Photographs

[Manti]

I see. Now I have read the US government's pre-assessment of UAP/UFO phenomena: https://www.dni.gov/files/ODNI/documents/assessments/Prelimary-Assessment-UAP-20210625.pdf

Contains virtually no information, but still worth a read it's quite short.

To me the witness accounts in the Dyatlov case about "UAP"s just don't add up. Some are clearly describing a meteorite/space debris/rocket stage burning up in the atmosphere. But there is the account of the sky looking like an imminent collision with another planet? And the bright "divine presence" lingering for minutes among the mountains? Others appear to describe atmospheric nuclear tests but there were none conducted during the DPI. And then there is the "searchlight reacting to human gaze"..


It's hard to tell which ones are genuine contemporary observations and which ones are from people trying to seek attention...

Nevertheless the photographs are nothing but magnified dust and scratches on the film. Capturing a meteorite or nuclear explosion on the cameras they had would have been almost impossible anyway, it would probably just result in a completely overexposed white photo, like trying to photograph the Sun.

[Paf]

Capturing a meteorite or nuclear explosion on the cameras they had would have been almost impossible anyway, it would probably just result in a completely overexposed white photo, like trying to photograph the Sun.

Not quite : They had manual film camera, not modern ones. No automatics settings. If the camera was set to take day-time picture, the picture would be overall under-exposed. Still, it's true the core of the light spot could be over-exposed, but not automatically depending on the light.
A nuclear explosion might have over-exposed quite a large portion of the picture, but a meteorite would not.

[time2fly]

I see. Now I have read the US government's pre-assessment of UAP/UFO phenomena: https://www.dni.gov/files/ODNI/documents/assessments/Prelimary-Assessment-UAP-20210625.pdf
Contains virtually no information, but still worth a read it's quite short.

Excellent, thank you. Will include parts of it in my my next book edition, like this important one:

"Some UAP appeared to remain stationary in winds aloft, move against the wind, maneuver abruptly, or move at considerable speed, without discernable means of propulsion.  In a small number of cases, military aircraft systems processed radio frequency (RF) energy associated with UAP sightings."

To me the witness accounts in the Dyatlov case about "UAP"s just don't add up. Some are clearly describing a meteorite/space debris/rocket stage burning up in the atmosphere. But there is the account of the sky looking like an imminent collision with another planet? And the bright "divine presence" lingering for minutes among the mountains? Others appear to describe atmospheric nuclear tests but there were none conducted during the DPI. And then there is the "searchlight reacting to human gaze"..
It's hard to tell which ones are genuine contemporary observations and which ones are from people trying to seek attention...

Most of them are authentic. But everyone sees something different, according to his education, age, experience, religious belief and profession bias. A member of the millitary will see a rocket, a religious person an angel, a physicists a plasma ball and a science fiction fan a UFO. I don't want to quote my book too often but "The Dyatlov Pass Mystery - NOT A Cold Case" explains what is behind these accounts. A celestial phenomenon that baffles science up to date and manifests itsself through different states and properties. Some of them can be found in the Pentagon declassified document (see quote above). I list over 100 such accounts and analyze the most important ones. To me there is absolutely no doubt that the Dyatlovs were chased out of their tent by this.

Nevertheless the photographs are nothing but magnified dust and scratches on the film. Capturing a meteorite or nuclear explosion on the cameras they had would have been almost impossible anyway, it would probably just result in a completely overexposed white photo, like trying to photograph the Sun.

Not all of them. Valentin Yakimenko does tend to overdo it in my opinion, concerning his frame analysis. But the most famous ones we all know are already enough evidence. They are analyzed in detail in my book. I do believe I can contribute with my mountaineering and image analysis background.