Reply to thread

Message

[QUOTE="Mila, post: 404144, member: 175641"]
Hi Tim,
It might be  evidence of an inversion (inversions are very, very common, superior mirages not so much), but it is mostly  evidence that there was no mirage.
Here's an image of flat-topped smoke due to  an invesion [URL]https://homecomingbook.files.wordpress.com/2012/01/flatplume2.jpg[/URL] Do you see a mirage there?
The passanger said that  smoke rose high into the sky. Only steep close-to-the ground inversion could result in a superior mirage.

I meant to ask you about this. For example in your book you write

and here's what Dr. Paul Lee writes on his site [URL]http://www.paullee.com/titanic/northatlanticships.html[/URL]

I did check the logs of Marengo myself and Dr. Lee is correct.
Then you write:

However the picture of the log you presentred in the book appears to show the not April 12 but April 13
[ATTACH=full]43119[/ATTACH]

Was Niagra still in the area on April 13?

Why is that? A mirage could have been not only 20, but even 50 miles away.  IMO if Lord observed refraction, saying so would have only helped him to explain why he did not try to help. At least [I]De Coverly[/I]  used this theory when he tried to prove that Lord's action were justified.

Well, maybe we should start with agreeing that there is no any confimed observation of night-time refraction that does not involve any light source.
[/QUOTE]

Verification

I which year did the Titanic sail?