Theories Discussion > Avalanche

Alleged slab slide that left no trace

<< < (2/5) > >>

GlennM:
Charles, you are certainly providing a compelling arguement. Let us review:

Their model should integrate these many thin and hard icy layers and the absence of overburden and the gentle slope under 30°... but it does not.
The rescuers moved about large blocks of compacted snow. Where did it come from? I think a slab slip. The slope is claimed to be less than 30 degrees, but who measured it in `59? Somebody could have said" where did all this come from." as they cleared the tent, but since they were not asked for their opinion, nothing was recorded.Further, before the ledge collapsed on the tent, perhaps the angle or slope was sufficient. This is speculation, but the snow on and around the tent is not.

And that's why:

- There are no testimonies of signs of avalanche observed by rescuers.

Good point, but there was residual snow on and around the tent and also there was the passage of time before the discovery. Were not the three who returned to the tent buried in blown snow?

- There are no signs of avalanche on the photos.

an avalanche is a macro event, a slab slide is micro

- The experienced mountaineers who were on site like Pashin didn't see any signs of avalanche and didn't speak about avalanche.

Could it be that historically the attention of the rescue party was not focused on avalanche nor slab slip, but rather discovery of the tourists? Too, is it true that an avalanche scours the slope of trees? At elevation  880, there were no trees, hence making an avalanche unlikely to detect. A slab slip though is localized

- The soviet authorities themselves couldn't conclude to an avalanche, of any kind, they had to speak about "unknown compelling force".

Agreed,, but could the slab slip be the unknown compelling force by another name?

Gaume and Puzrin just used the DPI for easy self-promotion, probably they needed funding for their department at their university... and their pseudo-scientific pseudo-experiment is a disgrace

In the academic arena, peer review and reputation are the basic tools for credibility. Could it be that the professional community was so indifferent to their findings that their conclusions went unchallenged?

GlennM:
Charles, I do not mind dancing with you provided you stop stepping on my shoes. Tone down the ad hominem stuff and we can get along just fine.

I agree an avalanche would be detected from a copter, but a slip covered by drifted snow after all that time? Perhaps not so much. I am not surprised that nobody cited a slab slide as a cause. Who among them had been in one? Too, without knowing the incline of the ledge prior to its collapse on the tent, all conclusions, including the latest official one are speculative with regard to a slab slip. To me, it just makes more practical sense. They very well could have sheltered in the lee of a hummock of snow with a sufficient angle.

I think the injuries suffered by the hikers can indeed be explained as altercation wounds, but this too is speculation. Additionally, it requires a greater number of basic assumptions and the ignoring of that which does not agree with the hypothesis. A natural catastrophe also requires assumptions, but consistent with the actual evidence of the tragedy.As it pertains to the slab slide, the assumption that there were sufficient conditions for the snow to collapse the tent seem reasonable.

If humans with malicious intent are to blame,  follow the money.  If Nature caused it, the story ends there.

GlennM:
Charles, your YouTube video of a spontaneous slab slip appears very similar to the debris in and around the tent. If continuing winds softened the fractured edge of snow after the slide, a slab slip certainly seems probable. It may have been more than probable is any of the hikers stood above the tent prior to collapse. There is nothing to suggest anyone did.

I do think that traces of a recent slide could be obscured by inclement weather.

The thing for me is that everything that follows their leaving the tent requires no additional rationalization. It is a cascading sequence of unfortunate circumstances and conditions. I believe when Zolo claimed the world know about their hike, it was enthusiastic hyperbole since they were attempting 200 miles of rough,dangerous travel.

Ziljoe:
@charles.

Is the photo from Puzrin and Gaume ? The photo you talk about with the red, blue, green and yellow lines?

Игорь Б.:
Возможность схода лавин, оползней, толщина снега, крутизна склона и т.п. не имеет значения.

Имеет значение только:

1.) отсутствие на месте палатки обледеневшего "лавинного" снега или хотя бы остатков его нижнего слоя, который невозможно копать лыжами и лыжными палками и в который невозможно их даже воткнуть.
2.) наличие такого же обледеневшего снега в следах-столбиках, которые не смог раздуть тот же ветер, что и на месте палатки.

Таким образом, любые разновидности "лавинных" версий опровергнуты быстро, просто, понятно, без всяких заумных схем и расчётов, раз и навсегда.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page