A
Anonymous
Guest
Slipway said:Gardiner states in his book, among a very many other things, that when the name on the bow of the Titanic wreck was cleared of rust in 1987, the raised letters 'M, P & Y' were visible. However, he does not show a picture of this in his book, nor does he offer any source for this assertition at all.
I have seen the source video footage of the name being revealed on the wreck, and in fact I have some stills of the same stored on my hard drive.
Nowhere visible are any raised letters. What ARE visible though are the letters T I T A N, visible clearly as outlines incised into the hull plating.
So why does Gardiner claim otherwise?
Now look, I am anti-Gardiner and his switch theory- I think it is absolutely ludicrous, to be hoinest with you- BUT, I am prepared to listen to the man and see/hear his evidence. However, just as with the wreck name issue, he makes a very many claims that do NOT have any actual solid evidence to back them up, or about which he gives no source for the info. Also, he states a lot of things as fact that are just plain wrong- again, like the wreck name. He uses a lot of the Harland & Wolff photos in his evidence of the appearance of the two ships at any one time, though in many cases, what he thinks he's seeing just isn't there, or, the photos were dated wrongly originally (this happened a lot).
I don't think it's very fair to dismiss a whole website full of Titanic enthusiasts out of hand; these people DO know what they are talking about, often literally down the last rivet of the ship. Really, THAT much is known about the construction/details of the ship!
What is also known is that there were HUNDREDS of structural/detail/fitting differences between the two ships; Titanic very much was not just a plain second copy of the Olympic. There are hundreds of small, but visible, detailed differences between them. Gardiner ignores this fact, however.
Lastly, on this forum here we have the man that is actually Gardiner's agent, coming on here to stir you all up and to tout Gardiner's forthcoming third book on the subject. Well, his second really- the 'switch theory' was only a small part of his first book, written with Van Der Vatt, who it should be remembered dissmissed the theory entirely and has kept away from it ever since.
Lastly, Gardiner himself has also admitted ON RECORD that the theory idea was just that, an idea.
Time to give this one up, people.
I did not come here to stir anyone up.
Dan Van Der Vaat now agrees with Robin Gardiner.
Your last claim that Gardiner (he does have a Christian name) admits on RECORD that the theory was just that, an idea, is straight out of the realms of the fantasy of the purists you defend.
Every claim that Robin makes can be backed up by documentary evidence. That is why I am his agent.
He is a man of sincerity and integrity.
I'm not touting the book, if you can write one discounting it, feel free.