Thomas B Williams Titanic and Californian

[Veronika Jenei]

Has anybody read Thomas B. Williams' book? I just purchased it and have read the first 110 pages but I get the impression that the author is just trying to prove his right every possible way. He is claiming that he is going to use only "facts" and objective "evidences" to support his hypothesis but again and again I find a number of myths coming up as facts in the text. The best example: "Let us now examine, without speculation, the evidence which the five captains would have given to the inquiry in Lord's defence, had the opportunity been given." Isn't this a paradox here? Speculating on what evidence someone WOULD HAVE GIVEN 95 years ago IF he would have been asked. Am I alone with my opinion?

 

[Michael H. Standart]

>>but I get the impression that the author is just trying to prove his right every possible way.<<

If that's what the author is doing, he has plenty of company on both sides of the Californian divide who attempt to do just that. It's a barrier to clearity and makes this whole issue a lot more controversial then it needs to be.

>>Am I alone with my opinion?<<

No you're not. Speculation may be useful, but they are not facts.

Beyond that, I'll reserve any further judgement as I've not even heard of this book, much less read it. He may well have some valid insights to offer, but what you've related here doesn't inspire confidence.

 

[Veronika Jenei]

Hi Michael! It just got released in May. According to a comment on Amazon.com Thomas B. Williams is a long time known "Lordist" (if I am correctly using this word for someone who is trying to prove that Captain Lord was innocent). Well, I have never heard of the author before and I thought that despite of these initial negative feelings I am going to read the book because it can have interesting suggestions in the matter and even real facts I have never heard of. My book is already full of my comments on his statements. It would be interesting to discuss it once you (and maybe others) have read the book.

 

[Michael H. Standart]

I don't honestly know if I'll ever get around to it. So many books, so little time and all that. That much aside, the Californian controversy is not for the thin skinned or the faint hearted.

 

[Sam Brannigan]

Awww Michael...what with everything else happening around the board lately, perhaps a little Californian debate would cheer everyone up!

 

[Veronika Jenei]

Well, I am convinced we will never know for sure what happened that night but I think some objective discussion would help the field. I don't think one has to join any of the sides in this matter. And who knows maybe something interesting could pop up. Anyway, this book is "interesting".

 

[Paul Lee]

I was suspicious of the book after I read that Thomas Williams provided the evidence that prompted the re-opening of the case by the MAIB. In fact, nothing of the kind happened; as the MAIB files show, many authors and researchers corresponded with the Bureau, and Williams didn't provide much in the way of "new" evidence. In fact, the earliest piece of correspondence in the file is from someone who claims to be the son of an engineer on the Californian.

Paul

 

[Veronika Jenei]

I am just reading that part of the book where he showed his correspondence with the leader of the re-appraisal, Captain T.W. Barnett. Did you read the book, Paul? Where did you read that he initiated the re-opening? Did he say that himself? Otherwise journalist can provide these kind of false-information.

 

[Paul Lee]

No I haven't read the book, nor do I intend to. I read that he initiated the re-appraisal on the back cover, and on Tempus and Amazon's website.

 

[Veronika Jenei]

You are right, I did not pay attention to that. I haven't heard of him before I bought the book, nor about the re-appraisal. Maybe I should take a deeper look at this. Can you tell me where I can find information on the MAIB files? I am trying to look at things an objective way that is why I did not exclude the book of my list of readings after I read the critics on Amazon but I try to be critical when I read it.

 

[Paul Lee]

Hi Veronika,
I think you can find information on the MAIB files by contacting them directly. I am not sure of the complete address, but I believe it is in Brunswick Place, Southampton. The file is quite big, so it might help if you specify the exact information you want! There are also pieces of iinformation that they can't divulge due to confidentiality though.

Best wishes

Paul

 

[Michael H. Standart]

The MAIB website is at http://www.maib.gov.uk/home/index.cfm if anybody is interested.

 

[Paul Lee]

The review on Amazon has changed, from one negative review to a glowing review, giving it 5 stars.

The only problem is that the reviewer is none other than Mr.Kamps, who edited the book. Vested interest, and against Amazon's reviewing policy too.

 

[Paul Lee]

Another piece of false information from the Amazon Review: that Captain Stulping of the Birma gave evidence at the British Enquiry on 26th April 1912. I'll leave it to others to point out the errors here.

 

[Michael H. Standart]

>>I'll leave it to others to point out the errors here.<<

That's easy enough. Go to http://www.titanicinquiry.org/BOTInq/BOTInq26Header.php

Captain Stulping's name doesn't even appear on the witness list for either inquiry.

 

[Veronika Jenei]

Hi Guys,
Well, I read more than 2 thirds of the book and then I simply gave up. Too many false, so called "facts", too subjective (I could write a looong list with false, or falsely interpreted information but that would be far too long). Regarding the book review: it matches the book, just as subjective and it seems there are problems with facts here as well, just like in the book. Actually I searched on Amazon.com and could not find the book but I found it on Amazon.co.uk so finally I read the review. I started another book in the topic instead of Thomas B. Williams'; Senan Moloney: Titanic and the mystery ship. This feels more objective to me although I have only read the first 50 pages so I cannot say more.

 

[Paul Lee]

I've updated an article by one of the authors:

http://www.paullee.com/titanic/articles.html

 

[Paul Lee]

Just added some new stuff that I forgot to put in. Thanks George!

 

[Michael Cundiff]

Veronika...

Actually those in favor of, Cpt. Lord's story of the events which unfolded 14-15 April '12, are commonly referred to as *LORDITES* Just as, owing to my academic research and particular fondness for W.T. STEAD & Wife, am somewhat
catergorized as a STEADITE.

Michael Cundiff
NV, USA
(Where Mr. Fossett has gone missing...:-(

 

[Paul Lee]

Fortunately there was no one on board called HITT or LUDD.