I have figured it out

[Liyla79]

So I’ve figured out this mystery.

This all happened because Zolotaryov was a CIA (or KGB) agent, and whatever exchange was meant to happen, went wrong for whatever reason.

They group were deliberately GASSED out of the tent. That explains the bleeding from their noses, internal bleeding, vomiting blood, leaving without shoes and the panic to get out of the tent, but then calmness when they’re out of the tent as they cannot see any immediate threat and probably have nfi what is going on at this point. It explains everything. Also why they can’t return to the tent to get supplies or shoes. I mean if you wake up to poisonous gas in your tent, the last thing you’re thinking of doing is grabbing your shoes and jacket. And you certainly wouldn’t go back to said poisonous tent to get them, either.

Then they walk down to the forest to stay warm with a fire, the perpetrators see they’re still alive, and clearly bash the crap out of each of them until they’re dead. It also explains how the branches on the tree were cut - they eventually realized what was happening and were trying to get a view of the tent and see when it was safe to return, before they were found by the killers. Or they could see the killers at their tent. They probably tried to climb the tree because they heard/saw someone coming for them.

Some try to go back to the tent during or after the attack (escaping maybe) but don’t make it back due to the injuries already sustained. There’s evidence on the bodies that they’ve been in a fist fight. That rules out aliens, and just about every other theory including weather and wind. If you look at the connection from Zolotaryov who was involved with top secret Russian government stuff and radioactive weapons, it seems likely he was the reason this happened (which also explains the radioactive clothing) and everyone else in the group suffered for the fact that he was double agent.

It also explains why the last members were more brutally killed - Zolotaryov was in that group.

Boom! Solved. *waits for the Russian mafia to turn up at door*

Wondering everyone else’s opinions on this and if there is anything about this incident that indicates this theory couldn’t work. I think it all fits... waking up to being gassed would make you frantically slash the tent to get out, especially if the source of the gas was just inside the entrances to the tent. It’s been said before - the only explanation for destroying their lifeline (tent) would mean the threat inside was greater than the threat outside. What’s a greater threat than deadly gas? And they were obviously all still sane and of sound mind, which is evident in their efforts to stay alive.

Also the stepping on the chest of one of the victims - this was clearly a military attack on a group of innocent people who were unaware that they were joined by someone in the CIA who had other motives for the trip.

What do you all think, do I need to hire a bodyguard now, or...?

[sarapuk]

I think you need to read a lot of Posts on this Forum and then you may reconsider your theory.

[Liyla79]

Thankyou for your response!

I’ve read a few, and am aware of the other theories. I just think there is flaw in all of them, there’s atleast one thing that doesn’t add up. And because I’m so convinced of my theory, I think they’re all wrong anyway haha!

Do you think there’s anything about this incident that can’t be explained with my theory? I’m genuinely looking for other opinions on that. 

[Monika]

Thank you for joining the discussions.

The idea that someone let go of gas into the tent and then let the students move freely outside, allow them to make a fire and dig the den is unthinkable. If someone wanted to kill them, there were different and very good ways (e.g. let them disappear without a trace). I never believed that someone had gotten them out of the tent and then waited for hours outside, when they would finally freeze and die. Such a scenario is just right for a good movie, but not in real life.

Although Zolotarev was older and much survived in the war, his motive for joining the expedition was to get a certificate of 3 levels of difficulty that would allow him to be an official tourist instructor in the future. Everyone in their group had the same motive to get that certificate. Only a fool would deal with spy character things somewhere in the mountains in the presence of witnesses. If he wanted to do some covert operations, he had a lot of opportunity to go alone without witnesses to some abandoned and low-populated place in Russia.
Besides, there is no evidence and no indication that Zolotarev had anything in the past with Russian government and had no access to radioactive stuff.

Radioactive clothing can be explained by the fact that two of the group worked in places where radioactive material was handled.

What I absolutely agree with you is that the only explanation for destroying their tent and the impossibility of returning for clothes and boots would mean the threat inside was greater than the threat outside.  This point is the biggest mystery of the whole event.

Each of us in this forum has own theory.
I have two possible theories:
1. The tent was hit by ball lighting (plasmoid) and the skis functioned as lightning conductors and this would be a real reason to leave the tent quickly (https://sites.google.com/site/mezoelectric/dyatlov-pass-incident-1.). And if this phenomenon lasts longer, it would keep them from returning to their tent for their clothes and shoes.
2. Katabatic wind (see theory of Richard Holmgren) when the wind was threatening them and they had to get out of the open space into the forest and the wind was so violent that they couldn't walking up the hill back to the tent.

[Star man]

There is a significant flaw in the theory and that is why they left the camp site.  The tent was their life boat.  If there was gas in it then they would have waited for it clear.  The theory is kind of like another version of the stove theory but with outside attack. 

Any attackers would have done a much more effective job.  Why use some irritating gas that wasn’t toxic enough to kill them straight off. Why allow them to walk away?

Regards
Star man

[Liyla79]

But it’s possible that if they were gassed, the perpetrator left the scene assuming the would die from it. Given that they died 6-8 hours after their last meal, it’s assumed they were sleeping. Perfect time to gas someone, I guess.

Maybe the killers returned to retrieve the item they used for the gas and saw they were all still alive, hence the further killings?

I can’t really explain all the motives behind Zolotaryov’s actions, I don’t think anyone can. No one will really know I guess. I believe he is key though and played a part in this.

If they were hit by lightning it wouldn’t explain missing eyes and the majority of all their injuries. That just doesn’t make any sense, why were they climbing a tree if that were the case? Why were there injuries on their hands to indicate a fist fight?

I struggle to understand how anyone can understand the katabatic wind theory also. Why would they rip their tent apart because of strong winds? And again, what about the injuries? Especially the missing eyes and tongue, and someone’s chest being stood on. They can’t have had any influence that sent them ‘crazy’ as they were making very sane and experienced efforts to stay alive. Those theories just don’t add up.

[Liyla79]

There is a significant flaw in the theory and that is why they left the camp site.  The tent was their life boat.  If there was gas in it then they would have waited for it clear.  The theory is kind of like another version of the stove theory but with outside attack. 

Any attackers would have done a much more effective job.  Why use some irritating gas that wasn’t toxic enough to kill them straight off. Why allow them to walk away?

The stove thing isn’t even close, as that situation wouldn’t be urgent enough to slash the tent, whereas poisonous gas is.

Maybe they WERE waiting for the gas to clear - hence the fire in the woods. And then the attempt to return.

I think the attacker’s may have assumed that they were doing an affective job with the gas, until they realized they had all escaped before they died. They probably hoped they would die in the tent. There has been speculation about poisoning of the hikers, I read an autopsy that indicated that, and vomiting blood does point to poisoning. I think it played a huge part in why some of them died, actually.

I certainly don’t think the attackers allowed them to walk away. That’s evident in the fact that they came back and murdered them all! Seems pretty effective to me.

[Liyla79]

I believe the murderers came back to confirm the deaths, and saw that they had survived the gas. Which is why they group had time to build fires and the den. They then realised they had to kill them, one by one.

[tekumze]

The theory of murderers is the same as the snow avalanche theory. There has never been any snow avalanche and there were no killers. That night they were on the slope alone. Whoever thinks that someone in the middle of the night awaited them on the mountain and then killed them in different ways all night long, probably too much watching science-fiction films.

[Liyla79]

The theory of murderers is the same as the snow avalanche theory. There has never been any snow avalanche and there were no killers. That night they were on the slope alone. Whoever thinks that someone in the middle of the night awaited them on the mountain and then killed them in different ways all night long, probably too much watching science-fiction films.

Why do you think there were no killers? There’s no other way to explain how they sustained all their injuries, unless you look at supernatural theories which would involve watching way more science fiction filmes haha

I don’t think they spent all night long, they tried gassing, it didn’t work, so they had to kill them individually. If it was an attack by the secret service or military, they would’ve had to keep going until the job was done.

Clearly there was no avalanche, I’m not sure how anyone thinks that’s even plausible. I’m curious, do you have a theory?

[Star man]

It is interesting that you conclude poison gas was involved.  There are several theories presented that point to potential evidence that poisoning was involved.

In one of my theories -low yield tactical nuke I present a theory for a cloud of nitrogen dioxide to have forced them away  from the tent and camp site and the resulting slow Odema and death of the some of the group members.  Others have presented nitrogen dioxide theories

The nuke theory Is far from a simple explanation though. even though it is my own idea I have to admit that it's unlikely.

It also seems very unlikely there was any outside human attack given the evidence.

I think there is probably a simple explanation for what happened.  Possibly some kind of fracture within the group that escalated out of proportion.

If you eliminate the following low probability theories:

Aliens
Big foot
Avalanche
Katabatic wind
Ball lightening
KGB
Military accident
And most of the other conspiracy theories - as interesting as they may be

On balance of probability it seems that whatever happened probably had something to do with the group themselves. 

Regards

Star man

[Liyla79]

There is a significant flaw in the theory and that is why they left the camp site.  The tent was their life boat.  If there was gas in it then they would have waited for it clear.  The theory is kind of like another version of the stove theory but with outside attack. 

Any attackers would have done a much more effective job.  Why use some irritating gas that wasn’t toxic enough to kill them straight off. Why allow them to walk away?

Regards
Star man

They would’ve HAD to leave the campsite, they had just slashed the tent into a million pieces to escape and it couldn’t be used, right? They would’ve frozen if they stayed there. Their only option was to get out of the wind, and keep warm. Hence the fire, and the den. 

I think the attackers believed the gas would kill them. Or maybe it was just to weaken them, to try to get information out of them first. They were clearly tortured.

[tekumze]

Dear Liyla79,
For all of their injuries, we can say that they could have been the cause of their struggle for survival and the natural process of decaying the human body (eyes, tongue, ribs ...) after so many times after death in the  specific circumstances (snow melting, running water, the pressure of snow on the body ...).

My theory what happened that night is: that nothing really happened at all. Only a tragic accident that was a set of natural complex coincidences and some wrong choices of these young people.

[Morski]

Welcome to the Pass forum, Liyla!

For me, your theory has some weak points, which you need to consider. I will mark just some of them, for now.
1. Zolotaryov.
Even though he was the-last-minute-joiner in the group, there is no evidence of any kind, that he was into whatever spy relations. The most certain thing about him, is that he was a war veteran, who survived the Great Patriotic War (one of the not so many of his generation, being born in 1921), and that he was aiming for a higher degree in sports, which was the official reason he joined Dyatlov`s group. I have to admit, his past is somehow shady (which I personally relate to the conditions of the historical time period), but as well as his end of course. This is it. Totally no evidence, that he had any kind of relations with the US and the CIA. I am afraid, you are referring to one of the many myths with this one, because of the fact he wasn’t part of the official students group and he was older. This is well discussed in this forum. Too much of a speculation.
2. Murder at Kholat Syakhl.
Another popular version, which you read about already, since you are so sure about the murder. The injuries of the “ravine four” are far more serious compared to the other members of the group, that is a fact. But a human cause for them is hardly a fact. The whole environment there is quite hostile. Weather is unpredictable, and it is usually bad, with strong winds and bad visibility and low temperatures. Such injuries are likely to be the result of falling onto rocks, stumbling, wind, tree climbing and falling, snow walls falling (for the RAV4) and so on. Apart from this, there were no traces of other people around. Only footmarks of about 8-9 people. Adding to that, after they died, there are more natural reasons for the more speculative injuries (missing eyes, tongue) – natural decay and small predators, water, melting snow).
You say, that there were murderers – KGB or military, who tried to gas the group while they were finally resting inside the tent. Not to mention the tens of other ways to get rid of the hikers, your theory suggests, that the KGB/Military failed so bad, that they had to go back or wait, to finish the job. That is a rather HUGE underestimation of the abilities of both the KGB and the Army. If they wanted to get rid of one or more members of the group, they would have done it in a way, that puts no questions. The hikers might have disappeared without a trace, or drowned in the rivers, or who knows. But leaving nine (!) bodies, all of which were found, with various injuries, is a highly implausible scenario. Also, the murderers, would have to go through the same difficulties of terrain and weather, and what is more – they had to be aware of the groups route, which is quite hard to believe, or stalking them to the very end, in a highly remoted area, which is also hard to comprehend.
3. The tent
The condition of the tent, as it was found by the searching parties is a highly debatable thing. There is NO proof, that the tent was cut from the inside (a huge myth as well). The whole ordeal with the tent is related to a very bad handling by the searching members and the authorities later on. The “cut from the inside” is way more plausible to be the result of digging using shovels, done by the searching members, rather than the act of the Dyatlov`s group. The tent was literally dragged to the helicopters – therefore, all of the damage to the tent is questionable.

All my respect, but I think you need some more time researching here. 

[cennetkusu]

The boys were definitely killed. It is very clear and clear. Saying the opposite, that is to say, he died of frostbite, is completely absurd. There are only three groups that can kill young people. 1. Humans 2. Jinn 3. An unknown coercive force There is no choice other than these 3 groups .... Given the injuries and the course of the incident, the closest possibility is the unknown coercive force. The weakest possibility is people. At first glance, this is the kind of conclusion. 3. I ask those who see the possibility weak. There are many unexplained events in the world in the past and present. So this third possibility is very likely. I'm more interested in why it happened than it is .... WHY ???

[Loose}{Cannon]

they had just slashed the tent into a million pieces to escape and it couldn’t be used, right?

They did nothing of the sort. 

http://forum.dyatlovpass.com/index.php?topic=205.msg1045#msg1045

[cennetkusu]

They left the tent, whether they cut it or not. And they're forcibly doing it. Because they left barefoot and without outerwear. So it doesn't matter if they cut the tent themselves. If he didn't cut the tent themselves, there might be a clue that this attack was made by people. Because people may have ordered them to leave the tent and go to the forest. But this result does not completely exclude the "unknown coercive force". But it is logical that young people have opened the peepholes in the tent. This proves that young people probably have a knife in their hands when they escape. This increases the likelihood that the tent will be cut by young people. Because they got a knife when they ran. But as a result, it is not important whether the tent is cut by young people. This result shows us that only the human factor increases the probability.

[Loose}{Cannon]

Because they left barefoot and without outerwear

Actually, they were dressed quite well.    There is nothing that indicates they were "forced" to do.....   anything.

[gypsy]

As for the gas poisoning theory, I am more inclined to believe that an accidental event could have taken place. At the time when weapons of mass destruction were sort of banned by international treaties, there was a high level of secrecy when conducting the tests. This does not require a mass explosion, release of a chemical or biological agent is sufficient. Small damage is still possible though.

After such test, the army is supposed to take samples a measure the results repeatedly over selected time span, hence the exclusion zone. They would have probably used a helicopter and/or tracked vehicle to access the site, hence no other footsteps.

I think that fits the (known) evidence and reaction of the state better because I fail to see a relevant motive in deliberate killing of the group.

[Liyla79]

they had just slashed the tent into a million pieces to escape and it couldn’t be used, right?

They did nothing of the sort. 

http://forum.dyatlovpass.com/index.php?topic=205.msg1045#msg1045

Ok but I’ve seen a picture of the tent, after it was taken from the mountain and set up again. I was exaggerating when I said “a million pieces” but it was torn/slashed many times, and clearly unusable.

[Liyla79]

Welcome to the Pass forum, Liyla!

For me, your theory has some weak points, which you need to consider. I will mark just some of them, for now.
1. Zolotaryov.
Even though he was the-last-minute-joiner in the group, there is no evidence of any kind, that he was into whatever spy relations. The most certain thing about him, is that he was a war veteran, who survived the Great Patriotic War (one of the not so many of his generation, being born in 1921), and that he was aiming for a higher degree in sports, which was the official reason he joined Dyatlov`s group. I have to admit, his past is somehow shady (which I personally relate to the conditions of the historical time period), but as well as his end of course. This is it. Totally no evidence, that he had any kind of relations with the US and the CIA. I am afraid, you are referring to one of the many myths with this one, because of the fact he wasn’t part of the official students group and he was older. This is well discussed in this forum. Too much of a speculation.
2. Murder at Kholat Syakhl.
Another popular version, which you read about already, since you are so sure about the murder. The injuries of the “ravine four” are far more serious compared to the other members of the group, that is a fact. But a human cause for them is hardly a fact. The whole environment there is quite hostile. Weather is unpredictable, and it is usually bad, with strong winds and bad visibility and low temperatures. Such injuries are likely to be the result of falling onto rocks, stumbling, wind, tree climbing and falling, snow walls falling (for the RAV4) and so on. Apart from this, there were no traces of other people around. Only footmarks of about 8-9 people. Adding to that, after they died, there are more natural reasons for the more speculative injuries (missing eyes, tongue) – natural decay and small predators, water, melting snow).
You say, that there were murderers – KGB or military, who tried to gas the group while they were finally resting inside the tent. Not to mention the tens of other ways to get rid of the hikers, your theory suggests, that the KGB/Military failed so bad, that they had to go back or wait, to finish the job. That is a rather HUGE underestimation of the abilities of both the KGB and the Army. If they wanted to get rid of one or more members of the group, they would have done it in a way, that puts no questions. The hikers might have disappeared without a trace, or drowned in the rivers, or who knows. But leaving nine (!) bodies, all of which were found, with various injuries, is a highly implausible scenario. Also, the murderers, would have to go through the same difficulties of terrain and weather, and what is more – they had to be aware of the groups route, which is quite hard to believe, or stalking them to the very end, in a highly remoted area, which is also hard to comprehend.
3. The tent
The condition of the tent, as it was found by the searching parties is a highly debatable thing. There is NO proof, that the tent was cut from the inside (a huge myth as well). The whole ordeal with the tent is related to a very bad handling by the searching members and the authorities later on. The “cut from the inside” is way more plausible to be the result of digging using shovels, done by the searching members, rather than the act of the Dyatlov`s group. The tent was literally dragged to the helicopters – therefore, all of the damage to the tent is questionable.

All my respect, but I think you need some more time researching here. 

THIS is the response I was looking for. Thankyou! Very interesting... I figured that whoever done this covered up their tracks? But yes I agree, following their moves especially when they veered off their indented route is hard to explain. But there was that photo of someone peering out from the trees? Just seems different from the other pics, and seems to be not one of the members of the group. It’s eerie.

I guess that’s possible about the tent being destroyed after it was found but I thought there were many studies done on the tent proving in detail that it was slashed from the inside?

I understand that it’s possible that the missing eyes might be from animals but not a tongue. Just... not a tongue. And the knuckle injuries from being in a fight... do you believe that was just within the group then?

And yeah I know Z being involved in CIA or KGB is a myth, but until proven otherwise every theory is just a myth and it’s the myth I believe although you have raised some very interesting points that make me reconsider!

Thanks for the added info, I don’t claim to know as much about this incident as many other people know, and it’s just my conclusion that I put forward. I still think it’s all that can explain the majority of what happened that night though. Out of curiosity what’s your theory? Do you have one?

[Liyla79]

The boys were definitely killed. It is very clear and clear. Saying the opposite, that is to say, he died of frostbite, is completely absurd. There are only three groups that can kill young people. 1. Humans 2. Jinn 3. An unknown coercive force There is no choice other than these 3 groups .... Given the injuries and the course of the incident, the closest possibility is the unknown coercive force. The weakest possibility is people. At first glance, this is the kind of conclusion. 3. I ask those who see the possibility weak. There are many unexplained events in the world in the past and present. So this third possibility is very likely. I'm more interested in why it happened than it is .... WHY ???

Behind every unknown event is an explanation. Just because we can’t figure it out, doesn’t make it supernatural or anything like that. Even if I’m wrong, there is an explanation for what happened. I’m sure whatever the truth is, would let down a lot of people who want to believe it was something extraordinary. They were killed, by someone. And not within the group or there would be atleast one left alive. They were too experienced to have let the cold or anything weather related get to them. It will always remain a mystery and there will never be a definitive answer, that I’m sure of.

[Morski]

Hi again!
The photo you are referring to is the famous frame №17 by Nikolay Thibeaux-Brignolle`s camera (https://dyatlovpass.com/camera-thibeaux-brignolle). More or less it is the foundation of the Yeti/Menk theory, and the speculation is that the hikers took a photo of a Yeti, who was stalking them… Oh well. Personally I think that it is a joke, a staged photo, deliberately made by the group to fit the joking theme about Yeti, which they included in their humoristic pamphlet “Evening Otorten №1”. I even think the “Yeti” on the photo is Nikolay himself (it is known, that he liked to be in the center of attention, he liked good joking and so), and the photo was taken with his camera.

As you can see from Loose Cannon`s post, the tent was treated really badly. They didn’t really put a lot of effort to keep it as a vital evidence of the case. They dug it with shovels, it was dragged over 700 meters to the helicopters. What we know about the original condition in which they`ve found it, does not suggest a desperate cutting and leaving through the holes. If I remember correctly, the cut from the inside wasn’t even originally suggested by a forensic specialist. For me, the whole confusing and general “not-knowing” about the tent kind of make it irrelevant as a piece of evidence. The only real fact regarding the tent, is that they decided to leave it, for whatever reason.

The injuries on Lyuda`s body are always causing speculations for obvious reasons. Small predators could get the eyes. The way Lyuda was found – with open mouth, and water pouring inside along with natural decay, could explain the missing tongue. What I personally find odd, is the coroner`s report. Vozrozhdenny describes missing hypoglossal muscle as well as muscles of the floor of the mouth. The tongue is simply “missing”. You know, Lyudmila was said to be very “edgy” and straightforward, she couldn’t keep her mouth. I have always find that fact to be ironically related to the missing tongue.

Yeah, for me Zolotaryov is still the most mysterious guy in the group, but I tend to think in a more down to earth way. He had a hard life before, probably as any other individual from his generation; he went to war, he suffered the horrors. I think he was just trying to get his life in hands, to get his sports degree and just move on.

As for your question, I don’t have a theory on my own. If you invest some time here, you can read a lot of well-structured and backed up theories. Some of them make sense and potentially explain a lot of what might have happened, some are too stretched or overcomplicated. I can say, that I am not a fan of the murder/KGB/CIA conspiracy/alien branch of theories. I think that a simpler approach works better. Natural causes – could be a weather phenomenon, could be some sort of a quarrel within the group, and the specific environment of the geographical location. A chain of misfortunate events in general.
Back in the day, after I went through the murder scenarios, of course  , one of my favorites was related to food/ergot poisoning. Starting with irrational behavior because of contaminated food, which later became a failed struggle for survival.
 
This is the real thing about the Pass – nothing fits perfectly.

[snaika1079]

Sorry!
The reason for leaving the tent in Russia in the Urals has long been found out in the closed nuclear city of Ozersk.  It took a lot of effort. Previously, journalists have always said that the stove on top of the tent tourists did not drown. This error was repeated from source to source. This mistake was strongly supported by supporters of the avalanche, i.e. from the state system. He didn't need a private investigation. However, researchers from Ozersk proved that the stove was heated on the last night, as always.  And leaving the tent was associated with the smoke of the tent. Part of the tent sank under the wind and snow and touched the hot stove. It wasn't a fire, it was smoke, Chad.

[snaika1079]

For a long time we were told that the night they supposedly cold, although in fact a cold night according to the rules of tourism of those children, it's any night on the route outside the home. In the tent with the stove identity is considered to be cold overnight.  The first reporters did not understand the terms of tourism and there was a rumor that a cold night-it's winter in a tent without a stove. Sorry, tourists from the Dyatlov group (YEAR) is the normal tourists, not special forces and not extreme athletes, masters of sports in mountaineering, to put on itself experiments. They had a stove, there were tools, firewood, they did not leave the oven in the lab, they carried it with them to Otorten.  And of course stoked on the last night.

[snaika1079]

The tent was presented for examination.  Examination revealed as the absent fragment of a slope. This is the fragment that hit the stove and caused smoke and evacuation of the tent. Imagine sleeping people who Wake up from suffocating acrid smoke. The cause of the accident was probably immediately apparent to all the searchers who found the first tent, but their communication with the Prosecutor's office bodies at that time gave fruits: honoring CoE silent. And who says has no details. A piece of the tent simply disappeared. There were traces of charring on it, a burnt piece was gone.  For no one had to think that tourists simply fell asleep and burned. Too great was the attention to the search for tourists. To the same could go rumors, that tourists had too much alcohol –industrial alcohol and fell asleep drunk. That's why they burned. Nobody wanted that.  Therefore, the plot is even worse.

[snaika1079]

Leaving the tent because it was so chaotic and complicated that the use of clothing was only after she airs out the smoke.  So outerwear is left in the tent. They wore what they managed to pull out at once. Stingrays were cut in order to save the unconscious, and there were such. Soaked in acrid smoke things left in the tent. And the second factor that made people go down to the bottom, and not stay near the tent, is the weather conditions. It was a hurricane, which battered the tent and caused an accident by burning , decay of the slope. We need to get a good look at this place where they spent the night. And in Ozersk conducted a whole study of this slope, this pass, this place. This is a godforsaken place for all living things and was called holat-chakhl – Dead mountain ( not the mountain of the dead). Because of the constant strong wind here and kurumnik and outliers and bare top. And the snow here has never been loose, immediately aminals was done firn.  They were unlucky enough to get caught in a hurricane. Which expelled them down, scattered on a slope and on kurumnik ( 350 meters from tent) a wound received Slobodin. It was night. Total loss of orientation. Total darkness. Few people can imagine these conditions. Few people can understand the mechanism of tragedy.

[snaika1079]

In order to begin to study the tragedy for real , we need real research. It is necessary to get acquainted not with newspaper clippings with sensational headlines about balls or moose, bloody gobeshnikami, it's all interesting, colorful, but invented for the movie. Although the role of the KGB in the campaign is huge. But that's another story.  The study of tragedy is best given to those who understand tourism, who understand the work of investigators, who are impartial, adult, who can responsibly examine the data. The fault here is not only the tourists themselves.  And this fascinating story contains not one, not two, but a dozen secrets.  It's like a matryoshka doll. Behind every mystery there is another mystery. The real story of the campaign is actually not as fabulous as the very devil as it is painted. But a lot of funny secrets. And a lot of interests came together on a criminal case. Only here it is impossible to tell immediately.

[snaika1079]

But if the interest is manifest to the present studies of atomic city, from where the campaign left Igor krivonischenko, who worked on the construction of the plant "Mayak" ( he worked at the plant "Mayak", he worked in construction formally in another mailbox, then Rakitin is there), then look in search engines Ozersk , Stanislav Ivlev, Кrivonischenko, the real story of the Dyatlov Hiking group.  Our countryman S. Ivlev can answer any questions, of course. Recently, he was in Ozersk presentation of the book, where the documentary history of the campaign. And about the party Кrivonischenko.

[Tuffknorf]

I think everyone needs to put the goverment murder conspiracy aside. It's the USSR in the 50s! If someone in the goverment wanted them killed they wouldn't follow them out to nowhere. They would just send officers to take them away from their homes. They were already being hassled by police on their way out.