This theory is about the presumptive frame series of the camera found on Zolotaryov's Body, read about it here:
https://dyatlovpass.com/controversy?flp=1#zolotaryovcameraValentin Yakimenko, who was a fellow student to the Dyatlov group and a member of the rescue team, presented at the Ural Federal University at the annual Dyatlov Conference 2015 examination of the films in the group cameras. He claims Zolotaryov grabbed his camera to take a picture of some lights in the sky. According to Yakimenko two of the negatives seem to depict a section of rocket or plane which may have broken off after a failed military experiment of possibly a two stage rocket launch.
Yakimenko says that the film was scrawled with Zolotaryov's name while non of the other films was tagged or labeled. We only lately speculate about the authorship of the photos on the films, so the fact that the only camera that was found on somebody's body was good enough reason to inscribe it. I don't think that reasons to allude there was special attention to that particular film.
"These photographs are a clear indication, of fallen angel/higher level demonic involvement, several of which, appear to capture, a partial physical manifestation, of a higher level, shape shifting demon... Yakimenko describes some of the photos as having 'A small, but very bright object', or being 'A bright little dot', which is typical of fallen angels and/or higher level demons, manifesting in orb form, that people mistakenly refer to as aliens or UFOs." Author Cora Hull Fallen Angels Exposed.
This theory is mostly based on the genius discovery of user "time2fly" here:
https://forum.dyatlovpass.com/index.php?topic=648.msg11079#msg11079
The 1st frame in Zolotaryov's presumptive frame series is actually a magnified CUTOUT of frame 34 from Krivonischenko's camera.I think it is probable that actually none of the pictures Yakimenko provided are from the camera on Zolotaryov's Body:- If Yakimenko misrepresented the origin of the first frame, he may have misrepresented the origin of the other frames as well
- Because of the visible sprocket holes and the size of scratches, we know that at least the majority of these pictures are highly magnified cutouts
- If Yakimenko had access to the Zolotaryov negative, why did he never release the unmagnified version?
- Why would he only bring this up in 2015, more than 60 years later?
- He clearly has an agenda to push his angels theory
If you look through the other pictures from the groups, there are loads of spots/defects that look, when magnified, very similar to the "bright lights" of Yakimenko.
Look at the upper right corner of this image for example:
How could we prove this?Simple, compare the "bright lights" images to spots/defects on all the other pictures and find matches.
Some caveats though:
- We don't know if Yakimenko scanned from negatives or positives, so a "bright light" could actually be a dark spot on a known picture
- There are sprocket holes visible in some of them, so the cutout is from the very edge of the frame, this may have been cut off in the images available online
- It may be that he took these cutouts from negatives entirely unrelated to the case.
Maybe we could use some sort of image software that compares the shape of the "bright lights" to the shape of defects on all the other frames?
Topic: I think NONE of the "bright lights" pictures are from Zolotaryov's camera (Read 16759 times)