It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

100 years ago TODAY since the TITANIC was first launched...or was it the OLYMPIC???

page: 2
8
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 31 2011 @ 07:58 AM
link   
reply to post by foxhoundone
 


thanks foxhoundone,

appreciate the input...

it was 100 years ago,
and like i said before,
times were a bit different,
and maybe the "bosses" could have fooled the workforce with some story/ or threats...

anyway,

seeya




posted on May, 31 2011 @ 08:03 AM
link   
reply to post by thoughtsfull
 


i am the same,
i always loved the whole Titanic story,
and when i heard the Olympic theory
so long ago i wondered...what if???!!!

anyway, i know they claim to have evidence that the theory is false,
but just thought i would mention it for the 100th anniversary of the launch of Titanic...

seeya



posted on May, 31 2011 @ 08:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by shaneR
reply to post by foxhoundone
 


thanks foxhoundone,

appreciate the input...

it was 100 years ago,
and like i said before,
times were a bit different,
and maybe the "bosses" could have fooled the workforce with some story/ or threats...

anyway,

seeya


I would guess if that where true it would be more loyalty than anything.. threats have a way of backfiring/people talking.

I would imagine those who built the ship also felt a huge sense of loss/guilt for being party to the mistake (or switch) craftsmen I know generally have a deep sense of pride in their work and for their work to fail so catastrophically must have been heart rendering.

On a side note it would be nice to work somewhere where loyalty existed today..



posted on May, 31 2011 @ 08:13 AM
link   
reply to post by thoughtsfull
 


"""""On a side note it would be nice to work somewhere where loyalty existed today.""""

thanks again thoughtfull,

my suggestion for your comment above...

find a bee hive or termite nest...
they are about as loyal as U get on EARTH...!!!

seeya



posted on May, 31 2011 @ 08:13 AM
link   
I originally saw this complete vid on The History Channel , a couple of years ago .
Fascinating and thought provoking

www.youtube.com...



posted on May, 31 2011 @ 08:22 AM
link   
reply to post by stevcolx
 


thanks stevcolx,
i think it must have been the same one i saw, ages ago...

it was very interesting,
if for no other reason, than it showed a lot of actual history, (with pics!!!)

seeya



posted on May, 31 2011 @ 08:26 AM
link   
reply to post by tpg65
 


thanks tpg65,
i am not sure if i have seen that one or not, now...

anyway, while i was there i also noticed this one...
"why they sunk the Titanic"

www.youtube.com...

seeya



posted on May, 31 2011 @ 09:11 AM
link   
reply to post by autowrench
 


thanks auto wrench...

i remember a theory that the Titanic was being pushed to break the record for crossing the Atlantic,
but not sure if that was just from the movie!

seeya



posted on May, 31 2011 @ 10:16 AM
link   
reply to post by shaneR
 


That must have been from a movie because the Blue Riband holder at the time was RMS Mauretania with an average speed of 24 knots. RMS Mauretania held the Blue Riband from 1909 until 1928 when the Bremen took the record.
Prior to the sinking of Titanic the Olympic had been involved in several incidents most natably with HMS Hawke. Not only was there physical damage involved but financial due to loss of revenue from being out of commission. There were other incidents too, nearly running aground and also hitting a wreck.



posted on May, 31 2011 @ 01:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by ignorant_ape
reply to post by shaneR
 


regards the alleged RMS olympic / titanic switch - any conspiracy theorists care to explain HOW this was acheived


Or better yet .. WHY? .. there's no point in even wondering how if we can't even establish a motive .. and the motive would have to be pretty compelling because if the ship switched then they went through a lot of effort to plant fake personal items at the bottom of the ocean.. many of which have been identified .. family portraits.. oh, there was also a DNA match for a child recently that sunk and was wrongly said to be the child of another family ..

Bottom line is to do this would be a MASSIVE undertaking, it's not just the painting of titanic on the side of the ship, it's all of the items found at the wreckage which have quite obviously been in the ocean for a long long time.. we' have to have had some skilled divers back them to be able to haul all that stuff down to the ocean bottom..

Sorry.. it makes zero sense.. and even if it did, I can't see them as being capable at the time.

You can theorize the ship was purposely sunk, though I've not heard any compelling motive to do that ... but I can't think for a moment it was swapped unless you're suggesting it was swapped before it's maiden voyage and labeled "Titanic" .. that would be plausible but I again don't see why ..
edit on 31-5-2011 by miniatus because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 1 2011 @ 07:35 AM
link   
reply to post by Hoisted
 

You are quite correct HYD, But the titanic and Olympic where unique in there design as they had interchangeable component's, and were machined in H&W own smelting yard, the one glaring thing is if you look at the ships propulsion system they had a three screw set up, and the blades where bolted to the main drive propulsion shafts, The Olympics port screw and drive where damaged by a Royal Navy vessel resulting in miss alignment of the drive shaft, an easy fix for any competentnt engineering squad., IMO,



posted on Jun, 2 2011 @ 08:22 AM
link   
reply to post by miniatus
 


thanks again for that,

one reason / MOTIVE =
$$$

there is a fairly well accepted history of problems / accidents with the OLYMPIC...

there were times while the Titanic was still being built that the Olympic was also in port...

if the Olympic really did suffer structural damage, possibly worse than reported,
there was motive + opportunity..

again, just a thought...

+ i didnt start the thread saying it DID happen...

just asked...

seeya



posted on Sep, 5 2011 @ 09:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by Hoosyourdaddyo
Well our buddy ShaneR thinks it was as simple as painting "Titanic" onto the side of the ship, and "Bob's your Uncle" you're done.... no one could figure that out.

Of course there's the fact that the Olympic would have had to have it's entire hull repainted, all of the stuff that was in the Titanic would have to be moved into the Olympic... you know, the furniture, the china (that was custom made for the Titanic, with the ships name on it), and every single place where the name "Olympic" appeared had to be altered, which is in a TON of places on a ship of that size (like the life saving rings, etc). All of this would have to have been done by hundreds of employees involved, due to the shear size of the operation, and to think that no one would have spoken up when 1,500 people were killed when it sank, is completely irrational.


China did not have the specific ship name on it, but was standard White Star issue; only the menus would have needed to be changed.

Lifeboats would have needed the name filled in and then painted over - there is evidence that this is exactly what was done at the White Star pier in New York.

Lifebelts would have to be swapped. Not a big task.

The name of the ship only occurred twice at the bow and twice at the stern. All in all, two dozen men could have easily handled the work over a weekend. They would all have been of the Orange Order.

Carpet would need to be placed in the areas of Olympic where the lino was marked or showed signs of wear. This was ordered by Ismay.

The REAL problem lay down in the bowels of the ship. Sailors have always been a very superstitious bunch and they would have etched their wife's or girlfriend's name or initials in parts of the boiler rooms, placed lucky charms in crivaces, etc. The boilermen, stokers, firemen, etc., would have known that the ship they were on was not Titanic but Olympic.

...

Perhaps that's why all but two of them refused to sail on her further than Southampton.



posted on Sep, 5 2011 @ 09:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by miniatus
Or better yet .. WHY? .. there's no point in even wondering how if we can't even establish a motive .. and the motive would have to be pretty compelling ...


The motive is extremely sinister.



posted on Sep, 5 2011 @ 09:09 AM
link   
This book was written 14 years earlier.



Titanic Sinking Was Predicted by a Prophet-Author!?!?!?

I always thought that this was a weird coincidence.



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 04:38 AM
link   
reply to post by DoctorJones
 


hi Doc, and thanks for the input, much appreciated...

some of what U say makes me think it was possible to switch ships...

not saying they did,

but as you also said, there was not only opportunity, but MOTIVE...

seeya, and thanks again...



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 05:18 AM
link   
this goes a little more in-depth on that book...

"The Wreck of the Titan was published in 1898, 14 years before RMS Titanic was even finished being [cheaply] built"

6 Insane Coincidences You Won't Believe Actually Happened

#5. Morgan Robertson Writes About the Titanic... 14 Years Early


A hundred years before James Cameron turned douchebaggery into an art form at the Oscars, American author Morgan Robertson wrote a book called Futility, or the Wreck of the Titan, about the sinking of an "unskinkable" ocean liner. When you see the cover, you figure you're pretty clearly looking at a fictionalized version of the Titanic story.
en.wikipedia.org...



No surprise there; it's a story that's been told over and over (there were 13 Titanic movies before Cameron's, including one by the Nazis) but Robertson's book was first.

Where it Gets Weird:

He was so eager to be first, apparently, that he didn't bother to wait for the Titanic to actually sink before writing about it. The Wreck of the Titan was published in 1898, 14 years before RMS Titanic was even finished being [cheaply] built.
www.nytimes.com...

The similarities between Robertson's work and the Titanic disaster are so astounding that one has to imagine if White Star Line built Titanic to Robertson's specs as a dare. The Titan was described as "the largest craft afloat and the greatest of the works of men," "equal to that of a first class hotel," and, of course, "unsinkable".
www.historyonthenet.com...

Both ships were British-owned steel vessels, both around 800 feet long and sank after hitting an iceberg in the North Atlantic, in April, "around midnight." Sound like enough to keep you up at night? Maybe that's why Robertson republished the book in 1912 just in case enough people didn't know that he wrote it.
www.lux-aeterna.co.nz...

Where it Gets Even Weirder:

While the novel does bear some curious coincidences with the Titanic disaster, there are quite a few things that Robertson got flat wrong. For one, the Titanic did not crash into an iceberg "400 miles from Newfoundland" at 25 knots. It crashed into an iceberg 400 miles from Newfoundland at 22.5 knots.

Wait, what the #? That's one hell of a lucky guess!


What 41.1 million square miles looks like.

But maybe the weirdest thing about Titan were points that had nothing to do with the story, but check out after numerous inquires and expeditions to the Titanic wreck site.
en.wikipedia.org...

For one, both the Titan and the Titanic had too few lifeboats to accommodate every passenger on board; the Titan carrying "as few as the law allowed." While Robertson decided to be generous and include four lifeboats more on his ship than Titanic, it's an odd point to bring up when you consider that lifeboats had nothing to do with the #ing story. When Titan hit the iceberg (starboard bow, naturally), the ship sank immediately, making the point made about lifeboats inconsequential. Why the # mention this?!
en.wikipedia.org...

It'd be like HAL 9000 addressing the danger posed by O-rings at low temperature decades before the Challenger disaster...

also...

Benjamin Guggenheim, Isa Strauss and John Jacob Astor were three of the richest men in the world, and all publicly opposed the idea of America having a central banking system. Coincidentally, all three perished on the night of April 12, 1912, when the Titanic hit an iceberg on its maiden voyage.

JP Morgan, who strongly wished to have a Federal Reserve established, owned the White Star Line, which in turn, owned the Titanic. Soon after the Titanic sunk, the Federal Reserve was established.

edit on 15-9-2011 by 1825114 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 07:35 AM
link   
reply to post by 1825114
 


hi 1825114,
and thanks for that, awesome work...

love the last quote...




Benjamin Guggenheim, Isa Strauss and John Jacob Astor
were three of the richest men in the world,
and all publicly opposed the idea of America
having a central banking system.

Coincidentally, all three perished on the night of April 12, 1912,
when the Titanic hit an iceberg on its maiden voyage.

JP Morgan, who strongly wished to have a Federal Reserve established,
owned the White Star Line, which in turn, owned the Titanic.

Soon after the Titanic sunk, the Federal Reserve was established.


seeya



new topics

top topics



 
8
<< 1   >>

log in

join