Suppose you had a time machine....
Cpnavatar
knowledge of future events to who ever you'd meet in the past.
Would you:
Go back to 1912 and attempt to prevent the disaster?
Go back to 1986 and Warn Bob Ballard not to reveal the location of the wreck,
or better still, prevent him from finding it?
Don Brynelsen
"Go back to bed lady, everyone knows this ship is unsinkable!"
LoneGnMan
the salvage rights.
___________________________________________________________________
Mike Finnell
http://members.xoom.com/deadite/
Anti-salvage all the way
Michel Morin
Cpnavatar (cpna...@aol.com) writes:
> Suppose you had access to a Time Machine, and were able to take proof of your
> knowledge of future events to who ever you'd meet in the past.
>
> Would you:
> Go back to 1912 and attempt to prevent the disaster?
>
> Go back to 1986 and Warn Bob Ballard not to reveal the location of the wreck,
> or better still, prevent him from finding it?
>
way from his room to the bridge.
My humble two cents.
Regards,
Mike
--
/ _____/ /_____/ /_____/ /_____/ /_________ /
__________/______I/ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .I___/______
| . . . . . . . . . . . . DO NOT DISTURB . .. . . . . . . . . (
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Countess
Staircase, saying, "It's for your own good..."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
--Rivetcountess
"There was peace, and the world had an even tenor to its way... (You know
the rest!) Jack Thayer
Michel Morin <dt...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA> wrote in article
<6rh8qo$g...@freenet-news.carleton.ca>...
nansaidh
>Is it possible that the "mystery ship" the one seen by those on Titanic but not
>responding to her rockets was actully a time machine from the future, her
>passengers being people who pay a fee to go back in time in order to witness an
>historical event?
<g> Now I have to admit, there's something I hadn't thought of
before... but what a novel idea. :) What a great mental
picture... hmmm this could induce hours of daydreaming....
nans
Come visit... www.secoast.net/~nans
Tziper
some impact on the future, no I would not have kept the disasterfrom happening
because then the saftey improvments that Titanic begot would not be in play for
some latter shipping mishap
However the idea of a time machine and Titanic makes me think of a theory that
I have-
Tom Pappas
they had to launch 705 people. They couldn't have done 1500 more in the time
available. See my website for a proposed timeline.
Do I get to use my time machine to wake up Smith and tell him it looks
doubtful?
--
Half-baked Titanic theories galore at:
http://home.earthlink.net/~tomswift1
"But this script can't sink!"
"She is made of irony, sir. I assure you, she can."
LoneGnMan
>not
>responding to her rockets was actully a time machine from the future, her
>passengers being people who pay a fee to go back in time in order to witness
>an
>historical event?
Ya know, I've thought of exactlly that, but I thought of them as scientists
with advanced listening and viewing equipment.
Tziper
with advanced listening and viewing equipment.
Well they could be that too, or some far flung future Cameron making and even
more "ultimate" Titanic movie.
My time machine theory is not as crazy as my "the ship was willed to sink by
her passengers" theory. This comes from the fact that anytime someone
interviewed a surrvior they would recall all the "bad omens" they had. Not to
speak ill of the dead, and Im sure she was a swet woman, but that damn Eva Hart
and her blasted mother! "That flys in the face of god to say the ship was
unsinkable! We almost hit another ship in port, my father said that was a bad
omen!" Im suprised someone didnt say the runny eggs they were served was a
signal of impending doom. Every one who made it off that ship seems to have a
story about their mother not able to sleep, up all nite, convinced somethjing
dreadfull was about to happen. It wasnt an iceberg that sank Titanic, it was
all the bad vibes!!!!!
chip
Louis Epstein
: Keeping in mind that whatever of the past one would change is going to have
: some impact on the future, no I would not have kept the disasterfrom happening
: because then the saftey improvments that Titanic begot would not be in play for
: some latter shipping mishap
Why not go back to 1910 or so and make sure the Titanic was built more
safely?
: However the idea of a time machine and Titanic makes me think of a theory that
: I have-
: Is it possible that the "mystery ship" the one seen by those on Titanic but not
: responding to her rockets was actully a time machine from the future, her
: passengers being people who pay a fee to go back in time in order to witness an
: historical event?
I've considered writing a story where a ship from the future shows up to
rescue everybody as soon as the iceberg is hit...my time travel theory
presupposes independent parallel universes.This would include paying
spectators(including at least one Jack-and-Rose nut who got through the
security screens).
Louis Epstein
: Californian couldn't have helped much. It took Titanic's crew all the time
: they had to launch 705 people. They couldn't have done 1500 more in the time
: available. See my website for a proposed timeline.
:
: Do I get to use my time machine to wake up Smith and tell him it looks
: doubtful?
My supership equipped with time drive would offer dozens of 150-seat
tenders to ferry people from the Titanic.
Louis Epstein
: >Is it possible that the "mystery ship" the one seen by those on Titanic but
: >not
: >responding to her rockets was actully a time machine from the future, her
: >passengers being people who pay a fee to go back in time in order to witness
: >an
: >historical event?
: Ya know, I've thought of exactlly that, but I thought of them as scientists
: with advanced listening and viewing equipment.
Watching people die brings up ethical questions.
(In my notional story,Ismay is mad enough that the folks from the next
century let them hit the iceberg before intervening).
Cpnavatar
>not
>responding to her rockets was actully a time machine from the future, her
>passengers being people who pay a fee to go back in time in order to witness
>an
>historical event?
I'm exploring that possibility in the Timeship:TITANIC! novel I'm writing.
Visit the Official timeship page at:
http://members.aol.com/cpnavatar/index.html
Dave Gittins
"Californian", which is where he said he would choose to be if he could.
Maybe we could get a psychologist to tag along.
Dave Gittins
Anne Reasoner
. .
NMBINC
I'm a psychologist and Titanic buff for 40 years- I'll be glad to tag along
LoneGnMan
>safely?
Hell why do that, just cut a hole in hull before the launch, that delay her,
and any delay would stop her from stiking ice berg.
LoneGnMan
>: >Is it possible that the "mystery ship" the one seen by those on Titanic
>but
>: >not
>: >responding to her rockets was actully a time machine from the future, her
>: >passengers being people who pay a fee to go back in time in order to
>witness
>: >an
>: >historical event?
I didnt say that, that was the Threed creators writing not mine.
TOM ELEVEN
>: Ya know, I've thought of exactlly that, but I thought of them as
>scientists
>: with advanced listening and viewing equipment.
>
>Watching people die brings up ethical questions.
>(In my notional story,Ismay is mad enough that the folks from the next
>century let them hit the iceberg before intervening).
My speculations about time travel have indicated that even if we could go back
in time, we could preform NO action which would have prevented our departure on
the time trip to begin with.
Any attempt to alter a past event that alters the time line to the time of
time machine departure would be impossible.--Simply because of the "lack of
energy" to pull it off.
Trying to shoot ones self, for example, a month in the past would not work,
because you could only pull the gun trigger so far, but not far enough to fire
the gun---for if you had you finger would not exist in the firing
position--because you were never there to fire the gun.----The effect of the
attempt would be like encountering a "force" that prevents you from pulling the
trigger.---The "force", though is really a "lack of energy" in the trigger
space area that prevents you from exerting force.
Tring to save TITANIC would result in not having the need to make the time
trip in the first place, so the attempt to save the ship could not progress
beyond the point where the time line would be changed---the would be rescuers
would encounter a seeming "force field" around the ship--or perhaps even within
sight of the ship--that prevents them from getting through---although it is
really a negative "cause and effect" energy conflict or void.
TOM
Thomas M. Ray/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
tome...@aol.com
Mankatt
>(In my notional story,Ismay is mad enough that the folks from the next
>century let them hit the iceberg before intervening).
well...maybe, in this hypothtical time traveling idea, we "beamed" or
something, all of the people away, but left all the shoes on the bottom...
heh heh heh
Louis Epstein
: >Why not go back to 1910 or so and make sure the Titanic was built more
: >safely?
:
: Hell why do that, just cut a hole in hull before the launch, that delay her,
: and any delay would stop her from stiking ice berg.
That might just have an overtime shift at the yard and restore the
original schedule.Who knows?
Louis Epstein
: >:
: >scientists
: >: with advanced listening and viewing equipment.
: >Watching people die brings up ethical questions.
: >(In my notional story,Ismay is mad enough that the folks from the next
: >century let them hit the iceberg before intervening).
: My speculations about time travel have indicated that even if we could go back
: in time, we could preform NO action which would have prevented our departure on
: the time trip to begin with.
: Any attempt to alter a past event that alters the time line to the time of
: time machine departure would be impossible.--Simply because of the "lack of
: energy" to pull it off.
: Trying to shoot ones self, for example, a month in the past would not work,
: because you could only pull the gun trigger so far, but not far enough to fire
: the gun---for if you had you finger would not exist in the firing
: position--because you were never there to fire the gun.----The effect of the
: attempt would be like encountering a "force" that prevents you from pulling the
: trigger.---The "force", though is really a "lack of energy" in the trigger
: space area that prevents you from exerting force.
: Tring to save TITANIC would result in not having the need to make the time
: trip in the first place, so the attempt to save the ship could not progress
: beyond the point where the time line would be changed---the would be rescuers
: would encounter a seeming "force field" around the ship--or perhaps even within
: sight of the ship--that prevents them from getting through---although it is
: really a negative "cause and effect" energy conflict or void.
: TOM
: Thomas M. Ray/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
I INVARIABLY assume independent parallel universes in discussing time
travel.Otherwise one has too many paradoxes.I call my vision the Time
Wave Theory.
Louis Epstein
: >Watching people die brings up ethical questions.
: >(In my notional story,Ismay is mad enough that the folks from the next
: >century let them hit the iceberg before intervening).
:
: something, all of the people away, but left all the shoes on the bottom...
: heh heh heh
The project here would be to just save all the people and belongings
that could be ferried to the new ship in the time available,then
deliver all the passengers to 1912 NY,then take the time-ship back
to the next century...but it may not work out that simply.(The guy
from Standard Oil is busy in the ship's library noting all the
undiscovered oilfields...Andrews is busy noting the new ship's
design...)
Andrew and Rebecca Hall
>
> I would NOT interfear with the sinking, but I would warn Ballard
> not to pass up the salvage rights.
Salvage law doesn't work that way. In order to win and maintain
such a claim, the salvor must (1) demonstrate the capability to
salvage the wreck (which Ballard certainly had) and (2) conduct
salvage activities on the wreck on a regular basis. If Ballard
had pressed and won a claim, then said, "OK, it's off limits,"
he would have ultimately forfeited his salvage rights to someone
(anyone) who came along to challenge him.
---------> AH
TOM ELEVEN
>: really a negative "cause and effect" energy conflict or void.
>: TOM
>: Thomas M. Ray/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
>
>I INVARIABLY assume independent parallel universes in discussing time
>travel.Otherwise one has too many paradoxes.I call my vision the Time
>Wave Theory.
I was not assuming a parallel system myself---for the reasons I stated, the
energy not being availible to change a traveler's timeline, would prevent
paradoxes before they could form. Indeed only in a parallel system could one
changed time as he/she pleased.
The stuff about actually creating paradoxes is a fictional device. And also a
logic error.
one would simply not be able to preform a paradox causing act as one would be
"stopped in their tracks" by a lack of ability to direct energy into the
task.---eg. you have to be in point A to preform task P. but if being in point
A causes you NOT to be in point A ---hence you cannot be in point A at
all---you cant BOTH be there and not be there at the same time.---so you will
be unable to be at point A to begin with.---you will experence a "force" that
keeps you away(really a lack of energy to move to that point)
TOM
Thomas M. Ray/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
Michael Semon
along with your other self.
-Michael Semon
Michael Semon
and melt all the icebergs.
-Michael Semon
Michael Semon
machine (preferrably the DeLorean from BTTF). I'm not sure if this would
actually prevent the disaster, but I would tell that guy that steers the
ship to hit it head-on so only 1 or 2 of the water-tight compartments would
flood. If it was still sinking, I'd just fly over to the Californian and
tell them to haul ass over there. And then, I'd load up with valuables from
the Titanic (not people's stuff -- just parts of the ship).
-Michael Semon
Alexander Arnakis
wrote:
><snip> I would tell that guy that steers the
>ship to hit it head-on so only 1 or 2 of the water-tight compartments would
>flood. If it was still sinking, I'd just fly over to the Californian and
>tell them to haul ass over there. And then, I'd load up with valuables from
>the Titanic (not people's stuff -- just parts of the ship).
>
Read Tom Pappas' Web page -- He reasons that (1) hitting the iceberg
head-on would cause the Titanic to sink like a stone, and (2) the
Californian's arrival would have made little difference in saving
lives. He's convinced me! As to your last point, isn't that what the
debate about Tulloch's "salvaging" is all about?
-
WinBear
convinces Captain Smith to divert south, slowing the Titanic's trip against
Ismay's wishes. Smith agrees, reluctantly, and diverts the ship ten miles
south.
The trouble is, the time traveler doesn't know that Smith *did* divert ten
miles south... and that is what put the ship on a heading toward the ice it
struck!
WinBear
Don Hilliard
not giving any more information than that publicly - spoiling the surprise
for anyone that's currently reading it wouldn't be fair, and there's enough
Titanic stories out there to keep 'em guessing!)
Will pass along the information privately, though, if anyone wants to know.
Don Hilliard
Restore proper e-mail address before replying privately!
WinBear wrote in message <01bdceb2$6770fb00$58e3ffcc@default>...
Viper206
let the new york hit the Titanic, causing a belfast trip, to think this
newsgroup would even be here now
Louis Epstein
: Actually, a similar story was written in 1995 and is still in print. (I am
: not giving any more information than that publicly - spoiling the surprise
: for anyone that's currently reading it wouldn't be fair, and there's enough
: Titanic stories out there to keep 'em guessing!)
: Will pass along the information privately, though, if anyone wants to know.
I have that book.
: Restore proper e-mail address before replying privately!
: >
:
Louis Epstein
: Here's an idea for an SF story... someone with a time machine goes back and
: convinces Captain Smith to divert south, slowing the Titanic's trip against
: Ismay's wishes. Smith agrees, reluctantly, and diverts the ship ten miles
: south.
:
: The trouble is, the time traveler doesn't know that Smith *did* divert ten
: miles south... and that is what put the ship on a heading toward the ice it
: struck!
Well,let's just say that it was at least 15 years ago that the editors
of Isaac Asimov's Science Fiction Magazine included "And,so,you see,the
time traveller had actually CAUSED what he went back in time to prevent!"
on a list of overused ideas they never wanted to see again.
WinBear
Louis Epstein <l...@put.com> wrote in article
<Ey5xH...@news2.new-york.net>...
Oh, yeah. IASFM, the magazine that finally drove a stake through my
remaining interest in modern science fiction, with its "Let's retell last
week's D&D game" story policy. All the warmed-over D&D and "Dark Ages Space
Colonies who have Forgotten Earth" stories... <sigh>. And they had the
nerve to print a list of stuff *they* didn't want to see again? Tell me,
was hard science fiction on the list?
WinBear
who is upset with modern SF, not you...
Doug Urquhart
>
> Well,let's just say that it was at least 15 years ago that the editors
> of Isaac Asimov's Science Fiction Magazine included "And,so,you see,the
> time traveller had actually CAUSED what he went back in time to prevent!"
> on a list of overused ideas they never wanted to see again.
LOL!
.....but talking of Asimov, he wrote a novel called 'The Corridors of
Time' where the premise was that major events could be avoided by going
back in time and making a tiny, apparently irrelevant change.
For example, the time operative would go back and hide someone's collar
stud; as a result, they would be late for a meeting, not be chosen as
candidate for local mayor, not rise to high office, not become
President, not start World War 5 etc....
The time police were very proud of their ability to affect the future
using only the Minimum Necessary Change (MNC) - it was considered gauche
and unprofessional, for example, to kill someone when stealing his car
keys could produce the same effect.
Right. Applying the same priciple to Titanic, any thoughts about the MNC
required to avert the disaster?
Remember, it has to be some minor act, achievable by an ordinary person
(with access to a time machine).
Regards
Doug Urquhart
<email address mis-spelled to avoid spam>
Danny Meeuwessen
Doug Urquhart heeft geschreven in bericht <35E1B3...@localnet.com>...
OK, I'll have a go:
Misplace lookout binoculars, they spot iceberg too late, Murdoch realises
avoiding action won't work as the iceberg is too close, Titanic hits berg
head-on, first three compartments flood, some fatalaties, ship stays afloat,
Olympic tows Titanic to New York and saves the day, unsinkability of the new
liners is proved, White Star stocks rise sky-high, White Star becomes no. 1
Shipping Company (and of course WWI and WWII are avoided ;-)
Apparently something went wrong........
Danny
TOM ELEVEN
>Time' where the premise was that major events could be avoided by going
>back in time and making a tiny, apparently irrelevant change.
>
>
That would not work for the same reasons I mentioned in my other postings on
the subject.
If the event was avoided, then the traveler would have never gone back to
change the event in the first place.
Literary devices aside, a time traveler cant do ANYTHING that affects his
time of departure on his time trip.----otherwise he would not be present at the
place to do the act.
since such a "paradoxial" state of " being there/not being there" could never
exist, the traveler would simply find himself incapable of doing the critical
act.--It would seem like a mysterious "force" blocking certian acts, but its
would really be a simple cause/effect, not unlike trying to lift one's self
with one's own bootstraps.
Doug Urquhart
>
> If the event was avoided, then the traveler would have never gone back to
> change the event in the first place.
> Literary devices aside, a time traveler cant do ANYTHING that affects his
> time of departure on his time trip.----otherwise he would not be present at the
> place to do the act.
> since such a "paradoxial" state of " being there/not being there" could never
> exist, the traveler would simply find himself incapable of doing the critical
> act.--It would seem like a mysterious "force" blocking certian acts, but its
> would really be a simple cause/effect, not unlike trying to lift one's self
> with one's own bootstraps.
> TOM
It's a work of fiction, dammit. The physics don't have to work.
On the other hand (and this is a bit off-topic, so I'll keep it brief)
there are plenty of splendid, paradoxical things which can occur
at the quantum level, and near singularities, including apparent
violations of causality.
Time travel is theoretically possible (under somewhat exotic
circumstances involving spinning black holes), so we can't
rule out the possibility that some day, somewhere, somebody
will figure out a practical way of doing it. Highly improbable,
I would admit, but not impossible.
Now, given the original premise, how about an MNC to stop the Titanic
disaster.
Bob Botts
If I remember correctly, just misplacing an electron at a critical stage is
enough to send the universe into a tither. So let's be careful out there
guys! ;-)
Cheers...Bob
Louis Epstein
: Louis Epstein wrote:
: >
: > Well,let's just say that it was at least 15 years ago that the editors
: > of Isaac Asimov's Science Fiction Magazine included "And,so,you see,the
: > time traveller had actually CAUSED what he went back in time to prevent!"
: > on a list of overused ideas they never wanted to see again.
: ---------------------------------------------------------------
: LOL!
: .....but talking of Asimov, he wrote a novel called 'The Corridors of
: Time' where the premise was that major events could be avoided by going
: back in time and making a tiny, apparently irrelevant change.
: For example, the time operative would go back and hide someone's collar
: stud; as a result, they would be late for a meeting, not be chosen as
: candidate for local mayor, not rise to high office, not become
: President, not start World War 5 etc....
:
: The time police were very proud of their ability to affect the future
: using only the Minimum Necessary Change (MNC) - it was considered gauche
: and unprofessional, for example, to kill someone when stealing his car
: keys could produce the same effect.
Are you thinking of The End Of Eternity?
: Right. Applying the same priciple to Titanic, any thoughts about the MNC
: required to avert the disaster?
:
: Remember, it has to be some minor act, achievable by an ordinary person
: (with access to a time machine).
Hmmm.
Perhaps something that barely makes history,which is the problem.
If J.P. Morgan had not paid a stand-in when drafted into the Army
in 1863,or caught the tuberculosis of which his first wife died,
that would have changed the White Star financial situation and
much besides.
Some move in the Titanic history with ice warnings might have
sufficed.
Louis Epstein
: >.....but talking of Asimov, he wrote a novel called 'The Corridors of
: >Time' where the premise was that major events could be avoided by going
: >back in time and making a tiny, apparently irrelevant change.
:
:
: the subject.
Asimov has his separate area outside time called "Eternity" from which
his time travellers operate.
: If the event was avoided, then the traveler would have never gone back to
: change the event in the first place.
: Literary devices aside, a time traveler cant do ANYTHING that affects his
: time of departure on his time trip.----otherwise he would not be present at the
: place to do the act.
: since such a "paradoxial" state of " being there/not being there" could never
: exist, the traveler would simply find himself incapable of doing the critical
: act.--It would seem like a mysterious "force" blocking certian acts, but its
: would really be a simple cause/effect, not unlike trying to lift one's self
: with one's own bootstraps.
I'll repeat,infinite independent parallel universes are the ONLY basis
on which one can rationally discuss time travel.
Philip Chien
git...@senet.com.au wrote anout Sextons - er Sextants -
> The last fix taken on "Titanic" was done by this method at
> 7-30 p.m. on the fatal night. The calculations used in those days were so
> tedious that it took Pitman and Boxhall around two hours to work out the
> sights.
I'm rather surprised that Boxhall didn't use celestial nagivation to
determine the Titanic's position after the collision with the iceberg.
Taking a reading at sunset and then calculating the distance travelled
based on the calculated speed seems to be a system with several inherent
errors (e.g. compass and speed errors would cumulate over time).
The latitude is fairly easy to determine - just sight the North Star to
get a reading accurate within .5 degrees. If the time's known then the
accuracy can be refined.
Knowing the time relative to Greenwich and the location of a known star
determines your longitude. While the calculations aren't trivial they
are straightfoward. And I'm certain any decent size vessel of the time
would have had a nautical almanac to make the calculations simpler.
Granted these techniques require a fairly clear sky and a view of the
horizon, but the night the Titanic sank was literally perfect for this
kind of calculation.
So is there any particular reason why Boxhall couldn't have used a
sextant and celestial navigation to make a more accurate determination of
the Titanic's location?
Boxhall went to his death swearing that his location determination was
accurate but certainly he had to realize the limitations of the
techniques he used.
Philip Chien, KC4...@amsat.org
Earth News - space writer and consultant
my E-mail address is purposely incorrect to avoid SPAM-bots. I will not
accept any unsolicited E-mail or commercial advertisements.
Gunlover45
>required to avert the disaster?
>
I'd ensure the lookouts each had an excellent pair of binoculars.
10376...@compuserve.com
>George Behe,
>Are you admitting to forgery here?
>Falsifying documents, no matter for what purpose is highly
>inappropriate, if not illegal, and I am really stunned to read this
>as I have had great respect for you and your work.
Hi, Marcus!
The documents that I "forged" were transparently so and were not seriously
intended to deceive anyone -- not even Mike Findlay. Contrary to what
Findlay would have you believe, he was *not* deceived by them, either -- in
fact, he wrote me a letter on June 13, 1988 in which he said, "The letters,
which I laughed at and threw away almost immediately....." Findlay knew who
wrote the letters -- just as I hope he knows that they were merely an
expression of my contempt for him and his behavior toward me and my friends.
>If it is true then I must say you lack in character. There is simply
>no excuse for this kind of behaviour, none whatsoever.
I'm afraid it's true, Marcus -- and yes, I certainly lacked good *judgement,*
I'll grant you that. :-)
You're right, too, that Findlay's behavior toward me, Don Lynch and my other
friends was no reason for me to bring myself down to his level. Findlay was
the very first Titanic buff I'd ever dealt with who brazenly displayed a
complete lack of ethics in his dealings with me. He made me angry, and I
responded in kind. However, you might like to know that I did so only after
he continued to pull the wool over my eyes for *years.* A single case in
point:
On September 27, 1984 Findlay wrote me a letter saying that he had just
received Henry Blank's handwritten account of the Titanic disaster and that
"the gambler info was great!" (At that time I was researching Titanic's
professional gamblers.) Findlay promised to photocopy the Blank account for
me, but he failed to do so and made continual excuses for his failure to do
so. Time passed, and Findlay began to forget which excuses he had already
made to me. A year and a half later (!!!), on February 19, 1986, Findlay
wrote me another letter saying that Henry Blank's son had been very busy and
that it was "impossible to get in touch with him to get his father's account
of the sinking and the gamblers."
Call me a slow learner, but Findlay's contradictory excuses (coupled with
many similar examples of the way he treated me and my friends over a period
of years) finally made me realize what kind of person he really is.
Again, Marcus, I agree with you that Findlay's behavior was no reason for me
to bring myself down to his level. Despite that fact, though, I hope that
you (and everyone else here except Findlay) can see fit to forgive me -- or
at least to understand why I did what I did.
As for my *character,* though, the difference -- as I see it -- is that I
have character enough to voluntarily tell you and everyone else here what it
was that I did -- even though it might make me look bad to some people. (I
could easily have denied my actions the way Findlay does.) To my way of
thinking, though, it takes character to admit wrongdoing, and I have
willingly done so.
>How do you expect people to respect you and your work when you put your integrity into question?
It hasn't happened since, Marcus (and that was fourteen years ago.) Now
Findlay, on the other hand...
All my best, Marcus.
George Behe
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp Create Your Own Free Member Forum
Marcus Graham
It is amazing to see several persons attacking ME, instead of
addressing the issue in my post.
By the way. I note that George Behe has decided not to speak for himself.
Interesting. I thought that I perhaps misunderstood him, but evidently I
did not.
As for my being affiliated with some organisation, I can assure you I am not.
I am an ordinary layman with an interest in Titanic, just like thousands
of other people. I can't say that I know who you people are, except for
Daniel Butler, who is an author, so I guess I could say that you are just
bought by THS if I wanted to, but I don't usually go around throwing
accusations around if I don't have any facts to support me.
George Behe has admitted he falsified and presented documents to someone he
disliked. I am sorry. To me this is the most inappropriate behaviour I
have ever seen a Titanic authority admit to, and I had to reread his letter
as I thought I could have misunderstood his meaning the first time.
By the way, how can you say it is a prank? He admitted to having deliberately
tried to mislead someone by presenting to him false evidence. I don't care if
it was communicated privately or not. Are you saying that as long as it does
not come out in the open you could just go around producing false evidence
regarding Titanic? I am even more stunned now than I was when I asked George
Behe for a clarification.
Marcus Graham
Andrys D Basten
<10376...@compuserve.com> wrote:
>On September 27, 1984 Findlay wrote me a letter saying that he had just
>received Henry Blank's handwritten account of the Titanic disaster and that
>"the gambler info was great!" (At that time I was researching Titanic's
>professional gamblers.) Findlay promised to photocopy the Blank account for
>me, but he failed to do so and made continual excuses for his failure to do
>so. Time passed, and Findlay began to forget which excuses he had already
>made to me. A year and a half later (!!!), on February 19, 1986, Findlay
>wrote me another letter saying that Henry Blank's son had been very busy and
>that it was "impossible to get in touch with him to get his father's account
>of the sinking and the gamblers."
This is such an unpleasant thread but I have a question since you
people are talking about all this and you're letting us in what
happened, from your perspective. Earlier, didn't you say that the
promise to photocopy the gambler-material for you was in exchange for
survivor info which you alone had and were sending him? I didn't see
your own note but saw Eric's quoting of it. That makes more sense re
your anger toward his dealings than if he just failed to photocopy
something he said he would. Just trying to understand.
At any rate, I judge your work by your work and your method of
dealing with challenges on this newsgroup by what I've seen here and
have found the work unusually well documented and your responses here
to challenges very civil and dependent on reasoning.
Maybe old problems among you all should be left alone by everyone
involved. You guys are sure, none of you, angelic types :)
- A
--
===========================================================
Andrys Basten <and...@netcom.com>
CNE, Basten Micro Consulting
San Francisco/East Bay - 510/235-3861
Have music, will travel: piano, harpsichord, recorders
http://www.andrys.com -Online resources
http://www.andrys.com/indox.html -Peru photos w/Canon Elph
Andrys D Basten
George,
Please note that I've done a trace on this "Marcus Graham" and that
he posts from Telia.Com, from Sweden, which is the Internet Provider
from which Caroline posted, very concerned about treatment of
Eaton/Haas, who are TI people, yes. Dan alluded to the connection
and my trace showed a very, very strong indication he is right.
I had thought he was just some disinterested observer,
disappointed, but apparently not. There are some interesting
connections here.
- Andrys
Doug Urquhart
>
> Are you thinking of The End Of Eternity?
Ooops! Yes I am.
--
Doug Urquhart
>
> I'm rather surprised that Boxhall didn't use celestial nagivation to
> determine the Titanic's position after the collision with the iceberg.
It's certainly possible to take a star sighting using a starlit horizon,
but it needs a good dark-adapted eye and no scatter from nearby lights.
Maybe those conditions were hard to find that night. The hooligan firing
rockets probably didn't help much :)
kpk...@acpub.duke.edu
> ....On the other hand (and this is a bit off-topic, so I'll keep it brief)
> there are plenty of splendid, paradoxical things which can occur
> at the quantum level, and near singularities, including apparent
> violations of causality.
>
> Time travel is theoretically possible (under somewhat exotic
> circumstances involving spinning black holes), so we can't
> rule out the possibility that some day, somewhere, somebody
> will figure out a practical way of doing it. Highly improbable,
> I would admit, but not impossible.
>
> Now, given the original premise, how about an MNC to stop the Titanic
> disaster.
Okay, I'll play:
1- go down to the shaft alley at about 11:15 Sunday night with a hammer,
and start a rythmic banging timed with the shaft's rotations. The
engineers hear this and think something's wrong with the propeller or
line bearing or stern tube. They'll slow down, and hopefully either miss
the berg altogether or spot it in time to dodge.
2- hide a wrench (or some small ferrous tool or object) next to the
binnacle and make Hitchins steer due south or even turn around for a few
hours.
3- Slip something into J.Bruce Ismay's soup on April 9th to give him a
tummyache, so he doesn't go on the maiden trip and encourage Captain
Smith to go faster.
Anybody else? There must be a million ways!
Cheerio- Doug King
TOM ELEVEN
>on which one can rationally discuss time travel.
THAT is the only way in which time travel can take place AND events changed,
but time travel could also be done in our own linear universe, but we couldnt
cause changes that would affect our own timelines.(does not make for
interesting fiction)
kpk...@acpub.duke.edu
Marcus Graham wrote:
> By the way. I note that George Behe has decided not to speak for himself.
Yes, he has, most coherently. Cogently, even. Something wrong with your
news server, maybe?
> As for my being affiliated with some organisation, I can assure you I am not.
And if you were, you would say so?
> George Behe has admitted he falsified and presented documents to someone he
> disliked. I am sorry. To me this is the most inappropriate behaviour I
> have ever seen a Titanic authority admit to
Ah, key point here. George is honest enough *to admit* what he has done.
Most of the "experts" who are trying to make a buck off the old ship
would never admit anything. Most of them know little and are blatantly
scamming the public.
> .... Are you saying that as long as it does
> not come out in the open you could just go around producing false evidence
> regarding Titanic?
Not at all. That's bad. But it is the stock in trade of many of the
self-appointed "experts" and officials of "historic societies." If Mr.
Behe was guilty of it once, at least he gave it up years ago!
Let me say that George Behe and his wife have posted on this newsgroup
many times, always to the benefit of any readers. They have devoted
quite a bit of time and effort to answer questions and offer
explanations. They have built up a large amount of goodwill which is not
going to evaporate at your whim. If you expect many of us who have
participated in this newsgroup to suddenly say, "O-oh, that George Behe
is such a rat!" just on your say-so, then you are barking up the wrong
tree.
-Doug King
Marcus Graham
I am not interested in George Behe's good will, here or anywhere else.
I am concerned about him admitting to forgery as I have held him in
high regard. Mr Behe is responsible for his actions and as far as I am
concerned he has proven to have an incredible disregard for the truth.
I addressed George Behe, not you, and so far he has not answered.
He wrote an arrogant answer to the person he shammed, not ever expressing
any regrets whatsoever. In fact he tried to put the blame on the other guy,
in essence telling him that because you are such a bad person I am free
to give you false historical information. I am sorry, integrity and
honesty are personal attributes you cannot turn off and on at whim.
If I understood him correctly he even signed using a fake name, Roland
Trombley.
This shows premeditation on his part. He obviously did not want the fake
documents to be legally connected to himself. This is not a prank.
It is ugly.
Marcus Graham
Believe it or not, your letter to me is not coming up in the thread.
I have gone to the Deja News database and looked you up, and there
I have now found your message. I cannot understand why it is not
coming up under the thread, but then again I'm not a computer expert.
Your reply was very sincere and I think it is good that you take
responsibility for your actions. As some here have pointed out there are
so many Titanic "experts" whose morale and behaviour are easily put into
question. Therefore it is important that we laymen can feel that we can trust
someone among all the fakes.
For instance people like Daniel Butler who I know has written a book on
Titanic are not making a good case for themselves by flaming and accusing
me of being involved in God knows what activities. There seem to be
some serious cases of paranoia among these people.
Anyway, I apologize to you for saying that you never answered me, which
you did, although I still cannot say that your behaviour was worthy a
Titanic authority, but again this we both agree on.
Best Regards,
Mark Taylor
Basten) wrote:
>George,
>
> Please note that I've done a trace on this "Marcus Graham" and that
>he posts from Telia.Com, from Sweden, which is the Internet Provider
>from which Caroline posted, very concerned about treatment of
>Eaton/Haas, who are TI people, yes. Dan alluded to the connection
>and my trace showed a very, very strong indication he is right.
>
> I had thought he was just some disinterested observer,
>disappointed, but apparently not. There are some interesting
>connections here.
Thanks for this information. It does cast an interesting light on some of
these posts made here.
--
Mark E.Taylor
Netwatch column, American Reporter
www.american-reporter.com
Personal website: www.internetfraudwatch.com
email: netw...@poboxNOSPAM.com
Butler1918
>It is amazing to see several persons attacking ME, instead of
>addressing the issue in my post.
>
>
the hell out of this kitchen.
>By the way. I note that George Behe has decided not to speak for himself.
>Interesting. I thought that I perhaps misunderstood him, but evidently I
>did not.
Hmmmmm, being a bit selective in reading our posts are we? Or maybe you've
conveniently kill-filtered George out so you don't have to be bothered with his
rebuttals? George answered your inital posting--in detail--hours before you
put up this piece of arrant crap, so I can only assume you're mind is already
made up and doesn't want to confused with minor details like facts. (Don't get
me started, kid, you won't last long!)
>As for my being affiliated with some organisation, I can assure you I am not.
>I am an ordinary layman with an interest in Titanic, just like thousands
>of other people. I can't say that I know who you people are, except for
>Daniel Butler, who is an author, so I guess I could say that you are just
>bought by THS if I wanted to, but I don't usually go around throwing
>accusations around if I don't have any facts to support me.
>
No, but you suddenly appear at the same time Mike Findlay does and add your
"support" to his position, while conveniently ignoring direct responses to you
by the person whom you are accusing. THAT looks suspicious, laddie, especially
since you never bothered to make your separation from and disinterest in TI
clear from the start. When some complete unknown suddenly appears here and
starts attacking someone with an established reputation like George, that
unknwon better be prepared with an asbestos suit. I admire and respect George
Behe and his work tremendously, and have found his work to be of a consistently
high quality. You? Hell, I don't even know who you are, let alone what
credentials if any you have to attack George.
>George Behe has admitted he falsified and presented documents to someone he
>disliked. I am sorry.
No, he didn't present "documents" to anyone. A document is an item whose bona
fides have been established as genuine in terms of origin and content. The
papers he gave to Mike Findlay were never presented as genuine, and never made
public as genuine. It was an inside joke, like the bogus interoffice memos
that float around almost ay workplace.
Climb off your high horse, son, it's too big for you. Or haven't you noticed
that Mike Findlay himself has never said that George's "letters" were
deliberate attempts at forgery and peerpetrating a public fraud?
>By the way, how can you say it is a prank? He admitted to having deliberately
>tried to mislead someone by presenting to him false evidence. I don't care if
>it was communicated privately or not. Are you saying that as long as it does
>not come out in the open you could just go around producing false evidence
>regarding Titanic? I am even more stunned now than I was when I asked George
>Behe for a clarification.
>
>
IF it's not made public or produced with intent of public disemmination, you
can say anything you want and produce any kind of "documentation" you want to
"prove" anything. It's only when you go before the public and attempt to
produce the "documentation" aas genuine and legitimate that it becomes a
falsehood. You don't have a clue as to the rules of evidence, Marcus. Don't
go digging this hole of yours any deeper.
Sincerely
Daniel Allen Butler
"Trouble rather the tiger in his lair than the sage among his books--for to you
kingdoms and their armies are things mighty and enduring, but to him they are
just toys, to be overturned at the flick of a finger."
Andrys D Basten
Marcus Graham <marcus_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>It is true that I have never posted here before. So what.
>It is amazing to see several persons attacking ME, instead of
>addressing the issue in my post.
Disingenuous. Not too many people would post similar attacks under an
unsual Swedish ISP like telia.com ...
Add that 'Caroline' never learned how to reply TO a person in the
thread, always making strange standalone posts so we have to guess
who it is you're addressing. No "reference" field entry. I see that
you do the same, which is highly unusual anywhere in Usenet.
Using a yahoo.com e-mail address to post usually indicates someone
wanting to hide their real identity. If you carry on much further in
this vein re George Behe, while using a yahoo (or dejanews) screen
name, we can ask your ISP for the message id on the NNTP post to find
out who you really are.
>By the way. I note that George Behe has decided not to speak for himself.
>Interesting. I thought that I perhaps misunderstood him, but evidently I
>did not.
Perhaps you should learn to use your newsreader. Caroline had the
same problem. He answered you publicly hours before I wrote the note
about your using telia.com, as 'Caroline' did while trying to
disguise the ISP in use or your real email-name by using yahoo.com to
post. It's too obvious you have an agenda.
- A
10376...@compuserve.com
> Earlier, didn't you say that the
> promise to photocopy the gambler-material for you was in exchange for
> survivor info which you alone had and were sending him?... That makes more >sense re your anger toward his dealings than if he just failed to photocopy
> something he said he would. Just trying to understand.
Hi, Andrys!
I appreciate your attempt to clarify this point.
Yes, Findlay's letters were filled with requests for passenger information,
survivor addresses, etc. etc. (I can't say that I'm the *only* person to
have that information in my collection, but it required a lot of time and
research for me to answer his questions and photocopy the material he
requested.) I originally hoped that he and I could *exchange* research data,
but the flow of meaningful information pretty much became a one-way street
(with the continuing "lure" of the Blank account as incentive for me to
continue the correspondence.) Please don't get me wrong, Andrys. I know
perfectly well that I shouldn't have foisted those silly papers off on
Findlay, but -- believe me -- there was absolutely no danger of those things
being mistaken for *genuine* historical items (unless you happen to believe
that Bruce Ismay locked his mistress in his stateroom to die, that a big
knife fight took place over a lifebelt, etc. etc.) I'm afraid my sense of
melodrama really kicked in while I was composing those items. :-)
> At any rate, I judge your work by your work and your method of
> dealing with challenges on this newsgroup by what I've seen here and
> have found the work unusually well documented and your responses here
> to challenges very civil and dependent on reasoning.
Thank you, Andrys. Still, my thoughtless action of so many years ago has
given people a valid reason to stop and think about their perception of me.
Some people (like Marcus) might well believe that my temporary lapse renders
me untrustworthy from now on, and he is of course free to believe that if he
wishes. Still, my friends know what I'm really like, and that's good enough
for me. As far as my Titanic research goes, I always try to footnote or
otherwise document the major premises contained in my written work so that
anyone who wishes to review my sources can look them up himself. I'm
perfectly content to allow my written work to stand on its own merits.
This little incident should be a good object lesson to my friends, though --
never make an irrevocable decision while you're angry. :-) :-)
> You guys are sure, none of you, angelic types :)
Mwa ha haaaaa! :-)
By the way, I'd like Marcus to know that I did indeed address the points he
raised in his first posting. (How much weight he gives to my reasoning is of
course up to him.)
All my best,
George (aka "Raffles")
Andrys D Basten
Marcus Graham <marcus_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>I could not care less about what people in this news group think.
Nor could "Caroline" - both of you hiding under yahoo.com or
dejanews.com not allowing your real email name or email address to
show up. It'd be nice if either of you ever learn how to reply to
newsgroup poster directly instead of making stand-alone notes, and
you two are the only ones I've seen do that.
You seem "concerned" mainly about advancing an agenda. Come back
with your real name and address like the rest of us and maybe you'll
get a hearing. At this point you have so little credibility hiding
under yahoo.com and dejanews.com that you have little effect talking
about integrity and pretense.
- Andrys
KDAD40
>I could not care less about what people in this news group think.
Think? About what? The Titanic? Leonardo Di Caprio? Bill Clinton? Or are you
talking about your previous posts concerning George Behe? Or about how you
presented yourself and your claim to the newsgroup? If that's so, I think you
may find that people in this news group may feel the same way about you.
>I am concerned about him admitting to forgery as I have held him in
>high regard.
Depends on what you mean by forgery--when you are talking about forged
documents or paintings or writings, the forgery arises when these productions
are passed off as the actual product of a particular person--for example there
was a Dutch painter after WWII who painted oil paintings in the style of
Rembrandt, which would have been fine if he had stopped there. However, when
he started signing the paintings with "Rembrandt", there's the forgery. If
George Behe produced these documents as the actual production of an actual
person named Roland Tremblay, you may have a case. It does appear that Findlay
was the victim of a prank by George Behe, and more than likely not actionable
under law--or in this newsgroup.
A friendly suggestion--give it a rest, OK?
Reg Pitts
KDA...@aol.com
Mary-Frances Bartels
>
> George,
>
> Believe it or not, your letter to me is not coming up in the thread.
I'll throw in my $.02 for the unusual behavior I've seen with Usenet,
or at least the way my ISP presents it. I don't always see an accurate
snapshot of the group when I retrieve it. In a previous thread on the
wireless I mentioned the sunspot cycle. From my perspective, it was a
new piece of info not previously presented. The next day when I
retrieved the NG I saw that someone had mentioned the sunspot cycle five
or more hours before I did, yet I did NOT see his entry until the next
day. ALSO, sometimes entries nearly a week old are retrieved as "new,"
yet entries a day old are discarded. I don't claim to understand how or
why this is happening. I do know that my ISP does not carry this NG
locally.
Lastly, I'm not sure that using yahoo or any other free e-mail
service is necessarily bad. I use USA Net, another free e-mail
service. My ISP, Cheap Internet Service Provider (ChISP) of Denver, CO
only gives one e-mail address per paid account. The way my husband and
I have our own private accounts is to use a service like USA Net to get
multiple accounts.
That being said, I now say that this entry is completely off-topic
being entirely computer-related since I have absolutely no interest in
any of the several sides of this discussion. Let's see... How can I get
the Titanic as part of this entry?
Mary-Frances
--
NOTE: Remove REMOVE-THIS. from REPLY-TO address. Disguising my real ad-
dress is my feeble attempt to thwart spammers combing Usenet.
Mary-Frances Bartels ki...@REMOVE-THIS.usa.net (((#))) ^ ^
http://www.qsl.net/ki0dz Denver, CO | ^ - ^
Watkins products Rep. #92389 ------- (o o)
** Beyond Infinity - Scanning & WWW Services ** |ooOoo| >{ | }<
http://members.xoom.com/beyondin ------- RRR)*
PGreen1029
KMKeaneEA
(KDAD40) writes:
>A friendly suggestion--give it a rest, OK?
>
>
Please, please, please! There is bad blood between the mystery "telia.com" and
George. Not that George has responded (and quite awhile ago might I add) and
telia.com has rebutted (or rather restated his/her point) let this stop.
Frankly, I do not believe George's action as presented in all postings meet any
definition of forgery, maybe a bit childish, but not forgery. George has been
a valuable contributor. Telia.com, you can be too if you can be nice and act
like an adult.
Thank you for your time,
Kathryn
KMKeaneEA
I meant to write
NOW THAT George has responded.....
Sorry for the typo.
Titanic
>Interesting. I thought that I perhaps misunderstood him, but evidently I<BR>
>did not.<BR>
Hey, how long ago did all this occur?
George has NOT been doing well over the last few months but is doing better
now.
He has NOT posted to another Mailing List to which he belongs in months - I
cannot personally believe he would be making posts to this news group while
ignoring the mailing list!
Marcus, this is not meant as an attack on you personally, but apparently you
are NOT aware of how respected Mr. Behe is and unaware of his personal problems
in recent months. Most of us hold George in the highest regard.
Regards,
Bill Walden
Bill Walden - Talent, Oregon
Louis Epstein
: >I'll repeat,infinite independent parallel universes are the ONLY basis
: >on which one can rationally discuss time travel.
:
: but time travel could also be done in our own linear universe, but we couldnt
: cause changes that would affect our own timelines.(does not make for
: interesting fiction)
My theory involves universes existing on both our own and alternate
timelines,all independent of each other.You could save a Titanic every
day for the rest of your life without affecting what had already
happened in your own universe further down the path you diverted those
from.
Mark Taylor
butle...@aol.com (Butler1918) wrote:
In short, "Marcus" you're
>a coward. Yellow. Chicken. A gutless wonder. Spineless. (Are you getting
>the idea?)
Dan--Don't hold back! :-)
Tom Pappas
--
Half-baked Titanic theories galore at:
http://home.earthlink.net/~tomswift1
"But this script can't sink!"
"She is made of irony, sir. I assure you, she can."
Doug Urquhart wrote in message <35E1B3...@localnet.com>...
>Louis Epstein wrote:
>>
>> Well,let's just say that it was at least 15 years ago that the editors
>> of Isaac Asimov's Science Fiction Magazine included "And,so,you see,the
>> time traveller had actually CAUSED what he went back in time to prevent!"
>> on a list of overused ideas they never wanted to see again.
>---------------------------------------------------------------
>LOL!
>
>.....but talking of Asimov, he wrote a novel called 'The Corridors of
>Time' where the premise was that major events could be avoided by going
>back in time and making a tiny, apparently irrelevant change.
>
>For example, the time operative would go back and hide someone's collar
>stud; as a result, they would be late for a meeting, not be chosen as
>candidate for local mayor, not rise to high office, not become
>President, not start World War 5 etc....
>
>The time police were very proud of their ability to affect the future
>using only the Minimum Necessary Change (MNC) - it was considered gauche
>and unprofessional, for example, to kill someone when stealing his car
>keys could produce the same effect.
>
>Right. Applying the same priciple to Titanic, any thoughts about the MNC
>required to avert the disaster?
>
>Remember, it has to be some minor act, achievable by an ordinary person
>(with access to a time machine).
Dante Hicks
[portions deleted]
> Kid, you just don't get it, do you? You think you got flamed before?...
> You don't care what we think? Little man, WE don't care what YOU think--or
> if you think, or even if you just think you think. For that matter, we don't
> even care if you continue to exist or not!...In short, "Marcus" you're
> a coward. Yellow. Chicken. A gutless wonder. Spineless. (Are you getting
> reputation--as the laughingstock of this newsgroup. You remind me
> of that little four-eyed pencil-necked geek who used to sit in the front of the
> classroom...All you've done is established that your ego is disproportionate
> to you intellect, that you're a mincing little pimply-faced, whiny, snot nosed
> brat, sitting in front of a computer because he can't get a date, munching on
> his own mucus and feeling sorry for himself. Now go away, kid, before I start
> to get nasty.
...Ouch. Here's hoping I never find myself on *your* bad side.
Dante :)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"I get up, and nothing gets me down..."
-Van Halen, "Jump"
Email:PlutoEVH [at] concentric [dot] net
AOL-IM:Dante ADD
Marcus Graham
I can assure you that I too have a high regard for George,
that is why I found his admissions so incredible. I would
never have bothered to write to him in the first place if
that had not been the case. However the strange correspondence
between him and a guy named Findlay raised questions that
needed some clarifications. George has written a very nice
post explaining the matter and this was all I could desire.
Everyone can make a mistake and by really accepting responsibility
he has proven himself to be a true Titanic authority, whose word
can be trusted. After all, he did not try to cover it up but
spoke candidly.
I'm sorry to hear that he has problems, and I sincerely hope he will
solve them real soon.
Best Regards,
Marcus Graham
PGreen1029
to the point that we can all recogzine
OBNOXIOUS POSTERS in this NG.
Other than getting us riled up these
folks are quite comical, with all their rants
and ravings. Like an says, Don't Get US
going!
Thanks,
Patti
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Butler1918
>Titanic are not making a good case for themselves by flaming and accusing
>me of being involved in God knows what activities. There seem to be
>some serious cases of paranoia among these people.
Oh, I'm wounded! I'm bleeding! I fear i shall never recover.
At least not until the next
Caroline/Marcus/Charlie/Whatever-incarnation-you-choose-this-time thread
appears.
Butler1918
managed to cry and whine about it anothe thread, I might add.) Laddie, this NG
is just gettin' warmed up. With your opening statement you make very clear
the emminently high regard you hold for this NG and its contributors. You
don't care what we think? Little man, WE don't care what YOU think--or if you
think, or even if you just think you think. For that matter, we don't even
post from DejaNews, through Yahoo, the originating point being Telia.com. Lo
and behold, that's the same route Caroline the Flaming (and Flamed) Idiot used
last month! There is no way of confirming that you are Marcus Graham, or that
Marcus Graham even exists, other than as a front for the same collection of
hydrocephalic morons who paid Caroline's ISP bills. In short, "Marcus" you're
a coward. Yellow. Chicken. A gutless wonder. Spineless. (Are you getting
attacking George Behe for what according to everyone involved was nothing more
than a prank. Instread of trying to do some serious work yourself you took it
upon yourself to denigrate the work of someone else, an attempt that was
without foundation or merit. Well, boyo, you have aname now--it's "Mud" and
you have a reputation--as the laughingstock of this newsgroup. You remind me
of that little four-eyed pencil-necked geek who used to sit in the front of the
time someone did something that he regarded as out of line. "Teacher, teacher,
do you know what Geeeoooorrge did?" All you've done is established that your
ego is disproportionate to you intellect, that you're a mincing little
pimply-faced, whiny, snot nosed brat, sitting in front of a computer because he
can't get a date, munching on his own mucus and feeling sorry for himself. Now
go away, kid, before I start to get nasty.
PGreen1029
with your first post? All this foolishness
would have been avoided if only you
had chosen your words more carefully.
You came across like some sort of maniac
with an agenda! If you continue to treat
this NG with respect you will get it in
return.
Thanks,
Patti
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
KMKeaneEA
Alexander Arnakis
>Keeping in mind that whatever of the past one would change is going to have
>some impact on the future, no I would not have kept the disaster from happening
>because then the saftey improvments that Titanic begot would not be in play for
>some latter shipping mishap <snip>
Looking at this from another perspective, suppose that without "time
traveler" intervention, the Titanic would NOT have struck the iceberg
and sunk. Now suppose that people in the far future, studying history
and technologically capable of time travel, decide that on balance,
and for the greater good, it would have been better for the Titanic to
HAVE sunk, for the reasons you mentioned. So they go back in time and
discreetly make sure that the sinking happened. Who is to say that
this is not in fact what did actually happen? Wow.....
Then what about the possibility of rival teams from the future
descending on the ship, some to save her from sinking and some to make
sure she sank. All these time travelers would have to act in such a
way as to be unnoticed by the 1912 people. Further, suppose some of
these time travelers knew of each others' presence....
Andrys D Basten
Mary-Frances Bartels <ki...@REMOVE-THIS.usa.net> wrote:
> Lastly, I'm not sure that using yahoo or any other free e-mail
>service is necessarily bad. I use USA Net, another free e-mail
>service. My ISP, Cheap Internet Service Provider (ChISP) of Denver, CO
>only gives one e-mail address per paid account. The way my husband and
>I have our own private accounts is to use a service like USA Net to get
>multiple accounts.
What you *can* be sure of is that you don't post from telia.com of
Sweden, showing up only to challenge and attempt to embarrass one of
the regulars here and showing traits of another person using that
rather unusual ISP. They never learned how to reply-direct to a
Usenet note. You learned, even using usa.net. I wonder why they
have that problem. It's hard to tell who "You" is in any of their
stand-alone responses
Multiple-ID use can be innocent, but if the only postings are
rants against regulars, while saying they don't care what anyone
thinks in the newsgroup, then I'd get a wee suspicious especially
when I see telia.com as the ISP. The Swedish users can get excited
only when authors are talking about one another?
Another thing: I may have differences with a guy like Dan, who can
be a wee extreme and seems to love battle, but he does not disguise
himself; he is all out there for the world to see, under his own
name. This is, as far as I am concerned, courageous in an author
when the newsgroup is known for its tendency to question, question.
It takes guts, and some authors have been known to ask who "you" are
to question them. Dan posts without that kind of vanity.
If Marcus/Caroline would give his/her email-name at telia.com, more
would be clear, but s/he's chosen not to, in spite of the notes here.
> That being said, I now say that this entry is completely off-topic
>being entirely computer-related since I have absolutely no interest in
>any of the several sides of this discussion. Let's see... How can I get
>the Titanic as part of this entry?
Titanic? Oh, yah! Skip or kill certain threads? :)
- A
CommanderL
writes:
>Still, my friends know what I'm really like, and that's good enough
>for me.
Hi Bro'
You damn well betcha your friends, and real close friends know that you are
trustworthy, kind and run around in carrot costums! Seriously, Geroge is a
well regarded Titanic researcher, and a kindly gentleman to boot! What
happened years ago, has no bearing on the present. And after all people, its
not like Geroge stated that what he had was the real deal?
Susan R.
Newberg, Oregon
Butler1918
>be a wee extreme
Moi? Extreme? Madam, surely you jest!
Butler1918
>>a coward. Yellow. Chicken. A gutless wonder. Spineless. (Are you getting
>>the idea?)
>
>
Yeah, I was pretty subdued, wasn't I?
Butler1918
>that is why I found his admissions so incredible. I would
>never have bothered to write to him in the first place if
>that had not been the case. However the strange correspondence
>between him and a guy named Findlay raised questions that
>needed some clarifications. George has written a very nice
>post explaining the matter and this was all I could desire.
>Everyone can make a mistake and by really accepting responsibility
>he has proven himself to be a true Titanic authority, whose word
>can be trusted. After all, he did not try to cover it up but
>spoke candidly.
>
>I'm sorry to hear that he has problems, and I sincerely hope he will
>solve them real soon.
>
Ever notice how some people become much kinder and gentler when they're
bleeding?
Now for the salt....
>I would
>never have bothered to write to him in the first place if
>that had not been the case.
If you really wanted us to believe that, Marcoline, why didn't you just send
him a private E-mail? George always puts his address on every posting, so it
wouldn't have been difficult for you to do. You didn't write to him, you wrote
to us, barged into the newsgroup casting aspersions on George's character and
questioning his integrity in a very public forum, which can be extremely
damaging to an author. George is a very gentle man, and will probably accept
your recatation with his usual good grace. If it were me I'd tell you to go to
hell, and enjoy every minute of it.
Now, go away, and never appear here again.
Sincerely,
Darth Butler
CommanderL
pgree...@aol.com (PGreen1029) writes:
AHMEN Sister Patti!
Hey you little runt MarcoLine, why don't you just go blow away. You attacked a
very close personal friend (and Brother) of mine, and you don't deserve and
respect from me. I will give you a little CHEESE with your WINE, Wah Wah Wah,
and maybe a "knuckle sandwich" to boot. You probably have the brain the size
of "A BeeBee in a BoxCar" and the IQ of a brick. So just stay off our
frigging NG until you learn manners and respect, and don't bring your Cracker
Jack Box comments back here again!
Susan L. Romanyuk
Newberg, Oregon
PS..........George, You'd better send me an E-mail or else :-))
Martti Halminen
> Now, given the original premise, how about an MNC to stop the Titanic
> disaster.
Close a few valves in the steering gear about an hour before the
collision. As soon as they notice the rudder is not responding, they'll
stop the ship and spend the rest of the night trying to find the reason,
thereby meeting the ice in broad daylight.
--
Cpnavatar
The traveller goes back, prevents the disaster and upon returning to the
present. finds Titanic still in existance having been saved from the scrap yard
by performing heroically when pressed into service during the Dunkirk
evacuation. However Walter Lord is a little known hack writer, James Cameron is
a burned out film director after terminator 4 tanks at the box office, and Bob
Ballard runs the submarine ride at Disneyland.
Don Brynelsen
"Go back to bed lady, everyone knows this ship is unsinkable!"
kpk...@acpub.duke.edu
novel....
Cpnavatar wrote:
>
> How about this?
>
> The traveller goes back, prevents the disaster and upon returning to the
> present. finds Titanic still in existance having been saved from the scrap yard
> by performing heroically when pressed into service during the Dunkirk
> evacuation. However Walter Lord is a little known hack writer, James Cameron is
> a burned out film director after terminator 4 tanks at the box office, and Bob
> Ballard runs the submarine ride at Disneyland.
The only problem I see here is how do you prevent the Depression, which
would have sent Titanic to the scrapyard long before Dunkirk? And if no
Depression, no WW2 and thus no Dunkirk at all (an all-around good thing,
IMHO).
Time travel just presents too many headaches. Although it does allow the
opportunity to wear very cool clothes....
Cheerio- Doug "I have just finished my device to selectively modify the
value of Planck's Constant" King
Cleidhmhor
>>
>> How about this?
>>
>> The traveller goes back, prevents the disaster and upon returning to the
>> present. finds Titanic still in existance having been saved from the scrap
>yard
>> by performing heroically when pressed into service during the Dunkirk
>> evacuation. However Walter Lord is a little known hack writer, James
>Cameron is
>> a burned out film director after terminator 4 tanks at the box office, and
>Bob
>> Ballard runs the submarine ride at Disneyland.
>
>The only problem I see here is how do you prevent the Depression, which
>would have sent Titanic to the scrapyard long before Dunkirk? And if no
>Depression, no WW2 and thus no Dunkirk at all (an all-around good thing,
>IMHO).
>
>
I'm sorry to have to say this, but I have to take a moment and point out one or
two small mistakes-or at least mistaken assumptions in these two posts. Walter
Lord would not have become an unknown hack writer: either he would have
continued his career in law or continued to write very good popular history,
and gone ahead to produce "The Good Years" "Day of Infamy" "Lonely Vigil"
"Incredible Victory" and all of his other offerings, including "Miracle at
Dunkirk". Which brings me to a second observation: the Titanic would not have
been spared the scrap yard due to any "heroic service" at Dunkirk. If you look
at the composition of the "mosquito fleet" that made up the maritime forces of
Operation Dynamo, you will find that the largest class of ship to participate
was a destroyer. A whacking great whale like the Titanic would have made a
target so inviting and so big that even the Luftwaffe couldn't have missed it.
That was part of the reasoning behind using the mass of small craft--the Royal
Navy knew it's big ships would have been sitting ducks standing still off
Dunkirk. Mind you, I don't always take the swabbies' side, but one thing the
Andrew has never lacked has been guts. All the same, I doubt if the Titanic
would have survived much longer than the Olympic, Depression or no, since by
the mid-1930's they would both have been pushing the quarter-century mark, and
as any chief engineer will tell you, twenty-five years of being pounded by
reciprocating engines at high speed is about all that a hull that size will
take.
Thank you for taking the time to read this.
David MacLaren
David MacLaren
aka Blade
Louis Epstein
: >Cpnavatar wrote:
: >>
: >> How about this?
: >>
: >> The traveller goes back, prevents the disaster and upon returning to the
: >> present. finds Titanic still in existance having been saved from the scrap
: >> yard
: >> by performing heroically when pressed into service during the Dunkirk
: >> evacuation. However Walter Lord is a little known hack writer, James
: >> Cameron is
: >> a burned out film director after terminator 4 tanks at the box office, and
: >> Bob
: >> Ballard runs the submarine ride at Disneyland.
And George Tulloch??????
: >The only problem I see here is how do you prevent the Depression, which
: >would have sent Titanic to the scrapyard long before Dunkirk? And if no
: >Depression, no WW2 and thus no Dunkirk at all (an all-around good thing,
: >IMHO).
: >
: >
:
: I'm sorry to have to say this, but I have to take a moment and point out one or
: two small mistakes-or at least mistaken assumptions in these two posts. Walter
: Lord would not have become an unknown hack writer: either he would have
: continued his career in law or continued to write very good popular history,
: and gone ahead to produce "The Good Years" "Day of Infamy" "Lonely Vigil"
: "Incredible Victory" and all of his other offerings, including "Miracle at
: Dunkirk". Which brings me to a second observation: the Titanic would not have
: been spared the scrap yard due to any "heroic service" at Dunkirk. If you look
: at the composition of the "mosquito fleet" that made up the maritime forces of
: Operation Dynamo, you will find that the largest class of ship to participate
: was a destroyer. A whacking great whale like the Titanic would have made a
: target so inviting and so big that even the Luftwaffe couldn't have missed it.
Would be interesting if the time traveller saved it from one kind of
sinking to see it meet another!(Even in WW I)
: That was part of the reasoning behind using the mass of small craft--the Royal
: Navy knew it's big ships would have been sitting ducks standing still off
: Dunkirk. Mind you, I don't always take the swabbies' side, but one thing the
: Andrew has never lacked has been guts. All the same, I doubt if the Titanic
: would have survived much longer than the Olympic, Depression or no, since by
: the mid-1930's they would both have been pushing the quarter-century mark, and
: as any chief engineer will tell you, twenty-five years of being pounded by
: reciprocating engines at high speed is about all that a hull that size will
: take.
: Thank you for taking the time to read this.
:
: David MacLaren
: aka Blade
If the Titanic lasted as long as Mauretania,it would have been around when
WW II started...would it have been of use as a troopship?(Mauretania,of
course,had turbine engines).
Gp lenexa
upon returning to the
>present. finds Titanic still in existance having been saved from the scrap
>yard
>by performing heroically when pressed into service during the Dunkirk
>evacuation. However Walter Lord is a little known hack writer, James Cameron
>is
>a burned out film director after terminator 4 tanks at the box office, and
>Bob
>Ballard runs the submarine ride at Disneyland.
Geri
"Try not. Do. Or do not. There is no try." - Yoda
"We can see in the puddle either the mud or the reflection of the blue sky,
just as we choose."
Dante Hicks
>...and Bob Ballard runs the submarine ride at Disneyland.
...Not for much longer. They close after Labor Day.
> If the Titanic lasted as long as Mauretania,it would have been around when
> WW II started...would it have been of use as a troopship?(Mauretania,of
> course,had turbine engines).
...Did Aquitania have turbine engines as well? She served in both World
Wars as a troop ship IIRC, so I don't see why Titanic couldn't have
served in that capacity.
Dundee the Pod
Desmont, the Titanics world renouned bean chef. I would then warn him about
the slippery floors in the Kitchens and ask him if it was true that Captain
Smith liked boiled cat meat.
Alexander Arnakis
Are you implying that Jenny, the ship's cat, and her kittens
(mentioned in Violet Jessop's memoirs) thus met an untimely demise
BEFORE the sinking? Hmm... always wondered about this.
Countess
Louis Epstein <l...@put.com> wrote in article
<EyFDx...@news2.new-york.net>...
> Cleidhmhor (cleid...@aol.com) wrote:
and
> And George Tulloch??????
He'd still be a lowly used-car salesman, probably making
cheesy-local-cable-station commercials. Or he could be one of the peole
who tried to blow a hole in the Empresss of Ireland to get at nickel inside
(which has been stopped by the Quebec gov't, thank God)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
--Rivetcountess
"There was peace, and the world had an even tenor to its way... (You know
the rest!) Jack Thayer
Pilar108
(Bring along some engineering schematics) and this way the Titanic would make
maritime travel safer since there will still be a disaster, but very few people
will die. Me, I would become rich outfitting every ship in the business with
the Jerry West patented inflatable raft!
Sincerely,
Jerry West
"If pro is the opposite of con, is Congress the opposite
of progress?"
-anonymous
Louis Epstein
: On Sat, 29 Aug 1998 21:10:42 -0600, "Dundee the Pod"
Jenny was on maternity leave,I think.
Tony Dickson
>be a wee extreme
That explains the pissing contests...
Butler1918
Betcha I can hit farther up the wall than you can, Tony!
Tony Dickson
Butler1918 wrote in message
<199809010206...@ladder01.news.aol.com>...
>>That explains the pissing contests...
>
>Betcha I can hit farther up the wall than you can, Tony!
That would truly be a wee extreme.
Butler1918
>
>
Tony, these puns of yours are all wet.
Or is that. "...these puns of urine...)
Dundee the Pod
would attract a lot of attention. The ship would still sink but boy..would
he have some explaining to do.
Cpnavatar wrote in message
<199809030122...@ladder01.news.aol.com>...
>How about this?
>
>Any action taken can have a multitude of outcomes, for example you step off
a
>curb, and:
>You get killed by a bus
>Killed by a Car
>Arrested for jay walking
>Fall down an open sewer
>Etc........
>
>Now suppose each of these possibilities existed side by side with the
others,
>like parralel railroad tracks with your action being the switch that choose
>which one you go down.
>
>You go back to the time of Titanic's sailing, and arrange for Bruce Ismay's
>luggage to be misrouted to another ship. Titanic's departure is delayed
>several hours while White Star employee's scramble to find the bosses
>suitcases. Finally the ship sails and on April 14th or 15th finds itself in
the
>fateful icefield in broad daylight. Smith orders course changes to avoid
the
>bigger ones, and Titanic reaches New York safely. History is changed and
the
>time track home is different. You get back to your proper era to find
Titanic
>berthed at Southhampton as a floating hotel much like the Queen Mary having
>been preserved after gaining reknown as a troopship in both World wars.
>Checking the history books, you discover that in late 1912 a plauge swept
>through New York, killing thousands. The cause? a new strain of virus
carried
>by several of the Immigrants aboard Titanic! The version of you that
belongs
>in this particular time stream has gone back to 1912 with the mission of
seeing
>that these people never reach New York, namely by doing something to ensure
the
>ship is sunk.