Titanic tourist submersible goes missing

[Skipper Kenny]

I believe it was Mark Twain that said, "It's easier to fool a man than convince him he's been fooled", but I found this article rather interesting.

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1...864355841.html

[GordMay]

I hate to sound like a conspiracy theorist here, but are we truly to believe that the Titanic sunk, after being hit by an iceberg?! Do they think we're stupid fools!?
I've been throwing lettuce at the window, for hours now, and it hasn't even scratched, let alone put a hole in it.


Things to remember:

“If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck...”
It’s a government surveillance drone.

Gravity is a conspiracy.
It's just another way for The Man to keep you down.

[Skipper Kenny]

Originally Posted by GordMay

I hate to sound like a conspiracy theorist here, but are we truly to believe that the Titanic sunk, after being hit by an iceberg?! .

In physics that's called Frame of Reference, which becomes very important for understanding Einstein's Theory of Relativity.

[CaptTom]

Originally Posted by Skipper Kenny

I believe it was Mark Twain that said, "It's easier to fool a man than convince him he's been fooled", but I found this article rather interesting.

I found it pure click bait. There were very few points which match the facts. I was going to go through them one by one, but that would take all day. And as Mark Twain pointed out, it's not worth the effort.

[Skipper Kenny]

Originally Posted by CaptTom

I found it pure click bait. There were very few points which match the facts. I was going to go through them one by one, but that would take all day. And as Mark Twain pointed out, it's not worth the effort.

I found the lack of lighting on the home made submersible interesting. So were the hatch designs on the submersibles made by legitimate sea vessel engineering companies.

[Franziska]

Originally Posted by Skipper Kenny

I found the lack of lighting on the home made submersible interesting. So were the hatch designs on the submersibles made by legitimate sea vessel engineering companies.

While both of these two technical aspects seen valid they carry on with a lot weird theories.

It's a common method when setting up a conspiracy theory. Lure the reader in with some seemingly correct content and then feed him with the bogous theory once they start to trust you.

[CaptTom]

Originally Posted by Franziska

While both of these two technical aspects seen valid they carry on with a lot weird theories.

Exactly. Spin some facts using dramatic words, and embellish from there.

I agree there were a lot of design flaws. But we all knew that. Those were some of the first things to be reported after the accident. And to those in the industry, they were well-known before the accident. No headline there.

Likewise, that whole thing about the game controller has been beaten to death. Electrically, it doesn't matter how "cute" your switch is. I think I read that there were other ways to control the sub. And if it were me, I'd just smash the stupid little thing and connect the wires together manually. Remember that the guy who designed the whole contraption was on board. Presumably he'd know which wires would activate whatever circuit he needed.

None of that justifies the string of arrogant, stupid decisions he made. But again, we all know that. Nothing new here. Move along.

[Skipper Kenny]

Originally Posted by Franziska

While both of these two technical aspects seen valid they carry on with a lot weird theories.

It's a common method when setting up a conspiracy theory. Lure the reader in with some seemingly correct content and then feed him with the bogous theory once they start to trust you.

I guess if the missing lights and the strange 'hatch' arrangement doesn't cause you any suspicions, you'd happily take a ride?

The news story was definitely splashy (no pun intended), but so often the media misses so many details.

When examining the details, there are some glaringly obvious omissions, such as the lights and the hatch.

[Skipper Kenny]

Originally Posted by CaptTom

Remember that the guy who designed the whole contraption was on board.

I don't remember any forensic identification of the said occupants by their dental records, but maybe it was done.

Do you have a link to the investigation?

[Franziska]

Originally Posted by Skipper Kenny

I guess if the missing lights and the strange 'hatch' arrangement doesn't cause you any suspicions, you'd happily take a ride?



The news story was definitely splashy (no pun intended), but so often the media misses so many details.



When examining the details, there are some glaringly obvious omissions, such as the lights and the hatch.

Exactly what I said. Feed the reader two or three commonly accepted facts to lure them and then feed them a crap conspiracy story.

Btw. if you read a bit about Mr. Rush, you are not surprised that his boat was not following the established lines of design. His mantra was that only disruptive design leaps forward, which seems not that clever in the case of deep sea subs, especially if it uses humans as Guinea pigs.

[Wotname]

Originally Posted by Skipper Kenny

I don't remember any forensic identification of the said occupants by their dental records, but maybe it was done.

Do you have a link to the investigation?

Huh???

There was never any question of who was onboard, there was never any need of any 'forensic identification of the said occupants' .

The occupants stepped inside the submersible, the hatch was bolted on externally by the handling crew. The occupants could not exit the submersible until the hatch was externally removed when it resurfaced. Unless there was some crazy conspiracy theory that involved all of the handling crew and the families of the occupants, we know who died.

[ChrisJHC]

Originally Posted by Wotname

Huh???

There was never any question of who was onboard, there was never any need of any 'forensic identification of the said occupants' .

The occupants stepped inside the submersible, the hatch was bolted on externally by the handling crew. The occupants could not exit the submersible until the hatch was externally removed when it resurfaced. Unless there was some crazy conspiracy theory that involved all of the handling crew and the families of the occupants, we know who died.

They could have used the same techniques that the Chinese used when they allegedly kidnapped the Australian Prime Minister - Harold Holt.

https://www.nfsa.gov.au/collection/c...iracy-theories

[Franziska]

Im out of here, not into stupid conspiracies, this is getting absurd.

[CaptTom]

Originally Posted by Skipper Kenny

I guess if the missing lights and the strange 'hatch' arrangement doesn't cause you any suspicions, you'd happily take a ride?

The news story was definitely splashy (no pun intended), but so often the media misses so many details.

When examining the details, there are some glaringly obvious omissions, such as the lights and the hatch.

OK. I'll bite.

1) Yes, had I not done any research into this idiot Rush, I might have happily taken a ride. I like to think I'd have spotted some of the red flags, but I can also imagine accepting the that these things were, historically, very safe. Would I have known to search out the background on this one individual?

2) Of course the media gets things wrong all the time. Journalists are not specialists in any one field. Their goal is to dumb things down for public consumption, and drive engagement (clicks.)

3) There was extensive reporting on the inadequacies of the hatches and port lights, even the overall design and materials. As for underwater lighting, I don't see the point. Are you suggesting this proves something sinister? They must have had lights, they'd been down before, even to the Titanic more than once. I don't recall any past passengers complaining that they couldn't see anything down there.

Originally Posted by Skipper Kenny

I don't remember any forensic identification of the said occupants by their dental records, but maybe it was done.

Do you have a link to the investigation?

Again, what's the point? Are you suggesting there was a second submarine, with other people in it, who were killed off while the "real" one snuck away?

Originally Posted by Franziska

Im out of here, not into stupid conspiracies, this is getting absurd.

Agreed. Beyond absurd. We may never know some small details, but the big picture of what happened is abundantly clear.

If someone wants to make extraordinary claims to the contrary, they ought to present some extraordinary evidence. Not some poorly-written click bait on the internet.

[Skipper Kenny]

Originally Posted by Franziska

Exactly what I said. Feed the reader two or three commonly accepted facts to lure them and then feed them a crap conspiracy story.

So it's accepted as fact that you need lights to see at that depth, and a proper hatch that can withstand that much pressure, but we're going to call hogwash, they're not really important if the author reporting such omissions plays with Ouiji boards and wears a garlic braid to bed.

Interesting method for throwing the baby out with the bathwater.