Aha. Also, Korruption. ;)Emmerich schrieb:Teddy hat mir ein Jahr kostenlosen Netflixzugang und einen Sack Blumenerde versprochen, da konnte ich nicht nein sagen
Container welcher Größe? Kann doch nicht mehr sein als das, das die Wanderer selbst schleppen konnten.tomkyle schrieb:Es sollen angeblich 3 Container voll von Zeugs, der Umgekommenen, eingesammelt worden sein.
Ja, das ist in den Tagebüchern gut dokumentiert. Er hat sich wegen medizinischer Beschwerden schon relativ früh von der Gruppe getrennt und ist dann zurückgereist. Ich denke nicht, dass er irgendetwas mit den späteren Ereignissen zu tun hatte.
An dieser Stelle erzählen die Autoren eine Geschichte mit bösen Buben, aber nicht wie Team Rakitin, weil sie eine Böse-Buben-Geschichte erzählen wollen, sondern weil sie müssen. Während Team Rakitin offenbar Freude dran hat, Folterszenen und eine Agenten-Story auszumalen, haben Team Teddy/Igor ihre Böse-Buben-Geschichte eher à contrecoeur „am Hals“, weil sie infolge ihrer „neuen Theorie“ und deren Schwächen dazu genötigt sind. Wie gesagt, immerhin warten sie mit Belegen auf. Ich wollte ja nichts mehr dazu schreiben ;).
Oje. Das beendet ja sofort jede eventuell doch gute Idee.
Welche, zB?
Aber das machen die andern doch auch so. Bedauerlicherweise. Schau dir nur mal Schkryabach an, da wird alles "Nichtpassende" auf routinierte Weise unterschlagen und totgeschwiegen.
Fakten, die zur Theorie nicht passen, werden schlechtweg nicht erwähnt
Oje. Das beendet ja sofort jede eventuell doch gute Idee.
Sage ich auch. Angeblich aber doch. Originalzitat (Pawlow/Hadjiyska, „1079: The Overwhelming Force of Dyatlov Pass“): "Our theory ist that an old fallen tree can be a reference point to track the location of the Dyatlov group tent. Fallen trees of this kind were found close to the famous cedar and in other places. A small fallen dear lies on the right side of the 4th Lozva tributary, approximately in the place where Dyatlov's body was found. Some old broken-off trunks were found on the left bank of the creek, 70 to 80 meters above the 'den'." Ich lese das so, daß da heutzutage ein alter Baum noch herum liegt, erster Satz, und daß die anderen Beobachtungen sich ebenfalls auf die Gegenwart beziehen. Das heißt, wir müssen nicht nur das Buch lesen sondern demnächst mal nach Swertlowsk reisen und eine Expedition in den Ural organisieren.Domino420 schrieb:Ich lese hier immer nur still mit, aber diese Baum-Theorie scheidet doch schon dadurch aus, dass kein Baum gefunden wurde. ;-)
A small fallen dear* lies on the right side of the 4th Lozva tributary, approximately in the place where Dyatlov's body was found.*cedar
Kati
2,0 von 5 Sternen Incredible, badly written waste of time
Rezension aus Deutschland vom 3. Juni 2021
Verifizierter Kauf
It seems the author is trying to daze the reader by bombarding him with every available bit of information, in the hope that he swallows the indigestible conspiracy theory in the end. If you want to save yourself considerable time, skip to the last chapter and avoid 300 pages of mostly irrelevant biographies, interviews and incoherent details, from which it is never clear why this information is mentioned in the first place, except to fill the pages. The final theory is of the type "creative conspiracy", but so wildly constructed and unrelated to the endless previous detail, that Occam would spin in his grave. Two stars because the book might serve as a biographical repository of everyone even minimally involved in the case, but this unfortunately won't bring you closer to a plausible solution. Since one of the authors is actually the creator of the largest case file database on the web, it is almost forgivable, that she is stuffing a maximum amount of detail into the book, up to the point where it becomes an unreadable information overkill and one of the most confusing and far-fetched conspiracy theories out here.
Aus USAQuelle:
Cara H.
2,0 von 5 Sternen Don’t Waste Your Time!
Rezension aus den Vereinigten Staaten vom 11. Mai 2021
Verifizierter Kauf
I don’t think I’ve ever been as angry at a book for wasting my time as this one. And this is going to have spoilers because I consider it a kindness to keep people from wasting their time and money on this book. But if you don’t feel it’s a waste of time and money then please stop here. I’m giving it two stars because it does have some good information and the author’s website has the case files translated into English (for the most part). However, the book is a mess when it comes to organization and there is a lot of needless information. If it’s your first read-through, skip over the biographies. I know to readers like me, that’s almost a capital offense, but you’re going to have enough trouble wading through the information. You can always go back and read them later.
So the book makes clear at the very beginning that they do not accept the official conclusion and believe there was a cover-up after the fact. Fine with me. That’s what I lean toward too. This is based on the Febuary 6 date on the criminal file, and I guess they conducted interviews of people that lived in the area at the time or surviving relatives of such ones. They relate in the beginning that human bodies were seen from the air and reported to the local militia station two weeks before the bodies were officially found. The militia station then sent a search party out, and they confirmed it. The stuff they gathered was sent to Ivdel and there the plot thickens, but for now that thread of the story ends until the last few chapters of the book.
In the last few chapters of the book, we are told that geologists were doing work in the Ural Mountains looking for ore deposits. As they were talking about blasting, I thought their theory was going to be that the geologists inadvertently killed the hikers. But evidently this section was only to convince us that the geologists were in the area and so were their helicopters.
Then it gets back to when the bodies were seen from the air.
And then the author veers off into relating briefly the circumstances surrounding the deaths of several others hikers that died that year. Why they put this section in is not immediately clear, but it is to make sure that the reader understands that just because a hiker died didn’t automatically result in the opening of a criminal case. The Dyatlov pass incident is different.
Why they felt they had to convince people that geologists were looking for uranium deposits in the Ural Mountains (during the Cold War, no less) and the Dyatlov Pass incident is different from a hiker who plunged to his death in front of the horrified gaze of two of his companions is beyond me. Well, whatever, we move on. They then seem to be playing a numbers game with how many hikers were in the Dyatlov group, and it’s never made clear what they believe or who they think the extra people might be.
I’m assuming the extra people must have survived. Places in the book seem to argue that Yuri Yudin wasn’t very forthcoming. In any case, six bodies were brought into the morgue (at a prison camp, I think). In this alternate version the six bodies were the four that were found later in the den, Zina, and Yuri Kri. They had died in the tent or around the tent. They couldn’t find the other four bodies, jumping from eleven to ten without an explanation, and then it became the other three, jumping from ten to nine without explanation.
The UPI started asking questions and the conspirators panicked because they evidently never thought that anyone would come to search for the lost hikers despite the fact that they had the presence of mind to gather up all the incriminating evidence to stage a scene and fool the Soviet government. They sent people out to look, but they couldn’t find the missing bodies, and right in the nick of time, they found two of the others around February 20th or something. As far as I can tell, Dyatlov was never found by the conspirators. His body was the only body that was actually discovered at the time of the official discovery. The conspirators staged the scene on February 24th and purposely hid the ones with the injuries in a thaw hole so they wouldn’t be discovered right away, and then infiltrated the official search teams to provide wrong information that the ones not in on the secret would accept. The one thing I will say for the book is that they don’t paint the conspirators as bad guys. They were just trying to protect themselves from the punishment the government would exact on them. But for what exactly?
It’s a hypothetical conversation that happened between a group of drunk men drinking vodka. The one guy tells his friends that the hikers died of the cold. It can’t be the whole story because he mentions injuries. However, in any case, he’s not worried about anything. He is convinced it’s nature related. And then someone suggests that they might have died due to the explosives set by loggers in the area. We get this account of a person who nearly walked into the radius of one and that the loggers don’t set flags or warnings or anything. So, of course, the guy knows what would the government would do if they were to find out about their lack of safety protocols and that it was the cause of the hikers’ death.
And the cover-up begins from there. So if you’re thinking this all makes sense, you might want to stop right here.
Because the final chapter reveals that the hikers died because a huge tree was blown over by a blizzard. Four were injured and the others scrambled out of the tent, to die of the cold later. The whole entire scene was staged only because of the possibility that the government might think the loggers did it. This is insanely stupid! A tree toppled by a blizzard would not have the same damage as a tree being blasted over by an explosion. And moving bodies, the tent, and all the group’s possessions to stage a scene has a lot more potential for leaving incriminating evidence than a tree falling in the forest.
This is worse than the Bigfoot theory, and I don’t even believe in Bigfoot. But it doesn’t depend on us accepting that the local authorities risked criminal prosecution by tampering with evidence because they thought someone would question a tree falling over in the middle of a blizzard. Seriously, don’t waste your time.
Nur drei :D.
Leider ja.
Nein! Das nicht.
Ja.
Doch, sollte man. es ist keine Etappe auf dem Weg zur Lösung. Es ist ein Irrweg, der weit von ihr weg führt.
Ja. Es ist hinten und vorne unlogisch. Wie gesagt, warum sollte man eine Unfall vertuschen?
Das wäre das übliche Prozedere gewesen: Eine Feuerstelle bauen. Der Ofen war nicht zum Kochen mit dabei.
Diese Frage darf erlaubt sein. Die ganze Verschwörungstheorie, um das Kind beim Namen zu nennen, hat weder Hand noch Fuß und ist eine reine Folge vorher liebgewonnener Thesen, die einen Verschwörungsplot leider benötigen.
Viele der positiven Rezensionen loben den Faktenreichtum. Für einige dieser Rezensenten war es auch das erste Dyatlov-Buch. Für andere nicht, aber wir wissen in etwa, welchen Dummfug die vorher verspeist haben müssen. Andere sind nicht sehr gebildet und denken, ein Fakten-Konvolut habe schon eine besondere Autoriät. Etc. pp.
Sorry, kann mich grad nicht entsinnen. War es denn das übliche Prozedere in dem Fall? Oder kann man den Umständen und Fakten nach annehmen, dass es eher aus einer Not heraus zum Aufwärmen gemacht wurde?
