What actually sunk the Titanic?

Well, hey. Got to ask you and I have my opinion.

What really sunk the Titanic?

I don't care what you think sunk it... I respect your opinion.
But I think that something else sunk it.

I think Germany was testing U-Boats or submarines and they maybe sunk the ship with a Torpedo.

The Glaciers in the Atlantic... I don't believe it much. The ship underwater has a hole that can't be caused by no Glacier. It would have to be dropped onto a friggen glacier to recieve the damage it had.

My 5 conspiracy's.

1.German U-Boats
Easy to say... WWI only started less then 10 years after it.

2.Terrorist Attack?
It's very possible. But almost unlike it would be that.

3.Pirates?
It was true that 2 of the people that lived said it was an Pirate or someone was attacking them.

4.Faulty Engine?
Seems to be.

5.Underwater life?
Don't know about that.

Please post your opinion or what you think sunk it!

HAve a great day

I think it was gethereitus
with some scotch on the rocks

Well... you said you dont really care about what I think so... theres actually no discussion here.

Originally posted by FraternitasSaturni
Well... you said you dont really care about what I think so... theres actually no discussion here.

I meant in opinion wise.

Given the first hand accounts of broken ice on the ship's deck, I would have to go with an iceberg slicing through the hull and flooding the lower compartments.

well i have no opinion but i'm farily sure survivors witnessed an ice berge.
either that or kate winslet went back in time to secure her career by sinking the ship.
man i hate that film.

hi op

apart from the iceberg
the doc i watched put it down to faulty rivets
a few companys were suplying them
and 1 test on a rivet showed to much slag
dave

There were 700 survivors, of course. No ice field? So all those warnings from Californian and others were a lie? How about the impromptu games of ice football on deck before the scope of the damage became apparant?

reply to post by matty1053

there was a thread about it not long ago, it was about a new scientific theory. i think, it had to do with the moon and an unusual amount of icebergs at that time. i will try to find the thread.

edit: here it is: www.abovetopsecret.com...

There was something in the UK news about the lookouts being affected my a mirage affect.....

www.thesun.co.uk...

Not the greatest source, but national geographic are publishing it....and there are other sources online if you look.

But yea....it was an iceberg

Originally posted by matty1053
Well, hey. Got to ask you and I have my opinion.

What really sunk the Titanic?

Water.

Really, I'm forced to put a second line on this one.

An iceberg, combined with the feeling of invincibility by being on an "unsinkable ship." Add to that the issue of whether the captain was drunk, or the helmsman. I seriously, seriously, seriously doubt it was a German U-boat since Germany was still pretty much broken and an occupied country after the first world war when the Titanic sunk.

I can guarantee that it wasn't a glacier. It is pretty well decided that it was ice floating in the water, sometimes called an iceberg. But hey if german submarines are what floats your boat go with it.

I believe it hit a berg; and I'm also inclined to believe that I've spent enough time on the subject to at least have some opinion.

With that said, however, there were a lot of strange things that happened. There was a coal fire that was left burning for days near the bottom of the ship, and nobody really seemed to know how that started. Then there was the whole business with Ismay persuading Captain Smith to speed through an area which at the time, was known to be filled with ice, purely so that they could make a speed record for the crossing.

People have since mentioned that there were a lot of industrialists aboard who were opposed to the creation of the American Federal Reserve. The Titanic sinking went close to wiping out the American economic aristocracy of the time; nearly all of them were aboard it. There was also talk that JP Morgan, the financier of the White Star Line, had a ticket, but pulled out the night before the ship was due to sail.

My own theory is that while it did hit an iceberg, there were a number of other factors which were engineered in order to help the process along.

A Pirate ship......



A pirate ship would be a little bigger that the bus down there

reply to post by petrus4


exactly
lots of factors not to mention
experts say the ship would have stayed afloat
if it hit the berg head on

It was an iceberg no doubt about it. Going too fast to make deadline. The crowsnest crewmember lost his binoculars that night so he couldn't see it. The hole was punched above the bulkhead doors so making the ship sealed was not an option. When the sos signals were sent out the wireless officer fell asleep on duty making a quick rescue impossible. The ship was made from sub par metal that easily cracked. But I guess I can drop all the facts and say that aliens sunk it that would be more believable.
Good day

i would say a rather large gouge along the hull below the waterline did it. across a number of watertight bulkheads
taking in too much water. similar situation to the concordia however the concordia was then blown onto the submerged rock just off the coastline so it didn't turn turtle.
regarding the titanic i suppose when the boilers were flooded they would have shed many rivets both boiler and hull plating as they exploded.
there is also speculation regarding an insurance/switch scam connected with the sister ship olympic. out there
in bit land. from memory it may have had something to do with a fire before launch.
f .

What really sunk the boat?
The displacement of air.
It is a little known fact that steel itself will not float.

Originally posted by FraternitasSaturni
Well... you said you dont really care about what I think so... theres actually no discussion here.

Indeed... What he said.

I'd point to the oversize Ice cube that oceanographic film specialists have examined and recorded the damage from, clear as anything..for all to see. However, as noted..well..it doesn't seem anyone cares about such physical evidence and uniform eyewitness testimony from those who survived that tragic night.

Something else did it..because..well..Why?? Are we really getting to the point now where every factual account of events must be questioned, torn apart and re-assembled in the image of what we'd like, regardless of any relation it still bears to the real thing?

Oh well...... Times are a changin' and Dylan was right.