A titanic conspiracy

bonkey

Futility, or the wreck of the Titan is a book by Morgan Robertson. The premise of the book is strikingly unoriginal - it deals with an ocean-liner named the Titan, which sank on its westward joutney across the Atlantic, after striking an iceberg.

As if to add plagiaristic insult to injury, the Titan was British, of comparable size and specification to the Titanic. The Titan also had insufficient lifeboats for its passengers, and the quantities of both rich and poor who perished as a result are stunningly close to those of the real event this clearly refers to.

This book was released before the Titanic set sail!!!

When I first heard this, I became suspicious. What if the Titanic wasn't an accident. What if its death was planned from the start? What if this book was used as inspiration, or even was a warning by someone who knew what was to come but was afraid to speak openly?

I decided to investigate some more. And wow, did I find stuff.

Here's some excerpts from a respected account of the final moments:


some of the refugees say, the ship broke in two abaft the engine room after the bulkhead explosions had occurred.

...
Mellers and Barkworth, who say their names have been spelled incorrectly in most of the lists of survivors, both declare there were three distinct explosions before the Titanic broke in two

...
The testimony of J. Bruce Ismay, managing director of the White Star Line, that he had not heard explosions

Could it be true? Was the Titanic deliberately sunk? I believe that JBI may have been in on it, denying explosions occurred, and sticking to the farcical notion that an iceberg could sink a ship which was explicitly built to be unsinkable from such accidents!

As they say on the shopping channel - But Wait! There's MORE!

William T. Stead. also referenced in the above-linked chapter was one notable passenger who died the evening the Titanic sank. He calmly conversed with other passengers about the details of an iceberg he hadn't seen! How could he have known? Perhaps all is not as it seems?

Similar to M. Robertson, Stead had written works startlingly close in detail to what actually happened, prior to the fateful night! Could he have been in on it? Was he really just a passenger, or was he invetigating a story (he was a reporter), trying to expose, or indeed foil the very plot he had been frightened into maintaining silent about? Did he really die when the ship went down, or was he killed trying to foil the detonation of the explosives which sank the ship?

There are also numerous other unanswered or unsatisfactorily-answered questions about that night - alleged communications difficulties with the rescuing ships, the mysterious "third ship", why the lifeboats were so poorly used, or indeed why there were so few in the first place. Why did the captain really order the speed he did in seas known to contain icebergs? How could the lookouts have missed such a large iceberg? Its ridiculous - there are too many coincidences invoked and required for this story to be credible.

I believe its clear - the official story of what happened to the Titanic is a fantasy - a Hollywood set of an excuse that crumbles when one stops discarding the inconvenient details.

Remember - there are no coincidences.

jc

Diogenes

Is it also not true that days after the Titanic sank, Harriet Quimby became the 1st woman to fly across the atlantic. Proving that a mere woman could manage this journey. Perhaps the sinking of the Titanic was the 1st of a one two punch by the burgening aviation industry, terrifying the public about oceanic travel while promoting this new fangled "air travel"?

bonkey

I think it more likely that pirates were involved, and that the ship was planned from the start as a "retirement fund" for a number of aging pirates (of whom I suspect JBI to have been one)

I wouldn't rule out the airline industry, though. They may, indeed, have had a hand in it too. If it was retiring pirates, they wouldn't have had any qualms about helping the airline industry supplant the easier target of shipping, as they themselves wouldn't have been effected.

Good thinking, that man. Some mutual back-slapping and high-fiving is in order here I think.

Either which way its clear that we need to reopen the books and have a proper, indpendant investigation which considers all options rather than just trying to ribberstamp some farcical fantasy story that a iceberg could have sunk the unsinkable which all the sheep out there still just unquestioningly follow.

TheFredJ

did you check anything about theis novella out?

did you note the fact that the novella, while originally published as futiliy in 1898, was re-published in 1912 with a name designed to cash in on the titanic sinking? not to mention the post disaster editing carried out to make the stories seem even more similar.

kippy

Sorry for my pessism. But come on......
Just a few small details without me actually getting in depth.
The explosions were the steam engines reacting with the ultra cool water which had entered the ship. Dont have a full account of the science behind it and dont want to invest the time into looking for it on line but am sure there is a detailed scientific explanation there.
As for communications? IT WAS 1912 for Gods sake.


What do you mean there are no coincidences? There are always coincidences.

Diogenes

bonkey wrote:

I think it more likely that pirates were involved, and that the ship was planned from the start as a "retirement fund" for a number of aging pirates (of whom I suspect JBI to have been one)

Sky Pirates? With Aqua planes? Did all those Monets really end up in clinger or did Caledon Hockley escape with them only to claim the insurance.

Follow the Money People. Ten Years before the titanic, White Star Liners, absorded International Mercnatile Marine Company

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Mercantile_Marine_Co.

The project was bankrolled by the House of Morgan, led by financier J. Pierpont Morgan. The company also had working profit-sharing relationships with the German Hamburg-Amerika Line and the North German Lloyd lines. The trust caused a great panic in the British shipping industry and led directly to the British government's subsidy of the Cunard Line's new ships RMS Lusitania and RMS Mauretania in an effort to compete. However, the new company had dramatically overpaid for acquiring stock due to an overestimation of potential profit and a proposed subsidy bill in the U.S. Congress failed

International intrigue and high finance, with Europe on the brink of war.

I wouldn't rule out the airline industry, though. They may, indeed, have had a hand in it too. If it was retiring pirates, they wouldn't have had any qualms about helping the airline industry supplant the easier target of shipping, as they themselves wouldn't have been effected.

Because they were retiring, right, gotcha......

Either which way its clear that we need to reopen the books and have a proper, indpendant investigation which considers all options rather than just trying to ribberstamp some farcical fantasy story that a iceberg could have sunk the unsinkable which all the sheep out there still just unquestioningly follow.

Absolutely

The explosions were the steam engines reacting with the ultra cool water which had entered the ship. Dont have a full account of the science behind it and dont want to invest the time into looking for it on line but am sure there is a detailed scientific explanation there.

Cold water causes explosions, god good luck getting any scientist to believe that. Explosives cause Explosions, any scientist can tell you that.

As for communications? IT WAS 1912 for Gods sake.

Yes, they could do everything from flag code to morse using lights. Why did the 3rd ship not contact or come to the rescue. Why did the lifeboats launch without full compliments. And why "Abide with me" Over and Over again. Was it a code?

Diogenes

TheFredJ wrote:

did you check anything about theis novella out?

did you note the fact that the novella, while originally published as futiliy in 1898, was re-published in 1912 with a name designed to cash in on the titanic sinking? not to mention the post disaster editing carried out to make the stories seem even more similar.

Hmmm so they had to revise their story, shift and change it. Interesting...

oscarBravo

Obviously The Man got to them.

bonkey

Diogenes wrote:

Hmmm so they had to revise their story, shift and change it. Interesting...

It was clearly an attempt to try and hide the original warning, by replacing the original work by an updated one with a newer version.

You have to remember, there was no internet or decentforensics back then. Anyone who claimed to have the original work could be dismissed as a fabricator and the book claimed to be a simple forgery, supported by the fact that the revised copy was on the bookshelfs with the corrected publishing date.

Disinformation. A common tactic. Thankfully, its easy to spot once you know what to look for.

Thankfully, for some reason, the dishonest coverup failed and the truth has been revealed. It was probably only ever intended to be a short-term effect anyway. Once the official fairy-tale was established, the assumption would be that the public would just accept it all, as they always do.

I think it could all be unravveling here, right before our very eyes....

oscarBravo

You know, the more I think about it, the more sinister it seems.

The ship was designed to survive an impact with an iceberg without sinking. And, sure enough, it stayed afloat after the impact - but then eyewitnesses describe hearing explosions, and the ship splits in two!

I think it's obvious that scuttling charges were placed on board at some point prior to the maiden voyage. Anybody who's seen A Night To Remember or Titanic will immediately understand - if they're honest enough to admit it - that the ship was destroyed in a controlled demolition.

Finally, it stretches credulity to imagine that a captain of the caliber of Edward J Smith could have been so careless as to hit an iceberg in the middle of the North Atlantic - which begs the question: who was really in charge of Titanic on that fateful voyage?

kippy

Can I just say now that I believe all of you who think that this whole post contains any figment of truth are extremely easily lead and have possibly nothing better to do with your imagination than think up of fairytales.
You have completly overlooked the majority of evidence and chosen to believe in a far more implausable cause.
As with the usual conspiracy theories I have to ask, why hasnt word of this come out-surely someone who was involved at some level in this whole conspiracy would have sold or written his or her own story and cashed in on the whole scandal? This in my opinion is the main arguement against any of these conspiracies. If it was such a big conspiracy a lot of people would have been in on it. Some of these people would definetly have spoken or indeed some of their friends would have-this is human nature.
And as for the "explosions causing explosions"-what a comment. An explosion is the result of a chemical physical reaction.
As you may be aware the titanic was steam powered and had massive steam boilers. When the cold water hit these boilers they contracted so much they blew up-A very simplistic explanation but I feel some people may not understand a more indepth explanation-especially if they are so blinded by absolute nonsense.
And as for those of you who seem to find the whole thing sinister, I would advise looking for a scientific and logical record of how/why the ship went down even though it was designed to withstand the impact of an iceberg. There are many sites out there that do this.
Kippy

oscarBravo

Since when is cold water an explosive force?

kippy

In the right conditions it can cause an explosion. The conditions it met on the titanic, ie hitting the steam boilers.....caused the explosions-gases, temperatures, pressures, expansions, etc etc.

Dynamite on its own isnt an explosive force either, but combine it with fire or a ignition it is..

civdef

No way, there's no way the impact with an iceberg could have sunk the SS Titanic. A noted professor of social astronomy at the University of East Virginia says so on his website, he proves conclusively the physics doesn't work.

www.scholarsunravellingthetitaniclies.org

By the way, given that the name of the ship was the SS Titanic, I wouldn't rule out a Nazi involvement.

Pongo

Thread of the year...

billy the squid

Pongo wrote:

Thread of the year...

You are easily amused

civdef wrote:

By the way, given that the name of the ship was the SS Titanic, I wouldn't rule out a Nazi involvement.

Obviously you are not the only one.

Anyway, If there is a discussion here to be had then fine, but any bull**** posts will not do.

Capt'n Midnight

The only conspiracy is that the Titanic did not sink. It was the Olympic that sank.

The 'Olympic' did have something of a bad track record in her younger days, running aground and colliding with 'HMS Hawke'. After this collision the 'Olympic' was brought back into dry dock for repairs to be carried out. This brought both the Titanic and the 'Olympic' together for the last time. This is what then happened:

The 'Olympic' was quite badly damaged, it would cost an awful lot more to repair it than was first thought, and, it would delay the launching of the Titanic by months. So, what could they do? They needed a reliable ship, and needed it for 10th April 1912. With time rapidly running out they decided it would be easier to do a botch job on the 'Olympic' and concentrate on the Titanic. But it was already too late. With days to go before sailing day the Titanic was not yet ready, and the 'Olympic' was still sitting barely sea worthy in dock. It is here that the unthinkable happened. Bruce Ismay and J. P. Morgan, realise that if the Titanic does not go to sea on April 10th they are going to have serious money problems soon after with refunds, this was something they could simply not afford, especially when the price of coal was at an all time high due to the coal strikes.

White Star needed all the money and coal they could get. Getting in Captain Smith they told him the plans. They were going to cancel all other White Star Crossings for a week surrounding the Titanic sailing, so that they would not have to pay for coal, also, those passengers affected by this would be offered a cheap ticked on Titanic so that White Star made money on it. Captain Smith was paid a lot of money if, on the 5th day he would sink his ship, everyone would be safe, as they would make sure ships were in the vicinity of the accident. Smith agreed. Meanwhile in the dock, the 'Olympics' lifeboats were being offloaded and placed on the Titanic, and vice versa, any object with the Titanic's name on were put onto the 'Olympic' and again vice versa.

Titanic Sinking Then, on April 10th the cheering crowds had a ship to sail on, the Titanic was ready to sail, but, it was not the Titanic, it was in fact the 'Olympic' dressed up as the Titanic. So the 'Olympic' set sail for a 5 day cruise and then she would be deliberately sunk so that White Star could claim insurance on the Titanic, when in fact it was the 'Olympic' that had sunk. However, some objects were forgotten. They had forgotten to put binoculars on the 'Olympic' (the Titanic). So, on the night of April 14th 1912, the 'Olympic' crashed in to an ice berg, just under 24 hours too early. She sank, taking 1,523 souls with her. White Star now had a problem. They could claim money on the Titanic sinking but, they would have to pay a lot of it out to the bereaved. But, none the less, White Star did make money out of the disaster, and, the Titanic (sailing under the name of the 'Olympic') served the company for 24 years without incident.

The US inquiry reported gash in the side of the ship several hundred foot long , had actually happened the ship would have gone down in a matter of minutes. The UK enquiry reckoned it was a series of small puncture holes. Perhaps it was just buckled plates separating a little where the rivets held the plates together. I've heard of figures as low as ONE square foot for the total area of the holes. Don't forget the hole was under water and coming in under pressure and it still took hours for it to fill up. 2:40 = 9600 seconds. Or 9,600 tonnes overall per cubic meter per second flowing in.

civdef

Anyway, If there is a discussion here to be had then fine, but any bull**** posts will not do.

Here comes the cover-up.

Pongo

Here's another angle on it.... Basically reckons that the Titanic (Olympic) was to be sunk deliberately and that rescue ships were on standby but that Titanic/ Olympic (delete as applicable) crashed into one of the waiting rescue ships, and then turned in the wrong direction, away from the main rescue ship, the 'Californian'.

http://www.titanic-titanic.com/titanic_conspiracy_theory.shtml


Edit: Just found this as well:

"My favorite conspiracy theory I saw in a cartoon the other day ...
it was called 'Oliver Stone's Titanic' and it showed a second iceberg."

- James Cameron, director of Titanic: interview
conducted by Online Tonight, 1/21/98, 8pm GMT, at
http://onlinetonight.msn.co.uk/newsquiz/transcript.htm

SpitfireIV

With regard to the Titanic/Olympic myth:

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=306345

Diogenes

kippy wrote:

Can I just say now that I believe all of you who think that this whole post contains any figment of truth are extremely easily lead and have possibly nothing better to do with your imagination than think up of fairytales.
You have completly overlooked the majority of evidence and chosen to believe in a far more implausable cause.

MAYBE you ARE just BLIND to the TRUTH of the matter!

As with the usual conspiracy theories I have to ask, why hasnt word of this come out-surely someone who was involved at some level in this whole conspiracy would have sold or written his or her own story and cashed in on the whole scandal?

Someone did! Morgan Robertson had the blueprint for the original cover story, but made changes after the event!

This in my opinion is the main arguement against any of these conspiracies. If it was such a big conspiracy a lot of people would have been in on it. Some of these people would definetly have spoken or indeed some of their friends would have-this is human nature.

Fear isn't the only way to silence dissent.

And as for the "explosions causing explosions"-what a comment. An explosion is the result of a chemical physical reaction.
As you may be aware the titanic was steam powered and had massive steam boilers. When the cold water hit these boilers they contracted so much they blew up-A very simplistic explanation but I feel some people may not understand a more indepth explanation-especially if they are so blinded by absolute nonsense.

Too simple! What fueled these explosions! What forced them to occur? The minor gashes? How much water would that bring in? Over what time period?

And as for those of you who seem to find the whole thing sinister, I would advise looking for a scientific and logical record of how/why the ship went down even though it was designed to withstand the impact of an iceberg. There are many sites out there that do this.
Kippy

Demanding that we do your research for you.:rolleyes: we HAVE teh FACTS. Follow the MONEY.

bonkey

In case anyone hasn't noticed it yet, there are striking similarities between the arguments and rebuttals thus far presented regarding the titanic and the various 911 theories....even more than may be initially apparent

I changed the apparent meaning of at least of the quotes I used by simply using a partial sentence rather than the full thing. Given that I supplied the link to where the quotes came from, its somewhat disappointing no-one spotted this. It is, however, a well-established tactic with many 911 conspiracies.

Similarly, while it is true that Futility was written before the Titanic launched, its even more correct to point out that it was written before the Titanic was even designed. Again, misrepresenting information allowed me to use it to apparently support an idea that it shouldn't have.

Mix in a couple of well-known questions about the night in question, a healthy dose of speculation, and the seeds were born.

The willingness of other skeptics to join in (without my asking) was a pleasant surprise. When you look at many "big name" Conspiracy Theoryu advocates, you'll find that they've dipped their toes in more than one Theory. Why would they do this, people always ask, unless they genuinely believed. Well...why would we do what we did? I know why I did it, but I've no idea why the others joined in. Maybe it would be enlightening to find out.


The Pirates reference was clearly a reference to yesterday being International Talk Like a Pirate Day. It served to add in a couple of weak theory-variants. I was intending to use these at a later point to claim disinformation....and maybe even link the whole Pastafarian movement and ITLAPD into a coverup for the real Titanic conspiracy.

It is gratifying to see, that even within a few short days, at least one person apparently "took the bait" and was subsequently subjected to what should be familiar techniques of ridicule, false logic, shameless misrepresentation of facts, abuse of science, and the rest.

If you believe in any Conspiracy Theories. were following this thread, and could spot any of the above....ask yourself why you would accept such tactics from the proponents of the Theory you believe in, or why you would use them yourself (if you do). Alternately, you can choose to believe that no-one you put your trust regarding the Theory you believe in engages in these tactics.....whatever rocks your boat.

If you believe in any Conspiracy Theory, were following this thread, and couldn't spot all of the above (and the bits I haven't pointed out) consider this an indication of how easily you can be duped.

I don't want this to just turn into a joke thread. My purpose for starting it was very definite, and has now been served. If the mods feel I have acted in appropriately, I unquestioningly accept their judgement on the matter in advance.

Cheers all, and thanks for playing.

kippy

So Bonkey,
You are saying this whole thread was a farce from the start to see who would believe it?
The people who believe in these theories are of a specific type
Great stuff if that is the case.
Kippy

bonkey

kippy wrote:

So Bonkey,
You are saying this whole thread was a farce from the start to see who would believe it?

Oh, I was equally interested to see if anyone who normally believes in Conspiracy Theories had the stones to come in here and do what you did - explain clearly and succinctly what obvious claptrap was being spouted.

It was a set-up rather than a p1ss-take, but I guess farce covers both of those. So yes, it was a farce from the start.

The people who believe in these theories are of a specific type

Not all of them, and not all theories.

But there are very specific traits that I was initially focussing on, some of which the other skeptics brought in without any prompting on my part.

Regardless of who actually responded to the thread, the main thing was to form the backdrop for the two points I made at the end of my previous post...that if you are intrigued by and/or believe there is something behind any conspiracy theory, you need to know what to look for and what to look out for.

If you can spot it here, you can spot it anywhere. The question is whether or not you choose to.

Great stuff if that is the case.

FOOL! YOU HAVE BEEN TAKEN IN BY HIS EVIL DECEPT...

...errr...

...I mean...

Thanks

Diogenes

I'm just annoyed no one noticed that I referenced Billy Zane's character and the plot of titanic as part of my theory.

Well done Bonkey an excellent excerise.

kippy

Bonkey,
I make up my own mind on many of these threories and would have to say that in general, I do not believe many/any of the theories.
As you can see from the above, I pointed out one major hole in all conspiracy theories which I believe blow apart most of the bigger ones.
The "cold Water versus steam boiler" explosion was put forward in a very indepth TV documentary a while ago but I have no official source for it.
I do think that some people do have really over active imaginations and these theories allow them to substitute their reality for that of the rest of us. Many of us follow the most glaringly obvious facts while the theorists would rather follow the hearsay, coincidence and general nonsense.
Anyway- I am glad to hear you do not believe in this nonsense.
Kippy

bonkey

kippy wrote:

The "cold Water versus steam boiler" explosion was put forward in a very indepth TV documentary a while ago but I have no official source for it.

There's no real mystery about it.

The way I understand it, large volumes of near-freesing (3-4 degrees, I believe was ambient) water would cause the steel in the boilers to under rapid cooling, which would stress and ultimately crack the steel. The boilers, being under pressure as boilers are, would then undergo explosive decompression.

There wasn't anything particularly unusual about the boilers blowing up at all.

jc

kippy

There wasn't anything particularly unusual about the boilers blowing up at all.

I didnt say there was, in fact I was, at the time, trying to point out what the "explosions" were.
Kippy

danbo

bonkey
Registered User



Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Biel/Bern (Switzerland)
Posts: 8,685
Adverts | Blog | Friends A titanic conspiracy

---

Futility, or the wreck of the Titan is a book by Morgan Robertson. The premise of the book is strikingly unoriginal - it deals with an ocean-liner named the Titan, which sank on its westward joutney across the Atlantic, after striking an iceberg.

As if to add plagiaristic insult to injury, the Titan was British, of comparable size and specification to the Titanic. The Titan also had insufficient lifeboats for its passengers, and the quantities of both rich and poor who perished as a result are stunningly close to those of the real event this clearly refers to.

This book was released before the Titanic set sail!!!

When I first heard this, I became suspicious. What if the Titanic wasn't an accident. What if its death was planned from the start? What if this book was used as inspiration, or even was a warning by someone who knew what was to come but was afraid to speak openly?

I decided to investigate some more. And wow, did I find stuff.

Here's some excerpts from a respected account of the final moments:


some of the refugees say, the ship broke in two abaft the engine room after the bulkhead explosions had occurred.

...
Mellers and Barkworth, who say their names have been spelled incorrectly in most of the lists of survivors, both declare there were three distinct explosions before the Titanic broke in two

...
The testimony of J. Bruce Ismay, managing director of the White Star Line, that he had not heard explosions

Could it be true? Was the Titanic deliberately sunk? I believe that JBI may have been in on it, denying explosions occurred, and sticking to the farcical notion that an iceberg could sink a ship which was explicitly built to be unsinkable from such accidents!

As they say on the shopping channel - But Wait! There's MORE!

William T. Stead. also referenced in the above-linked chapter was one notable passenger who died the evening the Titanic sank. He calmly conversed with other passengers about the details of an iceberg he hadn't seen! How could he have known? Perhaps all is not as it seems?

Similar to M. Robertson, Stead had written works startlingly close in detail to what actually happened, prior to the fateful night! Could he have been in on it? Was he really just a passenger, or was he invetigating a story (he was a reporter), trying to expose, or indeed foil the very plot he had been frightened into maintaining silent about? Did he really die when the ship went down, or was he killed trying to foil the detonation of the explosives which sank the ship?

There are also numerous other unanswered or unsatisfactorily-answered questions about that night - alleged communications difficulties with the rescuing ships, the mysterious "third ship", why the lifeboats were so poorly used, or indeed why there were so few in the first place. Why did the captain really order the speed he did in seas known to contain icebergs? How could the lookouts have missed such a large iceberg? Its ridiculous - there are too many coincidences invoked and required for this story to be credible.

I believe its clear - the official story of what happened to the Titanic is a fantasy - a Hollywood set of an excuse that crumbles when one stops discarding the inconvenient details.

Remember - there are no coincidences.

jc
__________________
"Child," said Aslan, "did I not explain to you once before that no one is ever told what would have happened".
(The Voyage of the Dawn Treader, C.S.Lewis)





Just to let you know, the person who wrote that above is an idiot, i have just this minute watched the National Geographic Channel and it was about the titanice, the reason why the ship didn't slow down in the ice patches was because in a bad situation the captain wanted to get out of it as quick as possible, not many lifeboats because they thought they wouldn't need them, the people in the watchout didn't have binoculars as they had been locked away and because they were at high speed they had icy wind in their eyes, even with bincoluars not much improvement, the main reason for the ships sinking is after it struck the iceburgs the rivets gave way as they were weak, when they were made they added slag into the iron to make the rivets stronger but too much slag makes them weak and they put too much in by accident, watch the national geographic channel next week, on ntl it is channel 230, it will be on at 21:00 GMT, watch it one day and it will tell you when it is on, So if you really want to know what hapened watch it, it is very good

oscarBravo

danbo wrote:

Just to let you know, the person who wrote that above is an idiot...

Word of advice: in future, read the whole thread before you reply on it.

RuggieBear

oscarBravo wrote:

Word of advice: in future, read the whole thread before you reply on it.

LOL