Dyatlov Pass Incident (1959)

[Waymarker]

The meteorological evidence (such as it is ... ), combined with the testimony of the other party at Chistop, pretty clearly demonstrates the temperature dropped radically that night..

If the temperature dropped to a dangerous level and gave them hypothermia, it's feasible that in their mental confusion they slashed their way out of the tent, but that still doesn't explain how they got their severe injuries apart from the ones who fell into a gully.
Also, a symptom of terminal-stage hypothermia is that the victim feels very hot and begins stripping off, yet some of the group built a fire in the trees, so they can't have been confused or feeling hot.

 

[1963]

I think I first encountered the story as a side note or passing mention in the context of destructive UFO encounters at least as far back as the early 1980's. I didn't pay it much mind, because it was a details-deficient bit of hand-waving analogous to what one gets on (e.g.) Ancient Astronauts.

I read at least two descriptions of the incident in the context of fatal backcountry / mountain trekking events no later than the mid-1990's. These accounts focused on the story in terms of bad luck or bad decision making, and only mentioned the more paranormal add-ons to illustrate how some others had spun the narrative.

The story was also familiar to me from mentions in one or more Usenet newsgroups in the pre-Web days. I believe the majority of these mentions were also in the context of UFO encounters.

Hi EG, I only came across the story about ten or so years ago, but have been spellbound by it ever since, and I know that i'm a bit late to the party on this thread [and have skipped virtually all of the previous posts for time constraint reasons , so excuse any unintentional duplication] but would like to post my current position on this brilliant mystery that has had me scratching my head for at least a decade...
After all of the hype that got me stuck into this case in the first place is near enough sided away as being capable to be explained mundanely, i.e the missing tongue and serious 'inexplicable-injuries' , the UFO, the radiation aspect etc. ... I still find at least one aspect of this great mystery totally enthralling, and that is what I believe to be the burning question about this tragic case...Why would they leave the tent?? And setting aside the popular speculations that the group were physically ousted from the relative safety of their tent... I would argue that the only thing that could make them leave would have to be an immediate thread inside the tent. if something was outside, such as an animal or a UFO, then there would be no reason to cut the tent open. There were no signs of an avalanche, however, they could have escaped believing an avalanche was tumbling towards them. The problem with that theory is that the footprints showed them walking in a calm and orderly manner down the slope as opposed to running away in panic. So something caused them to panic inside the tent but once outside they calmed down and made a conscious decision to walk down the slope. And in my humble opinion, the identity of the 'thing' that compelled this group of intelligent students to virtually commit suicide by destroying the integrity of their tent [aka, their lifeboat on the sea of frozen death] and marching relatively calmly to a certain agonizing death was something as simple as "Hysteria"! .. brought on by the consumption of narcotic toxins of some description. Throughout history the human race , especially true of the younger adult variety , have actively sought out and experimented in such hedonistic pursuits. So imho nothing too far fetched to contemplate in this theory. Something along the lines of LSD, which was ,I believe being invented by Swiss chemist Albert Hofmann in the late 30's and taken on by the CIA [MK Ultra] and other governmental bodies around the globe as well as being by the late 1950's the preferred 'mind enhancing tonic' by the super-cool beatniks and collegiate fraternity that sought out any mundanity-busting aids. Or then again the cause of this 'Hysteria' that I propose might just as easily be something more local than an illicit drug such as LSD being brought to the party by one or more of the hikers, indeed the region is known for it's own powerful hallucinogenic stimulant, and that is the renown very toxic fungus/shroom 'Fly Agaric', which the Mansi people in the area have gathered and cultivated throughout history to use for the purpose of getting high during their ceremonies, it should be taken into consideration that the fungus that I speak of is the very same product that the local Masnsi shaman often hang on lower branches of the pine's they were growing under to dry out before taking them back to the village. And the fact that their campsite and tent was pitched just a matter of yards from a pine forest seems to add a modicum of corroborative coincidence to this theory for me at least.
But of course that is just all conjecture coming from a guy that simply cannot know the truth of what happened that fateful night. But after a great deal of contemplation [wracking my tiny brain lol] the possibilities of this conundrum-ic case, first leaning one way and then switching direction etc over and over again, this speculative theory always seems to come around as the most likely to me.
And as for the second theory , well that is just as open to derision as the first, in relation to it's lack of tangible corroboration and is the identical causation of the flight from tent to the 'bad trip' hypothesis that I just mooted, .. yes 'Hysteria' again [or perhaps trepidation would be a better word]. This time facilitated by the [or at least someone within] Soviet Military. The source of this train of thought is that several facts of the case would seem to support the theory. For one , there are the numerous contemporary witness statements that clearly tell of an UFO being witnessed over the general Dyatlov-party area in the correct time frame. Secondly, the military's official denials of their presence in the region at any time , when it has been shown that the area had been and was a regular site for purposes of all kinds of military testing of new tech. [and the search party's recalling of seeing metallic debris over the area. And would explain a lot of the apparent governmental obfuscation and deliberate withholding of data, and summoning of the several different investigators to Moscow for instructions. My [maybe wild] estimation of what might have happened if this be the right track is that the Dyatlov party had unwittingly.. by means of deviating from their intended planned route.. stumbled upon a military testing of some new high tech vehicle, maybe as simple as a new helicopter or something? [ergo the UFO as seen from the many miles away that was the various vantage points of the eyewitnesses.].. and then [yes, still pure speculation.] you could make up your own scenario of what might have happened when a group of college hikers that weren't supposed to be there , gave the surprized soviet military unit a bit of a sudden jolt by being where there was supposed to be no-one! ... I'm thinking that a spot of heavy-handed scare tactics that got out of hand and ended in real tragedy might not be out of the question.
... I'll stretch my credibility no further and say no more about those two bits of speculation for now [probably said too much already. lol] And just say that imho at this point in time, that these are my best guesses as to what occurred on that fateful time, and that through the years of contemplation of this conundrum I have gone through the whole gamut of 'possibilities' that have been seriously touted.... UFO, Yeti, Mansi territorial murders, Semyon Alexandrovich Zolotaryov's spy connection, the Hikers being mistaken for escaped prisoners from a Gulag prison, the evil Mansi hunters theory, the popular spooked by avalanche suggestion, Infrasound, leaky stove, secret rocket launch, and a few that I can't remember right now.... and I can't promise that I won't go back to any of those [well some of them anyway] in the future, or that I may not even formulate another notion that seems to out-trump these two at any time,... but I have to say that for now at least these two seem the most feasible explanations for me. And please by all means, I always welcome alternative opinions.
This case has featured heavily on every paranormal site and in magazines for long since before I heard of it ten years ago, and there has been an awful lot of articles of various quality about it, [some downright weird ones] and I suspect that I have only seen a fraction of them, but if you are really interested in researching this fascinating case and are not already familiar with the facts of the occurrence [rather than wading through a lot of the more-sensational articles] then I recommend the following sites, where among many different references, theories and speculation [some quite sober, and some not so much?] you will find all of the available data on the case in one form or another for you to formulate your own conclusions...

https://dyatlovpass.com/updates
http://dyatlov.looo.ch/en/p/the-office-of-rauschenbach
http://forum.dyatlovpass.com/index.php?board=43.0

Cheers.

 

[Waymarker]

..something as simple as "Hysteria"! .. brought on by the consumption of narcotic toxins of some description.

'Hysteria' again [or perhaps trepidation would be a better word]. This time facilitated by the [or at least someone within] Soviet Military

1- Thanks for those two theories mate, I hadn't heard of your "Drugs" theory before, and offhand I can think of a piece of supporting evidence, namely that apart from some of the group keeping diaries, they also wrote in their joke newspaper called the "Evening Otorten"-
"We now know that Snowmen exist" (p 115 of McCloskey's book 'Mountain of the Dead')
So certainly if they were drugged up they could have been seeing anything in their minds, and panicked.

2- Your "Military" theory is quite possible too, and in fact Yuri Yudin (the member of the Dyatlov's who turned back with illness) thinks the military might have had something to do with it-
"..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

 

[Waymarker]

At this point let me just repeat something I touched on earlier in my "Murder Theory", as it's an avenue of investigation that as far as I know no investigator or researcher has ever pursued-
A chap at Serov railway station claimed the Dyatlovs had pinched his wallet and the police attended, but no charges were brought. So if the chap and his mates later tracked down the Dyatlovs and killed them in a fury to get his wallet back, perhaps his name is still on file in the Serov police records?

"A young alcoholic accused someone in the group of stealing his wallet, with the result that the police were called.
Luckily nothing came of it and the group were allowed to proceed without any further restrictions, much to their relief" (p 20 of McCloskey's book 'mountain of the Dead')

And as their deaths occurred 59 years ago, the alleged "young alcoholic" might well still be alive aged in his 70's.
I'm not accusing him of killing them, but just for the record it might be interesting if somebody found him and had a friendly chat with him?

 

[Krepostnoi]

At this point let me just repeat something I touched on earlier in my "Murder Theory", as it's an avenue of investigation that as far as I know no investigator or researcher has ever pursued-
A chap at Serov railway station claimed the Dyatlovs had pinched his wallet and the police attended, but no charges were brought. So if the chap and his mates later tracked down the Dyatlovs and killed them in a fury to get his wallet back, perhaps his name is still on file in the Serov police records?

"A young alcoholic accused someone in the group of stealing his wallet, with the result that the police were called.
Luckily nothing came of it and the group were allowed to proceed without any further restrictions, much to their relief" (p 20 of McCloskey's book 'mountain of the Dead')

And as their deaths occurred 59 years ago, the alleged "young alcoholic" might well still be alive aged in his 70's.
I'm not accusing him of killing them, but just for the record it might be interesting if somebody found him and had a friendly chat with him?

I reiterate that for someone to be described as "alcoholic" in the USSR they would have had to be pretty far gone. It seems vanishingly unlikely that they would still be alive now. And you still haven't really addressed Max's objections to the notion of an alcoholic being able to plan and execute a complex and physically challenging plan.

The encounter with the alcoholic takes place in the railway carriage at Serov station on January 24. It is not clear from the mention in the group diary whether the alcoholic actually travels on the train, although the reference to police intervention suggests he was probably removed. Dyatlov's group stays on the train, which takes them to Ivdel', arriving around midnight. They spend the rest of the night in the station there, and catch a bus into Ivdel' proper early the next morning. They then catch a bus to Vizhai, arriving around 2pm on January 25. At this point they say their farewells to Blinov's group, with whom they have been travelling on apparently good terms. Their onward journey is made by hitching a lift on a lorry, then a horse-drawn wagon, then skis. Disaster befalls the group on February 2. So some 8-9 days later.

So your hypothesis demands at least all of the following to be true:

1. that the young alcoholic was sufficiently compos mentis and charismatic to cajole his mates into joining him,
2. that he could raise enough money to cover travel, accommodation and food for the trip,
3. that he and his mates had sufficient self-control not to promptly piss this money up against the wall,
4. that they were able to follow in the group's footsteps for the next 8 days, and not take a wrong turn somewhere
5. eg that they knew for a fact their suspected thief was in Dyatlov's group, not Blinov's group
6. that they were sufficiently skilled and equipped to follow Dyatlov's group as they skied off into the wilderness
7. that they retained sufficient stamina and determination to physically overpower and kill the entire party, including tracking down those members who had left the initial scene
8. that they were able to do so without incurring serious injury themselves
9. that they were able to remove themselves from the scene without leaving obvious traces
10. that they were able to keep schtumm about it ever since

You've also got to bear in mind that a gaggle of drunks would be treated with extreme suspicion by most "respectable" Soviet citizens. The kind of social engineering that you or I might try when asking which direction the group went in would simply not be an option. They would probably find it difficult in the extreme even to be sold rail tickets, let alone find accommodation or hitch lifts in the way that Dyatlov's group had done. For example, the group diary talks of visiting the local school in Serov, where they spent 2 hours talking to the pupils, although apparently Zolotarev came across as a bit stern. My point being that Dyatlov's group was entirely respectable, if not actively admired. The same doors that would be open to them would be emphatically closed in the face of our young drunk and his pals. I'm sorry, I just don't buy it.

To forestall your next question: no, I don't have a theory of my own as to what happened, but the famous equation "Something happened. This theory is something. Therefore this is what happened" doesn't really compute. That said, I'm enjoying revisiting the case, so thank you for reviving the thread.

 

[Krepostnoi]

I recommend the following sites, where among many different references, theories and speculation [some quite sober, and some not so much?] you will find all of the available data on the case in one form or another for you to formulate your own conclusions...

https://dyatlovpass.com/updates
http://dyatlov.looo.ch/en/p/the-office-of-rauschenbach
http://forum.dyatlovpass.com/index.php?board=43.0

Cheers.

Thank you for these links. I'm slowly making my way through the Russian-language material on the first one. Is there any reason to believe that the purported primary sources are not in fact authentic?

 

[EnolaGaia]

... I still find at least one aspect of this great mystery totally enthralling, and that is what I believe to be the burning question about this tragic case...Why would they leave the tent?? ...

I completely agree ... The fact they arrived at the last campsite and settled in, like the fact they all died within a few hours of each other, is reasonably well-established. The fact they all died when away from the tent isn't surprising, given the conditions and their apparent state of unpreparedness for surviving the night away from the tent and most of their equipment.

The most obvious missing pieces in the puzzle are what motivated them to abandon the tent, the manner in which they left it, and what they did from that point until they died.

Here are some general or 'meta-' points that all too many commentators skip over when introducing or promoting a given theory ...

Many of the common theories involve accepting or rejecting tacit presumptions about the tent - more specifically, whether the state of the tent when discovered circa 3.5 weeks later represented the state of the tent when it was abandoned.

It's only fair to bear in mind there were 3.5 weeks in which some features or characteristics of the scene had changed.

As a result, it takes a leap of faith to assume the site's - particularly the tent's - state after presumably being vacated the night of February 1 remained static until its discovery on February 26.

Similarly, it takes a leap of faith to claim the site's / tent's state at the time of discovery had changed from the state in effect when last vacated.

Both versions of such a leap of faith are in play when assessing whether any or all of 3 key features had been in effect since February 1 and therefore provide clues to the context for abandoning the site:

- The rear half of the tent was totally collapsed;
- The side of the tent facing the Lozva valley (into which they fled) was severely damaged with cuts or tears; and
- The tent was mostly buried under snow.

One of the problems in sorting through the diverse theories is that they vary in terms of which among these 3 features are emphasized (or dismissed, or even ignored). For example, the avalanche / snow-slip theory incorporates all 3 features as key clues. Most of the 'externally induced panic' theories focus on the notion of people cutting their way out of the tent but don't necessarily involve the collapse and / or snow cover features.

I used these particular examples because they illustrate how easy it is for one hypothetical causal factor to result in different hypothetical narratives. The actual occurrence of an avalanche or snow-slip entails attention to all 3 features, whereas the fear of such an occurrence need not obligate one to account for all 3.

The reason I mention all this is because the state of the tent at the time of abandonment and the nature of any explanatory theory for its abandonment are interrelated. Any reasonably coherent theory about the fatal night's events must be coherent with respect to what it means for the tent and the party's exit.

 

[Waymarker]

I reiterate that for someone to be described as "alcoholic" in the USSR they would have had to be pretty far gone. It seems vanishingly unlikely that they would still be alive now. And you still haven't really addressed Max's objections to the notion of an alcoholic being able to plan and execute a complex and physically challenging plan..

As I said in post #535- "We don't know for sure that he was drunk, the Dyatlov group might simply have told the police that to discredit him when he alleged they'd pinched his wallet!
The book [McCloskey's 'Mountain of the Dead'] mentions that there was at least one other hiking group waiting for a train connection in Serov station, so perhaps he was a member of that group, therefore all fully equipped with the gear to go with him to track the Dyatlovs and get his wallet back."

In fact, he might have been holding the money of the whole group, so no wonder they'd go try to get it back!
Incidentally, McCloskey has currently launched a 'Solve Dyatlov' GoFundMe campaign to raise £1600 to re-open the case in Russia-
"The Dyatlov Foundation will be working with highly experienced and respected Kemerovo prosecutor Leonid Georgievich Proshkin. Leonid Georgievich is well acquainted with the Russian Prosecutor General and the Chairman of the Investigative Committee."
https://uk.gofundme.com/solvedyatlov

Perhaps they're going to try to track down the alleged "alcoholic", because I did mention my "Murder Theory" on McCloskey's website a while back and suggested somebody should examine old Serov police files.
For two pins I'd donate some cash to the appeal but I want to talk to McCloskey first, but his email address seems to have vanished from his website and I don't know how to contact him-
http://www.keithmccloskey.com/

 

[EnolaGaia]

And setting aside the popular speculations that the group were physically ousted from the relative safety of their tent... I would argue that the only thing that could make them leave would have to be an immediate thread inside the tent. if something was outside, such as an animal or a UFO, then there would be no reason to cut the tent open. There were no signs of an avalanche, however, they could have escaped believing an avalanche was tumbling towards them. The problem with that theory is that the footprints showed them walking in a calm and orderly manner down the slope as opposed to running away in panic. So something caused them to panic inside the tent but once outside they calmed down and made a conscious decision to walk down the slope. ...

I think we're generally in agreement, but there are some points with which I must take issue, if only to suggest slightly different orientation(s) from what I read at face value in your text.

I agree that the early theories postulating some physical force(s) throwing the people off the slope don't merit much scrutiny. IMHO most of the allusions to such force(s) can be traced to overly literal translation and / or parsing of Russian legal terminology. 'Force majeure' doesn't mean a physical force.

I can't accept the claim some threat inside the tent was the 'only thing that could make them leave'. The 'only' bit is the part I can't swallow.

There's always the possibility that something external to the tent drew them outside (e.g., an apparent glow that drew them outside to see weird lights in the sky), and abandoning the site was a response to either that initial attractor or something else.

In addition, I prefer to think of the motivating factor as a 'stressor' rather than a 'threat'. The notion of 'threat' implies something 'else' / 'external' which is dire and immediate. Their apparent lack of panic when hiking down the slope doesn't align with an immediate dire 'threat', but may reflect what seemed a reasonable course of action to resolve a problem rather than evade a proximate danger.

There was no compelling evidence of a major avalanche (e.g., tons of snow roaring down from the mountain peak nearby). However, the notion of a smaller snow-slip at the tent site remains one of the more viable theories overall and the only one which intrinsically accounts for all 3 key tent features I cited earlier.

The snow depth at the time of discovery was not the same as the snow depth on the fatal night. One reason the search party readily located the 500m-long uppermost trail of footprints leading away from the tent is that the snow cover had largely been blown away by winds during the 3.5 intervening weeks, leaving some stretches of the trail readily detectable.

The final photos of the party digging a place for the tent on February 1 show them waist-deep in snow. The search party photos don't seem to depict the same relative snow depth 3.5 weeks later.

My point is this ... There's good reason to believe the party descending into the valley were wading through snow significantly deeper than what remained when their footprints were found. The slow and deliberate walking the footprints seem to represent could just as easily be attributed to wading through deep snow as to notably calm people. I'm not sure they could have run down the slope even if they tried.

Generally, we seem to be in agreement that whatever motivated the tent's abandonment probably happened or reached a critical threshold while the folks were inside the tent that night. I agree with your idea that there could have been a major shift in attitude (e.g., from panic to calm) after exiting the tent. However, I can't go so far as to believe that's the only way things could have happened.

 

[Krepostnoi]

As I said in post #535- "We don't know for sure that he was drunk, the Dyatlov group might simply have told the police that to discredit him when he alleged they'd pinched his wallet!

I'm afraid McCloskey has led you astray. I've now done what I should have done in the first place: I've gone back to the group diary entry in the original Russian* and read it closely rather than just skimming over it. There is no mention of any wallet being stolen. In fact, the disputed object was a half-litre bottle, the clear implication being 500ml of vodka. The entirety of the group diary entry about this incident reads as follows (if I find any other references to this incident in the primary sources, I will post them on this thread.)

В вагоне какой-то еще молодой алкоголик требовал у нас поллитру и заявлял, что мы ее стянули у него из кармана. История снова закончилась, второй раз в этот день, вмешательством милиционера.

In my translation - and I will back my RU>EN translation skills against anyone you care to mention with the possible exception of Robert Chandler - this reads: "In the carriage, some alcoholic who hadn't even reached middle age demanded a half-litre bottle from us, declaring that we had fished it out of his pocket. Once again, for the second time that day, the episode ended with the intervention of a police officer."
So the guy is clearly labelled as alcoholic, not simply drunk, and the object in dispute is clearly a 500ml bottle, not a wallet. Even assuming the bottle was his in the first place, rather than it being the pretext for a ham-fisted scrounging attempt, I find it extremely implausible that he would go to war over it.

*Google suggests that many people believe this text is genuine.

 

[Spookdaddy]

I'm afraid McCloskey has led you astray...

Possibly not for the first time - given his rather confusing claim that none of the party owned ski poles. (I wonder if this is another lost in translation mistake.)

 

[Waymarker]

..There was no compelling evidence of a major avalanche (e.g., tons of snow roaring down from the mountain peak nearby). However, the notion of a smaller snow-slip at the tent site remains one of the more viable theories overall..

Yes, to me the snow-slip theory seemed to be the most logical one for a long time, but I never felt completely comfortable with it because even if it had crushed or partially-crushed the tent forcing them to cut their way out to get some fresh air, I couldn't understand why they didn't then get back in it because it would still have offered some protection against the cold. Instead, they abandoned it and the warm clothes in it, and trekked down to the trees partially-clothed to their certain deaths.

 

[Waymarker]

I'm afraid McCloskey has led you astray...the group diary entry in the original Russian...In my translation this reads: "In the carriage, some alcoholic who hadn't even reached middle age demanded a half-litre bottle from us, declaring that we had fished it out of his pocket. Once again, for the second time that day, the episode ended with the intervention of a police officer."

Thanks, that's one of the reasons why I've been trying to contact McCloskey to ask him where he got his information about some of the things he said in his book.
A year or two ago me and other people were chatting to him on his website, but now he seems to have shut it down for chat. Here's the link to it if anybody wants to try contacting him-
http://www.keithmccloskey.com/

 

[Waymarker]

[re McCloskey]...his rather confusing claim that none of the party owned ski poles. (I wonder if this is another lost in translation mistake.)

And I can't understand why McCloskey keeps referring to the Dyatlov group in his book as "tourists", I think a more accurate word would be "hikers".
PS- but to his credit, McCloskey once made a trip to the Mountain of the Dead himself to examine the landscape, something none of us have ever done as far as I know..

http://www.keithmccloskey.com/journey-to-dyatlov-pass/

 

[Austin Popper]

This is starting to remind me of the missing Malaysian airliner. People dreaming up preposterous scenarios based on a precious few distorted claims, ignoring mountains of evidence to the contrary. Of the many unwarranted assumptions in this imaginary massacre over a claimed theft, the one that bothers me the most is something that has become a pet peeve of mine over the years. People who think they have solved some old mystery often seem to assume that all the authorities and others involved in the original investigation, usually decades ago, were all idiots. I just don't buy that.

I live in the Rocky Mountains. To me, idea that anyone could find that group camped above treeline in the winter, manage to kill them all, and leave without a trace is just silly. The idea this was organized and carried out by a pissed off drunk is beyond ludicrous. These people took on an extreme challenge, and hoped to earn the highest rating in doing it.

Thank you, EnolaGaia for your usual thorough and sensible scholarship on this. It seems apparent that the tragedy was a mass death by misadventure. A complicated and still not fully understood misadventure, but anyone who has spent time above treeline in cold, winter conditions knows how easily things can unravel when the weather turns brutal. One bad decision can kill you. Every year out here, we have highly experienced, well prepared adventurers go missing. Sometimes their bodies are not found till the snow is gone. Sometimes it takes years. Often the details of what really happened are never discovered.

 

[EnolaGaia]

And I can't understand why McCloskey keeps referring to the Dyatlov group in his book as "tourists" ...

My guess is that he picked that up via literal translation from the original documentation, in which I seem to recall the victims were often alluded to as 'tourists'.

In this case it's being used as a synonym for (e.g.) 'camper', 'backpacker', or 'excursionist' - all valid according to dictionaries, but rarely encountered nowadays among native English speakers.

 

[EnolaGaia]

Yes, to me the snow-slip theory seemed to be the most logical one for a long time, but I never felt completely comfortable with it because even if it had crushed or partially-crushed the tent forcing them to cut their way out to get some fresh air, I couldn't understand why they didn't then get back in it because it would still have offered some protection against the cold. ...

There's a discrepancy between two themes that very few folks mention, much less try to explain ...

Many theories / theorists rely on the notion the tent failed / fell in some fashion that resulted in the occupants cutting their way out of it through the dramatic holes seen in the recovered tent photos.

Why, then, do they turn around and act mystified as to why experienced backcountry travelers would abandon a tent that had just been cut or torn to shreds?

There's every reason to believe these people suddenly found themselves standing outside a shredded tent (within which they may well have already been sliding into hypothermia) that had been effectively rendered useless as shelter in an over-exposed location under dire weather conditions.

A decision to evacuate everyone down into the valley doesn't strike me as odd at all. It's a reasonable strategy for attempting to wait out an immediate and potentially lethal situation. There was no point in deploying the stove, and there was no time to attempt repairs, at the tent site.

These weren't clueless day trippers - they were experienced winter trekkers. The fact that they left a 'den' deliberately dug out with branches laid inside tells me at least some of them were operating in a knowledgeable survival mode down in the valley.

What does surprise me about this hypothetical scenario is the fact they didn't take the few minutes required to access their remaining clothing, some useful gear, and most especially their shoes / boots before evacuating. Most of the party's footwear was stored in the front (entrance) end of the tent, which hadn't collapsed.

Except for the onset of outright panic, the only reason I can imagine for not accessing the storage area just inside the front entrance before evacuating everyone was that the front end of the tent was buried as well.

Personally, I tend to believe the tent had already started failing them before any catastrophic burial / collapse event may have occurred. There was an arc-shaped hole in the windward (valley) side of the tent canopy near the entrance, into which Dyatlov's own jacket was found stuffed. Why plug a single modest hole when the rest of that entire side of the tent was in shreds?

 

[Waymarker]

..A decision to evacuate everyone down into the valley doesn't strike me as odd at all..

Nevertheless, if the snowslip had partially flattened the tent, why didn't they simply re-erect it as best they could and get back in (even though it'd have been draughty with the cuts in it) put on the warm clothes and jackets that were in there, then snuggle under the blankets to wait for morning?
Furthermore I hear the snow was a metre or so deep, so the tent would be at the bottom of a "snow hole" which would give protection from the wind.
Instead, they chose to abandon the tent semi-naked and go down to the trees which strikes me as very odd indeed because it was a suicidal move and brings us back to the core mystery of the whole incident as to why exactly they chose to do that.

 

[Waymarker]

..It seems apparent that the tragedy was a mass death by misadventure..

Ah, I see you subscribe to EnolaGaia's "accident" theory.
Sorry but I don't buy it; I mean, nobody "accidentally" slashes their way out of a tent in subzero conditions halfway up a mountain in the dead of night and "accidentally" walks down to the trees while "accidentally" half naked and then "accidentally" freeze to death..
That theory might hold water IF the Dyatlovs had been green and inexperienced, but they were all highly experienced well organised hikers who'd made winter trips like it before..

(PS- you mentioned the missing Malaysian airliner mystery. That one's easy; the muslim pilot did it as a suicide/mass murder, but that's for another thread)

 

[Spookdaddy]

Ah, I see you subscribe to EnolaGaia's "accident" theory.
Sorry but I don't buy it; I mean, nobody "accidentally" slashes their way out of a tent in subzero conditions halfway up a mountain in the dead of night and "accidentally" walks down to the trees while "accidentally" half naked and then "accidentally" freeze to death..
That theory might hold water IF the Dyatlovs had been green and inexperienced, but they were all highly experienced well organised hikers who'd made winter trips like it before......

I think your definition of 'accident' conflates unintended consequences with unconsidered (or ill considered) action. The most experienced individuals in any field can follow actions that have consequences drastically different to those intended; as I've suggested before, the mountains of the world are littered with the bodies of very capable mountaineers (and Davy Jones' Locker is chock-full of very experienced sailors, etc). Experience - even of the highest order - is not synonymous with infallibility.

(PS- you mentioned the missing Malaysian airliner mystery. That one's easy...

No, its not.

...but that's for another thread)

Yes, it is.

 

[EnolaGaia]

... they chose to abandon the tent semi-naked ...

... "accidentally" walks down to the trees while "accidentally" half naked ...

Nobody left the tent site in a state of apparel reasonably construable as 'half-naked'.

The most glaring deficiencies were the accessories - headwear, footwear, and gloves.

Two of the bodies (the 2 found at The Cedar) had been partly stripped of their outer clothing, with the apparently scavenged items being found on bodies among both the trio headed back up-slope and the quartet at the den / ravine location.

This scavenging of apparel yields one of the only clues as to the sequence of events down in the valley - i.e., that Doroshenko and Krivonischenko died first (or at least earlier than most).

I've dug up a listing I compiled years ago that enumerates the apparel found on the bodies according to the medical examiner reports.

Here's the tally:

Yuri Doroshenko
WHERE FOUND: The Cedar
NOTE: Clothing had been removed from this body.
APPAREL:
- vest
- long-sleeved shirt
- short sleeve shirt
- knit pants
- shorts over pants
- wool socks (1 pair)
- no footwear

Yuri Krivonischenko
WHERE FOUND: The Cedar
NOTE: Clothing had been removed from this body.
APPAREL:
- shirt
- long sleeved shirt
- swimming pants
- pants
- sock (single; other presumably removed)
- no footwear

Zinaida Kolmogorova
WHERE FOUND: Party of 3 Headed Up-Slope
APPAREL:
- two hats
- long sleeved shirt
- sweater
- another shirt
- another sweater
- trousers
- cotton athletic pants
- ski pants
- three pairs of socks
- no footwear
- military mask (balaclava?)

Igor Dyatlov
WHERE FOUND: Party of 3 Headed Up-Slope
APPAREL:
- No headwear
- fur coat
- sweater
- long sleeved shirt
- pants
- ski pants
- no footwear
- socks (1 pair; 1 wool / 1 cotton)

Rustem Slobodin
WHERE FOUND: Party of 3 Headed Up-Slope
APPAREL:
- long sleeve shirt
- another shirt
- sweater
- two pairs of pants
- four pairs of socks.
- one felt boot ("valenki")

Ludmila Dubinina
WHERE FOUND: Den / Ravine Site
APPAREL:
- short sleeve shirt
- long sleeve shirt
- two sweaters
- underwear
- long socks
- two pairs of pants
- small hat
- two pairs of warm socks
- another, un-paired sock
- one half of a cut-up sweater wrapped around one foot.

Semen Zolotarev
WHERE FOUND: Den / Ravine Site
APPAREL:
- two hats
- scarf
- shorts
- long sleeve shirt
- sweater
- coat
- underwear
- two pairs of pants
- skiing pants
- socks (1 pair)
- leather shoes ("burka")

Aleksandr Kolevatov
WHERE FOUND: Den / Ravine Site
APPAREL:
- sleeveless shirt
- long sleeved shirt
- sweater
- fleece sweater
- ski jacket
- shorts
- light pants
- ski pants
- another pair of canvas pants.
- woolen socks (2 pairs)
- light socks (1 pair)

Nikolay Thibeaux-Brignolle
WHERE FOUND: Den / Ravine Site
APPAREL:
- canvas / fur hat
- knitted woolen hat
- shirt
- wool sweater
- fur-trimmed sheepskin jacket
- woolen gloves
- underwear
- sweat pants
- cotton pants
- ski pants.
- woolen socks (1 pair)
- felt boots ("valenki")

 

[EnolaGaia]

... in my humble opinion, the identity of the 'thing' that compelled this group of intelligent students to virtually commit suicide by destroying the integrity of their tent [aka, their lifeboat on the sea of frozen death] and marching relatively calmly to a certain agonizing death was something as simple as "Hysteria"! .. brought on by the consumption of narcotic toxins of some description. ... Something along the lines of LSD ... Or then again the cause of this 'Hysteria' that I propose might just as easily be something more local ... the renown very toxic fungus/shroom 'Fly Agaric', which the Mansi people in the area have gathered and cultivated throughout history ... the very same product that the local Mansi shaman often hang on lower branches of the pine's they were growing under to dry out before taking them back to the village. And the fact that their campsite and tent was pitched just a matter of yards from a pine forest seems to add a modicum of corroborative coincidence to this theory for me at least. ...

I recall reading suggestions the Dyatlov party was in the throes of a psychedelic experience, but it's been years since I can recall anyone mentioning this category of possible influence / stress.

The fly agaric version was by far the most common, while the LSD (and / or other government or military experimentation) version(s) only received occasional mention.

Given the time lapse until the bodies were recovered, I don't know whether any toxicology tests could have been attempted. In any case, I've never seen any toxicology testing mentioned or reported.

I never gave the LSD version much consideration, because (e.g.):

- Though LSD experiments were known to have been performed in Prague (1956 onward) and Sofia (1962 onward), there's been no evidence (of which I'm aware) any LSD research had been done in the USSR as of early 1959.

- Even if there were Soviet LSD research underway, it strikes me as unlikely it would have been done at the Dyatlov party's technical university.

- None of the Dyatlov party trekkers had connections to the fields of psychology or psychiatry, within which the Soviet bloc research emerged.

- I don't see how testing a hallucinogen whose effects only last on the order of 6 - 10 hours could be monitored from a distance in that remote location under those conditions, so it seems to me the only outcomes that could be noted would be 'nothing mentioned' and 'they didn't survive'.

The fly agaric version always seemed more plausible to me, but it never struck me as all that likely. For one thing, I was never certain whether fly agaric mushrooms could have been foraged in the dead of winter. The group's diaries don't mention any foraging.

The party had encountered, noted, and even photographed at least one Mansi sign / plaque on a tree they passed on their trail. This was the most tangible Mansi-related encounter they mentioned. If I recall correctly, they found some tracks of another party around the same time and wondered if they belonged to a Mansi hunting party, but the tracks diverged from the Dyatlov party's path and went off in a different direction. All this happened sometime before January 31.

I wasn't aware of the hanging mushrooms from the affiliated tree routine. If the party had swiped some shrooms found hanging on a tree it wasn't noted.

I would point out that the cache they established in the Auspiy valley (approach valley) early on February 1 was positioned underneath a relatively large cedar tree (sound familiar?), and cedars are among the trees under which the fly agaric can be found.

For what it's worth ... The shroom version of the hallucinogenic theory would seem more plausible to me if they'd done any cooking or water boiling that final night (or, for that matter, the night before).

Edit to Add:

They weren't a matter of yards from a pine (or any ... ) forest on the final / fatal night. The nearest treeline was on the order of a kilometer down-slope to the north and probably even farther to the south.

They were, however, camped among trees during the preceding nights.

 

[Yithian]

I reiterate that for someone to be described as "alcoholic" in the USSR they would have had to be pretty far gone.

Relative alcoholism.

If you don't pour vodka on your kasha, it isn't really a problem.

 

[EnolaGaia]

...And as for the second theory ... yes 'Hysteria' again [or perhaps trepidation would be a better word]. This time facilitated by the [or at least someone within] Soviet Military. The source of this train of thought is that several facts of the case would seem to support the theory. For one , there are the numerous contemporary witness statements that clearly tell of an UFO being witnessed over the general Dyatlov-party area in the correct time frame. Secondly, the military's official denials of their presence in the region at any time , when it has been shown that the area had been and was a regular site for purposes of all kinds of military testing of new tech. [and the search party's recalling of seeing metallic debris over the area. And would explain a lot of the apparent governmental obfuscation and deliberate withholding of data, and summoning of the several different investigators to Moscow for instructions. ...

There's always a chance (a remote chance, IMHO ... ) that there was official activity (almost certainly military) in the area that authorities needed to cover up.

The two factors you cite (mystery lights in the area of Kholat Syakhl; debris, etc., from prior military usage) are the ones most commonly mentioned in building a case for official intervention for the sake of secrecy. However:

- We've established that there was a rocket test launched from Kapustin Yar that night (recorded as occurring in the wee hours of February 2). It involved an R-5 (Western designation SS-3) IRBM. Given that particular missile's range and the USSR's proclivity for using remote northern regions and Siberia as landing zones, it's conceivable the light or lights observed in the direction of Kholat Syakhl represented the final phase of that missile's test flight.

- It's no big secret that the northern Urals were used for military tests and exercises. Still, the fact such things were done in that area doesn't mean they were occurring on or around the fatal night. In any case, there would be little reason to hide such facts now that the USSR is gone.

- The notion of a military (or other government) 'hit squad' disposing of the Dyatlov party is subject to the same problems as any other intruder / attacker theory - i.e., there was no evidence of anyone else being on the mountain or in the valley on or around the fatal night.

 

[EnolaGaia]

... Do you agree that some of the party was in the middle of footwashing?

No, not really ... I suspect the lack of footwear (only 2 of the 9 were found wearing a pair of shoes / boots) represented the folks' having removed them for the night, inside the tent.

To my mind the main mystery isn't why most of the folks had removed their shoes, but why they didn't put them on before evacuating the tent site.

 

[Naughty_Felid]

No, not really ... I suspect the lack of footwear (only 2 of the 9 were found wearing a pair of shoes / boots) represented the folks' having removed them for the night, inside the tent.

To my mind the main mystery isn't why most of the folks had removed their shoes, but why they didn't put them on before evacuating the tent site.

Good point as I'm assuming we have no idea what time this took place.

 

[EnolaGaia]

Good point as I'm assuming we have no idea what time this took place.

The timing is anybody's guess ... Here are the few time points that can reasonably be cited ...

The timeframe for the final photographs (showing the guys digging out a place for the tent) is widely estimated to be circa 1700 on February 1 based on lighting conditions, shadows, etc. This would have been right at sunset.

I've never seen any claims as to a typical or average time required to set up Dyatlov's tent, so there's no clear estimate for when the tent may have been ready for occupation. Given the weather conditions and the lack of handy trees, the tent setup could well have taken longer than was typical.

They would have eaten their group dinner (cold; uncooked). The time they ate this meal is a matter of speculation, but it's generally suggested to have occurred sometime between 1800 and 2000.

Their typical routine was to compile their group notes and chat until turning in for the night. I've never seen any specific claims as to a typical 'lights out' time. In any case, the late camp setup may well have thrown them off their usual routine.

The autopsies estimated the various times of death as ranging from 6 to 8 hours after ingesting the last food.

Moonrise that night would have been 0515 local on February 2 (cf. posts #121 / 122). The moon phase was waning crescent (last quarter moon had been the preceding night).

If one accepts both the latest suggested group meal time (2000) and the maximum time lapse until death (8 hours), this would put the latest death timeframe at circa 0400 hours - i.e., while there was still no moonlight.

The officially posted launch time for the Kapustin Yar test was midnight. This may be a default rather than a precise time of liftoff, because the listings from which I got the data gave midnight times for all launches in all years. As a result, I can't say with any certainty when the missile may have been visible as the reported 'mystery lights' that night.

Just for the record, the times displayed on the watches found with the bodies were as follows:

- Slobodin - 8:45
- Thibeaux Brignolle (2 watches): 8:14 / 8:39
- Igor Dyatlov: 5:31

 

[Waymarker]

Nobody left the tent site in a state of apparel reasonably construable as 'half-naked'...

Thanks for your listing in that post of what clothing the bodies were wearing, most of the 9 bodies definitely were only dressed in lightweight clothing, and 6 of them didn't even have shoes or boots which brings us back to the old question as to why they didn't at least put more stuff on before abandoning the tent which searchers found contained warm clothes, jackets and footwear.
At the moment, the two most plausible theories in this thread (as far as I know) are my "Murder Theory" (post #532), and 1963's "Drugs Theory" (post #630), both of which have good supporting evidence.
For bemused popcorn-munching newcomers to this thread, let me briefly recap those theories-
I maintain it may have been murder committed by another hiking group, one of whom claimed the Dyatlov's had stolen his wallet and/or his bottle of booze at Serov railway station.
1963 suggested the Dyatlovs might have eaten mushrooms from the forest which were hallucinogenic, making them slash their way out of the tent in a drug-induced state of terror.

 

[CuriousIdent]

At the moment, the two most plausible theories in this thread (as far as I know) are my "Murder Theory" (post #532), and 1963's "Drugs Theory" (post #630), both of which have good supporting evidence.

For bemused popcorn-munching newcomers to this thread, let me briefly recap those theories-
I maintain it may have been murder committed by another hiking group, one of whom claimed the Dyatlov's had stolen his wallet and/or his bottle of booze at Serov railway station.

1963 suggested the Dyatlovs might have eaten mushrooms from the forest which were hallucinogenic, making them slash their way out of the tent in a drug-induced state of terror.

To be fair, Waymarker, a fair part of that has been rendered somewhat unlikely by the lack of any tangible evidence of another group arriving or being at the site of the final camp. No second set of tracks arriving. No signs of any kind of fight or struggle AT the camp. No blood spilled at the camp.

We also know that the 'wallet' is a piece of false information, now.

In order for this other group to have come and murdered the group they'd have had to frickin' ninjas or something To leave no footprints, kill without spilling blood or leaving any sign of their presence.

It's a heck of a stretch.

 

[Waymarker]

..the lack of any tangible evidence of another group arriving or being at the site of the final camp. No second set of tracks arriving. No signs of any kind of fight or struggle AT the camp. No blood spilled at the camp.
We also know that the 'wallet' is a piece of false information, now..

1- The lucky 10th member of the group Yuri Yudin later said there were items at the abandoned site that he couldn't identify as belonging to the Dyatlov's. His own theory is that the military were at the tent and were somehow responsible for the deaths.
2- A ski pole was found at the site that didn't belong to the Dyatlov's, and it had cut marks on it as if it'd been used as a weapon, and autopsies revealed that several of the group had facial wounds caked with blood, and bruises to their fists as well as broken bones and internal injuries all pointing to a possible fight.
3- Further snowfalls, winds and blizzards would have obliterated or messed up many footprints and tracks so we can't be sure which prints and tracks belonged to who.
4- McCloskey says a stolen wallet was involved, but others say it was only a stolen bottle of booze, so who shall we believe? I'm still trying to get in touch with McCloskey to find out where he got certain bits of information, and if he replies I'll post his comments in this sensational thread..