Recent Posts

1

General Discussion / Re: Wood Expedition Theory

« Last post by ZuriDog on Today at 08:07:43 PM »

A technical point to work out is how the cry for help is heard over such a distance. We must determine whether the wind was in their face or back at the cedar. If at their back, the sound carries farther. You might consider instead of calling for help, waving a flaming branch might be more viable from a distance. We do have evidence of a fire at the cedar. The sticking point is that the fire has to be seen. Is this where the two better dressed hikers come into play? Were they not supposed to be outside the tent relieving themselves? Depending on what time they left the tent to attend to Nature's call, the two at the tree are getting progressively worse for wear due to prolonged exposure to the cold.

So in terms of the sequence of events, I think whether the people in the tent heard screams from very far away, or from very near - maybe even at the tent entrance itself-, and regardless of whether they could make out words or just screaming, I think the outcome would be exactly the same. They would hear the call for help, someone would attempt to open the entrance to the tent (they only managed a button or two), but someone got impatient and slashed the tent open.

Yes, evidence shows someone having relieved themselves outside the tent - but it is impossible to set a timeline for this. Someone could have gone whilst they were setting up the tent, or while the others were having a slight snack, or when Tibo and Zolotarev had gone out to the woods, or even while Tibo and Zolotarev were away.
This theory suggests Tibo and Zolotarev were down at the wooded area, and that no one was outside when Zolotarev ran back to the tent to get help, as anyone going outside to toilet would not bother doing up all the buttons to the entrance for the short period of time required. The entrance was mostly done up (I believe someone got impatient before the person could undo the next button) suggests no one was temporarily outside, i.e. toilet break. The only people outside were Tibo and Zolotarev as judged by their dress.

2

General Discussion / Re: Wood Expedition Theory

« Last post by GlennM on Today at 04:18:52 PM »

A technical point to work out is how the cry for help is heard over such a distance. We must determine whether the wind was in their face or back at the cedar. If at their back, the sound carries farther. You might consider instead of calling for help, waving a flaming branch might be more viable from a distance. We do have evidence of a fire at the cedar. The sticking point is that the fire has to be seen. Is this where the two better dressed hikers come into play? Were they not supposed to be outside the tent relieving themselves? Depending on what time they left the tent to attend to Nature's call, the two at the tree are getting progressively worse for wear due to prolonged exposure to the cold.

3

General Discussion / Re: Wood Expedition Theory

« Last post by ZuriDog on Today at 12:37:28 PM »

It all happened because there was a threat that Krivonischenko captured in the last shot of his camera, and from which he and Doroshenko were hiding on a cedar tree. The threat from the tent continued up the slope to the cedar, but there was no escape from it. It left a trail of destruction on the slope and by the cedar.

It is beyond belief that two persons would climb up a tree to hide from a perceived threat, then proceed to brake off branches and form a 5-meter-high window facing the direction of said threat. This is the most extreme case of hiding in plain sight that I have ever heard of. But you raise a valid concern about leaving without shoes.

I've thought of Rustem with one shoe and isn't it possible he lost the other to deep snow? Either by the snow pulling it off or maybe he used it as a shovel. Unless they accounted for the other shoe being in the tent? And I find it odd as well that this theory calls for a tent being cut up over Zolo yelling for help.

Also a valid point. In my version of events the hikers would have heard shouting from outside long before they could make out words. They are practically blind to what is happening outside, they have no idea what is going on, only urgent shouting. They must realize that their friends are in danger. And the person by the door is fumbling with the buttons, out of the 7 people present in the tent, it only takes one to think the delay is unacceptable and slash the tent.
They had the means and ability to repair the tent, they had already mended the tent a couple of times on this trip alone. What is a piece of fabric that can be mended when your friends are shouting for help?
If I were forced to name someone, I'd say Doroshenko. He had on a previous occasion confronted a bear, armed with nothing more than a hammer.
Now holding a knife, hearing the shouts from outside, and the person at the entrance taking too long. All he would want to do is get outside as soon as possible, and it only takes one person to think like that.
Similarly, the fact that the hikers left without shoes, or with only one shoe.. That is why in my version it is important to stress that they were not abandoning the tent. The intention was to help return Tibo to the tent. In my opinion it is harder to imagine a scenario in which the hikers are abandoning the tent but leave without jackets and shoes. It is hard to imagine them abandoning the tent without taking any of the items they would need to survive. In my scenario, because they intent to return, because it's not that cold (warm wind) then temporarily leaving the tent, perhaps a little underdressed, seems more plausible. What's some temporary, personal discomfort when weighed against the fact that a friend is in serious need of help?

4

General Discussion / Re: Wood Expedition Theory

« Last post by SURI on Today at 12:34:33 PM »

March 5 as a result of searching using probes under a layer of snow of 15 cm was found Slobodin. He too froze in the dynamic pose as Kolmogorova. He was dressed relatively warmer. He was wearing one felt boot (the second was found in a tent).

https://dyatlovpass.com/case-files-32-35?rbid=17743

5

General Discussion / Re: Wood Expedition Theory

« Last post by OLD JEDI 72 on Today at 10:46:49 AM »

I assume that Slobodin's second shoe was found in the tent, which is a confirmed fact. Therefore, it is impossible for him to voluntarily leave the tent and go to the cedar with one shoe. Slobodin with one shoe is another key factor in the whole case. The entire slope and the cedar were victims of that threat.

Only nature stopped that threat by burying it under a 4 m layer of snow.

You assume it was found, which is a confirmed fact? That statement contradicts itself. The first part implies speculation, and the last part certainty. What are you trying to say? We know the group's shoes were in the tent, but more specifically, how about Rustem's shoe? I honestly don't know

6

General Discussion / Re: Wood Expedition Theory

« Last post by SURI on Today at 08:44:01 AM »

I assume that Slobodin's second shoe was found in the tent, which is a confirmed fact. Therefore, it is impossible for him to voluntarily leave the tent and go to the cedar with one shoe. Slobodin with one shoe is another key factor in the whole case. The entire slope and the cedar were victims of that threat.

Only nature stopped that threat by burying it under a 4 m layer of snow.

7

General Discussion / Re: Book "1079"

« Last post by GlennM on Today at 06:42:32 AM »

Axelrod, it is called an " ad hominum" logical fallacy.

8

General Discussion / Re: Wood Expedition Theory

« Last post by OLD JEDI 72 on Today at 04:11:08 AM »

In your version, everyone would never run out of the tent at once without shoes. Why would Slobodin run out of the tent in one shoe? It's also nonsense that they would cut up the tent because of this.

Another nice illusion that everyone believes is that the "returning" trio on the slope voluntarily froze to death without cause, and the couple by the fire also voluntarily froze to death without cause. All of this is a naive idea.


It all happened because there was a threat that Krivonischenko captured in the last shot of his camera, and from which he and Doroshenko were hiding on a cedar tree. The threat from the tent continued up the slope to the cedar, but there was no escape from it. It left a trail of destruction on the slope and by the cedar. Its consequences is captured in Zolotaryov's damaged photographs.

That's all.
It may feel a little mysterious, but it's not.

One camera captures the threat, the other captures its consequences, and that is the key to everything.

Nature only finished the work, but did not begin it.

I've thought of Rustem with one shoe and isn't it possible he lost the other to deep snow? Either by the snow pulling it off or maybe he used it as a shovel. Unless they accounted for the other shoe being in the tent? And I find it odd as well that this theory calls for a tent being cut up over Zolo yelling for help.

9

General Discussion / Re: Wood Expedition Theory

« Last post by SURI on Today at 01:06:53 AM »

In your version, everyone would never run out of the tent at once without shoes. Why would Slobodin run out of the tent in one shoe? It's also nonsense that they would cut up the tent because of this.

Another nice illusion that everyone believes is that the "returning" trio on the slope voluntarily froze to death without cause, and the couple by the fire also voluntarily froze to death without cause. All of this is a naive idea.


It all happened because there was a threat that Krivonischenko captured in the last shot of his camera, and from which he and Doroshenko were hiding on a cedar tree. The threat from the tent continued up the slope to the cedar, but there was no escape from it. It left a trail of destruction on the slope and by the cedar. Its consequences is captured in Zolotaryov's damaged photographs.

That's all.
It may feel a little mysterious, but it's not.

One camera captures the threat, the other captures its consequences, and that is the key to everything.

Nature only finished the work, but did not begin it.

10

General Discussion / Re: Book "1079"

« Last post by Axelrod on Today at 12:59:28 AM »

I like the idea of a slab slide on 1079 being the impetus for all subsequent choices including actions at the cedar and the ravine.

You are already constantly repeating this spam about a snow slide, and you write it in almost every topic. Do you want people to believe this? Do you think you are so smart? Then write this text in your signature and do not clutter your messages with this text
You can think for yourself as you like. If this solution calms you down, then think for yourself, but what is the point of conducting propaganda for those who do not believe in it?
What is the point of repeating this spam in every topic if it is not confirmed by observations after the incident? After all, according to the laws of physics and mathematical calculations, this cannot be.
With the same success, you can talk about fireballs that rolled down the mountain and scared tourists (according to the stories of the Mansi). Maybe the Mansi are smart too.
Yes, my relative (Axelrod Moisei Abramovich) after thinking about this problem in his old age had problems with his head and thinking, and he decided that there was a landslide, although he did not write this in his testimony of 1959. He wrote that the slope of the mountain did not play any role. Only these words of his have legal force.

I hope that the readers of the forum are sensible.