Dyatlov Pass Forum
Theories Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: Dona on March 22, 2021, 12:29:13 PM
-
Their eyes popped out on their own with the crushing chest injuries..Eyes do that with extreme internal pressure.. They have been known to pop out even with a strangling..
-
That makes sense, how did they get the pressure on their chest?
-
Thats the question, isnt it.. What the heck crushed their ribs..There are 23 rib fractures between the 2 of them..
-
Their eyes popped out on their own with the crushing chest injuries..Eyes do that with extreme internal pressure.. They have been known to pop out even with a strangling..
It must have been one hell of a pressure then. And what about the other injuries like missing Tongue. And also some Flesh parts having appeared to have been surgically removed ! ?
-
She had her mouth open and water was rushing o it.. Taking the tongue is one thing. but the floor of her mouth was gone..down into her neck..
-
Their eyes popped out on their own with the crushing chest injuries..Eyes do that with extreme internal pressure.. They have been known to pop out even with a strangling..
It's an interesting point i haven't heard before. But Nicolai would have experienced the greatest skull pressure and his eyes stayed in place. Another theory for the damage to Semyon and Lyudmila is that as the meltwater made the bodies mobile they stayed frozen at the head, eventually detaching leaving "bits" behind. still frozen into the ice.
As for the injuries, the evidence points to being crushed under the snow (no bruising). There's lots of possible causes, my favourite is a slab slide due to unnaturally high temperatures. If you look at the photos of the den after being dug out the side of the snow "wall" behind the man sanding there looks like "settled rubble" = avalanche/slab slide?
-
The problem with the snow crushed them theory is that they were not under snow.. Their clean hands prove that. They weren't digging a den. Also, their bodies are perpendicular to the creek..
-
They had a knife to cut the poles. The poles would make useful "spades" for digging. Pieces of fabric would enable removal of snow. More fabric would wrap around the poles to save hands. Two men fully dressed one with gloves.
-
The problem with the snow crushed them theory is that they were not under snow.. Their clean hands prove that. They weren't digging a den. Also, their bodies are perpendicular to the creek..
I have to admit; I'm confused. In the other thread, you said they were under frozen snow. There are pictures of them being dug out from under the snow. They were under snow.
-
In May they were under snow.. In February, they were not..
-
In May they were under snow.. In February, they were not..
Why not?
-
They laid on top of the snow.. by May, they were covered..They didnt dig..their hands are not injured.
-
They laid on top of the snow.. by May, they were covered..They didnt dig..their hands are not injured.
The ends of Dubinina's fingers were missing, according to the autopsy. How would you determine they weren't injured?
-
They laid on top of the snow.. by May, they were covered..They didnt dig..their hands are not injured.
That's your guess, others guess different.
-
The ends of Dubinina's fingers were missing, according to the autopsy. How would you determine they weren't injured?
[/quote]
"....fingers are covered with wrinkled ‘bath skin’ which is removed together with the nail plate."
-
It's not a guess.. Their hands are NOT injured. Fact.
-
It's not a guess.. Their hands are NOT injured. Fact.
Why should their hands be injured from digging a snow den? Lots of people dig dens without getting injured?
-
Snow is ice crystals.. mini razor blades. Brutal on bare hands.
-
Snow is ice crystals.. mini razor blades. Brutal on bare hands.
That totally depends on the snow conditions. Digging in frozen hard snow will do that to your hands, digging in soft freshly fallen snow won't. Neither will wet snow.
-
Ice is still ice..in any form.
-
Snow is ice crystals.. mini razor blades. Brutal on bare hands.
I better not ever throw any snowballs then... Hang on...
-
Certainly not every 3 seconds, for half an hour, on someones bare skin.
-
She had her mouth open and water was rushing o it.. Taking the tongue is one thing. but the floor of her mouth was gone..down into her neck..
Not sure what you are getting at ! ?
-
Their eyes popped out on their own with the crushing chest injuries..Eyes do that with extreme internal pressure.. They have been known to pop out even with a strangling..
It's an interesting point i haven't heard before. But Nicolai would have experienced the greatest skull pressure and his eyes stayed in place. Another theory for the damage to Semyon and Lyudmila is that as the meltwater made the bodies mobile they stayed frozen at the head, eventually detaching leaving "bits" behind. still frozen into the ice.
As for the injuries, the evidence points to being crushed under the snow (no bruising). There's lots of possible causes, my favourite is a slab slide due to unnaturally high temperatures. If you look at the photos of the den after being dug out the side of the snow "wall" behind the man sanding there looks like "settled rubble" = avalanche/slab slide?
Crushed under the snow ! ? People have been buried in Avalanches and got out virtually unscathed.
-
It's not a guess.. Their hands are NOT injured. Fact.
I disagree. It is not fact. It isn't possible to determine if their hands were injured or not, especially since Dubinina's fingertips were not present, we have no picture of her hands and we would not be able to determine anything now, as there would be little to no soft tissue left, even if they could exhume.
-
The problem with the snow crushed them theory is that they were not under snow.. Their clean hands prove that. They weren't digging a den. Also, their bodies are perpendicular to the creek..
The position of the bodies certainly doesnt lend itself well to the snow crushed Theory. Its like they were placed there.
-
That's right. They certainly werent crushed to death. I think they were killed individually..
-
All in all, you make a lot of assertions with very little evidence to give us a reason to agree. I'll be interested to see more tangible evidence that back your theories.
-
In May they were under snow.. In February, they were not..
You have a point. We dont know for sure though. A lot of snow could accumulate in a few weeks or months.
-
I wouldnt mention something without evidence to back it up
-
Yeh.. the snow cave is under 10-12 feet of snow and they didnt dig that deep! wink1
-
It's not a guess.. Their hands are NOT injured. Fact.
I disagree. It is not fact. It isn't possible to determine if their hands were injured or not, especially since Dubinina's fingertips were not present, we have no picture of her hands and we would not be able to determine anything now, as there would be little to no soft tissue left, even if they could exhume.
If the hands had have been injured then it would or should have been in the Autopsy Reports.
-
Why did Dubinina and Zolotarev have no eyes:
http://1723.ru/forums/index.php?s=&showtopic=5133&view=findpost&p=61104
-
Except that only some are missing..Nicks face was submerged.. The ones who were crushed lost eyes...
-
Except that only some are missing..Nicks face was submerged.. The ones who were crushed lost eyes...
Игорь Б. has posted a link to another Forum. Its a Technical Forum and very good. But they seem to follow the line that the Eyes were missing due to the action of Water. There is a photo of a woman who drowned and had no Eyes and it looks similar to a photo of Dubinina.
-
If that were true, it would be a random event.. one of his, one of hers.. two of theirs etc.. Its not random. Nicks face was in the water and his eyes arent missing.
-
If that were true, it would be a random event.. one of his, one of hers.. two of theirs etc.. Its not random. Nicks face was in the water and his eyes arent missing.
The explanation in short is wheather there eyes were open or closed.
-
Overly simplistic but possible lol
OR... the 2 that were crushed lost their eyes.. You cant ignore that
-
Overly simplistic but possible lol
OR... the 2 that were crushed lost their eyes.. You cant ignore that
Lol, I couldn't be bothered explaining Igor B's explanation.
I think you actually hit on this in another post( I think you mentioned strangulation or someone did) If it was snow that fell ontop of them in the cave or whatever, then the two with eyes missing are the ones with the Brocken ribs. I don't actually like describing this but it may have caused bulging of the eyes. The heavy wet snow would lock them in their position.
-
Overly simplistic but possible lol
OR... the 2 that were crushed lost their eyes.. You cant ignore that
Lol, I couldn't be bothered explaining Igor B's explanation.
I think you actually hit on this in another post( I think you mentioned strangulation or someone did) If it was snow that fell ontop of them in the cave or whatever, then the two with eyes missing are the ones with the Brocken ribs. I don't actually like describing this but it may have caused bulging of the eyes. The heavy wet snow would lock them in their position.
And thats why your theory doesnt work..LOL Just teasing you..:)
-
And thats why your theory doesnt work..LOL Just teasing you..:)
Lol dunno1
-
I wouldnt mention something without evidence to back it up
What are you talking about ! ?
-
I have no idea.. it was days ago :)
-
I've seen this so many times before. There's an obvious explanation whereas the evidence does not fit with any other explanation, but someone (rarely a trained investigator) will say, "well what about X? If X is true then the obvious explanation can't be right," which may not even be true. Experts too can be wrong, and that's not an especially rare occurrence. In the case of the eyes, yes, that's possible, but you'd have to do a recreation, and even then it may be that the head would have to be on a specific angle with specific pressure applied to specific areas. And as to the "compelling force" notion, imagine falling ten feet or so, onto a rocky creek, with three guys falling on top of you as well. I'd guess some gruesome inujuries would certainly be possible! And let me point out that I'd be thrilled if there was an ususual explanation for the DPI, but all the evidence fits nicely into the mudnane explanation, with these minor things (the eyes or tongue) that you might only be able to explain fully if you spent a ton of money on multiple recreations (until you got all the possible factors just right and it all made perfect sense).
-
The only way for that theory to work is that if it was Springtime, there was a cliff, their hands were tied behind their back, blindfolded and they were jumping off a diving board.
-
The only way for that theory to work is that if it was Springtime, there was a cliff, their hands were tied behind their back, blindfolded and they were jumping off a diving board.
If you are referring to my post, you are making all kinds of assumptions. I could quote you some cases in which nobody believed what happened until after a reconstruction was done, but I don't think you are the kind of person who would care. If all the evidence fits one explanation, that's the explanation you go with until someone finds new evidence or demonstrates that the explanation is impossible. In this case, you'd have to spend a lot of money on reconstructions in order to cover every last detail, and so here we are, with people coming up with all kinds of notions that clearly do not fit the evidence.
-
The only way for that theory to work is that if it was Springtime, there was a cliff, their hands were tied behind their back, blindfolded and they were jumping off a diving board.
If you are referring to my post, you are making all kinds of assumptions. I could quote you some cases in which nobody believed what happened until after a reconstruction was done, but I don't think you are the kind of person who would care. If all the evidence fits one explanation, that's the explanation you go with until someone finds new evidence or demonstrates that the explanation is impossible. In this case, you'd have to spend a lot of money on reconstructions in order to cover every last detail, and so here we are, with people coming up with all kinds of notions that clearly do not fit the evidence.
What do you believe happened investigator ? Or what would you look for?
-
And I think you "are the kind of person" who cant admit when they are wrong.. Why dont you go over and post on the " They Fell Off The Cliff" board.. Oh wait.. THERE ISNT ONE!
-
A recreation would cost money yes. It would also be interest to a large number of people who would be willing to watch ads or even pay to see the recreation. Depends on a lot of factors but if books about the DPI can become NYT bestsellers maybe a film or series doing a recreation has a chance of breaking even...
Something that might be worth looking into ;)
-
I have no idea.. it was days ago :)
Well Donna I have to hand it to you, you have brought some life to this Forum in the last week or so.
-
You'd think that they would be more appreciative :)
-
You'd think that they would be more appreciative :)
lol2 thumb1
-
The only way for that theory to work is that if it was Springtime, there was a cliff, their hands were tied behind their back, blindfolded and they were jumping off a diving board.
If you are referring to my post, you are making all kinds of assumptions. I could quote you some cases in which nobody believed what happened until after a reconstruction was done, but I don't think you are the kind of person who would care. If all the evidence fits one explanation, that's the explanation you go with until someone finds new evidence or demonstrates that the explanation is impossible. In this case, you'd have to spend a lot of money on reconstructions in order to cover every last detail, and so here we are, with people coming up with all kinds of notions that clearly do not fit the evidence.
What do you believe happened investigator ? Or what would you look for?
As I said in another post:
...The Dyatlov tent began to collapse (probably due to ice/heavy snow buildup), or they though it would collapse, so they cut themselves out, secured the tent so it wouldn't blow away (along with all their stuff), and calmly walked down to the tree line, thinking they could survive with a fire (the fire in fact was said to be quite robust, lasting an hour or two). One interesting question is if the idea of digging the "den" was the original plan or some sort of secondary one (the two guys who were dressed fairly well could have dug the den while the others started and got warmed up by the fire). The problem is that when you do a lot of work in the cold (with minimal clothing), then stop to warm up, you're going to do a lot of sweating, and then if your heat source can't be maintained or isn't sufficient, you are in deep trouble!
-
Please accept my apologies investigator , I did my own pet hate. I didn't look at the posts before I asked.
-
People dont walk single file and fall to their deaths, one by one by one.. One doesnt need a recreation to see that.