Recent Posts

41

General Discussion / Re: New topic split from Medical Question

« Last post by GlennM on April 21, 2026, 02:02:39 PM »

Personally, I know I'm right. I walk on water...frozen water

42

General Discussion / Re: Does the term “criminal case” create bias when we look at Dyatlov?

« Last post by Ziljoe on April 21, 2026, 01:52:58 PM »

Ziljoe, any death that isn't natural (suicide, accident) requires an investigation. In the 1940s and 1950s, there were already requirements for what and how to do at the scene (whether it was a clear crime like armed robbery or murder, or an accident). For example, photographs of the body from several angles, panoramic shots with reference to stationary objects, a crime scene diagram, and so on were required. If you're interested in more details, I can send you books on what an investigator should have done and how (published in 1949 and 1957 or 1958).
None of this was done. And the case, as they would say today, was high-profile. If only because of who died and what forces were involved. In other words, it's better to be safe than sorry.

----------------------------

Ziljoe, любая смерть, которая не естественная (суицид, несчастный случай) требует расследования. В 40-е и 50-е годы уже существовали требования к тому, что и как делать на месте происшествия (не важно, это явный криминал в виде вооружённого ограбления или убийства или несчастный случай). Например, обязательны были фотографии тел с нескольких ракурсов, панорамные снимки с привязкой к стационарным объектам, схема места происшествия и т.д. и т.п. Если вас интересует более подробно, могу выслать книги по тому, что и как должен был делать следователь (1949 и 1957 или 1958 годов выпуска).
Этого всего не было сделано. А дело, как бы сейчас сказали, было резонансным. Хотя бы из-за того, кто погиб, какие силы привлечены. Т.е. тут лучше перебдеть, чем недобдеть.

Hunter, thank you i am grateful for your help.

This is my understanding.

. A homicide article number was opened — because the law required it
This was administrative, not investigative. 
It allowed the prosecutor to legally examine the bodies and circumstances. 
It did not mean homicide procedures were triggered.

2. The investigation itself was conducted as an accidental‑death case
If it had been treated as a homicide at any level, we would see:

- suspect interviews 
- search for weapons 
- trace evidence collection 
- forensic ballistics 
- crime‑scene perimeter 
- operational‑search measures (ОРМ) 
- prosecutorial escalation 
- investigative brigades 
- follow‑up interrogations 
- re‑opening orders 

None of these happened.

Not one.

3. The autopsies were accidental‑death style, not homicide style
No:

- fingernail scrapings 
- sexual assault kits 
- toxicology 
- weapon‑related wound analysis 
- homicide‑protocol photography 

The autopsies match exposure cases, not violent‑crime cases.

4. The case was closed under “no crime detected”
This is the official classification for:

- accidents 
- exposure deaths 
- natural causes 
- unclear but non‑criminal events 

A homicide case cannot be closed under this article.

5. Ivanov himself later said the case was “ordinary/routine”
His own words confirm:

- no suspects 
- no criminal leads 
- no escalation 
- no homicide procedures 

That is the opposite of a homicide investigation.


All we have is the documents about the search and search efforts. Everyone is interviewed in reference to the search and the case starts after the first bodies are recovered. As far as i understand it , this all they have to do and ultimately did. The incident is high profile at the time is because of who they were and relatively high profile. None of that equates to murder or something  else.

We have no evidence of anything else. By all means ivanov had no evidence and before 1990 he calls it a routine case.

I have the archive book of 1949 with photo's of murders and recommendations of how to proceed but i don't have the later ones which i think are important, i believe they hold the instruction about oversight and how to use the paperwork in different situations.

I would love the link to them. AI says they don't exist on line.

43

General Discussion / Re: Evening Otorten - Encrypted report

« Last post by Ziljoe on April 21, 2026, 01:32:07 PM »

I too find the combat leaflet affixed to the tent wall interesting. Duct tape?

I think there's two versions to the finding of the combat leaflet, one was at the entrance, where i think thats where it would be supposed to go as a wall newspaper. There's a second report in the case file section under someones notes or radiogram that they reported the combat leaflet after the tent had been transported to wherever with all the tourist equipment.

Not sure. Hunter says, " Pin. It was fixed with something, and it was found fixed by the searchers who found the tent. I think it was near the tent entrance. It's an interesting fact.

44

General Discussion / Re: New topic split from Medical Question

« Last post by sarapuk on April 21, 2026, 01:30:05 PM »

The elephant in the room is not how many footprints there were, it is that nobody is acknowledging the direction of the prints!  It must be clear to all that snow is not an ideal preservation medium and that time passes from when the prints were laid down to when they were found,  7,8,9, who cares? There was nobody in the tent and everybody in the woods,  all accounted for.

As for direction, they were all going away from the tent site. There was nothing to suggest a reversal of the plan, nothing to suggest division during the descent. There is nothing to suggest foot dragging or assisted limping. Nothing indicates someone being carried.

They left the tent under their own steam, they walked down hill, They did not return. Nobody visited the tent in the intervening time. The flashlight on the tent is baffling.

We can be sure how they left their shelter,  not why,

Everything needs to be taken into account though. Therefore we should care. We need to know if any one else or anything else was at the tent site. Did some one or something approach the tent leaving traces in the snow ? That's why having something to go by helps. We have some impressions in the snow. But apparently they were not investigated thoroughly !

If anyone or anything else was at the tent, they had wings. There is only so much a thorough investigation of footprints in the snow can yield. The most important findings have been revealed. They go in one direction. They are not prints from ski boots. They show no three legged pattern ( helping crippled companion) they are not accompanied by ski or sledge tracks. There are no other prints in the vicinity and certainly none leading to the tent from any point on the compass.

Someone could advance the arguement that the changes in snow over time could obfuscate other prints. I think not since those changes would certainly impact that which was found.

Aliens !? 😊👽🛸. Maybe.

45

General Discussion / Re: Evening Otorten - Encrypted report

« Last post by sarapuk on April 21, 2026, 12:39:09 PM »

I too find the combat leaflet affixed to the tent wall interesting. Duct tape?

Not sure. Hunter says, " Pin. It was fixed with something, and it was found fixed by the searchers who found the tent. I think it was near the tent entrance. It's an interesting fact.

46

General Discussion / Re: Does the term “criminal case” create bias when we look at Dyatlov?

« Last post by Hunter on April 21, 2026, 08:48:29 AM »

Ziljoe, any death that isn't natural (suicide, accident) requires an investigation. In the 1940s and 1950s, there were already requirements for what and how to do at the scene (whether it was a clear crime like armed robbery or murder, or an accident). For example, photographs of the body from several angles, panoramic shots with reference to stationary objects, a crime scene diagram, and so on were required. If you're interested in more details, I can send you books on what an investigator should have done and how (published in 1949 and 1957 or 1958).
None of this was done. And the case, as they would say today, was high-profile. If only because of who died and what forces were involved. In other words, it's better to be safe than sorry.

----------------------------

Ziljoe, любая смерть, которая не естественная (суицид, несчастный случай) требует расследования. В 40-е и 50-е годы уже существовали требования к тому, что и как делать на месте происшествия (не важно, это явный криминал в виде вооружённого ограбления или убийства или несчастный случай). Например, обязательны были фотографии тел с нескольких ракурсов, панорамные снимки с привязкой к стационарным объектам, схема места происшествия и т.д. и т.п. Если вас интересует более подробно, могу выслать книги по тому, что и как должен был делать следователь (1949 и 1957 или 1958 годов выпуска).
Этого всего не было сделано. А дело, как бы сейчас сказали, было резонансным. Хотя бы из-за того, кто погиб, какие силы привлечены. Т.е. тут лучше перебдеть, чем недобдеть.

47

General Discussion / Re: Evening Otorten - Encrypted report

« Last post by Hunter on April 21, 2026, 08:43:02 AM »

pin (булавка)

48

General Discussion / Re: Dyatlov Pass-My Theory: The Lighthouse and the Comrades Visceral Sacrifice

« Last post by LunarTides93 on April 21, 2026, 05:07:57 AM »

@LunarTides93,

I like your theory and share most of your conclusions regarding the events on 1079. If I have understood right, you consider high-altitude nuclear explosion of R-7's warhead. In this case I wounder if you also consider vast terrain contamination. How was radioactive dust delivered to the 1079 slope? Any why was it beta only?

Hey Senior, those are great technical questions. To address the R-7/Beta specifics:
​Why Beta only? Beta radiation is notoriously 'sticky' but has low penetration. In an R-7 context (or any fuel-based atmospheric event), you're often looking at isotopes that emit Beta particles which settle as dust. Unlike Gamma, which passes through almost everything, Beta particles are easily captured by organic filters—like the heavy wool fibers of the hikers' clothes. My theory is that the water acted as the transport, but the wool acted as the concentrator. The lack of Gamma just confirms this wasn't a direct 'blast' exposure, but a secondary 'collection' event.
​The Delivery: I'm not ruling out a high-altitude fuel dump or a pressure wave carrying localized fallout. However, my 'Lighthouse' theory argues that the topography did the heavy lifting. Whether the dust came from a missile or a localized atmospheric anomaly, it would have settled on the snow. When that snow melted or shifted into the ravine, the water became a concentrated 'slurry' of those particles.
​The Filtration Reality: Because the hikers in the ravine were effectively 'bookended' by rocks in a turbulent stream, their clothes spent weeks 'sieving' that water. It explains why the radiation was found in the fibers of the clothes (Beta capture) and not in the surrounding inorganic soil.
​Essentially, I think we're both right—the R-7 might have provided the 'dust,' but to me the environmental turbulence provided the 'concentration' on the bodies.

49

General Discussion / Re: Dyatlov Pass-My Theory: The Lighthouse and the Comrades Visceral Sacrifice

« Last post by Senior Maldonado on April 21, 2026, 04:39:09 AM »

@LunarTides93,

I like your theory and share most of your conclusions regarding the events on 1079. If I have understood right, you consider high-altitude nuclear explosion of R-7's warhead. In this case I wounder if you also consider vast terrain contamination. How was radioactive dust delivered to the 1079 slope? Any why was it beta only?

50

General Discussion / Re: Dyatlov Pass-My Theory: The Lighthouse and the Comrades Visceral Sacrifice

« Last post by LunarTides93 on April 21, 2026, 04:17:24 AM »

The Radiation Myth: The higher levels of radiation found on the clothing in the ravine weren't from a "death ray"—they were a result of Environmental Filtration. As the spring thaw turned the slope's runoff into a creek, it carried the radioactive fallout from those military "fireballs" directly into the ravine. The porous layers of clothing (wool/cotton) acted as a natural filter, concentrating the isotopes as the water flowed through the fabric for months.

The "death ray" is a fantasy of Lev Ivanov. Neither Soviet military forces nor alliens practiced targeted attacks on hikers with such exotic weapon.

Contamination of water in the creek is very questionable. The most contaminated clothes were on those, who lied the first and the last. If water had been contaminated, we could expect equal clothes contamination or contamination decrease from 1st to the last. Also sample of soil from under the corpses was not radioactive at all.

PS. What were those "military "fireballs"? Any idea?

Thanks for the engagement, Senior Maldonado! To address your points:
​The Soil vs. The Clothing: The lack of radioactivity in the soil actually supports the Environmental Filtration theory. Radioactive isotopes in water runoff are often particulate; they tend to adhere to porous, organic fibers like wool and cotton rather than non-organic soil. The clothing acted as a biological filter (a 'sieve'), concentrating the isotopes as the spring thaw runoff flowed through the ravine for months.
​Variable Contamination (The 'First and Last' Sequence): Regarding who lay first or last in the creek: a mountain ravine during a spring thaw is not a linear pipe; it is a high-turbulence environment. The water doesn't filter through one person to get to the next; it swirls around all of them. The variation in radiation levels is more likely due to Fabric Surface Area—thick wool sweaters will trap significantly more particulate isotopes than smoother layers, regardless of their position in the 'line.' OR There is the alternative possibility that the 'bookend' hikers likely acted as physical sediment traps. The upstream individual functioned as a primary sieve for the fresh runoff, while the downstream individual sat in the 'collection' area where the flow slowed down. The middle two hikers likely experienced higher-velocity, turbulent water being forced around the obstacles, which reduced the 'dwell time' for radioactive particulates to adhere to their clothing.
​The Fireballs: These were most likely high-altitude tests of R-7 ICBMs or similar projectiles launched from Baikonur. The 'spheres' are a well-documented phenomenon caused by the combustion of rocket fuel/oxidizers in the upper atmosphere. The 'invisible hammer' isn't a fantasy weapon—it’s a standard supersonic pressure wave from a high-altitude explosion or failure.
I really hope this helps to clear up your questions regarding the Radiation Myth, and Fireballs part of my theory and thanks again for reading and even more for asking questions!
​Ultimately, as I mentioned at the start, this is just my personal theory. I’m simply looking at the evidence through the lens of my own clinical experience and the physical reality of how the human body reacts to extreme environments. We may never have 'official' answers, but to me, the science of anatomy and the environment tells a much more powerful story of human loyalty, and the pure determination to survive than any ghost story ever could.