Theories Discussion > General Discussion
New theories!
CalzagheChick:
I watched a very short video from a medium out of Norway that proposed that what happened led to so much confusion because the party didn't know necessarily what was happening, just that they were in danger. The proposal was that this was a chemical attack with chemical weapons testing. The hikers were asleep and were woken up suddenly knowing that they didn't feel right. The chemicals caused many reactions--possibly even blindness--and the hikers at some points even started attacking each other in their confused and panicked state.
Now here's where it takes an interesting turn for me: after fleeing the tent into the blizzard, and some of the skiers had already started dropping like flies, those responsible for the testing came into the area absolutely horrified to find that there were actual victims of this experiment and some of those victims were still even alive. In order to cover up this huge mistake, those responsible resorted to threats and murder of the final victims.
So that's the story he tells, and he's sticking to it. As for me? I really love it for the fact that it makes me think. It's tantalizing that there could have been survivors but those left over absolutely had to be "dealt with." Accordingly, there exists this puzzle of half of our victims being dead of exposure whereas the other half are dead of physical damages sustained to their very fragile, very human bodies. We don't know who died when which makes a timeline nearly impossible to create without added speculation and more questions. It's just a big mess on top of an incomprehensibly botched investigation with fingers pointing in all directions and families going to their graves never knowing what happened to their beloved children/nieces/nephews/aunts/uncles/etc.--they're the REAL victims here. They're the ones that had to live with zero justice for the remainder of their hard lives under oppressive government conditions. Were they even allowed to talk about this without being threatened?
Obviously we can tear this theory apart at the seams, but consider this: it's just as good as any other theory out there right now so be gentle. I'm just the messenger. I think above all, this site should be an archive of any and all relevant information available on this brain-defyingly tragic incident.
CalzagheChick:
PS. - this newer proposal also made me think about something: I realize I'm always trying to pin ONE thing on all nine deaths. One reason for two profoundly different causes of death: exposure and physical trauma to the human body. I don't know why I'm doing this when it very obviously makes little sense to settle on one reason. The more likely reason is probably a handful of things that came from an event that quickly spiraled out of control. Am I the only person that's been trying to pin one thing to nine people that all died in profoundly different ways? So this short clip I watched of a medium sort of took me away from my own cemented thoughts and helped me to think in different terms: what if one thing happened here and then a completely different thing happened here yet they're all loosely connected. As opposed to: this thing happened which is why this half of the party are like this and this half of the group is like this.
SteveCalley:
--- Quote from: CalzagheChick on April 21, 2018, 10:52:16 AM ---… I realize I'm always trying to pin ONE thing on all nine deaths. One reason for two profoundly different causes of death: exposure and physical trauma to the human body. I don't know why I'm doing this when it very obviously makes little sense to settle on one reason. The more likely reason is probably a handful of things that came from an event that quickly spiraled out of control. Am I the only person that's been trying to pin one thing to nine people that all died in profoundly different ways? So this short clip I watched of a medium sort of took me away from my own cemented thoughts and helped me to think in different terms: what if one thing happened here and then a completely different thing happened here yet they're all loosely connected. As opposed to: this thing happened which is why this half of the party are like this and this half of the group is like this.
--- End quote ---
It is fine to have incongruous subsidiary event that seem unrelated. Linking them together is a higher-order puzzle solving.
SteveCalley:
It's fine having incongruous explanations. At worse they are placeholders for the true cause. From January 31 to leaving the tent I call this Gulo gulo time. If the wooded easternmost slopes of Kholat Syakl were home to wolverines that explained not camping there. They stink. Explains the rips into tent. Savage gluttons. And running off frightened poorly dressed. So far so good. Then premise collapsed. Why do skiers run so far? Let disgusting animal have its fill and leave. Not run 1500 meters.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[*] Previous page
Go to full version