Who knew the answer?

[MDGross]

The criminal investigation passed through a number of men in a short period of time. It begs the question: Did one of them (or more than one) know what happened to the Dyatlov group? Was he replaced because he was close or had the answer? Is this conclusive proof of a cover up?
Here's how the investigation proceeded in an interview given by Okishev, who participated in the investigation from beginning to end. The criminal investigation was first handled by Tempalov, the Ivdel prosecutor. He was assisted in the investigation by another man from the Ivdel prosecutor's office named Korotaev. What did these two men uncover? They were soon replaced by Sverdlovsk Oblast prosecutor, Ivanov. Tempalov was actually questioned as part of the criminal investigation. And Korotaev and what he might have found aren't even mentioned in the case file. Then the investigation passed to Sverdlovsk Oblast Public Prosecutor, Klinov. It again raises the question had Ivanov found out too much? Okishev mentions that he had never heard of a prosecutor being present at any autopsies, as Klinov was present at each of the Dyatlov group autopsies. The criminal investigation at last was taken over by Urakov, the Deputy Federal Prosecutor for Investigations. He was from Moscow and certainly had the power to order a cover up. He also made the decision to close the case in May. Was he following orders from the KGB or the supreme power, the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union?
Does all this point to a cover up of a military blunder, an exploded missile, for example? At this time in 1959 there was a Test Ban Treaty in place that prohibited the testing of nuclear weapons by the US, Great Britain and the Soviet Union, although it's highly unlikely that any of these countries paid much attention to it. Or does it hint at involvement by the KGB from the beginning? 
All of this strongly suggests a state cover up. The crucial question is, of course, what was being covered up?

[Star man]

The criminal investigation passed through a number of men in a short period of time. It begs the question: Did one of them (or more than one) know what happened to the Dyatlov group? Was he replaced because he was close or had the answer? Is this conclusive proof of a cover up?
Here's how the investigation proceeded in an interview given by Okishev, who participated in the investigation from beginning to end. The criminal investigation was first handled by Tempalov, the Ivdel prosecutor. He was assisted in the investigation by another man from the Ivdel prosecutor's office named Korotaev. What did these two men uncover? They were soon replaced by Sverdlovsk Oblast prosecutor, Ivanov. Tempalov was actually questioned as part of the criminal investigation. And Korotaev and what he might have found aren't even mentioned in the case file. Then the investigation passed to Sverdlovsk Oblast Public Prosecutor, Klinov. It again raises the question had Ivanov found out too much? Okishev mentions that he had never heard of a prosecutor being present at any autopsies, as Klinov was present at each of the Dyatlov group autopsies. The criminal investigation at last was taken over by Urakov, the Deputy Federal Prosecutor for Investigations. He was from Moscow and certainly had the power to order a cover up. He also made the decision to close the case in May. Was he following orders from the KGB or the supreme power, the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union?
Does all this point to a cover up of a military blunder, an exploded missile, for example? At this time in 1959 there was a Test Ban Treaty in place that prohibited the testing of nuclear weapons by the US, Great Britain and the Soviet Union, although it's highly unlikely that any of these countries paid much attention to it. Or does it hint at involvement by the KGB from the beginning? 
All of this strongly suggests a state cover up. The crucial question is, of course, what was being covered up?

I think that without solid proof we will not discover what happened.  I think based 9n the available information that something unusual happened.  The behaviour of the hikers seems strange.  The way they left the tent  and why the cuts were made, and how the cuts were made.  Its bizarre.  Infrasound?  A massive dose of radiation?  Poisoning?  Drugs? Toxic chemical?  It seems to me that tge cold wasn't the only thing that they hsd to deal with.

Regards

Star man

[Investigator]

MD Gross, the funny thing is that if they wanted to cover something up, all they would have had to do is to point to the evidence (including the diaries) and say that the group pitched a tent in a terribly dangerous spot and suffered the consequences.  However, from what I understand, the person in charge of the original investigation was some sort of "UFO nut" and made statements about "unknown forces" or something to that effect, which then led to the DPI becoming a "great mystery" in the internet age (that's how I learned about it).  Before you make such claims you should do reconstructions, because "failure of imagination" is a common problem among investigators of all types.  They could still do a precise reconstruction today, and it wouldn't cost much, so in a sense the officials thenselves are keeping the conspiracy theories alive for no good reason.  Are you aware of how common these kinds of "deaths by misadventure" are, especially in cold weather?

[Nigel Evans]

The criminal investigation passed through a number of men in a short period of time. It begs the question: Did one of them (or more than one) know what happened to the Dyatlov group? Was he replaced because he was close or had the answer? Is this conclusive proof of a cover up?
Here's how the investigation proceeded in an interview given by Okishev, who participated in the investigation from beginning to end. The criminal investigation was first handled by Tempalov, the Ivdel prosecutor. He was assisted in the investigation by another man from the Ivdel prosecutor's office named Korotaev. What did these two men uncover? They were soon replaced by Sverdlovsk Oblast prosecutor, Ivanov. Tempalov was actually questioned as part of the criminal investigation. And Korotaev and what he might have found aren't even mentioned in the case file. Then the investigation passed to Sverdlovsk Oblast Public Prosecutor, Klinov. It again raises the question had Ivanov found out too much? Okishev mentions that he had never heard of a prosecutor being present at any autopsies, as Klinov was present at each of the Dyatlov group autopsies. The criminal investigation at last was taken over by Urakov, the Deputy Federal Prosecutor for Investigations. He was from Moscow and certainly had the power to order a cover up. He also made the decision to close the case in May. Was he following orders from the KGB or the supreme power, the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union?
Does all this point to a cover up of a military blunder, an exploded missile, for example? At this time in 1959 there was a Test Ban Treaty in place that prohibited the testing of nuclear weapons by the US, Great Britain and the Soviet Union, although it's highly unlikely that any of these countries paid much attention to it. Or does it hint at involvement by the KGB from the beginning? 
All of this strongly suggests a state cover up. The crucial question is, of course, what was being covered up?

Good post, sums it up very well. Imo Okishev's interview is a key facet of the mystery stating the degree of state involvement. What's interesting is that this seems to continue to the present day, a reopened investigaton with a ridiculously limited scope followed by an equally ridiculous conclusion.

[Nigel Evans]

Another interesting question is - "if there was clearly a cover up, then why is it so obvious? Why wasn't it done better?". If state personnel were on site before the search party surely the bodies, tent etc would have simply been disposed of never to be found?

Theory 1 :-
They (the state) didn't know they'd killed them until Tempalov's investigation was underway. Then it was in the public domain and known to highly connected people like YuriK's father (construction manager of power stations and carried the personal approval of Stalin). So the only choice was to take control of the public domain and use it's resources to locate the last four bodies as defection of workers at sensitive installations would have concerned them. On their discovery it was then closed (with extreme prejudice - seems like Ivanov was read the riot act, Urakov travelling from Moscow).
Theory 2 :-Whatever actually happened was unknown to the state but it had a (big) problem with Ivanov connecting the deaths with "lights in the sky" from many witnesses who seem to have seen rocket testing (Feb17, Mar31). So he was read the riot act fairly early into the saga and became "a changed man". Once all the bodies were found then the case was shutdown with the authority of Urakov in person. How they died was a trivial matter, what mattered was national security. In this theory the cover up is a red herring.

[MDGross]

If state security had to be protected and no information made public, then the obvious nature of the cover up was not relevant. The crucial thing was to keep state security safe and secret. There's no doubt that the state put the squeeze on Tempalov (he was eventually questioned as part of the criminal investigation) and Ivanov (ordered to Moscow and returned a "changed" man). It would seem these two came very close to discovering what happened. Klinov seemed somewhat less inquisitive as if he were already following state orders. Obviously, Urakov was tasked with wrapping up the investigation and making certain state security was not threatened. If any of Tempalov's or Ivanov's personal files still exist about the case and could be examined (almost no chance of that happening), perhaps some conclusive answers could be found.
I would gladly inquire of the CIA about particulars of the case (I've done it once before), but it's as tight lipped about the case as the Russian authorities are.

[Squatch]

I think that without solid proof we will not discover what happened.  I think based 9n the available information that something unusual happened.  The behaviour of the hikers seems strange.  The way they left the tent  and why the cuts were made, and how the cuts were made.  Its bizarre.  Infrasound?  A massive dose of radiation?  Poisoning?  Drugs? Toxic chemical?  It seems to me that tge cold wasn't the only thing that they hsd to deal with.

Regards

Star man

I agree that the behavior of the hikers seemed strange, but I think their behavior points to a weather event as the answer to this mystery. The way they left the tent and the various states of clothing suggests they were partially caught off guard by the event.

I think the worsening weather made them concerned enough to send out two of them to inspect (or repair?) the tent. These two ended up being the best dressed of the group.

Horizontal slits in the tent -- if they indeed actually occurred -- might indicate an attempt to communicate from the inside of the tent to the outside. Those inside the tent would have no reason to dress warm. They don't expect to go outside. A flashlight -- later dropped outside the tent -- could have been used to illuminate the two outside by a hiker inside the tent who was communicating with them through the slits (Igor Dyatlov maybe? It was reportedly his flashlight).

An extreme worsening in wind results in a situation where it appears an avalanche is happening. The hikers cut their way out of the tent and flee in a panic. The panic would most likely be started by shouts of "Avalanche!" from the two well-dressed hikers outside the tent. Those inside would not question whether or not an avalanche was happening in that situation.

If this is basically true, the question still remains as to the kind of weather event that could simulate an avalanche. These were experienced hikers after all.

[Investigator]

Squatch, my take is that there was an incident/occurrence in or on the tent that demanded quick action, but once that was accomplished they could calmly set about the rest of their plan, as we see from one of the flashlights being carefully placed on top of the partially collapsed tent (which would not be done if there was fear of an avalanche), along with the orderly footprints and leaving nearly everything in the tent (seven apparently were wrapped up in blankets, so if they were going to walk calmly down the mountainside, the only reasons not to take other things that would help would be that they were told to do so by Igor or the items were frozen and not usable).  The two who were initially better dressed apparently were doing sentry duty at the time, and two blankets were still folded up.  The cutting of the tent from the inside, if we assume that happened (I'd need more expert opinion on that subject to not question it at all), could have been done for more than one reason:

1. The tent was collapsing or appeared to be about to collapse (wind and/or ice buildup).
2. The tent was blowing open or was letting so much cold air in that it was too dangerous to stay there with the stove not being used that night.
3. Igor was sort of punishing the group for not sewing the tent (actually two tents) up properly, as he told them to do the previous day or two (you can read about this in the diaries).
4. Igor knew it would happen and wanted to use it to show them how to survive in such a scenario and obtain the Level 3 certification (if this is true, he just happened to be wrong about how to survive or how things could go wrong and become very dangerous very quickly).
5. Some sort of angry and/or psychotic episode by one or more of the group (I think this is very unlikely, as no other evidence is consistent with it).

It may be that the two Yuris were sent down to start a fire, while the others worked on securing the tent, which would explain the two sets of footprints.  I think the main problem was that they wanted to be able to climb a large tree to see if the tent was blowing apart, but they started a fire near the tree and the wind was strong enough to render the fire insufficient.  One or more recognized this and so the "den" was created, which might have worked if those four hadn't fallen into the crevace type feature (with a creek lined with rocks underneath it).  The three going back to the tent is the most puzzling thing.  Perhaps only Zina was going back, disgusted by Igor (as we read in the diaries), holding him responsible for the death or one or both Yuris, and not willing to listen to him any more (then the two guys went after her to try and get her to go to the den).  Or perhaps the idea was to go back and get some gear after thinking that the original plan didn't work (and not thinking the den plan would work without that extra gear), or thinking they could survive by huddling in the corner of the tent that was still standing, using the nine blankets and each other to stave off hypothermia.

[Star man]

If there had been a weather event they would have at least had time to gather blankets, possibly footwear before setting off into the freezing night.

Clearly there was no avalanche, and even if there was a threat of an avalanche, they would have quickly realised after leaving the tent that there was no avalanche and returned promptly to the tent.  Even if if they had cut the tent to escape and damaged it, they could have returned to collect blankets and extra clothing, shoes, but they did not.

Why?

Regards

Star man

[Investigator]

Star Man, as I said before, in a case like this, all one can hope for is a reasonable explantion.  However, here we have several, and perhaps that is what causes many to think something incredible occurred.  If you read those "Missing 411" books, it seems that author believes incredible things have occcurred hundreds or even thousands of times in these kinds of incidents!  I do agree the blankets are key, as well as the flashlight left on top of the tent but under a layer of snow.  The blankets were not frozen up, as the heavy coats and boots likely were, nor was the flashlight (they left at least one axe and knife in the tent that could have helped cut down branches, which they mostly ripped off by hand).  This tells us they had a plan that included the belief that they could go down to the tree line, start a robust fire and sit on a bunch of tree branches, which they apparently did, and that would allow them to survive for several hours or so.  This did not happen, and the two Yuris apparently died of hypothermia within a couple of hours.  We now know that the core temperature of some people drops drastically under such conditions when they stop being active, but they would not have known that in the late 50s.  That may have led to panic, but the "ravine four" seem to have felt confident in their plan.  That only leaves the "returning three" to account for, and as I said in my previous post, there are several reasonable explanations.  A fear of the tent blowing apart, scattering their belongings all over the mountainside is likely the key to all this, and the tent was either cut by them or was ripped open by nature, so again, the major issue that may have concerned them at that point was securing the tent.  They (or at least Igor) thought suriving the night by doing what they did was probable.  Whether Igor set this up as a survivalist exercise or it was just a bad decision to pitch the tent there will likely never be known, so we can only put forth the reasonable hypotheses.

[MDGross]

It seems this discussion is veering off course. The first question is – do you believe there was a cover up or not? In my original post I relayed the information given by Okishev, who oversaw the investigation into the tragedy, in an interview some years after the fact. If you don't think there was a cover up, then please offer an explanation as to why these various men got involved with the case. Ivdel prosecutor Tempalov seemed to be in the best position to gather all the facts, but was suddenly replaced when Ivanov took over the criminal investigation. Second, if you do believe that there could have been a cover up, then what event was being covered up? It was this event that would have caused the group to exit the tent in some sort of panic or irrationally. Perhaps the toxic fumes from an exploded missile presented an immediate danger. Maybe there was some other type of military test or exercise that put their lives in danger. Do you have a possible explanation?

[sarapuk]

This is a good Topic. And Nigel Evans hit the nail on the head again and I quote '' What's interesting is that this seems to continue to the present day, a reopened investigaton with a ridiculously limited scope followed by an equally ridiculous conclusion''.  To me it appears that things took a major turn after the final 4 bodies were found at the Ravine. Note, however, that Geiger Counters were used before the final 4 bodies were found, and there was already much talk of mysterious lights in the sky, ie UFO's.

[Investigator]

MDGross, you asked a few questions in your original post to this thread, but they are not questions people like us can answer, other than, "sure, isn't just about anything possible?"  As I said, the easiest way to cover up the DPI would be to point at the diaries and the other evidence the rescuers recovered or discovered and say, "it all points to one explanation."  However, the original person tasked with rendering a conclusion apparently was some sort of "UFO nut" who talked in terms of "mysterious forces" and such, which may be the only reason we are talking about it today!  My main point is that the evidence that appears solid all fits together, though specific aspects of the incident may have more than one reasonable explanation, as I mentioned in other posts.  Sure, speculating about highly unlikely possibilities can be fun, but hardly ever leads anywhere, at least in cases like this, where there is so much evidence and only one way to view it that makes sense and does not possess huge "loose ends," as the other notions do (UFOs, Yeti, government special forces attack, weapons testing, auditory phenomenon of incredible force, avalanche, etc.).

[MDGross]

Investigator, Your point is well taken. And believe me, I've tried to make sense of reasonable explanations. I began with an avalanche scenario. Maybe they felt an earthquake and feared it would cause an avalanche. Maybe they heard an avalanche several miles away and with the wind and the sound echoing among the mountains, they thought it was much closer. Although there was no actual avalanche, maybe they thought one was happening. But as they fled the tent and started down the slope, wouldn't at least one of them turn around and see that there was no avalanche. Even if they believed they saw one approaching, why would they walk in the same direction as the avalanche? Wouldn't they turn 90 degrees and walk along the side of the slope out of the direction of the avalanche. Maybe a gale-force wind suddenly happened, the tent flapping wildly. But as long as the tent was standing, why not take time to put on your shoes, coat, gloves and hat? And if they fled the tent with the wind blowing, let's say 60 mph, wouldn't the wind chill be approaching minus 100°F. Surely, they would have frozen to death before they even reached the woods. I can't make the most reasonable explanations work.
Ivanov, who in an interview many years later, did believe that some of the last photos and eyewitness accounts pointed to fireballs in the sky, which he felt could have some intelligent force controlling them. But the first to investigate was Tempalov, the Ivdel prosecutor, and Korotaev, an investigator from the prosecutor's office. For at least a few days, these men had the best look at a scene that hadn't been disturbed. Perhaps they found the answer to the mystery. Of course, we'll never know. But it strikes me as strange that the were both pulled from the case and that there is no "official" record of all they might have found. Just my opinion and nothing more.

 

[Monty]

Sir, this is where I have ended up. Who knew the answer? Only they know. But it beggars belief that nine sane and rational hikers could exit their tent and head toward death. My theory is full of holes. But just exiting stage left in a state of absolute undress seems wrong. But that is what happened. So, we arrive at the same question, who knew the answer. Perhaps only the Dyatlov group, and they took the answer with them to their graves.

[Star man]

Investigator, Your point is well taken. And believe me, I've tried to make sense of reasonable explanations. I began with an avalanche scenario. Maybe they felt an earthquake and feared it would cause an avalanche. Maybe they heard an avalanche several miles away and with the wind and the sound echoing among the mountains, they thought it was much closer. Although there was no actual avalanche, maybe they thought one was happening. But as they fled the tent and started down the slope, wouldn't at least one of them turn around and see that there was no avalanche. Even if they believed they saw one approaching, why would they walk in the same direction as the avalanche? Wouldn't they turn 90 degrees and walk along the side of the slope out of the direction of the avalanche. Maybe a gale-force wind suddenly happened, the tent flapping wildly. But as long as the tent was standing, why not take time to put on your shoes, coat, gloves and hat? And if they fled the tent with the wind blowing, let's say 60 mph, wouldn't the wind chill be approaching minus 100°F. Surely, they would have frozen to death before they even reached the woods. I can't make the most reasonable explanations work.
Ivanov, who in an interview many years later, did believe that some of the last photos and eyewitness accounts pointed to fireballs in the sky, which he felt could have some intelligent force controlling them. But the first to investigate was Tempalov, the Ivdel prosecutor, and Korotaev, an investigator from the prosecutor's office. For at least a few days, these men had the best look at a scene that hadn't been disturbed. Perhaps they found the answer to the mystery. Of course, we'll never know. But it strikes me as strange that the were both pulled from the case and that there is no "official" record of all they might have found. Just my opinion and nothing more.

Agree that whatever happened it was an unusual occurrence.  Look at the three  cuts made from inside the tent.  Look at where they are in relation to the front of the tent, look at the shape of the cuts.  If you believe that there were no other people there that night, why would the hikers make those cuts like that and leave with such inadequate clothing when they would know it would likely mean certain death.

Regards

Star man

[MDGross]

Star man, Yes, it's possible that the KGB or Soviet military caused the Dyatlov group's death. Maybe they saw something that they weren't supposed to see. Maybe espionage explains it all. I don't know. However, it is one explanation for the cover up.

[Star man]

Star man, Yes, it's possible that the KGB or Soviet military caused the Dyatlov group's death. Maybe they saw something that they weren't supposed to see. Maybe espionage explains it all. I don't know. However, it is one explanation for the cover up.

MD maybe I worded my comment incorrectly.  What I meant is - consider the cuts assuming they were made by the hikers themselves.  Now look at them in detail and ask why they would have made them like that? 

Regards

Star man

[mk]

Another interesting question is - "if there was clearly a cover up, then why is it so obvious? Why wasn't it done better?". If state personnel were on site before the search party surely the bodies, tent etc would have simply been disposed of never to be found?

Yes!  This is what I keep coming back to.  Everything points to a coverup; but that fact in itself is suspicious.  It's almost as though they aren't entirely sure what they are trying to cover up, or why, or how. (The old joke when two conspirators give themselves away by telling different lies because they are in such a hurry to explain away suspicious evidence.)  It's too uneven and disorganized.

And it feels like they are still doing it!--all this misdirection about avalanche, etc.  The whole thing feels like the efforts of a half dozen stage magicians who are improvising.

Theory 1 :-
They (the state) didn't know they'd killed them until Tempalov's investigation was underway. Then it was in the public domain and known to highly connected people like YuriK's father (construction manager of power stations and carried the personal approval of Stalin). So the only choice was to take control of the public domain and use it's resources to locate the last four bodies as defection of workers at sensitive installations would have concerned them. On their discovery it was then closed (with extreme prejudice - seems like Ivanov was read the riot act, Urakov travelling from Moscow).
Theory 2 :-Whatever actually happened was unknown to the state but it had a (big) problem with Ivanov connecting the deaths with "lights in the sky" from many witnesses who seem to have seen rocket testing (Feb17, Mar31). So he was read the riot act fairly early into the saga and became "a changed man". Once all the bodies were found then the case was shutdown with the authority of Urakov in person. How they died was a trivial matter, what mattered was national security. In this theory the cover up is a red herring.

Very interesting and plausible!  Something to chew on for a while.

But, again, why the continuing smokescreen?  Maybe I just have a suspicious nature, or maybe it's due to difficulties of translating, but several interviews/quotes of people near the event (Bienko, Ivanov, et.al.) feel evasive to me.  Too much explaining of questions that weren't asked, and ignoring of other explicit questions.

[Nigel Evans]

But, again, why the continuing smokescreen?  Maybe I just have a suspicious nature, or maybe it's due to difficulties of translating, but several interviews/quotes of people near the event (Bienko, Ivanov, et.al.) feel evasive to me.  Too much explaining of questions that weren't asked, and ignoring of other explicit questions.

Yes i'd agree that many of the interviews seem strange. Ivanov's commitment to fireorbs for instance. Not a jot of self doubt or balance from a professional investigator.

[Beluga1303]

I am convinced that someone knows the truth. But we are talking about the year 1959. Soviet Union. Everything that the public should not notice was covered up. Regardless of whether it was a reactor accident or a missile accident. The Soviet Union was riddled with political officers and KGB men. And I'm also sure that there are other documents on this case there are under lock and key. The latest investigations by the public prosecutor's office show once again that today's state has no interest in solving this case.

The avalanche?

[sarapuk]

I am convinced that someone knows the truth. But we are talking about the year 1959. Soviet Union. Everything that the public should not notice was covered up. Regardless of whether it was a reactor accident or a missile accident. The Soviet Union was riddled with political officers and KGB men. And I'm also sure that there are other documents on this case there are under lock and key. The latest investigations by the public prosecutor's office show once again that today's state has no interest in solving this case.

The avalanche?

Its not only the former USSR is it. Its many of the big powerful Nations that tend to be very secretive and have very big Spy Departments, etc. The USA could be said to be riddled with CIA men. The point is that something happened that warranted a Lockdown for 3 years and a very quickly closed Case. The Tent was one of many important items to apparently disappear.

[eurocentric]

The circumstantial evidence for a military presence is reasonably strong.

Unless you believe in alien spacecraft, or ball lightning, the orange orbs seen hovering in the night sky, lasting from seconds to minutes, could be helicopter/s, where a search light appears orange at distance, or amber lamps were deployed for higher contrast in snow, as with car headlamps in alpine regions. Rotor noise would not be heard by witnesses at distance.

Mention is made of swirl marks seen in the snow near the tent, which could be caused by the downdraft from the rotors.

It's reasonable to assume that, with the camera found around his neck, Semyon took his night photo's that night, and the gist of them shows a bright lamp of distinctive shape, and one photo of a 'plane' looks suspiciously like a Yak-24 troop carrier, down to the particular shape and lines of the cockpit windows, the twin rotor stacks and other key features. Semyon's rudimentary camera would only be capable of taking images of relatively stationary objects at night without blurring (shutter speed versus aperture setting).

Because snowmobiles, 4WD and quad bikes were not available then, and would leave obvious tracks if used, the only conceivable way for the military to get there at night would be by helicopter. The timely coincidence of escapees in the region, some of whom may have been of high political value, provides a reason.

It's possible the helicopter dropped flares to get a better look in forests, explaining the burning to some tree tops.

It seems obvious the group felled their tent and covered it with the trench snow spoil, and because logically they wouldn't choose to do that when leaving without first retrieving all they needed to survive, this suggests there was a delay between felling and leaving, and that all adds up to hiding/staging the tent as abandoned, with hypothermia setting in by the time the coast was clear.

I believe the hikers would pitch their tent where they did to avoid the escapees they would have learned of at Vizhay, and then found themselves a little too conspicuously in the middle of a search zone at night.

The next day the military would continue their search, see the bodies on the pass (before snowfall covered them), and either land or abseil someone down a rope, the evidence of this activity hidden by the later snowfall, and turn the bodies, determine they were hikers, and make the connection with the 'abandoned' tent. It would be played to this day as though they were never there, because people would either blame them, directly or indirectly, for causing their deaths, or ask why they did not rescue them if they were searching that area and the hikers were in some other difficulty.

[MDGross]

A very thoughtful scenario. I've also speculated that Zolotaryov''s photo is a distorted picture of a helicopter search light. I favor a scenario in which the KGB is involved. The year 1959 was at the height of the Cold War. Soviet citizens employed by the CiA and British intelligence could be found everywhere. Perhaps there was fear that state secrets were at risk and the Dyatlov group needed to be executed, but in a way that would shine no light on the KGB. But the criminal investigation started by Tempalov began raising too many questions and so the coverup began.

[sarapuk]

The circumstantial evidence for a military presence is reasonably strong.

Unless you believe in alien spacecraft, or ball lightning, the orange orbs seen hovering in the night sky, lasting from seconds to minutes, could be helicopter/s, where a search light appears orange at distance, or amber lamps were deployed for higher contrast in snow, as with car headlamps in alpine regions. Rotor noise would not be heard by witnesses at distance.

Mention is made of swirl marks seen in the snow near the tent, which could be caused by the downdraft from the rotors.


The subject of Alien Spacecraft will cause a strong reaction for obvious reasons, but it still needs to be considered. Its not just a big World, its a big Universe and beyond. Aircraft engines and indeed those of an Helicopter can sometimes be heard for many miles. The Swirl Marks may be a phenomenom similar to the Crop Circle phenomenom. Alien Spacecraft would be a phenomenom.

[marieuk]

I was reading about Direct Energy Weapons and found this bit interesting:


In terms of immediate effects, lasers can produce anything from a glare or slight warming of the skin to blindness and severe skin burns. Pulsed high-power lasers can produce plasma in front of a target, which then creates a blast wave with subsequent blunt trauma.

is it possible that the injuries were caused by some futuristic type weapon?  could that explain the lack of damage to the skin and the radiation on the clothing? And who would have had access to such weapons?

[Nigel Evans]

In the west first laser wasn't built until 1960 apparently -  https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laser


The Soviets could have been ahead but not by much to support a theory of a high output military grade weapon.

[Per Inge Oestmoen]

It seems this discussion is veering off course. The first question is – do you believe there was a cover up or not?

There was a cover up - that is what we can say with absolute certainty.

It is important to consider the implications of this. There would be no need to cover up, if it were an accident.

[sarapuk]

I was reading about Direct Energy Weapons and found this bit interesting:


In terms of immediate effects, lasers can produce anything from a glare or slight warming of the skin to blindness and severe skin burns. Pulsed high-power lasers can produce plasma in front of a target, which then creates a blast wave with subsequent blunt trauma.

is it possible that the injuries were caused by some futuristic type weapon?  could that explain the lack of damage to the skin and the radiation on the clothing? And who would have had access to such weapons?

Alien Beings would have Alien Technology.

[Nigel Evans]

It is important to consider the implications of this. There would be no need to cover up, if it were an accident.

Not true. If an incident of unknown cause was drawing attention to top secret rocket (ICBM) testing then the state could elect to shut the investigation of it down, national security trumping justice.