Status
Not open for further replies.

Jim Currie

Member
Apr 16, 2008
6,660
1,395
323
NewtonMearns, Glasgow, Scotland.
Well done , Rob!

I have been reluctant to comment on Jim's recent posts, but you will find much of interest in Sam's new book that for one debunks Jim's recent posting that there is "no" evidence that Titanic ended up heading Northwards after the ice berg collision. Sam also considers, inter alia, the hypothesis Jim propounds, in his (Sam's) new book that Titanic ended up westwards.

Of late, we have considered much else of relevance thanks to Arun's medical expertise that is fundamental to issues that remain partly unresolved.

Cheers,

Julian
Come off it, Julian! .Sam's a big boy and perfectly able to defend himself. What commission are you and Arun on?

I respect you and Arun for your professional expertise and would not presume to challenge any profession - specific statement you or he made, unless I had equally professional back up to do so. Hopefully, you two will accord me the same respect.
With the foregoing in mind, I have often consulted my contacts in the Marine profession, specifically, learned members of the Naval Architect and Marine Engineering professions. I challenge you, Arun and Sam to do the same. Simply present such "experts" with the known technical information regarding helm and engine orders given during the first 6 seconds from impact.. I think you will be surprised.

As you know, an hypothesis is defined as " an idea or explanation for something that may be true but has not yet been completely proved: " I don't have an "idea", I simply apply the evidence to my professional knowledge and go with what it tells me. Nor do I offer evidence which cannot be verified by an independent, suitably qualified source. Specifically - I do not have an idea then attempt to make the evidence fit that idea.
I suggest to you and everyone else who might be interested that a simple answer as to how it was possible for all these folks on Titanic and in boats to see a red light and then a single white light on a fourteen miles away Californian before 1-30 am (Sam time - Titanic) will serve to settle this argument once and for all.
Incidentally, the evidence of Californian's Apprentice Gibson regarding rocket sightings is crucial to the answer but not exclusively so.

I cannot vouch for other members, but I suspect that Sam's reluctance to publicly answer my questions regarding the red light sightings is simply clever bait to sell his book.
If not, then it means that he cannot stretch his thought process to come up with a feasible explanation.
There is of course, the possibility that he messed with the evidence of young Gibson. But as I pointed out, Gibson's evidence is not the only governing bit of evidence.

This forum is the only "bait" i am tempted by, Julian.;)

Stay safe.
 
B

Bob_Read

Guest
Come off it, Julian! .Sam's a big boy and perfectly able to defend himself. What commission are you and Arun on?

I respect you and Arun for your professional expertise and would not presume to challenge any profession - specific statement you or he made, unless I had equally professional back up to do so. Hopefully, you two will accord me the same respect.
With the foregoing in mind, I have often consulted my contacts in the Marine profession, specifically, learned members of the Naval Architect and Marine Engineering professions. I challenge you, Arun and Sam to do the same. Simply present such "experts" with the known technical information regarding helm and engine orders given during the first 6 seconds from impact.. I think you will be surprised.

As you know, an hypothesis is defined as " an idea or explanation for something that may be true but has not yet been completely proved: " I don't have an "idea", I simply apply the evidence to my professional knowledge and go with what it tells me. Nor do I offer evidence which cannot be verified by an independent, suitably qualified source. Specifically - I do not have an idea then attempt to make the evidence fit that idea.
I suggest to you and everyone else who might be interested that a simple answer as to how it was possible for all these folks on Titanic and in boats to see a red light and then a single white light on a fourteen miles away Californian before 1-30 am (Sam time - Titanic) will serve to settle this argument once and for all.
Incidentally, the evidence of Californian's Apprentice Gibson regarding rocket sightings is crucial to the answer but not exclusively so.

I cannot vouch for other members, but I suspect that Sam's reluctance to publicly answer my questions regarding the red light sightings is simply clever bait to sell his book.
If not, then it means that he cannot stretch his thought process to come up with a feasible explanation.
There is of course, the possibility that he messed with the evidence of young Gibson. But as I pointed out, Gibson's evidence is not the only governing bit of evidence.

This forum is the only "bait" i am tempted by, Julian.;)

Stay safe.

Jim: For the life of me I don’t understand why the moderators put up with your slander of Sam Halpern. Don’t agree with him? Fine. But when you speculate on his motives for not answering you and all of them are foul, that’s where you cross a line that I wish the moderators would deal with when your ad hominems fly thick and fast. We can only hope they’ll assert themselves.
 

Jim Currie

Member
Apr 16, 2008
6,660
1,395
323
NewtonMearns, Glasgow, Scotland.
Jim: For the life of me I don’t understand why the moderators put up with your slander of Sam Halpern. Don’t agree with him? Fine. But when you speculate on his motives for not answering you and all of them are foul, that’s where you cross a line that I wish the moderators would deal with when your ad hominems fly thick and fast. We can only hope they’ll assert themselves.
Slander? That is a very strong word, Bob .
What is slanderous about expressing an opinion as to why someone whether it be Sam. you. or anyone else.. declines to publicly answer a series of simple questions?
 
B

Bob_Read

Guest
Jim: Because you only assign the basest of possible motives to Sam’s failure to answer.
 

Jim Currie

Member
Apr 16, 2008
6,660
1,395
323
NewtonMearns, Glasgow, Scotland.
Jim: Because you only assign the basest of possible motives to Sam’s failure to answer.
What other possible reasons might you suggest. Bob? Forgive me for saying so, but getting a simple answer to the simple questions I ask is like... dare I say it? like pulling teeth. If you ask me a question, I answer courteously and to the best of my ability. If I don't have an answer, I will say so. I most certainly will not dismiss you as having something better to do. If you do not accept my answer, I would expect you to explain why.
 

Philip Hind

Editor
Staff member
Member
Sep 1, 1996
1,767
76
323
England
To say you lot bicker like children is being rude to children. It's pathetic. this thread is closed until further notice, reread the house rules and when you are ready to discuss things like normal adults let me know.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Similar threads