Skocz do zawartości


Zdjęcie

Tragedia na Przełęczy Diatłowa (1/2 luty 1959 r.)


  • Zaloguj się, aby dodać odpowiedź
977 odpowiedzi w tym temacie

#961 fortyck

fortyck

    Administrator

  • Administrator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14121 postów
  • Płeć:Mężczyzna
  • Lokalizacja:Kraków

Napisano 30 lipiec 2018 - 21:54

43697818612_bd781f65dc_o.jpg

 

TIBO BROKEN WINGS - part 2
 

 

 

All rights belong to Maria Piskareva
 
Continuation from Part 1 →
43031007214_7663b98f9b_o.jpg
Kolya Thibault at the sign dividing Europe and Asia (no date). Archive Kazantseva M.E. (photo received from Galina Ivanovna Kryachko, Yekaterinburg)
 
42842762185_728fc7961e_o.jpg
Tourists on a trek. Summer of 1958, Altay. Kolya Thibault - 1st on the left. Archive Kazantseva M. E. (Photo received from Galina Ivanovna Kryachko, Yekaterinburg)
 
42842762195_506fe7bea2_o.jpg
Village of Tyomnoe on Serebryanoy river. An uninhabited barrack. 16-17 February 1958 Kolya Thibault - 1st on the right. Archive Kazantseva M.E. (photo received from Galina Ivanovna Kryachko, Yekaterinburg)
MP: What are your personal thoughts when you look at these hiking photos, where the guys are cheerful and fooling around?
Did they have a drink?
Do you think if they had alcohol with someone else?
AE: Regarding the alcohol ...
I would trust the opinion of people who went to winter hikes at that time, it was customary to take alcohol, or not.
As for the photo, it seems to me that this is just a posing to make the pictures more interesting and unusual, a reflection of a cheerful nature and perhaps some inclination towards showing off in Nikolai's case (as noted in the essay by A. Rakitin).
It reminds me of the photos that modern people put on social networks.
43698995042_a5d672f2b4_o.jpg
Fooling around in one of the hikes
MP: Was there anyone from your family at the Kolya's funeral?
Are there any photos from the funeral?
What memories of the funeral are preserved in the family?
MEK: My grandmother Anna Iosifovna, her daughter Olga - my mother, with her husband and two children - we all lived not in Sverdlovsk, but in Kamensk-Uralsky, this is a town 150 km from Sverdlovsk.
I can not say if there was someone from our family at the funeral.
We do not have a photo from the funeral.
And I do not have memories of the funeral.
I was then 7 years old, and I was guarded from such terrible impressions.
We have a photo of Elizaveta Iosifovna at Kolya's grave.
42842761765_822512f041_o.jpg
Elizaveta Iosifovna Muzafarova (Thibeaux-Brignolle), Kolya's native aunt , at Kolya's tombstone. Sverdlovsk, the early 60s of the twentieth century. Archive M.E. Kazantseva
MP: Very interesting photo.
It can be seen that the monument was different, the photo on the obelisk is different.
And the grave itself in relation to the landmark - the roof of the house on that side of the street - is to the right of the house.
Gennady Ivanovich Kizilov told a very sad story about the transfer of grave plates of Dyatlov group from their present place deep into the cemetery and a little to the side.
He once had a long conversation with V.A. Elovski, who was the custodian of the cemetery before the reconstruction, and who told G.I. Kizilov this story.
They specified the distance between the previous series of pyramids, the present series of tombstones, and agreed on a figure of "about three meters", i.е. so tombstones were moved, nobody moved the graves themselves, they remained in place.
AE: I read Gennady Ivanovich opinion on this topic.
I will be very happy if this photo is useful to him.
MP: This photo was very useful.
Even unique.
Probably the only remaining evidence that the current position of the gravestone does not coincide with the position of the grave in 1959.
This can be seen well from the preserved house i.e. by its roof, which is visible from behind the fence and is an indisputable landmark.
More recently, residents of Yekaterinburg, Darya Babayeva and Sergey Stol have volunteered to help resolve this issue.
They went to the Mikhailovskoe cemetery and made this photo of the Kolya gravestone from the very point from which the photo of Elizaveta Iosifovna was made in 1965.
42842761905_450f346501_o.jpg
The present gravestone. Photo by S. Shtol and D. Babaeva
Now everyone can compare these photos and draw their own conclusion, whether there were changes in the cemetery, and if the gravestones were laid in the same place as in the year of the burial of Dyatlov group.
And the benchmark is well served by the roof of the neighboring house, as it is located in both photos in relation to the tombstone.
Another observation was made at the cemetery: the location of the alleged Dyatlov group graves was cemented into one huge common slab, creating the impression of of an emergency blocks like the once they poured in Chernobyl.
Darya said something about this concrete monument left her with the unpleasant feeling, “since when they started spreading concrete slabs over graves, apparently, something there is unclean”.
MP: Were any of kolya's belongings returned to relatives?
There is an entry in the second volume of the Criminal Case, which E.V. Buyanov points out: "40. Draft:"
We received ....
Thibault pen knife ...
Thibault 008 ... 42.
Record: 1. In Thibault checked shirt 8 rubles.
2. Camera Zorkiy with a tripod and broken lens?
488797.
34 frames shot.
16. Pockets.
In Thibault windbreaker and trousers pockets a flashlight, a penknife and a Finnish knife, a compass 1 pc. 72.
Receipt dated 26.11.59 from Elizaveta Iosifovna Muzafarova, the relative of the deceased Thibeaux-Brignolle, for receiving from Ivanov wrist watches "Pobeda" and photographs (signed by Muzafarova and Ivanov)" I am personally not convinced that the camera mentioned in this receipt belongs to Kolya or is somebody else's.
In the photos from the expedition we see Kolya taking a picture with a camera, but if it is FED, Zorkiy or maybe Pioneer, the members of the Hibina did not come to an uniform conclusion.
MEK: I remember talking about the fact that nothing was returned from things, not even a camera.
At that time, the camera was of a great value.
But they did not return it. people whisper that all things are infected with a large dose of radiation, so you can not return them to the relatives.
About the wrist watches nothing was said, but the camera were in the center of rumors.
The only camera that remained in the family was "Mir", which made rather gray, fuzzy pictures.
The family asked to be returned Kolya's good camera naming its brand and identifying it among others, but they refused to return it.
It's so obvious: there is a receipt from Elizaveta Iosifovna that she has received Kolya's watches.
As for the camera, there is no such receipt.
If he had forgotten to take the camera with him on the trip, it had to be where Kolya lived.
But there was no camera!
MP: So Kolya had a camera in that expedition?
What brand?
MEK: I read many times in the memories of Kolya's friends that he was atking very good pictures.
Kolya's camera was of good quality.
Most likely, it was bought by Vladimir Iosifovich before his arrest.
It could be Sharp, FED.
It is possible that this was a German brand, which Vladimir Iosifovich brought from Germany, where he once studied.
The investigator showed it to aunt Lyusya (that's how Kolya's sister Elizaveta Vladimirovna was called in the family): "Is this yours?"
"Yes."
After that, the investigator took it to the safe and aunt Lyusya never saw it again.
MP: But why?!?
MEK: The explanation as of why the camera was not returned was that it irradiated with an increased dose of radiation, and it can not be released as a safety precaution.
MP: What are these photographs that the investigator gave to Elizaveta Iosifovna Muzafarova?
MEK: These photos from their last expedition, received by relatives, neither I nor Sergey know anything about.
Perhaps only the elder sister of Kolya, aunt Lyusya, took the pictures with her to Kemerovo ...
There is nothing in Elizaveta Iosifovna or else my grandmother Anna Iosifovna would have seen the pictures, and I as well.
I have seen photos of the the trek only on the Internet.
We had only earlier photographs, and then very few.
MP: This is all very strange, what kind of photos were there?
Maybe there were photos of Kolya, which the investigator asked for the gravestone and then returned them.
MEK: I'm sure that photos of the last trek were not returned to relatives.
In 1959, there was no talk about any photographs in the conversations between Anna Iosifovna and Elizaveta Iosifovna.
We can say that they were already elderly and did not take interest in photographs.
But Dina (the youngest daughter of E.I.) was very active, curious and liked photography.
And she very much involved in the discussion of Kolya's death.
But - never and nothing in their photo albums did not appear with the note: "photos issued by the investigator" or "photos from the last trek".
In 1968, during the winter holidays, I was in Kemerovo visiting aunt Lyusya and Anastasia Prohorovna (Kolya's mom), and they did not talk about any photos of this trek and didn't show me anything like that.
I stayed with them probably for a week.
MP: Probably these were pictures of Kolya from a personal archive of relatives, for a tombstone.
Therefore, when they were returned to relatives, no one in the family said anything because they were their own photos.
Are there any pictures of Kolya in the family circle?
AE: Unfortunately there are not photos of Kolya in the family circle.
There are a couple of photos I have not seen on the Internet, I put them on the Kolya's page, which I created on Facebook: http://www.facebook....beauxBrignolles
MP: Thank you, Anna, I will definitely subscribe to this page.
AE: I noticed that when answering your questions, mom and Sergey E. mentioned two family names that are relevant to our family, which are also present in the Criminal case.
For example, when answering a question about who of friends or acquaintances from Sverdlovsk could remember something about Kolya and the events of that time, Sergey Evgenyevich recalled his teacher from the UPI on electrical engineering named ...
Krivonischenko.
In the early seventies, this teacher was 35-40 years old.
It is possible that he was a relative of Yuri Krivonischenko.
And the second name is Rempel: Kolya's cousin Evgeniya, daughter of Dmitry Iosifovich, married Helmut Rempel.
Now they live in Germany.
MP: Indeed, interesting coincidences, as soon as life does not reduce people!
One person told me that Y. Krivonischenko's nephew lives in Yekaterinburg, and local Dyatlov case followers, if they really wanted, could find him.
His name is Krivonischenko Alexey Igorevich, he is now somewhere 46-47 years.
But Yuri's brother, the one who received the belongings, was called Igor, this is recorded in the case.
From a letter sent to me by a girl who managed to talk with him on the Internet: "He confirmed that he was Yuri's nephew, and even somewhat (really very reluctantly and briefly) answered my questions, and then canceled his account, along with his page.
They have something in common with Yuri, but of course this is my personal impression.
When asked why Yuri was buried separately and not with the rest, were his parents holding Dyatlov responsible for the death of his son, he replied that it was the will of the parents and nothing more.
On questions about the personality of Yuri, about that expedition, about his parents, he said nothing more, and then disappeared.
Now I understand that he really did not say anything, just a couple of monosyllabic phrases like "yes", "no," "nonsense," unfortunately.
I didn't save his photo, like the correspondence itself, so I have nothing ... "
MP: I was personally surprised by the fact that Kolya's aunt Elizaveta Iosifovna identified the saw as belonging to Kolya.
I don't think she could have seen it, even know about it, since Kolya lived in a dormitory.
According to the materials in the Criminal case, after graduating Kolya was sent to work in Sverdovsk, as the master of a site in the construction and installation department.
He had a roommate in the dormitory - Belyasov, who identified Kolya's belongings, alternately with Y.E. Yudin and Elizaveta Iosifovna.
Could Elizaveta Iosifovna identify the saw under duress, after Belyasov identified it?
What do you think?
AE: Mom and Sergey Evgenievich found a logical explanation of how Kolya's aunt could identify the saw ...
MEK: We do not think that Elizaveta Iosifovna was pressured. Kolya worked in Sverdlovsk, about this there was an entry in the family documents: "Having finished the diploma project, he was left in Sverdlovsk, worked as a master in the SMU" - his sister Elizaveta wrote in 1988. In Uralmash, where Elizaveta Iosifovna lived, there were old houses, two-story, rather cold.
And there was a stove in the wall in the room and in the kitchen, at the height of a man.
It was heated with firewood.
Sergey Evgen'evich recalls that in 1960 Elizaveta Iosifovna already had batteries.
Sawing wood with a hacksaw is very inconvenient.
My aunt had a wood-burning barn, there were firewood and probably there was a two-handed saw.
And then, when they put the batteries, this saw was no longer necessary to her, and Elizaveta Iosifovna could easily give it to Kolya for hikes.
And then she could recognize it right away, because it was her saw.
MP: Kolya's roommate Belyasov said that Kolya took this saw from the tool shop at work.
This is a discrepancy.
AE: It seems to me that such a simple explanation about the saw is well correlated with the idea of falsifying the data in the protocol.
Otherwise, it's difficult to explain why the aunt so easily recognized Kolya's saw, which was from his place of work.
The second assumption - if you believe that the saw was actually taken from the place of work - then Kolya brought this good saw and helped his aunt to cut the wood in her household before the heating appeared.
MP: This option is also possible.
From the copies of the records of the identification of things by Elizaveta Iosifovna, one can see that in the records of the identification of this mysterious saw there is not a single signature, no investigator, no witnesses, no Elizaveta Iosifovna herself.
Although there was room for signatures, as if the writer stretched the last sentence, trying to fill the remaining free space of the sheet.
And on the next page on the numbering sheet there is already a receipt of Yudin about the things he has received.
Were any clothes returned to the relatives?
Did they complain that some things were not returned?
Perhaps, some things were returned in secret, without a protocol?
After all, a new hare vest disappeared, a quilted jacket disappeared ...
MEK: Sergey and I, we are not aware of Kolya's belongings from the trek.
The hare vest, I think, someone could take it.
Not relatives.
Well, of course, there are speculations.
Aunt Lyusya did not particularly bother, I think, about the return of Kolya's things.
There were no more men in the family.
You can look at the photos of his clothes and check with the list.
MP: I do not like digging in other people's things, but this is a special case. It is necessary to find out everything that is in my capabilities.
We will be pushed to the wall, for lack of evidence, the lack of scans of the protocols of identification of things and the return of things, therefore, we will draw our own conclusion, on the basis of available documents.
I also consulted the search parties about the possible "marauding" in the search.
Everyone denies such things.
True, one person said that they could have taken cameras, because they were valuable.
AE: Maya, and what is the fundamental value and reliability of these protocols of identification of belongings?
Isn't the prevaling opinion that the investigation was led in a careless and superficial manner?
Do you think it makes sense to compare things with those that we see in the photos of the hikers?
MP: Anna, everything makes sense.
We have to keep reminding how incomplete and full of discrepancies the case is! Many do not believe this and consider this criminal case almost the truth from the higher level.
And there are so many frauds and inaccuracies.
For example, did Kolya wear glasses?
MEK: Judging by the photos and our meeting in Kamensk, Kolya did not wear glasses.
MP: I looked at Kolya's medical chart, which was filled in when I entered the institute.
Here is an extract from it, the conclusion of the optometrist:
42842762465_486dcd4b84_o.jpg
I consulted with ophthalmologists, Spanish and Russian, what these records mean.
The opinions of specialists coincided: this man had myopia.
With glasses his vision would be 70 percent, and without glasses - 40 percent.
MEK: In the conclusion of a doctor, 0.7 - this, in my opinion, means that out of 100% of the eyesight, a person has 70%.
And I do not understand the other figures.
It is clear only that both eyes were the same, which today is a great achievement.
When Kolya came to us, he was without glasses.
In all the photographs he has no glasses.
In hiking, he went extreme and always returned.
These are facts.
They are most important.
If there was poor vision, he could not go camping, photographing.
Just in the first hike I would have been severely injured and never walked again.
MP: No one from his Polytech's comrades have seen Kolya wearing glasses.
Specifically, I learned this from Yakimenko and Zinoviev.
Yudin also said that he does not remember anyone in this hike wearing glasses.
These glasses he considers to be belonging to Lyuda, and as an argument leads the fact that they were found in her personal belongings, in the pocket of her backpack along with a toothbrush, soap dish with soap, "and here it was impossible to make a mistake".
Why Lyuda's relatives did not identify her glasses, Yuri Efimovich believes that this is "due to their psychological state".
But the very position of the glasses in the pocket of the backpack, which was deposited on the bottom of the tent for insulation, is already in doubt - they could easily break.
And that happened - the glasses were broken.
And recently I received a letter from Doroshenko's sister, Irina Nikolaevna, and she confirmed that Yuri was wearing glasses, with big diopters, and in hiking trips too, which you can make sure by looking at his hiking photos.
But nobody recognized these glasses as belonging to Yuri.
We don't know whether they were shown ...
So, in my opinion, the identification of things as belonging to Kolya was hasty and, maybe, even fictitious.
And Elizaveta Iosifovna herself probably did not even hear about her identification of saw and glasses.
Until I see the scans of the records of the identification of Kolya's things, with the signatures of Elizaveta Iosifovna, and until I compare this signature with her real signature, one can assume that in the identification of things the investigation resorted to falsification.
In the meantime, we have to be satisfied with what is in the copy of the Criminal case - my aunt identified the saw and glasses as belonging to Kolya.
And there is not a single signature on the protocols for identifying these things.
It says in the Criminal case that there is a receipt from Elizaveta Iosifovna receiving watches "Pobeda" and some photographs.
But I personally have not seen the scans of this receipt yet.
The Foundation refused to show it to me.
AE: Unfortunately, there is no chance to find these glasses - there is nobody from his sisters and his aunt's family alive.
MP: Whether they were in the family, whether they were returned at all, that's the question.
Anna, of course, everyone will recognize the things of his relative and even a friend.
After all, if Kolya lived in Sverdlovsk, then he came to visit his aunt.
There were no that many things at that time.
Doroshenko's sister recalls that in general, all lived poorly, one or two sweaters, pants generally probably one pair.
Any person who had been in contact with Kolya for a long time could identify these items.
I mean, we did not have a lot of things in the "golden 70s", and they lasted for a long time until they didn't fit anymore.
And everyone saw and knew who was wearing what.
Was there a TV in Kolya's family?
MEK: Televisions sets were very rare in the Urals.
Usually on New Year's eve, for example, many people gathered in front of the TV.
We went to the friends of our family Browns and watched TV together.
They had, but we didn't.
My mother was afraid that we would not do our homework, so we didn't buy TV for a long time.
More specifically, the Browns got their TV in 1958. And our family - in 1966.
Elizaveta Iosifovna had a TV, but with a small screen. A lens was purchased separately.
The lens was installed in front of the TV and enlarged the screen.
Those who sat on the side could no longer watch through the lens.
MP: Are there any memories in the family about some events from his childhood, Kolya's youth and his time as a young specialist?
MEK: As my mother (Kolya's cousin) told me, for a while Kolya lived with his aunt Elizaveta Iosifovna in Sverdlovsk.
I think in the first year, at the very beginning.
But Elizaveta Iosifovna was quite strict, with a very firm upbringing, taught.
And he ran away from her somewhere.
She was worried, looking for him.
He then settled himself in a dormitory.
Probably his relation with his mother was very affectionate, and he was not used to nagging.
Then, I remember how he once came to Kamensk-Uralsky.
He was very nice, talked and joked with me and my brother Sergey, gave us a great new book "1001 Nights", children's edition.
And I remember that he was in "velveteen".
It was then a very fashionable corduroy jacket, on the chest were two pockets with sewn zippers.
Such jackets were not bought, but sewed themselves in the family, for example, a young man asks: Mom, sew me one!
There were no such velveteen in Kamensk.
It was sewn by his mother, or sister Lisa.
Kolya was cheerful, sociable. he was easy going.
He was very inventive, loved pranks and jokes.
If they were photographed, they would necessarily depict something, play some sketch.
MP: Did Kolya have any special passion for something, something like a hobby?
MEK: The most important hobby was hiking.
Because he liked to go hiking, he was both determined and fearless.
He just needed to go to the wild, harsh land from time to time and put himself to the test.
In his childhood he liked to read books very much.
When he lived in Osinnik, where he was born, his mother taught her children to grow vegetables and take care of animals.
He knew how to do all this.
About other interests I only know from Matveeva's book and from the Internet: he loved ti take pictures and he was a good at it, he drew maps very well, and liked reading the samizdat literature.
MP: Tell me, please, is it true that Kolya's mother asked him not to go on this trip?
MEK: Yes, Kolya's mother begged him not to go on this trip. Kolya said: "For the last time, Mom!"
Then she let him go.
My grandmother Anna Iosifovna remembers that Kolya was quite absentminded and had a tendency to get into all sorts of trouble.
One day he wanted to cross the road at a crossroads and stopped, waiting for the truck with a trailer, on which lay long logs, to pass.
The truck passed before Kolya and turned right.
And Kolya went to cross the road and flew right into the logs.
I also remember how they said that kolya's woolen socks were on one of the girls.
They believed that he gave them to her.
He acted like a knight i.e. Elizaveta Iosifovna and Anna Iosifovna saw the situation at that time quite probable and leaving the possibility of chivalry.
Sergey E. recalls that in the dormitory Kolya had problems in the room.
He came to visit his aunt and complained about the guys.
While he was sleeping, someone stuck cotton wool between his toes and set him on fire.
It was a stupid joke, but Kolya was not ready to jump up and stuff someone's face.
MP: Bastards!
I was interested in the former UPI students, what kind of behavior they had in the dorm room.
Askinadzi said that, yes, "there were no rules in the dormitory, if they saw someone as a weakling or a scoundrel, they make him suffer".
Most of all, it was for those who could not defend themselves, always and everywhere - even in the animal kingdom, where all relationships are based on instinct, no one touched me, and even vice versa - I was, in a sense, one of the leaders.
I did not know Thibault, so I can not say anything, but I do not want to suggest anything bad".
Zinoviev said that everything was fine and beautiful.
Sharavin said that he did not remember tormenting anybody in their dorm, although they joked about pranks.
42842762015_95b7b6ec04_o.jpg
Kolya on a trek. Kolya's great grandfather was an architect, it was not by chance that Kolya was drawing maps well.
MP: Are there any diaries or notebooks belonging to Kolya left in the family, any letters?
MEK: No.
MP: A. Rakitin asks if anything is known about whether Nikolai was left-handed or right-handed?
If he was left-handed, did they retrain him to use his right hand instead?
MEK: We do not know if Kolya was left-handed or right-handed.
AE: Judging by some photographs, Kolya wore a watch on his left hand, apparently he was right handed.
MP: Did Kolya take part in the trip of the students to the Kourovka camp site to meet the New 1959 with Dyatlov and Kolevatov?
This question is also from A. Rakitin.
MEK: We don't know.
MP: Y. Kuntsevich once in a conversation at the forum said that Nikolai Thibault was a Protestant, which I was very surprised.
Were the Thibeaux-Brignolles Protestants, not Catholics?
And in general, what was the position of the family on the question of faith, although I foresee the answer that Kolya was an atheist and a Komsomol member, like all young people at that time ...
But still, was Kolya baptized, if so, in what faith?
So many questions have been raised by a single replica of Y. Kuntsevich.
AE: Maya, this is a good question, I read that Kolya was a Protestant somewhere on the Internet.
But this is not true!
MEK: Kolya's great grandfather, Iosif Frantsevich, grew up in a Catholic family, but he married a Lutheran, his children were baptized as Lutherans.
Kolya's grandfather, Iosif Iosifovich, married an Orthodox, and all his children, including Kolya's father, Vladimir Iosifovich, were baptized in Orthodox churches (there are copies of records from the metric books).
Kolya's elder sister Elizaveta was baptized in the Orthodox church in 1916.
Data on whether Kolya and his brother were baptized by Volodya, we do not.
Baptizing children in the 1930s was quite dangerous for parents, in addition, in Osinniki, a mining village, at that time, apparently, there was not even an Orthodox church.
In any case, Kolya could not be neither a Protestant nor a Catholic.
MP: It was dangerous, yes. But that's interesting ...
For example, I learned that even in the families of Ivdel party workers, despite the disapproval of the heads of families, they were baking cakes and celebrating Easter, and grandmothers baptized their grandchildren, despite the bans of their parents.
And one of the party secretaries of the Ivdel city committee of the CPSU wore an icon in the tunic throughout the war, to which his mother blessed him, escorting him to the front.
Was it accepted in Kolya's family to celebrate Easter, bake a cake, celebrate birthdays?
MEK: They did not celebrate Easter, they did not color eggs, they did not bake cakes.
But birthdays were necessarily celebrated, given gifts, congratulated.
MP: How does the family look at setting up a memorial cross in the forest in the place where the bodies of the children were found?
MEK: The general opinion of the family - we think that it is necessary to put a cross.
Let there be at least an approximate place of death of people marked as it was customary in our country for centuries.
In this case is not even about a religious symbol only, but rather, a broader cultural tradition.
MP: Speaking of Nikolai, how would you introduce him?
AE: In the articles about the expedition and Dyatlov group Kolya is often called the son of a Frenchman or a Frenchman (for example, in a recent publication of the Komsomolskaya Pravda).
Indeed, in the inheritance from the French ancestors, Kolya received an unusual surname.
The origin of Kolya, the history of the genus Thibault often raises questions.
But the ancestors of Kolya remained forever in Russia, were at the service of the Russian state.
Kolya's mom - Anastasia Prohorovna - is a simple Russian woman, the daughter of a skilled worker.
So Kolya is - first of all - a Russian.
In difficult times, after his father's early death, he managed to get a high education, to become an engineer.
I would say that Kolya is a Russian Engineer - great grandson of a French architect.
MP: Dear Anna and Marina Evgenyevna, many thanks to you, and also to Sergey Evgenyevich, for share what you know about Kolya.
I was very interested to learn more about him, and to be honest, it was nice to talk with you on many lyrical topics.
Thanks for the new unique photos from the family history!
I think that now they will no longer speak of Nicolai Thibault as a French subject and the son of a French communist.
Yes, and the date of birth Kolya, perhaps, will be corrected in the records.
Yuri Yudin, on the question of whether he dreams of his deceased friends, answered that he is still dreaming of them, and then after these dreams he walks happy all day.
They are all alive there. "...
There is no illness, neither sorrow nor sighing, but life is endless."
I hope this publication will help readers to better know Nikolai Thibeaux-Brignolle.
Let this image of Kolya Thibault remain in our memory - a cheerful, bright, handsome young man smiling at us from the black and white photographs ...
 
M. P. July - November 21. (с) 2012 Kolya on a trek.
Kolya's great grandfather was an architect, it was not by chance that Kolya was drawing maps well.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Żródło: https://www.facebook.com/dyatlovmania/



#962 fortyck

fortyck

    Administrator

  • Administrator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14121 postów
  • Płeć:Mężczyzna
  • Lokalizacja:Kraków

Napisano 03 sierpień 2018 - 22:03

Photo reconstruction


1st row: Ortyukov, Delevich and Fyodorov, 2nd row: Askinadzi, Suvorov, after next Kuzminov, at the very top is the "lazy dog breeder" - photo archive Vladimir Askinadzi.

 

The dam (плотина) was built by rescuers where the creek flows into the fourth tributary of Lozva river so the still missing bodies are not carried away if they are lying in the creek.

 

28893140927_59a4dd6b9a_o.jpg

 

28893140937_168b733bc7_o.jpg

 

43781241812_6f9143de43_o.jpg

 

29959442618_5757665b50_o.jpg

 

 

43829015671_a41d219762_o.jpg

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Żródło: https://www.facebook.com/dyatlovmania/



#963 fortyck

fortyck

    Administrator

  • Administrator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14121 postów
  • Płeć:Mężczyzna
  • Lokalizacja:Kraków

Napisano 12 sierpień 2018 - 23:39

43953961832_8b34884c41_o.jpg



#964 fortyck

fortyck

    Administrator

  • Administrator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14121 postów
  • Płeć:Mężczyzna
  • Lokalizacja:Kraków

Napisano 15 sierpień 2018 - 21:09

42246831640_778b7b4e31_o.jpg



#965 fortyck

fortyck

    Administrator

  • Administrator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14121 postów
  • Płeć:Mężczyzna
  • Lokalizacja:Kraków

Napisano 18 sierpień 2018 - 22:04

44068501692_421e1c6b6e_o.jpg



#966 fortyck

fortyck

    Administrator

  • Administrator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14121 postów
  • Płeć:Mężczyzna
  • Lokalizacja:Kraków

Napisano 21 sierpień 2018 - 22:18

На перевале Дятлова нашли деталь от ракеты, которая могла убить туристов в 1959 году

 

Исследователи предполагают, что это элемент от советской межконтинентальной ракеты
 
 
 
inx960x640.jpgКак объяснили эксперты, подобная "вафельная" конструкция создается на емкостях ракет для прочности. Фото: Юрий Кунцеви

Версий о том, что же случилось 2 февраля 1959 года на перевале Дятлова ходит много.

 

Кто-то обвинял во всем инопланетян, кто-то инфразвук.

 

Грешили исследователи и на лавину, и на испытания некой ракеты, в зоне падения которой якобы и оказались девять туристов из Уральского политехнического института.

 

И вот, внезапно, последняя версия нашла косвенное подтверждение.

 

По крайней мере, так считают участники экспедиции, вернувшейся на днях с перевала Дятлова.

 

Там они нашли металлический предмет, который может быть частью космического аппарата.

 

– Это алюминиевая конструкция площадью более одного квадратного метра, – рассказал Юрий Кунцевич, руководитель фонда памяти группы Дятлова.

 

– Мы его нашли года четыре назад, но принесли только сейчас.

 

Он тяжелый и мы не решились тащить его, пока не привели с собой крепких мужчин на перевал.

 

Нам уже объяснили, что это стенка от топливного бака ракеты.

 

Впрочем, мы еще проведем анализ металла, чтобы понять, что же именно это за фрагмент.

 

wx1080.jpg

Этот фрагмент был найден еще четыре года назад, но лишь сейчас его вывезли с перевала Дятлова. Фото: Юрий Кунцевич

Сама найденная деталь сейчас находится в Екатеринбурге в фонде Дятлова.

 

Они предполагают, что это может быть фрагмент от УР-100, советской двухступенчатой межконтинентальной балистической ракеты.

 

Тем временем, мы решили поинтересоваться у экспертов, что это может быть за фрагмент.

 

– Судя по фотографии, по «вафельной» конструкции, это похоже на стенку какой-то емкости от ракеты.

 

Такая конструкция специально делается для прочности.

 

Потому, что если, допустим сделать тонкостенный цилиндр, то он при взлете не будет держать внешнее давление, начнет играть.

 

А когда на поверхности такая «вафельная» конструкция, то она становится жесткой несущей, – объяснил Сергей Булдашев, главный конструктор «Научно-исследовательского института машиностроения».

 

wx1080.jpg

В 1959 году на перевале Дятлова погибла группа из девяти свердловских туристов.

 

 

 

 

 

ЧИТАЙТЕ ТАКЖЕ

Тайна перевала Дятлова: туристов убила ракета (Подробнее)

Еще больше материалов по теме: «ПЕРЕВАЛ ДЯТЛОВА: ВЕРСИИ»

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Żródło: https://www.ural.kp..../26870/3913358/



#967 fortyck

fortyck

    Administrator

  • Administrator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14121 postów
  • Płeć:Mężczyzna
  • Lokalizacja:Kraków

Napisano 21 sierpień 2018 - 22:21

44183055711_9689f294cf_o.jpg

 

The rocket theory
43465523144_3258509254_o.jpg
"Komsomolskaya Pravda" together with Channel 1 continue investigation of the death of nine tourists
Researchers have been fighting over this mystery for half a century.
In the archive of the Foundation for the memory of Dyatlov group there are already 64 (!) versions of what happened - from the avalanche to the "snowman" - but none of them fully explains what has happened there after all.
So it turns out that everyone walks around in a vicious circle.
In his latest publications and in «Let them talk» about the tragedy of the Dyatlov group, we come to the conclusion that some unsuccessful military trials could have caused the drama.
A number of very serious facts lead us to that conclusion.
For example, in the beginning of May 1959 the bodies of the last four tourists were found.
Three of them were seriously injured.
Lyudmila Dubinina had fractured almost all the ribs, and Semen Zolotoryov broke half of the ribs, Nikolay Thibeaux-Brignolle had a fatal skull trauma.
All the injuries - experts established - were premortem.
What immediately comes to mind?
Someone beat the tourists violently.
There is no other explanations.
Hence, it is necessary to begin an even broader investigation, for which in 1959 the relatives of the deceased were asking.
However ... the party leaders of Sverdlovsk order to curtail this business!
 
OBSERVATIONS OF THE INVESTIGATOR
Investigator Vladimir Korotaev then in the years of glasnost said:
"... I was invited to the first secretary of the city committee of the party Prodanov who transparently hinted: there is suggestion to close this case.
It was clearly not his personal decision, but an order from above.
At my request, the secretary called Andrey Kirilenko (the first secretary of the Sverdlovsk regional committee of the party).
And I heard the same thing: to terminate the case.
Literally a day later investigator Lev Ivanov took over the case, and quickly turned it off ...
I was surprised by the rapid terms of the investigation - March, April, May - a case of this magnitude required a longer investigation.
These places had to be inspected in the summer, perhaps, when more traces could be found. "
However, in May 1959 the case was closed with a vague wording:
"The reason for the death of students was an overwhelming force, which they were unable to overcome."
Well, why explain this instruction from above - to stop the investigation?
If the tourists would have died from an avalanche, from a UFO, from a booze (and what other versions are there?), Would not they have continued to investigate the case?
Hence the conclusion: the case had to be closed only because it is connected with a state (i.e. military) secret.
42375416440_af644dd2b0_o.jpg
Perhaps the tourists photographed the test flight of the R-12 rocket, launched from the Kapustin Yar test site. Photo: GLOBAL LOOK PRESS
We read further the memoirs of the investigator Korotaev ("AiF-Ural", No. 5, 2004):
"... From the case, which I conducted, are missing the testimonies of Mansi Anyamov and Sambindanov.
They said that they had observed an elongated body over the taiga, behind which burst out flames ...
I remember well how I was present at the autopsy of corpses by medical experts Vozrozhdenny and Ganz.
The bodies had no visible damage, but the bones were badly broken.
Nikolay Thibeaux-Brignolle skull was literally flattened.
After the autopsy, we were ordered to get into barrels with alcohol.
I immediately reported the results of the autopsy to the members of the government commission, who at that time were drinking in Lozva.
But the new discoveries turned out to no use for them: everyone was satisfied with the version of the death of hikers from hypothermia.
Soon after I was removed from the investigation.
Many years later I communicated with scientists from the circle of Korolyov, Academician Raushenbach.
I was very vaguely told that there were some tests.
Personally, I like the "rocket" version.
A few years after the tragedy, one Mansi hunter discovered an strange piece of iron in the forest, which, apparently, was one of the debris.
So far, serious searches have not been conducted on Dyatlov Pass.
I think that the debris is still there and if you are looking for them ... ".
42375416680_4211e246bb_o.jpg
There is an opinion that the last frame Krivonischenko captured the falling stage of the rocket.
Many ask a logical question: if the tourists were killed by a rocket, why didn’t anybody from the military say anything till now?
We think that they actually talked, not once.
According to the memoirs of veterans, almost all of Sverdlovsk was saying that tourists were victims of weapons tests.
And relatives of the dead suspected the military.
For example, the father of Lyudmila Dubinina, who was in charge of the Sverdlovsk economic council, said at the interrogation in March 1959:
"... I heard the conversations of the students of the Ural Polytechnic Institute (UPI) that the flight of the stripped people from the tent was caused by an explosion and a large radiation.
., and the statement of the Head of the Sverdlovsk Regional Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, Ermash, made to the sister of the deceased, Kolevatova, that the remaining 4 people, not found yet, couldn’t have lived after the death of their comrades more than 2 hours, makes us think that the violent, sudden escape from the tent was caused by a rocket shell and radiation near the mountain 1079, that forced them to escape from it further and, it is believed, affected vital activity of people, in particular, the vision.
The light of the rocket shells was seen in Serov on February 2 at about 7 am ... it surprises me why the tourist routes from Ivdel were not closed ...
If the rocket deviated and did not reach the planned test site, in my opinion, the agency that launched the rocket, must send to the site of the fall and conduct aerial investigation to find out what is the aftermath of the accident.
... If aerial investigation took place we can assumed that the remaining four people were picked up.
I state here my personal opinion and it is not to be disclosed publicly."
42375416830_ebaf861919_o.jpg
Winter expedition "KP" and Channel 1 to Dyatlov Pass in 2013
In this regard, Sergey Sogrin published interesting memories (already in perestroika).
Sergey Sogrin was a student in UPI and participated in the search for for the missing tourists.
"In the early 70's I met in Pamir with I.D. Bogachev, a master of sports in mountaineering.
He worked in Moscow in some secret research institute.
In the evening at the fire at Iskander-Kul lake I told him the story of Dyatlov group, to which he literally replied the following:
"In those years we dropped the spent rocket launchers into the uninhabited regions of the Northern Urals, and Dyatlov was the victim”.
It was impossible to ask more, he worked, as they said at the time, in a "box".
 
EPILOGUE
Two arguments against this theory
  1. Why in the perestroika year, when everyone talked about everything, no one told the press about the events at Dyatlov Pass?
  2. After all, I.D. Bogachev (about which Sergey Sogrin wrote, see above) could tell us how the spent stages of rockets were dropped into the Urals. On the other hand: why should honorable retiree spoil his live with such stories? It means losing privileges and all sorts of honors and compensations from their company, betraying and losing friends ...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Żródło: https://www.facebook.com/dyatlovmania/



#968 fortyck

fortyck

    Administrator

  • Administrator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14121 postów
  • Płeć:Mężczyzna
  • Lokalizacja:Kraków

Napisano 21 sierpień 2018 - 22:45

44135639402_29a3a93b1e_o.jpg

 
Metal fragment with «waffle» design supports the rocket launch theory

The researchers suggest that this is a detail from the Soviet intercontinental rocket

 

 

44135735532_a50038b8f5_o.jpg
Similar «waffle» design is used on rocket tanks for durability. Photo: Yuri Kuntsevich
There are many versions of what happened at Dyatlov Pass on February 2, 1959.
People blame aliens, infra sound.
Researchers speculated about avalanche and testing of a experimental rockets that fell in the zone where allegedly the nine hikers from the Ural Polytechnic Institute turn out to be.
And suddenly, the latest version found an indirect confirmation.
At least, according to the participants of the expedition, which returned a few days ago from the Dyatlov Pass.
There they found a metal object that could be part of the spacecraft.
– This is an aluminum structure with an area of ​​more than one square meter, – said Yuri Kuntsevich, the head of the memory fund of the Dyatlov group.
– We found it about four years ago, but they brought it only now.
t was heavy and we did not had the means to drag it down until we brought strong men to the pass.
We have already explained that this is the wall from the fuel tank of the rocket.
However, we will also conduct an analysis of the metal in order to understand what exactly this fragment is.
29246836777_1d8263c379_o.jpg
This fragment was found four years ago, but was only now taken down from the pass. Photo: Yuri Kuntsevich
The detail is now in Yekaterinburg in the Dyatlov Foundation.
They assume that this could be a fragment from the UR-100, a Soviet two-stage intercontinental ballistic missile.
In the meantime, we decided to ask the experts what kind of a fragment it might be.
– Judging by the photo, according to the «waffle» design, it looks like a wall of some capacity from the rocket.
This design is specially made for strength.
Because if, let's say make a thin-walled cylinder, it will not take external pressure during takeoff, it will start to move.
And with such «waffle» design for the surface, it becomes a rigid carrier, – explained Sergei Buldashev, chief designer of the «Research Institute of Mechanical Engineering».
42375827750_9a1734c74a_o.jpg
Expedition August 2018 to Dyatlov Pass. Photo: Juri Kuntsevich

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Żródło: https://www.facebook.com/dyatlovmania/



#969 fortyck

fortyck

    Administrator

  • Administrator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14121 postów
  • Płeć:Mężczyzna
  • Lokalizacja:Kraków

Napisano 21 sierpień 2018 - 22:57

To hide the truth about the murder of Dyatlov group, the authorities came up with a missile version
This is the opinion of the participant in the searches of Dyatlov group Vladimir Askinadzi, who shared his memoirs with journalists Nikolay Varsegov and Natalya Varsegova
Nowadays Vladimir Askinadzi lives in the city of Sevastopol. In 1959 he was fifth year student of UPI and an experienced trekker.
He took part in the North Urals search of the missing tourists.
That is what Vladimir Mihaylovich remembers about the events.
– In the middle of April, they call me to the Party Committee of the UPI and instruct me to recruit a group of students to look for Dyatlov group.
We had to change Blinov's group, which had been searching for a long time at the pass, but found no one.
I hardly managed to pick up five students, because no one wanted to go - we had exams.
I suggested that the authorities wait with the search till the snow melts.
But they didn’t want to hear about it. We were promised an academic absence from the exams and keeping our scholarships in the event of our delay at the pass.
And just before my departure, I was again summoned to the party committee and told bluntly: make sure the tourists didn’t abscond to America through the North Pole.
And if you find any details that speak of them leaving to America, then do not talk to anyone about it.
When I told the guys about the escape to America, they laughed for a long time.
Nansen has been preparing for years to conquer the North Pole, and our supposedly on a whim decided to make it through the entire Arctic Ocean.
In addition, without skis!
After all, all their skis were found around the tent.
– I'm sorry, Vladimir Mihaylovich, but did the wise men in the institute party committee thought like that, who could imagine such a foolishness?
– Exactly.
It was only six years after Stalin's death.
The country was still living in fear.
The party was recruited in the party committees plain men who did not know how to think at all, but could obey and strictly follow instructions.
And they are not saints strictly speaking.
In addition, I am convinced that this marvel was not a product of our Party Committee, but the idea of ​​Dyatlov group making a run for America was a product of a higher party leadership.
– Vladimir Mihaylovich, you personally found Lyudmila Dubinina.
Tell us how it happened.
We have difficulty imagining technically how using a probe you can differentiate that under the thick snow, there is not earth, but a body.
After all, the bodies were frozen and hardened.
– We had professional emergency avalanche probes designed to search for bodies.
There is a hook at the end.
It is necessary to poke, turn and pull it back.
Mostly we pulled moss with the hook.
And then I took out the probe and saw a piece of meat on the hook ....
We immediately began to dig in that place.
This was how Lyuda Dubinina was found.
She was kneeling in a creek.
They began to dig more, and a half-meter from Lyuda appeared someone's head.
Lyuda was in the way, and we dragged her aside.
Put the face on the snow, covered with some rags.
Dug a little more, and found the rest.
43278585705_0374dd7332_o.jpg
This is a photo of Vladimir Askinadzi made during his search in early May 1959. He is in the foreground, on his back is dangling a grouse that was shot an hour ago.
THE NOTEBOOK
– When you dug them out, supposedly Semen Zolotaryov had a notebook in one hand, and in another pencil?
– Yes, the memory of the episode with a notebook made a big impression on me.
Because Colonel Ortyukov, who directed the searches, somehow behaved inadequately.
He jumped like a madman when he saw that there was a notebook in the hands of one of the bodies.
We couldn’t say who that was.
We didn’t know the guys, and they were practically unrecognizable.
So, Ortyukov grabbed the notebook and began to turn the pages, and I stood beside him.
She flipped back and forth, but it is empty.
And Ortyukov cursed in his heart, I do not remember words exactly, but he said, approximately, something like: "Ah, slug, couldn’t write anything ...".
– The book was submerged in the water.
Maybe it blurred the records?
– May be.
– And where is this notebook now?
– I don’t know.
But there is a photo of Ortyukov holding this notebook in his right hand.
43278585775_f830eb171d_o.jpg
Colonel Ortyukov holding in his right hand the notebook allegedly found on Zolotaryov
– So you found the bodies, what happened next?
– Next came the question: who will pull the bodies out?
We drew straws, the soldiers got to do it.
We watched them working.
Radio operator Nevolin sent a telegram right away, and the next morning the leadership from Sverdlovsk flew in.
– Was regional prosecutor Klinov among them?
– There were a lot of people. A
nd who is who - they did not introduce themselves.
I only knew one person: investigator Ivanov.
He behaved surprisingly detached.
He didn’t even make enough photos of the crime scene.
If I was an investigator, I would be all over the place, documenting everything. And he was indifferent, hands in his pockets.
Apparently, everything was clear to him and that's why everything is already indifferent.
In my opinion, he did not even approach the bodies.
By the way, on the same day Ivanov flew away.
We talked with him before the left, and he told me - I promise you as a reward photos from Dyatlov's films. But he didn’t give me anything.
– What did you talk about?
– I told him how the searches were going.
How we first found the den, and only after that the bodies.
By the way, Mansi Kurikovs lead us to the den.
I see them talking in their own language and point to small broken spruce twigs, no larger than the little finger, which were sticking from under the snow.
These branches, as it were, indicated the path from the chopped fir-trees to the ravine.
It turned out that the tourists cut off the branches and dragged them into the ravine, losing some debris of the branches along the way.
Where the path ended, there we started digging.
The snow was wet, caked.
We cut down blocks and took them out.
That’s how we found the den.
With trembling hands - thinking that we will now find the guys - we scooped up the snow.
When we saw an empty den, it became very painful.
Where are they?
And they were close to the den, literally at arms lenght.
Although for some reason it is publicized that they were a few meters away.
This is not true.
I remember well that the bodies lay nearby.
– Vladimir Mihaylovich, is it possible to have happened the following way.
The guys dug a hole, laid the clothes on the bottom.
And then they decided to dig a cave from the pit wall. In the cave would be warmer.
They did not know that a stream was flowing under them.
When they started digging they fell into the creek, and the snow fell on top of them.
Hence the fractures of the ribs, and the head could be broken by a stone underneath...
44135965112_4eb31885a8_o.jpg
If we assume that hikers trampled the den in the ravine under such a cornice, and then start digging a cave, they could be suppressed by snow falling down. Hence, fractures of the ribs, and trauma to the skull
– I do not think they could have dug a hole and a cave with their bare hands.
They may have trampled a small pit for the den, and after that it snowed on top.
The depth is about right. And why did they make a fire by the cedar?
The head of Nikolay Thibeaux-Brignolle is broken, most likely, with a butt stroke.
The size and shape of the wound is very indicative.
 
MYSTERIOUS TRACKS
– There is an opinion that strong winds prevented the hikers from making a sufficiently big fire and maintain it long enough to keep them warm and that’s why they died.
That they froze because of the wind.
But when we were on the pass both in summer and in winter, we couldn’t but notice that on the slope of Kholat Syakhl, where the tent was, the wind blew monstrously strong.
And when you go down to the cedar, there's a complete calm, the light of a lighter will not flicker.
When you were under the cedar, did you notice the winds?
– I remember the same thing.
On the slope there were very strong winds, and under the cedar it was calm.
– How, in your opinion, did the tragedy happen?
– I like the version with a poisonous cloud, which covered them, if you do not consider the causes of injuries.
They began to choke, Dyatlov ordered everyone to cut the tent and run.
But it is unclear how did the injuries happen.
I think they were killed.
But who and why - I don’t know.
The whole epic from leaving the tent to their demise, it's as if encompass several unrelated events.
Now I believe that there are criminals involved.
I have a photo of the bodies under the cedar, hitherto unknown to anyone, where there are foreign traces next to the corpses.
Now, I am giving you this photo, you study it.
These tracks are already heavily powdered with snow, perhaps they are a month old.
– So it could be traces of the hikers?
– No, they are too clear.
These are not traces of wounded people.
This may be the traces of their murderers.
44135965402_b66751db0e_o.jpg
First photo of Doroshenko and Krivonischenko under the cedar tree. Photo provided by participant in the 1959 serach Vladimir Askinadzi
– In his memoirs, investigator Ivanov says that he saw scorched tree branches on the pass.
Some eyewitnesses say that they saw melted snow.
Is this so?
– I didn’t see anything like this.
None of my friends did. And anyway, if there was an explosion that broke their ribs, he probably would have stripped the cedar from all its branches with its blow.
– How many soldiers worked there?
– At the time when our group was searching, the soldier were five men.
And at first there were a lot of them.
In the early days, there was hope that the hikers would be found sooner.
– And what about the scandal with the helicopter pilots who refused to transport the bodies of the last hikers found?
Allegedly, they feared that these bodies were radioactive.
– Yes there was such a situation.
To transport bodies according to the instructions, we needed a special packing, but we did not have it.
And here for the first time Colonel Ortyukov took out a pistol, threatening the pilots.
I did not know that he had a gun. But the pilots still refused to board the corpses without the packaging.
They were transpoarted the next day, when special bags were provided.
– Were you tested for radiation?
– No.
I learned about radiation only when the case was declassified.
True, there was a Moscow radiologist with a dosimeter there on the pass.
He took measurements, but we were not informed about the results.
– What were the first theories for the missing tourists?
– Then all Sverdlovsk said that somewhere on the pass a rocket exploded. Colonel Ortyukov filled us with the same information.
It is possible that he had this assignment.
It was profitable for the authorities to let out a rumor about the missile version, because this version justified all the secrecy surrounding this case.
It somehow calmed people and even relatives of the deceased.
This version was taking the search away from the real truth.
Well, if it is a rocket, it's all connected with state secrets.
Therefore, we should not demand explanations from the authorities.
But nobody believed the authorities then, everyone knew that officials are lying.
And when we returned from the search in the institute, we were interrogated separately.
My friend, also a student of UPI Moses Akselrod said, that most probably it was an avalanche.
I asked him - would you be scared of an avalanche?
He shook his head.
So Dyatlov wouldn’t be scared as well.
– Why did you decide that on there was a murder on the pass?
– I thought a lot about this and came to the conclusion that no spontaneous force could kill the nine healthy and fit guys.
They could not just freeze in those conditions.
Well, again, these inexplicable injuries.
Don’t ask me, I don’t know who or why were they murdered.
But this seems to me the only explanation of their death.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Żródło: https://www.facebook.com/dyatlovmania/



#970 fortyck

fortyck

    Administrator

  • Administrator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14121 postów
  • Płeć:Mężczyzna
  • Lokalizacja:Kraków

Napisano 24 sierpień 2018 - 21:33

44243218741_e31a4cd653_o.jpg

 

44194555642_423c1d3c42_o.jpg

 

44243218431_564558d4cc_o.jpg



#971 fortyck

fortyck

    Administrator

  • Administrator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14121 postów
  • Płeć:Mężczyzna
  • Lokalizacja:Kraków

Napisano 27 sierpień 2018 - 21:24

43402003365_9c8ffe5526_o.jpg



#972 fortyck

fortyck

    Administrator

  • Administrator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14121 postów
  • Płeć:Mężczyzna
  • Lokalizacja:Kraków

Napisano 30 sierpień 2018 - 22:03

30503656188_7f4f6a3f3e_o.jpg



#973 fortyck

fortyck

    Administrator

  • Administrator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14121 postów
  • Płeć:Mężczyzna
  • Lokalizacja:Kraków

Napisano 03 wrzesień 2018 - 21:33

29516575167_395731c3ec_o.jpg

 

Vladimir Borzenkov analysis of frame 34
The last shot of Yuri (Georgiy) Krivonischenko's camera became very popular.
Here is a link to the original scan.
29516739947_4d774bd11a_o.jpg
The negative of frame 34
There is an opinion that the last frame Krivonischenko captured the falling stage of the rocket.
Perhaps the tourists photographed the test flight of the R-12 rocket, launched from the Kapustin Yar test site.
If conspiracy ambassadors have this immense "fantasy allowance" on the topic "to think up something unreal, based on the lack of real facts", then why can't we present something real if there are real facts available for it?
I believe that there is nothing mysterious in this frame.
All mystery lives only in the minds of conspiracy theorists.
It should be noted that most qualified amateur and professional photographers basically share a point of view similar to mine.
The fact that there is nothing unusual in it and that the shot is "technical" and made entirely by accident.
If you look at this image from the point of view of a qualified photographer who dealt with chemical photography (shooting on a photosensitive film and developing it in photo chemicals), then nothing special can be found in it.
Distinguishable objects (areas) of the image
43545486125_78393630e9_o.jpg
Distinguishable objects (areas) of the image
Main and significant
  1. A rectangular light spot (this is all said for a positive image) in the middle of the left side,
  2. 8 faced polyhedron (octahedron) in the center of the frame,
  3. Whitish wide blurred strip from the rectangle up and to the right.

 

Secondary
  1. Thin strip in bend shape
  2. From the center of the frame to the right there are rows of surface scratches, the cause of which is contact with the metal surfaces of the transport unit of the camera film (flat pressing surface of the back cover of the camera), as well as mechanical defects from careless handling of the film. Weak longitudinal bands are the result of multiple folding and or dragging of the film along the glass of the photo enlarger), or something like that.
  3. An area of whitish exposition, not as intense in brightness as object No. 3 (the brightest area in the image) and "covering" almost half of the frame, where the main analyzed objects are located. It can easily be removed by means of image processing (for example, increasing the contrast), which was done on most of the images published on the web.

 

Concerning the exposure of the image, it can be said that it was produced without focusing on the sharpness, from a dark room to a light object, for example, an open tent canopy.
The white octahedron in the center of the frame is an optical effect.
Errors in focusing can occur due to the following: - this was neglected, - range finder was defective, - or when the viewfinder fogs up.
Exposure was quite permissible, that is called "by hand".
This follows from the fact that there is almost nothing "smeared".
In any case, this is not visible.
At exposure times of the shutter greater than ¼, ½ sec, this usually does not work.
By the way, such excerpts and there is not on that camera ("Zorki" №486963), which was used to filmed this frame.
Surely the camera settings before this "last shot" were installed in relation to the illumination, the two penultimate frames.
When the group goes in conditions of poor visibility already in the woodland.
And the shutter speed, aperture, and the focusing distance to the sharpness (depth of field), most likely, did not change.
If you start to analyze all these objects, you can get the following explanations:
Object №2
It's easiest to explain the presence of the octahedron (object №2).
This effect often appears when a thin beam of light enters the lens in such a way that it does not fall directly into the photographic material field, but is reflected from the side surfaces of the objective lens to form an image of the diaphragm's petals.
When shooting against the light due to internal reflections in the lens, a parasitic light may appear on the pictures - in the form of glare.
Such a glare comes from a bright source, for example, the sun, a light bulb in a room or a lamppost, etc.
The source itself does not have to be in the frame.
Virtually all lenses, except the simplest, consist of several "optical elements".
This is the lenses themselves and assemblies of several lenses.
Glare initiates a light that is outside the limits of the image on the frame.
This light, instead of passing through the normal optical path, is reflected from the optical elements inside (an arbitrary number of times) before it reaches the film.
Modern optical elements usually have different anti-reflective coatings that are designed to eliminate glare, but no multi-lens can not completely eliminate them.
The rays from the light sources will still be reflected inside and this reflected light will be in the frame in the form of highlights in areas where it will be comparable in intensity with the light of the main image.
Glare in the form of polygons are caused by light, which is reflected from the inner surfaces of the lens.
43545485685_022b056373_o.jpg
Formation of "false" images on film
That there might be reflections caused by internal re-reflections, it is necessary to have external high-brightness lighting sources.
Such sources can be the sun, artificial lighting. Such "random light" can get into the lens if it hits the front lens of the lens. Usually, the light outside the angle of the lens does not affect the resulting image, but if this light is reflected from the inner parts of the lens, it can go through an unintended path and get on the film.
If we say "in general", then it should be noted that in modern lenses, effective anti-glare coatings are usually used. Some old lenses, for example, Leica, Hasselblad, Zeiss, FED until 1948, and all Soviet (and most foreign) cameras that were produced at an earlier time do not have any special coatings, and therefore can highlight very much even with a soft light.
Sometimes this technique (a specially generated occurrence of highlights) is used by photographers to obtain a special artistic effect, or to "liven up" a photograph.
The octahedron is a reflection of the shape of the diaphragm of this lens.
This is a common phenomenon when shooting against the sun or another bright light source.
For this effect, you need a narrow bright beam that enters the lens.
This was not a problem at the site of the search camp in 1959.
The sun was just from the entrance to the tent, and it was very simple to find a flat snowflake "at a very obtuse angle", like a "mirrored dot".
Such effects are not uncommon.
Here is one example from my own practice.
This picture was taken with "Praktica LTL3" by "Pentacon Dresden" (GDR).
43737173164_ff8911e529_o.jpg
Illustration for diaphragm imaging
This picture also clearly shows the pentagon of the diaphragm of the Zeiss lens «Pancolar – 1,8/50».
In the example above, the sun practically did not hit the frame, but nevertheless caused pentagon glare.
On the exemplary frame there are a few pentagons (in contrast to the frame from Krivonischenko's film), but the Zeiss lens is more complex, and has several groups of lenses.
In addition, he more sharply "draws" the image.
Therefore, you can see even the weakest parts of the highlights.
What contributes to more and more perfect (and also colored) Film of a later period.
In my photo the appearance of the "polygon" in the frame is not accidental, I tried to achieve this artistic effect when I was shooting.
The photo from Dyatlov group was made through another, simpler lens - Industar-22, which has an octahedron diaphragm.
This is what I have on the pictures of my study - same lens, even about the same years of release, «Industar-22» with aperture 1:8 is shown on the picture below.
43737173064_2d7dff89cb_o.jpg
The shape of the diaphragm of the lens «Industar-22»
What can you find about this lens in the literature?
"It gives a very specific glare - a sharply outlined image of the diaphragm.
This is due to the fact that it has flat surfaces on the front lens and on the last component (or close to flat ones, it is difficult to obtain a technologically difficult plane, so it is made weakly convex).
Thus, the scattered light does not spread throughout the image field but concentrates in These reflections diminish the scattered light and improve tonal transmission on exactly two enlightened surfaces - as if there are gluing, which is characteristic."
Prof. D.S. Volosov, Photographic Optics, 2nd ed., Moscow:" «Art», 1978.
 
Well-defined facets have a glare as in the above picture, they can also be seen in the "last" photo of Dyatlov group.
Despite the blurred image.
From all that has been said, we can state that when shooting, there was a thin, non-divergent, bright beam of light.
This could only be: a ray of sun - in nature, or artificial - a laser beam. And obviously not red color, because all the films used in 1959 had a sensitivity dip in the "red" range.
Hoping for a green laser in 1959 would be too presumptuous.
Actually as a laser in general, in the same place, in that period.
There is also a completely reliable explanation of where this ray could come from.
There is an assumption that this picture was taken in the tent of the search group after the camera G. Krivonischenko was brought there.
This has already been clarified among the participants of the searches (I specified this in V.G. Karelin and P.I. Bartolomey).
The tent of their group in the region of Auspiya stood on the clearing by the entrance almost exactly to the south.
Therefore, in sunny weather, a thin ray from the sun could easily appear, which reflected from one of the numerous ice crystals (frost) formed at low negative temperatures.
In the winter of 2014 and 2015, I myself have seen many such "microchips" of ice crystals many times in the same place where the search group's tent stood in 1959.
Object №1
Object №1 (from the list), is a rectangle very close to a square.
Therefore, its original original form and image in principle can not have a different form.
In optics, there is a clear pattern in the distortion of the shape with a loss of focus - a square object, due to the loss of image clarity, can approach the shape of the circle.
But it's never the other way around.
Therefore, we can safely assume that the original object is rectangular.
And having a great brightness.
A bright spot is perceived as a source of bright light, much higher intensity, relative to the surrounding room.
And if you compare with the environment - at least more than an order of magnitude greater than any object on the frame near and more than the «exposure latitude» * of films of that period.
The room itself, where the picture was taken, is quite dark.
In any case, strongly obscured, relative to the external light background.
This object was filmed, not specifically, that is, it was not exactly shot.
From all that has been said, we can confidently assume that the «square» in the frame is the entrance to the tent that was opened.
Below it will be told where it could be with the greatest degree of probability.
And what could be this object.
* «exposure latitude» - the extent to which a light-sensitive material can be overexposed or underexposed and still achieve an acceptable result.
This measure is used for digital and analogue processes, i.e. optical microlithography or photography.
Object №3
The second, lighter than the background, but the "translucent" outline refers to «object №3».
Let's take a fragment of this image:
29516739597_4dd975032a_o.jpg
Objects №1 and 3 on frame 34
It most of all resembles a translucent gaseous medium, such as steam, finely dispersed suspension or something similar.
It seems that this "something" rises upwards, since it is lighter than air in the room, and with a brightly bright light from the area «Object №1», indicated in this picture as «exit».
Most of all, this resembles a cloud of steam (as indicated in the diagram above), formed from the cold air from the street into the tent of the rescuers, in which the stove was heated.
It is moisture condensing in cold air with back light.
Such a trace is obtained by condensing water vapor inside a warm tent, when outside cold air, illuminated by the bright external light of a sunny day, bursts into the door.
This state is very typical for this kind of state of the tent.
This was constantly observed in practice under similar conditions.
There is always an excess of moisture from constantly drying clothes, and a couple, from cooking and eating food in the cold.
The necessary physical conditions for this are: - great difference in air temperatures outside and inside - the presence of a humidity level near the condensation point - excess of such moist air - open entrance (draft) - back light
All these conditions are completely characteristic for conditions of the type that were in the tent of the search group in 1959.
It is unlikely, but it is still possible that this train can be considered a reflection of light on the canopy of the wall of the tent.
But then there must be a large reflecting surface next to the entrance.
Although there is nothing surprising in the fact that there was a lot of snow around.
A few words about the general blur of the image….
Notable for this photo is also the fact that all the details of the image on it are outside the depth of field of the lens.
The last shot, judging by the complete lack of focus throughout the frame, was made on condition that the operator did not have time (or did not intend) to extend the lens barrel to the end when photographing.
Most likely, I did not have time to change the exposition.
When the tube is not fully extended, the projection image is not on the plane of the film (as in the "normal mode"), but on the plane located behind the film.
Therefore, a blurred image is obtained, and with a completely non-extended lens tube, a circle is obtained.
On the two pictures below this is clearly visible.
29516739837_a2527b989e_o.jpg
Lens tube protruding Lens tube not extended at all
The case of a completely non-extended lens is excluded, because it would produce the following image:
43545486065_cca0a6b71b_o.jpg
The image obtained with a completely non-extended lens of «Industar-22»
In Dyatlov group films there is such a frame. SKAN_6_002.jpg – scan from film №6 (this is the numbering in the initial scan).
«Industar-22» has the same optical system as its prototype «Tessar» from 1902.
29516739857_9b0824463b_o.png
Optical scheme of lenses «Industar-22» is same as «Tessar»
In order to take a picture, the lens should be pushed from the inside to the stop and fixed on the bayonet lens mount.
Bayonet lens mount - this is the type of fixation when required, push it forward and insert it into the grooves, turning it all the way to the small angle.
As will be shown in the pictures below.
43545485945_94c67fc27c_o.png
A. The lens is extended but the bayonet lock is not closed (the flange is not in the slots of the lens housing) B. The lens is extended and the bayonet lock is closed (the flange is pushed into the slots of the lens housing) C. The lens is pushed out but the bayonet lock is not closed (the flange is on top of the lens housing slots)
The difference in the installation on the bayonet in the normal and "unattended" state (the lens is pushed out, but not in the grooves, but remained behind i.e. higher - closer to the film, the bayonet lock) = 1.3 mm
The flange focal distance is the distance from the mounting flange (the metal ring on the camera and the rear of the lens) to the film plane.
In «Industar-22» this is 28.8 mm
29516740307_ccbf47d4d4_o.png
and the full focus from mark "1 м" to mark "infinity – оо" is 2.5 мм
43737173234_c45a15f0e0_o.jpg
Setting at a min distance of 1 m Max distance infinity – “оо”
i.e. "non-advancement" with incorrect installation of the bayonet lock is equal to more than half of the entire focus scale, which means that even if the distance scale of this lens was set to "infinity", in fact, the setting was approximately "2 m"
And it is possible that (in addition, or even simply without it), the distance mark was set to "minimum", for example, to "1 m".
And to the main objects of shooting was a greater distance.
29516739407_01cda79509_o.png
The pointer of the distance scale is set to 1 m
All this suggests that the defocusing was large enough, but not so that the lens would not be fully extended.
In that case, the distance to the film would be about 9-11 mm, which is 6.8 ... 7.6 times the full-scale of the focus, which would give the image of the «ring».
Hence, one can conclude that even when the aperture is closed to 8 ... 11, the depth of the Sharply Imaginary Space (FLIP) can be very small when setting the sharpness to around 1 m, i.e. the extreme left position (corresponding to the maximally extended position).
Or, which is the same thing - not fully put forward (not put on bayonet fixation).
The lens is of the same type as «Industar-22».
More accurate data can be obtained if we calculate the Depth-of-Field for the «Industar-22» lens and the apertures at the level 1: 5,6 ... 1: 8 (and near this range).
DOF tables for the «Industar-22» lens for the entire range of apertures and basic points of focusing are shown below.
30585441368_ff269b3123_o.jpg
Depth-of-Field for lenses with focal length = 50 mm (for example, «Industar-22») for apertures from 1:2 to 1:6.3 The frame marks the intervals from the minimum distance to "infinity" for each aperture value
 
43737172754_c2d9dabca8_o.jpg
Depth-of-Field for lenses with a focal length = 50 mm (for example, «Industar-22») for apertures from 1:8 to 1:22
The term "diaphragm" is equivalent to the concept of "relative lens opening", i.e. the ratio of the current light diameter of the diaphragm to the focal length of the lens. ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Диафрагма_объектива en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diaphragm_(optics)
All modern cameras have a so-called "iris diaphragm".
Object №4
A thin strip in the form of a bend, reminiscent of the "hill" of Holatchahl, like the conspirologists like to call it, is a hair attached during storage.
It is an accidental artifact that appeared on film for many years of its movements, inspections and repackaging, which is stored in the archive of the Memorial Fund of the Dyatlov group, it is no longer there, he just stuck in the period before scanning, and then fell off.
Object №5
The rest of the film available on the modern frame is the defects of the film when it is used and stored.
The film was stored rolled up, then there is an increased danger of getting these scratches.
As far as I know, having been engaged in photography for more than 50 years (most of which are chemical photography), these are scratches when the film is twisted and stored.
Complicated by the appearance of microscopic crystals of chemical substances from time and temperature from dried photographic solutions (the smallest sharp objects, completely damaged the emulsion), which processed the film.
Well, maybe there is dust as an additional "formative".
These are so common defects that few of the qualified photographers pay attention to them on the 10th (not to mention the 50th) year of storage of films.
Moreover, these films were not stored "in science" - cut into six frames and placed in a sink, but simply rolled up and wrapped in paper ...
Object №6
This is a region of whitish exposition, in brightness less than object No. 3 and "covering" almost a half-frame - as noted above.
This is a manifestation of the fact that the lens of the lens dropped condensate when introduced from the frost into heat.
Even if the lens was rubbed, traces of this condensate still had to remain.
They gave this effect. And as it was mentioned above, on most of the images on the Internet, it was removed by means of electronic image processing (again, for example, increasing the contrast), considering it irrelevant to what was actually the case.

When was this frame shot

 

1. The shot was probably made by chance, and after all the events on 01-02.II.1959.
It is clear that it was made after Dyatlov group passed the Boot Rock, 1 km before the last place they pitched their tent. +/- 100 ... 200 m from this stone.
This is indicated by 2 previous pictures.
29516740547_dde5dfb0e0_o.jpg
43737173404_bd742c77d7_o.jpg
2. Most likely the shot is taken in the tent of rescuers between 26 ... February 27 (when the camera was brought to the searchers camp) and the day when it was sent to Ivdel with someone from the investigators, for example, L. N. Ivanov or V. I. Tempalov.
It is necessary to check when there was good sunny weather at this time, and it was quite cold.
Although these two states are compatible and completely natural for the winter conditions of February-March 1959 But the cut-off time i.e. when it could no longer be made, is very vague: it can be any time before the development of the film begins.
Even more precisely, before the film was rewound back, onto the feeding cassette.
And this could be in the searchers camp in the interval from February 26 ... 27 until March, when investigators took off with the evidence.
The next place where the camera could have been handled and there could be conditions for shooting such a frame is a small building on Ivdel airfield, where all things were brought and sorted, or other manipulations took place.
After that, the film must have been developed.
And after that, in urban conditions, it was very difficult to find a set of similar conditions.
3. The least likely it was in the morgue where the autopsy was done.
Why did I bring the last possible place?
Yes, because there is a film from the archive of L. N. Ivanov, where only the bodies in the morgue have been removed, and there is the very first frame that looks like this:
43737172994_7e36096f6b_o.jpg
The very first picture on the film of the investigation, filmed in the morgue of the city of Ivdel, when there were bodies of the first four (five) in early March 1959
The very first picture on the film of the investigation, filmed in the morgue of the city of Ivdel, when there were bodies of the first four (five) in early March 1959.
This first frame on the film photographers who provided the investigation (where all the pictures are taken exclusively in the morgue), is very similar to that last one.
By the general style, layout, shooting conditions and, most importantly, by a square bright silhouette, which very much resembles a window.
Such a combination in marching conditions is almost impossible to obtain.
The fact that he is technical is clear on all the criteria of photography: the very first, very close to the charging end, is shot at random, i.e. not caring about anything, etc.
This film has nothing to do with Dyatlov group cameras, it was shot after the bodies were taken to the morgue.
However, on this very first frame from this film there is an image that is somewhat reminiscent of what is on the "last frame" from G. Krivonischenko's film.
Apparently the shooting conditions were very similar.
In terms of the ratio of the darkness of the room and a bright fragment of a similar shape.
There is no overlap between the two photos, of course, but one can find similarities.
Once again I want to note: On this film there is nothing else but the corpses of the deceased in the morgue.
But all artifacts (a bright spot, not quite a round shape, an object in the form of a cloud of translucent consistency) are present. In any case, it has something similar ...
Most likely, an out of focus window gleams light on the walls in the dark room of the morgue.
And the frame is also "technical", i.e. made only to ensure that the film is guaranteed to be held in the camera further than the exposed charging end.
This is what photographers usually do.
Some people do this with a lid on the lens (but then there won't be any image at all), and some do it without a lid on the lens and then all that is captured in the shot is by chance, like in the photo above.

Where was the photo taken

 

"The scenery" in the photograph in question can be explained by the fact that it was shot in a room limited in size, in which there were no uniformly colored light surfaces, and some darker objects were closely located, behind a dense surface, not an open space.
1. The most likely place can be a tent of a search group in their camp on the river Auspiya.
The next photo shows the part of the door of the tent.
29516740197_189cb78f4e_o.jpg
The entrance to the tent of the search party in their camp at Auspiya, which was there between late February and late April 1959, is itself visible behind the bend figure in front of Igor Nevolin (facing us)
We can point to a number of key coincidences that can add to this assumption.
The entrance to the tent was set (direction of shooting, as well as the direction of the solar exposition) - almost strictly to the south, that's exactly the tent of rescuers in the clearing.
This information I received from V.G. Karelin back in February 2009.
And then everything coincided when I reconnaissance the location of this camp on the spot.
The fact that this is the meadow is not to be doubted.
On it, we found a large number of flat-cell batteries for a tube radio station, in August 2009.
And the orientation of the tent can also be just to the south, because in a different position, it will be quite inconvenient to place.
There they go, so differently, either the people will roll down one of the parties, or sleep "upside down", which again, it's completely inconvenient.
This same position gives the opportunity to catch a direct ray of the sun, with the appropriate weather.
2. I do not know what happened in the small building at the airfield, but it is possible that the same conditions have occurred there, purely theoretically.
3. As for the possibility of obtaining such a picture in the morgue, to what I have already said above, one can add that it is almost impossible to get there a ray that will give the image of the diaphragm. Although, judging by the frame from there a number of conditions for obtaining it are available.
Now we must point out that it is unlikely that this photo was taken directly in Dyatlov tent during all events that occurred on February 1 or 2, 1959.
  • In their tent there is no such space in which such a picture could be made. The tent was installed very low. The tent must have a height of no more than 130 ... 140 cm, which follows from the description when it was found on February 26, 1959 and the study on February 28, 1959. Ski poles had such a maximum height at that time. In addition, the entrance to the tent could not be rectangular, close to the square.
  • In those weather conditions that have been identified by the two penultimate shots - cloudy weather, limited visibility, lack of sunshine, dusk - the amount of this is not enough conditions for it to be obtained.
Let's consider the reasons why the picture could be made by chance.
  • There may be many reasons for accidental pressing of the camera button in the above described conditions, it is impossible to list everything.
  • But there is one natural instance of the shutter release. After the end of the film, it should be rolled back onto the cassette, before being removed, not "lighted", from the camera. To do this, first press the "release" button, then move to the rewind position a special lever and rewind with a special pen. In older devices, such as Dyatlov group camera «Zorki», when reinstalling the rewind lever, without this rewind the film it was impossible. If the bolt was cocked, but the button was not pressed, then it automatically descended. What kind of excerpt is this ...? And who knows ..? Most likely, it was installed before that.
43737172904_f75f58b9ce_o.jpg
The upper part of the camera is «Zorki». A red circle indicates the film rewind lever
I suspect that many connoisseurs of photography who can prove with all the calculations and calculations, as well as trumpeting their own authority, will argue that this is not usually done, especially by professionals.
Justification is simple: so, they say, the constantly cocked shutter stretches the spring of the timekeeping mechanism.
I can say with the same certainty that in all the campaigns, especially the winter ones, I have never done this.
Because the risk of losing an interesting shot was much more important than losing a few frames of the spent film.
By the way, so did many experienced tourists who were engaged in photography in campaigns at a fairly high level: A. Makletsov, A. Kolesnikov, B. Ogorodnikov, V. Shimanovskiy are only those tourists-skiers, MSU of the USSR, with whom I discussed questions photography in the ski hikes.
In fact, everything could be and even easier.
Someone from the search engines or investigators decided to just check whether the camera (camera mechanism) is in working order or not. He opened the case, cocked the bolt and pressed the trigger.
Or, someone from them just pressed "descent", that would rewind the tape back on the tape.
And these, mentioned randomnesses can be one more proof of that in this case it is a usual technical or unsuccessful random shot, which does not carry any meaning and/or mystery.
 
 

 DYATLOVPASS.COM

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Żródło: https://www.facebook.com/dyatlovmania/



#974 fortyck

fortyck

    Administrator

  • Administrator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14121 postów
  • Płeć:Mężczyzna
  • Lokalizacja:Kraków

Napisano 06 wrzesień 2018 - 21:39

Twilight Sleep - Unrest

 

 

 

 

Unrest in the streets

Unrest in your mind

Unrest in the constellations

We were always the restless kind

 

Unrest this restless heart

With stellar circuitry

There are no accidents

There are no friendly fires

 

So pull out all the wires

 

Unrest this restless heart

With stellar circuitry

The nights are getting longer

The days are getting colder

Remember when you told her

The time for growing older

Was not tonight or ever

So hush the signifier

 

And pull out all the wires

Pull out all the wires

Pull out all the wires

 

Disobey the future whispers only

Harm the ones

Who listen

We can stop the oxidation

Disobey the future whispers

Only harm the ones who listen

We can stop the oxidation

 

One task to remove the lines

Another to erase the signs

So many ways to kill the time

We have to kill the time

 

And pull out all the wires

Pull out all the wires

Pull out all the wires

 

Electric currents plan to

Outsmart mother nature

 

Disobey the future whispers only

Harm the ones

Who listen

We can stop the oxidation

Disobey the future whispers

Only harm the ones who listen

We can stop the oxidation



#975 fortyck

fortyck

    Administrator

  • Administrator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14121 postów
  • Płeć:Mężczyzna
  • Lokalizacja:Kraków

Napisano 09 wrzesień 2018 - 21:12

43859707424_0418aa8cc5_o.jpg



#976 fortyck

fortyck

    Administrator

  • Administrator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14121 postów
  • Płeć:Mężczyzna
  • Lokalizacja:Kraków

Napisano 12 wrzesień 2018 - 21:33

43733142225_4d760b099a_o.jpg



#977 fortyck

fortyck

    Administrator

  • Administrator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14121 postów
  • Płeć:Mężczyzna
  • Lokalizacja:Kraków

Napisano 15 wrzesień 2018 - 22:36

44652811712_fca516697a_o.jpg



#978 fortyck

fortyck

    Administrator

  • Administrator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14121 postów
  • Płeć:Mężczyzna
  • Lokalizacja:Kraków

Napisano 18 wrzesień 2018 - 22:15

43859028635_e844602b48_o.jpg






Użytkownicy przeglądający ten temat: 1

0 użytkowników, 1 gości, 0 anonimowych