Where’s the tongue?

[WAB]

Well there may have been a fall of snow, but by all accounts if that was so it would have been unlikely to have caused the serious injuries on some of the bodies.

No, in this place no falling of snow, a collapse and etc. in general is impossible
It is possible only in those imaginations who argues on it theoretically.

[WAB]

Никакой лавины не было:
http://1723.ru/forums/index.php?s=&showtopic=5133&view=findpost&p=65874

В ручье произошло обрушение снежного укрытия по вине Дубининой:
http://1723.ru/forums/index.php?s=&showtopic=5133&view=findpost&p=78905

Oh, these theorists who sit on sofa …. Also sit in heat …
There anywhere there is no even the slightest possibility of landslips, collapses and other. At is in any level of snow. In the end of February 1959 it were general very little in comparison with other years when there that that was observed.
And to appoint guilty for nonexistent " failure" it in general behind a common sense side.
It is necessary to study realities in practice, instead of to invent quasiscientific fairy tales about "collapses".
It is the first.

The second. Concerning level of knowledge I too had an opinion. I remember that some time ago at our discussion «attempt at the law of conservation of energy» has been made. 
It was when for Dyatlov group offered to climb simply during snow (in a cave) in those clothes that was available for it. And there it should be warm as at home … 
It is not correct. When deficiency of heat for the person those conditions was an order 400 … 500 W, and the thermal emission even at average level of loading is no more 100 W, at factor of protection of clothes no more than 10 % it is deadly through 2 … 3 hours, and in 30 minutes there comes from suporousing stage. It is when the person cannot any more is independent leave overcooling process.
It is necessary to notice that lying in a cave metabolic heat is used only. It is 50 … 70 W. And it does not consider that the clothes even more will lose a thermal protection for the account намокания at thawing of snow from heat of a body.

And the third. At this forum it is not necessary to send readers to the big texts in Russian. It is necessary to respect readers that it not is their native language. Here the international structure, therefore by default (and on intention of founders of this site) is accepted English. Too it is easier to me to send all to the text in Russian, but I at first ask, whether can to read that the opponent. Otherwise it is necessary to retell all by the “own words” in English. The main thing here is the reader, instead of "writer".

[Игорь Б.]

Единственный признак обрушения снега месячной давности - твёрдость снега.

Есть твёрдый снег - было обрушение:
http://1723.ru/forums/index.php?s=&showtopic=5133&view=findpost&p=64055

Нет твёрдого снега - не было обрушения:
http://1723.ru/forums/index.php?s=&showtopic=5133&view=findpost&p=65874

Все остальные теоретические предположения не имеют значения.

P.S. Пример аналогичного обрушения снежного укрытия:
http://1723.ru/forums/index.php?s=&showtopic=5133&view=findpost&p=85098

[WAB]

Единственный признак обрушения снега месячной давности - твёрдость снега.

These are reasonings of children of very small age. Especially it concerns: «the Unique sign» (c).
Does not happen there (at a cedar and nearby in radius of 500 m - ~ 1500 ft) friable snow to the first steady thaw. It is the beginning of April or the end of March.

In February the quantity of snow there was very small. There it was impossible not that to fall, and and even there was nothing to dig.
On what thickness of snow has been found DEN? - 30 sm (hardly 10 inches there are more)! The thickness of snow means was 35 … 40 sm (12 … 16 inches) when stacked it.
Snow can settle on 10 … 15 % from a thickness, but no more that. Another does not allow do durability of crystallisation and free intervals of air.
It is not necessary to think out here nonexistent point of the matter.

Has very correctly cited Global Moderator Loose} {Cannon: «Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts.» ― Daniel Patrick Moynihan (с)

"Own facts" are there is a way to a deceit of readers.
And as who that has told:
«Все остальные теоретические предположения не имеют значения»(с)
Translate:
«All other theoretical assumptions have no value.» (с)
Here also I think, who it could be? J

................................
Все остальные теоретические предположения не имеют значения.

******************************

P.S. Пример аналогичного обрушения снежного укрытия:
http://1723.ru/forums/index.php?s=&showtopic=5133&view=findpost&p=85098

Well also what the general at Altai and that concrete place, in comparison with N.Ural?
Can you had time to visit, both there, and there? I was in time, and I can tell that it is absolutely different two climatic areas. Even if not to speak about quantity of snow which is well visible in pictures in that and other place. And that the Altay picture is made in безлесье, and the place “rav4” is in a vegetative zone. Therefore snow adjournment there essentially different.
It is not necessary to jump since February to May, it already starts to remind a juggling.

You (even in the message http://1723.ru/forums/index.php?s=&showtopic=5133&view=findpost&p=64055 N 616) start to substitute snow of the beginning of the February, that snow that was in May (the telegramm from Ortukov). It is possible there is nothing not to speak Further, because it is substitution of actual facts by exclusively «you facts».

The analogue of Altai and N.Ural consists in such case - in what?

===========================================

PS. Once again, I ask: at this forum it is necessary write in language of its original, differently it will be disrespect for other public. If there is a desire to discuss in Russian for this purpose there are Russian forums, for example: http://pereval1959.forum24.ru/.
Then it will be possible to give here result, instead of simple copying of words.

PPS. It`s all today

[Игорь Б.]

Было ли много снега в ручье в момент происшествия? Да, тогда в ручье снега было много.

Из дневника группы Дятлова от 31 января 1959 г.:

Нужно выбирать ночлег. Спускаемся на юг - в долину Ауспии. Это видимо самое снегопадное место. Ветер небольшой по снегу 1,2 - 2 м. толщиной.
Усталые, измученные принялись за устройство ночлега. Дров мало. Хилые сырые ели. Костер разводили на бревнах, неохота рыть яму.

https://sites.google.com/site/hibinaud/home/kopia-dnevnika-gruppy-datlova

Если в лесу глубина снега достигала 2-х метров, то что говорить об оврагах, ручьях и тому подобных углублениях, которые снег заметает в первую очередь. Заметание снегом ручья начиналось от левого берега и высота его в месте обнаружения тел изначально составляла 3-4 метра.

[sarapuk]

Just curious on everyone’s thoughts about the missing tongue of Dubinina.
The autopsy report said the tongue was missing. There was no explanation.

Why was there no explanation  !  ?  We have some modern day investigators saying that SNOW was responsible for the MISSING TONGUE. But if SNOW really was responsible then surely that would have been included in the autopsy report or the findings soon after  !  ?  I strongly suggest that SNOW was not in any way whatsoever responsible for the MISSING TONGUE.

[CalzagheChick]

http://1723.ru/forums/index.php?s=&showtopic=5133&view=findpost&p=64056

It is a terrible heap of absurd and fables. It is necessary know at least elementary conditions and features of district, snow and a climate of that place where all it occurred.
Otherwise it looks as a deceit of readers of this forum.

If I am not mistaken, I already wrote a post about language in other section
http://forum.dyatlovpass.com/index.php?topic=198.0

Yes Vladimir and it was a fine written explanation indeed! I hadn't really considered the existence of mechanical erosion of the soft tissues within running water. Coupled with the fact that the tissue itself was dead and actively decomposing in chemical terms.

[Loose}{Cannon]

I won't even read these Russian links anymore...  Its literally the source of why the case is fubared to begin with.

[WAB]

Было ли много снега в ручье в момент происшествия? Да, тогда в ручье снега было много.

Из дневника группы Дятлова от 31 января 1959 г.:

Нужно выбирать ночлег. Спускаемся на юг - в долину Ауспии. Это видимо самое снегопадное место. Ветер небольшой по снегу 1,2 - 2 м. толщиной.
Усталые, измученные принялись за устройство ночлега. Дров мало. Хилые сырые ели. Костер разводили на бревнах, неохота рыть яму.

https://sites.google.com/site/hibinaud/home/kopia-dnevnika-gruppy-datlova

Если в лесу глубина снега достигала 2-х метров, то что говорить об оврагах, ручьях и тому подобных углублениях, которые снег заметает в первую очередь. Заметание снегом ручья начиналось от левого берега и высота его в месте обнаружения тел изначально составляла 3-4 метра.

This very naive explanation. Quantity and depth of snow very various in different places. If in a diary are written 2 metres (3,5 foots) in that place where they went in a river Auspia valley it does not mean that on a place of tent and in rav4 was as much.
In a photo where searchers remove tent in general almost naked slopes are visible.
From a place where there was a tent and to a cedar we always went without skis. And we did not fail. The measured depth of snow was from 40 … 50 sm (1,5 … 2 foots) to 70 … 90 sm (2 … 3 foots). These of 3 foots were very much in small quantity of places. In rav4 the thickness of snow was no more than 3 foots and snow was very friable. Further this place snow started to increase depth sharply. Probably snowfalls are late trees in wood more, than it occurs, when wood is not present.
Judging by aerodynamics of a place and snow adjournment under the classic theory all and should be. And it is a situation same as it and should be in 1959. Especially it is such as it should be taking into account small quantity of snow on this place. Increases in a thickness of snow which we observed makes approximately 10 … 15 sm (4 … 6 in) at week and no more than 30. 40 sm (12 … 16 in) at month. That is from January to May it should be approximately 1,6 … 1,8 m (5 … 6 foots). Taking into account accumulation in ravines it can be approximately  40 … 50 % more. If to look at that is written in case files that all coincides with certain accuracy.
On our supervision there is snow considerable quantity drops out snowfall on valleys of rivers, and smaller quantity to top (woodless) zone.

[WAB]

Yes Vladimir and it was a fine written explanation indeed! I hadn't really considered the existence of mechanical erosion of the soft tissues within running water. Coupled with the fact that the tissue itself was dead and actively decomposing in chemical terms.

As far as I understand, in real is the complex of the reasons always takes place. Very seldom is when the reason is one. My supervision during searches of travellers when I studied at university (and mute after) have given the chance to me understand that has occurred to bodies in a stream. I had almost similar a case in highland Sayan mountains 40 + years back.
I have article (in Russian) where traumas of participants Dyatlov group are in detail disassembled. In the same place there are also instructions on possible places where they could be received easily.
If who that could make primary transfer of this article, it could explain many such questions. In English I could make definitive editing of article itself, but completely make all work at me there is no possibility and time.
Article is big, approximately 25 pages. It is a lot of photos and schemes. Text information there are approximately 8 … 9 pages by font #11.

[WAB]

I won't even read these Russian links anymore...  Its literally the source of why the case is fubared to begin with.

For the good use it is necessary to read references in any language. If it to do probably. Especially if it is event source language. But, as all to read not probably then it is necessary at first will make sure of advantage of such reading. That is to check up reliability. It is what not do unnecessary work.
Or I in what that am wrong in my writing.

[sarapuk]

I won't even read these Russian links anymore...  Its literally the source of why the case is fubared to begin with.

Google Translate is pretty good. Maybe the problem is just too many words. Maybe its best to keep words minimal. But obviously this Dyatlov Mystery excites the mind.

[Игорь Б.]

На фотографии, снятой через месяц после происшествия видны место настила и тел:
http://1723.ru/forums/index.php?s=&showtopic=5133&view=findpost&p=56231

На месте настила ручей заметён снегом полностью, вровень с берегами. Это 4 метра снега.

[Игорь Б.]

Свидетельство поисковика Атманаки об очень глубоком снеге в овраге около кедра всего через месяц после происшествия, 2 марта 1959 г.:

Одновременно с этим группа из пяти человек развернула поиски внизу в районе кедра. Был прощупан участок в 50 м. за кедром, обследовать идущий там овраг не стали, т.к. имеющиеся в наличии щупы не позволяли проверить всю глубину снега, достигающую в этих местах 4-5 метров.

https://sites.google.com/site/hibinaud/home/dopros-svidetela-atmanaki

А до происшествия снег в овраг наметало на протяжении трёх месяцев - ноябрь, декабрь, январь.

[sarapuk]

Yes Vladimir and it was a fine written explanation indeed! I hadn't really considered the existence of mechanical erosion of the soft tissues within running water. Coupled with the fact that the tissue itself was dead and actively decomposing in chemical terms.

As far as I understand, in real is the complex of the reasons always takes place. Very seldom is when the reason is one. My supervision during searches of travellers when I studied at university (and mute after) have given the chance to me understand that has occurred to bodies in a stream. I had almost similar a case in highland Sayan mountains 40 + years back.
I have article (in Russian) where traumas of participants Dyatlov group are in detail disassembled. In the same place there are also instructions on possible places where they could be received easily.
If who that could make primary transfer of this article, it could explain many such questions. In English I could make definitive editing of article itself, but completely make all work at me there is no possibility and time.
Article is big, approximately 25 pages. It is a lot of photos and schemes. Text information there are approximately 8 … 9 pages by font #11.

WAB.  Would it be possible to see the full RUSSIAN article ? 

[sarapuk]

The following is taken from the Russian Tours Company and the web site link is below ;


http://russiantours.online/


Lyudmila received the most terrible wounds from all the members of the deceased group. Attempts to explain the absence of the eyes, tongue and mouth diaphragm by the action of the water flow in the stream, supposedly "washed" these organs, can not be considered satisfactory.
The effect of water on the body is well known and described in detail many decades ago - water exfoliates the epidermis, destroys the lungs (by the way, according to the degree of safety of the lungs, the forensic expert Revived and determined the duration of the last four dead in the water for 15 days), but does not destroy the eyes and language.
And even more so the water is not capable of "washing" two dense, smooth, symmetrically arranged and complex muscles mylohyoideus, forming the so-called. diaphragm of the mouth. If water really would be capable of destroying so destructively the human flesh, then first of all it would be manifested in the "washing out" of the auricles - they are the worst attached to the body. However, all four "dyatlovtsev" found in the stream, ears, as we know, remained in their places. And there does not exist in nature any "washing away" of the water flow of human organs or parts of the body - forensic medicine such a phenomenon is unknown. The very absurd euphemism "washing out the language" was invented by the multi-wise "researchers" of the tragedy of the group Dyatlov in attempts to invent a non-criminal explanation for the monstrous bodily injuries of Lyudmila Dubinina. For, I repeat, there is no concept of "flushing out the language" in either domestic or foreign forensic medicine.The forensic report does not in any way describe the damage to Ludmila's mouth, although the expert had to understand what kind of impact led to the removal of the language. Most likely, the Vozrozdennyi saw something that could not be categorically included in the official document, that is, the expert himself understood that trusting what he saw was destroying the entire official picture of the investigation, which on May 9, 1959, was already safely and uncontrollably tending to a cessation . But in the protocol of the Renaissance there is still an indirect indication of the forcible removal of the tongue and the diaphragm of the mouth, although it does not strike the eye with a superficial reading of the document. The expert left the following records in his signed protocol: "When probing the neck, the unusual mobility of the horns of the hyoid bone and the thyroid cartilage is determined. (...) The horns of the hyoid bone of unusual mobility - XXXXXXX (hereinafter the clipped word of 7 letters, in the sense of the sentence, it was the word" BROKEN " "), Soft tissue adjacent to the hyoid bone of a dirty gray color. Diaphragm of mouth and tongue absent. The upper edge of the hyoid bone is exposed. "The horn of the hyoid bone, which roughly approximates the shape of the letter W, easily breaks when it strikes the neck sideways in a slightly upward direction. Even without damaging the vertebrae, this stroke is considered fatal (or potentially fatal) because it provokes rapid and severe edema, narrowing the lumen of the respiratory throat and leading to death from suffocation within 10-30 minutes. But to the hyoid bone are attached two muscles of mylohyoideus, forming the diaphragm of the mouth. And the same damage to the W-shaped bone can be caused not by impact from the side and from the bottom up, but by a jerk of the tongue upwards, in which the muscles of the diaphragm transfer the force to the thin horns. Here, the analogy with the usual children's slingshot, well known to all boys, is appropriate: the muscles of the diaphragm can be likened to a stretchable rubber band, and the hyoid bone to the very Y-shaped rod, to which this elastic band is attached. But this analogy is lame in that, unlike a real slingshot, in our case the muscle is stronger than a thin, fragile bone, which in addition has a complex shape. And if the force effect was able to break the muscle, then it will break the bone the more.
   With some degree of probability, it can be asserted that Ludmila Dubinina's tongue was torn from her mouth, which resulted in the breaking of the horns of the hyoid bone.

[WAB]

.....................................

I won't even read these Russian links anymore...  Its literally the source of why the case is fubared to begin with.

:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Google Translate is pretty good.

Any translator gives words, instead of thoughts. Always there is a sense which is lost for wrong (not precisely) translated text. Especially it concerns from Russian. There it is a lot of shades in sense which it is necessary to translate very adequately and it is structured. Otherwise it is possible to lose all basis.
In my opinion Google (as any automated translator) well translates words, and for correct understanding the expert in that section of knowledge about which there is a conversation is necessary.

Maybe the problem is just too many words. Maybe its best to keep words minimal.

Yes. You it have noticed all absolutely correctly. However those references which here offered had more words, than sense. The basis in the form of practice and supervision on a place, instead of simple imaginations is necessary. As spoke classics of philosophy: «Practice - is criterion of true» (с).

But obviously this Dyatlov Mystery excites the mind.

Exactly. The best illustration of it is that this case is discussed at many forums in the USA, Germany, Czechia, Poland … is possible even in China and other countries of Asia but as I do not know foreign languages which are written by hieroglyphs, I cannot tell about it.
At this forum there is a person who writes from China, it is very interesting. There can be it could tell, whether there are such forums and sites in the Chinese segment of the Internet?

[WAB]

На фотографии, снятой через месяц после происшествия видны место настила и тел:
http://1723.ru/forums/index.php?s=&showtopic=5133&view=findpost&p=56231

На месте настила ручей заметён снегом полностью, вровень с берегами. Это 4 метра снега.

It is not necessary to result words which do not represent the facts. There are no anywhere 4 metres of snow. If the reference to »it is is resulted« faster a false argument, than the proof. In business sheet it is told: «… the flooring on depth from 3 - to 2,5 metres is found out.» (с). And if to look at a photo where at the bottom раскопа there is searcher Suvorov (https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/gallery/Dyatlov-pass-the-den-01.jpg ) the avalanche probe there is visible. It consists of three links on 60 sm in everyone. Besides to the top edge of snow remains about one link (+ 60 sm). Total its height turns out 2 metres 40 It see that depth which greatest possible on this place.
At photo (which it is removed in one month - https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/gallery/Dyatlov-pass-1959-search-310.jpg ) it is impossible to consider those details about which here speak. It can be decorated by any inscriptions but if information are not present, it cannot arise from anything. Here it is not necessary to persuade in something readers, it is necessary or to result trustworthy information and its source, or to prove the words personal practice in that place during the same season.
By the way to speak about «a place of a flooring and bodies» it will be possible only when it skilled will be proved. For now goes only unreasonable уговаривание beginners those who tries to give out wished for the valid. Because many parametres and place signs in photos 1959 do not converge with the objective data of district.

[WAB]

Свидетельство поисковика Атманаки об очень глубоком снеге в овраге около кедра всего через месяц после происшествия, 2 марта 1959 г.:

Одновременно с этим группа из пяти человек развернула поиски внизу в районе кедра. Был прощупан участок в 50 м. за кедром, обследовать идущий там овраг не стали, т.к. имеющиеся в наличии щупы не позволяли проверить всю глубину снега, достигающую в этих местах 4-5 метров.

https://sites.google.com/site/hibinaud/home/dopros-svidetela-atmanaki

А до происшествия снег в овраг наметало на протяжении трёх месяцев - ноябрь, декабрь, январь.

It too is very superficial and thoughtless opinion.
The first. Athmanaky has been interrogated in April. That is in 2 months after it was on this place. Means there is an occurrence high probability of "the noise information». It is such term when to the valid information it is mixed or the extraneous information is added. It does not become specially, this is consequence of information entropy.
The second. Depth of snow in 4 … 5 metres (12 … 15 foots) is in these parts impossible by definition. I do not know whence Atmanaki took this information, it is possible there is a consequence from the paragraph "First".
It is a question of a stream which is behind a cedar in 50 m (actually there 42 metres to a coast edge - I measured it by a laser range finder in the summer 2009 and in the winter 2014). Depth of a ravine of this stream in that place makes 3 … 4,5 metres, and even in the most snow winters, it never happens is filled up by snow completely. Pictures of this place in the winter 2013, 2014 and 2015 I now cannot result, because they are not present at me in access, but in the end of October, I can result them. If it there will be a necessity.
Therefore such thickness of snow there cannot be basically. For this purpose the channel of this stream should contain a snow hillock that is impossible in the nature.
The third. Is conducting from searcher Karelin that snow at this time was very little, therefore it is impossible to refer only to that information which it is favourable to you. Besides, in pictures on which there is an analysis of things from tent, it is unequivocally visible that snow on a slope almost that is not present.
Snow adjournment for the last 3 months does not happen big. In November and at the very beginning of December thaw sometimes comes, therefore snow is condensed and settles. Besides, the statistics of adjournment of snow in this area is that that its this share for December and January is much less than that drops out in March and April.
Therefore it is impossible to prove quantity of snow in a place where have found 4 in February 1959, other place and other time.

[WAB]

WAB.  Would it be possible to see the full RUSSIAN article ?

It is certainly possible. Here is the reference to it in Russian: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1Ey2F7ROB6ZXNJkp49tKPJE24iPP0nKRG 
Besides, it has been printed in the book “the Almanac about Dyatlov group. Volume № 2" Researches and materials. " Published by "Fund of memory Dyatlov group “ in 2017.
I very much would want, what who that has read this article and has expressed opinion that all of them materials should be left in the text for the English-speaking reader and that it is possible not to leave.

[WAB]

The following is taken from the Russian Tours Company and the web site link is below ;

http://russiantours.online/

...........................................

Here please, you can receive a typical example of gamble on this theme and exclusively superficial approach to the information.
1.Examples of this phenomenon are not known exclusively to the one who about it writes. At least because similar cases with travellers very rare and the statistics cannot collect. It is enough to me to ask that "expert" who wrote it: «how many time he saw the similar phenomena?» I will not be surprised, if I receive the negative answer in 100 % a case. Similar cases (destruction of soft fabrics of the defrozen bodies in water) for the past of 60 years was literally from one to … a maximum of five. I do not know, where this "writer" took statistics but as there is no at least one example with the statement that the such cannot be in practice, means, this statistics at it in general is not present. I have resulted 2 cases from the practice with similar consequences.
2.In this note author no speaks that all complex of the reasons (water, a stream pressure, oxygen, microflora and microfauna is not mentioned is very brightly expressed), and author speaks only about water as one. And it is the same as the statement that the executor of tricks at cinema has jumped about 5 floors of a building and has not broken though it is not mentioned that below there was crusher ( the device for absorption energy of movement).
3.The Most important thing and the core that it has not been resulted in a note, that all it occurred to the defrozen body. Such bodies even it is simple on air decay very quickly. And if they in water and under the influence of those factors that I have resulted, process should go very quickly. Two or three weeks it are very big term.

As the resume I can tell that similar non qualified articles, it simply attempt to clean stirring the facts. For the statement as authority or advancement of the ideas. Especially it becomes clear when the author constantly repeats «a criminal explanation» though no facts or even signs of it are present. But they can be thought up, as is occurs.
There even there is an attempt to attribute to Boris Vozrozhenny malfeasance structure so he that there has not written that specially. And the statement that it is made for this purpose, «what quickly close case», anything except laughter cannot cause. Under the law, this preliminary investigation could not proceed more than 2 months and its prolongation still a maximum for 1 month was possible. That is it for any reason should be closed not later than May, 28th. As results of criminal actions it was not revealed. But these try to find «criminal actions» already through 50 + years. If to tell easier them do not find out, and think out. Because any the actual information in this time has not appeared. But many consider that they «it is cleverer than Sherlock Holmes» and all of them see that others could not then to see. And without complicating itself revealing of the facts, and thinking out "quasifacts".
That the similar note has appeared not in section of medicolegal experts is interesting, and there where travellers write and there are conversations about Dyatlov pass.
Most likely, it was written by the person who poorly understands this process, and has simply picked at random citations from the Internet.

I saw many such notes. About murder by aliens from UFO, about murder by the Yeti and still everybody … But what by all to do when there is no any facts about any types of "murder"?
If as murder to consider all that the author cannot explain or present what we will imagine such revelry of criminality all over the world that nobody should survive, even is worse than at nuclear war … J

[Игорь Б.]

Свидетельство поисковика Сахнина об очень глубоком снеге в ручье в середине марта 1959 г.:

Вот так мы проваливались с Абрамом Константиновичем! Вот так! Нас страховали ребята за деревья рядом мы… по горло и мы не доходили до земли…
Да, мы смотрели этот сугроб и мы… не за что не зацепились там. Мы его ногами протопали, вот так, вертикально! И ни за что не зацепились. Это означает, что значительно глубже... В общем много там чего (снегу) было. Дойти до твёрдого наста вот так, вертикально мы не сумели. Мы погружались по самую шею.
...Очень очень глубокий снег был.

http://1723.ru/forums/index.php?s=&showtopic=5133&view=findpost&p=75065

[Игорь Б.]

Deleted.

[sarapuk]

WAB.  Would it be possible to see the full RUSSIAN article ?

It is certainly possible. Here is the reference to it in Russian: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1Ey2F7ROB6ZXNJkp49tKPJE24iPP0nKRG 
Besides, it has been printed in the book “the Almanac about Dyatlov group. Volume № 2" Researches and materials. " Published by "Fund of memory Dyatlov group “ in 2017.
I very much would want, what who that has read this article and has expressed opinion that all of them materials should be left in the text for the English-speaking reader and that it is possible not to leave.

Thankyou

[sarapuk]

The following is taken from the Russian Tours Company and the web site link is below ;

http://russiantours.online/

...........................................

Here please, you can receive a typical example of gamble on this theme and exclusively superficial approach to the information.
1.Examples of this phenomenon are not known exclusively to the one who about it writes. At least because similar cases with travellers very rare and the statistics cannot collect. It is enough to me to ask that "expert" who wrote it: «how many time he saw the similar phenomena?» I will not be surprised, if I receive the negative answer in 100 % a case. Similar cases (destruction of soft fabrics of the defrozen bodies in water) for the past of 60 years was literally from one to … a maximum of five. I do not know, where this "writer" took statistics but as there is no at least one example with the statement that the such cannot be in practice, means, this statistics at it in general is not present. I have resulted 2 cases from the practice with similar consequences.
2.In this note author no speaks that all complex of the reasons (water, a stream pressure, oxygen, microflora and microfauna is not mentioned is very brightly expressed), and author speaks only about water as one. And it is the same as the statement that the executor of tricks at cinema has jumped about 5 floors of a building and has not broken though it is not mentioned that below there was crusher ( the device for absorption energy of movement).
3.The Most important thing and the core that it has not been resulted in a note, that all it occurred to the defrozen body. Such bodies even it is simple on air decay very quickly. And if they in water and under the influence of those factors that I have resulted, process should go very quickly. Two or three weeks it are very big term.

As the resume I can tell that similar non qualified articles, it simply attempt to clean stirring the facts. For the statement as authority or advancement of the ideas. Especially it becomes clear when the author constantly repeats «a criminal explanation» though no facts or even signs of it are present. But they can be thought up, as is occurs.
There even there is an attempt to attribute to Boris Vozrozhenny malfeasance structure so he that there has not written that specially. And the statement that it is made for this purpose, «what quickly close case», anything except laughter cannot cause. Under the law, this preliminary investigation could not proceed more than 2 months and its prolongation still a maximum for 1 month was possible. That is it for any reason should be closed not later than May, 28th. As results of criminal actions it was not revealed. But these try to find «criminal actions» already through 50 + years. If to tell easier them do not find out, and think out. Because any the actual information in this time has not appeared. But many consider that they «it is cleverer than Sherlock Holmes» and all of them see that others could not then to see. And without complicating itself revealing of the facts, and thinking out "quasifacts".
That the similar note has appeared not in section of medicolegal experts is interesting, and there where travellers write and there are conversations about Dyatlov pass.
Most likely, it was written by the person who poorly understands this process, and has simply picked at random citations from the Internet.

I saw many such notes. About murder by aliens from UFO, about murder by the Yeti and still everybody … But what by all to do when there is no any facts about any types of "murder"?
If as murder to consider all that the author cannot explain or present what we will imagine such revelry of criminality all over the world that nobody should survive, even is worse than at nuclear war … J

The article taken from the Russian Tours Company website is debatable. I included it because we need to know what people are thinking about what happened to the Dyatov Group. We cant prove it one way or the other because we are lacking EVIDENCE, if we had EVIDENCE then that would be a different matter. But at least we are generating interest and thats important.

[Loose}{Cannon]

Lets try to stay on the topic discussion, in this case being the missing tongue. 

Also, I understand English is not everyone's native language, but if you want/expect members of this discussion forum to read or consider what you post.... please translate it prior to posting.  We simply cannot have multiple languages posted with the burden of translation transferred to the reader. 

Игорь Б, if you do not bother to translate this post and understand (this means you), and continue to post untranslated text, I will be forced to treat said posts as spam.   When I post on a Russian forum, I translate it prior to posting as as you need to do here. 

WAB....   thanks for all your input, we appreciate your expertise and experience on this subject and I enjoy reading your posts. 

[WAB]

Свидетельство поисковика Сахнина об очень глубоком снеге в ручье в середине марта 1959 г.:

Вот так мы проваливались с Абрамом Константиновичем! Вот так! Нас страховали ребята за деревья рядом мы… по горло и мы не доходили до земли…
Да, мы смотрели этот сугроб и мы… не за что не зацепились там. Мы его ногами протопали, вот так, вертикально! И ни за что не зацепились. Это означает, что значительно глубже... В общем много там чего (снегу) было. Дойти до твёрдого наста вот так, вертикально мы не сумели. Мы погружались по самую шею.
...Очень очень глубокий снег был.

http://1723.ru/forums/index.php?s=&showtopic=5133&view=findpost&p=75065

Sakhnin anywhere does not tell in what no matter where concrete place it occurred. Even if to pass further a mouth of 1 right stream 4 inflows on 20 … 30 metres [60...100 ft]  (or to depart to the left on 50 … 100 metres [150...300 ft] , and behind a height on the left inflow, it is even more deep), there depth of snow sharply increased. On a site dyatlovpass.com there is a scheme where the approximate border of deep snow is designated. There also many search works were spent. Because on a channel the most 4 inflows snow allowed to go absolutely freely. It is well visible in many photos of searches. I am assured that you well know them. Therefore I do not understand your persistence with attempts to prove that in a stream was too much snow that there it would be possible that or to dig, and furthermore to fall.

[WAB]

The article taken from the Russian Tours Company website is debatable. I included it because we need to know what people are thinking about what happened to the Dyatov Group. We cant prove it one way or the other because we are lacking EVIDENCE, if we had EVIDENCE then that would be a different matter. But at least we are generating interest and thats important.

To me it is not important where it has been written. Especially if it not scientific magazine, and is simple conversations of people on abstract themes.
All knowledge shares on useful and what distract from the useful. Just as the information shares on true and "noise". "The Second" information is that that distracts from the basic subject of studying. If all to dump in one heap so we never will find out that us interests. It is necessary to be engaged in the analysis of the entering information. And to eliminate that which is "noise". Only then it will be possible to receive useful result.
If no need the result but only conversation process I do not agree to it, and I will not support dialogue and further is necessary not do.

[WAB]

Lets try to stay on the topic discussion, in this case being the missing tongue. 
....................................

WAB....   thanks for all your input, we appreciate your expertise and experience on this subject and I enjoy reading your posts.

LC, I thank you for so flatter estimation for me. If I can make that useful for your site I try make it. How there is to me it probably.
You are right that in the given theme it is offtop, therefore please transfer my messages there where consider it is necessary. If they are necessary. If they have no advantage, you can annihilate them.

PS. LC, with your permission I will answer opponents in this theme last time, and then I will write there where you specify.

[sarapuk]

The article taken from the Russian Tours Company website is debatable. I included it because we need to know what people are thinking about what happened to the Dyatov Group. We cant prove it one way or the other because we are lacking EVIDENCE, if we had EVIDENCE then that would be a different matter. But at least we are generating interest and thats important.

To me it is not important where it has been written. Especially if it not scientific magazine, and is simple conversations of people on abstract themes.
All knowledge shares on useful and what distract from the useful. Just as the information shares on true and "noise". "The Second" information is that that distracts from the basic subject of studying. If all to dump in one heap so we never will find out that us interests. It is necessary to be engaged in the analysis of the entering information. And to eliminate that which is "noise". Only then it will be possible to receive useful result.
If no need the result but only conversation process I do not agree to it, and I will not support dialogue and further is necessary not do.

WAB, I posted the article from The Russian Tours Company website, which is in English, because I thought it was a good article on the missing tongue. Even if it is speculation, we simply dont have a mass of evidence to help us. I suppose its ok so long as we dont overspeculate.