June 18, 2021, 04:41:27 PM
Dyatlov Pass Forum

Recent Posts

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10
21
General Discussion / Re: Thoughts on the book
« Last post by Igor Pavlov on June 10, 2021, 11:27:03 AM »
I'll write a summary, please correct me if I'm getting anything wrong.

1) Datlov's group was at peace in the tent. It says it's nice and warm. They fell asleep. A tree fell. The lightly wounded were dragging out the heavily wounded. They were dying. The rest froze to death, either in the woods or trying to find help. Yes
2) Authorities received a report of the disappearance of the expedition. They feared the tourists were killed by those working for the geologists or by accident. They were afraid they would be held responsible and punished. Disposal. The authorities couldn't get a report of the disappearance of the expedition, because the bodies were discovered from the air in early February, when no one in Sverdlovsk knew about the disappearance of the group
3) They sent a group not listed anywhere to look for the tourists. (From the plane, a frozen man/woman couple in a hug could be seen). The group found them and the others in the woods. Those who matched the description of "hypothermia" were selected and scattered around the area. So they were "found" later. Yes
4) Those with injuries ended up at the creek where they were later found. Why was Kolevatov among those who succumbed to their wounds and they didn't use his body as well, and an unknown body was used instead? If I understand the references to six bodies and Kolevatov being pulled out of the river with Zolo, Tibo and Lyuda. What did I miss? Most likely, the injured could not be pulled out from under the tree. They were later found by a search party. The conclusion about the possibility of their injury was made on the basis of the discovery of bodies under a tree (autopsy was not performed). Most likely Kolevatov was also under the tree

22
General Discussion / Re: Thoughts on the book
« Last post by Andysek77 on June 10, 2021, 09:40:24 AM »
Amazing. Thank you very much for your reply.

I'll write a summary, please correct me if I'm getting anything wrong.

1) Datlov's group was at peace in the tent. It says it's nice and warm. They fell asleep. A tree fell. The lightly wounded were dragging out the heavily wounded. They were dying. The rest froze to death, either in the woods or trying to find help.
2) Authorities received a report of the disappearance of the expedition. They feared the tourists were killed by those working for the geologists or by accident. They were afraid they would be held responsible and punished. Disposal.
3) They sent a group not listed anywhere to look for the tourists. (From the plane, a frozen man/woman couple in a hug could be seen). The group found them and the others in the woods. Those who matched the description of "hypothermia" were selected and scattered around the area. So they were "found" later.
4) Those with injuries ended up at the creek where they were later found. Why was Kolevatov among those who succumbed to their wounds and they didn't use his body as well, and an unknown body was used instead? If I understand the references to six bodies and Kolevatov being pulled out of the river with Zolo, Tibo and Lyuda. What did I miss?

The work is amazing. So far I've liked Svetlana Os and her Mansi theory but this is truly incredible. It was a shock to me, I always see them running away from the tent downstairs. By the way, what do you think of the slab avalanche simulation when there was no tent at all. It's interesting that the Marie Celeste case has always been the most shocking with the claim that everything was as if they had left a minute before the ship was discovered and it was a lie. It was the same with the tent. There was no chaos, everything was in order. Now we know why. Interesting what a mystery they've inadvertently created. If they had waited to claim hypothermia and actually found the tent in the woods it wouldn't be one of the most remarkable mysteries of the 20th century.
23
Murdered / Re: Army Tactician - Definitely Ambush, potential events
« Last post by Jean Daniel Reuss on June 10, 2021, 04:59:29 AM »



Part 1 : First, here are 3 preliminary warnings.


1 ==>  sararapuk is right: There is no juridically valid absolute certainty about the DPI.

 In other words, the explanation for the death of the 9 hikers is a problem that admits of several solutions.

This was also the idea of Vladimir Askinadzi, who has a more humorous view
In the meantime, all we have left to do is to entertain ourselves intellectually with a game of investigation.


2 ==> Alas! I was not able to force Satan to stay behind me since I now have my theory. I hope that Loose}{Cannon will forgive me and tolerate me !!!
    (All theories are flawed....... Get Behind Me Satan!!!)

I was inspired by the remarks and arguments of the authors called : supporters of the criminal version or homicide theory who are mainly (chronological order):
Per Inge Oestmoen (since March 12, 2018) Vladimir Askinadzi ("I don't know who or why were they murdered.")- Eduard Tumanov - Liyla79 - hoosiergose - NightLurker - armyeng...

And now I am adapting Aleks Kandr's (Алекс К  on https://taina.li/forum) very complete exposition by eliminating from his text the (fortunately few and useless) silly references to astrology.
http://mystery12home.ru/t-ub-gr-dyatlova
https://taina.li/forum/index.php?topic=1002.0


3 ==> I do not know yet what WAB's theory is exactly, but what he wrote for him can also apply to me:
   
  "You need a very large amount of text to explain your position. Especially considering the fact that many positions need to be explained in great detail, because they are not understood...
..............
 I do not have the energy, time or ability to do that...
..............
 I am not a writer, I am a researcher, I want the physical result of what happened, not the number of letters on a paper that will be read without understanding the meaning of what's written there..."



Part 2 :The 8 paragraphs of the armyeng sequence.


.........this is how small armed tactics play out..........................
Likely sequence:
1.) ...
2.) Hikers pitched tent.....
3.)....
4.)....
5.)....
6. ....
7.)....
8.) Attackers exited ..................

I almost agree. I will make some further refinements and significant differences in these 8 paragraphs of the likely sequence written by armyeng at a later date.

In the meantime, in order to fix ideas, here are some broad outlines of my explanatory hypothesis, which is very similar to Aleks Kandr's theory.

No staging - No forgery or false documents - Essential advantage for the attackers of total surprise and initiative - No firearms, only big sticks wrapped in rags to hit hard and silently...................

The instigators and commanders (clients) were one or several Stalinist officers of the NKVD, having high ranks, who feared, with great reason (particularly during the XXI° congress of the CPSU), the de-Stalinization and thus the purge of the former NKVD leaders by the KGB.

In other words, these Ivdellag officers did not want to be arrested and sentenced to death as they had been since Stalin's death:
Bogdan Kobulov, Lavrenti Beria, Mikhail Ryumin, Viktor Abakumov, Vsevolod Merkulov, Amaiak Kobulov, Boris Rodos....... and many other lesser known ones.

The mercenaries recruited for the surprise attack on the evening of February 1, 1959 were 3 former Gulag camp guards who were specialized in the pursuit and extermination of the very few Zeks who seldom escaped from the camps.

The 3 mercenaries attacking had also for mission not to make any staging in the zone of the fights (slope of the Kholat Syakhl, Cedar, Den) so that the Khrushchevian governors in the Kremlin understand immediately that it was about a terrorist attack and so to show the power of the opposition to the Khrushchev's Thaw.
     

Part 3 : Something that could be called paragraph 9 of armyeng and Per Inge Oestmoen.

9.) Evgeniy Buyanov = "investigator Korotaev was secretly asked to conduct an unofficial investigation before the official one was launched.  (This date of launch is February 6, 1959).

Reply #15
............................................


...  We know that the deaths of the nine students was known in Moscow on February 6, which was long before anyone in Sverdlovsk or Ivdel had any reason to suspect that something had happened to the Dyatlov group. There was a written report which was already made on February 6. Such a report with a preparation for a search is unlikely to have been written immediately after the event had become known.

Thus it would seem that Moscow knew about the fate of the students some days before the sixth of February, which, I reiterate, was long before anyone in the Sverdlovsk area could suspect anything. How did they know in Moscow that the nine were dead at that early date [?], unless the mission was planned and decided upon in Moscow?

               My hypothesis to explain this date of February 6 is very simple:

There were 3 mercenary killers, who followed the tracks of the hikers from North-2, and who attacked the tent on the evening of February 1, 1959 (let's say for simplicity at 8 PM), at the place where the tent was found (by the rescuers) on february 26 .

     As Eduard Tumanov says the "hikers took part in a fight... with outsiders.........."

This "Altercation on the pass" was in reality a succession of fierce hand-to-hand fights (but without firearms) which ended at 6 AM on February 2 with the death (plus some mutilations) of the 9 hikers and thus with the total victory of the 3 attacking killers.

After having rested and after having eaten the provisions (of the hikers) in the tent, the 3 attackers amused themselves (perhaps without any rational motive or to replace their lost soft leg bands) by cutting the tent canvas with the knife which had been used to remove the 4 eyes and the tongue.
.........
By following (in the opposite direction of the outward journey) the deep tracks from the tent to North-2 the 3 attackers were able to reach North-2 on February 2nd around 7 PM.
............
Good night's rest (February 2-3) at North-2 for the 3 very tired attackers...
.............
The next morning February 3, a motor vehicle with driver (speed on the snowy track=30 km/h) brought back the 3 attackers, to Vizhay, before noon (February 3).
................
But the 3 attackers were known to be, as it was said, unsavory brutal characters. The marks and bruises on their faces (Kolgomorove, Slobodin, Dyatlov...had hit hard while trying to defend themselves on the slope) looked suspicious.
...........
The 3 attackers were quickly reported to the authorities. (February 3 or 4).
..................
On the morning of February 4 at least one of the 3 attackers was arrested by the KGB.
................
After 2 days of intensive interrogations, that is to say on the evening of February 5, 2021, the suspect(s) had spoken. (because when it is necessary the KGB had effective and fast means to make the suspects speak).

Thus, from February 6, the KGB knew everything they wanted to know about the murders of the 9 hikers.
From then on it was completely useless to go and check on the spot, on the slopes of Kholat Syakhl. It was enough to wait peacefully for the continuation of the events: the discovery of the tent on February 26 (or 24?).
 
The KGB agents prefer to be more efficient by staying inside their comfortable and well heated offices, close to their phones, folders and papers.........
24
General Discussion / Re: Thoughts on the book
« Last post by Igor Pavlov on June 10, 2021, 04:44:43 AM »
1) The hikers set up a tent in the forest where a tree fell on them, causing various injuries.   Yes

2) When the authorities learned of the group's disappearance, they wanted to bring a report to find them immediately. And before they were found, they reported a successful operation. Little did they know that a major investigation was about to unfold. That's why they created the illusion of discovery, and because they announced that they had discovered the tent and the six bodies, they created an illusion. They took the first five bodies and some other unknowns to keep the management happy. Do I understand correctly? No. The local authorities mistakenly decided that the tourists were killed because of the works carried out in that area. To avoid responsibility, it was decided to explain it by natural causes. Before the search began, no one from Ivdel reported on finding the dead. But the search began, and the plan had to be changed.

3) They dumped the bodies of Zolo, Ljuda, Tibo into the ravine because the reason for death in the plowing was hypothermia? Later, when the fear of trouble with the authorities had passed, they were "found" again? So the whole action was only because they reported the successful discovery of the tent and the bodies on the hillside, and they couldn't afford to show the tent in the forest and the bodies fatally injured by the tree because it would turn out they were lying? The bodies were hidden in the stream because they had injuries that did not correspond to the version of death from natural causes

4) The bodies of Datlov, Zina and Slobodin, as well as Dorosenko and Krivonisenko were manipulated and set up to create a perfect "Potemkin village" perfect deception? Yes, so that an official investigation can draw a conclusion about the natural causes of death on their basis

5) The reason for this action was then only because of the lying of the authorities? see above (2)

6) with the exception of Slobodin, all died in the forest? Tourists with serious injuries died in the forest. The others tried to save them, lost their strength and froze in the forest and on the slope

7) I ask because I'm not sure I've got this right. It's a huge amount of data and information. Admirable work. Thank you


25
General Discussion / Re: Thoughts on the book
« Last post by Andysek77 on June 10, 2021, 03:24:03 AM »
Hi, Teddy.

I'm from the Czech Republic and unfortunately I don't speak English very well. I bought your fascinating book in Kindle version and read it using deepl translator. I just want to ask if I understood everything.

1) The hikers set up a tent in the forest where a tree fell on them, causing various injuries.

2) When the authorities learned of the group's disappearance, they wanted to bring a report to find them immediately. And before they were found, they reported a successful operation. Little did they know that a major investigation was about to unfold. That's why they created the illusion of discovery, and because they announced that they had discovered the tent and the six bodies, they created an illusion. They took the first five bodies and some other unknowns to keep the management happy. Do I understand correctly?

3) They dumped the bodies of Zolo, Ljuda, Tibo into the ravine because the reason for death in the plowing was hypothermia? Later, when the fear of trouble with the authorities had passed, they were "found" again? So the whole action was only because they reported the successful discovery of the tent and the bodies on the hillside, and they couldn't afford to show the tent in the forest and the bodies fatally injured by the tree because it would turn out they were lying?

4) The bodies of Datlov, Zina and Slobodin, as well as Dorosenko and Krivonisenko were manipulated and set up to create a perfect "Potemkin village" perfect deception?

5) The reason for this action was then only because of the lying of the authorities?

6) with the exception of Slobodin, all died in the forest?

7) I ask because I'm not sure I've got this right. It's a huge amount of data and information. Admirable work.

Thanks for answer.
Andy
26
General Discussion / Re: The ravine deaths - a theory
« Last post by Jacques-Emile on June 07, 2021, 06:36:34 PM »
Возрожденный(?). All right here on site. Read.
27
General Discussion / Re: The ravine deaths - a theory
« Last post by Jacques-Emile on June 07, 2021, 06:30:50 PM »
Read the precise words of autopsy by Воскресение(?). In English or Russian. This is one of the Bibles to read along with 1079. Otherwise is blind speculation, disrespecting the dead.
28
General Discussion / Re: The ravine deaths - a theory
« Last post by Manti on June 07, 2021, 03:10:11 PM »

 


What if the dashed area is the tent and not the den, and the orange track is a tree not a heavy vehicle? I wonder what Nigel's reaction would be
29
General Discussion / Re: Thoughts on the book
« Last post by Teddy on June 07, 2021, 02:32:28 PM »
"the stove, which fell during the avalanche"

is now "the stove, which broke away during the fall"

Or is it not ok to post fragments like this here?
Actually is there a subforum planned where people who have read the book can ask questions without spoiling it for others? Some questions came up as I am reading but if I posted them here, it would practically reveal everything.

You input is greatly appreciated. It is ok to ask question that give away the theory. Secrecy is an exit we passed long time ago. I will be traveling the next two days but I will address all issues and questions you post in this topic.

This is great help. I was hoping to get support from the forum. I had proof readers for some chapters hence inconsistencies like this. That's the problem with getting help from people that are not fully aware of the case - fall becomes an avalanche.

Thank you again, for buying, reading and trying to help. This is exactly what I need. I say "I" because Igor's manuscript is ok, only the book in English is faulty at times due to the short terms I had for translation and publishing.

Please keep it coming.
30
General Discussion / Re: Thoughts on the book
« Last post by Manti on June 07, 2021, 12:10:40 PM »
I am nearing the end of the book, and I came across this fragment: "the stove, which fell during the avalanche". I think instead of "avalanche", what was meant here is the incident with the tree, right?

Or is it not ok to post fragments like this here?


Actually is there a subforum planned where people who have read the book can ask questions without spoiling it for others? Some questions came up as I am reading but if I posted them here, it would practically reveal everything.
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10