Alleged slab slide that left no trace

[Charles]

Charles replaced all his post with the words "nothing here" before deleting his account from the forum.
I am cleaning his mess.
Admin

[Ziljoe]

It certainly doesn't look there was a traditional avalanche but there are  different types. We also have to consider the hiker's perspective and how they perceived events. I still lean towards environmental reasons to leaving the tent. I respect Igor B's research as he triangulates his observations with references to each stage . When I speak of the environment , I mean that it was weather conditions,animal, etc.

I have to give some respect to those that are more knowledgeable than I regarding an avalanche of some description.. I guess it would depend on if these experts have been at the location. From what I can observe of the tent location , the slope certainly looks very shallow but looking at the maps it seems to be steeper further up from the tent.

[Manti]

That's true, but there are also no signs of others having been on the pass, no footprints leading to the tent, no deadly injury sustained by 6 hikers. The experienced investigator concluded that no-one else was there, just the Dyatlov Group.

They did suspect the Mansi for a while and it would also have been more convenient to scapegoat them than leave the case unsolved, but they ended up not doing that.

[GlennM]

It is clear that one can not take Nature to court. Nature is not going to compensate relatives of the deceased. On the other hand, if responsibility can be placed on a human, or human agency, then someone gains and someone loses. Conspiracy constructs are entertaining, fanciful and lucrative. Follow the money for both the author(s) of the theory as well as the players. A natural explanation is always going to be less satisfying.

[GlennM]

Good contribution Charles. 31 layers. All the numbered layers are uniform in composition, depth and slope. Yes? Then the point is moot. Is there variability in composition, depth and slope? Yes? Then, there  is justification  for the slab slip explanation. I see from the photographic evidence a non uniform terrain and a non homogeneous assortment of mounds of snow, described as layers. If we factor in a group of fatigued hikers pitching a tent on a surface that appears favorable to them at the time, such as on the Lee side of a mound, then the combination of location, the non uniform composition of snow layers  and wind deposited overburden on the leading edge of the slab are sufficient for the slab slip to happen. We need no conspiracy. Bad things happen to good people.

[GlennM]

Charles, you are certainly providing a compelling arguement. Let us review:

Their model should integrate these many thin and hard icy layers and the absence of overburden and the gentle slope under 30°... but it does not.
The rescuers moved about large blocks of compacted snow. Where did it come from? I think a slab slip. The slope is claimed to be less than 30 degrees, but who measured it in `59? Somebody could have said" where did all this come from." as they cleared the tent, but since they were not asked for their opinion, nothing was recorded.Further, before the ledge collapsed on the tent, perhaps the angle or slope was sufficient. This is speculation, but the snow on and around the tent is not.

And that's why:

- There are no testimonies of signs of avalanche observed by rescuers.

Good point, but there was residual snow on and around the tent and also there was the passage of time before the discovery. Were not the three who returned to the tent buried in blown snow?

- There are no signs of avalanche on the photos.

an avalanche is a macro event, a slab slide is micro

- The experienced mountaineers who were on site like Pashin didn't see any signs of avalanche and didn't speak about avalanche.

Could it be that historically the attention of the rescue party was not focused on avalanche nor slab slip, but rather discovery of the tourists? Too, is it true that an avalanche scours the slope of trees? At elevation  880, there were no trees, hence making an avalanche unlikely to detect. A slab slip though is localized

- The soviet authorities themselves couldn't conclude to an avalanche, of any kind, they had to speak about "unknown compelling force".

Agreed,, but could the slab slip be the unknown compelling force by another name?

Gaume and Puzrin just used the DPI for easy self-promotion, probably they needed funding for their department at their university... and their pseudo-scientific pseudo-experiment is a disgrace

In the academic arena, peer review and reputation are the basic tools for credibility. Could it be that the professional community was so indifferent to their findings that their conclusions went unchallenged?

[GlennM]

Charles, I do not mind dancing with you provided you stop stepping on my shoes. Tone down the ad hominem stuff and we can get along just fine.

I agree an avalanche would be detected from a copter, but a slip covered by drifted snow after all that time? Perhaps not so much. I am not surprised that nobody cited a slab slide as a cause. Who among them had been in one? Too, without knowing the incline of the ledge prior to its collapse on the tent, all conclusions, including the latest official one are speculative with regard to a slab slip. To me, it just makes more practical sense. They very well could have sheltered in the lee of a hummock of snow with a sufficient angle.

I think the injuries suffered by the hikers can indeed be explained as altercation wounds, but this too is speculation. Additionally, it requires a greater number of basic assumptions and the ignoring of that which does not agree with the hypothesis. A natural catastrophe also requires assumptions, but consistent with the actual evidence of the tragedy.As it pertains to the slab slide, the assumption that there were sufficient conditions for the snow to collapse the tent seem reasonable.

If humans with malicious intent are to blame,  follow the money.  If Nature caused it, the story ends there.

[GlennM]

Charles, your YouTube video of a spontaneous slab slip appears very similar to the debris in and around the tent. If continuing winds softened the fractured edge of snow after the slide, a slab slip certainly seems probable. It may have been more than probable is any of the hikers stood above the tent prior to collapse. There is nothing to suggest anyone did.

I do think that traces of a recent slide could be obscured by inclement weather.

The thing for me is that everything that follows their leaving the tent requires no additional rationalization. It is a cascading sequence of unfortunate circumstances and conditions. I believe when Zolo claimed the world know about their hike, it was enthusiastic hyperbole since they were attempting 200 miles of rough,dangerous travel.

[Ziljoe]

@charles.

Is the photo from Puzrin and Gaume ? The photo you talk about with the red, blue, green and yellow lines?

[Игорь Б.]

Возможность схода лавин, оползней, толщина снега, крутизна склона и т.п. не имеет значения.

Имеет значение только:

1.) отсутствие на месте палатки обледеневшего "лавинного" снега или хотя бы остатков его нижнего слоя, который невозможно копать лыжами и лыжными палками и в который невозможно их даже воткнуть.
2.) наличие такого же обледеневшего снега в следах-столбиках, которые не смог раздуть тот же ветер, что и на месте палатки.

Таким образом, любые разновидности "лавинных" версий опровергнуты быстро, просто, понятно, без всяких заумных схем и расчётов, раз и навсегда.

[GlennM]

The tent was at elevation 880. The hills is 1079. The difference is nearly 200 vertical feet. Could the slide happen behind the photographer in the photo with the dashed lines? How do we account for the broad line of broken snow blocks glistening white in the region just behind and below the tent?  Could some of that rubble have collapsed the tent as is went past?

I feel that if the snow slide happened near the first of the month and the discovery was made at the end of the month, that is sufficient time for evidence of the natural event to be erased. What I do not get is why the wind swept slope would still preserve tracks after a month and further how could anybody claim that month old depressions in windblown ice crust show bare foot or stocking footed prints.

[Manti]

The tent was at elevation 880. The hills is 1079. The difference is nearly 200 vertical feet.

The difference is 652 feet, because 1079 and 880 are measured in meters.

[GlennM]

Manti, thanks for the clarification. Charles is really bring a lot of information to the avalanche/slab slip thread. If I understand it correctly, the people who proposed the slab explanation did not conduct their investigation at or near 1079, but rather at a mile or so away.

When I inquired about the blocks of snow just downhill from the tent, he explains that they were cut out by rescuers. If so, that is a lot of compacted snow removed from on and around the tent. How did it get there? Were they chopping up snow to check for bodies? I thought they used probes.



I can not readily accept that conspirators harmed the hikers and then put their tent in a most unlikely location to obfuscate the crime.I understand that cutting your way out of a collapsed tent is accepted practice. I think nine people in a collapsed tent under a pile of snow are going to be more concerned about breathing than crawling over each other to find their boots in the dark.

Then again, I am shown pictures of rock piles. We know the tent was not covered with rocks, but if compressed snow was resting on these stones,  could a disturbance caused by wind and preparing the tent have caused the rocks to resettle?

I am also a bit surprised at the rescue photographs from 1959. Some of the landscape photos would not be high on my list. I'd save my film for the really important stuff.

I guess that if these specialists want to discount the possibility of the collapse of the tent by unfortunate natural events, they should have another explanation that adheres to Occam's Razor. So far, what I've read all involves an elaborate set of circumstances and unlikely behaviors by bad actors. I've said it before, "Follow the money". If there is evil doings, someone, somewhere is cashing in on it... and, you don't leave corpses around.

[Manti]

Recently I have been reading more about one of the least discussed theories: methanol poisoning.

There is a decent description several pages down here: https://www.dyatlov-pass-incident.com/ (search "methanol") Seems like it can explain almost everything

[Ziljoe]

Hi Charles

Georgiy Karpushin the navigator also said he observed the body  of a female next to the tent because he could see  long hair and another body not far away. He also states he saw the tent cut from the north side. All this being noted whilst from the plane. ( I think it was the 24th)Yet ,when the first rescuers found the tent , it was collapsed, covered with hard snow and no bodies next to the tent? said" By the way, I was already struck by the fact that the tent was improperly set up, on a gradient of about 30 degrees, open to all winds and rock falls ... What made the guys do this - I can not imagine."

Someone is telling fibs .


Alexander Puzrin and Johan Gaume also say that two avalanches were observed in 2022 by experienced hikers. I believe it was the location 1.8 miles /3km from the tent but what is interesting is that any signs of the avalanche were gone in a few hours.

The photo you put your lines on , suggesting that depressions would show is not necessarily true or accurate. The tent had also been moved by that point so the red lines would be more to the right and the person that took the photo might not have been standing at the steepest part of the proposed slope/slide. I would guess it's of to the left. However , I do fail to understand someone argue about angles/lines and illustrations by calling it pseudoscience when others do the same and claim it's fact because it's theirs....


Anyway, the snow goes up and down on the slope and gets blown away, it settles in depressions of different depths of layers. Some of the hikers got covered with snow on the slope. The snow came and went , there were warmer days and colder, wind and no wind. Oh, and almost four weeks for the weather conditions to change the scene, no matter what we choose to believe.

There does seems to be a lot of conflicting statements and observations on the discovery of the tent and observations within 48 hours and what followed. Maybe we should look at the contradictions during this time frame?


I will continue to subscribe to the Wolverine theory because it fits the most variables for me.

[Ziljoe]

I have, it's why I posted.... They also updated their information saying avalanches /slides have been recorded and they disappear quickly at that area. Their demonstration on the video is an example of concept, not actual fact.

The navigator ,Georgiy Karpushin that you use as an example also said .

"By the way, I was already struck by the fact that the tent was improperly set up, on a gradient of about 30 degrees, open to all winds and rock falls ... What made the guys do this - I can not imagine."

He suspects Rock falls? Says the gradient is about 30 degrees. Women lying next to the tent and the tent was poorly placed with the side cut open.

You just stated that he saw no sign of an avalanche and Karpushin said: " I remember we made a lot of runs over the tent. It was clearly visible that it was cut from the north."

How did Karpushin see the tent was cut from the north when it was found with snow on top and what happened to the female and other body he seen?

[GlennM]

Holy cats! On the one hand the slab slip hypothesis is supported,  but a girl by the tent? Could this lost clothing? A scavenging animal perhaps? It appears there are one too many females to be accounted for.

The explanation about the hikers pitching camp at elevation 880 so as to not lose hard won ground seems right. If conditions were harsh, then so does making a hasty camp, poorly set on that slope. A volunteer expedition is only going to work as hard as they want to and leadership is by the consent of the participants. As such, the leader can not be too didactic when getting cooperation to get things done. It seems that they worked well enough getting there, laying the cache and making camp. I suppose it met their immediate needs, even if the pilot was critical after the fact.

I feel the importance of getting to the bottom of the mystery is to prevent future occurrences precipitated by similar environmental conditions. If a conspiracy,  then the bad boys got away with it, taking their guilt to the grave. There is no value in that.

Getting to the truth is the standard response for why the DPI endures. But, is more?

[Ziljoe]

This is what is said by G Karpushin. If I remember correctly , he may have been dismissed as having a poor memory. I'm sure I read he had a hard time. But this has a strong link to the staging hypothesis.

https://dyatlovpass.com/interview-karpushin

Here is some of what he says in this interview.

February 25, the weather was just wonderful. Mountains against the background of a clear, clear sky created a calm, gracious mood. From Ivdel airport almost simultaneously in the air soared 7 aircraft. To the village of Burmantovo we flew in V formation. There, at an altitude of 300 m, were divided, as was agreed earlier. Kholat Syakhl (Mountain of the Dead), marked simply as "altitude 1079" on the pilot maps, was directly at the rate of the leading aircraft. "Approximately 25-30 km to the mountain," recalls navigator Karpushin, "we saw very clearly the tent stuck to the eastern slope of the mountain ...

"To avoid the accumulation of aircraft, I instructed the rest of the crafts to return to Ivdel.I remember we made a lot of runs over the tent. It was clearly visible that it was cut from the north. Straight by the tent, a corpse of a woman lay judging by her long hair.A little further away lay another body. It was evident that the students left the tent in panic. By the way, I was already struck by the fact that the tent was improperly set up, on a gradient of about 30 degrees, open to all winds and rock falls ... What made the guys do this - I can not imagine. I can assume that, having reached the top, they were so tired that they decided not to go down to the foot of the mountain. This mistake became fatal for them.

The pilots marked the tent position on the map and contacted Ivdel, where they received the command to return to the airfield. After a while, the helicopter Mi-4 flew to the place of the death of students with investigators on board. The landing of a group of investigators was borderline foul. The cloudiness was so great that the rotor was not visible. Landing on the mountain failed, so the helicopter passengers had to jump out of it from a height of several meters. In parallel, helicopter pilots evacuated other search groups. Then, at the end of the search, there was no more need for us, and in March the civil aviation pilots left for Sverdlovsk."

------------------------------------------------------------------

Obviously this raises more questions, how can he see hair and tell the gender of one of the bodies?  There would be snow fall for the length of time that the bodies were missing and the tent was collapsed with snow on top when found. How did he see that it was cut? He says that some investigators had to jump out of the helicopter , could they have gone to the tent to interfere and look for things?

Karpushin's memory is either wrong, he's fabricating the story for attention or something completely different happened .

There are a number of contradictions on how the tent was found and when things were found.


Below,Sharavin recollects how he found the tent on the 26th of February.

-----------------------------------------------------------

Question: How dense was the snow on the tent that you had to chop it up with an ice ax? Do you agree that the two skis were not set up as the center ridgepoles of the tent?

M.Sharavin: The snow on top of the tent was really so hard that it had to be chopped off with an ice axe. And the skis were in front of the tent and were not used as ridgepoles.

Question: About the rope at the entrance - did it tie the skate of the entrance with skis or an ice axe, or tied it to another pole?

M.Sharavin: I can't say anything about a rope. I don't remember such.

(However Slobtsov Boris Efimovich statement says the following)

Sheet 298

PROTOCOL
witness testimony

Near the entrance of the tent on the snow
an ice ax was stuck, on the canvas of the tent, in the snow lay a pocket flashlight, Chinese make, which, as it was subsequently established, belonged to Dyatlov. It was strange that while there was a layer of snow let say 5-10 cm thick under the flashlight, there was no snow on top of it, and it was snowed slightly on either side. I took the flashlight first and found that it was not turned on. When I turned on it lit. I did not notice that day, but then I heard from other people involved in the search that there was a trace of urine in the snow near the tent.
In the immediate vicinity of the tent there were no footprints.

[Ziljoe]

Charles,

Perhaps I am avoiding assuming the next step forward is firm , I do not wish to take that step only to find when I put my weight on it , I fall through a hole.  It is like we are all in the dark , at night on top of a mountain, there is fog, we have blindfolds on and our eyes closed tightly shut . Everyone is pulling or pushing in a different direction from there own fixed view point.

When lost, sometimes it's best to pause, even retrace ones steps back to where one came off the path.

I'm not sure what you mean by making hierarchies and everything put in front of you, you call a fairy or fantasy ,yet, if you don't like the idea you close your mind and eyes. You criticised the work of the scientists for the avalanche by claiming they went to Walt Disney , their illustrations were wrong and whatever else about the research etc, yet you select quotes without the full sentence or context, make your own diagrams with 29 fractures ,add lines , angles and theories etc. But your examples are scientifically based?  You haven't put anything forward to explain what happened in detail although you have supplied a possible motive for outsiders, which I appreciate.

I was looking at YouTube today and randomly it came up with those two scientist's about the avalanche, it just repeated that there has been several other reports of avalanches this year in the area by explorer's.

If I am flat, like a pancake , it is because there seems to be a counter argument for every theory. I spent six years reading almost every thread here and on other forums that I could find before I even registered on this forum.

  Igor B goes a long way long way to give plausible explanations for many of the event's that occurred. It So happens , that Wolverine's exist, as do snowdrifts/caves. It also covers the dilated pupils, the reason to exit the tent, the search dog's behaviour , spots on clothing and skin reaction on one of the investigators hands. The injuries to the four in the ravine are consistent with a collapse of mass.

As for scales, hierarchies and the world of contingency, I have no idea what you mean but I believe we have all reached a plateau, you on the other hand have decided to chip away at others to elevate your position.

. You could hang a Bellini's painting close to a Pollock's without seeing any difference... 

I  could hang a child's painting between a Bellini's and a Pollock's and you would refuse to look at the child's painting, say it's not art and have it thrown away....





 

[GlennM]

Well. Is seems certain that is anyone is skipping their prescription medicines, they should get regulated soon.

On the other hand, with the wolverine theory, is the idea the animal got into the tent? Is there witness statements to support the wolverine theory?
 
With regard to tearing down other points of view to elevate one's own, I suppose it is natural, though small minded. Far better to bolster one's own theory with evidence. The evidence is not going to come from what is already known. None of us are going to puzzle out this tragedy by recombining thrice told reminiscences. What is needed is original research. Teddy and her team go to the mountain and dig. That is good. Other avenues of research are checking the financials of suspicious characters. This could include promotions, transfers and even deathbed confessions. Follow the money! If there is malicious behavior, someone knows and someone will tell.

The natural explanation of slab slide requires the fewest assumptions. The question is how do contemporary explorers avoid the same fate.

[Ziljoe]

Hi GlennM


The idea is the Wolverine got into the tent.there are no witness statements because , unfortunately, they all the hikers died.

No one was even contemplating a Wolverine at the time. My guess is that it was a standard search and rescue. What followed all revolves around why the left the tent?

[GlennM]

Charles, I think you are starting to see my point. Congratulations. Please proceed. I do not need to follow the money, since natural events are not paid. If you turn up something compelling that supports your theory, let us know. Fewer people are interested as time goes on.

[GlennM]