Theories Discussion > Altercation on the pass

Altercation on the pass

<< < (11/13) > >>


--- Quote from: sparrow on July 27, 2020, 01:31:34 AM ---  Zina"s top two pairs of pants were undone as if someone had been trying to remove them, maybe for the purpose of wearing them also in an attempt to stay warm.

--- End quote ---
She was significantly far away from the rest of the hikers that anyone of them trying to remove her clothing is unlikely.

Jean Daniel Reuss:

--- Quote from: sparrow on August 10, 2020, 01:47:21 AM ---   Reply #48
In reading Zina's diary, date 29.1.59, "Burned mittens and Yurkin's second quilted jacket."  Zina was quite upset with Yuri. ........... I don't know about in the Russian language, but in English when you make a statement like the one above, the "I" is usually understood.

--- End quote ---

Are you saying that Kolmogorova deliberately destroyed some very useful warm clothes ?
It is unlikely because it does not seem consistent with everything we know about Kolmogorova's mentality.

--- Quote from: sparrow on August 10, 2020, 02:51:13 AM ---   Reply #49
I do believe there may have been some kind of altercation among some of the hikers based on some of their injuries.  And something else that bothers me a lot is that if you look at the clothes being worn by the hikers at their death...

--- End quote ---

A fight between the hikers resulting in serious injuries would only have been possible under the action of a powerful drug. 
And a laboratory of the Soviet army could have taken the initiative to test a new psychotropic product poorly known through Zolotaryov .
   See : Altercation on the pass , February 03, 2020, 02:04:13 PM  ---> Reply #15

I am now eliminating that hypothes because it is very improbable that Soviet army laboratories improvised a test incorporating civilians (non-military Soviet citizens).
  See : Altercation on the pass ,  March 24, 2020, 04:07:07 PM     ---> Reply #18

--- Quote from: Georgi on August 13, 2020, 10:03:51 PM ---   Reply #50

--- Quote from: sparrow on July 27, 2020, 01:31:34 AM ---  Zina"s top two pairs of pants were undone as if someone had been trying to remove them, maybe for the purpose of wearing them also in an attempt to stay warm.

--- End quote ---
She was significantly far away from the rest of the hikers that anyone of them trying to remove her clothing is unlikely.

--- End quote ---

With the hypothesis of the intervention of attackers capable of killing the 9 hikers, gouging out eyes and cutting out a tongue, almost all unanswered questions get a natural explanation. It was the attackers who, after defeating the hickers, without tiring, tortured Krivonischenko by burning, turned over the bodies of the moribunds, placed a camera around Zoloratyov's neck, cut the tent... etc.

 ••• North-2 may have been a starting base for the attackers....See :
SteveCalley : General Discussion => Second Severniye, February 25, 2018, 10:15:18 PM
(Note Steve Calley's error: at North-2, there were 25 houses in 1959, some without roofs, not 2000).
North-2, more or less refurbished, is (briefly) visible in several videos of recent expeditions.

 ••• The slope of the Kholat Shyakhl could give the hikers a false impression of loneliness and isolation and thus of security. In fact it was enough for an average, lightly loaded Siberian skier, following the tracks of the 9 hikers, to travel from North-2 to the tent in 8 hours. For the return trip from the tent to North-2, after the hikers had died, 7 hours could be enough given the decrease in altitude.

 ••• In response to the major objection of alecsandros :
alecsandros : Theories Discussion / Altercation on the pass / Altercation on the pass, June 26, 2020, 07:06:40 AM  --->    Reply #32
 "why did not the members of Dyatlov Group use the axes at hand ? where they to heavily engaged (attacked) to be able to take anything for self defense ?"

(Indeed it is difficult to threaten people inside a tent with a gun, without arousing their mistrust and anxiety).

Also Mishka has found a solution which seems to me to be the best one :

 ••• Mishka General Discussion / Re: Who cut open the tent?   , August 10, 2020, 12:04:43 AM  --->  Reply #16
         ".....they heard some people arrived .................they were asked to leave the tent immediately because the place was in danger..."

I supported this idea with an imaginary statement, see:  Who cut open the tent?,  August 11, 2020, 09:10:11 AM     ---> Reply #18

 ••• Gipsy General Discussion / Re: Simplest Possible Credible Explanation, April 17, 2019, 03:38:42 PM  ---> Reply #36
"If we are discussing simple explanations and motives, when it comes to unvoluntary deaths, statistically the most likely options involve money (highly unlikely in this case) or love affair"
This is a misconception; in History, as far as "unvoluntary deaths" are concerned, war, without forgetting terrorism, which is a kind of unconventional war, is more important.

What is intriguing is that Aleks Kandr is rarely quoted on the subject of DPI.
Aleks Kandr sets out his arguments which are admissible for his explanation of DPI on the website :
Aleks Kandr is registered on   :
   Posts: 0 (0 per day)
   Gender:  Male
   Date Registered: October 29, 2019, 01:06:21 PM
   Last Active:     November 11, 2019, 02:23:28 AM

                      Here is a preliminary summary of my hypothesis N°3, which is directly inspired by Aleks Kandr.
DPI is a terrorist action commissioned by one or more senior leaders or commanders of the many Gulag camps in the Ivdel region.
This or these Stalinist commanders, who were powerful on the regional scale of the oblast, were naturally violently opposed to the policy of dismantling the Gulag ordered by Krouchtchev from 1953 (a difficult dismantling which lasted until Brezhnev came to power in 1964).

(On the internal societal unrest in the USSR caused by the massive liberation of the zeks during the Thaw (1953-1964), see, for example, but in French, the historians Nicolas Werth and Marc Élie ...).

The 9 unfortunate young hikers, Soviet and apparently completely apolitical, were bearers of a sort of official pass (the VOUCHER) designating them de facto as agents of influence sent by Moscow, in connection with the 21st Congress of the CPSU: 27 January-5 February 1959.
The 20th Congress of the CPSU in 1956 had been the official announcement of destalinization (and sanctions against some Gulag personnel).

The hired mercenaries, probably former camp guards recently put out of work, were able to easily follow the deep trail left by the 9 skiers and reach the tent in just one day's skiing from their North-2 base, to launch a surprise attack at nightfall, February 1, 1959, around 8:00 p.m.

(The 9 heavily laden hikers - the ransom for autonomy - and especially on vacation, had made slow progress with narrow skis in the snow that was very soft under the taiga trees).

The precipitous exit from the tent was the result of a diabolical ruse of war (is however not excluded a tear gas grenade introduced by surprise inside the small tent).

The originality of this terrorist attack lies above all in the fact that no firearms were used, but only wooden clubs (batons).

Part of the group was knocked out and then left inanimate on the spot at -20°C or minus, until death ensued.
The other part had a broken skull and a sunken chest, (the mercenary killers then hit harder with two-handed clubs).
Finally, as a warning sign - and with a ferocity that was not unusual among some of the Gulag's "little chiefs" - a few corpses were vandalized by having their eyes and a tongue ripped out.

Among the many political reasons for the constant smokiness of the Russian authorities from 1959 until 2020, there is also the ridiculous ineptitude of the KGB, which at the time proved incompetent and incapable of protecting nine exemplary youths from the Soviet Union.


--- Quote from: sparrow on August 10, 2020, 02:51:13 AM ---And something else that bothers me a lot is that if you look at the clothes being worn by the hikers at their death, Lyuda either went down to the ravine wearing only a tee shirt, shirt, one sweater and only tights (no pants at all) and she had to strip George of his ruined pants and maybe a sweater or she went down to the ravine with her share of clothes and she was either asked to give up some or she was forced to give them up.  In the first case it seems odd that three guys fairly well dressed (maybe even wearing some of her clothes) would not share some with her and the second case speaks for its self.  So, please, if someone can explain this, do.

--- End quote ---

This brings up a more general topic about what happens when human beings try to survive.

When working together with other human beings increases your chance of survival, of course you do what you can to help others.

But when your actions mean that others live but you die, then you have to decide whose life is more valuable... your life or someone else's life?

This is the part of the Dyatlov Pass Incident that disturbs me more than anything else. How much voluntary sharing of clothing happened? Was there voluntary "clothes swapping" during the incident or was there selfishness and a refusal to relinquish warm clothing? I do not wish to think about this.

I think I agree with you, squatch, about there MAY have been selfishness on part of some of the hikers.  Nicholas had on Lyuda's hat and coat and at least one pair of her pants was lying cut up in the snow between the cedar and den or on the floor of the den.  As cold as it was, why would she willingly do that?  It makes no sense.  If we put the clothes back on the people to whom they belong, Lyuda would have been wearing  one or two pairs of pants, a tee shirt, shirt, two sweaters, a coat and hat. That would have made Lyuda one of the better dressed hikers.  Nicholas would then have been wearing two shirts, one sweater, two pairs of pants, one cap and valenki. That does not make him one of the better dressed. Nicholas also had George's watch.

I know that this puts Nicholas in a bad light, but people can do some pretty bad things when they are faced with death.

I think the question of the clothes, if answered, could tell us about the dynamics of the group after leaving the tent.  I do not believe they killed each other, but I do believe there were  problems among (at least) some of the group members.  To believe that they all stuck together and helped each other till the end is a nice thought but that does not  necessarily make it true,

Hello, Jean Daniel Ruess.

Yes, I do believe that Zina burned the jacket and gloves deliberately. If we want to solve this mystery, then we must look at everything we have available including the diaries and (in this case) Zina's letters.

I am trying to look at the hikers as normal young adults.  They were not perfect.  There were some problems.


[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

There was an error while thanking
Go to full version