Would this make you leave a tent?

[Ziljoe]

I am a bit uncertain how to read the data from the maps , but as I understand it , the large orange circle in Russia is the  Chelyabinsk meteor from 2013. The orange colour represents daylight hours. The size represents the energy created and not the number of fire balls in the region.

The previous map seems to show the observations but I'm not sure if it's observations by people on the ground or electronic devices. It would make sense that the bigger the fireball the more people see/hear it?

I don't know if these two maps are the same thing as the EPSC Abstracts
Vol. 8, EPSC2013-42, 2013
European Planetary Science Congress 2013 diagrams don't say a time period .

Apparently they make noises. Electrophonic Sounds from Bolides

http://inamidst.com/notes/electrophonic

[GlennM]

At this juncture on the topic of ball lightning affecting the hikers, we have a photo which is offered as evidence of skin damage from lightning. I am inclined to think that post mortem lividity and that the victim was found face down which explains the vascular outlining. I think ball lightning and/ or bolides are common enough globally to discount anyone walking a mile in snow to avoid them. The analysis of artifacts in " found photos" are described as photos of photos grabbed from a computer screen. Personally, I would expect to see raster lines of pixellation. If the photos were instead just,saved as JPG files, then thay is an option.  It may explain how color made it into what was all black and white photos. So far as I can tell, ball lightning is an extraordinary explanation for something that can be more mundanely explained.

[Ziljoe]

Are these rasterlines? And there's a magnifying graphic with a plus sign.

[GlennM]

They look like raster (scan lines) . Since the raster runs horizontally,,this image suggests a 90 degree rotation with the artifact turned robably for the sake of the viewer's imagination. Good detective work!

[sarapuk]

If ball lightning was involved in the tragedy, would we expect tent damage? Would anyone inside hold a metal knife to cut the tent just then? Would a nearby outside bright light be sufficient reason to emergency exit the tent yet walk downslope? Is ball lightning Zolo's last photograph?

Apparently ball lightning can penetrate objects like a tent without necessarily damaging the object. But these ball lightning events don't last long, usually seconds or minutes. If something last a long time then its probably not ball lightning. 

[sarapuk]

All good questions.

Plasma balls, if you read up on their occurrences in history, can pass through tents, walls, buildings, and so on, and leave no trace, no burns, nothing.
And yes, the balls of light seen on Dyatlov Pass the night of the tragedy could have been plasma balls.

Plasma balls or ball lightning as they are also called can penetrate objects without leaving a trace, apparently. I think in this Dyatlov case we have to consider the possibility that multiple events took place, that is maybe several or 4 or 5 things happened, including ball lightning. Along with atrocious weather conditions and maybe even a meteor shooting across the sky or rocket. But these do not necessarily mean they were involved in this Dyatlov case, just observed. 

[sarapuk]

Kuersten says that it wasn't only Zolotaryev who was taking photos of the phenomenon in the sky. I'll quote here for you:

QUOTE
When Zolotaryov was discovered in the ravine, 3 months after the tragedy and under 4-5 meters of snow, he had a weathered Zorki-1 camera around his neck, and inside this camera the searchers discovered a surprisingly intact film roll. The film consisted of 36 frames: 17 frames were from before the h ike and are considered irrelevant, 10 were  hidden by Ivanov, and returned to the Dyatlov Memorial Foundation by  his daughter in 2009, and 9 remain missing. Of course this immediately raises a few questions: why did Zolotaryov salvage a camera from the tent and not his backpack or an ice ax? Why did he keep it in reach up to his death? Why did the investigation remove these frames from the case files? And why, in spite of the thin evidence available today, is the Dyatlov Memorial Foundation not making the 10 resurfaced frames available to the public?

Valentin Yakimenko, a fellow student of the Dyatlovs, managed to get a hold of these frames and did a lengthy image analysis during a 2015 Dyatlov conference ....

Under the microscope, the frames show small bright dots with fine lines that resemble trails of signal flares, and one of the brighter objects seems to grow to double size of the moon before descending to the ground. Yakimentko assumes that Zolotaryov took these 10 (+ nine missing) frames between the time of the camp evacuation and his death in the ravine, that 4 other cameras also captured the bright object in the sky, and that these chronologically match Zolotaryov's frames 5, 7, and 10. From this, he concludes that Zolotaryov was the first to photograph the approaching object, and then called out his comrades with their own cameras. It would also prove that the object was a lasting phenomenon and not some sudden flash, because the overall time frame was much too long for a rocket or missile.

Yakimenko adds that not only 9 of Zolotaryov's frames are missing, but also an estimated 24 frames from Slobodan's and 12 frames from Thibeaux's camera. He concludes that the three of them photographed the majority of the incident at the camp site, that this event was the true cause of the evacuation and that all frames are withheld at the same location for that reason.
END QUOTE

I will stop quoting the book here because if I quote any more, I'll probably have to pay royalties 

Very good. It must be some years ago now that the subject of missing photos got a lot of discussions going. It does appear that many photos or and negatives are missing and may have been deliberately kept from public view, for some reason. Maybe that reason was too sensational to reveal. Perhaps there was and still is a cover up going on.

[sarapuk]

Number 8 the "chicken" is interesting because it catches a two tone colored border with what looks like lettering or numbering on the blue rod. Certainly nothing in the photo bears any relationship to the tent. I would speculate that this photo was an attempt to film something on the other side of a glass window taken from within a building or a moving vehicle. Of course, it was a failure and the "chicken" is just an artifact of no real significance. What seems important is whether this is the only color photo in the entire DPI archive? Suspicious, yes? Could a linguist hazard a guess as to the meaning of the obscured lettering?

I do not recall anybody suggesting these granular and streaked magnified  images coming from the middle or the ends of a roll of film.

In this strange, years-old mystery which has been examined by so many experts and lay-people for over 60 years, I think all theories should be properly considered, even Yeti.

I am intrigued by Henning Kuersten's book, but this will be the last time I quote it, as I'm not trying to push it on anyone.  If your (or anyone else's) interest is piqued, they can buy it themselves and read his theory.

QUOTE
..... I became convinced that the Dyatlov group perished in the wake of a rare but massive electromagnetic plasma event, commonly known as Earth Lights, Aerial Plasmoids, or Unidentified Aerial Phenomena (UAP), and most often mistaken for Ball Lightning. Due to the variability of the phenomenon and the dispute about the correct denomination, I will introduce the term Aerial Plasma Phenomenon (APP) and present a more detailed classification in the "Believe in Science" chapter.

.... I will also demonstrate to you that SX and K34 are not technical shots, but pretty good night-time photographs of this same spectacular phenomenon, which has seen repeating occurrences in the Ural mountains up until today. The following image is a histogram-equalized collage of our three "Famous Last Frames," to which I will later add more from this second hotspot in the Ural mountains. We will also learn of other similar spectacular incidents, adn slowly but surely paint a precise picture of what happened on that extraordinary but tragic night on the Dyatlov pass.

In the end, a lot can be interpreted into blurry, scratched, and weathered images. But Z7 is in my opinion the most intriguing evidence, something a criminal investigation might call a smoking gun.



END QUOTE
(Photo from book, above, shows three images from three different cameras, taken by the DPI that night.)

You are correct that all theories should be properly considered. Going over old ground is ok if it helps in some way and doesn't just clutter up and confuse things. Take this Dyatlov Forum, there have been so many posts over the years that it's difficult to keep track. Our hope is that more evidence will emerge from behind closed doors. I think that there is evidence that is deliberately being concealed. And maybe even what really happened.


 

[GlennM]

We all know what happened, not why.

[Missi]

We all know what happened, not why.

May I disagree? We don't know exactly what happened. In fact there's dissent in what happened, if you stray from "hikers went to the Urals and died". It starts with the question if other people were involved and ends with were the tent was placed by the hikers.

[GlennM]

There are facts and imaginings, the latter spawns tourism, media and forum topics. If imaginings are eliminated and only the facts remain, they are the " how", not the "why".

The best we can do is employ a legal model to see what fits. This is means, motive, opportunity. This is circumstantial, eyewitness and physical evidence.
By what means did events transpire?
What was their decision making processes?
What opportunities were present?
What circumstances contributed to their demise?
Who saw anything?
What material objects explain the outcome?

In a court of law, a verdict can be achieved on incomplete evidence. In the court of opinion in the forum, the same is true. Although attorney's are distrustful of eyewitness testimony, it is the closest path to answering the "why." Question. We do not have it...yet.

For the most part, addressing the tragedy is akin to a game. The reward is not so much winning as it is how well one plays the game. Some feel they win because they are analytically minded, others intuitive. We use their 1959 misfortune to better understand ourselves.

[sarapuk]

There are facts and imaginings, the latter spawns tourism, media and forum topics. If imaginings are eliminated and only the facts remain, they are the " how", not the "why".

The best we can do is employ a legal model to see what fits. This is means, motive, opportunity. This is circumstantial, eyewitness and physical evidence.
By what means did events transpire?
What was their decision making processes?
What opportunities were present?
What circumstances contributed to their demise?
Who saw anything?
What material objects explain the outcome?


But you say ; We all know what happened, not why. But we don't know what happened. There is not even a philosophical argument to be had. 


In a court of law, a verdict can be achieved on incomplete evidence. In the court of opinion in the forum, the same is true. Although attorney's are distrustful of eyewitness testimony, it is the closest path to answering the "why." Question. We do not have it...yet.

For the most part, addressing the tragedy is akin to a game. The reward is not so much winning as it is how well one plays the game. Some feel they win because they are analytically minded, others intuitive. We use their 1959 misfortune to better understand ourselves.