January 26, 2022, 07:34:53 PM
Dyatlov Pass Forum

Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
General Discussion / Re: Do you want the mystery solved
« Last post by ElizabethHarris on Today at 05:33:27 PM »
Glenn M, who do you think solved it already and why? What do you think their conclusions are?"
2
General Discussion / Re: "An Unknown Compelling Force"
« Last post by Игорь Б. on Today at 03:54:36 PM »
If it happened during the day, what is their reason to set up the tent on the slope?
Дятловцы были вынуждены остановиться из-за отсутствия видимости после того, как началась метель.
This means they would have had time to go to the forest and do it there.
Как они могли видеть лес? Граница леса находится в километре от места палатки, а видимость в момент установки палатки была около 50 метров из-за метели.
3
Publications / Media / Re: Jailers by helicopter
« Last post by Jean Daniel Reuss on Today at 03:39:08 PM »


I registered on sledopyt1959.mybb.ru.

However I did not have time to read everything, nor to understand everything.

°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°

Temporarily, while waiting for more details, I am the spokesman of the theory TOKEB

TOKEB = Eduard Tumanov + Per Inge Oestmoen + Aleks Kandr + EBE + BottledBrunette
 (A sponsor or client pays 3 mercenary contract killers with the mission to kill the 9 hikers)

°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°

TOKEB can answer almost all your :

"127 Main Pieces, Oddities and Shades"

(http://sledopyt1959.mybb.ru/viewforum.php?id=30)

for example:

---->  The weather when leaving the tent?
The weather doesn't matter.
The 3 mercenary hitmen could fulfill their mission, i.e. kill the 9 hikers, whatever the weather conditions were: Wind=3 m/s + Temperature= -10 °C or Wind=35 m/s + Temperature= -50 °C. 

---->  what forced the exit of the MP?
Surprise introduction of a suffocating gas inside the tent.
(tear gas grenade from NKVD stocks or home-made smoke pot)

---->  what motivated the cutting of the tent?
It was the 3 mercenary contract killers who cut the tent on February 2, 1959 after killing the hikers: mission accomplished!

°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°

TOKEB is very similar to the explanations of Aleks Kandr, see :

https://taina.li/forum/index.php?topic=1002.0

http://mystery12home.ru/t-ub-gr-dyatlova
http://mystery12home.ru/t-ub-gr-dyatlova-2
http://mystery12home.ru/t-ub-gr-dyatlova-3

°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°

TOKEB has some differences with Aleks Kandr.
(No firearms, only blunt obects, it is the contract killers who light the fire under the cedar, etc......)

The sponsor is an NKVD officer who is similar to Boris_Rodos (1905-1956)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boris_Rodos
Rodos was sentenced to death on February 26, one day after the speech of N. I. Khushchev on February 24, 1956.

See also about the habits of the jailers:
 Danzig Baldaev(1925-2005)
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/oct/17/drawings-gulag-danzig-baldaev-review

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++



Я зарегистрировался на сайте sledopyt1959.mybb.ru.

Однако у меня не было времени ни все прочитать, ни все понять.

°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°

Временно, в ожидании более подробной информации, я являюсь представителем теории TOKEB

TOKEB = Эдуард Туманов + Per Inge Oestmoen + Aleks Kandr + EBE + BottledBrunette
 (Спонсор или заказчик платит 3 наемным убийцам по контракту с заданием убить 9 походников)

°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°

TOKEB может ответить почти на все ваши :

"127 основных частей, странностей и оттенков"

(http://sledopyt1959.mybb.ru/viewforum.php?id=30)

например:

----> Погода при выходе из палатки?
Погода не имеет значения.
3 наемных убийцы могли выполнить свою миссию, т.е. убить 9 туристов, независимо от погодных условий: Ветер=3 м/с + Температура= -10 °C или Ветер=35 м/с + Температура= -50 °C. 

----> Что вынудило выйти депутата?
Внезапное введение удушающего газа внутрь палатки.
(граната со слезоточивым газом из запасов НКВД или самодельная дымовая шашка).

----> что побудило разрезать палатку?
Это были 3 наемных убийцы по контракту, которые разрезали палатку 2 февраля 1959 года после убийства участников похода: миссия выполнена!

°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°

TOKEB очень похож на объяснения Aleks Kandr, см:

https://taina.li/forum/index.php?topic=1002.0

http://mystery12home.ru/t-ub-gr-dyatlova
http://mystery12home.ru/t-ub-gr-dyatlova-2
http://mystery12home.ru/t-ub-gr-dyatlova-3

°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°

У TOKEB есть некоторые разногласия с Aleks Kandr.
(Нет огнестрельного оружия, только тупые предметы, именно заказные убийцы разжигают костер под кедром и т.д......)

Спонсор - офицер НКВД, похожий на Boris_Rodos (1905-1956)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boris_Rodos
Родос был приговорен к расстрелу 26 февраля, через день после выступления Н. И. Хрущева 24 февраля 1956 года.

См. также о привычках тюремщиков:
 Данциг Балдаев(1925-2005)
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/oct/17/drawings-gulag-danzig-baldaev-review

Переведено с помощью www.DeepL.com/Translator (бесплатная версия)
4
General Discussion / Re: "An Unknown Compelling Force"
« Last post by RMK on Today at 11:50:08 AM »
I can not figure why they didn't return for boots
They did not return not only for shoes, but also for jackets. Moreover, they threw away four jackets that had already been taken out of the tent. At the same time, they did not run away from the tent, but left at a slow pace.
P.S. The incident did not happen at night in the cold, but during the day at a temperature of about 0 ° C (32 ° F).



If it happened during the day, what is their reason to set up the tent on the slope? This means they would have had time to go to the forest and do it there.I understand this assumption comes from the conditions needed to form "raised footprints". But at the same time it sounds like they were wasting another day by setting up camp early?
They weren't necessarily "wasting" the day.  In their book, Teddy and Igor Pavlov make a good case for the theory that the Dyatlovites planned to use the 6th day of skiing--which was February 1st--as a rest day.
5
Murdered / Re: This murder scenario fits scene
« Last post by ElizabethHarris on Today at 11:38:42 AM »
If there were bite marks on eyes, eyebrows, noses, lips and inside of the mouth, a coroner could absolutely know whether or not they came from animal/human. I don't believe there wasn't enough evidence at the time to determine where the wound came from (bitemark analysis) it was simply omitted. It's a pretty crappy autopsy report that mentions the missing lips, eyebrows, eyeballs and tongue and makes no attempt to explain the cause. If the wounds were postmortem, we would be able to see evidence or lack of it, of animal activity on the corpse. If cuts are made by straight edge sharp force traumas (to eyes, mouth, eyelids, tongue etc.) or not, it is the coroner's job to indicate that. Maybe they didn't have that capacity in '59. If so, its not the coroner's fault but leaves a big gaping hole as to what happened here which could have been filled with many more helpful details. Today, if a coroner simply wrote 'tongue is absent' on an autopsy without any further explanation, they'd be fired. Vozrozdhenny left many details that should have been in the reports out, as far as today's forensic pathology's standards go that is. And finally, I especially love one of the concluding remarks in Lyuda's autopsy where it says, "some internal organs taken." Taken? He doesn't say absent, or missing, as he did earlier in the report, but taken. We can play the semantics game all we want but that is one bizarre choice of words.
6
GlennM, thank you, I find yours similarly interesting and very well expressed. I like your open-mindedness and ability to have an intelligent conversation when opinions differ! The environment was another huge enemy of the truth here. What the snow covered, what it didn't cover, leads only to more speculation. I don't dare say the M word but if you've ever read Saltyseadog's posts, I think his assumptions are correct IMO. The more complicated the story, the less likely it is to be true. (I know I'm going to be crucified for saying that and of course, this is not always the case but I believe simplicity to be true often enough to apply it to this case too)
7
General Discussion / Re: Ground tremor
« Last post by ElizabethHarris on Today at 04:57:08 AM »
There would be no other motivation to leave the tent barefooted and in underwear unless they were under extreme duress. But the high impact chest wounds couldn't be caused by a fall unless it was from at least 60 feet high. There is nowhere in the terrain around the scenes that shows a 60 foot drop anywhere. So the chest wounds couldn't have come from falling...   
8
[If the force wore boots, we would know.
According to the analysis commissioned by Teddy, the footprints were made by someone wearing boots (but then again, Semyon was found wearing boots).
9
General Discussion / Re: "An Unknown Compelling Force"
« Last post by Manti on January 25, 2022, 09:52:56 PM »
I can not figure why they didn't return for boots
They did not return not only for shoes, but also for jackets. Moreover, they threw away four jackets that had already been taken out of the tent. At the same time, they did not run away from the tent, but left at a slow pace.
P.S. The incident did not happen at night in the cold, but during the day at a temperature of about 0 ° C (32 ° F).



If it happened during the day, what is their reason to set up the tent on the slope? This means they would have had time to go to the forest and do it there.I understand this assumption comes from the conditions needed to form "raised footprints". But at the same time it sounds like they were wasting another day by setting up camp early?
10
General Discussion / Re: "An Unknown Compelling Force"
« Last post by Manti on January 25, 2022, 09:35:59 PM »
The cache wasn't at the boot rock, it was either in the Auspiya valley (where they spent their previous night, scenario A), or according to Teddy & Igor Pavlov's book/theory, on the slope where the tent was later "planted" (scenario B).

These values depend on where exactly their camp was etc. but here's what I gathered from a topographic map:
PlaceElevation
Camp in Auspiya valley and labaz (scen. A)600 ± 50m
"Dyatlov Pass" (that they apparently missed or avoided)~780m
Boot Rock~820m
Tent (labaz in scen. B)~880m
Cedar in Lozva valley~650m


According to this data, "retaining elevation gain" can't really be a reason to camp on the slope, because they had no reason to gain this elevation. If their cache was in Auspiya valley and their destination was the Lozva valley (as their planned route shows), why climb to where the tent was found?

If on the other hand they   set up the cache on the slope for some reason, and then descended to the Lozva valley to camp, then of course the earthquake / rock slide / avalanche risk is not there. Even in this scenario, I don't understand why they would want to set up the cache there... In the diary the previous day, Igor writes that he can't even begin to think about setting up the cache on the ridge (that was near the pass, but the terrain is similar to where the tent was found).


Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10