Theories Discussion > General Discussion

Footprints

(1/5) > >>

seniorsupport:
Hi guys
Does anyone else think the whole footprints in the snow is suspicious? I mean it was February and the poor hikers had been thrown off course by hiking in a blizzard the evening before their deaths so it's probably safe to say there are numerous blizzards at this time of year.  Also all the bodies were buried under the snow at varying depth by the time they were found. So how/why was so much emphasis put on the hikers visable foot prints ?  Surely their footprints would have either been windswept or buried by the time the search parties arrived. Thus making the theory of all the hikers left in a calm orderly manner redundant- what do you guys think?
 Seniorsupport

SimplyMadness:
Foot prints are apparently preserved in the snow quite well because the snow that's stepped on is left tightly compacted and the loose snow around it is blown away, leaving a raised hump. There are multiple testimonies to footprints leading down to the woods being found and there are some pictures of them that are posted on this site from the investigation.

That being said, the pictures of the tracks supposedly belonging to the 9 hikers are pretty poor quality. I for one, cant make out individual toes lke a couple of the testimonies say.

One testimony listed goes -
“When we finished taking inventory of the tent’s contents, we moved it to the helicopter pad, about 600- 700 m away.” Radiogram: “We managed to identify footprints of eight or nine people starting from the tent and going about 1 km down the slope, and then they were lost. One person was in boots, the others were only in socks and barefoot.”

It's interesting that he says with confidence that only one person was in boots when 3 people were found dead wearing boots. Slobodin had 1 boot on his right foot, Thibeaux had leather shoes on, and Zolotaryov had boots on.

This would seem to indicate that the tracks weren't that easy to identify and they were misread, or perhaps Zolotaryov and Thibeaux left the tent in only socks but managed to grab a pair of footwear before exiting the tent to put on once they got down the mountain. 

Apparently there is disagreement about where the tracks actually started too, with one testimony saying they started at the tent and another saying they started 30 to 40 meters away from the tent.

I would say its safe to assume that there was indeed evidence of tracks, but what information you can gather from that is questionable in my opinion. For instance the meme that the tracks indicated they had walked calmly down the hill in single file. I don't think the speed at which they were going could possibly be accurately measured and in the one photograph that shows multiple tracks, the tracks are not single file. They are clustered as if walking in a group, but definitely not what I would call single file.

All in all I would say any matter of fact statement garnered from the foot prints is dubious at best.

Armide:
On top of all of that, let's not forget that when they first found some of the hikers it was supposed to be a search-and-rescue operation. Most of the volunteers were students their age and had no idea that they were walking all around a crime scene. When they realised they should have been looking at the tracks around the tent, they would've probably been unable to differentiate between those of the Dyatlov group and those of the volunteers. Some might've stood out (those not wearing any type of footwear) but the others were probably confused with all the footprints that were found at the area.

Loose}{Cannon:
I think the footprints they documented were 'pillar' type prints that were compressed at the time they were made and later wind swept away the surrounding loose snow.  For the most part, it should have been easy to identify old vs new tracks. 

hanno:
I have a further question. I have now read a lot of times, that the hikers left the tent and then or later stood in a row. Some people use this hint to argue that they were forced from other human to leave the tent. For example collect them in a row and then force them to match down the slope. But I can't see this in the footprint photos.

So first question: Where is this fact (if it is a fact) coming from? Someone must have told this because it is not seen in the photos.

Second question: If they would have stood in a row, in which direction did they stand? Towards the tent, towards the slope or another direction?

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page