New topic split from Medical Question

[sarapuk]

The footprints are a bit of a mystery. 9 people at the tent but it doesnt look like 9 sets of footprints. And they look rather large prints.

They are reported by numerous witnesses as existing as human footprints in the case files by those that were at the scene. They were described as being in socks and in some instances the toes could be observed. Like wise there are statements of some in footwear, 3 months before those in footwear were found. The footprints fit the scenario.

We must surely have to question the number of footprints though. The photos don't appear to show the prints of 9 people, well thats what it looks like to me unless you can shine some light on that one.

Well, I for one can't make out if there are 9 sets or less or more. I can't make out neither, if the feet were with shoes or without. At least not from the photos. I might be able to distinguish when seeing them in reality, which, alas, is not possible. So in this case, I'd say we should somewhat believe what the testimony states and only doubt it, when we really have reason to believe otherwise.

Nicely put. Yes its the usual dilemma has with most things in this Dyatlov mystery. We have to believe or at least accept that that's the best on offer unless something better turns up one day. Maybe there are more photos of the footprints locked away somewhere !  There was mention of some footprints that were very large near the area in question, but no photos to show this. Seems a bit strange.

[sarapuk]

The prints lead fom the tent, not to it. There the tent was abandoned, not relocated.

Yes, but be honest, can you say for certain that you can see the footprints of 9 people ? I cant see the footprints of 9 people going away from the tent.

[Ziljoe]

The prints lead fom the tent, not to it. There the tent was abandoned, not relocated.

Yes, but be honest, can you say for certain that you can see the footprints of 9 people ? I cant see the footprints of 9 people going away from the tent.

Of course can't see 9 prints . The statements say there were up to 9 prints . There were 9 sometimes less. This is exactly what happens and is shown in countless videos. There were 9 hikers , the foot prints led in one direction, the testimonies say there were footprints for several hundred meters and in the direction to where they were found.

[Axelrod]

Of course can't see 9 prints . The statements say there were up to 9 prints . There were 9 sometimes less. This is exactly what happens and is shown in countless videos. There were 9 hikers , the foot prints led in one direction, the testimonies say there were footprints for several hundred meters and in the direction to where they were found.

I recently saw footprints in the snow near my house..
The footprints are more visible in real life than the footprints in the photo.

I think there were уight pairs of footprints.
Nine pairs of footprints is wishful thinking.

There were also eight spoons and eight cups. A very strange situation.
There could be different explanations.

[Ziljoe]

Of course can't see 9 prints . The statements say there were up to 9 prints . There were 9 sometimes less. This is exactly what happens and is shown in countless videos. There were 9 hikers , the foot prints led in one direction, the testimonies say there were footprints for several hundred meters and in the direction to where they were found.

I recently saw footprints in the snow near my house..
The footprints are more visible in real life than the footprints in the photo.

I think there were уight pairs of footprints.
Nine pairs of footprints is wishful thinking.

There were also eight spoons and eight cups. A very strange situation.
There could be different explanations.

I agree that the photos are not great . I also think that's not even relevant as the context of the moment  was for the searchers to find and hopefully rescue the hikers . This context actually has some sense in the nature of the case files . In the initial days of trying to locate the hikers no one was looking to record a crime scene , it was an accident to all intent purposes. It's the same today , no search and rescue teams takes umpteen photos of everything.

It's only when the ravine 4 are found that it gets complicated.

As to the reported foot prints , they range from 7-9 depending on the statement. This would also make sense as we can see from videos from recent expeditions that snow these raised foot prints occur randomly, some are raised , some are covered the next day.

Whilst you are here , I would like to ask a favour . That is if you could translate hiking reports from the other two hikes at the same time as dyatlovs?. 

That is if you have an easy way as you seem to be able to do so.

Thanks in advance.

[GlennM]

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,

[sarapuk]

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 !   

[Missi]

May I remind you, that - there being theories they cut their tent and those that the tent was cut by other people - we don't even agree on the how? As long as there are plausible theories that differ but no real proof as to what actually happened, we cannot be sure about the how.

[GlennM]

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.

[Missi]

Just a "what if", no proof available at this time, but...

What if the footprints were misread, because the raised profile makes them look unusual, and in reality they were not left by bare feet or feet in socks, but by shoes? I know the searchers reported the prints were from bare feet or people walking in socks or valenki. But I myself have never seen photos of those prints, only photos or prints with shoes. Or maybe I just can't discern them.
What if those prints actually were caused by the hikers walking downhill in the afternoon, after having placed their storage at this place and not were the labaz was later found?

I'm not sure, but I would imagine, that traces like those footprints can be formed easier during the day, because the sun helps to get to the melting point, which is, as I understand it, necessary to form those prints. I want to learn more about those kinds of prints. As of now, I asked perplexity. It said, that prints can form during the night, but are less sturdy and disappear faster. Perplexity insists, that in no circumstances could have prints lasted from Feb 2nd until Feb 26th.
I never thought about that, I just took for granted, that the prints were found. But now, sitting here in the middle of the night, I wonder, if the prints that were found maybe were not the prints of the hikers, but deliberately placed traces in order to back the narrative of the hikers leaving the tent on the slope, maybe even scarcely clothes (hence barefoot prints)?
As I said, it's not thought through, just an idea that popped into my mind, being half asleep.

[GlennM]

From Teddy's book 1079
"Shestopalov would later recall that no special instruction had been given. Having landed at the pass, the whole group skied from the Dyatlov people tent site down, along the pass of the traces, until the cedar and further on. That was a superficial examination: the group had not been set the task of a thorough examination of the territory. The track with footprints was clearly visible – leading downwards, to the left from the direction towards the cedar, most likely towards the ravine, but it had not been tracked down to the end"

This activity was on April 6th.

I find it remarkable that those prints endured from the time they were made, perhaps February 2nd until April 6th and beyond.

This attests that the combination of wind and cold could reveal and preserve prints.  Certainly, after a time the area got cluttered with additional prints, probe holes,tracks and prop blasts, but at that timemin April, there was no confusion about what they were seeing.

[sarapuk]

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.

[GlennM]

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