Bartolomey

[sarapuk]

For Sarapuk. To clarify my comment, consider a comparison between a fairy tale like Peter Pan and Science Fiction  20000 Leagues. Fairies like Tinkerbelle are not real, never were and never will be. Please do not go simple on me .

 I could say that anything is possible. Certainly, science fiction can become science fact eventually. So you mention fairies like Tinkerbell, but who's to say that they may not have an element of fact?

[GlennM]

As a case files achievement recipient, can you share which achievement moved the forum to a more complete understanding of the DPI?  Asking for a friend.

[sarapuk]

think we need to clear up the definitions here. You are mixing up 'mystical' with 'mysterious' or 'unproven.'The word mystical comes from the Greek mystikos, meaning a secret spiritual or divine power. Wind, cold weather, and avalanches are physical, natural phenomena. Even if you think the avalanche theory is imaginary, that makes it a disputed hypothesis—not a mystical theory. There is nothing spiritual about freezing to death.
[/quote]

Well, actually, mystical can be considered to be beyond human understanding. And the same applies to mysterious. The avalanche theory is not imaginary its a real theory, but I don't subscribe to it. And spiritual is also beyond understanding if it relates to non-physical things.

[sarapuk]

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

Anyone who believes Ivanov's letters doesn't need to deal with rockets, avalanches, or snow slabs. These things don't purposefully punish or kill anyone. That is why it can't work out for either of you. The evidence points in a completely different direction.

Only killing 3 people? Whatever was the cause of this incident, it ended up killing 9 people. Directly or indirectly. 

[sarapuk]

@SURI

My approach is that we should not be selective in what Lev Ivanov had said. We should accept that he did not have a solid theory what had happened at the Pass.

No one can really have a solid theory if so many things are missing. Missing at the time that the rescuers found the bodies, and missing now. Ivanov is one of the most important people in this whole investigation. Of course, he can change his mind about what may have happened. And after the fall of the USSR, he certainly came out with information that he had kept bottled up all those years. 

[sarapuk]

@Senior Maldonado

Ivanov knew exactly what had happened.

"I know all the details of this incident."

And at the forefront of it all was a motive. It seems you didn't fully understand his sentence and, consequently, failed to decipher what kind of "balls" he was actually talking about.

"...and many associated these mysterious phenomena, including unidentified flying objects with military tests, but investigative actions indicated that the case of Dyatlov group had nothing to do with military tests."

Therefore, it is first necessary to correctly determine the nature of these "balls" that possessed a motive.

"It is only necessary not to hush up their appearance, but to deeply understand their nature."

And balls there where. Many investigators concluded that they were fireballs of some kind. But they could also fit into the descriptions of orbs, a popular subject these days amongst the UFO brigade. Orbs under control. 

[sarapuk]

What drove them out of the tent was the light captured in Krivonischenko's final photograph. How could the two Yuris have started a fire when they didn't have any matches on them? A dead Slobodin up on the slope couldn't give them anything, and Kolevatov hadn't even arrived at the cedar tree at that time. And how could Zolotaryov have been digging a snow cave with a camera in his hand?


I think we are getting somewhere by saying that a light drove the group from their tent. And could the so-called balls of light be that light? Or, as I suggest, those orbs?

[sarapuk]

As a case files achievement recipient, can you share which achievement moved the forum to a more complete understanding of the DPI?  Asking for a friend.

That's an easy one to answer. No particular achievement. We have a collection of information. Some of it may be false; some of it may be true. Take your pick. We are definitely missing evidence, and we hope one day that evidence will show itself, or should I say that it will be shown. And presumably only the Russian Government can do that, or someone or something that releases that evidence.

[SURI]

What drove them out of the tent was the light captured in Krivonischenko's final photograph. How could the two Yuris have started a fire when they didn't have any matches on them? A dead Slobodin up on the slope couldn't give them anything, and Kolevatov hadn't even arrived at the cedar tree at that time. And how could Zolotaryov have been digging a snow cave with a camera in his hand?


I think we are getting somewhere by saying that a light drove the group from their tent. And could the so-called balls of light be that light? Or, as I suggest, those orbs?

Personally, I believe Yuri Yudin knew best what was actually shining out there. And it was a command...

This immediately reminded me of an encrypted command that is recorded in their unknown diary:

"In the evening it was decided that we will leave the tent exactly 8 minutes after waking up. Therefore, all have been awake and waiting for the command."

You can see his testimony here with English subtitles, starting from 9:30:

[sarapuk]

What drove them out of the tent was the light captured in Krivonischenko's final photograph. How could the two Yuris have started a fire when they didn't have any matches on them? A dead Slobodin up on the slope couldn't give them anything, and Kolevatov hadn't even arrived at the cedar tree at that time. And how could Zolotaryov have been digging a snow cave with a camera in his hand?


I think we are getting somewhere by saying that a light drove the group from their tent. And could the so-called balls of light be that light? Or, as I suggest, those orbs?

Personally, I believe Yuri Yudin knew best what was actually shining out there. And it was a command...

This immediately reminded me of an encrypted command that is recorded in their unknown diary:

"In the evening it was decided that we will leave the tent exactly 8 minutes after waking up. Therefore, all have been awake and waiting for the command."

You can see his testimony here with English subtitles, starting from 9:30:

Well found. Andrei Kirilenko
was one of the most influential men in the USSR. He nearly became the top man. A real worker with experience in the DONBAS Ukraine he rose to specialise in economics. Between 1955 and 1962 First Secretary of the Sverdlovsk Regional Party Committee. Appointed by Nikita Khrushev to do other economic work. Very close to Leonid Brezhnev. At the time of the Dyatlov incident Kirilenko would have been close to Khruschev. And as far as the Dyatlov incident is concerned its just a bit more evidence to suggest that the USSR Government had something to cover up.

 

[GlennM]

It is a semantic distinction, cover up versus down play. You do not cover up a tragedy by sending both civilians and military to find and retrieve the victims. You can down play the tragedy by wanting to exert control on the final services. This happened.

 The Soviet government, if anything did not bring the awareness of a hiking accident into the national spotlight. That would lead to criticisms of the system, especially when the Soviet was instituting programs to promote world class youthful excellence in sport. That said, heads did roll in the aftermath in that period of adjustment where someone had to shoulder the blame. This was in the organization or sports club Igor and the others belonged to. They, the DP9  if all went well,could even earn certifications culminating in Master of Sport. The government was all for it.

On the other hand, when such endeavors end badly, there is little incentive to make a big deal out of it, unless the story can be spun into a tale of heroism, like an astronaut. That was not the case here. In fact, it was somewhat the opposite. Hikers took on a winter challenge poorly equipoed, supervised and against local advice. Other than bragging rights to have rounded Ortoten in winter, there was not much to crow about. This failure could be seen as a random chance event, hubris, but not heroism. The deceased were treated well and laid to rest with love and ceremony. The treatment of the case was certainly not a cover up, it was known then as well as now. We all understand there were aspects of the case which raise our eyebrows, but these were sins of omission, rather than deliberate obfuscation. It was down played as an unfortunate circumstance where I contend unprepared hikers were caught out by a slab slip, hypothermia and a collapsed temporary shelter. Again, to my point, a down play, which is being quiet about unfortunate truths is not a cover up which is the deliberated obfuscation of evidence to hide a homicidal conspiracy.

[SURI]

It was down played as an unfortunate circumstance where I contend unprepared hikers were caught out by a slab slip, hypothermia and a collapsed temporary shelter.

A snow slab avalanche hitting the tent does not align with Krivonischenko’s final photograph of the light source. Hypothermia fails to explain Krivonischenko's extensive burn injuries to his left leg and the fact that he bit off a piece of his own skin in agony and died. Furthermore, the collapse of the temporary shelter in the ravine is completely inconsistent with Zolotaryov having a camera wrapped around his hand—his final activity was certainly not digging a snow cave.

And I would name Krivonischenko as the greatest hero in the fight against the "elements."

[Senior Maldonado]

A snow slab avalanche hitting the tent does not align with Krivonischenko’s final photograph of the light source.

Snow slab and avalanche do not justify probing the slope for radioactivity (Kikoin) either. Checking the hikers' tissues and clothes for radioactivity (Ivanov) cannot be inspired by snow movement theories also.

[Ziljoe]

It was down played as an unfortunate circumstance where I contend unprepared hikers were caught out by a slab slip, hypothermia and a collapsed temporary shelter.

A snow slab avalanche hitting the tent does not align with Krivonischenko’s final photograph of the light source. Hypothermia fails to explain Krivonischenko's extensive burn injuries to his left leg and the fact that he bit off a piece of his own skin in agony and died. Furthermore, the collapse of the temporary shelter in the ravine is completely inconsistent with Zolotaryov having a camera wrapped around his hand—his final activity was certainly not digging a snow cave.

And I would name Krivonischenko as the greatest hero in the fight against the "elements."

The last photo is the end of the film shot in Krivonischenko's camera. No one is taking photos in the dark with these cameras . If you reach for one of these cameras to take a photo , it means you have time for your subject matter. It's not point and click and you don't go digging for a camera with one photo left in it. The camera was packed in the tent.

Hypothermia seems to explains everything about the burns and behaviour at the cedar . It's known that people freezing stick there limbs into fires. We can't just dismiss the known evidence. They can't feel there limbs burn but they know they are cold.

I fail to see your link about how collapse of a cave is inconsistent with Zolo allegedly holding a camera case. Zolo could still hold a camera or have it on his person. We don't know what his final activity was.

[Ziljoe]

A snow slab avalanche hitting the tent does not align with Krivonischenko’s final photograph of the light source.

Snow slab and avalanche do not justify probing the slope for radioactivity (Kikoin) either. Checking the hikers' tissues and clothes for radioactivity (Ivanov) cannot be inspired by snow movement theories also.

Ivanov does not reference any probing of radioactivity on the slope , neither does he say there were any readings found in his later letters regarding the slope.

Snow movement and radioactivity are not mutually exclusive .The presence of one does not preclude the other, and neither phenomenon automatically implies a missile accident.

[Senior Maldonado]

Ivanov does not reference any probing of radioactivity on the slope , neither does he say there were any readings found in his later letters regarding the slope.

Not exactly. Newspaper reporter Bogomolov refers to Ivanov's direct speach:
"Ivanov: I only managed to conduct a radiation examination. Even had to carry on location a device in a large wooden box.
Bogomolov: Geiger counter?
Ivanov: Yes, it looks like it. It was clicking a lot... I am sure there was radiation. But nobody told me how much, and I didn't find out."

Petr Bartolomey and Sergei Sogrin both remember very well that Kikoin had performed radioactivity checks with his advanced measurement device. Sogrin even dared to ask Kikoin about results, and received expected answer - nothing found.

[Axelrod]

Пётр Бартоломей (Из жизни семьи репрессированного)
Pyotr Bartolomey (From the Life of a Family of a Repressed Person)

[SURI]

@Ziljoe

Unlike you, Yuri Yudin does not question this photograph at all. On the contrary, he directly connects this image with a flashlight shining on the tent and a sudden command to abandon the tent—a command that is, by the way, mentioned in the "unknown diary". This explains a lot and completes the overall picture of the incident. It shows that the group was not fleeing from an avalanche, but was responding to a specific light source that Krivonischenko attempted to photograph.

So according to you, Krivonischenko did not feel his own leg charring and burning, yet at that very same moment, out of unbearable pain from an external traumatic shock, he bit off a piece of his own skin from his hand? This makes absolutely no sense

[GlennM]

Once again, I must interject a semantic difference. A slab slip is quantitatively different from an avalanche.. in this case it is a matter of volume. A 30 degree slope
Subjected to snow deposition of soft snow over older compacted snow can indeed slip. The movement can be triggered by a build up of light snow at the tent. Further, when the hikers levelled the base for their tent, they could have cut through the horizontal boundary between one and new snow layers facilitating eventual release.

Then the topic takes a spin. It always does. This time, yet another published expert who was not there hears,filters and expresses an opinion. All behavior is motivated. Money is a tried and true motivator.


So far, I make a distinction between cover up and down play. So far I make a distinction between slab slip and avalanche. Ziljoe is right minded by looking at science to explain physical evidence. That said, attributing a gnawed knuckle to a numb burnt shin makes for a better novel.

[Ziljoe]

@Ziljoe

Unlike you, Yuri Yudin does not question this photograph at all. On the contrary, he directly connects this image with a flashlight shining on the tent and a sudden command to abandon the tent—a command that is, by the way, mentioned in the "unknown diary". This explains a lot and completes the overall picture of the incident. It shows that the group was not fleeing from an avalanche, but was responding to a specific light source that Krivonischenko attempted to photograph.

So according to you, Krivonischenko did not feel his own leg charring and burning, yet at that very same moment, out of unbearable pain from an external traumatic shock, he bit off a piece of his own skin from his hand? This makes absolutely no sense

So it's a photograph of a torch shinning in a tent or on a tent?.

We can look at the data we have, Krivonischenko was in a cold environment, not very well dressed for the temperature or conditions. However , he made the transition from the tent to the ravine and cedar .

We don't know exactly what happened at the ravine or the cedar but the evidence strongly points to activities that create a narrative of efforts to survive or battle the cold. There is nothing to suggest otherwise . Flooring to insulate bodies from the ground and a fire made from the only viable wood that could be resourced quickly given the tools and time they had.

I do not know of the unbearable pain that you speak off . There are a number of logical reasons for a peace of skin in his mouth, injury from breaking branches , dried out by trying to warm his hands , trying to gain feeling and use his mouth and violent chattering of teeth although that's the early stage of hypothermia.

We don't know the timing of the events at the fire or his injuries. What we do know from other case studies is people freezing will stick their limbs in naked flames , the limbs are dying and the cold and frostbite stop the surface nerves from giving sensation. When anyone gets to that stage , it's quite serious with out the proper care needed to stop amputation .

Krivonischenko has recorded frostbite on his hands and feet , this only happens whilst alive and this tells us the compromise situation the hikers were in. Their hands stop functioning, it's basically game over if you can't rectify the situation as you can't use your hands. If there is not even a shelter available or already made then nothing can be made to even keep you alive knowing that you will probably lose fingers even if you survive.

The only option is a snow shelter , they can't gather enough wood for a bonfire because of the environment and lack of tools and you can't just sit on some twigs hoping for the best and sunrise.

[SURI]

@Ziljoe

The light object is in motion. According to Yudin, someone came and shone a flashlight on them. I have no reason to disbelieve him. I hold the same opinion.

During the activities you described, skin does not just stay in your mouth. You spit it out. But here, Krivonischenko no longer had the strength to do so; he lost consciousness from the pain and died.The bitten finger proves he was conscious and reacting to the unbearable trauma of being burned, and he died shortly after. There is certainly no doubt, and the evidence suggests, that a fight for survival took place at the cedar.

This case is specific and cannot be compared to others as you so often do. It needs to be addressed on its own, otherwise, you will fall into a trap.

[sarapuk]

It is a semantic distinction, cover up versus down play. You do not cover up a tragedy by sending both civilians and military to find and retrieve the victims. You can down play the tragedy by wanting to exert control on the final services. This happened.

 The Soviet government, if anything did not bring the awareness of a hiking accident into the national spotlight. That would lead to criticisms of the system, especially when the Soviet was instituting programs to promote world class youthful excellence in sport. That said, heads did roll in the aftermath in that period of adjustment where someone had to shoulder the blame. This was in the organization or sports club Igor and the others belonged to. They, the DP9  if all went well,could even earn certifications culminating in Master of Sport. The government was all for it.

On the other hand, when such endeavors end badly, there is little incentive to make a big deal out of it, unless the story can be spun into a tale of heroism, like an astronaut. That was not the case here. In fact, it was somewhat the opposite. Hikers took on a winter challenge poorly equipoed, supervised and against local advice. Other than bragging rights to have rounded Ortoten in winter, there was not much to crow about. This failure could be seen as a random chance event, hubris, but not heroism. The deceased were treated well and laid to rest with love and ceremony. The treatment of the case was certainly not a cover up, it was known then as well as now. We all understand there were aspects of the case which raise our eyebrows, but these were sins of omission, rather than deliberate obfuscation. It was down played as an unfortunate circumstance where I contend unprepared hikers were caught out by a slab slip, hypothermia and a collapsed temporary shelter. Again, to my point, a down play, which is being quiet about unfortunate truths is not a cover up which is the deliberated obfuscation of evidence to hide a homicidal conspiracy.

More strangeness. You are making statements as if you know the facts when no one does. And this post is full of made-up stuff. The Dyatlov Group were not poorly equipped for a start. They were well organised for such an expedition. How do you know what the USSR government was doing at the time of the incident and after? Much of the info became classified. And there was an exclusion zone around the site of the incident for some time afterwards. 

 

[sarapuk]

A snow slab avalanche hitting the tent does not align with Krivonischenko’s final photograph of the light source.

Snow slab and avalanche do not justify probing the slope for radioactivity (Kikoin) either. Checking the hikers' tissues and clothes for radioactivity (Ivanov) cannot be inspired by snow movement theories also.

Ivanov does not reference any probing of radioactivity on the slope , neither does he say there were any readings found in his later letters regarding the slope.

Snow movement and radioactivity are not mutually exclusive .The presence of one does not preclude the other, and neither phenomenon automatically implies a missile accident.

Ivanov was fully aware of what went on during the search for the bodies. A Geiger counter was used in that search. 

[sarapuk]

Ivanov does not reference any probing of radioactivity on the slope , neither does he say there were any readings found in his later letters regarding the slope.

Not exactly. Newspaper reporter Bogomolov refers to Ivanov's direct speach:
"Ivanov: I only managed to conduct a radiation examination. Even had to carry on location a device in a large wooden box.
Bogomolov: Geiger counter?
Ivanov: Yes, it looks like it. It was clicking a lot... I am sure there was radiation. But nobody told me how much, and I didn't find out."

Petr Bartolomey and Sergei Sogrin both remember very well that Kikoin had performed radioactivity checks with his advanced measurement device. Sogrin even dared to ask Kikoin about results, and received expected answer - nothing found.

Ivanov was leading the investigation at the site of the incident, and he knew exactly what was going on. He was aware that a Geiger counter was being used at the site. There are no reports of radiation being found at the site, but that doesn't mean that radiation wasn't found. It was certainly found on the bodies later on.

[sarapuk]

Пётр Бартоломей (Из жизни семьи репрессированного)
Pyotr Bartolomey (From the Life of a Family of a Repressed Person)

It won't translate to English.

[sarapuk]

Once again, I must interject a semantic difference. A slab slip is quantitatively different from an avalanche.. in this case it is a matter of volume. A 30 degree slope
Subjected to snow deposition of soft snow over older compacted snow can indeed slip. The movement can be triggered by a build up of light snow at the tent. Further, when the hikers levelled the base for their tent, they could have cut through the horizontal boundary between one and new snow layers facilitating eventual release.

Then the topic takes a spin. It always does. This time, yet another published expert who was not there hears,filters and expresses an opinion. All behavior is motivated. Money is a tried and true motivator.


So far, I make a distinction between cover up and down play. So far I make a distinction between slab slip and avalanche. Ziljoe is right minded by looking at science to explain physical evidence. That said, attributing a gnawed knuckle to a numb burnt shin makes for a better novel.

You sound like you are describing yourself. Another published expert who was not there. Etc.

[GlennM]

Ill take that as a compliment since we dipping into ad hominem logical fallacies.  I have a book deal with the Tuna Fish publishing company,  but it seems fishy to me.

A slab slide does not equate with an avalanche with regard to scale and volume. A cover up is categorically different from down play. I prefer the slab slide as the impetus and down play as the consequence.

[sarapuk]

Ill take that as a compliment since we dipping into ad hominem logical fallacies.  I have a book deal with the Tuna Fish publishing company,  but it seems fishy to me.

A slab slide does not equate with an avalanche with regard to scale and volume. A cover up is categorically different from down play. I prefer the slab slide as the impetus and down play as the consequence.

I'm certainly not attacking anyone. Everyone is entitled to their opinions. So long as their opinions are not foisted on us as if the opinions were the law or were what actually happened. No one knows. YET. 

[SURI]

Conference 2024
In this video, looking at this new photograph, Pyotr Bartolomey completely rules out an avalanche. There could not have been an avalanche there. This also aligns with Ivanov's letters, in which Ivanov implies something else entirely.

[Ziljoe]

The "new photo" is a fake and photo shopped. You can see the repeating and overlaid snow patterns copied plus it seems to originate from an earlier book that believes it was an avalanche .