Theories Discussion > Yeti / Snowman
Menk Face...Zoomed in and clearly Simian
KFinn:
--- Quote from: marieuk on July 16, 2021, 02:51:53 PM ---I did read an article from a Russian newspaper saying that Igor did have a gun. Obviously, this doesn't mean it was true. I'll try and find it, but yes you're right, if you're heading off to the wilds inhabited by bears etc make sure you have a gun with you! By the way I'd recommend listening to Teddy's interview with Natasha Cooper to everyone. She mentions a lot of things you may or may not already know and it gives you an idea of just how much research has gone into the book. Sorry for going off topic a little bit AmericanKevin.
--- End quote ---
I have read that, as well. I was trying to find it today and could not locate it, however. I will keep searching.
marieuk:
I found the article.
https://www.kp.ru/daily/27243/4371547/
Manti:
Thank you for the link! Interesting article indeed.
Although the difference in the weather reports can be explained I think with Maslennikov's being weather in Burmantovo which is not that close and not on a mountain, and the contemporary weather report estimating the temperatures on Kholat which will be naturally colder.
And if they did have a gun, it not only makes a Menk attack or animal attack an unlikely cause, it also provides a motive for another theory.... Guns must have been very hard to obtain and valuable at that time... Anyway, that's speculation for another thread.
americankevin:
Thanks guys. Ill check out the article. For me it really comes down to their crushing/mpact injuries, the warnings of the Mansi, the hikers own writings about the Menk, the Menk photo and the removed tongue which we know was ripped out while she was still alive. Mansi said Menk ate deer tongue...which my tribe and many others do btw. But we cut it out. What human or Soviet soldier could rip out a human tongue and why would they? Especially when the victim was still alive? I heard some chatter that the older member who joined the expedition last minute could have been KGB. I really think its possible that the Soviets were indeed testing new munition technologies there. Its the perfect location due to a complete vaccum of humans at the "Mountain of the Dead" and "Don't Go There". Maybe the hikers had been intentionally allowed to go there by the USSR Government for some type of testing purposes? Basically to see how 1) said technology would effect human subjects or to 2) have recorded uniformed observant testimonials to learn how such technology would be interpreted by an enemy. Thus a KGB guy was sent along to keep tabs. Ok, but what I think then happened is that the USSR Military/Gov couldn't even imagine that the stated reason why this area was never visited by the indigenous people (Mansi)...was actually real and not a myth. A tribe of very violent and territorial Menks really did live there. All this munition testing thus got them very riled up. So when they finally see some humans...it really pissed them off. Even then, perhaps the attack wouldn't have happened...if it hadn't been for the Military Munitions tests occuring while the hikers were a present. The ladt photos clearly show lights that could have been such tests. If the case, at that point...all bets were off. The Menk associated this violent testing activity...which they didn't understand...as being created by the Dyatlov 9. Mansi said those Menk killed people anyway when they entered that territory. But exploding munitions going off when the hikers were actually there lead to several of them being killed on the spot by the Menk. BTW, the hikers were killed in the very manner that a massive ape/man primate creature would kill an enemy. Crushing blows and powerful strikes. The other survivors not attacked directly by the Menks then died from exposure. If USSR Soldiers had violently killed the original 4 or 5...why would they then leave the rest alone for a considerable time to scavenge the dead and then freeze to death? Also does anyone really believe that little Mansi people on skis during horrible Ural weather or men from other locations...who also have been on skis...would be able to generate suck crushing blows? Why wouldn't humans just stab or shoot the hikers? The snow looked deep too. Have any of you guys ever ran in deep snow in extreme sub-zero temps as the wind was blowing...during complete night time darkness to boot? Im from South Dakota...one of the coldest places on Earth during the winter with horrible conditions. Im telling you now...humans on skis or on foot in snow couldn't generate the crushing force needed to kill these people. Shoot...its likely impossible for any human...under any weather conditions...to kill someone like that. As for the munitions doing it...did the corpses have shrapnel in them? Were there horrible external injuries that should align with such explosions? Im telling you...the Soviet Military realized Menks were real after this event, but of course couldn't reveal their technology or the fact that they may have intentionally sent young people there to basically be used/tested on. The Menk appears to me to be the most likely theory. And certain interests are determined that this theory not be investigated. Thus the failure for any real forensic study of the purported Menk photo ever being conducted...not even by Big Foot researchers. A gazillion high tech studies of the Patterson-Gimblin film..nada for the Dyatlov Menk photo. Why? Unlike Patterson-Gmblin...the Soviet Military was involved in events at Dyatlov Pass.
RMK:
--- Quote from: Manti on July 16, 2021, 08:48:51 AM ---There are so many decisions the Dyatlov Group took that I don't understand... but one of them is not taking a gun with them.
We know from photos that they took shotguns on previous hikes.
The area of the incident is inhabited by bears, though they would have been hibernating, and moose. In my mind this is the main reason to take a gun... if a curious moose approaches, just shoot a warning shot into the air. This is the safest for both parties... the moose will leave you alone.
If you don't have a gun and meet a moose in the forest, you're in trouble.
There was a Mansi "chum" with moose antlers found nearby so we know there are moose in the area.
--- End quote ---
WAB once gave some remarks on the Dyatlovites' choice not to bring a gun with them, and he considered it a reasonable choice. The thing is, the discussion in that thread was concerned with the danger of bears, not moose. Dyatlov & Company wouldn't need a weapon to deal with bears, because the brown bear is dormant in late January & early February, and polar bears don't range that far south.
So, what about moose? In the "Elk(s) attack" thread, it's suggested that perhaps moose were not regarded as a serious danger in late January & early February, since that's neither rutting season nor the time when cows would be defending young calves. On the other hand, as that thread's OP reminds us, a wild animal might attack a human at any time. I guess I can see the possible threat of moose as a reason why Dyatlov & Company might have wanted to bring a firearm with them.
--- Quote from: Manti on July 16, 2021, 08:48:51 AM ---It is widely believed that none of their possessions were stolen but.. is it possible that they actually did take a gun and it went missing?
--- End quote ---
--- Quote from: marieuk on July 16, 2021, 02:51:53 PM ---I did read an article from a Russian newspaper saying that Igor did have a gun. Obviously, this doesn't mean it was true. I'll try and find it, but yes you're right, if you're heading off to the wilds inhabited by bears etc make sure you have a gun with you!
--- End quote ---
I do seriously doubt that Igor Dyatlov was carrying a firearm on his final trek. If I correctly understand WAB in the first thread I linked, civilians (except those who hunted for a living) would only be able to obtain shotguns, or smooth-barrel long guns that fire small-caliber rifle rounds. No such weapons are visible in any of the photos, nor mentioned in any diaries, nor documented as having been recovered from the scene of the Incident. Such weapons are not easily concealed, either.
Might it have been a handgun? From what I can tell, the Russian word used in that KP article, "ружье", refers to small arms in general (although input from a fluent Russian speaker would be welcome on that point), so that doesn't help to narrow down what type of weapon it might be. I very much doubt that it was a handgun, though. AFAIU, handguns were strictly controlled in that time and place, and there was no legitimate way an ordinary Soviet civilian could obtain one.
--- Quote from: Manti on July 17, 2021, 09:20:17 AM ---And if they did have a gun, it not only makes a Menk attack or animal attack an unlikely cause, it also provides a motive for another theory.... Guns must have been very hard to obtain and valuable at that time... Anyway, that's speculation for another thread.
--- End quote ---
Yeah, maybe we do need a separate thread to continue this line of discussion.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version