• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.
They could well have succumbed to hypothermia in the tent, and left it in a deluded attempt to "cool off".

Zolotaryov fought in WW2 from 1941 - 1946 where survival for a guy of his age was put at 3%. it's odd that a veteran who'd experienced such extreme cold would have succumbed to this.

I'd love to know more of his military history but google isn't turning anything up.
 
So guys, let's pin our own theories to the mast in scenario form..:)
Here's mine-
The guy who claimed the Dyatlov group had stolen his wallet at Serov railway station got some of his mates together (let's call them the W-group) and went after the D-group, eventually catching up with them at their campsite.
W's- "Hey you in the tent! Give us that wallet back!"
D's- "Clear off!"
W's- "Look, either you come out or we come in!"
D's- "We said clear off!"

The W's then started furiously slashing the tent with knives.
Now the D-group became furious and grabbed knives/hatchets of their own and come lunging out of the tent and all hell breaks loose, that's why the ski pole (a vital clue because it didn't belong to the Dyatlovs), was found by searchers with cut marks on it, possibly because it was used to deflect the Dyatlov's knife/hatchet attacks.
At this point both groups went completely berserk and it became a kill-or-be-killed situation, but because the W's had arrived better armed (e.g. with clubs/bats), they had the upper hand and began swinging wildly, and D's bones and skulls began cracking, so the D's fled in panic, dragging their wounded down to the trees, intending to return to the tent later after the W's had gone.
But sadly hypothermia got them before they could get back to the tent.
 
Personally, I suspect the bare bones are the effects of extreme, and worsening, environmental conditions exacerbated by internal tensions within the group - the tipping point being an apparently ill-advised change of plan.
 
So guys, let's pin our own theories to the mast in scenario form..:)
Here's mine-
The guy who claimed the Dyatlov group had stolen his wallet at Serov railway station got some of his mates together (let's call them the W-group) and went after the D-group, eventually catching up with them at their campsite.
W's- "Hey you in the tent! Give us that wallet back!"
D's- "Clear off!"
W's- "Look, either you come out or we come in!"
D's- "We said clear off!"

The W's then started furiously slashing the tent with knives.
Now the D-group became furious and grabbed knives/hatchets of their own and come lunging out of the tent and all hell breaks loose, that's why the ski pole (a vital clue because it didn't belong to the Dyatlovs), was found by searchers with cut marks on it, possibly because it was used to deflect the Dyatlov's knife/hatchet attacks.
At this point both groups went completely berserk and it became a kill-or-be-killed situation, but because the W's had arrived better armed (e.g. with clubs/bats), they had the upper hand and began swinging wildly, and D's bones and skulls began cracking, so the D's fled in panic, dragging their wounded down to the trees, intending to return to the tent later after the W's had gone.
But sadly hypothermia got them before they could get back to the tent.


From what I remember there was only a cut mark at the back of the tent made by someone trying to get out in a hurry not in.

I do agree something strange and bad happened but I don't think it was the conditions. If you look at how Scott died it was a gradual death caused by being ill-prepared, terrible weather, exhaustion, (they'd been starving within days as the diet was insufficient to the task). They should not have taken Evans or Oates along for the last haul. If they'd taken Tom Crean they might have survived.

This group was experienced and well prepared.

They left the tent without boots on due to the foot-washing ritual which Dylatov insisted on. That suggest an awful panic. I don't think it was an avalanche mainly due to the terrain.

I really don't believe it was mass paradoxical removal of clothes. Take Scott again. He was the only one that had possibly attempted to remove clothes when his body was found. At Daylatov some, (sorry memory about hazy), seemed to have recovered enough to try and put clothes back on, others Zolotaryov is one had used clothes from others that had died earlier and there seems to have been attempts to get back to the tent, people climbed trees etc.

Studies into Paradoxical Undressing suggest this and Terminal Burrowing is the last gasp unconscious attempt to save themselves and at that point Hypothermia is usually fatal. There was too much reasoning involved after the incident to put it down to Paradoxical Undressing - they even got it together to build a fire - that's not people suffering from cold-induced delirium.

Yes Hypothermia probably finished them off eventually but I don't believe it lead them to flee the tent. It also doesn't explain the physical trauma suffered by some of them.

I don't agree with your idea they were murdered by a guy who was pissed off with having his wallet stolen. If you've ever done any serious hiking in out they way areas it takes time to prepare and you have to really want to go, If they did pull it off why has no one said a word after all these years? You also got Zolotarvov in the party I'm fairly sure he'd have accounted for at least one of the attackers.

I don't agree with a member of the group going berserk. Even they relatively unknown Zolotaryov was carefree and a physical education teacher and guide and he didn't survive either. Also I recall there was no evidence of hand to hand combat.

Basically we are left with something so sudden and terrifying led the group to flee the tent. Something also may have caused severe trauma to several of the group. What it was? That's the mystery.
 
Last edited:
Most of the speculations over the decades have unquestioningly adopted the presumptions that:

- the Dyatlov group fled the tent and moved down into the wooded valley together; and
- they did so in a state of panic.

There's no compelling evidence supporting these presumptions.

We know at least 8 of the 9 folks walked down-slope following the same path for the first 500 meters (the length of the trail traced by the searchers). Some footprints diverged off the main set of footprints but eventually rejoined them.

The investigators specifically noted the footprints provided no indications of running or panic.

None of this proves they all fled down-slope together at the same time.

Their bodies were eventually discovered at 3 different sites below, at one of which were 3 bodies (including Dyatlov's) oriented so as to suggest they were headed back up to the tent when they expired.

Without footprint evidence we have no idea how closely everyone followed the same path the final circa 750 - 1000 meters (depending on whose distance figures you use).

We also have no solid basis for knowing who was where and when. The 3 who died heading back up to the tent site could just as reasonably have been an initial scouting party who never returned as the final desperate survivors retreating after finding the others dead and / or missing.

I would also point out that the collapsed and partially buried state of the tent when discovered could have occurred during the 2 weeks between the apparent fatal night and the day searchers located the final campsite. In other words, we don't know for certain the tent site was completely wrecked at the time some or all the party elected to abandon it.
 
There has been some great discussion about the incident over the last few days, worthy of being written up into an article.
 
Most of the speculations over the decades have unquestioningly adopted the presumptions that:

- the Dyatlov group fled the tent and moved down into the wooded valley together; and
- they did so in a state of panic.

There's no compelling evidence supporting these presumptions.

We know at least 8 of the 9 folks walked down-slope following the same path for the first 500 meters (the length of the trail traced by the searchers). Some footprints diverged off the main set of footprints but eventually rejoined them.

The investigators specifically noted the footprints provided no indications of running or panic.

None of this proves they all fled down-slope together at the same time.

Their bodies were eventually discovered at 3 different sites below, at one of which were 3 bodies (including Dyatlov's) oriented so as to suggest they were headed back up to the tent when they expired.

Without footprint evidence we have no idea how closely everyone followed the same path the final circa 750 - 1000 meters (depending on whose distance figures you use).

We also have no solid basis for knowing who was where and when. The 3 who died heading back up to the tent site could just as reasonably have been an initial scouting party who never returned as the final desperate survivors retreating after finding the others dead and / or missing.

I would also point out that the collapsed and partially buried state of the tent when discovered could have occurred during the 2 weeks between the apparent fatal night and the day searchers located the final campsite. In other words, we don't know for certain the tent site was completely wrecked at the time some or all the party elected to abandon it.

I think panic is much more plausible than Paradoxical Undressing.
 
From what I remember there was only a cut mark at the back of the tent made by someone trying to get out in a hurry not in. ...

There were multiple gashes and holes along the length of the tent by the time investigators arrived on the scene.

One very complicating factor is that the searchers who initially discovered the tent site (and were personally acquainted with Dyatlov) admitted they'd hacked holes in the tent to survey its interior and contents.

It's therefore unclear how many of the cuts / gashes / holes were present when the searchers first arrived, versus the greater degree of damage recorded for the tent as recovered / examined.

Here are two sketches illustrating the state of the tent when investigators arrived. The first one is the reconstruction of the tent as it was found. The second one illustrates the locations of damages as if the tent were properly erected.

3738_html_m59dc699.jpg


Tent-Cuts-Summary.jpg

The first sketch illustrates the location of a working flashlight atop the tent near its entrance. This sketch also illustrates the location of the fabled 'broken to pieces ski pole' near the far (rear) end of the tent.

Dyatlov's tent was supported by guy lines held up by skis and ski poles when erected with no trees around it. This was the setup motif the last / fatal encampment.

I would point out that the collapse of the tent's rear portion and breakage of a ski pole almost certainly employed as a rigging support, combined with the knowledge of high winds on the fatal night, both explains the broken pole and suggests it was related to the tent's collapse (whether on the fatal night or later).
 
..I don't agree with your idea they were murdered by a guy who was pissed off with having his wallet stolen. If you've ever done any serious hiking in out they way areas it takes time to prepare and you have to really want to go, If they did pull it off why has no one said a word after all these years? You also got Zolotarvov in the party I'm fairly sure he'd have accounted for at least one of the attackers..

1- The guy might have been a member of another hiking group waiting for a train connection at Serov station, so he and his mates would have been well equipped to go after the Dyatlov's to get his wallet back, seething with anger.

2-None of the attackers have said anything in in all the years afterwards because they don't want to end up in jail.
However as the incident occurred 59 years ago, it's quite possible that some of the attackers are still alive, aged in their 70's and 80's, so it's feasible one of them may yet spill the beans in a deathbed confession.

3- Yes, some of the attackers might have been hurt in the incident which would account for the bruises on some of the Dyatlov's knuckles found at the autopsies-
Extract from McCloskeys book 'Mountain of the Dead'-
p 71-76- "George Krivonischenko..bruises on hands..
Igor Dyatlov...bruises in the area of the Metacarpophalangeal joints of the right hand. A common injury in fights using fists.
Yuri Doroshenko- the fingers of both hands had torn skin.
Rustem Slobodin- bruises..in both hands."


But returning to the vital "ski pole"clue that indicates somebody else was at the campsite (below), until somebody can explain it my "murder" theory is the most logical answer to the mystery..:)-
p 61- "..a ski pole, which has been the subject of controversy, as none of the group were known to have a ski pole.
The pole had been damaged by having cutting marks made on it. There was no obvious explanation for the pole, i.e. how it had got there, or how and why it was damaged."
 
Last edited:
..Their bodies were eventually discovered at 3 different sites..at one of which were 3 bodies (including Dyatlov's) oriented so as to suggest they were headed back up to the tent when they expired..

Yes that would tie in with my earlier speculation that they fled down to the trees to get away from the attackers with the intention of returning to the tent later after the attackers had gone, but sadly hypothermia got them before they could make it.
 
... But returning to the vital "ski pole"clue that indicates somebody else was at the campsite (below), until somebody can explain it my "murder" theory is the most logical answer to the mystery..:)-
p 61- "..a ski pole, which has been the subject of controversy, as none of the group were known to have a ski pole.
The pole had been damaged by having cutting marks made on it. There was no obvious explanation for the pole, i.e. how it had got there, or how and why it was damaged."

Do either McCloskey or you know what a ski pole is?

In the event there's any confusion or ambiguity ...

It's any one of the two items each of the party is holding in his / her hands as they ascended the pass on the last known day of travel - the day preceding the presumptively fatal night.

0_5fa5e_3c1645fc_L.jpg

It's any one of the vertically standing items (other than skis) clearly visible in the background of the two final photos showing the party digging out the place where they pitched the tent the last time.

0_607a0_e5a076cc_L.jpg


0_607a1_8d0261c9_L.jpg

 
Yes that would tie in with my earlier speculation that they fled down to the trees to get away from the attackers with the intention of returning to the tent later after the attackers had gone, but sadly hypothermia got them before they could make it.

Then how is it that these attackers left no footprints, and the Dyatlov party's footprints showed no indication of running?
 
There were multiple gashes and holes along the length of the tent by the time investigators arrived on the scene.
One very complicating factor is that the searchers who initially discovered the tent site (and were personally acquainted with Dyatlov) admitted they'd hacked holes in the tent to survey its interior and contents..
I would point out that the collapse of the tent's rear portion and breakage of a ski pole almost certainly employed as a rigging support, combined with the knowledge of high winds on the fatal night, both explains the broken pole and suggests it was related to the tent's collapse (whether on the fatal night or later).

1- Whether or not the searchers made additional slashes to get into the tent is interesting, but the fact remains the tent was already slashed when they first found it. Below is the tent after being set up for examination later back at the searchers HQ-

Dyatlov_Pass5_zps9f650004.jpg~original


2- Regarding the mystery ski pole, can you give us links to whatever report on the incident you were reading? I've read (in McCloskey's book) that it "had cut marks on it" but there's no mention of it being broken.
The book also says the pole didn't belong to the Dyatlovs.
Anyway as a hiker/camper myself, I never take ski poles to help peg out my tent as I've never needed them.
 
1- Whether or not the searchers made additional slashes to get into the tent is interesting, but the fact remains the tent was already slashed when they first found it. Below is the tent after being set up for examination later back at the searchers HQ- ...

Correction ... The tent was already torn / ripped / holed when the searchers found it.

The interpretation that one or more of the original holes (most particularly the long slit at the back end of the tent) represented cuts made from inside the tent didn't arise until the tent was recovered, transported back to town, and inspected.

This interpretation was the one presented at the inquest hearing. It was based on the relative lack of raveling on the thread ends and the direction the thread ends appeared to be pointing when inspected back in town.

There is no question the original discoverers of the tent hacked their way into it. They noted this, and it was documented, at the time.
 
Do either McCloskey or you know what a ski pole is?
In the event there's any confusion or ambiguity ...
It's any one of the two items each of the party is holding in his / her hands as they ascended the pass on the last known day of travel - the day preceding the presumptively fatal night.


It's any one of the vertically standing items (other than skis) clearly visible in the background of the two final photos showing the party digging out the place where they pitched the tent the last time.



Nevertheless, a ski pole found at the tent didn't belong to the Dyatlovs.
Yuri Yudin (who left the Dyatlov group en route because of illness) was asked to identify everything found at the scene, so presumably he pointed at the pole and said "that's not theirs".
Interestingly, he also said that other items found were also not theirs, which further reinforces my theory that somebody else was involved in their deaths, and that the perpetrators left the scene without picking up some of their property that had been lost in the fight.
Yudin's own theory is that the military did it.

News item from 2013- "Yuri Yudin, who has died aged 75, was the only surviving member of a party of Russian students who perished in mysterious circumstances in 1959 in what became known as the Dyatlov Pass Incident.
..he..rose to become an administrator in the Solikamsk Perm region of Russia. He always felt that the Soviet military had probably been responsible in some way.
In an interview last year [2012] he recalled that he had been asked to identify the owner of everything found at the scene, but had failed to find a match for a piece of cloth that seemed to be of military origin, or for a pair of glasses, a pair of skis and a piece of a ski, leading him to suspect that the military had found the tent before the volunteer rescuers.
"If I had a chance to ask God just one question, it would be, 'What really happened to my friends that night?’" Yudin said.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/obituaries/10026000/Yuri-Yudin.html
 
Last edited:
... Regarding the mystery ski pole, can you give us links to whatever report on the incident you were reading? I've read (in McCloskey's book) that it "had cut marks on it" but there's no mention of it being broken.
The book also says the pole didn't belong to the Dyatlovs. ...

Where online resources were cited, the links can be found in my postings from years ago.

Among the various reports and documents I've reviewed about this incident I've always prioritized the original diaries, investigative reports, interviews with search party participants, and of course the inquest transcripts (all in Russian).

I also tend to give more credence to the retrospective analyses from fellow skiers and mountaineers than to the sensationalized mass-market tomes, which I've generally found to omit as much as they mention, to mention mostly only what's simply recycled / regurgitated from similar authors, and to put massive spin on what little of the case they actually present.
 
Correction ... The tent was already torn / ripped / holed when the searchers found it..

Yes that's what I said, so why does it need 'correction'?
As I pointed out, if the searchers made additional cuts to get in, that doesn't alter the fact that the tent was already cut when they first found it..:)
 
Where online resources were cited, the links can be found in my postings from years ago..

Thanks, but to save us time having to trawl through ancient threads, perhaps you can give us your own latest up-to-the- minute May 2018 cutting edge theory as to what exactly happened?..:)
 
Waymarker said- "..my earlier speculation..they fled down to the trees to get away from the attackers with the intention of returning to the tent later after the attackers had gone, but sadly hypothermia got them before they could make it."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Then how is it that these attackers left no footprints, and the Dyatlov party's footprints showed no indication of running?


The Dyatlov's and the attackers footprints may well have been mixed up, so who's to say for sure which belonged to which group?
Anyway it puzzles me how anybody could leave footprints in deep powdery snow, plus the tent was found 25 days after the incident and a lot of extra snow/blizzards could have fallen in the meantime.
 
Yes that's what I said, so why does it need 'correction'?
As I pointed out, if the searchers made additional cuts to get in, that doesn't alter the fact that the tent was already cut when they first found it..:)

My point is that the interpretation of the original (as of the searchers' arrival) hole(s) as 'cuts' came afterward, based on the state of the canvas after it had been retrieved, transported, set up back in town, thawed out, and inspected.

The problem this raises is that such folding / handling / etc. is known to affect the disposition of thread ends and progressively reduce confidence in any ability to distinguish incisions / cuts from tears / rips.

None of the initial reports mentioned so much as a suggestion that the hole(s) represented cuts made to allow the occupants to escape.

Whether on the presumptive fatal night or afterward, the holes found in the tent could just as reasonably be explained as tears or rips in a canvas subjected to high winds and buffeting while exposed on the flank of the mountain.

The weather conditions were known to have been terrible that last night - sufficiently so to drive another party on another mountain circa 35(?) km to the east / southeast (Chistop) to descend in the dark for fear of their lives.

The evidence for tearing / ripping versus cutting is equivocal at best. The cutting-from-within meme makes for a more dramatic narrative, so it's no surprise subsequent authors tended to seize on this interpretation.
 
Thanks, but to save us time having to trawl through ancient threads, perhaps you can give us your own latest up-to-the- minute May 2018 cutting edge theory as to what exactly happened?..:)

One of the remarkable things about the Dyatlov incident is that, although a historical case which predates us by decades, it's emergence and subsequent growth into a wider public consciousness has taken place well within the life of this message board. The easily accessible sources were so sparse barely ten years ago that some of us (I'm not ashamed to say myself included) suspected at first that the whole thing might be a film pitch. Therefore, this thread to some extent represents a timeline of the way a truly fascinating story has slowly unfurled itself into our consciousness - and I would suggest that anyone really interested in the case could do a lot worse things with their time than to read through it.
 
(EnolaGaia: I'm going to have to stop liking your posts, I'll get blisters on my finger - just take it as read.

Write a book, man.)
 
Actually, one thing I've never been able to fathom. As far as I can work out, the story took a foothold on the internet around maybe 2007/2008, and rapidly started to grow from that point.

I've always wondered if prior to this it was more widely known within the former USSR, or whether that state's aversion to perceived failure, and its pathological tight fistedness with information, meant that it was also very little known at home as well.
 
Thanks, but to save us time having to trawl through ancient threads, perhaps you can give us your own latest up-to-the- minute May 2018 cutting edge theory as to what exactly happened?..:)

We'll probably never know exactly what happened once the Dyatlov party concluded they were in a sufficient amount of trouble to take action. There are too many possible variations / permutations that can be derived from the available evidence.

The part of the story that can be addressed with the most confidence is the situation into which they put themselves and the factors preceding that situation that contributed to dooming them. The key elements include:

- Early in the expedition Dyatlov had been advised there were 2 ways to approach Ortoten from the south. One was to cross the pass, establish a cache (in the valley where they died), then ascend to Ortoten through the foothills. This was the original plan. The other option was to follow the summer path used by horseback trekkers above the treeline. It's not clear that taking the summer path negated the notion of establishing their cache in the valley into which they eventually fled.

- Their diary entries indicate Dyatlov was leaning toward shifting to using the summer path and staying above the treeline.

- They were fatigued after a difficult trudge to ascend the pass (as illustrated in one of the photos above).

- They'd turned back the previous day after initially attempting the ascent and finding the weather conditions too daunting to proceed.

- As of the fatal night they'd gone 2 days without using their stove, building a fire, or having a hot meal.

- They'd changed their plan after being turned back on their first ascent attempt, to the extent of building their cache south of the pass instead of north of the pass. This change may have occurred the morning after turning back from the first ascent attempt. As recently as the penultimate night Zina's journal entries indicated they were still intending to build their cache on the far (northern) side of the pass.

- Upon gaining the crest of the pass, they found themselves in heavy weather. Some claim they drifted westward atop the pass (toward the eventual tent site) because they were lost. I don't buy this interpretation. They had maps, and they'd plotted the route and reviewed it among themselves. They had every reason to know they simply had to cross over and ski downhill to end up in the originally intended valley location.

- Given the difficult weather conditions, one must wonder why Dyatlov kept the party up on the pass and pitched camp there. One possible reason is because it was late in the day (approaching 1700) and the light was failing. It's also been suggested that the party (or at least Dyatlov) had finally decided to follow the higher summer route, and camping at elevation was consistent with staying above the treeline. It's even been suggested that they stayed above the treeline as a self-test of their winter camping prowess (they were, after all, expecting to receive the highest - Class III - certification for the trip).

- The incursion of Arctic air on the fatal night dropped the temperature far below anything they'd yet encountered or probably expected. There's no reason to doubt the weather conditions were at least as fearsome as the ones that drove the similar party off Chistop the same night.

- With or without any abrupt motivating event (snow slip; lights in the sky; infrasound from the high winds, etc.) I believe they realized sometime during the night that their exposed position was dangerously untenable. They may or may not have been suffering the early effects of hypothermia by the time they abandoned the tent.

Past this ramp-up phase, it's anybody's guess what happened when. They may or may not have left the tent site and descended into the valley as a single group. They may have sent an advance party to scout the forest and signal (with a flashlight) to cue the rest of the group to come join them.

All 3 locations where the bodies were eventually found indicated proactive attempts to survive. Dyatlov and 2 others succumbed while attempting to get back uphill to the tent. The two found at 'The Cedar' were co-located with a fire they apparently couldn't keep burning. The 4 found at the 'den' / 'ravine' site were co-located with a burrow that had been dug out and its floor lined with branches (not simply paradoxical burrowing behavior).

The way I see it, here are the bottom lines:

- They'd obviously over-stretched their abilities and strength getting to the fatal site in the first place.

- It's hard to consider their decision to camp up on the mountain's flank reasonable, particularly since a few minutes' additional skiing would have placed them down into the forested area into which they'd eventually flee.

- They were camped in a riskily over-exposed location, even for the weather conditions they'd already encountered atop the pass.

- The weather conditions got much worse during the night - if nothing else, because the temperature plummeted precipitously.

- They attempted to retreat into the valley below and simply survive the night, but all were eventually overwhelmed by circumstances (and, at the 'ravine' site, by accident(s)).

- The autopsy results indicated they'd all died within circa 8 hours of sharing their final meal - most probably in the wee hours between midnight and dawn.

- The exact timeline and storyline for how their evacuation, trials, and deaths played out will probably never be known.

- Regardless of the suggestive and even lurid glosses and spins applied by later writers, there's nothing substantive to indicate this was anything other than a tragic accident or misadventure involving the Dyatlov party alone.
 
Then how is it that these attackers left no footprints, and the Dyatlov party's footprints showed no indication of running?


This.

Waymarker, your theory would be far more interesting than what likely happened. But nevertheless there's just no evidence to support a group of attackers having arrived at the camp. If they had? There would have been evidence of a trail into the camp from another direction. A whole set of other footprints leading to the camp. Because even the most lightfooted individual is still going to leave a trace oif their movements. There is no evidence to support that.

And as EnolaGaia points out if the group were attacked then those footprints from the group as they left the camp would show signs of panic. You ever try to run in snow? It's not easy. You'll chuff up the snow trying hastily to gain traction. If that happened there would be clear signs of it. There weren't.
 
Actually, one thing I've never been able to fathom. As far as I can work out, the story took a foothold on the internet around maybe 2007/2008, and rapidly started to grow from that point.

The key point is that it was after the turn of the century that the story proliferated in the West. A lot of the mystery imparted to the story results from the barrier caused by the original documentation, testimony from persons directly involved (e.g., Yudin; Ivanov), and substantial debates over the details being in Russian.


I've always wondered if prior to this it was more widely known within the former USSR, or whether that state's aversion to perceived failure, and its pathological tight fistedness with information, meant that it was also very little known at home as well.

The story was always more widely known, and documented, within the Soviet Union. One must bear in mind that the official verdict was essentially 'accident' or 'act of God', so the rampant second-guessing we know today wasn't in effect. The story had plenty of time to fade from memory by the time the USSR collapsed.

I'm not sure whether, or to what extent, the story may have been repressed 'from above'. There are two peripheral factors that may have given a bureaucrat pause. Any allusions to lights in the sky may have triggered secrecy owing to connections with general military usage of the fatal area for training and exercises and / or details of the space launches that would have overflown the area. The trace amounts of radioactivity found on X's (I don't remember which one's) clothing resulted from his having participated in the cleanup of a nuclear accident the Soviets wouldn't admit for decades, and this would have been an even stronger incentive to bury the affair.

To the extent I know the publication history it seems that the story got renewed publicity circa 1990, as the Soviet Union opened up and disintegrated. That's when a book by an Anatoly Gushchin appeared, entitled something like 'The Price of State Secrets was Nine Lives." That's also when the head investigator in 1959 (Lev Ivanov) published an essay about the case (to the best of my knowledge, his first public statement on the matter).
 
Waymarker said to EnolaGaia- can give us your own latest up-to-the- minute May 2018 cutting edge theory as to what exactly happened"..:)
----------------------------------------------------------------
[snip]...there's nothing substantive to indicate this was anything other than a tragic accident or misadventure involving the Dyatlov party alone.

Hmm..forgive my skepticism, but I'm puzzled how they could have "accidentally" abandoned the tent and gone down to the trees in subzero temperatures at night?
PS- I read somewhere that their tent had a lace-up door instead of a zipper, so they hung a curtain over the door end to keep out the draught whistling through the lace holes. That could be one explanation why they slashed the tent in an emergency to get out quickly rather than spend time fumbling with the curtain and laces in the dark.
One theory I've heard was that their stove was giving off carbon monoxide fumes that were choking them, so they slashed to get some fresh air, but even that wouldn't explain why they then went down to the trees.
But yet I read somewhere else that their stove wasn't turned on that night, so there are many theories and counter-theories whizzing around!
The only cold hard facts we have to go on are that they abandoned the tent and went to their deaths, and that Yuri Yudin said some items found at the abandoned tent didn't belong to any of the group.
 
Last edited:
... Yuri Yudin (who left the Dyatlov group en route because of illness) was asked to identify everything found at the scene, so presumably he pointed at the pole and said "that's not theirs". ...

There are multiple reasons to take Yudin's claims about articles found at the fatal site with a grain of salt:

- First, he was well-acquainted - even close - with most of the party's members and was in shock following the discovery they were all dead.

- Second, he had turned back on only the second day (January 28th) of the group's setting out on foot / skis. One must wonder how well he could have known and / or recognized all the others' belongings after so short a time with them on the trail.

- Third, some of the articles he was asked to identify were items that he may well have never seen at all, because they were packed away or carried in pockets.

- Finally, this was an expedition approved, subsidized, and formally supported by the university's ski or recreation club. If it was similar to the same sort of university club sponsored treks I'm familiar with, a significant proportion of the sport-specific equipment may well have been supplied / loaned by the club rather than being individually owned by the party's members.
 
..there's just no evidence to support a group of attackers having arrived at the camp. If they had? There would have been evidence of a trail into the camp from another direction. A whole set of other footprints leading to the camp..

Welcome after your pilgrimage to this sensational thread mate, let me just bring you up to speed..:)-
Firstly, as the attackers were tracking the Dyatlov's, they'd have been following in their footprints where the going was easier, not approaching from another angle through deep unbroken virgin snow..
Secondly, Yuri Yudin had to leave the Dyatlov group because of illness, and later when he was asked to identify items at the abandoned tent, he said several of them didn't belong to the Dyatlovs, so there's your evidence that other people had arrived at the camp!
"In an interview last year [2012] he recalled that he had been asked to identify the owner of everything found at the scene, but had failed to find a match for a piece of cloth that seemed to be of military origin, or for a pair of glasses, a pair of skis and a piece of a ski.."
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/obituaries/10026000/Yuri-Yudin.html
 
... But yet I read somewhere else that their stove wasn't turned on that night, so there are many theories and counter-theories whizzing around! ...

The portable custom-made stove wasn't even deployed (suspended inside the tent) the last 2 nights.

It was a compact cylindrical apparatus designed to be hung inside, with sections of pipe allowing for directing the smoke outside through an opening. Here's an illustration of the setup ...

daytloffz_group_19_palatka.jpg

The stove was typically hung when the tent's guy lines were secured to trees, owing to the need to support the stove's weight.

The stove was still stowed / packed up when discovered.
 
Back
Top