Recent Posts

1

General Discussion / Who knew the answer?

« Last post by MDGross on Today at 07:17:32 AM »

The criminal investigation passed through a number of men in a short period of time. It begs the question: Did one of them (or more than one) know what happened to the Dyatlov group? Was he replaced because he was close or had the answer? Is this conclusive proof of a cover up?
Here's how the investigation proceeded in an interview given by Okishev, who participated in the investigation from beginning to end. The criminal investigation was first handled by Tempalov, the Ivdel prosecutor. He was assisted in the investigation by another man from the Ivdel prosecutor's office named Korotaev. What did these two men uncover? They were soon replaced by Sverdlovsk Oblast prosecutor, Ivanov. Tempalov was actually questioned as part of the criminal investigation. And Korotaev and what he might have found aren't even mentioned in the case file. Then the investigation passed to Sverdlovsk Oblast Public Prosecutor, Klinov. It again raises the question had Ivanov found out too much? Okishev mentions that he had never heard of a prosecutor being present at any autopsies, as Klinov was present at each of the Dyatlov group autopsies. The criminal investigation at last was taken over by Urakov, the Deputy Federal Prosecutor for Investigations. He was from Moscow and certainly had the power to order a cover up. He also made the decision to close the case in May. Was he following orders from the KGB or the supreme power, the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union?
Does all this point to a cover up of a military blunder, an exploded missile, for example? At this time in 1959 there was a Test Ban Treaty in place that prohibited the testing of nuclear weapons by the US, Great Britain and the Soviet Union, although it's highly unlikely that any of these countries paid much attention to it. Or does it hint at involvement by the KGB from the beginning? 
All of this strongly suggests a state cover up. The crucial question is, of course, what was being covered up?

2

General Discussion / Re: Hypothermia

« Last post by beanie07 on September 23, 2020, 10:50:22 PM »

It is often said the 2 yuri's died 1st from hypothermia, becos they were found least dressed.
However,  many missed out the fact that when found, some of their clothes were already scavenged by others.

Comparing the amount of clothing on 2 yuri's  vs dyatlov's (https://dyatlovpass.com/injuries?lid=1)..
You see dyatlov is only slightly a vest, pullover and pants more than yuriK... (and it was suggested the shirt on Dyatlov belonged to yuriD?)

Thus could we think
1. at the start (when all departed the tent), the 2 yuri's were actually having the same amount of clothing as when Dyatlov died?
2. if so, why would they die 1st from cold.. when Dyatlov can last longer with the same amount of clothing?

3

UFO / Re: Link Between UFO / Creature / Mutilations

« Last post by sarapuk on September 23, 2020, 04:21:19 PM »

Source: The Great Airship Mystery: A UFO of the 1890s, Daniel Cohen. publ. Dodd, Mead, 1st ed. 1981, ISBN-13 978-0396079903, Chapter 7, pp.92-102.

“Last Monday night about 10:30 we were awakened by a noise among the cattle. I arose thinking that perhaps my bulldog was performing pranks, but upon going to the door saw to my utter astonishment that an airship was slowly descending upon my cow lot, about forty rods [600 feet] from the house.

“Calling my tenant, Gid Heslip, and my son Wall, we seized some axes and ran to the corral. Meanwhile the ship had been gently descending until it was not more than thirty feet above the ground and we came within fifty yards of it.

“It consisted of a great cigar-shaped portion, possibly three hundred feet long, with a carriage underneath. The carriage was made of glass or some other transparent substance alternating with a narrow strip of some material. It was brightly lighted within and everything was plainly visible-it was occupied by six of the strangest beings I ever saw. They were jabbering together but we could not understand a word they said.

“Every part of the vessel which was not transparent was of a dark reddish color. We stood mute with wonder and fright. Then some noise attracted their attention and they turned a light directly upon us. Immediately on catching sight of us they turned on some unknown power, and a great turbine wheel, about thirty feet in diameter, which was revolving slowly below the craft, began to buzz and the vessel rose lightly as a bird. When about three hundred feet above us it seemed to pause and to hover directly above a two-year-old heifer which was bawling and jumping, apparently fast in the fence. Going to her, we found some material fastened in a slip knot around her neck and going up to the vessel from the heifer tangled in the wire fence. We tried to get it off but could not, so we cut the wire loose to see the ship, heifer and all, rise slowly, disappearing in the northwest.

“We went home but I was so frightened I could not sleep. Rising early Tuesday I started out on my horse, hoping to find some trace of my cow. This I failed to do, but coming back in the evening found that Link Thomas, about three or four miles west of LeRoy, had found the hide, legs and head in his field that day. He, thinking that someone had butchered a stolen beast, had brought the hide to town for identification, but was greatly mystified in not being able to find any tracks in the soft ground. After identifying the hide by my brand, I went home. But every time I would drop to sleep I would see the cursed thing, with its big lights and hideous people. I don’t know whether they are devils or angels or what; but we all saw them, and my whole family saw the ship, and I don’t want any more to do with them.”

Analysis of the Story:

The description of the craft mimics airships of that time period, the first flown by Henri Giffard’s in 1852 which was steam powered. What’s interesting about this story is how it’s very similar to today’s sightings:

Description:

“It consisted of a great cigar-shaped portion, possibly three hundred feet long.”

Cigar-shaped UFO’s are still being seen today. As of this writing, The National UFO Reporting Center has eight listings so far in 2016 from Seattle, Washington down to Eagle River, Arkansas with two separate sightings reported in Joplin, Missouri. There’s over 2500 Cigar-shaped cases reported on this website.

Animal Mutilation:

The Airship picks up a cow, and then cow parts were found three to four miles west of LeRoy and appeared to have been dropped due to leaving no tracks in the soft ground.

If that story wasn’t enough, in Volume 38, No.11 of Fate Magazine’s issue, November of 1985, was printed a story called, “Cattle-Killing UFO of 1896”. One year before Hamilton’s story, in August of 1896 in Howell County, Missouri, a family experienced a UFO encounter.

Excerpts from the Fate Magazine article:

– “All at once we saw flashing lights. At first we thought they were a shower, but the “stars” stayed in a circle as if they were all strung together like beads.”

– “The circle of lights just kept whirling and falling towards us.”

– “ I ran to my mother and clung to her skirts, crying and shaking so hard that I could barely stand.”

– “ It stopped and hovered over the barn. We could now see it was a large saucer-like shape. It’s lights were blinding. The whole barn lot lit up like day.”

– “My father grabbed up the baby who was sleeping on a pallet and we fled into the house.”

– “The next morning when Ben took his dog Cappie and went out to the pasture to bring up the milk cows, as he always did, he came running back to the house scared out of his wits.”

– “In a large patch of burned grass were three of our steers lying dead on the ground.”

The father then examined the steers and noticed they were completely drained of blood.

Note: For a complete version of the article, please contact Fate Magazine and request, Volume 38, No.11, 1985 issue.

Real Animal Mutilation cases consist of the following:

– Animal is picked up at location A, then mutilated at location B, then placed at location C.
– Animal found with usual lesions, and lack of blood.
– Animal appears to have been dropped or placed.
– No animal struggle evidence found.
– No predator take-down evidence found.
– No human evidence found.
– No tracks of any kind!
– Sometimes strange lights are seen in the area before and even after the mutilation.

So we have two possible mutilation cases occurring in 1896 and one in 1897. Both talk about a purposed UFO and both sightings result in cattle deaths. But wait, there’s more to this.

Hamilton mutilation location, occurred around 38.062278, -95.725157
Missouri mutilation location, occurred around 36.969949, -91.892627

4

General Discussion / Re: Weather analysis from the night of the Dyatlov Pass incident

« Last post by Nigel Evans on September 23, 2020, 03:12:22 PM »

@Starman - yes.

5

General Discussion / Re: Weather analysis from the night of the Dyatlov Pass incident

« Last post by Star man on September 23, 2020, 02:37:23 PM »

@Starman - i'm not aware of Ivanov's reasoning wrt atomics but it's interesting that he privately pursued the radiation testing, sadly the lab not being able to identify the isotope which would narrowed things down.
The eye witness events fit a rocket launch? WAB states that they fit to the nearest minute.
looo.ch has other reports not mentioned by Ivanov.

Ok thanks.  Yeah why pursue the radiation?  Maybe its because for some strange reason, people seem to think Aliens/UFOs and radiation go together?   Part of Alien propulsion technology..  Didnt WAB say that the pass was out of range of any potential launch sites?  A weapon deployed from a plane would be less conspicuous, but you would want to ensure minimum safe distance so maybe deploy via a rocket.  Who knows

Regards

Star man

I think WAB is talking about the R7 launches from Baikonaur. Missiles like the Burya - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burya were trans continental cruise missiles and could presumably be programmed to go anywhere. The Burya's fuel components being excellent candidates for the DPI of course.

Nigel,

You are more knowledgeable about these things than me.  Are you saying that there were missiles that had sufficient range?

Regards

Star man

The Burya had a specified range of 8500km and was successfully tested at 6500km.
It had astro and inertial navigation systems so presumably could be sent anywhere.

Ok.  Just for clarity then what you are saying is that there were missiles that had sufficient range to reach the mountain? 

Thanks

Star man

6

General Discussion / Re: Question List

« Last post by Star man on September 23, 2020, 02:35:05 PM »

Star man, that is a good question.  A lot of people have their own notion of "proof."  In a criminal case, proof beyond a reasonable doubt can vary quite a bit.  Then there is proof in logic and math.  In science, something can be demonstrated, such as different states of matter, or one can put forth an hypothesis, which is supposed to be tested (as much as possible and by those without a conflict of interest); if it is ever fails, it's supposed to be discarded or reworked (not that this happens all the time).  In a case such as the DPI, one can do a precise, complete reconstruction.  I think if this was done, we would learn that the tent situation was not survivable for more than a short period of time, either due to it ripping apart (as it had under much better weather conditions), or ice forming on the outside (since they didn't use their stove for heat that night), or the strong winds, or some combination.  However, it's also possible that something unusual occurred, such as if one of them "lost his mind" and cut the tent open, but the evidence is not consistent with this idea, and that brings us to another concept that is in the realm of "proof beyond reasonable doubt," and that is if the notion is consistent with the evidence that seems to be solid.  You look at that evidence and you construct possible hypotheses, even if those are not appealing to you for one reason or another.

I think a reconstruction would be interesting.  But, it would need to be organised and funded, and the will would need to be there.  To do an accurate reconstruction would require an understanding of the starting conditions or the initiator of the event.  Or, you would need to test different initiators to see which one fits best.  A true reconstruction would also require the same conditions and terain which would be difficult to simulate.  Would need to be done on Kholat itself.  I think some simple information such as how long it would take them all to leave the tent by the door would be useful.  This would help gauge whether cutting the tent was justified in order to get out quicker.  Also, reconstruct the cuts.  How long would it take to cut the tent including the seams in order to get out.  If its concluded that the fastest escape route is via the door, then it leans us toward understanding that cutting the tent was not rational.  There is probably at least some useful information that could be gained.

Regards

Star man

7

General Discussion / Re: Question List

« Last post by Investigator on September 22, 2020, 04:58:08 PM »

Star man, that is a good question.  A lot of people have their own notion of "proof."  In a criminal case, proof beyond a reasonable doubt can vary quite a bit.  Then there is proof in logic and math.  In science, something can be demonstrated, such as different states of matter, or one can put forth an hypothesis, which is supposed to be tested (as much as possible and by those without a conflict of interest); if it is ever fails, it's supposed to be discarded or reworked (not that this happens all the time).  In a case such as the DPI, one can do a precise, complete reconstruction.  I think if this was done, we would learn that the tent situation was not survivable for more than a short period of time, either due to it ripping apart (as it had under much better weather conditions), or ice forming on the outside (since they didn't use their stove for heat that night), or the strong winds, or some combination.  However, it's also possible that something unusual occurred, such as if one of them "lost his mind" and cut the tent open, but the evidence is not consistent with this idea, and that brings us to another concept that is in the realm of "proof beyond reasonable doubt," and that is if the notion is consistent with the evidence that seems to be solid.  You look at that evidence and you construct possible hypotheses, even if those are not appealing to you for one reason or another.

8

General Discussion / Re: Question List

« Last post by Star man on September 22, 2020, 03:40:01 PM »

I do find myself really wanting to believe WAB's theory.  There is definitely a clear logic to it.  I feel that the behaviour of the hikers at the tent isn't entirely consistent with rational behaviour.  If that is true, the key question for me is why?  Infrasound is one possible explanation, but as WAB states proving it would be difficult without the funding and the will to investigate it.

Agreed, but poisoning, radiation and hypothermia could also account for confused behavior. That their behavior was confused is an inference in the absence of compelling evidence for something or someone else forcing them out of the tent. There was no recording equipment on the slope that night or surviving eyewitnesses, as far as we know, so how would one prove such a thing?

I think that is the million dollar question.  How do you prove any of these  theories.

Regards

Star man

9

General Discussion / Re: Question List

« Last post by Tony on September 22, 2020, 03:20:55 PM »

Do we have a list of unanswered questions anywhere? 

I find myself getting sidetracked on a handful of questions and forgetting about the others.  It helps me to see it all laid out, so I made a list of the questions I could think of off-hand.  Please feel free to add to the list--I'm sure there are plenty I've overlooked.

Obvious Questions (in no particular order)
1. Why did they leave the tent? This is the mystery
2. Did they cut the tent themselves? I think a better question is: who cut it from the inside? Were the hikers the only ones who could have made cuts from the inside?
   A. If so, why?
   B. If not, who cut it?
3. If it was an emergency, what sort of emergency would cause them to leave the tent and then walk more or less calmly for quite some distance to the forest? Again, this is the mystery.
4. Who took the last pictures on the film? One of the hikers
   A. If the hikers, what were they photographing? Probably just documenting the trip
5. Why were they incompletely dressed when they left the tent? Clothes were probably a little wet and they were getting ready for bed. It is not unusual, even in very cold weather, to not sleep in heavy coats - especially if they are wet.
6. Why didn’t they stay together? This is another mystery. Either A. there was a disagreement or B. unknown events caused the hikers to split. Although there is a lot of evidence, there is not enough to conclude which hikers were in which areas and for how long other than where they were found.
7. Why didn’t Zolotaryov write a final message with the notebook and pencil he had? Only Sasha knows this
   A. Or, if he did write a message, what happened to it? Only Colonel Ortyukov knows this
8. Why did they climb the cedar? This is a head scratcher. Although the new theory suggests that they climbed the tree because branches lower on the tree were wet, I find this hard to believe. For one, searchers testified that the larger branches broken further up the tree had not been used as firewood and were found where they fell. Personal opinion is that one of them climbed the tree to try and see something i.e. tent or other hikers? But this is also strange because it was a moonless night and they would not have been able to see even a few feet. We will probably never know.
9. Why didn’t they keep the fire going? Again, another mystery. It seems like the obvious answer would be to build the largest fire they could. The new theory has a good reason as to why they may have left the fire.
10. Did the Ravine Four really build a shelter in the snow? Well, many theories. Personal opinion is that they only built a bed of branches and clothes. They did not build a snow shelter. This was done by either A. Kolevatov or B. The three found returning to the tent. The other 3 found in the ravine were critically injured and did not build the bed. 
11. What accounts for the variety of injuries of all the hikers? A majority were probably from falls.
12.  How many actually died of hypothermia? 6
13.  What did the others die from? Trauma
14. Is the amount of radiation found on the clothing significant? Yes, the amount was excessive. No, it had no bearing on the events.
   A. If so, where did it come from? Previous employment of Kolevatov and Krivonischenko
   B.  Why did the officials feel it necessary to test the clothing for radiation? Not sure.
15. Why are the case files so unorthodox and missing key components? I didn't know that they were. What is missing?
16.  Why, in the middle of their investigations, were Ivanov and Okishev suddenly and inexplicably ordered to close the file and tell the families of the hikers that it was all an accident? Not sure.
17. Was Bienko intentionally removed from the group in order to make space for Zolotaryov? ?
18.  Why was the area closed off for 3 years following the incident? This is not unusual. This sometimes happens in the mountains around where I live. If there is an accident, authorities will often close off the area until it can be determine whether or not the area poses a risk. Also, I think this was a rumor and not something that actually happened.

Rumors – true, false, or irrelevant? (in no particular order)
* Fire orbs in the sky (reported by people in the area)I think Donnie Eichar debunks this in his book
* Burned marks on trees (reported by Ivanov) True, although it was discovered months later and Ivanov gets details wrong (as far as who was there).
* Unusual number of dead fowl/birds in the area (reported by rescue workers) Never heard this.
* Escaped captives from the Ivdel gulag ?
* Faces and skin of hikers discolored orange True, although I think it was later determined to be natural causes
* Tent found two days earlier than reported Yes, 3 hikers reported finding the tent two days earlier. You can read their (2 of the hikers) testimonies in the case files.
* Criminal investigation opened on the death of the hikers before they were reported missing. Possibly
* DNA from Zolotaryov’s grave doesn’t match that of his family. There are two articles on this site that clarifies this. Basically, it was determined that it was Sasha.

10

General Discussion / Re: Question List

« Last post by sarapuk on September 22, 2020, 02:39:03 PM »

A Post full of questions and theories that crop up throughout this Forum.