Gardeners claims

James Hill

Member
Feb 20, 2002
215
0
146
Like most of you I just could`nt bring myself to beleive Gardeners claims.Here are some of his claims.
Titanic fired more than 8 rockets.
The rockets were red,blue and white.
Harold Brides escape story is untrue.
ALL stories of survival from collapsible B are untrue.
The resteraunt staff were detained in the 2nd class dining room.
Fifth officer Lowe was a coward.
Sir Cosmo had already aranged to leave the ship in lifeboat 1.
Qaurtermaster Rowe claimed to see lifeboats in the water before no 7 was lowered.
Fred Fleet saw ice at 11:15pm but apparently the telephone did`nt work for another 25 minutes.
The ship was already turning to port before Fleet reported it.
The ship had a persistent list to port.
A large black ship came within a few hundred feet of no 7.
Inflatible liferafts were found.Carpathia passed 3 unidentified vessels.
Titanics crew were sworn to the official secrets act.
A Paddy Fenton who was an "Ordinary Seaman" aboard Titanic who`s name doesnt appear on the crew lists was apparently put in command of an unnamed lifeboat and was still serving at sea in the 70`s!
Obvoisly this "Paddy Fenton" is a person who claimed to have served on Titanic but never did.
What do you think about Gardener?To be brutally honest I think he`s just done it for publisity.Since nearly all the subjects about Titanic have been published.No offence to Mr Gardener but the book just does`nt make sense to me.
 
Dec 2, 2000
58,582
371
283
Easley South Carolina
James, you might want to check out some of the threads in the Conspiracies/Sinkings Theories Folders. Gardiner is not well regarded in the Titanic Community at all. However, to addres some of the points above, you'll surely notice that most of the, are irrelevant misdirection that have nothing to do with whether or not there was a ship switch.

The rest are of uncertain provenance/reliability, but are again irrelevant to the central premise.
 
Sep 22, 2003
571
0
86
Coatesville, PA
I've Never Read any of Gardeners books before, and now I probably never will, as i dont see how Titanic could have possibly been involved in a conspiracy theory or ship swapping. too many differences between the 2 for the ship swapping theory to work, and it would also be a waste of money for White Star.
 

Inger Sheil

Member
Dec 3, 2000
5,342
34
208
G'day James -

Most of Gardiner's other claims are about on a par with his switch claims. As Michael suggests, a good many aren't relevant to his conspiracy switch theory, but rather seem to be included to add to a general air of cover-up and dodginess. I don't have a copy of his book with me, so I'll work off your summary. Some of his claims might be based on an element of an eyewitness account, but his loose methodology and tendency to emphasise anomolous elements rather than reading them in the context of other evidence distorts whatever grain of truth there might be beyond all recognition.

quote:

Titanic fired more than 8 rockets.
The rockets were red,blue and white.
The number of rockets is a matter of debate still, with estimates ranging somewhere around the number eight, but possibly more or less. Most witnesses did not claim to be precise - Boxhall was to say in later years (and even stress it) that he wasn't sure how many he fired. The colour question is one that Gardiner has played up from divergant eyewitness accounts.

quote:

Harold Brides escape story is untrue.
ALL stories of survival from collapsible B are untrue.
While some elements of Bride's story might have been perhaps a enhanced or altered (e.g. the stoker story and the length of time he spent under B), I'm not quite sure why Gardiner would dismiss him wholesale. Likewise, I don't know why Gardiner would dismiss all stories of survival from B - there's more than ample disinterested eyewitness testimony from crew and passengers as to the survival of individuals on top of the boat.
quote:

The resteraunt staff were detained in the 2nd class dining room.
I believe there has been discussion of the treatment of members of the restaurant staff on the board.

quote:

Fifth officer Lowe was a coward.
The piece of character assassination that Gardiner performed on Harold Lowe is, I believe, one of his more egregious distortions of the historical record. He achieved it by a highly selective use of historical sources that eliminated all positive references to Lowe in eyewitness accounts and emphasised out of all proportion any comment that could be interpreted as negative. I recall that he attempted to suggest to a Welsh newspaper that heroic constructions of Lowe were an entirely modern phenomena with no root in historical sources - he was swiftly disabused of this notion by Clear Cameron's nephew, Ted Dowding, who responded very swiftly to the allegation with some of his aunt's recollections of Harold Lowe. Lowe was noted from childhood for being physically courageous to the point of foolhardiness. One of the anecdotes about his early years that surfaced in the wake of the disaster came from a woman who recalled him saving her brother as a child, and imperilling his own life in the process.

Some of his allegations, such as the use of Scarrott's account to suggest that Lowe rescued both the occupants of Collapsible A as well as those on a raft, show that Gardiner is not accustomed to - or chooses to stress - the anomolies that can occur in eyewitness accounts.

quote:

Sir Cosmo had already aranged to leave the ship in lifeboat 1.
Lol! I don't think there's much to support that.
quote:

Qaurtermaster Rowe claimed to see lifeboats in the water before no 7 was lowered.
Again - an aberrant eyewitness account. These are not at all uncommon in events as traumatic and stressful as the sinking. Eyewitnesses are not infallible.

quote:

Fred Fleet saw ice at 11:15pm but apparently the telephone did`nt work for another 25 minutes.
There was quite a bit of hearsay re what Fleet did and did not see or do, on which there have been several interpretations.

quote:

The ship was already turning to port before Fleet reported it.
That's been discussed here on the board, and is still being discussed. It is by no means as clear-cut as this suggests.

quote:

The ship had a persistent list to port.
I think that's another one that's been addressed here on the board.
quote:

A large black ship came within a few hundred feet of no 7.
According - again - to isolated eyewitness accounts. It has been suggested that what was actually seen was an iceberg.
quote:

Inflatible liferafts were found.Carpathia passed 3 unidentified vessels.
I'd love to see the documentation for inflatable liferafts. Carpathia or Californian, and at what time? There were several unidentified vessels reported by the steamers in the vicinity.
quote:

Titanics crew were sworn to the official secrets act.
Don't know about official secrets act - they were under instruction to give evidence at the BoT, and not to talk to the media beforehand.

quote:

A Paddy Fenton who was an "Ordinary Seaman" aboard Titanic who`s name doesnt appear on the crew lists was apparently put in command of an unnamed lifeboat and was still serving at sea in the 70`s!
Lol! Don't know if that one's even worth addressing - fake survivors are a dime a dozen. I'm surprised Gardiner didn't seize upon the story of Luis Klein, who was claiming all sorts of nefarious goings-on and alleged he was bribed by the WSL to leave NY after the disaster. Unfortunately for Klein, his tall tales made it to ear of Senator Smith who dragged him to DC for questioning. He bailed at the earliest opportunity before the could call him before the inquiry, and it was established he was not on the ship.​
 
Dec 2, 2000
58,582
371
283
Easley South Carolina
>>Sorry.I`m not one for in depth analysis of the switch.i focus on Gardeners other claims.<<

Gardiner's "other claims" call for some measure of in-depth analysis because he (mis)uses them in an attempt to support his base premise that the two sisters were switched. Fortunately, Inger has already covered that ground, and with much the same answers I would have given had I not been pressed for time to get to work.

In any event, I don't need Gardiner's help to see the environment of dodgyness and cover up which IMO, were certainly going on...but they would have been going on anyway. Sinking a ship her first time out and killing 1500 people is really lousy publicity, and the last thing the government wags ever wanted to do was call a lot of attention to the fact that the Board of Trade certified the ship as safe when some of the deficiencies were made so glaringly obvious.

But then that sort of thing is just standard operating proceedure in events like this. Ship Switches aren't needed when there is so much that's real to hide.
 
May 12, 2005
3,109
1
108
"...Sir Cosmo had already aranged to leave the ship in lifeboat 1..."

Total rubbish. The allegations of impropriety against the Duff Gordons were many and varied, none of them substantiated. Almost all of it was gossip and innuendo, perpetuated through the tabloid press. Sadly, these allegations continue to carry weight with those looking for scandal and who have no regard for fairness and truth.

Gardner and Pellegrino are the two most ill-informed, unscholarly writers that this subject has produced. They're content to do the bare minimum of research and at times absolutely no research at all, yet they have clout and connections which boggle the mind.
 

Mike Bull

Member
Dec 23, 2000
515
1
146
I'll second Randy's comments re. those two authors. I regard Gardiner lower than Pellegrino though, for having the sheer front to put that switch rubbish out there, and make a buck out of it, in the face of a whole world of contrary evidence.

I'm fully expecting Pellegrino's third Titanic book to go on, and on, and then on some more, about the 9/11 attacks and the paralells with the Titanic etc etc, and his own feelings after being along on Cameron's expedition at the time; just like his first book went on about him, the Titanic, and Challenger. Frankly, it's often nauseating.

Just what did he contribute to that expedition, anyway?
 
C

Christine Geyer

Guest
Wow, are we having a new Gardiner-thread now every week?

Ditto about Gardiner and Pellegrino. I still regret I payed for the Pellegrino. But am outstandingly relieved that I have a completely Gardiner-free home. And just the few claims that James has posted above reconfirm it. It's just too ridiculous.

I just couldn't prevent my pictorial phantasy to imagine Cosmo standing in the WSL office when buying his ticket; paying additional charge for the lifeboat guarantee pass in gold. You could also get silver or bronze, silver for a seat in a collapsible and bronze for a standing room on the overturned collapsible. *lol*

And about Fleet: Does Gardiner also claim that the bell wasn't working for 25 minutes?

It's a miracle to me how one seriously dares to say all the stories from Collapsible B are untrue. What sense in the face of those people. In reverse would his conclusion not mean that he labels all those on B are a bunch of either completely mentally disturbed or of cunning liars?

Ing, wherefrom do you take the energy to answer all this again and again??

Regards
Christine
 
Dec 8, 2000
1,289
2
168
James is approaching Gardiner's work from a different angle to that taken in several other threads in this forum. As such, it stands.
happy.gif
 

Lee Gilliland

Member
Feb 14, 2003
511
0
146
Christine, there are those who claim the holocaust didn't happen, and neither did 9-11 - I can give you URLs on those guys filling a page! This is not about fact. It is about money. Conspiracy theories sell. If they didn't, publishers would not publish them. And I will guarantee that this slop will continue to be published as long as the pubic enjoys them and it will sell.

Personally, I think this entire discussion is hilarious. The only thing Gardiner & Co. deserve is a hoot of laughter and a trash can.
 

Inger Sheil

Member
Dec 3, 2000
5,342
34
208
Agreeing with all you say, Christine.
quote:

Ditto about Gardiner and Pellegrino. I still regret I payed for the Pellegrino. But am outstandingly relieved that I have a completely Gardiner-free home.
It's always good to have material you're referencing on hand - particularly if you're going to rebut it! Like you, though, I do begrudge the money for these two authors that I forked out...but then, there's many a Titanic work sitting on my shelves that is good for nothing but pulp. And that's just the non-fiction works...won't even touch upon the fiction works.

The first switch book I could almost excuse - one gets the impression that the authors took the oft-given advice to writers to find a 'hook' to come up with the switch as a selling point for an otherwise rather banal re-telling of the Titanic story. The 'success' of the hook, however, seems to have fuelled further works and a very cold-blooded exploitation of the theory.

But, of course, we've discussed this before, and I know you don't need to be lectured on the economic dynamics of popular history!
quote:

Ing, where from do you take the energy to answer all this again and again??
From the memory of a friend and the pain that Gardener's poisonous attacks upon his father caused that friend when he was dying.​
 
Dec 6, 2000
1,384
1
166
quote:

Qaurtermaster Rowe claimed to see lifeboats in the water before no 7 was lowered.

Not according to what Rowe said in the Inquiry testimony, it wasn't! Rowe said he saw (BI 17615) "should think it was either 13 or 15." And since we know 15 came after 7, there can be no substance to Gardner's claim. Rowe said *nothing* about No. 7.
 

Inger Sheil

Member
Dec 3, 2000
5,342
34
208
Hallo Bill - looks like that notorious difficulty in lifeboat timings has surfaced again, and Gardiner has tired to sow more confusion. Here's what Rowe said at the American inquiry:

quote:

Mr. ROWE. I felt a slight jar and looked at my watch. It was a fine night, and it was then 20 minutes to 12. I looked toward the starboard side of the ship and saw a mass of ice. I then remained on the after bridge to await orders through the telephone. No orders came down, and I remained until 25 minutes after 12, when I saw a boat on the starboard beam.

Senator BURTON. What was the number of the boat?

Mr. ROWE. You could not tell the number. I telephoned to the fore bridge to know if they knew there was a boat lowered. They replied, asking me if I was the third officer. I replied, "No; I am the quartermaster." They told me to bring over detonators, which are used in firing distress signals.
From memory, Gardiner used some convoluted reasoning and timelines, based on when Rowe assisted with the rockets, to try and establish that the boat Rowe saw that prompted his call to the bridge was in the water before the first boats were supposed to have been launched.​
 
Jan 28, 2003
2,524
5
168
Yup, I second Christine here, Inger, where do you get the energy? An example to us all. Re conspiracy theories in general, a great prog on TV here last night - the top conspiracy theories according to website and hits. Sorry, no Gardiner in the top 100, which I guess shows he hasn't made the impression some of us feared. New to me was the No. 1 - microwave mind control. Disturbingly, it has some scientific historical basis, but has gone as far as cellphone masts controlling us all etc. Good stuff! It was only slightly less alarming than the preceding programme ('Horizon', therefore 'refereed') on the failure of the Gulf Stream - now, that really is scary for us here in the UK!
 

Inger Sheil

Member
Dec 3, 2000
5,342
34
208
Lol! My younger brother currently favours the 'Reptoid' theory. After a few pints, he will (completely tongue in cheek, lest you worry) begin to tie every conspiracy theory into this one. Whatever you care to nominate, the Reptoids are apparently behind it. No doubt he has too much time on his hands, but - with a cross between morbid fascination and the approach of an academic documenting urban myths - he tracks down new and exotic theories tying these creatures to just about every conspiracy theory out there.

I'm sure they were influencing JP Morgan and Ismay to sink the Olympic!

Lol! I have far too much energy, I've been told - not to mention an implacable determination when I sincerely believe a wrong has been done. The distortion to the historical record would have simply irritated me and I would have acted on that, but there is - as I indicated - also a personal dimension as well to my response.