Theories Discussion > General Discussion
So, why not a bear?
cz:
Hi,
One of the first ideas of most wildlife enthusiasts not yet familiar with the details of the case appears to be a bear. This would have to be a European brown bear (similar to a grizzly in North America). Of course a bear is not immediately consistent with all the facts (like any other theory). I have here collected some points against a bear and what I make out of them. Maybe you can add more or comment on these. At any rate, I find the idea appealing because it is so very unspectacular...
1) No traces (footprints) were reported
Well, this may not be entirely waterproof because of the character of the investigation (or the lack thereof at the beginning). Traces on the tent may be rather unspecific or destroyed during the search; we know that the tent was heavily worked on.
2) Bears hibernate
Yes, kind of. They enter a state of deep sleep (torpor) during the winter and typically rest in small caves or dig dens (less controversial than the other well known den here). They can be woken up quickly though, because their body temperature remains rather high despite their metabolism running slowly. When they wake up or are woken up, their mood is mostly an aggressive one. As far as I know this phenomenon is known among Siberian hunters and winterly bear encounters are not being looked forward to by them.
3) There was food in the tent.
This would be strange because it would be an easy resource for a hungry bear to plunder. In particular, there is mention of a piece of loin (not so sure about this) or ham found in the tent. This would be strange. Rusk and canned milk would probably be less delicious but maybe still an option for the bear table, depending on how accessible it was (no can openers for bears). Maybe the bear was "disturbed" (or even wounded maybe) before going for it.
It is plausible that the group left the tent when food was prepared or they had dinner in the tent. Could that have attracted a hungry tramp?
4) There are no typical injuries
What are such typical injuries? Maybe one of you knows more. We can be relatively sure that none was brought to death directly by a bear I think. This does not necessarily exclude an encounter or a "low level" fight. As far as I could research this, bears are not known to attack groups of humans. Maybe two or three but I think there is no known case with more than five in an attacked group. However, the bear cannot see inside the tent.
There is probably more to say. Looking forward to seeing your thoughts on this.
sarapuk:
I have a friend who is Russian, Iam English and have never been to Russia. My friend comes from Yekaterinburg and his brother went to the same college as the Dyatlov Group. I asked my friend could it have been a bear. He categorically said NO, it could not have been a bear. He is familiar with the Siberian wilderness. However that is not to say that it wasnt a bear or some creature like a bear. Lots of scratch marks on the bodies. The tent may have been ripped open from the outside [ speculation without more evidence ] Reports of very large non human foot prints found near by by some members of the search party. Other injuries on bodies could have been caused by a very large bear or bear like creature [ speculation ].
cz:
--- Quote from: sarapuk on August 09, 2018, 04:27:47 PM ---I asked my friend could it have been a bear. He categorically said NO, it could not have been a bear. He is familiar with the Siberian wilderness. However that is not to say that it wasnt a bear or some creature like a bear. Lots of scratch marks on the bodies.
--- End quote ---
As I have essentially no wildlife experience, I definitely appreciate opinions of people knowing the Siberian nature. Your friend may very well be right. Yet, has he mentioned the reasons to exclude this option?
As far as the tent and its damage are concerned, there is a highly informative post in the tent subsection of witness testimonies.
sarapuk:
When I first mentioned to him about a year ago that I had heard of the Dyatlov mystery, he went very quiet and pensive looking. He never actually gave a reason for why he said it couldnt have been a bear. I didnt press him because I know he doesnt like to be pressed on certain things. Occasionally I mention the mystery when I see him, but I get the impression that there is something he feels but doesnt want to tell me about it. As for the photos we see of the tent they do not prove that the tent was cut from the inside. What became of the tent ? A crucial piece of evidence has gone missing !
cz:
--- Quote from: sarapuk on November 11, 1974, 01:24:39 AM --- Occasionally I mention the mystery when I see him, but I get the impression that there is something he feels but doesnt want to tell me about it. As for the photos we see of the tent they do not prove that the tent was cut from the inside. What became of the tent ? A crucial piece of evidence has gone missing !
--- End quote ---
No reason to disgruntle a friend.
You are right, the current whereabouts of the tent remain unknown. We have to rely on the case file reports. Would not surprise me if the remains of the tent emerge from some cellar one day but who knows...
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
Go to full version