Dyatlov Pass Forum
Theories Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: amashilu on March 02, 2023, 02:06:19 PM
-
Specifically regarding the smashed ribs and the "literally flattened" skull of the Ravine4, what, in your favorite theory, actually caused this? In the wayward rocket theory, were these unfortunate souls standing near a rocket that let off some kind of blast that broke bones? In the avalanche or snow slab theory, was it snow? (I'm not sure snow could flatten a skull ... even a lot of snow). As I posted in Teddy's thread, "1079," a huge tree falling on them as they lay in the tent is really the only force that is obviously strong enough to do this kind of damage. But what is your take?
-
For the ravine 4 , from basic observation , it looks like a snow collapse whilst they were lying down. A mass of weight from the ceiling of the hypothetical snow cave/ hole . The skull fractures are on the side of the skull that was lying on the ground . If the head was supported on or above rocks and the mass came from the opposite side it would make sense that the fractures would occur on that side.
The ribs are the cage that protects the lungs and would be the easiest to break across a large area from the force . This is what leaves the other bones unbroken .
If there was little snow fall in the month of February, then the snow above the ravine 4 would most likely have been there be fore the incident. So....somehow that 2-3 meters got on top of them
They reported the snow was harder than other snow which would suggest that the snow had gone through a change to cause the density difference in the snow. They requested several strong men to dig this part of the ravine. ( Ido however question why they were not on a bed of firs when found but there seems that there was migration of the bodies due to the stream.
Questions to ask, where did the snow come from if it was not already there? Would outsiders spend their time shoveling snow on top of them if they had suffered these injuries at another location and were the placed there?
A forensic expert said it was likely bto be a snow collapse. This is in the documentation of semyon's exclamation.
But we have experts and we still can't feed the world.
4 bodies at bottom of stream in a ravine. 3 metered of snow above them and they are found under this snow mass.
-
Thanks, Ziljoe. I always wonder, since Zolo was one of the Ravine4, why didn't his skills from the war help him to survive? To go through years of a world war unscathed and then to die from a snow slab just seems weird.
-
I think he was also a ski instructor. He was experienced and skilled.
-
I don't think experience can help against bad luck. Semyon has broken ribs., sometimes bad things happen and the stars align, not in one's favour.
Life is completely random, if we think about you and how you came to exist amashilu. Every rock in space banging together to make the planet earth, every storm and meteor , the evolution of life on earth , every rain drop , every war and fight and how people met each other, fell in love and had children.,you came to be, with no experience and no input.
If it were a snow slab that made them leave the tent , it's not weird, it's a snow slab , they happen in real life. If it was cold and they needed to go to the woods for shelter and fire , it's not weird it's survival. There is nothing that weird about any of it.
It's how it's been presented to us that's weird. It was sold as a mystery , a compelling mystery , , "eyes missing ", "tongue cut out" , "crushed ribs" , "lights in the sky", " sacred dead mountain" , " big foot" , " radiation" , "military involvement", "spies", " undressed" and so on.
No one sells it in the mundane.
It's extremely cold, there was a lot of snow, the wind blows , it's the middle of winter, there can be hurricane winds, they had frostbite and typical hypothermia signs to their bodies, they were miles from help , foot prints were found going down hill(not up hill or sideways but down) . A ceder was used for fire wood, there was a fire made of these branches , from this ceder , two bodies were found on fir branches with slight burns , frostbite was present , with singed clothing on those next to fire and burnt clothing lying within the area.
4 people were found under 3 meters of snow, in water 4 months after their death. Their eyes were missing as were other parts of the skin around their faces where skin decomposes , two had flail chest fractures and one where his head was found in contact with hard ground , under 3 meters of hard snow. ( As you lie down in your bed or on a sofa, look up at the ceiling . That's how much snow is above the ravine 4. Imagine you have a space of 1 meter above you and that tonnage of snow falls on top of you ? )
3 were found frozen in the position they fell , in hypothermia body positions , having suffered frostbite on the slope towards where they had come from.
I think that's what happened here , just a random set of circumstances that played out against the DP9. In the wrong place at the wrong time.
-
That was a lovely post, Ziljoe.
I was not thinking that the snow slab happened at the tent. I've kind of ruled that out, in my own mind, because if the ribs and skull were smashed way up there at the tent, those three could simply not have made it to the ravine, a good hour's walk. Therefore, said snow slab had to have happened at the den or ravine. So were there two snow slabs, one to make them leave the tent and another at the ravine?
-
I mentioned the snow slab as you thought it was weird that Semyon would die from a snow slab given his military experience. I don't think they are connected. The snow slab is specific to avalanches. Anyway , that's the tent and a multitude of things could have made them leave.
Back to the topic of fractures at the ravine. Not technically smashed bones.
Let's ask a question, or actually two questions.The ravine 4 were under 3 meters of snow, so,how did they get under the snow? And/ or how did the snow get on top of them?
A possabile way for them to be under that snow , is to dig a snow hole or cave. We need to have a large snow drift( yep ,we do) in the ravine or the possibility for a snow bridge( yep, we have that too) . They could Crawl in and scoop the snow out, use feet, one of the branches etc. Or, it could be a natural snow bridge or cave formed early in the season.
A snow bridge is an arc formed by snow across a crevasse, a crack in rock, a creek, or some other opening in terrain.[1] It is typically formed by snow drift, which first creates a cornice, which may then grow to reach the other side of the opening.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snow_bridge
This next link shows great examples of a snow bridge in picture form as well as explanations of where they are found and how the are formed. Quite often over creeks and streams, all of various sizes and altidues.
https://www.mountaineers.org/blog/unseen-danger-navigating-snow-bridge-hazards
Here's a video link to give an example.not the best example but it's all I could find.
https://youtu.be/q4-pF5OBh2U
So, they could have found a snow cave, made it bigger etc and the snow fell on top of them, this fits with a land fill crush on the rib cages. A quick and sudden mass falls on top of them. ( Theres medical data on this)
Or they could have been walking on the snow bridge and it collapsed, this is not so easy to explain the injuries but others may have fell on top of them.
They may have been stuck in the hole with no easy way out , especially with the rib fractures. Perhaps the two Yuri's were in the hole with them with them. Got wet and started cutting their trousers there and administrating first aid . Obviously the badly injured couldn't get out. The Yuri's, now wet from the stream go to the ceder to make a fire as that's all they can do , the other three have to get supplies from the tent. Anyway there are many possibilities.....
So that's maybe how they got under the snow.
Now, If we look at how the snow may have got on top of them as opposed to how they got under the snow, if the ravine was empty, all the way down to the stream level when they died at the end of January then we only have two options ,
1) it snowed......a lot and the ravine was empty all season before the hikers turned up and it then filled up to cover them with 3 meters of snow to conveniently keep us guessing for decades.
2) someone else did it and decided to bury them with tons of snow.
So back to the injuries, we have snow, lots of it by the way and Crush impact injuries , similar to what would be sustained if you were lying in a hole on rocky ground and someone dumped an instant mass of earth, sand , snow on top of you. You have hard ground, large mass above you and your body is in the middle.
Or, the injuries happened somewhere else and someone put all that snow on top of them.
-
Yes, thank you for your thoughtful response.
I included Zolo's experience and skills in connection with this thread because I think if he had a hand in choosing a site and a method for digging a snow cave, den, or hole, he would have the expertise to choose something safer, such as nearer to the woods. I didn't survive a long Russian winter at war, but even I would have chosen a site closer to the trees, knowing that solid ground was underfoot. Don't you think? Experience counts for a lot in a desperate situation.
I also am skeptical about the snow crashing down and creating such terrible injuries. Old Man Google brings up many authorities who say that the vast majority of avalanche deaths are from asphyxiation, not from physical injuries. Only something like 5% are from trauma. (I couldn't find anything related to data on snow slab injuries, and I do know that an avalanche is different from a snow slab.)
Also, do you lean towards a snow slab at the tent or at the creek, or both?
I want this all to add up to what you are suggesting, but for me there are still these questions.
-
No problem. Forget the snow slab or avalanche.
You have asked about the ravine 4 and the injuries.
The injuries are consistent with a high impact. The reports suggest they can only compare to something like a car crash.
So we have teddy's tree, this works as being able to cause these injuries.
Many snow collapses in snow holes/caves are asphyxiationor kids playing
-
No problem. Forget the snow slab or avalanche.
You have asked about the ravine 4 and the injuries.
The injuries are consistent with a high impact. The reports suggest they can only compare to something like a car crash.
So we have teddy's tree, this works as being able to cause these injuries.
Many snow collapses in snow holes/caves are asphyxiation and kids playing building snow forts.
(I'll carry on, hit wrong button. )
The difference with an avalanche is you get carried along in a froth of snow and air, it heats up and comes to a standstill burying you and the snow is like concrete.
What we have at the ravine is the bodies at the bottom or under 3 meters of snow. Most snow holes are made by digging into a drift , so you wouldn't go near trees, although they are among trees , you would look for a snow drift , the ravine is ideal. It's the direct collapse of the snow from above falling on the bodies from above. If they had more snow below them and less above there would be a tipping point where there would be no fractures.
I can't remember the maths , but we have at least 2 m X 2m if the ravine 4 are lying next to each other . We have the potential for at least 2 m depth of snow above them. I would say it's plausible that it is this that caused the injuries.
I don't think there was a snow slab at the ravine, I think there might have been some type of avalanche at the tent, amoungst other theories , but nothing that caused the injuries at the tent that we are talking about here.
We have 4 bodies lying next to eachother, under lots of snow , with fractures. ???
The snow had to get on top of them somehow ?
-
I am in agreement. A high-impact car crash or a tree falling on them would cause those injuries.
But before I leave the snow slab possibility, there is one other question. Let's say a ton of ice fell straight down on them while they sat on their little seats in the den, knocking them down and breaking the ribs and the skull; then how did they get to the stream? The little seats are not melting sideways at all; they seem perfectly intact. Is there evidence you are aware of that somehow the snow slipped slowly sideways and downwards over time, and after awhile, the bodies just slipped that way also? What is the general thinking on these severely damaged (and dead) bodies going several feet sideways and downward into the stream, assuming they were originally in the den?
I am trying to approach this mystery from the point of view of the severe injuries of the Ravine4.
-
Help me bob.
Forget snow slabs at the ravine, the ravine 4 and the den are separated by 6 meters or so.
I think the den was used or being planned to be used later.
There has been discussion regarding if the bodies had migrated from the den to the ravine location. If I remember correctly it was non concluded. Theres still debate to the location of the two , up stream or down stream for example.
The snow collapse may have happened where they were found , give or take.
The injuries suggest they were lying flat. Not sitting . I suspect we would have different injuries otherwise. I don't think we have enough detail about the den.
-
I agree.
And I am aware of the previous thread in which it was discussed how the bodies would have moved from the den to the stream. As I recall, that thread was inconclusive, finding very little evidence for that kind of movement.
But you know what investigators do when they have been through all the evidence and are at a dead end. They start over!
-
I'm comfortable with the snow collapsing and causing the injuries.
4 bodies under large mass of snow . Bodies lying on or close to ground fractures consistent with where and how the bodies were found.
At our request, exhumation was conducted by forensic expert of the Moscow Bureau of Forensic Expertise Sergey Nikitin. Also at the cemetery was a tragedy researcher, doctor Galina Sazonova. We talked with them on the radio "Komsomolskaya Pravda" (97.2 Moscow), where they commented on the first results of the examinations.
https://dyatlovpass.com/zolotaryov-exhumation-2
SN: This indicates that at the contact zone, the impact exceeded the sizes from the first to the sixth rib. It was a large heavy mass. Most likely, snow.
GS: Can you determine when this injury took place?
SN: The presence of blood in the pleural cavity of Zolotaryov unequivocally indicates that he was alive.
GS: In what position was the person at the time of injury?
SN: It can be undoubtedly said that he was lying on his back. And the traumatic effect occurred from front to back, maybe some what from right to left.
GS: The surface on which the person was lying was relatively firm?
SN: Yes. It is unlikely that he was lying in the snow.
GS: You found that not all ribs are broken equally. Is it possible to say that the force that acted on the thorax in full force acted where the ribs are completely broken? And where they didn't brake completely, it seems like the impact was less?
SN: The ribs on the axillary line have broken as a result of excessive bending. This is called the flexural nature of the fractures. In the parasternal line, the character of the fractures was extensor. This suggests that the traumatic event occurred at the time when the person was lying on his back, and suggests the direction where the mass came from.
GS: Like as if squeezed a concrete slab? Or is it from the compression of a blow? There is a theory that a lot of snow has fallen.
SN: Was it impact or slow squeezing that took some time? When the corpse is examined not to the extent of decomposition in which the corpse of Zolotaryov was at the time of the autopsy, there are soft tissues, subcutaneous fatty tissue, one can estimate the hemorrhage into the subcutaneous fatty tissue. If it was a blow, we would see hemorrhages in the muscles and subcutaneous fatty tissue. If this mass of the snow layer type squeezed gradually, it is unlikely that we would see hemorrhaging.
GS: Hemorrhages were noted at the autopsy. And on histology, and in the act.
SN: This suggests that it was a sudden pressure, a velocity impact. Not gradual.
Cor: It's like a blow, lets say, by a car?
SN: A car is a comparison. In our case, we can say that this was the impact of a large mass.
GS: Could it be caused by explosive blast?
SN: It can be safely excluded. Injuries would be of a different nature.
-
I read that again recently myself ....
-
We can therefore say:
Zolotaryev, Lyuda, and TBo were lying down, on their backs, on a hard surface, when some high-velocity force smashed down onto them from above.
-
We can therefore say:
Zolotaryev, Lyuda, and TBo were lying down, on their backs, on a hard surface, when some high-velocity force smashed down onto them from above.
We can speculate that they were lying down. Tibo , posbably on his side and groupered together for warmth. Semyon maybe towards his right side. Not necessarily directly on a hard surface but enough not to give way from the opposing directional force.
If we take the skull fracture , think of holding a coconut , both hands and apply force down wards with your hands on to a stone or rock on the ground , smaller than the coconut. Maybe a coconut is not the best example, let's try watermelon. Force the water melon downwards on to a rock or stone. The watermelon will fracture from where it hits the stone , force depending. Like wise, the skull fracture is coincidentally on the side towards the ground. Not the other way round. . This suggests a uniform force from one side of the skull on to a hard object , without going and checking, I believe there was distortion in the neck also. The force is uniform from the non injured side.
Disclaimer, I am no expert in forensics or otherwise , however , I have tried to crack open a coconut.
-
I'm just not convinced that snow was the force.
But this was useful, in that I do now have a mental picture of the series of events involved in these three people's demise.
It's odd to me that they were lying down, on their backs. If I were freezing, I would definitely be curled into a ball on my side.
-
Perhaps, but it's not as easy to spoon each other if you're curled into a ball . There is suggestion that the coats were used to cover themselves also.
I understand you're not convinced( I'm not a 100% convinced either) , so i will ask you a question . How did they get under 3 meters of snow or how did the 3 meters of snow get on top off them?
-
I can't answer that because it would first be necessary to know how they ended up in the stream.
I don't think they fell or slipped away from the den, because it's too far away and like I said before, the little seats are perfectly intact.
So here they are in May, smashed up, dead, lying in a stream with 3 feet of snow on top of them. Did it snow 3 feet in the months before they were found? One foot? It could have snowed just enough to cover their bodies so that when the first five were found, nobody saw the Rav4.
-
I would avoid emotive words or use different language. Saying smashed bones or smashed bodies loads the readers minds . It may influence and I feel your statements should be more neutral.
The bones are not smashed. What does "literally flattened ' skull mean. It paints a picture of greater violence than observed by the autopsy and makes the reader assume incorrect information. It's this exaggeration that perpetually fuels confusion. There is no flattened skull , where does this even come from?
It is a shame you have no suggestion about how the snow got there. The little seats are not perfectly intact. They have been laid like that by the searchers as is obvious by the photos, they didn't have a hoover or brush to take away the snow on top of the little seats or if indeed they were little seats.
It's not 3 feet of snow , it's up to 10feet of snow .
You asked the question but have no suggestions.
I fear we may have lost a long term forum member and others have bans from speaking out. I've never seen the forum go this way before. I have no idea what yesterday's out burst was about on the forum but posts have been deleted, I have concerns for the forum.
-
Where did this come from?
I read "literally flattened" last week when I was reading the case files and interviews. Cannot tell you exactly who said it, but I can go back and search.
-
Snowmobile belonging to some of other groups being there to work. Drunken night ride and passing through the tent ( same logic about the force from tree only tent is on bare slope)
-
Specifically regarding the smashed ribs and the "literally flattened" skull of the Ravine4, what, in your favorite theory, actually caused this? In the wayward rocket theory, were these unfortunate souls standing near a rocket that let off some kind of blast that broke bones? In the avalanche or snow slab theory, was it snow? (I'm not sure snow could flatten a skull ... even a lot of snow). As I posted in Teddy's thread, "1079," a huge tree falling on them as they lay in the tent is really the only force that is obviously strong enough to do this kind of damage. But what is your take?
What large, heavy objects can fall on you in a pristine remote forest.A tree. Obvious choice but I we can pretty much exclude this because it would have stayed on top of the victims, unless you assume a coverup involving many men and a helicopter...Rocks, if there is a rockslide / landslide. Same problem as with the tree, where did the rocks go?Ice. You have to have been under a cliff or similar formation where a large amount of ice can build up and fall from sufficient height to gather speed. But they were not...Snow. I exclude this because snow, while if there is a lot of it can be heavy, is soft. Another counterargument is that an avalanche couldn't have gathered enough speed in a forested area, the trees would stop it (or if not, we would see a lot of uprooted trees...)A rocket / meteorite / decommissioned satellite / recon balloon. Extremely unlikely to actually hit you. Also, a meteorite would be very hot and burn clothing.- Airplane / helicopter. Against: It's a remote area with assumedly little air traffic. For: In the whiteout of a snowstorm, a treeless, snow covered slope is hard to distinguish from the sky. This being an era before the introduction of the GPWS which was rolled out in the 70s.
- A large animal. A herbivore, otherwise there would be bite marks. Moose and deer, when they feel threatened or perhaps even as a form of play, have a tendency to topple and then attempt to trample humans and even machines (ex. a lawnmower)
Resuscitation attempts. Not sure that the force can be high enough to cause these injuries. Definitely not Tibo's skull injury.
Another option is that instead of something falling on them, they fell on something.Falling from height. Against: No cliffs near the stream. Or even high trees. For: Falling out of an airplane alive, would cause similar injuries, I believe. But this is pretty out there... Why would they be on an airplane?- Avalanche that carried them at high speed. Collision with trees / rocks. Against: Same as for "snow" above: the forest would stop an avalanche. For: Found under deep snow. Also, it is said that the stream area is more overgrown with trees than it was back then. Also, all 9 bodies lie more or less on a "line" - the path of the avalanche? And finally, those in the forest (ravine area) are injured, while those who this supposed avalanche didn't carry as far that they could have collided with obstacles, die from the cold, trapped under snow. Another against: The timeline doesn't seem to match, although I don't have much confidence in the oft-repeated timeline. But the "Ravine 4" are supposed to have passed away last, whereas in an avalanche scenario, the 2 Yuris would be last who presumably are able to dig themselves out from under the snow and light a fire.
An explosion that threw them against trees. The others are more lucky and land on soft snow, then succumb to the cold lying there with a concussion. Against: Those with a military background tend to assume purpose made devices like a grenade or mine that would leave shrapnel wounds, which weren't found. But... what if it was a different kind of explosive with no "fragments", like something for use in ore exploration? Still, why would there be explosives in that forest? Mansi also frequented the area ("chum" structure found nearby, as well as bear hide, a track of a hunter, etc.) making this scenario even less likely.
I crossed out the ones I consider ruled out. That leaves, moose, avalanche, or possibly, although this is unlikely, an aircraft crash.
-
*GPWS: Ground Proximity Warning System that started to be installed in airplanes from the 70s and warns the pilot if they get too close to the ground.
Also, I should expand on the "avalanche" version. In my opinion this would have had to be quite a large avalanche, and to have started on the slope, above the forest. It would carry all the hikers with itself, who were presumably walking on the slope either to have a look from the top of Kholat, or walking to the forest to collect firewood for the stove. They were not in the tent when caught so the tent is left intact. It would carry them for different distances, basically to where they were found except for the 2 Yuris who dig themselves out. I recognize that it's incompatible with Rustem being found wearing 1 felt boot with the other one being in the tent. If they go for a walk, he would wear both, one might fall off and be found under snow but not back in the tent...
-
(https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/gallery/den-20.jpg)
The ravine area (https://dyatlovpass.com/ravine-alekseenkov-and-kan).
Does not seem prone to any avalanche / snow collapse of any considerable force...
-
" ... But... what if it was a different kind of explosive with no "fragments", like something for use in ore exploration? Still, why would there be explosives in that forest?" [Manti]
Really good thoughts, Manti. You make me think about the geologists using explosives, as in Teddy's book. I'm going to delve into them this weekend and read all I can find.
-
Please excuse my illustration, I have limited resources and ability.....
The illustration represents what I have been trying to explain. In my head at least.
The white marks is the top surface of the snow above the the stream. The two thick white lines represent the depth of the snow at the points above the 4 in the ravine.
As in the original photo that manti posted below. We can see the white string they used to represent the snow depth , over and across the ravine. The man is standing where they believe the den was( see sticks at his feet) , I have put the bodies where I think they may have been relative to this image.
The yellow represents the hypothetical snow / hole/cave /bridge, either naturally formed or physically dug out , perhaps a bit of both.
The red represents the 4 bodies, I know all 4 were not found lying like that, but we are here to talk about the injuries. Please be flexible.
There is a large mass of snow above the ravine 4, if the cave, (yellow) were to collapse onto the 4 bodies(red) then this is potentially how they received the fractures.
The snow was hard when digging, it was requested to get several "strong" men to dig out the ravine 4, this request was not put in to dig out the den.
This suggests that the snow density had changed. A possible reason for the change in density of the snow is a snow collapse, this would compact the snow after it coming to rest .
The force and energy coming from that amount of snow would be considerable all at once. The energy would have to go somewhere.
The snow is not particularly soft, we can see many of the searchers standing on the snow and not sinking into any snow around the ravine and den.
(https://i.ibb.co/sRSWwvn/Untitled.jpg) (https://ibb.co/xLvFjSW)
I am aware that it is not to scale, it is only to help visualise the concept.
-
thank you for that posting, I have a very difficult time seeing things in my mind and that really helped
-
Thank you, It's a pretty good illustration!
However... I think the injuries and the collapse would have happened where the flooring of the den was, right? Maybe the flooring also shifted a bit, their bodies shifting more can be explained by the weight / density difference: sticks are light, for example they float on water. Whereas bodies sink (if there is no air in the lungs). And melting, shifting snow behaves somewhat like a very thick fluid.
So the snow mass above them would have been less. And then, there's this:
GS: The surface on which the person was lying was relatively firm?
SN: Yes. It is unlikely that he was lying in the snow.
Are tree branches places on snow firm enough? I don't think so, but maybe. Or was the flooring of the den directly on the ground below the snow?
My main issue with the den collapse causing the injuries is that the snow would not fall a great distance. Maybe half a meter. And so it wouldn't gather much speed. Somehow the comparison that comes to my mind is a weightlifter who drops their weight during a bench press. The injury is mostly recovered from. Unlike a high speed "car crash" type injury.. Although maybe this is because usually there are others in a gym ready to render aid which wasn't the case in the den of the Dyatlovites.
-
I have found this snow load calculator: https://www.omnicalculator.com/construction/snow-loadDisregard that it's for rooves (roofs?).
I entered 50cm x 50cm as the area of the ribcage / chest. Snow cover thickness: 4m.- Load from fresh snow: 60kg
- Wind packed snow: 375kg
- Wet snow: 750kg
- Ice: 917kg
Maybe the den collapse injuring them is unbelievable to me because I was thinking of fresh snow
-
The forum broke the link above. Here it is again, sorry:
https://www.omnicalculator.com/construction/snow-load
-
Thank you, It's a pretty good illustration!
However... I think the injuries and the collapse would have happened where the flooring of the den was, right? Maybe the flooring also shifted a bit, their bodies shifting more can be explained by the weight / density difference: sticks are light, for example they float on water. Whereas bodies sink (if there is no air in the lungs). And melting, shifting snow behaves somewhat like a very thick fluid.
So the snow mass above them would have been less. And then, there's this:
GS: The surface on which the person was lying was relatively firm?
SN: Yes. It is unlikely that he was lying in the snow.
Are tree branches places on snow firm enough? I don't think so, but maybe. Or was the flooring of the den directly on the ground below the snow?
My main issue with the den collapse causing the injuries is that the snow would not fall a great distance. Maybe half a meter. And so it wouldn't gather much speed. Somehow the comparison that comes to my mind is a weightlifter who drops their weight during a bench press. The injury is mostly recovered from. Unlike a high speed "car crash" type injury.. Although maybe this is because usually there are others in a gym ready to render aid which wasn't the case in the den of the Dyatlovites.
There might have been movement of the bodies. Although not from the den, I don't think the den was found with water flow but you never know.
I think the snow was recorded at about 300mm under the den branches.
The ground under the bodies , I would guess to be about the same and be compacted snow with the stone/ gravel of the stream underneath.
I'm not sure about the weight lifters and I think I will have seen similar videos. The weight has a chance to go off to the left or right plus it would mostly be a slow squeeze. I'm not sure if my ribs would survive a drop of 60kg on them from my poor bench pressing . Thanks for the calculation link.
-
It is unlikely that the bodies will be displaced by the flow of the river. For this, the stream bed must be inclined. And the water flow must be strong enough. The slope in the stream bed is very low and the water flow is not enough. It is very difficult to move the corpses under these conditions. Maybe a few centimeters. But no more. Of course, measurements must be made to be absolutely sure. But at first glance, it doesn't seem possible to replace the bodies.
-
If you want to believe in a den collapse, there’s two questions you need to answer. The first is:
Why weren’t they found in the den then?
If your answer is water flow, then please explain how the water picked up three male bodies that were horizontal to the flow, meaning they offered the most resistance, and carried them almost as far as Luda, who was smaller and vertical to the flow. We’re talking about a stream here, not a river.
And the second question is:
That snow would have to be pretty hard to break human ribs. Remember, the only reason why they say such injuries are possible at the tent is because they were crushed between two hard surfaces, the reinforced floor beneath them and the snow which came down in one devastating slab. Their injuries were not typical of avalanche victims. Of course, the question isn’t whether it’s hard or soft snow. We can assume it’s hard snow because it would have to be to injure people like that. Once that assumption is made, though, then the question comes up. How did they dig out the snow den with their hands, while they were likely suffering from exhaustion, hypothermia, and frostbite? If the searchers had a hard time digging it out with shovels, then how did the Dyatlov group manage to do it without shovels.
Personally, I don’t believe the snow den was ever used.
-
It is a fact that whatever attacked young people was nothing out of the ordinary. There is a power that is very smart, very knowledgeable, and knows very well what it is doing. Because he scares the group while they are in the forest and has them set up a tent on the mountain slope. And again on the mountain slope, he scares them back into the forest!!!Then he doesn't show up for a while.... Then he comes back and kills the young people one by one!!! He thinks, plans and then implements it step by step. He's in no hurry. He seems sure of what he is doing(!) It looks like he chose these young people specially! That's why we need to look at what these young people have in common. Why were these chosen??? What common features do they have??? What I found; 1. Sincerity 2. They have a thoughtful nature. 3. Friendship and love are in the foreground 4. They have a fighting nature. 5. Optimistic people do not have a pessimistic nature. 6. They are in unity and togetherness 7. They have a desire to discover new things. 8. People of Faith These are all my findings... These made them special. And that is why the unknown POWER may have chosen them.
-
This video link is taken off dyatlovpass site.
https://dyatlovpass.com/ravine-alekseenkov-and-kan
View or download the file 'Обрушение карниза 2 Прыжок.MTS' https://disk.yandex.com/i/vKycSxksLBX_Og
It's in Russian and is a reconstruction at the ravine/ den area. I believe it's the actual location. In the first video clip it shows a possible way to dig out the snow drift using a stick by an individual ,in the second clip that I have shared above , it shows a small cornice over hang to the left of the screen and when the man jumps down the snow bank he disappears up to his chest , it would seem like there's a void under him. This is possibly the stream . This suggests that there could easily have been a natural snow cave or hole above the stream and that they may have used for shelter.
The den and the location of the bodies are separate areas. I do not think there was a snow collapse at the den. I think it was most likely to have occured where the bodies were found.
The cave may have been already there by a snow bridge being formed over the previous winter months. Digging is possible with a stick and if your only option is to shelter in a snow cave, you take it.
If there had been a snow collapse, then this would have changed the consistency of the snow for when the searchers came. It will have been compacted . If we think of snow that slides off a roof of a house , or when we make snow men or snow forts. The snow that has been compacted or forced together is hard . This snow is the last to thaw.
The logic I am applying here is,
1)We have a force, snow and gravity. ( A lot of snow).
2)We have four bodies under this snow and their bodies are at ground level.on a hard surface.
3)They have chest and skull fractures.
The other options are something dug a hole and buried them and they suffered the injuries somewhere else.
Other people laid the bodies there and it snowed/drifted , a lot in three weeks.
-
Luda and Semyon would have had to have been lying down to get those injuries, because it still would have been a slab avalanche of some kind, and I’m not sure why they would have been lying down in that spot, considering that would be the entrance to the snow den, which is supposed to be below the den itself because heat rises. There might be a reason. It’s not impossible, just weird. As far as digging it out with a stick, though, did the person try that when the temperature and weather would have been comparable to the night the tragedy happened, strip down to what Luda was wearing, walk all the way down the slope from the tent location to the cedar in stocking feet and then try to dig out a snow den with bare or mittened hands and a stick while suffering from hypothermia and frost bite and also gathering tree clippings that they somehow managed to break off the trees without a knife. It’s fine to say such things are possible. It’s quite another to say such things are possible given a certain set of circumstances. The snow den would have taken a while to dig out with a stick, and that’s time that the tourists did not have.
Not to mention that a slab avalanche at the tent makes Dyatlov look like an idiot while a snow den collapse makes Semyon look like an idiot. I thought these were professionals. What was UPI doing letting such novices wander around in such a forbidding place? Not to mention that a snow den collapse doesn’t explain what happened to make them need one anyway, unless you’re saying there was an avalanche at the tent too. And that’s really stretching credulity. I don’t know what people don’t understand about it not being an avalanche prone area.
-
Many professionals have been caught out in activities , in modern times too. Some unprofessional people have beaten the odds and survived .
If they can't be at the tent for whatever reason, then they have to work with the resources they have against the cold. Standing out in the cold is not an option.
We only really have two options. Outsiders or the environment.
If they are against the cold then you will dig a snow hole, it's common sense in that regard, using the ceder wood and dried branches is common sense.
Regarding it not being an avalanche prone area may have nothing to do with it. The hikers only needed to think there was an avalanche.
The best way to investigate, in my opinion , is to rule out if the circumstances caused their deaths by process of elimination, Can the injuries be caused by the environment?. There is little substance by saying people look like idiots or should be professional, there are tipping points.
It would be prudent to avoid such assumptions. If we can say that there's no way these injuries could occur from a snow collapse , it is then we can move forward.
The walking down the slope has been proven to be doable, they are moving their bodies. It can be done, so can building a snow hole and finding one..
-
In the first video clip it shows a possible way to dig out the snow drift using a stick by an individual ,
Are you referencing the video that shows the fully dressed man on skis in daylight knocking down part of a bank with a flat wide manufactured board? part of a ski? not sure what it is. That video?
-
Yes tenne,
That's the very one.
-
To begin with, I never said they couldn’t walk down a slope. So I’m not sure what that comment is aimed at. Nor do I believe they did not dig the snow den. My comment was in regard to the assumption that the snow was of a consistency that it could break human bones while still being a fairly localized event, considering the fact that it certainly wouldn’t be like a large avalanche you might get in the alps where it just sweeps up anything in its path. I do not believe that they’re having to dig out a snow den, with a stick or otherwise, supports that scenario, considering everything else they had to contend with, which I listed in my post. Furthermore, whatever happened at the tent has to account for, not only the fact that they left the tent, but also for why they didn’t go back to it. Why was digging out a snow den a better alternative than simply returning to the tent? The “window” in the cedar proves that they did know where the tent was, and the only reason to climb it, which at least one of them did, is to see the tent. To be sure, if it was a slab avalanche, perceived or otherwise, they might have feared a repeat performance. We know, though, there wasn’t one. So how long would they would have waited around, underdressed and freezing, while nothing happened. Until they were so far gone with exhaustion and hypothermia that they just fell and died where they lay in a desperate attempt to get back to the tent, like what happened to Igor, Rustem, and Zina. That seems highly improbable to me.
And it is correct that it had to be outsiders or environment. But that doesn’t mean outsiders or avalanche. Nor do outsiders necessarily mean they were murdered. And, yes, process of elimination is a great way to get to the bottom of the mystery. Unfortunately, very few scenarios in this case have been eliminated. The avalanche theory has its problems the same as all theories do. That is likely because we not only are missing pieces of the puzzle, but also have pieces that are not part of the puzzle at all, and there is no way for us to know that.
I will just end by saying that I don’t personally find the avalanche theory all that compelling. But if it is the answer, then it fits the facts a lot better that Semyon and Luda’s injuries were caused by a slab avalanche at the tent rather than the den, even though there’s some logistic problems with that scenario.
-
Sorry winterleia, nothing was directed at you ,it was general to a few comments.
We know from other researchers/ investigators that it is possible to walk down the slope from the tent to ceder and ravine in socks. We also know from the video clip that it's possible to fashion some sort snow hole with a stick and that snow holes/bridges exist and occur at the ravine.
I suspect some of the videos are filmed in day light so the viewer can see what's going on.
The data for the weather conditions vary considerably depending on who we listen to. Warm front to cold.
Small spruce trees can be cut with a small knife , there was at least one Knife recorded .
We don't know if the incident took place at night. We have the food being eaten so this could be evening or morning at a guess.
Whatever made them leave the tent must have been serious enough to make the decision that the forest was better. It is there they have to survive.
I'm not sure if the window at the ceder is a fact. In was an observation , the branches that were broken were used for burning and the window area on the ceder was the weathered side of the tree. These branches would be dryer.
There is debate about the Mansi chum for example, it is suggested that it's how they store wood for burning when making a stop. They are put vertical and exposed to the wind.
I agree about Igor Rustem and Zina, I can't understand why they would carry on without helping each other. That's one thing I can't fathom other than extreme cold .
I also agree that outsiders doesn't mean murder and that any of the scenarios can overlap..
An avalanche can occur at 20 degrees given the right condtions. It doesn't need to be a full blown avalanche to make them leave the tent, the hikers just need to think it was.
Anyway, I do think that a snow collapse above where the ravine 4 are located is the most likely explanation for the fractures. We have compacted snow above them, they are lying on a hard surface, the actual location of the 4 bodies also lends itself to be the natural location of an entrance to a snow cave/ bridge. There is the small waterfall and drop. As the winter season progressed , the water fall and dip would prevent snow accumulation, or at least , slow the process as compared to flat areas of the stream. I do however think they would have had insulation under them.
-
When trying to understand what might have happened, I always keep foremost in my mind the incredible severity of the injuries of the Ravine4. I don't believe anyone was injured at the tent because, given how badly disabled they would have been, they could not have walked for an hour afterwards. Something else happened at the tent, and then once they got down to the cedar area, the injuries took place. Here are 2 descriptions of them:
During the investigation, the forensic expert B.A. Vozrozhdenniy was questioned, who performed the autopsy of the bodies of the dead.
"I think the character of the injuries on Dubinina and Zolotaryov – a multiple fracture of the ribs – on Dubinina were bilateral and symmetrical, and on Zolotaryov were one-sided. Both had hemorrhaging into the cardiac muscle with hemorrhaging into the pleural cavity, which is evidence of them being alive [when injured] and is the result of the action of a large force... These injuries, especially appearing in such a way without any damage to the soft tissue of the chest, are very similar to the type of trauma that results from the shock wave of a bomb." (Case files 382)
Thibeaux-Brignolle could have received a blow to the temple with a hard blunt object with a limited surface - he had a depressed fracture of the right temporal parietal bone in a 9x7 cm area with a defect in bone tissue and temporal bone measuring 3x3.5x2 cm.In the cranial fossa there is a multifragmented fracture of the right temporal bone with divergence and transition of the bone crack into the anterior cranial fossa to the right supraorbital region of the frontal bone and a 17 cm long crack in the base of the skull."
Now, of course, it can be assumed that such a fracture can be obtained by falling and hitting his head on the stones. But in his case Thibeaux-Brignolle had to take himself by the legs and pound his own head on these very stones with a fury. - Igor Povetkin
-
Igor Povetkin says the following.
We will not believe Sharavin and regard his memoirs as invented retroactively on our own initiative or on a tip from the outside.
Why don't we believe it? Simply because there was no ice ax in the Dyatlov group. There is no ice ax in the inventory of the group's property available in the criminal case. The ice ax also does not appear in the protocols of inspections of the place where the tent was found, nor of the items inside. Sharavin himself has not been interrogated in the case, and his 2007 story can be safely assessed as a consequence of senile insanity.
There was an ax, ice ax. It's in several photos. I'm working my way through his theory. He seems to miss some facts and is emotive.
-
Hello Ziljoe,
Not sure what your point is. I think maybe you are attempting to discredit everything Povetkin says?
As we all know, there are varying reports and memories of just about everything, from the existence of the labaz, to how many skiis there were, to whether the tent was cut from the inside or the outside, to the ice axe, and the den, and just about everything else. I don't think your statement can be used to discredit Povetkin.
-
Hi amashilu,
They had an ice ax, at least one, it is obvious.
Is it not Povetkin that is trying to discredit Sharavin?.
To say
We will not believe Sharavin and regard his memoirs as invented retroactively on our own initiative or on a tip from the outside.
Why don't we believe it? Simply because there was no ice ax in the Dyatlov group.
Sharavin himself has not been interrogated in the case, and his 2007 story can be safely assessed as a consequence of senile insanity.
How can Sharavin 's story be the consequence of senile insanity ?
-
Luda and Semyon would have had to have been lying down to get those injuries,
Not at all.
Elbow strikes from a skilled special forces operator trained would create precisely this kind of injuries.
-
Luda and Semyon would have had to have been lying down to get those injuries,
Not at all.
Elbow strikes from a skilled special forces operator trained would create precisely this kind of injuries.
I said that on the assumption that their injuries were caused by a slab avalanche or a snow den collapse. I wasn’t considering any other theory. And the only way I know that is because that’s how the official theory says it happens. Personally, I don’t think their injuries were caused by an avalanche either at the tent or the den. But I don’t endorse any one theory.