Recent Posts

1

General Discussion / Re: Is there evidence for outsiders?

« Last post by Arjan on Today at 12:27:36 PM »

No evidence, but a physical obvious option/possibility.

In case the tent was on the place where it had been found by the first search party, this provides the next option.
 
In case if two or more group members had stayed in the re-erected tent on one ski-pole (as visible on the photo's made by the first search party),
than under normal weather conditions, one or two group members could easily return to '2nd settlement and Vizhay' and or to the 'Mansi settlement' nearby without leaving hardly any traces in the snow.

This option leaves room for:
1. Yuri Yudin leaving the group from the tent site
2. Semyon leaving the group, while a local 'guide' might be found in the ravine by the second search party
3. An unknown group member had left the tent site - to look for help - and she/he might have survived.

Ad 3. I have always been curious about this photo as mentioned at Dyatlovpass-com.



With a low certainty (less than 10 %), she might have been a 10th group member at the tent site.

Personally, I don't dispose this kind of options on beforehand, because I try to solve the case.
In this case the devil is in the details.

2

General Discussion / Re: Is there evidence for outsiders?

« Last post by Arjan on Today at 11:58:54 AM »

A few weeks ago, I have promised to come back on my search where I may have read that Yuri Yudin had used very long skis.

I have found no other kind of confirmation in the books that I have about this case.

Scanning my memory, I have two other possible sources:
1. interviews available on 'www.dyatlovpass.dom'
2. two facebook groups

Ad 1. for me it is not feasible to go through all entries - available via the search and keyword 'skis' - on dyatlovpass.com
Ad 2. I have left both facebook groups.

The result is: the photo above - showing Yuri Yudin - standing before long skis is my only source (with limited reliability) at this moment, that is available to me.

3

General Discussion / New variant of my book (Force majeure on Dyatlov pass)

« Last post by Axelrod on Today at 08:00:12 AM »

Hello people!

I know aboit DPI from winter 1997-98, because my mother (born 1933)
and her couses Lena (1938-2024) was wife of Moisei Akselrod (1932-1998).
I was born 3/3/1976...

We were interesting again about DPI after connecting her by Skype

New variant to my book (in 3 volumes) is ready.
First version of trilogy (800 pages) - written during 4 months between (January 9,2023 - May 8,2023) - was placed here as reference a year ago in old topic.
During last 12 months i Prepared a new variant by extending it to 1600 pages.
Maybe you find answers to all your question. Otherwise tell me about your problem.

English (auto-translated) variant:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1kEu4Kjc086-6YKqMRq-6OLSk3oAhv0pi/view?usp=sharing
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1FCNUKznvPa9s5yNtela1iTmSvSztfmJg/view?usp=sharing
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1rlPYK91pwDRx3bcB6Fg7GfEpyAoX0s8y/view?usp=sharing

Russian (original) version:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1RGzJpLYtlWttEV7FuSIyvFRQhK_BBpHg/view?usp=sharing
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1nRz_f9fRxSZ1ceUhtUDVPIQJEKPYoVio/view?usp=sharing
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1TL9sEfIYbt29W_W1osQdjb7p29Jks5NH/view?usp=sharing

LAST ADDITION:Отдельным файлом сегодняшняя добавка 2 страницы к 3-му тому (треть мегабайта)
https://drive.google.com/file/d/16bC5dk78HbEem2iNMqmXqGkG7Q3H4D3Z/view?usp=sharing

Здравствуйте! Моя книга "Форс-мажор на перевалe Дятлова" в 3 томах, в сумме на 1600 (1606) страниц
практически готова, но осталось править текст, где что не так...
 

4

General Discussion / Re: The exhumation is not Semyon Zolotarev

« Last post by GlennM on Today at 05:58:35 AM »

This is Zolotaryov's rib cage. At the exhumation he is even missing a whole floating rib. But then again the second rib on our right doesn't belong there, it is a piece of a larger rib.
In any case there is no such thing as "no piece is missing so this is not Zolotaryov".

Those teeth, how white they are.
I still marvel that these bones were exhumed, laid on a tarp and arranged in a graveyard. What a very liberal way ofmdoing things.

5

General Discussion / Re: The exhumation is not Semyon Zolotarev

« Last post by WinterLeia on Today at 04:44:09 AM »

Ziljoe, good to read your reply. Do you get the sense that Zolo's exhumation moves the needle on this mystery? Assuming the remains are his, I suppose nothing but bone was found. No embedded rocks, no rocket, nor bomb shards, no lead and no suspiciously high levels of radiation on hands or anywhere else. I have a distinct feeling this thread reinforces those who advocate for conspiracy, seeking proof from those bones.

If I read the forensic report on DyatlovPass.com correctly, he was dead before any healing could commence. And that points to post mortem crushing injuries.

I try to keep an open mind. It would be great if there were obvious discrepancies, like a completely different description from the autopsy of the teeth for example. Such facts would guide us all in a similar direction, but alas, we have nothing conclusive.

I do look at the photos and try to find anything that would contradict the statements, autopsy and reports etc but ultimately everything seems to be as said. For example, Zina has a comb in her pocket with two broken teeth, this is reported and we can see it in a photo. Slobodin is reported to have had two insoles under his jumper, in his thawed photo by the window, we can see a raised area under the jumper that is most likely the insoles. For me, It's this accuracy that makes it difficult to believe that there's any cover up and by that , I mean with regards to those doing the searching and autopsies , dental observations, skull fractures, missing eyes/tongue etc , it's all reported to be seen and known by the public when it could have been hidden. The details are there and they seem to match up in the most part, including the diary entries , chronological order of events. We just don't have an answer for why the hikers would leave their tent poorly equipped, all we have is nature to blame but I fully understand the approach that it may have been outsiders , but again, there's nothing conclusive.

I'm not expert enough to understand the autopsy  and I'm not sure about when healing starts or stops. Could the cause of the rib fractures be at the actual time of death? If so , could that also reflect the same results of there being no healing?.

My point being, if it was a tree that crushed them or the collapse of a snow cave in the ravine, this would or could have been instant death? .

There are some cases where that has happened. I know that two of the victims of the 1980 eruption of Mount Saint Helens were killed by a falling tree. But I don’t know if that’s a good comparison. They suffered head injuries, not broken ribs. Also, the force with which the tree hit them might have played a part. I know the winds on Dyatlov pass are strong and very deadly. But I highly doubt they compare to the blast from a stratovolcano that mows trees down like they were blades of grass. In all the other cases I found, the victims either lingered for awhile. Or it couldn’t be determined because they were trapped and rescuers had to spend valuable time getting to them.

It’s kind of hard to tell, though, with natural disasters if the person died instantly, just because of the pandemonium that ensues in its wake. It would probably be in the autopsy report, if they did an autopsy. But I highly doubt those are accessible to the general public.

Personally, though, I don’t see any reason to question the medical examiner, who was very clear about the fact that they did not die of exposure and probably lingered for a time afterwards. I’m not the medical expert. He is. And the only reason he would lie about something like that is if there was a cover-up, which is fine if you think outsiders were involved, but not very conducive to someone being killed by a quirk of nature. No one is going to charge an avalanche or a tree with murder.

6

General Discussion / Re: The exhumation is not Semyon Zolotarev

« Last post by anna_pycckux on Today at 01:13:34 AM »

Here expert Nikitin takes Zolotarev’s sternum in his hand and we see that it is solid. In addition, the expert does not say that this is only part of the sternum.

Where is the written expert opinion with the signature and seal, as it should be?

7

General Discussion / Re: The exhumation is not Semyon Zolotarev

« Last post by GlennM on May 11, 2024, 09:37:59 PM »

Sternum has three parts. I only see two. Does anybody see the upper portion called the manubrium? This part of the sternum connects to the clavicles which are called collar bones in my country. If not, is that fact germane to the record?

8

General Discussion / Re: The exhumation is not Semyon Zolotarev

« Last post by Ziljoe on May 11, 2024, 07:19:44 AM »

Ziljoe, good to read your reply. Do you get the sense that Zolo's exhumation moves the needle on this mystery? Assuming the remains are his, I suppose nothing but bone was found. No embedded rocks, no rocket, nor bomb shards, no lead and no suspiciously high levels of radiation on hands or anywhere else. I have a distinct feeling this thread reinforces those who advocate for conspiracy, seeking proof from those bones.

If I read the forensic report on DyatlovPass.com correctly, he was dead before any healing could commence. And that points to post mortem crushing injuries.

I try to keep an open mind. It would be great if there were obvious discrepancies, like a completely different description from the autopsy of the teeth for example. Such facts would guide us all in a similar direction, but alas, we have nothing conclusive.

I do look at the photos and try to find anything that would contradict the statements, autopsy and reports etc but ultimately everything seems to be as said. For example, Zina has a comb in her pocket with two broken teeth, this is reported and we can see it in a photo. Slobodin is reported to have had two insoles under his jumper, in his thawed photo by the window, we can see a raised area under the jumper that is most likely the insoles. For me, It's this accuracy that makes it difficult to believe that there's any cover up and by that , I mean with regards to those doing the searching and autopsies , dental observations, skull fractures, missing eyes/tongue etc , it's all reported to be seen and known by the public when it could have been hidden. The details are there and they seem to match up in the most part, including the diary entries , chronological order of events. We just don't have an answer for why the hikers would leave their tent poorly equipped, all we have is nature to blame but I fully understand the approach that it may have been outsiders , but again, there's nothing conclusive.

I'm not expert enough to understand the autopsy  and I'm not sure about when healing starts or stops. Could the cause of the rib fractures be at the actual time of death? If so , could that also reflect the same results of there being no healing?.

My point being, if it was a tree that crushed them or the collapse of a snow cave in the ravine, this would or could have been instant death? .

9

General Discussion / Re: Avalanche theory

« Last post by WinterLeia on May 11, 2024, 04:17:39 AM »

There only thing Occam’s Razorish about the avalanche theory, or slab slip theory, if you prefer, is that weather and nature-related theories don’t require as many assumptions as, say, murder or military testing

Quite right.  The most consistent with Occam's principle are those explanations of existing facts  that contain the fewest number of assumptions. That's exactly what I meant.

shouldn’t base your theory on the non-existent evidence.

None of the existing hypotheses has evidence. And most likely, they will no longer exist. All we can use in our search for truth are arguments.

Verdict on what caused the hikers to flee the tent: An unknown compelling force. That is the only theory that fits all evidence and requires the least amount of assumptions.

Thanks, Partog. You’re the only one who gets the point I was trying to make. While I don’t agree with the avalanche theory, I don’t have a problem with G & P believing it and writing a research paper, Nor do I have a problem with people agreeing with them and voicing their opinions. The absolutely frustrating thing about this case is that, other than Big Foot and alien visitors (in my opinion), no theory can be completely ruled out, although some obviously are far better than others. But that only bolsters my point. Since a lot of people who read research papers or books or watch documentaries about the tragedy do it because they have neither the time nor the inclination to deep dive into the source material, they are trusting you to present a fair and accurate case for your theory. True, it would always be way better to do the research for yourself. But many people don’t, and it doesn’t help anything to mislead the audience by not presenting both sides of the case and then let their audience be the jury. All it does is breed distrust. Especially is this the case, if you’re an expert in the field or the one responsible for putting the official report together, since opinions of such people carry far more weight than most everyone else. That’s the main reason why I tend to harp on the avalanche theory.

And I have to admit that after reading Teddy’s book, I was also skeptical of that theory. But I found her to be far more balanced and fair, in comparison to G & P. Even more admirably, she lets us discuss other theories on the forum, and thus provides the back and forth one needs to come to an informed decision, especially in the face of a supreme lack of evidence and not even knowing if what evidence we have relates to the tragedy.

10

General Discussion / Re: The exhumation is not Semyon Zolotarev

« Last post by Олег Таймень on May 10, 2024, 11:26:29 PM »