I want no be erroneous, but it seems to me that that you write, is a syndrome of the person which has decided that he knows others all better. As in nature you saw nothing and try do from position of the nonspecialist the definitive conclusions. It is not necessary hurry up and do conclusions superficial estimations.
A few days ago, I spoke with a Slovenian pathologist. I asked him to examine the publicly available report of the autopsy of 1959. And he wondered how on the basis of previous basic autopsies no criminal prosecution was initiated against an unknown third person? He fully agrees with the findings of Mr. Eduard Tumanov.
I spoke with Tumanov too, and I still had opinion that it as all medical workers very poorly understands the physicist, especially in the biomechanic reception of traumas. Its estimations are based on the statistican of city criminal cases or traumas in the result, received in conditions of life, on transport and at building. It absolutely does not have experience with climbing or ski travellers. Its visit on pass consisted from this that it has passed way part (incomplete way) and has sat nearby place where has been Dyatlov found. By the way, at mark which we have left week earlier. About it knew the correspondent of the newspaper which Shura has informed on it.
I was engaged biomechanics of shock conditions professionally. We developed devices of rescue and protection for aircraft and space flights. At us very serious work on working out of the theory human head, as mechanical system has been done. Though we were engaged not only head mechanics, but also bodies of the person entirely. Though it were already less important directions of researches. When I have shown Tumanov mathematical calculation of head injury of Tibo, and he at all has not understood that this such though I there specially did not begin use the differential equations, tensor calculation, and tried state all on base of physics average link of the preparatory school. Therefore I can tell that Tumanov estimates that Boris Vozrozhdenny not better than he wrote. The estimation is made taking into account the amendment on medicine progress for 60 years and that he already knows result and numerous opinions in view of that. Itself Tumanov alive did not see a body at opening, therefore it can домысливать that wrote Revived somehow. It is elementary psychology: when a lot of not clear and all say that there is a crime, involuntarily fantasy to this direction. If understand deeply there all according to physics laws, is more exact than mechanics + very unevident changes from decomposition of bodies which are found in May. I faced the such, when was engaged in search and research works with travellers in the winter and in the spring in 1973.
That standing from outsets Dyatlov bakhils he tries give out attritions for linkage of his feet was very indicative also. Though that such bakhils and as they are applied (especially with what they were then) he does not know in general.
In general, I have left very disappointed from he.
I assure you that anybody another on this place during a case with Dyatlov group was not, and could not be. Owing to features of district, logistics and level development of traficabilities at that time
I have made this addition for this purpose that people would not be fond superfluous essence, as for example of crime. It just as consider that at landing of Americans to the moon, there too there were strangers. Who that would not speak from theorists, who not can independently (only using the forces and possibilities) there get. If the person there have resulted also it there «did not look neither to the right, nor to the left» he of anything cannot tell, be it any expert, only from other section of knowledge.
Already only on the findings of external injuries anyone with a basic knowledge of medicine will have a reasonable suspicion of a criminal offense.
Suspicions it is emotions, profound knowledge, not only medicine, but also applied sciences because the mechanics of get damages to city conditions and on the nature will be different though signs of damages (but only signs without studying of important details) will be approximately identical is necessary. Here it is very easy change for one another. That about what I tell (biomechanic) can calculate physical parametres precisely enough. It not too most what he must remember: «Was, if I correctly remember, such case at autofailure ….» and consider that if the admission it is + / - 100 %, this it is one and too.
It agrees that, according to data and photos (otherwise poor), no serious pathologist can ignore at least the suspicion of physical violence against these people.
Once again I want remind - suspicion, these are emotions, it would be desirable that that more tangible - for example calculation of mechanics of damages.
If you read in Russian, here is the reference to all my elementary statements mechanics of traumas (with instructions to the most probable places of their reception) https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Ey2F7ROB6ZXNJkp49tKPJE24iPP0nKRG/view?usp=sharing
It is absurd to go all the way together with the finding of all the general sub cooling. In the case of three victims, it is obvious that they were hit by a "train" and the official final conclusion is: "Unknown compelling force". These are the injuries that were not incurred by 9 people because they are slipped on the snow or hit the stone or tree by accident ...
Death of 6 persons has come from overcooling (freezing), it is the medical fact. Other real reasons are not present. At the others death from the traumas, complicated by cold. For certain Slobodin could remain is live, if to it in time have rendered the qualified medical aid. Too most it is possible tell and about Simeon Zolotarev. Though at he trauma is heavier. Tibo and Dubinina hardly could survive with the big degree of probability. With such traumas there are not enough chances survive. The reason here not available strangers, and that in such conditions and at such possibilities it is simply impossible. Very few people can theoretically present itself (himself) conditions and possibilities of that place to that time. Therefore people also try simplify all to crime. Bernard Shaw spoke: «If people do not know anything, they replace it with conjectures». (c)
The solution to this question is to dig out all the corpses and make a complete DNA analysis and 99.999999% answer is there. But it's clear to everyone that this will not happen.
What will give DNA analysis? What there (in tombs) there are other people? That would be already ridiculous, if it was not so sadly. Already there was exhumation Zolotaryov body. And than it has come to end? Anything, except new conjectures which gradually too have died. At those soils which are in Ural Region`s, in 60 years it is impossible even distinguish details of crises. Places of crises can be defined. But it and so it is known from reports of the pathologist. What additional information will be appear? There acid soils, calcium fragments very quickly degrade. It at the analysis of Russian imperator family should be established who there is. It is they or not they? And what is the time and forces on it was required? Who and for what means will do similar analyses for Dyatlov group? Or you consider what important only loudly speak all, and the volume let will be everything? The main thing – it is designate itself…
And this is exactly what is becoming an interesting for the outside observer:
The 2019 "Reopening Dyatlov Pass Incident" opens with the only snow slide theory and they hysterically claim again and again:“Crime is out of the question. There is not a single proof, even an indirect one, to favor this version. It was either an avalanche, a snow slab or a hurricane." (Quoted Mr. Alexander Kurennoi)
1.It is not Reopening, is check of separate parts
old criminal case at the desire of public organisations and private persons. Reopening it is impossible owing to in force in general law. Besides there were no new facts, there are only loud statements and articles in press.
2.Nobody is going approve anything, it is check «could be so, or could not». The answer to it yet was not, and the criticism already goes with might and main though it is intervention in check action.
3.They have chosen only these 3 directions because they were widespread in books, and they cannot be denied in advance legally. In difference from other criminal and conspyrologe theories. If you are assured of these theories, please result your arguments, and proofs. If they are not present, and there are only suspicions it is necessary wait while there will be proofs, and only after that it will be necessary check these theories.
4. They did not spend logistics and psychological experiment on place because Tumanov has drawn the conclusion that it is dangerous. I and Shura many times did these experiments with logistics on slope. In January and February, day and night, but we do not consider, it is dangerous though our possibilities (us was only two, and the nearest people
for 60 km from us) were much weaker, than in expeditions of Office Public Prosecutor, the newspaper and TV. A difference that at us vocational training minimum 10 times more, than at this expedition. Psychological experiments should be spent in public which are not familiar with place because I and Shura has told, know place not worse than own ranch. I offered these experiments to Discavery channel group when they in January travelled to pass. But they even did not react in any way to it. I with Shura could there was be stand by this experiment, but it interested nobody. Too most is and with this expedition. The correspondent of the newspaper knew about it, but it was not interesting to them also it too does not happen. If spend what that experiments on logistics or on psychology in other place, especially near to city, it is similar to what spend them in Africa.
There is a well-founded question: WHAT is the real reason that this year the authorities officially opened the case of Dyatlov?
It is reaction to numerous articles in newspapers and TV expedition. The leading role is played here by the newspaper with very big circulation and foreign groups of TV which go to pass. And they, in turn, were inspired by that this year 60 years since event were executed. Besides there were some references of private persons. In them there was nothing concrete, but them was much. It is as no rather. As it is known: “the quantity passes to quality”. It has bothered them also they has solved that make.
In Main Investigatory Committee one of their veterans has written article which was engaged earlier in mountaineering. How much I can understand, he has seen on the book of Buianov and Slobtsov “The mysteries of Dyatlov group dead” familiar surname as Boris Slobtsov
because he somewhere met it in mountains. Therefore he has believed to that there is written as truth without check. At lawyers, as well as in medicine: “If the higher chief so has told, it is impossible doubt!”. There have decided that they well know he, that it is all means it correctly.
However, I was very well sign with Boris Slobtsov, and he did not consider that there could be an avalanche, or that that of this kind. It was persuaded by Evgenie Buianov become the co-author, and Slobtsov when has once one's consent, did not want it break. Therefore supported Buianov a little. However he said to me that though does not trust in avalanche, but recede from the given word cannot.
Here such intrigue develops with this check.
To us do not want listen, because we people modest, the book we do not write, but actual material at us more than at all the others. A case not in the one who knows, and in the one who is more known more.
Too most occurs also many participants of searches. Very many we can tell Vladislav Karelin, Sergey Sogrin, Peter Bartolomei … With all from them repeatedly I talked and periodically we correspond on an e-mail. At all of us opinion concerning these reasons obviously is negative, but there use other experts.
Because it's more than obvious that they do not want to find anything, regardless what Russian glaciologist will announce August (which year?) in his conclusions.
What for you have started attack to glaciologist? To it have appointed term of granting conclusion till August, therefore it there has given it already. It are results of check will be declare in August. At them such term according by plan.
With Victor Popovnin we are familiar for long time. I have passed to he my records, it has considered it. That will be in its conclusion, it will be known only when the Office of Public Prosecutor declares result. What for before this time attack the expert, at all without knowing, what he has written? Popovnin is expert of very high level (international), it the serious man and it is still not clear, how the Office of Public Prosecutor will interpret its conclusion.
Principle: «I did not read, but already I condemn!» (c), this very bad relation to problem. It is very assessment.