The forward mast


Status
Not open for further replies.
J

Jeffrey Word

Guest
>>RMSTI has consistently denied causing any sort of damage to the crow's nest, but this particular legend has been circulating as "Fact" for years, usually being repeated as such by RMSTI's critics.<<

I guess I have to fall into that long list of critics then. I firmly believe that RMSTI is responsible for a major part of the destruction done to that ship over the past 15 years. Yes, nature has played a HUGE part, but definitely not all. The mast is one of the major things that I firmly believe that RMSTI is responsible for. I state again, this is what I believe and I in no way mean to influence anyone elses opinions or beliefs...or tick anyone off. :)

The other thing I want to say is that RMSTI would deny any damage done to the wreck by them. Because they know the public is watching, and any damage is going to seriously damage their credibility as being able to salvage from the wreck without doing any harm to the structure itself.

Despite how it may sound, I am not against RMSTI. I think some careless mistakes were made in the name of discovery/research/salvage. Nobody's going down there to tear the wreck up. Some mistakes were made and accidents happen.

Just had a few thoughts and wanted to see what kind of responses I'd get. I want to say again that I'm not meaning to argue with anybody or to intrude on anyone's beliefs, as I'm very open-minded to all theories and thoughts. That's what makes this site great in my opinion.

Have a great one everybody!

Jeff.
 

Kyrila Scully

Member
Apr 15, 2001
2,079
35
243
South Florida
It's easy to lay blame when there are no witnesses. I'm in a situation right now where I must be careful in my apartment building not to lay blame for the ongoing removal of a handicapped parking sign on the owners of the vehicles parked in the space. It's tempting to say that the owners did it to defy the law and the property management, but without witnesses, you can't say for certain. There is evidence from some sources who say it could have fallen naturally, but others (mostly critics of salvaging) who say they see evidence of man's doings. What's done is done, so maybe we should move on and study what we can while we can and not waste time on mistakes, accidents, deliberate or natural destructions, etc.

Just my opinion.

Kyrila
 
J

Jeffrey Word

Guest
That's all I was meaning to say. I'm not saying it happened a certain way or that it didn't. I merely stated an opinion. The mast was in fine shape until the 87-89 expeditions, if I remember correctly. I'll double check my tapes. And people, it's not hard to fathom. They took the light off the mast did they not? Thereby, they had to land the sub somewhere close by to get to it, therefore I believe they mashed it trying to get at that light. Now, I think Mother Nature has played THE major role in the destruction of the mast as with the rest of the ship, but she's had a little help from us humans.
happy.gif
I say again, I meant nothing ugly by my post and I'm not against salvage. Unless it damages the structure of the ship somehow. And as Kyrila has rightfully stated, there is no proof. Only speculation. Kyrila I think you're right anyway. This conversation never goes well in ET. This is supposed to be a public forum to discuss all Titanic topics, but some people don't see it that way so this will be my final post on this subject. At least as far as the damage done by man.
 
Jul 9, 2000
58,655
860
563
Easley South Carolina
>>I guess I have to fall into that long list of critics then. I firmly believe that RMSTI is responsible for a major part of the destruction done to that ship over the past 15 years.<<

Based on what? Which witnesses have come forward with first hand testimony and recorded evidence of any of that? I'm well aware of the accusations that have been bandied about. They've been floating around the 'net for years and have taken on the dignity of being considered "Fact" when there's no direct evidence that this is so. (All it goes to show is that if something is repeated often enough, people will start to beleive it regardless of whether or not there's a valid basis for doing so.)

I'm not RMSTI's greatest fan, but unless somebody can show me firm evidence of wrongdoing, I'm inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt.
 
J

Jeffrey Word

Guest
Hey Mike. You're exactly right, there are no witnesses or any proof to back up my opinion. Which I clearly stated is my opinion. Nothing more. Actually the point of the original post was that IF they really did it, they're not stupid enough to announce it to the world. Who would? I'm not upset about it or anything like that.
happy.gif
What happens happens. I in no was intended to influence anybody's opinion. I'm actually kind of sorry I brought it up now. Maybe it's just best left alone. We've all got our beliefs, and they all differ in their own way. That's what makes us all special!
happy.gif
Sorry if I offended anyone with any earlier posts regarding the mast and its destruction.
 

Jason D. Tiller

Moderator
Member
Aug 20, 2000
8,239
29
398
Niagara Falls, Ontario
Jeffrey,

quote:

Sorry if I offended anyone with any earlier posts regarding the mast and its destruction.

I don't think you offended anyone, let alone me. That's your opinion and you're entitled to it, like anyone is. When I asked those questions, I wanted to know your views, so I wasn't asking for evidence.

Just as Mike is, I'm also not a huge fan of RMSTI but unless there is evidence in front of me that indicates that damage was done, I have to seriously doubt it.

Never be sorry for stating your opinion.​
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Similar threads