Recent Posts

1

Non-DP Related Mysteries! / Re: Sokhondo Nature Reserve: The Trans-Baikal Dyatlov Pass

« Last post by GlennM on Today at 04:51:08 PM »

I read nothing to rule out food poisoning. If they all ate together and ate the same thing, that might be it.

2

General Discussion / Re: Survival programs as a resource.

« Last post by Ziljoe on Today at 01:55:54 AM »

This video is from a book "to build a fire" by Jack London, written in 1908. It is narrated by Orson Welles and directed by David Cobham in 1969.

Although a story and a low budget film, it has a certain charm and tension that might give us an insight to some of the things experienced by the Dyatlov group. It certainly highlights the potential dangers of the cold and the deterioration of the mind and body against the elements.

It's about a man traveling a path in freezing cold conditions to meet some others at a camp but a series of events occur. The story identifies the problems of creeks and ravines being hidden by snow and this was written in 1908.



https://youtu.be/RBB06RLmCcU?si=zh6YViTe-V1c6t8p

3

General Discussion / Re: AVANLANCHE THEORY

« Last post by Ziljoe on April 21, 2024, 02:33:45 PM »

I think it's possible but so are some other theories. For me it's the most plausible explanation but obviously not a certainty.When I way it up against other proposed solutions, some sort of snow slide nudges ahead .

The avalanche 6-700 meters away from the tent that was observed on Kholat Syakhl in January 2023 shows it can happen, I believe the evidence is quickly eroded.

So we know an "avalanche" can happen on 1079 .That's a fact , plain and simple.....is it what happened to the hikers? .... Who knows.

4

General Discussion / Re: AVANLANCHE THEORY

« Last post by eurocentric on April 21, 2024, 11:39:02 AM »

Only 4 members, including myself, have answered this Poll. Even so none seem to believe this is possible or likely.

I see no point in circular arguments about whether an avalanche was possible up there, it would never be of such magnitude, surely, that the hikers could not dig out their tent, they'd already dug out the trench without shovels, and find themselves usefully deeper in a surrounding insulating wall of snow, the mountain even less likely to produce a second avalanche. That would be more preferable than walking off to your underdressed deaths.

What I have always taken the theory to suggest, its only logic, is that a piece of snow crust directly above the tent and inline with it calved off and slid into the tent, not a localised and wider avalanche. If that happened then a repeat may be possible, impacting with greater velocity, and there is then a logic to abandoning the tent site, though even then it should be possible to retrieve more items than torches to survive elsewhere.

But if such an event was to happen you'd expect the crust above the tent to bear some evidence, leaving behind a snow-filled depression, and for this fresh infill to feel very different underfoot, containing more air than the surrounding crust? Neither witnesses or photographs suggest this, and the uphill side of the tent was not damaged by any deluge, a coat even remained stuffed into a hole on that side, the tent kept its footprint, and ski poles and skis remained in position.

The aftermath does not suggest that 3 weeks earlier something happened connected with any type of snow slide.

5

General Discussion / Re: AVANLANCHE THEORY

« Last post by Partorg on April 21, 2024, 11:22:23 AM »

I look forward to your findings and conclusions

memories of search participants

S. Sogrin
http://musei-suksun-savod.blogspot.com/2014/06/blog-post.html

«Maslennikov and I studied all the traces very thoroughly, and Evgeny Polikarpovich made drawings of sketches of the area, indicating where things were found and where the bodies of the dead were found.
As a result, it was possible to reconstruct all the subsequent events after the exodus of people from the tent. ( We will return to the reasons for the flight below). As the tourists jumped out of the tent, they immediately rushed down the slope. That is why the footprints cross somewhere, run into each other. This gave rise to discrepancies and disagreement when counting their number. But unequivocally there were 9 pairs of them.

These tracks led to a huge ice formed by underground groundwater. It's impossible to stand on it. Here, flying up in the air and falling on the ice, they, gaining great speed, ran downwards. There were rocks sticking out in the way. After the ice, we could see hardly distinguishable traces, which told us that their character had changed dramatically. They became heaped and small in length. Everything said that someone was hurt on this slope and someone was helped to move, supported Below the tracks disappeared completely.»

V. Karelin
https://dyatlovcreek.moy.su/publ/article/ljod_i_kamni_vladislav_karelin/1-1-0-7

«Moving down the slope, along the trail chains, we approached three rocky ridges. At the rocky places the tracks disappeared. And between the ridges they reappeared. The tracks finally disappeared only on loose snow in the area of shrub vegetation. The fact that such stone ridges were practically an ice surface is very important. And there were many stones sticking out of the ice. Some flat, some sharp, some cone-shaped. It was not easy to walk down the slope, crossing such ice and rocky ridge. I myself once slipped and landed literally next to a sharp rock. How could the tourists who left the tent and went down the slope overcome these icy rocky ridges? And in the dark of night. Most likely, it was on such rocky ridges that they received the main bodily injuries, according to the scheme: movement, sliding, falling, hitting a rock»

More :
 S. Sogrin ; R. Sedov ;  Sakhnin,
https://taina.li/forum/index.php?msg=1021705

Grigoriev G. В 1959 г. reporter  for the newspaper "Uralsky Rabochiy"
Letter to the  "Uralsky Rabochiy" (1999)
http://samlib.ru/a/aleksej_parunin/grigorxewgpisxmowuralxskijrabochij1999g.shtml

6

General Discussion / Re: AVANLANCHE THEORY

« Last post by Partorg on April 21, 2024, 06:20:17 AM »

There only thing Occam’s Razorish about the avalanche theory, or slab slip theory, if you prefer, is that weather and nature-related theories don’t require as many assumptions as, say, murder or military testing

Quite right.  The most consistent with Occam's principle are those explanations of existing facts  that contain the fewest number of assumptions. That's exactly what I meant.

shouldn’t base your theory on the non-existent evidence.

None of the existing hypotheses has evidence. And most likely, they will no longer exist. All we can use in our search for truth are arguments.

Verdict on what caused the hikers to flee the tent: An unknown compelling force. That is the only theory that fits all evidence and requires the least amount of assumptions.

7

General Discussion / Re: AVANLANCHE THEORY

« Last post by Axelrod on April 21, 2024, 04:31:53 AM »

I don’t know if there is such an expression in English, but in Russian there is "from fire to fire"

Maybe “out of the frying pan and into the fire.”

It turns out that the tourists avoided one avalanche, but were caught in another avalanche, which had already overtaken them, completely?

8

General Discussion / Re: AVANLANCHE THEORY

« Last post by Ziljoe on April 20, 2024, 10:48:46 PM »

Fair enough, just to clarify from my pet, I don't think the injuries were caused by any snow, avalanche , slab slip at the tent . I only see the snow slip/ slump/ slide as a reason the hikers left the tent and moved to the ceder / ravine . The rib fractures I think happened at the location of the ravine.


I look forward to your findings and conclusions.

9

General Discussion / Re: AVANLANCHE THEORY

« Last post by Олег Таймень on April 20, 2024, 10:33:52 PM »

Up till now you have not committed your thoughts. I , for one would love to hear your version.

Why would I express versions without evidence.. I don’t know the cause of the tragedy. Everyone else doesn't know her either.
At the moment I am looking for a place in the Dyatlov Pass where it is possible to get such injuries. It is not possible to get these injuries in the usual place of the tent. This is my opinion today. In the winter of 2025 I will go to study the south-eastern slope of Khalatchakhl, the ice between the 2nd and 3rd ridges of stones and snow accumulations on the stream where four bodies of tourists were found

10

General Discussion / Re: AVANLANCHE THEORY

« Last post by Ziljoe on April 20, 2024, 10:03:50 PM »

Олег Таймень , with the biggest respect, an avalanche is very different to a loaded slope of loose snow. A shift or slide of a mass of snow is what I would argue, not an avalanche, or broken ribs , but enough for the hikers to move to a safer area until they assessed the situation.

I have to agree that I don't think there was an avalanche in the stereo typical assumption of an avalanche hurtling towards the tent. However, I think there's suitable evidence that there was movement of snow. I understand that you may disagree.

If you don't think cutting in to a snow bank, irrelevant of the angle of the slope and there was no movement of snow at all, I ask , please commit yourself to a theory of to why the hikers left the tent.

I have experienced cold, snow, and movement of snow with very shallow slopes but I was involved in changing the environment , the snow would not have moved if I did not dig.

It is the hikers perspective that is important, if they thought they were in danger ( although not) , it is this we should consider.

Up till now you have not committed your thoughts. I , for one would love to hear your version.