May 22, 2024, 04:32:30 PM
Dyatlov Pass Forum

Author Topic: Is there evidence for outsiders?  (Read 2816 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

May 14, 2024, 10:41:34 PM
Reply #30
Online

GlennM


"The reason could be some extraordinary natural phenomenon or the passage of meteorological intercepts, which Ivdel saw on February 1 and on February 17, saw Karelin’s group."

So, with only an ice axe and flashlight outside the tent ( which I assume were used for night time bowel and bladder needs) , the rescuers make the assumption that it was not human or animal intrusion which caused the DP9 to leave the tent.

Again, thinking of Tunguska, the forest, except for one identified fallen tree was not reported as unusual. It brings me back to a slab slide, but surely that would bury the flashlight and ice axe. Sigh!
We don't have to say everything that comes into our head.
 

May 14, 2024, 11:50:22 PM
Reply #31
Offline

Teddy

Administrator
we don’t object to you today, make the most appropriate decisions on your own, ask for property, food will be sent to you from the storehouse after drawing up an inventory, use it for food against the evacuation of Borisov, we don’t object to the angry ones. What is the reason for sending Blinova ? The need to send Blinova. In case of clearly bad weather, continue the search with the whole group. bye the whole group . We'll send a telegram to your wife now. Specify the coordinates of the warehouse =Commission=

Serdityh is a name that Google translates like angry.
See the correct translation here:
https://dyatlovpass.com/maslennikov-notebook-2#13
« Last Edit: May 14, 2024, 11:58:21 PM by Teddy »
 

May 15, 2024, 06:09:21 AM
Reply #32
Offline

Ziljoe


"The reason could be some extraordinary natural phenomenon or the passage of meteorological intercepts, which Ivdel saw on February 1 and on February 17, saw Karelin’s group."

So, with only an ice axe and flashlight outside the tent ( which I assume were used for night time bowel and bladder needs) , the rescuers make the assumption that it was not human or animal intrusion which caused the DP9 to leave the tent.

Again, thinking of Tunguska, the forest, except for one identified fallen tree was not reported as unusual. It brings me back to a slab slide, but surely that would bury the flashlight and ice axe. Sigh!

In case files and the notes, they speculate about many reasons to why they left the tent, including, animals, Mansi, winds etc. What you read above is just a snap shot of recorded notes.

The axe and flashlight may have been buried but new winds may have eroded any sign of a snow slab/ slide. I would suspect the snow level on the slope would have gone up and down several times over the 3 weeks , like waves in the sea .

 

May 15, 2024, 07:05:40 AM
Reply #33
Online

GlennM


We struggle with this case, but I am told that perhaps half of murders go unsolved. In fact, there is such a thing as a misdemeanor murder, a case so old and lacking in evidence that it is useless to keep it active. I do not think the DP9 were murdered, far from it, but a break in a cold case seems to come from using improved technology with old clues. Agaun, Teddy et.al. are using forensic methods not employed in 1959. This is to her credit.

An identified fault in trying to solve mysteries is one of forming a hypothesis too soon and force fitting facts to it ( eg. I know he did the crime and now I will prove it). The other approach is to gather the evidence and then generate an hypothesize.  You, Ziljoe, are astute in your open minded and even handed assessment of the evidence, but I think we agree that unless there is a breakthrough owing to discovery or refined technology, the investigation stalls out just like many, many unsolved mysteries.

At the heart of it is the issue of why they left the tent. Can technology ever address that question?  No, we just need a better way of inspecting the bread crumbs the case gives us.
We don't have to say everything that comes into our head.
 
The following users thanked this post: Teddy, Ziljoe

May 15, 2024, 08:30:48 AM
Reply #34
Offline

Ziljoe


We struggle with this case, but I am told that perhaps half of murders go unsolved. In fact, there is such a thing as a misdemeanor murder, a case so old and lacking in evidence that it is useless to keep it active. I do not think the DP9 were murdered, far from it, but a break in a cold case seems to come from using improved technology with old clues. Agaun, Teddy et.al. are using forensic methods not employed in 1959. This is to her credit.

An identified fault in trying to solve mysteries is one of forming a hypothesis too soon and force fitting facts to it ( eg. I know he did the crime and now I will prove it). The other approach is to gather the evidence and then generate an hypothesize.  You, Ziljoe, are astute in your open minded and even handed assessment of the evidence, but I think we agree that unless there is a breakthrough owing to discovery or refined technology, the investigation stalls out just like many, many unsolved mysteries.

At the heart of it is the issue of why they left the tent. Can technology ever address that question?  No, we just need a better way of inspecting the bread crumbs the case gives us.

I totally agree Glennm with your thoughts .

I can only try and look for evidence in nature because there is very little evidence of direct involvement by outsiders. I try to find evidence of outsiders within the documents and photos etc.

I continue to read the notes against the formal case notes and on the whole we can observe the frustration and potential blame towards those in charge of the hike at the UPI not following proper guidelines. This seems to include the failure to have proper documentation of the route and the proper contact date of the return arrival with any contingency plans. It seems there's a disbelief by the investigators of the sloppy approach by the UPI to signing off these hikes.

Teddy's approach gives us some tangible evidence , we can't dismiss a fallen tree and tree rings....
 

May 15, 2024, 08:45:22 AM
Reply #35
Offline

Teddy

Administrator
on the whole we can observe the frustration and potential blame towards those in charge of the hike at the UPI not following proper guidelines. This seems to include the failure to have proper documentation of the route and the proper contact date of the return arrival with any contingency plans. It seems there's a disbelief by the investigators of the sloppy approach by the UPI to signing off these hikes.

But it was not out of the ordinary. It is applicable to all the hikes and practices pre-Dyatlov. As so many times Askinadzi said, there was before Dyatlov and after Dyatlov era in signing off papers. A tragedy happened after which they tightened many screws and yet it doesn't explain what happened. This case has the advantage of a massive unprecedented search and rescue operation. Many, the number 50 comes to mind for just that year perish in the mountains and we haven't heard anything about them. Dyatlov case is very rich compared to any other. We are lucky to have what we have.

To me what is frustrating is that they didn't treat it as a crime scene.
« Last Edit: May 15, 2024, 08:57:27 AM by Teddy »
 
The following users thanked this post: Ziljoe

May 15, 2024, 09:07:23 AM
Reply #36
Offline

Teddy

Administrator
This case has the advantage of a massive unprecedented search and rescue operation.

The reason for this is the same why would anyone move the bodies - it was a special time for the regime and everything was amplified by the focus of attention on the man struggling for power, Khrushchev.
 

May 15, 2024, 10:13:42 AM
Reply #37
Offline

Ziljoe


on the whole we can observe the frustration and potential blame towards those in charge of the hike at the UPI not following proper guidelines. This seems to include the failure to have proper documentation of the route and the proper contact date of the return arrival with any contingency plans. It seems there's a disbelief by the investigators of the sloppy approach by the UPI to signing off these hikes.

But it was not out of the ordinary. It is applicable to all the hikes and practices pre-Dyatlov. As so many times Askinadzi said, there was before Dyatlov and after Dyatlov era in signing off papers. A tragedy happened after which they tightened many screws and yet it doesn't explain what happened. This case has the advantage of a massive unprecedented search and rescue operation. Many, the number 50 comes to mind for just that year perish in the mountains and we haven't heard anything about them. Dyatlov case is very rich compared to any other. We are lucky to have what we have.

To me what is frustrating is that they didn't treat it as a crime scene.

I couldn't agree more teddy. Looking at similar UK incidents, historical and recent , those doing investigations semm to highlight failures by those in charge of such hikes.

Everything is fine until it's not fine. It doesn't seem to be out of the ordinary in such that everyone was a bit sloppy , but out of the 50 that perished that year that year, is there survivors and explanations?

Hope that makes sense, I know that there were other hikes/rafting with deaths pre Dyatlov but I've read there was reasonable explanations.

I understand the frustration about they didn't treat like a crime scene, at least not in the first weeks. I don't think any hiking catastrophe is treated like a crime scene, why would they treat like a crime scene?
 

May 15, 2024, 11:23:22 AM
Reply #38
Offline

MDGross


Yes, hikers perish tragically every year. But what makes the Dyatlov case unlike any other is: 1. Why would all nine hikers exit their tent in the middle of the night and walk nearly a mile to the forest below, and most of them fatally underdressed? It wasn't a question IF hypothermia was going to kill them, but rather HOW SOON. Why didn't they walk a hundred meters and then stop for a moment and try to determine what was happening? Why not send a couple of guys back to assess the situation? Had the slab stopped moving? Could the snow on the tent be quickly removed? Was walking to the forest their only option?

2. How did three of the nine suffer injuries so severe as to be fatal? There are countless speculations, but only Igor's and Teddy's idea makes sense to me.

The bottom line is that the Dyatlov case is unlike any other in the long history of hiking tragedies. It beckons to us for answers. It zeroes in on that part of the brain that can't resist the challenge of so great a mystery.
 

May 15, 2024, 02:10:02 PM
Reply #39
Offline

Олег Таймень




The bottom line is that the Dyatlov case is unlike any other in the long history of hiking tragedies. It beckons to us for answers. It zeroes in on that part of the brain that can't resist the challenge of so great a mystery.

Well, why weren’t there similar tragedies..? Were. For example, the death of climbers in 1955. Here is a similar tragedy, where the participants cut the tent due to suffocation and left it without warm clothes. We moved to another tent. Then, freezing, they left the second tent and went downstairs. All but one died.. http://www.mountain.ru/article/article_display1.php?article_id=8690
What we see.
People, having cut the tent, did not take their warm clothes and quickly moved to another. Further, on the descent everyone froze, wandering in the snowstorm.
Why didn't they dig up the cut tent and take away the equipment?
Why didn’t they take off the whole tent and go down in a dense group, having sleeping bags and a tent?
If a mountain comes towards you, and you are not Mohammed, then it is a rockfall.
 

May 15, 2024, 02:47:53 PM
Reply #40
Online

GlennM


Much has been made of camping in the woods where the tree fall happened. Tree ring data and a can have been produced. The bodies were located nearby etc. If, however someone was as invested in scouring the tent site on 1079, could there be new discoveries? Human waste and waste paper would have washed and weathered away decades ago. Could there be other debris? In today's world it is customary to pack out your trash, but in 1959, tossing it aside may have been the norm. As I recall some tinned opened food was found in the tent, but not nine people's worth of food. What of that? What of scorched earth of an outdoor cooking fire? Charcoal can be carbon tested. Has that hillside been burned since 1959?  It seems nobody can pinpoint where the tent was on 1079, so a wider search circle seems prudent. I do not think discarded cans found on 1079 would be from the recovery teams.

Teddy regrets it was not treated as a crime scene, as do we all. Significantly though, when the tent was initially approached, no one noted anything about it or the immediate area pointing to foul play. It was a straight forward rescue, then recovery.

That reminds me whether luminol which detects blood residue could be used in the field or on samples for later testing.

« Last Edit: May 15, 2024, 05:12:55 PM by GlennM »
We don't have to say everything that comes into our head.
 

May 17, 2024, 02:42:00 AM
Reply #41
Offline

WinterLeia


Most accidents are not the result of one single thing going wrong, but a chain of things going wrong that if even one of those things had not happened or had happened differently the chain would be broken and the tragedy would not have occurred. In fact, so common is this phenomenon that it actually has a name: comedy of errors. The word comedy is ironic, emphasizing the sheer ridiculousness of so many bad things inexplicably happening, one after the other that it would be hilarious, if it wasn’t so tragic. While we can say that whatever happened at the tent led to the death of the hikers, we cannot say that the hikers would have died if that was the only misfortune they faced that night. We simply do not know what other challenges they may have come across before their deaths, and the fact that three of their number sustained such horrible injuries, whereas the group that survived the night without the tent did not, already implies that the ordeal of the second group was nowhere near as severe as what the Dyatlov group went through. And personally I don’t believe the injuries sustained by Luda, Semyon, and Nicolai were the result of what happened at the tent.

Regardless, when dealing with cases like this where uncertainty reigns and conspiracy theories flourish like weeds in the vast no man’s land where we hope instead to find facts and concrete evidence, it’s only prudent to remember that as human beings we love patterns and we hate meaningless deaths. Nothing wrong with that, but we have to be aware of our own weaknesses, that we will all too often see patterns where none exist and create meaning as a defense against the vulnerability of our own mortality.
 
The following users thanked this post: amashilu, Олег Таймень, Partorg

May 17, 2024, 10:33:16 AM
Reply #42
Offline

Ziljoe


Well said WinterLeia.

I don't think the three badly injured hikers could have been moved from the tent , if that were where the injuries happened. The remaining 5 hikers would not be able to carry or support them down the slope or would have had to make several trips at the very least which would have left very different tracks, they also would have collected more belongings/ equipment . Even the approach to the ceder and the ravine seems difficult in deep snow for a person that is not injured having looked at the many recent videos, without skis they seem to sink into the snow , with two of them with severity of the rib fractures, I don't think it would be possible.

Back to outsiders , for me , it's a strange way to try and kill people, if it was to be murder, to look like an accident, I would say  it's an odd way to go about it.  So much of the tongue was missing that it is also seems unlikely that outsiders or any person for that matter did that. To cut the tip off, perhaps possible if it was to be symbolic, I think so much of the tongue was missing that someone would have needed a dentist chair , a light and scalpel. In the cold and possibly at night, someone manages to do all this without cutting cheeks or leaving knife marks on the lower jaw would be a rare skill.

My thoughts for outsiders is only as far as the reason for leaving the tent , perhaps they were just threatened to leave and that was the end of any input, the rest was just the cold, falling into the ravine , snow cave collapse or falling off the tree on to each other., Perhaps even teddy's tree plays a part, the hikers climbed that ceder too and it collapsed/fell at that moment in time when gathering branches. It is reported that branches from the/a ceder were several meters away.
 
The following users thanked this post: WinterLeia

May 17, 2024, 11:58:09 AM
Reply #43
Offline

Partorg


Quote from: Teddy
This case has the advantage of a massive unprecedented search and rescue operation. Many, the number 50 comes to mind for just that year perish in the mountains and we haven't heard anything about them.
The case with the Dyatlov group differs from other tourist accidents only in that in no other cases did the relatives of the dead tourists make so much noise and it never occurred to any of them to send a telegram complaining about the inaction of the local leadership to the first person of the state.
This is precisely what explains such attention to him, both from the leadership of the city and region: a grandiose search operation, the presence of the regional prosecutor at the autopsies of corpses, etc., and from the Prosecutor's Office of the RSFSR - the visit of Vice Prosecutor Urakov to Sverdlovsk.
In itself, this case is no more “mysterious” than any other - for example, the death of Elvira Shataeva’s group in August 1974. And if you remember the circumstances of the death of Korovina’s group in 1993 on Khamar-Daban, then even less.

All the facts in this story have completely simple and natural explanations, and all the actions of the group can be understood and almost step-by-step reconstructed. But the absence of living witnesses provides the “researcher” with opportunities for fantasy, and only the unbridledness of our imagination + the inability to put ourselves in the place of someone whose actions you are trying to understand is our main problem and the main obstacle to the truth.
 
The following users thanked this post: GlennM, Ziljoe

May 17, 2024, 09:07:55 PM
Reply #44
Online

GlennM


"But the absence of living witnesses provides the “researcher” with opportunities for fantasy, and only the unbridledness of our imagination + the inability to put ourselves in the place of someone whose actions you are trying to understand is our main problem and the main obstacle to the truth.:"

I have done the mental exercise of putting myself in their place, but when it comes to getting me (as them) out of the tent and hiking a mile down slope, any number of logical explanations advanced by the forum would suffice. My particular preference is the suffocation hazard posed by a snow covered tent owing to a localized slab slip.  On the other hand , I have a more diffucult time imagining why 3 people who come out of a crushed tent in the forest would want to climb uphill only to freeze from expoure. If I wanted to signal aircraft,  I make smoke, not waving my snow covered arms on a snow covered slope.

As much as some imaginations are pretty far out there ( think flying saucers), probably telling more about the one who posts than the issue itself,  our inability always goes back to the why of things. WinterLea points out the cascade of small errors culminating in tragedy. She could be right.
We don't have to say everything that comes into our head.
 
The following users thanked this post: Partorg