Bartolomey

[GlennM]

Changing the letters isn't so hard...until I look at my unabridged dictionary. You can sure make a lot of combunations out of those 26 letters. I think Aardvark is a good one to start with.

[SURI]

Hi Suri .

Ivanov says it was . Do you not believe Ivanov? He says he lived in the mountains for four months without a break? But everyone else was rotated ?

"It was a difficult expedition. We lived in the Arctic, in the mountains, for four months without a break.

Maybe if you had a more accurate translation, it would be clear to you who actually spent four months in the mountains and never left at all:

"Сложная это была экспедиция. Мы просидели в Заполярье, в горах, четыре месяца безвыездно."

''It was a difficult expedition. We sat there in the Arctic region, in the mountains, for four months without leaving."

[Ziljoe]

@ suri

Thanks for the correction but Ivanov wasn't in the artic or at the pass for four months . ?

So I remain unsure of your claims at the moment. I wait for your break down of what occured.

[sarapuk]

Therefore lets move things along a little. What are the UFOs that Ivanov was referring to? Because UFO to most people conjures up aliens from other worlds, etc. Are these the type of UFO that Ivanov and some others may have believed to have been responsible for the Dyatlov tragedy?

Just change the letters and you will instantly know what Ivanov meant and where he was aiming.

You say just change the letters ? Enlightenment please !

[sarapuk]

Changing the letters isn't so hard...until I look at my unabridged dictionary. You can sure make a lot of combunations out of those 26 letters. I think Aardvark is a good one to start with.

Aardvark ? An African animal !

[SURI]

@ suri

Thanks for the correction but Ivanov wasn't in the artic or at the pass for four months . ?

So I remain unsure of your claims at the moment. I wait for your break down of what occured.

Ivanov was not there for four months, of course, but he had in mind those who were there for those 4 months – or rather, lay there.

[Ziljoe]

Changing the letters isn't so hard...until I look at my unabridged dictionary. You can sure make a lot of combunations out of those 26 letters. I think Aardvark is a good one to start with.

Aardvark ? An African animal !

It's known to be the first word the first word in the English dictionary.

[Ziljoe]

@ suri

Thanks for the correction but Ivanov wasn't in the artic or at the pass for four months . ?

So I remain unsure of your claims at the moment. I wait for your break down of what occured.

Ivanov was not there for four months, of course, but he had in mind those who were there for those 4 months – or rather, lay there.

Nobody was there for 4 months. Think about it.

[SURI]

@ suri

Thanks for the correction but Ivanov wasn't in the artic or at the pass for four months . ?

So I remain unsure of your claims at the moment. I wait for your break down of what occured.

Ivanov was not there for four months, of course, but he had in mind those who were there for those 4 months – or rather, lay there.

Nobody was there for 4 months. Think about it.

February, March, April, May

[GlennM]

The Thread has become tedious. It is about a second hand report someone who shared gossip with another guy who later on did not want to do it any more. From this I get UFO's (again) and the Let's  read my mind ploy (again).
I commend Ziljoe for constantly coming up with well reasoned answers.

My point in posting this topic was point out that for all his involvement with the case Ivanov knew as much as anyone else. My suggestion is that if Ivanov or anyone else who had thunderbolts to throw in this case they could simply close the case by saying the cause of death was weather, a known compelling force. Yhat would be the end of it and their nefarious secrets are cloaked in a custom made conspiracy coverup. But, then and now, there are people who will believe what they want to believe. An unknown compelling force is the absolute worst way of trying to deflect attention away from an open and shut case. I do not consider any person who was involved in the case to be a hero willing to stick his neck out with the goal of endicting the government, military or Mansi for a criminal act.

[SURI]

Therefore lets move things along a little. What are the UFOs that Ivanov was referring to? Because UFO to most people conjures up aliens from other worlds, etc. Are these the type of UFO that Ivanov and some others may have believed to have been responsible for the Dyatlov tragedy?

Just change the letters and you will instantly know what Ivanov meant and where he was aiming.

You say just change the letters ? Enlightenment please !

If you actually know this case, you don't need to guess any letters. You don't need 26 letters of the alphabet. The acronym associated with this tragedy comes up automatically. Ivanov's "UFO," against which he discovered absolute guilt, was of purely earthly origin.

[sarapuk]

The Thread has become tedious. It is about a second hand report someone who shared gossip with another guy who later on did not want to do it any more. From this I get UFO's (again) and the Let's  read my mind ploy (again).
I commend Ziljoe for constantly coming up with well reasoned answers.

My point in posting this topic was point out that for all his involvement with the case Ivanov knew as much as anyone else. My suggestion is that if Ivanov or anyone else who had thunderbolts to throw in this case they could simply close the case by saying the cause of death was weather, a known compelling force. Yhat would be the end of it and their nefarious secrets are cloaked in a custom made conspiracy coverup. But, then and now, there are people who will believe what they want to believe. An unknown compelling force is the absolute worst way of trying to deflect attention away from an open and shut case. I do not consider any person who was involved in the case to be a hero willing to stick his neck out with the goal of endicting the government, military or Mansi for a criminal act.

Most threads can become tedious. It's up to us all to try to avoid that. The unknown compelling force statement is a good way to wrap up an unknown event or events. Especially in the former USSR and indeed in today's Russia. 

[GlennM]

Except that here we are...

[sarapuk]

Except that here we are...

Yes, here we are with the unknown compelling force statement. That is the statement upon which this whole mystery hinges.

[GlennM]

This force can be unknown and unknowable. The force can be unknown but knowable. The forum exists because as reasonable people,me believe the unknown will be made known.

It that regard the unknown and unknowable could be grouped into the categories of fantasy or science fiction. In fantasy, elves, fairies,demons and spirits would be associated with the disaster. These constructs are not real and never were. We can rule out boogie man type explanations Any explanation of a fantastic nature can be dismissed.

Science fiction, on the other hand are plausible causes except the discovery of them, then technology to produce them and the laws that govern them are yet to be realized. This encompasses cryptid life forms terrestrial and otherwise. It includes wave and beam technologies and mechanisms which were not there in '59.

[Ziljoe]

Except that here we are...

Yes, here we are with the unknown compelling force statement. That is the statement upon which this whole mystery hinges.

It's says this in translation I believe.

Given the absence of external bodily injuries or signs of a struggle on the bodies, the fact that all the group's valuables remained intact, and the forensic medical findings regarding the cause of death, it must be concluded that the hikers perished due to a natural force they were unable to overcome.

The whole paragraph has to read in context and from a legal viewpoint. This is not a vague suggestion or multi meaning secret message. It is the documented conclusion . It is not written for the world of social media and entertainment, it's written to state how they came to their conclusion.

To break it down.

Учитывая отсутствие... и признаков борьбы = Considering the absence of external body injuries... and signs of a struggle

наличие всех ценностей группы =
the presence of all the group's valuables (proving they were not robbed by local tribes or
bandits)

заключение судебно-медицинской экспертизы = conclusion of the forensic medical examination

стихийная сила (stikhiynaya sila) = elemental force / force of nature / natural

disasterпреодолеть которую... были не в состоянии = which they were unable/powerless to overcome

[SURI]

Ivanov's later admission:
„Everyone was told that hikers were in an extreme situation and froze. However, that was not true. The true causes of the deaths were hidden from the people...“

That's why we have a case file without a number...

[GlennM]

Ziljoe writes "Given the absence of external bodily injuries or signs of a struggle on the bodies, the fact that all the group's valuables remained intact, and the forensic medical findings regarding the cause of death, it must be concluded that the hikers perished due to a natural force they were unable to overcome."

Natural forces in this case are cold, wind, elevation, gravity and snow. Some Natural forces that may be germane are crevasses and slippery ground.

A single explanation such as snow is responsible is insufficient because any natural occurrence is the sum total of numerous  conditions present, modified by time. So, the question of what compelled them to leave the tent is not likely explained by a single factor. The evidence of a collapsed tent in snow is clear enough to attribute snow, wind and gravity. The evacuation of the tent by cutting speaks to previous training and instinctive behavior. Leaving the tent speaks to the immediate prioritizing of mitigating heat loss. Walking away from the tent is exercise which is warming, arguably not enough though. Nothing suggests they ran. What happened subsequently is understood by the effects of relentless cold.

I do not understand why a fire was not maintained and a lean-to shelter  not made around it at the cedar. Too,  there would  eventually become a time when even if personal warmth was insured that hunger would become an issue., I think it reasonable for a delegation to go back to the tent and forage. If you subscribe to the "blind in the cedar" they could be on the lookout for the tent. In my simple imagining, hot rocks in pockets would be kept for warming hands and bodies. Clothes would be redistributed so that those returning to the tent were best dressed. Those who remain have the fire to tend.

It baffles me that the den and mat have no fire pit. I can see the wisdom of getting into a ravine for shelter. I can accept a cornice collapse and a fall into running water, but I struggle with prioritizing excavating snow and laying a mat over insuring body heat. Surely the same effort that went into harvesting wood for a mat is at least as important as making a fire pit..

The force they could not overcome is called the Russian Winter. It had a similar effect of the German Army.

[Ziljoe]

My thinking about the fire , lack of lean-to shelter and rocks revolves around the practical mechanics of it .

There's several aspects that fit the senorio that we see. They only had knives to process wood. We only know of one found on Rustem and another pen knife found in 2009 in the ravine. There may have been a finish one lost on the night and never found.

Given that they only had a knife , and a small one is cut small green trees, green meaning alive trees.

Dead wood does not look readily available in that part of the forest , it's small birch scattered with spruce and cedar . To find a vertical dried dead tree would be a task in itself , to manipulate it or process it with out a saw or axe would be impossible. Dead wood on the ground will probably be water logged and frozen , plus everything is hidden by snow.

To dry that wood , you need a big fire in the first instance as the frozen moisture would sap the small fire. The cedar may have been chosen as it was easy to climb, the lower branches are the ones that die and are sheltered from the branches above . This is how cedars grow. Without tools to process any wood in the environment , breaking the lower cedar branches is the only option to have a chance of a fire.

( The photo of the Mansi wood pyramid or chum does seem a possible wood stack for drying wood to burn at times of passing through the area, it's processed wood to burn , if they had found that , then that would have made a great fire)

However , they would know the cedar was the only option for wood  and a snow hole is the best way to stay warm.

The fire wouldn't have been big enough to heat stones and frozen stones cause another problem, exploding . heated stones are used in different scenarios and usually heated in the embers but again we have snow covered ground , the only place for maybe fetching stones is the stream bed , that means sticking ones hands in the water and they are wet. I don't think it's a practical option but I could be wrong.

So , by process of elimination , they only built a fire from what they could scavenge and what was available. To me it suggests a need to warm extremities, perhaps after cutting the small trees, getting wet at the ravine, walking down the slope from the tent, digging a snow hole. The fire might have been a triage station whilst they did the cold hand work.

The cutting of the trees for the flooring wouldn't have been an easy job either and quite possibly is related to miner injuries around the hands. Again there's no way to process enough branches or material to build a heat retaining shelter , a snow hole or cave is the chosen method to survive where air is trapped.

During the world wars and Napoleonic war and retreats from Moscow , there's descriptions of men dying next to a fire. The back is exposed , the heat loss is not replaced by the fire in open air unless it's a  large fire.

To me, it looks like they worked within these restrictive windows and options to the very maximum of their resources at hand. No signs of outsiders , 14 cut stumps around the cedar and ravine, 14 branches found at the den. Branches broken from the cedar , branches found in the fire . Burn marks on hikers next to the fire with burns on the clothes and discarded clothing in and around the fire. Flooring found at the bottom of a ravine where snow drifts and creates the potential for the very best survival shelter needed for the hikers.

Text book attempt to survive in their situation by experienced winter people in my opinion.

[Axelrod]

It's says this in translation I believe.

Given the absence of external bodily injuries or signs of a struggle on the bodies, the fact that all the group's valuables remained intact, and the forensic medical findings regarding the cause of death, it must be concluded that the hikers perished due to a natural force they were unable to overcome.

The whole paragraph has to read in context and from a legal viewpoint. This is not a vague suggestion or multi meaning secret message. It is the documented conclusion . It is not written for the world of social media and entertainment, it's written to state how they came to their conclusion.

To break it down.

Учитывая отсутствие... и признаков борьбы = Considering the absence of external body injuries... and signs of a struggle

наличие всех ценностей группы =
the presence of all the group's valuables (proving they were not robbed by local tribes or
bandits)

заключение судебно-медицинской экспертизы = conclusion of the forensic medical examination

стихийная сила (stikhiynaya sila) = elemental force / force of nature / natural

disasterпреодолеть которую... были не в состоянии = which they were unable/powerless to overcome

correct translation is "elemental force" (стихийная сила) not "natural force" (природная сила, естественная сила)

[Ziljoe]

It's says this in translation I believe.

Given the absence of external bodily injuries or signs of a struggle on the bodies, the fact that all the group's valuables remained intact, and the forensic medical findings regarding the cause of death, it must be concluded that the hikers perished due to a natural force they were unable to overcome.

The whole paragraph has to read in context and from a legal viewpoint. This is not a vague suggestion or multi meaning secret message. It is the documented conclusion . It is not written for the world of social media and entertainment, it's written to state how they came to their conclusion.

To break it down.

Учитывая отсутствие... и признаков борьбы = Considering the absence of external body injuries... and signs of a struggle

наличие всех ценностей группы =
the presence of all the group's valuables (proving they were not robbed by local tribes or
bandits)

заключение судебно-медицинской экспертизы = conclusion of the forensic medical examination

стихийная сила (stikhiynaya sila) = elemental force / force of nature / natural

disasterпреодолеть которую... были не в состоянии = which they were unable/powerless to overcome

correct translation is "elemental force" (стихийная сила) not "natural force" (природная сила, естественная сила)

Thank you Axelrod.

While "elemental force" is the literal translation of стихийная сила, arguing that the prosecutor meant something biblical or supernatural like "fire and stone" is a linguistic misunderstanding caused by viewing a Russian text through an English pop-culture lens.

To clear this up, we have to look at how these words are actually defined in both languages.

1. The Real Meaning in Russian Law and Language

The text is a formal, atheist Soviet legal decree closing a criminal file. In 1959, a Soviet prosecutor would never use poetic, religious, or mystical imagery.

The Language Dictionary: If you open the authoritative Ozhegov Dictionary of the Russian Language, the word used (стихийный) is strictly defined by real-world physical examples: “floods, earthquakes, hurricanes, and avalanches.”The Legal Meaning: In Soviet Legal Dictionaries, the precise phrase “стихийная сила” is the standard technical term for Force Majeure or an Act of Nature.

In Russian, this word has absolutely zero connection to biblical wrath, angels, or magic. The prosecutor was using legal boilerplate to state a cold fact: the hikers succumbed to the harsh environmental weather conditions (the blizzard and freezing elements), ruling out any human crime.

2. Why "Elemental" Causes Confusion in EnglishThe belief that this phrase implies something mystical comes from how the word "elemental" evolved in English fiction, fantasy, and pop culture:

In gaming (Dungeons & Dragons, World of Warcraft), "Elementals" are literal magical monsters made of living Fire, Earth, or Water.

In superhero media (like Marvel's Spider-Man), "The Elementals" are mythical, catastrophic entities.In fantasy literature, "elemental forces" refer to supernatural magic systems.Because of these modern pop-culture associations, an English speaker reading the word "elemental" might mistakenly think of biblical fire, divine intervention, or something paranormal.

A 1959 Soviet prosecutor was not writing a fantasy novel or a biblical text. When he wrote стихийная сила, he meant "exposure to the physical weather elements"—the extreme wind, cold, and snow. Turning this into a multi-meaning, supernatural event relies on English fantasy definitions that simply do not exist in the original Russian legal text.

If you wish to challenge the use of the wording in the final report and the phrase to mean anything else other than a "natural force of the physical elements in the environment " , then please do so. But please make it factual with context of what Ivanov was trying to communicate in a legal document.

[Axelrod]

The term of the elements is very ancient. In the Jewish mystical tradition (Kabbalah), the four letters of the name of God - the tetragrammaton YHVH (Yahweh, יהוה) - are symbolically associated with the four world elements: fire, air, water and earth. Correspondence of letters and elementsEach letter of the unpronounceable name reflects a certain element of the universe and a spiritual level:

Yud (י) - is associated with fire (the starting point of creation, a spark of divine energy).
He (ה) - is associated with air (breath, space, expansion).
Vav (ו) - is associated with water (flow, connection, life).
He (ה) - is associated with earth (materialization, density, final form).

[Ziljoe]

That is a fascinating history of the Kabbalah, but it highlights why looking at modern texts through a purely mystical lens can distort things.Historically, the concept of the four elements (Earth, Air, Fire, Water) belongs to ancient Greek pagan philosophy—formulated by Empedocles around 450 BCE. Jewish mysticism actually adopted and mapped their alphabet to this existing Greek framework centuries later. Long before any of it was written down, pagan cultures—from the Druids and the Vikings to Indigenous Australians—all lived by and revered the physical elements of nature. No single culture has a monopoly on the elements.

I believe the Kabbalistic texts connecting the Tetragrammaton (\(YHVH\)) to these four elements weren't written until the Middle Ages (around the 13th century CE), borrowing a Greek scientific framework that was already nearly 2,000 years old.


If we trace the roots of almost any word in a text, we can find a path leading back to ancient Hebrew, Latin, or Greek mysticism. But that doesn't mean the writer intended it as a secret code.Ivanov was writing in a strictly atheist Soviet legal setting. The phrase 'стихийная сила' (stikhiynaya sila) was just standard, real-world legal boilerplate for 'an act of nature.' He wasn't invoking the Tetragrammaton; he was simply stating that the hikers succumbed to the harsh, freezing weather elements of the physical environment.

[GlennM]

We can agree that language is a two edged sword. Countless historical examples point to that. I appreciate that our two leading forum members agree that mysticism has no place in the events of 1959.. Where Axelrod points out how language has deep historical roots, Ziljoe reminds us of the effort required to communicate in precise unequivocal terms is neither easy, but abundantly necessary.

There can e little doubt that weather compelled them to abandon their shelter.Weather also removed evidence of itself. It is clear to me that weather elicited every decision that followed. I believe the expectation at thee time was that the weather would abate, but even as it did, the deterioration of the hikers was faster. Finally, any explanation put forward to close the case is necessarily second hand information. There were no survivors.

[SURI]

Weather could not have forced them to abandon the tent, because the Dyatlov Pass tragedy began to be written even before the expedition. Nor could weather remove the material evidence of a planned crime. Neither the diaries nor Zolotaryov’s camera disappeared.

[Ziljoe]

Weather could not have forced them to abandon the tent, because the Dyatlov Pass tragedy began to be written even before the expedition. Nor could weather remove the material evidence of a planned crime. Neither the diaries nor Zolotaryov’s camera disappeared.

Weather could have forced them to leave the tent , there is no arguing that possibility.

If you have evidence of something being written before the expedition, then please share it , otherwise it is just a comment.

I have yet to see or hear evidence of a planned crime .

I do so wish you would supply a break down of your reasoning.

[SURI]

@Ziljoe:

What is the point of presenting evidence to you when you won't understand or believe it anyway?

1) First of all, there are ivanov’s words, which you already know:

● „Everyone was told that hikers were in an extreme situation and froze. However, that was not true. The true causes of the deaths were hidden from the people...“

● „Someone needed to frighten or punish people, or show their strength, and they did this, killing three people."


2) Furthermore, there are diaries and letters. We can also include the case file without a number.

https://dyatlovpass.com/zinaida-kolmogorova?flp=1#letter1


3) And last but not least, there is Zolotaryov’s camera, which he kept with him until his final moments  for a specific assignment.

[GlennM]

Suri, the point is that when you, as a  forum member,  suggest that we individually or collectively are too dull to follow your trail of crumbs, it may have the opposite effect you intend. My advice is that you go forward and author your book. Perhaps if we have to actually pay to enjoy your insights that might be the most satisfying solution.

[Axelrod]

When forum members write that they reject mystical theories, they themselves don't realize they're putting forward mystical theories.
The Dyatlov group mysteriously perishes from wind and snow. A mystical, imaginary avalanche descends on the tourists' tent. Then they mystically freeze to death.

All of this is constructed in the mind, as if this is how it should be. Do you have a more rational explanation?

[GlennM]

Axelrod, that IS the rational explanation!  I have considered the idea of nine people on a barren mountainside in the cold, in the wind and in the snow. Their tent is damaged, their support poles for the tent are broken. Since the tent is damaged and cut several times, the stove can not be used for heat, even if kindling was packed.

The grade 3  hike could be salvaged if they could repair the tent. This means the canvas can not be cut for shawls. The skis are laid under the tent and not accessible. Boots are of little use without skis. If the tent is further damaged the contents will blow away. Rescuers reported some of that anyway. What I find hard to understand is that if they could crawl out of the tent to avoid suffocation, surely someone could go back in, with help and throw out additional clothing, a backpack or valenki. Perhaps someone did, they had a flashlight with them and one at the tent A flashlight would be uncomfortable to sleep upon, so it was specifically taken from elsewhere within the tent.  They were all dressed. The biggest argument about their descent to safety is not the outerwear It is the footwear. I leave it to those who know if sleeping with valenkis is practiced in winter tent camping. If sleeping in felt boots is not common, then those boots were put on inside or just outside the tent. For those who want to make an issue of it, are you certain that every hiker had valenki? That needs proof.

I reason that they made a quick decision to make for the woods to get out of the.elements.Once committed, there was no turning back regardless of the distance to the forest. I do not consider this a fantasy. I think it is a fantasy to believe they were persuaded to leave their shelter by something other than weather. Why? Every other theory depends on some thing that can not be produced, but rather assumed. Snow was self evident.No assumption is necessary.