November 29, 2020, 11:43:18 PM
Dyatlov Pass Forum

Author Topic: The Real Ball Lightning theory  (Read 27603 times)

0 Members and 5 Guests are viewing this topic.

July 03, 2020, 12:14:05 PM
Reply #270
Offline

sarapuk

Case-Files Achievement Recipient
I have now read  quite a bit on DPI, and Yuri Yakimov's tale of bright lights, and approaching "swinging sets of moving lights" in a mine pit, and an exactly similar account given by Forest Ranger Rudkovskiy.  All note  frightening, approaching "swinging sets of lights" that approach only at a human glance. An analogy is made to the DPI & ball lightning, perhaps....A further example is given of an experienced taiga hunter who undressed and moved about the taiga for days before dying.  All these examples seem to include bright lights in the wilderness darkness.

However in the west, we also have in North America (where I am a forester) huge tundra and vast Northern forests, with immense Northern mountain ranges, its all very similar in our Canada.  Yet all these corroborating sights come from only one country, Russia.  How could this be, I think.  We in the West are trained to be rational only.  Superstition is out.  it does not make sense that no country other than Russia could have such events, surely? The topography and climate in Canada are the same.

Is it possible that something deep within Russia's society and culture and history, could be behind all these similar stories?  Why no bright swinging lights in our huge northern forests?

Well I have read a fair bit about similar phenomenon  in Northern America and Alaska and Canada as well. So its not just Russia where such things happen.

Thank you for the quick reply to my post.  I was wondering if you have a link for any stories you may have heard regarding    similar tales to the Russian ones, that originate in North America...? Thanks...

Well you could try Googling it. You will come with all sorts of stuff relating to North America and Canada.
DB

July 07, 2020, 10:37:19 AM
Reply #271
Offline

firefox


"Well you could try Googling it. You will come with all sorts of stuff relating to North America and Canada."

I have done my Google search, and indeed did come upon a number of cases of "strange lights" in North America, with one HUGE  difference; American reports are all in the sky only.  Nothing at all on land; and no eyewitness accounts, all are in the type of UFO style.  So my complaint stands; that all stories regarding "lights in the forest" are from Russia only; which is in itself problematical.

It's on those who believe in the worldwide nature of these things, to bring up their own examples of why this should be so.
« Last Edit: July 07, 2020, 11:07:27 AM by firefox »

July 08, 2020, 03:53:18 AM
Reply #272
Online

Nigel Evans


"Well you could try Googling it. You will come with all sorts of stuff relating to North America and Canada."

I have done my Google search, and indeed did come upon a number of cases of "strange lights" in North America, with one HUGE  difference; American reports are all in the sky only.  Nothing at all on land; and no eyewitness accounts, all are in the type of UFO style.  So my complaint stands; that all stories regarding "lights in the forest" are from Russia only; which is in itself problematical.

It's on those who believe in the worldwide nature of these things, to bring up their own examples of why this should be so.
You have to have the special knowledge that only special people have. - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Will-o%27-the-wisp

July 08, 2020, 10:54:28 AM
Reply #273
Offline

firefox


"You have to have the special knowledge that only special people have"

Aha Ha...!  This "special" knowledge now includes ghosts and goblins, eh...?  Then any hope to find what happened here is truly lost..

Here's a great hour long video documentary... That is very sensible and well-done...



.
« Last Edit: July 08, 2020, 05:26:25 PM by firefox »

July 09, 2020, 02:23:05 AM
Reply #274
Online

Nigel Evans


Ghosts and goblins? Whatever next? A falling theory perhaps?

July 26, 2020, 11:20:07 AM
Reply #275
Offline

firefox


 Well, here's a couple of thoughts...The thing that panicked them was as likely inside the tent, as was outside...

After all it was black outside, and very dark inside...How could they have seen clearly outside the tent...?  The tent was made of dark, or black material it seems.  I have winter camped, and it's very difficult to see outside the tent in the dark...So the thing that panicked them is un-likely to be outside.  I have no idea what this was, just that I doubt it could have been clearly seen outside...

Second, the tears in the tent   being 'cut" only from the inside...I feel free in rejecting this, as the only advice comes from a "seamstress."  This was from the original report.  This is far from "expert" opinion, that would NEVER be accepted in the West....in an inquest or any official report.  She has NOT spent twenty years studying cuts, that's for sure.  So, this opinion must be removed from official beliefs.

In the end, we are left with NOT knowing whether the cuts were made by getting out of the tent, or by some force cutting into the tent.  I'm just saying her opinion is not a professional one, nor is it final, as a result..
« Last Edit: July 26, 2020, 11:32:46 AM by firefox »

July 27, 2020, 02:19:34 AM
Reply #276
Online

Morski


Well, here's a couple of thoughts...The thing that panicked them was as likely inside the tent, as was outside...

After all it was black outside, and very dark inside...How could they have seen clearly outside the tent...?  The tent was made of dark, or black material it seems.  I have winter camped, and it's very difficult to see outside the tent in the dark...So the thing that panicked them is un-likely to be outside.  I have no idea what this was, just that I doubt it could have been clearly seen outside...

Second, the tears in the tent   being 'cut" only from the inside...I feel free in rejecting this, as the only advice comes from a "seamstress."  This was from the original report.  This is far from "expert" opinion, that would NEVER be accepted in the West....in an inquest or any official report.  She has NOT spent twenty years studying cuts, that's for sure.  So, this opinion must be removed from official beliefs.

In the end, we are left with NOT knowing whether the cuts were made by getting out of the tent, or by some force cutting into the tent.  I'm just saying her opinion is not a professional one, nor is it final, as a result..

Not so. Check this: https://forum.dyatlovpass.com/index.php?topic=124.0 for more information regarding the tent.

A professional, forensic criminologist Churkina did the examination.



July 27, 2020, 01:36:27 PM
Reply #277
Offline

sarapuk

Case-Files Achievement Recipient
Well, here's a couple of thoughts...The thing that panicked them was as likely inside the tent, as was outside...

After all it was black outside, and very dark inside...How could they have seen clearly outside the tent...?  The tent was made of dark, or black material it seems.  I have winter camped, and it's very difficult to see outside the tent in the dark...So the thing that panicked them is un-likely to be outside.  I have no idea what this was, just that I doubt it could have been clearly seen outside...

Second, the tears in the tent   being 'cut" only from the inside...I feel free in rejecting this, as the only advice comes from a "seamstress."  This was from the original report.  This is far from "expert" opinion, that would NEVER be accepted in the West....in an inquest or any official report.  She has NOT spent twenty years studying cuts, that's for sure.  So, this opinion must be removed from official beliefs.

In the end, we are left with NOT knowing whether the cuts were made by getting out of the tent, or by some force cutting into the tent.  I'm just saying her opinion is not a professional one, nor is it final, as a result..

Yes we only have someones word for it.  But sometimes someones word is all that is needed.  Apparently the Tent was examined properly.  However in this Dyatlov Mystery it seems like all options are open.  I have often thought about those cuts in the Tent and if they were indeed done from inside and not outside.  Without the Tent as material Evidence we can not be certain.  And the Tent, a crucial piece of Evidence, DISAPPEARED.  We are told it became damaged whilst in storage and was thrown away. And if we are to believe that then we may as well believe anything. 
DB

August 09, 2020, 09:32:14 PM
Reply #278
Offline

Georgi


In the end, we are left with NOT knowing whether the cuts were made by getting out of the tent, or by some force cutting into the tent.  I'm just saying her opinion is not a professional one, nor is it final, as a result..

1)Someone cut the tent from the inside so that they can escape.
2)Someone cut the tent from the inside/outside after the group was dead as a means of confusing the evidence.
3)Someone cut the tent from the inside and surprised the group and made them leave in an orderly manner.

What force other than the hikers themselves or other people would cut the tent?

August 09, 2020, 09:36:41 PM
Reply #279
Offline

Georgi



Yes we only have someones word for it.  But sometimes someones word is all that is needed.  Apparently the Tent was examined properly.  However in this Dyatlov Mystery it seems like all options are open.  I have often thought about those cuts in the Tent and if they were indeed done from inside and not outside.  Without the Tent as material Evidence we can not be certain.  And the Tent, a crucial piece of Evidence, DISAPPEARED.  We are told it became damaged whilst in storage and was thrown away. And if we are to believe that then we may as well believe anything.
The tent could have been cut from the inside or outside, the problem is since we don't have a way to ascertain WHEN it was cut it doesn't really prove anything whether it was cut from the inside or outside. It could have been cut by the hikers as a means of escape, it could have been cut by someone who killed them a day or two later as a countermeasure.

August 14, 2020, 09:41:43 AM
Reply #280
Offline

sarapuk

Case-Files Achievement Recipient

Yes we only have someones word for it.  But sometimes someones word is all that is needed.  Apparently the Tent was examined properly.  However in this Dyatlov Mystery it seems like all options are open.  I have often thought about those cuts in the Tent and if they were indeed done from inside and not outside.  Without the Tent as material Evidence we can not be certain.  And the Tent, a crucial piece of Evidence, DISAPPEARED.  We are told it became damaged whilst in storage and was thrown away. And if we are to believe that then we may as well believe anything.
The tent could have been cut from the inside or outside, the problem is since we don't have a way to ascertain WHEN it was cut it doesn't really prove anything whether it was cut from the inside or outside. It could have been cut by the hikers as a means of escape, it could have been cut by someone who killed them a day or two later as a countermeasure.

Well obviously we dont have the Tent as evidence.
DB

August 15, 2020, 09:48:08 PM
Reply #281
Offline

Georgi


"You have to have the special knowledge that only special people have"

Aha Ha...!  This "special" knowledge now includes ghosts and goblins, eh...?  Then any hope to find what happened here is truly lost..

Here's a great hour long video documentary... That is very sensible and well-done...



.

Ill give you that it was well presented but I think that he had a theory about what happened, or at least an incomplete theory of what happened and went back to interpret the evidence to fit his theory. There is the "tormentor" of Lyuda, is mentioned once in her own diary and it was that he picks on her and sometimes it is even offensive. He makes it out to be this huge bullying incident where no one of the Dyatlov group stepped in to protect her so this means they don't like her but in reality " It's my fault that I like to add fuel to the fire, damn me." to me this sounds like someone who is not a damsel in distress needing rescue but someone who can stand up for herself and thus doesn’t need to be protected. Then there is the 2 people entering the tent at anyone time, as far as I know its mentioned in one diary “Someone comes up with an idea that we need a special notebook for ideas that we might come up with. Conspiring, we started going into the tent two people at a time.” These doesn’t sound like it was instituted because the group didn’t trust each other and were worried about being robbed by their fellow hikers.

Then we get to the theory and it goes like this “Something terrified the two men outside who awaken the rest of the group and they put on whatever clothes they can and cut the tent to flee” 1)The suspicions is that the event that forced them to evacuate the tent area happened right before supper so they would not have been asleep. 2) they left their blankets behind which they were using at the time of the incident, that happens in only a few scenarios either someone tells you to leave it or you are in such complete state of panic that taking it doesn’t enter their thinking and nothing at the scene indicates panic aside from the cut and assumptions that they were in a panic because they cut their tent.

Then we get down to the treeline and this is where it gets confusing, for some reason Yuri D(someone who seems level headed and hard to scare) takes his frustration out on Igor by attacking him with a branch but there is zero evidence of that, Zina and Slobodin get involved in the fight and are injured. After the fight the three people(Igor, Zina and Slobodin) leave to go back to the tent and this is where he gets completely off rails. His theory is that due to his injuries Slobodin collapses first and Igor and Zina strip him of his clothes, then they keep going where Igor collapses and Zina takes some of his clothes as well until she collapses some 150m further along from him. Problem is that Slobodin dies in between Zina and Igor which means that they split up and Igor moves 180m back to the treeline where he collapses, Zina somehow takes his clothes and he dies while Zina moves towards the tent for 150m and collapses and dies there approximately 330m away from Igor which means she couldn't take anything from him if they had already split up and that right there would make absolutely no sense. There was no indication that either Slobodin or Igor lost much in the way of clothing to anyone else and in fact looks like Igor was wearing clothes that belonged to Yuri K so that would indicate that Yuri K was dead at the point in time.

And the best part is the glossing over the injuries suffered by the last 4 hikers and stating they succumbed to the cold. Then there is the constant accusation of theft like the Finnish knives being stolen even though all three were catalogued at the tent.

This guy basically had a theory before starting out, all the evidence that could have been misinterpreted to back up his theory was misinterpreted and then everything else was presented as lies(hikers smiling in the pictures) or was ignored all together (injuries on the hikers in the ravine, all the knives were accounted for etc…). I think the Soviet Authorities did a much better investigation than this guy and their investigation was either extremely incompetently done or intentionally covered up.

August 15, 2020, 09:52:06 PM
Reply #282
Offline

Georgi




Well obviously we dont have the Tent as evidence.
Having the tent physically in front of us might be able to hep us prove whether it was cut from the inside or out, but it wont tell us who did the cutting or when it was done. If you believe in the Yeti the tent was cut by the hikers in a panic, if you believe in the theory of murder then the tent was likely cut out by the killers. Just like the watches stopping at certain times, its great evidence but it is in no way conclusive and cannot prove when it was cut and who did the cutting.

August 18, 2020, 03:27:41 PM
Reply #283
Offline

sarapuk

Case-Files Achievement Recipient


Well obviously we dont have the Tent as evidence.
Having the tent physically in front of us might be able to hep us prove whether it was cut from the inside or out, but it wont tell us who did the cutting or when it was done. If you believe in the Yeti the tent was cut by the hikers in a panic, if you believe in the theory of murder then the tent was likely cut out by the killers. Just like the watches stopping at certain times, its great evidence but it is in no way conclusive and cannot prove when it was cut and who did the cutting.

On the contrary, having the Tent as physical evidence may enable us to know for certain if it was cut from the inside or the outside. And also what it was cut by. It may have been cut by a Claw or a Knife, or some other object. Also, Fabric has the ability to retain fluid stains, etc, even after many years. Also, modern Forensic Fabrics experts could probably find out much more than was found out back in 1959.
DB