Theories Discussion > General Discussion

Inconsistencies in photos of finding the tent

<< < (2/12) > >>

Osi:
Ziljoe, thank you for your thoughtful comments. I agree with you about the dark film stills. I believe this is actual footage of the trip, taken from a partially damaged film that was not officially recorded. The tent photo of Sharavin and Koptelov is a photo of a 3-legged action. Come, see and photograph. I think the first thing to do about these two photos was to take photos and no search activity has started yet. They cleared the snow, searched the tent, moved the tarp aside, and then dug around. There is no information yet about the 3 on the slope. Koptelov; In his statement, he stated that the tent entrance faces the passage, that is, the entrance, on the right side of the picture. The problem at the tent entrance; How to protect tent entrance if there is enough wind shear to eliminate a trench? Under normal circumstances, the tent entrance should have been damaged due to constant chewing by 9 young people. The original mound at the entrance of the tent caught my attention. All 4 corners of the tent were visible, only some snow in the middle. There was a pair of light slippers just ahead. There was a lantern and an outfit. I would expect blowing winds to blow these lightweight objects into the forest.

GlennM:
Is the assumption that photographs represent the scene or situation before things have been manipulated? The implications affect the interpretations.

Arjan:
Thank you Osi for starting this post.

My considerations on the authenticity of photos, diaries and documents
During the '50s of last century - while printing - competent black&white photographers had access in the dark room to all options as are available nowadays in Photoshop: it only took far more time to achieve the same result. At that time, the Communist Party has added or removed many politicians to/from official photos, even family photos had been adapted to add children to family photos.

Russian bloggers have shown that it is doubtfull that all photos from the film rolls 1 to 6 and the loose photos are authentic.

Based on information available via DyatlovPass.com it is hard to make a final verdict on the authenticity of photos made by film rolls 1 to 6 and the loose photos.

The 'last two photos of 5/6 group members digging a hole' has at least one flaw: too many skis visible without any bindings.

Without sound proof, the journalist collective Aleksej Rakitin suggests that the last two loose photos of the Dyatlov Group digging in the snow are 'pure propaganda', with Yuri Kri as 'heroic hero'.
Unfortunately I cannot confirm or proof otherwise, but I doubt the authenticity of both photos.

My considerations on the authenticity of photos, and documents from the two search party and from the mortuary
It will be hard to find a sound solution if these photos and documents are not authentic.
I even take the self statement made by Yuri Yudin as authentic, althought I am not fully convinced on the content of this statement: he may well have received orders to describe in his statement what was in line with 'historic materialism' according to the Communist Party at that time.

Let's assume that the photo of the tent as found by the first search party is authentic
No proof at all, but you may have noted that Yuri Dor's ski pole is visible down hill of the tent.

Snow conditions may alter considerable during three/four weeks.

The photo shows very favourable snow conditions around the camp site, with arguable additional snow at the entrancy that may be piled at the entrance by the wind.
One or two members of the first search party may already have been digging in the snow to see how deep the layer of snow was at the end of February.

Some 50 to 100 meters in the direction of the ravine, there is not much snow visible.
This is not by definition a sign that the condition of the terrain had been favourable: the underground may well have been icy and prone for sliding downhill.
No proof, but the photos of Zinaida in the Mortuary show her with natural fiber on her trousers: this may/might be an indication that she had layed herself for the last time on the ground that had only a tiny layer of snow on it

In my interpretation, this photo shows, that:
- the re-erected tent may/might have served as an adequate emergency bivac during a cold night for two or three group members
- both skis - now with binding! - may have served as mark for the place of the tent for Zinaida, Rustem (and arguable a 10th group member).
In the timeline I have drafted, Zinaida and Rustem descended on Feb 2nd around 9 am to the ravine to see what had happened to the seven other group members. Zinaida and Rustem had always had the intention to return to the tent and from there to return to Ivdel.

Remark:
This photo does not show any trace of an avalanche of a big snow slab hitting the tent causing that all group members had to leave the tent site


 

 









 

GlennM:
Arjan, how do you reconcile the physical evidence of footprint traces going to the forest with the movements of the tourists? I believe that those prints are made and raised under a particular set of circumstances. I find it troubling to think that those conditions persist long enough for a divided group to walk the same trail at different times and achieve those snowprints. Further, since there is nothing particularly sacred about footprints in the snow, I would predict that if Rustem and Zina left the tent later and last, they would either trample the prints of others or make their own trail. The data does not support either in my opinion. Comment?

Axelrod:

--- Quote from: Osi on February 03, 2025, 05:27:10 AM ---Normally, seekers had to pose on this blue line.

--- End quote ---
I don't understand why you decide for the seekers where they should pose? They posed wherever they wanted.
In general, the small number of photos with the tent tells us that they dodn't wanted to fix this moment.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page