Thursday, April 14, 2011

TITANIC: Myths Dispelled - Thursday, April 14, 2011

Tonight marks the 99th anniversary of the sinking of the White Star liner TITANIC which took place on the night of April 14th, 1912, at 11:40 p.m., when the ship collided with an iceberg and then sank to the bottom of the North Atlantic ocean, carrying down with her more than 1,517 passengers around 2:20 a.m. on April 15th, 1912. Thousands of innocent people lost their lives that night and as most of us out there already know, it was the most worst maritime disaster in the history of the civilized world. It definitely was a wake-up call reminding the world that mankind is not invincible against the forces of nature, let alone his own errors in judgement. This piece is not gonna be another rehashed history lesson on the events leading up to and during that tragic night, but rather my opportunity to set the record straight on a few aspects of the disaster that have been speculated about and/or accepted as pure fact ever since that day back in September, 1985 when Dr. Robert Ballard, in a joint expedition with Jean-Louis Michel of France, located the wreck of the TITANIC over 2 and a half miles down on the oceanfloor.

Originally I wanted to pen this piece under my real identity because even though I do write about a myriad of topics and subjects under this name I thought to myself "Well you know, does a piece about the TITANIC really belong in the blog of an Hiv'er/Hiv/AIDS activist?" My automatic response was a resounding "No, not exactly" but then I thought about it some more. It would be extremely absurd on my part to think that I shouldnt write about the TITANIC in this blog because out of all the famous ocean liners I have spent a lifetime studying, she's the one that sparked my interest in them to begin with. I've loved that ship ever since I was 8 years old and I cannot imagine not thinking about her, or doing what I can to help preserve the memory of her short-lived existence. This piece is dedicated not just as a memoriam in honor of the 1,517 men, women and children who died that night, but also is a chronicle of my allegiance in keeping the history of her story both correct and alive.

Myth #1: "The TITANIC did not sink from a 300 foot gash in her hull." Stop the presses as they use to say, cause I gotta giant newsflash for the entire world, including the two gentlemen who actually located the wreck. There is no other way, both mathematically and/or theoretically, that an ocean liner of that size and length, weighing 46,523 tons when fully loaded, could begin to sink that quickly without there being a 300 foot-long (or longer) gash breaching her hull. For a coupla decades now, Dr. Ballard and several of his colleagues have presented the theory that a series of morse-code-like smaller gashes on the TITANIC's starboard side is actually what caused her to sink, not some long, giant gash. Dr. Ballard has even gone on record as stating that there is no evidence whatsoever of a long gash in the ship's staboard hull, based on exclusive sonar and radar explorations of that particular area of the ship as well as the wreckage field surrounding that section of the ship. Well, I disagree with Dr. Ballard's findings. I think his multi-small-gashes theory regarding the TITANIC's sinking is just as unproven as his theory that a 300 foot long gash did not sink the TITANIC.

Let's simply examine all the facts. The larger bow section of the TITANIC, which seperated from the smaller stern section right before it sank, weighed between 28,000 and 35,000 tons and was traveling at an estimated speed of 50 m.p.h. when it hit the oceans floor. Although it did sink downward on a slighty slanted angle, it wouldnt have mattered how or where the ship landed, the sheer force of slamming thousands of tons of steel at such an accelerated speed drove the TITANIC's bow section a good 60 feet into the surface of the oceans floor, crumpling her bow section so severely and so thoroughly, that it would've condensed the 300 foot long gash in her hull into a mere slit. In fact, it wouldnt have mattered how long that gash technically was because all evidence of it was destroyed upon the impact of the TITANIC's bow section into the ocean floor. Dr. Ballard has claimed that his team of experts surveyed that particular area of the hull and found no evidence suggesting there was a gash - of course they didnt, how could they? Even with the sonar technology his team was using, how could anyone locate any evidence showing otherwise? It is literally impossible. It doesnt take a friggin rocket scientist to figure that out. In addition, when one examines the actual photos of the bow section of the TITANIC resting on the oceanfloor, they will notice a humongous crack at the top of the hull, both starboard and port sides, where the back portion of the forecastle ends and the bridge and upper decks of the liner begin - that gigantic tear in her metal wasnt created by her dropping onto the oceanbottom with the weight of a light feather, we are talking about tens of thousands of tons of steel here.

How does one go about proving that Dr. Ballard is wrong and I am right? Sad to say, that's the kicker in all of this - we may never know. The only way to physically prove that what I am saying is the truth is if the entire bow section of the TITANIC and the wreckage field immediately surrounding that portion of the wreck were to be literally excavated and closely examined. I'll be the first person to admit that I am not right about everything and that I dont have all the answers to the universe's riddles but one thing I do know is this - I am right about this. The truth is so crystal-clear. I only wish I had the funds and technological devices at my disposal to prove it but I dont, yet I do know that I'm right. In fact, I've never felt more right about something in my entire life than what really happened that night to the TITANIC when she sank.

Myth #2: "Metal forensic experts have proved that the TITANIC was constructed with an inferor grade of metal and thus this explains why she sank so fast, because her rivets popped left-n-right outta her steel plating which caused her to sink so fast. In fact, it was these very same loose rivets that caused her to sink, period, there were no gashes whatsoever." I've heard a ton of theories in the last 35 years or so as to why and how a ship as large as the TITANIC could sink so fast but I have never encountered such a heinous load of purely unadulterated bullshit as that particular theory in my entire life. How so? That's easy, all anyone needs to do is look at one single thing, the TITANIC's virtually identical sister-ship, the OLYMPIC. When I say  virtually identical, I mean it in every single sense of the word except for 2 minor differences - the OLYMPIC's promenade decks on both sides of the ship were all open versus the partially glass-enclosed forward ones located on the TITANIC; and, the OLYMPIC was about 14 feet shorter than her sister. Regardless, the OLYMPIC's long, illustrious career was living proof that the quality of steel used to construct TITANIC had no bearing on her sinking whatsoever. 

The OLYMPIC and TITANIC were both constructed with the same, idential steel. Not only that, but the two sister-ships were built side-by-side next to each other at the same identical shipyard, using the same identical construction materials and constructed in the same identical fashion as each other. The only difference is that the OLYMPIC was the first of the two sister-ships to enter service (almost an entire year prior to TITANIC's maiden voyage) and because of this the TITANIC was slighty modified with newer improvements as well as to make her just a tiny bit larger than her sister-ship. The OLYMPIC was in service from 1911 until 1935 and although she had a knack for colliding with things like her sister-ship TITANIC did, she never once sank and/or had the loss of one single human life aboard her. She collided on 3 seperate occassions with the Bristish destroyer HMS HAWKE and also once with the Ambrose Lightship; and, yes, sections of her hull were slightly compromised but she was never in any danger of sinking from any of those incidences. In fact, had it not been for the Cunard Line buying out and merging with the White Star Line in 1934 and scrapping a large roster of famed ocean liners from each of the two companies to make way for the building of the brand new QUEEN MARY (1936-1967), it has been assumed by many a ship historian that the OLYMPIC and the other liners of her era would've been in service way past 1935, for due to their large size they would've proved extremely useful as troopships for Great Britain and the Allied forces during World War II.

So the TITANIC was made with crappy steel and shitty rivets, heh? I dont think so. If that indeed were the case, how in the hell could her slightly smaller sister-ship OLYMPIC steam through a career that lasted 24 years without one major mishap, as well as no major maintenance periods, with the exception of the usual Transtatlantic overhaul/refitting that most liners of her era went through on a regular basis? One more key factor that most people overlook when re-examining the TITANIC disaster - had all those thousands of rivets in that particular area of her bow section indeed been THAT defective, trust me, they woulda let loose or given way during her rigorous sea trials. Even moreso, they woulda let loose and gave way during OLYMPIC's rigorous sea trials an entire year beforehand! And this business about water temperature affecting the steel and the rivets? Please, the OLYMPIC lasted 24 years on the North Atlantic run with at least 23 winter seasons outta those 24 years - without one single mishap. Luck you say? Nonsense. Those ships were not only designed to last, they were built to last. What happened to the TITANIC was an extremely horrible tragedy, a night of events that defied all the hands of fate and truly was the forebearer of the phrase "one-in-a-million chances."

Myth #3: "The White Star Line itself claimed the TITANIC was "unsinkable." I believe that this myth may have been previously dispelled by the British back in the early 1990's but regardless, it does need to be readdressed. The White Star Line NEVER once claimed the TITANIC was "unsinkable." The "unsinkable" claim all began shortly after OLYMPIC's maiden voyage in June, 1911, when one of the writers for "The Shipbuilder" magazine wrote an article about her upcoming sister-ship, TITANIC, and how the latter's water-tight doors construction "....may deem the ship itself to be virtually unsinkable." Now, let's all reread the last part of that sentence together, okay? "Virtually" means "virtually," it does not mean "definitely", it does not mean "absolutely" and it does not mean "without-a-shadow-of-a-doubt." It could've meant "practically" but there is a big difference between that word and "virtually." So many misconceptions of the TITANIC still abound all over the world but that one especially needs to be debunked because I think it's totally abhorrent that the memory of that ship has had to pay the price for such a horrible misinterpretation of the written word.

Several years ago, in an edition of the Boston Globe, I read an article stating that the chief staff members of the London Times, as well as allegedly a great majority of the British people, are literally sick-n-tired of hearing about the TITANIC as well as the annual commemoration ceremonies that are held every year in honor of those who were aboard her and the ship itself, that they wish the entire world would just give it all a rest. I cant speak for everyone else on this planet but I for one will never "give it all a rest" because I feel the lessons learned from what happened on that cold April night in 1912 are still relevant to our present time and will continue to be relevant for future generations. The main lesson of the TITANIC disaster that will always top the list, at least in my opinion, is that it is truly the quinessential example of what can happen when we do not work together to ensure the safety of all our fellow human beings as well as ourselves. No pun intended by any means, but we all should be in the same boat on that one, for right now, for tomorrow and for as long as the human race exists. So, the London Times, the Brits and everyone else may think what they want but I plan to be around to keep the memory of the TITANIC alive this year, for the 100th anniversary next year and if I'm lucky enough, for many many more years to come. Thank you for reading.

 

 

 

Posted via email from Luctor Et Emergo

No comments:

Post a Comment