Dyatlov Pass incident 1959

Status
Not open for further replies.
E

Element 117



What exactly happened to cause the deaths of nine hikers in the Ural Mountains of Russia on Feb. 2, 1959, remains one of the country's most notorious unsolved mysteries. On Jan. 28, 10 students from the Ural Polytechnic Institute set off for some winter hiking. One member fell ill and was left behind to recuperate in a mountain settlement.

The other nine never made it out of the woods, and what investigators found was both frightening and confusing. Their abandoned tent was found ripped open from the inside, half buried in snow, with the shoes and belongings of the students still inside. The first two bodies were found at the edge of the forest, barefoot and dressed in their underwear. The next three bodies were found nearby in similar condition. Two months later, the last of the bodies were found buried in the snow about 250 feet (75 meters) from the first victims [source: sptimes.ru].

These four students had massive internal injuries, broken ribs and crushed skulls. One of them was missing her tongue. One thing that perplexed investigators was the fact that there was no sign of struggle and no external wounds. The final four victims were wearing some of the clothes of the others that were found to have high levels of radiation.

Theories have abounded over the years -- avalanche, alien interaction and military testing to name a few. Case records were sealed until 1990, when it was learned that bright orange spheres had been spotted in the sky that night by other hikers. This and the radiation on the clothes lead most people to believe that were some secret military shenanigans going on -- although the Russian government has never owned up to anything.

Dyatlov Pass incident - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Text taken from Discovery Health "10 Bizarre Ways to Die"
 
E

Element 117

I'd love law enforcement/forensic science input on this.
 
E

Element 117

drifter said:
6 Famous Unsolved Mysteries (With Really Obvious Solutions) | Cracked.com
Click to expand...
not so fast, sugarfoot

St. Petersburg Times

---------- Post added at 03:01 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:52 PM ----------

Current Observation and Summation

The seemingly obvious answer to this mystery is that it was an avalanche. Why don’t people believe that this is the case?

The answer to this question has been compiled by a combination of review, first hand testimony and personal investigation. The evidence against an avalanche is as follows:

At the time of discovery, the specific location of the incident did not have any obvious signs of an avalanche having taken place. Many people have assumed that because the search and rescue party seen in old photographs had snow prods there must have been considerable movement of snow. In actual fact the snow prod is merely standard rescue equipment.

A study of the area using up-to-date terrain-related physics has revealed that the location is not conducive to the formation of snow build up of the kind that causes an avalanche.

"More than 100 expeditions to the region have been held since the event took place and none of them have ever reported conditions that might create an avalanche in this location."
The first bodies were found within ten days of the event and only covered with a shallow layer of (atmospheric) snow. Had there been an avalanche of sufficient strength to sweep away the second party then these bodies would have been swept away as well.

The condition of the tent when it was discovered indicated that it had not been impacted with any form of snow flow of sufficient strength to knock over the poles. Put another way – it had collapsed laterally not horizontally. This is clearly visible in the photographs.

An avalanche would have left “Flow” patterns and other “debris” distributed over a wide area. Neither of these indicators were ever found.





An avalanche of sufficient strength to “sweep” four people into a ravine – beyond the tree line – some 1.5 kilometres from their tent should have produced two results. Firstly it would have caused far more serious and different injuries and secondly it would have damaged the tree line at the point of impact. Neither of these conditions were ever observed.

The "dangerous" conditions sometimes referred to by proponents of the avalanche theory were observed in April and May when the snow falls of winter were melting. During February, when the incident occurred, there were no such conditions. In addition, the so called conditions were observed in a different location with significantly steeper slopes and cornices.

An analysis of the terrain, the slope and the incline indicates that even if there could have been a “miraculous” avalanche, its trajectory would have bypassed the tent.

Dyatlov was an experienced skier and the much older Alexander Zolotarev was studying for his Masters Certificate in ski instruction and mountain hiking. Neither of these two men would have been foolish enough to allow the camp to be established anywhere in the path of a possible avalanche.
 
sixpackshaker

sixpackshaker

Minor avalanche in a region littered with scrap containing radioactive material?

minor enough to give them the internal injuries but not enough to kill. they then cut their way out of the tent and die of exposure.
 
L

LordRavage

Wild stuff. Imagining the horrors they must of dealt with in their final moments.......its a bit chilling. (Groan..I know I know.)
 
E

Element 117

LordRavage said:
Wild stuff. Imagining the horrors they must of dealt with in their final moments.......its a bit chilling. (Groan..I know I know.)
Click to expand...
you're lucky you're my only friend here or you'd be on thin ic-

yeah.
 
Officer_Charon

Officer_Charon

Examination of the scene would not seem to indicate an avalanche flow pattern. Sudden massive snowstorm could, in theory, account for the burial of the campsite, but not the half-dressed state of the bodies.

The radiation is puzzling, as well... Hang about...

Nuclear weapon testing. Snow was blown by overpressure wave from the weapon, which also accounts for the radiation and the injuries. Seeing something like that through one's tent could also account for the panic. An air-bursting weapon could also account for the lights in the sky. Multiple airbursts, with the students fleeing at the sight of the first one, then getting caught in the open by a closer explosion/overpressure wave.

This is just a conclusion drawn from a quick, cursory examination of the circumstances. YMMV
 
PatrThom

PatrThom

Another possibility might be PCP/'Shrooms combined with said testing. Folks get high, see the lights in the sky, watch glowing stuff fall on the tent, blame each other, beat each other up, panic and (burst) wander out into the freshly-churned snow, where they die from exposure. I can see the Soviet military of that day and age before the whole incident saying, "Hikers in the test zone? Too bad for them!"

Here's my thought process. Assuming they have enough food to fuel their bodies and reasonable protection from the wind, I don't know why they would have died of hypothermia. 9 sedentary bodies together in a small space will easily generate just over 1000W (3400BTU) of heat. If the wind can be kept out, the air space inside the tent might be humid and smelly, but bearable. Certainly not hypothermia-inducing. If they have any sort of additional gear (ie sleeping bags/blankets) then there should be no reason to leave the tent except to answer the call of Nature. Maybe they indulge in a little something to 'relax' before drifting off.

So why did they leave the tent? And in such a hurry? My best (and unprofessional) guess is that they were forced to leave the tent in a big hurry, possibly due to the aforementioned testing. I can see the military testing some sort of low-yield atomic device (a small salted bomb would explain the radioactivity and the enforced closure of the area for 3 years afterwards), but it would have to be pretty low yield to generate a fireball without making enough noise to really draw some attention. The quickest thing that comes to mind is that the bomb(s) in question generate some sort of noxious gas which penetrates the tent. The panicked people inside try to get out but the zipper sticks (or some other mundane thing) and they are forced to cut their way out of the only real shelter they have at hand. Whether or not they have partaken of any chemicals at this point is unknown. They may have vacated the tent because whatever they were playing with inside the tent erupted or poisoned the air in the tent. Whatever it is, they decide they have to leave the tent in a big hurry and a broken zipper isn't going to stop them. They've probably decided that the weather outside isn't as dangerous as whatever got inside the tent. For all I know, a MIRV warhead fell through the roof of the tent causing (most of) the injuries to the four people who were banged up. The naked people carried them away but couldn't get back to the tent in time to dress up against the weather, so they also died.

Or maybe everbody just grabbed what they could and vacated the tent to safety, but there are only clothes enough for 4, so everyone sacrifices their clothes to the 4 who got away, and these people are sent off to find civilization. The other 5 try to make it back to shelter but freeze, and the group of 4 happens across some sort of unexploded device which detonates, causing their injuries. Maybe the girl with the missing tongue was hysterically ranting that she would guilt the rest of them for the rest of their lives and so they cut out her tongue to keep her from talking. Or maybe she got a piece of something in her mouth and someone decided to amputate it. Or perhaps an animal just stole her tongue before everything froze over. Who knows?

Sheesh, I feel like Castle.

--Patrick
 
E

Element 117

Patrick. That was awesome sauce.

you just made my day.

again.
 
PatrThom

PatrThom

Too much reading. It gave me a good imagination. The Internet supplies me with facts and I start making guesses. It's like content-aware fill for History. Sometimes it works, other times it doesn't. Still fun to play with.

--Patrick
 
General Specific

General Specific

Why has no one come up with the most obvious answer of all? Yeti. Obviously the hikers came across a young Yeti and took it into their tent. After all, they had room for 10, but their last friend was sick and stayed behind. So, they take the Yeti in by promising it food and such with the intent to bring the creature back with them for the government to harness and create super soldiers from. However, when the mama Yeti came near, the youngster rose up and tore open the tent to escape. The hikers, in a panic and being attacked by an enraged mama Yeti, fled. They grabbed whatever they could while fleeing. Some were caught and injured, others got away only to then be stuck out in the elements with little protection and eventually died of exposure. The radiation can be easily explained because all Yeti are radioactive. It's a well-known fact.

It accounts for everything while not resorting to some stupid explanation such as UFOs.
 
Fun Size

Fun Size

No, the most obvious answer is that they were campers sharing a tent. Campers eat beans. Tent becomes insufferable. They flee in an effort to breathe.

Those who doubt this theory based on the radiation have only to realize that men were present, so the first few expulsions were most likely lit. The blue flamer is a famed source of radiation.
 
SpecialKO

SpecialKO

The area radiation gave them mutant precognitive abilities, and so they committed group suicide by exposure to get good early seats for Buddy Holly's next performance?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top