigfoot means big profits.  I would be interested to hear what things led you to conclude that Bigfoot exists.

https://alumni.berkeley.edu/california-magazine/just-in/2018-10-26/so-why-do-people-believe-bigfoot-anyway
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: RidgeWatcher on January 30, 2021, 10:21:54 AM
"Never fight with a pig, you both get dirty and the pig gets happy"

Just to let the FORUM know that out of the three people I have personally known who all have nervously told me their stories, two had post graduate degrees. One of these men worked for the U.S. Government out in the field, meaning forests. The two other men are professional Alaskan fishermen, the much younger man had at the time no university degree but had worked as a fisherman in the Bearing Sea, within the last ten years or so his fishing boat went down north of the Aleutian Islands and this young man spent 8 hours in a survival suit floating in a round covered life raft before the coast guard could rescue them.

These men don't scare easily.

All of these men had seen a lot, been through a lot and had a lot of experience in nature. Yet, all of them when talking about their experiences seeing Sasquatch/Bigfoot talked almost in a scared voice and had some difficulty describing what they experienced. They were afraid. Big strong men just plain afraid and probably afraid they would be judged harshly by people who are unable to just listen.

I recently read that listen and silent have the same letters in them, since then I try to actively listen more and react less.

Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: DAXXY on January 30, 2021, 10:36:28 AM
The quote is from George Bernard Shaw
'I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and besides, the pig likes it'. One of my favorites.

Yes active listening is a good skill, but it doesn't also mean accepting everything that somebody else tells you at face value.
I wish you well in your beliefs.

 


Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: sarapuk on January 30, 2021, 02:09:22 PM
"Never fight with a pig, you both get dirty and the pig gets happy"

Just to let the FORUM know that out of the three people I have personally known who all have nervously told me their stories, two had post graduate degrees. One of these men worked for the U.S. Government out in the field, meaning forests. The two other men are professional Alaskan fishermen, the much younger man had at the time no university degree but had worked as a fisherman in the Bearing Sea, within the last ten years or so his fishing boat went down north of the Aleutian Islands and this young man spent 8 hours in a survival suit floating in a round covered life raft before the coast guard could rescue them.

These men don't scare easily.

All of these men had seen a lot, been through a lot and had a lot of experience in nature. Yet, all of them when talking about their experiences seeing Sasquatch/Bigfoot talked almost in a scared voice and had some difficulty describing what they experienced. They were afraid. Big strong men just plain afraid and probably afraid they would be judged harshly by people who are unable to just listen.

I recently read that listen and silent have the same letters in them, since then I try to actively listen more and react less.

Nice sensible post. It reminds me of when I did the Big Cat research stuff some years ago. I have posted something else in this Forum. Hundreds of sightings and experiences over the years throughout Britain. Yet the Media and unfortunately many in the Scientific Community didnt believe it possible that Big Cats could be roaming the British Isles. It wasnt until I actually saw something myself that I took a further interest in the subject. The reports I had were amazing. So many very good witnesses including the Police and Miltary and Doctors and Nurses and Landowners and Farmers and Game Keepers and so on. There was even the case of a small Country School where a School Teacher and some Pupils were out in the Playground and heard and saw a Big Cat in nearby bushes. The Police were called and searched the area but found nothing. They told locals to be careful in the woods and fields. That was a quiet part of East Sussex with lots of big Country Estates that are private and somewhat forgotten. That story never got on the main BBC news or much news for that matter.
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: DAXXY on January 30, 2021, 03:50:39 PM
I despair  bang1

https://www.cornwalllive.com/news/cornwall-news/day-bigfoot-stalked-workers-cornwall-4504485
Title: Re: Evidence
Post by: GKM on January 31, 2021, 07:41:32 AM
 lol1 lol2 bigjoke lol4