July 25, 2021, 02:44:06 AM
Dyatlov Pass Forum

Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
General Discussion / Re: The devil is in the details
« Last post by Investigator on July 24, 2021, 05:46:27 PM »
Some of the others were able to dig out a "den," start a robust fire that lasted at least an hour, and take clothing from the bodies of the "two Yuris," but these three couldn't even get to the tree line? 
I don't think the 'den' can be regarded as fact. The branches with 4 pieces of clothing on top might have simply been laid on top of the snow, perhaps in an area with some wind cover.

In fact if they had a den, it would be highly unlikely for them to end up outside of it, all of them near each other. If it collapsed, some might not be able to dig themselves out and would be found on top of the branches. If it didn't collapse, how did they sustain their injuries?

That they started a fire is more likely, but again is anecdotal, as far as I know there is no photograph of the fire's remains. Presumably these were found under snow.. however due to all the other Mansi items found near the cedar under snow, it could be that the fire predates the Dyatlov group and was from Mansi hunters who have been there months before, or... weeks after the incident. Or the half-burnt tree branch might have been struck by lightning in a storm and is not from a campfire.

However, I wouldn't concern myself too much with this, one way or the other, because it doesn't interfere with the most likely explanation of the "incident."
The most likely explanation of the incident being?

Well I'm not going to argue the point about how the group thought of what is now referred to as the "den" among apparently nearly everyone who talks about this incident in any kind of detail, but there certainly does seem to be only one way the evidence fits together into a coherent story.  Now if one wants to claim the evidence isn't real evidence, that is a different endeavor, and would require strong evidence to refute the apparent evidence, which in an old case of this nature is highly unlikely to ever exist.  As to the obvious interpretation:  problem with the tent that they thought required immediate action, decision to try and survive the night by starting a fire, decision to do the "den" idea (either due to lack of confidence in the fire or some other reason), fall onto the rocky creek after taking some clothing off the "two Yuris" and trying to get back to it, three returning to the tent but freezing to death before getting there (I think Zina got angry and decided to go back on her own, then the other two went after her, to try and convince her to go to the "den," but it's not relevant to the "big picture").
2
General Discussion / The devil is in the details
« Last post by Monty on July 24, 2021, 01:14:41 PM »
I concur with Manti in all points
3
Non-DP Related Mysteries! / Re: New development in the "Tamám Shud" mystery
« Last post by Manti on July 24, 2021, 06:13:10 AM »
Recently I have read about a case with similar details, for example all identifying tags removed from belongings: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isdal_Woman
4
General Discussion / Re: The devil is in the details
« Last post by Manti on July 24, 2021, 12:27:01 AM »
Some of the others were able to dig out a "den," start a robust fire that lasted at least an hour, and take clothing from the bodies of the "two Yuris," but these three couldn't even get to the tree line? 
I don't think the 'den' can be regarded as fact. The branches with 4 pieces of clothing on top might have simply been laid on top of the snow, perhaps in an area with some wind cover.

In fact if they had a den, it would be highly unlikely for them to end up outside of it, all of them near each other. If it collapsed, some might not be able to dig themselves out and would be found on top of the branches. If it didn't collapse, how did they sustain their injuries?

That they started a fire is more likely, but again is anecdotal, as far as I know there is no photograph of the fire's remains. Presumably these were found under snow.. however due to all the other Mansi items found near the cedar under snow, it could be that the fire predates the Dyatlov group and was from Mansi hunters who have been there months before, or... weeks after the incident. Or the half-burnt tree branch might have been struck by lightning in a storm and is not from a campfire.

However, I wouldn't concern myself too much with this, one way or the other, because it doesn't interfere with the most likely explanation of the "incident."
The most likely explanation of the incident being?
5
General Discussion / Re: The devil is in the details
« Last post by Investigator on July 23, 2021, 06:55:56 PM »
Perhaps the three hikers found on the slope died on the way down, ie descending?

It depends upon what you are trying to do.  Often, in an investigation, you will make a couple of charts of possible explanations, ones that are likely and ones that are far-fetched.  With the far-fetched ones, you can include interpretations of evidence that seem highly unlikely.  In this case the three were found in positions that seemed like they were heading back up to the tent.  But more than that, there is no reason to think that they couldn't get down to the tree line without freezing, as it wasn't that far.  Some of the others were able to dig out a "den," start a robust fire that lasted at least an hour, and take clothing from the bodies of the "two Yuris," but these three couldn't even get to the tree line?  If that was the case, they would have secured the tent while the others went down to the tree line, but it doesn't seem much was done with the tent.  However, I wouldn't concern myself too much with this, one way or the other, because it doesn't interfere with the most likely explanation of the "incident."
6
General Discussion / Re: The devil is in the details
« Last post by Manti on July 23, 2021, 09:38:13 AM »
Perhaps the three hikers found on the slope died on the way down, ie descending?

It is possible, but either way they were outside with some of their clothes left in the tent.

That we know for certain and it is hard to explain, whether they were descending or attempting to return to the tent or even if the tent was in the forest and a tree fell on it.. they could have still put on more clothes before attempting to ascend.

Rustem wearing one valenki only... not even carrying the other one. This hints at a very sudden exit from the tent, not even enough time to grab the other pair or their coats, and no immediate possibility to return. Even if the solution doesn't lie here, at least many scenarios can be ruled out based on this, and that the tent was still half-standing when found... you can basically rule out almost every single theory.
7
General Discussion / The devil is in the details
« Last post by Monty on July 22, 2021, 11:39:33 AM »
Perhaps the three hikers found on the slope died on the way down, ie descending?
8
General Discussion / Re: The devil is in the details
« Last post by Investigator on July 21, 2021, 04:29:13 PM »
Any case with a lot of "moving parts," like the DPI, is likely to have things that are puzzling in some way.  In this case, because they were under time pressure to do what was necessary to survive, some decisions might not have been made if they had the opportunity to sit around for an hour debating it.  As to your specific quetions, the flashlight was likely left on top so that if they went back there during the night, they would be able to see crucial details, such as where to start digging out the tent.  We know three tried to get back there (or one or two did, and one or two tried to get them to come back, to go to the "den" instead).  And as to the coat in the hole, the most obvious explanation is that you aren't going to survive the night with no heat and a large hole in your tent under those conditions.  However, it could have been the hole the stove exhaust pipe went through.  It's also necessary to vent a tent under those conditions so that condensation does not occur; if it does, that would then ice up and could cause all kinds of major issues.
9
Yeti / Snowman / Re: Menk Face...Zoomed in and clearly Simian
« Last post by RMK on July 18, 2021, 03:38:00 PM »
There are so many decisions the Dyatlov Group took that I don't understand... but one of them is not taking a gun with them.

We know from photos that they took shotguns on previous hikes.


The area of the incident is inhabited by bears, though they would have been hibernating, and moose. In my mind this is the main reason to take a gun... if a curious moose approaches, just shoot a warning shot into the air. This is the safest for both parties... the moose will leave you alone.

If you don't have a gun and meet a moose in the forest, you're in trouble.

There was a Mansi "chum" with moose antlers found nearby so we know there are moose in the area.
WAB once gave some remarks on the Dyatlovites' choice not to bring a gun with them, and he considered it a reasonable choice.  The thing is, the discussion in that thread was concerned with the danger of bears, not moose.  Dyatlov & Company wouldn't need a weapon to deal with bears, because the brown bear is dormant in late January & early February, and polar bears don't range that far south.

So, what about moose?  In the "Elk(s) attack" thread, it's suggested that perhaps moose were not regarded as a serious danger in late January & early February, since that's neither rutting season nor the time when cows would be defending young calves.  On the other hand, as that thread's OP reminds us, a wild animal might attack a human at any time.  I guess I can see the possible threat of moose as a reason why Dyatlov & Company might have wanted to bring a firearm with them.

It is widely believed that none of their possessions were stolen but.. is it possible that they actually did take a gun and it went missing?

I did read an article from a Russian newspaper saying that Igor did have a gun.  Obviously, this doesn't mean it was true.  I'll try and find it, but yes you're right, if you're heading off to the wilds inhabited by bears etc make sure you have a gun with you!

I do seriously doubt that Igor Dyatlov was carrying a firearm on his final trek.  If I correctly understand WAB in the first thread I linked, civilians (except those who hunted for a living) would only be able to obtain shotguns, or smooth-barrel long guns that fire small-caliber rifle rounds.  No such weapons are visible in any of the photos, nor mentioned in any diaries, nor documented as having been recovered from the scene of the Incident.  Such weapons are not easily concealed, either.

Might it have been a handgun?  From what I can tell, the Russian word used in that KP article, "ружье", refers to small arms in general (although input from a fluent Russian speaker would be welcome on that point), so that doesn't help to narrow down what type of weapon it might be.  I very much doubt that it was a handgun, though.  AFAIU, handguns were strictly controlled in that time and place, and there was no legitimate way an ordinary Soviet civilian could obtain one.

And if they did have a gun, it not only makes a Menk attack or animal attack an unlikely cause, it also provides a motive for another theory.... Guns must have been very hard to obtain and valuable at that time... Anyway, that's speculation for another thread.
Yeah, maybe we do need a separate thread to continue this line of discussion.
10
Publications / Media / Re: Natasha Cooper - True Crime
« Last post by marieuk on July 18, 2021, 09:35:01 AM »
I only found this recently and it's really worth a listen, if you haven't already. Loved hearing how passionate you are about it and all the research that has gone into the book.  Pretty sure, there were some things I hadn't heard before too.  At the end it was mentioned about having another interview with a pathologist to go through the autopsies - is there any update on that please?  Sounds like a great idea. 
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10