Lots of questions. No answers. It's like talking to a 4-year-old. I have no obligation to abandon the provable material facts. You have an obligation to prove anything other to be true.
Unfortunately, the ones I read are now buried under layers of other books. I read them over a decade or so ago. It shouldn't matter. The facts are facts. There are plenty of websites that debunk a wide variety of fanciful claims.
Sounds like CNN talking about Joe Biden's crimes. Just take everything at face value then. There's no evidence right here, right now, right in front of your face, so just believe what you've been told by Mockingbird Media and don't ask questions.
You are full of assumptions...which is your whole problem. You take a complete fantasy as reality and disdain the actual facts. And, against my contention, you can't even cite one or two of the most important pieces of physical evidence. (No mystery. There is none.) You are shooting blanks and trying to substitute personal remarks. You are the one who is not asking questions of this whole charade.
I never once stated what I personally believe regarding the titanic. I was hoping you'd fill me in on why you believe it was an organic event. I don't have a dog in this fight. You agreed that it would be stupid to think it was intentionally sunk but never explained why, while saying the burden is on the conspiracy theorist. I'm not the conspiracy theorist. I'm neutral but open to possibility and you haven't swayed me towards either conclusion. My only problem with what you've said is you're attacking people who think it was intentional, but you haven't explained why that's a stupid thought.
Because the story is known, documented, and makes sense.
And because sinking ocean liners is normally an act of war, not an assassination plot. Nor is it ever explained how an iceberg was wrangled to get in the way of the Titanic. Or why that was the most reliable and effective method of assassination (not to say most economical).
And the burden is on the conspiracy theorist, because the weight of evidence is against the conspiracy. So the burden is to disprove the evidence (a hard thing to do). Usually, the theorists totally avoid any attempt to do that and accuse the evidence of being fake.
Why are they stupid? Because they are willing to believe something that is entirely fictional. They think in terms of "But, couldn't it be this way?" instead of "Here is what is amiss with the original evidence. Other evidence that conflicts with the original evidence."
On top of everything is the unquestioned premise that had these three men not been killed, the Federal Reserve would not have happened. As a lifelong observer of government, that is not a bet I would take.
So, there is a lot of swallowing one has to do. I'll pass.
I'm sure he's NOT referring to the Jesuit priest who took pictures of everybody aboard the Titanic and coincidentally exited the ship mid trip, right before it left Ireland to launch itself into an iceberg.
The young Jesuit photographed the Titanic leaving port for the last time as it left Queenstown, in County Cork, for New York. He could have been onboard: An American couple he befriended on the ship offered to fund the final leg of the journey to New York.
From the Titanic, he sent a telegram to his provincial in Dublin to request permission. However, a frosty telegram awaited him in Queenstown: “Get off that ship.”
When news of the Titanic’s disastrous fate reached Fr. Browne, he folded the telegram and put it into his wallet and kept it there for the rest of his life. He later said it was the only time holy obedience had saved a life.
There are several books on the subject and a very good debunking page that takes all the conspiracy points to a confrontation with reality. To emulate the treatment I have received here previously, go do your own research. (Hint: There was no ship swap. The serial numbers on the propellers are identification. Etc., etc.)
The serial numbers of a propeller (something that literally can be unbolted even though its size makes it difficult) is better evidence than pictures of the differences between the window layout on each which is then compared to the pictures of the ship at the bottom of the ocean?
Ask yourself how the serial numbers get added to a propeller. In my pleasure boat experience, they are stamped into the brass/bronze. It would seem trivial to stamp a different or even additional serial number onto a propeller and use its existence as “proof”. Changing out the window arrangement would be much more difficult. No?
They were either cast with the propeller or engraved. You can't "unbolt" the propellers except in a shipyard, which is a big and costly operation, impossible to conceal, and both it and the Olympic would have had to be present (and out of service) simultaneously. Never happened. The propellers on the Titanic are those on the Titanic. The Titanic is the Titanic, based on detail differences in the superstructure. And there is no evidence that the Olympic was other than what it is.
The only relevant question is whether there is any EVIDENCE of a substitution. Speculative "What ifs?" do not count as evidence.
And what if the Titanic hadn't sunk and the key figures were rescued alive. Then what? Don't you see that you are entertaining a conspiracy for which absolutely everything would have had to work perfectly in order to attain the objective? After too many improbabilities, when does it become improbable?
You're on an Anon board. You have the obligation to GTFOH with your mainstream news hyperbole.
u/#q142
Lots of questions. No answers. It's like talking to a 4-year-old. I have no obligation to abandon the provable material facts. You have an obligation to prove anything other to be true.
So what books did you read and believe? Let's start there.
Unfortunately, the ones I read are now buried under layers of other books. I read them over a decade or so ago. It shouldn't matter. The facts are facts. There are plenty of websites that debunk a wide variety of fanciful claims.
"There is no evidence..."
Sounds like CNN talking about Joe Biden's crimes. Just take everything at face value then. There's no evidence right here, right now, right in front of your face, so just believe what you've been told by Mockingbird Media and don't ask questions.
You are full of assumptions...which is your whole problem. You take a complete fantasy as reality and disdain the actual facts. And, against my contention, you can't even cite one or two of the most important pieces of physical evidence. (No mystery. There is none.) You are shooting blanks and trying to substitute personal remarks. You are the one who is not asking questions of this whole charade.
I never once stated what I personally believe regarding the titanic. I was hoping you'd fill me in on why you believe it was an organic event. I don't have a dog in this fight. You agreed that it would be stupid to think it was intentionally sunk but never explained why, while saying the burden is on the conspiracy theorist. I'm not the conspiracy theorist. I'm neutral but open to possibility and you haven't swayed me towards either conclusion. My only problem with what you've said is you're attacking people who think it was intentional, but you haven't explained why that's a stupid thought.
Because the story is known, documented, and makes sense.
And because sinking ocean liners is normally an act of war, not an assassination plot. Nor is it ever explained how an iceberg was wrangled to get in the way of the Titanic. Or why that was the most reliable and effective method of assassination (not to say most economical).
And the burden is on the conspiracy theorist, because the weight of evidence is against the conspiracy. So the burden is to disprove the evidence (a hard thing to do). Usually, the theorists totally avoid any attempt to do that and accuse the evidence of being fake.
Why are they stupid? Because they are willing to believe something that is entirely fictional. They think in terms of "But, couldn't it be this way?" instead of "Here is what is amiss with the original evidence. Other evidence that conflicts with the original evidence."
On top of everything is the unquestioned premise that had these three men not been killed, the Federal Reserve would not have happened. As a lifelong observer of government, that is not a bet I would take.
So, there is a lot of swallowing one has to do. I'll pass.
What kind of "factual evidence" do you refer to? Wikipedia?
I'm sure he's NOT referring to the Jesuit priest who took pictures of everybody aboard the Titanic and coincidentally exited the ship mid trip, right before it left Ireland to launch itself into an iceberg.
https://catholicherald.org/news/nation-and-world/jesuit-seminarian-took-photographs-of-titanics-infamous-voyage/
Archived link - https://archive.ph/N6z7D
What did the Jesuit provincial know?
There are several books on the subject and a very good debunking page that takes all the conspiracy points to a confrontation with reality. To emulate the treatment I have received here previously, go do your own research. (Hint: There was no ship swap. The serial numbers on the propellers are identification. Etc., etc.)
The serial numbers of a propeller (something that literally can be unbolted even though its size makes it difficult) is better evidence than pictures of the differences between the window layout on each which is then compared to the pictures of the ship at the bottom of the ocean?
Ask yourself how the serial numbers get added to a propeller. In my pleasure boat experience, they are stamped into the brass/bronze. It would seem trivial to stamp a different or even additional serial number onto a propeller and use its existence as “proof”. Changing out the window arrangement would be much more difficult. No?
They were either cast with the propeller or engraved. You can't "unbolt" the propellers except in a shipyard, which is a big and costly operation, impossible to conceal, and both it and the Olympic would have had to be present (and out of service) simultaneously. Never happened. The propellers on the Titanic are those on the Titanic. The Titanic is the Titanic, based on detail differences in the superstructure. And there is no evidence that the Olympic was other than what it is.
The only relevant question is whether there is any EVIDENCE of a substitution. Speculative "What ifs?" do not count as evidence.
And what if the Titanic hadn't sunk and the key figures were rescued alive. Then what? Don't you see that you are entertaining a conspiracy for which absolutely everything would have had to work perfectly in order to attain the objective? After too many improbabilities, when does it become improbable?