To be clear, I agree with the latest official findings by the Soviet authorities. If anything, I parrot what is for most people common knowledge about the incident. As such, when I am mocked for my point of view, I feel that the mockery is also directed at the official explanation. Indeed, it may extend beyond that to others who have divergent points compared to yours.
I think as an expert on the subject, a post about the position of the deceased is really a digression from your thesis. Does it require this kind of bolstering? I thought your general research was very good, though unprovable. Then again all of this discussion is unprovable.
Since I do not have a time machine, I can only comment that the resting place of the deceased is more easily explained as a consequence of how they perished than the work of some ghoul. From what I know of such matters,,which is not a lot, when corpses are posed, it is obvious that they have been manipulated. There is usually a message to be inferred. In this regard, much has been made of how the hikers suffered and died, the villains leaving no clues for authorities to start an investigation such as yours. If I understand this right, you are apparently positing the opposite. Am I reading that the murderers intentionally posed the dead hikers for effect? If so it was certainly private symbolism at best and incredibly risky to boot. Personally, I remain unconvinced. In fact the only real question is why they left their tent. Since we are all of separate opinions in the absence of definitive proof, the tragedy lives on. I just prefer the explanation that requires fewer assumptions. Your turn.