Titanic 90 years below


Adam Usher

Member
Oct 26, 2004
47
0
86
I watched the titanic days on the history channel and on national geographic channel at the weekend and on titanic 90 years below, Dr Ballard was showing a man the wreck, which you probably all know about.

I was interested when it showed you a picture of what looked like a body on the ocean floor, it looked to me like an officer or a sailor, as it had a dark blue jacket and a dark blue hat, or thats what i thought it looked like.

The body could have been covered with something and that is why it has been preserved.

Does anybody know anything about this at all?
 
Dec 2, 2000
58,614
680
483
Easley South Carolina
I saw no such photo. If any exist, you can be sure it was an optical illusion. Dr. Ballard's team got something of a shock for example when they saw a face in the mud which, upon close examination, turned out to be the ceramic face of a little girl's doll.

There's just no way a corpse could have been preserved down there after all these years. Even without decomposition setting in, the local sealife would regard any organic remains as lunch.
 

Adam Usher

Member
Oct 26, 2004
47
0
86
The picture i saw definately did look like a body, it wasn't exactly preserved very well but it was the remains of a body, Dr Ballard said that himself. If you ever get the chance to see it, then watch out for it, i was very surprised.

I cant think of anything that would look similar or even be the dark blue colour. The colour was that of an officers uniform.
 
Jun 12, 2004
2,131
12
161
Then we're talking about one of four people:

1) Cpt. Smith
2) Chief Officer Wilde
3) 1st Officer Murdoch
4) 6th Officer Moody

That is, not counting the pursers (McElroy's body was discovered), the carpenter(s), and Master-at-Arms King (not sure whether or not his body had been discovered, but I don't think it was).

In the end, I agree with Michael. Even the metal was consumed, and that's the hardest substance involved in the Titanic sinking. Nothing would have remained (save for, as proven, leather, such as suitcases and boots). It may be possible for a coat or two, even maybe a cap, to have survived, but I wouldn't expect too much of that.

Then there is the possibility that Ballard's people fabricated the 'bodily remains' for the sake of sensationalism and high ratings. Hey, I'm not accusing anyone of anything, but it has happened before, so it is possible. Take it with a grain of salt water from the ocean.

Adam, are you sure it was a body you saw? As Michael Standart has repeatedly said on this forum: Sometimes what you think you see isn't what's actually there. I'm not saying I completely agree with this, but I know there's some validity to it. The mind does play tricks...
 
Dec 6, 2000
1,384
14
221
It would sure help if we could see *exactly* what Adam saw. I am not aware of any claims of a body found at the wreck. I am aware of clothes and shoes in the pattern where they *may* indicate a body was.
 
J

Jaime Croft

Guest
I know what Adam is referring to as I caught the tail end of the same program. (Ballard giving a tour via what they filmed during his "Return to Titanic".) I do not believe an actual body was present, but what you do see is a boot and "probably" the remains of a man's long coat. An oil slicker perhaps. Ballard indicates he believes it was a body because of the presence of the coat and the boot. (Definitely a little eerie looking to be honest.) I do not think he states that a body is still present, but that the coat had not been eaten as it was treated in the same fashion as the shoes which still exist on the wreck. (He does however make some comment about not knowing what may be present inside the shoes. He is very big on "look not touch" during the entire program.) I also believe that a still photo of the same is published in "Return to Titanic", although I would have to check at home for the page number.
 
Dec 2, 2000
58,614
680
483
Easley South Carolina
>>I do not believe an actual body was present, but what you do see is a boot and "probably" the remains of a man's long coat. An oil slicker perhaps.<<

That much I have seen, and Dr. Ballard may be right on that score but only insofar as what we're talking about is the *former* presence of a body. One may argue quite a bit about what Dr. Ballard's claimed, but I don't recall him stating "Here is a body." in the present tense. As an oceanographer, he would know all too well how time and the local sealife would turn any human remains into a snack.
 
Dec 6, 2000
1,384
14
221
I think what you're talking about it in his newest book. Let me check ....

Ah, here it is. Page 148, "Return to Titanic". It says "A slicker and heavy duty boot situated just below its hem, fire the imagination".

If a heavy duty boot, very unlikely to have been one of the deceased officers, probably one of the boiler or engine crew. And a slicker? Again, unlikely to have been an officer.

If this is the same shot, and I think it is, at least the book does not say "Here is a body". But hints strongly that it *may* have been. What I see in the photo is just a boot and empty coat.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Jun 12, 2004
2,131
12
161
Bill, I don't have the book. Are the boot and coat situated as if there had once been a human being lying there? It may be a coincidence that a boot and a coat from lockers could have fallen in close proximity to one another. After all, you said "boot," meaning one, not two. It's interesting, though...
 
Dec 6, 2000
1,384
14
221
Mark:

One boot. the other boot could have been out of camera range, under the coat, who knows?

And yes, they are situated as if a person could have been there.
 

Adam Usher

Member
Oct 26, 2004
47
0
86
Can i just point out the fact guys that i never once said that i saw a body on the ocean floor, meaning that i saw something that looked like a body or where a body could have been. To me it certainly looked like there were some kind of black remains inside the coat.

It was probably nothing but i cannot believe that people on this message board dont know much about what i am refering to!
 
Dec 6, 2000
1,384
14
221
We haven't seen whatever show you are refering to, Adam. At least, no one else has said they saw this show.

However, from your description, it sounds like the same remains in Ballard's book.
 
J

Jaime Croft

Guest
From what I can see in the book and what I saw on TV, I am pretty sure they are the same. Still, no actual body, but perhaps where someone came to rest.
 

Similar threads

Similar threads