I am rarely visit to this forum, but if I happen to be, I want answer to questions that are considered unanswered, although I have specific answers to specific questions.
These are already repeated answers to many questions in this forum.
I don't know how often I can appear here, but I will gladly read comments to these answers.
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.
Do we have a list of unanswered questions anywhere?
Obvious Questions (in no particular order)
1. Why did they leave the tent?
Because they felt that they could no longer be there. The presence of danger is not obligatory, because insurmountable feelings in everyone's head are more than common sense and sober calculation. It must be noted that this feeling occurred to everyone at the same time and within a short period of time.
If you think differently, there are always logical contradictions.
2. Did they cut the tent themselves?
Of course, by themselves. Others simply couldn't reveal it, because no one was there. You don't have to think that you can only get there from the doors of your ranch. In 1959, not many people could get there at all because of the conditions that had to be overcome and the dangers that few could overcome.
A. If so, why?
Why did you open up your tent? – It I wrote two points above. Why were they opened by themselves? - It I wrote one point higher.
B. If not, who cut it?
This has no bearing on the entire course of events. It could have been any of them. Perhaps, except for the girls.
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?
Regardless of the nature of this situation, they did so. The specific reason is covered by a wall of misunderstanding of the physical processes in the natural environment and a lack of the necessary knowledge. The biggest part of those who discuss this problem. I won't talk about the details, because those who have discussed it with (except academic specialists) say a lot, but there is no physical sense in these conversations.
Only highly qualified specialists can deal with false questions about natural phenomena. All the more so because in this case a symbiosis of several sciences in different fields of knowledge is required.
I have to make a comment on this: there is no sign that they have walked this distance "quietly" or "not quietly", and that they all acted together.
4. Who took the last pictures on the film?
Which photograph (or about which photographs) is this question asked?
A. If the hikers, what were they photographing?
If this question is about the photo "#34 from Krivonischenko", you can read everything on the link
https://dyatlovpass.com/frame-34?rbid=18461 .
5. Why were they incompletely dressed when they left the tent?
Because their feelings did not allow them to stay in place even for a short time. And before that, they were in a tent in a state of complete rest for the whole night.
6. Why didn’t they stay together?
Because when you leave the tent, nature (weather and psychological condition) scattered them far enough apart. Their ability to see and hear each other was very limited (a few metres or several tens of feet).
7. Why didn’t Zolotaryov write a final message with the notebook and pencil he had?
Why did he have to write something? Especially after he had been injured, which was almost fatal in those conditions. It's not like he's terminator in Hollywood`s film.
A. Or, if he did write a message, what happened to it?
What can happen to something that did not happen?
The conversations from this note are a myth. Even Vladimir Askinazi himself wrote to me (in his letter to me) that these are vague memories after 50+ years. Apart from him, nobody talked about it. Rumours spread faster than common sense. And if you look at a photo in a stream before the bodies have been removed, it is finally clear that even a crumpled piece of paper cannot be kept there.
8. Why did they climb the cedar?
It was the only place they could go and where there was at least even bad firewood.
9. Why didn’t they keep the fire going?
Because they had already lost consciousness from the cold and could not add wood to the fire.
10. Did the Ravine Four really build a shelter in the snow?
No.
1. This does not make any sense. This shelter couldn't protect them from anything. There is no wind at the cedar or the place where they were found. The cold is the same everywhere.
2. This is impossible even when there is a lot of snow. And when they had little snow there. Den was found at a height of 30 cm (1 ft from the ground) is the thickness of compacted snow. So the thickness of fresh snow should be 40 ... 45 cm (8 ... 9 in).
11. What accounts for the variety of injuries of all the hikers?
Because they received them in different places and under different conditions. It was very easy get hurt at that time and under those conditions. One might wonder that there aren't as many as there could have been.
12. How many actually died of hypothermia?
That's it. We can assume that Tibo and Luda Dubinina could have died before the cold finally hit them, but the others died of hypothermia for sure. If immediate, qualified and external assistance could have been provided, almost everyone else could have survived with different consequences. But there was nowhere to wait for help and there was no way to report what had happened.
Even now, if something happened to others and there was a connection to the rescue service, help could appear on the second or third day.
13. What did the others die from?
Tibo and Luda Dubinina both died from injuries that were almost incompatible with life. The cold made their deaths worse and faster.
14. Is the amount of radiation found on the clothing significant?
No. The maximum emission level obtained from the examination is 135 Bq (Becquerels). This is the same amount as gives 2 kG (140 pdl) bananas in the Ka-40 isotope. The type of emitter is irrelevant.
A. If so, where did it come from?
This is an external pollution that could have been received in any of the three cases:
1) From the fallout from the Novaya Zemlya test site, where a record number of nuclear explosions in the atmosphere were carried out in 1958 (before the moratorium). These particles were then transported by the wind and dropped out over a large area. They were then washed away by water in a stream (from the slopes of the surrounding mountains) and then applied to clothes.
2) They came from the clothes of Georgy Krivonishchenko, who worked at the "Mayak" combine immediately after the accident in 1957. This is the South Urals Radioactive Trace.
3. a small amount of contamination could have come from the clothes of Aleksandr Kolevatov, who studied at the university in a specialisation related to work with radioactive substances and worked directly with these substances. At the time, radiation control was not as strict as it is now.
B. Why did the officials feel it necessary to test the clothing for radiation?
This was decided by Lev Ivanov himself, who at that time was undergoing additional training under the radioactive research programme. He did not know what had happened (nobody knows for sure until now) and tried to find the reason by "going to the sky with his finger".
Radioactivity, along with missiles, was a very common meme at the time (as they say now!). It was the peak of anticipation of nuclear war, so many people were talking about it, kittens had almost no precise knowledge at the time.
15. Why are the case files so unorthodox and missing key components?
This was decided by Lev Ivanov himself, who at that time was undergoing additional training under the radioactive research programme. He did not know what had happened (nobody knows for sure until now) and tried to find the reason by "going to the sky with his finger".
Radioactivity, along with missiles, was a very common meme at the time (as they say now!). There was a peak of waiting for nuclear war, so many people talked about it, although almost no one had any precise knowledge at the time.
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?
This is fake statement. I have already written about it several times.
We look at the facts and requirements of the law on conducting such investigations:
1. The law requires a period of 2 months to carry out a preliminary investigation.
2. The regional prosecutor can extend this period by one month.
3. Further extensions are only possible at the federal level, provided that there is undeniable evidence that a crime has been committed.
Now we are looking at the facts:
The case was opened on 26 (28) February 1959.
The case was extended on 28 April 1959. By the way, there is the signature of Okishev himself, who temporarily replaced his boss, Stepan Lukin, who was on holiday.
The case was buried on 28 May 1959, although work continued there, because there are documents that did not have time to draw up and they cost the date 29 May 1959.
Now questions for you:
Who could break the law and extend the investigation if the deadline had expired and no evidence was found that there was a crime?
Why did the Federal authorities have to extend the case if there was no reason to do so?
Talking about someone interfering and ordering only remains unreasonable. Because there is no confirmation of this. There are only very biased interpretations of various events.
17. Was Bienko intentionally removed from the group in order to make space for Zolotaryov?
Why did you decide that? Bienko was sent to other work from the university and it was known before - a few days before his release.
Zolotarev was preparing to go on a trip to the Circumpolar Urals in the group of Sergei Sogrin, and a few days before the exit of the group of Dyatlov, he decided to abandon the group of Sogrin, because he was not satisfied with the terms of return. Dyatlov was looking for a replacement for Bienko, Sogrin recommended Zolotarev to Dyatlov. This is the whole combination that was here. It is possible to look for a black cat for a long time in a dark room, only what result do you want to get?
I don't understand at all why everybody, except those who are closely connected with such a journey, sucked so hard on Zolotarev. There is nothing special about the fact that a person older than the rest of the group is going on a journey. It is in every 8th or 10th group of travelers. When we went on a ski trip to the islands Severnaya Zemlya in the Arctic in 1980, we had Peter Lukoyanov in the unser group, who was 26 years older than me. What is so special about it? That's why such a powerful discussion of Semen Zolotarev's personality only distracts from the essence of what happened and prevents us from moving towards the truth.
18. Why was the area closed off for 3 years following the incident?
There was no closure of the "territory". There was limited access for travelers from the city of Sverdlovsk to this local place. It was an exceptionally bureaucratic decision, which had no effect on the travel of people from other cities even in the summer of 1959.
Rumors – true, false, or irrelevant? (in no particular order)
* Fire orbs in the sky (reported by people in the area)
If they coincide with rocket launches from Baikonur Cosmodrome (17.02.1959 and 31.03.1959) with the accuracy to minutes, it means that this is a visible reflection of these launches. Such coincidences do not happen by chance. If it is different and there are no repetitions in confirmation by objective information, it means rumors. There were a lot of rumors then, but they did not find any confirmation.
However, anyone can consider then it is UFO.
* Burned marks on trees (reported by Ivanov)
No one, except Ivanov himself (30 years after that) did not talk about it. Even the numerous search participants who were there from February to May.
* Unusual number of dead fowl/birds in the area (reported by rescue workers)
There were rumors about it. However, they had no confirmation. Talks of people who were not there and did not see it themselves, but talked about it, have no value.
* Escaped captives from the Ivdel gulag
At first, we should note that the Gulag will cease to exist in 1953...1956. They were ordinary criminal offenders who had long terms of imprisonment - 12, 25 and 6 years for serious crimes (the first two). They escaped their usual prison camp, which had nothing to do with political reasons.
They escaped on 19 February 1959 and were caught on 21 February 1959 at a distance of no more than 10 ... 20 km (6 ... 12 mi) from the camp. Let me remind you that before the pass at least 200 km (125 mi), and caught them in the opposite direction from the path to the pass. They were moving towards to the transport ways.
* Faces and skin of hikers discolored orange
https://dyatlovpass.com/chivruay-incident-2?lid=1 on page #16 has photo. Read it, everything is written there.
* Tent found two days earlier than reported
These are also the next fake conversations. There are a lot of such conversations, but it is clear to everyone who even little can think and analyze what is said.
* Criminal investigation opened on the death of the hikers before they were reported missing.
It is also a fake. I have already written here many times that the date of February 6 appeared on the cover because the archivists write it by the date of the very first document, but not by the fact of the location in the case of the first document, which is the order to start a criminal case. This document (with the date of February 06) is located in the middle of the folder, where the document for March 6 and beyond is located. This date appeared as a result of a mistake, because March had just begun and police officer used to write "February". By the way, there is absolutely nothing in this document that says that we should start the case.
So if a doctor accidentally writes about you that you died (
God forbid, of course, I'm speaking as for example), having confused you with another person, will you really die or will he consider it mistake?
* DNA from Zolotaryov’s grave doesn’t match that of his family.
Where did you get this from? I have already written here too. This is a traditional trick of journalists: first they say they have doubts, then they say they are not, then there is a mistake...
In April 2018, right after this exhumation Galina Sazonova (Vietnamka) - she was present there - together with Alexander Alexeyenkov (Shura) were at my home. We talked about this exhumation. I then said that in the newspaper it will be in four stages: first there will be an article with discussion, then there will be a conclusion that it is not him, then there will be an article about doubts, then there will be a conclusion that it is him.
That's how it happened afterwards. Journalists earn their money by writing a lot, so what they write in the press should be treated very critically.
Topic: Question List (Read 23533 times)
