Terms Which Have Disappeared

[Zombie_61]

Has anyone looked into the theory that the Titanic sinking was faked up as an insurance scam, that the so called Titanic was actually the badly damaged sister ship Olympic disguised as the Titanic, it was deliberately scuttled, and the ship that was standing by to rescue the passengers and crew did not see the signal flares by incredible bad luck (there happened to be another ship between them).

Several years ago my wife and I watched a marathon on one of the cable channels that was comprised of "made for tv" documentaries about Titanic, and they discussed this theory in one of them. Although they were sister ships, there were noticeable differences between the two vessels if you knew where to look. After comparing photos of the RMS Olympic to photos taken of the ship that sailed from Southampton under the name RMS Titanic, they concluded they could not have been the same ship.

 

[HudsonHawk]

Has anyone looked into the theory that the Titanic sinking was faked up as an insurance scam, that the so called Titanic was actually the badly damaged sister ship Olympic disguised as the Titanic, it was deliberately scuttled, and the ship that was standing by to rescue the passengers and crew did not see the signal flares by incredible bad luck (there happened to be another ship between them).

Lots of people have looked into this conspiracy theory, and pretty much all legitimate researchers have debunked it. But like most conspiracy theories, the notion persists in the imagination of the public.

 

[Fading Fast]

Did anyone else see the "weather-caused-distortions that both prevented the crew from seeing the iceberg and the California from seeing the emergency flares" documentary I saw? Any thoughts on it?

 

[ChrisB]

Didn't the Californian specifically note that they saw the rockets, but thought they were "company signals" rather than distress signals?

 

[ChrisB]

Has anyone looked into the theory that the Titanic sinking was faked up as an insurance scam, that the so called Titanic was actually the badly damaged sister ship Olympic disguised as the Titanic, it was deliberately scuttled, and the ship that was standing by to rescue the passengers and crew did not see the signal flares by incredible bad luck (there happened to be another ship between them).

It was carried out by the same people who went on to fake the moon landing....

 

[tonyb]

I don't know who first said "any two people can keep a secret, provided one of them is dead."

We've all conspired in one way or another, so we know that conspiracies are certainly real. But the more elaborate the alleged conspiracy, and the more people it involves, the less likely it is to have any foundation in fact.

But those with an emotional investment in even the most far-fetched and potentially earthshaking conspiracy theories aren't subject to reason. It's a religion with them.

Most such devotees of the outrageously implausible are harmless enough. But I have nothing but abject disdain for some, such as those who claim the murder of all those little kids in Newtown was an elaborate hoax perpetrated by people who wish to seize everyone's firearms. It's a sort of mental illness, I suppose, so it might be big of me to find some forgiveness in my heart for the poor deluded souls. But no, you just can't wash your hands of it. Not if you have any decency at all.

 

[Upgrade]

The theory goes that there was a mirage-like effect caused by the extremely frigid water. It yielded strange effects with lights having a frosted appearance and witness reports of smoke rising from the sinking ship flattening out as if against an invisible atmospheric layer.

Perhaps the most significant result would be the mirage actually concealing the iceberg until it was too late, In addition the people on the Titanic believed they saw a large ship very near by which could have been a distorted, elongated version of the Californian which was much smaller and much farther away.

This mirage effect in turn would have distorted and scrambled any morse lamp flashings seen by the Californian from the Titanic, leaving them to erroneously conclude that it was just a lamp hanging from the mast.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fata_Morgana_(mirage)

 

[2jakes]

The theory goes that there was a mirage-like effect caused by the extremely frigid water. It yielded strange effects with lights having a frosted appearance and witness reports of smoke rising from the sinking ship flattening out as if against an invisible atmospheric layer.

Perhaps the most significant result would be the mirage actually concealing the iceberg until it was too late, In addition the people on the Titanic believed they saw a large ship very near by which could have been a distorted, elongated version of the Californian which was much smaller and much farther away.

This mirage effect in turn would have distorted and scrambled any morse lamp flashings seen by the Californian from the Titanic, leaving them to erroneously conclude that it was just a lamp hanging from the mast.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fata_Morgana_(mirage)

Being such a huge ship, would it have been possible or realistic to rig up some floating device
after coating yourself with grease from the kitchen to prevent freezing in the water?

 

[Upgrade]

There's the story of the cook who survived the sinking after two hours supposedly because of the amount of alcohol he drank.

 

[2jakes]

There's the story of the cook who survived the sinking after two hours supposedly because of the amount of alcohol he drank.

Cool!

 

[ChrisB]

Absent any optical effects, to be visible from a lifeboat, the Californian would have to have been within about 10 miles. I have seen many strange mirages of ships near the horizon, but they have all occurred in very hot weather. I don't know if there are any cold weather mirages, and in any case, I am not at the beach in cold weather to witness them!

 

[BlueTrain]

I've always believed that too many conspiracy theories and other theories about things that are claimed to be faked are based on what cannot be done or what cannot happen. In the case of the Titanic, "everyone knew" it was unsinkable, so there must be another explanation. In the same sense, a lot of believes are based on the supposed fact that "everyone knew." On the other hand, since just about everything is predicted by at least someone, someone probably predicted the event, whatever it was.

I base my opinion about the idea that people seem to believe a lot of things are impossible on the assumption that most people never did anything difficult and they therefore can't believe that anyone else can do something difficult, either. One person by himself can do an incredible amount of work with a high skill level. An extra pair of hands sure makes it easier, too. The ancient Egyptians didn't need the help of Outer Space aliens to build the pyramids, although I don't doubt they would have appreciated the help.

The corollary of that is that just about everything is more difficult than is appreciated.

 

[2jakes]

I've seen a father in a rage kill a wild
coyote with his hands when the beast attacked his child.
Probably under other circumstances
it would not have been possible.

 

[LizzieMaine]

For years it was believed that the Titanic sank in one piece, because that's what's most of the eyewitnesses said happened. Those eyewitnesses who contradicted the received wisdom and claimed the ship broke in half before sinking were dismissed as victims of optical illusions.

Seventy-three years later, the Titanic was found -- broken into two pieces, and studies of the wreckage have proven that it did, in fact break in half as it went down. Not only that, discrepancies between the ship's plans and the evidence of the wreckage have proven that it broke in half specifically because of corner-cutting shilling-squeezing alterations made during construction at the instance of White Star.

The lesson, of course, is that even eyewitnesses can't necessarily be trusted to correctly interpret what they think thay saw. And that if there's a way to do something on the cheap, it will be found and it will be tried, no mater what the consequences.

 

[2jakes]

For years it was believed that the Titanic sank in one piece, because that's what's most of the eyewitnesses said happened. Those eyewitnesses who contradicted the received wisdom and claimed the ship broke in half before sinking were dismissed as victims of optical illusions.

Seventy-three years later, the Titanic was found -- broken into two pieces, and studies of the wreckage have proven that it did, in fact break in half as it went down. Not only that, discrepancies between the ship's plans and the evidence of the wreckage have proven that it broke in half specifically because of corner-cutting shilling-squeezing alterations made during construction at the instance of White Star.

The lesson, of course, is that even eyewitnesses can't necessarily be trusted to correctly interpret what they think thay saw. And that if there's a way to do something on the cheap, it will be found and it will be tried, no mater what the consequences.

I recall watching that study of the Titanic and the
discrepancies with the quality of the rivets or the
manner in which they were applied.

Sadly something similar with NASA and the shortcomings
regarding Apollo.
50th Anniversary of Apollo 1 Fire: What NASA Learned from the Tragic ...

 

[Zombie_61]

In one of the documentaries I watched a few years ago a group of "experts" once again examined Titanic's wreckage using one of those mini-subs. One of their goals was to attempt to determine how and why the ship broke apart as it did. Their conclusions as far as the "why" was concerned matched what Miss Lizzie wrote above--lower-than-expected quality of the materials, the construction, and the workmanship. But their conclusions as far as the "how" took them all by surprise. It was generally assumed at the time that the ship broke apart from the upper decks down. But after examining both halves they noticed that the steel around the upper hull was considerably deformed, while the steel around the bottom of the hull and keel was nearly pristine (taking into consideration the impact of the ship hitting the ocean floor). Their conclusion was that the weight of the water flooding the hull caused the keel to fail, and that the ship actually split from the bottom up. So even James Cameron, with all of his research, may have gotten it wrong.

 

[ChiTownScion]

For years it was believed that the Titanic sank in one piece, because that's what's most of the eyewitnesses said happened. Those eyewitnesses who contradicted the received wisdom and claimed the ship broke in half before sinking were dismissed as victims of optical illusions.

Seventy-three years later, the Titanic was found -- broken into two pieces, and studies of the wreckage have proven that it did, in fact break in half as it went down. Not only that, discrepancies between the ship's plans and the evidence of the wreckage have proven that it broke in half specifically because of corner-cutting shilling-squeezing alterations made during construction at the instance of White Star.

The lesson, of course, is that even eyewitnesses can't necessarily be trusted to correctly interpret what they think thay saw. And that if there's a way to do something on the cheap, it will be found and it will be tried, no mater what the consequences.

Very true. As a child my favorite account read, "... her huge stern rose high into the air, then disappeared beneath the waves."

Cameron's film had the advantage of ocean floor research, and the breakup of the hull and superstructure was displayed quite graphically. The technical detail in the film made all of the aforementioned teenage girl silliness in the film bearable.

Titanic, as a story, has all of the romantic bells and whistles that people love, but I wish that other maritime disasters where portrayed in adequately budgeted features as well. The Eastland. The Empress of Ireland. The Cap Arcona (as mentioned) and the Wilhelm Gustloff. And yes, the Lusitania. I doubt that all would star DiCaprio and Winslet... but perhaps they'd be acted, directed, and distributed well done enough to inspire kids to hit the library and read some really fascinating history. And that angle of doing things on the cheap costing human lives: they all share that aspect to some degree.

 

[Stearmen]

Absent any optical effects, to be visible from a lifeboat, the Californian would have to have been within about 10 miles. I have seen many strange mirages of ships near the horizon, but they have all occurred in very hot weather. I don't know if there are any cold weather mirages, and in any case, I am not at the beach in cold weather to witness them!

There are cold weather Mirages. Many think this explains why crew on the California said, all they saw was a single stack small ship in the distance. You can see a supertanker longer then a football field and it looks just like an old fashion tramp steamer. Very weird!

 

[Fading Fast]

In one of the documentaries I watched a few years ago a group of "experts" once again examined Titanic's wreckage using one of those mini-subs. One of their goals was to attempt to determine how and why the ship broke apart as it did. Their conclusions as far as the "why" was concerned matched what Miss Lizzie wrote above--lower-than-expected quality of the materials, the construction, and the workmanship. But their conclusions as far as the "how" took them all by surprise. It was generally assumed at the time that the ship broke apart from the upper decks down. But after examining both halves they noticed that the steel around the upper hull was considerably deformed, while the steel around the bottom of the hull and keel was nearly pristine (taking into consideration the impact of the ship hitting the ocean floor). Their conclusion was that the weight of the water flooding the hull caused the keel to fail, and that the ship actually split from the bottom up. So even James Cameron, with all of his research, may have gotten it wrong.

I am amazed, encouraged and, then, discouraged (slightly) as these new details emerge and the story changes. I'm amazed at what we can piece to together, encouraged that with enough technology we'll get to the truth and, then, as one "proven" truth after another falls to a newer "proven" truth I begin to question if we'll ever have a definitive answer or, instead, just an ever evolving skien of answers based on the newest science / discoveries.

It happened in 1912 and evidence is constantly being consumed by the sea even as our technology improves; will we ever have "the" answer - probably not, rather we'll have "The Great Gatsby" ending: “So we beat on, boats against the current, borne back ceaselessly into the past.”

 

[ChrisB]

When all you have are eyewitness accounts, it is hard to put together any definitive story. What we actually remeber are a few details, and our minds tend to fill in the gaps. Some things we will never know for certain.