Dyatlov fallout radiation hypothesis

[sarapuk]

A few thoughts that may or may not be applicable.

Ivanov was an odd duck.  He did seem fixated on the balls of light in the sky, but I believe it was stated previously on the forum that he had also just recently finished a training that had to do with radiation.  Whether he did bring the Geiger counter on his own or not, there are too many conflicting reports.  And we know Krivonischenko worked at the Chelyabinsk  nuclear plant and was part of their clean up after the Kyshtym disaster in 1957.  One of the other hikers had worked there at some point.  Kolevetov had previously worked in a nuclear lab in Moscow.  Kolmogorova lived in a contaminated zone.  And we know that this area of the region still tests high for radiation (I.e. Josh Gates testing at the site in 2018.). Gates did tree core samples around the ridge and they did not show any higher than usual radiation for the 1959 year.  Does that indicate that there wasn't a singular catastrophic nuclear event on Kholat Syakl that year?  I don't know enough about radiation, myself. 

It is a mystery with so many variables.  I am enjoying this discussion unfold.  Thank you for sharing your info and such!!

Ivanov was the Leading Investigator. He was stating that Fireballs or UFO's ie Unidentified Flying Objects were seen in that part of Siberia around the time of the Incident.

[KFinn]

A few thoughts that may or may not be applicable.

Ivanov was an odd duck.  He did seem fixated on the balls of light in the sky, but I believe it was stated previously on the forum that he had also just recently finished a training that had to do with radiation.  Whether he did bring the Geiger counter on his own or not, there are too many conflicting reports.  And we know Krivonischenko worked at the Chelyabinsk  nuclear plant and was part of their clean up after the Kyshtym disaster in 1957.  One of the other hikers had worked there at some point.  Kolevetov had previously worked in a nuclear lab in Moscow.  Kolmogorova lived in a contaminated zone.  And we know that this area of the region still tests high for radiation (I.e. Josh Gates testing at the site in 2018.). Gates did tree core samples around the ridge and they did not show any higher than usual radiation for the 1959 year.  Does that indicate that there wasn't a singular catastrophic nuclear event on Kholat Syakl that year?  I don't know enough about radiation, myself. 

It is a mystery with so many variables.  I am enjoying this discussion unfold.  Thank you for sharing your info and such!!

Ivanov was the Leading Investigator. He was stating that Fireballs or UFO's ie Unidentified Flying Objects were seen in that part of Siberia around the time of the Incident.

Yes.  Those are the balls of light I was referring to. 

[Manti]

If a satellite with potentially sensitive data or technology on it crashed, and it had a radioactive power source, then I could see the authorities combing the area for months with Geiger counters.

Doesn't even have to be a Russian satellite, finding an American one would be even more valuable. And given the reports of fireballs in the sky, maybe they considered this a possibility?
For example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kosmos_954

But the Searchers were not looking for crashed Satellites, they were looking for the Dyatlov Group.

I'm not sure.

Of course the students from UPI were looking for the Dyatlov Group.


The military continued searching the area including with metal detectors, for months after the students all returned home.
The rest of the dead were there nearby, under the snow in the ravine, with pens in their pockets, a camera (or just it's case?), watches on their wrists, etc. things a metal detector would presumably detect. Yet they were not found.
It might be that the soldiers just didn't do their job properly...

[Manti]

@Manti
In the lab report it says: “When determining the type of radiation, it is established that the activity takes place due to beta particles. Alpha particles and gamma quanta were not detected.“
I think if the lab didn’t look for alpha or gamma or had no means of detecting it, they would have stated it clearly (this was a scientific lab after all).

Well the report says that a "BFA-25 meter" was used in the "lab" to detect the radiation.I haven't been able to find any information about this, but if this was a Geiger counter, even modern ones aren't usable for differentiating between α and β radiation.

And maybe you're right and alpha and gamma radiation was not "detected". The first time I read this report I interpreted it as these were "not measured", but indeed it says "detected".

It also says at the end "Expert: chief radiologist of the city of Levashov (Signed)"

Levashov is a name, presumably the radiologist's. It's not a city. Just added this to point out that these documents are not exact word by word. And we also don't know what kind of laboratory this test was done in. If this is from the chief radiologist of Sverdlovsk, I would look at it differently compared to a report from the chief radiologist of Ivdel, for example. Just because they must have had very different means and budgets.



And finally, here's a map of the fallout contamination from the Kyshtim incident:

This seems to have missed the northern Urals.
Or is the hypothesis that the dust is from high altitude nuclear tests? Wouldn't that be evenly distributed around the globe i.e. wouldn't we have findings from the US UK France China and so on, the nuclear powers, about significantly contaminated snowmelt? I'd assume this would be a risk for example in agriculture, farmed fish etc.

[sarapuk]

If a satellite with potentially sensitive data or technology on it crashed, and it had a radioactive power source, then I could see the authorities combing the area for months with Geiger counters.

Doesn't even have to be a Russian satellite, finding an American one would be even more valuable. And given the reports of fireballs in the sky, maybe they considered this a possibility?
For example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kosmos_954

But the Searchers were not looking for crashed Satellites, they were looking for the Dyatlov Group.

I'm not sure.

Of course the students from UPI were looking for the Dyatlov Group.


The military continued searching the area including with metal detectors, for months after the students all returned home.
The rest of the dead were there nearby, under the snow in the ravine, with pens in their pockets, a camera (or just it's case?), watches on their wrists, etc. things a metal detector would presumably detect. Yet they were not found.
It might be that the soldiers just didn't do their job properly...

Well if you have ever used a Metal Detector you will know just how difficult they can be to use, especially the old Military Types. Ive got a Military Detector as usd by NATO Forces in Europe towards the end of the so called Cold War. Its crude, and thats putting it bluntly. Ive also got a variety of Metal Detectors, much more sophisticated. Point is it was a big area to search in very difficult conditions. Easy to miss something.

[sarapuk]

@Manti
In the lab report it says: “When determining the type of radiation, it is established that the activity takes place due to beta particles. Alpha particles and gamma quanta were not detected.“
I think if the lab didn’t look for alpha or gamma or had no means of detecting it, they would have stated it clearly (this was a scientific lab after all).

Well the report says that a "BFA-25 meter" was used in the "lab" to detect the radiation.I haven't been able to find any information about this, but if this was a Geiger counter, even modern ones aren't usable for differentiating between α and β radiation.

And maybe you're right and alpha and gamma radiation was not "detected". The first time I read this report I interpreted it as these were "not measured", but indeed it says "detected".

It also says at the end "Expert: chief radiologist of the city of Levashov (Signed)"

Levashov is a name, presumably the radiologist's. It's not a city. Just added this to point out that these documents are not exact word by word. And we also don't know what kind of laboratory this test was done in. If this is from the chief radiologist of Sverdlovsk, I would look at it differently compared to a report from the chief radiologist of Ivdel, for example. Just because they must have had very different means and budgets.



And finally, here's a map of the fallout contamination from the Kyshtim incident:

This seems to have missed the northern Urals.
Or is the hypothesis that the dust is from high altitude nuclear tests? Wouldn't that be evenly distributed around the globe i.e. wouldn't we have findings from the US UK France China and so on, the nuclear powers, about significantly contaminated snowmelt? I'd assume this would be a risk for example in agriculture, farmed fish etc.

Problem is that you then encounter Natural Radiation which as you probably know is all around us. Natural Radiation varies from place to place and sometimes its hard to differentiate between that and say small amounts of Radiation from Nuclear Tests etc.

[Missi]

Levashov, according to the book by Rakitin, was working in Sverdlovsk. But he also states, that the institute for which Levashov was working was a strange choice to conduct the test at. I don't know.

As for the kyshtym fallout:
Yes, it did miss the northern urals. I never tried to argument that way, neither did Felix. Our idea was, that maybe someone brought contaminated clothes from the area the fallout hit to Cholat Sjachl. Yet this is not very probable for the fallout in that time consisted of many gamma quanta. Therefore the radiation detected on the clothes of our group should have those as well.
Another idea was, that there was old fallout from before the time of the moratorium, that had decayed to that extend, that only beta-emitters were left. I don't know enough to guess the probability.
It is a fact, though, that not only the fallout of soviet nuclear tests, but also those of other countries nuclear tests was distributed around the globe in different amounts. As far as I know, there are indicators showing, that people around a certain age get a lot of cancer. Those are people, who were children when the overground tests were widely conducted. People that same age didn't get as often cancer before those generations. At least that is what I've been told. I didn't read studies researching that part.

[Dr. Curious]

Guys, in my initial posting I presented EVIDENCE that high levels of radioactive contamination were measured in rivers all over the USSR from 1960 onwards due to dozens of nuclear test detonations.
(The study started in 1960 but due to the ban treaty even the levels of 1960 were a result of the same 86(!) nuclear bombs detonated before the Dyatlov incident happened.)

In posting #8 I presented another study showing that fallout contaminated rain was even measured in the Netherlands in 1959 as a result of the same nuclear tests conducted by the USSR.   
 
WE KNOW THE RADIATION WAS IN THE WATER AND WE KNOW WHERE IT CAME FROM.

That’s why I find ticking wooden boxes, helicopters, satellites or radioactive cocaine entertaining, but as long as they are speculation, they are not really helping.     
Our best chance so far seems to be finding further studies on the fallout contamination of water/snow in 1959 in the USSR or near the Dyatlov pass. : )

In this summary for example there are some 50 study references to go through. ; )
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/287069767_The_Legacies_of_Soviet_Nuclear_Testing_in_Kazakhstan_Fallout_Public_Health_and_Societal_Issues

No front and best regards!
Felix

[Dr. Curious]

In general I want to apologize for being a source- and evidence-nazi, but when handling a case as complex as this one – those things are your best friends if you don’t want to go crazy or present conclusions that cannot be taken seriously by anyone.

@Missi
The ground sample sounds very interesting. Do you have a source or further info on that? ; )
I’m also very interested in the 8000cpm in a heart being normal. I will look into that at times.
As for the relevance of the radiation concerning their deaths: To me it is no longer relevant if there is a logical and plausible explanation why it wasn’t relevant. ; ) But hey – my hypothesis isn’t bullet-proof yet – so who knows! : )

@KFinn
“And we know that this area of the region still tests high for radiation (I.e. Josh Gates testing at the site in 2018.)” – Interesting, and with a source! I will look into that. Thanks!! : )

@Missi 2
“the institute for which Levashov was working was a strange choice to conduct the test at”
-Interesting. Further info on why? Source? : )

[Manti]

By the way, I wasn't speculating about what the source of the radiation might be, but why a radiology report could have been ordered by the criminal investigator.

Maybe he was just in the dark and testing every idea?

[KFinn]

Unfortunately there are contradictions.

I've read once that the area around the tent was highly radioactive.
I've read this once in one single interview said by one single person. Well, I might have read it a few times, but always quoting that interview. It's somewhere on the front site, I believe.

As mentioned before, there's the fact that only one of the first five was buried in a zinc coffin. On the other hand zinc is not really a protection against radiation, rather against leakage.

If I remember correctly, it was Ivanov himself who said in a recent interview, that he believes the site was contaminated and that he was given a wooden box which he believes to have been a geiger counter. And that he did observe the box to have clicked wildly.
There was the argument, that at that time there was only the possibility of live readings, as in once the number on the display disappeared, it was gone and nothing was gained by the measuring.

Whatever was released in Chelyabinsk was a mixture of various emitters. The first years it seems to have been largely gamma-emitters polluting the area, nowadays the most part seems to be indeed beta-emitters to be left. According to the book I mentioned above Krivonischenko was part of the teams that checked the area for highly contaminated parts and for radioactive objects, which then where evacuated, cleaned, destroyed or whatever could be done about them. That he of all people would bring contaminated objects out of the city seems improbable. Plus the rules seem to have been really strict. Appearently it was not only forbidden to take (or keep, for that matter) contaminated objects out of the closed zones, it was also considered treason.
I don't know about Kolmogorova, but I'd suspect that the argument that most of the radiation around the time was gamma, is also valid for her.
I don't know much about Kolevatov as of now.

@KFinn:
Do you refer to the Exploration Unknown episodes when mentioning the tree cores? I was also wondering about that. I know only about one core sample. So this one might be off for some reason. Yet I do believe, they would have taken and tested more than just one. I don't know. Gotta think about that, still.

Some things you may find of interest...

Regarding Yuri Krivonischenko being the only one of the first four bodies buried in a zinc coffin and in a different cemetery, there is an interview with his brother on this site that can help you understand.  The zinc coffin was because the family feared he would have radioactive clothing from the clean up at Chalyabinsk.  At the same time, his mother still kept a suitcase with his recovered belongings under her bed, which worried the family greatly.  Coincidentally, it seemed his coffin remained closed because his father did not want the rest of the family seeing Yuri dead.  He never talked about what Yuri looked like or the incident at all to anyone.  You let the dead lie kind of mind frame.  Also, His brother attributes his father's connections with top govt officials as to why Yuri was buried in the other cemetery. 

Here is the interview with Krivo's brother: 

https://dyatlovpass.com/konstantin-krivonischenko?rbid=18461

Now, compare that to Zolotaryev who was buried in what must have been a wood coffin or something (perhaps Vietnamka (Galina Sazonova) can correct this as she was there for the exhumation, ) as it seemed he was just lying in dirt covered with rocks.  If there were fear about radiation from the river contaminating the bodies, would he not have been in a zinc coffin? 

Just points to ponder.

[Dr. Curious]

By the way, I wasn't speculating about what the source of the radiation might be, but why a radiology report could have been ordered by the criminal investigator.

Maybe he was just in the dark and testing every idea?

I hope you didn't feel offended. I get that speculation is fun and part of the reason many people are here.
As for me personally, I want to find out stuff that can actually contribute to solving the case. Because that's even more fun! 

Let's have a look at "why a radiology report could have been ordered by the criminal investigator."
a) he was just in the dark and testing every idea -> radiation from nuclear tests is evident.
b) he thought a dirty government secret had something to do with it -> radiation from nuclear tests is evident.
c) he was ordered to do so because of Kyshtim -> radiation from nuclear tests is evident.
d) it was just standard procedure -> radiation from nuclear tests is evident.
e) he told a lawyer who told another lawyer that the clothes were glowing -> radiation from nuclear tests is evident.
f) ..... -> radiation from nuclear tests is evident.
g) ... -> radiation from nuclear tests is evident.
z) . -> radiation from nuclear tests is evident.

So whatever answer you will get, it will not change the facts that are truly relevant.
Same goes for the Geiger counter, the zync coffin, etcetc as long as no strong evidence is involved.
Now that doesn't mean that my hopethesis is proven and that we shouldn't look any further - but whatever we come up with from now on should include evidence or a better explanation than we already have or at least it should lead somewhere (imho). That is, of course - if we're interested in relevant investigative work. 
: )
 

[ash73]

There's a paper on strontium filtration here:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7334999/

It's over my head but section 3 says "...strontium did not precipitate out of the test water without the addition of coagulants" which doesn't sound very encouraging.

Might be worth emailing the author of the paper, Alissa J. O'Donnell, with your question. Unfortunately she's not listed in the University of Cincinnati staff contacts, maybe it was just a student thesis.

[Dr. Curious]

Ash! Now that is something!   
The study itself seems to rely on chemical removal of Strontium whereas my hypothesis relies on mechanical filtration of dust containing it, so two different things - but it is still GREAT information!!!
And: It references other studies that tried filtering! I will look into it right away! AWESOME!
: )

Come on, people! We can do it!!! We can solve this Mofo!!!
 

[Dr. Curious]

Hi everyone!

Alright, I dumped another few hours into this thing (despite having to work;) and found some interesting information, but nothing conclusive.
I found a fantastic document from the IAEA going into great detail about radioactive fallout and what is known about it, see page 34 and following:
https://www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/Publications/PDF/TE_1663_web.pdf

The good news:
-Fallout particles can indeed be (and are) mechanically filtered by fine meshes (filters) of various kinds and shapes. But due to more effective and precise techniques available, there doesn’t seem to be data on regular clothing being used as fallout filters (who would have thought! :O)

Quote:
“In contrast to bulk samples, radioactive particles retained on filter membranes are relatively easy to identify. Unfortunately, there are few published articles on radioactive particles in aqueous systems, especially about colloids which do not settle under the force of gravity.”

All in all I conclude:
-It is evident that precipitation (solid/rain/snow) in and around Russia in that time showed radioactive fallout contamination as a result of nuclear test detonations.
-It is evident that rivers all round Russia in that time showed radioactive beta fallout contamination as a result of nuclear test detonations.
-It is evident that radioactive fallout particles can be mechanically filtered by fine meshes.
-It is likely that common clothing could be capable of filtering those particles in sufficient amounts to explain the radiation later measrured, but there is no data, no proof (yet!).

Only a test (or somebody finding better data!) could provide certainty.
Still, to me my original hypothesis gives the best and most logical explanation so far for the Dyatlov radiation mystery. If I can convince a lab to run a test which then shows positive results, I will publish an article putting all the other theories to rest for good. ; )

Anyone having an uncle working in a nuclear fallout test lab? ; )
As a matter of fact I interviewed the Director-General and high level scientists from the Joint Research Centre a couple of years ago. Maybe the JRC is willing to spend some money on this test as a publicity stunt. I will reach out to them.

Best regards!
Felix

[Missi]

Yes, Felix, you're right, we're straying further from the facts towards speculation. I'm sorry.

Here are some facts:
The radiation tests were conducted by the sanitary epidemiological station of the city Swerdlowsk. According to Rakitin Ivanov mentioned in an interview in 1990 that he also had a meeting with scientists of UFAW (the part of the academy of sciences lodged in the urals region) which isn't mentioned in the files at all. He (Rakitin) also put to question, why the tests hadn't been conducted at a lab with better hardware and suggested another, which I can't find in the book at the moment.
Anyhow, the radiation detector used by the lab (as stated be Rakitin) was called TISS. I couldn't find anything about it, though.

The radiation lab results as shown on this site name the detector as STS-6. The report states the test of a soil sample and resulting 96cpm, which is about the background radiation stated in the same report. I'm not quite sure though, if that was indeed soil taken from the mountain underneath one of the victims or rather soil found on the clothes of one of them.
But I think, one of the search reports stated it was taken from the earth itself, can't find that right now, though.

[Dr. Curious]

Hey!

Thanks! Let's hope the guys in the lab knew what they were doing - because their results are everything we have. ; )
The soil sample is interesting but doesn't seem to allow for conclusions - what do you think?

And guys! I'm sorry if I accidentally shut down the conversation here. I thought people would enjoy credible findings or that I’m now reaching out to scientists for conducting a test in order to contribute to solving the Dyatlov case?! Isn’t that what you want??

My lectures on speculation and investigative work were meant to help people to better focus their research on a potentially useful output. And I wanted people to actually help me – which some of you did!!
I’m happy with the findings and I will back off from now on, also from criticizing people for speculating. ; )

FIRE AWAY and enjoy the conversation! : )

Best regards!
Felix

[Missi]

I think I have read in an interview with one member of the search party, that the soil sample was taken from the "riverbed", so in my opinion it's relevant. I also believe, that this is an indicator for the radiation being found on the clothes is not from the overall contamination due to bomb testing, accidents and general mishandling of nuclear material, because that should be in the clothes as well as the "riverbed", if it was transported by the flowing water and earlier on by the snow.
But I'm no expert and those statements are only my understanding of these things. They would have to be put to test before being sure.

Besides that: I love speculation, but it has to be credible to be enjoyable.

[ash73]

The study itself seems to rely on chemical removal of Strontium whereas my hypothesis relies on mechanical filtration of dust containing it, so two different things

One thing to consider is what form does strontium 90 exist in water. From reading the paper I understood it to be dissolved but you're suggesting it can exist on the surface of a particle of dust, which is then filtered mechnically. The tests they did of the clothes did show a reduction after "washing" (they don't say what water they used, maybe distilled?) so you might be right. Also the holes in the warp/weft of clothing will be quite large so it would only collect large particles (I would guess over 100 microns).

I'd suggest try and get in touch with one of the authors of the papers you found, and ask them the question. They might find it interesting if you tell them what it's about.

[KFinn]

Dr. Curious, something you may find of interest here...  This is a snippet from an interview in 2007-2008 with Sharavin, one of the student searchers:

AK: Now it’s not possible to find out, but Matveeva seems to have written that they got them before the prosecutor’s arrival?

MSh: No, in my opinion they didn’t go there, they were waiting. They waited for two days and were inquiring, judging by the radiograms ... So, in my opinion, they didn’t go there, maybe just one, or something... Yes, one, it seems...

YK: Well, this question is really for those who were there. If Suvorov, it will be necessary to contact him.

MSh: Yes, he will surely have some clearer memories, because he himself was present there. Moreover, he got sick there ... well, not right away, after that he got sick. He had a suspicion that due to contaminated water, they linked his disease with the environment.


Full interview: https://dyatlovpass.com/sharavin-1?rbid=18461

[Dr. Curious]

@Missi
A statement from a search team member doesn't outweigh multiple scientific tests. At least for me it doesn't.

@Ash
Quote from the study you posted:
"X-ray diffraction analysis suggested that strontium was likely incorporated in the calcium carbonate crystal lattice (...)"

This whole fallout particle topic is so complex (the IAEA topic overview has 90 pages) that I refuse to make concrete statements outside quoting studies. xD
According to the IAEA paper fallout particles that are spread through the atmosphere (which is the case for the Dyatlov case due to the distance to the test sites) have a size between 0.1 - 64 microns.
But as far as I understand they then can attach themselves to bigger particles etc.etc.

@KFinn
Huh? What's that all about? I will take a look at it right away, thanks!!
Edit: OK I did. That for sure is interesting. I don't know if it is plausible that fallout particles would make you sick instantly but still - this suspicion alone is interesting! Thanks for pointing it out!

[Dr. Curious]

Sometimes pictures speak louder than words. : )

"According to the IAEA paper fallout particles that are spread through the atmosphere (which is the case for the Dyatlov case due to the distance to the test sites) have a size between 0.1 - 64 microns.

This is a picture of <50 micron particles:


This is a picture of a 50 micron filter:


Now imagine over a million litres containing this powder going through clothing...
I cant wait for the test! I'm sure this is possible! 

[Missi]

Dr. Curious, something you may find of interest here...  This is a snippet from an interview in 2007-2008 with Sharavin, one of the student searchers:

AK: Now it’s not possible to find out, but Matveeva seems to have written that they got them before the prosecutor’s arrival?

MSh: No, in my opinion they didn’t go there, they were waiting. They waited for two days and were inquiring, judging by the radiograms ... So, in my opinion, they didn’t go there, maybe just one, or something... Yes, one, it seems...

YK: Well, this question is really for those who were there. If Suvorov, it will be necessary to contact him.

MSh: Yes, he will surely have some clearer memories, because he himself was present there. Moreover, he got sick there ... well, not right away, after that he got sick. He had a suspicion that due to contaminated water, they linked his disease with the environment.


Full interview: https://dyatlovpass.com/sharavin-1?rbid=18461

That sure is interesting. Didn't come across that one, yet.

@Missi
A statement from a search team member doesn't outweigh multiple scientific tests. At least for me it doesn't.

You're right, I'd say so as well. But I think you won't find a scientific test telling you were and when the sample was taken. I fear you will be forced to rely on the testimony of those who have taken it or were close at the time of taking.
At least I have not found anything better and more reliable concerning the question were the soil sample was taken.

[ash73]

Full interview: https://dyatlovpass.com/sharavin-1?rbid=18461

How old was he when he did that interview? It's interesting how they incorporate their own theories into the facts, I can imagine in the evenings of the search there will have been a lot of gossip around the campfires.

Interesting he mentions 7 or 8 thick branches in the den that had been cut by an axe... but they didn't have an axe. I'm also curious about the thick branches on the cedar fire, they wouldn't break easily. All they had were pocket knives.

[Missi]

This way or another, the interview took place about 48 years after the incident happened. That's a pretty long time and the memory can be deceiving. Whatever he might think has happened will influence his memories, making them fit to his hypothesis, so after all these years, he's probably not that trustworthy after all. Not to accuse him of lying, I don't think he's lying in the sense of consciously telling something wrong.

[KFinn]

This way or another, the interview took place about 48 years after the incident happened. That's a pretty long time and the memory can be deceiving. Whatever he might think has happened will influence his memories, making them fit to his hypothesis, so after all these years, he's probably not that trustworthy after all. Not to accuse him of lying, I don't think he's lying in the sense of consciously telling something wrong.

All witness testimony is subject to inaccuracy; its like standing around a statue.  I see one side, you see the other, but none of us see the whole statue.  That is why you have to confirm with other witnesses, evidence, etc.  Take for example the nurse who helped in the morgue.  By the time she was being interviewed, she had dementia and fifty years had passed.  But, her story stayed consistent every time she told it.  Was she reliable?  No.  Was her story, however?  Its plausible.  Rakitin, whom I believe you've been reading, wrote his books in the 1990's.  Is he reliable?  He had an agenda, certainly.  That doesn't make him reliable or not reliable.  It adds to the overall picture.

In the case of DPI, you have to continue digging.  You have to continue reading statements, interviews, etc.  You will not come to the same conclusions that I do and vice versa.  We are looking at this from different sides of the statue.  You have to consider *everything* everyone says and be willing to throw out *everything* that everyone says.  Its discernment.   

[Missi]

That's certainly true, what you say. All I wanted to say was, that while an interview conducted in 1959 might be subjective it can be expected to be more accurate than one conducted in say 2009, when in addition to the subjectivity there's also the change in memory that happens during the years, especially if you have your own theory as to what might have happened and you unconsciously bend your memory to fit your theory.

By the way: Although dementia makes people forget details and therefor changes their stories, there's also the possibility of stories staying coherent once in a state of dementia.
Example:
My grandma suffered from dementia (although I'm not quite sure if in the end it wasn't rather us suffering from her dementia than she herself, but that's another topic completely...). She used to tell us stories from when she was a child, going on hikes with her stepfather. I loved those stories a lot and encouraged her to tell them. When her dementia started, she told often the same stories until I knew them by heart. I was aghast when suddenly she spoke of herself as a little blonde girl although all her life she had been brunette (until her hair got grey and was colored blonde). But besides that fact and the increase in frequency of her telling the same stories, those stories stayed consistent and didn't change.
That being said: I wouldn't take a consistency in storytelling as a sign to prove against dementia. It's just a lack of a sign for dementia.

As for Rakitin: The more I read the less reliable I consider him. He complains about people leaving facts out of their theories because those don't fit. Yet there are many things he leaves out and doesn't mention. Not sure whether he just considers them as unimportant or whether they kill his theory. For example he mentions the part of the autopsy in which was stated that Ljuda was a virgin, leaves out the part stating the same about Zina. But then he doesn't make a case about the incident having anything to do with the women at all, so maybe he just doesn't care. It leaves me suspicious nonetheless.

[KFinn]

That's certainly true, what you say. All I wanted to say was, that while an interview conducted in 1959 might be subjective it can be expected to be more accurate than one conducted in say 2009, when in addition to the subjectivity there's also the change in memory that happens during the years, especially if you have your own theory as to what might have happened and you unconsciously bend your memory to fit your theory.

By the way: Although dementia makes people forget details and therefor changes their stories, there's also the possibility of stories staying coherent once in a state of dementia.
Example:
My grandma suffered from dementia (although I'm not quite sure if in the end it wasn't rather us suffering from her dementia than she herself, but that's another topic completely...). She used to tell us stories from when she was a child, going on hikes with her stepfather. I loved those stories a lot and encouraged her to tell them. When her dementia started, she told often the same stories until I knew them by heart. I was aghast when suddenly she spoke of herself as a little blonde girl although all her life she had been brunette (until her hair got grey and was colored blonde). But besides that fact and the increase in frequency of her telling the same stories, those stories stayed consistent and didn't change.
That being said: I wouldn't take a consistency in storytelling as a sign to prove against dementia. It's just a lack of a sign for dementia.

As for Rakitin: The more I read the less reliable I consider him. He complains about people leaving facts out of their theories because those don't fit. Yet there are many things he leaves out and doesn't mention. Not sure whether he just considers them as unimportant or whether they kill his theory. For example he mentions the part of the autopsy in which was stated that Ljuda was a virgin, leaves out the part stating the same about Zina. But then he doesn't make a case about the incident having anything to do with the women at all, so maybe he just doesn't care. It leaves me suspicious nonetheless.

This is why discernment is so important.  There us useful information to be gained from everyone, if you can limit the background noise.  There are books out there on DPI that have some really erroneous claims.  But, they still have some factual information.  You have to keep digging to find out if it is useful or not, but you cannot completely disavow everything because it contains mistakes.  You sift through, research, find the primary sources and decide whether it is important or not. Yes, Sharavin's later interview was in 2007-2008.  His earlier interview was in 2000, still decades later.  But, his story has not changed since he found the tent with Slobstov and the first two bodies under the cedar tree with Koptelev.  And because he was a primary source, he still has useful information.  He added to his story as more information came out, such as his fellow peer getting (what I assume is) cancer, which at least they believe is from radiation at Dyatlov Pass.  So, we dig deeper and see what we can find on his friend.  He is in several pictures from the search in 1959.  We know he was on the pass at the end of April and took part in finding the last four bodies.  So, now we try to find out more about him; is he still alive?  Does he have relatives who are open to discussion?  Has anyone here on the forum spoken to him or have an interview with him?  There may be nothing to it; it could be  completely a dead end.  But, it would be a data point on the theme of the original discussion topic. 

In my career, we focused a lot on patterns of behavior.  Everything has one, whether its a person or weather or animal or machine.  Even something totally unpredictable has a pattern in that it behaves randomly; you can rely on that or it wouldn't be unpredictable.  Matching evidence via interviews and witness testimonies is a big part of following a pattern of behavior.  Sharavin says A.  Does anyone else say A, too?  We go back to the case files to look.  Grigoriev's notes are really interesting in that he writes down almost everything he hears and thinks.  What about Koptelev who was with Sharavin?  What can we find about what he has to say?  If he says the same thing, and perhaps Grigoriev heard it, too, there is a pattern we can start tracking to decide if there is something relevant or not.  We do have witness statements from Slobstov.  What does he corroborate?

I find it interesting that Ivanov never got a witness statement from Sharavin.  Now, Sharavin was hospitalized at the tail end of April but Ivanov had almost two months before that to get a witness statement from him.  He found the first two bodies and yet, no testimony...

[Missi]

You put that in beautiful words.

And indeed, that is an interesting point in the story... Also: Is known why he went to hospital?

[ash73]

Also: Is known why he went to hospital?

He decided to go skiing one lunch time during the search, smacked into a tree and gave himself concussion.