Comments by "doveton sturdee" (@dovetonsturdee7033) on "New Titanic footage reveals 'astonishing' detail" video.

  1. True. Just goes to show that 'The Marching Morons,' a science fiction short story from the 1950s, is coming true.
    4
  2. As there wasn't any explosive involved. That might be difficult to manage.
    3
  3. No one from White Star or Harland & Wolff ever made such a comment. One of many myths.
    3
  4.  @anthonyhuerta8780  I have found that people who urge others to do 'research' tend to be the ones who have done least themselves. The problem is, as a naval historian for many years, I have been able to do a considerable amount of research into 'Old Reliable' and as a result I know, beyond doubt, that the idea of an insurance scam was invented by Robin Gardiner to support a rather silly book written in 1995, which has no credibility whatsoever, however much conspiracy theorists might fantasise to the contrary.
    3
  5. Nonsense.
    3
  6. No, it isn't. No, it wasn't.
    3
  7. As Abe Lincoln, or perhaps Mark Twain, said, 'Better to Remain Silent and Be Thought a Fool than to Speak and Remove All Doubt.' Oh dear! Too late in your case.
    3
  8. Yes, dear. Of course it is.
    2
  9. How is it, then, that OLYMPIC was actually on her way back from New York to Southampton at the trme, and had been doing the same thing since November 1911, when her repair was completed?
    2
  10. 'How is that for a theory?' Actually, an idiotic one, with absolutely nothing to support it. How is that for an answer?
    2
  11. There were no nameplates. The name was engraved into the hull, and previous expeditions have shown the images.
    2
  12. Don't be a silly boy.
    2
  13. There is no such documentary. There is a faked image of the letters M & P, which first appeared in 2000 or so, and has been either disowned or ignored by every expedition. Largely because the CGI is so amateurish, by the way.
    2
  14. Especially since Britannic was only launched in February, 1914.
    2
  15. Britannic was only launched in February, 1914.
    2
  16.  @YasN82  Don't be an even bigger fool!
    2
  17. A similar number died aboard both, but only three survived from Hood. The only slight consolation was that those from Titanic died uselessly, whilst those in Hood died doing their duty and serving their country.
    2
  18. As the ship was called Titanic, that won't happen.
    2
  19. Amazing the number of fools who watch a conspiracist video and swallow it whole.
    2
  20. Brilliant scam indeed. Pay £1.5 million to build a ship, then sink it in order to claim £1 million from Lloyds. Please explain the benefit in greater detail.
    2
  21. Nonsense. IMM regulations required that the condition of the coal bunkers of their ships be checked on a daily basis, because of the known danger of spontaneous combustion. The bunker fire was discovered in Titanic at Southampton. S team was put to work on it, and it was extinguished around a day before the collision. The bulkheads were never damaged. Indeed, the only actual damage was to paintwork inside the bunker.
    2
  22. No, they don't, but lots of eye witnesses refer to the iceberg. No one aboard the ship opposed the Federal Reserve. That is simply a myth invented by a writer in the 1990s to sell a book.
    2
  23. No. It wasn't.
    1
  24. Good luck. The MP letters are in a poorly made CGI image which appeared on line around 2000, and have been ignored or denied by every expedition.
    1
  25. People never stop talking about what happened! Sadly, they tend to be half-wits who watch a conspiracy video, swallow it whole, and proclaim themselves instant experts.
    1
  26. Sadly, the iceberg is now totally dissolved.
    1
  27. No.
    1
  28. Huge payout? An Olympic cost $7.5 million to build, and White Star received $5 million from Lloyds. Those are the actual facts. Oh, and the wreck is indisputably that of Titanic, however much half-wits might seek to disagree.
    1
  29. Not.
    1
  30. There was no one opposed to the Fed. aboard Titanic. That is simply a conspiracy myth begun by an author in a book from 1995.
    1
  31.  @zanehayes4380  Yes. Olympic was inspected by three teams, from the Admiralty, White Star, and the Board of Trade. The Admiralty published the report, which the other two teams supported, on 10 November, 1911. The damage was summarised as :- “Two major watertight compartments were flooded, hull plating gashed from the Orlop deck to E deck, and the starboard propeller shafting damaged.” The nonsense about a damaged keel first appeared in a book by Robin Gardiner in 1995, as part of his 'switch' claim. Certainly, Harland & Wolff, who repaired Olympic and had her back at sea by late November, 1911, don't seem to have known anything about it.
    1
  32. No. There really isn't.
    1
  33. What could possibly suggest that the sinking was deliberate?
    1