Harland Duzen

Member
Jan 14, 2017
1,544
587
123
The really silly thing about Titanic: The New Evidence, is that they even show in the first 5 minutes the smudge doesn't line up with either the coal bunkers or even Boiler Room 6 as a brief shot of the image put over a 3D model shows

(Stills taken from C4 Titanic: The New Evidence 2017).

Screen Shot 2017-01-23 at 21.02.33.png


Screen Shot 2017-01-23 at 21.02.44.png
 
Oct 19, 2007
51
2
78
I just saw this today. It's a shame that this documentary has so many obvious holes and discrepancies. I've really enjoyed reading Senan Maloney's research on this site, but now I'm doubting all his conclusions...
 

Lyle

Member
Jul 8, 2017
10
2
13
I find it extraordinary that a HUGE effort made by a number of noted Titanic historians to create a pamphlet that is utterly damning of this Bunker Fire TV program should be offered free to anyone willing to sift through its details. I certainly hope someone paid you guys for this work, because it's quite excellent. However, I Googled this title and other than the link to the website where the .pdf is offered, the rest of the links connect to news stories about this show.

The smudge seen in those photos looks like soot that's found a route of escape, even far away from the coal bunker fire. My theory entirely, no assumption of facts. I don't know if Titanic ever went through a rainstorm, but if it was strong enough, the soot in question would be washed away. Besides, its position in the hull means it has no relevance to the iceberg damage--simply too high!

I found the show entertaining and it had some good graphics, but as a friend once told me, "Why should the truth stand in the way of a good story?" I think William Randolph Hearst would heartily agree.
 
Mar 18, 2008
2,276
583
183
Germany
Thank you! I think I can say it also speaking for the other authors.

No one of us get paid for it. However it was worth to put the claims right with evidence.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

Lyle

Member
Jul 8, 2017
10
2
13
Well, it's an extraordinary effort, and so very necessary to combat the hyperbole that sprouts up as fact.

I am still reading it even though I'm only halfway through! Much to digest here. And I no longer support my idea of the smudges being soot. That suggests quite a bit more fire than was present, and it was a pretty frequent event in many ships, so no big deal here since they knew how to deal with it.

Substandard steel? Only one word need be mentioned: Olympic. Honorary warship with one U-boat to her credit in 1918. The Nantucket lightship sinking was a sad event but Olympic wasn't badly damaged in that incident, either.

Again thanks for the great effort.
 
Last edited:
Jan 5, 2001
2,299
99
178
Glad you enjoyed it, Lyle!

Faced with a position where pretty much every substantive claim made in the programme was false, we felt it was very worthwhile creating the paper for those who might have seen the programme and been misled.

Best wishes

Mark.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

Emilie

Member
Aug 10, 2013
89
13
38
35
Saint-Étienne, France
The only stuff I did agree within this docu is that the fire might have weakened the bulkhead.
The rest is completely conspiracy theory prone.
Ismay is depicted as too much often, aka the evil incarnated.
Andrews thought the Titanic couldn't sink? Bwaaaa.... they forgot to mention he hided his true knowledge to various passengers in order to avoid panic movement!
And don't get me started with the whole stuff about supposed cutting corners with material during the construction.
..
 

robert warren

Member
Feb 19, 2016
178
58
38
Once again, another theory done by people grasping at straws. Its one thing to talk about a historic subject to keep the memory alive, but another to pull out a bunch of bs to get some quick cash and 15 minutes of fame. How many times has the "raging fire" theory been flushed down? Of course the smudges on the photos could also have been generated over time and elements taking their toll. An iceberg didn't sink the ship?Please!!! Some of the berg's damage could be seen and was photographed by Bob Ballard 30 years ago!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
A

Aaron_2016

Guest
Looking at photos of the Olympic taken in Belfast almost at the same location, it appears the 'smudge' on the Titanic is nothing more than coal dust smeared against the hull, either from the open door or from the close proximity of a tug boat that perhaps came up close to the door at some earlier point.


Olympiccoal1.PNG


coal1aa.PNG


.
 

Harland Duzen

Member
Jan 14, 2017
1,544
587
123
The show and it's claims are best summed up by Lawrence Beesley himself:

-"to make a mass of nonsense that apparently sensible people believe or at which any rate discuss..."

The Loss of the SS Titanic (1912)

I can't help but wonder if Senan Molony has since regretted his decision or does he still stands by it?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users

Emilie

Member
Aug 10, 2013
89
13
38
35
Saint-Étienne, France
Once again, another theory done by people grasping at straws. Its one thing to talk about a historic subject to keep the memory alive, but another to pull out a bunch of bs to get some quick cash and 15 minutes of fame. .....An iceberg didn't sink the ship?Please!!! Some of the berg's damage could be seen and was photographed by Bob Ballard 30 years ago!!
Also a crappy way to legitimate Gardiner-like conspiracy theories....
 

robert warren

Member
Feb 19, 2016
178
58
38
It's all very frustrating simply because a lot of people who come up with these kinds of theories have studied the Titanic for what--a total of 10 minutes.Then the rest of us who know better have even more work cut out for us explaining and undoing the damage that this stuff unleashes on the general public.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

Harland Duzen

Member
Jan 14, 2017
1,544
587
123
Hear Hear! I had conversations with people who googled " what is Titanic?" and immediately proclaim themselves Experts in Edwardian Shipbuilding, Mechanics, Historical traditions, Maritime convention, social reactions etc.

Now we got dozens of younger Titanic experts out there believing this and other myths such as lack of keys in crow's nest dooming the ship (it didn't) and passengers locked behind gates at gunpoint (they weren't).
 
Last edited:

Rob Lawes

Member
Jun 13, 2012
1,081
606
143
England
The trouble is (and I have fallen into the trap myself) Google has changed the nature of research. In years gone by people put the hard yards in by trawling through microfiche in a backroom of a library in a town near nowhere looking for a small bit of information. Today all you need to do is google the Titanic inquiry, a few reports here and there and read someone elses book and not only are you a researcher but an expert.

Don't get me wrong. Google has its merits to help skim the surface but the task of finding what little undiscovered primary source information is still out there takes dedication, patience and a lot more than a computer.

If only I had the time and the energy. :)
 

Harland Duzen

Member
Jan 14, 2017
1,544
587
123
The trouble is (and I have fallen into the trap myself) Google has changed the nature of research. In years gone by people put the hard yards in by trawling through microfiche in a backroom of a library in a town near nowhere looking for a small bit of information. Today all you need to do is google the Titanic inquiry, a few reports here and there and read someone elses book and not only are you a researcher but an expert.
As Weird as it may be reading this by younger members, I wish I could have done my research like this (the words in bold above), but the problem now is things like Money, distance, but mainly after 100+ years, everyone's beaten me to all the info (like numbers, dates, locations etc).

Now the only evidence still out there are photographs and personal accounts in the form of postcards, family photos and letters hidden in Attics and boxes all the way from Belfast to New York!

If only I had the Time, Energy and Money (or a Time-Machine whichever's better)!

At least others (like Aaron_2016) are lucky enough to be in close proximity of their local offices and share their discoveries with us. :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
A

Aaron_2016

Guest
Trouble is, Belfast has received so much attention that several former beauty spots are now packed with tourists and places like the pump house and dry dock (which used to have free access) are now £5 for admission. Good for business I guess, although I'm not sure what they are doing to the pump house building at the moment. Hope they don't demolish too much. I took these photos last week when the Oriana and Boudicca came in.




Belfast01a.JPG


Belfast1b.JPG


Belfast01b.JPG


cruise01a.JPG


cruise1a.JPG



.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Harland Duzen

Member
Jan 14, 2017
1,544
587
123
Apparently they possibly adding a visitor's centre for the HMS Caroline? But why attact / demolish part of the Pump House when you could just have a moveable Vistor's hut or another building for it.

Belfast's Titanic Quarter does make some odd decisions in my opinion since I discovered they tore down several historic H&W buildings for the future installation of the Titanic Quarter.

(Those who don't like historic demolition please avert your eyes)

Back To Topic!
 

Similar threads