Recent Posts

61

General Discussion / Re: Solved? All Evidence tied Together

« Last post by sarapuk on October 28, 2026, 11:51:31 AM »

The helicopter pilots refused to fly not because of the radiation, but because of the decomposition of the corpses. The smell was so bad that chemicals would have been needed to remove it.

I don't recall any mention of decomposed corpses that smelled bad. 

62

General Discussion / Re: Another take on the mat at the den

« Last post by sarapuk on October 28, 2026, 11:49:02 AM »

What if the purpose of the branch mat with its scraps of clothes was not for a few people to sit on? Instead, what if the idea was to burn the mat using the cloth as tinder in order to dry the ground and warm it and then rest and recover over the warm ashes? Perhaps the R4 were found as they were was because they had not yet brought in enough long branches to overlay the ash which would be spread out under.

Experienced campers. I think that they would have known the best way to keep warm. And it's not the way that you are suggesting.

63

General Discussion / Re: What If Igor Was the Problem?

« Last post by sarapuk on October 28, 2026, 11:41:33 AM »

I would not rely on the interview of one person to try and judge Igor's character and how he may have behaved during the final expedition.

64

Interviews / Re: Daniel Curtis interview with Teddy Hadjiyska

« Last post by sarapuk on October 28, 2026, 11:26:38 AM »

This is the best video
regarding the Dyatlov case in English! I'm especially grateful to Daniel for not interrupting with questions and letting Teddy talk.
I hope there will be a sequel!

oh...and I can explain why Ivanov gave the photo negatives to the searchers without knowing what was visible in the pictures! It was a very dishonest trick!

Explain!

65

General Discussion / Re: The Manuals

« Last post by Ziljoe on October 27, 2026, 09:10:38 PM »

Bongyi ,

No one cared once the hikers were found dead , everyone on that search were amateurs, local volunteers or student friends. Every part of the scene was contaminated and touched. Everyone speculated and said how they thought things were.

They statements were musings of the mind and not based on anything forensic. Most of the statements are ramblings from memory as no one was documenting what they saw as they weren't expected to.

I think we both still have a problem articulating what you think is a branch , which bits are important for burning and which bits are not.

I'm going to simplify this .

Some branches were broken off the cedar , these branches were burned in a controlled manner at the base of the tree on the ground. The ground is ideal as building a fire on snow is not.

Some small young fir or spruce trees were cut or split at the base of these young trees . These trees with green branches were for lying on.

They are different branches for different uses. Thick dry branch for a fire, thing branches with green needles for a bed .

Someone speculated that it looked like a space of branches in the tree had been broken to create a window. But this is speculation, it could be just that these were the branches that were easily broken. It just means a gap was created by those removed branches or it looked like it. There's no proof of anything in that statement.

You are treating noise as evidence.

66

General Discussion / Re: The clues in the snow

« Last post by GlennM on October 27, 2026, 07:25:13 PM »

This is tedious and does not move the needle

67

General Discussion / Re: The clues in the snow

« Last post by bongyi on October 27, 2026, 06:44:23 PM »

Whether the stove was or was not used is a matter of complete indifference, unless someone wishes to argue for the sake of arguement.  It was found in a stored condition.

Since the tent was cut from the inside, we can be certain that a rapid exit was necessary. Since the tent was not reentered for additional supplies, we must reason that it could not be reentered for additional supplies. Since that was the case, there was also no reason to stand around and stare at a tent you are not going back into. There is every reason to move away and seek heat and shelter until such time that the tent could be cleared and patched, or the expedition abandoned.

Nothing related to the case is indifferent. In relation to the stove, conclusions can be made regarding the given night and the subsequent route. There are different statements about the state of the stove's invention: the stove contained firewood; the stove contained the chimney pipes; the stove was at the bottom of the tent. You can read such things. It is completely incomprehensible why such a fact was not clearly recorded during the investigation. It's just a matter of firewood. Determined by the number of pieces and centimeters, it should have been recorded what and how much firewood was supposedly there! Because maybe it wasn't even firewood!

Cutting the tent from the inside as information comes from the authorities, so it is basically questionable! It is an extremely entertaining element of the official narrative, the alleged story that the tent was set up in the authority's office in Ivdel when a tailor arrives to repair an officer's uniform, and this tailor states at a glance that the tent was cut open from the inside, and then the forensic examination confirms this. This is also Agatha Christie's style turn in the case - not the only one.
The authority was fully able to manipulate the evidence to serve the narrative they wanted people to believe. They could even scratch the fabric of the tent themselves. Then they documented the scratches as a fact. This fabulous tailor makes it most suspicious with her insight!

But who cut up the tent from the inside? The hikers? The killers? What is the consequence if the tent was actually cut from the outside?

68

General Discussion / Re: The Manuals

« Last post by GlennM on October 27, 2026, 05:55:27 PM »

Again, jumping up and down on a tree means nothing. It does not prove how the Yuris died. It does not prove that the tree was climbed to look for the tent, assasins, or little green men.

 What does mean something is the need to get two kinds of wood. One kind is wood to burn. Not a lot of it is needed all at once.In time, more will need to be obtained if a fire is to be lit in the snow cave. The other kind is wood to get you off the cold ground. This can be gathered over a longer period of time, but could be done in conjunction with excavating the ravine.In a perfect world, the branches you sit on could also be branches you burn. I suspect they did not plan to stay in a hole in the snow for that long.

69

General Discussion / Re: The clues in the snow

« Last post by GlennM on October 27, 2026, 05:38:30 PM »

Whether the stove was or was not used is a matter of complete indifference, unless someone wishes to argue for the sake of arguement.  It was found in a stored condition.

Since the tent was cut from the inside, we can be certain that a rapid exit was necessary. Since the tent was not reentered for additional supplies, we must reason that it could not be reentered for additional supplies. Since that was the case, there was also no reason to stand around and stare at a tent you are not going back into. There is every reason to move away and seek heat and shelter until such time that the tent could be cleared and patched, or the expedition abandoned.

70

General Discussion / Re: The Manuals

« Last post by bongyi on October 27, 2026, 04:20:56 PM »

One more interesting one:

"Krivonischenko's knife used to cut off the young firsts near the fire was found near the bodies."

from: 386 sheets. Ivanov: Resolution to close the case May 28, 1959.

It is interesting that no searcher saw the knife. And they didn't even return it to the relatives.
But!
Why would the knife be next to the bodies? If the clothes were cut off from them, after their death, why did whoever did this leave the only knife there? Is this an essential means of survival and is it just left?
It's pretty weird, isn't it?

At all, why did the clothes have to be cut? Why wasn't it taken off?  Unharmed clothes are warmer than cut clothes! How exactly were these clothes cut?

But in May, cut branches lead to finding the den. Then either there was another knife, or Krivonischenko's knife was at the den.
-----

Ahh, I misunderstood!  Sorry! The knife was found near the bodies of the 4. Also, not a knife, but only its case. The knife was not found.