They all felt endangered and reacted in the same way.

[MDGross]

What danger or threat affected the Dyatlov 9 in the same way? That is the great question of this maddening mystery. If something frightened them to such an extent that they fled the tent with no shoes or coats, why does it appear that they walked in an orderly fashion down the slope? If I felt my life was in danger, I'd run even in the dark. Mostly out of panic. Was it a natural occurring phenomenon such as a snow slab avalanche? If it was a snow slab, wouldn't the tent have been destroyed? And why would anyone flee in the same direction of the snow slab? An assault from outsiders remains a possibility. That may explain the orderly walk down the slope and perhaps the cracked skulls and broken ribs of those who didn't succumb to hypothermia. It may also explain what many feel was a government ordered coverup. As I write this, I favor a third-party assault over a natural phenomenon by, oh, 51% by 49%. Tomorrow I'll probably lean the other way!!!!!

[Manti]

Exiting the tent quickly but then walking away calmly is what I'd expect people to do in case of the presence of an animal (wolf, bear, feral dog, ...). I don't know if this was the same back then in Russia, but nowadays the common advice is to not run away, as it can trigger an instinctive response in the animal to chase you.

[Игорь Б.]

Есть простая причина идти медленно - дятловцы были без обуви, а склон был каменистый.
Очевидно, что на склоне никакой опасности не было.

[marieuk]

There doesn't  seem to be an explanation that covers everything, so I question what is not true out of all the things we have been told.  The most obvious being the location of the tent.  Until somebody proves it wrong I agree with Teddy's theory about its location.

[WarpedWing]

There doesn't  seem to be an explanation that covers everything, so I question what is not true out of all the things we have been told.  The most obvious being the location of the tent.  Until somebody proves it wrong I agree with Teddy's theory about its location.

Hi Marieuk,

What is Teddy's theory on the tent location? Would you mind linking to that discussion? Thank you!

[MDGross]

WarpedWing, The theory about the tent location and much, much more is meticulously covered in the excellent book, "1079." An English version is available on Amazon. If you desire to explore this mystery in depth, this book is a must read.

[GlennM]

My problem with the fallen branch theory is the relocation of the tent, the footprints leading from, not to the tent and three hikers attempting to return to the tent. It does not seem reasonable for the hikers to allow their property to be moved while they were still alive. Too, it seems unreasonable to kill people in the wood not hide their remains. It seems illogical to kill a party of nine and expect their families will be indifferent to it. Killing eight young university students and a war veteran is going to cause a stir. That said, an " unknown compelling force" is surely a half baked explanation for the loss of nine lives.

A slab slip is not the same as an avalanche of course. Because poles were still standing, it must have slipped in blocks. I believe that the tent, was covered in snow and, enough damage did happen to the tent, the support ropes and ski poles. It would be a group decision whether to stand there in the cold, windy rubble as a group and try to dig out and reset camp with a group effort, or head for the woods to get warm, regroup and return. Too, perhaps rebuilding the camp at night was dismissed because if a snow slab slipped once, it could happen again, and again. I think they misjudged the distance to the woods and their own strength. Nature prevailed.

[MDGross]

I believe that no reasonable scenario can be ruled out. Both the fallen tree and slab slip theories are reasonable. If there was a slab slip, however,  I feel the Dyatlov group would have risked digging out the tent to at least gather their coats and shoes. Then perhaps move to the forest. They knew the danger of hypothermia as well as anyone.
What about the murder theory and leaving the bodies out in the open? Well, if you killed hikers in the middle of winter, and didn't want anyone to know what you had done, wouldn't you try to make it appear that they died from natural causes? The KGB or Soviet military would not want to affect the positive vibes coming from Khrushchev and the 21st Congress of the Communist Party held Jan. 27-Feb. 5, 1959. Was foul play involved in the hikers' deaths? Who knows? But I think the possibility exists.

[Ziljoe]

If there was a slab slip, however,  I feel the Dyatlov group would have risked digging out the tent to at least gather their coats and shoes. Then perhaps move to the forest. They knew the danger of hypothermia as well as anyone.

This is how French skiers handle a slab slip much bigger than the one which allegedly caused the death of the Russian hikers :



No panic, no hysteria, no screams, no lose of rationality, no erratic behavior, no suicidal decisions... French males, not Russian pussies...

People don't understand how the "slab slip theory" is insulting for Russian people and specially for Russian men.

Charles, you're missing the point. Why use the terminology, pussies French men russian etc. Why use these label's?. The snow slipe or slide could have been very small and local to the digging of the snow trench for the tent. Enough to cause alarm. There are many different examples of avalanches, snow slides , small.movment of snow ... The debate is not that a snow slide killed the group or caused the injuries at that location. The point is that they evacuated that location to go to the tree line. The argument stands that they  died after the snow slide.

Where you get , " specifically for  Russian men" makes little sense.  To add , your "french skier's, weren't in a tent.



 

[Ziljoe]

I translate in English for you:

Avalanche: practical case of slab caused by wind accumuluation on monoski

- You see, in front of us, it is a slab caused by wind accumulation.. If you ski on it, it is the all slab that will slide down. I'll show you...

Slab goes away with the first skier. Second skier catches up with the first.

- You see ?
- Yes.

The rest of the debriefing is inaudible. But no screams, no hysteria, no erratic behavior, no crying "OMG! OMG!", no sudden lemming style  suicidal actions...

At Kolyat Syakhl, the slide was supposed to be less than 10 meters wide, here it is at least 30 meters. Were Russian young adults from the 1950's pure faggots ? Precious creatures unable to face the hazard of a 10 meters wide snow slip ?

Pure faggots???? You have excelled your self Charles. ......

[Ziljoe]

And you can see how the French student immediately followed his French mentor : he didn't need to have a 140 IQ, he knew instinctively that once the slab was gone, the area was safe. Not an ounce of hesitation, directly skiing right into the slide area.

The 10 meters slab slide theory causing a lemming style behavior among allegedly Russian precious and hysterical faggots, is an insult to the veterans of Stalingrad and Berlin fights. Seven Russian males born in the 1930s, in the heart of Stalinism and WWII unlimited violence, killing tens of millions of Russians, do not behave like Belgravian old ladies just because they were covered with snow.

Please, stop insulting Russia.

What is the definition of **** Charles?

And whilst your at it,Belgraviian old  ladies, ....where do they fit in?

[Ziljoe]

Charles, define and explain your use of the word f a g g o t s.? In my last post it came up with the 4 stars.

[Ziljoe]

You do understand that this is a stereo type against bigoted people like you?

[Ziljoe]

I can't believe that the British receive their friends at a diner party without a beautiful embroidered and monogrammed white linen tablecloth as we do in France. Now I have a doubt about the seriousness of that BBC documentary footage. Setting plates directly on the wood? Really? But whatever, in the whiteness of the French Alps, men behave without the slightest hysteria, why would Russian men behave differently in the 1950's Urals ?

I appreciate the joke of that clip being documentary, but you were not joking in your comments. You were being bigoted.

The argument for the 1950s and a snow slip is contextual . Ie. , Being in the tent , unsure of the surroundings, possibility at night. Although I lean to Igor b's chain of effects , I can also perceive  a small panic or concern if a side wall of snow slipped upon the tent, if this was durring nighttime, it is plausible that they should move to a safer location. Nothing to do with being a Russian **** or the rest of your terminology, age, sexual leanings etc. Again I'll ask you why you use the term **** got?

[Ziljoe]

Dear Charles,

I haven't a clue where your coming from......the two BBC clips are satirical/ ironic and modern comedy. I have zero understanding of the Lobster and 60 siding, and the 69ing video clip.

However, I do note a trend in your posts towards continuous sexuaality context.

Say what you mean , get it out of your system....

[Ziljoe]

Deta Charles,

If you think it was murder, do you think it was a perfect crime?

[MDGross]

Charles, I remind you that discussions on this forum have ONE goal: to share opinions, insights, thoughts, etc. about the mysterious deaths of the Dyatlov group of nine. And some of what you write does that. So thank you. However, it's not a forum for comparing French and Russian manhood or calling the Dyatlov group pussies and faggots. Please find another forum for doing such things. I know that one of Teddy's basic rules is to always be respectful of the nine.

Ziljoe, Nothing can be gained by arguing with a poster on this forum about racist, sexiest, etc. comments. You are more than welcome to send a private message to Teddy expressing your concerns and asking for her help. Thank you.

[Ziljoe]

Charles, I remind you that discussions on this forum have ONE goal: to share opinions, insights, thoughts, etc. about the mysterious deaths of the Dyatlov group of nine. And some of what you write does that. So thank you. However, it's not a forum for comparing French and Russian manhood or calling the Dyatlov group pussies and faggots. Please find another forum for doing such things. I know that one of Teddy's basic rules is to always be respectful of the nine.

Ziljoe, Nothing can be gained by arguing with a poster on this forum about racist, sexiest, etc. comments. You are more than welcome to send a private message to Teddy expressing your concerns and asking for her help. Thank you.

MDGross 

[Manti]

Belgravian old ladies

Anyway, I think what Charles is saying is that the French skiers weren't afraid of a couple of snow slabs, why would the have Russian hikers been?

[GlennM]

Manti and Charles, could it be a difference of degree? I mean by this that a slab slip in daylight and mild conditions is less a threat than the same thing at night in high catabatic wind. What I find odd is that if the hikers departed their tent at elevation 880 and trekked to the forest , why did the high winds not erase their footprints? I understand that they compressed snow as they walked. I understand wind scouring around the prints raisied them. I just  marvel at the fact that the supposed fierce winds did not completely eradicate the prints , or the subsequent snowfall not covering them up. After all were not most of the bodies covered more or less by snow?

[Manti]

That could be it.

Would the serious injuries - Tibo's head injury and Lyuda's and Semyon's broken ribs - be caused by the slab? Or would the slab only scare them into abandoning the tent and those injuries came later, in the forest?

[Ziljoe]

That could be it.

Would the serious injuries - Tibo's head injury and Lyuda's and Semyon's broken ribs - be caused by the slab? Or would the slab only scare them into abandoning the tent and those injuries came later, in the forest

Those with the serious injuries were found under several feet of hard snow. The hard snow implies a collapse of snow where they were found.

[GlennM]

I too subscribe to the theory that injuries were sustained after leaving the tent. If footprints are to be believed, there was no foot dragging or anything claimed to be staggering steps.

[Per Inge Oestmoen]

I too subscribe to the theory that injuries were sustained after leaving the tent. If footprints are to be believed, there was no foot dragging or anything claimed to be staggering steps.

The nine victims were in all probability forced at gunpoint to leave the tent. There was no hurry, because the nine did not flee by themselves.

Their attackers, who more than likely were professionals trained in killing people, assumed that they would soon freeze to death. However, that evening between February 1th and 2th, there was a relatively mild temperature. Then the students had to be hunted down and killed violently. Hence all the telling injuries.

[ilahiyol]

What danger or threat affected the Dyatlov 9 in the same way? That is the great question of this maddening mystery. If something frightened them to such an extent that they fled the tent with no shoes or coats, why does it appear that they walked in an orderly fashion down the slope? If I felt my life was in danger, I'd run even in the dark. Mostly out of panic. Was it a natural occurring phenomenon such as a snow slab avalanche? If it was a snow slab, wouldn't the tent have been destroyed? And why would anyone flee in the same direction of the snow slab? An assault from outsiders remains a possibility. That may explain the orderly walk down the slope and perhaps the cracked skulls and broken ribs of those who didn't succumb to hypothermia. It may also explain what many feel was a government ordered coverup. As I write this, I favor a third-party assault over a natural phenomenon by, oh, 51% by 49%. Tomorrow I'll probably lean the other way!!!!!

Running barefoot in the pitch dark at minus 20 degrees at night means death. And no professional mountaineer would do that, no matter how frightened he may be. Because it is impossible to run in the dark without seeing the way ahead. Even if you run, you'll likely fall to the ground before long. And running makes you sweat in a short time. And sweat means death at minus 20 degrees and in a windy environment. These young people were intelligent and knew very well that they would not be treated this way unless there was immediate danger of death. The reason why they went to the forest and not the stock tent might be because the unknown Force was leading them into the forest. So the unknown Power was positioned between the tent and the stock tent. So the group couldn't get to the stock tent and they headed to the forest

[ilahiyol]

I too subscribe to the theory that injuries were sustained after leaving the tent. If footprints are to be believed, there was no foot dragging or anything claimed to be staggering steps.

The nine victims were in all probability forced at gunpoint to leave the tent. There was no hurry, because the nine did not flee by themselves.

Their attackers, who more than likely were professionals trained in killing people, assumed that they would soon freeze to death. However, that evening between February 1th and 2th, there was a relatively mild temperature. Then the students had to be hunted down and killed violently. Hence all the telling injuries.

If the state killed them, why would they leave the bodies there? That would be so silly. You're going to spend hours killing them and leaving the bodies there? After all, it's the state that does the search... The state could at least hide the last three bodies. Because it is certain that they did not die of cold. And why should the state torture the people they want to kill? Removing the eyes, removing the tongue, removing the chin, breaking the ribs, etc. It is also very difficult or even impossible for the state to find the Dytlov group at the top of the mountain at night. It would also be illogical for them to detect their location during the day and attack at night. If you spotted it during the day, it would make much more sense to attack during the day. Why wait at night?

[GlennM]

I agree that murderers don't leave incriminating evidence ( read corpses) unless they are making some statement with the remains. This statement will either be in the form of public or private symbolism. I find absolutely nothing in this tragedy that suggests public symbolism, neither have the original investigators. There is absolutely nothing to show that the killing of the hikers was intended as a grim warning, an offering or any thing else. Additionally, the location and nature of the deceased do not indicate some sort of private symbolism, whose message makes sense to the murderers. Some imaginative members of this forum have tried to invent a private symbolism interpretation  but  it is the symbolism of the poster, not the assailants, for there were none. No, the DP9 had an odd mix of resources and deprivations at the time of their crisis. It would surely be an amateurish and sloppy assassination to have the victims fitted out as they were and then having the perpetrating agents rolling the dice to see if this sort of thing would work, in the meantime freezing themselves during the wait.

 The obvious conclusion is that they the DP9 were not driven to death by other humans. That scenario presupposes a whole lot of speculative "what if`s" that are not established fact, but rather additional layers of creative spins and embellishments. Occam's Razor has been mentioned numerous times on the forum and it has merit. To wit, the explanation of their demise with the fewest assumptions is that they were affected by a weather related event which caused them to seek temporary shelter elsewhere. Everything else that has been observed and documented is a consequence of their failed attempts at survival. To circle back to this reply, we know the corpses were not hidden, but should have been, given the wilderness location.. There is nothing in the official record indicative of symbolic action public or private. Nothing points to human intervention of the malicious kind that is unequivocal. Rather, everything could and could more easily be explained by natural causes. Conspiracies make for good theater and titillating reading. A tragedy from natural causes, not so much. If a DPI investigator insists on a conspiracy, I say, " Follow the money!" Either the perpetrators or the writers about the perpetration are or were paid. That in my opinion about where the proverbial smoking gun is. Follow the money!