It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Has the mystery of nine skiers who died half naked in the Siberian wilderness in 1959 been SOLVED? A

page: 7
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in


posted on Dec, 26 2013 @ 02:51 PM
reply to post by Wrabbit2000

This site seems to be supported by the Dyatlov Foundation Reunion:

Again, the short answer is: The radiation was superficial and this fact has been known for some time. It is generally irresponsible journalism that has exaggerated the importance of this aspect of the Dyatlov Pass case.

“The radiation referred to has been identified as beta-radiation with the characteristics of isotope K-40. This is very weak contamination and certainly superficial.”

According to various experts the radiation was minor surface contamination and probably from Lyudmila Dubanina’s coat. It was probably from a laboratory environment (Radium, Radon and Potassium) and not from any recent weapons use. A point has been made that prior to the moratorium on atomic weapons testing a fair number of detonations had been carried out in Russia and in other parts of the world. Again, it was not uncommon that small amounts of “fall-out” might be spread far and wide.

However this does not explain how the Russians knew to show up with a gieger counter to search for the bodies. Somehow they apparently knew that the clothing on one of the missing people was radioactive.

This site seems more sensationalist, but it does have a picture of the radiation report:
Kholat Syakhl (Холат-Сяхыл) aka Dyatlov's Pass Incident
Radioactivity level report
Does anyone here translate russian?

posted on Dec, 26 2013 @ 02:55 PM
Just a thought...after Tunguska and the more recent meteor that detonated over Russia...
could we have another incident like that?
It would provide answers to the burns...radiation...and concussive injuries...after which...the survivors succumbed to the elements and injuries, perhaps turning to cannibalism beforehand?

posted on Dec, 26 2013 @ 03:01 PM
reply to post by Char-Lee

I suppose what I'm having trouble understanding here is how the information presented at the 'Ermak Travel Guide' is so contradictory to statements and evidence attributed to men that were first hand to events?

Here for instance..

Investigators first explored the theory that the local Mansi people had killed the skiers in revenge for trespassing on their land. No evidence, however, was found to back up the theory; Neither Otorten nor Kholat-Syakhl were considered sacred or taboo places by the Mansi, case documents said.

Further debunking the theory, a doctor who examined the bodies in 1959 said he believed that no man could have inflicted the injuries because the force of the blows had been too strong and no soft tissue had been damaged,

“It was equal to the effect of a car crash,” said the doctor, Boris Vozrozhdenny, according to case documents.

and here...

Yudin said he also thought an explosion had killed his friends. He said the level of secrecy surrounding the incident suggests that the group might have inadvertently entered a secret military testing ground. He said the radiation on the clothes supported his theory.

Kuntsevich agreed, saying another clue to the deaths was the fact that the faces of the first five bodies had been inexplicably tan. “I attended the funerals of the first five victims and remember that their faces look liked they had a deep brown tan,” he said.

This is just one article, but is the one I chose to quote. I found similar details elsewhere. That's the whole thing though. Even the travel site isn't the only one to claim that level of document detail it seems ...but reports of injuries which did or did not exist on these bodies aren't consistent from one report to the next.

I guess that really is why the experts in the fields to look at this are still baffled.

* BTW.. Some of the photos taken and recovered from the site of the deaths were from the day of the incident and immediately prior...showing no such tan on those pictured? (The St Pete article has several photos linked in series at the top. A few, originals from the camp site evidence recovered)

edit on 26-12-2013 by Wrabbit2000 because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 26 2013 @ 03:08 PM
reply to post by AFewGoodWomen

There was significant damage to the terrain after Tunguska, nothing like that was reported here.

posted on Dec, 26 2013 @ 03:12 PM

reply to post by VoidWalker

Something had to of scared this poor soul so horribly that he destroyed his hands trying to climb a tree. To me that is unreasonable. Most smart people trying to flee something will only try an escape route once or twice before there mind says give up on this, try another way out? That being said I truly believe that there was some kind of other influence that killed these people. Personally when I am sitting in a tent camping and I have been spooked "which I have on several occasions" never once have I thought to rip through the side of my tent. I can't honestly say what I believe happened because I don't know. I know this is one of the most bizarre incidents I have ever looked into and wanted to continue. It is frustrating not having more information. We look at the government test, aliens, almas, to the local tribe that inhabited the mountain. Why were they buried in the specific coffins they were in? Hides radiation. What caused that? Government or Aliens.. I don't honestly know how to spot this situation other than it must have been one of the most horrifying nights on earth. I am sorry I am no use. If I had to peg this as something it would be other worldly maybe even pure malevolence. Maybe this could be the largest case of human mutilations we have ever seen and just don't know it. I am sure you have found by now nothing is making sense when looking into this. Not a damn thing. I just can't rap my mind around all of the information and what is vrais vs what is faux.
edit on 26-12-2013 by VoidWalker because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 26 2013 @ 03:12 PM
reply to post by Wrabbit2000

A lot of contradictions, yes everywhere, but much of it is presented as speculation.

If the autopsy reports are real, and they certainly seem professional to me if far from complete, than we have only those facts I would think to go on and the photos. Everything else is people speculating, or eyewitness accounts of searchers which have nothing to show they came from those searchers.

Interesting that there was no food in the stomachs for instance, were they sleeping and not eaten for sometime then.

posted on Dec, 26 2013 @ 03:14 PM
reply to post by VoidWalker

Why were they buried in the specific coffins they were in?

Do we know for sure they were buried in any other than regular fashion?

posted on Dec, 26 2013 @ 03:22 PM
reply to post by Char-Lee

Yes, they were buried in lead coffins! There is a video on Youtube somewhere of a gentlemen talking about it. I will see if I can find it for you

posted on Dec, 26 2013 @ 03:23 PM
reply to post by Char-Lee

I do appreciate the reponse and additional information. Given the contradictions, I'm simply not accepting the autopsy reports as genuine on face value. They may well be. The way they contradict other evidence from similarly credible sources may have very solid explanation. That isn't really being looked at from what I'm reading in news, and failing that? Well... Shoot.. We have experts on both sides I'd personally love to see in a debate on this topic.

* a quick FYI in general for the thread.

Defcon is absolutely right in noting the Travel site does source the Foundation for it's material. That would normally be enough to close the question for me on which source is solid.. The problem I have with that? Well.. The article I'm going by, in direct contradiction to some of that, was written with extensive material and direct quotes from the man who heads the Dyatlov Foundation, or headed it in 2008 when that was written. The contradictory information isn't a time sensitive thing by appearances.

“I was 12 at that time, but I do remember the deep resonance that the accident had with the public, despite the authorities’ efforts to keep relatives and investigators silent,” said Yury Kuntsevich, head of the Yekaterinburg-based Dyatlov Foundation, which is trying to unravel the mystery.

He's sourced for statements and evidence being used there. So, that's where I'm at for honestly not knowing which side of 'authoratative' information actually has factual authority to these basic elements?

posted on Dec, 26 2013 @ 03:33 PM
As I've written inside this thread before, I have extensive high altitude and arctic exploration time under my belt. I've seen what the cold does to an unprotected human being and the violence that ensues inside and close to my own expeditions.


If those video stills of the bodies are those of the victims, I am horrified beyond words. That is in no way shape or form natural wind burn or decomposition I would expect to see in, say, a climber high in the Andes or Everest routes. Same temperatures similar wind speeds, but those horrific results? no, never.

posted on Dec, 26 2013 @ 03:37 PM
reply to post by 4ajodster

This video is by far one of the most interesting if you have the time.

posted on Dec, 26 2013 @ 03:39 PM


However this does not explain how the Russians knew to show up with a gieger counter to search for the bodies. Somehow they apparently knew that the clothing on one of the missing people was radioactive.

Perhaps they knew that individual would have radiation on them, due to their job, and knowing that, they could use their geiger counters to help find the body with the radiation on it's clothes, under the snow?

posted on Dec, 26 2013 @ 03:43 PM
There bodies suffered internal trauma but no outside destruction of soft tissues.
What could cause this? Microwaves perhaps. It would be interesting to see if the camp site was located on a world grid energy node. A force released beneath from within the ground.

posted on Dec, 26 2013 @ 03:45 PM
reply to post by Tylerdurden1

I believe the one guy is the key

Semen Zolotarev

Was this all Espionage related?

Some sites say there was a pile of clothing in the middle of the tent as though the group were forced to remove them, all but two:

Nikolay Thibeaux Brignolle was well protected against coldness of Siberian winter. It was suggested that him and Zolotarev might have been outside of the tent at the time mysterious threat struck them. This explain why both tourists wore shoes and were covered by several layers of clothes. Both men were much better prepared than the rest of the group when they were forced to abandon their tent.

Did those two force the others to undress, were they in fact looking for something.

A couple had injuries that suggest professional killing:

We should probably add that snapped neck and blow behind the ear is a common sign of killing performed by special forces. However we can't be sure about this since the autopsy report didn't specify any more details about the body.

Why did Zolotarev left the tent with the camera and why did he take two cameras to the trip?

From what I have read film is recoverable from water damage, was there anything on the camera.
The other hikers seem to have been unaware of a hidden camera;

We should add that this camera became a complete surprise to Yury Yudin. He assumed the group had only four cameras that were found in the tent.

He had warm clothing and was in a den.

It was fairly clear that the guy didn't die from the coldness. On the contrary the den was pretty warm place for him. His lower part of the body was protected by underwear, two pairs of pants and a pair of skiing pants.

Two of hikers worked in secret nuclear plants.
Was one of them there to meet someone and pass off secrets and was the KGB aware and sent someone among them.

The fact of all their jobs and training leads me to believe it was not UFO related.

posted on Dec, 26 2013 @ 03:49 PM
Maybe we should take this one bit at a time and think of reasonable explanations for the stuff that we can actually prove.

So for example the tent. We know it was cut and appears to have been cut from the inside.
1)Its an old tent, I doubt it has zippers on the flaps.
2)Its a custom made tent that was sown out of two tents.
3)people back then were not rich, and that had to be a fairly expansive piece of equipment.
4)Even if I had to cut something I'd be more likely to cut the tie strings or flaps.

I can't think of much that would make me cut through, and ruin the only piece of shelter I had with me. Maybe if it had collapsed on me and/or was on fire, but I see no evidence of that. So that leaves me with:

1)It wasn't cut by them, but rather someone wanting to ruin their survival chances.
2)It was cut by an animal, but there is no evidence of that.
3)They had to cut out the side to sneak out so someone would not see them come out the front.

So any other thoughts on that?

On the same token, why was one of the ski poles cut?

posted on Dec, 26 2013 @ 04:08 PM
reply to post by defcon5

Its standard operating procedure of all mountaineers and expeditions to go through the biggest exit with the most potential to get the group out the fastest.

Knife, roof, out.

That bit shows me that there was a very dire threat be it real or imagined.

posted on Dec, 26 2013 @ 04:21 PM
reply to post by Astr0

Maybe that's the answer. If someone cut a hole in my tent, after a good thrashing, they'd be out sleeping in the snow too.

Seriously though, it does say in the diary that there had been an argument over the sleeping arrangements on the night before.

posted on Dec, 26 2013 @ 04:28 PM
reply to post by defcon5

3)They had to cut out the side to sneak out so someone would not see them come out the front.

I am thinking this one. Two or more (probably 4) of the group were confronting the rest whom they forced to undress, they stood between the group and the others, there were no extra footprints.

The ones in the back cut the tent and they all ran...the dressed ones attacked the others and people fought for their lives, running hiding in the dark scattered, they eventually gathered again below the camp tried desperately to get wood and started a fire. Some froze others took their clothing.

So why did the camera guy and the ones who were the attackers killed...was there possibly some of them alive when found but killed to cover the massacre and leave no witnesses? Some sites say a military search was started long before the official search.
edit on 26-12-2013 by Char-Lee because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 26 2013 @ 05:30 PM
reply to post by defcon5

One and three make the most sense, from your bottom list.

posted on Dec, 26 2013 @ 05:32 PM
reply to post by Char-Lee

Doesn't explain the severity of the injuries.

top topics

<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in