Comments by "doveton sturdee" (@dovetonsturdee7033) on "Inside Edition" channel.

  1. Yes dear, of course it was dear. Now take your medicine and stop pestering normal folk.
    8
  2. Brilliant! Invest £1.5 million to build a ship, then sink it for £1 million in insurance, and lose you record for safety at the same time. Why do you twerps continue to post this nonsense?
    7
  3. How would people possibly know something which isn't true? Moreover, even giving your absurd comment more credibility than it deserves, why is it that no exploration team hasn't suggested anything of the sort?
    6
  4. First, you need to shed your indoctrination and seek an education instead.
    5
  5.  @deepaksn1  If you had had a proper education you wouldn't have posted such nonsense.
    5
  6. Evidence, dear boy, evidence.
    5
  7. 'Trust you?' Because you watched a switcher video and swallowed it whole? I would be more likely to trust my cat to drive me to work.
    5
  8. Probably because she was?
    5
  9. Shame about the lack of any evidence for your fantasy, isn't it?
    5
  10. You can deduce that how, precisely?
    5
  11. 'most of the worlds ritches people died that night..' Not really. A small number only.
    4
  12. Good luck with that, as there is no such evidence, only an amateurish CGI fake from around 2000, ignored by everyone except a handful of switcher fanatics. As Titanic's sister ship was actually named OLYMPIC, I am rather impressed by the depth of your knowledge. By which I mean, how shallow it is.
    4
  13. No, it doesn't. Because it wasn't.
    4
  14. Haven't you actually heard of an ICEBERG?
    4
  15. It was a good documentary providing that you enjoy fiction. There is, almost literally, nothing in it which has not been disproven. It is totally implausible, and people need to be amazingly gullible to fall for the nonsense it presents.
    4
  16. I suppose it would be pointless to ask a troll like you, 'Why' would it?
    4
  17. Drivel. An officer was replaced by White Star, in favour of an officer from Olympic more familiar with that type of ship. Smith had no involvement in what signals were received by Titanic. He had altered to a more southerly course, and Titanic was never at full speed. Anything else you would like to blame him for?
    3
  18. No, he, or anyone else in the management of H & W or White Star, ever said such a thing.
    3
  19. Actually, no it isn't, whatever you might have swallowed whole from fact-free switcher videos.
    3
  20. Brilliant! Invest £1.5 million to build a ship, then sink it for £1 million in insurance, and lose you record for safety at the same time. Why do you twerps continue to post this nonsense?
    3
  21. Titanic means 'of exceptional strength, size, or power.' The Titans were a family of giants in Greek mythology born of Uranus and Gaea and ruling the earth until overthrown by the Olympian gods.
    3
  22.  @crisaunt  I neither know nor care much about 'the rich families of America.' I do, however, know more than enough to understand that, apart from in the minds of conspiracy theorists, the sinking of RMS Titanic was certainly not planned.
    3
  23. You shouldn't believe everything you see in Conspiracist videos. Morgan never intended to sail in Titanic, as he had a prior engagement at St. Mark's in Venice. An engagement which, moreover, was mentioned in a New York Times article from March, 1912, which can still be read. There were three leading financiers aboard Titanic who died. One supported the Fed., and the other two had remained silent on the issue. This myth firsy appeared in the mid 1990s. By the way, hasn't it occurred to you that, should you wish to remove your business competitors, sinking an ocean liner in the hope that they might possibly drown is a less than reliable of doing it?
    3
  24. Indeed. Look it up. You will find that this claim originated in the mid 1990s. It alleges that Astor & Guggenheim opposed the Fed., when they never seem to have done anything of the sort, and that Straus also opposed it, when he can be proven to have been a supporter. If you want people to believe that myth, the last thing you should do is tell them to look up the facts!
    3
  25. After much exhaustive research, it seems that Titanic sank because of collision with an iceberg.
    3
  26. No. The evidence decides, and all the real evidence proves that the wreck is that of Titanic.
    3
  27. If so idiotic a myth makes sense to you, then you clearly know nothing about the facts.
    3
  28.  @Blu3_SK33  You don't consider that, just possibly, Olympic was scrapped in the late 1930s (60 years before this lunatic claim was first made) because she had reached the end of an illustrious 23 years in service? Perhaps you don't know of the internal fittings and furniture auctioned off when Old Reliable was broken up, most of which still bears Olympic's 400 yard number? Silly me. Of course you don't. Her old rival Mauretania was scrapped at the same time. What do you consider that was intended to conceal?
    3
  29.  @badcholesterol  Whether I do or not is a judgement for my peers, not for me. I do, however, have the ability to hold a debate without feeling the need immediately to resort to insults. Possibly because I am certain of my facts?
    3
  30. Really? What is it then? The Hindenburg, perhaps?
    3
  31. More amazing that fools like you can still trumpet such nonsense, despite a total lack of evidence to support it.
    3
  32. 'Research history?' Yes, you should. History being facts and archives, rather than the silly switcher video which you have obviously watched and swallowed whole.
    3
  33. You appear to have cared enough to comment.
    3
  34. Perhaps because professionals use State ot the Art equipment, and can even explore the Marina Trench these days. A commercial enterprise taking short cuts is not the same thing.
    3
  35. No. 'They' didn't.
    2
  36. I thought insurance scams were supposed to make money, not lose it in large amounts?
    2
  37. No. They didn't.
    2
  38. No.
    2
  39. Which rather shows the extent of your knowledge. No, it isn't.
    2
  40. @Jason Torres You think incorrectly.
    2
  41.  @Seavixenn848  Perhaps it is because :- 1). I know rather more about the sinking than many? Or, 2). I have plenty of spare time available to allow me to educate people?
    2
  42. No.
    2
  43. You belief is not supported by any facts.
    2
  44. Do your carers know you have got hold of the laptop again?
    2
  45. Perhaps you haven't actually looked at the images?
    2
  46. No. It wasn't.
    2
  47. EEJOT!
    2
  48. No. He didn't.
    2
  49. That would be the Britannic which was launched in February, 1914, would it?
    2
  50. How does a 'scam' which loses you £500,000 and your reputation for safety actually work? Call me naive, but I thought that such scams were intended to make money, not lose it in large amounts.
    2
  51. Good idea. Look up the facts, instead of the invented conspiracy nonsense.
    2
  52. Do you thing God is so vindictive, not to say ill-informed? No one from H & W or White Star's management made such a claim.
    2
  53. There was no fire in the 'front' of the ship, despite Mr. Molony's questionable interpretation of a smudge on a photograph. The financiers who drowned were Astor, Guggnheim, & Straus. The first two had never expressed opinions about the Fed., whilst the third was a supporter. His views may be read in two articles in the NYT from October, 1911. You have been misled by a switcher video which has no basis in fact.
    2
  54. Really? I am sure you have convincing evidence? What? You don't? how sad.
    2
  55. Actually around 1,500. Titanic was only about half-full.
    2
  56.  @bobbyhernandez9558  No, but perhaps their superior knowledge?
    2
  57. No, it didn't. It sank because it collided with an iceberg.
    2
  58.  @evictioncarpentry2628  Nonsense. It was not an insurance scam. White Star lost £500,000 from it, at 1912 monetary values. Nor was there any 'rescue ship.' There was a fully laden freighter, Californian, nearby, whose officers saw Titanic's flares and alarted the captain, who chose neither to investigate nor even to ask. If Captain Lord was part of your imaginary plot, and knew what he was supposed to do, why didn't he do it?
    2
  59. We certainly do know that the Federal Reserve was not involved. That was simply a fairy story invented in the 1990s.,
    2
  60.  @LeodisTrainSpotter  Ah, but the conspiracists will soon be claiming that the survivors were either bribed or threatened.
    2
  61. You really shouldn't believe everything (or, indeed anything!) you see in Titanic conspiracy videos. Astor and Guggenheim had never expressed their views about the Fed., whilst Straus had spoken in favour. Their allaged opposition is a myth, invented in the mid 1990s. Seriously, if you seek to erase business or political opponents, is sinking a ship on which they might be travelling, in the hope that they might possibly drown, the best way to do it?
    2
  62.  @rbsk999  An unmanned ROV won't be stealing anything.
    2
  63. There certainly is technology capable of reaching Titanic and, indeed, going much deeper. The wreck of the USS Samuel B. Roberts, a WW2 destroyer escort, was inspected in June 2022 in the Pacific, at a depth of over 22,600 feet, or almost 7,000 metres. However, it has to be the right technology.
    2
  64. Then why did you bother commenting?
    2
  65.  @bobbyhernandez9558  The world does. For over 100 years.
    2
  66. Feel free to fund yout own expedition.
    2
  67. You mean the myth invented in the 1990s, about two people who had never commented, and a third who supported the Federal Reserve? That 'unknown story?'
    2
  68. Barely getting access to what?
    2
  69. Olympic had been fully repaired and had been back at sea since late November, 1911, when Titanic was five months short of completion. Insurance money? You mean £500,000 White Star lost, when the Company received £1 million for a ship which cost £1.5 million to build? Morgan did not cancel. There is a newspaper article from March, 1912, confirming his intention to attend an event at St. Mark's in Venice. He was J. P. Morgan, not Doctor Who.
    2
  70. You cared enough to comment.
    2
  71. Do you unquestionably believe every myth you come across? Smith never said anything of the sort.
    2
  72. What 'things' have been kept fro normal people?
    2
  73. Of course it is. Why do you insist in believing evidence-free videos about a myth invented in the mid 1990s?
    2
  74. Fascinating how every new Titanic video brings the crazies out in droves, isn't it?
    2
  75. I assume you have a source for that? Titanic was a British registered ship, by the way.
    1
  76. It crushed the stern section. The bow was full of water when it sank.
    1
  77. Why? Where do you think it is?
    1
  78. Actually, far more on 'that ship' were working class people.
    1
  79.  @YEAR-1-RELICS  No, you didn't. White Star offered cheap passages to large numbers of working class people. It was their bread & butter. The fares for a small number of 2nd & 1st class passengers were the icing on the cake. Put simply, 324 First, 285 second, & 709 third. Tickets were £7 for adults, and £3 for children.
    1
  80.  @YEAR-1-RELICS  Actually, seven pounds. In 1912 it was about two-three weeks wages for a labourer in Britain. It was certainly manageable for people determimed to make the trip.
    1
  81.  @YEAR-1-RELICS  I thought the topic was the price for third class passengers? Of course the wealthy paid a very highn price, just as they do today. White Star, like Cunard, made their bread and butter from steerage passengers, and ensured that the price was manageable, albeit with some effort. It easy enough to check, simply by referring to the occupations of the people on the passenger list.
    1
  82.  @YEAR-1-RELICS  Yes, it is, but many poor people were willing to make sacrifices in order to achieve what they hoped would be a better life for themselves and their children. Simply look at the manifests of any of the Atlantic liners of the time.
    1
  83.  @YEAR-1-RELICS  Nonsense. People then and now make sacrifices in order to achieve something. I know a few families who have not taken holidays in order to fund mortgages, or to pay for the education of their children.
    1
  84. Who do you wrongly believe actually made such a claim?
    1
  85.  @armedprophet3321  The claim that the comment had been made only, oddly, arose after the sinking. Prior to that, the Olympics had been described as 'practically unsinkable.' A small circulation engineering periodical did manage to miss out the word 'practically' in an article about them, but no-one from H & W, nor White Star, made such a claim. You seem to be basing your opinion on an article by a journalist. To believe that 'it was in the newspapers so it must be true,' is not a good idea.
    1
  86. No.
    1
  87. Yes, we do. Titanic sank.
    1
  88. Except, of course, that Astor & Guggenheim had never expressed their opinions about the Fed., whilst Straus was a supporter and had spoken in favour. Any false claims to the contrary were invented in the mid 1990s.
    1
  89. Why do you think there is any comparison between the two?
    1
  90. As no-one was locked up in the ship, good luck with your search.
    1
  91. You will need to wait a long time. No one has yet managed to prove any such allegation in the last 110 years.
    1
  92.  @FerrariLamborghini24  'ur saying it’s really the titanic? Its not the titanic and prove it with info I hve proof this is the Olympic' I asked you four days prior to this to show us this 'evidence.' Do you recall this? 'As someone who really has researched Titanic, I would be grateful if you would present your evidence to show me what I have missed.' I am still waiting, with eager anticipation.
    1
  93. Would you say the same of Olympic? A successful liner for 23 years?
    1
  94. No, they weren't.
    1
  95.  @zachwellentin5557  Interestingly, almost as many people cancelled their bookings for Titanic's maiden voyage as had cancelled for Olympic's the previous year. What does thast prove? Also there were three leading financiers aboard Titanic, Guggenheim, Astor, and Straus. Despite what you have swallowed whole from certain videos, the first two had never expressed their opinions about the Federal Reserve, whilst the third was in favour of it, as he demonstrated in a speech in October, 1911, recorded in two separate articles in the New York Times which may still be read. The idea of their opposition to the Fed. first appeared in the mid 1990s. It is nothing more than a myth.
    1
  96. Have you mentioned that to the captain of the Costa Concordia?
    1
  97. Actually, this is not true. No member of senior management from White Star or Harland & Wolff ever made such a comment.
    1
  98.  @JP-jb5di  No he didn't. Perhaps you might suggest a source for your claim?
    1
  99. Don't be an idiot.
    1
  100. Death would, perhaps thankfully, have been instantaneous.
    1
  101. No, it isn't.
    1
  102. Don't be silly. Launched by whom?
    1
  103. No, 'they' didn't.
    1
  104. Not a theory. Merely a myth dating from the mid 1990s which is sometimes believed by gullible berks with no actual knowledge of the events.
    1
  105. THe connection being? Astor & Guggenheim had never expressed their opinions about the Fed., whilst Straus was a supporter and had spoken in favour. Any false claims to the contrary were invented in the mid 1990s.
    1
  106.  @rogeriopires5352  What persuades you that the captain, officers and crew, would even sail if the ship really had a serious fire aboard? They were White Star employees, not members of a suicide cult. Have you ever tried thinking for yourself? You should. It really doesn't hurt.
    1
  107.  @rogeriopires5352  'The owner told to someone on board to get rid of the fire brigade men.' I am sure you have a source? You don't? How sad.
    1
  108. Depends what you mean by 'enough.' Enough to meet Board of Trade Regulations, certainly, but not enough to accommodate everyone. Largely because that wasn't seen as the primary purpose of lifeboats at the time.
    1
  109.  @rhian3943  You shouldn't simply believe everything you see in switcher videos. It makes you look such a fool when you repeat it.
    1
  110. Exactly how much footage of the wreck of Titanic do you need to see?
    1
  111.  @crazyTrouble80  Who were these men who were against the Fed., and where is your proof?
    1
  112. Do try to explain why?
    1
  113. If you actually do do the research, you will discover that the myths about Astor, Guggenheim, & Straus were invented by conspiracists in the mid 1990s. You will find precisely no evidence to support the suggestion that the first two opposed the Fed., but you will find documentary evidence that Straus supported it. Had you actually done any research, other than simply swallowing whole a conspiracist video, you would not have posted as you have.
    1
  114. Well, you can't argue with that!!!
    1
  115. Firstly, he never made any such comment, and secondly the Olympics were well designed ships, as Olympic demonstrated.
    1
  116.  @insurgentleman  It already has.
    1
  117.  @titaniac3037  Olympic was used as a troopship.
    1
  118.  @titaniac3037  All three were built by Harland & Wolff.
    1
  119. What 'murders?'
    1
  120.  @Mir_Nohti  Did you enjot the video you watched and swallowed whole? A bad mistake, I fear.
    1
  121. Except, of course, that Astor & Guggenheim had never expressed their opinions about the Fed., whilst Straus was a supporter and had spoken in favour. Any false claims to the contrary were invented in the mid 1990s.
    1
  122.  @bobbyhernandez9558  Good idea. If you actually do do the research, you will discover that the myths about Astor, Guggenheim, & Straus were invented by conspiracists in the nid 1990s. You will find precisely no evidence to support the suggestion that the first two opposed the Fed., but you will find documentary evidence that Straus supported it. Had you actually done any research, other than simply swallowing whole a conspiracist video, you would not have posted as you did.
    1
  123. Why?
    1
  124. Really? Why might that have been?
    1
  125. They had a fairly good idea of Titanic's position as the start for the search. Something which doesn't apply to the aircraft.
    1
  126. In many cases, simply watch a switcher or conspiracist video, swallow it whole and unquestioningly, pronounce yourself an instant expert, and then post lunatic comments on line. Or, you can study maritime and naval history over many years, be familiar with the archives, records, and documents from the period, and seek to correct the idiots I have referred to above.
    1
  127.  @dimi9215  A convincing fact that is.
    1
  128. You, evidently, have swallowed whole a switcher video, and now believe unquestioningly a myth invented by a writer called Robin Gardiner, in the mid 1990s.
    1
  129.  @shellmorton822  Racist.
    1
  130.  @shellmorton822  Look at your now deleted first post. Yes.
    1
  131. Don't be silly.
    1
  132.  @Bobby_K_king_of_YouTube  What??? The earth isn't flat! I am deeply shocked!!!
    1
  133. Which government, when, and to what purpose?
    1
  134. No. She hasn't.
    1
  135.  @tegofido  Not 'freaky.' Simply barmy.
    1
  136. Just look at the pictures to determine the state of the remains.
    1
  137. How many times? The builders never said any such thing.
    1
  138. Where did you get this nonsense from?
    1
  139. The only thing RAYCIST!!! here is your post.
    1
  140. Nonsense.
    1
  141.  @rickyjiggens2180  Firstly, because Titanic was not an American ship, and secondly because a large quantity of historical documents and archive material disproves any idea of a vast conspiracy, whilst there is no evidence to support one.
    1