Dyatlov Pass Forum

Theories Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: Star man on February 20, 2021, 04:52:42 PM

Title: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Star man on February 20, 2021, 04:52:42 PM
First of all I liked it.  The narrative is well laid out with the different time lines progressively becoming more and more integrated, and each rich in detail with facts and information from the case files and witness statements, as well as new information from other sources.   It gives a real sense of the level of control, bureaucracy, and the harshness of the penalties (fair and unfair), for stepping out of line with the ruling cliques.  Also, the opportunities and inevitability of corruption within such a system.  I like the way that each character important to the narrative  has their own summary of their background.

The level of detail, research and analysis behind the words on each page is truly amazing, and necessary to resolve the case.  I am not sure how many will recognise the depth that has been achieved in the book .  The book is obviously written by people with passion, conviction tenacity and after reading it I realise my own efforts have only ever been a minor scratch on the surface.  Therefore I take my hat off to you both.  loco1

Saying all that, I do have questions.  Clearly you have presented a very compelling argument, that would surely defy any laws of natural coincidences.  I am interested in understanding how much evidence there actually is.  For example when relaying information from the archival materials of the Ivdel city soviet executive committee and information recalled by the 6 sappers that were sent to assist in the search, ( do you have copies of the records of the meetings?  did the sappers make signed witness statements)?  If you do have such evidence then I would think there can be no doubt about the events that followed the incident. 

Will leave it there for now as I have run out of time.

Regards

Star man

Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Teddy on February 21, 2021, 01:32:15 AM
The book is a patchwork of information from documents.
Half of the text, if not more is in italics, which means it is citation.
Since the book became cumbered with reference notes from the start we decided to have all the supporting documents and photos listed on the site per chapter.
https://dyatlovpass.com/1079 (https://dyatlovpass.com/1079)

You can find the chapter where you have read about the participation of the sappers and see what documentation we have to show for that.
You mean Chapter 6 (https://dyatlovpass.com/1079#chapter16)  but the mother lode of the search documents is in Chapter 7 (https://dyatlovpass.com/1079#chapter7).

Shestopalov's identity was discovered November 2020 by Natalya Varsegova (Komsomolskaya Pravda) (https://dyatlovpass.com/shestopalov?rbid=1841). Till that moment we only knew his last name. Please follow the links above to see the documents that support his role in the case.

As for Nigel Evans - this our own garden variety of a hater. This is what keeps me away from forums. There is nothing productive in pollinating with hatred every post that addresses the book. Nothing I say would change his mind because he is not quoting things from the book.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Teddy on February 21, 2021, 01:44:40 AM
We never said the diaries are not genuine.
Ivanov apologized 30 years after the fact that he didn't do his job.
Urakov and Khrushchev were not in the know of the conspiracy.
Nothing we say would make Nigel Evans shut his trap so what's the point.
He is breathing hatred.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Teddy on February 21, 2021, 02:57:20 AM
We inked a contract with the Dyatlov Foundation to print the book in Russian. They do not have 75 books about the case. Something must have impressed them in our book to want to publish it.

"Приобрёл вашу электронную книгу. Круто! Столько материала обработано!
И версия из разряда бином Ньютона. Впечатляет!
— Александр (Шура) Алексеенков, исследователь (https://ura.news/news/1052469865)
-----------------------------
"Got your e-book. Cool! So much material processed!
And the version from the category of Newton's binomial. Impressive!
- Alexander (Shura) Alekseenkov, researcher (https://ura.news/news/1052469865)

From today's mail:

"Just finished my first read through and found it to be the most realistic and researched version of the events—and I have read probably all published books. I believe that this is most likely how it all went down. Kudos to the authors, well done." - Robert Templeton

"Well, I read it. Not an easy task, but the authors must have suffered much more compiling and filtering all this information, so it's a fair deal. The solution of the mystery? It's the most plausible, no - the only plausible solution I have seen so far. Most people will not like it though, there are no supernatural forces involved and the motivation of the people with power at the time is difficult to understand by someone who have not lived under communism of some form. So, for me the case is closed. Thank you Teodora Hadjiyska, well done!" - Dobrin Botev
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: GKM on February 21, 2021, 04:49:17 AM
I could not be silent on this matter. There are many on this forum who do not want this case solved. There are many that want a supernatural explanation for what happened. A ufo, yeti, and, of course, there is the ball lightening theory, and many more completely incomprehensible theories. Refusal to accept that it was a tragic accident is to refuse reality. The disbelief that it would be covered up in the way it was is completely understandable something the Soviets were masters of and still are to this day. A perfect example of this was the sinking of the Kursk, another tragic accident that was covered up by high ranking military. No one wanted to be the bearer of bad news because heads rolled when news arrived that no one wanted to hear and absolutely nothing got done to try and help those poor sailors trapped within that submarine until Putin was alerted to exactly how bad it was by the intelligence of countries such as America, England, and Norway, only then did his people have to come forward with the entire truth and heads did roll over it and he finally ordered his navy to accept international help. That is a perfect example of how things work in Russia. How can a sensible, thinking person not see how the DPI played out? And how can any reasonably intelligent person believe the group camped on that exposed ridge? This forum has turned into a mockery and that is very unfortunate because those nine people deserve better.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Star man on February 21, 2021, 06:13:36 AM
The book is a patchwork of information from documents.
Half of the text, if not more is in italics, which means it is citation.
Since the book became cumbered with reference notes from the start we decided to have all the supporting documents and photos listed on the site per chapter.
https://dyatlovpass.com/1079 (https://dyatlovpass.com/1079)

You can find the chapter where you have read about the participation of the sappers and see what documentation we have to show for that.
You mean Chapter 6 (https://dyatlovpass.com/1079#chapter16)  but the mother lode of the search documents is in Chapter 7 (https://dyatlovpass.com/1079#chapter7).

Shestopalov's identity was discovered November 2020 by Natalya Varsegova (Komsomolskaya Pravda) (https://dyatlovpass.com/shestopalov?rbid=1841). Till that moment we only knew his last name. Please follow the links above to see the documents that support his role in the case.

As for Nigel Evans - this our own garden variety of a hater. This is what keeps me away from forums. There is nothing productive in pollinating with hatred every post that addresses the book. Nothing I say would change his mind because he is not quoting things from the book.

Thanks Teddy.  Will delve into the details when I get a chance.  I am sure there are many more discussions to have.  Well done, and you have written something to be proud of imo.

Regards

Star man
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: MDGross on February 21, 2021, 07:48:32 AM
I miss the "old" Nigel. The one who offered intriguing and well-considered ideas in the forum. Especially ideas about the military exercise/exploded missile scenario or the ball lightning scenario. Pointing out someone's spelling error contributes nothing. Or criticizing others without providing alternate ideas.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: KFinn on February 21, 2021, 10:52:31 AM
I will admit; I have some questions that are mainly curiosity based (like the mention of seeing a red haired man holding one of the women, who both had died crawling together.  I just wonder which guy that was?  I'm mostly curious because I'm a red head, lol!  I got the impression Dyatlov had reddish hair, and Slobodan?  Again, its just curiosity that has no bearing on anything.)

Otherwise, even if you don't come to the same conclusions, the amount of information in this book is staggering.  There is more packed into this one book than any other on the market, regardless of theorem.  That alone has helped change my entire view of the incident and parts of my world view, to be absolutely honest.  I always wanted to know more; we all do.  But this book makes me want more than I did before, if that makes sense? 

At any rate, thank you, Teddy.  Both of you.  Your passion for this is unquestionable. 
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: marieuk on February 21, 2021, 03:26:42 PM
i've just finished reading it and feel overwhelmed with all the research and details that must have gone into it.  Well done to both of you for writing it.  I learnt so many things I didn't know from the book and would definitely recommend it.  I'm also curious about the man with red hair that was apparently dragging/pulling Zina?, who had broken arms and legs to the tent - or is that a fake report?  It would be incredibly painful to be dragged with broken limbs, so maybe that is not true?  It's always haunted me thinking they had to strip the clothes off their dead friends to survive, so I'm glad that has turned out not to be true. 
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Star man on February 21, 2021, 04:18:28 PM
We're not reading the same book....
Imo it's a good explanation for the ravine crushing and not much else.
  • There are four? photos of them ascending above the treeline and building their last camp. Ivanov was satisfied that the position of these photos on the roll(s) fitted with them ascending and making camp on the ridge on Feb 1? He even guessed the time?
  • Ivanov was satisfied that the hand written entries in the diaries (particularly Igor's concern about camping on the ridge) were genuine.
  • Zinaida's facial injuries don't fit.
  • Ditto Rustem's head injuries on both sides of the head don't really fit.
  • The stove burnt YuriK's leg, charred one half of one toe and YuriD's hands and singed his hair?
  • This red hot stove badly burns YuriK through his trousers and socks but magically doesn't even singe the tent?
  • The dark hands and faces are just ignored because there is no explanation within this narrative?
  • The rest of the story about creating the campsite, positioning the bodies on the slope and creating the footsteps is just bonkers imo. Why not just pack everything up, dress them, strap them into their backpacks and skis and put them in the river under the ice? If they were ever found at all in such a remote region there's an easy explanation that they fell through weak ice and the fish did the rest.
  • After the last four were found and defection concerns were satisfied,  Urakov travelled from Moscow to Sverdlovsk to shut the case down? Urakov's boss sat at the same table with Khrushchev and he's protecting some goons in Ivdel? Most unlikely.
As said before there were 75 theories, now there are 76. Sorry.

Yeah I think its credible Nigel.  They may have been digging the labaz not setting camp.
After all this time it is clear to me that it would be insane to make camp there and the staged tent presents a picture of complete nonsense.
The injuries do seem to fit overall although I would need to look at Zina'a and Rustems in more detail to understand
If Yuri K was unconscious then the burns could have been sustained as stated.  If the stove was lying on his leg then it prevent damage to the tent but some items inside may have been singed.
Why stage instead of hide them? - I think that given the snow they might not have recovered everything which could then be found later, hence stage at the existing scenes prevents this.

Regards

Star man

Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: GKM on February 22, 2021, 03:27:31 AM
I agree with you you Star man. You just provided an excellent response to Nigel's misgivings. The idea that the photos are of the hikers building the labaz seems, in my opinion, the only credible explanation for those photos and for them being on the ridge. Well done.  bow7
Title: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Monty on February 22, 2021, 06:06:25 AM
No way the photo in question was taken in trees (i.e. Where the labaz was found)
It's just too windy.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: marieuk on February 22, 2021, 07:45:09 AM
i think the suggestion in the book, is that the tent was pitched in the woods and the labaz was dug out on the slope as per Igor's original plan.  When they re-staged the scene, they used the dug out labaz on the slope, to pitch the tent there.  So the labaz was not where we thought it was.  hope I've got that right. 
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: KFinn on February 22, 2021, 08:32:51 AM
i think the suggestion in the book, is that the tent was pitched in the woods and the labaz was dug out on the slope as per Igor's original plan.  When they re-staged the scene, they used the dug out labaz on the slope, to pitch the tent there.  So the labaz was not where we thought it was.  hope I've got that right.

That was my understanding, as well. 
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: marieuk on February 22, 2021, 08:33:54 AM
phew thank you
Title: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Monty on February 22, 2021, 09:54:53 AM
Call me old fashioned but I would never forgive myself if the mandolin was buried and lost under the snow...
Not convinced the labaz would even be considered to be dumped on the ridge. It makes little sense.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: marieuk on February 22, 2021, 10:12:19 AM
I'm not saying it's right.  The thread is about the book, so just repeating what it says in the book. 
Title: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Monty on February 22, 2021, 10:32:08 AM
No ill intended. When I  joined the forum I was always tickled at the thought of the mandolin being lugged around.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: KFinn on February 22, 2021, 10:39:30 AM
Call me old fashioned but I would never forgive myself if the mandolin was buried and lost under the snow...
Not convinced the labaz would even be considered to be dumped on the ridge. It makes little sense.

True.  But its also not a good place for a tent and all of your belongings, either...  The tent does not make sense, either.
Title: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Monty on February 22, 2021, 11:04:07 AM
Interestingly - suppose everything was found as it was, but no tent was ever located. I know i would assume they camped at the cedar, and something or some event happened there, by the cedar. The absent tent would become part of the enigma.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: KFinn on February 22, 2021, 01:12:32 PM
Interestingly - suppose everything was found as it was, but no tent was ever located. I know i would assume they camped at the cedar, and something or some event happened there, by the cedar. The absent tent would become part of the enigma.

I absolutely agree, my friend!
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Star man on February 22, 2021, 03:40:07 PM
i think the suggestion in the book, is that the tent was pitched in the woods and the labaz was dug out on the slope as per Igor's original plan.  When they re-staged the scene, they used the dug out labaz on the slope, to pitch the tent there.  So the labaz was not where we thought it was.  hope I've got that right.

That's right, the labaz was on the route of the return journey more or less. 

Regards

Star man
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Star man on February 22, 2021, 04:03:32 PM
Nigel, what do you believe caused the wounds to Zina's face? I am only curious.I guess I don't understand what sets off the alarm bells. They are rather jagged but I have seen worse. I'm not being flippant merely, like I said, curious.   dunno1


She was found "face in blood" and the pathologist described them as abrasions. So this seems to (strongly?) suggest that she was still alive when she fell. People don't bleed like that when they're dead? She's been cleaned up for the morgue photo. Given that the abrasions include her eye lid it would seem that the agent was wind born. N.B. the young trees at the treeline had their uphill sides stripped of bark. Like sand blasted but with ice? High speed winds? Aggressive chemicals?

Couldn't tree branches cause those facial injuries though?   Could the facial abrasions and injuries give the appearance of the face being covered in blood?  I didn't think that you can see her face in the photo where her body is uncovered on the mountain.  Am not saying it is not an interesting point though.  There is a lot to discuss and pick through.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Star man on February 22, 2021, 04:17:34 PM
I agree with you you Star man. You just provided an excellent response to Nigel's misgivings. The idea that the photos are of the hikers building the labaz seems, in my opinion, the only credible explanation for those photos and for them being on the ridge. Well done.  bow7

Thanks.  Another reason for not making the bodies disappear is the timeline and the concern that the death of the hikers could be linked to the geophysics surveys.  If the hikers disappeared while hiking in the same area as the geophysics operation, then that would point a finger at them anyway, and if the discovered bodies and their deaths  were not attributed to some natural event then that also points the finger. More importantly, if they had not recovered all of the bodies there is not much benefit in making 6 or even 8 of them disappear as the remaining bodies would be found later and that is even more suspicious The only way out and to divert suspicion is to recreate the event of a natural tragedy. 

Regards

Star man
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: GKM on February 22, 2021, 05:01:08 PM
No one answered my question. Would anyone on this forum camp on that exposed ridge? It is a simple yes or no question. I wouldn't camp there. I would have more common sense then to camp there. Are members of the forum saying that the DG was so lacking in experience and common sense that they camped on the ridge? What an insult to the dead hikers. I ask each of you to answer the question. Would any of you camp there? bang1
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: KFinn on February 22, 2021, 05:30:54 PM
No one answered my question. Would anyone on this forum camp on that exposed ridge? It is a simple yes or no question. I wouldn't camp there. I would have more common sense then to camp there. Are members of the forum saying that the DG was so lacking in experience and common sense that they camped on the ridge? What an insult to the dead hikers. I ask each of you to answer the question. Would any of you camp there? bang1

I would not.  I am not as young as I once was and I used to be much more athletic however, I don't think I'd have camped there in my prime, either.  It would have to be an emergency situation where there was no other choice and we needed to set camp right then due to someone needing medical care or something else extenuating. 
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: ash73 on February 22, 2021, 06:03:11 PM
No one answered my question. Would anyone on this forum camp on that exposed ridge?

It's only useful to ask that question of experienced hikers, who know the area. I gather some said yes, some no.

I certainly wouldn't bury supplies there, the marker would get blown away and you'd never find them again.

The more puzzling question for me is why did they walk such a short distance that day.
Title: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Monty on February 22, 2021, 06:36:21 PM
Nigel, reply 32. Was just a hypothetical statement. Clearly the tent was located in it's final position, as evidenced by photos. But how would the theory change if no tent was ever located? All the other evidence may point to a camp site under the cedar.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Investigator on February 22, 2021, 07:28:49 PM
No one answered my question. Would anyone on this forum camp on that exposed ridge? It is a simple yes or no question. I wouldn't camp there. I would have more common sense then to camp there. Are members of the forum saying that the DG was so lacking in experience and common sense that they camped on the ridge? What an insult to the dead hikers. I ask each of you to answer the question. Would any of you camp there? bang1

Professional investigators examine the evidence that exists.  If you say to yourself, "I can't imagine myself doing this or that," you would solve many fewer cases!  And in similar situations, the Chivruay and Korovina groups made mistakes that are beyond "head scratching," considerably worse than the DG made, IMO.  You can also read about an expedition that also made huge mistakes in a similar situation in the book, "Denali's Howl," which led to several deaths. but we know about the disagreements and huge mistakes made, and have some sense about why those mistakes were made, due to there being survivors (or in the case of Chivruay, the evidence was never seriously questioned and apparently most people don't' think there's anything strange, other than a really bad decision).
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Monty on February 23, 2021, 04:43:48 AM
If the tent became spent then you may need temp shelter. I still think den is over describing what was made.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Manti on February 23, 2021, 01:15:26 PM
I think "would you camp on the ridge yes/no" is not so useful a question because many many such questions can be asked. Would you walk/ski on the snow-covered ice of a river where you can't even see the ice, so you don't know how strong or weak it might be? Nobody would. They did. Would you take stuffed animals and a mandolin on a hiking trip in subzero temperatures but no sleeping bag? Nobody would...

I agree that camping on the ridge makes no sense and camping at the cedar would, it's on their planned route, protected from wind, there's firewood nearby etc. But they also didn't camp at the cedar if we assume the book's scenario, because then there would be signs of the incident near the cedar. So that fallen tree and consequently the original campsite must have been somewhere else a considerable distance away, as it would not make sense to stage the tent in a place where the original site is visible from.


So where was the original campsite? And what happened at the cedar then? Is the den staged? And the campfire?



Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: KFinn on February 23, 2021, 02:04:56 PM
Thinking on it, i think the state of undress is the killer for this theory. If you've just cut your way out of the tent because a tree has fallen on it and you're now standing in the cold snow in your socks, what's the first thing you would do?




Get dressed!!!

I think the first thing I would do is change my pants, lol! 
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Star man on February 23, 2021, 04:29:08 PM
Thinking on it, i think the state of undress is the killer for this theory. If you've just cut your way out of the tent because a tree has fallen on it and you're now standing in the cold snow in your socks, what's the first thing you would do?




Get dressed!!!

Probably try to save your friends.  The thing is we don't know if those who got out of the tent did get dressed, if the scene staged.  They may have managed to get some clothes.  A tree landing on the tent in the dark while you are sleeping is a pretty shocking thing though.  You wake up in the dark hear your colleagues screams, you may be concussed or disorientated.  Those under the tree are likely trapped. Krivo may have been trapped with the stove on his leg.  The pain so bad he bit the skin off his finger?  The first thing you would do if you had your faculties in tact is try to save your friends.  Dorishenko's injuries may be a result of a desperate attempt to move the tree?  I think Zina was badly injured by a tree branch too.  I suppose there is always tge question - why did a tree fall?  High winds?  Or something else?

Regards

Star man
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Star man on February 23, 2021, 04:41:07 PM
The thing about camping on the ridge is that it's not just the location that is wrong.  Its the scene at the tent.  It's  mental.  I have considered it many times and tried to find an explanation and the only answers that seem to make sense are weird ones:

Infrasound
Radiation
Yeti

And even then there are problems.

In the end you have to accept that either something exceptionally strange happened, or you conclude that the only thing that makes sense at the tent is that it is nonsense.

Regards

Star man
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: KFinn on February 23, 2021, 05:00:59 PM
The thing about camping on the ridge is that it's not just the location that is wrong.  Its the scene at the tent.  It's  mental.  I have considered it many times and tried to find an explanation and the only answers that seem to make sense are weird ones:

Infrasound
Radiation
Yeti

And even then there are problems.

In the end you have to accept that either something exceptionally strange happened, or you conclude that the only thing that makes sense at the tent is that it is nonsense.

Regards

Star man

It would be so much easier if 1079 were high altitude and we could blame hypoxia for everything.  Burned hands and feet make sense in the context of frostbite.  Strange behavior happens.  Even some of the rib fractures could be explained by severe coughing from high altitude pulmonary edema (not all of the rib fractures but still.)  High altitude sickness is like being drunk and having the flu at the same time.  To me, that would make sense for almost everything.  But the Urals are not Eight-Thousanders and not anywhere near enough of an altitude that would have these results.  There are just no easy answers, anywhere :(
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: ash73 on February 23, 2021, 06:07:47 PM
I'm struggling with this theory. How does it explain:

- Rustem, Igor and Zina's injuries, they'd been in a fight
- The hikers leaving shoes, coats, hats and wood cutting tools in the tent
- Dyatlov's jacket and a knife sheath found outside the tent
- 30cm horizontal cuts on the downslope side of the tent
- Ski pole being cut
- Footprints down the slope
- Spent lantern found at the bottom of the slope
- Photos of the hikers digging out the tent base
- Lighting a fire by the cedar, exposed to the wind, rather than in the ravine
- All their clothes being unbuttoned
- The rav4 not being on the platform
- Missing cameras
- Radiation on clothes

Most can only be explained by the hikers being forced out of the tent (on the ridge) by persons unknown, imo.

I doubt the rav4's injuries are compatible with being hit by a falling tree. In that scenario other bones would be broken, e.g. Zolotarev's ribs were injured on one side, if he was lying on one side his arm would also be injured, no objects in the tent were crushed, and the survivors had time to record what happened (avalanche theory has the same problems).
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: KFinn on February 23, 2021, 06:46:25 PM
I'm struggling with this theory. How does it explain:

- Rustem, Igor and Zina's injuries, they'd been in a fight
- The hikers leaving shoes, coats, hats and wood cutting tools in the tent
- Dyatlov's jacket and a knife sheath found outside the tent
- 30cm horizontal cuts on the downslope side of the tent
- Ski pole being cut
- Footprints down the slope
- Spent lantern found at the bottom of the slope
- Photos of the hikers digging out the tent base
- Lighting a fire by the cedar, exposed to the wind, rather than in the ravine
- All their clothes being unbuttoned
- The rav4 not being on the platform
- Missing cameras
- Radiation on clothes

Most can only be explained by the hikers being forced out of the tent (on the ridge) by persons unknown, imo.

I doubt the rav4's injuries are compatible with being hit by a falling tree. In that scenario other bones would be broken, e.g. Zolotarev's ribs were injured on one side, if he was lying on one side his arm would also be injured, no objects in the tent were crushed, and the survivors had time to record what happened (avalanche theory has the same problems).

The book does answer some of your questions within the parameters of the theory presented.  If you haven't had the chance to read it, there is some really excellent information in there, whether we come to the same conclusions as the authors or not.

I can only really add that Zolotaryev did have a broken shoulder on the same side as his ribs, which was found during the exhumation, in 2018 (I think it was that year.)  The fact that no items in the tent were damaged is very valid.  Plus, the tent itself did not show the same damage as it should had it been hit.  I've had many canvas tents over the years, even made a couple.  Although they are a different weight of canvas undoubtedly, they still take damage when they get hit with falling debris.  At the very least, I would expect tears at the stress points of the canvas from the strike, which I do not see in any of the pictures. 
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: ash73 on February 23, 2021, 07:11:44 PM
...If you haven't had the chance to read it, there is some really excellent information in there, whether we come to the same conclusions as the authors or not.

Yep will do, I'm still reading Rakitin at the moment, Teddy's book is on my list.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: ahohti on February 23, 2021, 08:29:22 PM
I bought the kindle version of book and read it very intensively. It was
a great & comprehensive historical account of the events in January-May 1959 in the
Dyatlov search and investigation operation.

As a mathematician myself, it was interesting to see that the book
introduced "overdetermined systems". In the section
"Dyatlov Pass for Dummies",  we have that an

"overdetermined system is almost always inconsistent, it has no solution."

After reading several books and articles about the incident, I had
come to my own belief that the evidence is inconsistent. In mathematical
logic, Gödel's completeness theorem says that any consistent list of
statements ("evidence") has a model, or a "solution".
After 60 years there are all these theories but they all seem to be only
partially convincing. Why is that? My guess is that the evidence is
inconsistent. It has no model.

One the authors suggests that by breaking up inappropriate
connections (assumptions) in the evidence, the system may become consistent and have a solution (or in
the logical setting, by removing inconsistencies from the list of evidence
it may have a model).

The authors present a model that explains the extensive injuries on three
of the Dyatlov group members in a new and most natural way (tree falling
on the tent). This model becomes possible when some of the evidence, for
example the footprints leading down the hill, is re-evaluated as belonging
to a staging, not to the event itself.

Of course, their solution is dependent on the assumption that the "last photo"
(loose photos # 12 on the site) - thought to show the location of the tent
being prepared on Feb 1st - is not authentic or last. However, in this case the
coverup has to be even deeper than described in the book: This photo
shares an important detail with the famous tent picture of the Slobtsov
group finding the tent on Feb 26th. There is a ski pole looking object at similar
position with respect to the tent (photo #12 and the Slobtsov photo being
taken from opposite sides wrt tent). A coverup would have to have 1) developed
the films before Feb 26th, 2) removed any photos after #12 3) staged the scene
carefully with respect to the detail in the photo OR they would have needed to
fabricate photo #12.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: ash73 on February 24, 2021, 03:50:08 AM
Thinking on it, i think the state of undress is the killer for this theory. If you've just cut your way out of the tent because a tree has fallen on it and you're now standing in the cold snow in your socks, what's the first thing you would do?




Get dressed!!!

Probably try to save your friends.  The thing is we don't know if those who got out of the tent did get dressed, if the scene staged.  They may have managed to get some clothes.  A tree landing on the tent in the dark while you are sleeping is a pretty shocking thing though.  You wake up in the dark hear your colleagues screams, you may be concussed or disorientated.  Those under the tree are likely trapped. Krivo may have been trapped with the stove on his leg.  The pain so bad he bit the skin off his finger?  The first thing you would do if you had your faculties in tact is try to save your friends.  Dorishenko's injuries may be a result of a desperate attempt to move the tree?  I think Zina was badly injured by a tree branch too.  I suppose there is always tge question - why did a tree fall?  High winds?  Or something else?

Regards

Star man
Igor had no obvious wounds and Zinaida bruise would have hurt but not more serious than that. There's nothing in the injury profile that precludes a small group of survivors from a tree fall and they would know that to help others they must protect themselves from the cold.

That's how I see it too, after the initial shock they'd put their felt boots on, probably their coats too, and help their friends as best they could. After that, they've got all the resources in the tent to hand, and only minor injuries, and they're not on a mountain facing a 1 mile walk in their socks in this scenario; so they should survive the night and go for help the next day. They could panic when people started dying, even the most experienced people lose their heads, but where would they go? All they can do is keep warm and sit tight.

As I understand it they should already have their felt boots on in the tent, anyhow.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: GKM on February 24, 2021, 08:00:56 AM
I am beginning to wonder if people who claim to have read the book actually read the book. One can read the book and draw their own conclusions, and Teddy made that clear. Draw your own dotted line. It doesn't have to match perfectly the line drawn in the book. I have read several posts that insist their was a cover up yet when presented with one it's shouts of " No not that cover up. A different cover up" , but no one ever offers up their own version of what that cover up could be. Let's have a challenge. Present your own cover up. Maybe yours will be better. This is not addressed to any certain member of the forum but to all who believe in the ideal of some form of cover up by Soviet authorities.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: sarapuk on February 24, 2021, 10:25:27 AM
I bought the kindle version of book and read it very intensively. It was
a great & comprehensive historical account of the events in January-May 1959 in the
Dyatlov search and investigation operation.

As a mathematician myself, it was interesting to see that the book
introduced "overdetermined systems". In the section
"Dyatlov Pass for Dummies",  we have that an

"overdetermined system is almost always inconsistent, it has no solution."

After reading several books and articles about the incident, I had
come to my own belief that the evidence is inconsistent. In mathematical
logic, Gödel's completeness theorem says that any consistent list of
statements ("evidence") has a model, or a "solution".
After 60 years there are all these theories but they all seem to be only
partially convincing. Why is that? My guess is that the evidence is
inconsistent. It has no model.

One the authors suggests that by breaking up inappropriate
connections (assumptions) in the evidence, the system may become consistent and have a solution (or in
the logical setting, by removing inconsistencies from the list of evidence
it may have a model).

The authors present a model that explains the extensive injuries on three
of the Dyatlov group members in a new and most natural way (tree falling
on the tent). This model becomes possible when some of the evidence, for
example the footprints leading down the hill, is re-evaluated as belonging
to a staging, not to the event itself.

Of course, their solution is dependent on the assumption that the "last photo"
(loose photos # 12 on the site) - thought to show the location of the tent
being prepared on Feb 1st - is not authentic or last. However, in this case the
coverup has to be even deeper than described in the book: This photo
shares an important detail with the famous tent picture of the Slobtsov
group finding the tent on Feb 26th. There is a ski pole looking object at similar
position with respect to the tent (photo #12 and the Slobtsov photo being
taken from opposite sides wrt tent). A coverup would have to have 1) developed
the films before Feb 26th, 2) removed any photos after #12 3) staged the scene
carefully with respect to the detail in the photo OR they would have needed to
fabricate photo #12.

Put simply, there is not enough Evidence. It is highly likely that much Evidence is missing.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: sarapuk on February 24, 2021, 10:33:55 AM
I am beginning to wonder if people who claim to have read the book actually read the book. One can read the book and draw their own conclusions, and Teddy made that clear. Draw your own dotted line. It doesn't have to match perfectly the line drawn in the book. I have read several posts that insist their was a cover up yet when presented with one it's shouts of " No not that cover up. A different cover up" , but no one ever offers up their own version of what that cover up could be. Let's have a challenge. Present your own cover up. Maybe yours will be better. This is not addressed to any certain member of the forum but to all who believe in the ideal of some form of cover up by Soviet authorities.
The coverup (by the Soviet hierarchy) isn't a theory, both Ivanov and Okishev stated it as fact. The official line was that the first five died of hypothermia although the autopsies showed fractured skulls, third degree burns, facial abrasions, weeping bruises, hand wounds etc etc. When Ivanov got excited about fireorbs he was read the riot act, his words - "Beria was gone but his methods remained". When the last four were discovered with massive trauma the case was simply closed down by Urakov in person travelling from Moscow to Sverdlovsk a distance of 930 miles. A group of nine people have all died a violent death and the Deputy Prosecutor General travels a thousand miles to close the investigation down. Read Okishev's interview.

Nicely put Nigel. We certainly dont need much Evidence to suspect some kind of action, stratagem, or other means of concealing or preventing investigation or exposure. Some use the words Cover Up.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: GKM on February 24, 2021, 11:13:17 AM
Oh I agree there was a cover up, no doubt, I guess I should add the usual "in my opinion ". Definitely a cover up of some form and that is almost impossible to argue against.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Marchesk on February 24, 2021, 12:18:37 PM
How can a sensible, thinking person not see how the DPI played out? And how can any reasonably intelligent person believe the group camped on that exposed ridge? This forum has turned into a mockery and that is very unfortunate because those nine people deserve better.

Because there's almost 80 theories now, with quite a few coming from people who have done their research, travelled to Dyatlov Pass, and written books. Are we going to forget that WAB was a regular here? He thought the tent was pitched on the ridge. So did the Swedish team who proposed the Katabatic wind theory, and so did the poster who was adamant that the hikers were murdered.

How has this forum turned into a mockery just because people find different theories convincing or not so convincing? That's always been the case. There's never been consensus as to what happened, and there's always been a broad discussion of what it could have been.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Marchesk on February 24, 2021, 12:21:44 PM
Nigel's not a hater just because he points out issues he sees with the latest book/theory. Which I read and is interesting. It makes a lot of sense. But that doesn't mean I or anyone has to be compelled into thinking it is the one true theory. Can someone explain how the footprints going in two directions could have been confused for only going downhill?
Title: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Monty on February 24, 2021, 12:40:00 PM
Perhaps through frustration we mock and ignore. I wish I had the ability to write a book. My beliefs about the case still remain the same as i documented them, here some time ago. But I won't write off another.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Mark II on February 24, 2021, 04:32:55 PM
Why the tent was staged on the ridge?

Unless there’s a compelling reason, consider this: it’s far more likely that experienced hikers camp on a ridge (for unknown or contingency reasons), that a staging party chooses to stage a camp on a ridge, while giving their best to set up something in a credible way.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Star man on February 24, 2021, 04:39:20 PM
It is possible that there is more to the mystery than just a tree falling onto the tent.  It does fit the injuries.  There is also a compelling argument for a cover up.  A tree may have fallen on the tent, but it may not have been just bad weather, although it would be the simplest explanation. .  The book presents a wealth of information around the activities pointing towards the cover up.  I do wonder though if the searchers, (even the geophysics ground team) found the tent with a tree on it, why they did not just call in the rest of the search parties?  These sorts of accidents seem quite common at the time and if the others found a tent with a tree on it, and no evidence of anti tank mine detonation, then would anyone still blame the northern geological expedition?  I think it is only natural to have questions about the theory in the book.  The book is still an excellent piece of work though, that warrants further thought.

Regards

Star man
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: KFinn on February 25, 2021, 08:07:48 AM
Oh I agree there was a cover up, no doubt, I guess I should add the usual "in my opinion ". Definitely a cover up of some form and that is almost impossible to argue against.
Yes but the central case of the book is that the coverup was local to Ivdel? Which it very clearly wasn't. The Sverdlovsk office was being overruled (with some force) by Moscow.

I'm personally of the opinion there was at the very least some beaurocratic cover-up, by different parties for different reasons.  The UPI sports club tried to cover their butts (or at least Gordo) when he claimed he'd received a telegram saying the group would be late.  The families and friends of the rav 4 were not told the state of the injuries until into the nineties, according to accounts (other than Dubinina's father who saw her and passed out.)  That right there is an attempt to cover up, even if it was to avoid the families distress (but we don't know if that was the reason or not.)  The case being closed so quick after the last bodies were found does indicate an attempt to cover something.  Whether the locals or the geo-scientists were involved in their own cover up would really amount to the longest game of Weekend at Bernie's.  Is it possible?  Yes, but I don't see the evidence of it being as concluded in the book.  I think the tent would have sustained more damage, their belongings as well.  So possible, yes.  Plausible?  Less so than other theories.  I really want it to have happened that way, because I don't want them to have died due to violence perpetrated by others or human error.  But wanting it doesn't make it true.  Obviously, as we take in information,  my thoughts could change.  They have pretty regularly, lol. 
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Teddy on February 25, 2021, 10:01:38 AM
We made it into Süddeutsche Zeitung (https://www.sueddeutsche.de/wissen/schnee-unglueck-mysterioes-ural-1.5211552) and New York Times (https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/25/world/europe/russia-dyatlov-pass-avalanche.html).
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Teddy on February 25, 2021, 10:03:08 AM
Es geschah im Schnee

Orkanartiger Wind, minus 40 Grad Kälte, seltsame Himmelserscheinungen - und plötzlich sind neun junge Menschen tot. Stecken dahinter CIA-Agenten, Radioaktivität oder schlicht eine ungewöhnliche Lawine? Über eine mysteriöse Katastrophe im Ural im Winter 1959.

Von Hans Holzhaider

In der Nacht vom 1. zum 2. Februar 1959 starben während einer Skiwanderung in der Wildnis des nördlichen Uralgebirges, nahe der Grenze zwischen Europa und Asien, neun junge Leute, zwei Frauen und sieben Männer. Die Stelle, an der sie ums Leben kamen, wurde später nach dem Führer der Gruppe benannt: der Djatlow-Pass. Die Umstände ihres Todes geben bis heute Rätsel auf. Die Theorien über das, was sich in jener Winternacht an der östlichen Flanke des Berges ereignete, den die Mansen, die indigenen Bewohner dieser Gegend, Cholat Sjachl, den "kahlen Berg" nennen, füllen mehrere Bücher und Tausende Internetseiten.

Die Mitglieder der Wandergruppe kamen aus Swerdlowsk (heute Jekaterinburg), der Millionenmetropole im südlichen Ural. Fünf von ihnen - Igor Djatlow (23), Juri Doroschenko (21), Ljudmila Dubinina (20), Sinaida Kolmogorowa (22) und Alexander Kolewatow (24) waren Studenten am Polytechnischen Institut des Ural (UPI). Nikolaj Thibeaux-Brignolle (23) hatte sein Studium am UPI 1958 beendet und arbeitete als Bauleiter. Auch Georgi Kriwonischtschenko (23) hatte am UPI studiert und arbeitete danach in einer streng abgeschirmten Produktionsstätte für waffenfähiges Plutonium in Tscheljabinsk. Rustem Slobodin (23), war Ingenieur in einem Forschungsinstitut für Chemiemaschinen, aber er hatte auch eine Musikschule besucht, und er nahm seine Mandoline mit auf die Skitour. Und schließlich Semjon Solotarjow, der zumindest vom Alter her gar nicht zu der Gruppe passte. Er war 38, hoch dekorierter Weltkriegsveteran und zuletzt als leitender Führer in einem Wanderzentrum tätig. Alle neun waren erfahrene Skiwanderer, körperlich fit und absolut qualifiziert für die als sehr schwierig eingestufte Tour, die sie in knapp drei Wochen von der Ortschaft Wischai, 600 Kilometer nördlich von Swerdlowsk, durch menschenleere Wildnis und meterhohen Schnee auf die Berge Otorten und Ojko-Tschakur führen sollte.

Die Gruppe fährt mit dem Zug von Swerdlowsk nach Iwdil, dem Standort eines Straflagers, in dem 1959 noch mehr als 15 000 Verurteilte Zwangsarbeit leisten müssen, und von dort weiter mit dem Bus nach Wischai. Am 26. Januar nimmt sie ein Lastwagen mit zur Holzfällersiedlung Distrikt 41. Von dort geht es auf Skiern weiter, aber ein freundlicher Förster leiht ihnen einen Pferdeschlitten, der ihre schweren Rucksäcke noch bis zu einer verlassenen Bergwerkssiedlung transportiert. Hier verabschieden sie sich vom zehnten Mitglied der Gruppe: Ein entzündeter Ischiasnerv zwingt Juri Judin zur Umkehr. Die anderen machen sich am Morgen des 28. Januar auf den Weg zum Otorten, zunächst nördlich entlang des Flusses Loswa und dann nordöstlich dessen Nebenfluss Auspija folgend. Am Abend des 30. Januar lagern sie am Fuß des Passes, über den sie wieder ins Tal der Loswa gelangen wollen. Aber der nächste Tag verläuft nicht wie geplant.

Noch ehe sie den Pass erreichen, zwingt sie ein orkanartiger Wind zur Umkehr. Sie müssen noch einmal im Auspijatal lagern. Igor Djatlow schreibt ins Gruppentagebuch: "Wir sind erschöpft. Feuerholz ist knapp und feucht. Abendessen im Zelt. Schön und warm. Oben auf dem Grat wäre es bestimmt ungemütlicher, heulender Wind, hundert Kilometer von der nächsten menschlichen Siedlung entfernt."

Es ist das letzte Lebenszeichen der neun Wanderer.

Die Rückkehr der Gruppe nach Wischai war für den 12. Februar geplant, aber angesichts der Schnee- und Wetterverhältnisse hatte Djatlow schon eine Verzögerung von zwei bis drei Tagen angekündigt. Aber als es auch am 16. Februar noch keine Nachricht von den Wanderern gab, drängten besorgte Angehörige die Funktionäre des UPI und der örtlichen Parteiorganisation in Swerdlowsk zu einer Suchaktion. Es vergingen weitere vier Tage, bis sich die ersten Suchtrupps an die Arbeit machten, unterstützt vom Militär mit Suchhunden und Helikoptern.

Fußspuren von acht oder neun Personen führten vom Zelt in Richtung des Passes

Am 26. Februar entdeckten zwei Studenten des UPI und ein Förster aus Wischai an der Ostflanke des Cholat Sjachl in etwa 900 Meter Meereshöhe das verlassene Zelt der Djatlow-Gruppe. Der Cholat Sjachl steigt westlich des Passes auf, den die Wanderer überqueren wollten. Der Berghang ist völlig kahl mit einer Neigung von 15 bis 20 Grad. Die Wanderer hatten den Schnee so abgestochen, dass eine waagerechte Fläche entstand. Das Zelt war in der Mitte eingesackt und teilweise mit einer 20 bis 30 Zentimeter hohen Schneeschicht bedeckt. Die dem Berg abgewandte Seite war durch mehrere lange Schnitte zerfetzt. Unter dem Zeltboden lagen acht Paar Skier. Auf dem Zeltboden verteilt fanden sich verstreut fast die gesamten Habseligkeiten der Wanderer: neun Rucksäcke, acht Windjacken, acht Wattejacken, 13 Paar Handschuhe, acht Paar Skischuhe, sieben Filzstiefel, Äxte, eine Säge, zwei Eimer, zwei Kessel, der zylinderförmige Ofen, den Djatlow selbst konstruiert hatte, vier Fotoapparate, das Tagebuch. Vor dem Zelteingang steckte ein Eispickel im Schnee, daneben lag Djatlows Windjacke. Der seltsamste Fund aber war eine funktionsfähige Taschenlampe, die auf dem Zeltdach auf einer Schneeschicht lag, während auf der Lampe selbst kein Schnee war.

Die ersten Suchmannschaften, die das Zelt erreichten, achteten offensichtlich wenig auf Spuren. Die Berichte stimmen darin überein, dass Fußspuren von acht oder neun Personen vom Zelt in Richtung des Passes führten, die etwa einen halben Kilometer weit deutlich sichtbar waren, weiter unten aber, wo mehr Schnee angeweht war, verschwanden. Niemand berichtete von anderen Spuren, sei es von Menschen oder von größeren Tieren, was aber nicht heißen muss, dass es solche Spuren nie gab. Insbesondere flache Spuren von Skiern oder Schneeschuhen wären nach fast vier Wochen wahrscheinlich nicht mehr sichtbar gewesen.

Das Zelt war gefunden - aber wo waren die Wanderer? Der nächste Tag brachte schreckliche Gewissheit. Wenige Meter auf der Nordseite des Passes, unter einer hohen Zirbelkiefer über dem Steilufer eines Baches wurden die Leichen von Juri Doroschenko und Georgi Kriwonischtschenko entdeckt. Sie lagen nebeneinander, nur von einer dünnen Schneeschicht bedeckt, spärlich bekleidet - Hemd und lange Unterhose, keine Schuhe, keine Kopfbedeckung. Neben den Leichen erkannte man die Überreste eines Lagerfeuers. Um die Zirbelkiefer herum gab es etwa ein Dutzend Stümpfe abgeschnittener junger Tannen.

Die Entfernung vom Standort des Zeltes bis zum Fundort der ersten beiden Leichen beträgt etwa 1500 Meter. Noch am gleichen Tag fand man die Leichen von Igor Djatlow und Sinaida Kolmogorowa. Sie lagen fast exakt auf der Linie zwischen Zelt und Kiefer, Djatlow etwa 400 Meter, Kolmogorowa etwa 900 Meter von dem Baum entfernt. Auch sie trugen keine Schuhe. Erst weitere sechs Tage später, am 5. März, kam unter einer zehn Zentimeter hohen, festgepressten Schneedecke auch die Leiche von Rustem Slobodin zum Vorschein, etwa halbwegs zwischen Djatlow und Kolmogorowa. Die Obduktion ergab, dass alle fünf erfroren waren, aber der Gerichtsmediziner notierte, abgesehen von einer Vielzahl von Schürfwunden, auch einige Besonderheiten: Slobodin hatte eine sechs Zentimeter lange Fissur im linken Schläfenbein. Doroschenkos linke Wange war mit einer grauen, schaumigen Substanz bedeckt, die aus dem Mund ausgetreten war - kein Symptom einer Erfrierung. Kriwonischtschenko hatte am linken Unterschenkel eine 30 Zentimeter lange, schwere Brandverletzung. Keiner dieser Befunde konnte zufriedenstellend erklärt werden.

Das größte Rätsel sind die Obduktionsberichte

Und es fehlten ja auch noch vier Mitglieder der Wandergruppe. Die Suche nach ihnen blieb lange ergebnislos. Erst Anfang Mai gab der abschmelzende Schnee eine Spur frei: abgeschnittene Tannenzweige, die eine Art Pfad in die Schlucht des nach Norden fließenden Baches bildeten. Diesem Pfad folgend, grub sich die Suchmannschaft durch die mehr als vier Meter dicke Schneeschicht am Grunde der Schlucht, und dort, in einem reißenden Strom aus Schmelzwasser, lagen die Leichen von Ljudmila Dubinina, Alexander Kolewatow, Nikolai Thibeaux-Brignolle und Semjon Solotarjow. Nicht weit entfernt vom Fundort der Leichen entdeckte die Suchmannschaft unter zweieinhalb Meter Schnee eine ebene Fläche von etwa drei Quadratmetern, die mit abgeschnittenen Tannenbäumchen ausgelegt war. Darauf lagen mehrere Kleidungstücke der verstorbenen Wanderer, aber auch die Überreste einer militärischen Wickelgamasche aus grauem Tuch, die nach allem, was man weiß, nicht zur Ausrüstung der Djatlow-Gruppe gehörte.

Es sind die Obduktionsbefunde dieser vier Leichen, die das größte Rätsel der Djatlow-Katastrophe aufgeben. Denn jedenfalls Dubinina, Thibeaux-Brignolle und Solotarjow waren nicht erfroren, sondern an den Folgen ihrer schweren Verletzungen gestorben. Bei Thibeaux-Brignolle wurde eine schwere Schädelfraktur festgestellt. Das rechte Schläfenbein war auf einer Fläche von 2,5 mal 3 Zentimetern zwei Zentimeter tief eingedrückt - eine tödliche Verletzung. Dubinina und Solotarjow erlitten multiple Rippenbrüche - bei Dubinina vier Rippen rechts und fünf links, mit der Folge einer massiven Einblutung in der rechten Herzkammer. Bei Solotarjow waren vier Rippen auf der rechten Seite gebrochen, in der Pleurahöhle fand sich ein Liter Blut - ohne medizinische Hilfe musste er in kurzer Zeit ersticken. Und darüber hinaus fehlten bei Dubinina und Solotarjow beide Augäpfel, bei Dubinina auch die Zunge.

Die Leitung der Ermittlungen lag in der Hand des Swerdlowsker Staatsanwalts Lew Iwanow. Er ordnete eine Untersuchung der Leichen und der Bekleidungsstücke auf Radioaktivität an. Das Ergebnis: Drei Kleidungsstücke wiesen Spuren radioaktiver Verstrahlung auf. Dafür könnte es eine simple Erklärung geben: 1957 hatte sich in der Atomanlage, wo Kriwonischtschenko arbeitete, ein Unfall ereignet, der dem von Tschernobyl kaum nachstand. Aber man könnte natürlich auch auf andere Gedanken kommen. 2012 erschien in Russland das Buch eines anonymen Autors, der eine exotische Theorie entwarf: Der sowjetische Geheimdienst KGB habe zwei Agenten in die Wandergruppe eingeschleust, um durch die fingierte Übergabe von radioaktivem Material ein Spionageteam des CIA zu enttarnen. Das verabredete Treffen sei aus dem Ruder gelaufen, mit dem Ergebnis, dass die US-Agenten die russischen Kontaktpersonen teils brutal ermordet, teils dem Erfrieren preisgegeben hätten.

Absurd? Gewiss. Aber 1959, zwei Jahre nach dem Start von Sputnik, als die USA und die UdSSR sich einen gnadenlosen Wettlauf um die atomare Vorherrschaft lieferten, mag es einiges an Absurditäten im Kampf zwischen den Geheimdiensten gegeben haben. Und bis heute ist nicht klar, warum der Staatsanwalt Iwanow auf die eigentlich abwegige Idee kam, die Leichen auf Radioaktivität untersuchen zu lassen. Iwanow selbst gab später an, es seien Berichte über unerklärliche Himmelsphänomene in der Uralregion gewesen, die ihn dazu veranlasst hätten. Tatsächlich beobachteten viele, durchaus seriöse Zeugen unter anderem am 1. und 17. Februar und noch einmal am 31. März 1959 leuchtende Objekte in der Größe eines Vollmondes, die sich mehrere Minuten lang über den Nachthimmel bewegten und dann verschwanden. Er sei nach wie vor überzeugt, schrieb Iwanow noch 1990, dass die neun Wanderer durch eine unbekannte Energie getötet wurden, die von diesen "Feuerbällen" ausging. Der Verdacht liegt nicht fern, dass ein Staatsanwalt, der solchen Unsinn verbreitet, in Wirklichkeit eine andere, unerwünschte Wahrheit verschleiern will. Andererseits erinnert das Szenario eines US-Agententeams mitten in der sibirischen Wildnis schon sehr an die Fantasien eines zweitklassigen Thrillerautors. Dazu passt, dass sich hinter dem Namen Alexej Rakitin, den sich der anonyme Autor zulegt, ein vielköpfiges Autorenteam verbirgt, das auch Science-Fiction-Romane produziert. Und um das Fehlen von Augäpfeln und Zunge zu erklären, muss man keine CIA-Folterknechte bemühen. Dazu reicht auch ein Schwarm Krähen oder ein Horde kleiner Krebstiere im Gebirgsbach.

Aber auch, oder gerade wenn man alle Mutmaßungen über die Aktivitäten von KGB, CIA und Aliens ins Reich der Verschwörungstheorien verbannt, gibt das Schicksal der neun Frauen und Männer am Djatlow-Pass Rätsel auf. Was kann neun kräftige, gesunde Menschen veranlasst haben, bei tiefster Dunkelheit und Temperaturen unter minus 20 Grad Celsius ohne Windjacken, Schuhe, Mützen und Handschuhe das Zelt zu verlassen und mehr als einen Kilometer weit in den nahezu sicheren Tod zu laufen? Wie kamen Dubinina, Thibeaux-Brignolle und Solotarjow zu ihren tödlichen Verletzungen?

Das nächstliegende Szenario, das schon während der Bergungsarbeiten und der Ermittlungen für das wahrscheinlichste gehalten wurde, war eine Lawine. Die neun Wanderer im Zelt, einige noch mit Kochen beschäftigt, andere, die sich erschöpft hingelegt hatten, und dann wird das Zelt urplötzlich unter einer Schneemasse begraben. Oder hatte sich das Unglück schon durch ein Geräusch angekündigt, und einer oder zwei konnten noch rechtzeitig ins Freie entkommen? Die anderen schneiden die Zeltwand von innen auf, buddeln sich nach draußen, und alle zusammen flüchten aus Furcht vor weiteren Lawinenabgängen bergabwärts zum Pass.

Allerdings versichern Fachleute, dass ein Lawinenabgang bei einer Hangneigung von weniger als 30 Grad sehr unwahrscheinlich ist. Und multiple Rippenbrüche sind keineswegs eine typische Lawinenverletzung. In einer kürzlich im Fachmagazin Communications Earth & Environmentveröffentlichten Studie allerdings relativieren die Schweizer Forscher Johan Gaume und Alexander Puzin diesen Einwand. Die Wanderer hatten die Schneedecke senkrecht angestochen, um das Zelt aufzustellen. Wenn unter einer Deckschicht schweren, vom Wind zusammengepressten Schnees eine dünne, sehr instabile Schneeschicht lag, und wenn der hangabwärts wehende Wind im Lauf einiger Stunden eine kleine Schneewehe über dem Zelt anhäufte, dann könnte sich auch bei der geringen Hangneigung unvermittelt ein Schneebrett lösen. Wenn diese Schneemasse einen Menschen trifft, der flach auf einer harten Unterlage - hier den unter dem Zeltboden ausgelegten Skiern - liegt, dann könnte dies auch die festgestellten Einbrüche des Brustkorbs verursachen.

Die Theorie hat aber einen Haken: Mit den geschilderten Verletzungen hätten Dubinina, Thibeaux-Brignolle und Soltarjow nie und nimmer den Weg bis zum Pass und noch weiter in die Schlucht, wo sie gefunden wurden, schaffen können. Und es steht außer Frage, dass diese drei ihre beiden Kameraden, die bei der Kiefer gefunden wurden, überlebten, denn sie hatten Kleidungsstücke bei sich, die sie den beiden ausgezogen hatten, und das sicherlich nicht, als diese noch lebten. Der Swerdlowsker Staatsanwalt Andrej Kurjakow, der 2018 auf Initiative von zwei Journalisten der Komsomolskaja Prawdanoch einmal Ermittlungen im Fall Djatlow aufnahm, kam zwar auch zu dem Ergebnis, dass eine Lawine die Katastrophe auslöste. Aber er geht davon aus, dass die vier zuletzt aufgefundenen Wanderer nach dem Tod ihrer Gefährten versuchten, sich in der Schlucht einen notdürftigen Unterschlupf zu bauen, und dass sie dabei in dem steilen Gelände von abrutschenden Schneemassen getötet wurden. Djatlow, Slobodin und Kolmogorowa, die am Berghang zwischen Zirbelkiefer und Zelt gefunden wurden, hätten versucht, das Zelt zu erreichen, um wärmende Kleidung zu holen, hätten aber bei dem stürmischen Wind, der die gefühlte Temperatur auf unter minus 40 Grad sinken ließ, keine Überlebenschance gehabt.

Das neueste Szenario im Fall Djatlow stammt von dem russischen Kernphysiker Igor Pawlow, der sich sehr tief in das umfangreiche Archivmaterial eingearbeitet hat. Seine Theorie: Das Zelt der Djatlow-Gruppe stand ursprünglich nicht auf dem Hang des Cholat Sjachl, sondern in der Nähe der Kiefer, und wurde nachts von einem umstürzenden Baum getroffen. Weil einige Armeeoffiziere und Parteifunktionäre glaubten, das Unglück sei durch in der Nähe durchgeführte Sprengungen verursacht worden, und fürchteten, zur Rechenschaft gezogen zu werden, arrangierten sie das Zelt und die Leichen in aller Heimlichkeit so, dass der wahre Ablauf vertuscht wurde. Das würde einiges erklären: In der Tat erscheint es sehr ungewöhnlich, dass die Wanderer ihr Zelt auf dem ausgesetzten, unwirtlichen Berghang aufschlugen, statt im Schutz der Bäume, wo sie leichten Zugang zu Wasser und Feuerholz hatten. Die schweren Brustverletzungen wären durch einen umstürzenden Baum zwanglos zu erklären. Und schließlich wären die Rätsel der Militärgamasche und der Taschenlampe auf dem Zeltdach gelöst, für die es bisher keinerlei andere Erklärung gibt. Aber es gibt auch einige entscheidende Einwände: Die ganze Geschichte beruht auf bloßen Mutmaßungen. Die Risse im Zelt waren eindeutig von einem scharfen Werkzeug, nicht von einem umstürzenden Baum erzeugt worden. Es lag auch nirgends ein umgestürzter Baum. Es gibt nicht den kleinsten Beleg dafür, dass eine Sprengung einen Baum zum Umstürzen brachte, und es gab deshalb auch keinerlei Grund für die angeblichen Verschwörer, eine so aufwendige Operation in Gang zu setzen, die nach menschlichem Ermessen niemals geheim bleiben konnte.

Und so bleibt die Katastrophe vom Djatlow-Pass bis heute, was sie seit 62 Jahren ist: ein Mysterium.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Teddy on February 25, 2021, 10:05:34 AM
Too bad the author pointed as a weakness one of the facts only our theory can explain - the cuts from inside.
The hikers cut the tent from inside to get from under the tree. This is the only scenario that can explain why the opening of the tent was not used as exit.
This is how you get out from under a fallen tree - you cut your way out. Also a tree flattens the tent, does not tear it down.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: KFinn on February 25, 2021, 10:17:34 AM
We made it into Süddeutsche Zeitung (https://www.sueddeutsche.de/wissen/schnee-unglueck-mysterioes-ural-1.5211552) and New York Times (https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/25/world/europe/russia-dyatlov-pass-avalanche.html).

That was the first time I've seen mention of the altitude and sun being too blame for the radiation.  Has that been discussed before?  I mean, the rav 4 weren't exposed to the sun and they were the ones who had positive tests.  It seems a bit of a stretch to me; 1079 isn't like the Everest Summit where you burn your corneas in twenty minutes without eye protection. 

Well done on the article, Teddy!!
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: ash73 on February 25, 2021, 11:31:46 AM
That was the first time I've seen mention of the altitude and sun being too blame for the radiation.  Has that been discussed before?  I mean, the rav 4 weren't exposed to the sun and they were the ones who had positive tests.  It seems a bit of a stretch to me; 1079 isn't like the Everest Summit where you burn your corneas in twenty minutes without eye protection. 

They're conflating two different things - radioactive elements spontaneously decay and emit high energy particles (radiation), cosmic rays ARE high energy particles; you can't make something radioactive by firing high energy particles at it.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Nigel Evans on February 25, 2021, 11:51:50 AM
We made it into Süddeutsche Zeitung (https://www.sueddeutsche.de/wissen/schnee-unglueck-mysterioes-ural-1.5211552) and New York Times (https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/25/world/europe/russia-dyatlov-pass-avalanche.html).


Congrats.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: ash73 on February 25, 2021, 12:45:18 PM
you can't make something radioactive by firing high energy particles at it.

thats how c14 is formed. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon-14


a concentration of c14 being an explanation for the higher radiation levels.

I stand corrected, but a half life of 5700 years... that's going to be a tiny amount, would a geiger counter even pick it up?

And it only affected the clothes of Krivonischenko, who happened to work in a nuclear facility on the Kyshtym disaster cleanup?
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: KFinn on February 25, 2021, 01:39:55 PM
you can't make something radioactive by firing high energy particles at it.

thats how c14 is formed. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon-14 (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon-14)


a concentration of c14 being an explanation for the higher radiation levels.

I stand corrected, but a half life of 5700 years... that's going to be a tiny amount, would a geiger counter even pick it up?

And it only affected the clothes of Krivonischenko, who happened to work in a nuclear facility on the Kyshtym disaster cleanup?


I'm pretty sure that Lyudmila's sweater was tested as well.

I'm going to ask some questions about this on the radiation thread, so as not to get more off track on this post about the book. (I greatly do apologize; I do that often and am actively working on it.)
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Manti on February 25, 2021, 08:01:00 PM
Sorry this is not related to the book but as mentioned above, the investigation can be shut down for innocent reasons. For example, Ivanov for whatever reason ordered radiation testing, but when word of this gets to Moscow... This is information they would not want to become public either because it can lead to rumors about the Kyshtim incident and the extent of contamination (even though I would say that can almost certainly be ruled out as the source of the radiation on the clothes, but they wouldn't know at the time), or it can raise suspicions in the US about a nuclear test and thus a treaty violation. And we know pages pertaining to the radiation report were removed from the case files and only reinstated in modern times. Such a "coverup" can be carried out without the soviet state or radiation having to do anything with the actual incident.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Nigel Evans on February 26, 2021, 03:26:09 AM
Sorry this is not related to the book but as mentioned above, the investigation can be shut down for innocent reasons. For example, Ivanov for whatever reason ordered radiation testing, but when word of this gets to Moscow... This is information they would not want to become public either because it can lead to rumors about the Kyshtim incident and the extent of contamination (even though I would say that can almost certainly be ruled out as the source of the radiation on the clothes, but they wouldn't know at the time), or it can raise suspicions in the US about a nuclear test and thus a treaty violation. And we know pages pertaining to the radiation report were removed from the case files and only reinstated in modern times. Such a "coverup" can be carried out without the soviet state or radiation having to do anything with the actual incident.
The timeline is more like :-It's fair comment to suggest an innocent explanation for a cover up but there's a deeper sense (for me) that the case was from start to finish a problem for Moscow requiring personal intervention of high ranking officials to guide things along. It seems clear to me that the case would have been closed down much sooner had it not been for the involvement of nuclear workers and the need to confirm that Alexander had died (not defected).

Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: sarapuk on February 26, 2021, 11:11:00 AM
Sorry this is not related to the book but as mentioned above, the investigation can be shut down for innocent reasons. For example, Ivanov for whatever reason ordered radiation testing, but when word of this gets to Moscow... This is information they would not want to become public either because it can lead to rumors about the Kyshtim incident and the extent of contamination (even though I would say that can almost certainly be ruled out as the source of the radiation on the clothes, but they wouldn't know at the time), or it can raise suspicions in the US about a nuclear test and thus a treaty violation. And we know pages pertaining to the radiation report were removed from the case files and only reinstated in modern times. Such a "coverup" can be carried out without the soviet state or radiation having to do anything with the actual incident.

Innocent reasons  ! ?  Bit confused.  The Case was closed down very quickly after the last 4 bodies were found, some of which had extraordinary injuries. The area was then closed down for several years. Hardly innocent.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: sarapuk on February 27, 2021, 12:00:04 PM
Sorry this is not related to the book but as mentioned above, the investigation can be shut down for innocent reasons. For example, Ivanov for whatever reason ordered radiation testing, but when word of this gets to Moscow... This is information they would not want to become public either because it can lead to rumors about the Kyshtim incident and the extent of contamination (even though I would say that can almost certainly be ruled out as the source of the radiation on the clothes, but they wouldn't know at the time), or it can raise suspicions in the US about a nuclear test and thus a treaty violation. And we know pages pertaining to the radiation report were removed from the case files and only reinstated in modern times. Such a "coverup" can be carried out without the soviet state or radiation having to do anything with the actual incident.
Innocent reasons  ! ?  Bit confused.  The Case was closed down very quickly after the last 4 bodies were found, some of which had extraordinary injuries. The area was then closed down for several years. Hardly innocent.


Innocent = National security perhaps.

Well if strange and dangerous Events were happening in the area that would be a good reason to Lockdown.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: RMK on March 02, 2021, 04:47:41 PM
I finished reading the book about 4 weeks ago.  I bought the English edition, in hard copy from Amazon (if that's somehow relevant).  All of the illustrations were in grayscale (if I had bought an electronic copy, would I have gotten color illustrations?).  Anyhow, the book was long, and information-dense.  I liked it.  I've given it 4 weeks for my thoughts about it to incubate. 

The book's biggest strength is its novel interpretations of available evidence, made possible only by assiduous attention to detail, for instance:

There were some things I didn't like about the book, but most of them could be resolved if Teddy and Igor release a second edition of the book in a few years:

There are also some things about which I am still confused, and I'm surprised no one really seems to have asked about them yet:

All in all, nice work on the book, Teddy & Igor!  thumb1
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: ash73 on March 08, 2021, 08:18:03 AM
Interesting book, well done Teddy and Igor.

Quote from: book
On  February  2  there  was  an  aborted  launch  of  an  R5-M  rocket  from  the  Kapustin  Yar  test  range. Due to the early engine cut-off, the rocket fell short of 280 km from its estimated range of 1167  km. 

May I ask, what is the evidence for this? And do you know the trajectory? From what I've read elsewhere the normal test route was Easterly, Novaya Zemlya to the North is out of range of a single stage rocket and DP is 500km East of that path anyhow. There's no way they'd lob a nuclear warhead at the Urals, but they could have been testing the rocket itself.

Quote from: book
On  February  17,  at  4:45  AM  Moscow  time  and  6:45  AM  Sverdlovsk  time  R-7  rocket  was  launched  from  the  Tyuratam  test  range.  The  rocket  flew  a  distance  of  6307  km.

The R-7 was two-stage, and you're saying it flew 6307km, so it wouldn't be heading North over the pole (that would be interpreted as a preemptive strike by the USA!), it must have been going East. If it was launched East from Baikonur would it be seen from DP?

I'd love to know a bit more about these launches.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: ash73 on March 08, 2021, 09:20:24 AM
More interesting is ****'s - Journey to Dyatlov Pass quoting an unnamed source that 2 Tupolev Bears flew over the Urals that night. Reconnaissance mission?

Yes he was talking about them dropping parachute mines, iirc.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: ash73 on March 11, 2021, 03:58:19 PM
More interesting is ****'s - Journey to Dyatlov Pass quoting an unnamed source that 2 Tupolev Bears flew over the Urals that night. Reconnaissance mission?

Yes he was talking about them dropping parachute mines, iirc.


I'm thinking more about the Kangaroo missile...

It's an interesting idea, we need a Russian aviation buff to comment on kh-20 tests, maybe Igor looked into it when writing the book?

According to wiki, trials commenced Oct 1958 and ran for 12 months, and 5 out of 16 test flights failed. But I would have thought they'd test it out to sea, and they wouldn't fit a nuclear warhead so early in the test programme, especially given the problems they were having with accuracy.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: ash73 on March 12, 2021, 03:18:19 AM
More interesting is ****'s - Journey to Dyatlov Pass quoting an unnamed source that 2 Tupolev Bears flew over the Urals that night. Reconnaissance mission?

Yes he was talking about them dropping parachute mines, iirc.


I'm thinking more about the Kangaroo missile...

It's an interesting idea, we need a Russian aviation buff to comment on kh-20 tests, maybe Igor looked into it when writing the book?

According to wiki, trials commenced Oct 1958 and ran for 12 months, and 5 out of 16 test flights failed. But I would have thought they'd test it out to sea, and they wouldn't fit a nuclear warhead so early in the test programme, especially given the problems they were having with accuracy.
It's about the Atmospheric Electricity Theory, if the photos are genuine (and i think they are) then light emitting objects were being created that night. Light is of course just electromagnetic radiation of a certain wavelength and if these natural objects are emitting EM across a broad range of frequencies then they would be picked up on radar.... So you scramble a couple of state of the art bombers for a recon loaded with SOTA missiles to have a look see. The crews observe lights and a radar signature = craft, radio that back to base and the order is given to fire on it.

They would use specialised interceptors such as the Mig 19, armed with air-to-air missiles, for that purpose. They were designed to get to the target area (and altitude) as fast as possible. The kh-20 was an air-to-surface cruise missile, it would take the best part of 24 hours to get a Tu-95 into the air armed with one. It wasn't operational at that time, anyhow.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: ash73 on March 12, 2021, 05:25:37 AM
More interesting is ****'s - Journey to Dyatlov Pass quoting an unnamed source that 2 Tupolev Bears flew over the Urals that night. Reconnaissance mission?

Yes he was talking about them dropping parachute mines, iirc.


I'm thinking more about the Kangaroo missile...

It's an interesting idea, we need a Russian aviation buff to comment on kh-20 tests, maybe Igor looked into it when writing the book?

According to wiki, trials commenced Oct 1958 and ran for 12 months, and 5 out of 16 test flights failed. But I would have thought they'd test it out to sea, and they wouldn't fit a nuclear warhead so early in the test programme, especially given the problems they were having with accuracy.
It's about the Atmospheric Electricity Theory, if the photos are genuine (and i think they are) then light emitting objects were being created that night. Light is of course just electromagnetic radiation of a certain wavelength and if these natural objects are emitting EM across a broad range of frequencies then they would be picked up on radar.... So you scramble a couple of state of the art bombers for a recon loaded with SOTA missiles to have a look see. The crews observe lights and a radar signature = craft, radio that back to base and the order is given to fire on it.

They would use specialised interceptors such as the Mig 19, armed with air-to-air missiles, for that purpose. They were designed to get to the target area (and altitude) as fast as possible. The kh-20 was an air-to-surface cruise missile, it would take the best part of 24 hours to get a Tu-95 into the air armed with one. It wasn't operational at that time, anyhow.
Some thoughts :-
  • Nothing about Tu-95s precludes other interceptors being used. In fact it fits, air to air missiles failing to have an effect so dial up "bigger stuff".
  • https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kh-20 states that arming was reduced to 4 hours but doesn't give a timeline. Plus the 16 tests over say 51 weeks is 1 per 3 weeks so a good chance that they good to go that night irrespective of arming delay. Also arming delay might well have been due to setting up the thermonuclear warhead (can't rush it and risk dropping the ball with that one) and a conventional warhead could have been easier and even preloaded for the trials.
  • Above link states it was operational for trials?

Operational means "in service" i.e. completed trials. It was still being tested, there's no way they'd use it on a live target, and it was a ground attack weapon. There were various Mig 19 airbases nearby that could intercept an airbourne target in minutes (they were used to attack Power's U2, they even shot one down with their own SAMs iirc).

There might have been a kh-20 test flight, but I expect that would be out to sea given they were air launched.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Teddy on March 25, 2021, 04:00:56 AM
  • According to the book, a tree fell on the tent.  And yet, passages describing the conversations and actions of the conspirators refer to a "snowed-in" tent and an "avalanche".  What is the status of the Dyatlovites' tent supposed to be when the geologists(?) found it?  Did the conspirators have to remove the fallen tree from the tent, or not?
These are the most likely conspirators according to our version of events.

Geologists Ivdellag City Committee Railway troops
Abram Markovich Sulman Vitaliy Alekseevich Ivanov Ivan Stepanovich Prodanov Mihail Fyodorovich Shestopalov
SULMAN
Abram Markovich
18.IX.1904 - 17.III.1983
IVANOV
Vitaliy Alekseevich
PRODANOV
Ivan Stepanovich
1906 - IV.1964
SHESTOPALOV
Mihail Fyodorovich
1916 -
Head of the Northern
Geological Expedition
Lieutenant Colonel, Head of
the PO Box 240 Administration
First Secretary of the Ivdel
City Committee of the
CPSU
Lieutenant Colonel,
sapper commander leading
a group of 7

There are no
Quote from: RMK
passages describing the conversations and actions of the conspirators
but there is an interesting radiogram from May:
Received: Temnikov,
Stepanovich Prodanov
this is outrageous, fourteen comrades and I carried the corpses to the helicopter on our shoulders but the crew was ... more than dozen ... the helicopter lifted off, despite my convincing requests, they didn’t take on board what I had requested as a communist ... the crew’s behavior was insulting I ask you to inform the General Party of the Soviet Union and twice the hero of the Soviet Union, commander Col. General Lelyushenko.
for you personally. corpses are frozen in the state in which you saw them in ----- concerns their exposed parts of the body. we are not there ... guided by ... a detailed study showed that they are in a frozen state a medical expert --- refused to perform their resection because of the inability to do this, which he will personally report to you at your request
Ortyukov

The radiogram was addressed to Ivan Stepanovich Prodanov. It was received by Temnikov in the Northern Expedition (Ivdel), and it was definitely read by Sulman.
When could Prodanov or Sulman have seen the frozen corpses? This radiogram was sent after the pilots refused to take the bodies on board for transportation to Ivdel, and after Vozrozhdenny was summoned. There is no information about Prodanov or Sulman ever going to the pass in May, and Sulman has nothing to do with the search at all.
It is known that after finding the bodies Tempalov, Lev Ivanov and Vozrozhdenny flew to the pass. There are no recollections or documents about the arrival of Prodanov. An indirect fact in favor of his absence in May in the ravine is that Ortyukov had a heated argument with the pilots. Surely the local party leader would calmly resolve the issue.
The radiogram refers to the bodies found in May in the creek. The only time anybody could have ever seen these bodies frozen is before the official search for the Dyatlov group.

  • I'm not real clear about what is supposed to have happened between the tree falling on the tent and the discovery of dead bodies on the slope of Kholat Syakhl in the morning. Wouldn't the five that escaped the tent have eventually realized that the other four were dead, and nothing could be done for them? Why couldn't they retrieve at least some warm clothes and other life-preserving gear from the tent?

The tent crushed by the tree with some of the bodies still trapped inside is spotted from a routine flight over the pass and the common retrieval procedures are carried out. Bodies are recovered and sent to the Ivdel morgue. The tent is most likely folded and put somewhere. Everything was supposed to end with a funeral in the nearby cemetery after identifying the bodies by the relatives. So far there is no conspiracy. Solter washes the bodies, Prudkov examines the bodies. This is presumed to be Shumkov's group. Interrogation started on Feb 6 from Polunochnoe, the starting point of Shummkov's group. Then comes Feb 7 when the Shumkov group reaches District 41 where they have never been before and according to Shumkov's published recollections are greeted with "We didn't expect to see you again."

Dyatlov group is dead. We do not know when they were found, but it was the bodies crawling up the slope that were spotted from a routine flight. They are sent to the morgue. Dead bodies from apparent mountaineering incidents are not being autopsied. Same thing happened to Oleg Vavilov, conspiracy and all:

Dropped on orders from above (https://dyatlovpass.com/dropped-on-orders-from-above)
The route not traveled (https://dyatlovpass.com/the-route-not-traveled)

We don't know if the tent was found "in the morning", only that it was sometimes before the anyone was even looking for Dyatlov group.
"The five that escaped the tent" - which five escaped the tent? This is not what we say. Some hikers were crushed inside the tent. The rest frantically cut up the tent form inside and desperately tried to help their dying friends, not thinking about securing clothes or shoes. It's a mayhem. During their daytime trekking they have seen many helicopters in the sky. Some of the group went up the slope to call for help. Bardin, one of the searchers from Moscow suggested "If Kolevatov was such an erudite, as Yuri Yudin said, then from some moment of retreat he had to go straight upward, gaining height. Probably, right from the campfire." This is the direction where if there is a mishap a survivor should head to.

A question to RMK: If you are totally taken by surprise by a horrific disastrous event that leaves three of your friends dying right in front of your eyes, would you really try to retrieve warm clothes and other life-preserving gear?
Also the hikers were in a different state of clothing. Remember that they were redressed at the morgue. Anything we see is staged, not on purpose, but trying to put it back where it was first found. But since the order was not preserved it all seems very weird.

  • Why did the official search parties find clothing from Krivonischenko and Doroshenko on the "Ravine 4"?  Was that just part of the conspirators' staging of the scene?

Because some of them were redressed after being thawed and cleaned int he morgue. Recollections of Solter (https://dyatlovpass.com/interview-solter)

There was no planned staging. It was all put back, bodies dumped, no big picture, no intended scenario other than possibly to look like the events described in Fedoseev book "On the Road of Trial" (https://dyatlovpass.com/on-the-road-of-trial) that came out three months before Dyatlov Pass incident..

  • Why did it take so long for the conspirators to find Dyatlov's corpse? For that matter, why did the conspirators find the four bodies in the tent before finding Dyatlov, Krivonischenko, Doroshenko, and Kolmogorova (Slobodin fell in a creek, of course)?

Dyatlov's body was found on day 1, hours after the first two bodies under the cedar. The conspirators wanted the tent and some bodies to be found right away so the Sverdlovsk and Moscow to withdraw. The conspiracy didn't know what is still hidden in the snow. They sent to Ivdel only 6 bodies, then dumped them back to be found again. They didn't find all nine bodies which means the firts discovery was not "in the morning", teh snow have started to cover the bodies.

  • If the hot stove fell onto Krivonischenko and burned him, why don't the case files mention anything about scorch marks on the tent fabric?
No one considered worth mentioning them. They were very normal for this design of the tent with the stove pipe protruding through the tarpaulin. Remember Sogrin group (Zina and Zolotaryov were suppose to go on that trek), their tent burned down the first days of the hike but they still managed to achieve the world's first winter ascent on both the Sablya and the Neroyka peaks. Nevolin's remark when looking at the burns marks on the searchers tent that they have their own planetarium when the sun shines from outside in. Grigoriev -3 (https://dyatlovpass.com/grigoriev-3#39)

Churkina is ordered (https://dyatlovpass.com/case-files-303-304) to examine only the cuts in the tent. These are th only two questions she needs to write about. Her son says (https://dyatlovpass.com/igor-makushkin) that she is not allowed to do anything more than that.

Churkina mentions (https://dyatlovpass.com/case-files-303-304) that they are very different from all other damages. We don't know what other damages to the fabric of the tent are there.

  • How many dead bodies had the conspirators found before Col. Shapovalov learned about the hikers' deaths?
Col. Shapovalov is not involved in the case. He is an example for a highly decorated official punished for a work related accident. This is what would happen to "our conspirators" if they didn't distance themselves from the incident with Dyatlov group.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: RMK on March 25, 2021, 04:54:35 AM
Thank you very much for all those answers, Teddy!  I'll need some time to digest all that information.

  • How many dead bodies had the conspirators found before Col. Shapovalov learned about the hikers' deaths?
Col. Shapovalov is not involved in the case. He is an example for a highly decorated official punished for a work related accident. This is what would happen to "our conspirators" if they didn't distance themselves from the incident with Dyatlov group.
Oops!  I got names mixed up: I meant Shestopalov, not Shapovalov.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Teddy on March 25, 2021, 07:28:44 AM
The book is all citing (in cursive) or paraphrasing documents and recollections listed as reference at the beginning of the book. We "infer" only in the following two chapters:
Chapter 20. So turns the wheel.
Here we have the imaginative dialog between the conspirators clearly standing out as fiction since is no citation. How else do we know they said that in a book where 75% of the narrative is citing other sources (in cursive)? And as I already said, even between the cursives, we only repeat what is already said by others (searchers, witnesses, investigators). If you ask why we publish a book where 90% is said by others - because this is the first time we put facts in a certain context no one thought before.
Chapter 25. February 1-2, 1959.
Speculation how events went down on the night of the tragedy.

The two "1079" books (Russian and English) were written, translated, illustrated and published in the span of 4 months. I got tired from looking for a publisher. Igor Pavlov was sitting on his theory for I don't know how many years and I didn't want to add more years to "benefit from a professional, native-Anglophone editor". They cost money and I decided that getting the theory out is more important than keep writing agents, editors, and publishers.

As an example - Donnie Echart was advanced $40K and took him 2 sweet years to write his best seller with the help with line editors. 50% of the book is about his trip to Russia, and his photo on the back of the book is bigger than the photo of Igor Dyatlov on the front of the book. And his theory sucks according to any journalist I have talked to.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Teddy on March 25, 2021, 07:51:45 AM
Please note that our project is different because for first time a ground breaking book on the subject is published simultaneously in both languages the authors do their research. Neither of us is mere translator. Then we have the new developments and supporting documents published per chapter on https://dyatlovpass.com/1079

I have never seen anything like this before.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Teddy on April 16, 2021, 09:54:33 PM
  • No subject or person index.

Who is who (https://dyatlovpass.com/whois)

Кто есть Кто (https://dyatlovpass.com/whois-ru)
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: RMK on April 17, 2021, 08:34:41 PM
  • No subject or person index.

Who is who (https://dyatlovpass.com/whois)

Кто есть Кто (https://dyatlovpass.com/whois-ru)

Yes, thank you.  I was and remain aware of the online "Who is who" list. 

What I had in mind regarding a "person index" was an index in the back of the book that would give a page number for every instance of a particular person's name being mentioned in text.

At any rate...to be clear: Teddy, I never meant any disrespect.  I intended only to offer constructive criticism.  That's why I referred to a possible second edition of your book "in a few years"--I think a second edition could be even better than the first!  And, I do recognize how burnt-out you might be from writing and publishing the first edition...
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Teddy on April 18, 2021, 02:11:11 AM
And as I said I have chosen a different format for Indexing - online. Because you can have much more information that is coming up.
Your criticism is based on Donnie Echart's book which was good for 2013 and has not added anything in the meantime. BTW whatever is about the case is Borzenkov's (WAB) thoughts entirely. I have done this with Igor Pavlov work and his name is before mine.
The rest of the book is about Donnie Echart himself. Should I do this too? I went to the pass, I meant with Kunchevitch, well, I didn't crash at his place. Is this about the case or a tourist trip?
Top it with infra sound theory. Tell me that - why is this theory so popular? It is all PR, a book is not looked at for its contrubution to teh case but for what money is poured int he "marketing plan". This is not me, I have been told so by the literary agents.

Your criticism about the language is well taken, I am revising chapters 9-12 with a professional, native-Anglophone editor.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Teddy on April 18, 2021, 03:03:11 AM
And, I do recognize how burnt-out you might be from writing and publishing the first edition...

It is not about the burn out. I was talking with agents for a year. At one point I realized that I am sitting on a very important information which i decided to get out. I have not self-published a book before and even you have the platforms (software) have changed now. We realized that we are out of time for the date but I still went ahead and did what ever I could in the four months I had. To me the Russian variant was more important because it is the native one. I allocated two months for the Russian and two months for the English books. Halfway through the process when I was ready with the Russian book I hit the publish button and was given the following:
Important: Kindle Enterprise Publishing and Kindle Direct Publishing don't support Russian or Swahili.

I was determined the books will get out in both languages or not at all.
The remaining two months were a madhouse, but I managed to get them out.

I would have never done this if the process didn't allow fixing problems even after the publishing. I am constantly fixing things and re-uploading. It is a completely different ball game. I don't have to wait for the next edition. I am doing it right now.

I say - lets get the maximum of this conversation. I have hired a professional editor. Lets discuss what else do you think I should add or change. Name index - this is too long, we have too many names in the book, and we are adding more when we find new information. My reaction to your criticism is that you don't take in account https://dyatlovpass.com/1079 and list your comments as if Donnie Echart is the standard. He is not our standard.

Let me ask one direct question - if you had a theory that you really believe will solve the case would wait for two years to publish a book that might become a best seller? My goal is to get the word out, and if I have achieved the critical minimum of quality to present Igor's theory I am all for it.

I understand that your criticism is towards the book itself, not the theory. I did my best and if i had to do it all over again, I would choose to publish it when I did and work on the style later. You didn't mention the maps and images, did you like them?
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: RMK on April 18, 2021, 03:21:36 PM
Your criticism is based on Donnie Echart's book which was good for 2013 and has not added anything in the meantime.
I don't recall directly comparing your & Igor's book to Eichar's book.  Sorry if I posted anything implying that I was making such a comparison.

Your criticism about the language is well taken, I am revising chapters 9-12 with a professional, native-Anglophone editor.
Glad to hear it :-)

Halfway through the process when I was ready with the Russian book I hit the publish button and was given the following:
Important: Kindle Enterprise Publishing and Kindle Direct Publishing don't support Russian or Swahili.
Oh, gosh!

I would have never done this if the process didn't allow fixing problems even after the publishing. I am constantly fixing things and re-uploading. It is a completely different ball game. I don't have to wait for the next edition. I am doing it right now.
I guess my suggestion of a second edition was influenced by the fact that I bought the book in hard copy.  Or perhaps I misunderstand you, and you're using https://dyatlovpass.com/1079 to distribute updates?

Name index - this is too long, we have too many names in the book, and we are adding more when we find new information.
I flipped through my copy of 1079 this morning, and having done so, I agree that a name index like I had in mind would be infeasibly long.

Let me ask one direct question - if you had a theory that you really believe will solve the case would wait for two years to publish a book that might become a best seller? My goal is to get the word out, and if I have achieved the critical minimum of quality to present Igor's theory I am all for it.
I understand completely.

I understand that your criticism is towards the book itself, not the theory. I did my best and if i had to do it all over again, I would choose to publish it when I did and work on the style later.
Well, there are a few things I might criticize about the theory, but most of them concern details about which I'm still confused.  I will probably post again in this thread with questions about those details in the next few days.  Your theory is my "current favorite", though.  You and Igor Pavlov really "did your homework"!  In particular, I'd say I'm 100% convinced by your explanation of the conflicting dates on the criminal case.

You didn't mention the maps and images, did you like them?
Yes, I did!  They're grayscale in the print edition, but completely legible (so long as you don't try to read them in dim light).
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Teddy on April 18, 2021, 03:52:40 PM
I guess my suggestion of a second edition was influenced by the fact that I bought the book in hard copy.  Or perhaps I misunderstand you, and you're using https://dyatlovpass.com/1079 to distribute updates?
I can make changes on the eBook and hard copy and they will affect the copies from here on. This is the Print On Demand - it prints whatever is the current state of the book. So I didn't have to make the decision if the omits due to lack of time will propagate in volumes.

https://dyatlovpass.com/1079 is for everything we couldn't fit in the book, references and also we initially tried footnotes but they became longer than the page itself, so I came with the web supplementary area. While reading the book it is good to check the 1079 area for this chapter where there is more information and that information is piling up even after the book is finished. There is more information that comes available that supports our theory. Example: N. Varsegova's findings about Shestopalov, Alekseenkov's reports on magnetic anomalies on the pass, a new book by Arhipov just came out and it quotes Eduard Hodorochenko who in 1959 worked as a driller in the Northern Geological  Expedition, and he remembers planes flying in the sky "one after another" before the group was missing. This proves our theory that the  Dyatlov group might have tried to go up for help, and also that the bodies were most probably spotted form the air. There was just too much activity going on, and they keep coming. My point is that we can plug this new information into the chapters from https://dyatlovpass.com/1079

I agree that it is unconventional, it is not like closing the cover and wait for the next edition, but nothing about this case is conventional.

Yes, I did!  They're grayscale in the print edition, but completely legible (so long as you don't try to read them in dim light).
The downside is the Print On Demand is the price. Since Amazon keeps 60%  (unless you exclusively sell only through them which we are not) they don't allow you to go below certain price and for the maps to be in color the end user price for a book that thick had to be $40.

Since you have bought the book you can leave a review. Would you do this for me?
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: jsmith on April 19, 2021, 12:20:41 AM
Bought the book. Really enjoyed it, and I'm grateful to the authors who have put care and effort into a difficult case.

This is my favourite book on the event.

I don't agree with every conclusion the book makes - but that's okay. I think sometimes the book falls into the trap of Hanlon's Razor (ie  "never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity".) Lots of the investigators, rescuers and officials made blunders, contradict each other, omit details, get dates wrong, etc. I think this was down to ignorance and incompetence, however the book uses this as evidence of malice (staging the scene). I just think the investigation was botched, like many were back then are still are today...

I think the theory of the tree branch is a good theory on paper, but it requires moving the tent and I just have trouble accepting the idea of the tent being moved and the scene being staged (I still don't really get behind the proposed motive and its a lot of effort).

But like I said, it's okay to disagree. I still learned a lot from the book and I found it well written and captivating. I am leaving a positive review on kindle!
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Teddy on April 19, 2021, 12:49:56 AM
Books on the case are 90% facts tainted with certain prejudice to lead to a theory in the last chapter. This is the format.
I have read theories for 8 years. All of them explain the tragedy with either inexperience, even stupidity (I refer to the behavior after a unforeseen calamity, slashing the tent etc.) or a grave malice (crime).

In our case the "unbelievable" element is that someone moved the tent, which BTW is widely accepted by most Russians, and they know their taiga. Look at that same element from any other theory:
- abandoning the tent because???
- torturing and killing on purpose
- no other theory explains how Dubinina, Zolotaryov and Nikolay Thibeaux-Brignolle

Anyway, as you said - It is OK to disagree, and I appeal to everyone to please judge the book with what it brings to the table as new ideas and point of views to look at the evidence. If after 60 years we can still come up with a ground breaking new theory then there is hope for this case to be solved after all, and we don't have to chase tails in a circles forever. We can break the mold, look with fresh eyes. The Dyatlov group deserve nothing less. They don't have top go down as killed by Yeti, or an avalanche.

Thank you for the positive review  bow7
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: spotterroe on April 21, 2021, 10:36:42 AM
The main question I have is that if a huge tree fell on the tent why does it no show in the first photo of the discovered tent of Feb. 26 (27)?.
It would still be there.

I found the book to contain an awful amount of extraneous material that has nothing to do with the "solution"- falling tree- at the very end.
It needs a lot of slimming down, particularly with all the descriptions of participants whose contribution was peripheral at best.

Also don't see how a falling tree accounts for Ludmila Dubinina's having no eyeballs and no tongue.
Title: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Monty on April 21, 2021, 10:53:17 AM
If a tree fell in a forest and there was no one there to hear it would it make a sound?
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Teddy on April 21, 2021, 11:01:05 AM
spotterroe sent me the following PM a day ago:
Quote
"Have just read your book but it does not answer how Ludmila Dubinina had no eyeballs and a missing tongue- not caused by a falling tree.
Also, in the photo I have seen of the collapsed tent shortly after discovery, does not show a tree."

To which I answered same day:
Missing eyes and tongue months after the body is left out in the open is if not expected then very common according to any pathologist I have talked to.
The fall of the tree was accidental. Common causes are wind, snow, rotten trunk. The panic among the Ivdel leadership was due to lack of accurate and clear information at the time they made up their minds. Only geologists knew where exactly the incident took place. They found the bodies from the air and arrived at the scene for verification at the request of the police. All the rest - militia, Prodanov (party) and others knew only the "area of Mount Otorten". For them Otorten, 1079, and the area of the prospecting ground check for the magnetic anomaly are approximately the same place. The difference could be understood by Sulman (head of the Northern Geological Expedition), but It is unlikely that he went into the details (coordinates) when sending employees on a ground check. The said leaders unambiguously connected Tempalov's story about the incident with the hikers with the blasting works in the area.
Imagine this: the sheriff's son goes to shoot rabbits "in the forest behind the house". After a while, the sheriff finds John Doe body "in the forest behind the house". Chances are the sheriff's first thought will be "my son accidentally shot someone". And taking in consideration the time (XXI congress of the party) and place (punishment means gulag) the sheriff will decide to move the body and hush up the case.
Dumping bodies is very common psychological behavior even if the person is not culpable for the accident. This is even considered lightening the significance of their actions since "they didn't do anything wrong". Also they didn't move the bodies - they "put them back where they took them from on first place". They only moved the tent.
In the literature there are many examples of body dump to make sure the dead are not found in the house or company of someone that doesn't want to get involved.
From "Unnatural death" by Michael Baden MD:
"It’s much easier to move the body somewhere else and go on with their lives. … were amateurs, which is why the scene looked like murder. Amateurs always cause confusion. They don't realize the consequences of what they are doing."
I hope this helps.
Teddy
-------------------------------------------------
Since I see that my answer was wasted on spotterroe I am copying my resonance here so someone else may benefit from it.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Star man on April 22, 2021, 02:23:13 PM
If a tree fell in a forest and there was no one there to hear it would it make a sound?

No
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Star man on April 22, 2021, 02:46:02 PM
spotterroe sent me the following PM a day ago:
Quote
"Have just read your book but it does not answer how Ludmila Dubinina had no eyeballs and a missing tongue- not caused by a falling tree.
Also, in the photo I have seen of the collapsed tent shortly after discovery, does not show a tree."

To which I answered same day:
Missing eyes and tongue months after the body is left out in the open is if not expected then very common according to any pathologist I have talked to.
The fall of the tree was accidental. Common causes are wind, snow, rotten trunk. The panic among the Ivdel leadership was due to lack of accurate and clear information at the time they made up their minds. Only geologists knew where exactly the incident took place. They found the bodies from the air and arrived at the scene for verification at the request of the police. All the rest - militia, Prodanov (party) and others knew only the "area of Mount Otorten". For them Otorten, 1079, and the area of the prospecting ground check for the magnetic anomaly are approximately the same place. The difference could be understood by Sulman (head of the Northern Geological Expedition), but It is unlikely that he went into the details (coordinates) when sending employees on a ground check. The said leaders unambiguously connected Tempalov's story about the incident with the hikers with the blasting works in the area.
Imagine this: the sheriff's son goes to shoot rabbits "in the forest behind the house". After a while, the sheriff finds John Doe body "in the forest behind the house". Chances are the sheriff's first thought will be "my son accidentally shot someone". And taking in consideration the time (XXI congress of the party) and place (punishment means gulag) the sheriff will decide to move the body and hush up the case.
Dumping bodies is very common psychological behavior even if the person is not culpable for the accident. This is even considered lightening the significance of their actions since "they didn't do anything wrong". Also they didn't move the bodies - they "put them back where they took them from on first place". They only moved the tent.
In the literature there are many examples of body dump to make sure the dead are not found in the house or company of someone that doesn't want to get involved.
From "Unnatural death" by Michael Baden MD:
"It’s much easier to move the body somewhere else and go on with their lives. … were amateurs, which is why the scene looked like murder. Amateurs always cause confusion. They don't realize the consequences of what they are doing."
I hope this helps.
Teddy
-------------------------------------------------
Since I see that my answer was wasted on spotterroe I am copying my resonance here so someone else may benefit from it.

Hope the book is doing well.  A tree falling on the tent is consistent with the injuries and explains the events.  The tent scene is clearly staged.  Well it is clear if you have been pouring over the evidence for a year or two.  Definitely the best theory so far.

Although I believe this was an accident I do wonder if it was just the wind that caused a tree to fall, or something else.  Could the geological expedition have used explosives nearby and a shock wave caused a tree to fall?  Is it possible that there was some fault?

Regards

Star man
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Teddy on April 22, 2021, 03:41:50 PM
Hope the book is doing well.
It's doing very well. The Dyatlov Group Memory Fund is printing the book in Russian, and there is a great interest in the German edition that is coming out this year.

Although I believe this was an accident I do wonder if it was just the wind that caused a tree to fall, or something else.  Could the geological expedition have used explosives nearby and a shock wave caused a tree to fall?  Is it possible that there was some fault?

How can you tell? They are blasting all over - plenty of evidence about this. They find the site of the incident, the fallen tree, the tent the some of the bodies. They didn't panic right away, only when they learned that the a massive search is underway. No one was securing the area of blasting because no one was expected to be in the wilderness. There was no coordination between the Routing commission and the Northern Geological Expedition. There were accounts of people that happened to be in areas of exploration who found themselves in midst of a exploding mayhem, who threw themselves on the ground and prayed their life to be spared. They just happened to be in the middle of a blasting operation and lived to tell. No one made anything to make it safer. If Moscow hadn't been made aware of the tragedy the case would have ended after all the bodies were examined at the morgue, identified, and buried. If an expectation of the scene of the accident was not required the tent and all belongings would have been transported to Ivdel and later - to Sverdlovsk and given back to the UPI Sports club and families of the deceased. If the cause of death was called to be hypothermia (which would have been done without an autopsy) no one would have suspected any mystery. Usually an autopsy was required only if something seem amiss. The conspirators didn't do very good job staging it as a natural incident, and they didn't really know what would the autopsies show, but they were hoping for something "natural". And they almost got away... wait - they did get away, but not because they were Mensa smart. They couldn't be so effective in hiding the truth even if they wanted and planned it. The whole mess piled up by chance - light phenomenon, footprints, radioactive contamination, "survivor" (who survived nothing only turned back right on time to branch out whole universe of theories), late addition to the group (first to be exhumed), Lyuda's premonition, the traumas, the cuts, air force, discrepancies in the case files, investigator who knew nothing of mountaineering ... it goes on. It is a recipe for a mystery. It wasn't premeditated. They acted on an impulse, but once the wheels turn there was no stopping. I believe they were all deeply disturbed and sadden of the developments. There are more unsolved cases that we are aware of. All the publicity could entice someone to finally unburden from some information even only to say - yes, it was a tree that killed them but then...
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: spotterroe on April 22, 2021, 05:45:02 PM
I don't know how you can tell that the tent photo was "staged".
Regardless of the photo, the references in the book of what was found in the tent make no reference to a fallen tree.
Are you implying that the quotes in the book from those who were at the tent site are also "staged"?
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Teddy on April 22, 2021, 09:09:59 PM
I don't know how you can tell that the tent photo was "staged".
Regardless of the photo, the references in the book of what was found in the tent make no reference to a fallen tree.
Are you implying that the quotes in the book from those who were at the tent site are also "staged"?

I am not implying anything. No one said the tent was staged. Our conclusion is circumstantial. But again - if you don't see it my way you are welcome to give some other explanation. Please do so. No matter what I say it won't make a dent in your conviction.

The reason the book is so thorough is to give chance to people like you to find more information and build their own case. Our theory is in Chapter 25. Everything else is who was there and what exactly happened. This case is unsolved, and you can not say that any information is not pertinent and any participant in the events - "peripheral" was the word you used? You accuse me of jamming the book with unnecessary information? Who says what is important and what is not?
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Teddy on April 22, 2021, 09:27:09 PM
If a tree fell in a forest and there was no one there to hear it would it make a sound?

This was an inspirational quote of the book while its work title was "Dead forest".
Unfortunately this particular tree made a tremendous and deadly sound because there were nine people to hear it.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: NkZ on April 22, 2021, 11:22:06 PM
Any possibility that the blast was the circular clearing that appears in the rescuers drawings? It’s a bit of a direct course but skiing on this path could have made them get faster to the valley bellow than following the creek?
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Star man on April 23, 2021, 03:37:42 PM
Hope the book is doing well.
It's doing very well. The Dyatlov Group Memory Fund is printing the book in Russian, and there is a great interest in the German edition that is coming out this year.

Although I believe this was an accident I do wonder if it was just the wind that caused a tree to fall, or something else.  Could the geological expedition have used explosives nearby and a shock wave caused a tree to fall?  Is it possible that there was some fault?

How can you tell? They are blasting all over - plenty of evidence about this. They find the site of the incident, the fallen tree, the tent the some of the bodies. They didn't panic right away, only when they learned that the a massive search is underway. No one was securing the area of blasting because no one was expected to be in the wilderness. There was no coordination between the Routing commission and the Northern Geological Expedition. There were accounts of people that happened to be in areas of exploration who found themselves in midst of a exploding mayhem, who threw themselves on the ground and prayed their life to be spared. They just happened to be in the middle of a blasting operation and lived to tell. No one made anything to make it safer. If Moscow hadn't been made aware of the tragedy the case would have ended after all the bodies were examined at the morgue, identified, and buried. If an expectation of the scene of the accident was not required the tent and all belongings would have been transported to Ivdel and later - to Sverdlovsk and given back to the UPI Sports club and families of the deceased. If the cause of death was called to be hypothermia (which would have been done without an autopsy) no one would have suspected any mystery. Usually an autopsy was required only if something seem amiss. The conspirators didn't do very good job staging it as a natural incident, and they didn't really know what would the autopsies show, but they were hoping for something "natural". And they almost got away... wait - they did get away, but not because they were Mensa smart. They couldn't be so effective in hiding the truth even if they wanted and planned it. The whole mess piled up by chance - light phenomenon, footprints, radioactive contamination, "survivor" (who survived nothing only turned back right on time to branch out whole universe of theories), late addition to the group (first to be exhumed), Lyuda's premonition, the traumas, the cuts, air force, discrepancies in the case files, investigator who knew nothing of mountaineering ... it goes on. It is a recipe for a mystery. It wasn't premeditated. They acted on an impulse, but once the wheels turn there was no stopping. I believe they were all deeply disturbed and sadden of the developments. There are more unsolved cases that we are aware of. All the publicity could entice someone to finally unburden from some information even only to say - yes, it was a tree that killed them but then...

That is it.  How can you tell?  Those involved were unlikely to know whether their actions were to blame or it was just a natural event.  But, they did not want an investigation to find out that it had something to do with their activities - they would rather not find out and face the potential consequences.  Therefore try to make it look natural.  But they created an even bigger mystery.  That is what I took away from it.

Glad tge book is doing well. It is a great piece of work.

Regards

Star man
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Star man on April 23, 2021, 03:42:56 PM
If a tree fell in a forest and there was no one there to hear it would it make a sound?

This was an inspirational quote of the book while its work title was "Dead forest".
Unfortunately this particular tree made a tremendous and deadly sound because there were nine people to hear it.

Exactly. 
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: neni_cesty_zpet on April 30, 2021, 07:59:29 AM
Hello, I also read Theodora book and I agree that wounds are compatible with proposed theory but I must share some opinions of mine.

To my knowledge, no signs of outside damage to tent  was found.
I'd expect something like ripped tent/strings in case of tent installed in wood with supporting strings between trees. These tied strings are also essential for proper stove installation and there must be sufficient tension.

I cannot imagine someone staging natural cause. Was it weapon test - explosion that caused some nearby trees to fall ? Did something other fell from moving helicopter on tent, some kind of cargo?

If there was coverup, there were probably easier options for staging instead of moving tent from woods to slope risking some witnesses...

But wasnt the tent placed on slope to attract rescuers because of emergency situation in Dyatlov group that made them unable to return on skis - some members already seriously wounded? But then I would expect everyone properly dressed and most wounded members wrapped in blankets....

I dont rate this post much value but it may turn on red light in someone's head....

Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Dona on April 30, 2021, 07:01:24 PM
I haven't read any books on this but I think  she says that they were all dead before the tent was moved.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Manti on April 30, 2021, 07:37:57 PM
What are they doing in this photo then, if the tent was originally in the forest?
(https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/gallery/Unknown-origin-Dyatlov-photos-12.jpg)
Not saying it's a bad theory, I think it's a very good theory, just wondering..
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Dona on April 30, 2021, 07:41:41 PM
Teddy said that this picture was unrelated to a film roll, loose.. and no evidence as to when it was taken.. Could have been the day before etc..

Also, without any background in the scene, this could be that flat area right next to the den..
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Teddy on May 01, 2021, 03:51:37 AM
Teddy said that this picture was unrelated to a film roll, loose.. and no evidence as to when it was taken.. Could have been the day before etc..
Refer to the notes here: https://dyatlovpass.com/trek-photos#loose (https://dyatlovpass.com/trek-photos#loose)
... certain frames are known that are not part of the above mentioned films, and their corresponding negatives are unknown. It is known from memoirs that several UPI students printed photographs from the group's cameras already in Sverdlovsk at the request or assignment of the prosecutor's office: Bienko, Chubarev, Bychkov, Yudin, Sogrin, Shulyatiev, Stadnikov, Brusnitsyn, Plastun.

As for when was this photo taken according to our account of events it was taken earlier at the day of the tragedy, while according to their plans the group was building a storage. We believe the storage was removed, the tent pitched on its place by the conspirators, and later when it became important to find the storage a labaz was built 10 meters from the trail from base camp to the pass. This is all explained in Chapter 25. This is a copyrighted drawing from the book for the purpose of discussion only the domain DYATLOVPASS.COM which includes the forum.

(https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/Labaz-from-the-book-1079.png)
From "1079", chapter 25:
Quote
As a leader, Dyatlov stood out for being quite determined, even obstinate, when making decisions. There were no good reasons to reject the initial plan to make the storage in the area above the forest level. Igor may have expected to move further north, closer to Otorten, and into the valley of the 3rd Lozva tributary, and to go over the northeastern spur of height 1079 just in one passage. But again, like on the day before, the intensified wind interfered with his plans. With the north-western wind direction observed in the 2019 microclimatic examination in the area of Mt Kholat Syakhl, on February 2, 1959, there was no protection from the wind north of the spur in those days. The wind shadow zone was right on the site of the tent, which would be discovered on February 26 – in the exact location where the group must have laid a storage before going down into the valley of the 4th Lozva tributary for an overnight. The plan was that, on their return from Otorten, they would find the storage by means of a flag. The flag might have been tied to the circular cuts on the ski pole, which UPI searchers would later find in the tent discovered on the slope of height 1079.


Arguments in favor:

Bottom line: we think Dyatlov group made their storage where later the tent was found, the photo presumed last is actually made earlier on the last of their days alive, then the group went down the slope, pitched the tent, and were victims of the fallen tree accident.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: marieuk on May 01, 2021, 05:17:58 AM
40 Kg of missing food sounds like a lot.  Does anyone know how long that amount of food would have kept the group going for please? 
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Teddy on May 01, 2021, 05:38:16 AM
There were 55kg of products found in the storage. Maslennikov said that the distribution of food was 1200g / person / day = 10.8kg / day / group (after Yudin left) i.e. in the food in the labaz would last for the remaining 9 members of the group for 5 days.
 
Calculations in the following table show that Dyatlov group lacked about 40 kg of food which according to same calculations would last 3-4 days. The main question is that the items found in the labaz don't add up.

(https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/Missing-products.png)
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: marieuk on May 01, 2021, 01:18:58 PM
Thanks Teddy. 
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Manti on May 01, 2021, 07:31:58 PM
So, yes, setting up the cache on the slope and the tent in the forest would  make sense.

But looking at that photo, there is a person on the left and then 5(?) others in the trench. I see
So there was 55kg of products in the cache. Another 41kg missing: 96kg in total, would this need such a large trench that fits 4 or 5 people?

And why did they turn back the previous day from a closeby location? They were above the treeline but Igor wrote that he cannot even begin to think about setting up a storage there.


(Some possibilities: the snow was not deep enough in that part of the pass, or they didn't have enough time left and needed to set up camp for the night. )

And do I understand correctly, that the storage in the Auspiya valley would only be staged later, when the search was already underway?
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Teddy on May 02, 2021, 12:28:21 AM
And do I understand correctly, that the storage in the Auspiya valley would only be staged later, when the search was already underway?
Yes.

The one facing the camera is Krivonischenko, you can tell by the badges on his breast pocket. (https://dyatlovpass.com/sports-classification?rbid=18461)

(https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/gallery/Unknown-origin-Dyatlov-photos-11.jpg)

They were above the treeline but Igor wrote that he cannot even begin to think about setting up a storage there.
He is clearly saying the terrain is not easy to dig up a storage. I didn't know how did they find the snow drift the next day, but this is what the new investigation is implying they did - that they found the snow accumulation. If they did, then it is much easier to leave the supplies and go down light in the comfort of the forest. This is where their route will take them the next day, why cling to a barren slope with no wood to burn, and water supplies if there was no emergency as the new investigation proved from the meteorological records for that night (https://dyatlovpass.com/investigation-materials-2?rbid=18461).
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: bertie on May 04, 2021, 01:32:36 AM
Teddy you are a legend, hope you feel proud  clap1

Tree falls on tent due to natural causes, not hard to believe yet it explains the heaviest injuries and the cut tent in one stroke. Some higher-ups connect reckless blasting in the vicinity with the discovery of bodies under a tree, fear they could be asked uncomfortable questions so move the whole scene away from the forest, creating a tragic scene of slow death (similar to a well known one which really had happened a few years earlier). In other words, the handywork of that type of brainless, unprincipled and self-preserving official that has existed in every society, in every age.

Its the neatest theory I've heard and a worthy rival to WABs theory. I place little value on much else I've seen in 15 years.

Q. How come I'd never heard anything about blasting before??






Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Teddy on May 04, 2021, 04:35:02 AM
Q. How come I'd never heard anything about blasting before??

You have heard of the Northern Geological Expedition, right?
Or at least the name Sulman is on almost every radiogram. He is the chief of the prospecting party. Their work includes blasting.
Problem is that people don't look at who else was in the area at the moment of the tragedy. The widely accepted view is that there are only Yeti, Mansi and escapees from the Gulag roaming the taiga. Let's not forget occasional KGB and CIA spies. In reality there is a lot of mining and railroad construction going on in 1959.

(https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/gallery/Northern-Expedition.jpg)
Northern Expedition - festive procession along Trosheva St. in Ivdel. Around 1970. Photo from the archive of Boris Arhipovich Ezhov.
More photos from Ivdel (https://dyatlovpass.com/gallery-ivdel)

The 21st Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union was held from January 27 to February 5,1959. It was a mid-term congress, timed so that Khrushchev could try to consolidate his power over rivals after the attempted coup of the Anti-Party Group in 1957. We know that the Dyatlov group dedicated their trek to the congress. The fact is even mentioned in their “Evening Otorten №1”. Similar tributes were very popular at the time. The Northern Geological Expedition wants to find ore and mineral deposits to glorify the Communist Party.

The most valuable resource was uranium. In case of checking a gamma anomaly, given the limited capabilities, the works might be done with a method borrowed from the practice of the leasing system of excavation of the radioactive ore by the MVD of the USSR in 1945-48: "The works were conducted in the most primitive way – by manual short-hole drilling. Next, blasting out, collecting and sifting the chlopinite– a pitch-black uranium containing mineral. Antimagnetic anti-tank mines weighing up to 5 kg were used as explosives." Sinyukaev Hamza Fazilovich participated in the search. In 1959 he was a cadet of the division team in military unit 6602 (Ivdel). He remembers the cannonade of explosions that were so loud they had to send a request to Moscow to stop the blasting so they could work. The distance in his approximation was not more than 10 km from the search base camp, and the blasts were on the northern side of the ridge, on the side of the cedar tree. The searchers couldn’t stand it even though a mountain separated them from the explosions.The distance between Otorten and Dyatlov Pass is 13 km. The blasting was somewhere in between. The Sinyukaev division was dropped on the pass at the end of February.

In 1959 Georgiy Vasilyevich Novokreshtyonov was a judge in Ivdel. He remembers Tempalov, the Prosecutor of Dyatlov case, talking about craters in the ground in the area of the incident.

Many aircraft were flying in the skies above. In 1958 instead of retracing a map, a pilot offered Igor Dyatlov to fly him over the area to look around (https://dyatlovpass.com/gallery-1958-Subpolar-Ural (https://dyatlovpass.com/gallery-1958-Subpolar-Ural)). In a rescue operation of another accident the military helicopters were flying along a planned route and they were used to exchange information with short wave radio stations (https://dyatlovpass.com/chivruay-incident-2#13 (https://dyatlovpass.com/chivruay-incident-2#13)).

These maps show the magnetic anomaly lines along which the helicopters were flying in 1959 right on top of the pass:
https://dyatlovpass.com/aeromagnetic-survey-maps (https://dyatlovpass.com/aeromagnetic-survey-maps)

There is a lot more information where this came from.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Teddy on May 04, 2021, 09:00:58 AM
This topic was split in two. You can follow Nigel here → Nigel's thoughts on the book (https://forum.dyatlovpass.com/index.php?topic=920.0)
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: WAB on May 04, 2021, 01:19:21 PM
There were 55kg of products found in the storage. Maslennikov said that the distribution of food was 1200g / person / day = 10.8kg / day / group (after Yudin left) i.e. in the food in the labaz would last for the remaining 9 members of the group for 5 days.
 
Calculations in the following table show that Dyatlov group lacked about 40 kg of food which according to same calculations would last 3-4 days. The main question is that the items found in the labaz don't add up.

(https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/Missing-products.png)

Generally speaking, "judging by the run-up," I expected a more professional approach to the analysis of such components of the Dyatlov hike. As they say in scientific circles, this product analysis is reminiscent of the "Spherical Horse in a Vacuum. There is such a concept. The easiest way to illustrate it is with a picture:

(https://b.radikal.ru/b26/2105/45/a51b44ba5bf9.jpg) (http://radikal.ru))

This means that this is either amateurish reasoning, or there are such inaccuracies there that reduce the meaning of what is said by at least half. If you go to the table and its content, such errors in assumptions and comparisons are obvious:

1.   They had loin or ham, or, more likely, the usual country pork bacon (in Western countries it is called "bacon," only there the amount of animal fat is much less) for daytime snacks and for such occasions of a woodless overnight stay. They would not plan for it in advance, but if it happened, they did it to the best of their ability. They had slices of sliced loin (I'll use that term for anything that might have been there in fact) found in their tent, both used (the skins from them were mentioned) and sliced and not yet had time to be used.
The normal rate for these uses is about 50 grams (0.11 lb). I'm writing approximately, because that's the norm for calculation, but it's impossible to cut it so precisely, it turns out that someone will get a little less, someone will get a little more, but they don't make a problem out of this. It is unlikely it will be used daily, it is usually used in one or two days. So you can agree with the calculation of 30 grams per day for 1 person.

2.   120 grams (0.265 lb) of stew per day for 1 person is a lot by the standards and practices of the time. And now, too, although the stew nowadays in travel at this level try not to take - it is replaced by freeze-dried meat, which is at least 4 times lighter. They took a maximum of 2 cans of 330 grams (0.728 lb) at one time, or 1 can of 560 grams (1.235 lb). Most likely that's what they took because it has the best gross/net ratio. I'm talking about the weight of the iron can itself. Total, it turns out 66 (0.146 lb) or 56 grams (0.123 lb) for 1 person 1 time.

3.   Cheese in winter travels try not to take at all, because it freezes in the cold and its use does not give a gain in calories, because you need to melt the frozen water if you want to eat it. By the way, I do not remember that the search participants mentioned cheese when they wrote about food.

4.   Oil (butter) on a winter trip is a major metabolic energy source. It is considered that 50 grams (0.11 lb) of butter per day per person is not enough. At low temperatures, the rate is brought up to 70 ... 80 grams (0.154 ... 0.176 lb) per day. So here it is necessary to increase it even more. For the remaining 10 days of the trip, they left 4 kg (8.818 lb). of oil in storage, which is about 44 grams (0.097 lb). per person per time. Additionally, they took some more on the Otorten. I think that they took it with some reserve, because all unused products will be used as additional (or specially arranged)on the route. Even taking these calculations into account, the conclusion is that they had not yet come to the conclusion that they needed to increase the oil ration. That was still ahead of them, but in 1964, when I went to the Circumpolar Urals, it was already in practice. True, it was not in the Sverdlovsk groups, but in Moscow.

5.   25 grams of salt (0.05512 lb). -This is a very excessive amount. The normal rate is 10 (0.02205 lb). to 17 grams (0.03748 lb).
6.    As far as I understand, by the term "porridge" here you mean cereals for cooking them? The norms for them are different, but at the time they tried to stick to these norms:
- buckwheat groats = 70 grams (0.154 lb.). per person per single cooking.
- Rice = 60 grams (0.11 lb). per person per single cooking.
- oats = 45 grams (0.11 lb). per person per meal.
-oatmeal = 40 grams (0.11 lb). per person per meal.
- This may also include pasta = 70...100 grams (0.154...0.22 lb) per person per single cook.
I found my 1962 instructor school outline that gave such norms. In all the time since then in my practice of difficult travel, the norms have hardly changed and have given a positive estimate in view of the difficulty of the trip. It should be clear that this is not a picnic where you can eat until you burst, but anything more than the minimum necessary norm must be carried on your back, which only increases the strain and energy expenditure, hence requiring more nutrition. On such journeys often lose their original weight when they "eat up" the accumulated reserve of energy. Gone are the fat tissues, for example.
Then if you count the average per day, and then multiply by all the days of the trip, it turns out: 70 + 60 +45 + 40 + 90 = 305 : 5 = 61 grams (0.134 lb). per day for 1 person. The table shows 200 grams (0.44 lb), so I do not understand, where did it come from?

7.    Dyatlov's group took soups and kissels in briquettes, which were then very widely used, weighing 200 and 220 grams. (0.44 & 0.485 lb).  For their group they had to use 2 or 3 briquettes (a briquette was calculated in the city for 4 people, although it was often used for 3 people in the conditions of such a trip), even at the rate of 10 people. That is, 1 person at a time is 66 grams (0.146 lb). In the table the rate is a little overstated, but it's not essential, although if you calculate it the way it was in practice, it may turn out (I'm sure it will) that there was not a shortage of products, but a "surplus". Of course they would have eaten it all anyway, but if you do the theory, you have to do it competently and accurately.
The compotes they took with them were a set of dried fruit, which in winter is not very convenient to prepare. It is a long process that follows the fact that you have to melt the snow into water, which you also need a lot of, which turns out to be very long in total and makes it impossible to do it often. Plus it requires a relatively large amount of sugar. I have no knowledge that they took this on this trip (I saw no record or recollection that there was dried fruit). The very vague record in the log of food availability in the stall suggests that there is no accurate record of a particular compote. It is quite possible that they used dried fruit from this compote as a daily supplemental feed. But there is no information on the weight fraction of that dried fruit in that section, so I wouldn't take that ingredient as even with the soursop (there were soup-like briquettes) since the usability is very different and the weight ratios are also very different. So the proportion of compote has to be measured by the rate of sourdough. They could only make it on the route two or three times during the entire trip. Otherwise it would have been a large and unnecessary expenditure of labor that provided no gain in application. Rather, it is an echo of summer travel that is difficult to apply to winter travel.
 
9.   Cocoa, coffee and tea. We tried not to take coffee on such trips, either. No one forbade it, but compared to a good tea, it did not give any advantages, and the difficulty of preparation was obvious. They could take (and I think they did) a little coffee, but only, as they say, for the soul. At the same time 20 grams of tea per person for 1 time is a bit much, because they used 1 pack of 75 grams at a time. But the tea was usually made in the morning and in the evening. In total it was 15 grams for 10 people. There were packets of tea made in China on sale
 
(https://b.radikal.ru/b34/2105/a7/8d3a813be187.jpg) (https://radikal.ru)

And a very common hour of Georgian.
 
(https://c.radikal.ru/c11/2105/61/3357355da266.jpg) (https://radikal.ru)

The other varieties, could only be bought in specialized stores, and only in Moscow. No one has told me yet that there was such a store in Sverdlovsk at the time.
Chinese tea had to be brewed very carefully, otherwise it was very light in color and was not liked. Georgian tea was weaker in quality, but not in color, but there was always a lot of it, unlike the Chinese tea, so I think they only had it that way.
20 grams (0.044 lb) of cocoa per person for 1 time is also a lot. Back then they used (I remember it very well) packs of 100 grams (0.22 lb) of Zolotoy Yarlyk cocoa from the Moscow factory Krasny Oktyabr.
 
(https://c.radikal.ru/c17/2105/76/91dc27289471.jpg) (https://radikal.ru)

Only one packet was brewed at a time. That was enough for 10 360cc mugs. If they needed extra cocoa, such as for a warming pad or flask that they carried on them and then used on their day break, they used a second packet. It is quite possible that they could also buy a big tin can of cocoa from the factory named by Anastas Mikoyan (he had been the Minister of Trade a bit earlier and was good at introducing new and needed products into the USSR trade at that time). They were 250 gram (0.551 lb) cans. 
 
(https://a.radikal.ru/a36/2105/b0/7c5558eb944b.jpg) (https://radikal.ru)

. But they only used ½ of a can at 1 time to make them. Then you get a one-time rate of 12.5 grams(0.02756 lb). But cocoa was not made every day.  I think they had to make it 3...4 times during the whole trip. On the night before February 01 they cooked cocoa, it is written about it in the report Tempalov, in the form of a reference to the fact that they found a flask with the remains of cocoa.

10.   The norm for milk powder (or cream) has always been 20 grams (0.04409 lb) per 1 person at 1 time. I can't even imagine when they would use it twice a lazy? Unless in the evening (or in the morning if they had an "inverted" peeing system) they could dilute it in addition to the buckwheat porridge. But that wasn't every day either, and even if you imagine they could use it no more than once every 3 days, you still don't get the norm of 20 grams (0.04409 lb) per person at 1 time. To dilute powdered milk in good condition in the cold takes a lot of effort and "intelligence". Especially by the end of the trip do not do it. And so there is fatigue of all kinds, so save labor costs.
11. I have noodles included in the "pasta", but 30 grams (0.06614 lb) of noodles for 1 person at 1 time is not enough. Even for a very liquid soup, you need at least 50 grams (0.11 lb). But to "fill up" the total weight, let it stay, there will still be excess food in this calculation.  grin1

12.   300 grams of breadcrumbs is the limit on use, although they will be eaten anyway. It will always and everywhere there are such journeys. However, dried breadcrumbs have the property that they have a large volume at a small weight (which can be difficult to fit intelligently in a backpack) and they crumble, which reduces the efficiency of their use. There is a certain amount of compromise needed. Norm of dried breadcrumbs can be left as a calculation on the maximum.
13.   Sugar. This is the most difficult question. Sugar can not be counted as a norm per day to make products only for tea, coffee cocoa, kissel and compote. Sugar is very often used as a supplement on crossings. Back then there was still very little use of dried fruit and often issued sugar not a snack during the day. Pictured are. 
((https://a.radikal.ru/a31/2105/f1/d20e04132c5d.jpg) (http://radikal.ru)
Zina hands out sugar in the parking lot for "refreshment" during the transition. So if you take the norm of 4 pieces of pressed sugar at 1 time (that's 48 grams), and such times we get 3 a day (breakfast - tea or cocoa; snack instead of lunch), the total is 146 grams. In addition, sugar was usually used as an additive to milk porridge. But there they used 20 grams (0.04409 lb) per person at a time. However, one must take into account and subtract the fact that the use of halva and condensed milk (point below) allowed for no sugar in these cases. This was approximately (from practice) 25 ... 30% of all cases. Total, we can assume that 146 grams (0.322 lb) (main application) + 15 grams (0.03307 lb) (additional application with 25% deduction) were required per day. For sugar, there had to be a reserve in case the need for additional nutrition increased in difficult areas, losses for loss (e.g. soggy and melted sugar). Therefore it is possible to allow 200 grams (0.441 lb) for each day for 1 person, but this would also be a calculation on the absolute maximum.

14.    Condensed milk and halva. I did not see where they had records about halva, but let's say that they ate it on the first days (1 or 2 times) and took it with them to Otorten - 1 time.  Then they should have used 1 pack (270 grams -0.595 lb) for 4 or they were more comfortable using halva for 3 people 1 pack. Because they had 9 people. That makes 9 packs of 270 grams = 2,430 grams. Then you have to take away the sugar of 81 people X 48 grams = ~ 3800 grams.  They should have had condensed milk in 380 gram cans. This is a standard can according to the state standard. However, as all other products were given on the same basis.  The condensed milk was also used as a whole can at 1 time. Otherwise, it was difficult and inconvenient to pack and carry an open can. In addition, some of that product was lost there, so it wasn't done that way, but used to the exact unit of packaging. An additional advantage was that it was easier to count products and assign quantities to be used that way.
There were still cans of condensed milk of 3.05 kg (6.724 lb) on sale (in those days), but they were inconvenient to carry and use. Therefore, although there was a big loss in weight due to the iron cans, but it was much more convenient and reliable to use. Such cans were used by the participants of the search, but they were based on a stationary camp. We found remnants of such cans in the 2009 expedition, at the site of the 1959 Auspia search camp. On this basis (as well as finding the remains of batteries for the radio station) the exact location of this camp was established.
15.    I will not change the column "other", because it is not clear what is meant by this. If it is pepper, bay leaf and other spices, as well as vitamins (although no one remembered about them either) and other things, then we can leave it like that.  And if it were to be ingredients such as garlic, candy, the tangerine mentioned in the "unknown diary" and other things, then 20 grams (0.04409 lb) per 1 person per day would still be a lot. For 20 days and 10 people that works out to 4 kG (8.818 lb), which is critical for unaccounted for or extra foods. If it is personal weight, then 400 grams (0.8818 lb) per person will not work. Someone will have to carry a whole kilogram or more.

Of course, there was some confusion about food in this group. As they themselves wrote, they took 3 kg of salt (6.614 lb), which makes 15 grams (0.146 lb) per person per day for the entire trip of 20 days and for 10 people. This is at the upper level of consumption, which in general rarely occurs, especially on ski trips. Usually 10...12 grams(0.022...0.02646 lb) is quite sufficient. Although half of this amount they left the labase (stock). Nevertheless, this is an excessive amount. But this is a consequence of too much haste and confusion, which is typical for students when they take exams and at the same time prepare something for the trip. It's hard to do everything optimally. In addition, the young age and inexperience in some domestic matters makes such mistakes.
If you calculate everything, you get the following picture: the total daily norm for 1 person in reality is: 831 grams (1.832 lb) per day for 1 person. For convenience, this can be rounded upwards, that is, to 900 grams (1.984 lb) per day per person. Then for the 20 days counted in the table (I don't understand where this figure comes from, if even by maximum calculations they had to plan for 16 days?) would be (166.2 kg or 366.408 lb) or 180 kg (396.832 lb) if you round up the daily rate. Since they were already on a journey for 6 days (after Vijaya, they ate only from their own food), so we must subtract 9kG or 19.842 lb (10 people) for 3 days = 27 kg (69.525 lb), and 8.1 kg or 17.857 lb (9 people) X 3 days = 24, 3 kg (53.572 lb), the total is 51.3 kg (113.097 lb). They left 61, 6 kg (69.525 lb) of food in the warehouse. It turns out that 112.9 kg (248.902 lb), out of 166.2 (366.408 lb), or 180 kg (396.832 lb), the balance is 53.3 kg (118.829 lb), This is what they had to take for the 3 days trip to Otten and back. Then it turns out that it is 5, 92 kG (13.051 lb) per participant or 2.97 kG (6.548 lb) of food per day per person, which is an excess of almost 2.5 times the practical norm calculated from practice at most.

So not only did they not have a shortage of food, but they had a surplus for 1.5 days.  grin1
If you do not use jokes, it turns out that they ate even more modestly than I thought and did not find in this position any crime or lack. Although, to be honest, on such trips you always want to eat, and a lot.  grin1
It is necessary to know how to subordinate their desires to the circumstances in such events.
The standards and methods of calculation I took from my own practice of more than 100 different trips (more than 60 were winter trips - on skis) and some specifications I got from those who were on the peaks Dyatlov in 1959. Most of all Peter Bartolomei, professor at UPI University, and Vladislav Karelin, doctor of special metallurgy, helped me the most. They both (like me) have a master's degree in such journeys.
It should be noted that there were experiments in nutrition on such trips, when the ration was calculated at 400 grams (0.882 lb) per day for 1 person. In December 1979 and January 1980 we went to the Polar Urals (this is north of Vorkuta) "in polar night", there our female part (3 people) and three men tried to use such a ration of 400 grams (0.882 lb). However we (3 other men) have refused such experiments and have made our own ration of 750 grams (1.653 lb), which we carried as our own cargo, against the public cargo, which was calculated very strictly for the whole event. On the route we were 13 days and walked more than 200 km. We started the route from the settlement of Halmer-Yu (it doesn't exist now), and finished in the settlement of Amderma on the shore of the Kara Sea. There were interesting psychological moments after the end of this trip, connected with restoration of a diet regime after this trip.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: RidgeWatcher on May 04, 2021, 05:13:31 PM
Thank you, Professor WAB and Teddy,

This really explained the nutrition and wise caloric intake during that time. I can't imagine going anywhere without cheese! But after you explained the wasted effort in the sub-arctic I can see the wasted energy. The Dyatlov Skiers were true athletes to be commended.

I always thought there was something strange about that platform cache down by the Auspiya, it never made sense to me but in the book it made a lot more sense to me that the strange was up on Kholat Syakul where there would be a lot less wildlife foraging through the drift snow and ice.

Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Teddy on May 07, 2021, 01:45:38 AM
Greatly appreciated the information. WAB is in his apogee!
Title: More Thoughts on the book
Post by: Jacques-Emile on May 10, 2021, 07:47:02 AM
I find the book a true luxury for anyone interested in the matter of the Dyatlov Pass.  I suggest that nobody REALLY can understand the topic without the forum AND the book.  You must purchase it!

There is a quote attributed to Nietzsche that I cannot find in his writings - "A bad reader is like an invading horde - they grasp a little, scatter the rest, and ride off after making a mess of things."  Does anyone know the source?  Yes, yes, I know what Google is, thank you, and I cannot find this citation online easily.
I am not yet sure if my prejudices concur with the reasoned and tireless authority of these two authors.  That is because my prejudices are still held from the lack of information.  I wish to be open not stubborn.

That being said, I have a little I would ask the authors to add in the second edition (for I am sure there will be a second edition.)
I offer gratitude to the authors for their hard-fought work.  Their trek earns them a Level Three, that's for sure.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Jacques-Emile on May 10, 2021, 07:58:07 AM
More thought - only a group led by a Дятлов could die in the presence of a дятел.
And another - see the question of the tree and making a noise.  Very profound at the heights of the Urals.
Title: Re: More Thoughts on the book
Post by: Teddy on May 10, 2021, 08:00:44 AM
You made my day.

This is Vizhay: https://dyatlovpass.com/vizhay (https://dyatlovpass.com/vizhay)

Ivdel: https://dyatlovpass.com/gallery-ivdel (https://dyatlovpass.com/gallery-ivdel)

More to come...
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Jacques-Emile on May 10, 2021, 09:27:32 AM
I seem to be chatty today.
Source of thoughts for me:
https://www.fs.fed.us/pnw/pubs/229chpt2.pdf
Title: Re: More Thoughts on the book
Post by: Teddy on May 10, 2021, 03:56:57 PM
Thank you for the quote.

There is a quote attributed to Nietzsche that I cannot find in his writings - "A bad reader is like an invading horde - they grasp a little, scatter the rest, and ride off after making a mess of things."  Does anyone know the source?

"The worst readers are those who behave like plundering troops: they take away a few things they can use, dirty and confound the remainder, and revile the whole."
― Friedrich Nietzsche
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Teddy on May 14, 2021, 04:23:13 AM
This was posted on Nigel's board but I am going to respond here.

For instance,  the bowl in the snow near the barren tent-site was twice described, but not analyzed, as I recall after one hasty reading.  It was perhaps 7-8 meters wide, and from what I recall, a meter deep.  This is the profile that one would expect to see if a helicopter is hovering above snow, even perhaps ten to twenty meters above snow.  So why don't you set down a helicopter in the snow?  It is incredibly dangerous, even to be twenty meters above the ground if there are the risk of down-drafts.  And when you set your trusty helicopter down in snow, does it have a special "keel" for landing in snow?  Otherwise, it sinks to the level of the firm rock.  If that is three meters, the whole body of the helicopter is sunk in the snow to the level of the doors, which is bad.  And the main blades and the tail blades get uncomfortably close to the snow.  If they touch the snow, they suddenly decelerate, and are flung off, destabilizing the rotor entirely, such that it will explode into shrapnel.  Very messy.  If you survive, you have to explain this to your chief.  Also very messy. 

There are very deep roots in any fact cited in the book that can and should be traced back to its origin.
------------------------------------------------
Maria. Михаил Шаравин отвечает на вопросы участников группы "Перевал Дятлова". (samlib.ru) (http://samlib.ru/p/piskarewa_m_l/sharavinkontakt.shtml)
Question: In one of your interviews you said that not far from the Dyatlov group's tent, a small area of ​​blown snow in the form of a circle was clearly visible. Do you think it could have been from a helicopter landing there? At the time you saw many times helicopters landing and taking off. Can you compare with the tracks they left?
Or was the snow melted and icy, but again, in the form of a circle?

Sharavin: The circle of blown snow was larger than that of a helicopter propeller.
This was reported in the search radiograms. Later, this notebook with a record of all messages from the search was confiscated by the "competent" authorities, the room was closed and the watch was stopped. This is evidenced by one of the then on duty Galya ... who made a repentance, that is, a statement 50 years later.
------------------------------------------------

It is up to you what do you make out of this information. Our (the authors of "1079") comment is the following:

We are extremely skeptical about this information:
- this swept-out circle is not visible in any search photograph of 1959, although many of them show the slope in the area of ​​the tent;
- not mentioned in the case files;
- it is not clear whether Sharavin himself saw it, or repeats from the words of Batalova, who could have misinterpreted something said in the radiograms. The radiogram itself has not survived if ever existed.
 
This information is often used by supporters of conspiracy theories that someone flew to the slope in helicopters, collected fragments of missiles, laid out bodies, etc.
To our knowledge the slope is too steep to land especially since there is an even and very convenient terrain nearby, used by the helicopters to land in 1959 (well documented). Why risk to land a helicopter on the slope?
 
We are using this information in a different context. If the conspirators wanted to recreate a snowed-in tent they could have removed snow to pile up on top of the tent.
It could be traces from some activity around the tent. We do not have information about how wide, or deep, or shaped this track was. It is all made up.

This is a perfect example how to build a theory on a sinking sand. The fact is not important for our theory at all, but we have tried to mention in the book all "popular" facts so people could question and trace them before starting using them as supportive facts for a scenario.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Jacques-Emile on May 14, 2021, 08:10:40 AM
We humans have an irresistible temptation to ask "why" that often leads to peril.
I am tempted to bicker with the fellow who is the source.
Helicopters almost always carry main rotors approximating the length of the craft. See https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/13278/what-is-the-relation-between-a-helicopters-length-and-rotor-diameter (https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/13278/what-is-the-relation-between-a-helicopters-length-and-rotor-diameter) but studious pursuit of the irrelevant leads to more solidly proven irrelevance. So I concede that any dip in the snow adds nothing to the story.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Teddy on May 14, 2021, 09:13:13 AM
I am tempted to bicker with the fellow who is the source.


(https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/Dyatlov-Pass-RIP-Mikhail-Sharavin.jpg) (https://dyatlovpass.com/whois#sharavin)
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Jacques-Emile on May 15, 2021, 06:38:12 AM
I am sorry.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Mars on May 17, 2021, 11:11:47 AM
First of all, I have to congratulate you on an extensive book that I have read very carefully. Before that, I knew very little about the events. Then I also got acquainted with your website that you run. I'm very impressed with all details which this website offer to readers.
I was very impressed by the book and I must say that it convinced me with its chronology of events and explanation of the concluding theory of tragic events.
Because the book convinced me of the sequence of events, I have no theory of my own given my poor knowledge of the facts. I am only interested in how it is that only 62 years have passed since the accident and that no witness has appeared anywhere to confirm this theory.
And when reading the members on the forum, by far the most scientific reference is Professor WAB. Accurately, scientifically answer all these or other theories. And he is also a historical connoisseur of these places and those times. It surprises me that I didn’t come across it to support the theory from the book. And on the other hand, I also didn’t come across any critical comments. As a great connoisseur of the Dyatlov accident and a connoisseur of historical events at the time, he can certainly confirm or deny some of the statements. Given that he is a highly respected connoisseur, his opinion would be very welcome.
Unless he refuses to do so because the book’s author is also the founder of Dyatlovpass.com
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Teddy on May 17, 2021, 02:17:29 PM
First of all, I have to congratulate you on an extensive book that I have read very carefully. Before that, I knew very little about the events. Then I also got acquainted with your website that you run. I'm very impressed with all details which this website offer to readers.

Thank you for reading the book. Please leave a review on Amazon if you can spare the time.

Unless he refuses to do so because the book’s author is also the founder of Dyatlovpass.com

Please do not go into politics straight from your very first post. WAB has very directly expressed his opinion about the theory and the authors at the end of this post.
https://forum.dyatlovpass.com/index.php?topic=924.msg16009#msg16009 (https://forum.dyatlovpass.com/index.php?topic=924.msg16009#msg16009)

In short according to WAB (who hasn't read our book) the mere fact that we believe the tent was moved makes us Kuntsevich and Rakitin entourage and the theory "fiction" and "nonsense". I repeat - WAB has not read "1079" which is available in both Russian and English. I am happy to give it to him if he wants me to. But I think he doesn't have the time since he is working on his own theory which I am curious about. So far what I know about his theory is infrasound made them leave the tent and then.... I am not sure what happened after that. They seem to die from... confusion. Donnie Eichar book is 50% Borzenkov and the rest is about his trip to Yekaterinburg in 2012. It would be like me filling up the book with Expedition Unknown. Igor solved the case without setting foot on Dyatlov Pass. I prefer WAB to explain his theory and not criticize a book he hasn't read. Maybe WAB has gained some new perspective on the case since 2012.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: RidgeWatcher on May 17, 2021, 08:19:29 PM
Teddy,

You said that you were collecting autopsy photos of tree fall victims. I want to ask you with respect to the victims and the Dyatlov tourists, how similar are the injuries?

I remember when "An unknown compelling force" had me mesmerized. I remember thinking what out there in the forest could have done that to the group.
It's as if we couldn't visualize the tree through the forest.

It was Victor Hugo who said "We are all born straddling the grave, we are just given an indefinite reprieve". No truer words were spoken in the Urals on that day

I found this recently from my neck of the woods:

https://youtu.be/TqkmoQYJ6tE (https://youtu.be/TqkmoQYJ6tE)

Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Teddy on May 17, 2021, 10:48:59 PM
First of all - thank you for the adequate question. We spent time researching this theory, please give me a chance to tell you more about our efforts.

You said that you were collecting autopsy photos of tree fall victims. I want to ask you with respect to the victims and the Dyatlov tourists, how similar are the injuries?

It is all done out of respect to the hikers. Once because I fill them kindred souls being born under the regime, Bulgaria was the baby brother of the Soviet Union, and then brought up in Cuba since age 5. I don't have to tell you about Fidel Castro. Twice - I am a mountaineer, in certain climates we hang hammocks under the trees. I need to know more about trees. In fact I believe this is going to be the continuation of the cause - rising awareness about incidents involving trees.

The quote is very true although a hybrid between:
Les hommes sont tous condamnés à mort avec des sursis indéfinis.
We are all under sentence of death, but with a sort of indefinite reprieve.
— Victor Hugo

They give birth astride of a grave, the light gleams an instant, then it’s night once more.
 — Samuel Beckett, "Waiting for Godot"

I like them both, and Samuel Beckett is already on the front of the forum.

About the respect. How come people like the idea of vicious attack against the group or them acting like no-brain zombies and causing their own demise with absurd behavior and risks?
Any other theory I have come across has one of the other. Our is the only one that doesn't blame the group of nothing. Someone else did something that created the mystery, not them. They were just in the wrong place at the wrong time, which is the exact definition of a fallen tree accident.

Back to your question about the injuries. They are in chapter 25:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In 2015 in the Kirov region, a cut down tree fell and struck a man nearby.
"The death of the victim occurred as a result of an open traumatic brain injury including: a bruised head wound on the left, fractures of the frontal bone on the left with spread to the bones of the base of the skull, which form the anterior cranial fossa, hemorrhages: in the soft tissues of the head, above the dura mater, under the soft cerebral membranes, bruising and destruction of the brain tissue of a severe degree, complicated by edema and wedging of the brain substance."

A similar case took place in 2013 in the Kurgan region.
"A tree trunk broke off and fell on a victim who was nearby, causing bodily harm including: a closed craniocerebral injury, bruising of the eyelids in both eyes (a spectacle haematoma), extensive hemorrhage in the soft tissues of the head, depressed fragmentary fracture of the vault and base of the skull with the formation of subdural (250 ml) and total subarachnoid hemorrhages, partial crushing of the brain substance of the left parietal and occipital lobes, multiple small-focal and focal hemorrhages in the brain substance and trunk, extensive bleeding in the soft tissues of the head; closed chest injury: extensive bruising of a pale bluish color of the anterior surface of the chest, with a transition to the anterior surface of the right shoulder joint, straight oblique-transverse fractures of 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ribs on the left along the scapular line, with damage to the parietal pleura and tissue of the left lung with extensive hemorrhages in the surrounding soft tissues; direct oblique fractures of the 6th, 7th rib of the paravertebral line without damage to the parietal pleura with extensive hemorrhages into the surrounding soft tissue; scomminuted fractures of 3, 4, 5, 6 thoracic vertebrae with extensive hemorrhages in the surrounding soft tissues; extensive bruising of the upper third of the left shoulder, direct comminuted fracture of the right humerus with the formation of extensive hemorrhage into the surrounding soft tissues; extensive bruising of the lower third of both thighs. Direct, oblique fractures of the lower third of the diaphysis of both femurs with the formation of extensive hemorrhages in the surrounding soft tissues ... which resulted in death."

In 2015, in the Republic of Mari El, a cut down tree fell on the head of a victim who was close by and caused the following injuries:
"...hemorrhage in the scalp, multi-splintered depressed fracture of the bones of the cranial vault, comminuted fracture of the basal skull, rupture of the dura mater of the left hemisphere of the brain with hemorrhages along the edges of the rupture, crushing of the substance of the outer surface of the temporal lobe of the left hemisphere of the brain, hemorrhages in the substance of the medulla oblongata and the left hemisphere of the cerebellum, complete rupture of the brain stem at the level of the Varolian bridge with crush and hemorrhage in the area of rupture, fractures of the lower jaw with hemorrhages at the edges of the fractures... From these injuries… the victim died on the scene of the accident..."

In 2013 another man was also found under a fallen tree in the Udmurt Republic.
"According to the medical report stating the nature of the injuries received, the diagnosis was made: open craniocerebral injury, brain contusion, open depressed fracture of the right parietal bone… According to the forensic medical examination report, the death was caused by a basilar skull fracture"

In all these cases, trees fell on standing people. First, the head and the upper part of the body were struck. The traumatizing continued while the victim was falling, which resulted in polytrauma. Some of these traumas are similar to those found on the bodies of some members of the Dyatlov group, such as rib fractures, craniocerebral injuries, bruises. But the injuries of the dead hikers were localized.
In 2018, after Zolotaryov’s exhumation, a forensic medical examination report was drawn up.
"The examination of the bones revealed fractures of the right 2nd - 6th ribs along the parasternal and posterior axillary lines. The nature of the fractures along the parasternal line is extensor, along the posterior axillary line it is flexion. On the peri-sternal line, extensor fractures of the 2nd - 5th ribs are complete, there are no fragments; the extensor fracture of the 6th rib is incomplete. There are three linear fractures of the right scapula: in the supraspinatus fossa it is horizontal, in the infraspinatus fossa it is vertical, and it is horizontal above the lower angle. All the fractures are extension ones. The detected fractures of the 2nd - 6th right ribs and fractures of the right scapula were formed simultaneously as a result of excessive compression of the right half of the chest in the direction from the sternum to the spine and somewhat from right to left. The area of traumatic impact is the front and, partially, the lateral surface of the right half of the chest. It is most likely that S.A. Zolotaryov was lying on his back at the time of the traumatic impact..."

In 2020, a big tree fell on a tent in Bulgaria. People were lying inside, and a woman died.
"On the skin of the left cheek, in its upper part, a superficial, irregularly shaped round abrasion with a diameter of about 1.5-2 cm is visible. On the skin behind the left auricle, two more small superficial abrasions of a rounded shape with a diameter of about 2 3 mm and a linear abrasion of about 1 cm long are visible. Along the anterior surface of the right auricle in the middle upper part, there is a spotted bluish bruise about 2.5 to 3 cm in diameter. Two superficial linear abrasions about 3x0.5 cm in size are visible on the skin of the upper front of the neck. A similar abrasion about 4x0.3 0.8 cm is also present on the skin of the lower jaw. In the upper part of the neck, on the right side, there is a bruise about 1 cm in diameter. On the skin of the chest, in the upper right part, above and below the collarbone, several oval-shaped bruises about 8x5 cm are visible. Two superficial reddish abrasions with a diameter of about 0.5 cm and a size of about 1x0.5 cm are visible on the skin of the abdomen in its upper half on the left in front. Along the anterior surface of the right lower leg in the upper two-thirds to the lower part of the knee, there is a large longitudinal wound of a linear shape about 35 cm long. On the skin in the rest of the upper and lower limbs, mainly on the front and outer parts, there are several linear abrasions ranging in size from 1x05 cm to 15x cm in different directions and several bruises with a diameter of 1 3 cm... No injuries of the sternum, both collarbones, and all ribs… The pelvic bones are broken, there are vertical fractures in the front and back to the right in the sacrum… The rest of the pelvic and spine bones are not injured..."

All the injuries are localized. The man who was lying in the tent next to the deceased woman survived and his only injury was a fractured collarbone. The head of the forensic medicine department where the body was taken noted that there was gray foam coming out of her mouth. The cause of death was mechanical asphyxia. This is very similar to Doroshenko. The woman lived under the rubble for 15 20 minutes. This sounds familiar too. Dubinina could have lived for 10-20 minutes, Zolotaryov even longer (* (https://dyatlovpass.com/case-files-381-383#sheet382)).
The experts assumed that, at the time of the traumatic impact, Zolotaryov was lying on his back. Dubinina received similar fractures. The rest of the hikers were most likely also lying at the time of the injury. The incident in Bulgaria shows that a tree falling onto lying people causes local injuries of varying severity, from bruises to severe fractures. Similar injuries were observed in 1959.
When given the autopsy reports and asked to comment on the possible causes of injuries of Zolotaryov, Dubinina, and Thibeaux-Brignolle, Plamen Dimitrov Doctor of Medical Sciences, Head of the Department of Forensic Medicine at the Kaneff University Hospital (Ruse, Bulgaria), said: "If you are asking me whether these injuries could have been caused by a tree falling on the three of them while they were lying down, I cannot exclude such a version, it is consistent - it sounds plausible!"

In which case, in winter conditions, can a blow take nine lying hikers unawares? Only if they are sleeping in the tent.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Teddy on May 17, 2021, 11:19:25 PM
Douglas Preston: "I have a friend who a few months ago was struck by a falling tree, which broke most of his ribs in very much the same way as some of the Dyatlov victims, and he is now paralyzed. Your theory makes eminent sense to me."

(https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/thumbs/tree-3.jpg) (https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/gallery/tree-3.jpg) (https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/thumbs/tree-1.jpg) (https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/gallery/tree-1.jpg) (https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/thumbs/tree-2.jpg) (https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/gallery/tree-2.jpg) (https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/thumbs/tree-4.jpg) (https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/gallery/tree-4.jpg) (https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/thumbs/DSC_5571.jpg) (https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/gallery/DSC_5571.jpg) (https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/thumbs/DSC_5572.jpg) (https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/gallery/DSC_5572.jpg) (https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/thumbs/IMG_20200731_102404.jpg) (https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/gallery/IMG_20200731_102404.jpg) (https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/thumbs/IMG_20200731_102234.jpg) (https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/gallery/IMG_20200731_102234.jpg) (https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/thumbs/DSC_5574.jpg) (https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/gallery/DSC_5574.jpg)

I started showing up at incidents sites with fallen trees on top of tents and befriending the medical examiners – they invited me to attend the autopsies. In one of the incidents a woman dies without a single broken bone from mechanical asphyxiation. Somehow the tree propped itself but didn’t leave her enough space to breathe. There was gray foam coming out of her mouth. This is what Doroshenko had too. The conspiracy theorists say that may be because the CIA used to sit on the chest of a person during interrogations. Another wild interpretation is that Zina’s hair was messy because, the conspiracy says, whoever was after them roughed her up. This would be torture for a beauty like Zina, messing with her hair, as frightening as tearing the tongue out of Lyuda’s mouth. Things are not balanced in this case. The medical examiner of the incident from the photo told me that when tree falls is like the Rapture – one is gone, the one lying next continues living. This is one disaster that can affect people clustered together very differently.

During the autopsy I mentioned that I have 6 broken ribs and flail chest, like Dubinina, to instigate a comment on how they can tell old from new injuries. The medical examiner looked at me with dreamy eyes and said: “Your autopsy would be very interesting.” I got myself into an automobile accident hours later and the nearest morgue was the one I just had left. On the photo I am with the white Peugeot. The father of the woman driving the red car had died days before. She flew from Paris for his funeral. This is what he left her, the red car. It has been sitting in the garage for 10 years. She never thought of checking the tires, they were smooth as glass, it was raining; on braking she lost control and started spinning. I had all the time in the world thinking how interesting my autopsy will be.

At the autopsy where I was present I was explained, for example, why the autopsy in 1959 missed the two fractures on Zolotaryov's scapula. They were only registered at his exhumation. To see the scapula you need a back incision. Nowadays in unnatural deaths where broken bones are expected the body undergoes computed tomography scanning before the autopsy and the image diagnostics tools help with the autopsy.

One interesting detail about the man with the blurred face killed by the tree is that he was stealing wood and there was definitely someone with him who fled the scene. The body was definitely moved. Something similar happened in the Dyatlov case.

I have the opinions of two medical examiners, both heads of major city hospitals with regional morgues. They both say that the injuries of the Dyatlov group could have been caused by a fallen tree. This proves nothing since they were not found under a fallen tree, but even if they had been, this would have just added to the autopsy report that the injuries do not contradict the scene of the incident. This would still not be definitive. Medical examiners are very careful about what they say. The terminology usually is "it doesn’t contradict" or "cannot be excluded".
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Teddy on May 17, 2021, 11:32:02 PM
There is one line of inquiries that we didn't have time to pursue. According to our theory, following Ivdel medical personnel recollections (chapter 21), there were 6 bodies brought to the morgue at the beginning of February 1959. According to the procedures in place at the time the bodies were externally examined by Dr. Prudkov, cleaned up and prepared for burial pending identification. These bodies are not accounted for. No one knows who they were, they match the description of Dyatlov group members and there are no other accidents with hikers in the area at that time. Where did these bodies go? In our opinion - back to the pass. This brings a very specific post-mortem characteristic - the bodies being frozen and thawed twice, cleaned up in between, only six of them. I started looking into Repeated Freeze-thaw Cycles on cadaver symptoms.
From the original autopsy reports you can see who had traces of crusted blood or foam, who was clean or dirty, and the exchange of clothes could be explained with redressing for forensic examination, too.
The head of the Forensic Medical Department of the Kaneff hospital in Ruse (http://www.umbal.ruse.bg/), Stoyanov M.D. (https://dyatlovpass.com/1079#morgue), told me that if a foreigner dies they need to put him in the freezer until the relatives come for the body.
One time they got the body out but the flight of the relatives canceled and they had to refreeze the body. When they got it out the second time and prepared for transportation some liquid came out from his nostrils - grey and foamy. Sounds familiar?
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: bertie on May 18, 2021, 12:48:17 AM
Extremely interesting material, Teddy, thanks.

Although off topic, in your comments on the previous page regarding WABs theory, I didnt realise he was working on a new idea - but he has written years ago, on this forum, a detailed scenario where the Rav4 were actually injured in a much deeper (different) ravine and then carried by the remaining able-bodied campers to their final resting place. At least that is what I have previously regarded as 'WABS theory'.
Best, Bertie
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Teddy on May 18, 2021, 01:17:07 AM
I posted WAB's theory years ago, trying to swift through all the rambling. I didn't get it then either. Here is his theory, I give equal opportunity objectively. I don't judge before I understand. His theory I do not understand: https://dyatlovpass.com/ravine-borzenkov (https://dyatlovpass.com/ravine-borzenkov)

Latest developments with Kuryakov's results from the place of the tragedy show the last four bodies found in May to be not where Borzenkov says they were. At least not what he said in this theory. https://forum.dyatlovpass.com/index.php?topic=146.msg549#msg549 (https://forum.dyatlovpass.com/index.php?topic=146.msg549#msg549)

If WAB is summarizing our theory as "the falling tree and the transfer of the tent" in here https://forum.dyatlovpass.com/index.php?topic=924.0 (https://forum.dyatlovpass.com/index.php?topic=924.0) I want his theory summary within the same amount of words.

I respect WAB (Borzenkov) for what he knows and the effort he makes for the forum, to give us valuable information, to keep the facts in check. But his theory I do not understand, and so far I haven't heard his feedback on particulars from our book. I don't see how can he have an opinion on a theory he hasn't read. In a perfect world he can elaborate on his theory, I can do the same on ours.

What I do not understand in WAB's theory is why would the hikers leave the tent by cutting it from inside. Let's start form there. He is an experienced hiker, he knows the mindset in the mountain. What would make the hikers cut up their tent and go slowly down a slope they haven't seen before, not having outer or footwear. Concentrate on this part only please. No confusing maps, not unconfirmed trajectories of hiking to a crevice nowhere near their path only to jump one after another, as far as I understood on top of each other?? like suicidal lemmings.

When I published this page https://dyatlovpass.com/ravine-borzenkov (https://dyatlovpass.com/ravine-borzenkov) Borzenkov (aka WAB) said that this photo is from the time when he was presenting the rocket theory. This is now Kuntsevich's theory. This means Borzenkov is prone to change theories, and I know for a fact that he is currently working on his "version of events" [sic]. Not sure if this means a brand spanking new theory or just his final revision of Donnie Eichar's book, but I am all ears to check it out when it's ready and available.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: bertie on May 18, 2021, 02:27:50 AM
I am ok with anyone changing theories, it's an occupational hazard with the piles of suspect and contradictory evidence in the case.
I also don't demand a summary in 10words from anyone 😃😃 coz that summary you quoted doesn't do justice to ur theory (obviously).

You have produced a marvellous theory, both well researched and quite plausible.
Which is enough. You have never previously knocked down anyone's theories (that is well quite done by the users anyway😃) -  it is part of your charm and most fitting for the host of a site that is established to be always in persuit of knowledge.
Best Bertie
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Teddy on May 18, 2021, 02:48:24 AM
This is what I am trying to be, a good host for anyone that wants to and speak out. It is strange how this case brings the best and the worse in anyone, sometimes in the span of the same post :)
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: bertie on May 18, 2021, 02:53:12 AM
It is strange how this case brings the best and the worse in anyone, sometimes in the span of the same post :)

👍😃
I'd imagine for those going very deep into this case that it is enough just to keep one's sanity, everything else is a bonus
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Teddy on May 18, 2021, 03:18:33 AM
I'd imagine for those going very deep into this case that it is enough just to keep one's sanity...

That exit is way behind :))
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Mars on May 18, 2021, 07:22:46 AM
Thank you for your  explanation Teddy. By no means did I want my first post to turn out to be political.
I have just delved into your book and of course all the available information I have been able to read on this forum from members ’contributions. It just surprised me about my opinion, which I got when I read the book. For me, your book, when I read it, was the ultimate solution to a mysterious tragedy. Then I expected the so-called Dyatlov Pass experts to think so too.
And I expected people on this forum who have a tremendous amount of historical knowledge, know the time, and deal with it to give criticism. As for Professor WAB, who delves so thoroughly into every little thing that is published, it just surprises me that he hasn’t even read your book yet. I also became acquainted with his theory (infra sound) but I must say that given my modest knowledge I did not even understand what his conclusion and interpretation of events was. However, it would be right and appropriate for experts to say what they agree with and what they do not agree with, and of course to justify this.
By the way, I rated your book with the highest possible rating on Amazon.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Teddy on May 18, 2021, 07:40:46 AM
However, it would be right and appropriate for experts to say what they agree with and what they do not agree with, and of course to justify this.
This is what I expect as well. I am bewildered how the so called experts want to diminish other people's work. Not all of them though. This is how you can tell who really wants to learn the truth. If the case is unsolved one has to be open for new interpretation of the facts. BTW I highly respected researcher Alekseenkov who goes to the pass for the last 10 years and who Borzenkov, I am sure, can not brush away without a second thought reached out with unsolicited feedback about the book. He is a really deep into the case, well respected from the whole Russian circle of researchers.

"Read your e-book. Cool! So much information!
And the theory is on the level of a Newton's binomial theorem (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binomial_theorem). Impressive!
- Alexander (Shura) Alekseenkov, researcher

"Приобрёл вашу электронную книгу. Круто! Столько материала обработано!
И версия из разряда бином Ньютона. Впечатляет!
— Александр (Шура) Алексеенков, исследователь

(https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/Aleksander-Alekseenkov-Yekaterinburg-2021.jpg)

On this year annual conference in Yekaterinburg Alekseenkov made public the results of his measurements on the pass which directly confirm our theory
https://dyatlovpass.com/1079#new-magnetic (https://dyatlovpass.com/1079#new-magnetic)

By the way, I rated your book with the highest possible rating on Amazon.
bow7
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: RidgeWatcher on May 18, 2021, 08:47:51 PM
Thank you Teddy for answering all the questions, it is important to those of us who read your book because the book is important.

I have one more question: Spoilers for non-book readers:

At the end of your book it sure seemed like a lot of people died who were involved with the searches and cover-ups. What percentage of those deaths do you surmise were the victims of the state? And did any stand out to you as odd or peculiar?

And thank you for correcting my hybrid poetry concerning Victor Hugo and Beckett I love Becket but I was trying to quote Victor Hugo, my tired mistake.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: bertie on May 18, 2021, 11:34:02 PM
I'd imagine for those going very deep into this case that it is enough just to keep one's sanity...

That exit is way behind :))
Oh well, sanity is over-rated anyway...
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Igor Pavlov on May 19, 2021, 12:43:06 AM
At the end of your book it sure seemed like a lot of people died who were involved with the searches and cover-ups. What percentage of those deaths do you surmise were the victims of the state? And did any stand out to you as odd or peculiar?
The number of deaths is normal for this place. People were constantly dying there from hunting accidents, from drunkenness, and so on.We have given this list so that the reader can make a conclusion for himself - whether they are related to the case or not. I personally, to be honest, do not know :). It is possible that some cases are related.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Teddy on May 19, 2021, 01:22:03 AM
I was trying to quote Victor Hugo, my tired mistake.

Hugo it is then (on forum's home page).

I want to repeat something form my post here with the photo.

when tree falls is like the Rapture – one is gone, the one lying next continues living. This is one disaster that can affect people clustered together very differently.

This has always bothered me - why some of the injuries were so grave and some just died from total exhaustion and hypothermia. If there is a crime it looked like the longer someone lived the worse he was beaten up. This is if you presume the epicenter to be the tent on the slope. If you reverse the epicenter to be the cedar tree, then it all makes much better sense. The injuries that are lethal happened first and everyone trying to get help died at some distance.

Till this moment the theories were divided to criminal and noncriminal. I think they should be divided depending to where the epicenter of the disaster is. Did something happened on the slope, what could it be, or was the accident in the forest, and what could it be. The fact Dubinina, Tibo and Zolotaryov couldn't be moved answers this question.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Mars on May 19, 2021, 05:44:15 AM
Teddy thanks for the explanation and for the link you sent me.
I also listened to the interview “Discussions of the Dyatlov Crossing Incident with Special Guest Teddy Hadjiysk”.
For the past two months, I’ve really delved into everything available about the accident at the Dyatlov Pass. I have to say that I started the book without any prior knowledge. I liked it because it was written as scientific research without any sensationalism or desire to commercially impose on the reader. Then I got acquainted with the forum you run on your website. The forum is really interesting because there are people there who have something to say and of course people who have nothing to say.
As far as I'm concerned, the mystery of the accident is explained by your and Igor's theory. I am aware that this is just a theory that 100% will never be possible to prove. But so far, with all the evidence presented and the sincere effort that has been put into the work is the best approximation of the truth that gave rise to this terrible accident. As metaphor I can compare with Albert Einstein’s theory of relativity, which is unprovable in practice. But so far it is the most powerful theory, which, despite countless attempts, no one has been able to refute. And so it has been with your theory so far. A huge number of so-called professionals with their academic knowledge being recycled to infinity without any product have experienced a shock at your work. And I have noticed that they have reacted extremely insultingly and in some cases ignorantly, without, as far as I know, giving a single objective critique or proof that could negate your work. And I have to figure out that it’s just endless envy. Which is also understandable, because for years and years they revolved in an unproductive circle, sterile knowledge that yielded no results. And suddenly you and Igor appear without a huge ego just with a huge heart, without a desire for personal promotion or financial success and give a solution. So I’ll find that it’s time for everyone that until they have something better to show, to slowly admit that you taken biggest step for once with your research work, to the explanation of the tragic events on Dyatlov Pass. From my side, I can only say thank you and Igor for the effort, knowledge and real big heart research that led to the strongest theory for once. 
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Ziljoe on May 19, 2021, 05:43:34 PM
Mars,That's a really respectful and nicely written post. kewl1
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Teddy on May 20, 2021, 12:01:16 AM
And suddenly you and Igor appear without a huge ego just with a huge heart, without a desire for personal promotion or financial success and give a solution.

Mars, thank you so much, this is how I feel, I am all in with my heart all right (throwing some ribs in the mixture), but believe me, although I haven't met Igor in person (it is on my bucket list), it is his brain that is in this book. The book is my idea. At some point of Igor helping me with the site he said he has a theory. I didn't believe him, but when he said what it is I was dumbfounded and relieved at the same time. At last, someone was making sense. Igor told me it took him 10 years to figure it out. The book was all my idea because I wanted a format to lead the reader through the mountain of facts that this theory is based on. This is not a momentary revelation, not an aha moment, it is a long process taking a decade to put the pieces together. Why is this so frustrating for other researchers, I don't know. Maybe because as you said they have all tried for a long time and suddenly someone is passing them in the fast lane. As if any of this matters, I hate what the obsession turns people into. When we turn the Dyatlov group into monuments, we want to climb on that same pedestal with them.

Yesterday we released the WHOIS (https://dyatlovpass.com/whois) database in both English (https://dyatlovpass.com/whois) and Russian (https://dyatlovpass.com/whois-ru), as well as a database with Russian Abbreviations (https://dyatlovpass.com/russian-abbreviations) I had to hunt down while translating anything from Russian e.g. case files, articles and Igor Pavlov's manuscript. I am sure these will come handy while navigating through Russian literature in general. The gallery PEOPLE (https://dyatlovpass.com/people) contains both past and modern times individuals, you can tell by the photos, all names can be looked up in the WHOIS (https://dyatlovpass.com/whois) database. It goes without saying if you have additional information please send it to me. I created a separate board for the WHOIS discussion: https://forum.dyatlovpass.com/index.php?topic=936.0

(https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/Dyatlov-pass-whois.png) (https://dyatlovpass.com/whois)

We will continue working on the case. Having a theory helps with sanity. Although overrated I need the appearance or else they will tie my sleeves behind my back and won't be able to type. I have a lot of typing before me.

Mars, thank you again, you made my day.

Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Mars on May 20, 2021, 12:26:15 AM
Thanks Ziljoe,
I wrote this because I was affected by the relationship, from the “experts” (I won’t name them because of the politenes) to the theory from Teddy and Igor.
With their huge egos, they allow themselves to criticize someone who has so far been the only one to take a significant step forward in solving the problem. Theyselves however, apart from the learned knowledge and the empty repetition of this knowledge, they have not been able to present anything meaningful so far. And that’s what hurts them. And because of that, the work of Teddy and Igor is ignored on many level.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Mars on May 20, 2021, 12:47:34 AM
Thanks Teddy for the kind reply (I didn't expect)
I'm glad there are people like you in the world.
For it happens to everyone that once lost wanders in the dark and then even a small flame of a candle can show her/him the way to happiness. So people - let’s turn on the flame.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Igor Pavlov on May 20, 2021, 01:49:15 AM
Mars, thank you so much for your kind words. I must say that any project with the participation of several authors is quite complex. Each person has his own approach, his own vision etc. But in our case Teddy and I came to a compromise very quickly. Working on the book was a real pleasure. I am glad that many people have positively assessed the result of our work. I can't criticize those who didn't like the book. Anyone can have their own point of view on events.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Teddy on May 20, 2021, 02:32:09 AM
I have to disagree with Igor on one aspect - I didn't make any compromises on the account of difference in opinions. I honestly do not remember a single thing that I have disagreed with Igor. This may sound tacky but there is an explanation: we are experts in very different areas. Igor has the information, the resources, I am with the idea about a site, book, and visuals. Our areas hardly intercept, and when they do we tend to have the same taste and standards. Examples: Igor came up with the title, I loved it, I came up with the subtitle, Igor said he was thinking about the same one. Visuals - Igor has always corrected (a lot) only the factual information, all the drawing is mine. The whole world was against Igor's manuscript - every potential agent I showed examples of the book wanted it rewritten for a Hollywood movie. I said nope, we are publishing it as is. Because this is how Igor wrote it, this is how the mind  that solved the case works. And I liked it this way. This book is not about our feelings and personal involvement. As I always say: "We are not in this book." The making of this book, if it wasn't for the setbacks from KDP, Amazon, etc. and the brutally short time for publishing has been a pleasure. Communication with Igor is something I have never experienced in my life. I can't explain it. You have the chance to see it for yourself. No one has ever been so right on the spot on anything factual. His brain is amazing. But before the book, he had never spilled his guts on public forums. He has helped decipher documents and corrected information, hasn't withheld resources. But he is a very private person. He told me something like: What would be the purpose of this, they don't want to know. Now I see what he meant.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Mars on May 20, 2021, 02:38:11 AM
Igor, I completely agree with you that everyone has the right to their own view of events. But if you can’t justify this view and professionally defend it, it’s just an empty opinion with no relevant weight. In fact, so far only you two have put forward a theory that answers every question with great probability.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Teddy on May 20, 2021, 02:44:55 AM
In fact, so far only you two have put forward a theory that answers every question with great probability.

These were the first words from Igor about his theory, he said and I quote: "I have a theory that explains all facts."
My first thought was: "Please don't ruin this..."
Me after:

(https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/big-lebowski.jpeg)
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Mars on May 20, 2021, 03:05:35 AM
"What would be the purpose of this, they don't want to know?"

Teddy, because I can't, you personally tells Igor:

 Throughout history, many great people have wondered about the purpose of their work and may never have received recognition. But every great work enlivens its independent life and becomes an element that builds civilization.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: bertie on May 20, 2021, 03:29:40 AM
I am glad that many people have positively assessed the result of our work. I can't criticize those who didn't like the book. Anyone can have their own point of view on events.

Igor, a pleasure to hear from you on this forum and commendation for your work. clap1

May we ask, please, along this 10 year journey of formulating your theory at what point did you first consider the weird hypothesis that the bodies did a circular trip through the morgue and how long after that until you satisfied yourself that your radical theory 'ticked all the boxes'?
Second question, some people studying this matter get fixated on a particular inconsistency, in your case was there a key feature in the evidence which first turned your mind towards the possibility that the bodies were moved?

Thanks Bertie
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: bertie on May 20, 2021, 03:36:42 AM
These were the first words from Igor about his theory, he said and I quote: "I have a theory that explains all facts."
kewl1

Teddy, great to see the earlier quote from Alekseenkov.
I had to look up Newton's binomial theorem... but it looks pretty solid ha grin1

Such a pity the official re-investigation has already run its course, or has it?
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Igor Pavlov on May 20, 2021, 05:42:46 AM
Thank you, bertie

I was not the first to suggest that some of the bodies were being moved to the Ivdel morgue and back to the pass. This has been repeatedly discussed on Russian-language forums in the context of various conspiracy theories. The movement of bodies is not the basis for our theory. Our main arguments are the strange involvement in the search for organizations that should not have been involved in them in any way. These are geologists, employees of Ivdellag and military railway workers. They had enough to do on their own to distract them from the search. I assumed that the reason for the death of tourists lies in some joint activity of these three structures. The only such joint activity that came to my mind was blasting. But nothing was known about such works in the area of the pass. And the main confirmation of the theory I received when friends helped me to get acquainted with the materials of the geophysical report on possible work in the area of the pass in February 1959. That was the moment when the theory "ticked all the boxes". It happened in 2016. We cite the materials of this report in the book and on the website.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: EBE on May 20, 2021, 07:22:01 AM
I am not saying that the fallen tree is not possible. However, there is still no direct evidence to that. It could happen, but it is still a theory. A rather complicated theory..

However, Lyuda had 3 fracture lines on her chest, as if caused by 2 or 3 impacts, not just one. But I am not a pathologist..:)

I honestly think that the only new real evidence to this case may come from exhumation of all bodies. Is there any chance that it will be possible?
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Teddy on May 20, 2021, 07:47:37 AM
Such a pity the official re-investigation has already run its course, or has it?
It has.

However, Lyuda had 3 fracture lines on her chest, as if caused by 2 or 3 impacts, not just one. But I am not a pathologist..:)
Not true, Kuryakov illustrated this with a ping pong: https://dyatlovpass.com/prosecutors-investigation#2 (https://dyatlovpass.com/prosecutors-investigation#2)

I am the living proof with 6 broken ribs in two fracture lines frоm a single blow in a car accident:
http://distal-humerus.com/resources/320/gallery/2012-07-24-X-Ray-chest.jpg (http://distal-humerus.com/resources/320/gallery/2012-07-24-X-Ray-chest.jpg)

Read here the conclusion of the forensic expert Sergey Nikitin who handles Zolotaryov remains during the exhumation: "It was a single powerful blow" (https://dyatlovpass.com/zolotaryov-exhumation-2)

This tendency to dig up graves without even knowing (reading) what the discoveries are is sickening. What for?

I honestly think that the only new real evidence to this case may come from exhumation of all bodies. Is there any chance that it will be possible?
This is horrible idea. Zolotaryov's exhumation confirmed every detail from the autopsy report, brought nothing but scandals, media circus and grief.
https://dyatlovpass.com/zolotaryov-exhumation (https://dyatlovpass.com/zolotaryov-exhumation)
https://dyatlovpass.com/zolotaryov-exhumation-2 (https://dyatlovpass.com/zolotaryov-exhumation-2)
https://dyatlovpass.com/zolotaryov-dna (https://dyatlovpass.com/zolotaryov-dna)
https://dyatlovpass.com/zolotaryov-exhumation-3 (https://dyatlovpass.com/zolotaryov-exhumation-3)
https://dyatlovpass.com/semyon-zolotaryov (https://dyatlovpass.com/semyon-zolotaryov)
https://dyatlovpass.com/semyon-zolotaryov-2 (https://dyatlovpass.com/semyon-zolotaryov-2)
https://dyatlovpass.com/semyon-zolotaryov-3 (https://dyatlovpass.com/semyon-zolotaryov-3)
https://dyatlovpass.com/semyon-zolotaryov-4 (https://dyatlovpass.com/semyon-zolotaryov-4)

Relatives have petitioned against digging up more graves.

the main confirmation of the theory I received when friends helped me to get acquainted with the materials of the geophysical report on possible work in the area of the pass in February 1959. That was the moment when the theory "ticked all the boxes". It happened in 2016. We cite the materials of this report in the book and on the website.
https://dyatlovpass.com/1079#magnetic (https://dyatlovpass.com/1079#magnetic)

Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Teddy on May 20, 2021, 09:23:07 AM
I want to elaborate on Zolotaryov's exhumation in 2018. Everyone was on the edge of the chair watching (rather listening). This wasn't his relative's idea. Komsomolskaya Pravda journalist Natalya Varsegova worked hard for two years to find a loophole and not having a body or a body of a different person would have most certainly led to reopening the case. But the man in the grave was Zolotaryov himself rpoved by expert Sergey Nikitin through a skull superimposition (https://dyatlovpass.com/zolotaryov-exhumation-2). What is appalling is the aftermath, what the media did with the event. Natalya Varsegova was no longer in control of what she started. She kept in strictest confidence her sources and his relatives till one day Zolotaryov's step daughter decided she would look good on TV and started talking how bad her step dad was because he made her tidy up her room etc. Zolotaryov's character was obviously not all smelling of roses, his common law wife left a baby on a porch to try to get him back for Pete's sake. And we will learn every teeny-tiny detail in the lives of each of these people. Do we really need this? As a result of the botched DNA match Zolotaryov was made worse than the devil. He died a horrible death. Each grave will be treated by the media like Jack in the box. Thank God there is a statute of limitations on the case.
Statute of limitations means only the Prosecutor's office can investigate. Not good if there is a cover up from the highest level. But it prevents parties to turn the case into Cinco de Mayo. Isn't it strange that the bodies were found on May 5th?
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: bertie on May 20, 2021, 03:34:09 PM

The only such joint activity that came to my mind was blasting. But nothing was known about such works in the area of the pass. And the main confirmation of the theory I received when friends helped me to get acquainted with the materials of the geophysical report on possible work in the area of the pass in February 1959. That was the moment when the theory "ticked all the boxes". It happened in 2016.

🙏Many thanks for those insights into exactly how the matter unfolded!

I can forgive anyone for baulking at the 'staging' theory since conspiracies generally require the silence of too many people to be credible. In this case, however, I am inclined to think the explanatory power of your theory makes it worthy of serious consideration.  In particular, I like the fact that it allows us to view the actions of the Tourists as intelligent and rational at all times, without invoking hopelessly contrived events to account for their sad end. I am also hopeful that your theory may prove to have some predictive power, in the sense that your highly specific theory may bring to light even more material that nobody would otherwise have even thought to look for!

Again, well done on the book.
Can I ask, lastly, is the book gaining postive attention within Russia?

Thanks Bertie
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Teddy on May 20, 2021, 11:59:17 PM
Can I ask, lastly, is the book gaining positive attention within Russia?

Russia doesn't know about this book yet. While I can reach the English spoken audience Russia is completely different ball game. Russia is saturated with opinions. They are much worse than this forum, their forums are brutal. They have heard it all... or so they think. I don't have presence there, and I already mentioned that Igor is not someone that will start advertising his own book. If asked he answers questions, but he is not going to fly the red flag. They are going to eat him alive.

In this post I mentioned that I had a setback with the Russian paperback
https://forum.dyatlovpass.com/index.php?topic=818.msg15621#msg15621

Also in general the book is expensive for Russians.

Having said that, important for us people - researchers who really want to find out the truth read the book. As Igor said about Alekseenkov: Feedback from people like him are much more important (make me happy [sic]) to me than information in the social media.

Igor had received (and forwarded to me) many mails from Russians that know him and highly appreciate the book.
From The Dyatlov Foundation: "This is incredible! You have systematized so much information. Can't put the book down. We have never seen such a detailed account of the events in 1959. Hats down!" and they are now printing the book in Russian. It is due in a month or two. We get paid close to nothing, but we don't do it for the money.

Here Kuntsevich says: (https://vk.com/wall27607789_2613)
This book will be published in Russian this year. And I very much advise everyone not to miss it. We will contribute to this. And I'll tell you more about it later. In the meantime, it should be noted that this is a very serious work (and do not be confused by its apparent foreign origin). So Coming Soon!

Bottom line in Russia "1079" is still Coming soon.

Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: EBE on May 21, 2021, 12:17:35 AM
Teddy, you said you have 2 fracture lines from one accident. But Lyuda had 3 fracture lines.

Also, you said that the exhumation of Zolotaryov brought nothing new. This is not true, as the pathologist found out that he had three additional fractures:

"We looked at the right shoulder blade, there were three fractures. The act of this was not noted. I assumed first that this is a posthumous injury. The whole grave was covered with pieces of granite, the pressure on the bones of the skeleton can't be ignored. But then I reassessed, because the left shoulder was intact. If there were posthumous damages, it is logical to assume that both the left shoulder blade would be broken and in general would be other multiple fractures on the bones of the skeleton."

So the original autopsy report was not accurate. No one really wants to exhume dead bodies, but I think that there is a possibility that unreported fractures could be found also on other bodies. That would bring at least some new evidence to this case. Without new hard evidence, all theories, no matter how sophisticated, remain just theories..
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Teddy on May 21, 2021, 12:19:06 AM
I want to add that the book reads in Russian much better than in English. Igor did me a favor of withholding the information so it can come out in both languages simultaneously. This is a precedent when we know something before the Russians do. I couldn't afford to take the time to polish my translation so I am doing it now. I constantly update the Amazon content to improve the narrative. Part 1 is rewritten. I can't do anything about the Russian abbreviations. I unfolded them in the text so you don't have to constantly consult a cheat sheet. It is hard to read, I am aware of that. But I made my decision that I will get the theory out and work on the style later.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: bertie on May 21, 2021, 12:32:11 AM
That's all brilliant news then, Teddy👍
Also interesting to hear about the Russian news landscape.

I believe that a truly good idea will always find its way into the spotlight. 
Anyway you already have very well-respected supporters over there.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Teddy on May 21, 2021, 12:32:29 AM
Teddy, you said you have 2 fracture lines from one accident. But Lyuda had 3 fracture lines.
Zolotaryov had two fracture lines and the mechanism is the same. She was lying down on her back, he was lying down on his side.

Also, you said that the exhumation of Zolotaryov brought nothing new. This is not true, as the pathologist found out that he had three additional fractures:
...
So the original autopsy report was not accurate.
I showed Zolotaryov's exhumation photos to Marina Miteva M.D. and Plamen Dimitrov M.D., the Head of Forensic Medicine Department. This is the autopsy of a man that fell from the 5th floor in a work related accident. The body has been through a computed tomography scan (CT scan) and they see that the neck, spine and scapula are broken. Unless they have an indication for it, the body is not cut from the back. Zolotaryov's scapula is not visible from an autopsy done with only one cut from the front, and she is showing me this in this photo. Unless cut from the back the scapula injury would not be visible with an autopsy done only with one frontal opening. And if you see the cause of death you don't cut from the back. The autopsy in 1959 was fairly accurate by the opinion of the forensic examiners.
Here Marina is talking about the scapula and showing me how you can't see the fractures. They are small and you can't feel that anything is broken. The injuries on the torax are so brutal that you don't have to look any further for the cause of death. The exhumation brought nothing.

(https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/gallery/DSC_5571.jpg)
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Teddy on May 21, 2021, 12:43:33 AM
The scapula was thoroughly discussed here.
https://forum.dyatlovpass.com/index.php?topic=187.msg880#msg880

And the opinion of Dr. Schultz is that the injuries were caused by a single blow.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: EBE on May 21, 2021, 12:48:48 AM
Yes the autopsy in 1959 showed the cause of death, so they did not examine the whole body and did not find those 3 additional fractures.

But that only proves that there may have been other fractures on all bodies that were not noticed in 1959. Especially on those whose death was attributed to freezing. The only way how this can be found out is the autopsy.

By the way, if the injuries would have been caused by a tree, there would be punctures on the bodies from broken branches, traces of wood and bark in the wounds, etc. No one seems to have noticed anything like that back then..
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: EBE on May 21, 2021, 12:56:35 AM
Dr Schultz concluded that: "I do not see that pattern as due to multiple blows (but not impossible of course)."

The way I read his statement is that one impact would be sufficient to cause these injuries, but it does not exclude the possibility of two impacts.

On the other hand, the article shows that another pathologist thinks that the injury was caused by two impacts.

So the truth is that we don't know and we cannot be sure.

By the way, thank you for posting this, I haven't read it before, it is very interesting.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: bertie on May 21, 2021, 01:02:03 AM
By the way, if the injuries would have been caused by a tree, there would be punctures on the bodies from broken branches, traces of wood and bark in the wounds, etc. No one seems to have noticed anything like that back then..
I don't see that as self-obvious?  In the theory, there was a tent and clothes/blankets between the bark and the skin. As far as skin punctures from branches go, everything depends at which exact point each branch of relevance ended up severing, as the branches presumably had some opportunity to depress the ground at either side of each body and also to prop the tree up a little above ground level. To my thinking, perhaps a better question is why the tent (with wider surface area) wasn't obviously punctured...
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: EBE on May 21, 2021, 01:09:01 AM
If a tree fell on the hikers, the tree would almost certainly be a coniferous tree (spruce, cedar, pine..). I find it impossible that the broken branches and twigs would not puncture anyone and would not leave any trace of bark and wood chips in their wounds.

That is my opinion, of course yours may be different and I don't want to persuade you.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: bertie on May 21, 2021, 01:19:42 AM
That is my opinion, of course yours may be different and I don't want to persuade you.

We agree perfectly there, in time an authority can speak to this matter and I'm sure we will both follow the science as we both want to know the truth👍🙏
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Igor Pavlov on May 21, 2021, 01:20:05 AM
In the theory, there was a tent and clothes/blankets between the bark and the skin.
Absolutely right

To my thinking, perhaps a better question is why the tent (with wider surface area) wasn't obviously punctured...
The tent had a large amount of damage (tears). This can be seen at the 1959 photos. Very often, this is not paid attention to, because the expert describes only the cuts of the tent. The experts were asked only about the nature of the cuts, so they did not pay attention to the description of the tears of the tent.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: EBE on May 21, 2021, 01:31:11 AM
I agree that the tent had many holes, but it seems that the hikers tried to repair those holes, pls see the pieces of cloth, especially the large one on the right:

(https://i.ibb.co/SsbBM4h/Dyatlov-pass-tent-02.jpg) (https://ibb.co/Fx2zyLS)

If a (coniferous) tree would fall on them, the needles from the tree would be absolutely everywhere, also in their hair, clothes, equipment etc. There would be punctures from broken branches on their bodies, traces of bark, twigs etc.

I have to say that I spent quite a large part of my life in coniferous forests, very similar to the area of DP. I have seen many fallen trees, damage caused by fallen trees, I had injures from working with the trees etc. In my opinion, there is no evidence of any damage done by a tree on the bodies. There were traces of needles, moss on the hair of both Juris, but that's all I think.

I don't want to say that the tree is impossible, I just don't see any evidence for that.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Teddy on May 21, 2021, 01:34:13 AM

(https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/gallery/Zinaida-Kolmogorova-post-mortem-5.jpg)
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Teddy on May 21, 2021, 01:37:51 AM
I don't want to say that the tree is impossible, I just don't see any evidence for that.

I have never seen anyone change their opinion on the case because you show them evidence. You have made up your mind and that's it. You were just told that between them and the tree there was a tent, clothes and that they have been cleaned in the morgue once. What else do you want to be told? We can show but we can not make you see.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Teddy on May 21, 2021, 01:40:22 AM
One last thing, not that it will matter to you. The forest is not just coniferous. This is my photo from the pass.

(https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/gallery/Dyatlov-pass-expedition-2019-024.jpg)
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Teddy on May 21, 2021, 01:45:17 AM
I don't want to say that the tree is impossible, I just don't see any evidence for that.
It all depends where are you looking.

I want to go on the pass again with this theory in mind.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: EBE on May 21, 2021, 01:56:52 AM
The birches on your photo are small, they grow on the upper tree line and in these conditions they rarely reach more than 5m in height. Their trunks are narrow, and  would hardly cause much damage. Also, as they don't have leaves in winter, strong wind or a blast wave would probably not break them, as there is not enough mass for that. That's why I said that if a tree would fall on them, it would probably be a coniferous tree, as they grow larger in that area and break more easily in wind.

Regarding photo of Zina, yes, that could have been bark and needles, but only on a limited body surface, most probably from sitting on a log of dragging cut branches. I am not sure if you have ever seen a coniferous tree fall. The needles would be everywhere, and I really mean it.

I am sorry, but my mind is open here. I don't exclude possibilities, just trying to find some direct hard evidence. I wanted to be polite, but I think it is you who is married to a theory. I am just trying to tell that there is no direct evidence that it was all caused by a tree. There is no evidence that the tent was even moved. There is no evidence that there was any cleanup. It is all just speculations. Anything could have happened, if it fits into your theory. But in case you find new evidence for your theory in the pass, I will happily let myself to be convinced..
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Teddy on May 21, 2021, 02:22:00 AM
I didn't say it is a birch tree. I said the forest is not just coniferous.
I am not trying to convince you, on the contrary, what I am proving is that if someone doesn't want to see we can't make them.

As for being married to a theory - we can be helpful to explain how did we come to our conclusion. It would be weird to contradict our own conviction.
You are not convinced and please stay that way. You may find your own explanation and prove it.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Teddy on May 21, 2021, 02:28:02 AM
Look at real photos and video https://dyatlovpass.com/ravine-alekseenkov-and-kan (https://dyatlovpass.com/ravine-alekseenkov-and-kan)
The coniferous trees are minority.
Which is not even the point since we are not arguing what kind of tree fell on top of the tent.
This is your argument and I have to tackle if to admit the argument itself.
It is obvious that you will stay unconvinced.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Teddy on May 21, 2021, 02:55:54 AM
There is no evidence that there was any cleanup. It is all just speculations. Anything could have happened, if it fits into your theory. But in case you find new evidence for your theory in the pass, I will happily let myself to be convinced.

We never said we have evidence. As far as I know no theory has showed evidence. We claim to explain better than any other theory the facts surrounding the case. We can connect all the dots. Other theories have very low point count. A theory has to explain most facts, not just some facts.
I would use the word evidence against. There are no evidences against our theory. While I can point out evidence against the rest of the theories, which means facts they can not fit into their scenario, or facts that contradict their scenario.

So far your argument against our theory is that you see no pine needles. I say the tree doesn't need to be coniferous.
You say you don't see damage on the tent consistent with fallen tree. I tell you that the tents I saw were completely flattened. It depends how the tree hits the tent. Also I have never seen a tent more damaged than the one of Dyatlov group. And if you tell me that you can find a better explanation for cuts made from inside other than trying to get from under a tree, then we really won't be able to convince you of anything. Give it a try - what is your explanation for cuts made from inside?
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: EBE on May 21, 2021, 03:02:32 AM
I plan to buy your book and go through all the "boring" stuff:).

Regarding the tree: The photo you have posted shows the recent photo of the area. In 1959, the tree line was lower, the trees were smaller (especially the birches). This can be visible from the search photos. However, there were quite large birches here and there even back then, so I cannot exclude a possibility that one of the larger birches fell. My point was also that a coniferous tree would fall much more easily in winter.

However, if you claim that a tree fell on the tent, I think you should present some hard evidence of that. For example photo of that tree, remains of the tree found on their equipment, broken stove (as the stove would be the first item to be hit), injuries showing marks of wood chips and bark, etc. As far as I know, nothing is available at this moment. Therefore it is just another theory, that's all.

If you will manage to go back to the pass to find the particular tree, how do you think you would be able to identify the right one after >60 years? There are probably many old fallen trees over there..

But I wish you luck and all the best.. I agree with some points of your theory that you presented in interviews (for example with Natasha Cooper) - especially about the fire (ordinary one, not emergency one). But there are many points where your theory is not really based on evidence.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Teddy on May 21, 2021, 03:14:38 AM
We don't have evidence. Our theory is circumstantial at best.
But it is the best theory there is.
Remember that it is not my theory, I chose to be an ambassador of Igor's theory because I have heard them all and this is the only one that makes sense to me.
Thank you in advance for planning to read the book.
I will come back with a plan what I would do if (when) I go back to the pass.
All I can say is that there is a real chance for this to happen, and I was requested to come up with a plan.  lipseal1

Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: EBE on May 21, 2021, 03:17:22 AM
Sorry, you have posted another reply before I hit the "post" button:).

I agree that other theories don't explain all details. That is why I am not really a fan of any of them:). What I think is needed here is more hard evidence, and in my view there is a chance that new evidence could be obtained (exhumations).

However, I don't agree with evidence against. There should be "evidence for", and not "no evidence against". For example some freaks would say that the hikers were all killed by aliens, and there is "no evidence against". :)

Regarding the tent - it is obvious from the photo I posted above that the large holes were there before the accident happened (large pieces of cloth with which the group repaired the tent). As for the cuts inside, there are more possibilities and I don't want to stick to just one:

1. As the cuts were too close to the entrance (which was still standing), and too small for anyone to pass through, it is possible that someone else was involved and cut the tent..
2. There was a strong snowfall in the area, a dust-snow avalanche hit the tent, the group cut the tent in order to get out. The dust snow was then blown off by the wind, so no traces of avalanche remained.. I remember there was a similar case in our mountains, where a group of tourists died in their tent in an avalanche, only one has survived and went down the slope to be rescued - he was in socks.
3. The cuts were made by the hikers because a tree fell on them:).

And maybe more explanations are possible..
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Igor Pavlov on May 21, 2021, 03:50:20 AM
I plan to buy your book and go through all the "boring" stuff:)... I agree with some points of your theory that you presented in interviews (for example with Natasha Cooper) - especially about the fire (ordinary one, not emergency one). But there are many points where your theory is not really based on evidence.
EBE, nothing personal, but it seems to me that it is not correct to criticize the theory without even reading the book. The book and Teddy's interviews are completely different things and have different goals. Including the difference in presentation of information for the reader or listener. If your criticism is based on information from the interview, then your comments are more suitable for posting on Natasha's channel. We are ready to discuss all the questions with you on the forum after you read the book. I think it would be more correct.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: bertie on May 21, 2021, 03:53:11 AM

I will come back with a plan what I would do if (when) I go back to the pass.
All I can say is that there is a real chance for this to happen, and I was requested to come up with a plan.  lipseal1

How about a plan that doesnt involve the Dyatlov case!! grin1  some well-meant advice might be to kick back and just enjoy life for a while... not everyone can say they have published a book!

Anyway, about the theory, I am really hopeful if for no other reason that it has demonstrated the possibily that genuinely new info (geological survey & magnetic anomoly) can still be brought to light after 60 years!
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: bertie on May 21, 2021, 04:01:06 AM
We are ready to discuss all the questions with you on the forum...

Marvellous thumb1
Have you considered complaining to the site owner about your 'Beginner' status on the forum :-)
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: EBE on May 21, 2021, 04:27:00 AM
EBE, nothing personal, but it seems to me that it is not correct to criticize the theory without even reading the book. The book and Teddy's interviews are completely different things and have different goals. Including the difference in presentation of information for the reader or listener. If your criticism is based on information from the interview, then your comments are more suitable for posting on Natasha's channel. We are ready to discuss all the questions with you on the forum after you read the book. I think it would be more correct.

Igor, I think you are partially right, I will read your book.

Don't take my posts badly, the critique from my side is meant mainly to show some weak points, it is up to you if you take them into consideration or not. I think having doubts is healthy:).
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Igor Pavlov on May 21, 2021, 04:46:54 AM
I think having doubts is healthy:).
thumb1
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Mars on May 21, 2021, 05:07:53 AM
I make no comments about the theory in the book. Everything that is written seems probabilistically possible to me. The only thing I’ve been constantly thinking about in my head since I read the book is: These were young, healthy, physically strong people. How is it that out of nine people, even one failed to survive? How come everyone succumbed?
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: EBE on May 21, 2021, 05:15:03 AM
I make no comments about the theory in the book. Everything that is written seems probabilistically possible to me. The only thing I’ve been constantly thinking about in my head since I read the book is: These were young, healthy, physically strong people. How is it that out of nine people, even one failed to survive? How come everyone succumbed?

Exactly! That is my main concern too.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Igor Pavlov on May 21, 2021, 08:44:30 AM
These were young, healthy, physically strong people. How is it that out of nine people, even one failed to survive? How come everyone succumbed?
We only have one explanation. To stay alive in such a situation, a person who did not receive serious injuries would have to get out of the tent necessary equipment and a minimum supply of food to go to the nearest settlement. Staying near the tent is difficult to count on a favorable outcome. In principle, it was possible to reach the nearest settlement. But everyone chose to spend their strength on saving their comrades, rather than on their own salvation. And their forces were not unlimited.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Mars on May 21, 2021, 01:05:43 PM
Thanks Igor. I agree with your explanation. I myself have tried to resolve my doubt in this way. The only question that constantly comes to my mind is and I can't help myself: Why didn't the uninjured organize themself, divide on two group. One group help the injured, while the other should tried to seek help. There were nine of them anyway. Someone should survive such a situation. Well, of course, it’s one thing to create some situation in my head and another is a historical fact. And unfortunately, the fact is that they all died.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Teddy on May 21, 2021, 01:57:33 PM
Have you considered complaining to the site owner about your 'Beginner' status on the forum :-)

You really did me a number here. There are two types of member groups: non post-count and post-count based. A feature that would make only the first type to show is not working (Hide post group titles for grouped members). So I am now cheating by bringing Igor's posts number to 777 so his title doesn't read Expert Beginner. I have requested the help of Loose Cannon to upgrade the forum to the latest version hoping for the bug to go away.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: bertie on May 21, 2021, 04:41:59 PM
These were young, healthy, physically strong people. How is it that out of nine people, even one failed to survive? How come everyone succumbed?
Staying near the tent is difficult to count on a favorable outcome. In principle, it was possible to reach the nearest settlement. But everyone chose to spend their strength on saving their comrades, rather than on their own salvation.

I believe that, and such belief has come through in WABs writing too.
One can never know a persons motivations, but they just really seemed like fine young people.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: bertie on May 21, 2021, 04:47:42 PM
Have you considered complaining to the site owner about your 'Beginner' status on the forum :-)
I have requested the help of Loose Cannon to upgrade the forum to the latest version hoping for the bug to go away.

Speaking of whom, where has he been the past month? Probably taking a break from forum life, most understandable!
I've had a busy little burst here over the past few days and will likely disappear again until the next exciting find.
Keep the faith  thumb1
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: RMK on May 21, 2021, 06:31:59 PM
These were young, healthy, physically strong people. How is it that out of nine people, even one failed to survive? How come everyone succumbed?
We only have one explanation. To stay alive in such a situation, a person who did not receive serious injuries would have to get out of the tent necessary equipment and a minimum supply of food to go to the nearest settlement. Staying near the tent is difficult to count on a favorable outcome. In principle, it was possible to reach the nearest settlement. But everyone chose to spend their strength on saving their comrades, rather than on their own salvation. And their forces were not unlimited.
Mars' question above is a question that I had.  But, I suspected that Igor & Teddy would give the same answer that Igor did indeed give above.  Furthermore, it is an answer I find credible, since it aligns with my thoughts as well.

See, my family knew I was hyped up for the Pavlov-Hadjiyska book, and the day after I finished it, I told them this: (1) the book was not really about the Dyatlov hikers (by that, I mean that their backgrounds, personalities, etc. were completely unrelated to the Incident); (2) the theory is at the extreme of "wrong place at the wrong time"; and (3) any other group of 9 hikers with similar unit cohesion would have met the same fate.  So, I'm willing to believe that the Dyatlovites' mutual commitment to their comrades is a significant factor in why none of them survived.

I guess a minor criticism I have is that the book doesn't have much to say about what the survivors did between the tree-fall and when the conspirators discovered their dead bodies.  But, maybe the answer would be pure speculation?  The overall theory doesn't seem to depend on any narrative for what the survivors did during that time...
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Mars on May 21, 2021, 11:29:23 PM
Igor I have another question. Through your book, it has slowly become clear that many more people were constantly present in the field of tragedy than has been presented so far. So far, connoisseurs have claimed that the Dyatlov group was the only one in the field and that there was no one far around. I wonder to what extent you even allow the possibility that they came into any physical contact with other people at the time of the tragedy. Have you completely ruled out this possibility?

Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Igor Pavlov on May 22, 2021, 12:33:08 AM
I am now cheating by bringing Igor's posts number to 777
I quickly moved up the career forum ladder  shock1.
 bow7
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: EBE on May 22, 2021, 12:35:18 AM
But everyone chose to spend their strength on saving their comrades, rather than on their own salvation. And their forces were not unlimited.

And they did not even put their shoes on...

Sounds very improbable to me..
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Igor Pavlov on May 22, 2021, 12:50:15 AM
I wonder to what extent you even allow the possibility that they came into any physical contact with other people at the time of the tragedy. Have you completely ruled out this possibility?
Our supposed ground-based anomaly-checking team was far enough away from this location. Directly in the area of the pass, tourists could only meet Mansi hunters. A meeting with them is quite possible, but most likely, that would be reflected in the diaries. if you mean a clash, a fight - this is also possible. But then I can't explain why the fight with Mansi was covered up by geologists, the military, and ivdellag.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Igor Pavlov on May 22, 2021, 12:55:32 AM
And they did not even put their shoes on...
Just because they were found without shoes doesn't mean they didn't put their shoes on initially.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: bertie on May 22, 2021, 01:02:42 AM
But everyone chose to spend their strength on saving their comrades, rather than on their own salvation. And their forces were not unlimited.

And they did not even put their shoes on...

Sounds very improbable to me..

You realise you are replying to one of the authors of a book whose contention is that the scene was staged after the deaths.
Perhaps you have found yourself in the wrong thread.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Teddy on May 22, 2021, 01:46:39 AM
This board is called "Thoughts on the book".
I would think to be asking questions you should have read the book.
EBE, your questions do not stick. What a CWOT (complete waste of time).

By adding Sounds very improbable to me. or I will happily let myself to be convinced. you make it sound like the whole case is to convince you or make you happy.
This is a theory - ask questions about the theory and Igor will "happily" answer, but do not make it about your conviction. You are not a juror.
Stick to questions and information. What you do with it emotionally is your own business. Otherwise affects the discussion. Because we don't have to stick around to make you happy. We want to answer questions. For example, you ask: Why weren't they wearing their shoes? We say: According to our theory we can't be sure who was wearing what and how does this make you feel is your problem, not ours. Next question, please.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Mars on May 22, 2021, 02:53:35 AM
Igor thank you. Yes, I was thinking of any possibility of violent physical contact. Maybe geologists, their escort groups, military patrols ... but if you say they were just Mansi at the time, then I also don’t know why there would be an overlap at all. Given that those times aren’t that very distant. Do you think it’s possible that there is still someone who was present and actually knows the whole story?
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Teddy on May 22, 2021, 03:13:55 AM
The theory is only one chapter of the book. The amount of information that Igor has put together can be used for any other theory. While we are working on the book - me translating, not understanding, asking million of questions about particulars, I set aside so much information that didn't go into the book, but I will eventually publish on https://dyatlovpass.com/1079 This is how I came with this idea on first place. Every line in this book refers to something that is in this area. This is your chance to ask your own questions. I had my chance, your turn now, while I cope with all that is still not published.

With my previous post I am trying to explain that it is not productive to poke the theory like a punch back only to say - nay, not convinced. Of course, the theory has to hold off, but with Dyatlov case I have noticed that the people behave like this: first they try to come up with their own theory - these are the best readers, the fresh minds and eyes, they ask questions, they are thinking. Like dating :) Then they get married to a theory (borrowing this from EBE) and they stop thinking and start being confrontational. According to EBE I am in this phase of my life and I agree. But I stay in the marriage and do not go trashing other people's theories (marriages). What do you choose to do with your energy and time? Not believing or defending something. So EBE, we will not convince you. Let us at least tell you something you don't know. Do you believe Igor is capable to supply you with information you didn't know? If you do, then please be more respectful. I respect anyone that knows more about the case than me. It is only natural, you may learn something from them. In this particular thread you know nothing about the case compared to Igor. So stick around if you can contribute something, even if it is questions that leads to something other than your conviction.

To finish my metaphor about marriage (to theories), there are the ones that never get married. They do not commit to a theory, which I completely understand, I lived "single" for 8 years. It is lonely out there, this case gets on your nerves. But if you in your heart, decide that solving this case is not worth it (because you can't come up with the idea of what happened) then you tend to disapprove of everything and everyone on your way as too "ugly" for you.

What a long post saying nothing, really. Just either say something you know better or do not attack people that are trying to solve it, ok?
And yes, ask questions. You know the saying you don't see the forest for the trees? Well Igor was struggling with the trees for a decade and finally made it out and saw the forest. Now hearing the theory right off the bat we see the forest and don't want to get in between the trees. Common, get in.
If I write one more line like that I am going to jump out the window.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Teddy on May 22, 2021, 03:40:44 AM
In short - there are people with theories and experts on the case. Sometimes they overlap, not always. Igor is both. If you don't like him for the theory then tread him as the person who know this case inside out.
I know - jumping now.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: bertie on May 22, 2021, 03:52:04 AM
Teddy I would write it in shorter form.

Stupid people pretending to be experts are everywhere, in any field, and the last thing this world needs are more of such.
True experts are rare, in any field, and should be treasured.

You can usually pick a real expert by how they interact when dealing with their special subject - a real expert is always trying to build insight and encouragement in others.
A pretend expert is always trying to make themself look like an expert and just makes the world a more depressing place in the process.

Anyway, I've been back here too long now, see y'all on the flip side🙏

Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Teddy on May 22, 2021, 04:10:27 AM
Anyway, I've been back here too long now, see y'all on the flip side🙏

We are all headed there. All the best in your future endeavors!

Want to add - reading the book will put more thoughts in your head, more ideas where to look and what to ask. The book is not just the theory. It is the volume on the case. Everything and everyone is in it.
We have two members (Jacques-Emile & bertie) on this board that are going away having had their answers, and because they know where to look if they have new questions. I myself, after doing all that is necessary to bring this new book into the world, intend to get back to my travels. The first one I hope to be back to the pass to close the circle.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Igor Pavlov on May 22, 2021, 05:34:33 AM
Do you think it’s possible that there is still someone who was present and actually knows the whole story?
Yes, it is possible. He must be about 80 years old. But the chances are very small.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Mars on May 22, 2021, 09:19:38 AM
Igor that's great. I believe that, given that 80 years is not much of an age today, your book, as it spreads across Russia, will encourage someone to feel an ethical and moral duty to confess. This answer of yours gave me hope.
Title: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Jacques-Emile on May 24, 2021, 07:13:45 AM
Why?  It is testimony and belief, from persons unknown in honor of the nine travelers who died so cruelly, that is why we do this.  We - most of whom were not even born that fateful day - insist that they deserve more than an epitaph of lies and a hasty grave.  They were PERSONS, they were HUMAN, and they deserve a gentle and somber history of the TRUTH of what happened, and for this we explore here.  If I am ever in Yekaterinburg, I shall bury in a small box a copy of the book in Russian, a tasteful distance near their graves in Ivanovskoe and Mikhailovskoe Cemeteries, for they deserve to be buried with the truth, at the best that we can find it now.  The book is not sacred, but the effort to speak the truth of the dead, is.

Before that time, a character in Koestler's Darkness at Noon stated the following brilliancy:

Quote
There are only two conceptions of human ethics and they are at opposite poles.
One of them is Christian and humane, declares the individual to be sacrosanct and asserts that the rules of arithmetic are not to be applied to human units.
The other starts from the basic principle that a collective aim justifies all means, and not only allows, but demands, that the individual should in every way be subordinated and sacrificed to the community which may dispose of it as an experimentation rabbit or a sacrificial lamb. The first conception could be called anti-vivisection morality, the second, vivisection morality.
Whoever is burdened with power and responsibility finds out on the first occasion that he has to choose; and he is fatally driven to the second alternative.
So he speaks, is that true?

I do know that we all walk with one foot in the province of the zek, and one foot in the province of Beria.  We pretend that this is not so, but it is all too easy to slip into puppetry, playing a game of the Dyatlov corpses, moving these poor meat puppets hither and yon, crushing a skull with a rifle but or blasting a chest with explosives or avalanches or such, and we risk profaning the sancrosanct, our brothers and sisters who died in such undeserving ways.

What I completed in my own heart was not solving the ultimate riddle - that will never be done, for every riddle solved brings on the next.  I was done, to the point that I could lay these poor souls down to await their eternity.  I no longer feel quizzical about them, just unbelievably sad for these poor children.  Whether it was God's hand or man's that snuffed them out, whether they died where they lay or were dragged about indifferently by selfish men after their demise, that now lays in the hand of justice other than mine.

I most emphatically endorse and support those who look for the sacredness implicit in justice and truth, for that struggle does honor to these men and women.  Carry on!  But for me, it no longer turns toward the province of the zek, but that of Beria and Stalin.  I must not sport with them any more.  That is my truth, my conscience, not yours.  I wanted to add this because I do not drop these poor souls as though I am bored with them.  It is time for me to bury them in reverence, that is why.
Darkness at Noon, Arthur Koestler 1940.  Also read a remarkable writer, Yevgeny Zamyatin, whose book WE inspired lesser efforts from George Orwell in 1984, Aldous Huxley in Brave New World, and various writings of Alisa Zinovyevna Rosenbaum, graduate of Petrograd State University who wrote as Ayn Rand.
Joy upon all who come here, and gratitude to the writers of 1079.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: MDGross on May 25, 2021, 06:26:12 AM
By asking questions, we honor the memory of the brave Dyatlov nine. Something happened that night because we see the tragic result. Our hope is that some day our questions will be answered at last. Until that day arrives, and perhaps it never will, we will continue to ask questions. To quote Churchill: "...failure is not final; it is the courage to continue that counts."
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: MDGross on May 25, 2021, 06:34:51 AM
Correction (apologies to Sir Winston): "...failure is not fatal; it is the courage to continue that counts."
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: RidgeWatcher on May 25, 2021, 10:59:31 AM
Hello Teddy,

You have answered my question in your book regarding why Nurse Solter would have the need to clean the very dirty six bodies in the morgue, my question was how dirty could they get in the snow and ice, not much unless...

My second question here is after the tragedy occurred in the forest, then why would the makeshift cache be developed. I did read the book and I know a good amount of food provisions were missing but why the cache after the accident? I always picture the mandolin laying there, sadly.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Teddy on May 25, 2021, 12:16:00 PM
my question was how dirty could they get in the snow and ice, not much unless...
They have been in an accident, of course they would be dirty. Some of you want more dirt (EBE), others less dirt (RidgeWatcher), make up your mind.

In our account of events the storage (labaz) was where later the tent was pitched (not by Dyatlov group).
After finding the tent pinned by the tree and bodies in and out (the labaz was flagged with a gaiter and must have been one of the first things they saw on the slope) they flew the bodies found so far (5+1) to the morgue. This is before they felt threatened. They didn't expect a search, it was normal to scavenge the original labaz, fold the tent, keep looking for more bodies till they knew who they are and how many.

Then all hell broke loose. Massive search, they don't know how many are in the group, what will be their injuries, so they hastily put the tent on the slope to account for the scattered items from the original labaz which the snow has covered, put the bodies back since there will be more bodies, so they can't move them away, how will it look when they find the ones still unaccounted for... Then the diary is found, and it says in it that they were planning on building a storage... so the conspirators need to produce a storage... and put in it the items they took from the original storage like boots, mandolin, they add food from the Ivdellag, not really making thorough calculation of the food, they knew what was approximately in the original labaz, they just didn't keep it since there was not suppose to be any investigation. The hikers died in an accident... but before they knew who they were, Moscow, Khrushchev and everyone else was on their heels. They were obviously interrupted, the positioning of the bodies is suggestive of dragging and dumping. The labaz was not even there when the search started. According to Yarovoy, the storage was 10 meters away from the ski track from the search camp to the pass. 30 feet and for 5 days no one saw it going up and down like trail of ants.

In short - the labaz was removed routinely... and then when everyone started looking for a storage they gave them one 10 m away to be found. There are items in this labaz that are hard to explain, like the cardboard on the bottom, where did that come from? The storage was marked with a torn gaiter strung on skis, the whole setup looks like a storage built on a treeless slope, not in a forest. Everyone says that if a storage is left in a forest it has to look differently. When locals are asked what do they think of the Dyatlov group labaz, the answer is where do you see a labaz? This is what a labaz should look like (https://dyatlovpass.com/controversy#labaz), the provisions have to be raised on trees or else they will have the fate of Dubinina's eyes and tongue. Even the fact that the food in the storage was undisturbed means that it was very recently left there, not a month earlier. The labaz was officially found on March 2.

More on the labaz: https://dyatlovpass.com/labaz
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: RidgeWatcher on May 26, 2021, 08:00:35 AM
Thank you, Teddy

You explained that perfectly. There is a lot of information in your book to take it all in at one reading. I think the book really needs two readings.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Teddy on May 26, 2021, 02:05:01 PM
There is a lot of information in your book to take it all in at one reading. I think the book really needs two readings.
I know the information could fill two books. We left out more, could fill a third one easy.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Teddy on May 29, 2021, 01:51:25 PM
Borzenkov said what he had to say about the book, and since he is leaving the forum I have no incentive to answer. Even if he wasn't leaving the forum I need this contemptuous outburst to be broken down into questions I can answer. But Borzenkov doesn't need answers, he is just bickering. For those of you who want to continue conversing with Borzenkov you can do so on this board: Farewell from Borzenkov (https://forum.dyatlovpass.com/index.php?topic=944.0) in case he decides to get back.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: sigaffa on May 31, 2021, 01:21:39 AM
I am coming into this thread a little late, but I finished "1079" today. To Teddy and Igor I wish to say sincere congratulations - I am awestruck as to the amount and depth of the information and facts that the book contains!  bow7 The reason it took me so long to get to the end was my constant desire to further research the information that was presented in the book - both from the mountain of additional information on this forum/website and from other sources on the internet.

As to the book's ending, I am going to say equally and sincerely - well done!

With respect to the DPI (and the other "mysteries that I "follow"  bang1), I am not primarily driven by a need for them to be "solved" ... personally I get far more satisfaction from facts, investigations, forensics etc.

But in saying this, I did find Teddy and Igor's final chapters intriguing - and well worthy of consideration. Now I think what is in order - is a immediate re-read - and then perhaps a few questions!

Once again, bravo to you both!

Kind regards.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Teddy on May 31, 2021, 03:13:12 AM
Thanks sigaffa.

I myself am using the book as a tool. It lists everyone present at a given time and event. Here is an example from what I am working on right now. I am in the process of translating a series of interviews with Sharavin who was on the pass Feb 23-Mar 4 and Apr 6-17 (https://dyatlovpass.com/whois#sharavin). I found this very important drawing he did of the tent (https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/Dyatlov-pass-Sharavin-drawing-ru-en.jpg) the way they found it. While deciphering the writings I had questions I had to clarify. Everything has to be checked with first hand witness testimonies, and the closer to the events the better. There is also a strong tendency of hearsay sneaking into this case. "1079" helps you to track down the best sources of information. Here is an example: I was looking at the writing that says Ru: куски (или шкурка) буженины (of course Igor stepped in) En: wedges of ham (I decided on ham, although literally it should be boiled pork). Now, in the original drawing it seems like they are outside the tent. But then the original drawing is cramped and the arrow pointing inside for the Diaries and Flashlight could be applying to the slices of ham, but then the Diaries were inside the tent, and the Flashlight was on top of the tent, so I searched for a testimony given in 1959 that describes the items found in the tent. I also remember that there were rusks scattered. Sharavin made this drawing in 1999. I wanted the account of the items found in the tent made in 1959 by someone that was present, not a hearsay. And here the book comes handy, the part that so many find tedious and encumbering to read. Go to Chapter 7: February 27 - March 10, 1959. Dyatlov Five.
Quote
In the morning, Tempalov, Chernyshev, and about ten more men, including Maslennikov, Brusnitsyn, Sharavin, Lebedev, Karelin, Atmanaki, and Koptelov, went to dig out the tent. Maslennikov instructed Brusnitsyn to make a list of items recovered in the process of digging out the tent, but the latter was continuously distracted by other matters and could not keep a systematic record. There was no thorough examination of the items on‑site – they would be properly protocolled only in Ivdel. Soon after they began stripping down the tent: there was an order to wind down the inspection of its contents, to put everything back inside the tent, and to bring it to the landing site. Brusnitsyn and Sharavin dragged the tent with its contents for half a mile towards the rock outlier now known as the Boot rock. Three of the four discovered corpses were as well moved up to the pass under heavy wind. The corpses were taken uphill by eight people so that not to damage the frozen bodies. The body of Krivonischenko would be moved to the pass only on March 1.

So we go to read what Brusnitsyn managed to put down Case files 362-369 (https://dyatlovpass.com/case-files-362-369#367):
Quote
Under the tent were laid 8 pairs of skis with their fasteners facing down. Thanks to the dense snow cover, the tent was installed very firmly. Everything is covered with already clammy snow, except for the southern end, fortified on a ski pole and tied to a pair of skis. No stick was found under the northern end; there was no pole.
Snow was cleared with the help of skis and ski poles. Ten people worked without any system. In most cases things everything was pulled out directly from under the snow, so it's very difficult to determine where and how each thing was.
First they took out several blankets, frozen in a ball, then buckets, a stove, 2-3 sacks of rusks, boots, etc. The things in the tent were arranged in the following order. At the bottom were laid rucksacks. Then 2-3 blankets. Next were the quilted jackets and personal belongings of the participants. Buckets, stove, ax, saw were lying at the entrance to the right. Here was part of the products: rusks, sugar, condensed milk, open bag with a loin. The rest of the products were in the far right corner. Most of the shoes lying were placed on the left side of the tent. Two pairs - right in the middle. The rest of the things were in disarray in the tent.
Apparently the group was in the final stage of dressing and preparing for the night at the time of the incident. In the area of the tent near the entrance were found a few wedges from the loin. There are rusks scattered all over inside the tent.


This is how to use the book. Read how it really happened, do look for answers in the popular articles and fictional books who present an obfuscated truth already burdened with the edits to make it easy to read or comply with the rest of the rules of "easy science" or marketing assignment. "1079" is the closest account you will ever find about what happened. If we had had an editor and publisher they would have made this book into a Hollywood movie, and at the end Igor's manuscript would have been still published in some Russian forum, but it is the TRUE ACCOUNT of what happened. These words have been so heavily corrupted by so many titles about the Dyatlov case that they are rendered meaningless.

"1070" was never meant to entertain. It is a tool. Use it or don't, we had to provide it and in doing so I feel relieved.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: sigaffa on June 02, 2021, 05:16:46 PM
It has been five days since I finished the book - and four sleepless nights since then (Teddy/Igor - you my expect a note of thanks to arrive from the Australian Red Cross sometime soon if these sleepless nights continue!)

I am not much of a DPI "theorist", but the final chapter of this book intrigues me. One reason for this is that it presents a theory that puts the "acute" deaths of the three (Dubinina, Zolotarvov & Thibeaux-Brignolle) as the "commencement" of the DPI. This theory - that what happened on the night of Feb 1/2 started with these tragic & violent deaths - has always interested me as a possibility - and I am intending to author a "pseudo-theory" post elsewhere on this forum to invite further discussion on this possibility.

Before I do this, could I raise a few questions here for comments/consideration, please?

Firstly, the comments written on pages 233/234 speak of Dyatlov's intention for a "day of rest", which I had not read about before. If the suggestion is that this "easier" day was before the assent to Mt. Otorten, then was this "easy" day, indeed, the day of February 1st?  With the weather deteriorating and the collective experience of the hikers it is logical to expect that they would make a decision at the start of the day to make that day's hike and activities as easy as possible to 1) make the assent to Mt. Ortorten achievable on February 2nd, but 2) allow also them plenty of time to set up a cache/storage/labaz and then an adequate/comfortable camp (with tent/wood-stove/outside fire, etc)?

Secondly, The map and comments on page 284 suggest the cache/storage/labaz was placed at the approximate (or secondary - according to the book's theory) location of the tent-site prior to the descent to the forest-line to set-up a camp. Apart from Dyatlov'e suggested insistence on this, is it at least possible that the group followed a more direct route from the January 31st campsite to their February 1st campsite (below the forest-line as suggested in the book) and set up the cache/storage/labaz in the immediate proximity of the camp-site? This would mean that they reached the forest-line even earlier in the day and would allow more time for the group to set up an suitably adequate camp in deteriorating weather (e.g. the group divides into three upon arrival - one group sets up the tent and internal stove, the second group constructs the cache/storage/labaz and the third group collects fire-wood and starts an external fire)?

Finally, on page 294, I read the quote from Maslennikov about the "notched" birch trees - I have never seen this quote before - was it part of the final investigate documentation/reports (if so it is VERY frustrating to not have an investigators photograph of it!)?  Of this quote - it certainly suggests that the cuts/notches could be of the type that campers learn to make to suspend objects off the ground (I have done this while camping) - and if the two birches were a sufficient distance from each other - to hang a suspension-style tent from them?

I look forward to feed-back.  Kind regards.

Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Teddy on June 03, 2021, 12:28:13 AM
Finally, on page 294, I read the quote from Maslennikov about the "notched" birch trees - I have never seen this quote before - was it part of the final investigate documentation/reports (if so it is VERY frustrating to not have an investigators photograph of it!)?  Of this quote - it certainly suggests that the cuts/notches could be of the type that campers learn to make to suspend objects off the ground (I have done this while camping) - and if the two birches were a sufficient distance from each other - to hang a suspension-style tent from them?

I will answer this one with my morning coffee and then I have to get out.
Of course you have seen the quoted text but never in this context - last sentence from the first paragraph on p. 69 of E. P. Maslennikov witness testimony (case file 62-75) (https://dyatlovpass.com/case-files-62-75#69)
And yes, these two trees could be the two from which the tent hung on Feb 1, 1959. There is no way to knowing the distance between them unless we go and find them.

More to come, maybe Igor will take over before I get back to it.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Igor Pavlov on June 03, 2021, 01:15:40 AM
Firstly....
Secondly...
Finally...
Yes, Yes & Yes. Our assumptions are the same
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Teddy on June 03, 2021, 03:36:38 AM
More on the labaz. On my Google map the lines are too straight, I was allowed certain number of points per line so the route looks "choppy".


But the fact is that where the tent was found is the point where the intended route back from Otorten is crossing the route to Otorten. If you are to leave supplies for the way back wouldn't you do it at the location where you intend to pass on the way back?

(https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/map-forum.jpg)
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: sigaffa on June 04, 2021, 04:13:10 PM
Finally, on page 294, I read the quote from Maslennikov about the "notched" birch trees - I have never seen this quote before - was it part of the final investigate documentation/reports (if so it is VERY frustrating to not have an investigators photograph of it!)?  Of this quote - it certainly suggests that the cuts/notches could be of the type that campers learn to make to suspend objects off the ground (I have done this while camping) - and if the two birches were a sufficient distance from each other - to hang a suspension-style tent from them?

I will answer this one with my morning coffee and then I have to get out.
Of course you have seen the quoted text but never in this context - last sentence from the first paragraph on p. 69 of E. P. Maslennikov witness testimony (case file 62-75) (https://dyatlovpass.com/case-files-62-75#69)
And yes, these two trees could be the two from which the tent hung on Feb 1, 1959. There is no way to knowing the distance between them unless we go and find them.

More to come, maybe Igor will take over before I get back to it.

... to me, this is yet another of countless examples where the investigative process seems almost unbelievably amateurish. To discover something like this at the site and then not photograph it - or at least describe it with investigative accuracy (e.g. distance between the two notched trees, height of the notches above the ground, distance and heading from, say, the Cedar) ... it just makes me want to  cry2
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Teddy on June 05, 2021, 08:20:57 AM
My understanding is that the investigators didn't bring cameras to the scene. They used the cameras of the dead to take photos, and then some of the searchers (not the investigation) had their own cameras. Only after printing the photos it was decided which ones to include in the case files. Nothing was shot in the course of real investigation work, only on a whim. Then the rolls were sent by a helicopter to be developed in students' bathrooms turned into dark rooms (Bienko); or students (not forensic technicians) called to develop the films in the regional prosecutor's office at 2B Malysheva St.  On the same films that the hikers were smiling were the photos of their dead bodies.

Bychkov's recollections (https://dyatlovpass.com/bychkov):
"We had to print as many photographs from the films of the members of the deceased group as possible in order to distribute the pictures to the families of the deceased, as well as to our friends and members of the UPI hiking club. To our question: why?, Lev Ivanov gave a strange, as it seemed to us, explanation: In case someone wants to imply that what happened is the result of improper leadership and confrontation inside the group... On some films, hiking photographs were followed by photos of corpses taken by those who found the dead."

Askinadzi's recollections (https://dyatlovpass.com/askinadzi) about the discovery of the bodies in May:
"Ivanov behaved surprisingly detached. He didn’t even take enough photos of the crime scene. If I was an investigator, I would be all over the place, documenting everything. And he was indifferent, hands in his pockets. Apparently, everything was clear to him and that's why everything is already indifferent. In my opinion, he did not even approach the bodies."
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Ziljoe on June 05, 2021, 01:43:42 PM
Hi teddy,

All extremely interesting. Do you think the bodies ( of at least the first 5 )were taken to somewhere ,then taken back to the slope and the forest and placed in those positions? .
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Teddy on June 05, 2021, 02:31:23 PM
All extremely interesting. Do you think the bodies ( of at least the first 5 )were taken to somewhere ,then taken back to the slope and the forest and placed in those positions? .

Haven't you read the book?
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Ziljoe on June 05, 2021, 03:11:55 PM
Sorry teddy,

Not yet. I have personal reasons for not being able to. But I have all intentions to do so. I suppose I shouldn't ask until I have read what you have probably already explained. I apologise.

It was just curiosity from Yuri k's shirt in the photo at where he was found and then at the morgue. I asked the question when I joined the forum. It an interesting small difference. I don't want you to have to explain every single thing when you have probably covered it all.

Z,x
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Teddy on June 06, 2021, 12:24:06 AM
This is half of the book.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Manti on June 07, 2021, 12:10:40 PM
I am nearing the end of the book, and I came across this fragment: "the stove, which fell during the avalanche". I think instead of "avalanche", what was meant here is the incident with the tree, right?

Or is it not ok to post fragments like this here?


Actually is there a subforum planned where people who have read the book can ask questions without spoiling it for others? Some questions came up as I am reading but if I posted them here, it would practically reveal everything.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Teddy on June 07, 2021, 02:32:28 PM
"the stove, which fell during the avalanche"

is now "the stove, which broke away during the fall"

Or is it not ok to post fragments like this here?
Actually is there a subforum planned where people who have read the book can ask questions without spoiling it for others? Some questions came up as I am reading but if I posted them here, it would practically reveal everything.

You input is greatly appreciated. It is ok to ask question that give away the theory. Secrecy is an exit we passed long time ago. I will be traveling the next two days but I will address all issues and questions you post in this topic.

This is great help. I was hoping to get support from the forum. I had proof readers for some chapters hence inconsistencies like this. That's the problem with getting help from people that are not fully aware of the case - fall becomes an avalanche.

Thank you again, for buying, reading and trying to help. This is exactly what I need. I say "I" because Igor's manuscript is ok, only the book in English is faulty at times due to the short terms I had for translation and publishing.

Please keep it coming.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Andysek77 on June 10, 2021, 03:24:03 AM
Hi, Teddy.

I'm from the Czech Republic and unfortunately I don't speak English very well. I bought your fascinating book in Kindle version and read it using deepl translator. I just want to ask if I understood everything.

1) The hikers set up a tent in the forest where a tree fell on them, causing various injuries.

2) When the authorities learned of the group's disappearance, they wanted to bring a report to find them immediately. And before they were found, they reported a successful operation. Little did they know that a major investigation was about to unfold. That's why they created the illusion of discovery, and because they announced that they had discovered the tent and the six bodies, they created an illusion. They took the first five bodies and some other unknowns to keep the management happy. Do I understand correctly?

3) They dumped the bodies of Zolo, Ljuda, Tibo into the ravine because the reason for death in the plowing was hypothermia? Later, when the fear of trouble with the authorities had passed, they were "found" again? So the whole action was only because they reported the successful discovery of the tent and the bodies on the hillside, and they couldn't afford to show the tent in the forest and the bodies fatally injured by the tree because it would turn out they were lying?

4) The bodies of Datlov, Zina and Slobodin, as well as Dorosenko and Krivonisenko were manipulated and set up to create a perfect "Potemkin village" perfect deception?

5) The reason for this action was then only because of the lying of the authorities?

6) with the exception of Slobodin, all died in the forest?

7) I ask because I'm not sure I've got this right. It's a huge amount of data and information. Admirable work.

Thanks for answer.
Andy
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Igor Pavlov on June 10, 2021, 04:44:43 AM
1) The hikers set up a tent in the forest where a tree fell on them, causing various injuries.   Yes

2) When the authorities learned of the group's disappearance, they wanted to bring a report to find them immediately. And before they were found, they reported a successful operation. Little did they know that a major investigation was about to unfold. That's why they created the illusion of discovery, and because they announced that they had discovered the tent and the six bodies, they created an illusion. They took the first five bodies and some other unknowns to keep the management happy. Do I understand correctly? No. The local authorities mistakenly decided that the tourists were killed because of the works carried out in that area. To avoid responsibility, it was decided to explain it by natural causes. Before the search began, no one from Ivdel reported on finding the dead. But the search began, and the plan had to be changed.

3) They dumped the bodies of Zolo, Ljuda, Tibo into the ravine because the reason for death in the plowing was hypothermia? Later, when the fear of trouble with the authorities had passed, they were "found" again? So the whole action was only because they reported the successful discovery of the tent and the bodies on the hillside, and they couldn't afford to show the tent in the forest and the bodies fatally injured by the tree because it would turn out they were lying? The bodies were hidden in the stream because they had injuries that did not correspond to the version of death from natural causes

4) The bodies of Datlov, Zina and Slobodin, as well as Dorosenko and Krivonisenko were manipulated and set up to create a perfect "Potemkin village" perfect deception? Yes, so that an official investigation can draw a conclusion about the natural causes of death on their basis

5) The reason for this action was then only because of the lying of the authorities? see above (2)

6) with the exception of Slobodin, all died in the forest? Tourists with serious injuries died in the forest. The others tried to save them, lost their strength and froze in the forest and on the slope

7) I ask because I'm not sure I've got this right. It's a huge amount of data and information. Admirable work. Thank you


Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Andysek77 on June 10, 2021, 09:40:24 AM
Amazing. Thank you very much for your reply.

I'll write a summary, please correct me if I'm getting anything wrong.

1) Datlov's group was at peace in the tent. It says it's nice and warm. They fell asleep. A tree fell. The lightly wounded were dragging out the heavily wounded. They were dying. The rest froze to death, either in the woods or trying to find help.
2) Authorities received a report of the disappearance of the expedition. They feared the tourists were killed by those working for the geologists or by accident. They were afraid they would be held responsible and punished. Disposal.
3) They sent a group not listed anywhere to look for the tourists. (From the plane, a frozen man/woman couple in a hug could be seen). The group found them and the others in the woods. Those who matched the description of "hypothermia" were selected and scattered around the area. So they were "found" later.
4) Those with injuries ended up at the creek where they were later found. Why was Kolevatov among those who succumbed to their wounds and they didn't use his body as well, and an unknown body was used instead? If I understand the references to six bodies and Kolevatov being pulled out of the river with Zolo, Tibo and Lyuda. What did I miss?

The work is amazing. So far I've liked Svetlana Os and her Mansi theory but this is truly incredible. It was a shock to me, I always see them running away from the tent downstairs. By the way, what do you think of the slab avalanche simulation when there was no tent at all. It's interesting that the Marie Celeste case has always been the most shocking with the claim that everything was as if they had left a minute before the ship was discovered and it was a lie. It was the same with the tent. There was no chaos, everything was in order. Now we know why. Interesting what a mystery they've inadvertently created. If they had waited to claim hypothermia and actually found the tent in the woods it wouldn't be one of the most remarkable mysteries of the 20th century.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Igor Pavlov on June 10, 2021, 11:27:03 AM
I'll write a summary, please correct me if I'm getting anything wrong.

1) Datlov's group was at peace in the tent. It says it's nice and warm. They fell asleep. A tree fell. The lightly wounded were dragging out the heavily wounded. They were dying. The rest froze to death, either in the woods or trying to find help. Yes
2) Authorities received a report of the disappearance of the expedition. They feared the tourists were killed by those working for the geologists or by accident. They were afraid they would be held responsible and punished. Disposal. The authorities couldn't get a report of the disappearance of the expedition, because the bodies were discovered from the air in early February, when no one in Sverdlovsk knew about the disappearance of the group
3) They sent a group not listed anywhere to look for the tourists. (From the plane, a frozen man/woman couple in a hug could be seen). The group found them and the others in the woods. Those who matched the description of "hypothermia" were selected and scattered around the area. So they were "found" later. Yes
4) Those with injuries ended up at the creek where they were later found. Why was Kolevatov among those who succumbed to their wounds and they didn't use his body as well, and an unknown body was used instead? If I understand the references to six bodies and Kolevatov being pulled out of the river with Zolo, Tibo and Lyuda. What did I miss? Most likely, the injured could not be pulled out from under the tree. They were later found by a search party. The conclusion about the possibility of their injury was made on the basis of the discovery of bodies under a tree (autopsy was not performed). Most likely Kolevatov was also under the tree

Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Andysek77 on June 10, 2021, 01:13:14 PM
Timeline


1) Some tourists die under a tree. Others in forrest, others manage to get to the slope, where they also die
2) A plane crew working for a geological survey sees the dead bodies and mentions it.
3) The authorities learn that Datlov's expedition has disappeared. They have a report of the bodies from the plane. They report finding the bodies and zhat death was by hypothermia.
4) A special group sent by them arrives at the site, finds a tent in the woods, the bodies and positions them as needed, some hides and moves the tent. The theatre is ready.
5) Official search teams arrive, already on record, and find everything as we know it. The tent, the bodies of the five victims. The. Picture known to world.

Authorities reported finding six, so a sixth/stranger was added?

Btw thank you for answers you gave me.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Teddy on June 11, 2021, 01:08:03 AM
1) Some tourists die under a tree. Others in forrest, others manage to get to the slope, where they also die

2) A plane crew working for a geological survey sees the dead bodies and mentions it.

4) A special group sent by them arrives at the site,

finds a tent in the woods,

Solter says she washed six bodies early February. All six are returned to the pass to be found again after the Dyatlov group was reported missing.

3) The authorities learn that Datlov's expedition has disappeared. They have a report of the bodies from the plane. They report finding the bodies and zhat death was by hypothermia.

the bodies and positions them as needed, some hides and moves the tent. The theatre is ready.

5) Official search teams arrive, already on record, and find everything as we know it. The tent, the bodies of the five victims. The. Picture known to world.

Authorities reported finding six, so a sixth/stranger was added?
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Andysek77 on June 11, 2021, 05:58:37 AM
Thanks again


I hope I'm beginning to understand. So the expedition members really died in early February as officially reported. Several of the bodies were seen by an observer from the plane. A key moment.

The authorities sent a team to check what happened. The bodies were found and taken away. washed and no more was done. The discovery was not reported "upstairs".
Then came the news of the loss of the expedition. So the authorities announced that they had found the students from the expedition and that they had died of hypothermia.

 Then they took the dead bodies back to the pass and created this spectacle.  They moved the tent and hid the remaining bodies that didn't fit by the river to avoid suspicion that they were responsible for their deaths. They weren't frozen, but the wounds killed them.

I just don't understand why they took the six bodies back there and didn't show the dead bodies immediately that they were found and brought back. What was stopping them? Why did they take the bodies back again and make a spectacle of it? Was the reason a sixth body that didn't belong to the expedition?
I'm not quite sure yet. I'm trying understand whole story.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Teddy on June 11, 2021, 07:54:13 AM
You keep saying authorities and sixth body.
The parties that knew are Ivdellag, railway troops and Northern Geological Expedition.
Sverdlovsk, Moscow, and Khrushchev were on in the clear.
There are six bodies brought to the morgue. They are not necessarily the five bodies found in Feb-Mar + 1. Sending bodies to the nearest morgue is routine. The bodies are not identified. There is nothing to report "upstairs". They are waiting for someone to be declared missing.
The perfect storm is because of the telegram to Khrushchev and the 21st mid-term or "​Extraordinary" Congress that took place in Moscow 27 January - 5 February 1959.
They don't expect higher levels to get involved in the search. The external examination in the morgue should have been followed by a funeral. But things went sideways in this particular case.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Andysek77 on June 11, 2021, 09:17:14 AM

Oh, I see, I hope so.

So, after several bodies were spotted by plane, six bodies were brought to the mortuary and nothing was known about them. It can be assumed that they were part of an expedition. I thought the first search party had found the tent in the woods, and therefore all the bodies of Datlov's expedition. That's not what happened. Six bodies were found and taken to the morgue. There was no further search. So the tent may not have been found at all at this point in time and therefore not all the bodies.

Then came the information about the loss of the expedition and the interest of Moscow and Sverdlovsk to find it. Then the panic began, an unknown group of searchers discovered the whole situation / tent and all the bodies. Those that might look like victims of violence (and thus investigation ) were tidied up to the river under the snow. That is, Zolo, Tibo and Ljuda. Kolevatov, too, for some reason.

The rest of them formed the familiar illusion. Thus "from the tent on the mountainside, the tourists fled into the forest and gradually died in a heroic struggle with nature". The groups sent out have already found this scene. Within months everything disappeared from sight and then the remaining four were found but by then the injuries no longer mattered because everything was closed as an accident.

I apologize for all the questions but the fate of the Datlov expedition is a very debated topic , unfortunately there are only known sources about the "mysterious forces" I do not want to in any way misinterpret your work when we discuss the fate of the expedition with other curious people. I don't know if the book will ever be translated into Czech.

Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Teddy on June 11, 2021, 10:48:12 AM
Then came the information about the loss of the expedition and the interest of Moscow and Sverdlovsk to find it. Then the panic began, an unknown group of searchers discovered the whole situation / tent and all the bodies. Those that might look like victims of violence (and thus investigation ) were tidied up to the river under the snow. That is, Zolo, Tibo and Ljuda. Kolevatov, too, for some reason.
Why unknown, the people that found the tent and bodies end of February are very well known.
The conspirators didn't know the injuries. Igor told you that perhaps Kolevatov was found trapped in the tent, or trying to help someone in the tent, and his injuries may have been presumed severe.

The rest of them formed the familiar illusion. Thus "from the tent on the mountainside, the tourists fled into the forest and gradually died in a heroic struggle with nature". The groups sent out have already found this scene. Within months everything disappeared from sight and then the remaining four were found but by then the injuries no longer mattered because everything was closed as an accident.
I am confused by all this.

Here is someone's famous summary of the plot:
-------------------------------------------------------
The group never pitched their tent on the slope – they were too experienced to make that mistake and in any case it made no sense as they had much better shelter from the wind, as well as access to firewood and running water in the forest at the foot of the slope. So that is where they camped on the night of Feb 1st.

A freak accident – a falling tree - caused the traumatic injuries suffered by five members of the group. Lyudmila who suffered the worst injuries probably died 15 minutes afterwards. The others tried their best to liberate their friends from under the tree and attend to their injuries but they didn’t manage and they eventually froze to death. Leaders in Ivdel (Ivdellag, railway troops and Northern Geological Expedition) feared they might be blamed for the hikers’ deaths – maybe they had failed to observe safety regulations in some way? So they colluded with party members and local police to cover up the real reason for the young people’s deaths. The bodies were taken from the morgue and spread out on the slope and under the cedar tree and pitched their tent up the slope to make it look like a case of hypothermia  but threw the four  students with the most serious traumas from the tree accident  into a crevice/pit so they wouldn’t be discovered until much later and the cause of their deaths would be hard to determine.
-------------------------------------------------------

Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Andysek77 on June 11, 2021, 01:11:48 PM
Of course.
1) They learned of the dead bodies from the plane. The girl and the man in the hug were frozen if I remember correctly.
2) They sent someone to get the bodies. Six bodies were found and taken to the morgue. So far, normal procedure as you wrote. The dead awaiting identification and burial. Only six bodies and not nine or the tent in the woods was found during the first search. Otherwise, nine would have been brought in. At least that's what I think.

3) The news of the lost expedition came and panic and the idea of getting rid of responsibility arose. The conspirators sent a group to find the area again. They found rest of bodies, tent and moved tent  to the hillside. Threw four bodies into the ravine and spread the other corpses. Igor, Zina and Slobodin up the slope. Dora and Krivo to the cedar.
4) Then they sent another group to officially search and they found everything as we know it.

This is what I thought. I mean, someone brought the bodies to the morgue. The second then made Potemkin Village, and the third was the one who had no idea he was moving in a setup prepared by the conspirators. That's how I thought it went down.
May be i am wrong not sure.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Teddy on June 11, 2021, 01:24:59 PM
4) Then they sent another group to officially search and they found everything as we know it.

The official search was not sent by the conspirators. It was sent by Sverdlovsk and Moscow. The conspirators inserted themselves into the search when they had other problems to take care of - mining, building railroads, catching escaped prisoners... Their participation in the search is not justified... unless they wanted to be closer to what will be found, and to be able to make last moment adjustments to the discoveries e.g. the storage (aka labaz).
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Andysek77 on June 11, 2021, 01:51:21 PM

Yeah,
That's what I meant. Sorry my bad english.  The conspirators had the theater made. Tent, bodies for official investigators to find what the conspirators wanted and draw the conclusion the conspirators wanted. And it's likely they put someone on the oficial search team.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Earthland on June 16, 2021, 01:04:21 PM
I watched the fictional Russian series about the incident, and I found the way they depicted the avalanche and all that followed as very convincing (especially after the new scientific study that was made this year). However, I knew how heavily fictionalized everything was and I didn't want to live with the impression that avalanche is the most probable explanation, if I had got this idea in fact from a fictionalized TV series. That prompted me to buy the book from Amazon and get myself really to know the facts.

I can see that a huge work has gone into this book, but frankly, it was difficult for me to read this. Even when I skipped the life stories of people, there was too much detail. I think it went downhill for me after the endless listing of the different search groups began, it was hard to digest all the information (the part before this, description of the hike before the accident, was very good!). At first I skipped the chapter "so turns the wheel", as it looked to me as just a background information of prior accidents. Now, of course, I understand that this is probably the most important chapter in the book. I read the last chapter of the book - very well written - and then turned back to "so turns the wheel", but it's still hard to detect where the important stuff begins in this chapter, and I'm still kind of at loss with understanding, what was this conspiracy about and why was it needed.

I agree the important part was to get the theory out, but now that it is out, I also hope the book will be continuously improved, it certainly has material of a bestseller - but in current form I feel as if it needs the willpower of a dedicated dyatlovist to go through all the details and understand what it is really about.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Teddy on June 16, 2021, 11:53:58 PM
I watched the fictional Russian series about the incident, and I found the way they depicted the avalanche and all that followed as very convincing
I loved the movie but the avalanche part was pulled out of thin air for the lack of better idea.

It needs the willpower of a dedicated dyatlovist to go through.
Very well said. I wanted to put this in the cover.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Manti on June 18, 2021, 08:37:54 AM
Some more thoughts on the book...

The Dyatlov Pass Incident is interesting because it's a mystery: several things seem hard to explain. Of course what these things are differ somewhat for everyone...

There are so many of such mysterious details, let me just focus on one: how did the hikers die? With the tent on the slope, it's really hard to explain the injuries of Lyuda, Thibo and Semyon. So the book does a great job demystifying this. A falling tree causing these injuries is plausible.


But then the reader finishes the book and some questions in are still unanswered in their head. To stay with the same question: how did the rest of the hikers die?

Here are purely my thoughts of how I would think:


Several of my friends are stuck under a tree. Thibo is probably unconscious but still has a pulse. The others might have been conscious. We need to free them! Let's try lifting the tree. Let's assume it's not successful, the tree is too heavy.

At this point the rest of us are getting a bit cold. All of our clothes and boots are in the tent, just put these on. It only takes half a minute.
Then continue trying to save those under the tree perhaps by trying to saw the trunk into smaller pieces. After all they had a saw. Perhaps send two or three to start a fire, as 2 are enough to operate the saw. When the fire is ready, we swap, they continue the sawing and we warm up by the fire. Perhaps even this fails, the tree is too thick.

Those stuck under the tree no longer show signs of life.


At this point, there are 5 very shocked, but otherwise healthy and fit hikers with only superficial injuries, a fire, warm clothes, a stove that by all accounts wasn't damaged, enough food for a week... I don't see any reason why they would die.


Their tent is perhaps stuck under a tree, what I would try is cut it in half and try to repair that half, then try to make it back to Vizhay. But even without a tent, they had hope. They passed a Mansi hut next to Auspiya which could be used for an overnight stay in this emergency. They passed caves where they could shelter and at 2nd Northern there is a usable house.

So I would like if the book expanded on this more. Perhaps even an additional chapter about what happened in the hours after the tree fell? Why did those only lightly injured not even put on boots and their coat?


(As I understand, the conspirators never found Dyatlov's body, and he was without a coat and boots.)

Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Ziljoe on August 10, 2021, 05:05:00 AM
The book is like an 8 course meal with all the steak , ice cream , beans, cake and caviar thrown on a single plate to be accompanied by fortified wine .

There's one hell of a lot going on here. It is going to take time chewing this lot. I can see why there has been some negative comments because it does seem to jump about in some places.

However, this is the nature of the Dyatlovpass and the more I invest in reading it , the more interesting I'm finding it. This can not of been easy to put together so I totally respect that. I don't even know how you could of ascertained some of the information.

I don't actually think there would be an easier way to put such complex information together. I understand that some people would maybe like things explained easier but i agree that it's best suited to Dyatlov devotees.

There are some leaps of faith in what I've read so far and I'm sure I'll have some questions but I'll read it a couple of times (or more ) to make sure I understand the facts being presented.

Some ireally nteresting new links and explanations for sure . Good job to you and Igor and I don't know where you get the time from. 

All the best.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Teddy on August 11, 2021, 07:11:00 AM
Thank you for reading the book. I never said it's going to be easy. It reads like a thesis.
This is the work of Igor Pavlov's lifetime. It took him 10 years to figure it out.
In the last year I felt some eagerness to publish the book, and I was none the wiser. I am still fixing and uploading issues but overwhelmed with deep relief that I published it while he was alive to see it.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: Ziljoe on August 11, 2021, 08:20:02 AM
Thank you for publishing it . It covers a lot about all the anomalies in communication at the time and gives credence to a lot of the reports/statements that have remained as just hearsay.
Title: Re: Thoughts on the book
Post by: thealexhiggins on August 22, 2021, 02:41:15 PM
I certainly wouldn't bury supplies there, the marker would get blown away and you'd never find them again.

That is a very valid point to make.