Titanic Sinking: Could A Virgin Perspective Solve the Mystery + Are we unintentionally Biased?

In your opinion, Could a fresh untainted analysis of the Sinking tell us what actually happened?


  • Total voters
    14

Harland Duzen

Member
Jan 14, 2017
1,593
718
188
I not to sure how to explain this but here we go...

I been thinking what would happen if we got people who never heard of Titanic to determine the sinking:

My hypnosis, is that if we got together a bunch of experts in ship structure who had never heard anything about the ship or seen any imaginings or witness accounts (which sounds impossible) and just gave them the the essential info needed (like dimensions, speed, buoyancy etc), would they give us a new series of events that matched witness testimony and solve the mystery.

-----------------

My second issue is that are our ideas / viewing of the sinking been made biased by films, witness testimony and personal opinions. would you agree?

Finally, does it seem odd when it comes to witness testimony we come up with two excuses?

Witness Testimony from 1912: "We can't trust it due to reporters, Inquires tainting their statements and the trauma affecting their memory."

Witness Testimony from 1950+ "We can't trust it due to them forgetting the events 50+ years onwards and contradicting their earlier statements."
 
A

Aaron_2016

Guest
Difficult to say. The only hard fact we know is that the Titanic sank because there is a wreck on the bottom of the Atlantic that looks uncanny like the photos of the Titanic. Apart from that, everything else we have learned about the sinking comes from survivors accounts - and there the problem begins. Accounts are contradictory and come from a wide range of sources that could be credited or discredited depending on the reader's choice and each one could be interpreted differently. I believe the best way to find out what really happened would have been to hold a full 'independent inquiry' outside the influence of any outside source. Sadly the witnesses have all since passed away.


.
 

Harland Duzen

Member
Jan 14, 2017
1,593
718
188
While I admit a 3rd inquiry would have help (Samuel Halpern did do a good job in his book) I can't help but wonder if all the films and documentaries over the year might had made us subconsciously want it to happen a particular way.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
A

Aaron_2016

Guest
There is undoubtedly a positive and negative effect to films and documentaries. James Cameron's Hollywood film was so well made with incredible sales that many people might have taken every scene in the film as truthful to the real events. We also have documentaries that do greater harm than good. e.g. There are people on Youtube who are completely convinced that the Titanic was sunk on purpose or switched with the Olympic because they saw it on a documentary on Youtube.


.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 users
Mar 22, 2003
6,361
1,642
383
Chicago, IL, USA
www.titanicology.com
What actually happened? The answer is simple. Titanic hit an iceberg and sank.

What some people are looking for is a minute-by-minute factual account of every little detail. That is impossible. Even if everyone that survived were still here, eyewitnesses accounts by themselves are notorious for being unreliable. There would always be contradictions and inconsistencies that always come about after some traumatic event takes place. As far as what people believe, unfortunately, people believe whatever they want to believe. Before the days of TV documentaries, movie films and YouTube, "If it was written, so it must have been done." Now it is, "if I saw it happen that way, so it must have happened that way."
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users

Harland Duzen

Member
Jan 14, 2017
1,593
718
188
We know what sank the ship but I was referring more to the breakup and reaction of the Bow and Stern during the breakup since it' still heavily discussed and contended.
 
Last edited:

Rob Lawes

Member
Jun 13, 2012
1,187
733
208
England
I think one of the biggest factors that governs the study of the Titanic is the industry that has grown around the story of the ship.

It seems to me, and I mean no offence to any individual by this, that if a researcher can not find an 'angle' to sell their work then they don't have much to sell. The story of the liner that struck an iceberg and sank on its maiden voyage condemning 1500 people to a watery grave has been well written. The only way to pique interest is to find a new angle on an old story.

Just look at how many documentaries National Geographic push out, "the final word", "the last secrets", "the final secrets", "the last of the words on the final secrets....".

Then we have our own perception thrown into the mix. It can't be as just straightforward as a ship in the wrong place at the wrong time, receiving overwhelming damage to its hull. There has to be more to it than that?

Then there's conformation bias where we seek to confirm our own pre-conceived ideas at the expense of the obvious or the true.

I think its a story so often told we have run out of ways to tell it. A good way to start again would be to ask ourselves what really matters and what don't we know?

Overall, does it matter one hill of beans if the bow lifted up a foot? 10 yards or sprang back out of the water and span round three times? Of course not. Well, not in the overall scheme of things.

But where were all those ships that the Californian saw? Were they there at all? Did the Mount Temple do enough or is there more to her story?

The bigger picture remains more interesting.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users

Harland Duzen

Member
Jan 14, 2017
1,593
718
188
"...I think its a story so often told we have run out of ways to tell it..."

Writing my book and trying to avoid unintentional plagiarism, I certainly know the feeling... there's only so many ways you can describe the collision or her arrival somewhere before the alarm starts going off.
 
Oct 28, 2000
3,242
543
388
There are no neutral observers. There are no unbiased researchers. We all come to subjects like Titanic with a life history which shapes our views. An engineer would focus on the damage and breakup. A socialist would rant about the evils of the big shipping companies. An attorney for the officers would point out how tightly they were constrained by company orders and international regulations. News reporters would look for sad stories to tell, or heroes to promote. So it would go...then as now. The answer to the question is, "yes," the Titanic story would be different if it were told fresh today. But, that begs the question of whether it would be told any more correctly. Probably not. As there are different long splices for different ships, so their are different biases for different generations.

-- David G. Brown
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users

Harland Duzen

Member
Jan 14, 2017
1,593
718
188
There are no neutral observers. There are no unbiased researchers. We all come to subjects like Titanic with a life history which shapes our views. An engineer would focus on the damage and breakup. A socialist would rant about the evils of the big shipping companies. An attorney for the officers would point out how tightly they were constrained by company orders and international regulations. News reporters would look for sad stories to tell, or heroes to promote. So it would go...then as now. The answer to the question is, "yes," the Titanic story would be different if it were told fresh today. But, that begs the question of whether it would be told any more correctly. Probably not. As there are different long splices for different ships, so their are different biases for different generations.

-- David G. Brown

You make a good point, David G. Brown.

Off topic, but how do your speeches aways sound so dramatic and epic? they aways sound as if they should come at the end of a meaningful Story!
 
Mar 18, 2008
2,631
1,117
248
Germany
Then we have also evil Ismay and the White Star Line wanting to make a speed record for profit! Not to forget that they were cutting corners when building Titanic using only the cheapest stuff to save money!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Dec 13, 2016
149
54
73
30
Sometimes its this very curiosity that keeps us searching for more and sometimes, although very rarely it brings up new information and a fresh approach to a disaster. Its when theories are thrown around and repeated as truth, without solid evidence, that we run into problems. Just my thoughts.
 
Mar 22, 2003
6,361
1,642
383
Chicago, IL, USA
www.titanicology.com
It has been said in another thread, "Nothing can be overlooked or out ruled. Every survivor account should be treated as true until proven wrong because everything we have learned from the disaster comes from survivor accounts. Hence their importance and why nothing can be overlooked."

Perhaps because of the scientifically proven unreliability of eyewitness accounts, it should be restated as: Every survivor account should be treated as UNTRUE until proven RIGHT.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 users

Rob Lawes

Member
Jun 13, 2012
1,187
733
208
England
This is a quote from one of my all time heroes. Richard Feynman:

"In general, we look for a new law by the following process. First, we guess it (audience laughter), no, don’t laugh, that’s really true. Then we compute the consequences of the guess, to see what, if this is right, if this law we guess is right, to see what it would imply and then we compare the computation results to nature, or we say compare to experiment or experience, compare it directly with observations to see if it works.

If it disagrees with experiment, it’s wrong. In that simple statement is the key to science. It doesn’t make any difference how beautiful your guess is, it doesn’t matter how smart you are who made the guess, or what his name is… If it disagrees with experiment, it’s wrong. That’s all there is to it.”
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Apr 8, 2008
57
7
98
Intresting concept. First find someone who has never heard or seen of the Titanic. Ok. Then they also have to be someone who is an expert on ship construction ect ect ect. This sounds like finding an unbiased jury to try Lee H. Oswald for the assination of JFK or any one of some of the most important happenings i history. Aint gonna happen. I think we are gonna have to wait for someone to invent a time machine that would hold all of us to go back and observe (can not interfere due to butterfly effect/paradox).
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users

Similar threads

Similar threads