October 19, 2021, 10:56:08 AM
Dyatlov Pass Forum

Author Topic: Exploring The Yeti Theory  (Read 58890 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

July 01, 2020, 06:15:19 AM
Reply #480
Offline

sarapuk

Case-Files Achievement Recipient
When I first started out on this adventure if thats the right word to use, my first thought was that it may have been a Bear or Bears that caused the demise of the Dyatlov Group. But I spoke to a Russian friend and he was completely dismissive of the Bear Theory. I also had doubts because of the lack of Damage to the Tent, and no signs of a big altercation at the Tent. Having said that, Bears can be unpredictable. And an 8 foot Bear towering over you would make you flee. The nearest thing to a Bear would be the so called YETI CREATURES, that seem to appear to some people in various parts of the World. The problem then is that we have no specimens to even prove their existence. So we could end up making all sorts of claims for an unknown quantity to fit our various Events at the Mountainside and Forest where the Dyatlov Group ended up. The Tent. The Cedar Tree. The Fire. The Den. The Ravine.
DB
 

July 01, 2020, 11:11:35 PM
Reply #481
Offline

Georgi


 
It's way to complicated to stage the scene like that. For starters, the 2 men would require fire arms. From where ? How would they get into possession of firearms ?
They were spies and their handlers gave them the pistols.

Quote
Then what would be the motive ? Everyone knew that the group was well welded together and they were good friends. This entire scenario would require a completely different group to work.
There are marriages that last decades where someone hides their true self from their partner, there are people who work with someone for decades and call them a friend only to have that person turn out to be fake, there are people who kill themselves and no one could believe it because it was the guy who was always cracking jokes and smiling or it was the bubbly girl who seemed to be always happy.

Quote
I was saying about looking for documents hidden in the fabric of the tent...
Why would they hide anything in the fabric of the tent?

Quote
- why did Zolotaryov say "we will be famous around the world" before leaving on the hike ? What did he expect to encounter/do on Mount Otorten or nearby that would be so important ?
Maybe it was misunderstanding and he was saying he will be famous when he gets back because he will be a very successful guide?
Quote
- why did the skiers pitch their tent on the slope, in an exposed position to wind ? It was a realy bad place to camp. And it was completely different from what they've been doing the previous days (pitching tent in the forest).
It could have been exhaustion, they were too tired to  make it to the treeline. It could have been a sudden snow storm that threatened their visibility or it could have been something as simple as they were losing daylight and decided the risks were worth it when compared to moving 1.6km to the tree line and pitching a tent in the dark.

Quote
- where is Zolotaryov's notebook (containing presumably his journal) ? How did it disappeared ?
Suposedly someone from the search party found it in his hand and picked it up, it could have been too damaged for any recovery and was thrown out or it could have held a clue the investigation didn’t want to release or it could have been simply misplaced/forgotten about in someone’s bag and they didn’t want to come forward later and be accused of stealing it.

Quote
- what are the mystery fireballs reported by eye-witnesses in the night of Fev 1st ?
Could have been a natural phenomenon, jet’s flying. In 1960 the flight plan of the American U2 that was shot down over the USSR took it within a few hundred km of the pass, could have been an American spy plane being shot at by air defence.

Quote
- what caused Zolotaryov, Lyubidina's and Thibeaux-Brignolles's fractures ?
Butt of a rifle, baton, rock, for Zolotaryov and Dubinina it could have been hit repeatedly by the butt of a rifle, a baton, they could have been stomped, hit by a rock or it could have been some form of fighting technique or torture technique applying pressure to certain areas of the body to inflict injuries or pain.

Quote
- what is the cause of the Mansi legend of the nine dead hunters on Kholat Syakl ?
Unless we have proof that they actually disappeared, it could have been a legend born after the death of the hikers or it could have been 9 hunters dying over 5 years and with every retelling it gets changed until its 9 hunters dying at once.

Quote
- what is the cause of the Mansi legend about the people-abducting Menk ?
Just a legend, or it could be a story used to scare the children only to be believed by those so inclined after the death of the hikers.

Quote
Those questions, and others like them, paint a complicated picture. It is possible that the group encountered something truly extraordinary on Fev 1st/2nd.
Is it really that likely though? The 4 hikers that were engaged in the fight wouldn’t have survived without significant and very obvious injuries of a fight with something that outclassed them, if a yeti did the damage to the 4 in the ravine, why didn’t the Yeti do such damage to the faces of Dyatlov and Zinaida? I mean if the Yeti could crush all those ribs in one punch and fracture a skull, why didn’t it simply smash their faces with one punch?


 

July 02, 2020, 01:19:12 AM
Reply #482
Offline

alecsandros


They were spies and their handlers gave them the pistols.
It is conceivable, but it still is a huge complication from the "natural phenomenons" that are officialy blamed (avalanche, snow slab, hurricane, etc). Gun circulation was strictly controlled in the USSR and satellite countries, therefore producing two pistols would require a lot of measures to be taken.

Quote
There are marriages that last decades where someone hides their true self from their partner, there are people who work with someone for decades and call them a friend only to have that person turn out to be fake, there are people who kill themselves and no one could believe it because it was the guy who was always cracking jokes and smiling or it was the bubbly girl who seemed to be always happy.
Agreed but still it is a complication that they wouldn't want...

Quote
Why would they hide anything in the fabric of the tent?
To be difficult to find by the others.

Quote
Maybe it was misunderstanding and he was saying he will be famous when he gets back because he will be a very successful guide?
Perhaps...
Quote
It could have been exhaustion, they were too tired to  make it to the treeline. It could have been a sudden snow storm that threatened their visibility or it could have been something as simple as they were losing daylight and decided the risks were worth it when compared to moving 1.6km to the tree line and pitching a tent in the dark.
The day of Fev 1st is interesting: the group travelled just one kilometre before setting camp. That's very little. The labaz was erected on Jan 31st, thus they had the entire day of Fev 1st for hiking. Yet they pitched their tent on a barren slope. And, after hiking 1 kilometre, they couldn't be exhausted or even tired...

Quote
Suposedly someone from the search party found it in his hand and picked it up, it could have been too damaged for any recovery and was thrown out or it could have held a clue the investigation didn’t want to release or it could have been simply misplaced/forgotten about in someone’s bag and they didn’t want to come forward later and be accused of stealing it.
Agreed. But , as anything that goes missing, this piece of evidence may hold important clues...

Quote
Could have been a natural phenomenon, jet’s flying. In 1960 the flight plan of the American U2 that was shot down over the USSR took it within a few hundred km of the pass, could have been an American spy plane being shot at by air defence.
What Lev Ivanov is describing are not fighter jets. He is describing, after putting together the memories of dozens of individuals, apparently sentient fireorbs, that descended and caused the Dyatlov Pass Incident...


Quote
Is it really that likely though? The 4 hikers that were engaged in the fight wouldn’t have survived without significant and very obvious injuries of a fight with something that outclassed them, if a yeti did the damage to the 4 in the ravine, why didn’t the Yeti do such damage to the faces of Dyatlov and Zinaida? I mean if the Yeti could crush all those ribs in one punch and fracture a skull, why didn’t it simply smash their faces with one punch?
Well, certainly not likely.
However, stranger things have happened... (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beast_of_G%C3%A9vaudan)

Regarding the damage done to the hikers - it would depend on the fight, where and when did the Yeti strike, etc. Even if outclassed, the skiers could put up a good fight, even armed with pocket knives. They were possibly more nimble then the Yeti, and thus could dodge it's attacks more then once.

Best Regards,
« Last Edit: July 02, 2020, 01:37:42 AM by alecsandros »
 

July 02, 2020, 09:57:52 PM
Reply #483
Offline

Georgi


It is conceivable, but it still is a huge complication from the "natural phenomenons" that are officialy blamed (avalanche, snow slab, hurricane, etc). Gun circulation was strictly controlled in the USSR and satellite countries, therefore producing two pistols would require a lot of measures to be taken.
Problem with the natural explanation is that it very obviously wasn’t one natural event, if it was natural it would have had to be a series of events and the hikers had to basically make the worst decision at each fork in the road for them to arrive to their deaths with such injuries. Plus if it was natural incident the soviet authorities would have been more serious with the investigation to prevent such incidents in the future because if nothing else you don’t want to be back there in a few months to a few years with more dead hikers, instead they tried to bury the investigation and end it with some half-assed assessment that it was an avalanche when it clearly wasn’t since we have pictures of the tent which was not completely covered in snow and we have footprints of the hikers which were also not covered in snow. What are the chances that 9 experienced hikers would panic in the dark, cut their own tent and then slowly walk down the hill to the treeline with most of them being poorly dressed to a degree where they guarantee serious bodily harm or death?

Quote

Agreed but still it is a complication that they wouldn't want...
Yet here we are 61 years later still throwing around theories. The complication is that they very obviously tried to cover the incident up with a quick and predetermined investigation and left much more suspicions in their wake, so if they knew 1-2 weeks before the search got there, they sure screwed that up.

Quote
To be difficult to find by the others.
 
If they are spy’s yeah they would have creative ways to hide information, if they are hikers they would keep their papers or diaries with them. You have to have something worth hiding to hide it in such a manner, so for someone to go and search the tent in such a manner would mean that there is more to one or more of the hikers than we know about.

 
Quote

The day of Fev 1st is interesting: the group travelled just one kilometre before setting camp. That's very little. The labaz was erected on Jan 31st, thus they had the entire day of Fev 1st for hiking. Yet they pitched their tent on a barren slope. And, after hiking 1 kilometre, they couldn't be exhausted or even tired...

If I remember correctly, somewhere it said they traveled further and had to double back, so while they made 1km advance they likely traveled further. Another option is an injury to one of the hikers forced them to set up camp on the slope rather than try to make it to the treeline, that person doesn’t have to be incapacitated, they just have to be in significant enough pain to warrant them camping on the slope.

Quote
Agreed. But , as anything that goes missing, this piece of evidence may hold important clues...
This leads us further into the argument that there was human involvement, but it could also be something as simple as someone walking away with a souvenir or it was damaged in the water and whoever found it tossed it away at a later time because it had no value to anyone.



Quote
Well, certainly not likely.
However, stranger things have happened... (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beast_of_G%C3%A9vaudan)
What does that have to do with anything?


Quote
Regarding the damage done to the hikers - it would depend on the fight, where and when did the Yeti strike, etc. Even if outclassed, the skiers could put up a good fight, even armed with pocket knives. They were possibly more nimble then the Yeti, and thus could dodge it's attacks more then once.
Krivochenko, Dyatlov, Slobodin and Zinaida all had serious injuries to their faces from an obvious fight, if the same being that caused the massive injuries to Zolotaryov and Lyudmila caused the injuries to the faces of the first four hikers then it makes no sense. The first four obviously took hits, taking a hit from something that strong should have left devastating injuries on their faces and left them to die where they stood rather than give them injuries from a fight but at the same time be very gentle.
 

July 08, 2020, 04:14:52 PM
Reply #484
Offline

Star man

Case-Files Achievement Recipient
It is conceivable, but it still is a huge complication from the "natural phenomenons" that are officialy blamed (avalanche, snow slab, hurricane, etc). Gun circulation was strictly controlled in the USSR and satellite countries, therefore producing two pistols would require a lot of measures to be taken.
Problem with the natural explanation is that it very obviously wasn’t one natural event, if it was natural it would have had to be a series of events and the hikers had to basically make the worst decision at each fork in the road for them to arrive to their deaths with such injuries. Plus if it was natural incident the soviet authorities would have been more serious with the investigation to prevent such incidents in the future because if nothing else you don’t want to be back there in a few months to a few years with more dead hikers, instead they tried to bury the investigation and end it with some half-assed assessment that it was an avalanche when it clearly wasn’t since we have pictures of the tent which was not completely covered in snow and we have footprints of the hikers which were also not covered in snow. What are the chances that 9 experienced hikers would panic in the dark, cut their own tent and then slowly walk down the hill to the treeline with most of them being poorly dressed to a degree where they guarantee serious bodily harm or death?

Quote

Agreed but still it is a complication that they wouldn't want...
Yet here we are 61 years later still throwing around theories. The complication is that they very obviously tried to cover the incident up with a quick and predetermined investigation and left much more suspicions in their wake, so if they knew 1-2 weeks before the search got there, they sure screwed that up.

Quote
To be difficult to find by the others.
 
If they are spy’s yeah they would have creative ways to hide information, if they are hikers they would keep their papers or diaries with them. You have to have something worth hiding to hide it in such a manner, so for someone to go and search the tent in such a manner would mean that there is more to one or more of the hikers than we know about.

 
Quote

The day of Fev 1st is interesting: the group travelled just one kilometre before setting camp. That's very little. The labaz was erected on Jan 31st, thus they had the entire day of Fev 1st for hiking. Yet they pitched their tent on a barren slope. And, after hiking 1 kilometre, they couldn't be exhausted or even tired...

If I remember correctly, somewhere it said they traveled further and had to double back, so while they made 1km advance they likely traveled further. Another option is an injury to one of the hikers forced them to set up camp on the slope rather than try to make it to the treeline, that person doesn’t have to be incapacitated, they just have to be in significant enough pain to warrant them camping on the slope.

Quote
Agreed. But , as anything that goes missing, this piece of evidence may hold important clues...
This leads us further into the argument that there was human involvement, but it could also be something as simple as someone walking away with a souvenir or it was damaged in the water and whoever found it tossed it away at a later time because it had no value to anyone.



Quote
Well, certainly not likely.
However, stranger things have happened... (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beast_of_G%C3%A9vaudan)
What does that have to do with anything?


Quote
Regarding the damage done to the hikers - it would depend on the fight, where and when did the Yeti strike, etc. Even if outclassed, the skiers could put up a good fight, even armed with pocket knives. They were possibly more nimble then the Yeti, and thus could dodge it's attacks more then once.
Krivochenko, Dyatlov, Slobodin and Zinaida all had serious injuries to their faces from an obvious fight, if the same being that caused the massive injuries to Zolotaryov and Lyudmila caused the injuries to the faces of the first four hikers then it makes no sense. The first four obviously took hits, taking a hit from something that strong should have left devastating injuries on their faces and left them to die where they stood rather than give them injuries from a fight but at the same time be very gentle.

If you look at the attack pattern of primates, they tend to hit and run initially.  They also grab the legs and drag you along the ground.  This could explain some of the superficial injuries.  It would also explain why the flashlight was dropped but not recovered.   When you are isolated, on the ground and weak, that is when the severe beating happens with the ape standing over you  beating with its hands.  Apes also tend to maul the face, leaving severe injuries.  All of the injuries are consistent with this type of attack.  Chimps and Gorillas are also known to bite, but there are no bite Mark's on the bodies.  So maybe the attackers were not "normal" apes., but they could have been.

Regards

Star man
 

July 16, 2020, 09:29:24 PM
Reply #485
Offline

Georgi




If you look at the attack pattern of primates, they tend to hit and run initially.  They also grab the legs and drag you along the ground.  This could explain some of the superficial injuries.  It would also explain why the flashlight was dropped but not recovered.   When you are isolated, on the ground and weak, that is when the severe beating happens with the ape standing over you  beating with its hands.  Apes also tend to maul the face, leaving severe injuries.  All of the injuries are consistent with this type of attack.  Chimps and Gorillas are also known to bite, but there are no bite Mark's on the bodies.  So maybe the attackers were not "normal" apes., but they could have been.

Regards

Star man
If there were 9 hikers, why did only 4 of them have injuries consistent with a fist fight? And more importantly why did they have injuries consistent with a fist fight? I mean some had facial injuries consistent with getting punched, if a bear hits you in the face, you are probably not getting up which means that some of the hikers should have died in the tent area rather than the treeline. More importantly, why run out of the tent and walk the rest of the way? Why run out of the tent in a panic without grabbing the very things that would help you fight off whatever is attacking you?
 

July 17, 2020, 04:10:16 PM
Reply #486
Offline

Star man

Case-Files Achievement Recipient


If you look at the attack pattern of primates, they tend to hit and run initially.  They also grab the legs and drag you along the ground.  This could explain some of the superficial injuries.  It would also explain why the flashlight was dropped but not recovered.   When you are isolated, on the ground and weak, that is when the severe beating happens with the ape standing over you  beating with its hands.  Apes also tend to maul the face, leaving severe injuries.  All of the injuries are consistent with this type of attack.  Chimps and Gorillas are also known to bite, but there are no bite Mark's on the bodies.  So maybe the attackers were not "normal" apes., but they could have been.

Regards

Star man
If there were 9 hikers, why did only 4 of them have injuries consistent with a fist fight? And more importantly why did they have injuries consistent with a fist fight? I mean some had facial injuries consistent with getting punched, if a bear hits you in the face, you are probably not getting up which means that some of the hikers should have died in the tent area rather than the treeline. More importantly, why run out of the tent and walk the rest of the way? Why run out of the tent in a panic without grabbing the very things that would help you fight off whatever is attacking you?

These are reasonable questions.  I think a part of the problem for us who try to understand what happened is perspective.  It is difficult to understand completely the situation of the hikers from our armchairs.  I imagine even first hand knowledge of the location and weather conditions would not really help to understand their predicament completely.  Irrespective of what caused them to leave the tent, the hikers situation was one of extreme stress, where they had to make life or death decisions.  It is quite possible that they disagreed and fought with each other.  But evidence of a fist fight cannot lead to any particular conclusion on why they left the tent.

Why run from the tent and walk down the slope?  I think the answer is simple.  It was cold, dark, the terrain was dangerous and icy and most had no shoes.  Moving slowly, carefully and keeping together would make more sense.

Why not grab the axe or more knives.  I think whatever happened, it happened quickly and panic set in.  In a panicked state the higher brain functions are reduced and flight or fight kicks in.  Many people have lost their lives because they have been unable to think their way through a dangerous situation.

  The hikers cut the side of the tent, which makes me wonder why not use the door, where the axes and ice axe were.  Maybe because that is where the threat was too. They didn't stop to pick up shoes and clothes either.  Whatever happened they believed they needed to leave quickly without collecting anything.

Regards

Star man
 

July 17, 2020, 05:08:05 PM
Reply #487
Offline

sarapuk

Case-Files Achievement Recipient
I notice the number of apparent SCRATCH MARKS on many of the bodies.  Scratch marks are not usually associated with a fist fight. An animal with CLAWS could take a swipe and cause such marks. In any kind of fist fight the face always seems to get plenty of attention. The hands also show clear signs of injury.  Swelling and bruising is usually prominent.
DB
 

July 28, 2020, 02:10:56 PM
Reply #488
Offline

sarapuk

Case-Files Achievement Recipient

I found an interesting book today in a Charity Shop in Sussex. First Edition. 1955. A very good well written sensible and serious book. Its about an Expedition to find proof of the existence or not of the so called Yeti. Good references. The book also covers Sherpa Culture and geographical information. It would be good to have something like this on the Menk and the Mansi Culture.





















DB
 

August 09, 2020, 09:15:07 PM
Reply #489
Offline

Georgi



These are reasonable questions.  I think a part of the problem for us who try to understand what happened is perspective.  It is difficult to understand completely the situation of the hikers from our armchairs.  I imagine even first hand knowledge of the location and weather conditions would not really help to understand their predicament completely.  Irrespective of what caused them to leave the tent, the hikers situation was one of extreme stress, where they had to make life or death decisions.  It is quite possible that they disagreed and fought with each other.  But evidence of a fist fight cannot lead to any particular conclusion on why they left the tent.
The evidence of a fist fight is but one piece of the whole puzzle. The scene indicates a panicked retreat but the foot prints down the slope indicate a controlled descent, if big foot had attacked them at the tent why were they left alone to leisurely walk down the slope instead of continuing the pursuit? To me, what makes sense is that someone made them leave the tent and let them walk down the slope without harassing them and the hikers knew they could not turn back because whoever was at the tent had ranged weapons(pistols/rifles). Even if we ignore the cut in the tent, leaving the tent without sufficient clothes, without survival tools, in the middle of the night in sub zero temperatures would only happen under very extreme circumstances, so if something is enough of a threat to leave the tent poorly dressed, without tools, without proper footwear in the dark and travel 1.5km away from your tent, it would require you to do so at a run and a fast run at that. What would force you to abandon your clothes, shoes and tools for survival but wouldn’t threaten you on the way down? They had three options, certain death at the tent, certain death on the slope or almost certain death at the treeline since it offered them a slim chance of survival

Quote
Why run from the tent and walk down the slope?  I think the answer is simple.  It was cold, dark, the terrain was dangerous and icy and most had no shoes.  Moving slowly, carefully and keeping together would make more sense.
If something terrified me enough to leave my shelter, clothes, shoes and survival equipment it would terrify me the entire way down. What’s more, why would the yeti be satisfied to sit at the tent site and not follow them to continue the attack? At some point they would have realizes that they were not being followed by the yeti so they would have stopped, retraced their steps and waited it out because it apparently didn’t want to kill them. Besides 9 young, fit people would get over their panic and realize that their best chance of survival would be at the tent site and going back as a concentrated group would give them their best chance of survival.

Quote
Why not grab the axe or more knives.  I think whatever happened, it happened quickly and panic set in.  In a panicked state the higher brain functions are reduced and flight or fight kicks in.  Many people have lost their lives because they have been unable to think their way through a dangerous situation.
We are not talking about 1 or 2 people, we are talking about 9 individuals some of them have survived terrifying things in their lives so they wouldn’t have been easily scared, what’s more there is the contradiction again, they were in such a panicked state as to not take the blankets they were wrapped up in, or the knife they used to cut the tent with but they were in a calm enough state on their decent. They were either panicked or they were calm, being in such a complete state of panic to cut your only shelter for 60-70km, throw away the knife you used to cut the tent with, leave the tent after throwing down the blanket you were wrapped up in, some of them would have been right next to the jackets, boots and tools so they must have been in complete state of panic to destroy and subsequently abandon your tent without clothes, shoes, or tools yet they had the presence of mind not to run down the slope and whatever scared them at the tent was not bothering to follow them.

Quote
  The hikers cut the side of the tent, which makes me wonder why not use the door, where the axes and ice axe were.  Maybe because that is where the threat was too. They didn't stop to pick up shoes and clothes either.  Whatever happened they believed they needed to leave quickly without collecting anything.
That would make sense in a tent that is 30 or more feet, this was a small tent which was basically 2 4-man tents sown together and likely at the time of egress there were 7 people in the crowded tent, if big foot was standing at the door or even at any point around the tent it is likely it would have seen them leave and followed them, if it didn’t follow them why did they continue going down the slope?
 

August 09, 2020, 09:18:24 PM
Reply #490
Offline

Georgi


I notice the number of apparent SCRATCH MARKS on many of the bodies.  Scratch marks are not usually associated with a fist fight. An animal with CLAWS could take a swipe and cause such marks. In any kind of fist fight the face always seems to get plenty of attention. The hands also show clear signs of injury.  Swelling and bruising is usually prominent.

You would get scratch marks if you were subsequently restrained facedown on the ground. Scratch marks could also happen based on what the attackers were wearing, depending on the gloves they could have created the scratches. Something with claws would not leave scratch marks, it would leave gashes. If the yeti left scratches on the people I fought, it has to be the most considerate and restrained animal in the world.
 

August 10, 2020, 11:56:24 PM
Reply #491
Offline

Star man

Case-Files Achievement Recipient

These are reasonable questions.  I think a part of the problem for us who try to understand what happened is perspective.  It is difficult to understand completely the situation of the hikers from our armchairs.  I imagine even first hand knowledge of the location and weather conditions would not really help to understand their predicament completely.  Irrespective of what caused them to leave the tent, the hikers situation was one of extreme stress, where they had to make life or death decisions.  It is quite possible that they disagreed and fought with each other.  But evidence of a fist fight cannot lead to any particular conclusion on why they left the tent.
The evidence of a fist fight is but one piece of the whole puzzle. The scene indicates a panicked retreat but the foot prints down the slope indicate a controlled descent, if big foot had attacked them at the tent why were they left alone to leisurely walk down the slope instead of continuing the pursuit? To me, what makes sense is that someone made them leave the tent and let them walk down the slope without harassing them and the hikers knew they could not turn back because whoever was at the tent had ranged weapons(pistols/rifles). Even if we ignore the cut in the tent, leaving the tent without sufficient clothes, without survival tools, in the middle of the night in sub zero temperatures would only happen under very extreme circumstances, so if something is enough of a threat to leave the tent poorly dressed, without tools, without proper footwear in the dark and travel 1.5km away from your tent, it would require you to do so at a run and a fast run at that. What would force you to abandon your clothes, shoes and tools for survival but wouldn’t threaten you on the way down? They had three options, certain death at the tent, certain death on the slope or almost certain death at the treeline since it offered them a slim chance of survival

Quote
Why run from the tent and walk down the slope?  I think the answer is simple.  It was cold, dark, the terrain was dangerous and icy and most had no shoes.  Moving slowly, carefully and keeping together would make more sense.
If something terrified me enough to leave my shelter, clothes, shoes and survival equipment it would terrify me the entire way down. What’s more, why would the yeti be satisfied to sit at the tent site and not follow them to continue the attack? At some point they would have realizes that they were not being followed by the yeti so they would have stopped, retraced their steps and waited it out because it apparently didn’t want to kill them. Besides 9 young, fit people would get over their panic and realize that their best chance of survival would be at the tent site and going back as a concentrated group would give them their best chance of survival.

Quote
Why not grab the axe or more knives.  I think whatever happened, it happened quickly and panic set in.  In a panicked state the higher brain functions are reduced and flight or fight kicks in.  Many people have lost their lives because they have been unable to think their way through a dangerous situation.
We are not talking about 1 or 2 people, we are talking about 9 individuals some of them have survived terrifying things in their lives so they wouldn’t have been easily scared, what’s more there is the contradiction again, they were in such a panicked state as to not take the blankets they were wrapped up in, or the knife they used to cut the tent with but they were in a calm enough state on their decent. They were either panicked or they were calm, being in such a complete state of panic to cut your only shelter for 60-70km, throw away the knife you used to cut the tent with, leave the tent after throwing down the blanket you were wrapped up in, some of them would have been right next to the jackets, boots and tools so they must have been in complete state of panic to destroy and subsequently abandon your tent without clothes, shoes, or tools yet they had the presence of mind not to run down the slope and whatever scared them at the tent was not bothering to follow them.

Quote
  The hikers cut the side of the tent, which makes me wonder why not use the door, where the axes and ice axe were.  Maybe because that is where the threat was too. They didn't stop to pick up shoes and clothes either.  Whatever happened they believed they needed to leave quickly without collecting anything.
That would make sense in a tent that is 30 or more feet, this was a small tent which was basically 2 4-man tents sown together and likely at the time of egress there were 7 people in the crowded tent, if big foot was standing at the door or even at any point around the tent it is likely it would have seen them leave and followed them, if it didn’t follow them why did they continue going down the slope?

The decent down the slope does not appear calm though, and it is possible they were followed at a distance and may have even had an altercation of some kind on the decent.  If you are a group of 9 frightened people looking out for each other you stick together and move cautiously (basic principle of safety in numbers).  If you are calmly walking down a slope, why drop your flash,ight 450m from the tent and not stop to pick it up again?  It was important enough to them when they left.  Is it possible that they had a close encounter with something and decided not to hang around to pick up the flashlight?  This piece of evidence does not point to an orderly calm decent and needs to be explainec?

Regards

Star man
 

August 11, 2020, 07:04:09 PM
Reply #492
Offline

Georgi



The decent down the slope does not appear calm though, and it is possible they were followed at a distance and may have even had an altercation of some kind on the decent.  If you are a group of 9 frightened people looking out for each other you stick together and move cautiously (basic principle of safety in numbers).  If you are calmly walking down a slope, why drop your flash,ight 450m from the tent and not stop to pick it up again?  It was important enough to them when they left.  Is it possible that they had a close encounter with something and decided not to hang around to pick up the flashlight?  This piece of evidence does not point to an orderly calm decent and needs to be explainec?

Regards

Star man

If you are running in the snow it becomes quite obvious, there would be indications that they were running and consequently evidence of falling. If the steps indicate a calm and measured decent it means that they knew there was a threat at the tent that was likely not following them but would kill them if they turned back. If it was the yeti they would have clustered together and likely turned around once they figured out the yeti wasn't following.

As for the flashlight? It was dark by the time they were going down the slope, whoever forced them out of the tent told them to use the flashlight so that the attackers can keep track of them and at some point they told them to drop it. If they were in a panic they might not have all gone in the same direction, maybe initially they would have but being in a blind panic, in the dark and cold and running for 1.5km they would have separated and maybe some would have in different places with no way to find their friends in the dark without attracting the attention of whatever forced them out. The only reason that 8 of them ended up under the tree was because they walked there together in an extended line, the fire was a no choice situation for them.
 

August 11, 2020, 11:34:51 PM
Reply #493
Offline

Star man

Case-Files Achievement Recipient

The decent down the slope does not appear calm though, and it is possible they were followed at a distance and may have even had an altercation of some kind on the decent.  If you are a group of 9 frightened people looking out for each other you stick together and move cautiously (basic principle of safety in numbers).  If you are calmly walking down a slope, why drop your flash,ight 450m from the tent and not stop to pick it up again?  It was important enough to them when they left.  Is it possible that they had a close encounter with something and decided not to hang around to pick up the flashlight?  This piece of evidence does not point to an orderly calm decent and needs to be explainec?

Regards

Star man

If you are running in the snow it becomes quite obvious, there would be indications that they were running and consequently evidence of falling. If the steps indicate a calm and measured decent it means that they knew there was a threat at the tent that was likely not following them but would kill them if they turned back. If it was the yeti they would have clustered together and likely turned around once they figured out the yeti wasn't following.

As for the flashlight? It was dark by the time they were going down the slope, whoever forced them out of the tent told them to use the flashlight so that the attackers can keep track of them and at some point they told them to drop it. If they were in a panic they might not have all gone in the same direction, maybe initially they would have but being in a blind panic, in the dark and cold and running for 1.5km they would have separated and maybe some would have in different places with no way to find their friends in the dark without attracting the attention of whatever forced them out. The only reason that 8 of them ended up under the tree was because they walked there together in an extended line, the fire was a no choice situation for them.

I think that you may be associating the fact they were not running with not being frightened or scared.  If you are confronted with a wild animal like a bear, the worst thing you could do is run and split up.  Also it would have been very difficult to run in those conditions given the depth of snow, icy patches, rocky slopes, dark conditions.  One wrong step and you might over the top of a ridge.  I don't think they had much choice other than to move carefully and slowly.  Eye witness accounts of Yeti's/big foot suggext that they are cautious too.  Stalking humans and 9bserving from a distance until curiosity gets the better of them.  Most stories don't involve a physical encounter, but others do. 

By the way I am not saying that I am convinced it was a Yeti, just that there is evidence that fits.  Whatever happened to the hikers was unusual, and the correct theory is always going to be one that under normal circumstances would be considered unlikely.

Regards

Star man
 

August 13, 2020, 09:56:05 PM
Reply #494
Offline

Georgi




I think that you may be associating the fact they were not running with not being frightened or scared.  If you are confronted with a wild animal like a bear, the worst thing you could do is run and split up.
If you are in a state of panic the last thing you would be doing is to think rationally about how you would decent, panic means running and not thinking with too rationally.


Quote
Also it would have been very difficult to run in those conditions given the depth of snow, icy patches, rocky slopes, dark conditions.  One wrong step and you might over the top of a ridge.  I don't think they had much choice other than to move carefully and slowly.  Eye witness accounts of Yeti's/big foot suggest that they are cautious too.  Stalking humans and 9bserving from a distance until curiosity gets the better of them.  Most stories don't involve a physical encounter, but others do.  By the way I am not saying that I am convinced it was a Yeti, just that there is evidence that fits.  Whatever happened to the hikers was unusual, and the correct theory is always going to be one that under normal circumstances would be considered unlikely.
 
Again though, panic doesn't normally go hand in hand with rational though, this is one of the major problems with this theory, tent cutting and state of dress indicates panic, state of inside of tent indicates orderly withdrawal, tracks down the slope indicate orderly movement. The evidence continually contradicts itself, they were both panicked and calm, the two men on the outside reacted the exact same as the 7 people on the inside of the tent and went the exact same direction and all of them reacted in complete panic while also being in command of their facilities enough to be careful when they egress down the slope.
 When you have a fight or flight response situation and there are 9 people chances are that some would choose to stand and fight while others will run and yet a third group might completely panic and shut down. The injuries on some of the hikers indicating a fight, some fought back but were quickly overwhelmed by a superior force or weapons they could not hope to take. After they fought back and were subdued they were given a choice, certainly die at the tent or almost certainly die at the treeline or a variation of those two options. When the choice is certain death and almost certain death most people would choose the almost especially after they had already been beaten in a hand to hand fight. They are told to take off their boots, and start marching in an extended line down the slope, a ways down the slope they are told to drop the flashlight.
The expectation would be they would die after prolonged exposure to the elements but the hikers prove to be resourceful, they built a fire and survived far longer than expected but by the point that the attackers show up to the tree two men are already dead, Slobodin has been dead since the evening due to injuries survived during the fight the previous night and Igor at this point decides to go back to the tent out of desperation knowing that they are facing certain death in the forest and the tent at least gives them some chance of survival if the attackers are gone. Zina chooses to go with him and by 6am they both are dead a few hundred meters apart from each other and Slobodin. In the early morning the attackers find 5 of the 9 hikers dead leaving only 4 hikers alive, they look for them, find them and kill them in brutal fashion. All 4 hikers had injuries that were similar as if someone stood behind them and hit them with the butt of a rifle or a baton with some force with the expectation to knock them down. Nikolay died due to the head injuries, Kolevatov has his neck broken and that leaves Lyudmila and Zolotaryov. For whatever reason these two were chosen to suffer the worst, whether Zolotaryov was the actual target and Lyudmila just happened to piss of the attackers or they both proved to be the most defiant we wont know but they suffer brutal injuries and slowly die thereafter.

Once the deed is done, the attackers get to go and stage the scene, they cut the tent, sabotage the camera Zolotaryov was found with, cover their tracks and leave the area as quickly as possible, maybe splitting in smaller groups to be less noticeable. People have been killing each other for stupid reasons since the beginning of time, the reason they had to die will likely never be known unless there is a diary somewhere or the KGB has some top secret archives that have not been opened yet. There could have been any of several dozen reasons I can name and even more I cant name because some people just don’t value human lives the same way normal people do.

We don’t need to use a supernatural beast that has not been proven to exist try to explain a situation like this, and we don’t have to reconcile the contradictory evidence because there are logical explanations for everything. Someone committed a crime, they didn’t want hikers getting stabbed or shot so they used every means available to kill those hikers hell of a lot easier to create theories about someone killing those hikers if the evidence is confusing and contradictory and it would be a hell of a lot harder if they were riddled with bullets or stabbed to death.
 

August 14, 2020, 09:37:34 AM
Reply #495
Offline

sarapuk

Case-Files Achievement Recipient
I notice the number of apparent SCRATCH MARKS on many of the bodies.  Scratch marks are not usually associated with a fist fight. An animal with CLAWS could take a swipe and cause such marks. In any kind of fist fight the face always seems to get plenty of attention. The hands also show clear signs of injury.  Swelling and bruising is usually prominent.

You would get scratch marks if you were subsequently restrained facedown on the ground. Scratch marks could also happen based on what the attackers were wearing, depending on the gloves they could have created the scratches. Something with claws would not leave scratch marks, it would leave gashes. If the yeti left scratches on the people I fought, it has to be the most considerate and restrained animal in the world.

I have considered that a creature with claws could cause gashes. But the Dyatlov Group were wearing fairly tough clothing.
DB
 

August 15, 2020, 03:11:33 AM
Reply #496
Offline

Star man

Case-Files Achievement Recipient


I think that you may be associating the fact they were not running with not being frightened or scared.  If you are confronted with a wild animal like a bear, the worst thing you could do is run and split up.
If you are in a state of panic the last thing you would be doing is to think rationally about how you would decent, panic means running and not thinking with too rationally.


Quote
Also it would have been very difficult to run in those conditions given the depth of snow, icy patches, rocky slopes, dark conditions.  One wrong step and you might over the top of a ridge.  I don't think they had much choice other than to move carefully and slowly.  Eye witness accounts of Yeti's/big foot suggest that they are cautious too.  Stalking humans and 9bserving from a distance until curiosity gets the better of them.  Most stories don't involve a physical encounter, but others do.  By the way I am not saying that I am convinced it was a Yeti, just that there is evidence that fits.  Whatever happened to the hikers was unusual, and the correct theory is always going to be one that under normal circumstances would be considered unlikely.
 
Again though, panic doesn't normally go hand in hand with rational though, this is one of the major problems with this theory, tent cutting and state of dress indicates panic, state of inside of tent indicates orderly withdrawal, tracks down the slope indicate orderly movement. The evidence continually contradicts itself, they were both panicked and calm, the two men on the outside reacted the exact same as the 7 people on the inside of the tent and went the exact same direction and all of them reacted in complete panic while also being in command of their facilities enough to be careful when they egress down the slope.
 When you have a fight or flight response situation and there are 9 people chances are that some would choose to stand and fight while others will run and yet a third group might completely panic and shut down. The injuries on some of the hikers indicating a fight, some fought back but were quickly overwhelmed by a superior force or weapons they could not hope to take. After they fought back and were subdued they were given a choice, certainly die at the tent or almost certainly die at the treeline or a variation of those two options. When the choice is certain death and almost certain death most people would choose the almost especially after they had already been beaten in a hand to hand fight. They are told to take off their boots, and start marching in an extended line down the slope, a ways down the slope they are told to drop the flashlight.
The expectation would be they would die after prolonged exposure to the elements but the hikers prove to be resourceful, they built a fire and survived far longer than expected but by the point that the attackers show up to the tree two men are already dead, Slobodin has been dead since the evening due to injuries survived during the fight the previous night and Igor at this point decides to go back to the tent out of desperation knowing that they are facing certain death in the forest and the tent at least gives them some chance of survival if the attackers are gone. Zina chooses to go with him and by 6am they both are dead a few hundred meters apart from each other and Slobodin. In the early morning the attackers find 5 of the 9 hikers dead leaving only 4 hikers alive, they look for them, find them and kill them in brutal fashion. All 4 hikers had injuries that were similar as if someone stood behind them and hit them with the butt of a rifle or a baton with some force with the expectation to knock them down. Nikolay died due to the head injuries, Kolevatov has his neck broken and that leaves Lyudmila and Zolotaryov. For whatever reason these two were chosen to suffer the worst, whether Zolotaryov was the actual target and Lyudmila just happened to piss of the attackers or they both proved to be the most defiant we wont know but they suffer brutal injuries and slowly die thereafter.

Once the deed is done, the attackers get to go and stage the scene, they cut the tent, sabotage the camera Zolotaryov was found with, cover their tracks and leave the area as quickly as possible, maybe splitting in smaller groups to be less noticeable. People have been killing each other for stupid reasons since the beginning of time, the reason they had to die will likely never be known unless there is a diary somewhere or the KGB has some top secret archives that have not been opened yet. There could have been any of several dozen reasons I can name and even more I cant name because some people just don’t value human lives the same way normal people do.

We don’t need to use a supernatural beast that has not been proven to exist try to explain a situation like this, and we don’t have to reconcile the contradictory evidence because there are logical explanations for everything. Someone committed a crime, they didn’t want hikers getting stabbed or shot so they used every means available to kill those hikers hell of a lot easier to create theories about someone killing those hikers if the evidence is confusing and contradictory and it would be a hell of a lot harder if they were riddled with bullets or stabbed to death.

Panic only tends to take hold when you are in immediate mortal danger.  It doesn't persist continuously for over an hour.  So when there is a yeti tyring to gain access through the door of your tent it is natural to panic, but once you are no longer cornered, fear replaces panic and you get some logical thinking back.  So its not contradictory at all imo.

What is more contradictory is a group of armed people following them, up a mountain at night in the middle of nowhere, and attacking them with no motive, ordering them to march down the mountain, but allowing them to take knives , matches, and a variety of  clothing and a camera.  The clothing reflects the randomness that you would expect people to be wearing if having a meal in a tent and then having to leave suddenly.

The injuries  could not have been inflicted by another human being due to the forces required, even using clubs or large bludgeoning weapons.  A person with the strength required would have to be able to hold our a baseball bat anfullmarms length, place the end of the baseball bat on a table 1.5 metres high and then push down and lift their bodies off the floor.  Try it and it and it will give you an appreciation of the level of strength required.

For the attack theory to be viable you have to explain the injuries to Semyon and Lyuda and how they were achieved.?

Regards

Star man
 

August 15, 2020, 10:46:56 PM
Reply #497
Offline

Georgi




I have considered that a creature with claws could cause gashes. But the Dyatlov Group were wearing fairly tough clothing.
Not tough enough, and the injuries of being punched in the face would be claws to the face, their very much exposed face.
 

August 15, 2020, 11:13:07 PM
Reply #498
Offline

Georgi




Panic only tends to take hold when you are in immediate mortal danger.  It doesn't persist continuously for over an hour.
That’s true but we would then have inidcations of a dead run at the beginning of the descent and gradual slowing down but no matter the snow, in a dead run in complete panic the 1.5km would have been taken in less then 30 minutes, more like 20 minutes but by that point they would be completely burned out and out of energy. They were all fit individuals and panic in partnership with adrenaline would get them running pretty fast snow or no snow.



Quote
What is more contradictory is a group of armed people following them, up a mountain at night in the middle of nowhere, and attacking them with no motive,
Just because WE don’t know the motive doesn’t mean there is no motive. There could be dozens of motives for this group to be killed that I can name and many more that I cant because I have different values from the killers and the motive would never register as a real thing. 


 
Quote
ordering them to march down the mountain, but allowing them to take knives , matches, and a variety of  clothing and a camera.  The clothing reflects the randomness that you would expect people to be wearing if having a meal in a tent and then having to leave suddenly.
All those things give the hikers a chance at survival thereby they willingly go down the hill because that gives them a miniscule chance of survival while staying at the tent does not. Giving people the choice of certain death or certain death would lead to 9 hikers either stabbed, shot or beaten to death right by their tent and there would be no mystery as it would be pretty evident what happened to them. They were given enough tools, weapons and clothing to give them the illusion of a chance of survival but not enough to actually give them the chance of survival, they were resourceful and lasted longer than expected but by early the following morning only 4 of them had survived, if the attackers remained at the tent the last 4 would have died eventually but at that point it would be to risky to wait them out, too much chance of random hikers, hunters or someone else stumbling across the 4 hikers and adds to the body count or rescues the hikers.

Quote
The injuries  could not have been inflicted by another human being due to the forces required, even using clubs or large bludgeoning weapons.
You don’t think a 180-200 pound man jumping from a height of a few feet(6-4) on the chest of Lyuda would not cause those serious injuries? A lot of torture was done during the war on the eastern front by both sides, so there were a lot of soviet men who could inflict horrific injuries in ways they learned in arguably the most brutal theater during one of the most brutal wars in modern history.


Quote
For the attack theory to be viable you have to explain the injuries to Semyon and Lyuda and how they were achieved.?
I gave one example above, or it could have been a strike from any number of martial arts, sometimes knowing where/how to hit gets the job done better than raw strength.
 

August 16, 2020, 03:20:47 AM
Reply #499
Offline

Star man

Case-Files Achievement Recipient


Panic only tends to take hold when you are in immediate mortal danger.  It doesn't persist continuously for over an hour.
That’s true but we would then have inidcations of a dead run at the beginning of the descent and gradual slowing down but no matter the snow, in a dead run in complete panic the 1.5km would have been taken in less then 30 minutes, more like 20 minutes but by that point they would be completely burned out and out of energy. They were all fit individuals and panic in partnership with adrenaline would get them running pretty fast snow or no snow.



Quote
What is more contradictory is a group of armed people following them, up a mountain at night in the middle of nowhere, and attacking them with no motive,
Just because WE don’t know the motive doesn’t mean there is no motive. There could be dozens of motives for this group to be killed that I can name and many more that I cant because I have different values from the killers and the motive would never register as a real thing. 


 
Quote
ordering them to march down the mountain, but allowing them to take knives , matches, and a variety of  clothing and a camera.  The clothing reflects the randomness that you would expect people to be wearing if having a meal in a tent and then having to leave suddenly.
All those things give the hikers a chance at survival thereby they willingly go down the hill because that gives them a miniscule chance of survival while staying at the tent does not. Giving people the choice of certain death or certain death would lead to 9 hikers either stabbed, shot or beaten to death right by their tent and there would be no mystery as it would be pretty evident what happened to them. They were given enough tools, weapons and clothing to give them the illusion of a chance of survival but not enough to actually give them the chance of survival, they were resourceful and lasted longer than expected but by early the following morning only 4 of them had survived, if the attackers remained at the tent the last 4 would have died eventually but at that point it would be to risky to wait them out, too much chance of random hikers, hunters or someone else stumbling across the 4 hikers and adds to the body count or rescues the hikers.

Quote
The injuries  could not have been inflicted by another human being due to the forces required, even using clubs or large bludgeoning weapons.
You don’t think a 180-200 pound man jumping from a height of a few feet(6-4) on the chest of Lyuda would not cause those serious injuries? A lot of torture was done during the war on the eastern front by both sides, so there were a lot of soviet men who could inflict horrific injuries in ways they learned in arguably the most brutal theater during one of the most brutal wars in modern history.


Quote
For the attack theory to be viable you have to explain the injuries to Semyon and Lyuda and how they were achieved.?
I gave one example above, or it could have been a strike from any number of martial arts, sometimes knowing where/how to hit gets the job done better than raw strength.

I have made some calculations around the injuries, and a person would need to jump 3 to 4 metres into the air and land on their chests to cause those injuries.  The truth is the only martial artist capable of those injuries are the ones in the old B movies that had wires attached to them when they jumped and really bad dubbing and sound effects.  Seriously, the forces required are beyond any normal human being.  The devil is in the details on this one.

The three top theories imo are:

1. Infrasound
2. Weapon test
3. Yeti or large ape

Not in any order of preference or liklihood.

Regards

Star man
 

August 16, 2020, 07:27:51 PM
Reply #500
Offline

Georgi





I have made some calculations around the injuries, and a person would need to jump 3 to 4 metres into the air and land on their chests to cause those injuries.  The truth is the only martial artist capable of those injuries are the ones in the old B movies that had wires attached to them when they jumped and really bad dubbing and sound effects.  Seriously, the forces required are beyond any normal human being.  The devil is in the details on this one.

The three top theories imo are:

1. Infrasound
2. Weapon test
3. Yeti or large ape

Not in any order of preference or liklihood.

Regards

Star man
Can you share the calculations with us? Because if a 180 pound man were to jump on the chest of a young woman like Lyuda from a height of say 6 feet it would not cause broken ribs? As for the martial arts, both the Israeli’s and the Soviets have developed martial arts with some serious kick to them and I would put it past them to have the means to break ribs.
 1. Infrasound
There were 9 different people in that group and they all managed to have the exact same reaction to the infrasound? Not a single one of them had a different reaction like fall to the ground in the tent and unable to move due to vertigo? Infrasound made them so panicked to cut their tent but not panicked enough to run down the hill?

2. Weapon test
Exactly what kind of weapons test would cause them to flee in panic, and then hours later cause injuries to all the hikers who were at various points that ultimately cause their deaths all without leaving a trace aside from some radiation on 3 pieces of clothing?
3. Yeti or large ape
First you have to prove it exists. Second you have to explain why no one in the search party after the hikers disappeared ran across it. Third you have to explain how no one in the last 60 years of repeat treks to the pass has ever seen the Yeti that wreaked so much havoc. Fourth you have to prove the Yeti exists, this has to be repeated because me basing a theory around Zeus being the culprit would be about as believable as a yeti which has not been proven to exist let alone be in the region.
 

August 16, 2020, 11:53:45 PM
Reply #501
Offline

Star man

Case-Files Achievement Recipient



I have made some calculations around the injuries, and a person would need to jump 3 to 4 metres into the air and land on their chests to cause those injuries.  The truth is the only martial artist capable of those injuries are the ones in the old B movies that had wires attached to them when they jumped and really bad dubbing and sound effects.  Seriously, the forces required are beyond any normal human being.  The devil is in the details on this one.

The three top theories imo are:

1. Infrasound
2. Weapon test
3. Yeti or large ape

Not in any order of preference or liklihood.

Regards

Star man
Can you share the calculations with us? Because if a 180 pound man were to jump on the chest of a young woman like Lyuda from a height of say 6 feet it would not cause broken ribs? As for the martial arts, both the Israeli’s and the Soviets have developed martial arts with some serious kick to them and I would put it past them to have the means to break ribs.
 1. Infrasound
There were 9 different people in that group and they all managed to have the exact same reaction to the infrasound? Not a single one of them had a different reaction like fall to the ground in the tent and unable to move due to vertigo? Infrasound made them so panicked to cut their tent but not panicked enough to run down the hill?

2. Weapon test
Exactly what kind of weapons test would cause them to flee in panic, and then hours later cause injuries to all the hikers who were at various points that ultimately cause their deaths all without leaving a trace aside from some radiation on 3 pieces of clothing?
3. Yeti or large ape
First you have to prove it exists. Second you have to explain why no one in the search party after the hikers disappeared ran across it. Third you have to explain how no one in the last 60 years of repeat treks to the pass has ever seen the Yeti that wreaked so much havoc. Fourth you have to prove the Yeti exists, this has to be repeated because me basing a theory around Zeus being the culprit would be about as believable as a yeti which has not been proven to exist let alone be in the region.

The rib fractures are caused by a single blow, possibly two.  This is clear because the fractures follow straight lines, with breaks at the weakest points.  To break all those ribs at the same time requires a very large force as described.  The pathologists compared to force required to inflict the injuries as the equivalent of a car crash and this is a typical type of injury seen due to massive trauma.  A fall from 3 to 4 metres or very large fast impact is about right.  A human could not inflict this type of force.  WAB has also made some biomechanical calculations and has come to a similar conclusion 8ndependently of me so I am confident its reasonable.

All of the three theories I have mentioned there are unlikely under normal circumstances, making it difficult to accept them as a possibility.  However, whatever happened to the Dyatlov group was very unusual and unlikely, so this should be taken 7nto account.  The behaviour at the tent doesn't make normal sense.  The cuts from the inside, leaving without proper gear, in a random state of dress.  Infrasound may have affected several of them to panic and crazy, cut tge tent and then head down to the forest.  The injuries caused, by a lack of cognitive function and falling.

A weapon test such as a neutron bomb fits the scenario, and anecdotal evidence about fire orbs plus the radiation.  If the hikers were exposed to lethal radiation dose, they would be in a very bad way and their bodi3s would start to shut down vety quickly.  This could easily result in irrztic nefarious, panic.  They may have been in alot of pain.  Also there is a chance that the dallot cloud could contain high levels of nitrogen oxide gases which are acrid and toxic..  the inuri3s may have been caused by a wind blast throwing Semy8n and Lyuda against trees during a second test.  It could have been some other kind of test too, chemical weapon, chlorine gas.


Yeti - yes providing evidence of a Yeti or just a large ape like a gorilla is required, but the evidence available fits such an attack.  The magnitude and consistency of Semyon and Lyuda chest injuries, damaged faces, missing tongue.  Th8bo's skull fracture shape is consistent with a 30cm hand, Zina's 30 cm  bruise on her side.  Climbing a tree with severe frost bite etc.

Regards

Star man
 

August 17, 2020, 08:14:14 PM
Reply #502
Offline

Georgi




The rib fractures are caused by a single blow, possibly two.  This is clear because the fractures follow straight lines, with breaks at the weakest points.  To break all those ribs at the same time requires a very large force as described.  The pathologists compared to force required to inflict the injuries as the equivalent of a car crash and this is a typical type of injury seen due to massive trauma.  A fall from 3 to 4 metres or very large fast impact is about right.  A human could not inflict this type of force.  WAB has also made some biomechanical calculations and has come to a similar conclusion 8ndependently of me so I am confident its reasonable.
What happened to her then? And why was it localized on her chest and didn't cause similar injuries all over her body? If she didn't fall and cause those injuries, and nobody caused those injuries to her, what caused those injuries in such a localized fashion?

Quote
All of the three theories I have mentioned there are unlikely under normal circumstances, making it difficult to accept them as a possibility.  However, whatever happened to the Dyatlov group was very unusual and unlikely, so this should be taken 7nto account.
But there are far more likely scenario's that explain everything without having to have a lot of unlikely events to befall that group one after the other and have the worst outcome from each befall them.


Quote
The behaviour at the tent doesn't make normal sense.  The cuts from the inside, leaving without proper gear, in a random state of dress.  Infrasound may have affected several of them to panic and crazy, cut tge tent and then head down to the forest.  The injuries caused, by a lack of cognitive function and falling.
The behaviour at the tent makes complete sense if someone is making you leave the tent with the least amount of clothes. It's not like there is a video and a timestamp on when the tent was cut and by who, we know it was cut, it could have been cut by them that night or it could have been cut by someone else in the morning to create confusion.

Quote
A weapon test such as a neutron bomb fits the scenario, and anecdotal evidence about fire orbs plus the radiation
.   And only does damage to their ribs and one broken neck? If something has the power to do that much damage to the ribs don't you think it would do damage to other parts of their bodies too?

Quote
If the hikers were exposed to lethal radiation dose, they would be in a very bad way and their bodi3s would start to shut down vety quickly.  This could easily result in irrztic nefarious, panic.  They may have been in alot of pain.  Also there is a chance that the dallot cloud could contain high levels of nitrogen oxide gases which are acrid and toxic..  the inuri3s may have been caused by a wind blast throwing Semy8n and Lyuda against trees during a second test.  It could have been some other kind of test too, chemical weapon, chlorine gas.
There would have been damage to the tent, and most likely they would have died on the way down. We would have evidence on the site of such events and more importantly, there are far more deserted places in the soviet union that also were significantly further from population centers than the less than 400km from Yekaterinberg/Sverdlosk.


Quote
Yeti - yes providing evidence of a Yeti or just a large ape like a gorilla is required, but the evidence available fits such an attack. 
It could also fit an attack by the boogeyman, or Baba Yaga.

Quote
The magnitude and consistency of Semyon and Lyuda chest injuries, damaged faces, missing tongue. 
The evidence of injuries sustained in a fight for 4 of the hikers tells me its not a Yeti because if a Yeti hits them in the face with the force that Lyuda and Zolotaryov suffered, those people would have been dead before they hit the ground.

Quote
Th8bo's skull fracture shape is consistent with a 30cm hand, Zina's 30 cm  bruise on her side.  Climbing a tree with severe frost bite etc.
And her facial injuries? Her fists? She punches the Yeti and he punches back, no big deal she walks away from the encounter, Lyuda gets punched in the chest and gets multiple broken ribs. Isn't that a little inconsistent?
 

August 18, 2020, 03:01:56 PM
Reply #503
Offline

sarapuk

Case-Files Achievement Recipient


I have considered that a creature with claws could cause gashes. But the Dyatlov Group were wearing fairly tough clothing.
Not tough enough, and the injuries of being punched in the face would be claws to the face, their very much exposed face.

But tough enough for a Siberian Winter  !    No proof that the Injuries were caused by punches to the face.
DB
 

August 18, 2020, 05:10:53 PM
Reply #504
Offline

Star man

Case-Files Achievement Recipient


The rib fractures are caused by a single blow, possibly two.  This is clear because the fractures follow straight lines, with breaks at the weakest points.  To break all those ribs at the same time requires a very large force as described.  The pathologists compared to force required to inflict the injuries as the equivalent of a car crash and this is a typical type of injury seen due to massive trauma.  A fall from 3 to 4 metres or very large fast impact is about right.  A human could not inflict this type of force.  WAB has also made some biomechanical calculations and has come to a similar conclusion 8ndependently of me so I am confident its reasonable.
What happened to her then? And why was it localized on her chest and didn't cause similar injuries all over her body? If she didn't fall and cause those injuries, and nobody caused those injuries to her, what caused those injuries in such a localized fashion?

Quote
All of the three theories I have mentioned there are unlikely under normal circumstances, making it difficult to accept them as a possibility.  However, whatever happened to the Dyatlov group was very unusual and unlikely, so this should be taken 7nto account.
But there are far more likely scenario's that explain everything without having to have a lot of unlikely events to befall that group one after the other and have the worst outcome from each befall them.


Quote
The behaviour at the tent doesn't make normal sense.  The cuts from the inside, leaving without proper gear, in a random state of dress.  Infrasound may have affected several of them to panic and crazy, cut tge tent and then head down to the forest.  The injuries caused, by a lack of cognitive function and falling.
The behaviour at the tent makes complete sense if someone is making you leave the tent with the least amount of clothes. It's not like there is a video and a timestamp on when the tent was cut and by who, we know it was cut, it could have been cut by them that night or it could have been cut by someone else in the morning to create confusion.

Quote
A weapon test such as a neutron bomb fits the scenario, and anecdotal evidence about fire orbs plus the radiation
.   And only does damage to their ribs and one broken neck? If something has the power to do that much damage to the ribs don't you think it would do damage to other parts of their bodies too?

Quote
If the hikers were exposed to lethal radiation dose, they would be in a very bad way and their bodi3s would start to shut down vety quickly.  This could easily result in irrztic nefarious, panic.  They may have been in alot of pain.  Also there is a chance that the dallot cloud could contain high levels of nitrogen oxide gases which are acrid and toxic..  the inuri3s may have been caused by a wind blast throwing Semy8n and Lyuda against trees during a second test.  It could have been some other kind of test too, chemical weapon, chlorine gas.
There would have been damage to the tent, and most likely they would have died on the way down. We would have evidence on the site of such events and more importantly, there are far more deserted places in the soviet union that also were significantly further from population centers than the less than 400km from Yekaterinberg/Sverdlosk.


Quote
Yeti - yes providing evidence of a Yeti or just a large ape like a gorilla is required, but the evidence available fits such an attack. 
It could also fit an attack by the boogeyman, or Baba Yaga.

Quote
The magnitude and consistency of Semyon and Lyuda chest injuries, damaged faces, missing tongue. 
The evidence of injuries sustained in a fight for 4 of the hikers tells me its not a Yeti because if a Yeti hits them in the face with the force that Lyuda and Zolotaryov suffered, those people would have been dead before they hit the ground.

Quote
Th8bo's skull fracture shape is consistent with a 30cm hand, Zina's 30 cm  bruise on her side.  Climbing a tree with severe frost bite etc.
And her facial injuries? Her fists? She punches the Yeti and he punches back, no big deal she walks away from the encounter, Lyuda gets punched in the chest and gets multiple broken ribs. Isn't that a little inconsistent?

The injuries of Semyon and Lyuda are very similar in nature and force.  One or two massive blows from a gorilla or Yeti would do the job.  They would have been attacked while on the ground.  Beaten from above with very large hands.  30 cm  would span most of the rib cage.  The force delivered by fleshy pads reduces the chance of soft tissue damage.  Thibo's depressed skull fractures is identical in shape and proportion to the ball of a thumb on a 30 cm long hand, as if his head was pushed into the snow crushing his skull.  Rustem may have had a similar, but less severe head crush.  His fractured skull in temporal region is matched by another injury directly opposite.    Its odd that he has injuries on both temporal regions, but there may be other ways he could have received these injuries.  The cut knuckles and lips was probably a fist fight amongst the hikers, caused by the tress of the situation.  Not all injuries have to have been inflicted by a Yeti.

Here is a puzzle I still haven't seen a satisfactory explanation for:

Doroshenko had severe frost bite on his hands and yet there is strong evidence that he climbed the cedar tree.  The cuts and abrasions around his armpits and on his legs suggest he struggled to climb the tree, possibly using his arms, armpits and legs to cling on.  If there were others there in better shape why allow him to climb the tree?  The hikers climbed the tree up to 4 metres and cleared branches many of which were from the one side facing the tent.  Clearly not all of the branches were collected as fire wood as some were still found hanging on the lower branches when the bodies were found by the rescuers.  Why cut the branches from mainly one side and not collect them all to burn?  Why go up as far as 4 metres when there were still  branches lower down to collect?

Boogey man or Baba Yaga? There have been over 10,000 eye witness accounts of big foot/Yeti?  Not sure how many eye witness accounts there are of the Boogey man or Baba Yaga?  Your scepticism is perfect,y understandable though.

If Zina's bruise was caused by a yeti then I suspect it was because she was grabbed, possibly while in the tent.  I dont think it was a face to face punch up.

Regards

Star man

 

August 18, 2020, 07:23:23 PM
Reply #505
Offline

Georgi



But tough enough for a Siberian Winter  !    No proof that the Injuries were caused by punches to the face.
Four of them had injuries consistent with a fight, none of their shirts, pants and underwear would have been on their face. So their tough clothes would not have protected them from claws because it was not in a place they had the injuries and unless their clothes was made of Kevlar or something similar I don't see how the little they had on would stop claws.
 

August 18, 2020, 09:46:19 PM
Reply #506
Offline

Georgi




The injuries of Semyon and Lyuda are very similar in nature and force.  One or two massive blows from a gorilla or Yeti would do the job.  They would have been attacked while on the ground.  Beaten from above with very large hands.  30 cm  would span most of the rib cage.  The force delivered by fleshy pads reduces the chance of soft tissue damage.  Thibo's depressed skull fractures is identical in shape and proportion to the ball of a thumb on a 30 cm long hand, as if his head was pushed into the snow crushing his skull.  Rustem may have had a similar, but less severe head crush.  His fractured skull in temporal region is matched by another injury directly opposite.    Its odd that he has injuries on both temporal regions, but there may be other ways he could have received these injuries.  The cut knuckles and lips was probably a fist fight amongst the hikers, caused by the tress of the situation.  Not all injuries have to have been inflicted by a Yeti.
So a Yeti could punch someone and cause those injuries but a 180 pound man jumping on the chest of Lyuda from a 6 foot height would not be able to deliver the same kind of injuries or worse? I would place my bets on the 180 pound man over the imaginary creature. As for the 30cm being thrown around? What are you basing it off of?

Quote
Here is a puzzle I still haven't seen a satisfactory explanation for:

Doroshenko had severe frost bite on his hands and yet there is strong evidence that he climbed the cedar tree.  The cuts and abrasions around his armpits and on his legs suggest he struggled to climb the tree, possibly using his arms, armpits and legs to cling on.  If there were others there in better shape why allow him to climb the tree?  The hikers climbed the tree up to 4 metres and cleared branches many of which were from the one side facing the tent.  Clearly not all of the branches were collected as fire wood as some were still found hanging on the lower branches when the bodies were found by the rescuers.  Why cut the branches from mainly one side and not collect them all to burn?  Why go up as far as 4 metres when there were still  branches lower down to collect?
The frostbite is preventing him from participating in whatever other task was designated(Firewood, Shelter, Weapons, Reconnaissance etc…), so Yuri K and Yuri D are designated with the fire management while the other 6 break out into 2 or more groups. Yuri D decides to climb the tree 4m up to try and see if the tent is clear of the threat. At some point it might have become apparent to him that he will die that night, so he decides to do whatever he can to help his friends increase their chances of survival. If you read his bio he seems like a person who is willing to endure hardships for his friends and risk his life to protect others if we are to believe the story about the bear. I don’t see how its so hard to believe that in his last hours of life he tried to improve the chances of survival for his friends. It could have been pride(refusing to show weakness so that his friends can focuse on survival rather than taking care of him) or just siply knowing he is going to die since even if the tent was clear and the threat was gone he was still 1.5km away from the tent and that would be an almost insurmountable distance to someone who suffered on the way down and now hours later is much weaker and injured to boot.

Quote
Boogey man or Baba Yaga? There have been over 10,000 eye witness accounts of big foot/Yeti?  Not sure how many eye witness accounts there are of the Boogey man or Baba Yaga?  Your scepticism is perfect,y understandable though.
So with all this attention on them and thousands of witnesses no one has been able to get a picture of big foot? Seriously? How many people went in the area for the search effort? And how many encountered the Yeti during the search? How many people have gone to the region over the last 60 years on overnight or multi-night trips and have never run across the yeti?

Quote
If Zina's bruise was caused by a yeti then I suspect it was because she was grabbed, possibly while in the tent.  I dont think it was a face to face punch up.
Her face has injuries that suggest someone punched her in the face at least once but maybe more than once. And the torso injury why grab her and let her go? So did the Yeti cut the tent? And if he reached in and grabbed her why didn’t the others grab for the weapons nearby and fight him off?


Instead of using imaginary animals to explain this why not look at it rationally? In 1960 the USSR shot down an American U-2 Spy Plane right over Sverdlosk if I’m not mistaken. Who is to say that in 1959 there wasn’t a similar incident where an aircraft was shot down or crashed due to mechanical issues, either the Soviet Military didn’t know the plane crashed or they didn’t realize they shot it down. The Americans send a rescue party to get the pilot, they get the pilot or the body of the pilot and leave only to encounter the hikers. During the cold war, having a bunch of American Special Forces soldiers running around the middle of the USSR might have escalated tensions a little too much and therefore they might have had orders to keep a very low profile. If at any point they ran across the hikers and the hikers reached the conclusion those were not soviet hikers but were in fact Americans that might explain Frame #17 from Thibeaux-Brignolle’s camera and why the hikers made so little headway on their last day and why they pitched their tent where they did, knowing they cant outpace them so maybe if they acted like nothing happened and slowed down the Americans would outrange them be in enough rush to not stop and they set up camp in the open in the hope of line of sight giving them advance watining  or were afraid of going to the treeline.

The Americans cant leave the hikers alive because they are 1) witnesses to American troops conducting an operation in the middle of the soviet union and 2) 1 or 2 of the fittest of them could use the next day or two to rush back to civilization to warn the soviet authorities before the Americans can escape. For the Americans it would be a kill or be killed situation since having American soldiers on Soviet soil would not be a good place to be for those soldiers if discovered. They wait until the hikers pitch a tent are already inside, when it gets dark they make their way to the camp, capture the two men outside and proceed to order the rest of the hikers to leave the tent. They leave the tent and grab their boots on the way out, at some point someone throws a punch when they are outside, the two men that were already outside are restrained at this point and only 4 of the 7 hikers inside the tent might have been in a position to resist, whatever happens punches are exchanged and the hikers are subdued when they are overwhelmed by sheer strength or someone fires a warning shot.
Hikers are told to take off their boots which are then dumped in a pile in the tent and whoever has a jacket is told to take it off. The hikers are either not searched, or are allowed just enough to give them hope of survival but not enough to actually let them survive. If they went down to the treeline with a knife the attackers took it back, the camera around Zolotaryov’s neck might have been a plant as well to cause confusion. Expectations would have been succumbing to the elements within a few hours but most of the hikers proved resilient and the attackers had to go down and finish the job. At this point Rustem is dead, Yuri K and Yuri D are also dead, the 6 remaining hikers have split into two groups, one is centered around Zolotaryov who focuses on shelter hopping the attackers let them live or have already left while the other group made up of Zina and Igor make their way back towards the tent. At some point the attackers catch Igor or Igor intentionally stays behind the give Zina a chance to run, he is brought down hard on his knees and restrained and eventually weakened enough to be left to die. Zina is weakened, scared and in a rush which is why when she passes by Rustem who is dead she doesn’t strip him of some clothes such as the shirts and socks at least. Eventually she slows down and is caught again where the baton injury might come into play if it was not acquired earlier in the night.  She succumbs to the elements after that hit combined with the exhaustion of the previous several hours.

Now there are four remaining hikers and the attackers find them and deal with them, in the previous 20 years there have been two major wars with a third in its opening stages, so whoever it was would have had plenty of combat experience and might have experience with how to hurt people. They stun 3 of them with hits to the head but the fourth is hit a little too hard and was left unconscious. Kolevatov dies from the broken neck which leaves Zolotaryov and Lyuda, either they resisted the most, or for whatever reason angered the attackers and as a result suffered the injuries they did. Once those last 4 hikers are killed the attackers go back, cover their tracks and stage the scene, cut the tent and make sure all traces they were ever there are gone. They stage the scene in such a way as to point in 5 directions at once, a panicked egress from the tent(tent cut) but an orderly and seemingly calm walk down the slope. A knife being used at the cedar tree but not being found with any of the dead hikers. Flashlight being thrown down while on the decent from the slope but no one bother to pick up. Zolotaryov had a camera and a notepad, so if he had both it wasn’t some one killing them it had to be an act of god since no sane killer would leave a camera and notepad behind. Take some clothes form Lyuda and put them on Zolotariov and Tibo while Tibo also had a second watch. Throw in enough contradictory evidence and you end up with 60 years of discussion and likely a few more decades of speculation before interest dies down.

The Americans will not admit to this or acknowledge this because this would be a public relations nightmare and would also be a diplomatic relations nightmare. The Soviet Government would keep their mouths shut because an American aircraft crashed in the middle of the soviet union, the Americans Send SF team to rescue the pilot, the SF team killed the hikers and then escaped all before the Soviet Military knew what happened. For them to admit it would have been humiliating and made them look incompetent and the aircraft would not be missed easily since it would be a CIA Aircraft and they can cover this up real quick. Both sides have a reason not to talk and that would be why the Soviet authorities put such pressure to end the investigation quickly and incomplete. Once the bodies were found no one was scouring the area, and since 9 people died the authorities could order people to not go to the area while they search for the crash site.

This explains why the investigation was so obviously mismanaged, why the area was shut down for a long while after the tragedy and why everything is so quiet. No one wants to admit what happened because the Soviets cant prove conclusively that the Americans did it and throwing accusations like that without at least some dead or captured Americans will only hurt them, the Americans wont admit it for obvious reasons so the conclusion the Soviet Authorities presented was that they died because Igor Dyatlov made a series of mistakes and died as a result of overwhelming force, which the hikers were not able to overcome.

In 1960 a Soviet Pilot was shot down by his own side while trying to intercept the U-2 aircraft and no one knew he was dead aside from his family and close friends for over 30 years, when announced in the news paper for his actions it was never mentioned he died. If the Soviet Union covered up that they shot down their own aircraft by accident, they would definitely be willing to cover up being presented as fools for not knowing there was an aircraft spying on them, that it crashed, and that the Americans send a rescue team that got the pilot or the body of the pilot all before the Soviet Authorities knew anything was up. Without proof the US will deny deny deny, without conclusive proof the Soviet citizens will think the government incompetent and likely still believe it was the soviet government that killed them.

If the hikers died during the night of the second or the early morning of the second, then the attackers would have a day of daylight to cover their tracks and then make their way from the region as a group or split into smaller less conspicuous groups.
 

August 20, 2020, 06:06:11 AM
Reply #507
Offline

sarapuk

Case-Files Achievement Recipient

But tough enough for a Siberian Winter  !    No proof that the Injuries were caused by punches to the face.
Four of them had injuries consistent with a fight, none of their shirts, pants and underwear would have been on their face. So their tough clothes would not have protected them from claws because it was not in a place they had the injuries and unless their clothes was made of Kevlar or something similar I don't see how the little they had on would stop claws.

Well injuries consistent with a fight do not specify punches to the face. Anyway there is enough information to suggest some kind of violence. But what kind of violence  ?  We know that wild animals behave differently in a fight scenario. We are exploring the Yeti theory, so how would a Yeti behave  ?  Thats a tricky question because we dont even know if they exist. So once again its anyones guess.
« Last Edit: August 20, 2020, 06:12:40 AM by sarapuk »
DB
 

August 20, 2020, 09:46:56 AM
Reply #508
Offline

Star man

Case-Files Achievement Recipient


The injuries of Semyon and Lyuda are very similar in nature and force.  One or two massive blows from a gorilla or Yeti would do the job.  They would have been attacked while on the ground.  Beaten from above with very large hands.  30 cm  would span most of the rib cage.  The force delivered by fleshy pads reduces the chance of soft tissue damage.  Thibo's depressed skull fractures is identical in shape and proportion to the ball of a thumb on a 30 cm long hand, as if his head was pushed into the snow crushing his skull.  Rustem may have had a similar, but less severe head crush.  His fractured skull in temporal region is matched by another injury directly opposite.    Its odd that he has injuries on both temporal regions, but there may be other ways he could have received these injuries.  The cut knuckles and lips was probably a fist fight amongst the hikers, caused by the tress of the situation.  Not all injuries have to have been inflicted by a Yeti.
So a Yeti could punch someone and cause those injuries but a 180 pound man jumping on the chest of Lyuda from a 6 foot height would not be able to deliver the same kind of injuries or worse? I would place my bets on the 180 pound man over the imaginary creature. As for the 30cm being thrown around? What are you basing it off of?

Quote
Here is a puzzle I still haven't seen a satisfactory explanation for:

Doroshenko had severe frost bite on his hands and yet there is strong evidence that he climbed the cedar tree.  The cuts and abrasions around his armpits and on his legs suggest he struggled to climb the tree, possibly using his arms, armpits and legs to cling on.  If there were others there in better shape why allow him to climb the tree?  The hikers climbed the tree up to 4 metres and cleared branches many of which were from the one side facing the tent.  Clearly not all of the branches were collected as fire wood as some were still found hanging on the lower branches when the bodies were found by the rescuers.  Why cut the branches from mainly one side and not collect them all to burn?  Why go up as far as 4 metres when there were still  branches lower down to collect?
The frostbite is preventing him from participating in whatever other task was designated(Firewood, Shelter, Weapons, Reconnaissance etc…), so Yuri K and Yuri D are designated with the fire management while the other 6 break out into 2 or more groups. Yuri D decides to climb the tree 4m up to try and see if the tent is clear of the threat. At some point it might have become apparent to him that he will die that night, so he decides to do whatever he can to help his friends increase their chances of survival. If you read his bio he seems like a person who is willing to endure hardships for his friends and risk his life to protect others if we are to believe the story about the bear. I don’t see how its so hard to believe that in his last hours of life he tried to improve the chances of survival for his friends. It could have been pride(refusing to show weakness so that his friends can focuse on survival rather than taking care of him) or just siply knowing he is going to die since even if the tent was clear and the threat was gone he was still 1.5km away from the tent and that would be an almost insurmountable distance to someone who suffered on the way down and now hours later is much weaker and injured to boot.

Quote
Boogey man or Baba Yaga? There have been over 10,000 eye witness accounts of big foot/Yeti?  Not sure how many eye witness accounts there are of the Boogey man or Baba Yaga?  Your scepticism is perfect,y understandable though.
So with all this attention on them and thousands of witnesses no one has been able to get a picture of big foot? Seriously? How many people went in the area for the search effort? And how many encountered the Yeti during the search? How many people have gone to the region over the last 60 years on overnight or multi-night trips and have never run across the yeti?

Quote
If Zina's bruise was caused by a yeti then I suspect it was because she was grabbed, possibly while in the tent.  I dont think it was a face to face punch up.
Her face has injuries that suggest someone punched her in the face at least once but maybe more than once. And the torso injury why grab her and let her go? So did the Yeti cut the tent? And if he reached in and grabbed her why didn’t the others grab for the weapons nearby and fight him off?


Instead of using imaginary animals to explain this why not look at it rationally? In 1960 the USSR shot down an American U-2 Spy Plane right over Sverdlosk if I’m not mistaken. Who is to say that in 1959 there wasn’t a similar incident where an aircraft was shot down or crashed due to mechanical issues, either the Soviet Military didn’t know the plane crashed or they didn’t realize they shot it down. The Americans send a rescue party to get the pilot, they get the pilot or the body of the pilot and leave only to encounter the hikers. During the cold war, having a bunch of American Special Forces soldiers running around the middle of the USSR might have escalated tensions a little too much and therefore they might have had orders to keep a very low profile. If at any point they ran across the hikers and the hikers reached the conclusion those were not soviet hikers but were in fact Americans that might explain Frame #17 from Thibeaux-Brignolle’s camera and why the hikers made so little headway on their last day and why they pitched their tent where they did, knowing they cant outpace them so maybe if they acted like nothing happened and slowed down the Americans would outrange them be in enough rush to not stop and they set up camp in the open in the hope of line of sight giving them advance watining  or were afraid of going to the treeline.

The Americans cant leave the hikers alive because they are 1) witnesses to American troops conducting an operation in the middle of the soviet union and 2) 1 or 2 of the fittest of them could use the next day or two to rush back to civilization to warn the soviet authorities before the Americans can escape. For the Americans it would be a kill or be killed situation since having American soldiers on Soviet soil would not be a good place to be for those soldiers if discovered. They wait until the hikers pitch a tent are already inside, when it gets dark they make their way to the camp, capture the two men outside and proceed to order the rest of the hikers to leave the tent. They leave the tent and grab their boots on the way out, at some point someone throws a punch when they are outside, the two men that were already outside are restrained at this point and only 4 of the 7 hikers inside the tent might have been in a position to resist, whatever happens punches are exchanged and the hikers are subdued when they are overwhelmed by sheer strength or someone fires a warning shot.
Hikers are told to take off their boots which are then dumped in a pile in the tent and whoever has a jacket is told to take it off. The hikers are either not searched, or are allowed just enough to give them hope of survival but not enough to actually let them survive. If they went down to the treeline with a knife the attackers took it back, the camera around Zolotaryov’s neck might have been a plant as well to cause confusion. Expectations would have been succumbing to the elements within a few hours but most of the hikers proved resilient and the attackers had to go down and finish the job. At this point Rustem is dead, Yuri K and Yuri D are also dead, the 6 remaining hikers have split into two groups, one is centered around Zolotaryov who focuses on shelter hopping the attackers let them live or have already left while the other group made up of Zina and Igor make their way back towards the tent. At some point the attackers catch Igor or Igor intentionally stays behind the give Zina a chance to run, he is brought down hard on his knees and restrained and eventually weakened enough to be left to die. Zina is weakened, scared and in a rush which is why when she passes by Rustem who is dead she doesn’t strip him of some clothes such as the shirts and socks at least. Eventually she slows down and is caught again where the baton injury might come into play if it was not acquired earlier in the night.  She succumbs to the elements after that hit combined with the exhaustion of the previous several hours.

Now there are four remaining hikers and the attackers find them and deal with them, in the previous 20 years there have been two major wars with a third in its opening stages, so whoever it was would have had plenty of combat experience and might have experience with how to hurt people. They stun 3 of them with hits to the head but the fourth is hit a little too hard and was left unconscious. Kolevatov dies from the broken neck which leaves Zolotaryov and Lyuda, either they resisted the most, or for whatever reason angered the attackers and as a result suffered the injuries they did. Once those last 4 hikers are killed the attackers go back, cover their tracks and stage the scene, cut the tent and make sure all traces they were ever there are gone. They stage the scene in such a way as to point in 5 directions at once, a panicked egress from the tent(tent cut) but an orderly and seemingly calm walk down the slope. A knife being used at the cedar tree but not being found with any of the dead hikers. Flashlight being thrown down while on the decent from the slope but no one bother to pick up. Zolotaryov had a camera and a notepad, so if he had both it wasn’t some one killing them it had to be an act of god since no sane killer would leave a camera and notepad behind. Take some clothes form Lyuda and put them on Zolotariov and Tibo while Tibo also had a second watch. Throw in enough contradictory evidence and you end up with 60 years of discussion and likely a few more decades of speculation before interest dies down.

The Americans will not admit to this or acknowledge this because this would be a public relations nightmare and would also be a diplomatic relations nightmare. The Soviet Government would keep their mouths shut because an American aircraft crashed in the middle of the soviet union, the Americans Send SF team to rescue the pilot, the SF team killed the hikers and then escaped all before the Soviet Military knew what happened. For them to admit it would have been humiliating and made them look incompetent and the aircraft would not be missed easily since it would be a CIA Aircraft and they can cover this up real quick. Both sides have a reason not to talk and that would be why the Soviet authorities put such pressure to end the investigation quickly and incomplete. Once the bodies were found no one was scouring the area, and since 9 people died the authorities could order people to not go to the area while they search for the crash site.

This explains why the investigation was so obviously mismanaged, why the area was shut down for a long while after the tragedy and why everything is so quiet. No one wants to admit what happened because the Soviets cant prove conclusively that the Americans did it and throwing accusations like that without at least some dead or captured Americans will only hurt them, the Americans wont admit it for obvious reasons so the conclusion the Soviet Authorities presented was that they died because Igor Dyatlov made a series of mistakes and died as a result of overwhelming force, which the hikers were not able to overcome.

In 1960 a Soviet Pilot was shot down by his own side while trying to intercept the U-2 aircraft and no one knew he was dead aside from his family and close friends for over 30 years, when announced in the news paper for his actions it was never mentioned he died. If the Soviet Union covered up that they shot down their own aircraft by accident, they would definitely be willing to cover up being presented as fools for not knowing there was an aircraft spying on them, that it crashed, and that the Americans send a rescue team that got the pilot or the body of the pilot all before the Soviet Authorities knew anything was up. Without proof the US will deny deny deny, without conclusive proof the Soviet citizens will think the government incompetent and likely still believe it was the soviet government that killed them.

If the hikers died during the night of the second or the early morning of the second, then the attackers would have a day of daylight to cover their tracks and then make their way from the region as a group or split into smaller less conspicuous groups.

A man about 650 lbs jumping 6 foot into them might have done it.?

Yuri D climbing the tree without the use of his hands doesnt sound like something a person would do to just to show team spirit.  He may have been hauled up the tree partly by his friends. 

There are plenty of photographs and grainy video, but none of this is valid as evidence.  A body or significant body part is what science demands as evidence, and this is understandable.

I have looked at all the different theories rationally, and my conclusion is that there isn't a rational explanation.  For the attack murder scenario, there is alot that doesn't add up.  In particular the cameras and why they were left.  Another is the extreme lengths that the attackers would have had to go to create the illusion of an accident, or some other issue. 

Regards

Star man
 

August 20, 2020, 03:59:05 PM
Reply #509
Offline

Jean Daniel Reuss


...............................................
For the attack murder scenario, there is alot that doesn't add up.  In particular the cameras and why they were left.  Another is the extreme lengths that the attackers would have had to go to create the illusion of an accident, or some other issue. 

I do not agree : I have looked at all the different theories rationally, and my conclusion is that there is only one possibility that is plausible, and that is the one summarized by :

hoosiergose : General Discussion / Re: We may never really know what happened   => on June 07, 2020, 12:14:23 AM  ---> Reply #31

    "They came under attack - human attackers."

The next more interesting questions are "WHY ?" and “WHO ?”.

I have been influenced by several intervenors who have strong arguments, I cannot quote them all here, here are 4 for example:

Eduard Tumanov
"..The 9 hikers took part in three fights against outsiders..."

Per Inge Oestmoen  :  180 posts from March 12, 2018   to   March 07, 2020,
https://forum.dyatlovpass.com/index.php?action=profile;u=325;area=showposts;start=0

Sabine  (Sabine Lechtenfeld)
"...My chain of arguments is based on the assumption that Lyuda's facial disfigurations were the work of perpetrators who mutilated her deliberately after she died".

Aleks Kandr   On his website which is written in Russian (I use :  https://translate.yandex.com/)
http://mystery12home.ru/t-ub-gr-dyatlova

I now believe that DPI is a massacre that falls into the broad category, from the standpoint of history, of terrorist action.

A terrorist attack is an unwritten message addressed to the enemies to signify to them: See how determined we are - See how wicked we are - So beware: do not antagonize us. The perpetrators of a terrorist attack do not want their action to look like an accident.

DPI is a terrorist action sponsored by one or more senior leaders or commanders of the many Gulag camps in the Ivdel region.
This or these Stalinist commanders, who were powerful on the regional scale of the oblast, were naturally violently opposed to the policy of dismantling the Gulag ordered by Khrushchev from 1953 (a difficult dismantling which lasted until Brezhnev came to power in 1964).

The nine unfortunate young Soviet and apparently completely apolitical hikers were bearers of a kind of official pass (the voucher) designating them de facto as agents of influence sent by Moscow, in connection with the 21st Congress of the CPSU: 27th January-5th February 1959 (the 20th Congress of the CPSU in 1956 had been the official announcement of the destalinization).

The mercenaries hired, probably former camp guards recently put out of work, were able to easily follow the deep trail left by the 9 skiers and reach the tent in only one day's skiing from their North-2 base, to launch a surprise attack at nightfall, February 1, 1959, around 8 p.m.

But the murderers had no firearms, only blunt objects, wooden clubs, and their task was difficult....

This discussion should continue in the topic that is normally intended, that is: 
Altercation on the pass -> Altercation on the pass
https://forum.dyatlovpass.com/index.php?topic=411.30
Jean Daniel Reuss

Rational guidance =

• There is nothing supernatural and mysterious about the injuries suffered by the Dyatlov group. They are all consistent with an attack by a group of professional killers who wanted to take the lives of the nine  [Per Inge Oestmoen].

• Now let us search for answers to: WHO ? WHY ? HOW ?

• The scenario must be consistent with the historical, political and psychological  contexts.

• The solution takes in consideration all known findings.