Inconsistencies in photos of finding the tent

[Osi]

The snow pile in the red circle has remained as it was the first day the tent was erected, and has not been destroyed. The blue line contains information about the slope towards the top according to the original snow condition. Normally, seekers had to pose on this blue line. They are sitting in the pit. Where did the snow here go? Is the red circle the entrance to the tent? If it was the entrance, it must have been trampled, or after everyone entered the tent, a lot of snow fell and it was not trampled again. The L line is more rugged and must resist snow retention. The snow in the L section has blown away or melted. The K section is in a smoother state and why has there been no snow blowing from here?
Can't see the scrolling plate?

[Osi]

We need to prove that this photo was actually taken at Kholat shaykl. If this photo is from that day; Children who are 1.80 tall have cut at least 90 cm of snow and are preparing a flat area. I imagine Koptelov from its original place through time travel and the day the tent was pitched. He was probably sitting where the bags were. He had to see the tent in a pit inside a 90 cm cut snow wall. Imagine the view taken from the person taking the photo at 45 degrees from behind. How can Koptelov be on the same plane as the tent?

[Osi]

Most of the officials involved in the search thought there would be no avalanche there. The tent was in the open. There were a few items scattered around. What were the workers at the bottom of the tent looking for in the snow? If the tent is open and there is no possibility of an avalanche falling there, there is no one under the snow.
Also, where did these excavations come from? It looks like it could be set up as a tent by flattening it a bit. If there was no excavation in the tent area, where did all the excavated material at the bottom of the tent come from?

[Ziljoe]

Hi Osi

I can only guess by reading the case files and trying logic, I might not be correct.

We don't know if the photo of the DP9 digging the trench for the tent is true but there is little reason to doubt it as authentic. It's been in the public domain for many years and no other hikers came forward to say it was from their hike , the photo is in the case files and there would be little reason to fake it . There seems to be no deliberate lies in the case files, just a little confusion it the retelling of events .

I'm not sure why we don't have a 90cm trench in the photo when it's discovered, this may have been eroded by the wind over 3 weeks.

The lumps of snow are from the searchers digging around the tent , the possible reason for them digging around the tent comes from the statements and what was believed may have happened . It was first thought one of the hikers went to the toilet and was blown down the slope , then the others chased to help but the wind was too strong for them to return. We must remember when the photo with the searchers was taken. It was taken after the first 4 bodies were found and there was no autopsy /ravine 4 or any other information. All they knew was that Dyatlov and zina had been found buried on the slope , so I would guess they started digging around and below the tent for that reason.

Also, I believe one of the early searchers  said they had dug up around the tent and taken skis( I believe these were for the sappers )  and items out of the tent before the official investigation/ inventory had taken place  , this is perhaps why we get different reports about what was in the tent and lying about. It was all a bit clumsy and we have to accept there was a lot going on the 26th and 27th of February.  That's , several search parties in the forest and other mountain tops, the lead investigators trying to land, sappers , dog handlers,being called in and instructions to find a campsite for the searchers tents and make a landing zone for a helicopter in the forest.  Radios, stoves , food all had to be dropped off  and transported to a suitable site . On the same day the two Yuri's were found , then Dyatlov and then Zina , everyone was running about with very limited resources and trying to help.

I guess very few protocols were followed, no one was given instruction what to do or not do, radiograms would take time , digging up the bodies and collecting the bodies to boot rock , bagging them etc. A busy and stressful day for all.

[Axelrod]

Conspiracy theories, manipulations and hoaxes appear from time to time, but I see this explanation:

1) you can endlessly repeat the same thing from the official picture endlessly;

2) you can add something and invent that we have a picture of deception in front of us.

Thus, a conspiracy theorist can do 2 things:

1) be silent;

2) invent something.

Since we do not observe a picture of silence, we see a picture of conspiracy. Otherwise, there would be a picture of silence.

[Osi]

Ziljoe, thank you for your thoughtful comments. I agree with you about the dark film stills. I believe this is actual footage of the trip, taken from a partially damaged film that was not officially recorded. The tent photo of Sharavin and Koptelov is a photo of a 3-legged action. Come, see and photograph. I think the first thing to do about these two photos was to take photos and no search activity has started yet. They cleared the snow, searched the tent, moved the tarp aside, and then dug around. There is no information yet about the 3 on the slope. Koptelov; In his statement, he stated that the tent entrance faces the passage, that is, the entrance, on the right side of the picture. The problem at the tent entrance; How to protect tent entrance if there is enough wind shear to eliminate a trench? Under normal circumstances, the tent entrance should have been damaged due to constant chewing by 9 young people. The original mound at the entrance of the tent caught my attention. All 4 corners of the tent were visible, only some snow in the middle. There was a pair of light slippers just ahead. There was a lantern and an outfit. I would expect blowing winds to blow these lightweight objects into the forest.

[GlennM]

Is the assumption that photographs represent the scene or situation before things have been manipulated? The implications affect the interpretations.