I personally do not believe they were murdered.
1. There were no traces of strangers in the snow
2. No external injuries on the four from ravines
3. The idea that someone would drive them out of the tent and then wait for hours when they freeze is a complete nonsense!
4. The Army would dispose of them quickly and efficiently
5. The Army would simply let them disappear
6. the expedition was organized by the tourist club at the university and the expedition was supposed to be as the celebration of some Communist convention, and everyone knew they were going to this area. And during 50-80-ties it was necessary to have permission to move within Russia. Therefore, no one would ever have tried any weapons at that time and near that place where student were trekking.
1. The long period between the fateful night and the discovery of the tent ensured that the traces of the killers were gone. In particular as they must have used mountain skis. There is practically no chance that their tracks would remain after a month.
Traces remain always in the winter. If you do not know it, it does not mean that it should be denied.
Traces happen not only prints on snow. But these prints too do not happen selective: traces of Djatlova of group remained, and traces of murderers have disappeared all. So does not happen.
I had to see traces from skis (!) in 2 months after them have left. It was in Polar Ural Mountains in 1982. Traces from skis remain than traces from feet pressure less. Safety of traces depends on external conditions, instead of from the one who has left them.
2. If you take a close look at the injuries of the four in the ravine, it will be apparent that these injuries are consistent with murder by brutal force.
These are your errors based only on fictions. If to analyze traumas from the point of view of biomechanics that do not grow out "by means of cruel force". They are not to any signs.
Being a jiu jitsu practitioner myself, I have learned how easy it is to crush the rib cages of people with elbow strikes. I immediately thought about this when seeing the injuries of Dubinina.
It is either error or notorious misinformation. In the previous letter I asked you to result signs of those actions and their consequences. While we will not receive a definite answer on these questions, I will consider that you are mistaken. I am ready to lead counterobjections to your arguments on the basis of such science, as biomechanics
3. To drive their victims out of the tent and let the cold do the grisly work, is an extremely intelligent method. The students did not freeze to death as planned, because the temperature was a bit higher,
Whence you take the information on temperature and in general about weather during events. There it was not warm. The person could live in those conditions and those clothes only no more than 5 … 8 hours. It is if a difference in productivity of heat and heat losses was 150 … 200 J. And by available calculations there was much more severe.
so the attackers had to chase down their victims - and even so they made sure that there were no bullet wounds or knife cuts.
They are very "intellectual" murderers. They to themselves think out many difficulties, what them specially them to overcome with the greatest expenses of forces and possibilities.
You or scoff at common sense at readers of your texts, or try to inspire obviously false thoughts.
But injuries there were, and it must be emphasized that these injuries are without exception consistent only with human attack.
It either error or notorious misinformation. The head injury of Thibeaux-Brignolles has a site of through penetration 2 х 3,5 х 3 … 4 sm (0,78 х 1.3 х 1.57 in). For this purpose that it would be possible to punch a bone, the subject for defeat should have hardness at least 10 times more than a bone. Show please on elbow parts where there are such conditions (the sizes and hardness)? I do not say about that on an elbow there should be clothes and there was a possibility to receive the necessary pose.
However this trauma could be easily received on a place of a stone ridge № 3 as a result of falling from height of growth or even more low. That I have in detail described in article https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Ey2F7ROB6ZXNJkp49tKPJE24iPP0nKRG/view?usp=sharing
I already some times gave this reference.
In the same place there is a full set of cases of reception of traumas with instructions of places and conditions of their reception.
It bespeaks the resourcefulness of the killers that they accomplished their mission in such a way that the tragedy could be interpreted as an accident. There is no escaping the fact that the injuries of all the victims are consistent with murder - and only with murder.
It not the fact, is your conjectures as which you want to consider as the fact a method of constant repetition.
It is impossible that these injuries could be caused by a series of accidents - and only one of the dead (Dyatlov) seems to have frozen to death. The intelligence of the killers is evidenced today - a lot of people are led to believe that the Dyatlov group succumbed to a combination of bad decisions and accidents. Just as those orchestrating the killling of the nine had planned.
They have not given in it to thoughts, it is the validity. You try repetitions and arrangements to convince it that it was the murder which signs are not available in general. If to use only the facts, instead of your conjectures and mantras. Read attentively papers of the expert and do correct conclusions leaning not against conjectures and on scientifically well-founded calculations, the theory and practice of such cases.
However, the answer lies in the bodies - and the injuries leave no doubt.
Traumas do not leave doubts that they are received by a natural way.
4 and 5. Many people seem to believe that military and government killers prefer to dispose of their targets quickly and effectively, as in most films. Apart from in direct combat situations in military interventions, in the real world this is very far from the case. More often than not, death by government is characterized by "accidents" and "death by natural causes" like "heart attacks," and "suicides" are also common. This is a normal pattern when the killers do not want the public to know what happened. Very resourceful and intelligent, determined attackers on a killing mission will generally endeavor to make murder seem like an accident. If the killers had just made the Dyatlov group disappear, "everyone" would have smelt foul and understood that they had been disposed of. The same if the killers had just shot them and buried them in locked coffins. As a matter of fact, the method chosen was the smartest way to accomplish the mission. Lastly, there is nothing to tell us that the army was responsible. We do not know the precise identity of the killers.
These are words all only, which:
A - are no supported by nothing, except yours of texts
B - have not reason for the basis of such actions.
6. In the Soviet union, the secrecy surrounding everything ensured that one branch of government did not necessarily know what the others did.
You know all - as how it became in the USSR, especially considering that time? Whence? From films of Hollywood?
It is perfectly possible that someone on high determined that the nine students were a security risk if they witnessed something they were not supposed to see.
What should not they see?
It very much reminds a method of suggestion which in psychology "nested doll" is called. It consists that there is one reference to another continuously be. And so becomes indefinitely.
The answer should be accurate, real and what can be checked up. While it is not present, all your words, no more than simply words which mean nothing.
I say it is perfectly possible, It is so far impossible to know the precise identity of the killers or the exact reason why the Dyatlov group was killed, but the bodies tell their tale.
Here it is a sign of this method which "nested doll" is called. It already was is used many times in this case in a current of many years. Answer it has not been given.
Dead bodies do not lie, and their injuries very unmistakably tell us that the Dyatlov Pass tragedy was the result of human involvement with murderous intent.
And it is a following sign of that behind your words it costs nothing. You have many times repeated same, but not too well have not resulted any real fact. At you even substantiations of actions are not present. That which are not invented, and were actually.
Moreover, it is clear that the attack was carefully planned and carried out by people who knew what to do.
The word "obviously" constantly is applied more often by people who have nothing to show as the fact or reality. And you use it constantly and continuously. Read all your texts - everywhere same, but anywhere there are no facts (real, instead of invented) and the reasons for such actions. You have only arrangements and excuses.