Scepcop wrote:I don't know if the Titanic was a conspiracy or not. But there are many suspicious things about it:
- Why did the captain of the Titanic order the ship to move at full speed through the waters at night with no visibility? Other ships in the area all slowed down, including the Californian. The captain was the most experienced and knew those waters very well too. Yet he acted against all logic.
The captain was widely criticised for this after the disaster. However, it was standard practice in those days, as they assumed that the lookouts would see any icebergs in time to take avoiding action. Also, by a quirk of fate the two lookouts that night had forgotten their binoculars. Also the sea was dead calm that night and there was no moon, so there would have been little to give away the icebergs position. If the lookouts had seen the iceberg just a few seconds earlier then it might have been avoided.
- Why did the Californian not rescue the Titanic even though it was nearby? It was close enough to see its rocket flares fire, yet it left. Why did the Californian have no cargo or passengers, only sweaters and blankets? It was as if it was tagging along the Titanic to serve as a rescue ship, but something went wrong with the plan, or it was called off.
The wireless operator on the Californian had already gone to bed when Titanic started sending distress signals (it became compulsory to man the wireless 24 hours a day after the Titanic disaster) some of the crew saw the distress rockets but didn't seem to realise that they were a sign of distress, as there was no commonly accepted protocol for distress signals at the time. Anyway, the actions of the Californian's crew is one of the most controversial aspects of the Titanic story.
- Why was the Titanic story written about 14 years prior in 1898 and in various other articles as well? The word "Titan" was used for the ship in the story and it also sank 400 miles off Newfoundland, which happened in real life as well. Did the writer have a premonition, or did the conspirators borrow their idea from the book?
It's not that spooky, the inadequate maritime safety regulations were controversial for years before the Titanic sank, there had been plenty of people predicting some sort of major disaster, and many of the details of that story were totally different from the actual sinking. Although the use of the name 'Titan' is a pretty spooky coincidence!
- How can ice break through metal? Isn't that physically impossible? How did it tear through five compartments so easily?
I addressed that in my previous post.
- How can the ship suddenly break apart while sinking? How can an unsinkable ship just break apart?
The ship was designed to be supported by the water, it wasn't designed to bear the weight of half of the ship being lifted out of the water, that put stresses on the hull which were far beyond what it was designed for. It's not that surprising really.
- Why did they call the Titanic "unsinkable"? No ship has been called that before. It seems as though they were setting it up to take a bigger fall by calling it "unsinkable".
That's actually a myth. They never actually claimed that it was unsinkable without qualification. There's more about that here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legends_and_myths_regarding_RMS_Titanic#Unsinkable
- How come three powerful men who opposed the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 just happened to die on the Titanic?
- Why did JP Morgan, the billionaire tycoon who owned the Titanic, suddenly cancel his voyage on the Titanic? Why would he do that unless he knew something or was warned? If it was just an accident, then how could he know anything or be warned about it?
There could be all sorts of reasons, he wasn't the only person to cancel his crossing.
- How come the Titanic's sister ship, the Olympic, just happened to suffer a big collision with the HMS Hawke the year before the Titanic disaster, rendering it damaged beyond repair, yet somehow it operated for many years afterward without a hitch? Could the Olympic and Titanic have been switched in a big insurance fraud scheme, since the Olympic was reportedly beyond repair and unable to qualify for insurance compensation?
It wasn't damaged beyond repair. Also the Olympic and Titanic weren't identical and had different deck layouts and window positions etc, there is little chance they could have been switched in the time available as that would have required extensive work. Also all of the components and fittings on Titanic were stamped with a unique serial number different from that of the Olympic. All of the artefacts brought up from the wreck site had the Titanic's number stamped on them. It would have been impossible to re-stamp everything in the short time available. There's a good critique of the Titanic switch theory here: http://www.markchirnside.co.uk/pdfs/Conspiracy_Dissertation.pdf
Doesn't any of this raise an eyebrow? Aren't they suspicious?
You can see whatever you want to see, it doesn't mean it's there!