Off topic

[anna_pycckux]

This is not spam. I suggested Oleg to take an experienced and fearless hiker to the vacant place.  I wanted to delete an extra photo, but there is no "edit" function on the forum.

I was hoping that Oleg would thank me that I had found a worthy candidate for an empty seat.

finally, the "edit" function appeared.

[anna_pycckux]

I think you should go, Anna.

1. Evidence of the presence of military and KGB officers at the pass should be sought in archival documents. The soldier's winding, found in the spring of 1959, is an important evidence of the presence of the military, who could have been the liquidators of the Dyatlov group.
2. The loss of weapons was severely punished, and therefore it is unlikely to be possible to find a gun. (I appreciated your humor)
3. Of course, we need to keep looking for artifacts in the cedar, the creek and the helicopter landing zone.
4. If I were younger, I might have gone on this hike. In 2001 and 2002, I walked 170 km with the Procession. It wasn't easy. Russian Russian soldiers from Florida were with us, I remember, probably sent to pray for the entire Russian diaspora. So did the American professor-historian Larry E. Holmes. Memoirs of this procession were written and published. You can read: https://proza.ru/2022/06/03/622 
https://pycckux.livejournal.com/409536.html quote from Professor Larry: This procession was the most difficult physical test in my life.
5. On June 3, 2023, the Procession leaves Vyatka again.

.

[Teddy]

2. The tent is intact, it was cut by M. Sharavin.

Certainly not from the inside.

[anna_pycckux]

Certainly not form the inside.

Interview with M. Sharavin 2010:
The tent was under hard snow... there were skis, an ice axe near the tent.... And nothing else. It was clear that the guys had suffered a big accident. We cut through part of the tent with an ice axe and saw inside jackets, backpacks, skis, a stove, a camera..... the flask of alcohol that we took with us.

[Teddy]

Anna, read what I said, the keyword being FROM THE INSIDE:

Certainly not from the inside.

[anna_pycckux]

Anna, read what I said, the keyword being FROM THE INSIDE:

Certainly not from the inside.

Yes, I understood and agree that the tent was not cut from the inside... And the proof of this is the interview of Mikhail Sharavin.

[eurocentric]

Anna, read what I said, the keyword being FROM THE INSIDE:

Certainly not from the inside.

Yes, I understood and agree that the tent was not cut from the inside... And the proof of this is the interview of Mikhail Sharavin.

When the tent was set up indoors for forensic examination some of the cuts were found to have been made from the inside, using a blade. I think that was the point Teddy was making.

With the tent covered in hard snow Mikhail Sharavin may not have noticed those, otherwise logically he could have exploited them to gain entry, rather than making his own using an ice axe.

It's a great pity he was never called upon to give a witness statement, being subordinate to his search group leader.

[Teddy]

The tent was cut from the inside.
https://dyatlovpass.com/case-files-303-304

anna_pycckux, why do you insist on wasting everybody's time?

[anna_pycckux]

Certainly not from the inside.

????!!!!!!

[anna_pycckux]

The tent was cut from the inside.

???!!!!!

[Ziljoe]

2. The tent is intact, it was cut by M. Sharavin.

Certainly not from the inside.

Anna, you say it was cut by Sharavin. It might well have had more cuts from outside.

 But they found some of the cuts showed attempts from the inside.

Teddy is responding that Sharavin certainly did not cut the tent from the inside.

[anna_pycckux]

There is nothing strange here. The cuts from the inside do not fit into Annushka's version.

The liquidators, having completed the task, opened the tent from the inside with a knife so that none of the accidental survivors could escape in it. That's what it says in my book.  There is not a single known fact that does not fit into my version.

[eurocentric]

There is nothing strange here. The cuts from the inside do not fit into Annushka's version.

The liquidators, having completed the task, opened the tent from the inside with a knife so that none of the accidental survivors could escape in it. That's what it says in my book.  There is not a single known fact that does not fit into my version.

They didn't do a very good job of it then, the 3 cuts made from the inside seemed repairable by a determined survivor with needle and darn or even a well-placed coat shoved inside them, like the one found.

With medicinal alcohol in the tent surely the liquidators would set fire to it. It could even be staged as a stove accident. Then the tent is reliably out of service, as are blankets, clothing and food - everything needed for survival, apart from what was in the labaz.

[anna_pycckux]

There is nothing strange here. The cuts from the inside do not fit into Annushka's version.

My version would not have suffered in any way, even if the tent had not been cut, or cut only from the inside, or only from the outside, or burned to the ground. Or the tent would be moved from the forest to the slope.

[Ziljoe]

2. The tent is intact, it was cut by M. Sharavin.

Certainly not from the inside.

Anna, you say it was cut by Sharavin. It might well have had more cuts from outside.

 But they found some of the cuts showed attempts from the inside.

Teddy is responding that Sharavin certainly did not cut the tent from the inside.

There is nothing strange here. The cuts from the inside do not fit into Annushka's version. Therefore, she does not notice them and ignores them. All researchers do the same thing - they manipulate the facts to fit their versions and do not notice the facts that contradict these versions. That is why the tragedy has not yet been solved

I agree. There is nothing strange here. The tent may have been cut from the outside by the searcher's, they had to find out what lay beneath the tent canopy. I have no problems withe that.

The reported cutting from the inside must be respected also.

I believe Anna is choosing her evidence to fit with her book.

[Олег Таймень]

There is nothing strange here. The cuts from the inside do not fit into Annushka's version.

The liquidators, having completed the task, opened the tent from the inside with a knife so that none of the accidental survivors could escape in it. That's what it says in my book.  There is not a single known fact that does not fit into my version.

They didn't do a very good job of it then, the 3 cuts made from the inside seemed repairable by a determined survivor with needle and darn or even a well-placed coat shoved inside them, like the one found.

With medicinal alcohol in the tent surely the liquidators would set fire to it. It could even be staged as a stove accident. Then the tent is reliably out of service, as are blankets, clothing and food - everything needed for survival, apart from what was in the labaz.

The liquidators also put down two lanterns and forgot about them. One lantern was placed on the slope of the tent. The second was laid on the third ridge of stones.
And the liquidators also allowed Zina Kolmogorova to put on two ski pants for insulation and put fur insoles between three pairs of socks so that her feet would not freeze.

[anna_pycckux]

I believe Anna is choosing her evidence to fit with her book.

You're wrong. At first I had a version of political crime based on the testimony of Yudin and other witnesses, according to the materials of the criminal case, and only then all the other evidence began to suggest itself in favor of my version. But now we are discussing the version of Oleg Taimen's nuclear explosion, and the tent, the tourist commission that allowed the hike, and the frisky partridges that Askenazi caught with his hands do not fit into it.

[eurocentric]

I believe Anna is choosing her evidence to fit with her book.

You're wrong. At first I had a version of political crime based on the testimony of Yudin and other witnesses, according to the materials of the criminal case, and only then all the other evidence began to suggest itself in favor of my version. But now we are discussing the version of Oleg Taimen's nuclear explosion, and the tent, the tourist commission that allowed the hike, and the frisky partridges that Askenazi caught with his hands do not fit into it.

Frisky partridges? 

(ignoring how you introduced them as quails earlier)