Dyatlov Pass Forum
Theories Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: Axelrod on December 01, 2023, 12:12:38 PM
-
Another interesting video (in Russian)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cgmLt_W8QK4
Dyatlov Pass. The leaders of Sverdlovsk knew the truth!
-
Transcript vor last video - English (autotranslated) / Russian:
NAME: Dyatlov Pass. The leaders of Sverdlovsk knew the truth! (Duration: 00:18:37)
[-] The overwhelming majority of people believe that in order to uncover any incident in history, one must certainly delve into the archives to find some secret document in which the holy truth is written. That is, you don’t need to think about anything? Just find it, read something there, and that’s it - the secret is revealed.
But the question arises: if this document does not exist, then what? So the secret will never be revealed? And besides, you know, there were times when there were no archival documents at all. But nevertheless, historians somehow unravel the mysteries of the past. For example, through archaeological excavations. For example, in the time of dinosaurs there were no documents. But nevertheless, historians somehow learned about their existence. So this is what I want to say: even if some document is found, it is unlikely that anything is directly written in it about this or that event. So you even have to think about the document. So, no matter how hard you try to get out of it, you still have to use your brains.
And now I want to talk about one historical document in which something is revealed in the mystery of the Dyatlov Pass. I don’t know who was the first to find this document, but I personally learned about it from Ildar Garifulin. The document is the minutes of the meeting of the bureau of the Sverdlovsk city committee on March 27, 1959. It would seem, what does the city party committee have to do with it? What does he have to do with the death of the Dyatlov group? It turns out it does. The fact is that at that meeting the issue of the incident with the Dyatlov group was considered. And ultimately, the city committee bureau stated that the cause of the death of the Dyatlov group was a hurricane.
But here’s what’s strange: the investigation has not yet been completed in this case. Investigator Ivanov continued to investigate, various examinations were carried out, and witnesses to the incident were interviewed. And then suddenly the city committee somehow found out that the cause of the death of Dyatlov’s group was a hurricane.
How could they find out if the investigation is not yet completed? So you need to think about this document to understand. And you don’t need to understand much here. The City Committee is not the Investigative Committee, it is not the police. And the city committee could not find out what was the reason for the death of Dyatlov’s group.
But since he stated that the reason was a hurricane, then the conclusion follows: it means that someone gave them instructions to state this. The City Committee could not declare on its own behalf. Moreover, there are investigative bodies. And their opinion must be taken into account. But it turns out that they didn’t give a damn about investigator Ivanov at all. They themselves took it and declared that there was a hurricane, and that’s why the tourists died.
So, this document, the minutes of the meeting, testifies: they were given instructions to blame the hurricane. Who could give such an instruction? It is clear who is the Kremlin. Khrushchev could have given them such instructions. But no one else could.
This is where the conclusion follows: both Khrushchev and the Sverdlovsk city committee - they knew what the true reason for the death of the Dyatlov group was, and they decided to hide this matter. Hide the truth. So they came up with a version about a hurricane. More precisely, it was not the city committee who came up with it, of course, but Khrushchev who came up with it and gave the following instructions to the city committee: “Announce that the cause of the tragedy with the Dyatlov group is a hurricane.”
They did just that. An order is an order. But another conclusion follows from this: after all, if they knew what the true reason for the death of tourists was, then it means they knew where the bodies of tourists were currently located. And not only the bodies of tourists, but also where the tent is located. Where is the storehouse made? And from here follows a general conclusion: since they knew, it means that all these searches for the Dyatlov group were also staged. That is, the search for tourists was just a performance staged by order of the party and government. And the performers of this performance were the leaders of the Sverdlovsk region. They, these leaders, were also stagers. But not only them. I have already said that the leaders of the Sverdlovsk region - they only staged the search for the Dyatlov group, but someone staged this very hurricane. It’s clear who staged it. These are the military. And indeed, if you look at the scene of the incident, it becomes clear that there was a staged hurricane! Look here. It turned out that the tourists made a mistake by putting up a tent on the mountain. They set up a tent, there was a hurricane at night, it blew them out of the mountain, and they didn’t even have time to get dressed, and as a result, they all froze and died. And, by the way, in the resolution of the city committee it was written that Dyatlov himself was directly to blame for the death of the Dyatlov group. He allegedly made a mistake by giving the order to put up a tent on the mountain. But it was impossible to put up a tent on the mountain; there could have been a hurricane there. Where should it have been placed? In the forest. There is no wind in the forest; trees provide protection there.
And in this resolution there was also this: they were punished... well, Dyatlov could not be punished for the fact that he put up a tent in the wrong place... Dyatlov died, but the leaders of the Ural Polytechnic Institute were punished. They are punished because, you know, they did not explain to Comrade Dyatlov that it was forbidden to put up a tent on the mountain. The rector of the institute, Siunov, was punished as follows: he was severely reprimanded. The secretary of the institute's party committee, as well as the chairman of the institute's trade union committee, were also reprimanded. But the chairman of the institute’s sports committee, whose last name is Gordo, was dismissed from this position. True, a year later, it seems, it was restored. So, the party and the government staged it: they pretended that Dyatlov’s group died from a hurricane. The military placed a tent and corpses there on the pass. And the leaders of the Sverdlovsk region supervised the staging of the search for tourists.
But, as we all know, despite the version of the hurricane, it was not written in the criminal case that the cause of the death of tourists was a hurricane. And the question is, why wasn’t it written. After all, this is understandable: since the city committee stated that the reason was a hurricane, then they should have told Ivanov: “You write there in your criminal file that the reason is a hurricane.” Why didn’t Ivanov write this? The answer is simple: about a month after the meeting of that city committee, the corpses of the remaining four tourists were found. An examination was carried out and it was found that Dubinina and Zolotaryov had broken ribs. And Thibeaux-Brignolles had a fractured skull. These injuries were... Well, in short, it was a closed fracture, that is, outwardly it was not visible that their bones were broken.
And then a problem arose. The fact is that a hurricane cannot break a person’s ribs or fracture a skull. A hurricane is a powerful thing, but it cannot break a person’s bones. And if so, how can you write in a criminal case that the cause is a hurricane? Naturally, you won’t write.
So Ivanov did not write that the cause of death of tourists was a hurricane, but instead he came up with such a vague formulation that the cause of death was an irresistible natural force. That is, the following picture emerged: it was not possible to blame the hurricane. Now, if Dubinina, Zolotaryov and Thibeaux-Brignolles had not had broken bones, they would have been able to blame it on the hurricane. Like, people were frozen, they were cold.
And since the bones were broken, the hurricane staging failed. And this ultimately led to the fact that this incident was never forgotten. Because look: if they had blamed the hurricane, and the tourists’ bones weren’t broken, then no one would have returned to this incident. Everyone would have forgotten about him long ago. Hurricane, what is there to investigate?
It is precisely the fact that Dubinina and Zolotarev had broken ribs, and Thibault-Brignolle had a fractured skull, which is why this “Mystery of Dyatlov Pass” arose. Therefore, people are still trying to solve this mystery, but they just can’t.
The whole reason is that three tourists had terrible injuries. If not for this, then everyone would have forgotten about this incident long ago. Therefore, in order to solve the mystery, we must first find out what is the cause of the broken ribs and what is the reason for the fracture of the skull. Until this is clarified, the mystery of the Dyatlov Pass will exist!
--------------
Перевал Дятлова. Руководители Свердловска знали правду! (Duration: 00:18:37)
[-] Подавляющее большинство людей считает, что для раскрытия какого-нибудь происшествия в истории надо непременно копаться в архивах, чтобы найти какой-нибудь секретный документ, в котором написана святая правда. То есть, думать, значит, ни о чём не надо? Просто найти, что-то там почитать, и всё - тайна раскрыта.
Но возникает вопрос: а если этого документа нет, то что? Значит, тайна никогда не будет раскрыта? И к тому же вы знаете, были ведь времена, когда никаких архивных документов вообще не было. Но тем не менее как-то историки разгадывают тайны прошлого. Например, путём археологических раскопок. Например, во времена динозавров документов же никаких не было. Но тем не менее историки как-то узнали об их существовании. Так вот, что я хочу сказать: даже если будет найден какой-то документ, то в нём вряд ли что-то прямо написано о том или ином событии. Так что даже над документом и то придётся думать. Так что, как бы вы ни пытались отвертеться, но включать мозги всё-таки придётся.
И вот сейчас я хочу поговорить об одном историческом документе, в котором кое-что раскрывается в тайне перевала Дятлова. Не знаю, кто первым нашёл этот документ, но я лично узнал о нём от Ильдара Гарифулина. Документ такой - протокол заседания бюро горкома Свердловска 27 марта 1959 года. Казалось бы, при чём тут горком партии? Какое он имеет отношение к гибели группы Дятлова? Оказывается, имеет. Дело в том, что на том заседании рассматривался вопрос о происшествии с группой Дятлова. И в конечном счёте бюро горкома заявило, что причина гибели группы Дятлова - это ураган.
Но вот что странно: ведь следствие ещё не было закончено по этому делу. Следователь Иванов продолжал расследовать, проводились разные экспертизы, опрашивали свидетелей происшествия. И тут вдруг горком как-то выяснил, что причина гибели группы Дятлова - это ураган.
Как они могли это выяснить, если следствие ещё не закончено? Так что надо подумать над этим документом, чтобы понять. А понимать тут много и не надо. Горком - это не Следственный комитет, это не милиция. И выяснить, в чём причина гибели группы Дятлова, горком не мог.
Но раз он заявил, что причина в урагане, то отсюда следует вывод: значит, им кто-то дал указание это заявить. Горком не мог заявить от себя. Тем более, что существуют следственные органы. А с их мнением надо считаться. А тут получается, им вообще наплевать было на следователя Иванова. Они сами вот взяли да и заявили, что ураган был, вот и погибли туристы.
Так вот, этот документ, протокол заседания свидетельствует: им дали указание свалить вину на ураган. А кто мог дать такое указание? Понятно кто - Кремль. Хрущёв мог им дать такое указание. А больше никто не мог.
Вот отсюда и следует вывод: и Хрущёв, и горком Свердловска - они знали, в чём истинная причина гибели группы Дятлова, и решили это дело скрыть. Скрыть правду. Вот и придумали версию об урагане. Точнее, не горком, конечно, придумал, а Хрущёв придумал и дал такое указание горкому: "Объявите, что причина трагедии с группой Дятлова - это ураган".
Они так и сделали. Приказ есть приказ. Но отсюда следует ещё вот какой вывод: ведь если они знали, в чём истинная причина гибели туристов, то, значит, они и знали, где в данный момент находятся тела туристов. И не только тела туристов, но и где палатка там стоит. Где лабаз сделан. И отсюда следует общий вывод: раз они знали, то, значит, все эти поиски дятловцев были тоже инсценировкой. То есть, поиски туристы - это был просто такой спектакль, устроенный по заказу партии и правительства. А исполнителями этого спектакля были руководители Свердловской области. Они, эти руководители, тоже были инсценировщиками. Но не только они. Я уже говорил, что руководители Свердловской области - они инсценировали только поиски группы Дятлова, но кто-то инсценировал и этот самый ураган. А кто инсценировал, понятно. Это военные. И действительно, если взглянуть на место происшествия, то становится понятно, что тут была инсценировка урагана! Вот смотрите. Тут получилось как бы, что туристы совершили ошибку, поставив палатку на горе. Палатку поставили, ночью был ураган, сдул их из горы, и они даже одеться не успели, и в результате все замёрзли и умерли. А, кстати, ведь в постановлении горкома так и было записано, что непосредственно виноват в гибели группы Дятлова сам Дятлов. Он, мол, совершил ошибку, дав указание поставить палатку на горе. А на горе нельзя было ставить палатку, там же мог быть ураган. А ставить её надо было где? В лесу. В лесу ветра не бывает, там деревья защищают.
И в этом постановлении ещё было вот что: были наказаны... ну, Дятлова наказать нельзя было за то, что он палатку не там поставил... Дятлов погиб, но были наказаны руководители Уральского политехнического института. Они наказаны за то, что они, понимаете ли, не объяснили товарищу Дятлову, что нельзя ставить палатку на горе. Ректор института Сиунов был наказан так: ему объявили строгий выговор. Выговора объявили ещё и секретарю парткома института, а также председателю профкома института. А вот председатель спорткомитета института, фамилия которого Гордо, был уволен с этой должности. Правда, через год, кажется, его восстановили. Итак, партия и правительство совершили инсценировку: они изобразили, что будто бы группа Дятлова погибла от урагана. Палатку и трупы там на перевале расположили военные. А руководители Свердловской области руководили инсценировкой поисков туристов.
Но, как мы все знаем, что несмотря на версию урагана, в уголовном деле не было написано, что причина гибели туристов - ураган. И вопрос, а почему не было написано. Ведь это же понятно: раз горком заявил, что причина - ураган, то они же Иванову должны были сказать: "Ты напиши там у себя в уголовном деле, что причина - ураган". Почему же Иванов это не написал? Ответ прост: где-то через месяц после заседания того горкома были найдены трупы остальных четырёх туристов. Была проведена экспертиза и было выяснено, что, оказывается, у Дубининой и Золотарёва сломаны рёбра. А у Тибо-Бриньоля проломлен череп. Эти травмы были... Ну, короче, это был закрытый перелом, то есть внешне не было видно, что у них кости сломаны.
И вот возникла проблема. Дело в том что ураган - он не может сломать человеку рёбра и проломить череп. Ураган - это мощная штука, но кости ломать он человеку не может. А раз так, то как ты напишешь в уголовном деле, что причина - ураган? Естественно, не напишешь.
Вот Иванов и не написал, что причина гибели туристов - ураган, а вместо этого он придумал такую неопределённую формулировку, что причина гибели - неодолимая стихийная сила. То есть, получилась следующая картина: не удалось свалить вину на ураган. Вот если бы у Дубининой, Золотарёва и Тибо-Бринболя кости не были сломаны, то удалось бы свалить вину на ураган. Мол, замёрзли люди, холодно им было.
А раз кости были сломаны, то инсценировка с ураганом не удалась. А это в конечном счёте привело к тому, что это происшествие так и не было забыто. Потому что смотрите: если бы свалили вину на ураган, а кости не были сломаны у туристов, то никто бы к этому происшествию и не стал возвращаться. Все бы давно забыли о нём. Ураган, что тут расследовать?
Вот именно тот факт, что у Дубининой и Золотарёва были сломаны рёбра, а у Тибо-Бриньоля был проломлен череп, поэтому и возникла эта "Тайна перевала Дятлова". Поэтому до сих пор люди пытаются разгадать эту тайну, но никак не могут.
Вся причина в том, что у трёх туристов были жуткие травмы. Если бы не это,то все давно забыли бы об этом прошествии. А потому, чтобы раскрыть тайну, надо в первую очередь выяснить, в чём причина перелома рёбер и в чём причина пролома черепа. Пока это не будет выяснено, тайна перевала Дятлова будет существовать!
-
Axelrod:
I would understand his version if you could have it translated into English.
Thanks
Kathleen Dee Smith read1 read1 read1
-
Everyone and Teddy:
I don't know what to say as to what "DECISION TO APPOINT CRIMINAL EXPERT" Case files 301-302 suggest that all 9 Hikes were "Killed"...
I sent images and highlighted in blue were it is written...
(https://i.ibb.co/Qb6jD7S/criminalexpert2023-12-05-6-15-27-PM.png) (https://ibb.co/w0KrcZG)
-
@KathleenDSmith1
Interpretation of Russian text by Google Translate
"But the question arises: if this document does not exist, then what? So the secret will never be revealed? And besides, you know, there were times when there were no archival documents at all. But nevertheless, historians somehow unravel the mysteries of the past. For example, through archaeological excavations. For example, in the time of dinosaurs there were no documents. But nevertheless, historians somehow learned about their existence. So this is what I want to say: even if some document is found, it is unlikely that anything is directly written in it about this or that event. So you even have to think about the document. So, no matter how hard you try to get out of it, you still have to use your brains.
And now I want to talk about one historical document in which something is revealed in the mystery of the Dyatlov Pass. I don’t know who was the first to find this document, but I personally learned about it from Ildar Garifulin. The document is the minutes of the meeting of the bureau of the Sverdlovsk city committee on March 27, 1959. It would seem, what does the city party committee have to do with it? What does he have to do with the death of the Dyatlov group? It turns out it does. The fact is that at that meeting the issue of the incident with the Dyatlov group was considered. And ultimately, the city committee bureau stated that the cause of the death of the Dyatlov group was a hurricane.
But here’s what’s strange: the investigation has not yet been completed in this case. Investigator Ivanov continued to investigate, various examinations were carried out, and witnesses to the incident were interviewed. And then suddenly the city committee somehow found out that the cause of the death of Dyatlov’s group was a hurricane.
How could they find out if the investigation is not yet completed? So you need to think about this document to understand. And you don’t need to understand much here. The City Committee is not the Investigative Committee, it is not the police. And the city committee could not find out what was the reason for the death of Dyatlov’s group.
But since he stated that the reason was a hurricane, then the conclusion follows: it means that someone gave them instructions to state this. The City Committee could not declare on its own behalf. Moreover, there are investigative bodies. And their opinion must be taken into account. But it turns out that they didn’t give a damn about investigator Ivanov at all. They themselves took it and declared that there was a hurricane, and that’s why the tourists died.
So, this document, the minutes of the meeting, testifies: they were given instructions to blame the hurricane. Who could give such an instruction? It is clear who is the Kremlin. Khrushchev could have given them such instructions. But no one else could.
This is where the conclusion follows: both Khrushchev and the Sverdlovsk city committee - they knew what the true reason for the death of the Dyatlov group was, and they decided to hide this matter. Hide the truth. So they came up with a version about a hurricane. More precisely, it was not the city committee who came up with it, of course, but Khrushchev who came up with it and gave the following instructions to the city committee: “Announce that the cause of the tragedy with the Dyatlov group is a hurricane.”
They did just that. An order is an order. But another conclusion follows from this: after all, if they knew what the true reason for the death of tourists was, then it means they knew where the bodies of tourists were currently located. And not only the bodies of tourists, but also where the tent is located. Where is the storehouse made? And from here follows a general conclusion: since they knew, it means that all these searches for the Dyatlov group were also staged. That is, the search for tourists was just a performance staged by order of the party and government. And the performers of this performance were the leaders of the Sverdlovsk region. They, these leaders, were also stagers. But not only them. I have already said that the leaders of the Sverdlovsk region - they only staged the search for the Dyatlov group, but someone staged this very hurricane. It’s clear who staged it. These are the military. And indeed, if you look at the scene of the incident, it becomes clear that there was a staged hurricane! Look here. It turned out that the tourists made a mistake by putting up a tent on the mountain. They set up a tent, there was a hurricane at night, it blew them out of the mountain, and they didn’t even have time to get dressed, and as a result, they all froze and died. And, by the way, in the resolution of the city committee it was written that Dyatlov himself was directly to blame for the death of the Dyatlov group. He allegedly made a mistake by giving the order to put up a tent on the mountain. But it was impossible to put up a tent on the mountain; there could have been a hurricane there. Where should it have been placed? In the forest. There is no wind in the forest; trees provide protection there.
And in this resolution there was also this: they were punished... well, Dyatlov could not be punished for the fact that he put up a tent in the wrong place... Dyatlov died, but the leaders of the Ural Polytechnic Institute were punished. They are punished because, you know, they did not explain to Comrade Dyatlov that it was forbidden to put up a tent on the mountain. The rector of the institute, Siunov, was punished as follows: he was severely reprimanded. The secretary of the institute's party committee, as well as the chairman of the institute's trade union committee, were also reprimanded. But the chairman of the institute’s sports committee, whose last name is Gordo, was dismissed from this position. True, a year later, it seems, it was restored. So, the party and the government staged it: they pretended that Dyatlov’s group died from a hurricane. The military placed a tent and corpses there on the pass."
-
@axelrod
One pivotal injury in this case – the fatal rib cage fracture of Lyudmila – is hard to explain by ‘slow speed impact’, like a fall through a snow bridge, or a fall from height or a human pushing quickly on the ribcage.
Slow speed fatal impact on a ribcage will cause fractures leaving visible traces on the outside of the body, e.g.: so-called ‘complicated fractures’ (bones perforating the skin), bruises on the skin, an indented and/or deformed ribcage (as seen on the photo of Semyon in the mortuary).
The photo of Lyudmila in the mortuary shows a ribcage with an absolute minimal deformation for an internal – fatal – ribcage fracture. With this kind of deformation – as seen on the photo of Lyudmila in the mortuary – other humans will recover under normal circumstances within one or a few months, without any remaining. consequences left.
An possible explanation for the fatal ribcage fracture of Lyudmila as seen on the photo in the mortuary is rather extensive: it requires a separate post.
-
Surprising then that these youthful enemies of the State had to be eliminated, but Yuri Yuden gets a free pass. Meanwhile,,at the institute, heads roll and Yuri Yuden gets a free pass. Was there something on the mountain that took an additional three years to clean up? Mensi are going to hunt game where the game is, whether its off limits or not. I think they got a free pass too. Hurricane still fits better than conspiracy.
-
I don't know what to say as to what "DECISION TO APPOINT CRIMINAL EXPERT" Case files 301-302 suggest that all 9 Hikes were "Killed"...
"killed" is changed to "died". This is entirely my fault. This is the reason I keep the Russian originals handy. This was a very good catch, thank you.
-
Another interesting video (in Russian)
Topic title: ANOTHER INTERESTING VERSION.
But where is the version? What is the version? Why did the tourists die?
-
Vacuum bomb
Dyatlov Pass. Why didn't two of them have eyes? (December 7, 2023):
VENIAMIN MOCHALOV: We continue the conversation about the Dyatlov Pass. The topic of today's conversation is: why did Dubinina and Zolotarev not have eyes? And why didn’t Dubinina have a tongue?
There are many versions on this topic. And the first version that the researchers came up with sounds like this: the eyes and tongue were eaten by mice. But this version does not stand up to criticism. If only because the bodies of Dubinina and Zolotarev were in the stream, in the water. And mice are not waterfowl. They will not go into the water to have a meal with their eyes and tongue.
Another version is that the eyes and tongue were cut out by some bandits. And this version does not stand up to criticism. The bandits wouldn't cut anything out. They would simply shoot them there, stab them to death or strangle them. Why cut out their eyes? All this is of no use to them! And besides, if bandits suddenly attacked tourists, they would probably rob them and take away some valuables. Cameras, for example. Well, they could take away the clothes. It's still winter, it's cold. And besides this, remember - when the tent was found, there was a bucket inside the tent at the entrance. And in the bucket there was a flask with alcohol. If the bandits had attacked Dyatlov’s group, why didn’t they drink alcohol? Were they teetotalers or something? Well, they were hardly teetotalers! So they would certainly drink alcohol and eat that sliced loin, which, as you know, was there, in the tent at the entrance.
There is also a version that Alexander Veter persistently preaches. He is strenuously trying to prove that the Dyatlov group was killed by the Mansi, killed with the aim of sacrificing them, as a sacrifice to their gods. Well, this version is also complete nonsense. After all, when the tent and bodies of tourists were found, the first version that investigators developed was exactly this: they were killed by the Mansi. And so they, the investigators, studied this issue and came to the conclusion: the Mansi could not have been killed. In their religion there is no ritual of human sacrifice. Well, they sacrificed animals, elk there, but they didn’t sacrifice people. In addition, they sacrificed animals, not at the pass, but at the so-called Prayer Stone, very far from the Dyatlov Pass. I haven't figured out exactly where he is. It is somewhere 50 km further south.
So the version about Mansi’s involvement in cutting out eyes and tongue is also incorrect, also erroneous. So why did they not have eyes and tongue? It seems that it is even impossible to put forward any more versions here.
Nevertheless, I still put forward one version, based on the testimony of Alexei Cheglakov. He was one of the search engines. In addition, it seems that he was also a secret KGB agent, an informant. And since he was a KGB agent, he could know something that others did not know. And, indeed, in 1975, he told his son Vladimir how the Dyatlov group died.
From his words the conclusion follows: Dyatlov’s group entered a military training ground where they were testing new weapons. What kind of weapon it was, Cheglakov did not know. He himself did not personally participate in the tests. All he knew about this weapon was that it took oxygen out of the air. He said these words to his son Vladimir.
Well, for a long time I tried to understand what kind of weapon this was, and finally I guessed it. This is a thermobaric weapon. This is the only type of firearm that removes oxygen from the air. One type of thermobaric weapon is a vacuum bomb. And so, when I realized this, I thought: wasn’t it a vacuum bomb that took out Dubinina’s eyes and tongue and Zolotaryov’s eyes?
Here's the thing: a vacuum bomb is called that because when it explodes for a second, perhaps a kind of vacuum is formed in the surrounding space. Or rather, a rarefied atmosphere. That is, the atmosphere becomes like high in the mountains there, for example. No, it is not very sparse in the mountains. Somewhere at an altitude of 50 km, maybe it’s already quite sparse there.
And then the explosion creates a vacuum in the atmosphere for a second. What happens to the human body when it enters a rarefied atmosphere? This is shown in one film. True, this film is artistic, but besides, you know, it is also fantastic. But it’s not mystical, but kind of science fiction. Therefore, the creator of the film, showing the episodes there, was based on some scientific facts. This film is called “Total Recall.” (Total Recall, 1990). Starring Arnold Schwarzenegger.
There, at the end of the film, Schwarzenegger finds himself in the rarefied atmosphere of Mars, and the following begins to happen to him - his body begins to swell. And to a greater extent, his eyes and tongue swell. It's even shown in that movie.
If the air production plant had not turned on, what would have happened to the eyes and tongue? Obviously they would burst! And from this episode the conclusion follows: yes, when a vacuum bomb explodes, a person’s eyes and tongue can burst. Hence the conclusion: Dubinina and Zolotarev were caught in the explosion of a vacuum bomb. Cheglakov told the truth. Yes, there was a testing ground there, and a vacuum bomb was tested there. He, of course, did not know such words as vacuum bomb, thermobaric weapon, so he put it simply: a weapon that removes oxygen from the air. Thus, we conclude: the reason for the absence of eyes and tongues in Dubinina and Zolotarev is that they entered the same training ground. Well, we got caught in the explosion of a vacuum bomb!
Thibault-Brignolle was also hit, but his eyes and tongue did not burst. This is obviously for the reason that he was at a greater distance from the epicenter of the explosion than Dubinina and Zolotarev.
As for the other six tourists, their eyes are in the right place. And the languages are also in place. From which it follows that they did not go to the training ground! Only three people went to the training ground: Dubinina, Zolotarev and Thibault-Brignolle. And the rest, that means, were sitting in the tent. Although, perhaps, not all of them were sitting in the tent, but some went to Otorten. Well, so as not to waste time. Let's say three went to Otorten, and three stayed in the tent. That's what we can assume.
And this version about a vacuum bomb, I think, is the only correct one!
It is no longer possible to explain why Dubinina and Zolotarev did not have eyes. Only a vacuum bomb could do this. The following question arises, of course: okay, let’s say three died as a result of a vacuum bomb explosion. Well, what did the rest die from if they weren’t at the training ground?
I have already said more than once why they died. After all, the military reported the incident to Moscow, and Khrushchev obviously made the following decision: he ordered the killing of all the other six tourists - to kill in order to preserve military secrets! Well, they were killed, and then they staged it: the corpses of all nine tourists were transported by helicopter to the pass and they pretended that they had died as a result of a hurricane.
That is, it was as if they had pitched a tent on the mountain, and at night there was a hurricane, and it blew them off the mountain, and they didn’t even have time to get dressed. And as a result, they froze and died.
This is the kind of staging that was carried out by the military on the orders of Khrushchev. But at the same time, they made one gigantic mistake: they did not know that Dubinina and Zolotarev, among other things, also had broken ribs, and Thibault-Brignolle had a fractured skull. The blast wave threw him to the ground, and he hit his head on a stone. Well, his skull was fractured.
But the stone was probably covered with snow on top. Therefore, there was no external damage to the skull. And, naturally, there were no external injuries to Dubinina and Zolotarev. That’s why neither the military nor Khrushchev knew that the ribs were broken and the skull was fractured.
If they knew this, they would pretend that a tree broken by a hurricane fell on Dubinina, Zolotarev and Thibault-Brignol. And then, indeed, the dramatization would have turned out very convincing. And since the military did not know about the fractures, they made the following mistake: they simply put the corpses in the stream...
Thus, the mystery of the death of the Dyatlov group is explained very simply, but no one can guess. Because people simply don't know how a vacuum bomb works. They do not know that the bomb, it turns out, has the property of tearing apart the eyes and tongue.
But I knew about it. I've known this since 1982. Therefore, I guessed that the cause of the death of the Dyatlov group was a vacuum bomb. And the reason for the death of the remaining tourists was that they were simply poisoned by order of Khrushchev. I don’t know what kind of poison they were poisoned with, but they were poisoned. And their poses indicate that they were poisoned. After all, if a person dies from freezing, then he assumes the fetal position. All criminologists know this. But none of the six tourists had this pose. From which the conclusion follows: that they died not from freezing, but from poisoning. Now, this is the truth.
(https://i.ibb.co/WBZtKFM/arnie-eye-bulge.jpg) (https://ibb.co/3S2zhWj)
Вакуумная бомба
Перевал Дятлова. Почему у двоих не было глаз? (7 декабря 2023):
ВЕНИАМИН МОЧАЛОВ: Продолжаем разговор о перевале Дятлова. Тема сегодняшнего разговора такая: почему у Дубининой и Золотарёва не было глаз? И почему у Дубининой не было языка?
Много версий есть на эту тему. И первая версия, которая возникла у исследователей, звучит так: глаза и язык съели мыши. Но эта версия не выдерживает никакой критики. Хотя бы потому, что тела Дубининой и Золотарёва находились в ручье, в воде. А мыши – они же не водоплавающие. В воду они не полезут, чтобы устроить трапезу с глазами и языком.
Другая версия, что будто бы глаза и язык вырезали какие-то бандиты. И эта версия не выдерживает критики. Бандиты ничего не стали бы вырезать. Они просто застрелили бы их там, зарезали или задушили бы. Зачем им глаза-то вырезать? Всё это им ни к чему! А кроме того, если бы на туристов вдруг напали бандиты, то они бы наверняка ограбили бы их, забрали бы какие-нибудь ценные вещи. Фотоаппараты, например. Ну и одежду могли забрать. Зима всё-таки, холодно. А кроме этого, вспомните – там, когда палатка была найдена, внутри палатки у входа стояло ведро. А в ведре находилась фляжка со спиртом. Если бы бандиты напали на группу Дятлова, и что же они спирт не выпили? Они что, трезвенники что ли были? Ну, вряд ли они были трезвенники! Так что спирт они непременно выпили бы, и закусили бы той нарезанной корейкой, которая, как известно, была там же, в палатке у входа.
Есть ещё такая версия, которую упорно проповедует Александр Ветер. Он усиленно пытается доказать, что группу Дятлова убили манси, убили с целью, чтобы принести их в жертву, в жертву своим богам. Ну и эта версия тоже полнейшая чепуха. Ведь когда палатка и тела туристов были найдены, то первая версия, которую разрабатывали следователи, была именно такой: их убили манси. И вот они, следователи, изучили этот вопрос и пришли к выводу: манси не могли убить. У них в религии нет ритуала жертвоприношения людей. Ну, животных они приносили в жертву, лосей там, а людей они не приносили в жертву. Кроме этого, в жертву они приносили, значит, животных, не на перевале, а у так называемого Молебного Камня, очень далеко от перевала Дятлова. Я точно не выяснил, где он там находится. Он где-то южнее на 50 км.
Так что версия о причастности манси к вырезанию глаз и языка – тоже неправильная, тоже ошибочная. Так отчего же всё-таки у них не было глаз и языка? Тут больше никаких версий вроде даже невозможно выдвинуть.
Тем не менее, одну версию я всё-таки выдвинул, на основе свидетельства Алексея Чеглакова. Он был одним из поисковиков. Кроме этого он, похоже, был ещё и тайным агентом КГБ, осведомителем. И раз он был агентом КГБ, то он кое-что мог знать то, чего не знали другие. И, действительно, в 1975 году он своему сыну Владимиру рассказал, от чего погибла группа Дятлова.
Из его слов следует вывод: группа Дятлова зашла на военный полигон, где испытывали новое оружие. Что это было за оружие, Чеглаков не знал. Он же сам лично не участвовал в испытаниях. Он знал об этом оружии только то, что оно изымает из воздуха кислород. Эти слова он сказал своему сыну Владимиру.
Ну, долго я пытался понять, что это за оружие, ну и наконец, догадался. Это термобарическое оружие. Это единственный вид огнестрельного оружия, которое изымает из воздуха кислород. Одним из видов термобарического оружия является вакуумная бомба. И вот, когда я это понял, я подумал: а не вакуумная ли бомба изъяла глаза и язык Дубининой и глаза Золотарёва?Ъ
Тут ведь вот какая штука: вакуумная бомба называется так потому, что при взрыве на секунду, может быть, образуется в окружающем пространстве как бы вакуум. А точнее, разреженная атмосфера. То есть, атмосфера становится такой, как высоко в горах там, допустим. Нет, в горах она не сильно разрежена. Вот где-то на высоте 50 км, может, там уже достаточно разреженно.
И вот взрыв создаёт на секунду разряжение в атмосфере. А что происходит с телом человека, когда он попадает в разреженную атмосферу? Это показано в одном фильме. Правда, этот фильм художественный, но и к тому же, знаете, он ещё и фантастический. Но он же не мистический, а как бы научно-фантастический. Поэтому создатель фильма, показывая там эпизоды, основывались на каких-то научных фактах. Фильм этот называется так – «Вспомнить всё» (Total Recall, 1990). В главной роли – Арнольд Шварценеггер.
Там в конце фильма Шварценеггер попадает в разреженную атмосферу Марса, и с ним начинает происходить следующее – у него начинает раздуваться тело. А в большей степени у него раздуваются глаза и язык. Это даже показано в том фильме.
Если бы там не включилась установка по производству воздуха, то что бы случилось с глазами и языком? Очевидно, они бы лопнули! И вот из этого эпизода следует вывод: да, при взрыве вакуумной бомбы у человека могут лопнуть глаза и язык. Отсюда вывод: Дубинина и Золотарёв попали под взрыв вакуумной бомбы. Чеглаков сказал правду. Да, там был полигон, и там испытывали вакуумную бомбу. Он, конечно, не знал таких слов, как вакуумная бомба, термобарическое оружие, поэтому он выразился просто: оружие, которое из воздуха изымает кислород. Таким образом, делаем вывод: причина отсутствия глаз и языка у Дубининой и Золотарёва заключается в том, что они зашли на тот самый полигон. Ну и попали под взрыв вакуумной бомбы!
Попал также ещё и Тибо-Бриньоль, но у него не лопнули глаза и язык. Это, очевидно, по той причине, что он находился на более значительном расстоянии от эпицентра взрыва, чем Дубинина и Золотарёв.
А что касается остальных шести туристов, то у них глаза на месте. И языки тоже на месте. Из чего следует вывод, что они на полигон не ходили! На полигон пошли только три человека: Дубинина, Золотарёв и Тибо-Бриньоль. А остальные, значит, в палатке сидели. Хотя, может быть, и не все они в палатке сидели, а кто-то пощёл на Отортен. Ну, чтобы не терять время. Скажем, трое пошли на Отортен, а трое в палатке остались. Вот так можно предположить.
И эта версия о вакуумной бомбе, я думаю, единственная правильная!
Больше никак нельзя объяснить, почему у Дубининой и Золотарёва не было глаз. Только вакуумная бомба могла такое сотворить. Возникает, конечно, такой вопрос: ладно, допустим, трое погибли в результате взрыва вакуумной бомбы. Ну а остальные-то от чего погибли, если они на полигоне не были?
Я уже не раз говорил, от чего они погибли. Ведь военные доложили о происшествии в Москву, и Хрущёв принял, очевидно, такое решение: он приказал убить и всех остальных шестерых туристов – убить с целью сохранения военной тайны! Ну вот, их и убили, а потом совершили инсценировку: трупы всех девяти туристов перевезли на вертолётах на перевал и изобразили, что будто бы они погибли в результате урагана.
То есть, будто бы они палатку поставили на горе, а ночью был ураган, и он их с горы сдул, и они даже не успели одеться. И в результате они замёрзли и умерли.
Вот такую инсценировку совершили военные по приказу Хрущёва. Но при этом они совершили одну гигантскую ошибку: они не знали, что у Дубининой и Золотарёва кроме всего прочего ещё и рёбра сломаны, а у Тибо-Бриньоля череп проломлен. Взрывной волной его бросило на землю, и он удался головой о камень. Ну и ему проломило череп.
Но камень, вероятно, был покрыт снегом сверху. Поэтому никаких внешних повреждений на черепе не было. И не было, естественно, никаких внешних повреждений у Дубининой и Золотарёва. Вот поэтому ни военные, ни Хрущёв не знали, что рёбра сломаны, череп проломлен.
Если бы они это знали, они изобразили бы, что на Дубинину, Золотарёва и Тибо-Бриньоля упало дерево, сломленное ураганом. И тогда, действительно, инсценировка получилось бы очень убедительной. А так как военные не знали о переломах, то совершили такую ошибку: они просто положили в ручей трупы…
Таким образом, тайна гибели группы Дятлова объясняется очень просто, но никто не может догадаться. Потому что люди просто не знают, как действует вакуумная бомба. Они не знают, что бомба, оказывается, имеет такое свойство: разрывать глаза и язык.
Но я про это знал. Я это знаю с 1982 года. Поэтому я догадался, что причина гибели группы Дятлова – это вакуумная бомба. А причина смерти остальных туристов – их просто отравили по заказу Хрущёва. Какой именно отравой их отравили, я не знаю, но они были отравлены. И на то, что они были отравлены, указывают их позы. Ведь если человек умирает от замерзания, то он же принимает позу эмбриона. Это знают все криминалисты. А ни у кого из шести туристов этой позы не было. Из чего следует вывод: что они умерли не от замерзания, а от отравления. Вот, такова истина.
https://youtu.be/AfRw22vDcFY
-
Thanks for this and for all the work you did translating it. It is an intriguing theory and has prompted me to do some googling about thermobaric bombs. One paragraph said that the blast could break ribs on the side of the body the person is facing when it hits.
I have read before about the military installation behind Mt. Otorten and Cheglakov's involvement. The one thing that has never added up to me about those theories is, is it really logical or reasonable to then go on to murder any remaining hikers / witnesses, just because they were present when the missile testing occurred? This was the era when the US and the Soviet Union were developing and testing such weapons, but that was common knowledge and I don't see the justification for murdering people who simply witnessed the testing.
-
Interesting Axelrod.
Some observations from the autopsy bodies show an established deterioration of the facial features. The fact that the ravine 4 were in running water and were already decomposing can't be ignored.
I don't think a vacuum bomb would cause the eyes to come out of the sockets and certainly not the tongue.
I also doubt that there would be random military testing in that area, the Mansi hunt and move through the area , tourists are taking hiking trips etc. I don't think it's a testing range, obviously a rocket or missile could accidentally go off course but everything points towards leaving the tent and then fighting for survival.
The resting positions of the hikers bodies are consistent with the variables of death from hypothermia .
For me, there is a lot of consistency with previous reports of survival situations in cold environments. These are,in no particular order, undressing, a fire, burnt clothing, (socks and sleeves, where one would warm up the extremities) , the making of flooring to keep of the ground, the marks on hands and faces from pushing through snow, the resting position of the bodies.
As for the ravine 4 , they are found at close to ground level with 3 meters of snow on top of them . I can't ignore that fact. These are the hikers with the broken ribs , coincidence perhaps?.
If it was staged or murder, someone dug a hole, which is a lot of work. If there was no snow at the time and the ravine filled up over the following 3 weeks to three meters , then the murders or stagers got lucky? . I just can't see if there was an accident that all the hikers would be killed by whoever was responsible.
All very interesting though.
-
the version does not have even the smallest confirmations
1. If tourists were killed as witnesses to the launch of the bomb, then the rest of the witnesses should also be killed: those who developed the bomb, scientists, those who launched it, who carried out control and destroyed the consequences. It should be a few dozen or hundreds of people. From scientists to workers and the military. But the creator of the Mochalov version has no answer to this question!
2. There was no military training ground or signs of its presence in the area of Dyatlov Pass and in the immediate vicinity of it.
В районе перевала Дятлова и в непосредственной близости от него не было ни военного полигона, ни признаков его присутствия.
3. Разработка и первые испытания вакуумной бомбы в СССР были в начале 1960-х годов, как сообщает пресса.
The development and first tests of a vacuum bomb in the USSR were in the early 1960s, according to the press.
-
Dyatlov Pass. Weird Explorers (July 4, 2023):
[MOCHALOV:] Today I decided to talk about the stupidest versions about the Dyatlov Pass.
Among the Dyatlov Pass researchers there are some inadequate individuals, in other words, weirdos who put forward some strange versions. You can't even call them versions. This is some kind of fantasy!
I'll start with the imagination of one of my commentators (his last name is Berko). I never expected him to come up with such nonsense! Here's his hypothesis, let's put it this way. He claims that in fact there was no camping trip of the Dyatlov group. But some jokers simply stole 9 corpses from the Sverdlovsk morgues, somehow took them to the pass and staged a re-enactment there. That is, they set up a tent, laid out the corpses there... I don’t even understand how such a stupid version could come into the head of an adult?
Or here's another weirdo. I don’t know what his name is, he calls himself Kulibin. His version is pure fantasy! He claims that Zolotarev was some kind of time traveler. How he was a time traveler is unclear...
Or here’s another commentator, his version is more serious, but also somehow unrealistic. They call themselves either Evening Otorten or Evening Helicopter. His hypothesis is that Dyatlov’s group was flying in a helicopter, the helicopter crashed and everyone crashed... This version is also completely stupid! If the helicopter crashed, then why did only three have such terrible injuries? There, the ribs were broken, the skull was fractured, but others did not have any fatal injuries! There are just some scratches...
If the helicopter had fallen, and two people, Zolotaryov and Dubinina, had had their ribs broken, and Dubinina’s ribs even in two places... This means that the height from which the helicopter fell was very high. I don't know how much. Maybe 100 m. If a helicopter fell from such a height, then why are there no other injuries? It’s not clear... In general, this version is also not true.
Let me also remind you of one researcher whom many probably know. His name is Anton Sizykh. He speaks very, let's say, intelligently. He is a very meticulous researcher, for which he can be praised. But his version as a whole looks somehow completely unrealistic. It goes like this: Dyatlov’s group was killed in Second Northern. And after that, the killers dragged the corpses 50 km through the taiga to the pass to stage a re-enactment there. What is all this for? Well, they killed me. Why drag it 50 km? Well, they would have buried it somewhere there, near the second Northern one. So this version also looks very strange...
Indeed, this topic of the Dyatlov mountain pass is of interest to many, many are trying to figure it out. But it turns out that some people who are trying to figure it out are somehow, I don’t know how to say it, but to put it mildly, somehow thinking naively. Well, like children. They make up some strange fantasies. And what’s interesting is that they really don’t like my version! Although there is nothing fantastic in my version. This is a completely realistic version. Now I’ll repeat once again what the essence of my version is.
When Dyatlov’s group with Zolotaryov was moving towards Mount Otroten, they saw some fireballs to the left of their course. They became interested and decided to go there, take a closer look and photograph them. But they didn’t know that, it turns out, military tests were being carried out there. There they tested liquid explosives, sprayed them from an airplane, and it turned out something like a cloud. Then this cloud was set on fire in some way, it exploded, and it looked like a huge fireball. So, Dyatlov’s group came to this training ground, and then this explosion was heard. And those who were very close to the epicenter of the explosion died. One was injured. This is Thibeaux-Brignolles. And the three dead were Dubinina, Zolotaryov, Kolevatov.
When the military reported this to Moscow, Khrushchev made the following decision: he decided to kill the surviving tourists in order to preserve the military secret. And then he ordered a reenactment and pretend that they died not as a result of military trials, but from a hurricane.
The point here is that despite such a terrible explosion, outwardly the bodies of the dead tourists looked quite normal. There were no special injuries, only Dubinina and Zolotaryov’s eyes were badly damaged, and Dubinina’s tongue was also damaged. It's like it burst or something else...
Only one tourist was severely mutilated - Kolevatov. The upper part of his body was inside the fireball. Everything, naturally, burned down. And Kolevatov was replaced with the corpse of some person.
And then, that means they staged it. All the corpses were brought by helicopter to that same pass, the corpses were laid out there in different places, and a tent was set up on the mountain. And then Khrushchev ordered local authorities to stage a search. That is, to pretend that we are looking for missing tourists. although in fact all the leaders knew where they were.
This is my simple version, without any fantasy or mysticism!
(https://i.ibb.co/SQffbhY/mochalov-chudiki.jpg) (https://ibb.co/XyYY1h0)
Перевал Дятлова. Исследователи-чудики (4 июля 2023):
[МОЧАЛОВ:] Я сегодня решил рассказать о самых дурацких версиях о перевале Дятлова.
Среди исследователей перевала Дятлова есть какие-то неадекватные личности, проще говоря - чудики, которые выдвигают какие-то странные версии. Их даже версиями нельзя назвать. Это какие-то фантазии!
Я начну с фантазии одного из моих комментаторов (его фамилия Берко), Я никак не ожидал, что он выдаст такую чушь! Вот его гипотеза, скажем так. Он утверждает, что на самом деле никакого турпохода группы Дятлова не было. А просто какие-то шутники похитили из моргов Свердловская 9 трупов, увезли их каким-то образом на перевал и там устроили инсценировку. То есть, палатку поставили, трупы там разложили... Я даже не понимаю, как такая дурацкая версия могла прийти в голову взрослому человеку?
Или вот ещё один чудик. Как его имя, я не знаю, он именует себя Кулибин. Его версия - это вообще чистейшая фантастика! Он уверяет, что будто бы Золотарёв был каким-то путешественником во времени. Как он был путешественником во времени - непонятно...
Или вот ещё один из комментаторов, у него версия более серьёзная, но тоже какая-то нереальная. Они себя именует то Вечерний Отортен, то вечерний вертолёт. Его гипотеза заключается в том, что будто бы группа Дятлова летела на вертолёте, вертолёт упал, и все разбились... Эта версия тоже совершенно глупая! Если вертолёт упал, то почему только у троих такие жуткие травмы? Там рёбра переломаны, череп проломлен, а у других никаких смертельных травм нет! Только какие-то царапины есть...
Если бы вертолёт упал, и у двоих человек - у Золотарёва и Дубининой переломало рёбра, причём у Дубининйо даже в двух местах... Это означает, что высота, с которой упал вертолёт, была очень большая. Не знаю, сколько. Может, 100 м. Если с такой высоты упал вертолёт, то почему у других травм нет? Непонятно... В общем, эта версия тоже не соответствует истине.
Ещё напомню об одном исследователе, которого, наверное, многие знают. Его зовут Антон Сизых. Он очень, скажем так, умно рассуждает. Он очень дотошный исследователь, за что его можно и похвалить. Но его версия в целом выглядит как-то совершенно нереально. Она звучит так: группу Дятлова убили во Втором Северном. А после этого убийцы 50 км тащили трупы по тайге на перевал, чтобы устроить там инсценировку. К чему всё это? Ну, убили. А зачем за 50 км тащить? Ну, закопали бы где-нибудь там же, возле второго Северного. Так что тоже версия выглядит очень как-то странно...
Действительно, это тема перевал Дятлова многих интересует, многие пытаются разобраться. Но получается так, что некоторые люди, которые пытаются разобраться, какие-то, не знаю как сказать, мягко скажу так, как-то наивно мыслят. Ну, как дети. Сочиняют какие-то странные фантазии. Причём, что интересно, моя версия им жутко не нравится! Хотя в моей версии ничего фантастического нет. Это вполне реалистическая версия. Сейчас ещё раз повторю, в чём суть моей версии.
Когда группа Дятлова с Золотарёвым двигалась к горе Отротен, они слева по курсу увидели какие-то огненные шары. Они заинтересовались и решили туда сходить, рассмотреть их поближе и сфотографировать. Но они не знали, что там, оказывается, военные испытания проводились. Там испытывали жидкие взрывчатые вещества, распыляли их с самолёта, и получалось что-то вроде облака. Потом это облако поджигали каким-то образом, она взрывалась, и это выглядело, как огромный огненный шар. Итак, пришла группа Дятлова на этот полигон, и тут раздался этот взрыв. И кто был очень близко к эпицентру взрыва, те погибли. Одного травмирвоало. Это Тибо-Бриньоль. А трое погибших - это Дубинина, Золотарёв, Колеватов.
Когда военные доложили об этом в Москву, Хрущёв принял такое решение: он решил убить оставшихся в живых туристов, чтобы сохранить военную тайну. А потом он приказал совершить инсценировку и изобразить, будто не в результате военных испытаний они погибли, а от урагана.
Тут дело в том, что несмотря на такой страшный взрыв, внешне тела мёртвых туристов выглядели вполне нормально. Никаких особых травм не было, только у Дубининой и Золотарёва глаза сильно попортило, а у Дубининой ещё и язык. Он как бы лопнул что ли...
Сильно изуродовало только одного туриста - это Колеватова. Верхняя часть его тела оказалось внутри огненного шара. Всё, естественно, сгорело. И Колеватова заменили на труп какого-то человека.
И потом, значит, совершили инсценировку. Все трупы на вертолётах привезли тот самый перевал, разложили там трупы в разных местах, а палатку поставили на горе. А потом Хрущёв приказал местным властям совершить инсценировку поисков. То есть, изобразить, что мы ищем пропавших туристов. хотя на самом деле всё руководстов знало, где они находятся.
Вот такая моя простая версия, без всякой фантастики без мистики!
https://youtu.be/HeEtbMNbUbo
-
Only one tourist was severely mutilated - Kolevatov. The upper part of his body was inside the fireball. Everything, naturally, burned down. And Kolevatov was replaced with the corpse of some person.
The whole version of Mochalov is based on his personal fantasies. Sasha Kolevatov was identified by his mother. She stated that she did not want to bury an unknown person. There are letters from Elena Kolevatova to Maya Piskareva. They can be read.
-
Where are these letters? I want to read them!
-
Where are these letters? I want to read them!
Have you been banned from Yandex?
-
Dyatlov Pass. I refute Anna Russkikh’s version! (July 14, 2023):
Here, one researcher of the Dyatlov Pass, Anna Russkikh, constantly overwhelms me with her version of the cause of the death of the Dyatlov group. Her version is that the Dyatlov group was killed by order of the 1st Secretary of the Sverdlovsk Regional Committee, Kirilenko. They killed because they, the tourists of Dyatlov’s group, opposed Soviet power.
But in Soviet times, those who opposed Soviet power were not killed. Everyone knows that dissidents were placed in mental hospitals... Well, sometimes in prisons. But to kill, this was not the case.
And that’s why Anna Russkikh’s version looks, well, somehow, to put it mildly, strange. Moreover, she claims that they were killed by order of Kirilenko himself. This, all the more, could not happen; local authorities did not have the right to kill someone. Even in Tsarist Russia, landowners were forbidden to kill their serfs. The well-known Saltychikha killed her serfs, and she was also sent to prison. So Anna Russkikh’s version is not true.
At the same time, I must say that during the time when Andropov was the chairman of the KGB, he seems to have introduced this practice of killing dissident individuals. For example, once such a story happened to Solzhenitsyn: he suddenly became so very ill that he even had to call an ambulance.
Solzhenitsyn survived, but it appears that they tried to poison him. Apparently the dose was not calculated. But this already happened under Andropov, but this did not happen under Khrushchev.
So Anna Russkikh’s version is fundamentally incorrect. Moreover, blaming the local boss Kirilenko is stupid. Local bosses could not kill someone without the approval of the Supreme leadership.
Under Stalin, it happened when local authorities arrested enemies of the people and sentenced them to death. It was so. But they acted on Stalin's orders. Stalin allowed them. The same can be said about other leaders of the USSR who came after Stalin. Only with the approval of the Supreme Command could someone be killed. The local bosses themselves would never have decided to do this. So Anna Russkikh is wrong.
(https://i.ibb.co/0crVrf6/mochalov-anna.jpg) (https://ibb.co/R9c4cCs)
Перевал Дятлова. Опровергаю версию Анны Русских! (14 июля 2023):
Тут одна исследовательница перевала Дятлова, Анна Русских, постоянно одолевает меня своей версией о причине гибели группы Дятлова. Её версия такова, что группу Дятлова убили по заказу 1-го секретаря Свердловского обкома Кириленко. Убили по причине, что они, туристы группы Дятлова, против Советской власти выступали.
Но в советские времена не убивали тех, кто выступал против Совесткой власти. Всем известно, что диссидентов помещали в психушки… Ну, иногда в тюрьмы. Но чтобы убивать - этого не было.
И поэтому версия Анны Русских выглядит, ну как-то мягко говоря, странно. Тем более, она утверждает, что они были убиты по заказу самого Кириленко. Такого тем более не могло быть, местные власти не имели права кого-то убивать. Даже в царской России помещикам было запрещено убивать своих крепостных. Всем известная Салтычиха убивала своих крепостных, так её же посадили в тюрьму. Так что версия Анны Русских не соответствует истине.
Вместе с тем я должен сказать, что во времена, когда председателем КГБ был Андропов, он, похоже, ввёл такую практику убийства диссидентствующих личностей. Например, однажды с Солженицыным такая история произошла: ему вдруг стало так очень дурно, что даже пришлось вызывать скорую помощь.
Солженицын выжил, но похоже, что его пытались отравить. Видимо, дозу не рассчитали. Но это было уже при Андропове, а при Хрущёве такого не было.
Так что версия Анны Русских в корне неверна. Тем более, обвинять местного начальника Кириленко, это же глупо. Не могли местные начальники без санкции Верховного руководства убивать кого-то.
При Сталине было такое, когда местные власти арестовывали врагов народа, приговаривали их к расстрелу. Было такое. Но действовали они по указке Сталина. Сталин им разрешил. То же самое можно сказать о других руководителях СССР, которые были после Сталина. Только с санкции Верховного руководства могли кого-то убить. Сами местные начальники на такое никогда бы не решились. Так что Анна Русских не права.
https://youtu.be/19thUbyh-20
-
At the same time, I must say that during the time when Andropov was the chairman of the KGB, he seems to have introduced this practice of killing dissident individuals.
Why are you passing on the gossip from Mochalov who is not familiar with the topic of Dyatlov Pass at all, does not know the history and does not even know who was the head of the KGB at that time, calling Andropov's name??! He doesn't know my version, so he can't give a proper assessment. I tried to correct his mistakes, but I see that it is pointless, and I decided not to visit his channel anymore.
-
Dyatlov Pass. Where did Krivonischenko get the burn on his leg? (August 19, 2023):
Yes, a terrible secret surrounds the death of the Dyatlov group. And no one has yet been able to give an intelligible answer to the question, why did they die? All the answers sound somehow unconvincing... In the sense that all these versions, they explain something, but do not explain something.
Let's take the avalanche version for example. The avalanche could well have been responsible for the death of the Dyatlov group. After all, it happened in the mountains. So there could have been an avalanche? But it has to be rejected, because there are no traces of an avalanche there. Theoretically, there could be one, but practically there is no trace of it.
Well, or let’s take the version that they were killed by local residents - Mansi. It's the same here. Theoretically, yes, this could happen. What’s not clear is this: what kind of weapon did they have? A weapon that breaks a person's ribs without leaving any damage to the body. I mean the broken ribs of Dubinina and Zolotarev. If, for example, they were attacked by Mansi armed with clubs, then the ribs could break. But the batons would leave marks on the body: bruises, bruises, abrasions. But there is nothing like this on the bodies of tourists.
And this mystery of the death of the Dyatlov group, in turn, consists of numerous small secrets. For example, why did they leave the tent? The tent was standing there, and suddenly they up and left it! The fact that they left and did not run away is shown by the traces. The tracks show that they did not run, they walked calmly. They took it calmly and left! And what’s strange is that for some reason they didn’t put on their shoes and outerwear before leaving.
And such a small secret: Why were there 8 tracks from the tent towards the cedar? After all, there were 9 tourists. That means there were 9 traces. It’s also unclear. Although someone says: they were carrying someone there, so there are 8 tracks. But this explanation is unconvincing. Because it’s unclear: why did they take him somewhere, on the ninth? Where could they take him? They took it, calmly left the tent and carried it away. Where and why?
And there are a great many such small secrets surrounding this incident. In this video I would like to talk about one of these secrets. Although no, about two secrets: where did the burn on Krivonischenko’s shin come from?
And the second mystery associated with this burn is that Krivonischenko bit his finger and bit off a piece of skin. This can be explained this way: from the hellish pain as a result of the burn, he bit his finger. And besides, he bit so as not to scream in pain, not to attract attention to himself. This is also strange. On the contrary, if a person finds himself in some dangerous situation, he calls for help. But for some reason Krivonischenko did not call for help. On the contrary, he tried to hide the fact that his leg was burning there.
There is such an explanation for the burn on his leg: a stove fell on top of him, coals spilled out of the stove, and it resulted in a burn. The Dyatlov group's stove was hanging right at the ridge of the tent, and it could have happened that they did not secure the stove properly, and the stove fell directly on Krivonischenko, who was sleeping under the stove. That's just the point, it sounds unconvincing. If the stove had fallen, he would have woken up and thrown the stove off of him. And there would be no burn! And here it turns out that not only did he not raise the alarm, he did not throw off the stove and coals. On the contrary, he also bit his finger so as not to scream. Moreover, it looks somehow strange! From which it follows that the version about the fallen stove is not true!
Besides, remember this... Where was the stove hanging? In the middle of the tent! And the tourists were sleeping across the tent. So, what was there under the hanging stove? The middle of Krivonishenko's body. What is in the middle of the body? Well, we all know what is in the middle of any person's body. There is the belly, as well as what is below the belly. In other words, if the stove had fallen, it would have burned the stomach and what was below. But she could not have burned the foot and shin, because they are not in the middle when a person lies in a tent, but somewhere there at the edge of the slope. Further, any stove, especially an iron one, is equipped with a latch so that the door does not open accidentally and so that the coals do not spill out, a latch is made there. Thus, even if the stove fell, the coals would not spill out, because the door would not open. True, the stove itself is also hot, but it could not burn the leg to such an extent that the leg even charred and the skin burst! Well, he would have a small burn, his skin would turn red, and that’s all! And here the skin did not turn red, but charred.
It turns out that the leg was in the flames for quite a long time. Maybe 5 minutes. Or even more. This could not have happened from the stove. The picture that emerges is that their stove has absolutely nothing to do with it. There was something different here! Namely: Krivonischenko found himself in a situation from which he could not get out. And, besides, it was impossible to call anyone for help in this situation. That's why he was silent and even bit his finger.
And so the question arises: what kind of situation could this be? If it were summer, then the following hypothesis could be put forward... A fire started in the forest, a burning tree fell on Krivonischenko and crushed his leg. The tree was heavy. He could not pull his leg out from under the tree on his own, and as a result he received such a burn. Then his comrades arrived and helped him pull his leg out from under the tree. But I must say that the tree is quite heavy. Moreover, if it was burning, how can you lift it? It was necessary to cut down the thin trunks and lift them so that Krivonischenko could pull out his leg. Well, while they were fiddling around, their leg got burned.
The version with a burning tree will not work here. This could only happen in the summer. There are no fires in winter.
According to my version, Krivonischenko received this burn when he climbed into the stove. Of course, not into the stove that they hung there in the tent, but into a large stove. And not just an ordinary Russian stove, which is usually found in the village. A person probably won’t be able to climb there, won’t be able to fit there.
Mansi hardly had such stoves. Huge stoves only happen... you know where? In the boiler room, which heats the surrounding houses in the city. When I was a child, there were coal boiler houses, and my father worked there, and I am quite familiar with this business. I visited him sometimes at work.
So, in every boiler room there are huge stoves. So huge that even a person could climb inside. The width of this oven is about 2 m, the height is about 2 m, and its length will probably be about 3 m. I haven't measured it exactly, so I can't say.
Overall a fairly long stove. The openings in the ovens, which are closed with a door, are quite huge, so that an adult can climb into them. But in boiler rooms, not all stoves are usually lit. I’ve seen people turn on two or three stoves alternately, while the rest are turned off.
I want to say that Krivonischenko climbed into such a stove! To the question, where did he find it in the taiga, in the mountains? Where are these boiler houses located? They simply aren't there.
So, they were there, these boiler rooms and stoves!
To continue the story, I must tell you my version again. When they walked towards Mount Otorten, they saw fireballs on the left. Well, their curiosity got the better of them, and instead of going north, they went west to these balls.They didn’t know that there was a testing ground there... When a vacuum bomb explodes, a giant fireball, 15-20 m in size, flares up above the ground. And so they went there, not knowing that they were going towards their death!
And the explosion killed three, the other six remained alive because they were far from the Epicenter. The military noticed that there were strangers at the training ground, and they took both the living and the dead by helicopter to their base. The base was located where the training ground was located. I think about 50 km from the test site. I don’t know, I haven’t yet been able to find out where this base was located.
They were placed at the base and reported to Moscow about the incident. It reached Khrushchev, and Khrushchev made a terrible decision - he decided to kill the surviving tourists, on Khrushchev’s orders. And pretend that they died from the cold and the hurricane. Assassins from the KGB arrived at the base. And I assume that early in the morning of one day they began to kill the remaining tourists, and early in the morning.
Subsequently, these tourists were found - six without shoes or outerwear. This means they were sleeping. Well, they started killing them, and the tourists resisted. There was a fight. Since there were more killers, resistance was useless. But Krivonischenko managed to escape from the killers. He ran out into the yard, ran across the territory of the military base, and there he came across a boiler room on his way. He ran there, saw the stoves, found an unlit stove and climbed in. She probably worked for an hour. That's why the coals were preserved there. And his left leg just happened to be where the hot coals were. That's why he got a burn! That's why he didn't call anyone for help! It's clear? Who will you call for help? If you scream, they will hear and find you, and kill you too.
Therefore, in order not to scream, he bit his finger. And so hard that he bit off a piece of skin. But the killers, of course, found him there, pulled him out of the oven, injected him with poison, and Krivonischenko died immediately.
This is my version about the cause of the burn. This, of course, sounds very complicated and unusual, and even... maybe unconvincing. But all the other versions are even more unconvincing; none of this could have happened.
This is how one of the minor secrets of the death of the Dyatlov group is explained. The reason for Krivonischenko’s burn is that he climbed into the stove, which was located in the boiler room of the military base.
(https://i.ibb.co/1LBdyvz/mochalov-krivo.jpg) (https://ibb.co/f2Zn61D)
Перевал Дятлова. Откуда у Кривонищенко ожог на ноге? (19 августа 2023):
Да, страшная тайна окружает гибель группы Дятлова. И никто ещё не мог дать вразумительный ответ на вопрос, отчего же они погибли? Все ответы звучат как-то неубедительно… В том смысле, что все эти версии, они что-то объясняют, а что-то не объясняют.
Возьмём, например, версию лавины. Лавина вполне могла быть виновницей гибели группы Дятлова. Ведь дело происходило в горах. Значит, могла быть лавина? Но её приходится отвергнуть, потому что никаких следов лавины там нет. Теоретически она могла быть, но практически – нет её следов.
Ну или возьмём версию, что их убили местные жители – манси. Тут то же самое. Теоретически – да, могло такое быть. Непонятно вот что: а что это у них за оружие такое было? Оружие, которое ломает человеку рёбра, не оставляя никаких повреждений на теле. Я имею в виду перелом рёбер у Дубининой и Золотарёва. Если, допустим, на них напали манси, вооружённые дубинками, то рёбра могли сломаться. Но после дубинок остались бы следы на теле: синяки, кровоподтёки, ссадины. Но ничего подобного нет на телах туристов.
И эта тайна гибель группы Дятлова, в свою очередь, состоит из многочисленных мелких тайн. Например, зачем они ушли из палатки? Палатка стояла там, а они вдруг они взяли да и ушли из неё! То, что они именно ушли, а не убежали, показывают следы. По следам видно, что они не бежали, они шли спокойно. Взяли спокойно и ушли! И что странно, перед тем как уйти, они зачем-то не надели обувь и верхнюю одежду.
И такая мелкая тайна: Почему следов от палатки в сторону кедра было 8? Ведь туристов было 9. Значит, и следов 9. Тоже непонятно. Хотя кто-то говорит: кого-то они там несли, поэтому 8 следов. Но это объяснение неубедительно. Потому что непонятно: зачем они куда-то его понесли, девятого? Куда они могли его нести? Взяли, спокойно вышли из палатки и понесли. Куда и зачем?
И вот таких мелких тайн, окружающих это происшествие, великое множество. В этом видеоролике я хотел бы говорить об одной из этих тайн. Хотя нет, о двух тайнах: откуда на голени Кривонищенко появился ожог?
А вторая тайна, связанная с этим ожогом, заключается в том, что Кривонищенко укусил себя за палец и откусил кусочек кожи. Это можно объяснить так: от адской боли в результате ожога он прокусил себе палец. И к тому же укусил из-за того, чтобы не закричать от боли, не привлекать к себе внимание. Это тоже странно. Наоборот, если человек попал в какую-то опасную ситуацию, он же зовёт на помощь. Но Кривонищенко почему-то не стал звать на помощь. Наоборот, он старался скрыть тот факт, что у него там нога горит.
Есть такое объяснение ожога на ноге: на него упала сверху печка, из печки высыпались угли, ну и получился ожог. Печка у дятловцев висела у самого конька палатки, и могло так случиться, что они плохо закрепили печку, и печка упала прямо на Кривонищенко, который спал под печкой. В тот-то и дело, что это звучит неубедительно. Если б печка упала, он бы проснулся и сбросил печку с себя. И никакого ожога не получилось бы! А тут выходит так, что он мало того что не поднял тревогу, не сбросил с себя печку и угли. А наоборот, он ещё палец прикусил, чтоб не закричать. Тем более, это выглядит как-то странно! Из чего следует вывод, что версия об упавшей печке не соответствует истине!
Кроме того, вспомните вот что… Печка висела где? Посередине палатки! А туристы спали, значит, поперёк палатки. И значит, под висящей печкой было что? Середина тела Кривонишенко. А что находится в середине тела? Ну, все мы знаем, что находится в середине тела любого человека. Там находится живот, а также то, что ниже живота. Иначе говоря, если б печка упала, она бы обожгла живот и то, что ниже. А ступню и голень она никак не могла обжечь, потому что они находятся не в середине, когда человек лежит в палатке, а где-то там у края ската. Далее, любая печка, особенно железная, она оборудована задвижкой, чтобы дверь дверца случайно не открылась и чтобы угли не выспались, там сделана задвижка. Таким образом, даже если бы печка упала, то угли бы не высыпались, потому что дверца бы не открылась. Правда, сама печка тоже раскалённая, но она бы не могла обжечь ногу до такой степени, что нога даже обуглилась, и кожа лопнула! Ну, был бы небольшой ожог у него, кожа покраснела бы, и всё! А тут кожа не покраснела, а обуглилась.
Получается, нога была в пламени довольно длительное время. Может, 5 минут. Или даже больше. От печки такого не могло быть. Получается такая картина, что их печка тут совершенно ни при чём. Тут было что-то другое! А именно: Кривонищенко попал в такую ситуацию, из которой он никак не мог выбраться. И, кроме того, нельзя было звать никого на помощь в этой ситуации. Поэтому он молчал и даже прикусил себе палец.
И вот возникает вопрос: а что это такая за ситуация могла быть? Если бы дело было летом, то можно было бы выдвинуть такую гипотезу… В лесу начался пожар, на Кривонищенко упало горящее дерево и придавило ему ногу. Дерево было тяжёлое. Он самостоятельно не мог вытащить ногу из-под дерева, в результате он получил такой ожог. Потом подоспели товарищи и помогли ему вытащить ногу из-под дерева. Но я должен сказать, что дерево довольно-таки тяжёлое. Тем более, если оно горело, то его как поднимешь? Надо было срубить тонкие стволы и приподнять, чтобы Кривонищенко мог вытащить ногу. Ну а пока они возились, нога обгорела.
Версия с горящим деревом здесь не подойдёт. Такое могло быть только летом. Зимой не бывает пожаров.
Согласно моей версии, Кривонищенко получил этот ожог, когда залез в печку. Конечно, не в ту печку, которую они там подвешивали в палатке, а в большую печь. И не просто обычную русскую печь, которая обычно бывает в деревне. Туда человек, наверное, не сможет залезть, не сможет там поместиться.
У манси вряд ли такие печи были. Огромные печки бывает только… знаете где? В котельной, которая обогревает окружающие дома в городе. Во времена моего детства были угольные котельные, и там работал мой отец, и я с этим делом достаточно хорошо знаком. Я посещал его иногда на работе.
Так вот, в каждой котельной стоят огромные печи. Такие огромные, что и человек может залезть туда. Ширина этой печи где-то 2 м, высота где-то 2 м, а в длину она, наверное, где-то 3 м будет. Я не мерил точно, не могу сказать.
В общем достаточно длинная печка. Отверстия в печах, которые закрываются дверцей, довольно-таки огромные, что и взрослый человек может залезть туда. Но в котельных обычно не все печи зажжены. Я же видел, кто включают две-три печки попеременно, а остальные выключены.
Я хочу сказать, что Кривонищенко залез в такую печку! На вопрос, а где он её нашёл в тайге, в горах? Где там такие котельные стоят? Их там просто нет.
Так вот, они там были, эти котельные и печки!
Чтобы продолжить рассказ, я должен опять рассказать вам свою версию. Когда они шли в сторону горы Отортен, они слева увидели огненные шары. Ну, их разобрало любопытство, они вместо севера пошли на запад к этим шарам. Они не знали, что там был полигон… Когда вакуумная бомба взрывается, над землёй вспыхивает гигантский огненный шар, размером 15-20 м. И вот пошли они туда, не зная, что идут навстречу своей смерти!
И взрывом убило троих, остальные шесть остались живы, потому что они были далеко от Эпицентра. Военные заметили, что на полигоне посторонние, и живых и мёртвых увезли на вертолёте на свою базу. База находилась нет там, где находился полигон. Я думаю, где-то в 50 км от полигона. Не знаю, мне пока не удалось выяснить, где эта база находилась.
Поместили их на базу, сообщили в Москву о происшествии. Дошло до Хрущёва, и Хрущёв принял жуткое решение – он решил убить и оставшихся в живых туристов, по приказу Хрущёва. И изобразить, что они погибли от холода и урагана. На базу прилетели убийцы из КГБ. И я предполагаю, что рано утром в какой-то день они начали убивать оставшихся туристов, причём рано утром.
Впоследствии эти туристы были найдены – шестеро без обуви и верхней одежды. Это означает, что они спали. Ну вот, начали их убивать, а туристы оказали сопротивление. Произошла драка. Так как убийц было больше, то сопротивление было бесполезно. Но Кривонищенко удалось убежать от убийц. Он выбежал во двор, по территории военной базы побежал, и там ему на пути встретилась котельная. Он забежал туда, увидел печи, нашёл незажжённую печь и залез туда. Вероятно, за час да этого она работала. Поэтому там сохранились угли. И его левая нога как раз оказалось там, где были горячие угли. Вот почему у него появился ожог! Вот почему он никого не звал на помощь! Понятно? Кого на помощь позовёшь? Закричишь – услышат и найдут, и убьют тоже.
Поэтому, чтобы не закричать, он прикусил себе палец. Причём так сильно, что откусил кусочек кожи. Но убийцы, конечно, нашли его там, вытащили его из печки, вкололи ему яд, и Кривонищенко тут же умер.
Вот такая у меня версия о причине ожога. Это, конечно, очень сложно звучит и необычно, и даже. может быть, неубедительно. Зато все остальные версии – они тем более неубедительные, всего такого не могло быть.
Вот так объясняется одна из мелких тайн гибель группы Дятлова. Причина ожога Кривонищенко заключается в том, что он залез в печь, которая стояла в котельной военной базы.
https://youtu.be/1qaYL5IKnjA
-
I maintain it is relativley simple. A,wind driven slab slip forced evacuation of the tent. The day's previous exertions, spartan diet, the persistent cold and blowing snow induced them to seek shelter in the woods and effect repairs in the morning. They misjudged the distance. The longer they stayed at the tent, the colder they got. Moving downhill works the muscles and provides body heat. They move downhill for self preservation. Once there, the camp fire was insufficient for their needs, but sufficient enough for three hikers to attempt to regain the tent while the other surviving four made à snow den. Those four sustained injuries in their attempt tp do so. They also sustained post mortem crushing damage from the overburden of snow. Compared to other theories, I believe natural causes require far fewer assumptions...but then again, I could be wrong.
-
Dyatlov Pass. Who are these two people they were looking for? (December 10, 2023):
[-] Still, no matter what you say, time works for my version. Every time I surf the Internet, I constantly find some new facts for me. These facts show that, after all, the cause of the death of the Dyatlov group was military trials. And the second conclusion is this: even before the search for the Dyatlov group began, the authorities of the Sverdlovsk region already knew everything that the group had died, and why they died.
And recently I discovered some more facts showing that the Dyatlov group died as a result of military tests. And the authorities of Sverdlovsk knew everything. Here's what I recently found on the Internet: I found the Varsegovs' book about the Dyatlov Pass. Not all of it is published there, but only the beginning. And to read it in full, you have to pay. Well, this is the beginning I read. And I discovered some interesting information. I'll read it now. They write: in the city of Ivdel they met Vladimir Alekseevich Lyubimov, who in those years worked as a radio operator on a geological exploration expedition. And Lyubimov told the Varsegovs a most curious story.
At the end of 1958, Lyubimov and his wife were sent to spend the winter under Mount Yaruta. It is 200 km north of Mount Otorten. There, near Mount Yaruta, there was a warehouse for geologists, where several tons of explosives were stored. And the Lyubimov spouses were sent to this warehouse to guard it, so that no one would break in there, no one would steal anything. Shortly before the Lyubimovs left for that warehouse, a foreign spy was arrested in those parts. He was transmitting some secret information abroad via radio. And after this spy was arrested, all local radio operators were given instructions to listen to the broadcast regularly. And if any other spy there passes on information so that they can detect him. And so Lyubimov began listening to the broadcast on different waves.
And then one day, he definitely remembers, either in January or February 1959, he heard strange negotiations on the radio on some wavelength. People talked in Russian, but at the same time they used such words that the essence of the conversation was incomprehensible. Only one thing was clear: they said that something so terrible had happened, something so terrible. But what exactly is unclear. Lyubimov, of course, reported to his superiors about these negotiations. He probably thought they were spies. And a day later, Lyubimov received the following instructions from his superiors: stop eavesdropping on conversations on this wavelength. Interesting, isn't it?
That is, there was something here, it seems, secret. But it was not the spies who were talking, but their own, but about something secret. It’s just not clear: why didn’t they transmit this information in encrypted form? And as they say, they spoke openly, but only in such words that it is not clear what they are talking about. Despite the instructions from his superiors, Lyubimov still began to listen to these strange negotiations. And he realized something else. He realized that it said that they couldn’t find any two people. They either ran away or disappeared somewhere, and now they are looking for them.
And much later, when Lyubimov returned from the winter and learned that Dyatlov’s group had died there, he found one of the radio operators who had conducted these very negotiations. It turns out it was his friend. The radio operators there were communicating in Morse code, so he did not know that this was his acquaintance.
Naturally, when Lyubimov realized that it was Nevolin who was talking about something secret, he asked: “What were you talking about there?” And Nevolin replied that he had no right to tell. By the way, many people probably know the name Nevolin. This is the radio operator who remained at the Dyatlov Pass during the entire search period, starting on February 26, and sometime in early May they ended the search when the last four tourists were found in the creek. And all this time, more than 2 months, Nevolin was there at the pass, transmitting radiograms. But here, you know, one interesting question arises. Who are the two people they were looking for? Why are there two of them? Firstly, there were nine of them. Five were found, four were not found. They were found later. But Nevolin spoke about some two people who were being looked for. It’s not clear who these two are?
And based on this fact that they were looking for two, we can put forward 2 hypotheses. The first hypothesis will sound like this: in fact, these negotiations that Lyubimov listened to, they took place not when the search for tourists had already begun, but even before that, before February 20.
The first hypothesis is this: probably everyone remembers that there is information that they allegedly brought not 9 corpses to the morgue, but 11. That is, two more. Hence the following thought arises: maybe there were two other people along with Dyatlov’s group? These two were exactly what they were looking for in February until February 20th.
And before I tell you the second hypothesis, I must remind you of my version about the death of the Dyatlov group. This version is this: they went to the test site where they tested vacuum bombs. and three were killed there. And after that, the military decided to arrest all 9 tourists and take them to their base. And so, when they grabbed these six surviving tourists, two of them managed to escape. They fled into the taiga, and the military began to look for them. That is why Nevolin said in the negotiations that we are looking for two and cannot find them. Well, then they were found, they were also found, caught, arrested and also sent to the base.
What Lyubimov said somehow fits in with another fact. I'll tell you what this fact is. At the same time when Dyatlov’s group was on a tourist trip, another tourist group was traveling several tens of kilometers from its route to the south. It was Shumkov's group from the Sverdlovsk Pedagogical Institute. And on the night of February 5-6, this group of Shumkov stormed Mount Chistop, which is located 35 km southeast of the Dyatlov Pass. And so they went up there... The story is narrated by a member of Shumkov’s group, Vladimirov. At the same time, as Vladimirov emphasized, climbing the mountain at night was prohibited by the rules, but for some reason they decided to break the rules.
They stormed the mountain not on skis, because it was crusty there, and it was very inconvenient to climb on skis. The skis skid there on the crust, so they stormed it without skis, but only with ski poles. This is how Nordic walking works these days.
So they climbed Mount Chistop in the same way. So he writes: The frost is well over 30, the main Ural ridge stretches to the northwest. And against the backdrop of the black sky, 25 km from us, the snowy dome of Mount Otorten. Vladimirov said that 25 km. I think he was wrong. 35 km actually. And so they climbed the mountain and found there on the top of the mountain a stone tour and a jar with a note from Perm tourists who had once left this note there. And instead of a note from Perm tourists, they left their own note - as proof that they were there.
Here's the rest of the story: For the last time we take a look around the mountainous night country. But what is it? A signal flare soars above Otorten, cutting through the darkness of the night. Housing in that area. Are polytechnics celebrating their ascension?
Well, they should have been there a few days ago. It's February 5th, they shouldn't be there, they should have left by now! But there was no time to think, and they decided to go down the mountain, well, to warm up. So, an interesting picture emerges! On the night of February 6, someone launched a signal flare near Mount Otorten. Who could it be? There is only one answer: they were military. Because no one else, except the military, could launch a signal flare. The Dyatlovites did not have a rocket launcher, and they did not need it. In addition, on February 5, the Dyatlov group should no longer have been at Mount Otorten; they should have been there on February 2. Well, maximum, February 3. The local residents of Mansi should not have any rocket launcher.
Conclusion: it was the military, they launched a signal flare. And here’s the question: Why did they launch it? For what purpose?
I have the following answer to this: two Dyatlovites managed to escape, and the military rushed after them. When the military found these two Dyatlovites, they launched a rocket to signal to their commander that these two had been found. Do you understand?
This is my version. Although there may be a completely different version here. I read that a signal flare is only visible at a distance of no more than 7 km. Well, she's small. Well, I mean, this flash is not a signal flare. Well, I don’t know... maybe such a fireball is 10-15 cm, such a small ball. It is probably not visible at a distance of 35 km.
So it wasn't a signal flare. Vladimirov says that she soared upward. He didn't say up. He simply said that the signal flare flashed. Moreover, she did not fly. If it were a ballistic missile from Baikonur, it would fly there horizontally, and you could observe it for a long time. And then it happened so that it flared up and disappeared. This means it was not a ballistic missile from Baikunur. And in general it was not a rocket, something like a fiery spherical flared up there, and then went out.
So what was it? I hypothesize that it was a flash from a vacuum bomb explosion. It flares up like that too. Maybe for a second, or maybe for two, and goes out... The size of this fireball from the explosion of a vacuum bomb is not 10 cm or 15 cm. The size of the flash of the fireball is somewhere within 20 m. Well, at such a huge distance that was between Otorten and Chistop, these 20 m could seem like a signal flare.
This is my version... Of course, everything that I have just listed in this video is, as it were, all in the version. Of course, there is no direct evidence. That they were really looking for two escaped tourists, that there really was a vacuum bomb flash there on February 5... I have no proof! But, you know, all this leads to an idea. The thought is this: the matter here is still connected with the military. It doesn't matter what flashed there, or a signal flare, or vacuum bombs. It is clear that the military is involved here! And, of course, from everything I said, the conclusion follows: even before the search began, the leaders of the Sverdlovsk region knew everything! They knew that Dyatlov's group had died. And she died as a result of military trials. Otherwise how would they know? Let's assume that the group is killed by an avalanche. How can you instantly find out that they died from an avalanche?And if they died from an avalanche, then why did the Sverdlovsk authorities hide it? What's the point of hiding? None. Hence the conclusion: it means that they died as a result of military trials!
(https://i.ibb.co/8Bp9NXv/mochalov-1.jpg) (https://ibb.co/GJLRnFY)
Перевал Дятлова. Кто они - эти двое, которых искали? (10 декабря 2023):
[-] Всё-таки, что не говори, а время работает на мою версию. Каждый раз, когда я шарюсь по интернету, я постоянно нахожу какие-то новые для меня факты. Эти факты показывают, что всё-таки причина гибели группы Дятлова - это военные испытания. А второй вывод такой - ещё до того, как начались поиски группы Дятлова, власти Свердловской области уже всё знали, что группа погибла, и отчего она погибла.
И вот недавно я обнаружил ещё кое-какие факты, показывающие, что погибли дятловцы в результате военных испытаний. И власти Свердловска всё знали. Вот что я нашёл недавно в интернете: я нашёл книгу Варсеговых о перевале Дятлова. Там она не вся опубликована, а только её начало. А чтобы прочитать полностью, надо заплатить. Ну вот, это начало я прочитал. И я обнаружил интересную информацию. Сейчас я зачитаю. Они пишут: в городе Ивделе они познакомились с Владимиром Алексеевичем Любимовым, который в те годы работал радистом в геологоразведочной экспедиции. И Любимов рассказал Варсеговым прелюбопытнейшую историю.
В конце 1958 года Любимова вдвоём с его женой отправили зимовать под гору Ярута. Это в 200 км на север от горы Отортен. Там, у горы Ярута, был склад геологов, где хранилось несколько тонн взрывчатки. И супругов Любимовых отправили на этот склад, чтобы они его сторожили, чтобы никто там не залез, никто ничего не украл. Незадолго до того, как супруги Любимовы уехали на тот склад, в тех краях был арестован один иностранный шпион. По рации он передавал какие-то секретные сведения за рубеж. И после того, как этого шпиона арестовали, всем местным радистам дали указания, чтобы они регулярно слушали эфир. И если там какой-нибудь ещё шпион будет передавать сведения, чтобы они его засекли. И вот Любимов начал слушать эфир на разных волнах.
И вот однажды, он точно чиcло не помнит, то ли в январе, то ли в феврале 1959 года он услышал по рации на какой-то волне странные переговоры. Переговаривались люди на русском языке, но при этом они употребляли такие слова, что суть разговора была непонятной. Понятно было только одно: они говорили, что случилось что-то такое страшное, что-то такое ужасное. Но что именно, непонятно. Любимов, конечно, об этих переговорах доложил начальству. Он, наверное, подумал, что это шпионы. А через день Любимов получил от начальства такое указание: прекратить подслушивать разговоры на этой волне. Интересно, правда?
То есть, что-то тут такое было, кажется, секретное. Но не шпионы переговаривались, а свои, но о чём-то секретном. Вот только непонятно: а почему они не в зашифрованном виде передавали эту информацию? А как говорится, открытым текстом говорили, но только такими словами, что непонятно, о чём они говорят. Несмотря на указание начальства, Любимов всё равно стал слушать эти странные переговоры. И понял он ещё кое-что. Он понял, что тут говорится, что никак не могут найти каких-то двоих человек. Они то ли убежали, то ли куда-то пропали, и вот их ищут.
А много позже, когда Любимов вернулся с зимовки и узнал, что там группа Дятлова погибла, он нашёл одного из радистов, который вёл эти самые переговоры. Оказывается, это был его приятель. Радисты там азбукой Морзе переговаривались, поэтому он не знал, что это его знакомый.
Естественно, когда Любимов понял, что это Неволин о чём-то там тайном говорил, он спросил: «А о чём это вы там говорили?» А Неволин ответил, что рассказывать не имеет права. Кстати, фамилию Неволин многие, наверное, знают. Это радист, который пребывал на перевале Дятлова в течение всего периода поисков, начиная с 26 февраля, и где-то в начале мая они закончили поиски, когда были найдены последние четверо туристов в ручье. И всё это время, более 2 месяцев Неволин там был на перевале, передавал радиограммы. Но тут, знаете, один интересный вопрос возникает. А кто эти двое, которых искали? Почему их двое? Во-первых, их было девятеро. Пятерых нашли, четверых не нашли. Их нашли позже. Но Неволин говорил о каких-то двоих, которых искали. Непонятно, что за двое?
И исходя из этого факта, что искали двоих, можно выдвинуть 2 гипотезы. Первая гипотеза будет звучать так: на самом деле вот эти переговоры, которые слушал Любимов, они происходили не тогда, когда начались уже поиски туристов, а ещё до того то, до 20 февраля.
Первая гипотеза такая: наверное, все помнят, что есть информация, что будто бы в морг привезли не 9 трупов, а 11. То есть, ещё двоих. Отсюда такая мысль возникает: а может быть, это вместе с группой Дятлова были какие-то ещё 2 человека? Вот этих двоих как раз и искали в феврале до 20 февраля.
А прежде чем рассказать вторую гипотезу, я должен напомнить вам свою версию о гибели группы Дятлова. Эта версия такая: они зашли на полигон, где испытывали вакуумные бомбы. и там убило троих. А после этого военные решили всех 9 туристов арестовать и увезти на свою базу. И вот, когда они схватили этих шестерых оставшихся в живых туристов, двое из них успели сбежать. Они в тайгу убежали, и военные стали их искать. Вот почему Неволин в переговорах и сказал, что мы ищем двоих и не можем найти. Ну а потом их нашли, тоже нашли, поймали, арестовали и тоже на базу.
Вот то, что рассказал Любимов, как-то стыкуется с ещё одним фактом. Я расскажу, что это за факт. В то же самое время, когда была в турпоходе группа Дятлова, на несколько десятков километров от её маршрута на юг путешествовала ещё одна туристическая группа. Это была группа Шумкова, из Свердловского педагогического института. И в ночь с 5 на 6 февраля эта группа Шумкова штурмовала гору Чистоп, которая находится в 35 км юго-восточнее перевала Дятлова. И вот они поднялись туда… Рассказ ведёт участник группы Шумкова, Владимиров. При этом, как подчеркнул Владимиров, подниматься на гору в ночное время было запрещено правилами, но они решили почему-то нарушить правила.
Они штурмовали гору не на лыжах, потому что там наст, и на лыжах очень неудобно подниматься. Лыжи разъезжаются там по насту, поэтому они штурмовали её без лыж, а только с лыжными палками. Так в наше время скандинавская ходьба бывает.
Вот они таким же образом поднимались на гору Чистоп. Значит, он пишет: Мороз далеко за 30, на северо-западе тянется главный Уральский хребет. И на фоне чёрного неба в 25 км от нас белец снежный купол горы Отортен. Владимиров сказал, что 25 км. По-моему, он ошибся. 35 км на самом деле. И вот они поднялись на гору и нашли там на вершине горы каменный тур и банку с запиской пермских туристов, которые когда-то эту записку там оставили. И вместо записки пермских туристов они оставили свою записку - в качестве доказательства, что они там были.
Вот дальше расказ: В последний раз окидываем взглядом горную ночную страну. Но что это? над Отортеном, прорезая ночную мглу, взмывает сигнальная ракета. Жилья в том районе. Неужели политехники празднуют восхождение?
Так ведь они там должны быть несколько дней тому назад. Сейчас 5 февраля, их там не должно быть, они должны были уже уйти! Но думать некогда, и они решили спуститься с горы, ну чтобы согреться. Так вот, интересная картина получается! В ночь на 6 февраля кто-то запустил сигнальную ракету у горы Отортен. А кто это мог быть? Ответ только один: это были военные. Потому что больше никто, кроме военных, не мог запустить сигнальную ракету. У дятловцев ракетницы не было, и она им не нужна была. Кроме того, 5 февраля дятловцы уже не должны были быть у горы Отортен, они там должны быть 2 февраля. Ну, максимум, 3 февраля. У местных жителей манси - тем более никакой ракетницы не должно быть.
Вывод: это были военные, они запустили сигнальную ракету. И вот вопрос: А зачем они её запустили? С какой целью?
У меня на это есть такой ответ: двое дятловцев успели убежать, и за ними в погоню бросились военные. Когда военные этих двоих дятловцев нашли, они запустили ракету, чтобы своему командиру сигнализировать, что эти двое найдены. Понимаете?
Вот такая у меня версия. Хотя тут может быть вообще другая версия. Я прочитал, что сигнальную ракету видно только на расстоянии не больше 7 км. Ну, она же маленькая. Ну в смысле, вот эта вспышка не сигнальной ракеты. Ну, я не знаю… может, такой огненный шар 10-15 см, такой маленький шарик. Наверное, его не видно на расстоянии 35 км.
Значит, это была не сигнальная ракета. Владимиров говорит, что она взмыла вверх. Он не говорил что вверх. Он просто сказал, что вот мол, сигнальная ракета вспыхнула. Причём она не летела. Если бы это была баллистическая ракета с Байконура, она бы там летела так горизонтально, и долго можно было бы её наблюдать. А тут получилось так, что вспыхнула и исчезла. Значит, это была не баллистическая ракета с Байкунура. И вообще это была не ракета, там что-то такое огненное шарообразное вспыхнуло, и после этого потухло.
Так что же это было? Выдвигаю гипотезу, что это была вспышка взрыва вакуумной бомбы. Она же тоже так вспыхивает. Может, на секунду, а может, на две, и гаснет… Размер этого огненного шара от взрыва вакуумной бомбы не 10 см и не 15 см. Размер вспышки огненного шара - где-то в пределах 20 м. Ну, на таком огромном расстоянии, которое было между Отортеном и Чистопом, эти 20 м могли показаться, как в виде сигнальной ракеты.
Вот такая у меня версия… Конечно, всё, что я тут сейчас в этом видеоролике перечислил, это как бы всё в версии. Прямых доказательств, конечно, нет. Что там действительно искали двоих сбежавших туристов, что там действительно 5 февраля была вспышка вакуумной бомбы… Доказательств у меня нет! Но, знаете, всё это наводит на мысль, Мысль такая: дело тут всё-таки связано с военными. Неважно, что там сверкнуло, или сигнальная ракета, или вакуумные бомбы. Понятно, что тут военные замешаны! Ну и, конечно, из всего сказанного мной следует вывод: ещё до начала поисков руководители Свердловской области всё знали! Они знали, что группа Дятлова погибла. И погибла она в результате военных испытаний. Иначе откуда бы они узнали? Предположим, что группа погибла в результате лавины. А как мгновенно можно узнать, что они от лавины погибли? А если они погибли от лавины, то почему свердловские власти это скрывали? Какой смысл скрывать? Никакого. Отсюда вывод: значит, всё-таки они погибли в результате военных испытаний!
https://youtu.be/yXPGLJSbFwM
-
Veniamin Mochalov pleased us with new material Dyatlov Pass. The staging continued during the search! (December 17, 2023):
[–] Today I will talk about the memories of pilot Karpushin, who also participated in the search for Dyatlov’s group. These memories confirm that Dyatlov’s group did not actually set up a tent at height 1079, but that this tent was set up by some stagers. Although Karpushin himself adheres to a different version.
Karpushin believes that Dyatlov’s group did put up a tent on the mountain. And the reason for the death, according to Karpushin, is that they entered places sacred to the Mansi. And the Mansi decided to drive them out of these places. Not to kill, but simply to scare, drive away. Here's the version.
Karpushin says that in the second half of February 1959, a UPI representative named Gordo came to our air squadron, and this Gordo was so reluctant to tell us that a group of students in the Ivdel area was not getting in touch. And it wouldn’t hurt, they say, to organize a search. But we are not a private shop, we tell him. If you need to search, apply! As a result, after some time we actually received an application.
On a Yak-12 plane, the commander of the plane, Ivan Emelyanovich Spitsyn, with him Karpushin and two other UPI representatives flew out to search for the group. Karpushin says he doesn’t remember the first name. Well, the second was the aforementioned Gordo. The first is, perhaps, Colonel Ortyukov.
(as you know, it was student Blinov - approx.)
Okay, I won't guess. The first night after arriving at Ivdel airport, they began to study the route of the Dyatlov group and began studying weather conditions in the mountains of the Northern and Subpolar Urals. By comparing the route and the report, Karpushin was able to find out where tourists could be caught in a blizzard or blizzard.
Despite the fact that those places are quite provincial, at first glance, there was a first-class weather station at the Ivdel airport. She worked under the program of the International Geophysical Year, and the head of the station was Rakhimov. By the way, pay attention to what a good memory Karpushin has. He even remembered the name of the head of the weather station - Rakhimov.
According to Gordo, the final goal of Dyatlov’s group was Mount Otorten, and then the students, having crossed the Ural ridge, were supposed to move south along the Western slope of the Ural Mountains and the upper reaches of the Vishera River (this is a tributary of the Kama). Pay attention to the words I just said, or rather Gordo's words. He said that Dyatlov’s group had to reach Otorten, then turn west, cross the Ural ridge and walk along the western slope.
But according to the official version set out in the documents of the criminal case, everything should not be like this: having reached Otorten, it was as if Dyatlov’s group should have gone back in the direction from which they came. To the storage shed that they supposedly installed there before. The question arises: if, according to Karpushin and Gordo, respectively, the group was supposed to move to the Western slope at Otorten, then why did they build a storage shed there? They shouldn’t have built a storage shed, they should have hauled all their cargo to Otorten, it turns out. Is the storage shed that was found a fake storage shed?
It is not clear how they were actually supposed to go: build a storehouse and go to Otorten, then return to the storehouse? Or vice versa: don’t build a storage shed, but go to Otorten and cross the ridge there to the western side?
So, “we started by exploring the foot of the ridge and the river.” Here Karpushin does not indicate in what place. He probably means the western foot of the Ural Mountains and the Vishera River. Since he had previously mentioned the western slope and this river. Unclear... But for the first time he says: we flew along the eastern slope of Mount Otorten. It’s not clear here either. He writes here that there was very low cloudiness. The lower edge of the clouds was 300-350 m from the ground.
He further says: an An-2 plane was called from Sverdlovsk to replace the Yak-12, because it had better navigation equipment, and with it they decided to break through the clouds and go along the western slope... It turns out that first they were on the Yak- 12 were flying along the eastern slope, but there was a lot of clouds, so they couldn’t see anything what was going on there on the ground. But when the An-2 arrived, they had already flown along the western slope, and at the same time a disaster almost happened to them. They flew near Mount Oika-Chakur, this mountain is at the same latitude as Vizhay. It was cloudy, nothing was visible, and they were flying on instruments. The crew commander was Ivan Emelyanovich Spitsyn, he was tired and asked Karpushin to replace him, and Karpushin took the helm.
“According to instruments,” says Karpushin, “the distance to Oika-Chakur is 600 m. I took a closer look: fathers, these are rocks!” In a few seconds everything was decided. Thank God, there was enough time to make a very sharp right bank and not collide with Mount Oika-Chakur.
On February 18-20, Spitsyn was recalled to Sverdlovsk. The regional leadership, realizing the seriousness of the situation, ordered to strengthen the search teams. According to Karpushin, a certain Shishmarev arrived from Sverdlovsk to lead the headquarters for the search for the Dyatlov group. Lieutenant General. From the Ministry of Internal Affairs or from the KGB?There was such secrecy. that they didn’t even know his name, only his last name. By the way, this surname Shishmarev is not mentioned in the case documents. It was as if he didn't exist at all. And Karpushin is not mentioned.
Meanwhile, 3 more crews of the 123rd detachment and 3 air defense squadrons arrived in Ivdel. In addition, rescuers had several helicopters at their disposal. And then one day, probably already on February 20-21, on an MI-4 helicopter, the helicopter commander, Vladimir Pustobaev, and I landed several search groups on the ledge of Mount Otorten and others.
As far as I understand, Slobtsov’s group was landed near Otorten on February 23, and near Oika-Chakur it seems to be Chernyshov’s group. And in these 3 groups there were workers from Ivdellag (this is Chernyshov’s group), local Mansi hunters and guys from among the tourists, well equipped and prepared. This is about Slobtsov's group, obviously.
We decided: as soon as the weather was good, we would take off with all 7 planes. Look what happened: the search was carried out both with the help of airplanes and with the help of search groups.
A plan was submitted to General Shishmarev for approval, according to which the pilots of the 123rd detachment were to go along the western slope, the air defense pilots were to go along the eastern slope, and the lead aircraft, whose commander was Gladyrev with navigator Karpushin, was supposed to communicate with all the crews of these seven aircraft . General Shishmarev approved the plan. And here is the main point: on February 25, as Karpushin says, the weather turned out to be simply wonderful. The mountains against the backdrop of a clear clear sky created a calm, blissful mood. 7 planes took off from Ivdel airport almost simultaneously. They walked in a wedge to the village of Burmantovo. Burmantovo is located somewhere in the same place as Vizhay, but just to the east. And then at Burmantovo, at an altitude of 300 m, the planes separated, as agreed in advance. Mount Kholatchakhl, indicated on the maps simply as height 1079, was directly on the course of the leading aircraft. That is, the same plane where Karpushin was flying.
“About 25-30 km before the mountain,” as Karpushin recalls, “we very clearly saw a tent that was stuck to the eastern slope of the mountain.”
Here some researchers say: how could they see the scarf at such a gigantic distance of 25-30 km? It can not be so!
And I think it can. The fact is that the weather was clear, as Karpushin says, and against a white background the black spot of the tent should be very clearly visible - and at a very long distance. So, by saying that they noticed a tent, Karpushin means that they noticed a black dot on the mountainside. Naturally, they did not yet know that it was a tent. It was when they flew closer that they saw that it was a tent. And from afar they simply noticed a black dot, and it was clearly visible at 25-30 km.
“I remember,” says Karpushin, “we made many passes over the tent, and it was clear that it was cut on the north side. Right next to the tent, with its head towards it, lay a corpse (judging by the long hair, a woman), and a little further away lay another body. It was clear that the students left the tent in panic.
“By the way,” says Karpushin, “it struck me even then that the tent was pitched incorrectly, on a slope of about 30°, open to all winds and rockfalls. What made the guys do this? I mean, put up a tent like that. “I can’t imagine!” - speaks. After that, when they circled the tent several times, they recorded the tent’s position on the map and contacted Ivdel, from where they received the command to return.
“After some time, an MI-4 helicopter with an investigator on board flew to the scene of the students’ deaths. The landing of a group of interrogators took place on the verge of a foul. The cloud cover was so great that the main rotor was not visible." He is probably already telling what happened in the following days.
Now let's think about this question. Karpushin said that the cuts on the tent were clearly visible. But how could it be seen if the tent was covered with snow? This means that on February 25 it was not covered with snow!
But the most interesting thing is this: navigator Karpushin says that on February 25, 2 corpses lay near the tent. And we all know that on the same day rescuers Slobtsov and Sharavin visited the tent, and they did not see any corpses there. Strange, right? How to understand all this? Obviously, it should be understood this way: in the morning or afternoon, someone dragged the corpses away from the tent towards the cedar tree.
This means that Slobtsov and Sharavin found the tent in the evening! So these stagers had almost a whole day to spare. That day they dragged the corpses towards the cedar! Whose corpses were these? Well, as for the female corpse, it’s clear who it was. This is Kolmogorov. The stagers dragged her and the body of another tourist to the foot of the mountain and there, obviously, buried her in the snow. And who was second is no longer clear. It could be anyone: either Krivonischenko, or Doroshenko, or Dyatlov, or Slobodin.
In general, this is how the picture turns out: even when the search began, the stagers continued to stage the scene, continued to drag corpses back and forth, cover them there with blankets, and so on.
And I also want to say this: these memories of Karpushin fit in with the memories of Pashin. Many years after the tragedy with the Dyatlov group, forester Pashin told his nephews that he was the first to discover corpses under a cedar tree, and one of the corpses was female.
Interesting, isn't it? The only difference is that Karpushin says that the corpses were near the tent, and Pashin says that they were under the cedar tree. That is, such confusion results. It turns out that the corpses were even dragged more than once on February 26! At first they dragged two corpses from the tent under the cedar tree, and then they changed their minds and dragged them to the slope there.
And here’s something else interesting Karpushin said. He said that the skin of those two corpses near the tent was not orange. She was ordinary. This refutes the claim of other people who saw that the skin was orange. How can I explain this? I have this explanation... Yes, by the way, here another question arises: how did Karpushin see from the plane that the skin was not orange? Well, you know, it's quite simple! The weather was clear, and the faces meant corpses if they were lying face up. then it was clearly visible what color they were, natural or unnatural.
So, what else does Karpushin say? Well, he refutes the theory that a rocket fell there. There, he says, no rocket debris was visible, and no craters. Well, this is, of course, a moot point. Because if it was staged, then it is clear that the rocket fell not at the pass, but somewhere else. And the military dragged the corpses to the pass.
Well, let’s sum it up: even during the search, a staging was going on, and the dragging of corpses and objects from place to place continued with might and main. This proves once again: Dyatlov’s group did not set up a tent at an altitude of 1079. They set up a tent there for staging. Even navigator Karpushin confirms that he was surprised: why did they put up a tent on the mountain? The wind constantly blows there. Bare slope. We can say with confidence: yes, indeed the tourists of Dyatlov’s group did not die at the pass, but in some other place. But at the pass, a re-enactment was made: the corpses were transported to the pass, they set up a tent on the mountain, and then they began to lay out the corpses.
Moreover, it seems that the military did not have any strictly defined plan for disposing of the corpses. Therefore, they first placed two corpses near the tent, then dragged them under a cedar tree, and then dragged them onto the slope. This is probably how events unfolded...
(https://i.ibb.co/FsJxY0p/mochalov-karpushin.jpg) (https://ibb.co/4sMmSYk)
Вениамин Мочалов порадовал нас новым материалом Перевал Дятлова. Инсценировка продолжалась и во время поисков! (17 декабря 2023):
[–] Сегодня я расскажу о воспоминаниях лётчика Карпушина, который тоже участвовал в поисках группы Дятлова. Эти воспоминания подтверждают, что группа Дятлова на самом деле не ставила палатку на высоте 1079, а поставили эту палатку какие-то инсценировщики. Хотя сам Карпушин придерживается другой версии.
Карпушин считает, что группа Дятлова всё-таки ставила палатку на горе. А причина гибели, как считает Карпушин, заключается в том, что они зашли на священные для манси места. И манси решили прогнать их из этих мест. Не убить, а просто напугать, прогнать. Вот такая версия.
Карпушин говорит, что во второй половине февраля 1959 года к нам в авиаотряд пришёл представитель УПИ по фамилии Гордо, и этот Гордо так неохотно рассказал, что в районе Ивделя на связь не выходит группа студентов. И не мешало бы, дескать, организовать поиски. Но мы же не частная лавочка, говорим мы ему. Если надо искать, делайте заявку! В итоге через некоторое время к нам действительно поступила заявка.
На самолёте Як-12 на поиск группы вылетели командир самолёта Иван Емельянович Спицын, с ним Карпушин и ещё двое представителей УПИ. Фамилию первого Карпушин говорит, что не помнит. Ну а вторым был вышеупомянутый Гордо. Первый - это, возможно, полковник Ортюков.
(как известно, это был студент Блинов – прим.)
Ладно, не буду гадать. Первую ночь после прибытия в аэропорт Ивделя они стали изучать маршрут движения группы Дятлова и занялись изучением метеоусловий в горах Северного и Приполярного Урала. Сравнив маршрут и сводку, Карпушин смог выяснить, где туристов могла застать метель или пурга.
Несмотря на то, что те места довольно захолустные, на первый взгляд, но в аэропорту Ивделя была первоклассная метеостанция. Она работала по программе международного геофизического года, а начальником станции был Рахимов. Кстати, обратите внимание, какая хорошая память у Карпушина. Он даже фамилию начальника метеостанции запомнил – Рахимов.
По словам Гордо, конечной целью группы Дятлова была гора Отортен, а затем студенты, перевалив через Уральский хребет, должны были двигаться на юг по Западному склону Уральских гор и верховьям реки Вишеры (это приток Камы). Обратите внимание на только что сказанное мною слова, точнее, слова Гордо. Он сказал, что группа Дятлова должна была дойти до Отортена, потом повернуть на запад, перейти Уральский хребет и идти уже по западному склону.
Но согласно официальной версии, изложенной в документах уголовного дела, всё не так должно быть: дойдя до Отортена, будто бы группа Дятлова должна была пойти обратно в ту сторону, откуда пришла. До лабаза, который они до этого там будто бы установили. Вот вопрос возникает: так если, по словам Карпушина и Гордо соответственно, группа должна была у Отортена перейти на Западный склон, то зачем они лабаз там построили? Они не должны были строить лабаз, они были должны были весь свой груз тащить на Отортен, получается. Тот лабаз, который был найден, это фальшивый лабаз?
Непонятно, как на самом деле должны были идти они: построить лабаз и идти до Отортена, в потом вернуться к лабазу? Или наоборот: не строить лабаз, а идти к Отортену и там перевалить через хребет на западную сторону?
Так, «начала мы обследовали подножие хребта и реки». Тут Карпушин не указывает, в каком месте. Вероятно, он имеет в виду западное подножие Уральских гор и реку Вишеру. Поскольку он до этого упомянул западный склон и эту реку. Непонятно... Но первый раз он говорит: мы вылетели по восточному склону горы Отортен. Тут тоже непонятно. Он тут пишет, что была очень низкая облачность. Нижняя кромка облаков была на 300-350 м от земли.
Далее он говорит: на смену Як-12 из Свердловска был вызван самолёт Ан-2, потому что он имел более лучшую навигационную аппаратуру, и на нём они решили пробить облака и пройти уже по западному склону... Получается, сначала они на Як-12 летели вдоль восточного склона, но была большая облачность, поэтому они ничего не видели, что там на земле творится. А вот когда Ан-2 прилетел, они уже по западному склону полетели, и при этом с ними чуть не произошла катастрофа. Они летели у горы Ойка-Чакур, эта гора на той же широте, где Вижай. Была облачность, ничего не было видно, и они летели по приборам. Командиром экипажа был Спицын Иван Емельянович, он устал и попросил Карпушина подменить его, и Карпушин сел за штурвал.
- По приборам, - говорит Карпушин, – расстояние до Ойка-Чакура 600 м. Я пригляделся: батюшки, да это скалы! Какие-то секунды всё решили. Слава Богу, хватило времени успеть очень резко уйти правым креном и не столкнуться с горой Ойка-Чакур.
18-20 февраля Спицына отозвали в Свердловск. Ообластное руководство, поняв серьёзность положения, распорядилось усилить состав поисковых групп. По словам Карпушина, руководить штабом по поиску группы Дятлова из Свердловска прибыл некто Шишмарёв. Генерал-лейтенант. Из МВД или из КГБ? Такая секретность была. что они даже его имени не знали, только фамилию. Кстати, эта фамилия Шишмарёв в документах дела не упоминается. Как будто его вообще не было. И Карпушин не упоминается.
Тем временем в Ивдель прилетели ещё 3 экипажа 123-го отряда и 3 эскадрильи ПВО. Кроме того, в распоряжении поисковиков оказались несколько вертолётов. И вот однажды, вероятно уже 20-21 февраля, на вертолёте МИ-4 мы с командиром вертолёта Владимиром Пустобаевым высадили несколько поисковых групп на уступе горы Отортен и других.
Насколько я понимаю, у Отортена была высажена группа Слобцова 23 февраля, а около Ойка-Чакура – это вроде группа Чернышова. И в этих 3 группах были работники Ивдельлага (это группа Чернышова), местные охотники манси и ребята из числа туристов, хорошо снаряжённые и подготовленные. Это про группу Слобцова, очевидно.
Решили: как только будет хорошая погода, взлетать всеми 7 самолётами. Смотрите, что получалось: поиски шли и с помощью самолётов, и с помощью поисковых групп.
На утверждение генералу Шишмарёву был передан план, согласно которому лётчики 123-го отряда должны были идти по западному склону, лётчики ПВО - по восточному склону, а головной самолёт, командиром которого был Гладырев со штурманом Карпушиным, должен был вести связь всех экипажей этих семи самолётов. Генерал Шишмарёв одобрил план. И вот главный момент: 25 февраля, как говорит Карпушин, погода выдалась просто чудесная. Горы на фоне чистого ясного неба создавали спокойное благостное настроение. Из аэропорта Ивделя в воздух почти одновременно взмыл 7 самолётов. До посёлка Бурмантово они шли клином. Бурмантово находится где-то там же, где и Вижай, но только восточнее. И вот у Бурмантово на высоте 300 м самолёты разделились, как было условлено заранее. Гора Холатчахль, обозначена на картах просто как высота 1079, оказалась прямо по курсу ведущего самолёта. То есть, того самого самолёта, где летел Карпушин.
«Примерно за 25-30 км до горы, - как вспоминает Карпушин, - мы очень чётко разглядели палатку, которая прилепилась к восточному склону горы».
Тут некоторые исследователи говорят: а как они на таком гигантском расстоянии 25-30 км могли разглядеть платку? Такого не может быть!
А я считаю, что может. Дело в том, что погода-то была ясной, как Карпушин говорит, а на белом фоне чёрное пятно палатки должно быть очень чётко заметно - и на очень большом расстоянии. Так что, говоря, что они заметили палатку, Карпушин имеет в виду, что они заметили чёрную точку на склоне горы. Они, естественно, ещё не знали, что это палатка. Это когда они ближе подлетели, они увидели, что это палатка. А издалека они просто заметили чёрную точку, и она была чётко видна на 25-30 км.
- Помню – говорит Карпушин, – мы сделали много заходов над палаткой, и было видно, что она разрезана с северной стороны. Прямо у палатки головой к ней лежал труп (судя по длинным волосам, женский), а чуть в отдалении лежало ещё одно тело. По всему было видно, что студенты покинули палатку в панике.
- Кстати – говорит Карпушин, – мне уже тогда бросилось в глаза, что палатка неправильно поставлена, на уклоне примерно в 30°, открытая всем ветрам и камнепадам. Что заставило ребят так поступить? В смысле, поставить так палатку. «Ума не приложу!» - говорит. После этого, когда они несколько раз облетели палатку, они зафиксировали точку положения палатки на карте и связались с Ивделем, откуда они получили команду возвращаться.
«Через некоторое время на место гибели студентов вылетел вертолёт МИ-4 со следователем на борту. Высадка группы дознавателей происходила на грани фола. Облачность была настолько велика, что несущий винт не было видно». Это он уже рассказывает, наверное, что было в последующие дни.
А теперь подумаем над таким вопросом. Карпушин сказал, что отчётливо было видно разрезы на палатке. Но просто как могло быть видно, если палатка была засыпана снегом? Значит, 25 февраля она была снегом не засыпана!
Но самое интересное вот что: штурман Карпушин говорит, что 25 февраля около палатки лежали 2 трупа. А все мы знаем, что в тот же день у палатки побывали поисковики Слобцов и Шаравин, и никаких трупов они там не видели. Странно, да? Как всё это понять? Очевидно, понимать, следует так: утром или днём кто-то трупы от палатки утащил в сторону кедра.
Значит, Слобцов и Шаравин нашли палатку вечером! Так что в запасе у этих инсценировщиков был почти что целый день. Вот за этот день они и утащили трупы в сторону кедра! А чьи это были трупы? Ну, насчёт трупа женского пола – понятно, кто это был. Это Колмогорова. Её и труп ещё одного туриста инсценировщики утащили, значит, к подножию горы и там, очевидно, закопали в снег. А кто был вторым, это уже непонятно. Это мог быть любой: или Кривонищенко, или Дорошенко, или Дятлов, или Слободин.
В общем, картина вот такая получается: даже когда начались поиски, инсценировщики продолжали инсценировать, продолжали трупы туда-сюда таскать, одеялами накрывать их там, и так далее.
И ещё я хочу сказать вот что: эти воспоминания Карпушина стыкуются с воспоминаниями Пашина. Через много лет после трагедии с группой Дятлова лесник Пашин рассказывал своим племянникам, что это он первым обнаружил трупы под кедром, и один из трупов был женским.
Интересно, правда? Отличие только в том, что Карпушин говорит, что трупы были у палатки, а Пашин говорит, что они были под кедром. То есть, такая получается путаница. Получается, трупы 26 февраля даже не раз перетаскивали! Сначала два труп от палатки притащили под кедр, а потом передумали и притащили их там на склон.
И вот ещё что интересное сказал Карпушин. Он сказал, что кожа у тех двух трупов около палатки была не оранжевого цвета. Она была обычной. Тем самым опровергается утверждение других людей, которые видели, что кожа была оранжевой. Вот как это объяснить? У меня есть такое объяснение... Да, кстати, тут ещё вопрос такой возникнет: а как это Карпушин увидел из самолёта, что кожа была не оранжевой? Ну, знаете, это довольно просто! Погода была ясной, и лица значит трупов, если они лежали лицом вверх. то ясно же было видно, какого они цвета, естественного или не естественного.
Так, что ещё там говорит Карпушин? Ну, он опровергает версию, что там ракета упала. Там, говорит, никаких обломков ракеты не было видно, и никаких воронок. Ну, насчёт этого, конечно, вопрос спорный. Потому что, если была инсценировка, то понятно, что ракета упала не на перевале, а где-то в другом месте. А военные перетащили трупы на перевал.
Ну что ж, подведём итоги: даже во время поисков шла инсценировка, вовсю продолжалось перетаскивание трупов и предметов с места на место. Это ещё раз доказывает: группа Дятлова не ставила палатку на высоте 1079. Там палатку поставили инсценировки. Даже штурман Карпушин подтверждает, что его удивило: а зачем они палатку на горе поставили? Там же постоянно дует ветер. Голый склон. Можно с уверенностью сказать: да, действительно туристы группы Дятлова погибли не на перевале, а в каком-то другом месте. Но на перевале была сделана инсценировка: трупы перевезли на перевал, поставили палатку на горе, а потом стали трупы, значит, раскладывать.
Причём какого-то строго определённого плана в раскладывании трупов, похоже, у военных не было. Поэтому сначала расположили два трупа у палатки, потом притащили их под кедр, а потом перетащили их на склон. Вот таким образом, наверное, развивались события...
https://youtu.be/oc_PEBw5mNU
-
These statements of seeing bodies from the plane have always raised a question. Could he actually have seen hair from that distance? Also he doesn't mention seeing the blackness of boot rock and the other outliers, they would have stood out as much as a tent. Also the fact that the snow was hard/firn over the tent and bodies when found. Where did the snow come from over 2 days? Slobodin had ice under him which suggests he died where he fell.
Definitely one of the stranger witnesses statements.
-
Was there a total staging? Gospel Example
For a long time I didn’t know how to approach the topic of the total staging of photographs and the incident with the Dyatlov group, in what words to tell it, to explain it, until the speech of pensioner Veniamin Mochalov came out. And now it seems to me that this is a good analogy that best answers the question.
I can even say that this whole story with the contradictory testimony of different rescuers and investigators turns out to be somewhat similar to the Gospel. And therefore, this problem also became an object of interest for studying discrepancies, for establishing the truth. Because the truth certainly exists.
For example, Moses Axelrod mentions Dyatlov’s roommate with the last name Chigvintsev, and Sogrin, who writes an interrogation on the same day, April 24, mentions the last name Chiglintsev. When I tried to determine which variant of the surname actually occurs, the Internet gave me both variants with equal frequency. Since Moses Axelrod is mistaken with the last name of another radio operator, Sergei Sogrin’s version inspires more confidence. But when one rescuer remembers a walkie-talkie weighing 20 kg, Sogrin says that the weight of the walkie-talkie was 200 kg.
Some testimony and details are given for speculative reasons, from assumptions that this should not happen, or could not have happened otherwise, but this could and should be exactly the case. As an example, I will give fragments from a conversation between Yuri Kuntsevich and rescuer Brusnitsyn in May 2007:
[B.:] And on the 26th Sharavin went down to the Lozva valley and found the first two corpses under a cedar tree. Then we went there in greater numbers and found those who were trying to go up... Well, there were already people there, dogs, etc. I was working on the tent, I was instructed to work on the tent. This means that at first, due to inexperience, I did not make any inventory, but then I had to do it.
[K.:] So when they made the inventory, it was on pieces of paper in pencil, and then the protocols were then written, probably indoors? (…) Was there a saw when inventorying the tent?
[B.:] There was no saw. There was an ax, there was an ice ax, but she didn’t need a saw.
[K.:] Were the skis standing next to the tent and what was propping up the corners of the tent?
[B:] All the skis were under the tent. The tent was pitched using ski poles. I don't remember under the visor. (end of quote)
But the tent inspection report contains a saw. How can we determine the truth here? For example, I can say for sure that my phone weighs 90g, and my smartphone weighs 200g, and you can even determine, if not the model, then the screen size.
I once read that astronomers had established that 2 thousand years ago, in the 30s AD, a total solar eclipse was visible in the spring in the Palestine region. This was on Friday at approximately 15:00 local time. Apparently, at these hours the execution of Jesus Christ was taking place.
As you can understand, an extraordinary celestial phenomenon was superimposed on another event, which was not in vain and is still manifesting itself. And our situation is basically similar: some rescuers were looking for the Dyatlov group in Otorten, others were looking 15 km from Otorten. Some witnesses say that Jesus Christ performed near Jerusalem, other witnesses say that Jesus spoke in Galilee, which is 150 km from Jerusalem. I give the floor to Veniamin Mochalov.
Dyatlov Pass. Don't believe the investigative documents! (November 29, 2023).
[MOCHALOV:] Since childhood, I have been interested in various mysteries of history, and somewhere in the mid-80s I became fascinated by this secret history: did Jesus Christ really exist? And I started reading the Bible. Or rather, the Gospels. The fact is that there are many different books in the Bible, and the biography of Christ is described in four gospels. And I started reading them to understand if what was written there was true.
Well, I noticed that in these four gospels something is written differently about Jesus Christ. In one there is one thing, in the other - something else, in the third - a third. For example, take an event such as the Ascension of Jesus Christ into heaven. So, for some reason, only two gospels write about the ascension. So, in the gospel of Mark and Luke. But the Gospels of Matthew and John do not say that Jesus ascended into heaven. Question: what to believe? Has he ascended or not?
Or here's an example. Who was the first to know that Jesus had risen? In the Gospel of John it is written: Mary Magdalene was the first to know about the resurrection of Jesus. She, therefore, came to the tomb of Jesus and saw that he was not there. Well, I mean, the stone has been moved away, but the coffin is empty! This is what it says in the Gospel of John.
But in the Gospel of Mark it is not written exactly like that, it says the following: not only Mary Magdalene came to the tomb of Jesus, but also some woman whose name was also Mary. That is, there were two women! And in the Gospel of Luke it is written that there were a lot of people there! Well, I mean, Mary Magdalene and some other women came to the tomb of Jesus. Not just one, but several more. And again the question: What to believe? Everywhere it is written differently.
Or here's another event. The Gospels say that after Jesus was resurrected, he met with his disciples. Well, with these, then, twelve apostles. But how did he meet them? That is, where did he meet? It's written in different ways. The Gospel of Luke records that Jesus met with his disciples in Galilee. Galilee is a region of Israel located about 150 km from Jerusalem. That is, in the Gospel of Luke it is written: Jesus met with his disciples in Galilee. But the Gospel of John says something else. As if he met with his disciples somewhere near Jerusalem. Not in Jerusalem itself, but nearby. Again, the question is: what to believe? Where did he meet them? Near Jerusalem or in Galilee? Unclear…
Let's look at one more question. There was an inscription on the cross on which Jesus was crucified. And what kind of inscription was this? In the Gospel of Mark it is written: the inscription was: king of the Jews. It does not say in what language this inscription was made, but probably in Hebrew. In general, it is not specified in what language. And the Gospel of Luke indicates that the inscription “king of the Jews” was made in three languages: Hebrew, Roman and Greek. And in the Gospel of John it is written that the inscription there actually was: “Jesus of Nazareth, King of the Jews.” That is, again there are discrepancies. One gospel says one thing, another says something else, and a third says something else. That is, it is not clear what exactly the inscription was on the cross.
Why did I tell all this now? A few days ago I decided to read in more detail the criminal case against the Dyatlov group. Well, I read something there and was surprised. For some reason, some things are written differently there. One document says one thing, another says something else. Well, that is, it’s something like what happens with the Gospels: one Gospel says one thing, another says something else. Take this example: when Dubinina’s corpse was found in the stream, her right leg was wrapped in something. The question is - what? One document says that Dubinina’s leg was wrapped in a woolen trouser leg. Well, I mean, they cut off the leg of some trousers and wrapped Dubinina’s leg.
And in another document it is written that Dubinina’s leg was wrapped in half a sweater! That is, they took a sweater, someone there cut it in half, and that means one half of it was wrapped around Dubinina’s leg.
And again, it’s unclear: what was Dubinina’s leg actually wrapped in? Again there are some discrepancies! Well, if you look at other documents, some, let’s say, incomprehensibility also arises.
For example, in the final document of the criminal case it is written: Dyatlov’s group died on the night of February 2. It is written, but no evidence is provided that they actually died on the night of February 2. How did investigators know that they died on the night of February 2? After all, nothing is written about this in the diaries. If they, say, died on February 2, then the diaries should have an entry for February 1. How they set up a tent on Mount Kholatchakhl. But this entry is not there! It only says how they set up the tent on January 31st. Based on this recording, we can draw the following conclusion: they died on the night of February 1, and not February 2. Where did the investigator get the idea that it was the night of February 2? Again, some kind of confusion results. Although all these are documents from a criminal case. They were written, so to speak, in hot pursuit.
Here are the Gospels - they were not written in hot pursuit, they were written decades after those events. And so, of course, people might have forgotten what really happened to Jesus. Therefore, everyone wrote in their own way. One wrote one thing, the other wrote something else. And all these testimonies contradict each other. Human memory is not perfect. A person may forget something, especially if a lot of time has passed. But the criminal case was not written 100 years later. It was written in the same year, on the same days, months.
Despite the fact that it was written in hot pursuit, nevertheless, there are some contradictions and unsubstantiated statements there. I am telling all this to show that the acts indicated in the criminal case against the Dyatlov group should not be trusted too much. Because it may not be true. Why this is not true is another question. Maybe it’s not true, because it’s written differently: in one document one thing is different in another. Who to believe?
Here is another case for the sake of example. There are two documents. Protocols of interrogation of forester Pashin and fire chief Cheglakov. Both of them say: on February 23 they arrived at Mount Otorten. And the next day they found a tent, that is, February 24.
But another document says something else: the tent was found not by Pashin and Cheglakov, but by students Slobtsov and Sharavin. And they found her not on February 24, but on February 26. Again it’s unclear: who was the first to find the tent? and what date?
This is such a confusion. In addition, I and some other researchers noticed that the so-called diaries of the Dyatlov group seem to be fakes.
For example, the general diary of the Dyatlovites. For some reason it is present in the criminal case in the form of a typewritten copy. Its original must be written by hand (since they did not have a typewriter on the campaign), and in addition, in pencil. You can't write with ink in winter; it will freeze. Therefore, they wrote their diaries in pencil. So, this group’s pencil diary is not in the criminal case. But there is a copy. The question arises: where did the original go? This is one question. Another question arises: Why did the investigators create a copy of the diary? Why was a copy needed? If you have the original, you don't need a copy!
(Even when this diary was reprinted on the Internet, one phrase was missing.)
There is Dubinina’s diary, but there is no copy of Dubinina’s diary. There is only the original. And for some reason, the general diary is present in the form of a copy, but there is no original. A suspicion arises that this general diary is a fraud. The original was destroyed, but the copy was left. Or they deliberately made a copy of the diary in order to destroy the original.
If you take the wall newspaper “Evening Otorten”, there is no original there either. Again, it is not clear why they made a typewritten copy? And where did the original go? The conclusion arises that “Evening Otorten” is some kind of fake, and therefore a copy was made and the original was destroyed. By the way, there was an original, some people saw it: helicopter pilot Potyazhenko and investigator Korotaev. The original of this “Evening Otorten” seemed to hang in a tent next to the entrance. Was it somehow glued to the wall? Well, naturally, it was written by hand. But something completely different was written there. Not the same as in the copy.
Both Potyazhenko and Axelrod say that plans for the future were written there. But if you read this in the criminal case, there are no plans for the future. There's tourist humor there. Hence the conclusion from all of the above: you cannot trust these documents that are available in the criminal case.
Of course, one should not assume that everything written there is absolutely a lie. No, there is truth there, of course. But to find out this truth, you need to use your brain. You need to think in order to understand what is true and what is not true.
Well, I will conclude my speech with my conclusion about Jesus Christ... Did he really exist? My verdict: it existed. There was such a man, but in the Gospels a lot of things were invented about him. There is truth about the facts of his biography, but there is also some untruth.
What can I add to Mochalov's remarkable research? Of course, prosecutors could never have imagined that their records would become the subject of such meticulous research decades later.
(https://i.ibb.co/VQC50br/mochalov-gospel.jpg) (https://ibb.co/mXygrd1)
Была ли тотальная инсценировка? Пример Евангелия
К теме тотальной инсценировки фотографий и происшествия с группой Дятлова я долго не знал, как подойти, какими словами рассказывать, объяснять, пока не вышло выступления пенсионера Вениамина Мочалова. И мне сейчас кажется, что это хорошая аналогия, которая лучше всего отвечает на вопрос.
Могу даже сказать, что вся эта история с противоречивыми показаниями разных поисковиков и следователей чем-то, получается, похожа на Евангелие. И поэтому эта проблема тоже стала объектом, интересным для изучения разночтений, для установления истины. Потому что истина, безусловно, есть.
Например, Моисей Аксельрод упоминает соседа Дятлова по комнате, с фамилией Чигвинцев, а Согрин, который пишет допрос в тот же день 24 апреля, упоминает фамилию Чиглинцев. Когда я попытался определить, какой вариант фамилии встречается на само деле, интернет мне выдал оба варианта с равной частотой. Так как Моисей Аксельрод ошибается с фамилией другого радиста, то вариант Сергея Согрина внушает больше доверия. Но когда один поисковик вспоминает про рацию весом 20 кг, Согрин говорит, что вес рации был 200 кг.
Некоторые показания и детали даются из умозрительных соображений, из предположений, что такого не должно быть, или иначе не могло быть, а такое как раз могло и должно быть именно так. Для примера приведу фрагменты из беседы Юрия Кунцевича с поисковиком Брусницыным в мае 2007:
[Б.:] И 26-го Шаравин пошёл в долину Лозьвы спускаться и нашёл под кедром два первых трупа. Потом уже более многочисленно мы пошли туда и нашли тех, которые пытались пойти наверх… Ну там уже народ был, собаки и пр. Я занимался палаткой, мне было поручено заняться палаткой. Значит, сначала по неопытности я опись никакую не делал, потом её пришлось делать.
[К.:] Так когда делали опись, то на листочках карандашом, а протоколы потом писались, вероятно, в помещении? (…) При описи палатки пила была?
[Б.:] Пилы не было. Топор был, ледоруб был, а пила она и не нужна.
[К.:] Стояли ли лыжи рядом с палаткой и что подпирало углы палатки?
[Б:] Все лыжи были под палаткой. Растяжки палатки была организованы на лыжных палках. Под козырьком я не помню. (конец цитаты)
Но в протоколе осмотра палатки пила есть. Как тут определить истину? Для примера, я могу точно сказать, что мой телефон весит 90г, а мой смартфон весит 200 г, и вы сможете даже определить, если не модель, то размер экрана.
Когда-то я прочитал, что астрономы установили, что 2 тысячи лет назад, в 30-х годах нашей эры весной в районе Палестины было видно полное солнечное затмение. Это было в пятницу примерно в 15 часов дня по местному времени. Видимо, в эти часы как раз происходила казнь Иисуса Христа.
Как можно понять, необычайное небесное явление наложилось на другое событие, что не прошло даром и проявляется до сих пор. И у нас ситуация в принципе похожая: одни поисковики искали группу Дятлова на Отортене, другие искали в 15 км от Отортена. Одни свидетели говорят, что Иисус Христос выступал около Иерусалима, другие свидетели говорят, что Иисус выступал в Галилее, а это в 150 км от Иерусалима. Передаю слово Вениамину Мочалову.
Перевал Дятлова. Не верьте следственным документам! (29 ноября 2023).
[МОЧАЛОВ:] С детских лет я интересуюсь разными тайнами истории, и вот где-то в середине 80-ых годов я увлёкся вот такой тайной истории: а существовал ли на самом деле Иисус Христос? И я начал читать Библию. А точнее, Евангелия. Дело в том, что в Библии там много разных книг, а биография Христа описана в четырёх евангелиях. И я начал их читать, чтобы понять, правда ли то, что там написано.
Ну и я заметил, что в этих четырёх евангелиях про Иисуса Христа что-то по-разному написано. В одном что-то одно, в другом – другое, в третьем – третье. Например, взять такое событие, как Вознесение Иисуса Христа на небо. Так вот, о вознесении почему-то только в двух евангелиях написано. Значит, в евангелии от Марка и от Луки. А в евангелии от Матфея и Иоанна не написано, что Иисус вознёсся на небо. Вопрос: а чему верить? Вознёсся он или нет?
Или вот такой пример. Кто первым узнал, что Иисус воскрес? В евангелии от Иоанна написано: первым о воскресении Иисуса узнала Мария Магдалина. Она, значит, пришла к гробнице Иисуса и увидела, что его там нет. Ну в смысле, камень отодвинут, а гроб пустой! Вот так написано в Евангелии от Иоанна.
А в Евангелии от Марка там написано не совсем так, там написано следующее: к гробнице Иисуса пришла не только Мария Магдалина, а ещё какая-то женщина, которую звали тоже Мария. То есть, две женщины было! А в евангелии от Луки написано, что там вообще была куча народу! Ну в смысле, к гробнице Иисуса пришла и Мария Магдалина, и ещё какие-то женщины. Даже не одна, а ещё там несколько. И опять же вопрос: А чему верить? Везде по-разному написано.
Или вот ещё событие. В Евангелиях написано, что после того, как Иисус воскрес, он встретился со своими учениками. Ну с этими, значит, двенадцатью апостолами. Но как он с ними встретился? То есть, где он встретился? Это написано по-разному. В евангелии от Луки написано, что Иисус встретился со своими учениками в Галилее. Галилея – это такая область Израиля, находящаяся где-то в 150 км от Иерусалима. То есть, в Евангелии от Луки написано: в Галилее встретился Иисус со своими учениками. А в Евангелии от Иоанна написано другое. Будто бы он встретился со своими учениками где-то около Иерусалима. Не в самом Иерусалиме, а рядом. Опять же вопрос: а чему верить? Где же он встретился с ними? Около Иерусалима или в Галилее? Непонятно…
Разберём ещё один вопрос. На кресте, на котором распяли Иисуса, была сделана надпись. И что это за надпись такая была? В евангелии от Марка написано: надпись была такой: царь иудейский. Там не написано, на каком языке эта надпись была сделана, но вероятно на иврите. В общем, не указано, на каком языке. А в Евангелии от Луки указано, что надпись «царь иудейский» была сделана на трёх языках: на еврейском, на римском и на греческом. А в Евангелии от Иоанна написано, что там надпись на самом деле была такой: "Иисус Назарей, царь иудейский". То есть, опять же получаются разночтения. В одном евангелии сказано одно, в другом – другое, в третьем – третье. То есть, непонятно, какая точно надпись была на кресте.
К чему я всё это сейчас рассказал? Несколько дней назад я решил подробнее почитать уголовное дело по группе Дятлова. Ну, кое-что там почитал и удивился. Почему-то по-разному там кое-что написано. В одном документе написано что-то одно, в другом другое. Ну то есть, это примерно как с Евангелиями получается: в одном Евангелии написано одно, в другом другое. Вот взять такой пример: когда в ручье был найден труп Дубининой, там её правая нога была обмотана чем-то. Вопрос – чем? В одном документе написано, что нога Дубининой была обмотана шерстяной штаниной от брюк. Ну в смысле, отрезали от каких-то брюк штанину и замотали ногу Дубининой.
А в другом документе написано, что нога Дубининой была обмотана половиной свитера! То есть, взяли свитер, кто-то там разрезал его напополам, и значит, одну его половину намотал на ногу Дубининой.
И вот опять непонятно: чем же на самом деле была замотана нога Дубининой? Опять какие-то разночтения получаются! Ну и если разобрать другие документы, тоже какие-то, скажем так, непонятности возникают.
Например, в завершающем документе уголовного дела написано: группа Дятлова погибла в ночь на 2 февраля. Написать-то написано, но не приведены доказательства того, что они действительно погибли в ночь на 2 февраля. Откуда следователи узнали, что они погибли в ночь на 2 февраля? Ведь в дневниках ничего про это не написано. Если бы они, допустим, погибли 2 февраля, то в дневниках должна быть запись за 1 февраля. Как вот они ставят палатку на горе Холатчахль. Но этой записи нет! Там написано только, как они ставили палатку 31 января. Исходя из этой записи, можно сделать такой вывод: они погибли в ночь на 1 февраля, а не 2 февраля. Откуда же следователь взяли, что ночь на 2 февраля? Опять же какая-то Путаница получается. Хотя всё это документы уголовного дела. Они же написаны, так сказать, по горячим следам.
Вот Евангелия – они написаны не по горячим следам, они написаны через десятки лет после тех событий. И поэтому, конечно, люди могли забыть, что на самом деле произошло с Иисусом. Поэтому каждый писал по-своему. Один что-то одно писал, другой писал другое. И все эти показания – они противоречат друг другу. Человеческая память – она не совершенна. Человек может забыть что-то, особенно если много времени прошло. А уголовное дело написано не через 100 лет. Оно написано в том же году, в те же дни, месяцы.
Несмотря на то что оно написано по горячим следам, тем не менее, там встречаются какие-то противоречия, бездоказательные утверждения. Всё это я рассказываю к тому, чтобы показать: актам, указанным в уголовном деле по группе Дятлова, не следует слишком сильно верить. Потому что это может быть и неправда. Почему это неправда, это другой вопрос. Может, и неправда, потому что по-разному написано: в одном документе одно в другом другое. Кому верить?
Вот ещё ради примера приводу один случай. Есть два документа. Протоколы допроса лесника Пашина и начальника пожарной охраны Чеглакова. И тот, и другой рассказывают: 23 февраля они прибыли к горе Отортен. А на следующий день они нашли палатку, то есть 24 февраля.
Но в другом документе написано другое: палатку нашли не Пашин и Чеглаков, а студенты Слобцов и Шаравин. И они нашли её не 24 февраля, а 26 февраля. Опять непонятно: кто первый нашёл палатку? и какого числа?
Вот такая путаница. Кроме того, я и ещё некоторые исследователи заметили, что так называемые дневники дятловцев – похоже, это фальшивки.
Например, общий дневник дятловцев. Он присутствует в уголовном деле почему-то в виде машинописной копии. Его оригинал должен быть написан от руки (т.к. в походе у них не было печатной машинки), и вдобавок карандашом. Зимой чернилами не напишешь, они замёрзнут. Поэтому дневники они писали карандашом. Так вот, этого карандашного дневника группы в уголовном деле нет. Зато есть копия. Возникает вопрос: куда делся оригинал? Это один вопрос. Возникает другой вопрос: А зачем следователи создали копию дневника? Зачем нужна была копия? Если есть оригинал, то копия не нужна!
(Даже при перепечатке этого дневника в интернет пропала одна фраза.)
Есть дневник Дубининой, но ведь копии дневника Дубининой нет. Есть только оригинал. А почему-то общий дневник присутствует в виде копии, но нет оригинала. Возникает подозрение, что этот общий дневник - подтасовка. Оригинал уничтожили, а копию оставили. Или специально сделали копию дневника, чтобы уничтожить оригинал.
Если взять стенгазету «Вечерний Отортен», там оригинала тоже нет. Опять непонятно, зачем сделали машинописную копию? И куда дели оригинал? Возникает вывод, что «Вечерний Отортен» – это какая-то фальшивка, и поэтому сделали копию, а оригинал уничтожили. Между прочим, оригинал-то был, его видели некоторые люди: вертолётчик Потяженко и следователь Коротаев. Оригинал этого «Вечернего Отортена» будто бы висел в палатке рядом со входом. Он как-то был приклеен что ли к стенке? Ну, естественно, он написан был от руки. Но написано там было что-то совсем другое. Не то, что в копии.
И Потяженко, и Аксельрод говорят, что там были написаны планы на будущее. Но если почитать это в уголовном деле, там нет никаких планов на будущее. Там туристический юмор. Отсюда вывод из всего вышесказанного: нельзя верить этим документам, которые имеются в уголовном деле.
Конечно, не следует считать, что всё там абсолютно враньё написано. Нет, там есть и правда, конечно. Но чтобы выяснить эту правду, надо включать мозги. Думать надо, чтобы понять, что тут правда, а что неправда.
Ну и завершу я своё выступление своим выводом насчёт Иисуса Христа… Существовал ли он на самом деле? Мой вердикт – существовал. Был такой человек, но в Евангелиях о нём много чего придумано. Есть и правда о фактах его биографии, но есть и какая-то неправда.
Что я могу добавить к замечательному исследованию Мочалова? Конечно, прокурорам и в страшном сне представиться не могло, что их записи станут предметом такого дотошного исследования спустя десятилетия.
https://youtu.be/2GYNhpct_0I
-
The previous comment comparing DP9 to Jesus is good. In the search for the objective truth, there is always the problem of the bias in the observer. First, we must recognize that our memory is not like a tape recording. We may have a personal recollection, but the mind will fill in the gaps with what seems logically consistent. Secondly, everybody may see or hear the same thing (stimulus), but each may filter the significant information differently owing to psychological " noise" or the lack of previous experiences. Too, language itself may suffer in translation. Consider the biblical phrase, " peace on earth, good will to men" and " peace on earth to men of good will". Multiple versions of the same thing can be reported by credible and sincere witnesses. It is like six blind men describing an elephant according to what they are holding. For this tragedy is there eye witness testimony? No. Is there circumstantial evidence, Yes, abundantly so. Physical evidence? Yes, abundantly so. Demonstrative evidence, in the forms of a demonstration or an experiment? Yes, but not nearly enough.
In a court of law, you see an example of this. The objective truth is subservient to the arguements both sides present. Therefore, the judgement is based on whose construct is better as opposed to the objective truth. And, just to add grist to the mill, the gospels were written years after Christ died. The DP9 criminal case was also delayed in time.
I feel that more could be done to demonstrate or rule out different possibilities. Actions speak louder than words. I think a scale model wind tunnel test of the various wind conditions like a straight hurricane or a vortex street would be doable. I think inducing a slab slide on a mocked up tent in real conditions has merit. I think someone could walk the distance in socks and report back. Without going to stupid extremes, actually doing some of the things we speculate on would be of benefit. Finally, if any demonstrations are done, we need a thread dedicated to those efforts.
-
(https://i.ibb.co/hgYXVJQ/vac-bomb.jpg) (https://ibb.co/tHLZDTj)
Dyatlov Pass. Who undressed Doroshenko and Krivonischenko? (December 23, 2023).
[MOCHALOV:] It seems that I am on the verge of another discovery. I'll lay it out now. You all know that Doroshenko and Krivonischenko were found in the same underwear. Well, in shirts and long johns. And it looks very strange! After all, the other tourists were dressed more or less normally. Why were these two dressed so lightly?
There is also this fact: Kolevatov, on the contrary, was very well dressed! You can even say this: he was dressed like a cabbage. He was wearing two shirts, two sweaters and a ski jacket. This is from above. And underneath he was wearing three trousers. Well, and also long johns. The question arises: look, people usually don’t dress like that! If people want to dress warmly, they wear a sweater or a fur coat.
He was dressed strangely: two sweaters, two shirts, three trousers! Who dresses like that? It might be some old man who is constantly freezing. He can put on a bunch of different clothes. And a young man like Kolevatov would hardly have dressed like that.
And I had one thought. But all these numerous clothes that Kolevatov was wearing, did they by any chance belong to Krivonischenko and Doroshenko? As I already said, Doroshenko and Krivonischenko were stripped down to their underwear! And all these clothes of theirs ended up on Kolevatov? But how did she end up on Kolevatova? Did he divide Doroshenko and Krivonischenko or something? Why would he act so cruelly? This couldn't happen!
Maybe they died, and since they were dead, that means they didn’t need clothes. So Kolevatov took off their clothes and put them on himself.
Could this be so? It could, of course. But we just need to explain: why did Krivonischenko and Doroshenko suddenly die? There were no wounds on them, and there were no injuries. That’s why Dubinina and Zolotaryov died, that’s understandable. They had such terrible injuries! It is also clear why Thibeaux-Brignolles died. His skull was fractured. But Krivonischenko and Doroshenko - they were not injured. Here it is more logical to assume that Kolevatov would have taken off the clothes from Dubinina, from Thibeaux-Brignolle, from Zolotaryov, since they died from injuries. He doesn't need clothes anymore, right? He would have taken them off! But for some reason he did not take off their clothes, but from Doroshenko and Krivonischenko. This is such a mystery. But it seems that I managed to solve this riddle. Remember when I told you about my version? That in fact it was not Kolevatov who was lying in the stream, but another person!
This is why: when four of our tourists entered the training ground, the explosion of a vacuum bomb broke the ribs of Dubinina and Zolotaryov, Thibeaux-Brignolle’s skull was broken, and Kolevatov found himself at the epicenter of the explosion! As a result, he was burned. Well, maybe not all of it was burning, but waist-deep.
This is because when such a bomb explodes, the fireball hangs above the ground, and the bottom edge of this fireball may not reach the ground. Maybe there's a meter missing somewhere. And so Kolevatov found himself inside the fireball. Well, it burned... Either completely burned, or half.
But there is one nuance: the clothes had to burn first. And since the clothes burned, the question is: whose clothes was the corpse that was slipped into the stream instead of Kolevatov wearing? After all, Kolevatov’s clothes burned, right? This means that the other corpse had nothing to wear from tourists’ clothes.
The answer is: The stagers stripped Doroshenko and Krivonischenko, and put their clothes on the corpse of the imaginary Kolevatov!
This is my discovery. Well? even if it is not a discovery, but an assumption. But I think that my assumption sounds quite convincing.
I repeat my assumption: since Kolevatov’s clothes were burned, the corpse of the imaginary Kolevatov was dressed in the clothes of Doroshenko and Krivonischenko. That's why Doroshenko and Krivonischenko were stripped down to their shirts and underpants! You know, I think I'm right. What I said now can be considered a discovery!
(https://i.ibb.co/Cng35Jw/mochalov-clothes.jpg) (https://ibb.co/rZYRGbQ)
МОЧАЛОВ: Кажется, я стою на пороге очередного открытия. Сейчас я это изложу. Все вы знаете, что Дорошенко и Кривонищенко были найдены в одном нижнем белье. Ну, в рубашках и кальсонах. И это выглядит очень странно! Ведь другие туристы более-менее нормально были одеты. А почему эти двое были так легко одеты?
Есть ещё такой факт: Колеватов, наоборот, был очень хорошо одет! Даже так можно сказать: он был одет, как капуста. На нём были две рубашки, два свитера и лыжная куртка. Это сверху. А снизу он был одет в трое брюк. Ну и ещё кальсоны. Возникает вопрос: смотрите, обычно люди так не одеваются! Если люди хотят тепло одеться, то они свитер надевают, шубу.
Он странно как-то одет был: два свитера, две рубашки, трое брюк! Кто же так одевается? Это, может быть, старик какой-нибудь, который постоянно замерзает. Он может на себя натянуть кучу разной одежды. А молодой человек, каким был Колеватов, вряд ли стал бы так одеваться.
И у меня одна мысль возникла. А вот все эти многочисленные одеяния, которые были на Колеватове, они случайно не Кривонищенко с Дорошенко принадлежали? Как я уже сказал, Дорошенко и Кривонищенко были раздеты до нижнего белья! И вот вся эта их одежда - оказалась на Колеватове? Но как она оказалась на Колеватове. Он что, раздел Дорошенко и Кривонищенко что ли? А с чего он стал бы так жестоко поступать? Этого не могло быть!
Может быть, они умерли, и раз они мёртвые, значит, одежда им была не нужна. Ну и Колеватов снял с них одежду и надел на себя.
Так могло быть? Могло, конечно. Но только надо объяснить: а с чего Кривонищенко и Дорошенко вдруг умерли? На них никаких ран не было, и никаких травм не было. Вот почему умерли Дубинина и Золотарёв, это понятно. У них были такие страшные травмы! Понятно также, почему Тибо-Бриньоль умер. У него был проломлен череп. Но Кривонищенко и Дорошенко - они не были травмированы. Тут логичнее предположить, что Колеватов снял бы одежду с Дубининой, с Тибо-Бриньоля, с Золотарёва, раз они умерли от травм. Ему уже одежда не нужна, верно? Он бы с них снял! Но он почему-то не с них снял одежду, а с Дорошенко и Кривонищенко. Вот такая загадка. Но кажется, мне удалось разгадать эту загадку. Помните, я рассказывал о своей версии? Что на самом деле в ручье лежал не Колеватов, а другой человек!
Это вот почему: когда четверо наших туристов зашли на полигон, то взрывом вакуумной бомбы сломало рёбра у Дубининой и Золотарёва, у Тибо-Бриньоля проломило череп, а Колеватов оказался в эпицентре взрыва! В результате он обгорел. Ну пусть может и не весь горел, а по пояс сверху.
Это потому, что когда такая бомба взрывается, огненный шар висит над землёй, и нижний край этого огненного шара может не доставать до земли. Может там метр где-нибудь не достаёт. И вот внутри огненного шара и оказался Колеватов. Ну и сгорел... Или целиком сгорел, или наполовину.
Но есть такой нюанс: в первую очередь должна была сгореть одежда. А раз сгорела одежда, то вопрос: в чью же одежду был одет тот труп, которого подсунули в ручей вместо Колеватова? Ведь одежда Колеватова сгорела, верно? Значит, одевать тот другой труп не во что было из одежды туристов.
Ответ такой: Инсценировщики раздели Дорошенко и Кривонищенко, а их одежду надели на труп мнимого Колеватова!
Вот такое моё открытие. Ну? пусть даже и не открытие, а предположение. Но я думаю, что моё предположение достаточно убедительно звучит.
Повторяю своё предположение: так как одежда на Колеватове сгорела, то труп мнимого Колеватова одели в одежду Дорошенко и Кривонищенко. Вот почему Дорошенко и Кривонищенко были раздеты до рубашек и кальсон! Вы знаете, по-моему, я прав. То, что я сказал сейчас, можно считать открытием!
https://youtu.be/M7BVwbm2Cq0
-
At the very end of 2023, pensioner Veniamin Mochalov pleased with his next analysis Dyatlov Pass. Criminologist Sakharov: documents destroyed! (December 30, 2023). This is an analysis of the article The investigation into the death of the Dyatlov group was unreliable. This conclusion was made by forensic expert Natalya Sakharova (January 22, 2014).
https://dyatlovpass.com/natalya-saharova-KP?rbid=18461
Those. 10 years after interviewing her, her thoughts haunt her!
Veniamin Mochalov.
[-] I continue to scour the Internet and look for additional evidence that military tests were the cause of the death of the Dyatlov group. And recently I found some very interesting evidence...
All those people who are investigating the mystery of the Dyatlov Pass are not professional investigators, criminologists or experts. And I'm not a professional. And in this regard, it would be interesting to know: What do professionals say about the incident with the Dyatlov group?
And recently I found on the Internet the opinion of one professional criminologist, an expert. Her name is Sakharova Natalya Semyonovna, that is. Forensic expert, age 62 (already 72 - approx.), lives in Irkutsk, retired with the rank of lieutenant colonel, after 25 years of service in the internal affairs department. A doctor by training, she worked in a correctional labor colony in Eastern Siberia, then moved to IVF... (But I don’t know exactly what IVF is. It’s probably something like an expert or something?)... Has extensive practical experience as an expert on the ground. Well, the word Earth means that it was directly involved in the examination.
And she worked in one of the most criminal areas of Irkutsk.
Now she is an employee of the ANO “Irkutsk Expert Bureau”.
So, everything I’ve read now is from the article by the Versegovs. They, therefore, met with Sakharova and interviewed her. So, let's begin now... What exactly did she say in this interview? So, she says:
The inspection of the crime scene was carried out extremely carelessly. The trail picture near the tent is not reflected. It is not indicated how the snow is located, in layers or sediments. It is not determined what was under the snow when removing it layer by layer...
That is, look what happens. It turns out that we had to look not only at what was there in the snow, but also under the snow. And even in layers! But none of this was done. There is no description of the tracks with measurements, understand? Everyone in their memoirs says that there were footprints leading from the tent towards the cedar tree. It turns out that this is not enough. It turns out that it is necessary to specifically describe all these traces, measure each trace, what is the distance between the traces, and so on. There is nothing of this in the criminal case. There is no description of signs of falling or dragging. That is, even this should have been described, but it wasn’t.
There is no precise description of the location of objects found near the tent, indicating distances (for example, clothes, slippers).
Probably, many remember that the search engines said that somewhere 15 m from the tent there were some objects - slippers, hats, and even a roll of film. But in the case there is no description of all these objects, what exactly it was and at what distance these things were located from each other, do you understand? There is nothing of this in the case.
There is no exact description of the arrangement of things inside the tent, with a diagram of their location in the form of a picture.
And indeed, although the protocol drawn up by Tempalov says what was inside the tent, there is no drawing showing where this thing was, another thing, and so on.
There are no professionally made photo tables - these are a special kind of photographs taken according to the rules of forensic photography. Including no photos of the tent from 4 sides.
You know, from four sides! Everyone has seen a photograph of a tent located on the slope of height 179. It was only one photograph! There should be 4, and the tent should be photographed from four sides.
As we all know, there is nothing of this in the criminal case. Sakharova even said that in the criminal case there is only a domestic amateur photographer. This is true. Here is a photo of the tent - it was not taken by Tempalov, but by tourist Brusnitsyn. And this is an amateur photographer.
There are no properly taken photographs of the tracks; the photographs were taken at an angle, without filters.
Do you understand? Well, many people have probably seen a photograph of the footprints. But this photo was taken at an angle. But it was necessary to shoot perpendicular to the tracks. Moreover, this photograph, which everyone, of course, saw, means it was taken at an angle, without filters and even without a ruler. That is, it was necessary to indicate the size of the marks! Well, Sakharova says that if you don’t have a ruler, you can use some kind of standard. For example, put a box of matches next to the trail and take a photo.
The rules of forensic photography have been known since the late 1930s. And, of course, they should also be known in the mid-1950s. And such a gross violation of the inspection of such a serious and high-profile case is almost impossible to imagine.
“I believe!” says Sakharova, “that these photographs were still taken, but they were removed from the case materials.”
This is the most important thing that I would like to draw attention to. That is, Sakharova says that all these photographs and measurements are different, they must certainly be used. And since they are not there, it means they are destroyed.
Photographs allow you to give the most objective picture of the scene of the incident; they are the most reliable information. But she is also missing. The photographs were replaced by numerous, with discrepant, subjective testimony of witnesses...
Well, everyone knows that there are interrogations of witnesses. But these opinions of witnesses are subjective, and they do not reflect the exact picture. For example, search engines say: there were traces there, there were 8-9 of them. But you need to write the exact number of traces, 8 or 9, and not “8 dash 9”.
Now what Sakharova says about the tent:
I believe that the area near the tent was deliberately covered with snow to hide traces of shoes, struggles, dragging, and where the guys left the tent.
And in fact, all the search engines say: there were no traces near the tent itself. The tracks began somewhere 15-30 m from the tent. The question arises: how could it be that the tracks did not start from the tent? Did the people there jump out of the tent and fly through the air? And then went on foot? This couldn't happen! So Sakharova says that the footprints near the tent were deliberately hidden. Well, by throwing snow on it.
(https://i.ibb.co/PWMSGGg/mochalov-saharova.jpg) (https://ibb.co/JpqhjjH)
В самом конце 2023 года пенсионер Вениамин Мочалов порадовал очередным своим анализом Перевал Дятлова. Криминалист Сахарова: документы уничтожены! (30 декабря 2023). Это разбор статьи Расследование гибели группы Дятлова было недостоверным. Такой вывод сделала эксперт-криминалист Наталья Сахарова (22 января 2014).
Т.е. через 10 лет после интервью с ней, её мысли не дают покоя!
Вениамин Мочалов.
[-] Я продолжаю шарить по интернету и искать дополнительные доказательства того, что причиной гибели группы Дятлова были военные испытания. И недавно я нашёл очень интересные доказательства...
Все те люди, которые исследуют тайну перевала Дятлова, это же не профессиональные следователи, криминалисты или эксперты. И я не профессионал. И в связи с этим интересно бы узнать: А что говорят профессионалы про случай с группой Дятлова?
И вот недавно я нашёл в интернете мнение одного профессионального криминалиста, эксперта. Её зовут Сахарова Наталья Семёновна, значит. Эксперт-криминалист, возраст 62 года (уже 72 - прим.), живёт в Иркутске, вышла на пенсию в звании подполковника, после 25 лет службы в отделе внутренних дел. По образованию врач, работала в исправительно-трудовой колонии Восточной Сибири, потом перешла в ЭКО... (А вот что такое ЭКО, я точно не знаю. Это, наверное, что-то такое экспертное что ли?)... Имеет большой практический опыт работы экспертом на земле. Ну, слово Земля означает, что непосредственно занималась экспертизой.
И работала она в одном из наиболее криминальных районов Иркутска.
Сейчас она сотрудник АНО «Иркутское экспертное бюро».
Так вот, всё, что сейчас я прочитал, это из статьи супругов Версеговых. Они, значит, встречались с Сахаровой и взяли интервью у неё. Так, сейчас начнём... Что именно она сказала в этом интервью? Так вот, она говорит:
Осмотр места происшествия проведён крайне небрежно. Не отражена следовая картина возле палатки. Не указано, как расположен снег, пластами или наносами. Не определено, что было под снегом при снятии его послойно ...
То есть, смотрите, что получается. Оказывается, надо было смотреть не только что там на снегу находится, но ещё и под снегом. Да ещё и послойно! А ничего этого не было сделано. Нет описания дорожек следов с замерами, понимаете? Все в своих воспоминаниях говорят, что там от палатки в сторону кедра шли следы. Оказывается, этого-то и недостаточно. Надо, оказывается, все эти следы конкретно описать, каждый след ещё измерить, какое там расстояние между следами и так далее. Ничего этого в уголовном деле нет. Нет описания следов падения, волочения. То есть, даже это надо было описать, а этого нет.
Нет точного описания расположения предметов, обнаруженных около палатки, с указанием расстояний (например, одежда, тапочки).
Наверное, многие помнят, что поисковики говорили, что где-то в 15 м от палатки были какие-то предметы - тапочки, шапочки, и даже рулон киноплёнки. Но в деле нет описания всяких этих предметов, что конкретно это было и на каком расстоянии эти вещи располагались друг от друга, понимаете? Ничего этого в деле нет.
Нет точного описания расположения вещей внутри палатки, со схемой их расположения в виде рисунка.
И действительно, хотя в протоколе, составленном Темпаловым, написано, что там было внутри палатки, но рисунка-то нет, показывающего, в каком месте находилась вот та вещь, другая вещь и так далее.
Полностью отсутствуют профессионально сделанные фототаблицы - это особого рода фотоснимки, выполненные по правилам судебной фотографии. В том числе нет фотографий палатки с 4-х сторон.
Понимаете, с четырёх сторон! Все видели фотографию палатки, находящейся на склоне высоты 179. Это же была только одна фотография! А должно быть 4, причём сфотографирована палатка должна быть с четырёх сторон.
Как мы все знаем, ничего этого в уголовном деле нет. Вот Сахарова даже сказала, так в уголовном деле имеется лишь бытовая фотолюбительщиша. Это действительно так. Вот фотография палатки - это же не Темпалов сделал, а турист Брусницын. А это есть фотолюбитель.
Нет правильно выполненных фотоснимков следов, фото сделаны под углом, без светофильтров.
Понимаете? Ну, многие наверное видели фотографию следов-столбиков. Но это фото сделано под углом. А надо было снимать перпендикулярно следам, Причём эта фотография, которую все разумеется видели, она так значит сделана под углом, без светофильтров и даже без линейки. То есть, надо было размер-то следов указать! Ну и Сахарова говорит, что при отсутствии линейки можно использовать какой-нибудь стандарт. Например, положить рядом со следом коробок спичек и сфотографировать.
Правила судебной фотографии были известны с конца 1930-х годов. И уж, разумеется, в середине 1950-х годов тоже должны быть известны. И такое грубейшее нарушение в проведении осмотра по столь серьёзному и резонансному делу практически невозможно представить.
- Полагаю!, - говорит Сахарова, - что данные фотоснимки всё же выполнялись, но из материалов дела они изъяты.
Вот это самое главное, на что я хотел бы обратить внимание. То есть, Сахарова говорит, что все эти фотоснимки и измерения разные, они непременно должны быть в деле. А раз их нет, значит, они уничтожены.
Фотоснимки позволяют дать наиболее объективное представление о месте происшествия, они является самой достоверной информацией. Но она-то и отсутствует. Фотокарточки заменены многочисленными, с разночтениями, субъективными показаниями свидетелей...
Ну, это все знают, что там есть допросы свидетелей. Но ведь эти мнения свидетелей - они же субъективны, и точную картину они не отражают. Вот, например, поисковики говорят: там были следы, их было 8-9. Но ведь надо писать точное количество следов, 8 или 9, а не "8 тире 9".
Теперь, что Сахарова говорит насчёт палатки:
Полагаю, что участок возле палатки был намеренно забросан снегом, чтоб скрыть следы обуви, борьбы, волочения, места выхода ребят из палатки.
И в самом деле, все поисковики говорят: около самой палатки никаких следов не было. Следы начинались где-то в 15-30 м от палатки. Спрашивается, как так могло получиться, что следы начинались не от палатки? Неужели люди там из палатки выскочили и полетели по воздуху? А потом пошли пешком? Такого же не могло быть! Вот Сахарова и говорит, что около палатки следы были намеренно скрыты. Ну, путём накидывания снега.
https://youtu.be/KnqeFIUwYTM
-
Hi Axelrod
I appreciate these translation's. Can you translate this video by Yuri Yudin? That is if you feel it's in keeping with this thread. The auto translation into English is awful and makes little sense.
https://youtu.be/_vaPTqZnFlA?si=IEnk50gbIKZqtwN6
If the English translation is on the main website , please direct me.
Many thanks
-
I have only last short part from this interview which I prepared in summer for translations.
This full interview starts from speech abour hikers inventory as some incorrect for this hike. Yudin says about sleeping bag for 10 persons which definitely was absent in this hike.. So I have no time prepare this full text right now and provide only actual content
-----
[Y.:] The atmosphere of secrecy is incredible. Well, everyone was on duty there at the institute. Who, how, why? Found, not found?
[–] And what conversations did you have at the institute? What did they say? Why?
[Y.:] There were talks that there was some kind of natural cause, an element, and everyone was sure that this was an avalanche.
[–] Did everyone think they were alive or not?
[Y.:] Until they were found, everyone thought they were alive. There was no talk about the fact that they had already died. But here are the people who knew that they had died, they were in the shadows.
[–] Who knew? What kind of people were they?
[Y.:] I assume that this is due to some kind of factory or whatever tests. And there, it means, there were people who were on duty there, well, this is my opinion. YOU DON'T WRITE IT ANYWHERE. And I think that they… I am a supporter of this, Kuntsevich, that they were cleared out there.
[–] How did you personally find out about this? Who told you about it?
[Y.:] And there immediately, there was duty, in the tourist club, in the trade union committee. Immediately all the news spread instantly. Everyone went there and looked. What's there, what's the news? Communication was already with the entire region. And there was a connection with the rescuers… And then this entire magazine was confiscated from them.
[–] What is your first feeling? They told you, they came and told you.
[Y.:] Fear, fear, fear. Such here. But it's impossible to explain… It's impossible to believe it. What's happened? I don't know, it's indescribable. The whole city was thinking about it. Well, what is it? What fell? Everything is horror…
[–] Did you have a fear for yourself at that moment that you could be there?
[Y.:] N-no, where did I get it from? I wasn't with them.
[–] Well, if you suddenly went? Did you think about it then?
[Y.:] Now, if I went, then… No, I didn't think that I could be. I just put myself in their place. I thought, why did I leave, why did I not share this fate with them, and everything else. Maybe things would have been different there. What is there, here? And investigator Ivanov immediately told me to put all these thoughts out of my head. That definitely I would be the tenth. He told me right away. That is, the case was already opened on the 6th, the search began on the 20th. And on February 6, they already knew everything there, these people. And Ivanov, the investigator, says that these people were Kirilenko, the first secretary of the regional party committee…
[–] But Ivanov said this later.
[Y.:] He immediately told me about it. Straightaway!
[–] What did he say? What did he say?
[Y.:] Well, when he was talking to me, I can't do it… Even when Kirilenko invited me… Why? Some student? I… I was afraid. There are 30,000 students there, and the director of the institute takes me from class, trembling all over, and Kirilenko leads me there, to the office, for protection. Kirilenko is like a governor with us now. And not as a governor, he was then, it's like a god. Vicar of God. And that's it. They knew everything, the reasons were known. Ivanov knew, Kirilenko knew the reasons, and also the regional prosecutor. Here are 3 people!
[–] You were called to see Kirilenko, so what?
[Y.:] Yes, they didn’t call me, but he was curious to see who it was? Everyone died, but he remained. Well, I don't know, because he said something to me, he hugged me. I don't know what, I mean, I don't remember. Well, first of all, I was trembling there like an aspen leaf. Suddenly me to the most important. I got it all off. That is, if there was some kind of elemental force, then everyone would be happy, there would be a reason, and the case would be closed immediately. And now, almost 60 years later, this meeting between us would not have happened.
[–] Yuri Efimovich, what did Ivanov tell you, what did he tell you?
[Y.:] Ivanov, he calmed me, as it were. He treated me like a child. He is a good man. But in the end, about the reasons, I tell him that an avalanche, even with him I proved it to him… But he could not write an avalanche, it was not there. Because there was a Moscow group, there were specialists, our Moscow climbers were there, and there were no traces of an avalanche. This tent, it stood as it was, fastenings, everything, there was nothing… there was nothing. And now some people are reanimating it, this version. When she was No. 1, then she was not confirmed. And now it’s very convenient to write it all off under it.
[–] And what about Ivanov? What did he tell you?
[Y.:] And Ivanov told me about the reasons: when we investigate completely, I will gather all of you and tell you. But there was this elemental force, there was a frost, a blizzard, a hurricane, a wind… But we are still investigating… And he blamed everything on a hurricane.
[–] Did he directly tell you that this is all under Kirilenko's control?
[Y.:] No, no! God forbid! This is what he said now, now it is the media, but then he could not say this at all!
[–] Did you go to the identification?
[Y.:] I went. So they invited me there to identify things, to Ivdel. All the things had already been brought there, but they were in disorder, in heaps. I distributed them. But since I knew which backpack was whose, I already knew from the backpacks what was in the backpack, it was already clear that this person. That's how I did it. And the clothes that were outside the backpacks, I certainly knew. There were axes, everything was Dyatlov's… But now they write that I didn't recognize them. Yes, I didn’t recognize it, because how exactly do I know… it’s all when going on a hike, this one brings this, this one another. You see, I didn't know about that. There was one thing alien – a soldier's winding! I unfolded it and told Ivanov that it was not theirs. I don't know how this thing got here. Maybe she's from somewhere else. Here is someone else's. But he didn't write it down. I conclude that he did not need to write it down. Where did the soldier winding come from? And then the head of the search, Lieutenant Colonel Ortyukov, he found the second winding in the ravine, where they found the last ones, and there was so much snow there! The winding there, of course, was lost from the leg, because it cannot be found there, in such snow. And he found this second winding, and even then he specially gave a radiogram: «The appearance of the winding is incomprehensible to me,» and he described it. And at the very beginning I said that there is only one winding. That is, there were other people who did all this.
[–] Have you seen the dead guys? Did they see them dead in the morgue?
[Y.:] When I arrived, I saw Rustik Slobodin there, and I saw Igor. Rustik was not yet defrosted, but Igor had already been opened and covered with a shroud. And they opened it to me, showed me. That's who it is, they asked, in this regard. And I said.
[–] Everyone says there was an unusual body color. Can you say something about this?
[Y.:] Rustik had this color of a living person. It's like here. But he wasn't defrosted yet. Well, I didn't look at it that way. And Igor already had color. Well, an open body, everything. He was kind of dark.
[–] Have you seen this orange color?
[Y.:] I didn't see orange, but all the guys would talk about it. And this is evidence that there was either radioactive, or chemical, or fuel impact. For radioactive, it means that I gave it to specialists there, from there I gave the soil, and gave a piece of cedar. The author of all these textbooks on radioactivity, he is an impeccable authority. And he told me that this is all background. There, I gave him all these tests. He said, all this is the background of that area and that time. But he says that this technique, which was used then for this diagnosis, these all these analyzes, then the technique was imperfect, so I can’t say anything specifically, they say, now I can’t. But he said that this is all background. I believe him. And no one did an analysis of the terrain for fuel. I tried to do this at my own expense, but they told me that you don’t poke your nose here, that we are only dealing with the direction of the authorities.
[–] Who told you that?
[Y.:] I was told at the Institute of Ecology in Yekaterinburg. And then, I knew one ecologist there. I say, how can I organize it all myself? He confirmed all this and said that it was all very expensive. And even we, when we give it for tests, take fabulous money from us. Now, if someone would give this money now, because this analysis… it is not too late to do it even after a hundred years. Therefore, you just need to do this analysis.
[–] Were you not invited to the identification of those 4 who were found in the stream?
[Y.:] No, everything was hidden there. Even the institute did not know about it all. I learned about it only after 40 years, about these injuries. When I was allowed to do this under protection. And then, when their last were buried, then in the most closed environment. One might even say secret. Nobody knew that they would be buried. Absolutely no one knew. Not in college, not anywhere.
[–] But did the relatives know?
[Y.:] Relatives knew. The only ones. Nobody else knew.
[–] Did you have to communicate with them after everything happened?
[Y.:] I only talked with the Dyatlovs… They all invited me and they say: here you will be like a son with us… But it's so hard… I stopped talking… They invited me, I was at them visiting. Arrived, everything is fine. But like this, when everyone is crying there, and I am the source of these very feelings there…
…And this Lenka Koskina, Milenko's wife. She was a student, saw this case in the archive. It was already almost ruined. Who needs it, he took it. But this is a fake case, nobody needs it, it has no number. And now this case is being offered to all of us, we are writing to all instances, to the prosecutor's office, to the Prosecutor General, to all instances, to the KGB… And they all offer us this case, which Lena Koskina found. Then there was a long article by the journalist Bogomolov. Very good, reliable information. Then he somehow walked away from this business. And I found out myself only through these publications…
[–] So, all these 50 years you've been trying to find out?
[Y.:] Yes, yes, I'm trying to find out, but no one says anything, because… the reason for the secrecy is that it still exists.… It all goes on there, there, in that area.
[–] What's going on?
[Y.:] The reason that killed the guys. It continues to this day.
[–] And in your opinion, what was the reason? What ruined?
[Y.:] In my opinion, this is a purge. This is on the one hand. Why did the purges appear? Since they had already run into the wrong place, well, where it was not necessary to come. But it is not their fault that they happened to be witnesses and were poisoned. They were already doomed, because Ivanov told me so. Here is the word «doomed.» They just weren't needed. They reported on command. They were told what they were? So, spies.
[–] Why did Ivanov tell you that they were doomed?
[Y..:] They were already poisoned due to their health. But Ivanov didn't tell me that. He told me that there was an elemental force – a hurricane. And they were afraid of it. But knowing them each separately, who could do what, I completely exclude this version. No hurricane. These guys were adequate in any situation. Moreover, there was such an experienced Zolotaryov. Igor, too, before making a decision, he would have to find out what is there? Of course, there was no hurricane there…
-----
(https://i.ibb.co/W5Kw2Fn/yudin2013.jpg) (https://ibb.co/54cyRvT)
ORIGINAL:
[Ю.:] Атмосфера секретности неимоверная. Ну как вот, все дежурили там в институте. Кто, как, почему? Нашли, не нашли?
[–] А какие разговоры в институте ходили? Что говорили? Почему?
[Ю.:] Разговоры были, что там какая-то естественная причина, стихия, и все были уверены, что это лавина.
[–] А все думали, что они живы или нет?
[Ю.:] Пока их не нашли, все думали, что они живы. О том, что они уже умерли, об этом никаких разговоров не было. Но вот люди-то, которые знали, что они умерли, они были в тени.
[–] А кто знал? Что это за люди были?
[Ю.:] Я предполагаю, что это связано с какими-то заводскими или там какими испытаниями. И там, значит, были люди, которые там дежурили, ну это моё мнение. ВЫ ЭТО НИГДЕ НЕ ПИШИТЕ. И я думаю, что их… я сторонник этого, Кунцевича, что там их зачистили.
[–] Вот вы лично как об этом узнали? Кто вам об этом сказал?
[Ю.:] А там сразу же, там же дежурство было, в турклубе, в профкоме. Сразу же все вести распространялись моментально. Там же все ходили, смотрели. Что там, какие новости? Связь-то была уже со всею областью. И с поисковиками была связь… А потом этот весь журнал у них изъяли.
[–] Что вот ваше первое чувство? Вот вам сказали, пришли и сказали.
[Ю.:] Страх, страх, страх. Такой вот. Но это невозможно объяснить… Невозможно в это поверить. Что такое? Не знаю, это не передать. Весь город об этом думал. Ну вот что это такое? Что упало? Всё – ужас…
[–] У вас был страх за себя в тот момент, что вы могли быть там же?
[Ю.:] Н-нет, откуда у меня? Я же с ними не был.
[–] Ну если бы вдруг пошли? Вот вы тогда думали об этом?
[Ю.:] Вот если бы я пошёл, то… Нет, я не думал, что я мог быть. Я только себя поставил на их место. Я думал, а почему я ушёл, почему я не разделил с ними эту участь, и всё прочее. Может быть, там обстоятельства были бы по-другому. Что там такое, вот? А следователь Иванов мне сразу сказал, чтобы я выкинул из головы все эти мысли. Что однозначно я был бы десятым. Он мне сразу так сказал. Т.е., уже дело было открыто 6-го, поиски начались 20-ого. А 6 февраля там уже всё было им известно, вот этим людям. А Иванов, следователь, говорит, что эти люди были Кириленко, первый секретарь обкома партии…
[–] Но Иванов об этом сказал уже потом.
[Ю.:] Он мне сразу сказал об этом. Сразу!
[–] А как он сказал? Что он сказал?
[Ю.:] Ну вот при разговоре он мне, я не могу это… Я даже, когда Кириленко меня приглашал… Зачем? Какой-то студент? Я… я боялся. Там 30 тысяч студентов, а меня директор института с занятий берёт, весь дрожит, и меня для защиты туда, в кабинет ведёт, к этому Кириленко. Кириленко это как губернатор у нас сейчас. И не как губернатор, он тогда был, это, как бог. Наместник бога. И всё. Им всё было известно, причины известны. Иванов знал, Кириленко знал причины, и ещё прокурор области. Вот 3 человека!
[–] Вас вызвали к Кириленко, и что?
[Ю.:] Да меня не вызвали, а ему было любопытно посмотреть, а кто это такой? Все погибли, а он остался. Ну, я не знаю, потому что что-то он там мне говорил, он меня обнял. Я не знаю, о чём, то есть, не помню. Ну я, во-первых, это, дрожал там, как осиновый лист. Вдруг меня к самому Главному. У меня всё отшибло. То есть, если бы там была какая-то стихийная сила, то все были бы довольны, была бы причина, и дело бы закрыли немедленно. И вот сейчас, через почти 60 лет, вот этой нашей с вами встречи не было бы.
[–] Юрий Ефимович, а что рассказывал вам Иванов, что он говорил вам?
[Ю.:] Иванов, он меня, как бы это, успокаивал. Он ко мне относился, как к ребёнку. Он хороший человек. Но в конце концов, о причинах, я ему говорю, что лавина, ещё с ним доказывал это ему… А он же не мог написать лавина, её там не было. Потому что там была московская группа, там были специалисты, московские наши ребята-альпинисты были, и там не было никаких следов лавины. Эта палатка, она как стояла, так и стояла, крепления, всё, там ничего… не было. А теперь некоторые люди реанимируют её, эту версию. Когда она была №1, тогда она не подтвердилось. А сейчас под неё очень удобно это всё списать.
[–] И что Иванов? Что он вам говорил?
[Ю.:] А Иванов мне сказал о причинах: когда мы расследуем полностью, я вас всех соберу и скажу. Но там была эта стихийная сила, там был мороз, пурга, ураган, ветер… Но мы пока расследуем… И он всё свалил на ураган.
[–] Он вам прямо сказал, что это всё находится под контролем Кириленко?
[Ю.:] Нет-нет! Боже упаси! Это он сейчас так сказал, сейчас же это, средства массовой информации, а тогда он этого вообще говорить не мог!
[–] Вы ездили на опознание?
[Ю.:] Я ездил. Вот они меня туда пригласили для опознания вещей, в Ивдель. Там вещи уже были все привезены, но они были беспорядочно, кучами. Я их распределял. Но поскольку я знал, какой там чей рюкзак, я уже по рюкзакам знал, что там в рюкзаке лежит, ясно уже, что этого человека. Вот так я это делал. И одежду, которая была за пределами рюкзаков, я конечно знал. Там топоры, всё-всё было дятловское… Но сейчас пишут, что вот я их не опознал. Да я не опознал, потому что откуда я конкретно знаю… это же всё когда собирается в поход, этот приносит то, этот другое. Понимаете, я в этом смысле не знал. ‹Там была одна вещь чужеродная› – солдатская обмотка! Я её развернул и Иванову сказал, что это не ихняя вещь. Я не знаю, как эта вещь здесь оказалась. Может быть, она откуда-то с другого места. Вот это чужое. Но он это в протокол не записал. Я делаю вывод, что ему это и не надо было записывать. Откуда там взялась солдатская обмотка? А потом начальник поисков, подполковник Ортюков, он вторую обмотку нашёл в овраге, где нашли последних, а там же было вот столько снега! Обмотка там, естественно, с ноги потерялась, потому что там её и не найти, в таком снегу. И он нашёл эту вторую обмотку, и он даже потом специально дал радиограмму: «появление обмотки мне непонятно», и он её описал. А я же в самом начале сказал, что вот обмотка одна. То есть, там были чужие люди, которые это всё делали.
[–] Вы видели мёртвыми ребят? В морге видели их мёртвыми?
[Ю.:] Я, когда приехал, так там я видел Рустика Слободина, и видел Игоря. Рустик ещё был не размороженный, а Игорь уже был вскрыт, и саваном накрыт. И мне открыли, показали. Вот кто это, спрашивали, в таком плане. И я сказал.
[–] Все говорят, был необычный цвет тела. Что-то можете по этому сказать?
[Ю.:] Вот у Рустика был это цвет живого человека. Вот как будто бы вот. Но он ещё был не размороженный. Ну я ж его не разглядывал так это. А у Игоря цвет был уже. Ну, вскрытое тело, всё прочее. ‹Он был какой-то тёмный›.
[–] Этого вот оранжевого цвета вы не видели?
[Ю.:] Оранжевого цвета я не видел, но все ребята бы об этом говорят. А это свидетельство того, что там было или радиоактивное, или химическое, или топливное воздействие. На радиоактивное, значит, я отдавал специалистам туда, оттуда почву отдавал, и кусок от кедра отдавал. Автору этих всех учебников по радиоактивности, он авторитет безукоризненный. И он мне сказал, что это всё фоновое. Там вот эти все анализы я ему дал. Он сказал, всё это фон той местности и того времени. Но говорит, что эта техника, которая использовалась тогда для этой диагностики, вот эти всех этих анализов, тогда была техника несовершенная, поэтому сказать что-либо конкретно, мол, сейчас я не могу. Но сказал, что это всё фоновое. Я ему верю. А анализ местности на топливо никто не делал. Я пытался за свой счёт это сделать, но мне сказали, что ты сюда не суйся, что мы имеем дело только по направлению органов.
[–] Кто вам это сказал?
[Ю.:] Мне сказали в институте экологии в Екатеринбурге. А потом, я там знаком был с одним экологом. Я говорю, как мне это всё организовать самому? Он это всё подтвердил и сказал, что это всё очень дорого. И даже мы, когда отдаём на анализы, с нас берут баснословные деньги. Вот если бы кто-то эти деньги дал сейчас, потому что анализ этот… его сделать не поздно даже через сто лет. Поэтому надо просто сделать этот анализ.
[–] На опознание вот тех 4-х, которых нашли в ручье, вас не приглашали?
[Ю.:] Нет, и там вообще было всё скрыто. Даже в институте не знали об этом всём. Я об этом узнал только через 40 лет, об этих травмах. Когда меня по протекции допустили к этому делу. И потом, когда их последних хоронили, то в максимально закрытой обстановке. Даже можно сказать, секретной. Никто не знал, что их будут хоронить. Абсолютно никто не знал. Ни в институте, нигде.
[–] Но родственники знали?
[Ю.:] Родственники знали. Единственные. Больше никто не знал.
[–] Вам приходилось общаться с ними после того, как всё случилось?
[Ю.:] Я только общался с Дятловыми… Они меня все пригласили и говорят: вот ты у нас будешь как сын… Но это настолько тяжело… Я перестал общаться. Они меня пригласили, я был у них в гостях. Приехал, всё нормально. Но вот так, когда там все плачут, и я там источник вот этих самых чувств…
…И вот эта Ленка Коськина, жена Миленко. Она была студентка, увидела это дело в архиве. Оно уже было почти раскурочено. Кому надо, тот и брал. Но это дело бутафорское, оно никому не нужное, оно без номера. А теперь вот это дело нам всем предлагают, мы там во все инстанции пишем, в прокуратуру, Генеральному прокурору, во все инстанции, в КГБ… И они нам все предлагают вот это дело, которое нашла Лена Коськина. Потом была большая статья журналиста Богомолова. Очень хорошая, достоверная информация. Потом он от этого дела отошёл как-то. А я узнавал сам только через эти публикации…
[–] Получается, все вот эти 50 лет вы пытаетесь узнать?
[Ю.:] Да-да, я пытаюсь узнать, но никто ничего не говорит, потому что… причина секретности – она сохраняется до сих пор. … Там это всё продолжается, там, в том районе.
[–] А что продолжается?
[Ю.:] Причина, которая ребят погубила. Она продолжается до сих пор.
[–] А на ваш взгляд, что за причина была? Что погубило?
[Ю.:] На мой взгляд, это зачистка. Это с одной стороны. А почему появились зачистка? Поскольку они уже напоролись туда, куда не надо было приходить. Но они-то не виноваты, что они случайно оказались свидетелями и подверглись отравлению. Они уже были обречены, потому что мне так сказал Иванов. Вот это слово «обречены». Они просто были не нужны. Там сообщили по команде. Им сказали, что такие? Значит, шпионы.
[–] А почему Иванов вам сказал, что они были обречены?
[Ю.:] По здоровью они уже были отравлены. Но Иванов мне так не говорил. Он мне сказал, что там была стихийная сила – ураган. И они от этого испугались. Но зная их каждого в отдельности, кто как мог поступить, я эту версию совершенно исключаю. Никакой ураган. Эти ребята были адекватны при любой ситуации. А тем более был такой опытный Золотарёв. Игорь тоже, прежде чем принять решение, он должен был бы узнать, что там такое? Урагана там, конечно, не было…
-
Thank you so much Axelrod, I appreciate it.
-
Dyatlov Pass. The mystery of soldiers' windings (January 9, 2024):
[MOCHALOV:] Today I would like to talk about the strange things found among the belongings of the Dyatlov group. For example, these strange things were discovered - soldiers' windings. Where could tourists get soldiers' windings from? After all, they didn’t serve in the army! But even if they served, it’s unlikely that they would have these soldier’s windings.
The fact is that windings were abolished in the Soviet Army in 1943. By the way, in the same year, shoulder straps were introduced into the Soviet Army. Probably, simultaneously with the introduction of shoulder straps, windings were also abolished.
But usually the appearance of windings among tourists’ belongings is explained as follows: they belonged to Zolotarev. He is a front-line soldier, and began his participation in the war even before 1943. This means it could have windings.
But this version that the windings belonged to Zolotarev, it seems to me, will not work. And the main reason why this version will not work is the following... I’ll explain now. This means that one winding was found near the tent, and the other on the flooring. So, there is such a nuance: not a winding was found on the flooring, but half a winding. Colonel Ortyukov wrote in a radiogram that a winding of overcoat cloth was found on the flooring. And how she appeared there, he cannot understand. So, Ortyukov didn’t write it quite correctly. What was found on the flooring was not a winding, just half a winding. After all, he wrote in the radiogram that the length of the winding was about 1 meter. But in fact, the length of the windings was not a meter, but 2 m 15 cm. And 1 m is half. And the fact that half of the winding was discovered suggests that it is unlikely to have belonged to Zolotarev. Why on earth would Zolotarev take half the winding on a hike? You can’t wrap it around your leg! These windings were wound around the shin. But to completely wrap the entire shin, a minimum of 2 m was required. And with one meter, of course, you cannot cover the entire shin. It's simply not enough! Thus, Zolotarev simply would not have taken half the winding on a hike. She wouldn't be of any use to him there! It cannot even be used as a scarf. The fact is that overcoat cloth is rough. Wrap it around your neck like a scarf, and it will rub your neck. This is one of the arguments showing that the winding (more precisely, half of the winding) could not belong to Zolotarev.
Well, the second argument is this. According to the official version, the tourists of Dyatlov’s group left the tent for no reason. Question: why, when running away from the tent, did Zolotarev take half the winding with him? What did he want to do with them? (laughs) And what’s interesting is that for some reason Zolotarev, while escaping from the scarf, also took a camera with him, as well as a notebook! Strange... Why does he need all this with him? Well, let’s say a camera, okay, can be explained by the fact that a camera is a valuable thing. He may not have wanted to lose it, so he captured it. Well, why a notebook? (In which I didn’t write anything!) Moreover, he would not have taken half the winding with him. These considerations show that this winding did not belong to Zolotarev, but to some completely stranger, not a member of Dyatlov’s group.
Don’t forget that Zolotarev was not from Sverdlovsk or the region, but from the Stavropol Territory. Did he really decide to take half the winding with him over 1000 km? Also very strange... In short, this is not his winding!
So, I think I’ve told you everything about the winding. But there is one more thing I would like to tell you. This means that there was an army flask with alcohol in the tent, and chopped loin was also found there. Well, there were pieces of bread lying nearby. What hypothesis can be put forward by looking at this? And this: someone was going to have a drink and a snack. Who? Are they tourists? Then it turns out somehow strange: at night, out of the blue, they suddenly decided to have a drink and a snack, they cut up some loin and bread, you know? Very strange...
Then this flask with alcohol was discovered by search engines, and it was lying in a metal bucket. And the bucket stood at the entrance to the tent. Now let's think about it. Would tourists really store alcohol in the cold in a bucket? He'll freeze there. True, it will not turn into ice. As far as I know, alcohol turns into ice at a temperature of -114 degrees, or -144. Well, in short, at a very low temperature. But it is not important. Even if the alcohol did not turn into ice, it would still be cold. And drinking cold alcohol internally or as a rub is also somehow uncomfortable. My point is that tourists couldn't put a flask of alcohol in a bucket. Usually tourists do this with alcohol: they pour it into hot water bottles, and then hang the hot water bottle on themselves, around their necks. Well, so that the heating pad is closer to the body, and so that the alcohol is warm. Well, that is, it would be heated by the body.
And we can conclude that this flask did not belong to the Dyatlovites, but to some strangers. These strangers decided to have a drink and a snack, they cut the loin, they also cut the bread, but something prevented them from drinking. Do you understand? Before they had time to drink, they were forced to unexpectedly leave the tent. Well, give it all up - the loin, the alcohol, and the bread.
So what is the reason that they did not drink alcohol? My version: it was not the Dyatlovites who were going to have a drink and a snack in the tent, but soldiers. They were given alcohol to help them warm up. Well, so that they will be there when the tent is set up and the corpses of the Dyatlovites are laid out, so that they can drink there, warm up and have lunch. And so the soldiers climbed into the tent. Well, how many of them were there? Maybe there are three of these soldiers there, or maybe four. They climbed into the tent, cut everything there, and were just about to have a drink, when suddenly a helicopter flies in, the commander lands and orders:
“Come on, guys, get ready immediately and board the helicopter!” There's no point in sitting here! Suddenly someone will see. Maybe a Mansi hunter will pass by and see that the soldiers have set up a tent for some reason...
That’s why the commander quickly drove them out of the tent, they boarded the helicopter and flew away. And at the same time they forgot a flask of alcohol, chopped loin and pieces of bread in the tent.
This is my version. I don't know how convincing this all sounds. But, in my opinion, it is quite convincing.
(https://i.ibb.co/xs9Ft77/mochalov-obmotki.jpg) (https://ibb.co/7zMkd11)
Перевал Дятлова. Тайна солдатских обмоток (9 января 2024):
[МОЧАЛОВ:] Сегодня я хотел бы поговорить о странных вещицах, обнаруженных среди вещей дятловцев. Вот такие, например, странные вещи были обнаружены - солдатские обмотки. Откуда у туристов могли взяться солдатские обмотки? Ведь они же в армии не служили! Но даже если бы и служили, то тоже вряд ли у них были бы эти солдатские обмотки.
Дело в том, что обмотки были отменены в Советской Армии в 1943 году. Кстати, в том же году в Советской Армии были введены погоны. Наверное, одновременно с введением погон были отменены и обмотки.
Но обычно появление обмоток среди вещей туристов объясняют так: а это они Золотарёву принадлежали. Он же фронтовик, причём начал своё участие в войне ещё до 1943 года. Значит, у него могли быть обмотки.
Но эта версия, что обмотки принадлежали Золотарёву, мне кажется, не пройдёт. И главная причина, почему эта версия не пройдёт, заключается в следующем... Сейчас объясню. Значит, одна обмотка была обнаружена у палатки, а другая на настиле. Так вот, тут есть такой нюанс: на настиле была обнаружена не обмотка, а половина обмотки. Полковник Ортюков в радиограмме написал, что на настиле обнаружена обмотка из шинельного сукна. И как она там появилась, он не может понять. Так вот, Ортюков не совсем правильно написал. На настиле была обнаружена не обмотка, в половина обмотки. Ведь он написал в радиограмме, что длина обмотки была где-то 1 метр. А на самом деле длина обмоток была не метр, а 2 м 15 см. А 1 м - это получается половина. И тот факт, что была обнаружена половина обмотки, как раз и говорит о том, что вряд ли она принадлежала Золотарёву. С какой стати Золотарёв взял бы в поход половину обмотки? Ею же на ногу ты не замотаешь! Эти обмотки наматывались на голень. Но чтобы полностью замотать всю голень, требовалось минимум 2 м, А одним метром, понятно, всю голень не заметаешь. Её просто не хватит! Таким образом, Золотарёв просто бы не взял половину обмотки в поход. Она бы ему там никак не пригодилась! Её даже в качестве шарфа невозможно использовать. Дело в том, что шинельное сукно - оно же грубое. Намотаешь вокруг шеи, как шарф, и тебе шею натрёт. Это один из аргументов, показывающий, что обмотка (точнее, половина обмотки) не могла принадлежать Золотарёву.
Ну а второй аргумент такой. Cогласно официальной версии, туристы группы Дятлова ни с того ни с сего покинули палатку. Вопрос: а почему, убегая из палатки, Золотарёв захватил с собой пол-обмотки? Что он с ними хотел далать? (смеётся) Причём что интересно, Золотарёв зачем-то, убегая из платки, ещё и фотоаппарат с собой захватил, а также записную книжку! Странно... Зачем ему всё это с собой? Ну, допустим, фотоаппарат, ладно, можно объяснить тем, что фотоаппарат - ценная вещь. Он, может, не хотел его терять, и поэтому захватил. Ну а записную книжку зачем? (В котрой ничего не записал!) А тем более не стал бы он с собой прихватывать половину обмотки Вот эти соображения показывают, что эта обмотка принадлежала не Золотарёву, а какому-то совершенно постороннему человеку, не участнику группы Дятлова.
Ещё не забывайте, что Золотарёв был родом не из Свердловска или области, а из из Ставропольского края. неужели за 1000 км он решил с собой половину обмотки везти? Тоже очень странно... Короче, это не его обмотка!
Так, про обмотку, кажется, я всё рассказал. Но ещё кое о чём мне мне хотелось бы рассказать. Значит, в палатке была армейская фляжка со спиртом, а также там была обнаружена нарезанная корейка. Ну и рядом валялись куски хлеба. Вот какую гипотезу можно выдвинуть, глядя на это? А такую: кто-то собирался выпить и закусить. А кто? Неужели туристы? Тогда как-то странно получается: ночью ни с то ни с сего вдруг решили выпить и закусить, нарезали корейку и хлеб, понимаете? Очень странно...
Далее эта фляжка со спиртом была обнаружена поисковиками, и она лежала в металлическом ведре. А ведро стояло у входа в палатку. А теперь подумаем. Неужели туристы стали бы хранить спирт на холоде в ведре? Он же там замёрзнет. Правда, в лёд он не превратится. Насколько мне известно, спирт превращается в лёд при температуре -114 градусов, то ли -144. Ну, короче, при очень низкой температуре. Но это неважно. Даже если спирт не превратился бы в лёд, всё равно он бы холодный был. А холодный спирт употребля внутрь или в качестве натирания - тоже как-то некомфортно. Я хочу сказать, что туристы не могли положить фляжку со спиртом в ведро. Обычно туристы со спиртом поступают так: они наливают его в грелки, ну а грелку вешают на себя, на шею. Ну чтобы грелка была ближе к телу, и чтобы спирт был тёплым. Ну то есть, нагревался бы от тела.
И можно сделать вывод эта фляжка принадлежала не дятловцам, а каким-то посторонним людям. Эти посторонние люди решили выпить и закусить, нарезали корейку, хлеб тоже нарезали, но что-то им помешало выпить. Понимаете? Не успели они выпить и были вынуждены неожиданно покинуть палатку. Ну и всё это бросить - и корейку, и спирт, и хлеб.
Так в чём же причина, что они не выпили спирт? Моя версия: выпить и закусить в палатке собирались не дятловцы, а солдаты. Им для сугреву выдали спирт. Ну, чтобы они там, когда палатку поставят и трупы дятловцев разложат, чтобы могли там выпить, согреться и пообедать. И вот солдаты, значит, залезли в палатку. Ну, сколько их там было? Может, три человека там этих солдат, а может четыре. Они залезли в палатку, нарезали всё там, и только собрались выпить, как тут вдруг прилетает вертолёт, командир высаживается и приказывает:
«А ну-ка, ребята, немедленно собирайтесь и погружаетесь в вертолёт! Нечего тут сидеть! Вдруг кто-то увидит. Может, охотник манси пройдёт мимо и увидит, что солдаты палатку поставили зачем-то...»
Вот поэтому командир их быстренько прогнал из палатки, они погрузились в вертолёт и улетели. И при этом они забыли в палатке фляжку со спиртом, нарезанную корейку и куски хлеба.
Вот такая моя версия. Не знаю, насколько всё это убедительно звучит. Но, по-моему, вполне убедительно.
https://youtu.be/EuZD9b8fKHE
-
YURI ALEKSEEVICH KRIVONISCHENKO (GEORGIY) is known to have owned windings. He is photographed wearing them.
-
New video by Veniamin Mochalov Dyatlov Pass. Answer to Nikolai Chudin (January 10-11, 2024):
[-] Yesterday one person asked me a question. And I decided to answer him in the video. The question was: if Dyatlov’s group was killed at the training ground, then why did the military stage a reenactment? They could have simply hidden the corpses somewhere and no one would have found them!
Yes, indeed, this is usually done. If a criminal has committed a murder, then he hides the corpse rather than displaying it. And then it turned out that the military put everything on display: they brought a tent to the pass, put it there on the mountain, and laid out the corpses nearby. And in such a way that they were visible. Especially Doroshenko and Krivonischenko. They weren’t even buried in the snow, they were simply laid there.
I answer this question: why did the military stage the staging? Since Dyatlov’s group disappeared, they would certainly start looking for them. How to search? Let's follow in their footsteps! And besides, everyone knew the route of the Dyatlov group and could not even follow the tracks, but precisely along the route... And where would these traces lead? They would lead me to the training ground. Since this was a testing ground, then naturally there should be traces of explosions of vacuum bombs. Firstly, there must be craters, and the craters are not in the ground, but in the snow. In addition, these explosions could have scorched or broken trees, and would also have left a mark. Well, since the tree is broken and scorched, it is clear that there was an explosion.
And when rescuers came to the test site, they would see these traces of explosions and understand that Dyatlov’s group died as a result of military tests. The military could not allow rescuers to discover the site and traces of explosions. How can this be done so that rescuers do not reach the landfill? Should we put up a cordon there, around the training ground? It wouldn't help. On the contrary, everyone would immediately guess that the tourists died as a result of military tests. And the military decided to make sure that rescuers found the corpses before the landfill. Because if they had found them, they would not have gone further to search and would not have reached the training ground. Do you understand?
That's why the military staged it. They brought the corpses and equipment of the tourists to another place, not at the training ground, but transported them closer to the beginning of the route. The training ground was somewhere closer to Otorten. So they transported the corpses from that place, set up a tent on Mount 1079, laid out the corpses nearby and pretended that Dyatlov’s group had died as a result of a hurricane. It’s as if the tourists set up a tent on the mountain, and at night a hurricane began and blew them off the mountain. And everything happened so quickly that the tourists did not even have time to get dressed, and as a result they froze and died. This is how the military staged it. I think my answer is clear, comprehensive, and no further explanation is required from me. And if something is not clear, ask the following questions!
(https://i.ibb.co/Mh12F0c/mochalov-answer.jpg) (https://ibb.co/pPK0YFf)
Новое выступление Вениамина Мочалова Перевал Дятлова. Мой ответ Николаю Чудину (10-11 января 2024):
[-] Вчера один человек задал мне вопрос. И я решил ему ответить в видеоролике. Вопрос был такой: если группа Дятлова убита на полигоне, то зачем военные устроили инсценировку? Могли просто спрятать где-нибудь трупы, и никто бы их не нашёл!
Да, действительно, обычно так и делается. Если преступник совершил убийство, то он прячет труп, а не выставляют его напоказ. А тут получилось так, что военные выставили всё напоказ: привезли палатку на перевал, поставили её там на горе, трупы рядом разложили. Причём так, что их видно было. Особенно Дорошенко и Кривонищенко. Их в снег даже не закопали, а просто положили.
Отвечаю на этот вопрос, зачем военные устроили инсценировку. Раз группа Дятлова пропала, то их непременно стали бы искать. А как искать? А пошли бы по их следам! А кроме того, все знали маршрут группы Дятлова и могли бы даже не по следам идти, а именно по маршруту... И куда бы привели эти следы? Они привели бы на полигон. Раз это был полигон, то естественно, там должны быть следы взрывов вакуумных бомб. Во-первых, воронки должны быть, причём воронки не в земле, а в снегу. Кроме того, от этих взрывов могло опалить или сломать деревья, и тоже бы остался след. Ну, раз дерево сломано, опалено, то понятно, что был взрыв.
И вот когда поисковики пришли бы на полигон, то они эти следы взрывов увидели бы и поняли, что группа Дятлова погибла в результате военных испытаний. Военные не могли допустить, чтобы поисковики обнаружили полигон и следы взрывов. А как это сделать, чтобы поисковики не дошли до полигона? Оцепление что ли выставить там, вокруг полигона? Это не помогло бы. Наоборот, все сразу догадались бы, что туристы погибли в результате военных испытаний. И военные решили сделать так, чтобы поисковики нашли трупы раньше полигона. Потому что если бы они их нашли, то дальше они не пошли бы искать и не дошли бы до полигона. Понимаете?
Вот почему военные совершили инсценировку. Они привезли трупы и снаряжение туристов в другое место, не на полигоне, а перевезли их поближе к началу маршрута. Полигон был где-то ближе к Отортену. Вот они с того места трупы и перевезли, поставили палатку на горе 1079, трупы там рядом разложили и изобразили, будто бы группа Дятлова погибла в результате урагана. Будто бы туристы поставили палатку на горе, а ночью начался ураган и сдул их с горы. И всё произошло так быстро, что туристы даже не успели одеться, и в результате они замёрзли и умерли. Вот такую инсценировку совершили военные. Я думаю, мой ответ понятен, исчерпывающий, и больше объяснений от меня не требуется. А если что-то непонятно, задавайте следующие вопросы!
https://youtu.be/spzwzLDDIUE
-
More thoughts from his speech, just in time for Igor Dyatlov’s 88th birthday Dyatlov Pass. Three reasons preventing the solution (January 13, 2024):
[MOCHALOV:] Sometimes it even makes me kind of funny that people just can’t solve the mystery of the Dyatlov Pass. Well, what's so mysterious about it? There is no mysticism or fantasy here. Everything is explained quite materialistically. But I know why it takes so long for people to solve this mystery. (…)
I know because I revealed it. So, there are three reasons why this mystery remained unsolved for so long.
The first reason is that Dubinina and Zolotaryov were killed by a very unusual weapon. There were no such weapons before. This weapon has a very unusual effect on a person when it is triggered. Namely: this weapon can break a person’s ribs and damage the skull and such human organs that contain a lot of fluid. This weapon is called thermobaric.
As everyone knows, Dubinina and Zolotaryov had broken ribs, and somehow unusually broken, in two places... Moreover, they were broken as if in one line. The fracture line ran from top to bottom. That is, these fractures of the ribs were not randomly located, but along two lines.
Further, Zolotaryov and Dubinina did not have eyes, and Dubinina also did not have a tongue, mouth diaphragm, upper lip, and the skin surrounding the eyes was also missing. Zolotaryov had about the same thing - the skin around his eyes was also missing.
So, the explosion of a vacuum bomb has all these properties (breaking ribs, damaging eyes, tongue, lips and mucous membranes in general). But people don’t know this, that it is the explosion of a vacuum bomb that affects the human body in such a strange way.
People don't know this! And therefore they cannot guess that the cause of the death of Dubinina and Zolotaryov was the explosion of a vacuum bomb! This, then, is the first reason why the mystery cannot be solved.
The second reason is that after the death of the Dyatlov group, a staging was carried out. That is, the people involved in the death of the Dyatlov group moved the corpses from the places where they were killed to another place, namely to that very pass. They were moved there and placed there in a special way. Well, we also set up a tent on the mountain. And because these bodies and the tent were moved there, people also cannot understand the reason for the death of the group. Now, if the bodies lay in the same place where these tourists died, then people would have guessed what they died from.
But since the bodies were moved to another place, how can you guess? There's a corpse lying in front of you. There are broken ribs, no eyes... How can you guess why a person died, if there is nothing nearby that could break a person’s ribs and tear out his eyes...
So, the second reason why people cannot solve the mystery is due to the dramatization. And the third reason why people cannot guess that the head of the search for Dyatlov’s group, Evgeniy Polikarpovich Maslennikov, has put too much noodles in the ears of both search engines and investigators. Roughly speaking, Maslenyikov was covering the stagers with his ass. Maslennikov himself did not participate in the staging, and he did not drag the corpses, and did not set up the tent in any other place, but he tried to cover up the actions of the staging team, and people believed him...
After all, who is Maslennikov? Famous tourist. The most, one might say, the main tourist of the region, an authoritative person. Therefore, no matter what he said, people believed him... Well, how can you not believe such a person? And he lied mercilessly... And the first lie he told was that the tent was set up according to the rules. This is a lie. The tent was pitched completely against the rules. Firstly, tourists, especially experienced tourists, will never pitch a tent on the mountain.
Second, the tent on the mountain that the searchers found, it wasn’t even standing at all, it was lying down! Just imagine, place a sheet on the snow, and at one end, under this sheet, stick a ski pole into the ground. This is roughly how the tent stood on the mountain. She didn’t stand, she lay down... And at one end they propped her up with a ski pole, you know? Well, someone is putting up tents? Even children can’t pitch a tent like that.
In order for the tent to stand, you need at least 2 supports in the form of ski poles, and at least 8 ski poles in the form of guy ropes. And if you look at the photo of the tent at an altitude of 1079, what do we see? We see one stick propping up the entrance to the tent. Next we see two more sticks. One stands at the entrance, but it does not support anything and does not pull anything back. Another stick stands at the opposite end, and it also does not support anything, does not pull anything back. Question: Where are the other 6 sticks that are supposed to pull back the scarf? They are not there! Therefore, the tent is not stretched, it simply hangs on one pole at the entrance.
By the way, what’s interesting is that the tent inspection report does not say how many ski poles were found near the tent. That's how many skis there are, how many backpacks, how many boots - it's written there, but how many poles are not written. It simply says: yes, there were also ski poles... But the quantity is not indicated! This is written about skis: Eight pairs of skis lay under the tent, with their noses down. The ninth pair of skis stood stuck near the tent. Where are the sticks? Were they standing there or lying there? And how many were there? How many were there? This is not written in the protocol. Why isn't it written? I think I can guess. Prosecutor Tempalov could not write down the number of sticks, because there were very few of them.
Judging by the photo of the tent, there were only 4 poles. There should have been 18 pieces (9 pairs), but there were 4 pieces (2 pairs)! I repeat once again about these 4 things: one stick propped up the entrance to the tent, the second for some reason was near the entrance, the third was stuck at the opposite end of the tent. And the fourth stick, as you can understand, was lying inside the tent. Moreover, for some reason this 4th stick was cut into 3 more sticks. Judging by the stories of the search engines, the upper part of her stick seemed to have been broken off along a circular cut! Then another cut was made there, but it was not broken off. They just made an incision, but didn’t break it off.
And not a word is said about this strange stick, cut up and ringed, in Tempalov’s protocol. It was as if she never existed. Only the search engines said that it was a stick.
Further... So, Maslennikov, in short, was lying, claiming that the tent was standing according to the rules. She didn't follow the rules. This is not how tourists set up tents. Further, Maslenniokv wrote in a radiogram that Dyatlov’s group allegedly died on the night of February 2. How did he know this? Even forensic experts cannot determine the date of death of a person if his body is found a month later. That is, the corpse has decomposed so much, or has changed so much, that it is impossible to determine the exact date. We can roughly say that he died about a month ago. Can't find out the exact date! And Maslennikov found this out. He said that on the night of February 2! It turns out that Maslennikov had a diamond eye or something?
Maslennikov also stated in a radiogram that on February 1, Dyatlov’s group set off at 15:00. Question: How did he know this? Did he see them set out at 3:00 p.m.? He didn't see anything! The diary entries do not say at what time Dyatlov’s group set off. So the claim that she set off at 15:00 is just a hypothesis, to put it mildly. And to put it bluntly, it’s just a lie. Maslennikov could not know what time Dyatlov’s group set out on February 1.
These, then, are the three reasons why they cannot solve the mystery of the death of the Dyatlov group for so long. I will repeat these reasons again.
The first reason is that Dubinina and Zolotaryov were killed by an unusual weapon, a thermobaric one. And since people do not know how this weapon affects a person, they naturally cannot guess that the cause of their death is a thermobaric weapon.
Secondly, why can’t they guess that it was staged? With this staging, the military fooled people’s brains, so people can’t guess why Dyatlov’s group died.
And the third reason why people cannot guess is Maslennikov’s lie. He deceived everyone, but people believed him because he was an authoritative man. Thus, the conclusion follows - they shouldn’t have believed him!
In general, the idea is clear. Where it is possible to accurately count the number of tracks, Ivanov writes about 8-9 tracks. And where only the time range is known, he writes the exact time and exact date.
(https://i.ibb.co/vjV8X3d/mochalov-3.jpg) (https://ibb.co/S35pftm)
Ещё мысли из его выступления, как раз к 88-летию Игоря Дятлова Перевал Дятлова. Три причины, препятствующие разгадк (13 января 2024):
[МОЧАЛОВ:] Иногда мне становится даже как-то смешно от того, что люди никак не могут разгадать тайну перевала Дятлова. Ну что тут такого слишком уж таинственного? Нет тут никакой мистики и никакой фантастики. Всё объясняется достаточно материалистически. Но я знаю, почему люди так долго не могут разгадать эту тайну. (…)
Я знаю, потому что я её раскрыл. Так вот, есть три причины, почему эта тайна так долго не поддавалась разгадке.
Первая причина заключается в том, что Дубинину и Золотарёва убило очень необычное оружие. Такого оружия раньше не было. Это оружие очень необычно воздействует на человека при своём срабатывании. А именно: это оружие может сломать человеку рёбра и повредить череп и такие органы человека, в которых много жидкости. Это оружие это называется термобарическое.
Как все знают, у Дубининой и Золотарёва были сломаны рёбра, причём как-то необычно сломаны, в двух местах... Причём они сломаны были как бы по одной линии. Линия излома проходила сверху вниз. То есть, не хаотично были расположены эти изломы рёбер, а по двум линиям.
Далее, у Золотарёва и Дубининой не было глаз, а у Дубининой также не было языка и диафрагмы рта, верхней губы, и ещё отсутствовала кожа, окружающая глаза. У Золотарёва примерно то же самое было – тоже кожа отсутствовала вокруг глаз.
Так вот, всеми этими свойствами (ломание рёбер, повреждение глаз, языка, губ и вообще слизистых оболочек) как раз обладает взрыв вакуумной бомбы. Но люди-то этого не знают, что именно взрыв вакуумной бомбы таким странным образом воздействует на тело человека.
Не знает этого люди! А потому и не могут догадаться, что причина гибели Дубининой и Золотарёва – это взрыв вакуумной бомбы! Вот, значит, такая первая причина, почему тайна не поддаётся разгадке.
Вторая причина заключается в том, что после гибели группы Дятлова была совершена инсценировка. То есть люди, причастные к гибели группы Дятлова, переместили трупы с тех мест, где они были убиты, в другое место, а именно на тот самый перевал. Их переметисли туда и расположили там особым образом. Ну и на горе также палатку поставили. И вот от того, что эти тела и палатку туда переместили, люди тоже никак не могут понять, в чём причина гибели группы. Вот если бы тела лежали на том же месте, где погибли эти туристы, то люди бы догадались, от чего они погибли.
Но раз тела переместили в другое место, то как ты догадаешься? Вот перед тобой лежит труп. Там сломаны рёбра, глаз нет… Как ты догадаешься, отчего человек погиб, если рядом ничего похожего нет, чтобы сломало у человека рёбра, ну и вырвало глаза…
Так вот, вторая причина, почему люди не могут разгадать тайну, заключаются в инсценировке. А третья причина, почему люди не могут догадаться, что руководитель поисков группы Дятлова – Масленников Евгений Поликарпович – слишком много лапши навешал на уши и поисковикам, и следователям. Грубо говоря, Масленyиков прикрывал задницей инсценировщиков. Сам-то Масленников не участвовал в инсценировке, и трупы он не перетаскивал, и палатку ое не ставил в доугом месте, но он пытался прикрыть действия инсценировщиков, а люди-то ему верили…
Ведь Масленников - кто это такой? Известный турист. Самый, можно сказать, главный турист области, авторитетный человек. Поэтому что бы он ни говорил, а люди ему верили... Ну как ты не поверишь такому человеку? А он врал беспощадно… И первая ложь, которую он высказал, заключалась в том, что будто бы палатку поставили по правилам. Это враньё. Палатка была поставлена совершенно не по правилам. Во-первых, туристы, особенно опытные туристы, никогда не поставят палатку на горе.
Второе, палатка на горе, которую нашли поисковики, она вообще не стояла даже, она лежала! Вот, представьте себе, положьте на снег простыню, а с одного конца под эту простыню воткните в землю лыжную палку. Вот примерно таким образом стояла палатка на горе. Она не стояла, она лежала… А с одного конца её подпёрли лыжной палкой, понимаете? Ну кто-то ставит палатки? Это даже дети - и то так палатку не поставят.
Чтобы палатка стояла, нужны как минимум 2 подпорки в виде лыжных палок, и как минимум 8 лыжных палок в виде оттяжек. А если взглянуть на фото палатки на высоте 1079, то что мы видим? Мы видим, как одна палка подпирает вход в палатку. Далее мы видим ещё две палки. Одна стоит у входа, но она ничего не подпирает и ничего не оттягивает. Другая палка стоит у противоположного конца, и она тоже ничего не подпирает, ничего не оттягивает. Вопрос: А где остальные 6 палок, которые должны оттягивать платку? Их нету! Поэтому палатка не натянута, она просто висит на одной палке у входа.
Кстати, что интересно, в Акте осмотра палатки не написано, а сколько обнаружено лыжных палок около палатки. Вот сколько лыж там, сколько рюкзаков, сколько ботинок - там написано, а сколько палок - не написано. Просто написано: да, там были ещё и лыжные палки... А количество не указано! Про лыжи написано так: Восемь пар лыж лежали под палаткой, носами вниз. Девятая пара лыж стояла, воткнутая около палатки. А где палки? Они там стояли или лежали? И сколько их было? Какое количество их было? В протоколе это не написано. А почему не написано? Я, кажется, догадываюсь. Прокурор Темпалов не мог написать количество палок, потому что их очень маловато было.
Судя по фотографии палатки, палок было всего 4 штуки. Должно быть 18 штук (9 пар), а их было 4 штуки (2 пары)! Повторяю ещё раз про эти 4 штуки: одна палка подпирала вход в палатку, вторая зачем-то около входа, третья была воткнута у противоположного конца палатки. А четвёртая палка, как можно понять, она лежала внутри палатки. Причём эта 4-я палка почему-то была разрезана ещё на 3 палки. Судя по рассказам поисковиков, у неё верхняя часть палки была вообще как бы отломлена по кольцевому надрезу! Далее там был сделан ещё один надрез, но там не было отломано. Просто надрез сделаи, но не отломили.
И вот про эту странную палку, изрезанную и окольцованную, в протоколе Темпалова ни слова не сказано. Как будто и не было её. О том, что это палка была, рассказывали только поисковики.
Далее… Значит, Масленников, короче, врал, утверждая что палатка стоит по правилам. Она стояла не по правилам. Так туристы не ставят палатки. Далее, Масленниокв в радиограмме написал, что будто бы группа Дятлова погибла в ночь на 2 февраля. А откуда он это узнал? Даже судмедэксперты не могут определить дату смерти человека, если его труп найден через месяц. То есть, труп настолько разложился, или настолько вообще изменился, что точную дату определить невозможно. Примерно можно сказать, что вот он погиб где-то месяц назад. На точную дату не выяснить! А Масленников это выяснил. Он заявил, что вот мол, в ночь на 2 февраля! Получается, у Масленникова глаз-алмаз что ли был?
Ещё Масленников заявил в радиограмме, что 1 февраля группа Дятлова вышла в путь в 15:00. Вопрос: А откуда он это узнал? Он что, видел, как они вышли в путь в 15:00? Да ничего он не видел! В дневниковых записях не сказано, во сколько часов вышла группа Дятлова в путь. Так что утверждение, будто она вышла в путь в 15:00 – это просто гипотеза, если сказать мягко. А если сказать грубо – это просто враньё. Не мог Масленников знать, во сколько часов вышла в путь группа Дятлова 1 февраля.
Вот таковы, значит, три причины, почему так долго не могут разгадать тайну гибели группы Дятлова. Ещё раз повторю эти причины.
Первая причина – Дубинину и Золотарёва убило необычное оружие, термобаричемкое. А так как люди не знают, как это оружие воздействует на человека, то естественно, не могут догадаться, что причина их смерти – это термобарическое оружие.
Второе, почему не могут догадаться, что была осуществлена инсценировка. Этой инсценировкой военные запудрили людям мозги, поэтому люди никак не могут догадаться, отчего погибла группа Дятлова.
И третья причина, почему люди не могут догадаться – это ложь Масленникова. Он всех обманул, а люди ему поверили, потому что человек-то ое авторитетный. Таким образом, следует вывод - зря они ему поверили!
В общем, мысль понятна. Там, где можно точно сосчитать число следов, Иванов пишет про 8-9 следов. А где известен только диапазон времени, то он пишет точное время и точную дату.
https://youtu.be/cFlkOvmexa4
-
From his words the conclusion follows: Dyatlov’s group entered a military training ground where they were testing new weapons. What kind of weapon it was, Cheglakov did not know. He himself did not personally participate in the tests. All he knew about this weapon was that it took oxygen out of the air. He said these words to his son Vladimir.
It is a rare military test site that has open boundaries, yes?
-
From his words the conclusion follows: Dyatlov’s group entered a military training ground where they were testing new weapons. What kind of weapon it was, Cheglakov did not know. He himself did not personally participate in the tests. All he knew about this weapon was that it took oxygen out of the air. He said these words to his son Vladimir.
It is a rare military test site that has open boundaries, yes?
There's strong logic in that question Glennm . We have the potential for Mansi , prisoners, U2 spy planes, loggers/foresters , people mining the mountains , helicopters /planes and the known hobby of tourists/
hikers in the Soviet Union. If the secret base couldn't work out through its intelligence services that it was used by all of the above , then what hope do we have.
I don't think tongues fly out of the mouth by any special invented bomb?. Plus words are used like "tear out eyes". The eyes were missing, the other two sets of eyes were shrunk etc. They were decomposing by the time they were found, in running water...I would be more concerned and suspicious if the ravine bodies were in perfect condition after enduring months in the bottom of the ravine !?.
-
Possible explanation for Lyudmila found without tongue
Let's assume that Alexander, Igor, Yuri Dor, Yuri Kri?) had found Lyudmila lying badly injured in the ravine.
It is highly likely ‘the four’ – or one/two of them – had noted that Lyudmila had stopped breathing.
It may well be that one or two group members had considered the possibility of an upper airway obstruction by the tongue.
Page 25 in the report 'Bombings: Injury Patterns and Care - Blast Injuries Seminar - Curriculum Guide' states:
‘Mild upper airway obstruction secondary to the tongue is more common, and this usually responds to repositioning of the patient's head or a jaw thrust’, see: https://emergency.cdc.gov/masscasualties/word/blast_curriculum_3h.doc
Remark:
The normal emergency procedure for an upper airway obstruction is ‘Cricothyrotomy’ or ‘Tracheostomy’ (small incision from the outside in the upper throat to create a small hole for breathing through), see further: https://www.msdmanuals.com/professional/critical-care-medicine/respiratory-arrest/surgical-airway
It may well be that one of the group members had removed the tongue as amateur emergency surgery: he may have thought that herewith the upper airway obstruction might have been removed.
A little later they had noted that her heartbeat had already stopped: she had already died.
Possible explanation for Lyudmila and Semyon found with missing eyes
As secondary injury caused by a blast, small particles - accelerated to high speeds by the pressure wave - had damaged and penetrated the retina and eyeballs.
-
Pensioner Veniamin Mochalov recently published the following speech: Dyatlov Pass. Did Zolotaryov and Dyatlov know each other before? (January 19, 2024):
[-] Yesterday I discovered another fact showing that Zolotaryov’s trek with Dyatlov’s group was not accidental, and Zolotaryov planned this trek in advance. But before I talk about this new fact, I would like to talk about the previous fact, which also shows that Zolotaryov planned in advance a trek in the Northern Urals to Mount Otorten.
I read the Varsegovs’ article from Komsomolskaya Pravda. This article contained an interview that they conducted with former students of Zolotaryov. After all, he taught physical education at a school in the city of Lermantov in the Stavropol Territory, and he also went on hikes with the students of this school. And they met one of his former students named Kuznetsov.
And this is what Kuzentsov told the Varsegovs: Zolotaryov was eager to go on a trek to the Northern Urals! And he was waiting for some letter from Sverdlovsk from someone... And after this letter he went to Sverdlovsk, went on a trek, and as a result of this trek Zolotaryov wanted to turn the whole world upside down! These words of Zolotaryov should be understood as follows: at Mount Otorten he wanted to carry out some kind of research, and as a result, make a scientific discovery that would turn the whole world upside down.
I think that Zolotaryov was drawn there for the following reason: he somehow learned that some fireballs were flying near Mount Otorten, and he wanted to study these fireballs, photograph them, write for the newspaper, and thereby he wanted to turn the world upside down.
Of course, I was also interested in the following question: Who exactly was Zolotaryov expecting a letter from Sverdlovsk from? I assumed that he was waiting for a letter from Sergei Sogrin. When Zolotaryov arrived in Sverdlovsk at the end of December, he settled in the apartment of Sogrin, with his parents, and I thought that Zolotaryov received this letter from Sogrin.
And recently I discovered a fact that shows that Zolotaryov corresponded not with Sogrin, but perhaps with Dyatlov himself. There is such a book “The Pass Without Dyatlov”, the author of the book is Vladimir Bobrikov. There are words from Professor Bartolomei, but in 1959 he was not yet a professor, but a student like Dyatlov. And he tells how in the summer of 1958 Dyatlov, as a leader, led their group through Altai. There were 10 people there, including Slobodin, Thibault-Brignolle, Yudin... It was after this hike that Dyatlov became eager to go on a ski route in the area of Mount Otorten. He invited five, including Bartolomei and Khalizov.
Bartholomew brought up a very interesting fact! It turns out that at the time when Dyatlov, Bartolomey and others were traveling in Altai, Zolotaryov was also traveling in Altai. He worked at some camp site in Altai. In short, it is recorded that he made three treks in Altai.
And so I thought: if both Zolotaryov and Dyatlov were traveling in Altai at the same time, then could their paths have crossed? In other words, Zolotaryov could have met Dyatlov, you know? And there they talked about something, and either Dyatlov told Zolotaryov about the fireballs at Otorten, or Zolotaryov already knew about these fireballs. And Zolotaryov shared with Dyatlov his dream - to travel to Otorten and study these fireballs. Well, in this way he seduced Dyatlov with this journey. That is why, since the time of the Altai journey, Dyatlov had an idea: to also make a trip to Otorten! Well, maybe Zolotaryov and Dyatlov agreed to make this trip together.
And from that moment Zolotaryov and Dyatlov began to correspond. And the letter that Zolotaryov received from Sverdlovsk in December, he received from Dyatlov. That is, Dyatlov wrote to him: “Come on, come!” We’ll go on a trip to Otorten soon!” Well, Zolotaryov has arrived. It was no coincidence that Zolotaryov went on a hike with Dyatlov. And in general, it was not by chance that he came to Sverdlovsk, he planned all this in advance. Well, thanks to this journey, he wanted to turn the world upside down - this is the only way to explain it! He wanted to study these mysterious fireballs.
But he didn’t know what these balls were, and he didn’t know that all this would lead to his death and the death of the entire group!
(https://i.ibb.co/qrBFcnN/mochalov-pismo.jpg) (https://ibb.co/vj1vTB3)
Пенсионер Вениамин Мочалов опубликовал недавно такое выступление: Перевал Дятлова. Золотарёв и Дятлов раньше были знакомы? (19 января 2024):
[-] Вчера я обнаружил очередной факт, показывающий, что поход Золотарёва с группой Дятлова не был случайным, а Золотарёв заранее спланировал этот поход. Но прежде чем я расскажу об этом новом факте, я хотел бы рассказать о предыдущем факте, который также показывает, что Золотарёв заранее спланировал поход на Северный Урал к горе Отортен.
Прочитал я статью Варсеговых из «Комсомольской правды». В этой статье было интервью, которое они взяли у бывших учеников Золотарёва. Ведь он преподавал физкультуру в школе города Лермантова в Ставропольском крае, а также он ходил в походы с учениками этой школы. И они познакомились с одним его бывшим учеником по фамилии Кузнецов.
И вот что Кузенцов рассказал Варсеговым: Золотарёв рвался в поход на Северный Урал! И он ждал какое-то письмо из Свердловска от кого-то... И после этого письма он поехал в Свердловск, пошёл в поход, и в результате этого похода Золотарёв хотел перевернуть весь мир! Эти слова Золотарёва следует понимать так: у горы Отортен хотел совершить какой-то исследование, а в результате совершить научное открытие, которое перевернуло бы весь мир.
Я думаю, что Золотарёва тянуло туда по такой причине: он откуда-то узнал, что у горы Отортен летают какие-то огненные шары, и он хотел изучить эти огненные шары, сфотографировать, написать в газету, и тем самым он хотел перевернуть мир.
Конечно, интересовал меня и такой вопрос: А от кого же именно Золотарёв ждал письмо из Свердловска? Я предположил, что он ждал письмо от Сергея Согрина. Когда Золотарёв в конце декабря приехал в Свердловск, то там он поселился на квартире у Согрина, у его родителей, и я подумал, что Золотарёв получил это письмо от Согрина.
И вот недавно я обнаружил факт, который показывает, что Золотарёв переписывался не с Согриным, а возможно, с самим Дятловым. Есть такая книга «Перевал без Дятлова», автор книги Владимир Бобриков. Там есть слова профессора Бартоломея, но в 1959 году он был ещё не профессором, а таким же студентом, как и Дятлов. И он рассказывает, как летом 1958 года Дятлов в качестве руководителя провёл их группу по Алтаю. Там было 10 человек, в том числе Слободин, Тибо-Бриньоль, Юдин... Именно после этого похода Дятлов загорелся желанием пройти лыжным маршрутом в районе горы Отортен. Он пригласил пятерых, включая Бартоломея и Хализова.
Очень интересный факт привёл Бартоломей! Оказывается, в то время, когда Дятлов, Бартоломей и другие путешествовали по Алтаю, там же по Алтаю путешествовал и Золотарёв. Он работал на какой-то турбазе на Алтае. Короче, записано, что на Алтае он совершил три похода.
И вот я задумался: если в одно и тоже время на Алтае путешествовали и Золотарёв, и Дятлов, то не могли ли их пути пересечься? Иначе говоря, Золотарёв мог познакомиться с Дятловым, понимаете? И там они о чём-то поговорили, и то ли Дятлов рассказал Золотарёву про огненные шары у Отортена, то ли Золотарёв уже знал про эти огненные шары. И Золотарёв поделился с Дятловым своей мечтой - совершить путешествие к Отортену, изучить эти огненные шары. Ну и тем самым он соблазнил Дятлова этим путешествием. Вот почему ещё со времён Алтайского путешествия у Дятлова возникла мысль: тоже совершить путешествие к Отортену! Ну и, может быть, Золотарёв и Дятлов договорились вместе совершить это путешествие.
И с этого момента Золотарёв и Дятлов стали переписываться. И то письмо, которое получил Золотарёв из Свердловска в декабре, он получил от Дятлова. То есть, Дятлов ему написал: «Давай, приезжай! Скоро пойдём в путешествие к Отортену!» Ну вот, Золотарёв и приехал. Золотарёв не случайно пошёл в поход с Дятловым. И вообще, он не случайно приехал в Свердловск, всё это он заранее запланировал. Ну и благодаря этому путешествию он хотел перевернуть мир - объяснить это можно только так! Он хотел изучить эти таинственные огненные шары.
Но он не знал, что из себя представляют эти шары, и не знал, что всё это приведёт и к его гибели, и к гибели всей группы!
https://youtu.be/mVqa8J8SRO0
-
Zolotaryov wanted to turn the whole world upside down! These words of Zolotaryov should be understood as follows: at Mount Otorten he wanted to carry out some kind of research, and as a result, make a scientific discovery that would turn the whole world upside down.
If he got it right, fame and fortune. If wrong, humiliation, obscurity or worse. Zolo carried two cameras, no special film in either one. He had a notebook and a pencil. I believe the most sophisticated think the hikers carried was a mandolin.
-
New Video // Dyatlov Pass. The mysterious 41st school in Serov
Veniamin Mochalov.
[–] Today I made another historical discovery. I hasten to share it. Although this discovery is so small and insignificant that it’s even somehow funny to talk about it. But I will say it anyway. this is why because this discovery once again confirms my idea that the copy of Kolmogorova’s diary is a fake.
Once upon a time, while surfing the Internet, I came across a message that when Dyatlov’s group arrived in Serov, they were not allowed into the station, and they had to take up quarters at some school – school No. 41. But researchers from the Dyatloa group went to this city and found out that there is no school No. 41 in the city and never has been… Well, how can we understand this? And today I decided to deal with this matter. I decided to read the diaries. All four diaries say that Dyatlov’s group was at the school, they settled down there since they weren’t allowed into the station. And all four diaries say about the school, but only one diary says that it was school No. 41. This is a copy of Kolmogorova's diary.
But, as I showed in my previous videos, the copy of Kolmogorova’s diary is a fake. That is, this number 41 for the school was invented by a counterfeiter. And in the original diary of the cow and club, it is clear that the school number was 41.
Another thought came to my mind. This falsifier, who composed Kolmogorova’s diary, seemed to be a great dreamer. He is not only the school number, while writing Kolmogorov’s diary, he also came up with the idea that on January 30, Dyatlov’s group celebrated Kolevatov’s birthday.
(He even fantasized that a tangerine could have 8 slices.)
And the last thing I want to say… This forger seems to have been a resident of Moscow. Let's think about it. Serov is a small town. There couldn't be 40 schools there.
This fiction about school 41 could have been invented by a person living quite far from Serov, and living in some big city like Moscow. But in Moscow – yes, there are many schools there. Well, this forger probably didn’t know how many people there are in the city of Serov.
He probably thought that Serov was also some kind of big city. Maybe there are a million people there. Well, if that’s the case, there could very well be 40 schools, and maybe even 50 schools. So he blurted out about school 41. This also leads to the following conclusion, if this falsifier was a resident of Moscow.
(https://i.ibb.co/xmFf1y6/school-41.png) (https://imgbb.com/)
School No 41 near Moscow airport VKO
This means that this fake was composed, perhaps, in May, when the Deputy Prosecutor of the RSFSR Urakov took the case to Moscow. This is all I wanted to tell you today.
(https://i.ibb.co/7N1HWQj/mochalov-school.jpg) (https://ibb.co/G35X29n)
Новое Выступление // Перевал Дятлова. Таинственная 41-ая школа г. Серова
Вениамин Мочалов.
[–] Сегодня я совершил очередное историческое открытие. Спешу поделиться им. Хотя это открытие такое мелкое такое незначительное, что даже как-то смешно о нём говорить. Но тем не менее я скажу. это вот почему потому что это открытие ещё раз подтверждает мою мысль, что копия дневника Колмогоровой – это фальшивка.
Когда-то давно, шаря по интернету, я встретил такое сообщение, что когда группа Дятлова прибыла в Серов, то их не пустили на вокзал, и пришлось им пристроиться на постой в какой-то школе – в школе № 41. Но исследователи группы Дятлоа ездили в этот город и выяснили, что никакой школы №41 в городе нет и никогда не было… Ну и как же это понять? И вот сегодня я решил с этим делом разобраться. Я решил почитать дневники. Во всех четырёх дневниках говорится о том, что группа Дятлова была в школе, там устроилась раз их на вокзал не пустили А у всех четырёх дневниках говорится про школу, но только в одном дневнике говорится что это была школа №41. Это копия дневника Колмогоровой.
Но, как я показал в предыдущих своих видеороликах, копия дневника Колмогоровой – это фальшивка. То есть, этот номер 41 для школы придумал фальсификатор. А в оригинале дневника коровой а также дубининой сно, что номер школы был 41.
Ещё одна мысль у меня появилась. Вот этот фальсификатор, который сочинил дневник Колмогоровой, был похоже большим фантазёром. Он не только номер школы, сочиняя дневник Колмогорова он ещё и придумал, что 30 января группа Дятлова отмечала день рождения Колеватова.
(Он даже нафантазировал, что у мандарина может быть 8 долек.)
И последнее что я хочу сказать… Этот фальсификатор, похоже, был жителем Москвы. Вот давайте поразмыслим. Серов – это ведь маленький город. Там не могло быть 40 школ.
Эту выдумку про 41-ю школу мог придумать человек, живущий довольно далеко от Серова, причём живущий в каком-то большом городе типа Москвы. А вот в Москве – да, там много школ. Ну и наверное, этот фальсификатор не знал, сколько населения в городе Серове.
Он, наверно, подумал что Серов – это тоже какой-то большой город. Может, там миллион человек населения. Ну а раз так-то там вполне могла быть могли быть 40 школ, и может даже 50 школ. Вот он и ляпнул про 41-ю школу. Отсюда ещё вот такой вывод следует, если этот фальсификатор был жителем Москвы.
(https://i.ibb.co/xmFf1y6/school-41.png) (https://imgbb.com/)
Школа No 41 в аэропорту Внуково
Значит, это фальшивка была сочинена, возможно, в мае, когда заместитель прокурора РСФСР Ураков увёз дело в Москву. Вот всё это я хотел сегодня рассказать.
https://youtu.be/6i0_qXu1JEo
-
Around 4:30 pm they arrived at District 41, where they were warmly greeted by civilian workers. In the evening they were treated to one more cultural program, including two Soviet movies, My Apprenticeship (1939), Est takoy paren (1956), and once again the Symphonie in Gold (1956). Then they spent the night at the District 41 dormitory.
To be clear, were all Soviet primary schools numbered in sequence? Were the schools numbered only within the city limits? How were elementary schools numbered in the rural areas? Where is the location of school 40 and 42?
-
Schools in city of Serov:
https://www.google.com/maps/search/%D0%A1%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%B2+%D1%88%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%BB%D0%B0/@59.5977113,60.5559174,15z?entry=ttu
-
Axelrod, thank you. The link you gave me shows no clear pattern. Therefore I submit the Region 41 and school 41 are authentic and consistent with some sort of naming system. Therefore, the school number can not be taken as evidence that the diary is fake.
-
The point here is that in Serov there was school 4, but there was no school 41.
My mother said this absolutely bluntly. Who should I believe, my mother or a person with sick logic?
-
@ axelrod,
I'm getting confused , the links and photos that you put forward and translate ( which I appreciate) . Is that you in the picture and videos? . I thought you were interpretation various theories?
-
The point here is that in Serov there was school 4, but there was no school 41.
My mother said this absolutely bluntly. Who should I believe, my mother or a person with sick logic?
With all respect to mother, she must certainly be correct. It is the fault of the trasnscriptionist that 4 became 41. Could it be clerical?
-
Копия с ошибкой - это уже не копия, а фальсификация.
Ещё в уголовном деле есть случаи расхождений копии с оригиналом
рукописный текст: в сторону кедра (протокол Темпалова)
машинописный текст: в сторону леса
A copy with an error is no longer a copy, but a falsification.
In this criminal case, there are cases of discrepancies between the copy and the original
handwritten text: towards the cedar (Tempalov's protocol)
typescript: towards the forest
-
Falsification or mistake is a matter of intent, I think. If falsified, then I recommend we follow the money and see who profits. If a mistake, then we questiin the validity of the report and move on. In either situation, it is a "no lose" proposition, meaning that either way it can be used to support a point or view. As such, we must consider it for what it is worth. It won't bring back the dead.
-
The point here is that in Serov there was school 4, but there was no school 41.
Ms. Axelrod , don't confuse the readers of this forum. The fact that there were only 4 schools does not mean that their numbering should follow the general order. In addition, it is necessary to understand that this school #41 was a departmental school - belonging to the Sverdlovsk Railway Department. Their numbering could go throughout the entire territory of this department. This was a common practice at that time. Other schools could also have numbers of a different numbering. This was determined by what was given by the Department of General Education of the Sverdlovsk Region.
It makes no sense to build any theories with such a lack of knowledge of history. Neither does it make sense to doubt the authenticity of Dyatlov's diaries.
This school (# 41 of the railroad) was located somewhere on the corner of modern Kirov Street and Victory Street, about house # 38. Now there is another house there. Later, the building was moved further down Victory Street and rebuilt. It is school # 22 now.
My mother said this absolutely bluntly.
This doesn't change anything except that there are now 22 schools in the city. They also have numbers out of order....
Although I'm not sure that even then, for a city of almost 100 thousand people there were only 4 schools. But I was not in the city then, and much later - I was and dealt with it directly on the spot.
Who should I believe, my mother or a person with sick logic?
You can believe (or not) whoever you want, but you should have knowledge. And common sense.
Who do you mean, "a person with sick logic?"©
Before you make accusations, you need to take a hard look at what happened.
-
Ms. Axelrod, now it is clear to me where you get so many incomprehensible and erroneous things. Instead of reading primary sources or at least competent scientific and technical literature, you follow all sorts of talkers like Mochalov and " Historical
Губитель Destroyer Amateur " Garifulin.
I have not seen more illiterate videos on this topic for a long time.
Still, I am a specialist in this industry.
I don't have time to analyze everything in detail, and I don't want to (because it's a waste of time) either.
I will take only one, but the main point from this, so to speak, "masterpiece".....
[MOCHALOV:] Sometimes it even makes me kind of funny that people just can’t solve the mystery of the Dyatlov Pass.
I too find it funny when people who do not have even elementary knowledge in what they write and talk about derive mind-boggling theories on an empty place.
But we need to move closer to the point....
The first reason is that Dubinina and Zolotaryov were killed by a very unusual weapon. There were no such weapons before. This weapon has a very unusual effect on a person when it is triggered. Namely: this weapon can break a person’s ribs and damage the skull and such human organs that contain a lot of fluid. This weapon is called thermobaric.
There are 2 aspects here (in the fantastic ignorance of the authors):
1.historical,
и
2.technical.
The author has no knowledge in either of them at all....
1. Volumetrically Detonating Munitions (VDM) - this is the correct name in the USSR began to be developed only in 1969. Factory tests began only in the early 70s. Therefore, there is no way to do without a "time machine" (judging by all the authors invented it, secretly, and are pissing in front of the whole world). This alone multiplies by zero all the dilettantish reasoning of the authors of these opuses in further reasoning.
2. the authors portray its effect on the surrounding area and on people in a very childish way (of the youngest age). As they themselves noted there is a thermobaric effect. This means that when a cloud of aerosol is set on fire, a zone with a temperature of about 2000C (or ~ 2750 K) is formed and everything around that can burn is burned out within a radius of 100...500 meters. Additionally there is a pressure wave, a short interval (~0.5 mS) - a large compression, and then a long (several units of seconds) rarefaction. There is no vacuum there, but it is enough that internal pressure would make brick and concrete walls of buildings fall outward, and people were torn to pieces literally. Therefore, "toys" with broken ribs and "eyes", with "lips" and so on, are just child's play.
Injuries are easily explained by other natural causes. I described this in detail (in Russian) in the books published by the "Dyatlov Memorial Foundation". There was also an explanation of why there were such rib fractures - it is the properties of strength characteristics of biocomposite materials and loading conditions when getting traumas in those places.
But there are other claims against these authors. Back in 2006 and 2008, Ms. Malginov and Ms. Nechaev wrote the same thing (almost literally) in Russian forums. Even then they were given similar explanations, although for some time they continued "their song", but then they calmed down.
I doubt very much that modern "authors" have not read those records. They've been on the internet for a long time.
Unfortunately, many bloggers now have a very strong desire to "make a hype", which is why such tall tales and fakes appear.
-
@axelrod ,Who is this man? And why do you keep posting his version?
(https://i.ibb.co/LNH6C94/mochalov-school.jpg) (https://ibb.co/vXRmJL2)
He posts Twice a day on YouTube and makes little sense. Even his arguments within the comment section doesn't make sense ( I'm being polite) .
-
Mr. Borzenkov, I saw your map on taina.li, at first I thought it was an error that was attributed to you.
Where did you get this information? Who misinformed you? Otherwise, you are immersed in fantasies, like all the visitors to this forum, except for those who “I know nothing and understand nothing.”
My mother (she is alive now) was a teacher of mathematics, physics and astronomy" at school #22 in the city of Serov.
This was from September 1953 to May 1961, including January 1959.
She not only drew a place on the map that coincides with the current location,
but also pointed to 3D photographs of her office window. Victory Street was then called Vokzalnaya Street, and she lived there.
Therefore, your assumption that in 1959 it was school 41 is just a fantasy in order to somehow link the data. The numbering of schools was with a large gap, but there were no thirtieth schools. There was no school number 41 either.
Before you come up with something ridiculous, imagine. that someone can refute you.
--------------------
Господин Борзенков, я видел вашу карту на taina.li, сначала я думал что это ошибка, которую вам приписывают.
Где вы получили такие сведения? Кто вас дезинформировал? Иначе вы погружаетесь в фантазии, как собственно все посетители данного форума, кроме тех, которые "я ничего не знаю и ничего не понимаю".
Моя мать (она сейчас жива) была учительницей математики, физики и астрономии" в школе #22 города Серова.
Это было с сентября 1953 по май 1961 года, в том числе в январе 1959.
Она не только нарисовала место на карте, которое совпадает с современным местоположением,
но и указала на 3d-фотографии окна своего кабинета. Улица Победы тогда называлась улица Вокзальная, и она на ней проживала.
Поэтому ваше предположение, что в 1959 году это была школа 41, это просто фантазия, чтобы как-то увязать данные. Нумерация школ шла с большим пропуском, но тридцатых школ не было. Школы №41 тоже не было.
Прежде чем придумывать какую-то нелепость, представьте. что вам может кто-то опровергнуть.
-
https://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/350159199/ball-fire-seen-travelling-across-central-north-island-sky
-
Mr. Borzenkov, I saw your map on taina.li, at first I thought it was an error that was attributed to you.
Where did you get this information? Who misinformed you? Otherwise, you are immersed in fantasies, like all the visitors to this forum, except for those who “I know nothing and understand nothing.”
Ms. Axelrod, don't inflate your own importance too much. It might burst.
I don't know from what sources, other than home talk, you get your information, but it turns out to be not too reliable.
It will be so if you know how to read what is written to you and understand it correctly. Although I'm not so sure about that either.
So, for your information, the logistics of the city (Serov) and possible routes of Dyatlov's group, I researched twice:
1. Back in 2008, using texts from their diaries and available photos from their trek. This was because the train from Ivdel arrived at 5:??? AM, and the train to Moscow left at almost midnight. There was more than enough time to explore such a small town. It was just after the end of the very first expedition of Kuntsevich to the Dyatlov Pass. The subject was not too important, but at least something useful could be done during this time. At the same time the scheme was made, which I published later in the collection of the "Dyatlov Group Memorial Fund". I can't say anything about taina.li (I don't know what and where you saw there).
2. Again, had to do the same in March 2012, when we went to the "pass" together with Yuri Kuntsevich and the American writer Donnie Eichar, whom I then consulted when he wrote his book "Dead Mountain". Then Yuri Kuntsevich in advance attracted one of the local local historians and everything was shown in detail on the spot. I have now found the records of that trip, but I can not find the name of the fifth person who was with us on that excursion.
The fourth was Dima Voroshchuk - who was a translator for the writer.
It was all about this school.
My mother (she is alive now) was a teacher of mathematics, physics and astronomy" at school #22 in the city of Serov.
This was from September 1953 to May 1961, including January 1959.
She not only drew a place on the map that coincides with the current location,
but also pointed to 3D photographs of her office window. Victory Street was then called Vokzalnaya Street, and she lived there.
It does not matter what the street was called (I knew that it was "Vokzalnaya" when I first visited it), what matters is that you still did not understand what I wrote to you.
The corner of modern Victory Street and Kirov Street is what in 1959 was known as "New settlement". There was a so-called "Chuprakov`s House", which housed the school. Only, they distorted the number: this school was not 41-th, but 47-th, - belonging to the railroad department. This is a common and traditional mistake. For example, the number of the train on which they traveled from Sverdlovsk was not 43th (which is written everywhere), but 45th. (which is established by the documents of the USSR Ministry of Railways for that period). Apparently, when rewriting (or reprinting) the information simply distorted the original handwritten text. This happens quite often.
But if the number itself is wrong, that doesn't mean the school itself didn't exist.
Now about the "3D photos" (c)...
Are you saying this building existed in 1959?
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1bV9BcTThFAosXa62Av9zdjnXNT9kE1iR/view?usp=drive_link
School 22, Serov, 38 Kalinina St. - the address and numbering of the school goes not by the largest street, but by the street at its intersection. The building was built somewhere in the 70-80s or later.
Then what "3D" and "pointed to 3D photos of her office window" (c) can there be here?
Or are we talking about different school 22? I mean the one near the Serov train station.
So your assumption that in 1959 it was school #41 is just a fantasy to tie the data somehow.The numbering of schools was with a big gap, but there were no thirtieth schools. There was no school #41 either.
It seems that you only find familiar letters in the text, without understanding the meaning of what is written there.
I'll explain for the especially gifted:
The school was there.
And Dyatlov's group was there too.
Only in modern texts the number was mixed up. Instead of #41 it should be #47. And it was an elementary school and it belonged to the railroad department. Then (later in 1959) it was liquidated and the next students were transferred to another one. The old building was demolished and there are other buildings there now.
Or do you again not understand the difference between transferring students and "turning one school into another"?
In this case, buildings are not transferred brick by brick to a new school grin1, and the transfer of students may not be noticed by any of the teachers. Especially if the transfer is to the lower grades and the teacher works in the upper grades.
There have been endless such changes. And different, and personally incomprehensible to you.
As well as the fact that school numbers could be any, for example, because the administration of the region (or its department) distributed them according to its principle, not your personal wish?
And the fact that school numbers for different departments (for example, railroad) could be different and different?
Therefore, your assumption that in 1959 it was school 41 is just a fantasy in order to somehow link the data. The numbering of schools was with a large gap, but there were no thirtieth schools. There was no school number 41 either.
It seems that you only find familiar letters in the text without understanding the meaning of what is written there.
I'll explain for the especially gifted:
The school was there.
And Dyatlov's group was there too.
Only in modern texts the number was mixed up. Instead of #41 it should be #47. And it was an elementary school and it belonged to the railroad department. Then (later in 1959) it was liquidated and the next students were transferred to another one. The old building was demolished and there are other buildings there now.
Or do you again not understand the difference between transferring students and "turning one school into another"?
In this case, buildings are not transferred brick by brick to a new school :), and the transfer of students may not be noticed by any of the teachers. Especially if the transfer is to the lower grades and the teacher works in the upper grades.
There have been endless such changes. And different, and personally incomprehensible to you.
As well as the fact that school numbers could be any, for example, because the administration of the region (or its department) distributed them according to its principle, not your personal wish?
And the fact that school numbers for different departments (for example, railroad) could be different and different?
Before you come up with something ridiculous, imagine. that someone can refute you.
Before you "refute" something, you should check your knowledge not only in home conversations.
And it is not funny, but sad for your intellectual level.
PS. And one more friendly advice: do not get involved in the topic about infrasound, in which you know worse than in oranges. However, as well as many others.
It is interesting that the less a person knows what he is talking about, the more loud and stupid statements he makes.
-
I feel like I’m talking to an old, deeply sick person who is not used to making mistakes, and all his thoughts immediately seem correct to him. That part of school No. 22, which is perpendicular to the street, was still there in 1953-59. The school had 1200 students (pupils) in 2 shifts, with 75 teachers. Transition on the second floor to a new extension parallel to Victory Street, maybe was built later. It is unknown for my mother.
Trees around the school were absent in 195x.
It’s not clear why you decided that the New Village is where you like it. You even came up with a place for him
at the intersection of the right streets (or someone misinformed you, like the guy, just leave me alone, and you believed him)
Yes, there is kindergarten No. 47 “Solnyshko”, and it is located next to the old station (now it is the Serov-Sortirovochny station). Already in 1953 (I don’t know from what year) the main station was in a new location and far away from this 47th kindergarden
.
(https://i.ibb.co/r26cn2Q/school-47.png) (https://ibb.co/WvyPSvH)
-
May ask what the significance of the school is to the case? I'm missing context somewhere.
-
Significance exists because Unknown Diary and case totally contain very many/much mistakes like February 6, no photos with damaged ski poles around the tent (that immediately removes avalanche version), etc.
It is totally falsificated or totally mistaken.
Train #43 and train #45. School #4 near main railway station and imaginary scool #41 in falsificated diary (and 47th kindergarden near the next station).
Tangerine with 8 slices (during 2 winters I calculated slices in tangerine and have observed tangerines only 9+ slices).
Maybe there was an extra person that day (second Zolotaryov e.g.).
Kolevatov's birthday with wrong date.
If diary contains so many mistakes - maybe all another documents contain mistakes.
Researchers like sir Borzenkov with his imagined explanations presented us as the facts (not only by him).
So, we still cannot solve this case and incident.
The advantage is in that we have riddle to discuss!
-
I recall similar things being discussed before.
Some points to ponder in this riddle involving anyone changing information in diaries, or mistakes by the group.
Why is the school so important, it's something easily researched or could have been. Why falsify a diary entry leading to multiple witnesses, school children , teachers etc. The likelihood is that the event took place, no one questions that episode, not the public who were made of the deaths of the hiker's? Why make a story up of train stations and police getting involved ? There's too many witnesses that would deny these events. That's my thinking at least.
No photos of damaged ski poles does not immediately remove the avalanche version in the slightest. There are photos of ski poles at angles along with broken rings, although the rings may have been removed from some poles as make shift probes which has been suggested but I don't know how that would work.
I have mixed feelings on an avalanche but I can however imagine enough snow sliding , moving, falling or dispersing over the tent to collapse it. Not a chundering mass of snow but enough to make them cut their way out and decide it's best to leave until day light. There just has to be movement of enough snow to make this happen, not broken ribs . I know there is debate over this and I accept that the slope above was not in the category for avalanche but every slope with the right conditions is susceptible to move by under cutting or snow build up.
Tangerine may vary I suspect, it is not impossible there were 8 segments, the Clementine is reported to have 8+ segments. Were they Clementine's, Why fake a story of 8 segments ?. It is not prove that it didn't happen because your tangerines have 9 segments.
I think it's very difficult to present facts. It is not a fact that diaries were changed. We also have to deal with the fact the cameras were left with the film in them. That film could have contradicted any staging by anyone. Why leave it in the cameras? .
-
I feel like .......
...... this 47th kindergarden
.
(https://i.ibb.co/r26cn2Q/school-47.png) (https://ibb.co/WvyPSvH)
Citizen Axelrod, I asked you not to puff yourself up too much, there could be air fallout?
Then you'll get it:
1. Mr. Axelrod started to pretend to be a goddamn expert, although he is not. Even the city, which he considers his own and boasted to be a connoisseur, he does not know.
That's what he noted as what I told him about (New settlement is a microdistrict in the city).
By the way such an excuse is a bluff, you should have at least roughly depicted the boundaries of the neighborhood. I only have the characteristic landmark of this place marked.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1wesHtN4ez4t7G_6jY2W98TtC7hZeWzjd/view?usp=sharing
Here's a map of the city, the neighborhood he depicted, if you take a larger piece:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1IZQYBHVTvR3EjD2103kJ1NS1IuPOxEWG/view?usp=sharing
This is easily verified. Here is a true map of the town with the name of that village, as it was really called and as we were told by local professional town historians.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1OGnkufE4o9XwOgFDrECrIVTFyPe9vfqj/view?usp=sharing
The area where he labeled his version is on the right side and is indicated by a red ellipse. The fragment coinciding with his picture is indicated by a thin red circle.
The true New Settlement is on the left side very close to the station. About what is clearly written in the diaries of Dyatlov's group "We were welcomed warmly in the school near the railway station." (c) - general diary,
"Then we managed to move to the elementary school together with Blinov group."(c), "Finally he (? not sure about the identity) finds school number 41 (about 200 meters from the train station), where we were very well received." (c) - this is a quote from this site, but in the original Russian version it is written differently: " Наконец находим ж/д 41-ю школу (метров 200 от вокзала), где нас очень хорошо встретили. " (c) " Finally we find the (ж/д = railroad`s - it is my edit) 41st school (200 meters from the station), where we were greeted very well." (c) - this is a more accurate translation of a part of the diary, which in the criminal case was called Zina Kolmogorova's diary.
There's even a distance given, which is easy to see on the maps I've indicated. Naturally, there are always mistakes. The 200 m in the diary actually turns into ~500 m (0.3 mi), but this is quite acceptable, nobody measured this in Dyatlov's group, and compared to Axelrod's >3.5 km (>2 mi)
Now anyone can compare and conclude which of us is right. Even Wikipedia knows where the actual "Novy Poselok" in Serov is and was located, unlike citizen Axelrodov. But apparently he was banned from Wikipedia, not only in Google, but in all other browsers as well.
This is all the more strange if he claims that they lived on Vokzalnaya Street, which is now called Pobeda (Victory) Street. This village is directly south of that street.
That is the price of his "knowledge"... Besides, I am not sure that he understands the terms he easily juggles. I gave him the only scan from a really 3D photo of school No. 22, but he easily missed it, as we say: "past his ears" (c).
I show a photo of school #22 (to which he refers) from an earlier period (which should have been around the corner of Vokzalnaya Street) in this picture:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Cxh3mgPhvuxMjJAo71M_TeLa8pMMj1gN/view?usp=drive_link
But it's not 3D at all, it's just an ordinary simple photo. That is the price of his words and "knowledge".
So which photo showed him something?
If you read him, it turns out that everyone lies: the diaries of Dyatlov's group lie, the school doesn't exist (no matter what number it has, there are always mistakes and misspellings), local professional historians of the town lie..... What he says about me, I no longer note. There's a Russian parable about the wind and the dog.
One Axelrod "white and fluffy..."
That's bullshit.....
So far, he has been seen here only in one capacity: collecting, propagandizing and spreading various rumors, gossip and fakes. I have already clearly explained on only one fragment what is behind those words (about the so-called "vacuum bomb..."). The rest of it goes in the same way. I don't have time and energy for the rest of the nonsense. Everything is the same there...
It takes a lot of analysis based on real knowledge, not ambition, to unravel this difficult and convoluted story. You need to visit a lot of places yourself, have a decent education, sift out everything that is fake, gossip and fiction (very often very unintelligent), which is proven by the example I gave. To find a pearl (a grain of truth) one should turn over a pile of empty rock (information), and not pile tons of manure, which then others have to shovel. Before you say something, you should analyze it, and speak only about the substantiated result. But so far Axelrod has only piles of all kinds of verbal crap, and no analysis. And it needs to be substantiated and on a real basis. To come to the truth it is necessary to unravel, not to confuse and not to obfuscate ....
I have the impression that it was said about him in a famous Russian movie:
https://youtu.be/3zP1th08tWg
I give it only in Russian on purpose (there are a lot of linguistic specifics that are not understandable for other languages), so that at least he could understand it, and everyone will see the reaction.
-
We all appreciate that the whole matter being debated on this thread is peripheral and wide off the mark in explaining the tragedy. We may believe that individuals may be unreliable, but the understanding of the situation does not depend on one person, nor one diary. Rather it is the gestalt of all input. Sifting information and picking the nits suggests a narrow focus and point of view. We must be mindful of the big picture. For me, the big picture is that bad things happen to good people and Nature is indifferent to suffering. The concept is simple, things change and only the strong survive. What changes and who may survive are controlled by Nature. If it works in our favor, good luck. If not, bad luck and any number of swear words. Arguing over street maps seems a waste intelligence for our dedicated forum.
-
I do not support myself neither the vacuum bomb version (like a thermobaric weapon), nor the infrasound version.
I think both are fairy tales. If Mochalov will talk about infrasound and how people are thrown out of the 10th floor, I will also copy such texts here as an interesting example.
My mother worked with an office on the 3rd floor in school 22 on the street. Vokzalnaya in 1953-1961, 15 minutes from the station. This is 1 km or a little more, but not 500 meters (by Borzenkov (c)).
we read the text. The picture you showed is not this school.
As for kindergarten 47, I’m not sure that it was a school, it’s just a guess.
I'm not writing school, I'm writing kindergarten 47. Such a city could have 47 kindergartens, but not 47 schools.One advantage is that it is located near the station and the water tower.
Such a city could have 47 kindergartens, but not 47 schools.
If this kindergarten was assigned to the New Village,
perhaps this is a mistake by the compiler of the text (the Old village is a metallurgical plant, the new village is everything else in his understanding. He had no Wikipedia to check. Wikipedia appeared only 20 years ago.
In general, we are pointing out the secrets of history indiscriminately. as if it were an accurate document, I wouldn’t. The director of the museum, where this text about school 47 comes from, Vera Bellendir, believes that in tent at the Dyatlov pass were also Lelyushenko’s children (son #10 and daughter #11, who were taken out first), however. After this message about Lelyushenko’s children, I consider it useless to trust any information from Vera Bellendir about Chuprakov’s school and house and where he is.
The school was located in the New Village in Chuprakov’s house near the water tower of the station.
There were two small shops nearby.
how could the water tower be located 1 km from the station. Usually such structures are located 50-100m from the station.
=================
Я не поддерживаю версию на вакуумной бомбы (как термобарическое оружие), ни версию инфразвука.
Я считаю, что то и другое сказки. Если Мочалов будет рассказывать про инфразвук и как люди выбрасываются с 10 этажа, я такие тексты тоже буду копировать сюда как интеерсный пример.
Моя мама работала с кабинетом на 3 этаже в 22 школе на ул. Вокзальная в 1953-1961 годах в 15 мин от вокзала. Это 1 км или немного больше, но не 500 метров (как подсчитал господин Борзенков). Та картинка, которую вы показали , там деревянный дом 2 этажа. Непонятно, что это такое.
Насчёт детского сада 47, я не уверен, что это была школа, это как предположение. Остальные предположения ещё хуже.
В таком городе могло быт 47 детских садов, но не 47 школ.
Я не пишу школа, я пишу детский сад 47. Одно преимущество - он находится рядом от вокзала и от водонапорной башни.
Если этот детский сад поместили в Новый посёлок, возможно это ошибка составителя текста (Старый посёлок - Надеждинский металлургический завод, новый посёлок - всё остальное в понимании автора текста). Тогда Википедии ещё не было, чтобы свериться. Википедия появилась 20 лет назад.
В общем, тайны истории, и так огульно указывать пальцем. как будто это точный документ, я бы не стал. Директриса музея, откуда этот текст про 47 школу, Вера Беллендир, считает, что на перевале были дети Лелюшенко (сын дочка, которых вывезли первыми), впрочем. После разговора про детей Лелюшенко я считаю бесполезным доверять любой информации про школу и дом Чупракова и где он находится.
Школа располагалось в Новом поселке в доме Чупракова у водонапорной башни вокзала.
Рядом находились два небольших магазинчика.
каким образом водонапорная башня могла находиться в 1 км от вокзала. Обычно такие сооружения находятся в 50-100 м от вокзала, он не в 1 км.
-
The concept is simple, things change and only the strong survive.
What about Yudin?
-
Yuden became unwell and could not continue - things change
Yuden lived - the strong survived.
Being strong has little to do with strength. Sometimes the strength comes from fortunate circumstance. In his case, having an illness in that circumstance had survival value. Why? Yuri learned to heed his personal warning signs. This reflects intelligence. Intelligence is a favorable characteristic and has survival value in that situation.
If you disagree, then just say the sick kid got damned lucky. Nature is indifferent.
-
Discovery of Veniamin Mochalov Dyatlov Pass. Korotaev saw that very training ground! (February 1, 2024):
[-] There is an expression - truth is born in a dispute. Yesterday an event occurred that confirms that truth can indeed be born in a dispute.
This is what happened... Yesterday I made another discovery, and I made it thanks to one argument...
The question was: And if Otorten had a training ground, then why didn’t the pilots who participated in the search for Dyatlov’s group see the training ground there? Well, what could I answer? I replied that they actually saw this training ground! But the pilots simply did not understand that this was a military training ground. The fact is that the test site did not look from a height exactly like test sites usually look like, where, for example, shells or bombs are exploded... At this test site there should be craters in the ground from explosions. But the testing ground where vacuum bombs are tested doesn’t look like that. The fact is that a vacuum bomb does not explode on the ground. It explodes at a height above the ground. And when it explodes, a shock wave occurs. This wave also goes down to the ground. And there is snow on the ground. Well, since it was winter. And what happens as a result of the impact of a blast wave on snow? There's a dent in the snow! That is, a wave - it seems to squeeze the snow. Well, a dent is formed, probably of some kind of round shape.
So, if some pilot flying over the training ground saw these dents in the snow, how would he guess that this was a military training ground? There are no funnels! There are only dents in the snow. That is, a pilot flying over the training ground simply will not understand that some kind of weapon is being blown up here. He may guess that something was blown up here, but he won’t understand: What did they blow up? Why are there no funnels? Why are there any dents in the snow? So the pilots saw this training ground and the dents in the snow, but did not understand anything...
This is how the dispute arose. And after the argument, I suddenly started thinking. I remembered some of the information I had heard before. Namely, I remembered that once investigator Korotaev in one interview told how he flew from the pass back to Ivdel, and he flew together with prosecutor Tempalov. And so they were flying, and there in one place they saw some holes in the snow from the helicopter. Tempalov saw these pits and said: it looks like something was being blown up here. The fact is that Tempalov was an artilleryman when he served in the army. And so he saw these holes in the snow and accordingly said that it looked like something was being blown up here.
And so I remembered this interview with Korotaev and thought about it. What happens? What Korotaev and Tempalov saw was clearly a testing ground where vacuum bombs were tested! There were dents in the snow. But what seemed strange to me: after all, look, Korotaev and Tempalov were flying from the pass to Ivdel. The training ground was located north-west of the pass, and Korotaev and Tempalov were flying south-east of the pass, do you understand? That is, it turns out to be some kind of nonsense! How could they see this training ground if it was located northwest of the pass? So they couldn’t see this training ground...
I continued thinking and remembered something else. I remembered Sogrin’s interview, this is one of the participants in the search. So, Sergei Sogrin was in Axelrod’s group, which was looking for traces of the Dyatlov group on Otorten. On the evening of February 28, Axelrod’s group left Otorten, and they flew by helicopter to Ivdel. And Sogrin, telling all this, mentioned that Tempalov was also flying with them. You see, Tempalov was flying with them on the same helicopter!
Question: How could Tempalov fly with Axelrod’s group to Ivdel if Tempalov was not at Otorten, but at the pass (15 km to the south). Well, accordingly, the helicopter that brought Tempalov to the pass was also there. Well, I didn’t think long about this. I understood how it happened that Axelrod’s group flew to Ivdel together with Tempalov. And it turned out like this: Tempalov, which means the helicopter landed at the pass, and after that the helicopter flew to Otorten to pick up Axelrod’s group. And the helicopter was just flying over that same training ground, you know? If you look at the map, the helicopter flew either over the test site itself or over its eastern outskirts.
And now it becomes clear to me how it happened that Korotaev and Tempalov flew to Ivdel, but saw the training ground. So they didn’t fly directly to Ivdel! They first flew to Otorten, and just flew near that same training ground. That's why they saw these pits in the snow. And so my discovery sounds like this: Korotaev saw exactly the same training ground that Dyatlov’s group entered and where Dubinina, Zolotaryov, Kolevatov died.
This is, one might say, an incredible discovery that I made. Korotaev, it turns out, saw the training ground with his own eyes! This once again confirms that Otorten had a training ground there. It was located, as I already said, 7 km south of Otorten and, accordingly, 9 km northwest of the pass. This is my next discovery!
(https://i.ibb.co/9HM4FgM/mochalov-korot.jpg) (https://ibb.co/F4PYS3P)
Открытие Вениамина Мочалова Перевал Дятлова. Коротаев видел тот самый полигон! (1 февраля 2024):
[-] Есть такое выражение - в споре рождается истина. Вчера произошло событие, которое подтверждает, что действительно в споре может родиться истина.
Вот что произошло... Вчера я совершил очередное открытие, и совершил его благодаря одному спору...
Вопрос был такой: А если у Отортена был полигон, то почему лётчики, которые участвовали в поисках группы Дятлова, не видели там полигон? Ну что я мог ответить? Я ответил, что они видели на самом деле этот полигон! Но лётчики просто не поняли, что это военный полигон. Дело в том, что полигон выглядел с высоты не совсем так, как обычно выглядят полигоны, где взрывают, например, снаряды, какие-нибудь бомбы... На этом полигоне должны быть воронки в земле от взрывов. А вот полигон, где испытывают вакуумные бомбы, он выглядит не так. Дело в том, что вакуумная бомба - она же взрывается не на земле. Она взрывается на высоте над землёй. И когда она взрывается, то возникает ударная волна. Эта волна идёт вниз тоже, на землю. А на земле лежит снег. Ну, раз зима была. И что происходит в результате воздействия взрывной волны на снег? В снегу образуется вмятина! То есть, волна - она как бы снег сдавливает. Ну и образуется вмятина, вероятно, какой-то такой круглой формы.
Так вот, если какой-то лётчик, пролетавший над полигоном, увидел эти вмятины в снегу, то как он догадается, что это военный полигон? Воронок нету! Есть только вмятины в снегу. То есть, лётчик, пролетавший над полигоном, он просто не поймёт, что тут какое-то оружие взрывают. Он может так догадаться, что тут что-то взрывали, но он не поймёт: А что такое взрывали-то? Почему воронок нет? Почему какие-то вмятины в снегу? Так что лётчики видели этот полигон и вмятины в снегу, но ничего не поняли...
Вот такой спор возник. А после спора я вдруг задумался. Я вспомнил кое-что из информации, которую я слышал раньше. А именно, я вспомнил, что однажды следователь Коротаев в одном интервью рассказал, как он летел с перевала обратно в Ивдель, и летел он вместе с прокурором Темпаловым. И вот они летят, и там в одном месте они с вертолёта увидели на снегу какие-то ямы. Темпалов увидел эти ямы и сказал: а тут, похоже, что-то взрывали. Дело в том, что Темпалов был артиллеристом, когда служил в армии. И вот он увидел эти ямы в снегу и соответственно сказал, что тут, похоже, что-то взрывали.
И вот я вспомнил это интервью с Коротаевым и задумался. Что же получается? То, что видели Коротаев и Темпалов, это же явно полигон, где испытывали вакуумные бомбы! Там были вмятины в снегу. Но что мне показалось странным: ведь, смотрите, Коротаев и Темпалов летели с перевала в Ивдель. Полигон находился к северу-западу от перевала, а Коротаев и Темпалов летели на юго-восток от перевала, понимаете? То есть, какая-то несуразица получается! Как они могли увидеть этот полигон, если он находился на северо-западе от перевала? Так что не могли они видеть этот полигон...
Я продолжил думать и вспомнил ещё кое-что. Я вспомнил интервью Согрина, это один из участников поисков. Так вот, Сергей Согрин был в группе Аксельрода, которая искала следы группы Дятлова на Отортене. Вечером 28 февраля группа Аксельрода покинула Отортен, и они на вертолёте полетели в Ивдель. И Согрин, рассказывая всё это, обмолвился, что с ними ещё и Темпалов летел. Понимаете, с ними на том же самом вертолёте летел и Темпалов!
Вопрос: А как Темпалов мог лететь с группой Аксельрода в Ивдель, если Темпалов был не на Отортене, а на перевале (15 км южнее). Ну и соответственно вертолёт, который привёз Темпалова на перевал, тоже там же находился. Ну тут я уже недолго думал. Я понял, как это так получилось, что группа Аксельрода полетела в Ивдель вместе с Темпаловым. А это получилось так: Темпалов, значит, погрузился вертолёт на перевале, а после этого вертолёт полетел на Отортен, чтобы забрать группу Аксельрода. И вертолёт как раз пролетал над тем самым полигоном, понимаете? Если посмотреть по карте, то вертолёт пролетал или над самим полигоном, или над восточной его окраиной.
И теперь мне становится понятно, как так получилось, что Коротаев и Темпалов летели в Ивдель, но видели полигон. Так они же не напрямую в Ивдель полетели! Они сначала полетели на Отортен, и как раз пролетели около того самого полигона. Вот почему они видели эти ямы в снегу. И таким образом моё открытие звучит так: Коротаев видел как раз тот самый полигон, на который заходила группа Дятлова и на котором погибли Дубинина, Золотарёв, Колеватов.
Вот такое, можно сказать, невероятное открытие я совершил. Коротаев, оказывается, видел полигон своими глазами! Это ещё раз подтверждает, что там у Отортена был полигон. Он находился, как я уже говорил, на 7 км южнее от Отортена и соответственно на 9 км северо-западнее перевала. Такое моё очередное открытие!
https://youtu.be/Qh0_ONiU-8w
-
Ms. Axelrod, now it is clear to me where you get so many incomprehensible and erroneous things. Instead of reading primary sources or at least competent scientific and technical literature, you follow all sorts of talkers like Mochalov and " Historical Губитель Destroyer Amateur " Garifulin.
I have not seen more illiterate videos on this topic for a long time.
Thank you WAB for keeping members and visitors feet firmly on the ground and reminding people not to drift off course
-
I guarantee that anyone living within a hundred miles of a military base or test range knows it exists. Vishay forester Rempel who counseled the tourists lived 40 miles from 1079. He cautioned Igor about weather, not bombs, nor restricted areas. This business of vaccum bombs does not ring true.
-
And what rings true?
-
And what rings true?
Ah, that is the thing, isn't it? Every single theory from Nature to Man is fraught with assumptions. If the hikers left the tent by their own accord, they were poorly clothed to do so. If they were driven out by others, they were too well dressed. If they were camped on the ridge, they should have stayed there. If they were camped in the woods, there is no good reason for three of them climbing up a hill to nothing they did not already have. Nothing is going to make a sane person walk a mile in snow without protecting hands and feet. No one is going to kick them out of their shelter without a fight. The injuries to the hikers does not exclude combat, but accidental damage fits better. There was no one around to fight with anyway.
Absolute truth, we may never know. Relative truth, we may achieve. Although not an absolute law, Occams Razor still works. A natural disaster of high winds, loose snow, bad location and inadequate protection is preferable, in my estimation than any vengeful attack or cover up. When those human generated things happen, there is a ripple effect of people affecting other people to ultimately produce a tangled web of deception. Conspiracy theorists have plucked at strands of the web for years. No spider has come out. Slippery snow driven by gale force winds would cause them to leave their tent. Lack of a sheltered fire would drive them to the forest. The need to wait out the storm would induce them to make a snow cave. The desire to get their shoes would induce 3 to return to the tent. Nature was indifferent.
-
GlennM, I've tried for years to make an Occam's Razor type scenafio fit the circumstances of the hikers' deaths. Certainly, the sudden occurrence of a gale force wind could have made it seem to the Dyatlov group that their tent was about to fly away like a sail. But no one who was so dangerously underdressed could walk nearly a mile in such freezing temperature and winds over 60mph. Severe hypothermia would happen iquickly. According to the National Weather Service's Wind Chill Index, at –20°F with winds at 60mph and above, an inadequately dressed person has less than 5 minutes before frostbite starts. Severe hypothermia and death wouldn't be far behind. Only Semyon and Tibo were properly dressed. The other seven, some of them even walking barefooted, would have no chance to reach the forest under such conditions.
-
I believe that the description from GlennM is suitable for some standard case, but the case with the Dyatlov group does not apply to the standard case, so we need to look for some non-standard solution for it.
Therefore, I believe that little of his text has anything to do with reality.
Figuratively speaking, if we can apply a certain Levenshtein metric (Levenshtein distance) to match the version of some imaginable vacuum bomb and an hurricane, then the version with a vacuum bomb will have fewer discrepancies with reality. In this case, the vision from GlennM should be consigned as to be sent to the dustbin of history as useless and harmful.
-
GlennM, I've tried for years to make an Occam's Razor type scenafio fit the circumstances of the hikers' deaths. Certainly, the sudden occurrence of a gale force wind could have made it seem to the Dyatlov group that their tent was about to fly away like a sail. But no one who was so dangerously underdressed could walk nearly a mile in such freezing temperature and winds over 60mph. Severe hypothermia would happen iquickly. According to the National Weather Service's Wind Chill Index, at –20°F with winds at 60mph and above, an inadequately dressed person has less than 5 minutes before frostbite starts. Severe hypothermia and death wouldn't be far behind. Only Semyon and Tibo were properly dressed. The other seven, some of them even walking barefooted, would have no chance to reach the forest under such conditions.
I'm not a 100% sure if the hikers were barefoot but here's a link to what I think is quite interesting , it's about walking or running in socks in extreme cold. It seems it can be done in reasonable comfort.
https://forum.dyatlovpass.com/index.php?topic=1507.msg24062#msg24062
-
And here!!!!
Just looked at the links. https://forum.dyatlovpass.com/index.php?topic=1499.msg24409#msg24409
I think we can rule out one thing. The hikers could have walked to the ceder in socks without severe compromise.
-
If KGB, disreputable. If military, disreputable, If escaped prisoners, disreputable. If Mansi, disrepitable. If geologists, disreputable. If government, disreputable. Everywhere I turn, the Soviet Communists, native tribes and govrnment workers are all disreputable. Must the hikers also be disreputable people? It is just too much! How about good people caught in bad weather conditions? That is the idea that makes sense to me.
-
If KGB, disreputable. If military, disreputable, If escaped prisoners, disreputable. If Mansi, disrepitable. If geologists, disreputable. If government, disreputable. Everywhere I turn, the Soviet Communists, native tribes and govrnment workers are all disreputable. Must the hikers also be disreputable people? It is just too much! How about good people caught in bad weather conditions? That is the idea that makes sense to me.
True, I've forgotten the names but there was two other groups that got into trouble with the weather. One with a ripped or burnt tent and another group with frostbite.( Might be the same group).
If they were too found dead would we be blaming the locals, KGB, rockets etc. ?
There's endless similar examples of people taking clothes off , leaving tents , no shoes , poorly dressed. One thing in common with these similar stories is the weather.
This includes poor decisions, perhaps brought on by the conditions, some incidents happened very close to shelter but hypothermia plays a strange game with the human mind.
We still have the oddity of the ravine 4 under such a huge amount of snow . I can not see stagers digging through 4 meters of snow then burying 4 bodies , why? Why leave other hikers in full view?. If the ravine was empty of snow at the time of the incident why would stagers put them there , what would they bury them with. Also ,why would any stagers leave the Hansel and Gretel trail of clothes and twigs that lead to the den, which is a few meters away from the ravine 4?.
Noting else was found at the ceder to suggest the tent was pitched there. No cuttings or sawdust, no fire pit and no signs
of ski trails. It was the thawing of the snow
that revealed to the Mansi of activity in that area that lead to the den. Nothing else is reported.
I certainly don't think a natural standard solution should be put in the dustbin and that certainly isn't harmful?
If outsiders or stagers are involved then we must find evidence, this may be in paper work like teddy has researched or the fallen tree.
-
Veniamin Mochalov's version is unsubstantiated, implausible.
Veniamin does not provide any evidence, does not show maps and diagrams of the test site for vacuum bombs, does not submit documents, he has no links to scientific articles, no video evidence. Everything he says is not confirmed by anything. This is just his personal, unconfirmed opinion. Allegedly, the investigator saw from a helicopter a piece of land on which craters were visible, as from explosions. Mochalov does not assume that these pits were formed as a result of geological seismic surveys, and not from vacuum bombs. A link is given to materials on geological exploration from the DyatlovPass forum.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n7L3qiO-Hmg&t=33s (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n7L3qiO-Hmg&t=33s)
-
According to Mochalov
Korotaev, it turns out, saw the training ground with his own eyes! This once again confirms that Otorten had a training ground there. It was located, as I already said, 7 km south of Otorten and, accordingly, 9 km northwest of the pass. This is my next discovery!
(https://i.ibb.co/8d4Sx1L/vacuum-polygon.png) (https://imgbb.com/)
It was situated on territory of Komi ASSR, so General Lelyushenko (military commander of Perm and Sverdlovsk district) didn't know about it!
Rescuers was not allowed to walk around.
Only Abram Kikoin climbed Mt.Kholat(1079) in March. But he was silent! Or he didn't see the polygon in Komi through the mountains (see the map)!
-
According to Mochalov
Korotaev, it turns out, saw the training ground with his own eyes! This once again confirms that Otorten had a training ground there. It was located, as I already said, 7 km south of Otorten and, accordingly, 9 km northwest of the pass. This is my next discovery!
(https://i.ibb.co/8d4Sx1L/vacuum-polygon.png) (https://imgbb.com/)
It was situated on territory of Komi ASSR, so General Lelyushenko (military commander of Perm and Sverdlovsk district) didn't know about it!
Rescuers was not allowed to walk around.
Only Abram Kikoin climbed Mt.Kholat(1079) in March. But he was silent! Or he didn't see the polygon in Komi through the mountains (see the map)!
Interesting but how did they get supplies to this training ground, what about the Mansi? We are talking about Mansi hunting ground and looking after deer etc. Plus tourists student tourism?
-
Korotaev, it turns out, saw the training ground with his own eyes! This once again confirms that Otorten had a training ground there. It was located, as I already said, 7 km south of Otorten and, accordingly, 9 km northwest of the pass. This is my next discovery!
You, a Russian-speaking blogger, have inattentively watched my video. All of Mochalov's words have no confirmation. Please give me a link to an interview with Karataev, where he reports that he saw the military training ground with his own eyes!! If you do not have such a link, then the version is unfounded. In addition, no exploration work could be carried out at the site of the military training ground...
-
1) https://dyatlovpass.com/novokreschenov-2008-ru
PAGE3-LEFT:
GVN:then the prosecutor Vasily Ivanovich Tempalov, who was present at the examination of the tent, and flew on a helicopter over the area said: "What can I say, rockets had fallen, craters all around, I'm an artilleryman." he has been on the front-lines, a commander... batteries, 76 mm batteries, awarded with an order.
NAVIG: In what part did he see the craters during the flight?
GVN: In the same area, at the same time, on the same days.
NAVIG: There is no such information anywhere..
GVN: He also said: "There are craters there, I'm an gunner, I can tell when I see one!" said Vasiliy Ivanovich Tempalov, the prosecutor. This also led to a certain look at this event. It is clear that there is an explosion of a rocket, large or small, directed, whether it reached its target or not we can't say, of course, a test, not enemies...
НГВ: дальше прокурор был Темпалов Василий Иванович, который присутствовал при экспертизе этой палатки, и вообще он принимал участие в облётах на вертолёте этой местности, говорит: "Да что и говорить тат ракеты падали, кругом воронки, я же артиллерист." он фронтовик, командир... батареи, 76 мм батареи, орденом награжден.
НАВИГ: В какой части он воронки видел при облете?
НГВ: Так же в той же местности, в тоже время, в эти же дни.
НАВИГ: Такой информации нигде нет.
НГВ: Он же говорил: "Там же воронки, я же артиллерист, что я не знаю что ли?" Василий Иванович Темпалов, прокурор, сказал.
PAGE3-RIGHT:
NAVIG: Did Tempalov report his observation about the craters somewhere?
GVN: Unlikely.
НАВИГ: А он (прим. ред: речь идет о Темпалове В.И.) свои заключения о воронках куда-нибудь сообщал?
НГВ: Вряд-ли.
2) https://dyatlovpass.com/evgeniy-okishev-2013
Interview with Evgeniy Okishev
PAGE1-RIGHT:
We applied with a letter signed by the Oblast Prosecutor to either the Prosecutor General of the USSR or the Federal – I don’t remember exactly now – asking to explain what really we were investigating into? And how it was related to radiation? Could it be so that even the top commandant of the Urals Military District knew nothing of any tests of armaments held there? In response to our letter, Deputy Prosecutor General, comrade Urakov came to meet with us
Мы обратились с письмом за подписью прокурора области то ли к генеральному, то ли, не помню, к республиканскому прокурору: мол, просим разъяснить, что мы тут все ж таки расследуем? И как это связано с радиацией? Не было ли там каких-то испытаний оружия, что неизвестно даже командованию Уральского военного округа?. В ответ на это письмо к нам приехал заместитель прокурора РФ товарищ Ураков
-
These are all words that someone has heard from someone. But there are official documents on the geological exploration carried out in these places, which means that the craters have an origin from geological explosions of the soil.
-
Военные цели могли быть оформлены как гражданские (геологические)
Северная Корея заработала 167 миллионов долларов на экспорте париков и накладных ресниц
Они продаются по всему миру под видом сделанных в Китае. По данным таможни Китая, экспорт из Северной Кореи в страну в 2023 году вырос более чем вдвое, при этом парики и ресницы составили почти 60 процентов от всего объема поставок. В прошлом году в КНР было ввезено 1680 тонн северокорейских накладных ресниц, бород и париков.
Поскольку текст сообщения содержит военную тайну, я не перевожу его на английский.
*****************************
This post in English:
Military targets could be registered as civilian (geological)
North Korea earns $167 million from export of wigs and false eyelashes
They are sold all over the world under the guise of being made in China. North Korea's exports to the country more than doubled in 2023, with wigs and eyelashes accounting for nearly 60 percent of total shipments, according to China Customs. Last year, 1,680 tons of North Korean false eyelashes, beards and wigs were imported into China.
Since the text of the message contains military secrets, I do not translate it into English.
-
- Today Anna Russkikh made another attempt to refute my version of the vacuum bomb. So, to begin with, I must say the following: only a vacuum bomb design engineer can refute my version of a vacuum bomb, and no one else! To refute something, you must at least understand the subject that you are trying to refute. And if you don’t understand, then you have nothing to do...
Further, it means that Anna Russkikh presented me with such a claim that I supposedly do not provide a link to the information that I report. It is not true. I constantly provide links to that information. The only thing I didn’t provide a link to was Korotaev’s interview. But that's because I simply forgot to write down the address of this interview on the Internet. But instead of Korotaev’s interview, I can give another link - to an interview with the judge of Ivdel - Georgy Vasilyevich Novokreshchenov. In this interview, Novokreshchenov talks about the same thing that Korotaev spoke about, namely, that somewhere in the vicinity of the Dyatlov Pass there is a certain place where there were a lot of craters from explosions. This means that in the comments I will later give this link to the interview with Novokreshenov. further, here Anna Russkikh is trying to assure that the explosions and craters that were there were supposedly done by geologists. Yes, indeed, geologists use explosives in their, let’s say, activities. But in this case, it cannot be said that geologists did the explosions. The fact is that geologists carry out their blasting operations in the summer, and not in the winter. I can even say: where was the geologists' explosives warehouse? It was located 200 km north of Otorten. I managed to find out. But since geologists don’t need explosives in winter and don’t use them, radio operator Viktor Lyubimov was sent to this explosives warehouse. To guard this warehouse. And so he was there all winter and guarded this warehouse, together with his wife he stayed there. So this fact again confirms that geologists do not carry out blasting operations in winter!
So, what else did Anna Russkikh say? In my opinion, nothing more. I repeat once again that Anna Russkikh’s version that the Dyatlov group was killed on Kirilenko’s order is incorrect. The fact is that in a dictatorial state, although murders occur, they occur exclusively with the sanction of the dictator. That is, the subordinates of a given dictator cannot give orders for murder. Therefore, Kirilenko could not arbitrarily give the order to kill the Dyatlov group.
Well, let's say he would give an order. Who could he give this order to? Local KGB administration? No! All local KGB departments are subordinate to Lubyanka, i.e. Chairman of the KGB. Well, at that time Shelepin was the chairman of the KGB. So, only on Shelepin’s order could the local KGB department in the Sverdlovsk region give the order to kill at least Dyatlov’s group, or anyone else. By order of Kirilenko, they could not do this! He was not their boss. And Shelepin could not arbitrarily give the order to kill Dyatlov’s group. He could only do this on Khrushchev's orders. He couldn't do it himself!
Or remember the murder of Trotsky under Stalin. This murder was committed under the leadership of Beria. But Beria did not act of his own free will, but on the orders of Stalin. He could not do anything of his own free will. Thus, Anna Russkikh’s claim that the Dyatlov group was killed on the orders of Kirilenko is simply stupid! This couldn't happen.
But even if we assume for a moment that yes, they were killed on Kirilenko’s orders. For example, he hired his employees from his regional committee there for murder, and they armed themselves with guns, axes or something else and chased after Dyatlov’s group... But look, the tourists of Dyatlov’s group were not killed with guns or pistols, or with axes. They were killed in some strange way. They had broken ribs, fractured skulls... What kind of weapon did Kirilenko’s henchmen have that breaks ribs, or breaks a skull? No, Kirilenko’s employees would not have killed the Dyatlvoa group in such a strange way, by breaking ribs and so on.
All these injuries were caused by the explosion of a vacuum bomb. A vacuum bomb has just such a property. She has a very powerful blast wave. In addition, it explodes at altitude. In other words, if a person finds himself under the epicenter of a vacuum bomb explosion, then the blast wave not only throws him to the ground, he is also pressed into the ground, as if by a press. Well, as a result, ribs break, like those of Zolotarev and Dubinina. As for Thibault-Brignolle, whose skull was fractured, the situation is somewhat different. Thibault-Brignolles found itself at a considerable distance from the epicenter. Well, maybe 50 meters, let’s say, and the blast wave only threw him to the ground. He was not hit, because he was far away, and the blast wave seemed to pass horizontally rather than vertically. That's why Thibault-Brillnol's ribs didn't break! But the blow was such a terrible force that he fell and hit his head on a stone. As a result, his skull was fractured.
Oh, I feel like Anna Russkikh is bored listening to what I’m saying now. Yes, of course, for non-specialists all this is boring. Therefore, I probably won’t explain. I’ll just repeat: the kind of injuries Dubinina and Zolotarev had could only have been caused by a vacuum bomb. It also injures the eyes. And when the bodies of Dubinin and Zolotarev were found, they had no eyes. They were injured and decomposed first because the bodies of these tourists lay in the stream for 2 months. That's why when they were found they had no eyes!
And the last thing I will say. Anna Russians claim that no one believes my version. That's just funny. Well, of course they don’t believe it. Nobody knows how vacuum bombs work. Only I, and the design engineers of vacuum bombs, know this. Nobody else knows this.
(https://i.ibb.co/3rBbnd2/mochalov-anna-rus.jpg) (https://ibb.co/DV5FZWh)
- Сегодня Анна Русских совершила очередную попытку опровергнуть мою версию о вакуумной бомбе. Так вот, для начала я должен сказать следующее: опровергнуть мою версию о вакуумной бомбе может только инженер-конструктор вакуумных бомб, а больше никто! Чтобы чего-то опровергать, надо как минимум разбираться в том предмете, который ты пытаешься опровергнуть. А если ты не разбираешься, то тебе нечего делать...
Дальше, значит, Анна Русских предъявила мне такую претензию, что я мол не даю ссылки на ту информацию, которую сообщаю. Это неправда. Я постоянно даю ссылки на ту информацию. Единственное, на что я не дал ссылку, это на интервью Коротаева. Но это потому, что я просто забыл записать адрес этого интервью в интернете. Но вместо интервью Коротаева я могу дать другую ссылку - на интервью с судьёй Ивделя - Георгием Васильевичем Новокрещёновым.
В этом интервью Новокрещёнов рассказывает о том же самом, о чём говорил Коротаев, а именно, что где-то там в окрестностях перевала Дятлова находится некое место, на котором была масса воронок от взрывов. Значит, в комментарии я потом дам эту ссылку на интервью с Новокрешёновым. далее вот тут Анна Русских пытаются уверить, что будто бы взрывы и воронки, которые там были, это мол геологи совершили. Да, действительно, геологи применяют взрывчатку в своей, скажем так, деятельности. Но в данном случае тут нельзя сказать, что взрывали геологи. Дело в том, что геологи свои взрывные работы совершают в летний период, а не зимой. Я даже могу сказать: а где находился склад взрывчатки у геологов. Он находился в 200 км севернее от Отортена. Это мне удалось выяснить. Но так как взрывчатка зимой геологам не требуется, они её не используют, то на этот склад взрывчатки был направлен радист Виктор Любимов. Чтобы охранять этот склад. И вот он там всю зиму и охранял этот склад, вместе со своей женой он там пребывал. Так что этот факт опять же подтверждает, что зимой геологи взрывные работы не совершают!
Так, что там ещё говорила Анна Русских? По-моему, больше ничего. Ещё раз повторю, что версия Анны Русских о том, что группа Дятлова убита по заказу Кириленко, неверна. Дело в том, что в диктаторском государстве хотя и происходят убийства, но происходят они исключительно с санкции диктатора. То есть, подчинённые данного диктатора не могут отдавать приказы в убийстве. Поэтому Кириленко не мог самовольно отдать приказ об убийстве группы Дятлова.
Ну, допустим, он бы отдал приказ. А кому он мог отдать этот приказ? Местному управлению КГБ? Нет! Все местные управления КГБ подчиняются Лубянке, т.е. председателю КГБ. Ну а в то время председателем КГБ был Шелепин. Так что, только по приказу Шелепина местное управление КГБ по Свердловской области могло отдать приказ убить хоть группу Дятлова, хоть ещё кого-то. По приказу Кириленко они не могли это сделать! Он для них был не начальником. Да и Шелепин не мог самовольно отдать приказ убить группу Дятлова. Он мог это сделать только по приказу Хрущёва. Сам он не мог это сделать!
Или вспомните убийство Троцкого при Сталине. Это убийство было совершено под руководством Берии. Но ведь Берия действовал не по собственному желанию, а по приказу Сталина. По собственному желанию он ничего не мог делать. Таким образом, утверждение Анны Русских, что группа Дятлова была убита по приказу Кириленко, это просто глупость! Такого не могло быть.
Но даже если предположим на миг, что да, по приказу Кириленко они были убиты. Он, допустим, там своих сотрудников из своего обкома нанял для убийства, и они там вооружились ружьями, топорами или ещё чем-то и погнались за группой Дятлова... Но смотрите, а ведь туристы группы Дятлова были убиты не из ружий и не из пистолетов, и не топорами. Они были убиты каким-то странным образом. У них были сломаны рёбра, проломлены черепа... Что за оружие было у подручных Кириленко, которое ломает рёбра, или там череп проламывает? Нет, не стали бы убивать сотрудники Кириленко группу Дятлоdа, таким странным образом, путём ломания рёбер и так далее.
Все эти травмы нанесены взрывом вакуумной бомбы. Вакуумная бомба как раз обладает таким свойством. У неё очень мощная взрывная волна. Кроме того, она взрывается на высоте. Иначе говоря, если человек оказался под эпицентром взрыва вакуумной бомбы, то взрывной волной его не только бросает на землю, его ещё в землю ещё и как бы вдавливает, как прессом. Ну и в результате ломаются рёбра, как у Золотарёва и Дубининой. А что касается Тибо-Бриньоля, у которого был проломлен череп, тут несколько иная ситуация. Тибо-Бриньоль оказался на значительном расстоянии от эпицентра. Ну, может, на 50 метров, допустим, и взрывной волной его только бросило на землю. Не его не впечатало, потому что он был далеко, и взрывная волна прошла как бы не вертикально, а горизонтально. Вот почему рёбра у Тибо-Бриньоля не сломались! Но удар был такой страшной силы, что он упал, ударился головой об камень. И в результате у него проломило череп.
Ой, я чувствую, Анне Русских скучно слушать то, что я сейчас рассказываю. Да, конечно, для неспециалистов всё это скучно. Поэтому я, пожалуй, не буду объяснять. Я просто повторю: такие травмы, какие были у Дубининой и Золотарёва, могла нанести только вакуумная бомба. Она травмирует также глаза. И когда тела Дубинина и Золотарёва нашли, у них не было глаз. Они были травмированы и разложились в первую очередь, потому что тела этих туристов 2 месяца лежали в ручье. Вот почему, когда их нашли, у них не было глаз!
И последнее, что я скажу. Анна Русских утверждают, что никто не верит в мою версию. Просто смешно. Ну ,конечно, не верят. Никто же не знает, как действуют вакуумные бомбы. Это знаю только я и инженеры-конструкторы вакуумных бомб. Больше этого не знает никто.
https://youtu.be/NeWR4KlKjB4
-
Nobody knows how vacuum bombs work. Only I, and the design engineers of vacuum bombs, know this. Nobody else knows this.
shock1
-
I would say lots of people know how vacuum bombs work.
https://youtu.be/pM84YNda36w?si=emfXIzy8nXpQ24aY
Axelrod, your version raises some questions, as does every theory I suppose. I do not think a tongue would fly out of the body , neither do I think eyes would be destroyed without significant other injuries to the body.
Here is a quote from our friend the internet.
As mentioned earlier, the thermobaric cloud’s detonation creates extremely high temperatures, potentially vaporizing the human targets enveloped by the fireball. Because it utilizes all the atmospheric oxygen of a given area for combustion, a vacuum or ‘rarefaction’ is created which causes all the humans within its radius to die of suffocation, ruptured lungs, and burns. A prolonged high-pressure wave follows which obliterates the targets nearby.
I feel you are cherry picking the injuries
without understanding the reality. Your version also does not address the reason why vacuum bombs would be getting dropped in February in the middle of no where, against none testing targets, house, bunker, animals. I fail to see the point of dropping vacum bombs randomly without collecting data for this so called secret base.
The Mansi live on that land, tourist's are known to travel . I also believe there is some kind of settlement Futher north.
If there was some kind of bomb or rocket , I would suspect that it was an accidental and not a test sight.
There are no burns of significance on any of the clothes or bodies . The burns that are reported are small and work in tandem with trying to heat or warm themselves with the small fire.
I do not think we can ignore the amount of snow above the ravine 4 . My opinion at present, is that the rib fractures are most likely crush injuries.
However, I would like to hear your version of what happened after the vacuum bomb. How the tent was placed , how they got into the ravine , why there's 3 bodies on the slope etc. ?
-
Nobody knows how vacuum bombs work. Only I, and the design engineers of vacuum bombs, know this. Nobody else knows this.shock1
cry2 lol1 thumb1 bigjoke
-
In the region of Vizhay-Burmantovo-District 41 there were 6 groups that hiked in late January 1959: Pyotr Shtiglits - not confirmed, not on the map, Igor Dyatlov (10), Yuri Blinov (10) - he did not keep a diary for this trek, Anatoliy Shumkov (10), Igor Fomenko (7), and Vladislav Karelin (8)
...and nobody else saw anything.
-
In the region of Vizhay-Burmantovo-District 41 there were 6 groups that hiked in late January 1959: Pyotr Shtiglits - not confirmed, not on the map, Igor Dyatlov (10), Yuri Blinov (10) - he did not keep a diary for this trek, Anatoliy Shumkov (10), Igor Fomenko (7), and Vladislav Karelin (8)
...and nobody else saw anything.
So , we have 6 groups of hikers in January roaming the hills and the Mansi doing their hunting and traveling around the area.
Who would fire random explosives, of any type in that area without taking appropriate safety precautions?.
-
Vaccum bombs, a candidate for the dustbin of history.
-
A pure vacuum bomb can be sent to the world of imagination.
Unfortunately for humanity, a supersonic blast wave followed by an underpressure can be caused by so-called high-order explosives, like TNT and Semtex.
During warfare, these high-order explosives are used in bombs blasting in the sky, see image below:
(https://i.ibb.co/sWxMXSW/Afbeelding82.png) (https://imgbb.com/)
The (thin) pressure wave is the blue line in the image.
The underpressure is the area within the blue sphere.
The image below shows a timeline of a passing pressure wave followed by an underpressure:
(https://i.ibb.co/WkSHk4Z/Afbeelding81.png) (https://imgbb.com/)
Only with this kind of pressure wave, I can explain the fractured ribcage of Lyudmila, while on her photo in the mortuary the ribcage shows hardly any signs of an fatal injury.
The explanation for this fatal fracture without any signs of injury is:
- during several milliseconds the ribcage is compressed by the pressure wave: the ribs are fractured at weak points (probably butterfly fractures)
- during one full second the ribcage is inflated tot beyond its normal size (by the overpressure of the air in the lungs in comparison with the underpressure outside the ribcage), causing the ribs returning in its normal position
- after one second - and some heavy wind around - the ribcage returns to its normal size, while inside the ribcage fatal injuries had been caused by the compression during a few milliseconds.
A nasty feature of these kind of blast waves is: one cannot hide behind a wall or inside a hole, because walls will reflect the pressure wave and even increasing the pressure.
See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blast_wave
For further information: Chapter 2 in 'Tools of Violence' by Chris McNab and Hunter Keeter
-
However, the explosive charge is not species specific. If the pressure differential is great enough to inflict the damage claimed, the victim would be hurled through the air, as,would snow, dirt, rocks, and branches. Trees would fall in the blast radius. For me, it is the distinct lack of observable damage to the forest ( did I mention dead animals?) that argues against such a blast. When a bomb goes off, destruction is the rule, not the exception. The four hikers in a snow den in a forest should arguably be safer than three others walking in the open toward their tent. No record of bleeding from the ears.I am still favoring Natural circumstances.
-
Thank you for your coment.
What happens to victims of pressure waves caused by supersonic blast waves, depends primarely on the distance from the cause of the blast in the air.
The injury may vary from:
- being shaken by the sound/air pressure to
- fully evaporation of the victim when very close to the detonation.
and everything in between.
The hyperlink to the Youtube shows the effects of an exploding meteor in Russia.
The distance of the cameras can be estimated by:
- no damage to the windows
- broken glass panes
- glass scattered
- wall demolished.
Especially the demolished walls of the factory - at 10:40 of the video - shows that the walls had not been hurled through the air. The bricks and rubble are neatly piled next to the walls, as may be expected from this kind of pressure waves.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mebWfDlhcRs
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mebWfDlhcRs)
Note that hollow structures are vulnerable.
Also note the condensed air in the wake of the meteor, that is caused by the underpressure behind the passing meteor.
-
Can you make a comparison to the Tunguska event?
-
Thank you for your question.
Seen from the photos, the meteor that had caused the 'Tunguska meteor impact' in 1908 has been of another scale than the meteor flying by on the video of the 'Chelyabinsk meteor event' in Siberia on Feb. 15th of 2013.
The meteor in 2013 had only a very local impact, in the Tunguska event 2000 km2 of forest had been destroyed.
Conclusion: the event of 2013 had been caused by a smaller meteor than the event in 1908
More information about the Tunguska event is available via:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tunguska_event (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tunguska_event)
-
The fall of the Tunguska meteorite is only similar to the meteorite fall in 2013.
But then the meteor fell into the lake, and earlier the Tunguska meteorite fell in the forest, June, 30
and in the summer there are frequent fires in the taiga, especially last years.
This is in no way similar to the incedent with Dyatlov, except for the fame factor.
Particularly, in 2013, for some reason, people did not run out of their houses, especially undressed.
-
Thank you for your comment and for additional information about both meteor events.
As far as I am aware, there is no sound timeline available for the last two days of the Dyatlov Group, that completely explains all details as found by search parties.
For me, the most complicated detail had been: the fatal injury - broken ribcage - of Lyudmila while her ribcage is seen hardly damaged on the photo of her in the mortuary (without any complicated fractures visible outside the body, without any deformation caused by broken ribs poking in the lungs or to the heart , without any indents like Semyon's broken ribcage).
In case a tree had fallen on the ribcage of Lyudmila, (or in case a human had push causing a fatal ribcage fracture) defromations should be seen on the outside of the ribcage.
As far as I know, the best way to explain this kind of ribcage fracture is: an outside force all around her ribcage (pressure is the best candidate) had compressed her ribcage during a very short time; causing fatal internal injuries.
After this compression, a decompression had followed that had expanded the broken ribcage beyond it normal size. This expansion of the ribcage had as effect that her broken ribs had returned nearly into its normal position, without leaving any visible signs outside the body.
THe best candidate for this kind of compression followed by a decompression, is a blast/pressure wave.
As far as I am awere, good candidates for this kind of blast/pressure wave are:
- an exploding meteor high in the air
- exploding bombs high in the air (suggested by the journalist collective Aleksej Rakitin)
- Limited nuclear explosion high in the air.
In the timeline that I have presented in six parts, the group had left the tent area in three subgroups, all with the intention to return to the tent area:
1. Semyon, Thibo (and Lyudmila found partly undressed to wash herself?) had left the tent area properly dressed for a return trip in the afternoon fetching running water
2. four group members had left the tent area to look after the fate for the three in the ravine. Yuri Kri and Yuri Dor had provided their clothing for insulating the floor of the den for the wounded.
3. Zinaida and Semyon had left the tent area the next morning (properly dressed for a return tour) for fetching running water and for looking after the fate of the seven: both had placed the others in the postures as found by both search parties.
Of course all with the preconditions as stated at the beginning of the six parts.
As far as I am aware, these preconditions resemble "the least action' (Okham's razor) in this case that provides a logic explanation for all details (even the flashlight and the missing eyes tongue) as found by both search party
And of course, if these preconditions are different (or if the post mortem reports and the details found by both search parties are staged), than this analysis and timeline is void.
During my investigation of this cold case, I have learned a lot about the progress of hypothermia and about different kind of detonations.
-
Thank you both for your replies. Yes, the Tunguska event was orders of magnitude greater, but that also suggests that its effects are more easily studied. I do not find any evidence in the knockdown of the forest of a vacuum phenomena. It appears that the force was directed away from the projectile in a butterfly pattern.
It is certainly arguable that a blast of some sort inflicted the crush type of injuries, but aside from those injuries, there is no supporting evidence for a detonation. A vacuum bomb does not happen in a vacuum, damage would be generalized, not localized. Further and significantly, an explosion of such character would have been detected in Vizhay, it was not, recalling reports of conventional German artillary being seen and heard dozens of miles from the battlefront in the last great war.
Finally, I ponder the effect of detonation on the tent. If it happened while the tent was on the ridge, I do not think the tent could,withstand it. If in the forest, there is no practical reason to relocate the tent and ignore the corpses. It makes no sense to me. A fall from an embankment and a crush of snow at the snow den can't be ruled out. Cold makes people numb. Numb people lose coordination. Bad things happen to good people.
-
I do not support myself neither the vacuum bomb version (like a thermobaric weapon),
Then why are you promoting this nonsense?
If you are paraphrasing it, then be responsible for what you say....
Why repeat someone else's nonsense if you don't agree with it?
I explained to everyone clearly that what was at least 10 years later could not have anything to do with what happened to the Dyatlov group.
Or do you have an obsession with drowning the discussion in empty talk?
nor the infrasound version.
I told you not to get involved in a subject you know less about than oranges!
If you don't have enough education in acoustics, it's better to keep silent.
You'll look smarter...
I think both are fairy tales. If Mochalov will talk about infrasound and how people are thrown out of the 10th floor, I will also copy such texts here as an interesting example.
Why bring all of Mochalov's nonsense in here? Or do you think he knows better than you?
Do you want to completely bog down the topic, just to show your own ignorance of the subject?
My mother worked with an office on the 3rd floor in school 22 on the street. Vokzalnaya in 1953-1961, 15 minutes from the station. This is 1 km or a little more, but not 500 meters (by Borzenkov (c)).
we read the text. The picture you showed is not this school.
As for kindergarten 47, I’m not sure that it was a school, it’s just a guess.
1. you have a very bad habit of constantly taking the conversation in an unnecessary direction, i.e. into a logical dead end.
2. you have a very bad habit of constantly twisting the words of the person who told you something.
For example:
A) the conversation is not about "your mother", but about the school where the members of Dyatlov's group came.
About school 22 I said only that after its liquidation already in 60th or 70th years there were transferred pupils who studied earlier in elementary school 47(41? - That's what it says in their diaries. Or do you know better than them what they had?). Nothing more. You don't have to twist things to your own way. That's not smart. Then there was an education reform (more precisely - centralization of the education structure), when all schools belonging to different ministries (railway, water, forestry) were transferred to a single education system. Previously, each school of those ministries had its own numbering system. I've already written about it, but you stupidly ignore it. And you twist it all your own way.
B) the conversation is not about what you fantasize and attribute to others, but about what I wrote specifically. 500 m is not about your favorite school 22, but about the corner of that district, which in 1959 was called "New Settlement". As it turns out, you don't know what neighborhoods were in the city you think you own. Why did you have to fantasize and "transfer" the district "Novy Settlement" to the location of "Serov-Sortirovochny"? It turns out that you either do not know "your hometown" at all, or deliberately deceive the readers of this forum.
C) the conversation is not about the fact that you constantly twist one concept into another. It's called dumbing down the topics of discussion.
I'm not writing school, I'm writing kindergarten 47. Such a city could have 47 kindergartens, but not 47 schools.One advantage is that it is located near the station and the water tower.
Such a city could have 47 kindergartens, but not 47 schools.
Once again, you are either very stupid or trying to deceive your readers. But I have already mentioned this, both before and in this message. It concerns the different numbering system for schools of different departments (ministries). It did not depend on what city it was located in. They had their own registry.
So substituting the school that was there then for the kindergarten that is there now is what is known in the card game as "twisting".
And here you contradict yourself: if you refer to the fact that "In such a city there could be 47 kindergartens, but not 47 schools" (c) The city of Serov is 100,000 people or about 20,000 children. Where then all to a children from kindergartens had to go. Especially since not all children went to kindergarten, but all children had to go to school.
If this kindergarten was assigned to the New Village,
perhaps this is a mistake by the compiler of the text (the Old village is a metallurgical plant, the new village is everything else in his understanding. He had no Wikipedia to check. Wikipedia appeared only 20 years ago.
In general, we are pointing out the secrets of history indiscriminately. as if it were an accurate document, I wouldn’t. The director of the museum, where this text about school 47 comes from, Vera Bellendir, believes that in tent at the Dyatlov pass were also Lelyushenko’s children (son #10 and daughter #11, who were taken out first), however. After this message about Lelyushenko’s children, I consider it useless to trust any information from Vera Bellendir about Chuprakov’s school and house and where he is.
The school was located in the New Village in Chuprakov’s house near the water tower of the station.
There were two small shops nearby.
The information for us (with the participation of Y. Kuntsevich) was received not from the former employee of the museum of Ivdel city V. Belinder, but from a researcher of the museum of Serov city. I didn't write down the surname then, which I regret now... So don't substitute notions. If most of the readers of this forum cannot distinguish such details, it does not give you the right to deceive them.
If you don't understand something, then I am equally critical of conversations and assertions by people like what V. Belinder said. Not because I dislike them as people, but because they say such nonsense. It's called spreading gossip, which is something you are also making great progress in.
how could the water tower be located 1 km from the station. Usually such structures are located 50-100m from the station.
1. 1 km you made up yourself, what I said I wrote above....
2. Why do you think that there should be no more than one water tower in the city and it should be located only at the station? You yourself realize the absurdity of this. There should be a lot of them in the city and they should be located where it is necessary. And the expression "it was located in the New Village in Chuprakov's house near the station's water tower." means only that it was there. You don't say how far it was from the station.
3. By the way, what is not far? 1 м? 50 м? 100 м? 500 м? 1000 meters? 5000 meters? It depends on what the person who said it was thinking. So don't make it up for others. These are their thoughts, not yours, distorted....
-
Comrade Borzenkov go away and don’t interfere please!
Don't write so much text!
No one will believe you anyway...
Belinder, but from a researcher of the museum of Serov city. - I know this but I don't think they are mentally different.
Your idea about infrasound has origins from Uvarov's witness testimony, director of museum in Ivdel. A funny tale...
https://dyatlovpass.com/case-files-60-61
Nobody else knows about infrasound acoustics, and nobody else knows abous vacuum bombs...
Very similar ideas!
Then why are you promoting this nonsense? (c)
-
Hi Axelrod,
I think there's been some confusion. I actually got confused by your posts as I wasn't sure what you were saying. I now realise that you were quoting someone else. When you added this post below , I thought these were your words. I think you should say who you are quoting at the top of the post, or maybe keep to your theory , unfortunately it all got a bid muddy . If a new reader looks at the post , they will think that these are your words, which I now believe they are not.
To clarify, this below is you posting the transcript of someone else's YouTube video?
Today Anna Russkikh made another attempt to refute my version of the vacuum bomb. So, to begin with, I must say the following: only a vacuum bomb design engineer can refute my version of a vacuum bomb, and no one else! To refute something, you must at least understand the subject that you are trying to refute. And if you don't understand, then you have nothing to do...
....Nobody knows how vacuum bombs work. Only I, and the design engineers of vacuum bombs, know this. Nobody else knows this. - Today Anna Russkikh made another attempt to refute my version of the vacuum bomb. So, to begin with, I must say the following: only a vacuum bomb design engineer can refute my version of a vacuum bomb, and no one else!
-
My answer:
You see, I have not found anywhere a description of what chemical substances the action of a vacuum bomb is based on. It seems that REALLY only the inventors of vacuum bombs know this. But this is understandable, because even a description of the composition of ancient Chinese gunpowder is difficult to find in books so that children cannot use this recipe.
Therefore, in order to confirm or refute how right Mochalov may be with his vacuum bomb, I need to know the principle of operation of a vacuum bomb. You only gave me a description of the effects of the vacuum bomb, but not its chemical composition.
-
Sorry Axelrod, I am not explaining myself clearly.
When you post, I , as the reader of the post ,don't know if you are quoting someone else or if you are posting from your own thoughts.
Im not entirely sure what the debate about vacuum bombs is or secret bases for that matter.
-
Original idea about Khruschev maybe is going from here
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uYl9sS9YV7g
published in Russian by another person in2019 year
-
Comrade Borzenkov go away and don’t interfere
please!
Thank you.
Citizen axelrod, if you don't know the old wisdom, "If I'm not told what I should (or shouldn't) do, I won't tell the person telling me where to go!" (c) then I suggest you memorize it well.
And don't expect me (or anyone else) to tacitly agree with your nonsense, which you spill out of мешка деда Мороза (Santa Claus') bag. You won't.
Don't write so much text!
If you don't know many familiar letters, don't read it, it's not meant for you. There are a lot of other readers here and don't decide for them. Although I can't compete with you even closely in terms of the size of meaningless texts....
No one will believe you anyway...
There are many other readers here and you don't have to decide for them what they should do. You're just as much a member here as anyone else. And no more significant than anyone else.
Belinder, but from a researcher of the museum of Serov city. - I know this but I don't think they are mentally different.
With this you have shown your level of intelligence, if you do not understand that these are two different cities and these are different people who have studied different history of different cities? Then you'd better keep quiet, you'll look smarter.
Your idea about infrasound has origins from Uvarov's witness testimony, director of museum in Ivdel. A funny tale...
https://dyatlovpass.com/case-files-60-61
Oh, yeah? Do you know better than me how I know something and who I have as sources of scientific information? Apparently it is useless for this axelrod to say anything, but for the rest I will explain:
1. the testimony of Ivan Evlampovich Uvarov is also significant for understanding of this phenomenon.
2. there is a whole section of physics - acoustics of low and ultra-low frequencies, and there is a lot of literature on this subject. It is enough to find references on Google by the surnames of researchers V. Gavreau, L. Tarnozzi, R. Wood, S. Heal, D. S. Nussbaum, S. Reinis, В. В. Шулейкин (V. V. Shuleikin), Л. М. Бреховских (L. M. Brekhovskikh) [by the way, this is the father-in-law of B. E. Slobtsov], И. И. Клюкин (I. I. Klyukin), В. А. Гордиенко (V. A. Gordienko ) - Prof. of the Acoustics Department of the Physics Department of Moscow Lomonosov University (https://www.phys.msu.ru/rus/about/sovphys/ISSUES-2014/01(104)-2014/20600/)....
By the way, it was with him that I discussed this topic several times. Unlike all kinds of axelrods, it was quite understandable and lucid.
And discussed the same in absentia with Dr. A. Bedard (NOAA), via Donnie Eicher, but it was very brief, as their work is, shall we say... not for publication.
Really, I think that with your kindergarten-47 level approach to this matter, it is all boring and incomprehensible, so the easiest thing to do is not to deal with complex and intellectually demanding matters, but to chatter... Which you do not without success and constantly do....
Nobody else knows about infrasound acoustics, and nobody else knows abous vacuum bombs...
Don't speak for others, and the fact that you are a complete oak (дуб) in these matters, it is already clear at least because you haven't said anything concrete, and you can't say due to your mental abilities....
Very similar ideas!
It's not surprising to you at all, it's enough to put everything in one pile without knowing anything about it.....
Then why are you promoting this nonsense? (c)
I see, you don't have your own words and thoughts, so you have to repeat someone else's....
It's also an indicator of level.
But I do not promote collections of other people's gossip and limitless sets of empty words, in which you have absolutely no knowledge, but have succeeded here more than successfully.
It's called noodling the ears of untrained readers in this forum...
Stop it, as your level has already been assessed here and you don't need to embarrass yourself further...
******************************
PS. Against your further stupidity I can comment on such a statement:
1." ...I have not found anywhere a description, on what chemical substances the action of a vacuum bomb is based.
...only the inventors of vacuum bombs know that."
This is your delusion.
A) You probably haven't looked for anything, since it's three clicks away, even on Wikipedia. It is true that you need to know what you are looking for, and how relevant it is to the question you are asking. You have to know what you are writing about.....
B) These things are known in detail to any competent engineer who had anything to do with it. Including military technicians with a little theoretical training in this field.
Here everything is simple enough: when the primary fuse is triggered, there is a small explosion that sprays an aerosol mixture (usually oxirane (ethylene oxide or ethylene oxide) or similar compounds. After 100-150 milliseconds, the initiating detonator detonates and the main fuel-air mixture explodes. What consequences occur and the properties of the striking factors, I have already described in previous messages. I will not repeat myself, who is interested - find it yourself (by my nickname). Time is a pity.
The criterion of competence is always how deeply the opponent can understand the request, talk about it and answer.
This section of the answer is addressed mainly to GlennM and Ziljoe. And also to all those who are interested in knowledge, not in idle chatter...They are very competent in their approach to the topic and do not write anything, but clarify information about which they do not know yet, but want to know.
-
This section of the answer is addressed mainly to GlennM and Ziljoe. And also to all those who are interested in knowledge, not in idle chatter...They are very competent in their approach to the topic and do not write anything, but clarify information about which they do not know yet, but want to know.
Thank you WAB.
I agree, the vacuum bomb is a few clicks away , as is much scientific information and data.
This thread has become a mess as it's unclear what is being debated . It was interesting for translation of some of the YouTube videos from Russian to English but unfortunately it has become confused .
The vacuum bomb I understand well enough in concept but it's where it came from , where is the so called secret base , how did it get there and why are they building secret bases in winter where people roam quite freely. A fallen test stage of a rocket gone wrong perhaps, a slim change I guess but testing vacuum bombs at random , a secret base? there would be no point. Rockets , missiles and weapons were not secrets , the only secrets were the capabilities and numbers of rockets to the west. In fact I think there was a whole nuclear city in the south Urals that was secret, but only to the west...
This clip below is 1957 and a military parade of rockets etc, in the USSR.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=oyt_RjDfah4&si=F9aNYa0tBoQSN0v9
The frustration is, Axelrod seems to be debating several theories at once, which has got confusing. I have zero concern regarding the school and I don't understand what Axelrod is trying to communicate about the schools name or number.
The diary entries seem to fit logically, it gives the story of the start of the hikers journey, singing, a telling off for singing by the police , a drunk on the train , going for a walk and missing the bus , the talking to children about their adventures and then films ,songs with the locals. It seems like normal people doing normal things , I can't see anyone doctoring diaries that would expose so many witnesses to the hikers diary.
The footprints are probably the biggest indicator that the tent was pitched where it was found and the 9 hikers descended to the ceder area. The foot prints are also the best evidence that no one else was involved.
-
What Ziljoe said!
-
I’ll say right away that the version of the rocket fall is easy to assume, but it’s also now easy to check using archival data,
and this version definitely fits because I found a table of rocket launches in 1959
on the RVSN (Strategic Missile Forces) website, and copies on other websites. It lists 200 rocket launches in 1959, 20 of them from Baikonur. Range from 50 km to launch to the Moon and creation of a solar satellite.
For rocket launches, a landing or crash point is usually specified.
Therefore, this version is no longer available.
I consider all such rocket discussions as spam.
-
I agree, the vacuum bomb is a few clicks away , as is much scientific information and data.
This thread has become a mess as it's unclear what is being debated .
That's what I'm talking about as the most important thing. You can't do everything at once. You have to deal with one issue and draw conclusions first, and then research the next one.
It was interesting for translation of some of the YouTube videos from Russian to English but unfortunately it has become confused .
Yes, of course. Only it should be a very high quality work. And it needs explanations on various issues, from different understanding of terms in different languages to interpretation of concepts for the level needed by different readers. If this is not done, then you get a lot of nonsense. There are a lot of words, but no concepts.
The vacuum bomb I understand well enough in concept but it's where it came from ,
I have already explained that all the work on such munitions was already after all the events for more than 10 years. So I don't understand what there is to discuss in connection with the Dyatlov group?
where is the so called secret base , how did it get there and why are they building secret bases in winter where people roam quite freely.
This is a typical example of empty fiction as a subject for blatant chatter. I think that we should not fall for it, because it is elementary contrary to common sense.
I might add that the area is generally difficult to access, both now and then. This is especially important for the winter period. The reason for such idle talk appears because most of the readers of the forum do not visualize this aspect. And some "writers" blatantly use it for their own PR. They have no other tasks, for example, to honestly inform the readers of the forum. That is why there are attacks on those who inform about the actual state of information.
A fallen test stage of a rocket gone wrong perhaps, a slim change I guess but testing vacuum bombs at random , a secret base? there would be no point. Rockets , missiles and weapons were not secrets , the only secrets were the capabilities and numbers of rockets to the west.
The rocket version in general here is a consequence of many rumors (= speculation ) and gossip (or piece of scandal) - these are two different concepts in Russian.
I, as a specialist, can confidently say that in January 1959 there were no missiles that could fly to the pass from the places that were really available at that time.
All deployments of missile forces were at the borders of the country, they were not needed elsewhere. From the nearest place of such deployment were distances about 2 times the range of missiles that were in such troops.
There simply could not be other places, as they had to be only to fire only at their own, not at enemy positions.
This is elementary common sense.
However, rumors, supplemented by secrecy (no matter whether necessary or not) are always very stable among the ordinary population, so in Sverdlovsk at that time there were a lot of them. Because the "rocket theme" was then in "very big and fashionable".
In fact I think there was a whole nuclear city in the south Urals that was secret, but only to the west...
If you are saying that there were "closed cities" where there were nuclear industry plants, that is absolutely true. So too, there was Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL or Site Y, LASL) and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) in the US, and there was nothing special about that. It's a peculiarity of the time. By the way, continuing to this time....
This clip below is 1957 and a military parade of rockets etc, in the USSR.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=oyt_RjDfah4&si=F9aNYa0tBoQSN0v9
This was shown in 1957, but by 1959 almost nothing had changed in this technique. Of course, there were still new developments, but in appearance they were almost unchanged.
I can comment on this rocket video as follows:
1. 6 min 06 sec - the missiles of the S-75 air defense system are demonstrated. Such missile in May 01, 1960 was shot down U-2 airplane near Sverdlovsk.
2. 6 min 40 sec - R-11 type missiles are demonstrated. It is a ground forces missile with a range of 150...270 km (90...165 mi). Its modifications are known as "Scud".
3. . 6 min 55 sec - 2k4 or 2k5 missiles are demonstrated with very short range - up to 25 km (15 mi), but with the possibility of installing a nuclear warhead. This missile is supposed to be a development of field artillery.
4. 7 min 15 sec - R-5 type missiles are demonstrated. This is an operational-tactical missile with a range of 1200 km (750 mi). Exactly such missile was launched on February 02, 1959 from the area of Kapustin Yar in the eastern direction for the purpose of military tests. But even if we assume fantastically that it would have flown towards the pass, it still could not have flown because the distance there is 1640 km (1020 mi). Although it actually flew ~750 km (460 mi) towards Kazakhstan (east).
There could still be presented a rocket R-7 (such in 1957 was launched the first satellite, and then, its modification in 1961 was launched cosmonaut Gagarin), but it was very large and could not fit on the transport for transportation.
The frustration is, Axelrod seems to be debating several theories at once, which has got confusing.
Unfortunately that is not what is most wrong. He is so amateurish in his presentation of this information that it is almost impossible to understand even someone who is well versed in what is written there....
I have zero concern regarding the school and I don't understand what Axelrod is trying to communicate about the schools name or number.
This refers to minor details of the route of the Dyatlov group and does not affect the final accident in any way. I wrote about it only because if a writer wants to assert something, he should do it as accurately as possible and with a deep understanding of what he wants to say....
The diary entries seem to fit logically, it gives the story of the start of the hikers journey, singing, a telling off for singing by the police , a drunk on the train , going for a walk and missing the bus , the talking to children about their adventures and then films ,songs with the locals. It seems like normal people doing normal things , I can't see anyone doctoring diaries that would expose so many witnesses to the hikers diary.
You are absolutely correct here. If not to delve into unnecessary conspiracy, nothing foreshadowed the final event and the group's demise. This means that all the answers should be sought in the causes on the very last leg of their travel.
The footprints are probably the biggest indicator that the tent was pitched where it was found and the 9 hikers descended to the ceder area. The foot prints are also the best evidence that no one else was involved.
Yes, you're absolutely right here too, but we need to find a distinction in which facts of their reflective details of events are important and which are irrelevant. That is the difficulty of this investigation.
It takes a very significant amount of scientific and practical training to be able to distinguish between such details of events.
This is especially important as many things have changed over time (65+ years!).
For example, weather parameters, societal psychology, the basis for action assessments, the ability to reach the scene, and much more.
It is necessary, as they say in science, which I now have to do, to be able to solve inverse problems. That is, using the available objective data now, to reconstruct the picture that was then.
This is all the more difficult, because you have to take into account a lot of different parameters and conditions... And this is almost impossible for one person, if you go very deeply into this case....
***********************************
Unfortunately, lately the substance of this thread is more and more filled with conspiracy theories, dilettantism at the level of medieval ignorance and just plain chatter. I'm already tired of trying to explain something in more detail and closer to life. Probably, in the nearest future I will simply destroy my archive and stop saying anything on this topic at all.
I just have to write a couple of notes on the subject of this winter expedition, as there are monstrous errors in this "research".
This will reinforce the tendency that the reasons will never be known.
Much later they (these reasons) will be found, but a great deal of time will have passed, too much effort and intelligence will have been expended.
But this is already possible only with a completely new and from scratch informational approach. Now it is impossible to do it, because the mass of unreliable and "garbage" information is piling up all the time. And there is nothing that can be done about it.
It is necessary to stop and start all over again. And it should be done by specialists acting simultaneously in different fields of knowledge. Dilettantes and fictitious people cannot do complex and complicated cases.
The received information should be carefully analyzed for reliability and weed out everything that does not meet the criteria of compliance with the laws of nature, correspondence to historical realities and common sense. This is especially important if there are multiple layers of different factors. Moreover, specialists should be practitioners, not "doing philosophy sitting on the sofa".
And it is always necessary to have an answer to the questions:
- why any action is done there and
- how possible is it to do it in those conditions?
-
Thank you WAB.
You have also taught me a new word that I have never heard in all my years, dilettantes/dilettantism. I shall be sharing this with my friends this evening, making myself sound clever bigjoke .
I would love experts in their field or profession to enter the forum. I don't think a medical doctor or forensic expert has ever openly commented on the injuries of the ravine 4.
The missing tongue and eyes have definitely conjured up some of the most interesting theories, whilst the situation, location and the exposure of the bodies has being completely ignored along with the autopsy.
I also think there was an obsession with rockets and UFO'S in the west , it was the time of new technology, the public would be interested to hear anything I suppose. We all like to gossip from time to time.
I look forward to hearing your comments on the winter research.
-
I don’t know how to throw Mr. Borzenkov (WAB) out of the virtual reality that he has invented for himself and in which he is confident. with all these infrasounds, schools, I don’t know what else.
(As for the rocketry and the military, I agree with them.)
Truth and historical reality do not depend on ours, it is as it is...
Here, I made a screenshot of the map. There are objects connected with the railway nearby.
- Stadium Lokomotiv
- Railway dental clinic
- House of Culture for Railway Workers
- Parovoznikov street (steam locomotive operators street).
- Electrovoznikov street (electro locomotive operators street).
this is all located in the area of the old station in the east of the city
(the railway to Ivdel and Polunochnoe is on the right on the map).
After this, it is logical to assume that kindergarten Solnyshchko No. 47 for some time
was school No. 47 for children of railway workers.
But all this is located ~5 km east of the new main station,
which is closer to the city center and Sverdlovsk.
in 1953 the new station was already in operation, it is unknown when it was opened.
I asked my mother (and I can ask her sister, both worked at this school for several years in the 195s) that that school is 22, it was in this place in 1959,
A 3-story brick building was then apparently added to it by another 3-story building perpendicular to it.
There was no other school on the way from the station if you walk along Vokzalnaya Street (later Pobeda Street vertically on the map)
Perhaps there were schools on the other side of the railway, to the south, say school No. 4.
Mr. Borzenkov came up with unverified information, allegedly in 1959 at this place where school 22 is located, these are his delusions. Feel bad from his fantasies!
(https://i.ibb.co/s2dTXm5/serov-47.png) (https://ibb.co/vH6NMws)
Я не знаю, как выкинуть господина Борзенкова (WAB) из той виртуальной реальности, которую он себе придумал и в которой он уверен. со всеми этими инфразвуками, школами, не знаю чем ещё.
(Насчёт дальности ракет и военных баз я с ним соглашусь.)
Истина и историческая реальность не зависит от нашей, она такая, как она есть...
Вот, я сделал скришнот карты. На ней рядом находятся объекты, связанные с железной дорогой.
Стадион Локомотив
Железнодорожная стоматологическая поликлиника
Дом культуры железнодорожников
улица Паровозников.
улица Электровозников.
это всё находится в районе старого вокзала на востоке города
(железная дорога от Свердловска на Ивдель и Полуночное справа на карте).
После этого логично предположить, что детский сад Солнышко №47 какое-то время
был школой №47 для детей железнодорожников.
Но это всё находится в ~5 км на восток от нового главного вокзала,
который ближе к центру города и к Свердловску.
в 1953 году новый вокзал уже работал, неизвестно когда был открыт.
Я спрашивал маму (и могу спросить её сестру, обе работали в этой школе несколько лет в 195х годах), что та школа 22, она и в 1959 году была на этом месте,
3 этажное кирпичное здание потом к ней видимо пристроили ещё одно 3-этажное здание перпендикулярно.
Никакой другой школы на пути от вокзала не было если идти по улике Вокзальная (позднее улица Победы вертикально на карте)
Возможно были школы по другую сторону от железной дороги, на юг, скажем школа №4.
Господин Борзенков придумал непроверенную информацию, якобы в 1959 году на этом месте, где находится школа 22, это его заблуждения. Плохо себя чувствовать от его фантазий!
-
"It is necessary, as they say in science, which I now have to do, to be able to solve inverse problems. That is, using the available objective data now, to reconstruct the picture that was then."
There are two types of reasoning. They are induction and deduction. With deduction, it goes like this," Every swan, I've seen is white. I deduce the next swan shall be white".or from many clues comes a conclusion. With induction, " This swan is white, therefore all swans are white." Put in plain terms , induction says, " if you have seen one, you've seen them all." Deduction says " if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it's a duck".
So what? Something may be logical, but may still be wrong in fact, as in the case of swans. So what? With the Dyatlov tragedy, we can gather many clues and come (deductively) to a conclusion. Or, we can say that since something like this has happened once before, then we can assert that it will always happen this way. Both approaches may lead to the truth, but the facts must be true and the reasoning must be logically consistent. Of course, the trouble is that in the absense of facts, speculation runs wild. Hence, all the varied theories and the sparring in the forum. Since no new facts are coming forward we can deductively or inductively come to an explanation that pleases us. This may change when someone figure out how to run the clock backwards.Teddy's tree ring data is one such attempt. I still favor the slab slip as the incident that precipitated all the rest.
-
When working on Wikipedia, there is such a thing as an “authoritative source”.
There are quite a lot of such cases for avalanche injuries.
I would really like to receive infrasound not only indications of the names and opinions of some scientists,
and references to newspaper articles where people are running somewhere from infrasound and throwing themselves out of windows and breaking bones.
Where, in what place and what date did this happen? I didn't find such information.
There is only mention that people experience some discomfort, and even this is some doubtful.
-
The defense for infrasound must surely be in shared experiences. In a group, if one person starts to feel an unfocused sense of dread, and if another person can confirm that they also feel strange, that is sufficient to start a cascade of potential responses. In our brains, we depend on intellect to govern emotions. If something elicits an emotional response, then the cortex must expend energy defining, evaluating and forming a response to the triggering stimulus. Tired minds are compromised. As such, an unfocused feeling of dread can escalate into panic, waiting for " the other shoe to drop", as the saying goes. If others respond similarly, even if they don't percieve things the same way, its known as the "bandwagon effect".
-
I cannot source any solid science behind infra sound. I remember the TV program "mythbusters " trying to replicate fear or the "brown note" without much success but it wasn't exactly scientific. There is also the reported "Havana syndrome" which has been discussed here before but having had a look , it remains a mystery and may have a connection to the "bandwagon effect" .
Likewise , the sound of the wind may have installed fear in the group, that I believe is a possibility. " One or two of the group could influence the others that it's just too dangerous to stay at the tent, perhaps collapsed by the wind .
This video gives us an impression of conditions in daylight on the slope, change it to night time and stronger winds with more snow being blown , then it could be a possibility to move down the slope .
https://youtu.be/GFQ1zKdq_SE?si=i2IM-1m_-byn8Y0e
This still leaves a question mark as to why they didn't take more equipment though. My only conclusions are these. They all cover the possibility of not taking more equipment.
1) the tent was never there in the first place.
2) they were forced out by other humans or animal .
3) a tent collapse of some description, wind, snow slip , avalanche.
4) some other unusual but natural occurrence, ball lightning, infrasound...
Number 3 or a combination of ,is what I think to be most likely. I cannot compute the logistics of staging the tent and people involved. I see no motive for other humans to be there or kill 9 hiker's. I was keen on the wolverine idea but if it can not spray then this theory is far less plausible. Unfortunately, I do not know anything about ball lightning or infrasound, the internet is extremely vague on such topics.
It is a frustration as I don't think I can add anything of help . The ceder seems a sensible place to at least try to start a fire and shelter and make a plan. The ravine for a snow hole or cave is another option but there could also have been accident in that area. It's impossible to tell how much of that 3-4 meters of snow above the ravine 4 was there on the 1-2 of February. It's hard to believe that 4 meters of snow conviently blew into the ravine over that 3 weeks only.
-
I think the closest approximation any of us get to an infrasound effect is the deep rumble of impending doom used in cinema. If you have experienced an earthquake, as I have, there is a also a rumble. These are, of course not infrasound, as they can actually be heard, but the tummy shaking vibration does have an effect. In my experience, what goes on in my inner ear and in my gut together or separately, affect my sense of wellbeing. If either are disturbed, the effect is immediate.
If, in the case of the DP9, infrasound was masked by howling wind and if those winds deposited enough snow on the snow bank just above the tent to precipitate the collapse, then the unfocused dread would surely undermine confidence in staying put in the tent.
I feel that in the best circumstance, infrasound is still a distant second to the actual slab slip.
-
The mystery for me is what this thread is even about. How did you guys get from a vacuum bomb to infrasound, and whose theories are these? This is the most incomprehensible conversation I think I have ever read on a forum. By the time I was done with the third page I felt like the going theory was that they were hit by a rocket missile after Nikolai, Semyon, and Luda set off a vacuum bomb while government agents triggered a slab avalanche at the tent to punish Dyatlov for invading school 41! I mean, are people posting their own theories, or is this just collection of stuff they got off the internet and YouTube?
-
I think it started as various theories, all of which we know.
-
The bird walks are a natural consequence of Nature hating a vacuum. In this case, a vaccum of relevant information.
-
a vacuum bomb while government agents triggered a slab avalanche at the tent to punish Dyatlov for invading school 41!
Dyatlov was not invading school 41, because school with such number was absent in city of Serov.
The same about traint #43. Only train #45/46 was passing through Serov. Maybe they visited an another place.
Last night, about 9-00 we boarded the train №43. At last. There is 10 of us. Slavik Bienko didn't come, they didn't let him. We are going with Blinov group. Fun. Songs. Around 8 am we arrived in Serov. We were not allowed to stay on the train station, the train to Ivdel is at 6-30 pm. We are looking for a room. We are trying to get into the club (to the right of the dining room of the station) and school, but fail. Finally he (? not sure about the identity) finds school number 41 (about 200 meters from the train station), where we were very well received.
But I know that such school is present in Moscow near airport VKO (Vnukovo).
Maybe mistificators were flyint throught this airport!
(https://i.ibb.co/rssKNKz/vko-sch41.png) (https://ibb.co/5FFXwXS)
Guess please which of them is school #41?
-
What do you think about school #14 in Serov?
(https://i.ibb.co/86mxWHY/serov-4.png) (https://ibb.co/cDy8GjY)
-
Maybe this school #4 - position 30-40 min. in video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_Jp1czPwaI
-
a vacuum bomb while government agents triggered a slab avalanche at the tent to punish Dyatlov for invading school 41!
Dyatlov was not invading school 41, because school with such number was absent in city of Serov.
The same about traint #43. Only train #45/46 was passing through Serov. Maybe they visited an another place.
Last night, about 9-00 we boarded the train №43. At last. There is 10 of us. Slavik Bienko didn't come, they didn't let him. We are going with Blinov group. Fun. Songs. Around 8 am we arrived in Serov. We were not allowed to stay on the train station, the train to Ivdel is at 6-30 pm. We are looking for a room. We are trying to get into the club (to the right of the dining room of the station) and school, but fail. Finally he (? not sure about the identity) finds school number 41 (about 200 meters from the train station), where we were very well received.
But I know that such school is present in Moscow near airport VKO (Vnukovo).
Maybe mistificators were flyint throught this airport!
(https://i.ibb.co/rssKNKz/vko-sch41.png) (https://ibb.co/5FFXwXS)
Guess please which of them is school #41?
That was a joke. Or more accurately, a hyperbole.
-
Google Maps shows me schools #41 in amount of 8 in Moscow.
(https://i.ibb.co/pZrYKsv/map-school41.png) (https://ibb.co/rMfDpLG)
(https://i.ibb.co/sWBRMdP/map-photo.jpg) (https://ibb.co/3RJdL9s)
This is not school #41 on photo! And not a school in name of Gregory Taran. This is school #1008.
(https://i.ibb.co/XCbHR0S/school1008.png) (https://ibb.co/wzRtmGM)