My point is less about why they left their shelter and more about why they did not get further. In the simplest sense, I contend they didn't go further because they couldn't. Weather stopped them. I believe Suri would argue for human interference. In my defense, I think there was enough time to stop, level a base, lay skis, rig the tent and stake it down. There is no definitive evidence to show any injuries that would prevent forward progress to Ortoten, nor justify a walk to the cedar. In essence, I contend they went as far as they could, hunkered down and intended to proceed the following day. Going back to my previous thought, an injured hiker could remain at the tent while others moved on to Ortoten if they were single minded in their quest. There were no broken legs or arms. No splints.
I think the conspiracy advocates would argue that some feigned condition or personal threat halted the expedition. This is unsatisfactory for me because of two reasons. First, if the object it death, you don't let your victims make camp. Second, the malefactor(s) must have an exit plan. No evidence of mutual combat exists that can not be better explained by natural causes.