 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Mr Titanic
Spirit of the Night
Location: Gotham City
Posts: 1355
Rivets: 13 (+13/-0)
|
 | 
|
|
Re: Whose fault?
In conclusion, you have requested proof in regards to something you judge by opinion has been stated as fact. I have stated I believe it is current fact, and until proven otherwise I choose to accept it by the evidence present. It is your choice now to either reject it or do the same by accepting it. A good point is we all have never sailed on or witnessed the Titanic sink, and even if it was possible none of us could have been in more than one place at a time. However with statements from those who have we are able to come to a conclusion to support and give birth to theoriesas to what happened that night. Putting peices of the puzzle together and learning all the Titanic may teach us. I am currently so/so about the binoculars, though not completley convinced will take the evidence (providing it is from experience as mine is as well) into consideration. I am now aware of two arguments in regards to this subject relating to Titanic, so I have learned a few new things through this discussion.
As points have been stated, and re-stated, as well as providing the initial "disrepect" felt by myself and others throughout the thread, I see no point in it remaining open, however the main subject (whose fault) though clearly discussed here may be further discussed in the future.
|
|
Sep/26/2005, 5:35 pm
|
|
The Foxes
Deck Officer
Location: Somewhere in the world
Posts: 115
Rivets: 3 (+3/-0)
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Whose fault?
The meat of the debate has been the use of the word fact. I wanted to know if fact was meant or if it was not. I now see the qualifier 'current fact'.
The word 'fact' means just that. If it is quallified then it alters the meaning. Let the readers judge.
To illustrate breifly; The Titanic sailed, the Titanic sank, peolple died. These are facts. They can not be altered. There can be no argument unless we go into realms beyond reason or into conspiracy theories. Most of what happened that night is still debatable.
Of course there are facts but until we have imperical proof then we simply do not know. We can have well educated thoughts, theories and ideas that may well be fact in the end. But until you can 'touch it' 'hold it' 'see it' etc then you are still guessing.
One more brief illustration. There were those who thought the earth was flat, many of them thought it fact. There were those who thought the earth was a sphere many thought it was fact. The point is that until somebody sailed around the world and more recently took pictures from space nobody knew for sure. Therefore it was all speculation and could not be called fact until proved.
As for the post contents, wording, tone etc I am happy for the readers to judge.
Thank you for allowing me to reply.
GF.
|
|
Sep/27/2005, 7:59 pm
|
|
MurdochsAid
Lady of the Sea
Posts: 1968
Rivets: 15 (+21/-6)
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Whose fault?
Quote:
The Foxes Wrote:
The meat of the debate has been the use of the word fact. I wanted to know if fact was meant or if it was not. I now see the qualifier 'current fact'.
The word 'fact' means just that. If it is quallified then it alters the meaning. Let the readers judge.
To illustrate breifly; The Titanic sailed, the Titanic sank, peolple died. These are facts. They can not be altered. There can be no argument unless we go into realms beyond reason or into conspiracy theories. Most of what happened that night is still debatable.
Of course there are facts but until we have imperical proof then we simply do not know. We can have well educated thoughts, theories and ideas that may well be fact in the end. But until you can 'touch it' 'hold it' 'see it' etc then you are still guessing.
One more brief illustration. There were those who thought the earth was flat, many of them thought it fact. There were those who thought the earth was a sphere many thought it was fact. The point is that until somebody sailed around the world and more recently took pictures from space nobody knew for sure. Therefore it was all speculation and could not be called fact until proved.
As for the post contents, wording, tone etc I am happy for the readers to judge.
Thank you for allowing me to reply.
GF.
It is also fact that God wrote the Bible (KJV). It says so in II Timothy 3:16,17 -- All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.
For more on Captain Smith, go here: TSOLD>Officer's Quarters>Captain E.J. Smith's 'mental state of mind'. Hope that what you read, will lead credence to the topic of "this" thread.
MA
Last edited by MurdochsAid, Sep/28/2005, 8:48 am
|
|
Sep/28/2005, 8:18 am
|
|
Mr Titanic
Spirit of the Night
Location: Gotham City
Posts: 1355
Rivets: 13 (+13/-0)
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Whose fault?
These are rather true statements as well, however I would like to breifly add to the above posts. It was only implied that the tone was stated as fact clearly as a matter of opinion, when indeed it was intended as 'Current Fact'. Any statement related to Titanic may be headed off in the sense that "By What We Know" and so on. And The Foxes brings up a good point, however the example differs slightly from Titanic. The world being flat, was a theory, that could have been proven (as it was) by sailing the globe or going into space. However as of now we have no way of returning to the past. However, we do have accounts and testimonies of events and people from the time period, who lived within it, and witnessed the Titanic's history in the making. Therefore, we have evidence, which supports theories that make the case. Though debatable, can only be contradicted by other facts. Therefore we are always one step closer to knowing what we believe may have happened to the Titanic (as far as specific details are concerned). Knowing for sure is not possible, as stated by Graham, however the evidence does illustrate a portrait depicting the possiblities, the facts being the guide to the true deal. Conjecture, guesses or speculations are however not the correct words. The people who testifyed at the inquiry were actually there and it is peiceing together this information that draws out theories (keep in mind Titanic is also being explored which provides a source of proof).
It's the same metaphor I drew with the crime. No one knew exactly who did it, and the Jury have no proof. Evidence from the scene are provided and witnesses who were there (that note aspects of what happened here and there) also testify, requiring the jury to peiceing together the known and current facts. As of what was present, the ruling may rule in favor of or against the suspect (in this case the suspect is the theory at hand). As more evidence is gathered new conclusions may be drawn out, however, as of what was known then, it was logic accept it, when such fits together so well. In the Titanic's case, what was stated (such as mistraining of the officers - proven by their reaction to launching boats and the HMS Hawke, or the head on collison, as the Arizonia survived it were supported by known facts. Wether the ship would have survived is debatable though was the ship larger, more technically advanced and newer than the Arizonia, yes she was.) In all truth, the theories are current fact, supported by known fact. Statements judged on tone are a matter of opinion, and never quote a post as an example of a negative feeling.
So to some degree I agree, though there is more to it. As for the readers, they can accept the content or reject it on their own terms of belief. AS for Murdoch's Aid's thread, I believe it is a good post worthy of one's time. Take a look at the thread, it is rather interesting!
|
|
Sep/30/2005, 6:51 pm
|
|
MurdochsAid
Lady of the Sea
Posts: 1968
Rivets: 15 (+21/-6)
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Whose fault?
On TBN today, Anna Kendall gives her theory as to why Titanic sank here...
She surmises that "character" is the reason. Why? Because she feels that J. Bruce Ismay and Thomas Andrews were too busy caring more about the needs of the wealthy, than they were about the safety features of the ship. And that's why over 1500 passengers lost their lives that horrific night of April 14 & 15, 1912.  :WSL:
MA
|
|
Dec/28/2005, 3:07 pm
|
|
Lights
Deck Officer
Location: Anyplace on Water
Posts: 637
Rivets: 17 (+17/-0)
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Whose fault?
I have thought quite a bit about the event and I believe that one of the greatest causes of the disaster was hubris. This hubris was especially apparent in the brevity of her sea trials. Less than a day was given over to learning the properties of what was, even after several months of her sister ship in service, a new kind of ship—one of the first superliners. Compare this to almost the six weeks dedicated to the sea trials of USS United States. No two ships are ever alike, even when built with the same materiel, by the same workers, in the same slip. There are differences which can be discovered only by operation of the ships under various conditions.
There are those who blame Captain Smith for running Titanic at an excessive speed. Captain Smith’s actions can be seen as negligent and foolhardy only in hindsight. He was doing what practically every captain of every steamship was doing in the era before Titanic. At the Board of Trade Inquiry, a long line of merchant captains, both active and retired, testified, and almost to a man, even under the conditions which obtained that night (no moon, no wind). This was standard operating procedure and Captain Smith, absent opposite evidence, did as he always had.
Still others blame First Officer Murdoch. Much of his problem that night, I believe, was traceable to the brevity of Titanic’s sea trials. He had no real opportunities to discover her true operating parameters (turning radius, stopping distances, etc) and thus he could not accurately judge the best course of action.
Even with knowledge in hand, he might not have been able to avoid the berg. At a Titanic exhibition a few years ago, several people, myself included, attempted to avoid the berg using a ship simulator. I used every combination of helm and engine orders I could think of and I still hit the berg. Even those with better reflexes than mine ended up hitting the berg. My opinion is that no one on that ship could have kept her from striking.
It has been mentioned that the crew and officers may have not been properly trained. Many of Titanic’s crew (though only three of her officer corps) were Olympic veterans, but many of the crew were taken from other White Star ships, and were something of a “scratch crew” unfamiliar with both one another and the ship. Still, they did possess at least basic seamanship skills. As for the lookouts, both Fleet and Lee were trained lookouts, and had had uneventful careers aboard other White Star Liners.
I still think that blame can, at best, be apportioned only in small amounts to crew and officers aboard that night. Much of it can be attributed to overconfidence, but much can also be attributed to both lack of knowledge of Titanic and her performance capabilities.
|
|
Feb/19/2008, 3:21 pm
|
|
Lights
Deck Officer
Location: Anyplace on Water
Posts: 637
Rivets: 17 (+17/-0)
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Whose fault?
It's fun to revisit a thread after a long time and I find the whole subject quite interesting.
In regards to helm orders given after the berg was sighted, it was mentioned in Knight's Modern Seamanship" that the worst thing to do is to reverse the engines and turn the helm. One of the reasons for this is that you will end up with the broadside (her length) exposed to danger.
However, I think that First Officer Murdoch's orders may have been a reflexive, spur-of-the-moment thing. As for turning, well, very few sane people would think of hitting something such as that iceberg head-on. In fact, it is my understanding that captains of amphibious craft have to be taught to force themselves to run their craft onto the beach, so strong is the instinct to avoid hitting anything or beaching one's craft.
|
|
Dec/1/2008, 2:20 am
|
|
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Link to us
- Blogs
- Hall of Honour
- Chat
 TSOLD's time is: Nov/27/2009, 3:49 am
|
|
|
Topic 