Theories Discussion > General Discussion
Decision to leave the tent
jhou:
This was obviously an experienced and tough group of winter hikers. Their background and history as well as the details of this trip tell that. They had already spent many cold nights in a <2x4m sized tent, apparently in relative comfort, all 9 of them. It's a stampede by today's standards. It helps keeping everyone warm, but still. Tough group. And the original plan was even more ambitious, with 10 people in that tent.
I don't know why they went up the mountain, but once they were there, setting up the tent the way they did was a good job too. i don't think the snow walls and banks were intended as disguise. It's normal procedure in winter camping to use snow to improve shelter, insulation and also to keep the tent sleeves firmly in place. They didn't set up the stove, but apparently it was warm enough inside, judging by the fact that many were sleeping in relatively light clothing.
And then they left the tent, with woefully inadequate clothing, in the middle of the night, in snow, in lethally cold temperatures and with no spare shelter available. They knew better. So, if that was considered the best course of action, how bad were the alternatives? This is the one part of the mystery I struggle to explain with anything else than a sustained threat of imminent and severe physical damage, by an outside human force.
Sustained, because they couldn't just hang around nearby and see if the situation would improve. They were forced to keep on moving downhill. Imminent, because they didn't have time to put on proper clothing. Severe, because going downhill practically naked was still better than staying put. And human, because despite of everything they descended peacefully and orderly, if we are to believe investigator's conclusions. You don't do that if you're chased by a Yeti, or there's a natural (or unnatural) disaster unwinding right next to you.
The problem is, the theory of outside attackers runs into all kinds of conflicts with several known facts as soon as the group starts descending. As described in earlier posts by other members already.
Carlo:
This is undoubtedly the biggest puzzle of this whole case.
In my opinion, the only way we can come up with some reasonable theory is by thinking that maybe the rescuers were wrong when the said that they "they descended peacefully and orderly". Panickly cutting the tent from the inside, but walking out from the tent peacefully and orderly while half naked with freezing temperature in the middle of the night just doesn't make sense. Even if they were so afraid to cut the tent, why leaving the camp if they realized there was nothing to be afraid of?
BUT, if you think that maybe they left the camp running away, then you can think at many other theories, for example they heard some loud noises and they were afraid there was an avalanche.
Marchesk:
--- Quote from: Carlo on January 14, 2021, 04:15:40 PM ---BUT, if you think that maybe they left the camp running away, then you can think at many other theories, for example they heard some loud noises and they were afraid there was an avalanche.
--- End quote ---
However, it would take time to descend in the varying depth of snow and rocky terrain at night mostly without shoes. Time enough to reconsider whether there was a real threat, and return to the tent. Also, they would have known better than to go downhill to escape a potential avalanche.
sarapuk:
--- Quote from: jhou on January 14, 2021, 03:01:08 PM ---This was obviously an experienced and tough group of winter hikers. Their background and history as well as the details of this trip tell that. They had already spent many cold nights in a <2x4m sized tent, apparently in relative comfort, all 9 of them. It's a stampede by today's standards. It helps keeping everyone warm, but still. Tough group. And the original plan was even more ambitious, with 10 people in that tent.
I don't know why they went up the mountain, but once they were there, setting up the tent the way they did was a good job too. i don't think the snow walls and banks were intended as disguise. It's normal procedure in winter camping to use snow to improve shelter, insulation and also to keep the tent sleeves firmly in place. They didn't set up the stove, but apparently it was warm enough inside, judging by the fact that many were sleeping in relatively light clothing.
And then they left the tent, with woefully inadequate clothing, in the middle of the night, in snow, in lethally cold temperatures and with no spare shelter available. They knew better. So, if that was considered the best course of action, how bad were the alternatives? This is the one part of the mystery I struggle to explain with anything else than a sustained threat of imminent and severe physical damage, by an outside human force.
Sustained, because they couldn't just hang around nearby and see if the situation would improve. They were forced to keep on moving downhill. Imminent, because they didn't have time to put on proper clothing. Severe, because going downhill practically naked was still better than staying put. And human, because despite of everything they descended peacefully and orderly, if we are to believe investigator's conclusions. You don't do that if you're chased by a Yeti, or there's a natural (or unnatural) disaster unwinding right next to you.
The problem is, the theory of outside attackers runs into all kinds of conflicts with several known facts as soon as the group starts descending. As described in earlier posts by other members already.
--- End quote ---
Well I dont think we have many cases of people being chased by Yeti's ! ? So we wouldnt know what its like really. It would be scarry thats for sure. Also you can only run or walk as the weather conditions allow. Still some debate about just how much snow and ice was around. And of course no other Footprints other than those of the Dyatlov Group, so we are told.
sarapuk:
--- Quote from: Carlo on January 14, 2021, 04:15:40 PM ---This is undoubtedly the biggest puzzle of this whole case.
In my opinion, the only way we can come up with some reasonable theory is by thinking that maybe the rescuers were wrong when the said that they "they descended peacefully and orderly". Panickly cutting the tent from the inside, but walking out from the tent peacefully and orderly while half naked with freezing temperature in the middle of the night just doesn't make sense. Even if they were so afraid to cut the tent, why leaving the camp if they realized there was nothing to be afraid of?
BUT, if you think that maybe they left the camp running away, then you can think at many other theories, for example they heard some loud noises and they were afraid there was an avalanche.
--- End quote ---
Yes well pointed out. Cutting the Tent in panic and then walking peacefully away from the Tent seems a bit of a contradiction.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
Go to full version