September 25, 2021, 02:14:18 PM
Dyatlov Pass Forum

Author Topic: Thoughts on the book  (Read 13919 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

February 26, 2021, 11:11:00 AM
Reply #60
Offline

sarapuk

Case-Files Achievement Recipient
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.
DB
 

February 27, 2021, 12:00:04 PM
Reply #61
Offline

sarapuk

Case-Files Achievement Recipient
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.
DB
 

March 02, 2021, 04:47:41 PM
Reply #62
Online

RMK


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:
  • Collating the times and locations of UFO sightings on the night of February 16-17 to sketch the course of the airborne object.
  • Detecting the presence of "unaccounted persons" during the search operation.
  • Satisfactorily explaining the conflicting dates of February 6th, 26th, and 28th on the criminal case (I was VERY impressed!).
  • Placing geologists, supported by sappers, in the vicinity of Mt. Otorten around the time of the Incident.
  • Establishing a falling tree as a credible cause of injuries, especially those of the "Ravine 4".
  • Making the case that the Dyatlov company stopped for a day of rest on February 1st.

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:
  • I was frustrated that the book (the English edition, at least) did not always make it clear when it was describing something that is documented fact, or something that the authors inferred.
  • No concise timeline of the whole affair.  I suggest that future editions of the book should include a timeline that clearly distinguishes between documented facts and author-inferred events.
  • No subject or person index.
  • The prose was awkward at times, sounding "unnatural" to a native English speaker.  But, that was only confined to a few chapters.  Chapter 9, in particular, would benefit a lot from advice from a professional, native-Anglophone editor.

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:
  • 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?
  • 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?
  • 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?
  • 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)?
  • 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?
  • How many dead bodies had the conspirators found before Col. Shapovalov learned about the hikers' deaths?

All in all, nice work on the book, Teddy & Igor!  thumb1
 

March 08, 2021, 08:18:03 AM
Reply #63
Offline

ash73


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.
 

March 08, 2021, 09:20:24 AM
Reply #64
Offline

ash73


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.
 

March 11, 2021, 03:58:19 PM
Reply #65
Offline

ash73


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.
 

March 12, 2021, 03:18:19 AM
Reply #66
Offline

ash73


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.
 

March 12, 2021, 05:25:37 AM
Reply #67
Offline

ash73


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.
 

March 25, 2021, 04:00:56 AM
Reply #68
Offline

Teddy

Administrator
  • 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
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

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" 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

Churkina is ordered to examine only the cuts in the tent. These are th only two questions she needs to write about. Her son says that she is not allowed to do anything more than that.
  • Is Dyatlov group tent cut?
  • If yes, are the cuts made from inside or outside?

Churkina mentions 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.
 

March 25, 2021, 04:54:35 AM
Reply #69
Online

RMK


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.
 

March 25, 2021, 07:28:44 AM
Reply #70
Offline

Teddy

Administrator
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.
« Last Edit: March 25, 2021, 07:33:08 AM by Teddy »
 

March 25, 2021, 07:51:45 AM
Reply #71
Offline

Teddy

Administrator
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.
 

April 16, 2021, 09:54:33 PM
Reply #72
Offline

Teddy

Administrator
 

April 17, 2021, 08:34:41 PM
Reply #73
Online

RMK


  • No subject or person index.

Who is who

Кто есть Кто

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...
 

April 18, 2021, 02:11:11 AM
Reply #74
Offline

Teddy

Administrator
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.
« Last Edit: April 18, 2021, 07:29:26 AM by Teddy »
 

April 18, 2021, 03:03:11 AM
Reply #75
Offline

Teddy

Administrator
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?
 

April 18, 2021, 03:21:36 PM
Reply #76
Online

RMK


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).
 

April 18, 2021, 03:52:40 PM
Reply #77
Offline

Teddy

Administrator
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?
 

April 19, 2021, 12:20:41 AM
Reply #78
Offline

jsmith


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!
 

April 19, 2021, 12:49:56 AM
Reply #79
Offline

Teddy

Administrator
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
 

April 21, 2021, 10:36:42 AM
Reply #80
Offline

spotterroe


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.
« Last Edit: April 21, 2021, 10:54:42 AM by Teddy »
 

April 21, 2021, 10:53:17 AM
Reply #81
Offline

Monty


If a tree fell in a forest and there was no one there to hear it would it make a sound?
 

April 21, 2021, 11:01:05 AM
Reply #82
Offline

Teddy

Administrator
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.
 

April 22, 2021, 02:23:13 PM
Reply #83
Offline

Star man

Case-Files Achievement Recipient
If a tree fell in a forest and there was no one there to hear it would it make a sound?

No
 

April 22, 2021, 02:46:02 PM
Reply #84
Offline

Star man

Case-Files Achievement Recipient
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
 

April 22, 2021, 03:41:50 PM
Reply #85
Offline

Teddy

Administrator
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...
 

April 22, 2021, 05:45:02 PM
Reply #86
Offline

spotterroe


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"?
« Last Edit: April 22, 2021, 08:23:53 PM by Teddy »
 

April 22, 2021, 09:09:59 PM
Reply #87
Offline

Teddy

Administrator
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?
« Last Edit: April 22, 2021, 09:15:24 PM by Teddy »
 

April 22, 2021, 09:27:09 PM
Reply #88
Offline

Teddy

Administrator
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.
 

April 22, 2021, 11:22:06 PM
Reply #89
Offline

NkZ


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?